• Nexus Analysis: A Nexus Study is typically required to determine the appropriate amount of the impact fee. The study should demonstrate a clear connection between the new development and the infrastructure, or services required to support it. • Proportionality: The study should also demonstrate that the fees are proportional to the level of service that the new development will require. • Fee Calculation: The fee level is determined based on the estimated cost of infrastructure improvements and the number of new residents or employees that will be generated by the development. Various methodologies can be used, such as:
o Level of Services Method: Charges developers for the actual costs of providing facilities or services.
o Plan-based Method: Calculates fees based on an adopted capital improvement plan or facility master plan.
o System-based Method: Calculates the fees associated with the Fire Development Impact Fee.
• Public Review: The public must be given an opportunity to review the proposed fees.
This includes a public hearing where stakeholders can provide input. • Adoption of Fees: After the public hearing, the governing body (e.g., City Council) may adopt the fees.
In order to ensure that newly established or updated fees are in alignment with the Mitigation Fee Act, the City contracted with NBS, a consulting firm with extensive experience in the preparation of nexus studies, to prepare the attached nexus study.
On April 2, 2025, the City Council opened the duly noticed public hearing regarding the proposed non-transportation impact fees, as well as the proposed transportation impact fee. The City Council continued the public hearing as the non-transportation impact fees described herein to the April 16, 2025, City Council meeting and continued the public hearing as to the transportation impact fees to the May 7, 2025, meeting.
ANALYSIS:
The DIF Program is designed around key projects and improvements outlined in the City’s General Plan. With the enactment of new State laws and updates to existing regulations, the General Plan has undergone revisions to align with these changes. Notably, these updates include provisions to accommodate more than 10,000 new residential units mandated by the State of California and implement new infrastructure to accommodate new development. These revisions directly affect the City’s DIFs.
As a result of these updates, the City’s approach to levying fees has evolved, particularly in response to the new requirements of AB 602, which became effective on January 1, 2022. This legislation mandates that impact fees levied on residential development be calculated based on square footage for future units rather than the prior standard of per dwelling unit. A nexus study must evaluate how existing and future residential development can be estimated by square footage or provide justification for why square footage is not relevant in this context, if it does not appropriately reflect the relationship between the fee, facility demand, and residential land use.
Additionally, AB 602 requires that, effective July 1, 2022, large jurisdictions adopting a nexus study must also adopt a capital improvement plan as part of the study. To comply with this requirement, the City has prepared an amendment to the Capital Improvement Plan, which is
integrated into the Major Projects Program. This amendment has been included in the attached resolution for consideration as part of the process to establish fees under the DIF Program.
To comply with the requirements of AB 602 the Non-Transportation Nexus Study utilized an existing level of service approach while calculating the Park Impact Fees. Chapter 3.68 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code established and governs impact fees for park land acquisition and park improvements. The City follows the General Plan standard for parkland and as a result the City does not use the Quimby Act.
In 2021, Section 66016.5 was added to the Mitigation Fee by Act AB 602. Paragraph (a)(2) of that section requires that, after January 1, 2022, the level of service used to calculate impact fees in a nexus study must be compared with the existing level of service, and if the proposed new level of service is higher than the existing level of service, an explanation must be included Because the level of service used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the same as the existing level of service, no explanation is required to satisfy the requirements of Section 66016.5(a)(2).
Park Land Acquisition Impact Fee and the Park Improvement Impact Fee The following tables reflect the City’s existing park acreage, existing level of service for park land and improve land, the cost per capita of existing park maintenance equipment, cost per capita for park land acquisition and improvements all of which are incorporated into the calculation which creates the Park Land Acquisition Impact Fee per Square Foot and the Park Improvement Impact Fee per Square Foot.
Existing Level of Service
Table 3.2 calculates existing levels of service in terms of acres per capita and acres per 1,000 population for total City-owned Park land and for improved park land.
Table 3.3 calculates the costs per capita for park maintenance vehicles and equipment based on the replacement cost of existing park maintenance vehicles and equipment divided by the existing population of the City. That cost per capita is added to the cost per capita for park improvements in Table 3.6 where the per-capita costs are converted into a cost per unit of development.
Cost Per Capita
Table 3.4 calculates the cost per capita for park land acquisition and for park improvements using the existing level of service in acres per capita and the cost-per-acre estimates for park land acquisition and park improvements.
Impact Fees per Square Foot
Table 3.5 shows the calculation of park land acquisition impact fees per square foot for singlefamily and multi-family residential development. It should be noted that this fee was reduced from the prior version of the nexus study issued for public comment. The lower impact fee reflects a “credit” against existing unimproved land owned by the City and planned for park uses within the City.
Table 3.6 shows the calculation of impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development for park improvements.
Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee
To comply with Section 66016.5 of the Mitigation Fee Act, the level of service used to calculate impact fees in a nexus study must be compared with the existing level of service, and if the proposed new level of service is higher than the existing level of service, an explanation must be included. Because the level of service used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the same as the existing level of service, no explanation is required to satisfy the requirements of Section 66016.5(a)(2). This existing level of service approach was utilized in the calculation for the Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee.
Existing Facilities
Table 4.1 lists the City’s existing community and recreation centers with their estimated replacement cost. Replacement cost is used in this analysis as an indicator of the cost of
constructing additional facilities to serve future development.
Cost per Capita
Table 4.2 calculates the replacement cost per capita for community and recreation center facilities using the impact fee cost basis from Table 4.1 and the existing population.
In the next section, the cost per capita from Table 4.2 is used to calculate community and recreation center impact fees per unit, which are then divided by square-feet-per-unit factors to get impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development.
Impact Fees per Square Foot
Table 4.3 shows the calculation of community and recreation center impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development.
Library Impact Fee
To comply with Section 66016.5 of the Mitigation Fee Act the level of service used to calculate impact fees in a nexus study must be compared with the existing level of service, and if the proposed new level of service is higher than the existing level of service, an explanation must be included. Because the level of service used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the same as the existing level of service, no explanation is required to satisfy the requirements of Section 66016.5(a)(2). This existing level of service approach was utilized in the calculation for the Library Impact Fee.
Existing Facilities
Table 5.1 lists the City’s existing libraries with their estimated replacement cost. Replacement cost is used in this analysis as an indicator of the cost of constructing additional facilities to serve future development. Cost for library furniture fixtures and equipment, and the contents of the museum at the Biane Library are listed separately.
This analysis also includes the cost of library materials (books and electronic media). Table 5.2 shows the estimated replacement cost of the library system’s existing materials.
Cost per Capita
Table 5.3 calculates the replacement cost per capita for library facilities and materials using the impact fee cost basis for library facilities from Table 5.1, and the impact fee cost basis for existing library materials from Table 5.2, both divided by the City’s existing population.
In the next section, the total cost per capita from Table 5.3 is used to calculate library impact fees per unit, which are then divided by square feet per unit factors to get impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development.
Impact Fees per Square Foot
Table 5.4 shows the calculation of library impact fees per square foot for single-family and multifamily residential development.
Animal Center Impact Fee
The City has not adopted a formal level of service standard for animal center facilities.
Consequently, the level-of-service standard used to calculate impact fees is the existing relationship between the City’s population and the replacement cost of existing animal center facilities, vehicles and equipment, stated as a cost per capita.
To comply with Section 66016.5 of the Mitigation Fee Act the level of service used to calculate impact fees in a nexus study must be compared with the existing level of service, and if the proposed new level of service is higher than the existing level of service, an explanation must be included. Because the level of service used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the same as the existing level of service, no explanation is required to satisfy the requirements of Section 66016.5(a)(2). This existing level of service approach was utilized in the calculation for the Animal Center Impact Fee.
Existing Facilities
Table 6.1 shows the estimated replacement cost for the City’s existing Animal Center and the value of a 1.92-acre site the City has acquired to expand that facility. Table 6.1 also shows a credit for the current balance in the City’s Animal Center impact fee fund which is available to increase the existing level of service.
Table 6.2 lists the Animal Services Department’s existing vehicles and equipment with replacement costs.
Cost per Capita
Table 6.3 calculates the cost per capita for Animal Center facilities, vehicles and equipment using the impact fee cost basis from Tables 6.1 and 6.2 and the City’s existing residential population In the next section, the total cost per capita from Table 6.3 is used to calculate animal center impact fees per unit, which are then divided by square feet per unit factors to get impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development.
Impact Fees per Square Foot
Table 6.4 shows the calculation of animal center impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development.
Police Impact Fee
The Police Impact Fee is calculated for police facilities needed to serve future development in the City. Chapter 3.64 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code establishes and governs the police impact fee. The City’s primary police facility is the Public Safety Building at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center. The other existing City-owned police facility is a satellite police station co-located with Fire Station 172 on San Bernardino Road in the western portion of the City. The
department also has a substation in a leased space in the Victoria Gardens shopping mall and is planning to construct a permanent substation in that area in the future.
To comply with Section 66016.5 of the Mitigation Fee Act the level of service used to calculate impact fees in a nexus study must be compared with the existing level of service, and if the proposed new level of service is higher than the existing level of service, an explanation must be included. Because the level of service used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the same as the existing level of service, no explanation is required to satisfy the requirements of Section 66016.5(a)(2). This existing level of service approach was utilized in the calculation for the Police Impact Fee.
Existing Facilities
Table 7.1 lists the City’s existing police facilities with their estimated replacement cost.
Replacement cost is used in this analysis as an indicator of the cost of constructing additional facilities to serve future development.
Cost per Call for Service
Table 7.2 calculates the facility cost per call for service for police facilities using the impact fee cost basis from Table 7.1 and the number of existing calls for service.
In the next section, the cost per call from Table 7.2 is multiplied by calls per unit factors to calculate police impact fees per unit for each type of development defined in this study The residential impact fees per unit are then divided by square feet-per-unit factors to get impact fees per square foot for residential.
The cost per call from Table 7.2 can also be used to customize impact fees for any non-residential project that does not reasonably fit within one of the development types identified in this report.
Such a customized fee would be based on the estimated number of police calls per year for the project, multiplied by the cost per call from Table 7.2. The number of police calls per year for a specific type of development project can be estimated by reviewing call records for similar existing projects in the City.
Impact Fees per Square Foot (Residential) and per Unit (Non-Residential) Table 7.3 shows the calculation of police impact fees per square foot for residential development and per unit for non-residential development.
Fire Impact Fee
Rancho Cucamonga does not have an existing fire impact fee. This section calculates impact fees for fire protection and emergency response facilities, apparatus and equipment provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD or District) to all development in the City.
The boundary of RCFPD encompasses the entire City as well as a small area to the north of the City that is planned to remain within the unincorporated territory of San Bernardino County.
Fire districts lack authority to impose impact fees on their own. Impact fees calculated in this section will be adopted and imposed by the City and revenue from the impact fees will be used to support RCFPD to pay for additional capital facilities and other capital assets serving new development in the City. These impact fees will apply only to the portion of RCFPD that is within the City.
To comply with Section 66016.5 of the Mitigation Fee Act the level of service used to calculate impact fees in a nexus study must be compared with the existing level of service, and if the proposed new level of service is higher than the existing level of service, an explanation must be included. Because the level of service used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the same as the existing level of service, no explanation is required to satisfy the requirements of Section 66016.5(a)(2). This existing level of service approach was utilized in the calculation for the Fire Impact Fee.
Level of Service
The most important single factor in defining level of service for fire protection and emergency medical services agencies is response time to emergency calls. The 2024 Comprehensive Master Plan for RCFPD states that RCFPD’s first due unit currently arrives within 9 minutes and 45 seconds, 90% of the time. The Master Plan makes recommendations to improve total response time, including reducing call processing time. The addition of one fire station will help RCFPD maintain and possibly improve its response time performance as future development occurs.
Facilities, Apparatus and Equipment
At present, RCFPD operates eight fire stations as well as an administrative facility, an all-risk training center (ARTC) and a shop facility. RCFPD is planning to construct one additional fire station and has acquired property on 8th Street as a site for that station.
Table 8.1 lists RCFPD’s existing and planned fire stations as well as the administrative and training center buildings and the shop facility. Stations 171 through 178 currently exist. Station 179 is planned for future construction.
The impact fee cost basis in the right-hand column of Table 8.1 includes the depreciated replacement cost for existing buildings plus the estimated site value for each building. Where multiple buildings are located on one site, the land cost is shown for the first building. For future Station 179, the cost shown is estimated based on recent construction costs.
Table 8.2 lists RCFPD’s existing firefighting apparatus and other vehicles and equipment. Costs for all vehicles and equipment shown in the far-right column of Table 8.2 are depreciated replacement costs based on the useful life shown in that table. Vehicles and equipment are assumed to have a residual value of at least 15% of replacement cost, regardless of age. Assets with a value of less than $10,000 have been omitted from Table 8.2.
Table 8.3 shows the cost of future apparatus and equipment needed to serve the City in 2040, including one Type I engine that will be needed for future Fire Station 179. The estimated cost of that engine is based on the current cost of similar equipment. Also shown in that table is the cost of personal protective equipment for nine firefighters that will be needed to staff Station 179.
Table 8.4 summarizes the costs from the preceding three tables.
Cost per Call for Service
Table 8.5 calculates the cost per call for service for RCFPD facilities, apparatus and equipment using the total impact fee cost basis from Table 8.4 and the projected number of calls for service per year in 2040. In Table 8.5, the combined cost of existing and planned facilities, apparatus, vehicles and equipment is divided by total 2040 calls to both existing and future development served by RCFPD.
The number of calls for service per year shown for 2040 includes calls in the area served by RCFPD outside of the City, so that the cost of serving development in that area is not included in the cost per call for impact fees charged by the City. The impact fees calculated in this section are designed to recover new development’s proportionate share of the cost of all RCFPD’s existing and planned facilities, apparatus and equipment our to 2040. In the next section, the cost per call is multiplied by calls per unit factors to calculate impact fees per unit. Then for residential development, the impact fee per unit is divided by square feet per unit factors to get impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development.
The cost per call for service per year in Table 8.5 can also be used to calculate customized impact fees for development of non-residential development projects that do not fit within the categories of development defined in this study. Customized impact fees can be calculated using the cost per call for service per year from Table 8.5 multiplied by the estimated number of calls per year that will be generated by a specific project.
Impact Fees per Square Foot (Residential) and per Unit (Non-Residential) Table 8.6 shows the calculation of fire impact fees per square foot for residential development and per unit for non-residential development.
Fee Adjustment to Avoid Overcollection
The fees shown in Table 8.6 project revenue that exceeds the estimated cost of future assets shown in Table 8.4 by around 3%. To avoid the potential for overcollection, the impact fees from Table 8.6 are reduced by 3.1% in Table 8.7.
In order to be in alignment with the requirements of AB 602, the Non-Transportation Nexus Study changed its method of fee levy from the DU (dwelling unit) approach to a square foot approach.
The change is illustrated in Tables S.1 and S.3 of the NBS Non-Transportation Nexus Study below:
Administrative Fee:
The City is required to implement the fee program according to various administrative, accounting, reporting, and public notice responsibilities that are specified in the Government Code. These responsibilities require the expenditure of staff time and often include retaining outside advisory services. The City proposes to include a fee to allow for reasonable cost recovery for these administrative costs and proposes a fee of two and one-half percent (2.5%) which is in line with representative implementation costs including as specified in the “Nexus Study and Residential Feasibility Calculation Templates in fulfillment of AB 602” prepared by the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley for the California Department of Housing and Community Development.
Communication:
The City met the requirements of Government Code Section 66016.5(a)(7) by publishing and sending notice to interested parties 30 days prior to the adoption of the impact fee nexus (30 days prior to the advertised hearing). The City published and sent notice thirty- four (34) days prior to the advertised hearing. The City also made a copy of the Nexus Studies available on the City’s website and a hard copy available at the City Clerk’s office thirty-four (34) days prior to the advertised public hearing. The Public Hearing Notice was advertised twice ten (10) days in advance and at least five (5) days between those dates in the local newspaper. The City met with BIA (Building Industry Association) and other interested parties twice before the previous advertised hearing once in November of 2024 and once in December of 2024 and has had conversations with BIA and interested parties prior to the advertised public hearing date for April 2, 2025. The City has received letters with questions and comments from DVBA (Desert Valley Builders Association), BIA, DPFG (Development Planning & Finance Group) and LLG (Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers) and have provided responses to the questions and comments which have been attached to the Staff Report as Attachment 8. In added, the City Council continued the public hearing initially scheduled for April 2, 2025, to April 16, 2025 for the NonTransportation Nexus Study and May 7, 2025, for the Transportation Nexus Study, in order to provide for further communication with interested stakeholders on the fees.
Implementation
During last minute discussions with the Building Industry Association (BIA) concerns were expressed about the prepayment of development impact fees prior to increases taking effect, as well as ensuring a level of certainty for projects with already completed applications. Existing state law, known as SB 330, already provides a process for housing developers to freeze fees at the time of application submittal. The City follows existing state law in this regard with no local changes or additions. The City is also proposing that if approved by the City Council, the proposed Development Impact Fee changes outlined in this report would take effect on July 1, 2025, which is more time than would otherwise be required under the Mitigation Fee Act. In practical experience, however, the City has found the fee changes which take effect at the start of a new fiscal year are often easier to notice, apply and update systems.
The BIA expressed concerns that existing deemed complete applications in process, should be allowed several years to finish entitlement and move to permits, during which their fees would be grandfathered. The City, however, did not calculate this type of extended multiple year freeze into the Nexus Study and has significant concerns that this could undermine the validity of the Nexus Study calculations. A second issue the BIA expressed concern about was the deadline for deemed complete applications as the BIA was requesting a deadline 30 days after the ordinance takes effect. The City has similar concerns with a rush of applications intended to beat the deadline that could result in thousands of units coming in under the old fees, also undermining the validity of the Nexus Study calculations. In response to the BIA concerns, the City is recommending the following:
- Developers with applications submitted prior to close of business on April 16, 2025, and are subsequently deemed complete, may elect to proceed forward under the new or old Development Impact Fee Program.
▪ Proceeding forward under the old development impact fee program will be permitted so long as entitlements are received and building permits are pulled prior to July 1, 2026.
▪ Proceeding forward under the new development impact fee program, and the payment of fees at the initial rates, prior to issuance of a building permit, will require completion of plans to the point of knowing actual square footages. Otherwise, the option always exists to pay the fees in effect at time of permit issuance or time of certificate of occupancy, however long that might take.
- The City finds the adjustments noted above should not create a significant deviation in the nexus study such that further adjustments would be needed.
An updated draft resolution will be included and available at the City Council meeting on April 16, 2025.
Actions to Update the DIFs:
To implement the updated DIF program as proposed, the City Council must:
1) Adopt the Nexus Studies
2) Adopt the CIP
3) Establish the DIF fee amounts
4) Add Chapter 3.80 to the Code to add the Fire Impact Fee 5) Amend Chapter 3.68 of the code to update the Park Impact Fees Items 1, 2, and 3 above are included in Resolution No. 2025-010, which is included as attachment
4. Items 4 and 5 above are included in Ordinance No.1038, which is included as attachment 1.
Staff therefore recommends that the City Council: (1) Adopt A Resolution of the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga, California, Approving Development Impact Fee Nexus Studies, Adopting Capital Improvement Programs as Part of the Nexus Studies, Updating and Establishing the Fee Amounts for the City’s Development Impact Fees, and Making a Determination of Exemption
Under CEQA and (2) Introduce Ordinance No.1038, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further Reading, An Ordinance of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Adding Chapter 3.80 to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, Establishing a Development Impact Fee for Fire Impacts of Residential and Business Development, Amending Chapter 3.68 to Remove References to Quimby Act in Lieu Fees, and Making a Determination of Exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act.
ENVIRONMENTAL
The Project (approval of the Nexus Studies, Capital Improvement Plans associated with the Nexus Studies, and the adoption of the development impact fees specified in the Resolution and Ordinance), was reviewed in accordance with the criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines. Approval of the Nexus Studies, Capital Improvement Plans, and the adoption of the development impact fees specified will not have a significant impact on the environment and are exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of State CEQA Guidelines because these actions involve the adoption of development impact fees and no specific development is authorized by the adoption of the Nexus Studies, Capital Improvement Plans, or the adoption of new or updated development impact fees.
Furthermore, the Capital Improvement Program is a prioritizing and funding allocation program and cannot and does not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. No physical activity will occur until all required environmental review is conducted at the time the physical improvements prioritized in the Capital Improvement Program are undertaken at a future unspecified date. Therefore, the approval of the Nexus Studies, Capital Improvement Plans associated with the Nexus Studies, and adoption of the development impact fees does not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. In addition, the adoption of this Project approves and sets forth a procedure for determining fees for the purpose of obtaining funds for capital projects and equipment necessary to maintain service within existing service areas and is statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines 15273(a)(4).
