The URL can be used to link to this page

CC Resolution No. 17-081 Approving the 2017 Transporation Impact Fee Nexus StudyRESOLUTION NO. 17-081 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING THE 2017 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY WHEREAS, Mitigation Fee Act (AB 1600/ Government Code Section 66000 et seq.) enables cities to charge fees for transportation facilities; and WHEREAS, the City adopted an amended General Plan known as "General Plan: Community Vision 2015 -2040" (The General Plan) on December 4, 2014; and WHEREAS, The General Plan identifies the buildout land use and growth projections and is based on a horizon year of 2040; and WHEREAS, The General Plan identifies impacts on transportation and traffic impacts from the potential future development associated with the 2040 buildout; and WHEREAS, the City has r etained Economic Planning Systems, Inc. to develop the Transportation Impact Fee Nexus Study; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Impact Fee Nexus Study provides the City of Cupertino with the necessary technical documentation to support the adoption of a new Citywide Transportation Impact Fee Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino hereby approves the 2017 Transportation Impact Fee Nexus Study. PASS ED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 15 51 day of August 2017 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Members of the City Council Vaidhyanathan, Paut Chang, Schart Sinks None None None ATTEST:~ &RAX ,if APPROVED : -{~h~~~ Grace Schmidt City Clerk City of Cupertino Tlw E/'lJr111rn11 ·.i ,!f Lwul ( '.w, • Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. One Kaiser Plaza , Suite 1410 Oakland, CA 94612 510 841 9190 tel 510 740 2080 fax Oakland Sacramento Denver Los Angeles www.epsys.com Report City of Cupertino Transportation Impact Fee Nexus Study Prepared for: City of Cupertino Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. and Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Stantec August 2017 EPS #161085 Table of Contents 1. STUDY OVERVIEW AND RESULTS ...........................•........•..•.......•................................ 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1 Legal Context ........................................................................................................... 1 Maximum Allowable Fee Schedule ............................................................................... 2 Key Issues and Assumptions ...................................................................................... 3 2. LAND USE AND GROWTH ASSUMPTIONS ....................................................................... 4 Land Use Assumptions and Forecast ............................................................................ 4 Travel Demand Assumptions and Forecasts .................................................................. 5 3. TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS AND COSTS ............................................................... 7 Project Selection Criteria ............................................................................................ 7 Project List ............................................................................................................... 7 Facility Cost Estimates ............................................................................................... 8 4. NE XUS ANALYSIS AND MAXIMUM FEE .......................................................................... 9 Overview of Nexus Findings ....................................................................................... 9 Travel Demand Model and Cost Allocation .................................................................. 10 Ma x imum Fee Calculation ........................................................................................ 14 5. TIF IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION ............................................................... 16 Approval Process .................................................................................................... 16 Fee Amount and Collection ....................................................................................... 16 Fee Credits, Reimbursements, and Exemptions ........................................................... 17 Annual Review, Accounting, and Updates ................................................................... 19 Securing Supplemental Funding ................................................................................ 20 Appendices APPENDI X A: Detailed TIF Project List and Costs Estimates List of Tables Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Maximum Allowable Transportation Impact Fee ..................................................... 3 General Plan Land Use Assumptions and Forecasts ................................................ 4 Trip Generation Assumptions .............................................................................. 5 Trip Generation Projections ................................................................................ 