Development Impact Fee Update Study
City of Richmond
September 26, 2023
What is a Development Impact Fee?
1One-time charge
Imposed at building permit stage
Imposed on all development projects
within a defined geographic area
Funds facilities to serve new development
2 Mitigation Fee Act Findings (Govt. Code §66001)
Key findings
Need: Development creates need for facilities
Benefit: Development use of revenue
Rough Proportionality: Fee amount development’s
share of facility costs
Other findings
Purpose of fee
Use of fee revenue
3 Impact Fees – Basic Methodology
ESTIMATE
EXISTING
DEVELOPMENT
AND FUTURE
GROWTH
IDENTIFY FACILITY
STANDARDS
DETERMINE NEW
FACILITY NEEDS
AND COSTS
ALLOCATE SHARE
TO
ACCOMMODATE
GROWTH
IDENTIFY
ALTERNATIVE
FUNDING NEEDS
CALCULATE FEE BY
ALLOCATING
COSTS PER UNIT
OF NEW
DEVELOPMENT
4 Impact Fee Categories
Sewer Facilities
Parks
Community / Aquatic Center
Police Facilities
Fire Protection Facilities
Library Facilities
Storm Drains
**Note that Richmond Traffic Impact Fees are not being updated at this time.
Growth Projections
2023 2040 Increase
Residents 111,924 164,220 52,296
Dwelling Units 40,871 59,968 19,097
Employment 27,587 61,815 34,228
Sources: CA DOF; ABAG; US Census’ OnTheMap Application
6 Cost Allocation Methods:
WHAT Facilities Serve WHO
PLANNED FACILITIES
Planned Facilities
New Demand
SYSTEM PLAN
Existing + Planned Facilities
Existing + New Demand
EXISTING INVENTORY
Existing Facilities
Existing Demand
Cost Allocation Methodologies
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
Facility Demand Facility Needs
Existing
Demand
Future
Demand
Existing Inventory Method
New
Facilities
Existing
Facilities
Fee $
System Plan Method
(Increase Service Level)
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
110
120
130
140
150
Future
Demand
Growth
Share
Existing
Deficiency
Existing
Demand
Existing
Facilities
Facility Needs
New
Facilities
Facility Demand
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
110
120
130
140
150
Future
Demand
New
Facilities
Demand Facility Needs
Planned Facilities Method
8 Fee Program Methodologies
Parks
Libraries
Fire Protection Facilities
Existing Standard
Police Facilities
System Plan
Sewer
Community / Aquatic
Centers
Storm Drain
Planned Facilities
9 Sewer
Various Improvements at the WWTP
based on WWTP Master Plan
Community / Aquatic Centers
Martin Luther King Jr. Community
Center
Police Facilities
New Police Station
Storm Drain
Various improvements
Fire Protection
Training Tower
Station 64 Apparatus Storage Building
Restrooms at Station 66
Parks
Land and improvements to maintain
standard
Library Facilities
Library Reconfiguration
FF&E
Courtyard Improvements
Major Planned Facilities
10 Projected Impact Fee Revenue
Fee Category
Fee Calculation
Methodology Net Project Cost
Projected Impact
Fee Revenue
Additional
Funding
Required
Sewer Facilities Planned Facility Standard $ 584,149,500 $ 228,891,385 $355,258,115 Parks1 Existing Facility Standard 303,328,000 303,328,000 - Community / Aquatic Center Planned Facility Standard 16,000,000 16,000,000 - Police Facilities System Standard 80,000,000 32,771,000 47,229,000 Fire Protection Facilities Existing Facility Standard 17,714,400 17,714,400 - Library Facilities Existing Facility Standard 6,910,000 7,687,512 - Storm Drains Planned Facility Standard 5,947,000 2,587,773 3,359,227 Total $1,014,048,900 $ 608,980,070 $405,846,342
Note: For facility categories calculated using the existing facility standard, the projected fee revenue is equal to the cost of planned facilities needed to serve new development. 1 Fee revenue shown if all development is infill development. Refer to study for projections of Quimby in-lieu fee revenue.
11 Maximum Justified Impact Fee Schedule
Maximum Justified Impact Fee Summary
Land Use
Sewer
Facilities1
Pa rks -
Quimby
(Subdivisions)2
Pa rks
(Infill)2
Community /
Aquatic
Center
Police
Facilities
Fire
Protection
Facilities
Library
Facilities
Storm
Drains
Total -
Subdivisions
Total -
Infill
Residential - per Sq. Ft. 7.99$ 11.32$ 11.03$ 0.58$ 0.99$ 0.46$ 0.28$ 0.03$ 21.66$ 21.37$ Nonresidential - per Sq. Ft.