Also, approval of the Capital Improvement Plans associated with the Nexus Studies, is exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(4) because the Plan is not a “project” as defined by CEQA, but involves the creation of government funding mechanisms or other government fiscal activities that do not involve any commitment to any specific project that may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impacts of DIFs on the City’s finances are associated with both increased revenues and expenses. Administrative expenses will be incurred as City staff collect fees and manage the use and application of fee revenues. The City is proposing a two and one-half percent (2.5%) Administrative Fee to cover these costs.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the City Council’s vision for building upon our past successes to create a world class community by ensuring that the means are available to continue the City’s growth and success.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 Proposed Ordinance No.1038 (Fire DIF Program and Park Impact Fee Revision) Attachment 2 Exhibit A to Ordinance No.1038 (Fire Impact Fee – Chapter 3.80) Attachment 3 Exhibit B to Ordinance No.1038 (Park Impact Fee Revision) Attachment 4 Proposed Resolution No. 2025-010 (DIF Program Fee Update) Attachment 5 Exhibit A to Resolution No. 2025-010 (NBS Nexus Study) Attachment 6 Exhibit B to Resolution No. 2025-010 (Capital Improvement Plans for NonTransportation) Attachment 7 Exhibit C to Resolution No. 2025-010 (Amendments to Non-Transportation Master Fee Schedule)
Attachment 8 Comment Response Memorandum for Comments on Non-Transportation Nexus Study
Attachment 9 Attachment to Comment Response Memorandum (DVBA – Non-Transportation) Attachment 10 Attachment to Comment Response Memorandum (BIA) Attachment 11 Attachment to Comment Response Memorandum (DPFG – Non-Transportation)
Resolution No. 2025-010 - Page 1 of 11
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-010
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY FOR THE
COMMUNITY AND RECREATION CENTER IMPACT FEE,
LIBRARY IMPACT FEE, ANIMAL CENTER IMPACT FEE,
POLICE IMPACT FEE, PARK IMPACT FEES AND FIRE
IMPACT FEE, ADOPTING A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM AS PART OF THE NEXUS STUDY, UPDATING
AND ESTABLISHING THE FEE AMOUNTS FOR SUCH
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES, AND MAKING A
DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION UNDER CEQA
A Recitals.
1. The Mitigation Fee Act, contained in Government Code 66000 et seq., permits the City to impose development impact fees on new development for the purposes of funding public facilities necessary to serve that new development.
2. Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapters 3.28 (“City-Wide System Fees for Transportation”) (referred to herein as the “Transportation Development Impact Fee”),
3.52 (“Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee”), Chapter 3.56 (“Library Impact Fee”), Chapter 3.60 (“Animal Center Impact Fee”), 3.64 (“Police Impact Fee”), and 3.68 (“Park Impact Fees”) established the City’s current development impact fee program.
3. The City Council now desires to update the foregoing impact fees on new development to fund the costs associated with the increased demand for such public facilities throughout the City.
4. The City Council further desires to establish an impact fee on new development to fund the cost of fire protection facilities within the City and utilized by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
5. Proposed Ordinance No. 1038, once effective, will add Chapter 3.80 (“Fire Impact Fee”) to the Municipal Code to establish a Fire Impact Fee.
6. These existing and proposed Municipal Code provisions will establish the program and the requirements for imposition of development impact fees on development projects, as supported by nexus studies, and provide that the City Council shall, by resolution, impose the specific amount of development impact fees that will be levied on new development in the City for each category of fee.
Resolution No. 2025-010 - Page 2 of 11
7. NBS Government Finance Group has prepared the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Impact Fee Nexus Study dated February 20, 2025, included as Exhibit A (“NBS Nexus Study”). The NBS Nexus Study covers the Park Impact Fees, Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee, Library Impact Fee, Animal Center Impact Fee, Police Impact Fee, and proposed Fire Impact Fee.
8. The NBS Nexus Study identifies the purpose of each fee and the use of each fee, and demonstrates a reasonable relationship between each fee’s use, the type of development projects where the fee will be imposed, provides how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of each fee, and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development. In addition, the Nexus Study identifies capital projects necessary to meet the goals, programs and objectives within the City’s General Plan.
9. The Nexus Study provides the documentation, detail, and other information required by the Mitigation Fee Act as the basis for the adoption and imposition of the development impact fees for (1) park, (2) community and recreation center, (3) library, (4) animal center, (5) police, and (6) fire facilities. Furthermore, the Nexus Study describes the benefit and impact area on which the development impact fees are to be imposed, lists specific public improvements to be financed through the imposition and collection of the development impact fees, describes the estimated cost of providing the improvements and facilities, describes the reasonable relationship between the development impact fees and the various types of new development, and otherwise satisfies the requirements of the law with regard to the imposition and collection of development impact fees.
10. The facts and evidence presented to the City Council have established that there is a reasonable relationship between the need for new facilities or improvements and the impacts of new development for which a corresponding fee is charged, also that there is a reasonable relationship between the fees’ uses and the type of development for which the fees are imposed.
11. There is a reasonable relationship between the development and improvement of parks and residential development that does not involve the subdivision of land for which the fee is imposed, because the additional parks and improvements will improve and expand the City’s Park system and thus reduce the risk that the City’s increasing population will overuse or overcrowd the City’s parks.
Resolution No. 2025-010 - Page 3 of 11
12. The City is required to implement the fee program according to various administrative, accounting, reporting, and public notice responsibilities that are specified in the Government Code. These responsibilities require the expenditure of staff time and often include retaining outside advisory services. The City proposes to include a fee to allow for reasonable cost recovery for these administrative costs and proposes a fee of two and one-half percent (2.5%) which is in line with representative implementation costs, including as specified and studied in the “Nexus Study and Residential Feasibility Calculation Templates in fulfillment of AB 602” prepared by the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley for the California Department of Housing and Community Development.
13. The City has complied with the notice and hearing requirements of state law and the Mitigation Fee Act prior to adopting the Nexus Studies, Capital Improvement Plans, and fees specified in this Resolution, and a notice of public hearing on the development impact fees was mailed as required by law to any interested party who filed a written request with the City Clerk for mailed notice of a meeting on new or increased fees.
14. The City Council opened a duly noticed public hearing at the April 2, 2025 regular City Council meeting, at which time testimony was presented. Thereafter, the City Council continued the public hearing to the City Council’s regular meeting of April 16, 2025 as to the non-transportation impact fees described herein. The City Council reopened the duly notice public hearing at the April 16, 2025 regular City Council meeting and took further testimony, and closed the public hearing as to the non-transportation fees.
15. The City Council continued the item with respect to the F&P Nexus Study and the Transportation Development Impact Fee to its May 7, 2025 meeting, and took action to approve the NBS Nexus Study and the park, community and recreation center, library, animal center, police, and fire facilities impact fees.
16. Fehr & Peers has prepared the Transportation Development Impact Fee Program Nexus Study dated February 11, 2025, The F&P Nexus Study covers the Transportation Development Impact Fee. It will be considered at the May 7, 2025 continued public hearing.
17. The City Council finds that the record of these proceedings, including the NBS Nexus Study, the City’s General Plan, ordinances and resolutions, the staff report, written correspondence received by the City, and the testimony received at the hearing prior to the adoption of this Resolution held on April 2, 2025, contains substantial evidence to support the imposition and collection of the development impact fees established herein.
18. The City Council has reviewed and considered the development impact fees established herein, and finds that the fees will mitigate some of the impacts associated
Resolution No. 2025-010 - Page 4 of 11
with additional capital and infrastructure needs necessitated by new residential and nonresidential development in the City.
B. Resolution.
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga finds and resolves as follows:
SECTION 1. Recitals. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts and re c it a ls set forth in Part A of this Resolution are true and correct and incorporated as a material part of this Resolution.
SECTION 2. CEQA. The approval of the Nexus Studies, Capital Improvement Plans associated with the Nexus Studies, and the adoption of the development impact fees specified in this Resolution, was reviewed in accordance with the criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines.
The City Council finds that approval of the Nexus Studies, Capital Improvement Plans, and the adoption of the development impact fees specified in this Resolution will not have a significant impact on the environment and are exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of State CEQA Guidelines because these actions involve the adoption of development impact fees and no specific development is authorized by the adoption of the Nexus Studies, Capital Improvement Plans, or the adoption of new or updated development impact fees. Furthermore, the Capital Improvement Program is a prioritizing and funding allocation program and cannot and does not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. No physical activity will occur until all required environmental review is conducted at the time the physical improvements prioritized in the Capital Improvement Program are undertaken at a future unspecified date. Therefore, the approval of the Nexus Studies, Capital Improvement Plans associated with the Nexus Studies, and adoption of the development impact fees does not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. In addition, the adoption of this Resolution approves and sets forth a procedure for determining fees for the purpose of obtaining funds for capital projects and equipment necessary to maintain service within existing service areas and is statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines 15273(a)(4). Also, approval of the Capital Improvement Plans associated with the Nexus Studies, is exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(4) because the Plan is not a “project” as defined by CEQA, but involves the creation of government funding mechanisms or other government fiscal activities that do not involve any commitment to any specific project that may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment.
SECTION 3. Approval of the NBS Nexus Study and Mitigation Fee Act Findings.
The City Council hereby approves the NBS Nexus Fee Study, and the findings contained therein. The NBS Nexus Study shall constitute the current “Study” for each respective fee pursuant to Chapters 3.52, 3.56, 3.60, 3.64, 3.68, and the proposed Chapter 3.80 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. A copy of the NBS Nexus Study shall be on file with the City Clerk and available during regular City business hours for public inspection. With respect to development impact fees for (1) park, (2) community and recreation center, (3)
Resolution No. 2025-010 - Page 5 of 11
library, (4) animal center, (5) police, and (6) fire facilities, the NBS Nexus Study explains (1) the purpose of each impact fee; (2) the use of each impact fee; (3) the reasonable relationship between the use of each impact fee and the development type on which it is imposed; (4) the reasonable relationship between the need for the facilities and the type of development between the need for the type of development on which each fee is imposed; and (5) the reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and facility cost attributable to the applicable development project. The City Council agrees with the findings set forth in the NBS Nexus Study and adopts them as their own as if set forth in full here.
SECTION 4. Adoption of a Capital Improvement Program. The City Council hereby adopts the amendments to the Fiscal Year 2024/25 Major Projects Program which contains the City’s Capital Improvement Program as shown in the attached listing included as Exhibit B to this Resolution as a part of the Nexus Studies.
SECTION 5. Establishing the Amount of Development Impact Fees. The City Council hereby adopts the development impact fee amounts for the Park Impact Fees, Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee, Library Impact Fee, Animal Center Impact Fee, Police Impact Fee, and Fire Impact Fee in accordance with the Amendments to the Master Fee Schedule, attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference. The Master Fee Schedule shall be amended to contain the fees and amounts identified therein. The City Council is not readopting or revising the existing fees not identified in this Resolution or analyzed in the Nexus Studies; all such fees and charges remain in place at the current amount.
SECTION 6. Adoption of Methodology for Calculation, Adjustment, and Collection of Development Impact Fees. The City Council adopts the methodology set forth in the NBS Nexus Study for calculating and collecting the development impact fees adopted herein. The amount of the development impact fees shall be adjusted annually in July of each calendar year beginning in 2026, using the Construction Cost Index (CCI), for the Park Impact Fees, the Building Cost Index (BCI) for the Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee, Library Impact Fee, Animal Center Impact Fee, Police Impact Fee, and Fire Impact Fee for the Los Angeles Region both as reported by Engineering News Record (ENR) for the twelve-month period ending in May, or a similar published index if the BCI, CCI, or Caltrans Construction Cost Indexes are no longer available. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to make such annual adjustments to certain fees based on an inflationary factors effective July 1 of each year.
SECTION 7. Timing of Payment. All development fees shall be paid when required by the applicable provisions of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code and in accordance with Government Code section 66007.
SECTION 8. Effective Date of Development Impact Fees. Except for the Fire Impact Fee, the development impact fees established by Section 5 of this Resolution shall be effective on the later of: (i) the sixtieth (60th) day following the adoption of this Resolution or (ii) July 1, 2025. The Fire Impact Fee established by Section 5 of this Resolution shall be effective on the later of: (i) the sixtieth (60th) day following the adoption of this
Resolution No. 2025-010 - Page 6 of 11
Resolution, (ii) the effective date of proposed Ordinance No. 1038, an ordinance adding Chapter 3.80 (“Fire Impact Fee”) to the Municipal Code and establishing the City’s program and requirements for the imposition of a fire development impact fees on development projects, or (iii) July 1, 2025.
SECTION 9. Delayed Effective Date for Development Impact Fees on Housing Development Projects. Notwithstanding Section 8 above, a housing development project that is the subject of an application for a land use entitlement submitted prior to 5 P.M. on April 16, 2025, and that has been deemed complete or is subsequently deemed complete, may elect to be subject to either: (i) the development impact fees and rates in effect as of April 16, 2025 (“Old DIF Program”); (ii) the development impact fees and rates in effect as of the effective date provided in Section 8 (“New DIF Program”); or (iii) the development impact fees and rates in effect as of the time the fees are paid (or as otherwise provided for under applicable state law). For purposes of this Section 9, a “housing development project” shall have the same meaning as currently provided under Government Code Section 65589.5(h)(2).
In order for a housing development project to qualify under the Old DIF Program, the land use entitlement(s) that is the subject of the timely application must be approved and a building permit to construct the associated housing development project must be issued prior to July 1, 2026. Thereafter, the housing development project shall be subject to the development impact fees and rates in effect as of the time the fees are paid.
In order for a housing development project to qualify under the New DIF Program prior to the issuance of a building permit, the land use entitlement(s) that is the subject of the timely application must be approved and complete development plans must be submitted to the City for plan check showing the square footages of all units prior to July 1, 2026. Thereafter, the housing development project shall be subject to the development impact fees and rates in effect as of the time the fees are paid. - The City hereby finds the adjustments noted above will not create a significant deviation in the NBS Nexus Study such that further adjustments would be needed. Any shortfall in funding for improvements identified in the Nexus Study will be paid for by third party sources, such as grant funding or the General Fund.
SECTION 10. Administration Fee. The City shall include an Administration Fee in the not to exceed amount of two and one-half percent (2.5%) of the total project cost for the management of the development impact fee program.
SECTION 11. No Changes to Other City Fees. Nothing in this Resolution shall repeal, amend or supersede any other City imposed fees except for the amount of specific type and category of development impact fee addressed in the Nexus Studies and expressly established by this Resolution.
SECTION 12. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions of this Resolution shall nonetheless remain in full force and effect. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted each section,
Resolution No. 2025-010 - Page 7 of 11
subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Resolution, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions of this Resolution be declared invalid or unenforceable.
SECTION 13. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
11231-0001\3092816v3.doc
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 16th day of April 2025 AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
__________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
Kim Sevy, City Clerk
I, KIM SEVY, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting of said City Council held on the 16thnd day of April 2025.
Executed this ___ day of_______, 2025 at Rancho Cucamonga, California _________________________________
Kim Sevy, City Clerk
11231-0001\3092816v3.doc
EXHIBIT A
NBS NEXUS STUDY
11231-0001\3092816v3.doc
EXHIBIT B
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS
-11-
11231-0001\3092816v3.doc
EXHIBIT C
AMENDMENTS TO MASTER FEE SCHEDULE
Development Impact Fee Study
Revised Final Draft Report
April 10, 2025
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ S-1 Organization of the Report...............................................................................................S-1 Development Data ............................................................................................................ S1 Impact Fee Analysis..........................................................................................................S-2 Impact Fee Summary........................................................................................................S-5 Chapter 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................1-1 Purpose.............................................................................................................................1-1 Legal Framework for Impact Fees....................................................................................1-1 Recent Legislation ............................................................................................................1-6 Impact Fee Calculation Methodology ..............................................................................1-8 Alternative Funding Sources ............................................................................................1-9 Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) ...........................................................1-9 Impact Fee Credits and Exemptions...............................................................................1-10 Review of Assumptions As Required by Gov’t Code Section 66016.5(a)(4) ..................1-11 Facilities Addressed in this Study ...................................................................................1-11 Chapter 2. Development Data.............................................................................................2-1 Study Area ........................................................................................................................2-1 Time Frame.......................................................................................................................2-1 Development Types..........................................................................................................2-1 Demand Variables............................................................................................................2-3 Demand Factors ...............................................................................................................2-5 Existing and Future Development....................................................................................2-5 Chapter 3. Park Impact Fees................................................................................................3-1
Service Area......................................................................................................................3-1 Methodology ....................................................................................................................3-1 Demand Variable..............................................................................................................3-1 Level of Service.................................................................................................................3-2 Existing Parks....................................................................................................................3-2 Existing Level of Service ...................................................................................................3-4 Cost Per Capita .................................................................................................................3-5 Impact Fees per Square Foot ...........................................................................................3-6 Projected Revenue ...........................................................................................................3-7 Updating the Fees ............................................................................................................3-8 Nexus Summary................................................................................................................3-8 Chapter 4. Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee...................................................4-1 Service Area......................................................................................................................4-1 Methodology ....................................................................................................................4-1 Demand Variable..............................................................................................................4-1 Level of Service.................................................................................................................4-2 Existing Facilities...............................................................................................................4-2 Cost per Capita .................................................................................................................4-3 Impact Fees per Square Foot ...........................................................................................4-3 Projected Revenue ...........................................................................................................4-3 Updating the Fees ............................................................................................................4-4 Nexus Summary................................................................................................................4-4 Chapter 5. Library Impact Fee .............................................................................................5-1 Service Area......................................................................................................................5-1 Methodology ....................................................................................................................5-1
Demand Variable..............................................................................................................5-1 Level of Service.................................................................................................................5-1 Existing Facilities...............................................................................................................5-2 Cost per Capita .................................................................................................................5-3 Impact Fees per Square Foot ...........................................................................................5-3 Projected Revenue ...........................................................................................................5-4 Updating the Fees ............................................................................................................5-4 Nexus Summary................................................................................................................5-4 Chapter 6. Animal Center Impact Fee ..................................................................................6-1 Service Area......................................................................................................................6-1 Demand Variable..............................................................................................................6-1 Methodology ....................................................................................................................6-1 Level of Service.................................................................................................................6-1 Existing Facilities...............................................................................................................6-2 Cost per Capita .................................................................................................................6-3 Impact Fees per Square Foot ...........................................................................................6-4 Projected Revenue ...........................................................................................................6-4 Updating the Fees ............................................................................................................6-5 Nexus Summary................................................................................................................6-5 Chapter 7. Police Impact Fee...............................................................................................7-1 Service Area......................................................................................................................7-1 Methodology ....................................................................................................................7-1 Demand Variable..............................................................................................................7-1 Level of Service.................................................................................................................7-2 Existing Facilities...............................................................................................................7-2
Cost per Call for Service ...................................................................................................7-2 Impact Fees per Square Foot (Residential) and per Unit (Non-Residential)....................7-3 Projected Revenue ...........................................................................................................7-4 Updating the Fees ............................................................................................................7-5 Nexus Summary................................................................................................................7-6 Chapter 8. Fire Impact Fee ..................................................................................................8-1 Fire Protection District Law of 1987.................................................................................8-1 Service Area......................................................................................................................8-1 Methodology ....................................................................................................................8-1 Demand Variable..............................................................................................................8-2 Level of Service.................................................................................................................8-2 Facilities, Apparatus and Equipment................................................................................8-3 Cost per Call for Service ...................................................................................................8-6 Impact Fees per Square Foot (Residential) and per Unit (Non-Residential)....................8-7 Fee Adjustment to Avoid Overcollection .........................................................................8-8 Projected Revenue ...........................................................................................................8-9 Updating the Fees ..........................................................................................................8-11 Nexus Summary..............................................................................................................8-11 Chapter 9. Implementation.................................................................................................9-1 Adoption...........................................................................................................................9-1 Administration..................................................................................................................9-1 Requirements Imposed by AB 602...................................................................................9-6 Training and Public Information.....................................................................................9-97 Recovery of Study Costs.....................................................................................................-7 Appendix A ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. A-1
Appendix B ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. B-1 Appendix C-1 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… C-1 -1 Appendix C-2 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… C-2 -1
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page S-1
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
Executive Summary
The City of Rancho Cucamonga retained NBS Government Finance Group to prepare this study to analyze the impacts of new development on several types of capital facilities and to calculate impact fees based on that analysis.
The methods used in this study are consistent with those outlined in the Impact Fee Nexus Study Templates prepared for the California Department of Housing and Community Development by the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley in fulfillment of AB 602. Those methods are designed to satisfy the legal requirements of the U. S.