6 Summary of TIF Projects and Costs ..................................................................... 8 TIF Travel Demand Assumptions ....................................................................... 12 TIF Cost Allocation Assumptions and Calculations ................................................ 14 Maximum Fee per Trip ..................................................................................... 14 Maximum TIF Schedule .................................................................................... 15 1. STUDY OVERVIEW AND RESULTS Introduction This Transportation Impact Fee Nexus Study (Nexus Study) provides the City of Cupertino (City) with the necessary technical documentation to support the adoption of a new Citywide Transportation Impact Fee Program (TIF Program). Impact fees are one-time charges on new development collected and used by the City to cover the cost of capital facilities and infrastructure that are required to serve new growth.1 The fees are typically collected upon issuance of a building permit or certificate of occupancy. The City adopted an amended General Plan known as "General Plan: Community Vision 2015 - 2040" (The General Plan) on December 4, 2014. The General Plan specifically identifies the need to implement a TIF to fund needed transportation improvements necessary to accommodate and mitigate the impacts of future development in the City. To support the TIF program, the City must prepare a Nexus Study that will provide a legal basis for requiring development impact fees consistent with Mitigation Fee Act (AB 1600/ Government Code Section 66000 et seq.). The Fee Program described in this Nexus Study is based on growth projections and transportation infrastructure requirements identified in the General Plan and supporting documents (e.g., Environmental Impact Report). This Nexus Study quantifies the potential allocation of the proposed transportation improvements to new growth in the City and calculates the ma x imum allowable transportation impact fee schedule by land use category. The City may decide to adopt fees below the maximum supportable level based on economic or policy considerations. Such fee reductions should be considered in conjunction with the availability of alternative sources of capital improvement funding. Legal Context This Ne x us Study is designed to provide the necessary technical analysis to support a schedule of transportation impact fees to be established by an Impact Fee Act Fee Ordinance and Resolution. The Mitigation Fee Act allows the City to adopt, by resolution, the Transportation Impact Fee consistent with the supporting technical analysis and findings provided in this Report. The Resolution approach to setting the fee allows periodic adjustments of the fee amount that may be necessary over time, without amending the enabling ordinance. Impact fee revenue can be collected and used to cover the cost of constructing capital and infrastructure improvements required to serve new development and growth in the City. As such impact fees must be based on a reasonable ne x us, or connection, between new growth and development and the need for a new facility or improvement. Impact fee revenue cannot be used to cover the operation and maintenance costs of these or any other facilities and 1 New development includes any construction activity that requires a building permit and creates add itional impacts on the City's transportation infrastru cture onc e completed (e.g., through additional t ravel demand or "trips"). Eco n omic & Pla nnin g Sys tem s, In c . 1 P: \16 1 OOOs\161 OBSCupertino TIF\Report\Nexus5tudy80817. docx Cupertino Transportation Impact Fee Ne x us Study Report 8/0 8/1 7 infrastructure. In addition, impact fee revenue cannot be collected or used to cover the cost of existing needs/ deficiencies in the City transportation capital improvement network. In establishing, increasing, or imposing a fee as a condition for the approval of a development project, Government Code 66001(a) and (b) state that the local agency must: 1. Identify the purpose of the fee; 2. Identify how the fee is to be used; 3. Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the fee use and type of development project for which the fee is being used; 4. Determine how the need for the public facility relates to the type of development project for which the fee is imposed; and 5. Show the relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility. These statutory requirements have been followed in establishing this TIF, as documented in subsequent chapters. Chapter 4 summarizes the specific findings that explain or demonstrate this ne x us . If the transportation impact fee is adopted, this Nexus Study and the technical information it contains should be maintained and reviewed periodically by the City to ensure Impact Fee accuracy and to enable the adequate programming of funding sources. To the extent that transportation improvement requirements, costs, and development potential changes over time, the