Commercial 3.55$ -$ -$ -$ 0.35$ 0.32$ -$ 0.06$ 4.28$ 4.28$ Office 4.44 - - - 0.54 0.49 - 0.07 5.54 5.54 Industrial 7.10 - - - 0.19 0.18 - 0.11 7.58 7.58 Warehousing 7.10 - - - 0.06 0.05 - 0.11 7.32 7.32 1 Only charged w ithin Richmond Municipal Sew er District Boundaries.
Sources: Tables 3.5, 4.7, 5.7, 6.6, 7.9, 8.8 and 9.5.
2 A development project either pays the Quimby fee of the park infill fee, not both. Development not occurring in subdivisions is subject to the infill fee. Development in subdivisions is subject to the Quimby fee.
12 Staff Recommendation: Residential – Phase In Increases Over Four Years Residential - Four Year Phase In
Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Parks - Quimby (Subdivisions) 4.39$ 6.12$ 7.86$ 9.59$ 11.32$ Parks (Infill) 4.39 6.05 7.71 9.37 11.03 Community / Aquatic Center 1.05 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 Police Facilities 0.25 0.43 0.62 0.80 0.99 Fire Protection Facilities 0.30 0.34 0.38 0.42 0.46 Library Facilities 1.19 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 Storm Drains 0.45 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 Sewer Facilities 2.29 3.72 5.14 6.57 7.99 Total (Subdivisions) 9.92$ 12.86$ 15.79$ 18.72$ 21.66$ Total (Infill) 9.92$ 12.78$ 15.64$ 18.51$ 21.37$ 13 Staff Recommendation: Nonresidential – Phase In Increases Over Two Years Nonresidential - Two Year Phase In
Current Year 1 Year 2
Office
Police Facilities 0.30$ 0.42$ 0.54$
Fire Facilities 0.26 0.38 0.49
Library 0.42 - -
Storm Drainage 0.74 0.07 0.07
Sewer 2.32 3.38 4.44
Total 4.04$ 4.25$ 5.54$
Industrial
Police Facilities 0.11$ 0.15$ 0.19$
Fire Facilities 0.19 0.18 0.18
Library 0.18 - -
Storm Drainage 0.79 0.11 0.11
Sewer 1.14 4.12 7.10
Total 2.41$ 4.56$ 7.58$
Warehousing
Police Facilities 0.11$ 0.06$ 0.06$
Fire Facilities 0.19 0.05 0.05
Library 0.05 - -
Storm Drainage 0.79 0.11 0.11
Sewer 1.14 4.12 7.10
Total 2.29$ 4.34$ 7.32$
14 Comparison: Single Family Residential – 1,600 Sq. Ft. $-
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000
Oakland
(Low)
Berkeley Oakland
(High)
Concord
(Low)
Richmond
(Current)
Concord
(High)
San
Leandro
(Low)
Hayward Richmond
(Maximum
Justified)
San
Leandro
(High) 15
Comparison: Multifamily – 20 Units
$-
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
$450,000
$500,000
Oakland
(Low)
Berkeley
(Low)
Oakland
(High)
San
Leandro
(Low)
San
Leandro
(High)
Concord
(Low)
Hayward Richmond
(Current)
Concord
(High)
Richmond
(Draft)
16 Comparison: Commercial – 15,000 Sq. Ft. Retail
$-
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
Hayward Oakland San Leandro
(Low)
Concord Berkeley Richmond
(Current)
San Leandro
(High)
Richmond
(Maximum
Justified)
17 Comparison: Industrial – 100,000 Sq. Ft.
$-
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
$800,000
$900,000
$1,000,000
San Leandro
(Low)
Oakland Concord Berkeley Richmond
(Current)
Hayward San Leandro
(High)
Richmond
(Maximum
Justified)
18 Credit Policy
• A public facility or improvement must be included on the current adopted list of public improvements and facilities for the applicable to be considered eligible for credits toward future Impact Fees.
• Fee Credits will apply only to the “cost of the improvements,” not the related financing costs.
• Costs incurred for work not directly related to improvement of a thoroughfare will not be eligible for credit. Specifically excluded from credit calculations are costs of contaminated soils removal or remediation. • Credits shall be awarded only upon receipt of satisfactory documentation that
(i) the improvement is completed; or
(ii) land has been conveyed to and accepted by the City; or (iii) that funds for the improvement are in escrow; or
(iv) that a construction contract for the improvement has been executed; or (v) that a performance bond approved by the City Attorney has been posted to ensure completion.
19 Questions
20