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 8 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. Community and Recreation Center Facilities
Chapter 5. Library Facilities and Materials
Chapter 6. Animal Center Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment Chapter 7. Police Department Facilities
Chapter 8. RCFPD Facilities, Apparatus and Equipment
Chapter 9 summarizes requirements for adopting and implementing impact fees.
Appendix A to this report contains data from the CoStar real estate database that supports the estimated cost per acre for land used throughout this report. Appendix B contains a detailed inventory of park maintenance vehicles and equipment supporting replacement cost estimates shown in Table 3.3 in Chapter 3. Appendix C contains maps of the City’s existing parks supporting the total park acreage and improved park acreage estimates shown in Table 3.1 in Chapter 3.
Development Data
Chapter 2 of this report presents estimates of existing development in Rancho Cucamonga and a forecast of future development in terms of units of development, population, police department calls for service per year and Rancho Cucamonga Fire
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page S-2
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
Protection District (RCFPD) calls for service per year for each type of development defined in this study.
Chapter 2 also establishes values for factors such as population per unit and police and fire calls per unit per year. Those factors are used to represent the impact of new development in the impact fee calculations.
It is important to note that because of amendments to the Mitigation Fee Act contained in AB 602 (2021) that were incorporated into California law effective in 2022, residential impact fees must be calculated proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units. Impact fees for residential development in this study are calculated as impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family development. Prior to the adoption of AB 602 it was common practice to calculate residential impact fees on a per-unit basis for single-family and multi-family residential development.
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.
The impact fees are based only on capital costs for facilities and other capital assets needed to mitigate the impacts of additional development. Impact fees may not be used to pay for maintenance or operations.
Impact fees calculated in this report are shown later in this Executive Summary.
The following paragraphs briefly discuss the methods used to calculate impact fees for each of the facility types addressed in this study.
Park Land and Park Improvements. Chapter 3 of this report calculates impact fees for park land acquisition and park improvements. The cost of park maintenance vehicles and equipment is included in the park improvement impact fees.
Impact Fees for Park Land Acquisition. The impact fees for park land acquisition calculated in Chapter 3 apply only to residential development and are based on the existing level of service which is defined in this report as the existing ratio of improved park acres to population in the City.
The park land impact fees calculated in Chapter 3 are based on the City’s existing ratio of improved park land to population in acres per capita, and the land cost per acre used in those calculations is based on the estimated cost per acre to acquire additional park land in the City. Those factors are used to calculate a cost per capita, which is multiplied by the population per unit for single-family and multi-family residential development to get a park land impact fee per unit for each type of residential development. Those impact fees per unit are divided by the average square feet per unit to get impact fees per square foot
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page S-3
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
for single-family and multi-family residential development. Impact fees for park land do not apply to non-residential development.
The City does not require dedication of park land or payment of fees in lieu of dedication pursuant to the Quimby Act. Park land acquisition is funded, in part, through development impact fees imposed on residential development.
Impact Fees for Park Improvements. The park improvement impact fees calculated in Chapter 3 are based on the City’s existing ratio of improved park land to population in acres per capita, and the estimated cost per acre for park improvements. The cost of park maintenance vehicles and equipment is incorporated into the park improvement impact fees, but the vehicles and equipment component represents less than 0.5% of those fees.
Park improvement impact fees per unit and per square foot for single-family and multifamily residential development are calculated in the same manner as for the park land impact fees.
The impact fees calculated in this report for park land and park improvements are shown in Table S.1 on page S-5.
Community and Recreation Center Facilities. Chapter 4 of this report calculates impact fees for community and recreation centers.
The impact fees for community and recreation center facilities are based on the City’s existing level of service for these facilities, which is defined as the relationship between the existing population and the replacement cost of existing community and recreation center facilities. That relationship is stated as a cost per capita. The impact fees per unit for community and recreation center facilities are calculated as the cost per capita multiplied by the population per unit for single-family and multi-family residential development. Those impact fees per unit are divided by the average square feet per unit to get an impact fee per square foot for single-family and multi-family development. The impact fees for community and recreation center facilities do not apply to non-residential development.
The impact fees calculated in this report for community and recreation center facilities are shown in Table S.1 on page S-5.
Library Facilities and Materials. Chapter 5 of this report calculates impact fees for library facilities and materials.
The library impact fees are based on the City’s existing level of service which is defined as the relationship between the existing population and the replacement cost of existing library facilities and materials. That relationship is stated as a cost per capita. Impact fees per unit of development are calculated as the cost per capita multiplied by the population per unit for single-family and multi-family residential development. Those impact fees per unit are divided by the average square feet per unit to get an impact fee per square foot for single-family and multi-family development. The impact fees for library facilities and materials do not apply to non-residential development.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page S-4
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
The impact fees for Library facilities and Library materials are calculated separately in Chapter 5, but they are shown as a combined fee in Table S.1 on page S-5.
Animal Center Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment. Chapter 6 of this report calculates impact fees for animal center facilities, vehicles and equipment.
The impact fees are based on the City’s existing level of service for these facilities which is defined as the relationship between the existing population and the replacement cost of the existing facilities, vehicles and equipment. That relationship is stated as a cost per capita. The impact fees per unit for the animal center are calculated as the cost per capita multiplied by the population per unit for single-family and multi-family residential development. Those impact fees per unit are divided by the average square feet per unit to get an impact fee per square foot for single-family and multi-family development. The impact fees for the animal center apply only to residential development.
The impact fees calculated in this report for animal center facilities are shown in Table S.1 on page S-5.
Police Department Facilities. Chapter 7 calculates impact fees for Police Department facilities based on the existing level of service in the City. The existing level of service is defined as the relationship between the replacement cost of existing Police Department facilities and the number of calls for service per year received by the Department. That relationship is stated as 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 each type of development defined in this study. The impact fee per unit for each type of development is calculated by multiplying the cost per call for service and the number of calls per unit per year. For residential development, the cost per unit for single-family and multi-family residential development is divided by the average square feet per unit to get an impact fee per square foot. Police impact fees are intended to apply to all types of new development in the City.
The impact fees calculated in this report for Police Department facilities are shown in Table S.1 on page S-5 for residential development and in Table S.2 on page S-6 for nonresidential development.
Fire Department Facilities, Apparatus and Equipment. Fire protection and emergency response services for the City of Rancho Cucamonga are provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD). Chapter 8 calculates fire impact fees for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which occupies a large part of the RCFPD service area.
By law, fire districts are prohibited from imposing impact fees on their own, but they are allowed to receive funds from other entities for any legitimate purpose. So, the City can impose fire impact fees on new development in the City and provide the revenue from those fees to RCFPD to pay for capital facilities, apparatus and equipment needed to mitigate the impacts of new development in the City.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page S-5
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
Unlike the other impact fees calculated in this study which are based on the existing level of service for the relevant facilities, the fire impact fees in Chapter 8 are calculated using the system plan method. That method bases the impact fees on future conditions, so the cost of both existing and future RCFPD assets serving the City are allocated to both existing and future development in the City. In this case, future development is projected out to 2040.
The impact of development on RCFPD facilities, apparatus and equipment is represented in this study by the number of calls for service per year generated by development in the City. As part of this study, NBS analyzed the distribution of RCFPD 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 year is calculated by dividing estimated 2040 asset costs by the projected number of calls for service per year generated by development in the City in 2040. 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 impact fee per unit for single-family and multi-family residential development is divided by the average square feet per unit to get an impact fee per square foot.
The impact fees calculated in this report for Fire Department facilities are shown in Table S.1, below for residential development and Table S.2 on the next page for nonresidential development.
Impact Fee Summary
Table S.1 summarizes the residential impact fees calculated in this report, which are all shown as impact fees per square foot.
Table S.2 shows the non-residential impact fees calculated in this report, which are calculated on a per-unit basis.
Table S.1: Summary of Residential Impact Fees per Square Foot Calculated in This Study Development Park Park Comm/Rec Animal
Type Units 1Land Imprvmts Centers Libraries Center Police RCFPD Total Residential, Single Family SF $ 1.04 $ 1.94 $ 0.85 $ 0.42 $ 0.09 $ 0.15 $ 0.38 $ 4.87 Residential, Multi-Family SF $ 1.20 $ 2.24 $ 0.99 $ 0.49 $ 0.10 $ 0.19 $ 0.42 $ 5.63 1 SF = 1 gross square foot of building area
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page S-6
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
Table S.3 shows the City’s existing impact fees.
Because the proposed residential impact fees shown in Table S.1 are calculated on a persquare-foot basis in response to amendments to the Mitigation Fee Act, they cannot be compared to the City’s existing residential impact fees, which are charged on a per-unit basis. However, non-residential impact fees are still calculated on a per-unit basis, so it is possible to compare the existing and proposed non-residential impact fees. Table S.4 shows the difference between the existing non-residential impact fees in Table S.3 and the proposed non-residential impact fees from Table S.2. Numbers in parentheses indicate that the proposed fees are lower than the existing fees.
This study proposes eliminating many of the existing impact fees for Senior/Assisted Living Facilities on the grounds that residents of Senior/Assisted Living facilities have limited access to some types of facilities addressed in this study. That is why most of the Table S.2: Summary of Non-Residential Impact Fees per Unit Calculated in This Study Development Park Park Comm/Rec Animal
Type Units 1Land Imprvmts Centers Libraries Center Police RCFPD Total Senior/Assisted Living Bed $ 893 $ 14,397 $ 15,290
Commercial/Retail KSF $ 1,010 $ 1,175 $ 2,185
Hotel/Motel Room $ 64 $ 585 $ 649
Office KSF $ 239 $ 621 $ 860
Industrial KSF $ 66 $ 89 $ 155
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite; Bed = accommodation for a single resident or patient
Table S.3: Existing Impact Fees From City of Rancho Cucamonga 2024 Fee Schedule Development Park Park Comm/Rec Animal
Type Units 1
Land Imprvmts Centers Libraries Center Police RCFPD Total Residential, Single Family DU $ 4,744 $ 4,583 $ 2,481 $ 891 $ 169 $ 376 $ 0 $ 13,244 Residential, Multi-Family DU $ 3,239 $ 3,129 $ 1,693 $ 608 $ 116 $ 297 $ 0 $ 9,082 Senior/Assisted Living Bed $ 1,576 $ 1,523 $ 825 $ 296 $ 56 $ 136 $ 0 $ 4,412 Commercial/Retail KSF $ 1,184 $ 0 $ 1,184
Hotel/Motel Room $ 182 $ 0 $ 182
Office KSF $ 371 $ 0 $ 371
Industrial KSF $ 54 $ 0 $ 54
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite; Bed = accommodation for a single resident or patient
Table S.4: Difference Between Existing Non-Residential Impact Fees and Impact Fees Calculated in This Study Development Park Park Comm/Rec Animal
Type Units 1Land Imprvmts Centers Libraries Center Police RCFPD Total Senior/Assisted Living Bed $ (1,576) $ (1,523) $ (825) $ (296) $ (56) $ 757 $ 14,397 $ 10,878 Commercial/Retail KSF $ (174) $ 1,175 $ 1,001
Hotel/Motel Room $ (118) $ 585 $ 467
Office KSF $ (132) $ 621 $ 489
Industrial KSF $ 12 $ 89 $ 101
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite; Bed = accommodation for a single resident or patient
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page S-7
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
fees for that category show a negative change in Table S.4. At the same time, the proposed creation of an impact fee for RCFPD results in a large increase overall for impact fees on the Senior/Assisted Living category.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1-1
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 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 Rancho Cucamonga (City) and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD or District) 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 City has previously enacted impact fees for the City facilities addressed in this report.
The purpose of this study is to update those fees to reflect current costs and conditions in the City. See Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapters 3.52 (Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee), 3.56 (Library Impact Fee), 3.60 (Animal Center Impact Fee), 3.64, (Police Impact Fee), and 3.68 (Park In-lieu/Impact Fees). The impact fee calculated in this study for Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District facilities, apparatus and equipment would be a new fee.
The impact fees calculated in this report 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 even legislatively adopted impact fees are subject to Nollan and Dolan.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1-2
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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. 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 developmentrelated 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.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1-3
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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 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.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1-4
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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 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 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 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. 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. That new requirement 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 remains in effect.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1-5
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
The City of Rancho Cucamonga publishes the Capital Improvement Program as part of the annual budgeting procedures, and the latest available information can be found on the City’s website under Financial Reports. Further, the City has prepared an amendment to the Major Project Program (which includes the Capital Improvement Program) which will be considered for approval as part of the DIF Program update. A copy of the Major Project Program amendment is available under separate cover.
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.
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) 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.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1-6
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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.
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.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1-7
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
▪ 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 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
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1-8
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1-9
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
demand, the value of existing 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.
Alternative Funding Sources
The Terner Center impact fee templates recommend that an impact fee study discuss the availability of alternative funding sources for facilities addressed in the study and whether there are existing deficiencies for which other funding is needed. This study has not identified existing deficiencies with respect to the existing level of service standard used as the basis for impact fee calculations for all impact fees except those for RCFPD.
However, for several types of facilities including libraries and the animal center, there is a perceived need in the City to provide a level of service higher than the existing level.
This study has not identified alternative funding sources that could be used to elevate the level of service in the City above the level currently provided. Should such funding become available, it could be used for that purpose or, given the many uncertainties regarding the course of future development and the actual cost of future facilities, such funding could be used to cover unanticipated costs of needed facilities. In the event that the City should acquire funding specifically earmarked for facilities identified in the Capital Improvement Program for impact fee funding, it may be appropriate to modify the impact fee calculations to take account of that funding.
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-bycase 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)
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1-10
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Impact Fee Credits and Exemptions
Existing State law provides that certain types of projects, largely involving housing, are exempt from or receive reduced or vested development impact fees (exceptions). These exceptions include, for example, a prohibition on impact fees for accessory dwelling units of 750 square feet or less and vested impact fees for qualifying housing development projects subject to a preliminary application under the Housing Accountability Act, SB 330. Such exceptions may change over time. As a Pro Housing jurisdiction, the City of Rancho Cucamonga recognizes the importance of providing more housing and affordable housing for all income levels. To that end, the City supports current State law in this regard and intends to comply with future changes in this area.
This nexus study anticipated all future development in the City without considering the potential applicability of any exceptions to the impact fees applied to such development. This is because, among other reasons, it is not possible to determine whether any particular project will qualify for an exception and then to what extent. It is speculative to forecast that a certain amount of development expected in the City will be attributable to projects that qualify for exceptions. To be sure, the value of any potential exception was not re-allocated or re-distributed to other development projects. Therefore, no project will subsidize any lost revenue caused by a project that qualifies for an exception, and any shortfalls in funding for exempt or reduced fee projects will be made up through grants or other local discretionary funding sources.
Further, the City has long recognized that for some development projects there is mutual benefit for the developer to construct public improvements or dedicate land that are part of the impact fee program’s list of capital projects. In accordance with the applicable provisions of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code and other laws, the developer may be eligible for a credit against the amount of the relevant impact fee for the cost of the improvement or value of the land dedicated when the development impact fee is calculated. In order to ensure the sustainability and equity of the program, such credits are equal to the estimated value of the improvements and/or dedicated land as outlined in the nexus study, as adjusted and in effect as of the date the fees are calculated.
Finally, the City seeks to defray the cost of construction for public infrastructure through alternative means such as grant programs. The City proactively pursues grants and other funding mechanisms; however, the City does not have the ability to guarantee a certain percentage of grant awards toward projects within this DIF program. In order to ensure that new development funds its fair share of the improvements in this program, applicable grant awards will be first used to offset the appropriate project cost share attributable to existing development and then remaining grant awards (if any) will be used to offset the cost borne by the fee program unless the grant award is specifically made to offset new development costs. Should new development costs be offset by grant or other funding mechanisms, such offset will be accounted for in the next major update to this nexus study.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1-11
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Review of Assumptions As Required by Gov’t Code Section 66016.5(a)(4) The most recent iteration of the adopted fee programs for Park Land and Park Improvements, Community and Recreation Facilities, Library Facilities and Materials, Animal Center Facilities, Vehicles, and Equipment, and Police Facilities Impact Fees were adjusted in 2020 by Resolution No. 20-121 (Appendix XX – Resolution No. 20-121).
Government Code Section 66016.5(a)(4) as amended by AB 602 requires local agencies adopting increases to existing DIF program fees review the assumptions in the prior study as part of a new nexus study. Since the adoption of Resolution No. 20-121, the City approved a General Plan update that set forth a renewed vision for the community including anticipated development patterns, population growth estimates, and public infrastructure, facilities, materials, and equipment needs. Further, since that time, construction costs have increased dramatically for public improvements. This study has reviewed the prior assumptions and incorporated currently available data and assumptions as more appropriate to the analysis considered in this study.
Facilities Addressed in this Study
Impact fees for the following types of facilities are addressed in this report:
▪ Park Land and Park Improvements
▪ Community and Recreation Center Facilities
▪ Library Facilities and Materials
▪ Animal Center Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
▪ Police Facilities
▪ Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Facilities, Apparatus and Equipment 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.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2-1
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 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 Rancho Cucamonga (City) in this study is the planning area defined in the City’s current General Plan which was adopted in 2021. That area encompasses both the existing City and the small Sphere of Influence (SOI) along the northern edge of the City above the Alta Loma neighborhood. Impact fees for City facilities are calculated in Chapters 3 through 7 of this report.
The study area for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD or District) impact fees is the entire area within the boundaries of the District, which includes the entire City and its SOI, as well as an area north of the City that is currently unincorporated and is not planned for annexation to the City. All of RCFPD’s capital assets are located within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, but a very small percentage of the calls for service originating within the district boundaries come from the portion of RCFPD outside the City. The RCFPD impact fees are calculated using all of the calls for service within the District so that the cost of serving the area outside the City is not averaged into the RCFPD impact fees charged within the City. Impact fees for RCFPD facilities, apparatus and equipment are calculated in Chapter 8 of this report.
Time Frame
Planned future development in this study is forecasted out to 2040. However, 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. 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
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2-2
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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”
This study calculates impact fees per square foot for two types of residential development using average square-feet-per-unit numbers provided by the City:
• Single-family Residential Units
• Multi-family-Residential Units (including all attached dwelling units) Senior/Assisted Living Facilities. While senior living and assisted living facilities, including rehabilitation and skilled nursing facilities have some of the characteristics of residential uses, their impact characteristics can be substantially different from most residential development, with less impact on transportation and parks and recreation facilities and greater impact on emergency medical services. Consequently senior/assisted living facilities are treated as a separate category in this study and are not considered a form of housing development subject to the requirements of Government Code Section 66016.5.
Development in this category is measured in terms of beds, which is intended as a proxy for the number of occupants of a facility.
Non-Residential Development. Non-residential development types used in this study are:
▪ Commercial/Retail
▪ Hotel/Motel
▪ Office
▪ Industrial
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).
In the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code (Title 17 of the Municipal Code), allowable uses are grouped into broad categories. In general, those categories correspond reasonably well with the development types listed above, except that in the Development Code, hotels and other lodging uses are included in a category called Service and Office Uses whereas this study breaks out hotels and motels as a separate category.
In cases where a proposed development project does not fit reasonably well into one of the development types defined in this study, the City has the option to calculate an impact fee that is tailored to that specific use. See the sub-section on Other Types of Development, below.
Public Facilities, Public Schools and Parks. In addition to the development types listed above, the development tables presented later in this chapter include public
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2-3
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
(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.
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 customized 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 2.2.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2-4
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Population. Population is used in this study as the demand variable for parks, libraries, community and recreation centers and the animal center. 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.
Police Department Calls for Service. Demand for police services is impacted by both residential and non-residential 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 Rancho Cucamonga Police Department for a one-year period from May 2023 to May 2024.
During that period, the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department logged about 80,000 calls.
A random sample of 648 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 total number of 2023 calls to get the number of calls generated by each type of development for the year. The number of calls associated with 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 type of development.
RCFPD Calls for Service per Year. Demand for fire protection, emergency medical response and other services provided in the City by RCFPD is impacted by both residential and non-residential development. In this study, the number of calls for service per unit per year to RCFPD 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 to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
In 2023, RCFPD logged about 18,600 calls for service. As part of this study, NBS analyzed a random sample of 700 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. Fire calls-per-unit-per-year factors used in this study are shown in Table 2.2, below.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2-5
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Demand Factors
Table 2.1 shows the values of demand factors by development type used in this study.
Factors for population per unit and Police Department calls for service per unit per year are for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Factors for Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District calls for service per unit per year are for the area within the boundaries of the District. Calls from development within the City make up an estimated 99.6% of all calls generated within RCFPD.