Fee Program will need to be updated. Further information on the implementation and administration of the TIF program is provided in Chapter 5. Maximum Allowable Fee Schedule Table 1 shows the City's maximum transportation impact fee schedule by land use consistent with ne x us requirements and the associated analysis contained in this Technical Report. These transportation impact fees apply to new residential and nonresidential development and cover the transportation improvement costs required to support new development after existing deficiencies and known other funding sources have been taken into account. The fee est i mates also include a 2 percent fee program administration fee, consistent with Mitigation Fee Act program administrative costs in many other California jurisdictions.2 The fees apply to all new development, ex cept those exempted by the Ordinance of other means, such as approved under the terms of a Development Agreement.3 2 The 2 percent administration cost is designed to cover ex penses for preparation of the development impact fee study and subsequent updates as well as the required reporting, auditing, collection and other annual administrative costs involved in overseeing the program. Development impact fee programs throughout California have applied similar administrative cha rges . 3 These individual Dev elopment Agreements spe cify th e specific tran s portation improve ments/ contributions to be made by the se individual developments. Eco n o mic & Pl a nning Sys t em s, In c. 2 P: \ 161 OOOs\1 61 085Cupertino TTF\Report \NexusStudyBOB 17. docx Cupertino Transportation Impact Fee Ne x us Study Report 8/08/17 The adoption of the recommended fee schedule would result in fee revenues of about $59.8 million in today's dollar terms assuming full build-out of the General Plan consistent with current land use designations. An additional $134 million in revenues will be required from other funding sources to cover the full cost of the transportation facilities included in the fee calculations. In other words, the TIF is estimated to generate about 31 percent of the revenue needed to cover the future transportation improvements and facilities costs identified to mitigate growth impacts associated with build-out of the General Plan. Table 1 Maximum Allowable Transportation Impact Fee Land Use Residential Single Fa m il y Multi-Famil y Non-residential Retail Office Ho tel O ther Total TIF per Unit $5,968 / unit $3 ,700 / unit $9.60 / sqlt. $16.81 / sqfl. $3 ,272 / room $6 ,025 I trip Key Issues and Assumptions The results of this analysis are based on a variety of conditions and assumptions regarding facility costs, service standards, growth projections, and facility demand. Assumptions are covered in detail in later chapters, though some of the key issues are summarized below: • Future Development and Trips. The fee calculations were based on residential and nonresidential development projections, and associated trip generation. The most recently approved General Plan was the starting source for this information. In addition, the Cupertino Travel Demand model was utilized to conduct travel demand analysis. • Capital Improvement Program. The list of transportation improvements included in the Fee Program focus on projects identified in existing City planning documents and supporting studies. As such, the Consultant Team will not seek to identify or plan entirely new transportation projects in the City. • Cost Estimates. Stantec has developed or verified cost estimates for all of the transportation improvement projects identified herein. The cost estimates were based on assumptions about the planned right-of-way, roadway cross-sections, and landscaping treatments for each corridor. Assumptions were based on similar existing corridors within the City of Cupertino and the City's roadway design standards, and have been reviewed and confirmed by City staff. • Cost Allocation. Transportation analysis conducted by Stantec (including Select Link Analysis) was used to determine the portion of transportation improvements costs to be included in the fee program. Only transportation improvement costs specifically required to support new development are included in the transportation impact fee calculation. In addition, funding for the identified transportation improvement projects from other sources was subtracted from the gross cost estimates . Economic & Planning Sys tems, Inc. 3 P: \16 1 OOOs\161085Cupertino TIF\Report\Nexus5tudy808 J 7. docx 2. LAND USE AND GROWTH ASSUMPTIONS This chapter documents the land use and growth assumptions and forecasts that underlie the TIF calculations. These factors drive the traffic generation and attraction in the City of Cupertino and, in turn, are critical factors in determining how to allocate new transportation improvement costs between existing and new development and between different land uses. Land Use Assumptions and Forecast The existing and future land use estimates used in the TIF are based on the General Plan: Community Vision 2015 -2040, approved in