Existing and Future Development
Tables 2.2 through 2.4, beginning on the next page, present summaries of existing and future development by development type in Rancho Cucamonga. The figures for units, population and police department calls for service shown in those tables are for the City only. The RCFPD calls for service shown in those tables are for the entire District, but development in the City accounts for more than 99% of those calls.
The portion of RCFPD outside the City is small and development in that area is constrained by topography. The only difference in existing and future development between the City and the District is that the District has an estimated 348 more existing residential units than the number of existing residential units in the City. The number of units does not Table 2.1: Demand Factors Used in This Study
Development Dev Population RCPD Calls RCFPD Calls
Type Units 1
per Unit 2per Unit 3per Unit 4
Residential, Single Family DU 3.15 0.717 0.185
Residential, Multi-Family DU 2.48 0.617 0.139
Senior/Assisted Living Facility Beds 1.738 2.829
Commercial/Retail KSF 1.966 0.231
Hotel/Motel Rooms 0.125 0.115
Office KSF 0.465 0.122
Industrial KSF 0.129 0.017
Public Facilities KSF 0.954 0.476
Public Schools Students 0.118 0.015
Parks Acres 3.474 0.213
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = hotel/motel room or suite; Bed = accommodation for a single resident or patient 2 Population per unit based on American Community Survey Tables 25032 and 25033, 2022 one-year estimates
3 Estimated average Police Department calls for service per unit per year based on analysis of a random sample of calls for service for a one-year period from May 2023 to May 2024; see discussion in text
4 Estimated average Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District calls for service per unit per year based on analysis of a random sample of 2023 calls for service by NBS; see discussion in text
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2-6
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
enter directly into the impact fee calculations. Those 348 additional residential units are not shown in these tables but are included in the calculation of impact fees for RCFPD.
Table 2.2 shows estimated existing development as of January 1, 2024, in terms of units, population, police department calls for service and RCFPD calls for service.
Table 2.3 shows projected new development to 2040, in terms of units, population, police department calls for service and RCFPD calls for service.
Table 2.2: Existing Development - January, 2024
Development Dev Existing Existing Existing Existing
Types Units 1
Units 2Population 2RCPD Calls 3RCFPD Calls 4
Residential, Single Family DU 38,997 122,821 27,980 7,152 Residential, Multi-Family DU 28,803 69,166 17,773 4,013 Senior/Assisted Living Facility Beds 709 1,232 2,006
Commercial/Retail KSF 8,412 16,542 1,942
Hotel/Motel Rooms 1,410 176 162
Office KSF 5,300 2,464 647
Industrial KSF 40,805 5,279 712
Public Facilities KSF 1,292 1,232 615
Public Schools Students 32,732 3,871 485
Parks Acres 456 1,584 97
Total 191,987 78,133 17,831
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = hotel/motel room or suite; Bed = accommodation for a single resident or patient 2 Existing residential units and population based on travel demand model data provided by Fehr & Peers; non-residential units provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department
3 Existing RCPD calls for service per year based on analysis of calls for service to the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department for a one-year period from May 2023 to May 2024 4 Existing RCFPD calls for service per year based on analysis of 2023 calls for service to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2-7
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Table 2.4 shows projected total development in 2040 in terms of units, population, police department calls for service and RCFPD calls for service.
Table 2.3: Projected New Development to 2040
Development Dev Added Added Added Added
Types Units 1
Units 2
Population 2RCPD Calls 3RCFPD Calls 4
Residential, Single Family DU 2,868 8,750 6,278 531
Residential, Multi-Family DU 15,812 33,150 20,455 2,203 Senior/Assisted Living Facility Beds 138 240 391
Commercial/Retail KSF 700 1,377 162
Hotel/Motel Rooms 275 34 32
Office KSF 2,000 930 244
Industrial KSF 5,800 750 101
Public Facilities KSF 252 240 120
Public Schools Students 6,383 755 95
Parks Acres 89 309 19
Total 41,900 31,369 3,897
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = hotel/motel room or suite; Bed = accommodation for a single resident or patient 2 Added residential units and population based on travel demand model data provided by Fehr & Peers, added non-residential units based on conservative scenario projections by Strategic Economics; see Appendix 5.14-1 to the General Plan DEIR 3 Added RCPD calls = added units X calls per unit per year from Table 2.2; average residential calls per unit per year based on the rate for >1,200 - 1,900 square foot units 4 Added RCFPD calls = added units X calls per unit per year from Table 2.2; average residential calls per unit per year based on the rate for >1,200 - 1,900 square foot units
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2-8
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Table 2.4: Projected Total Development in 2040
Development Dev 2040 2040 2040 2040
Types Units 1
Units 2Population 2RCPD Calls3RCFPD Calls 4
Residential, Single Family DU 41,865 123,370 34,258 7,683 Residential, Multi-Family DU 44,615 110,517 38,228 6,216 Senior/Assisted Living Facility Beds 847 1,472 2,397
Commercial/Retail KSF 9,112 17,919 2,104
Hotel/Motel Rooms 1,685 210 194
Office KSF 7,300 3,394 891
Industrial KSF 46,605 6,029 813
Public Facilities KSF 1,544 1,472 735
Public Schools Students 39,115 4,626 580
Parks Acres 545 1,893 116
Total 233,887 109,502 21,728
Note: The figures in Table 2.5 represent the sum of the corresponding figures in Table 2.3 and Table 2.4
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3-1
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
Chapter 3. Park Impact Fees
This chapter calculates impact fees for park land acquisition and for park improvements.
Chapter 3.68 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code established and governs impact fees for park land acquisition and park improvements. The City does not require park land dedication or payment of fees in lieu of dedication pursuant to the Quimby Act (Government Code Section 66477). The Quimby Act would allow park land dedication and in-lieu fee requirements to be based on 3.0 acres per 1,000 population, which is a substantially higher standard than the existing level of service used to calculate park land impact fees in this study.
At present, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has five community parks and 26 neighborhood parks. The City owns about 399 acres of land designated for park use, of which about 346 acres are currently developed as parks. The park impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the relationship between the City’s existing ratio of improved park acres to population. However, later in this chapter, unimproved, City-owned park land is credited against the amount of park land needed to serve future residential development at the existing level of service. The result is a substantial reduction in the amount of the park land impact fees applied to new development.
Service Area
All park impact fees calculated in this chapter are intended to apply to the entire City.
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 that level of service as the City grows.
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 population.
Population is used here because in Rancho Cucamonga, as in most cities, the need for parks is defined in terms of the relationship between park acreage and population.
Because added population is associated with residential development, the impact fees calculated in this chapter apply only to residential development.
The impact fees for each type of residential development depend on the average population per dwelling unit for that type of development. The individual population-perunit factors used to calculate the park impact fees are from Table 2.2 in Chapter 2. See the discussion of population per unit in Chapter 2.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3-2
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
Level of Service
The level-of-service standard used to calculate park impact fees is based on the relationship between the City’s existing park acreage and its existing population.
In 2021, Section 66016.5 was added to the Mitigation Fee by Act AB 602. Paragraph (a)(2) of that section requires that, after January 1, 2022, the level of service used to calculate impact fees in a nexus study must be compared with the existing level of service, and if the proposed new level of service is higher than the existing level of service, an explanation must be included Because the level of service used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the same as the existing level of service, no explanation is required to satisfy the requirements of Section 66016.5(a)(2).
Existing Parks
Table 3.1 on the next page lists the City’s existing parks and shows both total acres and improved acres of park land. For the parks listed in Table 3.1, there are four parks for which the total acres exceed the improved acres, indicating that there is unimproved land available within those parks. Two of those parks, Central Park and Etiwanda Community Park, have a total of 46.61 acres of unimproved land available. Later, in Table 3.4, that unimproved land is credited against the acreage needed to serve future residential development at the current level of service in terms of improved acres per thousand population.
Of the other two parks shown as having available, unimproved park land, Don Tuburcio Tapia Park is on land that is owned by the Cucamonga Valley Water District, not the City, and is subject to lease rights that allow for the District’s ongoing use of the property.
Therefore, the availability of this land for future park purposes remains uncertain, and the 4.34 acres shown as unimproved land is not credited to future development. The 911 Park has park improvements currently under construction, so 1.4 acres shown as unimproved land for that park is also not credited to future development.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3-3
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
Table 3.1: Existing Parks
Park Total Improved
Name Acres 1Acres 4
Community Parks
Central Park 74.45 35.84
Etiwanda Creek Community Park 22.48 14.48
Heritage Community Park 34.02 34.02
Red Hill Community Park 44.20 44.20
Epicenter Adult Sports Complex 48.90 48.90
Subtotal Community Parks 224.05 177.44
Neighborhood Parks
Bear Gulch Park 4.56 4.56
Beryl Park East 10.10 10.10
Beryl Park West 8.72 8.72
Church Street Park 7.00 7.00
Coyote Canyon Park 4.74 4.74
Day Creek Park 9.98 9.98
Don Tuburcio Tapia Park (Long Term Lease) 4.34 0.00
Ellena Park 6.04 6.04
Garcia Park 5.55 5.55
Golden Oak Park 4.99 4.99
Hermosa Park 9.57 9.57
Kenyon Park 7.82 7.82
Legacy Park 3.76 3.76
Lions Park 2.50 2.50
Los Amigos Park 3.36 3.36
Milliken Park 8.40 8.40
Mountain View Park 5.03 5.03
Old Town Park 5.01 5.01
Olive Grove Park 7.38 7.38
Ralph M. Lewis Park 8.03 8.03
Rancho Summit Park 6.71 6.71
Spruce Avenue Park 3.89 3.89
Victoria Arbors Park 7.75 7.75
Victoria Groves Park 6.02 6.02
Vintage Park 8.02 8.02
West Greenway Park 6.10 6.10
Windrows Park 8.01 8.01
9/11 Park 1.40 0.00
Subtotal Neighborhood Parks 174.78 169.04
Total 398.83 346.48
1 Source: City of Rancho Cucamonga; park acreage numbers revised February 2025; see maps of individual parks in Appendix C
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3-4
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
Existing Level of Service
Table 3.2 calculates existing levels of service in terms of acres per capita and acres per 1,000 population for total City-owned park land and for improved park land.
The level-of-service standard for parks contained in the 2021 Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, in terms of a ratio of acres to population, is five acres per 1,000 residents for neighborhood parks (see Table OS-2 in the General Plan).
In 2019, the California Court of Appeal in Boatworks, LLC vs. City of Alameda held that parks not currently open to the public may not be used in calculating the existing level of service for purposes of establishing park impact fees. Impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the existing level of service in terms of improved park acres per 1,000 population. Only park acreage that is improved and open to the public is counted in establishing the existing level of service for both park land acquisition and park improvement impact fees in this study.
In the following pages, the existing level of service is converted into a cost per capita for park land acquisition and park improvements using the existing level of service in acres per capita multiplied by the estimated cost per acre for park land acquisition and park improvements.
There is one additional cost component included in the park improvement impact fees.
That is the capital cost of added park maintenance vehicles and equipment. Table 3.3 calculates the costs per capita for park maintenance vehicles and equipment based on the replacement cost of existing park maintenance vehicles and equipment divided by the existing population of the City. That cost per capita is added to the cost per capita for park improvements in Table 3.6 where the per-capita costs are converted into a cost per unit of development.
Table 3.2: Existing Level of Service - Total/Improved Park Land Existing Existing Acres per Acres per
Component Acres 1Population 2Capita 3
1,000 4
Total Park Land 398.83 191,987 0.00208 2.08
Improved Park Land 346.48 191,987 0.00180 1.80
1 See Table 3.1
2 Existing residential population; see Table 2.2
3 Acres per capita = existing acres / existing population 4 Acres per 1,000 residents = acres per capita X 1,000
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3-5
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
Cost Per Capita
Table 3.4 calculates the cost per capita for park land acquisition and for park improvements using the existing level of service in acres per capita and the cost-per-acre estimates for park land acquisition and park improvements. In both cases, the acres-percapita standard is based on the existing level of service discussed previously in this chapter.
In the next section, the per-capita costs from Table 3.4 are used to calculate impact fees per unit, which are then divided by square-feet-per-unit factors to get impact fees per Table 3.3: Cost per Capita - Existing Park Maintenance Equipment Total Existing Cost per
Cost 1Population 2Capita 3
$1,450,620 191,987 $7.56
1 See Appendix B for a detailed listing of existing park maintenance vehicles and equipment
2 Existing population; see Table 2.3
3 Cost per capita = total cost / existing population
Table 3.4: Cost per Capita - Park Land Acquisition and Park Improvements Cost Acres per Cost per Cost per
Component Capita 1Acre 2Capita 3
Park Land Acquisition 0.0018 $ 1,176,197 $ 2,117.15
Park Land Acquisition-Adjusted 40.0007 $ 1,176,197 $ 823.34 Park Improvements 0.0018 $ 850,000 $ 1,530.00
1 Acres per capita for both park land acquisition and park improvements is based on the existing level of service for improved park land; see Table 3.2 2 Cost per acre for land acquisition based on recent sales data from the CoStar real estate database; see Appendix A for detailed data; cost per acre for park improvements is based on improvement costs, adjusted for specialized im- provement or typical improvements that were omitted, with an adjustment for inflation, for a recently completed 4.9 acre dog park
3 Cost per capita = acres per capita X cost per acre
4 Park land acres per capita is adjusted to credit future development for 46.61 acres (0.0011 acres per capita) of City-owned, unimproved park land in Central Park and Etiwanda Community Park; that adjustment reduces the total park land to be funded by park land impact fees from 75.42 acres to 29.33 acres; the adjus- ted cost per capita is used in Table 3.5 to calculate impact fees for park land acquisition
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3-6
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development for park land acquisition and park improvements.
Impact Fees per Square Foot
Table 3.5 shows the calculation of park land impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development. The average square feet per unit for singlefamily and multi-family residential development were provided by the City.
Table 3.6 shows the calculation of impact fees per square foot for single-family and multifamily residential development for park improvements. The cost of park maintenance vehicles and equipment is incorporated into the park improvement impact fees but amounts to less than 0.5% of those fees.
Table 3.5: Park Land Acquisition Impact Fee per Square Foot Development Unit Population Cost per Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Impact Fee Type Type 1
per Unit 2Capita 3per Unit 4per Unit 5per Sq Ft 6
Residential, Single Family DU 3.15 $ 823.34 $ 2,593.51 2,500 $ 1.04 Residential, Multi-Family DU 2.48 $ 823.34 $ 2,041.88 1,700 $ 1.20 1 DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 2.1
3 See Table 3.4
4 Impact fee per unit = population per unit X cost per capita 5 Average square feet per unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 6 Impact fee per square foot = impact fee per unit / square feet per unit Table 3.6: Park Improvement Impact Fee per Square Foot (Incl. Maintenance Equipment) Development Population Cost per Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Impact Fee Type Units 1per Unit 2Capita 3per Unit 4per Unit 5per Sq Ft 6 Residential, Single Family DU 3.15 $1,537.56 $ 4,843.30 2,500 $ 1.94 Residential, Multi-Family DU 2.48 $1,537.56 $ 3,813.14 1,700 $ 2.24 1 DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 2.1
3 Includes cost per capita for park improvements from Table 3.4 and cost per capita for park maintenance vehicles and equipment from Table 3.3
4 Impact fee per unit = population per unit X cost per capita 5 Average square feet per unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 6 Impact fee per square foot = impact fee per unit / square feet per unit
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3-7
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
Projected Revenue
Table 3.7 projects revenue from park land impact fees using the park land impact fees per square foot from Table 3.5, the average square feet per unit for each type of residential development and the added residential units from Table 2.3. This projection assumes that future development occurs as shown in Chapter 2 and that all future private development will be subject to impact fees. However, for a variety of reasons, some future development may not be subject to these impact fees. See the section on Impact Fee Credits and Exemptions in Chapter 1.
Table 3.8 projects revenue from park improvement impact fees using the park land impact fees per square foot from Table 3.6, the average square feet per unit for each type of residential development and the added residential units from Table 2.3. This projection assumes that future development occurs as shown in Chapter 2.
Specific projects and costs to be funded by these impact fees can be found in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan.
Table 3.7: Projected Revenue - Park Land Acquisition Impact Fees Development Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Added Projected
Type per Sq Ft 1per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single Family $ 1.04 2,500 2,868 $ 7,456,800 Residential, Multi-Family $ 1.20 1,700 15,812 $ 32,256,480 Total $ 39,713,280
1 See Table 3.5
2 Average square feet per unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per square foot X average square feet per unit X added units
Table 3.8: Projected Revenue - Park Improvement Impact Fees Development Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Added Projected
Type per Sq Ft 1per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single Family $ 1.94 2,500 2,868 $ 13,909,800 Residential, Multi-Family $ 2.24 1,700 15,812 $ 60,212,096 Total $ 74,121,896
1 Impact fee (cost) per capita; see Table 3.6
2 Average square feet per unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per square foot X average square feet per unit X added units
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3-8
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the current estimated cost of park land acquisition and park 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) or the California Construction Cost Index. 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.
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 Rancho Cucamonga and to prevent a reduction in the level of service provided to residents of the City as a result of new development.
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. Specific projects and costs to be funded by these impact fees can be found in the City’s Capital Improvement Program.
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 population associated with new residential development in Rancho Cucamonga.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New development increases the need for
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3-9
Development Impact Fee Study
April 10, 2025
parksto maintain the existing level of service, as described earlier in this chapter. Without additional parks, the increase in population associated with new residential development would result in a reduction in the level of service provided to all residents of the 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 residential development project will depend on the unit types and square footage associated with that project. The fees per square foot calculated in this chapter for each type of residential development are based on the estimated average population per unit and square footage per unit for that type of development in Rancho Cucamonga. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the need for parks in the City.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 4-1
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Chapter 4. Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee
This chapter calculates impact fees for community and recreation centers needed to serve future development in the City. Chapter 3.52 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code establishes and governs the Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga has a number of existing community and recreation centers as well as the Victoria Gardens Cultural Center, which is included in this category.
The Paul A. Biane Library, which is a part of the Victoria Gardens Cultural Center, is addressed separately in Chapter 5, Libraries.
The community and recreation center impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the relationship between the City’s existing population and the replacement cost of Rancho Cucamonga’s existing community center and recreation center facilities.
Service Area
The community and recreation center impact fee is intended to apply to the entire City.
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 that level of service as the City grows.
Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development. The demand variable used to calculate impact fees for community and recreation centers is population. Since population is associated with residential development, these impact fees will apply only to residential development.
Population is used as the demand variable for these fees because the need for community and recreation centers is normally defined in terms of the size of the population to be served. Added population is used in this chapter to measure the impact of new development on the need for community and recreation center facilities.
Average population per unit is estimated for each category of residential development defined in this study. Individual population-per-unit factors for each category of residential development are shown in Table 2.2 in Chapter 2.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 4-2
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Level of Service
The City has not adopted a formal level of service standard for community and recreation centers. Since some existing facilities such as the Lewis Family Playhouse at the Victoria Gardens Cultural Center are one-of-a-kind, a ratio of facility square footage to population would not reflect differences in cost for different types of facilities. Consequently, the level-of-service standard used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the existing relationship between the City’s population and the replacement cost of existing community and recreation centers, stated as a cost per capita. See the Cost per Capita section below.
In 2021, Section 66016.5 was added to the Mitigation Fee by Act AB 602. Paragraph (a)(2) of that section requires that, after January 1, 2022, the level of service used to calculate impact fees in a nexus study must be compared with the existing level of service, and if the proposed new level of service is higher than the existing level of service, an explanation must be included. Because the level of service used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the same as the existing level of service, no explanation is required to satisfy the requirements of Section 66016.5(a)(2).
Existing Facilities
Table 4.1 lists the City’s existing community and recreation centers with their estimated replacement cost. Replacement cost is used in this analysis as an indicator of the cost of constructing additional facilities to serve future development.
Table 4.1: Existing Community and Recreation Centers Estimated Replacement Cost Facility Site Site Building Building Impact Fee
Name Acres 1
Value 2
Sq. Feet 3Repl Cost 4Cost Basis 5
RC Family Resource Center 1.80 $ 2,117,155 11,800 $ 6,926,502 $ 9,043,657 RC Sports Center 1.47 $ 1,729,010 32,000 $ 18,783,734 $ 20,512,744 Lion's Center West 0.24 $ 282,287 11,400 $ 6,691,705 $ 6,973,993 Lion's Center East 0.37 $ 435,193 11,384 $ 6,682,313 $ 7,117,506 Lewis/Brulte Community/Sr. Ctr. Located in Central Park 57,000 $ 33,458,527 $ 33,458,527 Heritage Park Equestrian Center Located in Heritage Park 3,045 $ 1,787,390 $ 1,787,390 Victoria Gardens Cultural Center 1.80 $ 2,117,155 67,584 $ 49,005,658 $ 51,122,812 Total $ 6,680,799 194,213 $ 123,335,829 $ 130,016,628
1 Site Acres provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department 2 Existing site value = site acres X estimated land value of $1,176,197 per acre; see Appendix A 3 Building square footage provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department 4 Building replacement cost based on estimated cost in 2020 impact fee study escalated to 2024 using the California Construction Cost Index
5 Impact fee cost basis = site value + building replacement cost
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 4-3
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Cost per Capita
Table 4.2 calculates the replacement cost per capita for community and recreation center facilities using the impact fee cost basis from Table 4.1 and the existing population from Table 2.3 in Chapter 2.
In the next section, the cost per capita from Table 4.2 is used to calculate community and recreation center impact fees per unit, which are then divided by square-feet-per-unit factors to get impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development.
Impact Fees per Square Foot
Table 4.3 shows the calculation of community and recreation center impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development. The average square feet per unit for single-family and multi-family residential development were provided by the City.
Projected Revenue
Table 4.4 projects revenue from the community and recreation center impact fees using the impact fees per square foot from Table 4.3, the average square feet per unit for each Table 4.2: Community and Rec Centers - Existing Level of Service Impact Fee Existing Cost per
Cost Basis 1Population 2
Capita 3
$130,016,628 191,987 $677.22
1 See Table 4.1
2 Existing population; see Table 2.2
3 Cost per capita = impact fee cost basis / existing population Table 4.3: Community and Recreation Centers - Impact Fees per Square Foot Development Population Cost per Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Impact Fee Type Units 1
per Unit 2Capita 3per Unit 4per Unit 5per Sq Ft 6
Residential, Single Family DU 3.15 $677.22 $ 2,133.23 2,500 $ 0.85 Residential, Multi-Family DU 2.48 $677.22 $ 1,679.50 1,700 $ 0.99 1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 2.1
3 Cost per capita; see Table 4.2
4 Impact fee per unit = population per unit X cost per capita 5 Average square feet per unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 6 Impact fee per square foot = impact fee per unit / square feet per unit
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 4-4
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
type of residential development and the added residential units from Table 2.3. This projection assumes that future development occurs as shown in Chapter 2 and that all future private development will be subject to impact fees. However, for a variety of reasons, some future development may not be subject to these impact fees. See the section on Impact Fee Credits and Exemptions in Chapter 1.
Specific projects and costs to be funded by these impact fees can be found in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan.
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the current estimated replacement costs for community and recreation center facilities. We recommend that the fees be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Building Cost Index (BCI) or the Department of General Services California Construction Cost Index. 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 an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees to 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
Table 4.4: Projected Revenue - Community/Rec Center Impact Fees Development Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Added Projected
Type per Sq Ft 1
per Unit 2Units 3
Revenue 4
Residential, Single Family $ 0.85 2,500 2,868 $ 6,094,500 Residential, Multi-Family $ 0.99 1,700 15,812 $ 26,611,596 Total $ 32,706,096
1 See Table 4.3
2 Average square feet per unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per square foot X average square feet per unit X added units
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 4-5
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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 the Nollan and Dolan decisions discussed in Chapter 1. (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 prevent new residential development from reducing the quality and availability of public services provided to residents of the city by requiring new residential development to contribute to the cost of expanding the availability of community and recreation center assets in the city.
Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional community and recreation centers to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for those facilities in the City. Specific projects and costs to be funded by these impact fees can be found in the City’s Capital Improvement Program.
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 community and recreation center facilities to mitigate the impact of added population associated with new residential development on the need for community and recreation centers in Rancho Cucamonga.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New residential development increases the need for community and recreation center facilities to maintain the existing level of service as described earlier in this chapter. Without additional community and recreation center facilities, the increase in population associated with new residential development would result in a reduction in the level of service provided to all residents of the City.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The community and recreation center impact fees calculated in this chapter are proportional to the impact of the added population associated with various categories of residential development in the City. The fees per square foot of development calculated in this chapter for each type of residential development are based on the estimated average population per unit and square footage per unit for each type of residential development in Rancho Cucamonga. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the need for community and recreation center facilities in the City.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5-1
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Chapter 5. Library Impact Fee
This chapter calculates impact fees for library facilities and materials needed to serve future development in the City. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has two existing libraries:
the Paul A. Biane Library located in the Victoria Gardens Cultural Center and the Archibald Library on Archibald Avenue. Chapter 3.56 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code establishes and governs the Library Impact Fee.
Service Area
The library impact fee is intended to apply to the entire City.
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 that existing level of service as the City grows.
Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development. The demand variable used to calculate the library impact fee is population.
Population is used as the demand variable for these fees because the need for libraries is normally defined in terms of the size of the population to be served. Added population is used in this chapter to measure the impact of new development on the need for library facilities.
Because population per dwelling unit varies by development category, the average population per unit is estimated for each category of residential development defined in this study. Those individual population-per-unit factors are shown in Table 2.2 in Chapter
2. Level of Service
The City has not adopted a formal level of service standard for libraries. The level-ofservice standard used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the existing relationship between the City’s population and the replacement cost of library facilities and materials stated as a cost per capita. See the Cost per Capita section below.
In 2021, Section 66016.5 was added to the Mitigation Fee by Act AB 602. Paragraph (a)(2) of that section requires that, after January 1, 2022, the level of service used to calculate impact fees in a nexus study must be compared with the existing level of service, and if the proposed new level of service is higher than the existing level of service, an explanation must be included. Because the level of service used to calculate impact fees
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5-2
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
in this chapter is the same as the existing level of service, no explanation is required to satisfy the requirements of Section 66016.5(a)(2).
Existing Facilities
Table 5.1 lists the City’s existing libraries with their estimated replacement cost.
Replacement cost is used in this analysis as an indicator of the cost of constructing additional facilities to serve future development. Cost for library furniture fixtures and equipment, and the contents of the museum at the Biane Library are listed separately.
This analysis also includes the cost of library materials (books and electronic media). Table
5.2 shows the estimated replacement cost of the library system’s existing materials.
Table 5.1: Existing Library Facilities
Site Site Building Building Impact Fee
Facility Acres Value 1
Sq. Feet 2Repl Cost 3Cost Basis 4
Paul A. Biane Library 1.35 $ 1,587,866 38,912 $ 26,298,402 $ 27,886,268 Museum Contents at Biane Library $ 3,500,000
Archibald Library 1.67 $ 1,964,249 22,500 $ 11,964,272 $ 13,928,521 Library Furniture, Fixtures, Equipt. $ 4,100,000
Library Kiosk (RC Resource Center) 199 $ 220,000 $ 220,000 Library Kiosk (Fire Station 178) 199 $ 220,000 $ 220,000 Total $ 3,552,115 61,810 $ 38,702,674 $ 49,854,789
1 Site value based on $1,176,197 per acre; see Appendix A 2 Building square footage provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Library Services Department 3 Building replacement cost based on the estimated cost in 2020 impact fee study escalated to 2024 using the California Construction Cost Index
4 Impact fee cost basis = site value + building replacement cost Table 5.2: Existing Library Materials
Number Avg Cost Impact Fee
of Items 1per Item 2Cost Basis 3
269,559 $54.71 $14,747,573
1 Number of items provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Library Services Department
2 Cost per item estimated by the Library Services Department 3 Impact fee cost basis = cost of existing library materials = number of items X average cost per item
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5-3
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Cost per Capita
Table 5.3 calculates the replacement cost per capita for library facilities and materials using the impact fee cost basis for library facilities from Table 5.1, and the impact fee cost basis for existing library materials from Table 5.2, both divided by the City’s existing population from Table 2.3 in Chapter 2.
In the next section, the total cost per capita from Table 5.3 is used to calculate library impact fees per unit, which are then divided by square feet per unit factors to get impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development.
Impact Fees per Square Foot
Table 5.4 shows the calculation of library impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development. The average square feet per unit for single-family and multi-family residential development were provided by the City.
Table 5.3: Library Facilities and Materials - Cost per Capita Impact Fee Existing Cost per
Component Cost Basis 1
Population 2Capita 3
Library Facilities $ 49,854,789 191,987 $ 259.68
Library Materials $ 14,747,573 191,987 $ 76.82
Total $ 64,602,362 191,987 $ 336.49
1 See Tables 5.1 and 5.2
2 Existing population; see Table 2.2
3 Cost per capita = impact fee cost basis / existing population Table 5.4: Library Impact Fees per Square Foot
Development Dev Cost per Population Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Impact Fee Type Units 1
Capita 2per Unit 3
per Unit 4per Unit 5per Sq Ft 6
Residential, Single Family DU $ 336.49 3.15 $ 1,059.96 2,500 $ 0.42 Residential, Multi-Family DU $ 336.49 2.48 $ 834.51 1,700 $ 0.49 1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit
2 Cost per capita; see Table 5.3
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = population per unit X cost per capita 5 Average square feet per unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 6 Impact fee per square foot = impact fee per unit / square feet per unit
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5-4
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Projected Revenue
Table 5.5 projects revenue from the library impact fees using the impact fees per square foot from Table 5.4, the average square feet per unit for each type of residential development and the added residential units from Table 2.3. This projection assumes that future development occurs as shown in Chapter 2 and that all future private development will be subject to impact fees. However, for a variety of reasons, some future development may not be subject to these impact fees. See the section on Impact Fee Credits and Exemptions in Chapter 1.
Specific projects and costs to be funded by these impact fees can be found in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan.
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the current estimated replacement costs for library facilities and materials. We recommend that the fees be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Building Cost Index (BCI) or the Department of General Services California Construction Cost Index. 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 an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees to 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; Table 5.5: Projected Revenue - Library Impact Fees
Development Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Added Projected
Type per Sq Ft 1
per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single Family $ 0.42 2,500 2,868 $ 3,011,400 Residential, Multi-Family $ 0.49 1,700 15,812 $ 13,171,396 Total $ 16,182,796
1 See Table 5.4
2 Average square feet per unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per square foot X average square feet per unit X added units
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5-5
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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 the Nollan and Dolan decisions discussed in Chapter 1. (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 prevent new residential development from reducing the quality and availability of public services provided to residents of the city by requiring new residential development to contribute to the cost of expanding the availability of library and cultural center assets in the city.
Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional library facilities and materials to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for those facilities in the City. Specific projects and costs to be funded by these impact fees can be found in the City’s Capital Improvement Program.
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 library facilities and materials to mitigate the impact of added population associated with new residential development on the need for library services in Rancho Cucamonga.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New residential development increases the need for libraries to maintain the existing level of service, as described earlier in this chapter. Without additional library facilities and materials, the increase in population associated with new residential development would result in a reduction in the level of service provided to all residents of the City.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The library impact fees calculated in this chapter are proportional to the impact of the added population associated with various categories of residential development in the City. The fees per square foot of development calculated in this chapter for each category of residential development are based on the estimated average population per unit and square footage per unit for each type of residential development in Rancho Cucamonga. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the need for library facilities and materials in the City.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6-1
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Chapter 6. Animal Center Impact Fee
This chapter calculates impact fees for additional animal center facilities, vehicles and equipment needed to serve future development in the City. Chapter 3.60 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code establishes and governs the animal center impact fee.
The City’s existing Animal Center is already over capacity and additional space will be needed to serve the growing demand imposed by future development. It should be noted that the impact fees calculated in this chapter will only maintain the existing level of service provided by the Animal Center and will not remedy any existing deficiencies in Animal Center facilities.
Service Area
The animal center impact fee is intended to apply to the entire City.
Demand Variable
It is reasonable to assume that the demand for Animal Center facilities depends on the number of pets kept by City residents, in which case the need for animal center facilities is reasonably related to population of the City. Consequently, added population will be used to represent the impact of development on the need for additional Animal Center facilities.
Because added population is a function of new residential development, the fees calculated in this chapter apply only to residential development.
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 that existing level of service as the City grows.
Level of Service
The City has not adopted a formal level of service standard for animal center facilities.
Consequently, the level-of-service standard used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the existing relationship between the City’s population and the replacement cost of existing animal center facilities, vehicles and equipment, stated as a cost per capita. See the Cost per Capita section below.
In 2021, Section 66016.5 was added to the Mitigation Fee by Act AB 602. Paragraph (a)(2) of that section requires that, after January 1, 2022, the level of service used to calculate impact fees in a nexus study must be compared with the existing level of service, and if the proposed new level of service is higher than the existing level of service, an explanation must be included. Because the level of service used to calculate impact fees
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6-2
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
in this chapter is the same as the existing level of service, no explanation is required to satisfy the requirements of Section 66016.5(a)(2).
Existing Facilities
Table 6.1 shows the estimated replacement cost for the City’s existing Animal Center and the value of a 1.92-acre site the City has acquired to expand that facility. Table 6.1 also shows a credit for the current balance in the City’s Animal Center impact fee fund which is available to increase the existing level of service.
Table 6.2 lists the Animal Services Department’s existing vehicles and equipment with replacement costs.
Table 6.1: Existing Animal Center Replacement Cost
Site Site Building Building Impact Fee
Facility Acres Value 1Sq. Feet 2Repl Cost 3Cost Basis 4 Existing Animal Center 1.60 $1,881,915 12,148 $ 8,305,256 $ 10,187,171 Animal Center Expansion Site 1.92 $2,258,298 $ 2,258,298 Total $ 4,140,213 12,148 $ 8,305,256 $ 12,445,469
1 Existing site value = site acres X $1,176,197 per acre; see Appendix A 2 Building square footage provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Animal Services Department 3 Building replacement cost based on estimated cost in 2020 impact fee study escalated to 2024 using the California Construction Cost Index
4 Impact fee cost basis = site value + building replacement cost
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6-3
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Cost per Capita
Table 6.3 calculates the cost per capita for Animal Center facilities, vehicles and equipment using the impact fee cost basis from Tables 6.1 and 6.2 and the City’s existing residential population from Table 2.3 in Chapter 2.
In the next section, the total cost per capita from Table 6.3 is used to calculate animal center impact fees per unit, which are then divided by square feet per unit factors to get impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development.
Table 6.2: Animal Center Vehicles and Equipment
Impact Fee
Manufacturer Type Description Cost Basis 1
Ford F-250 Pickup Truck $ 110,000
Ford F-250 Pickup Truck $ 110,000
Ford Ranger Pickup Truck $ 40,000
Saturn UT $ 30,000
Chevrolet SV Cargo Van $ 55,000
Chevrolet Cargo Van $ 55,000
Maverick Horse Trailer $ 15,000
Midmark Dental X-Ray Machine $ 22,970
Midmark Mobile Dental Machine $ 12,792
VMS Plus Anesthesia Machine (2) $ 7,274
VMS Anesthesia Machine (2) $ 6,738
LED Procedure Light - Dual $ 7,851
LED Procedure Light - Single (4) $ 15,704
LED Procedure Light - Mobile $ 3,926
Cuattro DR X-Ray Machine $ 52,000
Sound Imaging Ultrasound Machine $ 20,000
Total $ 564,255
1 Impact fee cost basis = replacement cost; replacement cost estimated by the Animal Services Department
Table 6.3: Animal Shelter Facilities and Equipment - Cost per Capita Cost Impact Fee Existing Cost per
Component Cost Basis 1
Population 2Capita 3
Facilities $ 12,445,469 191,987 $ 64.82
Vehicles & Equipment $ 564,255 191,987 $ 2.94
Total $ 13,009,724 191,987 $ 67.76
1 See Tables 6.1 and 6.2
2 See Table 2.2
3 Cost per capita = impact fee cost basis / existing population
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6-4
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Impact Fees per Square Foot
Table 6.4 shows the calculation of animal center impact fees per square foot for singlefamily and multi-family residential development. The average square feet per unit for single-family and multi-family residential development were provided by the City.
Projected Revenue
Table 6.5 projects revenue from the animal center impact fees using the impact fees per square foot from Table 6.4, the average square feet per unit for each type of residential development and the added residential units from Table 2.3. This projection assumes that future development occurs as shown in Chapter 2 and that all future private development will be subject to impact fees. However, for a variety of reasons, some future development may not be subject to these impact fees. See the section on Impact Fee Credits and Exemptions in Chapter 1.
Table 6.4: Animal Shelter - Impact Fees per Square Foot Development Population Cost per Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Impact Fee Type Units 1
per Unit 2Capita 3per Unit 4per Unit 5per Sq Ft 6
Residential, Single Family DU 3.15 $ 67.76 $ 213.46 2,500 $ 0.09 Residential, Multi-Family DU 2.48 $ 67.76 $ 168.05 1,700 $ 0.10 1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 2.1
3 Cost per capita; see Table 6.3
4 Impact fee per unit = population per unit X cost per capita 5 Average square feet per unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 6 Impact fee per square foot = impact fee per unit / square feet per unit Table 6.5: Projected Revenue - Animal Center Impact Fees Development Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Added Projected
Type per Sq Ft 1
per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single Family $ 0.09 2,500 2,868 $ 645,300 Residential, Multi-Family $ 0.10 1,700 15,812 $ 2,688,040 Total $ 3,333,340
1 See Table 6.4
2 Average square feet per unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per square foot X average square feet per unit X added units
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6-5
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Specific projects and costs to be funded by these impact fees can be found in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan.
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated replacement costs for animal center facilities. We recommend that the fees be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Building Cost Index (BCI) or the General Services Department’s California Construction Cost Index.
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 an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees to 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 the Nollan and Dolan decisions discussed in Chapter 1. (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 prevent new residential development from reducing the quality and availability of public services provided to residents of the city by requiring new residential development to contribute to the cost of expanding the availability of animal center assets in the city.
Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional animal center facilities and equipment to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for those facilities in the City. Specific projects and costs to be funded by these impact fees can be found in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan.
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 animal center facilities and equipment to mitigate the impact of added
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6-6
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
population associated with new residential development on the need for animal center facilities in Rancho Cucamonga.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New residential development increases the need for animal center facilities to maintain the existing level of service, as described earlier in this chapter. Without additional animal center facilities, additional residential development would further overburden the existing animal center.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. This study assumes that the need for animal center facilities in the City is impacted by increasing population. The amounts of the animal center impact fees calculated in this chapter are proportional to the impact of the added population associated with various categories of residential development in the City. The fees per square foot calculated in this chapter for each type of residential development are based on the estimated average population per unit and square footage per unit for that type of residential development in Rancho Cucamonga. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the need for animal center facilities in the City.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7-1
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Chapter 7. Police Impact Fee
This chapter calculates impact fees for police facilities needed to serve future development in the City. Chapter 3.64 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code establishes and governs the police impact fee.
The City’s primary police facility is the Public Safety Building at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center. The other existing City-owned police facility is a satellite police station colocated with Fire Station 172 on San Bernardino Road in the western portion of the City.
The department also has a substation in a leased space in the Victoria Gardens shopping mall and is planning to construct a permanent substation in that area in the future.
Service Area
The police impact fee is intended to apply to the entire City.
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 that existing level of service as the City grows.
Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development on a certain type of facilities. The demand variable used to calculate impact fees for police facilities is calls for service per year.
As part of this study, NBS analyzed a random sample of approximately 80,000 calls for service logged by the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department for a one-year period from May 2023 to May 2024 to estimate the number of calls per unit per year generated by each type of development defined in this study. Table 2.2 in Chapter 2 shows the callsper-unit-per-year factors derived from that analysis. Those factors are used to calculate impact fees per unit later in this chapter. For a more detailed discussion of how calls for service were analyzed, see Chapter 2.
One of the findings from the calls-for-service analysis is that 8.4% of police calls for service in Rancho Cucamonga during the relevant period were generated by public facilities, public schools and parks. The police facility costs associated with those calls are not allocated to new private development in this study.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7-2
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Level of Service
The City has not adopted a formal level of service standard for police facilities. The level of service used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the existing level of service, which is defined as the relationship between the replacement cost of police facilities shown in Table 7.1 and the number of police calls for service per year received in the one-year period from May 2023 to May 2024.
In 2021, Section 66016.5 was added to the Mitigation Fee by Act AB 602. Paragraph (a)(2) of that section requires that, after January 1, 2022, the level of service used to calculate impact fees in a nexus study must be compared with the existing level of service, and if the proposed new level of service is higher than the existing level of service, an explanation must be included. Because the level of service used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the same as the existing level of service, no explanation is required to satisfy the requirements of Section 66016.5(a)(2).
Existing Facilities
Table 7.1 lists the City’s existing police facilities with their estimated replacement cost.
Replacement cost is used in this analysis as an indicator of the cost of constructing additional facilities to serve future development.
Cost per Call for Service
Table 7.2 calculates the facility cost per call for service for police facilities using the impact fee cost basis from Table 7.1 and the number of existing calls for service from Table 2.3 in Chapter 2.