December 2014. Specifically, the land use assumptions summarized in Table 2 were derived from Tab le LU-1 of the Land Use and Community Design Element and are categorized as follows: Table 2 General Plan Land Use Assumptions and Forecasts Year Growth Land Use -----------(2014 -2040) 2014 2040 Residential Units Sing le Famil y 15 ,117 16,172 1,055 Multi-Family 1 6,295 7,122 827 Subtotal 2 1.41 2 23,294 1,882 Non-residential Retail (1,000 Sq. Ft.) 3,632 4.431 799 Office (1 ,000 Sq . Ft.) 8,916 11.470 2,554 Hotel (rooms) l, 116 1.429 313 [l] Multi-family Includes apartments, condos , duplexes and townhomes. The breakdown between single-and multi-family based on estimated from the Cupertino Tra vel Demand Model. Sources : City of Cupertino Community Vision 2040 , Table LU-1 . Cupertino Tra ve l Demand Model • Single-Family Residential: This category refers to detached single-family homes. Traffic impact fees for new single -fam ily residential development are applied on a per unit basis. • Multifamily Residential): This category covers apartments, town homes, condos, duplexes and other multifami ly housing in which walls are shared among units . Traffic impact fees for new construction of this type of residential development are applied on a per unit basis. The break-o ut between single-family and mu ltifamily development is based on the Cupertino Travel Demand model. • Retail: Retail development can in clude shopping centers, discount stores, nurseries, factory outlets, car sale lots, convenient stores, and specialty stores. Traffic impact fees for new construction of this type of development are app l ied on a square footage basis. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4 P: \16 l OOOs\161 085Cupertino TI F\Report\NexusStudy8081 7. docx Cupertino Tran sportation Impa ct Fee Ne x us Study Report 8/08/1 7 • Office: This category covers general offices, including professional and medical office development, government offices, and post offices. Traffic impact fees for this type of development are applied on a square footage basis. • Hotel: This category includes hotels, motels, and other lodging faci l ities. Traffic impact fees for this type of development are applied on a per room basis. • Other: This category is included as a catch-all to cover all other development activity in Cupertino that generates new travel demand or trips but is not included in one of the above categories . For example, it could include churches, private schools, entertainment venues (e.g., cinemas) and other development that is not eas i ly categorized. Travel Demand Assumptions and Forecasts The land use forecasts documented above are used to estimate future travel demand, or trips, based on a variety of assumptions related to trip rates and lengths by land use category. These assumptions are summarized in Table 3. Table 3 Trip Generation Assumptions Land Use Primary Diverted Trips 1 Trips 1 Residential Single Family 86% 11% Multi -F amily 86 % 11% Non-residential Retail 47% 31% Office 77 % 19% Hotel 58% 38% Avg . Trip Adjustment Excluding Lenglh 2 Faclor3 Total Pass-by 1 97% 6.77 0.99 97% 6.77 0:99 78% 3.65 0.43 96% 12.93 1.87 96% 6.25 0.90 ITE Category Single Fa m il y Detached (2 10) Apartment (220) Shopping Center (820) General Office Bu il ding (71 OJ Hotel (310) Trip Avg . PM Demand Trips 4 Faclor5 1.00 0.99 0.62 0.61 3.71 1.59 1.49 2.79 0.60 0.54 [ 1 J Percent of total trips . Primary trips are trips w ith no midway slops. or "links." Di verted trips are linked trips whose distance adds at least one mi le to the primary trip. Pass-by trips are links that do not add more t han one mile to the total trip. [2] In miles. Residential based on Home-Based 'Total . personal travel", Retail based on "Home-Based Shop/Olhe(. Hotel based on "Non-Home Based" trip lengths and Office based on "Home-Based Work High Income" trip length form City of Cupertino Travel Demand Model Year 2040 Trave l forecasts. [3] The trip adjustment factor equals the percent of non-pass-by trips multiplied by the average trip length and divided b y the systemwide a verage trip length of 6.63 miles. [4] Trips per dwelling unit. room or per 1,000 building square feet. [5] The trip demand factor is the product of the trip adjustment factor and the average PM trips . Sources: San Diego Association of the Govermenls, Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Regions , April 2002; In stitute of Traffic Engineers. Trip Generation. 9th Edition; Staniec. Table 4 combines the travel demand assumptio ns presented in Table 3 with the growth estimates summarized in Table 2 to estimate the total growth in tri ps through bui l d-out of the General Plan. As shown, this approach results in an estimated growth of 10,120 PM peak hour trips per day, which represents a 20 percent increase over existing levels. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 5 P: \16 1 ODOs \16 1 OB S Cupertino TIF\Report \Nexus5t udy808 17, docx Table 4 Trip Generation Projections Land Use Residential Units Single Family Multi-Family2 Subtotal Non-residential Retail (1 ,000 Sq . Ft .) Office (1,000 Sq. Ft.) Hotel (rooms) Subtotal Total Trip Demand Factor 1 0 .99 0 .61 1.59 2.79 0 .54 2014 Units Trips 15 ,117 14 ,973 6,295 3,866 21,412 18 ,839 3,632 8,916 1,116 5,786 24 ,872 606 31 ,264 50 ,103 Cupertino Transportation Impact Fee Ne x us Study Report 8/08/ 17 Growth -------~Q~-~------· , __ (2014 -2040) _ Units Trips 16 ,172 16 ,018 7,122 4,374 23 ,294 20 ,392 4,431 7,059 11,470 31,997 1,429 776 39 ,832 60 ,223 Units Trips 1,055 827 1,882 799 2,554 313 1,045 508 1,553 1,273 7,125 lZQ 8 ,568 10,120 [1 J PM Trips per dwelling unit, per 1,000 building square feet, or per hotel room (see Table 3) [2] Includes apartments, condos, duplexes, and townhomes . Sources: Cupertino General Plan : Community Vision 2015 -2040; Stantec. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 6 P: \ 161OOOs\16108 SCupertino TIF\Report\NexusStudyBOB 1 7. docx 3. TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS AND COSTS This chapter describes the major roadway improvement projects required in the City of Cupertino as well as their cost estimates. The following chapter discusses the ne x us-based cost allocations .. Project Selection Criteria Development impact fees are derived from a list of specific capital improvement projects and associated costs that are needed in part or in full to accommodate new growth. Consequently, the capital improvements included in the fee program need to be described in sufficient detail to generate cost estimates. However, impact. fee programs do not, in themselves, represent actual approval of a City plan or capital project (and as such do require clearance through the California Environmental Quality Act o r CEQA). Given the above consideration , the TIF Consultant Team recommends that as a baseline criterion, all transportation projects identified in existing City planning documents be considered for inclusion in the fee program. As such, the Consultant Team will not seek to identify or plan entirely new transportation projects in the City. Existing planning documents relied upon by the Consultant Team will include, without limitation, the recently approved General Plan: Community Vision 2015 -2040, the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan, and other project related or area- specific planning documents. II The list of transportation projects identified in ex isting City planning documents will be further refined as follows: • The TIF program will e x clude any projects that are outside the City of Cupertino. • The TIF program will e x clude any projects where secured and dedicated funding source have already been established to cover the full cost. Project List As part of the Cupertino TIF and Ne x us Study, Stantec has prepared a preliminary conceptual improvement list, as shown in Table 5 . The improvements included in the list cover the intersections/segments where significant impact(s) were identified in the General Plan: Community Vision 2015 -2040 Draft Environmental Impact Report (December 2014). In addition, the projects identified in the City of Cupertino 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan are also included in the list, as shown in Appendix A. Transportation projects that have been identified as mitigations in CEQA documents fo r specific projects (e.g., Apple Campus 2, Marina Plaza, the Hamptons) have been e x cluded from the TIF. The completion of mitigations identified in these project specific EIR's would be placed as a cond.ition upon, and paid by, the developer separate from the TIF . None of the projects included in the TIF addresses ex isting deficiencies . Rather, they are a response to new development and li mited to intersections curr ently operati ng at a level of service (LOS) w ithin City's acceptable standards, but are ex pected to d eteriorate to levels below City standards with proposed new developments. The Citywide sidewalk and bicycle facility Eco nomic & Pla nning Sys tems, I nc. 7 P: \ 161 OOOs \16 1 OBS Cupertino TIF\Report \Nexus5tudy808 J 7. docx Cupertino Transportation Impact Fee Nexus Study Report 8/08/17 installations are also in response to new development and a need to encourage shifts to modes such as walking and biking so that the roadway system is not overtaxed. Table 5 Summary of TIF Projects and Costs TIF # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Project Name SR 85 NB Ramps and Stevens Creek Blvd . Stelling Rd . and Stevens Creek Blvd . Sunnyvale-Saratoga Rd . / De Anza Blvd . / Homestead Rd. De Anza Blvd . and 1-280 Ramps De Anza Blvd . and Stevens Creek Blvd. De Anza Blvd . and McClellan Rd. / Pacifica Dr . Wolfe Rd. and Homestead Rd . Wolfe Rd. and 1-280 NB & SB Ramps Wolfe Rd .-Mil ler/Ave. and Stevens Creek Blvd . North Tantau Ave./Quail Ave./ Homestead Rd . 