Table 7.1: Existing Police Facilities
Facility Building Impact Fee
Name Square Feet 1 Cost Basis 2
Civic Center Public Safety Building 30,500 $ 30,454,510 Police Department Structure Parking - 62 spaces $ 2,759,000 San Bernardino Road Satellite Station 5,673 $ 6,934,243 Total 36,173 $ 40,147,754
1 Building square feet provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department 2 Impact fee cost basis for Public Safety Building and Satellite Station = estimated building replacement cost from 2020 impact fee study escalated to 2024 using the California Construction Cost Index; impact fee cost basis for Police Dept structure parking based on current estimated construction cost of $44,500 per space for structure parking
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7-3
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
In the next section, the cost per call from Table 7.2 is multiplied by calls per unit factors to calculate police impact fees per unit for each type of development defined in this study The residential impact fees per unit are then divided by square feet-per-unit factors to get impact fees per square foot for residential.
The cost per call from Table 7.2 can also be used to customize impact fees for any nonresidential project that does not reasonably fit within one of the development types identified in this report. Such a customized fee would be based on the estimated number of police calls per year for the project, multiplied by the cost per call from Table 7.2. The number of police calls per year for a specific type of development project can be estimated by reviewing call records for similar existing projects in the City.
Impact Fees per Square Foot (Residential) and per Unit (Non-Residential) Table 7.3 shows the calculation of police impact fees per square foot for residential development and per unit for non-residential development.
Table 7.2: Facility Cost per Call for Service per Year
Impact Fee Existing Calls Cost per Call
Cost Basis 1
for Service 2for Service 3
$40,147,754 78,133 $513.84
1 See Table 7.1
2 See Table 2.3
3 Cost per call for service per year = impact fee cost share / existing calls for service
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7-4
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Projected Revenue
Potential revenue from the police impact fees is projected separately for residential and non-residential development because residential impact fees are per square foot and non-residential impact fees are per unit. These projections assume that future development occurs as shown in Chapter 2 and that all future private development will be subject to impact fees. However, for a variety of reasons, some future development may not be subject to these impact fees. See the section on Impact Fee Credits and Exemptions in Chapter 1.
Table 7.4 shows the projected revenue to 2040 from the residential police impact fees calculated in this chapter.
Table 7.3: Police Impact Fees per Square Foot (Residential) and per Unit (Non-Residential) Development Cost per Call Calls Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Impact Fee Type Units 1
for Service 2per Unit 3per Unit 4per Unit 5per Sq Ft 6
Residential, Single Family DU $513.84 0.717 $ 368.67 2,500 $ 0.15 Residential, Multi-Family DU $513.84 0.617 $ 317.07 1,700 $ 0.19 Senior/Assisted Living Facility Beds $513.84 1.738 $ 892.88 Commercial/Retail KSF $513.84 1.966 $ 1,010.46
Hotel/Motel Rooms $513.84 0.125 $ 64.14
Office KSF $513.84 0.465 $ 238.89
Industrial KSF $513.84 0.129 $ 66.48
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite; Bed = accommodation for one patient or resident 2 Cost per call for service per year; see Table 7.2
3 See Table 2.1 and the discussion of calls for service in Chapter 2 4 Impact fee per unit = cost per call for service X calls per unit 5 Average square feet per residential unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 6 Impact fee per square foot (residential) = impact fee per unit / square feet per unit
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7-5
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Table 7.5 shows the projected revenue to 2040 from the non-residential police impact. fees calculated in this chapter.
The combined impact fee revenue from Tables 7.4 and 7.5 equals $7,894,510. Specific projects and costs to be funded by these impact fees can be found in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan.
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the current estimated replacement costs for police facilities. We recommend that the fees be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Table 7.4: Projected Revenue - Police Impact Fees (Residential) Development Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Added Projected
Type per Sq Ft 1
per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single Family $ 0.15 2,500 2,868 $ 1,075,500 Residential, Multi-Family $ 0.19 1,700 15,812 $ 5,107,276 Total $ 6,182,776
1 See Table 7.3
2 Average square feet per unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per square foot X average square feet per unit X added units
Table 7.5: Projected Revenue - Police Impact Fees (Non-Residential) Development Dev Impact Fee Future Projected
Type Units 1
per Unit 2Units 3
Revenue 4
Senior/Assisted Living Facility Beds $ 892.88 138 $ 123,445 Commercial/Retail KSF $ 1,010.46 700 $ 707,320
Hotel/Motel Rooom $ 64.14 275 $ 17,635
Office KSF $ 238.89 2,000 $ 477,773
Industrial KSF $ 66.48 5,800 $ 385,561
Total $ 1,711,734
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite; Bed = accommmodation for one patient or resident
2 Impact fee per unit of development; see Table 7.3
3 Future units; see Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per unit X future units
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7-6
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Building Cost Index or the General Services Department California Construction Cost Index. 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 an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees to 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 prevent new residential and commercial/industrial development from reducing the quality and availability of public services provided to residents of the city by requiring new residential and business development to contribute to the cost of expanding the availability of police assets in the city.
Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional police facilities to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for those facilities in the City. Specific projects and costs to be funded by these impact fees can be found in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan.
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 police facilities to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for police facilities in Rancho Cucamonga.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New development increases the demand for law enforcement services, which impacts the need for police facilities to maintain the existing level of service, as described earlier in this chapter. Without additional police facilities, the increase in demand associated with new development would negatively
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7-7
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
impact the ability of the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department to provide services efficiently and effectively to all development in the City.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the police impact fees calculated in this chapter are proportional to the impact of the increased demand for law enforcement services associated with various types of development in the City. The fees per square foot for residential development and the fees per unit for non-residential development calculated in this chapter for each category of development are based on the estimated number of calls for service per unit per year for each category of development in Rancho Cucamonga. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the need for police facilities in the City.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8-1
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Chapter 8. Fire Impact Fee
Rancho Cucamonga does not have an existing fire impact fee. This chapter calculates impact fees for fire protection and emergency response facilities, apparatus and equipment provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD or District) to all development in the City. The boundary of RCFPD encompasses the entire City as well as a small area to the north of the City that is planned to remain within the unincorporated territory of San Bernardino County.
As discussed in the next section, fire districts are prohibited by California law from imposing impact fees on their own. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be adopted and imposed by the City and revenue from the impact fees will be transferred to RCFPD to pay for additional capital facilities and other capital assets serving new development in the City. These impact fees will apply only to the portion of RCFPD that is within the City.
Fire Protection District Law of 1987
California Health and Safety Code Section 13916, which is part of the Fire Protection District Law of 1987, states: “A (fire protection) district board shall not charge a fee on new construction or development for the construction of public improvements or facilities or the acquisition of equipment.” However, although a district itself may not charge such fees, Health and Safety Code Section 13898 provides that a district may accept revenue from any federal, state, regional, or local agency or from any person for any lawful purpose of the district. That section allows the City to transfer impact fee revenue to RCFPD to pay for facilities, apparatus and equipment needed to serve the City.
Service Area
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are intended to apply to the entire City.
Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the system plan method discussed in Chapter 1.
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 facilities plus the cost of planned facilities is divided by the combined demand associated with both existing development and planned development. (As discussed in the next section, demand for services provided by RCFPD is represented by calls for service per year.) This method ensures that costs for all existing and future RCFPD facilities, apparatus and equipment are allocated to all existing and future development, so that impact fees charged to future development will pay for future development’s proportionate share of the overall cost of those assets. With the system plan method, we depreciate the replacement cost of existing assets because new development is effectively buying in to those assets. With
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8-2
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
the existing inventory method used elsewhere in this report, replacement costs for existing assets are not depreciated because they represent the cost to acquire additional assets needed to serve additional development.
Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development on a certain type of capital facilities. The demand variable used to calculate impact fees for fire protection and emergency response facilities, apparatus and equipment in this report is calls for service per year.
As part of this study, NBS analyzed a random sample of all calls for service logged by RCFPD in 2023 to estimate the number of calls per unit per year generated by each type of development defined in this study. Chapter 2 discusses that analysis and Table 2.2 in Chapter 2 shows the calls-per-unit-per-year factors derived from that analysis. Those factors are used to calculate impact fees per unit later in this chapter.
Level of Service
The most important single factor in defining level of service for fire protection and emergency medical services agencies is response time to emergency calls. The 2024 Comprehensive Master Plan for RCFPD states that RCFPD’s first due unit currently arrives within 9 minutes and 45 seconds, 90% of the time. The Master Plan makes recommendations to improve total response time, including reducing call processing time. The addition of one fire station will help RCFPD maintain and possibly improve its response time performance as future development occurs.
In 2021, Section 66016.5 was added to the Mitigation Fee by Act AB 602. 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 new impact fees are based on a level of service that exceeds the existing level of service, an explanation is required.
For other types of impact fees calculated in this study, impact fee calculations are based on the cost of maintaining the existing level of service using the existing inventory method discussed in Chapter 1. That approach can be used for fire impact fees, but we believe the system plan method, discussed above and in Chapter 1, is more appropriate because geography and fire station location are so critical to response time across a fire agency’s service area.
Fire protection and emergency response are provided by an integrated system of assets and the best time to assess the overall relationship between development and service demand is at the point when all of the assets and all of the development will be in place, which is what the system plan method is designed to do.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8-3
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Facilities, Apparatus and Equipment
At present, RCFPD operates eight fire stations as well as an administrative facility, an allrisk training center (ARTC) and a shop facility. RCFPD is planning to construct one additional fire station and has acquired property on 8th Street as a site for that station.
Table 8.1 lists RCFPD’s existing and planned fire stations as well as the administrative and training center buildings and the shop facility. Stations 171 through 178 currently exist.
Station 179 is planned for future construction.
The impact fee cost basis in the right-hand column of Table 8.1 includes the depreciated replacement cost for existing buildings plus the estimated site value for each building.
Where multiple buildings are located on one site, the land cost is shown for the first building. For future Station 179, the cost shown is estimated based on recent construction costs.
Table 8.2 on the next page lists RCFPD’s existing firefighting apparatus and other vehicles and equipment. Costs for all vehicles and equipment shown in the far-right column of Table 8.2 are depreciated replacement costs based on the useful life shown in that table.
Table 8.1: Existing and Future Fire Stations
Constr Bldg Site Building Useful Land Depreciated Impact Fee Facility Location Date Sq Ft Acres Repl Cost 1
Life 2 Cost 3 Bldg Cost 4 Cost Basis 5
Station 171 Amethyst St 1974 4,480 0.99 $ 644,687 50 $ 1,164,435 $ 0 $ 1,164,435 Admin Bldg Amethyst St 1977 2,754 Included $ 1,755,420 50 $ 105,325 $ 105,325 Station 172 San B'dino Rd 2020 13,341 2.90 $ 14,053,099 50 $ 2,728,777 $ 12,928,851 $ 15,657,628 Station 173 Firehouse Ct 2005 12,000 2.36 $ 6,823,656 50 $ 2,775,825 $ 4,230,666 $ 7,006,491 Storage Bldg Firehouse Ct 2005 2,500 Included $ 234,078 50 $ 145,129 $ 145,129 Station 174 Jersey Blvd 1992 17,000 6.14 $ 8,984,714 50 $ 7,221,850 $ 3,234,497 $ 10,456,347 Shop/Garage Jersey Blvd 2001 14,304 Included $ 6,306,495 50 $ 3,405,507 $ 3,405,507 Trng Ctr Bldg A Jersey Blvd 2016 7,000 Included $ 3,588,740 50 $ 3,014,542 $ 3,014,542 Trng Ctr Bldg B Jersey Blvd 2016 1,900 Included $ 1,180,251 50 $ 991,411 $ 991,411 Trng Ctr Bldg C Jersey Blvd 2016 2,455 Included $ 1,064,350 50 $ 894,054 $ 894,054 Trng Ctr Bldg D Jersey Blvd 2016 15,415 Included $ 4,006,318 50 $ 3,365,307 $ 3,365,307 Trng Ctr Bldg E Jersey Blvd 2016 3,064 Included $ 894,974 50 $ 751,779 $ 751,779 Trng Ctr Bldg I Jersey Blvd 2016 1,300 Included $ 1,422,959 50 $ 1,195,286 $ 1,195,286 Station 175 Banyan St 1992 13,000 3.05 $ 7,304,058 50 $ 3,587,401 $ 2,629,461 $ 6,216,862 Station 176 East Av 2003 9,594 1.07 $ 4,297,952 50 $ 1,258,531 $ 2,492,812 $ 3,751,343 Station 177 Rancho St 2012 6,000 1.23 $ 4,025,220 50 $ 1,446,722 $ 3,059,167 $ 4,505,890 Station 178 Town Ctr Dr 2023 12,176 3.80 $ 16,389,052 50 $ 4,469,549 $ 16,061,271 $ 20,530,820 Station 179 8th St Future 13,000 0.94 $ 15,600,000 50 $ 1,105,625 $ 15,600,000 $ 16,705,625 Total $ 98,576,024 $ 25,758,714 74,105,065 $ 99,863,779 1 Estimated replacement cost for existing buildings other than Station 178 are based on 2020 estimates, escalated by 38% to 2024 costs based on the California Construction Cost Index; cost for Station 178 is actual 2023 construction cost; cost for future Station 179 based on $1,200 per square foot, which is below the actual cost of the two most recently constructed fire stations; estimated costs include construction soft costs, utilities, site development, and furniture, fixtures and equipment 2 Estimated useful life of buildings in years
3 Estimated land value for existing fire stations or land cost for future fire stations = $1,176,197 per acre 4 Depreciated building replacement cost for existing stations using straight-line depreciation over the useful life of the asset; no depreciation applies to future buiding costs
5 Facility replacement cost = depreciated building replacement cost or new building cost + estimated land cost or value
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8-4
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Vehicles and equipment are assumed to have a residual value of at least 15% of replacement cost, regardless of age. Assets with a value of less than $10,000 have been omitted from Table 8.2.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8-5
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Table 8.2: Existing Fire Apparatus and Vehicles
Model Useful Unit Repl Depr Unit Total Depr
Quantity Year Description Life (Yrs) Cost 1 Repl Cost 2 Repl Cost 3 2 2013 Type 1 Engine (KME) 10 $ 1,200,000 $ 180,000 $ 360,000 2 2003 Type 1 Engine (KME Excel) 10 $ 1,200,000 $ 180,000 $ 360,000 1 2017 Type 1 Engine (KME) 10 $ 1,200,000 $ 360,000 $ 360,000 1 2008 KME Severe Duty Predator 10 $ 1,200,000 $ 180,000 $ 180,000 2 2005 Type 1 Engine (KME Excel) 10 $ 1,200,000 $ 180,000 $ 360,000 1 2018 Type 1 Engine (KME) 10 $ 1,200,000 $ 480,000 $ 480,000 1 2010 Type 1 Engine (KME) 10 $ 1,200,000 $ 180,000 $ 180,000 1 2006 Type 1 Engine (KME Predator) 10 $ 1,200,000 $ 180,000 $ 180,000 1 2020 Type 1 Engine (Rosenbauer) 10 $ 1,200,000 $ 720,000 $ 720,000 1 2023 Type 1 Engine (Rosenbauer Electric) 10 $ 2,200,000 $ 1,980,000 $ 1,980,000 1 2006 Type 3 Engine (West Mark) 10 $ 600,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 1 2008 Type 3 Engine 10 $ 600,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000
1 2014 Type 3 Engine 10 $ 150,000 $ 22,500 $ 22,500
1 2020 Type 6 Engine 10 $ 150,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000
1 2002 KME Aerial Ladder Truck--Tiller 10 $ 2,350,000 $ 352,500 $ 352,500 1 2008 KME Aerial Ladder Truck 10 $ 2,350,000 $ 352,500 $ 352,500 1 2015 Rosenbauer Aerial Ladder Truck 10 $ 2,350,000 $ 352,500 $ 352,500 1 2022 Rosenbauer Heavy Rescue Unit 10 $ 1,650,000 $ 1,320,000 $ 1,320,000 1 2006 KME Hazmat Unit 10 $ 1,650,000 $ 247,500 $ 247,500 1 2003 KME Water Tender 10 $ 550,000 $ 82,500 $ 82,500
3 2012 Dodge Ram 4WD 7 $ 110,000 $ 16,500 $ 49,500
1 2019 Dodge Ram 4WD V8 Hemi 7 $ 200,000 $ 57,143 $ 57,143 1 2024 Dodge Ram 4WD V8 Hemi 7 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 1 2015 Ford F-450 Super Duty Stake Bed 7 $ 120,000 $ 18,000 $ 18,000 1 2008 Ford F-350 Medic Squad 10 $ 100,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 3 2019 Chevy Bolt EV 7 $ 35,000 $ 10,000 $ 30,000
3 2013 Ford C-Max Hybrid 7 $ 35,000 $ 5,250 $ 15,750
4 2012 Ford Escape Hybrid 7 $ 35,000 $ 5,250 $ 21,000
1 2023 Ford Lightning 7 $ 110,000 $ 94,286 $ 94,286
2 2009 Saturn Vue 7 $ 35,000 $ 5,250 $ 10,500
2 2020 Toyota RAV-4 Hybrid 7 $ 35,000 $ 15,000 $ 30,000 2 2023 Toyota RAV-4 Hybrid 7 $ 35,000 $ 30,000 $ 60,000 1 2024 Toyota RAV-4 Hybrid 7 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 2 2016 Chevy Colorado 4WD 7 $ 110,000 $ 16,500 $ 33,000 2 2018 Chevy Colorado 4WD 7 $ 110,000 $ 16,500 $ 33,000 1 2017 Ford F-350 7 $ 200,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000
1 2019 Ford F-350 7 $ 200,000 $ 57,143 $ 57,143
2 2016 Chevy Colorado 4WD 7 $ 110,000 $ 16,500 $ 33,000 2 2018 Chevy Colorado 4WD 7 $ 110,000 $ 16,500 $ 33,000 2 2008 Chevy F-2500 4WD 7 $ 110,000 $ 16,500 $ 33,000
1 2012 Chevy 3/4 Ton Suburban 7 $ 110,000 $ 16,500 $ 16,500 1 2005 GMC Yukon 7 $ 110,000 $ 16,500 $ 16,500
1 2002 Dodge Ram 2500 4WD 7 $ 110,000 $ 16,500 $ 16,500 1 2004 GMC 7500 Series w/ Equipment 7 $ 200,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 1 2008 Ford E-350 Van 7 $ 75,000 $ 11,250 $ 11,250
1 2021 Ford Transit-250 Van 7 $ 110,000 $ 62,857 $ 62,857 2 2020 Nissan NV200 Van 7 $ 30,000 $ 12,857 $ 25,714
1 2012 Ford 1-Ton 4x4 Long Bed 7 $ 110,000 $ 16,500 $ 16,500 1 2006 Freightliner Ambulance 10 $ 480,000 $ 72,000 $ 72,000 1 2024 Polaris ATV 10 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000
1 2001 Mitsubishi Forklift 10 $ 65,000 $ 9,750 $ 9,750
1 2011 JLG Telehandler 10 $ 100,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000
1 2013 Griddle Trailer 10 $ 75,000 $ 11,250 $ 11,250
1 2020 Progressive Trailer 10 $ 25,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Total $ 29,085,000 $ 8,652,286 $ 9,417,143
1 Replacement cost provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District 2 Depreciated replacement cost using straight-line depreciation over the useful life of the asset; minimum depreciated value = 15% of replacement cost
3 Total depreciated replacement cost = depreciated unit replacement cost X number of units
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8-6
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Table 8.3 shows the cost of future apparatus and equipment needed to serve the City in 2040, including one Type I engine that will be needed for future Fire Station 179. The estimated cost of that engine is based on the current cost of similar equipment. Also shown in that table is the cost of personal protective equipment for nine firefighters that will be needed to staff Station 179.
Table 8.4 summarizes the costs from the preceding three tables.
Cost per Call for Service
Table 8.5 calculates the cost per call for service for RCFPD facilities, apparatus and equipment using the total impact fee cost basis from Table 8.4 and the projected number of calls for service per year in 2040. In Table 8.5, the combined cost of existing and planned facilities, apparatus, vehicles and equipment is divided by total 2040 calls to both existing and future development served by RCFPD.
Table 8.3: Future Fire Apparatus, Vehicles and Equipment No. of Cost Total New
Description Units per Unit 1
Equipt Cost
New Type 1 Engine (Station 179) 1 $ 1,200,000 $ 1,200,000 Personal Protective Equipment 2
9 $ 9,153 $ 82,377
Total $ 1,282,377
1 Cost per unit provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District 2 Personal protective equipment for future added firefighters; estimated cost includes uniforms and personal protective equipment for fire suppression, wild land firefighting and tactical response
Table 8.4: Impact Fee Cost Basis - Existing and Future Assets Impact Fee
Component Cost Basis 1
Existing Fire Stations $ 83,158,154
Future Fire Station $ 16,705,625
Existing - Fire Apparatus, Vehicles and Equipment $ 9,417,143 Future - Fire Apparatus, Vehicles and Equipment $ 1,282,377 Total $ 110,563,299
1 See Tables 8.1, 8.2 and 8.3
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8-7
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
The number of calls for service per year shown for 2040 includes calls in the area served by RCFPD outside of the City, so that the cost of serving development in that area is not included in the cost per call for impact fees charged by the City. The impact fees calculated in this chapter are designed to recover new development’s proportionate share of the cost of all of RCFPD’s existing and planned facilities, apparatus and equipment our to 2040. In the next section, the cost per call is multiplied by calls per unit factors to calculate impact fees per unit. Then for residential development, the impact fee per unit is divided by square feet per unit factors to get impact fees per square foot for single-family and multi-family residential development.
The cost per call for service per year in Table 8.5 can also be used to calculate customized impact fees for development of non-residential development projects that do not fit within the categories of development defined in this study. Customized impact fees can be calculated using the cost per call for service per year from Table 8.5 multiplied by the estimated number of calls per year that will be generated by a specific project.
Impact Fees per Square Foot (Residential) and per Unit (Non-Residential) Table 8.6 shows the calculation of fire impact fees per square foot for residential development and per unit for non-residential development.
Table 8.5: Cost per Call for Service
Total Impact Fee 2040 Calls for Cost per Call for
Cost Basis 1Service per Year 2Service per Year 3
$110,563,299 21,728 $5,088.58
1 See Table 8.4
2 Projected 2040 calls for service for the District; see Table 2.4 3 Cost per call for service per year = total impact fee cost basis / 2040 calls for service per year
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8-8
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Fee Adjustment to Avoid Overcollection
If the fees shown in Table 8.6 are used to project potential revenue from the RCFPD impact fees, the result is that projected revenue exceeds the estimated cost of future assets shown in Table 8.4 by around 3%. To avoid the potential for overcollection, the impact fees from Table 8.6 are reduced by 3.1% in Table 8.7. The adjusted impact fees from Table 8.7 are then used to project revenue in the next section and are also shown in Table S.1 in the Executive Summary.
Table 8.6: RCFPD Impact Fees per Unit and per Square Foot (Residential) Development Cost per Calls Impact Fee Avg Sq Ft Impact Fee Type Units 1
Call 2per Unit 3per Unit 4per Unit 5per Sq Ft 6
Residential, Single Family DU $5,088.58 0.185 $ 941.39 2,500 $ 0.38 Residential, Multi-Family DU $5,088.58 0.139 $ 708.97 1,700 $ 0.42 Senior/Assisted Living Facility Beds $5,088.58 2.829 $ 14,397.31 Commercial/Retail KSF $5,088.58 0.231 $ 1,174.76
Hotel/Motel Rooms $5,088.58 0.115 $ 584.65
Office KSF $5,088.58 0.122 $ 621.19
Industrial KSF $5,088.58 0.017 $ 88.79
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; room = guest room or suite; Bed = accommodation for a single resident or patient
2 Cost per call for service per year; see Table 8.5
3 Calls for service per unit per year; see Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per call for service X calls for service per unit 5 Average square feet per residential unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 6 Impact fee per square foot (residential) = impact fee per unit / square feet per unit
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8-9
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Projected Revenue
Potential revenue from the fire impact fees is projected separately for residential and non-residential development because residential impact fees are per square foot and non-residential impact fees are per unit. These projections assume that future development occurs as shown in Chapter 2 and that all future private development will be subject to impact fees. However, for a variety of reasons, some future development may not be subject to these impact fees. See the section on Impact Fee Credits and Exemptions in Chapter 1.
Table 8.8 shows the projected revenue to 2040 based on the adjusted residential impact fees per square foot from Table 8.7.
Table 8.7: RCFPD Impact Fees per Unit and per Square Foot Adjusted to Avoid Overcollection Development Adj Cost Calls Adj Impact Avg Sq Ft Adj Impact Type Units 1
per Call 2per Unit 3Fee per Unit 4per Unit 5
Fee per Sq Ft 6
Residential, Single Family DU $4,930.83 0.185 $ 912.20 2,500 $ 0.36 Residential, Multi-Family DU $4,930.83 0.139 $ 686.99 1,700 $ 0.40 Senior/Assisted Living Facility Beds $4,930.83 2.829 $ 13,950.99 Commercial/Retail KSF $4,930.83 0.231 $ 1,138.34
Hotel/Motel Rooms $4,930.83 0.115 $ 566.52
Office KSF $4,930.83 0.122 $ 601.93
Industrial KSF $4,930.83 0.017 $ 86.04
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; room = guest room or suite; Bed = accommodation for a single resident or patient
2 Adjusted cost per call for service per year is reduced by 3.1% from Table 8.6 3 Calls for service per unit per year; see Table 2.1
4 Adjusted impact fee per unit = adjusted cost per call for service X calls for service per unit 5 Average square feet per residential unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 6 Adjusted mpact fee per square foot (residential) = adjusted impact fee per unit / square feet per unit
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8-10
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Table 8.9 shows the projected revenue to 2040 based on the adjusted non-residential impact fees per unit from Table 8.7
The sum of the projected revenues from both residential and non-residential impact fees in the preceding tables is $17,917,643. The estimated cost of future facilities, apparatus and equipment shown in Table 8.4 is $17,988,002, so the projected revenue based on the adjusted impact fees shown in Table 8.7 is about 0.4% less than the estimated cost of future assets. Additional information is shown in the City’s capital improvement plan.
Table 8.8: Projected Revenue - RCFPD Impact Fees (Residential) Development Adj Impact Avg Sq Ft Added Projected
Type Fee per Sq Ft 1
per Unit 2
Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single Family $ 0.36 2,500 2,868 $ 2,581,200 Residential, Multi-Family $ 0.40 1,700 15,812 $ 10,752,160 Total $ 13,333,360
1 Adjusted impact fee per square foot; see Table 8.7
2 Average square feet per unit provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = adjusted impact fee per square foot X average square feet per unit X added units
Table 8.9 Projected Revenue - RCFPD Non-Residential Impact Fees Development Dev Adj Impact Future Projected
Type Units 1
Fee per Unit 2Units 3
Revenue 4
Senior/Assisted Living Facility Beds $ 13,950.99 138 $ 1,928,794 Commercial/Retail KSF $ 1,138.34 700 $ 796,840
Hotel/Motel Room $ 566.52 275 $ 155,765
Office KSF $ 601.93 2,000 $ 1,203,868
Industrial KSF $ 86.04 5,800 $ 499,017
Total $ 4,584,283
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite; Bed = accommodation for a single resident or patient
2 Adjusted impact fee per unit of development; see Table 8.7 3 Future units; see Table 2.4
4 Projected revenue = adjsuted impact fee per unit X future units
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8-11
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the current estimated replacement costs for fire district facilities, apparatus and vehicles. We recommend that the fees be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Building Cost Index or the California Construction Cost Index.
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 an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees to 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 in the City on the need for facilities, apparatus and equipment provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD).
Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional facilities, apparatus and equipment to mitigate the impact of new development in the City on the need for those facilities.
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 facilities, apparatus and equipment to serve the added demand for fire protection and other emergency services associated with new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New development in the City increases the demand for fire protection and other emergency services provided by the Rancho
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8-12
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Cucamonga Fire Protection District. Without additional facilities, apparatus and equipment, the increase in demand associated with new development would negatively impact the ability of RCFPD the to provide services efficiently and effectively to all development in the City.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the fire impact fees charged to a development project will depend on the increase in calls for service associated with that project. The fees per square foot for residential development and the fees per unit of non-residential development calculated in this chapter for each type of development are based on the estimated calls for service per unit per year associated with that type of development in the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the overall need for facilities, apparatus and equipment used by RCFPD to serve development in the City.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 9-1
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
Chapter 9. Implementation
This chapter of the report summarizes requirements for adoption and administration of impact 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
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 a 30-day 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.
A nexus summary for each impact fee calculated in this report can be found in individual chapters of this report and those nexus summaries may be used to support the findings required by Section 66001.
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 capital improvement plan that must now be adopted with each new impact fee nexus study.
Section 66020 (d) (1) requires that the agency, at the time it imposes an impact fee, shall 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.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 9-2
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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, as amended by SB 937 in 2024, provides that, with some exceptions, a local agency shall not require payment of impact fees by developers of residential development projects prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, or first temporary certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first. That provision does not apply if construction of the residential development does not begin within five years of the date upon which the building permit is issued.
An exception that allows utility service fees to be collected when an application for service is received, is now limited to the cost of “connection activities.” Local agencies may require payment of fees prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy under certain conditions, including if the fees are to reimburse the agency for expenditures previously made, unless the project reserves at least 49% of residential units for occupancy by lower income households. For such projects, the local agency may require posting of a performance bond or letter of credit from a federally insured depository institution to guarantee payment when the fees are eligible for collection.
In cases where the fees are not collected upon issuance of building permits, Sections 66007 (d) (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. The local agency may not charge interest or other fees on any amounts deferred pursuant to Section 66007.
If a residential development contains more than one dwelling, the local agency may determine whether the fees or charges described shall be paid on a pro rata basis for each dwelling when it receives its certificate of occupancy, on a pro rata basis when a certain percentage of the dwellings have received their certificate of occupancy, or on a lumpsum basis when all the dwellings in the development receive their certificate of occupancy.
Statutory restrictions on the time at which fees may be collected do not apply to nonresidential development.
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).
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 9-3
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
We are not aware of any municipality that has interpreted that language to mean that funds must be segregated by individual projects. 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.
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;
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 9-4
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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;
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.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 9-5
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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, Abbott and Kindermann, and Rick Jarvis, Managing Partner, Jarvis, Fay and Gibson, presented at the 2022 League of California Cities City Attorneys Spring Conference.
Audit Requests. Section 66023 provides that any person may request an audit to determine whether any fee or charge levied by a local agency exceeds the amount reasonably necessary to cover the cost of any product, public facility, as defined in Section 66000, or service provided by the local agency. The legislative body of the local agency may retain an independent auditor to conduct the audit but is not required to conduct an audit if an audit has been performed for the same fee within the previous 12 months.
The agency shall retain an independent auditor to conduct an audit only if the person who requests the audit deposits with the local agency the amount of the local agency’s reasonable estimate of the cost of the independent audit. At the conclusion of the audit, the local agency shall reimburse unused sums, if any, or the requesting person shall pay the local agency the excess of the actual cost of the audit over the amount that was deposited.
However, if the local agency fails to comply with the annual report requirement of Section 66006 following the establishment, increase or imposition of a fee, but requires payment of that fee in connection with the approval of a development project for three consecutive years, the agency shall not require a deposit for the independent audit and shall pay the cost of the audit.
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. For construction costs, the General Services Department’s California Cost Index is a useful reference, as is the Engineering News Record Building Cost Index (BCI). 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. Costs for vehicles and other assets may be updated based on vendor information.
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 9-6
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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 went 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 is 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. 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
City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 9-7
Development Impact Fee Study
February 20, 2025
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-day's 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 Study Costs
The City Council will establish an administrative fee in order to recover City costs of administering the impact fee program.
Appendix A Page 1 of 1
Appendix A
Land Sales Data from CoStar Real Estate Database (2019-2024)
Appendix B Page 1 of 3
Appendix B
City of Rancho Cucamonga - Park Maintenance Vehicles and Equipment
Appendix B Page 2 of 3
City of Rancho Cucamonga - Park Maintenance Vehicles and Equipment
Appendix B Page 3 of 3
City of Rancho Cucamonga - Park Maintenance Vehicles and Equipment
Appendix C-1 Page 1 of 34
Appendix C-1
All City Parks Maps
9/11 Memorial Park
0 0.0125 0.025
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
0.00 acres
1.40 acres
WATERBURY PL
NEW ENGLAND DR
DICKENS CT
RHODE ISLAND CT
MERRIMACK PL
CONGRESS DR
DECLARATION DR
TERRA VISTA PARKWAY EAST
Mountain View Park
0 0.025 0.05
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
5.03 acres
0.00 acres
HUMBOLT
AVE
24TH ST
MAIN ST
HERMOSA AVE
Old Town Park
0 0.025 0.05
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
5.01 acres
0.00 acres
PINECONE WAY
DOVE CANYON WAY
ROSE WAY
BANYAN ST
PARKMEADOW PL
HOPPE DR
WESTWOOD WAY
STEPHENS PL
YOUNGS
CANYON RD
Olive Grove Park
0 0.025 0.05
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
7.38 acres
0.00 acres
ROCHESTER AVE
JACK BENNY DR
VICTORY DR
STADIUM PARKWAY
ARROW RTE
R.C. Adult Sports Complex
0 0.05 0.1
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
48.90 acres
0.00 acres
STANISLAUS PL
AMARILLO ST
BASE LINE RD
FAIRMONT WAY
CAMPBELL PL
HINSDALE
PL
BELPINE PL
DREW CT
MERCED
CT
PARKSIDE PL CLOVER
CT
WHEATON CT LA VINE ST
NOVA CT
BEAL CT BIOLA
PL
SPRINGMILL PL
CHICAGO
CT
MILLIKEN AVE
WOODBURY
CT
STERLING CT MANCHESTER
ST
DEL
MAR CTSHERBROOKE PL
BIRKDALE
PL
ROXBURY PL
BAYLOR ST
MUIRFIELD DR GLENVIEW PL CASCADE CT
TULARE PL
NORTHVIEW DR
FORDHAM CT
DAVENPORT CT
ARMSTRONG PL
GREENBRIAR PLGLENOAKS DR
SINCLAIR ST
WILDWOOD DR BERWICK DR SPRUCE AVE
CENTRAL PARK
Central Park
0 0.1 0.2
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
35.84 acres
64.54 acres
3 8.248 ac
1 4.204 ac
4 9.175 ac 7
10.907 ac
8 4.292 ac
9 2.437 ac
12 5.227 ac
11 3.506
ac
6 15.276 ac
2 3.911 ac
5 3.494 ac
10 29.468 ac
Central Park Survey Data
The total acreage of Central park is 100.39 acreas. Within the 65.54 unimproved acres, there is
25.94 acres that is for non-public park facilities and is therefore not included in the total acreage.
The breakdown is as follows:
Lot 3 at 8.248 ac with an estimate of about hal going to parking. The result is that 4.124 ac is removed.
Lots 11(3.506 ac) and 12 (5.227 ac) for the grape vineyards total 8.731 ac removed Lot 2 used for a maintenance facility and some drainage areas is 3.911 ac.
Lastly we have the adventure facility at 9.175 ac in lot 4.
25.941 aces is subtracted from Central Park as it is for non-public facilities.
CHURCH ST
ELM AVE
Ralph M. Lewis Park
0 0.025 0.05
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
8.03 acres
0.00 acres
ROBINSONG WAY
SAN
THOMAS CT
KITTYHAWK WAY
PARKVIEW WAY
SOLEDAD WAY
Rancho Summit Park
0 0.02 0.04
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
6.71 acres
0.00 acres
CALLE FELIZ
BERYL ST
VIVERO ST
BASE LINE RD
ANADA CT
CALLE DEL PRADO
AVILA
AVE
CHURCH
ST
GARNET
ST
YEW ST
ARROYO VISTA AVE
RIO DEL SOL PL
BAJADO
CT
ANTIGUA
PL
IRONWOOD ST
NAPA CT
SUNSTONE AVE
PEPPER
ST
CANDLEWOOD ST
AZURITE AVE
ARROYO VISTA AVE
ZIRCON AVE CANDLEWOOD
ST
CALUMA CT
AGATE ST
BALSA ST
GARNET ST
CALLE DEL PRADO
ALDER ST
EL ARCO
VINEYARD AVE
ZIRCON AVE
CARNELIAN ST BALSA ST
Red Hill Community Park
0 0.1 0.2
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
44.20 acres
0.00 acres
SPRUCE AVE
COUNTRYVIEW DR
NORFOLK DR
ELM AVE
CARDIFF PL
ELM AVENUE WEST
Spruce Ave Park
0 0.02 0.04
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
3.89 acres
0.00 acres
ARBOR LN
LONG MEADOW DR
VICTORIA
PARK LN
CREEK CT
SONOMA
LEEDS PL
READING DR
NOTTINGHAM DR
BLYTHE PL
VINTNER DR
KENWOOD PL
Victoria Arbors Park
0 0.025 0.05
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
7.75 acres
0.00 acres
YORK PL
FISK CT
GRAYSON PL
CHARLESTON ST
FAIRMONT WAY
Victoria Groves Park
0 0.025 0.05
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
6.02 acres
0.00 acres
Vintage Park
LUCERA DR
TRAPANI DR
TOLENTINO DR
FORLI DR
MILANO DR
BENEVENTO PL
KENYON WAY
VICTORIA PARK LN
Vintage Park
0 0.025 0.05
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
8.02 acres
0.00 acres
ALTA LOMA DR
SOMERSET DR SOMERSET DR
OPAL ST
EMERALD ST
SUNSTONE AVE
SACRAMENTO AVE
I 210 FWY
I 210 OFRP
West Beryl Park
0 0.05 0.1
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
8.72 acres
0.00 acres
COUNTRYVIEW DR
SARZANA PL
BASTIA CT
CORSICA CT
AMIATA DR
FAIRHAVEN PL
DANNER CT
MONTECITO CT
MEADOWCREST CT
PALACIO CT
LINARO RD
West Greenway Park
0 0.05 0.1
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
6.10 acres
0.00 acres
LOTUS CT
PLUM WAY
TIPU PL
VERBENA CT
NORTH VICTORIA
WINDROWS LOOP
VICTORIA
PARK LN
Windrows Park
0 0.025 0.05
Miles
Park Improvement Acreage Study
Acerage Type
Improved
Unimproved
/
8.01 acres
0.00 acres
Appendix C-2 Page 1 of 18
Appendix C-2
CO 2024-193 CP Lease Agreement
Exhibit "C"
Admin. Fee
2.5%
Residential, Single Family SF $0.026 $1.066
Residential, Multi-Family SF $1.20 $0.030 $1.230
Admin. Fee
2.5%
Residential, Single Family SF $1.94 $0.049 $1.989
Residential, Multi-Family SF $2.24 $0.056 $2.296
Admin. Fee
2.5%
Residential, Single Family SF $0.85 $0.021 $0.871
Residential, Multi-Family SF $0.99 $0.025 $1.015
Admin. Fee
2.5%
Residential, Single Family SF $0.42 $0.011 $0.431
Residential, Multi-Family SF $0.49 $0.012 $0.502
Admin. Fee
2.5%
Residential, Single Family SF $0.09 $0.002 $0.092
Residential, Multi-Family SF $0.10 $0.003 $0.103
Admin. Fee
2.5%
Residential, Single Family SF $0.15 $0.004 $0.154
Residential, Multi-Family SF $0.19 $0.005 $0.195
Senior/Assisted Living Bed $892.88 $22.322 $915.202
Commercial/Retail KSF $1,010.46 $25.261 $1,035.721
Hotel/Motel Room $64.14 $1.603 $65.743
Office KSF $238.89 $5.972 $244.862
Industrial KSF $66.48 $ 1.662 $68.142
Development Type Unit
Impact Fee
(Nexus Study)
Total Impact
Fee
Park Land Impact Fee
Development Type Unit
Impact Fee
(Nexus Study)
Total Impact
Fee
Park Improvements Impact Fee
Development Type Unit
Impact Fee
(Nexus Study)
Total Impact
Fee
Community and Recreation Center Facilities Impact Fee
Development Type Unit
Impact Fee
(Nexus Study)
Total Impact
Fee
Library Facilities and Materials Impact Fee
Development Type Unit
Impact Fee
(Nexus Study)
Total Impact
Fee
Animal Center Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment Impact Fee Development Type Unit
Impact Fee
(Nexus Study)
Total Impact
Fee
Police Department Facilities Impact Fee
$1.04
Exhibit "C"
Admin. Fee
2.5%
Residential, Single Family SF $0.36 $0.009 $ 0.369
Residential, Multi-Family SF $0.40 $0.010 $0.410
Senior/Assisted Living Bed $13,950.99 $348.775 $14,299.765 Commercial/Retail KSF $1,138.34 $28.459 $1166.799
Hotel/Motel Room $566.52 $14.163 $580.683
Office KSF $601.93 $15.048 $616.978
Industrial KSF $86.04 $2.151 $88.191
RCFPD Facilities, Apparatus and Equipment Impact Fee
Development Type Unit
Impact Fee
(Nexus Study)
Total Impact
Fee
Note
Fees established by this resolution shall be adjusted annually, commencing on July 1, 2026, and each year thereafter, without further action of the City Council according to the percentage change in the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index for the Los Angeles Area, for the 12-month period ending on December 31st of the immediately preceding year. If the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index for the Los Angeles Area is discontinued, the replacement index in use and accepted as the industry and business standard for Souther California, as determined by the City Engineer, shall be used.
Units of development; DU= dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite; Bed = accommodation for one patient or resident.
2025-04-16 – Regular City Council Meeting – Correspondence Received for Item G1 Dear City Council and/or Staff Representative:
We received a copy of the revised NBS Development Impact Fee Study dated April 10, 2025. Since we received the impact fee study and the rest of the agenda package over the weekend, we have not had time to fully digest the Study or the staff recommendations.
That being stated, upon my cursory review of the report and the staff recommendations, there appears to be a disconnect between the recommended RCFPD fee in the body of NBS study and the fee set forth in Exhibit “C” (The fee schedule) of the draft approving Resolution and the Study’s summary. Secs. 8.6 and 8.7 of the NBS Study recommend that the fee should be $0.36 (SFD) and $0.40 (Multifamily) to offset the calculated overcollection, yet Exhibit “C” to the resolution and Table S-1 Summary of the NBS Study show the higher overcollection amounts set forth in the study ($0.38-SFD and $0.42-multifamily).
We would request a continuance of these new DIF fees (Item G1) to be able to have a reasonable opportunity to adequately review the materials (205 pages of information provided). The new proposed fees do not go into effect until July so I think a 2-week continuance would not create any issues. Thank you in advance for your understanding.
Rob
J. Robert Meserve
General Counsel
500 Newport Center Drive, Suite 570
Newport Beach, CA 92660
P: (949) 344-2704
F: (949) 344-2702
C: (949) 500-2768
E: [email protected]
DATE: April 16, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Rick Snawder, Battalion Chief
Nathan Hunt, Deputy Director of Community Services
Marlena Perez, Principal Engineer
Jenifer Phillips, Director of Organizational Development Matt Marquez, Director of Economic Development
SUBJECT: PathwaysRC – A Plan to Develop Pathways to Public Service. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file a presentation on PathwaysRC, a plan to develop pathways to public service.
BACKGROUND:
California’s local governments are facing a workforce crisis, with 70% of the state’s cities, counties, and special districts struggling with recruitment and retention. This issue can lead to significant vacancies in essential positions and ultimately disrupt services for local community members and hinder effective planning for the future of many cities. (ILG, 2024) The City of Rancho Cucamonga is committed to fostering a strong, engaged community by cultivating local talent and encouraging civic involvement. PathwaysRC is a plan designed to introduce and inform Rancho Cucamonga residents and others, particularly students from elementary school through college, about career opportunities within the city and local government. In September of 2024, a group of city employees began working on PathwaysRC as part of the Lincoln Vibrant Communities Team Program. This program brings together the forces of the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and Claremont Lincoln University in a powerful program for leaders and teams engaged in addressing public sector challenges. They partner with organizations to support municipalities in addressing common and complex issues, creating thriving communities. Participants were tasked with creating a plan to address an issue that, if resolved, would significantly improve the community. (Claremont Lincoln University, 2024) The Rancho Cucamonga team selected workforce development as its issue to address and developed PathwaysRC. Understanding this issue is complex and includes many different components, the group chose to focus on developing a plan that will help to create pathways to public service. By choosing a career in public service, people can directly contribute to the growth and well-being of the local communities they call home, creating a legacy of service and civic pride. PathwaysRC serves as a starting point for greater workforce development efforts.
ANALYSIS:
In the past decade, Rancho Cucamonga has experienced remarkable growth due to its unique approach to city building, resulting in an increase in population, employment opportunities, and business investment. However, approximately 85% of the working population in Rancho Cucamonga commutes outside the city for employment. Plus, only 33% of the people who work for the city, are residents of the community. To address the workforce development challenges faced by local government agencies, including those in Rancho Cucamonga, it is essential to create new pathways to public service for future generations of local leaders and city builders.
This will help ensure opportunities for local economic development, education, local hiring, internships, and employment from cradle to career. Over time this will help to increase resident retention, preserve educational resources and human capital, and promote equitable opportunities for everyone to thrive.
The City’s General Plan, known as PlanRC, is the vessel for the community’s forward-thinking approach to city building. PlanRC puts people at the forefront of the city building process and includes polices addressing issues such as current and future workforce development needs.
One such policy is known as LC-3.7 and states the following:
Develop our Economy. Actively promote and encourage opportunities for local economic development, education, housing, locally hiring, internships and employment from cradle to career so as to increase resident retention, improve and grow a strong local economy, achieve a positive jobs-housing match; retain critical educational resources and human capital, reduce regional commuting, gas consumption and greenhouse gas emissions and ensure equitable opportunities for all residents of the City and region to thrive.
The City’s Economic Development Strategy (EDS), adopted in October 2023, builds on the framework laid out by PlanRC and fortifies linkages to its goals, including fostering growth of local businesses and workforce. General Plan Policy LC-3.7 heavily influenced workforce development related goals and action items in the EDS. Included in the EDS are strategies intended to foster growth of the local workforce by expanding higher education opportunities, cultivating local innovation, and connecting students, job seekers, and employers with workforce development opportunities. Just as the EDS was built from the foundation laid by PlanRC, PathwaysRC continues to build off the workforce development goals, policies, and strategies set forth in PlanRC and the EDS.
PathwaysRC aims to tackle both the industry wide challenge of public sector workforce shortages and the local challenge of the perceived limited amount of employment opportunities within the city. It is intended to build awareness of the diverse career opportunities within local government and public service. The plan is focused on the following key priorities:
• Provide opportunities for all residents to thrive.
• Provide opportunities for engagement and learning at multiple levels of education. • Increase resident retention and human capital through workforce development efforts. • Create opportunities for community members from cradle to career. • Actively promote and encourage opportunities for greater education and local hiring.
PathwaysRC Programming
PathwaysRC was structured to engage students and young professionals at multiple educational levels, focusing on developing an ongoing and sustainable community engagement program to educate future workforce participants, ensuring early exposure to municipal careers and fostering a deep sense of local commitment. Per the plan, engagement would occur at three different stages. These stages, along with ideas for initial program elements are displayed below:
1. Elementary & Middle School Program
2. High School Program
3. Early Career Program
Elementary & Middle School Program
Aimed at early engagement to educate children about various careers in public service and local government. Programming at this level could include the following components:
• School Career Days to share public service careers – coordinate with school districts within the city to attend (or to continue to attend) career days and share work experiences.
o Cadence – 4 events/year
• Community Service Events – attend Community events with a booth and interactive activities to educate and inspire children about careers in public service and local government.
o Cadence – 2 events/year
• Day in the Life Videos – Produce a series of videos interviewing City Staff about their jobs including day-to-day responsibilities, their pathway to this type of career, and why they love public service. Videos could be shown at library events, on social media, and in other places.
o Cadence – 1 program/year
• Healthy RC Youth Leaders – Middle school students are assigned a capstone project to solve over the course of the year focusing on different community issues. City staff and nonprofit individuals lead each team’s capstone project and provide guidance. o Cadence – 1 event/year
High School Program
Focuses on outlining career paths, offering course credits, and providing guidance on college or other training opportunities available for students to prepare themselves for careers in the public sector.
• Pathways to Public Service Day – Students come to City Hall and meet with department directors and others to learn about their personal pathway into public service. Allow students the opportunity to meet employees in a smaller group setting and ask questions. o Cadence – 1 event/year
• Civic Spark Opportunity – Partner with High Schools to offer course credit for Civic Spark program where students work at City Hall in the afternoon for a semester.
Students would rotate shadowing different departments for a two-week period. o Cadence – 2 events/year
• Career Fairs – City staff to attend High School Career Fairs to educate students about different opportunities within the Public Sector and the benefits of public service. o Cadence – 4 events/year
• Healthy RC Youth Leaders – High school students are assigned a capstone project to solve over the course of the year focusing on different community issues. City staff and nonprofit individuals lead each team’s capstone project and provide guidance. o Cadence – 1 event/year
Early College and Young Professional Development
Focuses on forming one-on-one connections with City staff and people early in their careers to help paint a picture of careers in the public sector.
• Internships – Offer paid internship programs across various City departments to attract staff. Internships should be paid where possible to attract quality applicants. Explore potential grant opportunities to fund program.
o Cadence – Ongoing
• Apprenticeship Network – Partner with community colleges and technical institutes to offer a one-on-one apprenticeship program. Students are paired with a city employee for a six-month period to meet and discuss their career path and answer questions. o Cadence – 1 offering/year
• RC Hiring Fair – City staff to continue to offer and expand annual RC Hiring Fair which includes over 200+ participants and discuss various job opening opportunities at the city. o Cadence – Ongoing, 1 event/year
• Community College Connections – Develop & deepen connections with Community Colleges within the City to participate in their ongoing programs including multiple career fairs annually, employee training events, and mentorship programs for minorities or firstgeneration college students. o Cadence – Ongoing
Digging Into the Data
The development of PathwaysRC was informed by different surveys conducted as part of other plans or initiatives, as well as a survey of existing workforce development initiatives. First, data was analyzed from the city’s Quality of Life Survey conducted between July and December 2023.
That survey was to serve as a catalyst for the creation of innovative programs and targeted strategies to address health issues and gaps in access to resources within the community. Then, the development of PlanRC included an extensive community engagement program which aimed to be inclusive, intentional and equitable. Efforts prioritized determining values and ideas for the future of the city. Finally, an internal survey was conducted by the team who developed PathwaysRC. Identifying the available and existing resources provided by the city was deemed a necessity. There was no specific and comprehensive database regarding workforce development prior to the work on PathwaysRC. So, the team gathered representatives from various city departments to gain an inventory of any related existing programs, activities and events. Thirty-four initiatives were identified, and a Workforce Development Inventory Database document was developed.
PathwaysRC Is and Is Not
Since its beginning, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has committed to creating a world-class community. With each decade and each generation, the idea of what makes a world-class community has evolved, but it remains grounded in the concepts of excellence, opportunity, and high quality of live. Like the City, PathwaysRC is a plan that will also evolve over time and adapt to different conditions and challenges. It is a start to a greater workforce development effort.
PathwaysRC Is:
• A vision and guide for the development of future local government leaders. • A start to and piece of a larger, long-term citywide workforce development program.
• Aligned with the City’s goals as outlined in the City’s General Plan, known as PlanRC and the Economic Development Strategy.
• Routinely evolving, as it will need to be further researched, developed, and updated regularly to remain relevant and provide the greatest impact.
PathwaysRC Is Not:
• A Plan to Overrule All Plans. This plan builds off other plans and initiatives within the city. It is designed to be collaborative in nature and supportive of previous and future efforts.
• Complete. Like many of the City’s plans, this plan will continue to constantly evolve and be responsive to change.
• Perfect. This plan builds off of other City efforts and is a starting point for greater workforce development efforts citywide.
• A Quick Fix. This work will not happen overnight, but there is a strong commitment to systemic change.
Next Steps
To begin moving forward with implementation of PathwaysRC, the following next steps were developed:
• Pathways RC Subcommittee: Develop a workforce development subcommittee consisting of members of multiple city departments at various levels within the organization to make the Vision & Goals outlined in PathwaysRC a reality. • Research: Investigate workforce development programs in other local government agencies to develop an understanding of best practices to assist with future programming.
Potentially send members from the PathwaysRC Subcommittee to these agencies to learn more about their programs. This will include cities such as Fort Lauderdale, St. Louis, Lewisburg, Tempe, and many more.
• Workforce Development Hub Publication: Generate a comprehensive list of existing and available PathwaysRC programs that community members can register to participate in, allowing for activity cross promotion, improved accessibility, and resource identification.
CONCLUSION:
"Pathways RC" represents a strategic investment in the future of Rancho Cucamonga by inspiring the next generation of public service professionals. By emphasizing the personal and communitywide benefits of serving one’s hometown, this initiative seeks to instill a profound sense of purpose and pride in local government careers. Through "Pathways RC," the city can cultivate homegrown talent, enhance civic engagement, and build a more resilient workforce dedicated to making Rancho Cucamonga an even greater place to live, work and play. Staff looks forward to Council’s feedback and support in advancing this important initiative.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is not fiscal impact at this time. As work on implementing PathwaysRC moves forward, any related budget request will be made as part of the city’s formal budget process.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUES /GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
• Providing and nurturing a high quality of life for all • Building and preserving a family-oriented atmosphere
• Intentionally embracing and anticipating our future
• Equitable and prosperity for all
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - PathwaysRC
LINCOLN VIBRANT
COMMUNITIES
Teams Program
PATHWAYSRC
Plan created through the Lincoln Vibrant Communities Teams Program in March 2025.
This project is supported by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, a non-profit global thought leader in solving social, environmental, and economic challenges.
ATTACHMENT 1
DEVELOPED BY
NATHAN HUNT, COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPUTY DIRECTOR
MATT MARQUEZ, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
MARLENA PEREZ, PRINCIPAL ENGINEER
JENIFER PHILLIPS, ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPEMENT DIRECTOR
RICK SNAWDER, FIRE MARSHAL
PATHWAYSRC
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ABOUT THIS PLAN............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 04 09
14 PATHWAYSRC
OUR VISION..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
KNOWING & UNDERSTANDING THE WHY (METHODOLOGY)......................................................................................................................................
VISION & GOALS......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 12 BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 20 3
SURVEY KEY FINDINGS (SURVEY AND DATA)...........................................................................................................................................................................
CONCLUSION & NEXT STEPS................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 29 31 24
Executive Summary Page 500
Executive Summary
5 California’s local governments are facing a workforce crisis, with 70% of the state’s cities, counties, and special districts struggling with recruitment and retention. This issue can lead to significant vacancies in essential positions and ultimately disrupt services for local community members and hinder effective planning for the future of many cities. (ILG, 2024)
In the past decade, Rancho Cucamonga has experienced
remarkable growth due to its unique approach to city building, resulting in an increase in population, employment
opportunities, and business investment. However,
approximately 85% of the working population in Rancho
Cucamonga commutes outside the city for employment. Plus, only 33% of the people who work for the city, are residents of the community. To address the challenges faced by local
government agencies, including those in Rancho Cucamonga, it is essential to create new pathways to public service for future generations of local leaders and city builders. This will help ensure opportunities for local economic development,
education, local hiring, internships, and employment from cradle to career. Doing so will over time help to increase resident retention, preserve educational resources and human capital, and promote equitable opportunities for everyone to thrive.
Problem Statement
Executive Summary
6 This plan develops a vision and goals for establishing pathways to public service, through different connections and programming for the following three groups of individuals:
1.Elementary and Middle School
2.High School
3.Early Career
Goals were developed to address needs within each individual group and examples include the following:
Group: Elementary and Middle School
Program: School Career Days - Coordinate with school districts within the City for staff to attend career days and share stories about their work and experience in local government.
Group: High School
Program: Pathways to Public Service Day - Students come to City Hall to meet with department directors to learn about their personal pathways into public service. Allows students the opportunity to meet employees in a smaller group setting and ask questions.
Group: Early Career
Program: Apprenticeship Network - Partner with community colleges and technical institutes to offer a one-on-one apprenticeship program. Students are paired with a City employee for a six month period to meet and discuss their career path and answer questions.
Proposed Solution
Executive Summary
7 Through this plan’s implementation, the City expects to establish greater workforce development related connections both within and outside of City Hall. New programming will be created to help prepare future local government leaders for careers in public service, and the City’s workforce development related efforts will be centralized through the creation of a Workforce Development Subcommittee. Over time, the City anticipates an increase in the number of residents who choose a career path in local government, and who choose to work locally.
This City plan recognized the opportunity to address the heavy outbound commute flows and developed workforce development related policies to help grow the number of people who work and live in Rancho Cucamonga. This in turn allows for the Economic Development Strategy goals to be addressed, which include:
Grow and Diversify the City’s Economy
Enhance the Quality of Life
Expand Retail, Entertaiment, and Hospitality
Foster Growth of Local Businesses and Workforce
This plan prioritized determining values and ideas for the future of the city and there were many opportunities to identify visions and collaborations of possible workforce development components that would strengthen and benefit the community and residents at large.
Value
Executive Summary
8 This plan will be a living document and it will be routinely evolving to respond to the needs of community members and changing demographics. The plan will need to be further researched, developed, and updated regularly to remain relevant and provide the greatest impact. Anticipated known next steps and action items identified by this plan include:
Develop a workforce development subcommittee consisting of members of multiple city departments at various levels within the organization to make the Vision & Goals outlined in PathwaysRC a reality.
Investigate workforce development programs in other local government agencies to develop an understanding of best practices to assist with future programming. Potentially send members from the PathwaysRC Subcommittee to these agencies to learn more about their programs. This will includes cities such as Fort Lauderdale, St. Louis, Lewisburg, Tempe, and many more.
Present PathwaysRC to City Council for feedback and support on the efforts. Council support will be key to implementing the plan and achieving long-term success.
Generate a comprehensive list of existing and available PathwaysRC programs that community members can register to participate in, allowing for activity cross promotion, improved accessibility, and resource identification.
Final Thoughts/Next Steps
Our Vision
Cultivate future
generations of local
government leaders
while improving
quality of life and
opportunities for
residents.
PATHWAYSRC
11 Our Vision
The Vision of PathwaysRC is to build a pipeline of future public sector employees by developing a strategy for workforce development. This plan will outline ways to engage with the future workforce at all different ages to introduce them to potential careers in public service. This document identifies goals and strategies that will serve as a road map for City staff and civic leaders. The success of the PathwaysRC depends on the coordination and communication with each City department, other public agencies, and partner organizations.
Provide opportunities for all residents to thrive.
Provide opportunities for engagement and learning
at multiple levels of education.
Increase resident retention and human capital
through workforce development efforts.
Create opportunities for community members from
cradle to career.
Actively promote and encourage opportunities for
greater education and local hiring.
Key Priorities
About This Plan
A vision and guide for the development
of future local government leaders.
A start to and piece of a larger, long-term
citywide workforce development
program.
Aligned with the City’s goals as outlined in
the City’s General Plan, known as PlanRC
and the Economic Development Strategy.
Routinely evolving, as it will need to be
further researched, developed, and
updated regularly to remain relevant and
provide the greatest impact.
This Plan Is This Plan Is Not
13 About This Plan
Since its beginning, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has committed to creating a world-class community. With each decade and each generation, the idea of what makes a world-class community has evolved, but it remains grounded in the concepts of excellence, opportunity, and high quality of live. Like the City, PathwaysRC is a plan that will also evolve over time and adapt to different conditions and challenges.
A Plan to Overrule All Plans. This plan builds
off other plans and initiatives within the City.
It is designed to be collaborative in nature
and supportive of previous and future efforts.
Complete. Like many of the City’s plans, this
plan will continue to constantly evolve and be
responsive to change.
Perfect. This plan builds off of other City
efforts and is a starting point for greater
workforce development efforts citywide.
A Quick Fix. This work will not happen
overnight, but there is a strong commitment
to systemic change.
Knowing & Understanding the Why
(Methodology)
The Industry-Wide Challenge: California’s local governments are facing a workforce crisis, as 70% of the state’s cities, counties, and special districts experience challenges with recruitment and retention. This can lead to vacancies in crucial positions and ultimately a disruption of services for local community members. (ILG, 2024) The Local Challenge: In the last decade, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has experienced remarkable growth, experiencing increases in population, employment opportunities, and business investment. Despite these changes, roughly 85% of Rancho Cucamonga’s working population travel outside city boundaries for work.
PathwaysRC aims to tackle both the industry-wide challenge of the public sector workforce shortage and the local challenge of a limited perceived employment opportunities within the city.
Why is PathwaysRC a priority for the City?
15 Knowing the Why
Rancho Cucamonga has always been a city of forward thinkers who have never shied away from a challenge. Today, PlanRC, is the vessel for the community’s forwardthinking approach. PlanRC puts people at the forefront of the community building process and includes policies that will help maintain its status as a world-class community, while also addressing issues such as current and future workforce development needs. Moving forward, there is a need to cultivate future generations of local government leaders to continue this forward-thinking approach to city building.
Vision Statement: Build on our success as a world-class community, to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive.
PlanRC Goal LC-3.7: Actively promote and encourage opportunities for local economic development, education, housing, locally hiring, internships and employment from cradle to career so as to increase resident retention, improve and grow a strong local economy, achieve a positive jobs-housing match; retain critical educational resources and human capital, reduce regional commuting, gas consumption and greenhouse gas emissions and ensure equitable opportunities for all residents of the City and region to thrive.
Alignment with the City’s Vision
16 Understanding the Why