11 Tantau Ave. and Stevens Creek Blvd. 12 Monta Vista Sidewalk (Orange and Byrne) 13 Monta Vista Sidewa lk (McClellan) 14 Bicycle Projects -Tier 1 15 Bicycle Projects -Tier 2 16 Bicycle Projects -Tier 3 Total -Citywide Transportation Projects [1 J See Appendix A for detailed project cost estimates. Facility Cost Estimates Source Project Cost 1 Community Vision 2015 -2040 $536,000 Community Vision 2015 -2040 $1 ,318,000 Community Vision 20 15 -2040 $3,210 ,000 Community Vision 2015 -2040 $1,840,000 Community Vision 2015 -2040 $145,000 Community Vision 2015 -2040 $9,707 ,000 Community Vision 2015 -2040 $7,131,000 Community Vision 2015 -2040 $76,300,000 Community Vision 2015-2040 $153,000 Community Vision 2015 -2040 $145,000 Community Vision 201 5 -2040 $145,000 Community Vision 201 5 -2040 $4 ,000,000 Community Vision 2015 -2040 $2,040,000 Bicycle Transportation Plan $38,611 ,000 Bicycle Tran spo rtation Plan $15,399 ,500 Bicycle Transportation Plan $33, 168,500 $193,849,000 The cost estimates shown in Table 5 above are based on assumptions about the planned right- of-way, roadway cross-sections, and landscaping treatments for each corridor. Assumptions were based on similar existing corridors within the City of Cupertino and the City's roadway design standards, and have been reviewed and confirmed by City staff. Detailed cost estimate sheets for each project are attached to this report as Appendix A. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 8 P: \161 OOOs\161 085Cupertino TIF\Report\Nexus5tudy80817. docx 4. NEXUS ANALYSIS AND MAXIMUM FEE This chapter presents the ne x us analysis and calculations for the ma x imum allowable TIF based on the land use projections and transportation improvements described previously. Overview of Nexus Findings A "nexus " or relationship between new development in City of Cupertino and transportation improvements and their costs must be established before incorporating transportation improvement costs into a transportation impact fee calculation. To determine the appropriate costs to include in the new transportation fee calculation, it is necessary to conduct a series of steps: • Identify Total Costs of Transportation Improvements . The identification of the required transportation improvement projects and their associated costs is the first step (conducted in prior chapter) • Remove Existing Deficiencies. Ne xt, it is necessary to evaluate whether there is an ex isting deficiency at any of the project locations, and if so, the magnitude of that deficiency . Ex isti ng deficiencies are accounted for by reducing the project cost that is included in the Fee Program with funding required from other sources. • Determine Proportionate Allocation to New Development. Once ex isting deficiencies are ide ntified, it is necessary to determine the proportion of the remaining project cost that i s attributable to new development in Cupertino, and therefore can be the subject of a fee program. • Account for Known Funding . To the ex tent there is dedicated funding for any of the transportation improvements, this portion of costs should not be included in the transportation fee calculation. For th is TIF calculation, funding from Measure B has been e x cluded. The technical calculations described above and further detailed in subsequent sections establish the following ne x us findings, consistent with the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act. Purpose The fee will help maintain adequate levels of transportation service in Cupertino . Use of Fee Fee revenue will be used to fund City transportation improvements, including roadway, i ntersection, i nterchange, and traffic signal improvements, as well as th e reimbursement of upfront investments from other City funds for transportation improvem e nts required to serve future grow th. The list of eligible transportation projects and costs are summarized in Chapter 3 and further detail ed in the Appendix A . Eco n omic & Pla n n in g Sys tems, Inc. 9 P: \1 61 OOOs\16 1 085Cupertino TIF\Report\NexusStudyBDB 1 7.docx Relationship Cupertino Transportation Impa ct Fee Ne x u s Study Rep o rt 8/0 8/1 7 New development in the City of Cupertino will increase demands for and travel on the City's transportation network. Transportation fee revenue will be used to fund additional transportation capacity necessary to accommodate growth. New development will benefit from the increased transportation capacity. Need Each new development project will add to the incremental need for transportation capacity and improvements. The transportation improvements considered in this study are considered necessary to meet the City's future transportation needs. Proportionality The fee levels are tied to fair share cost allocations to new Citywide development based on the transportation model developed by VTA and adapted for this study purpose by Stantec. Travel Demand Model and Cost Allocation Travel Demand Assumptions and Methodology In order to allocate TIF program costs equitably, the City of Cupertino General Plan travel demand model was applied to this nexus study. The City of Cupertino General Plan travel demand model was developed using the Santa Clara VTA countywide travel demand model with refined land use estimates for the City of Cupertino . The VTA model is a mathematical representation of travel demand based on the buildout of all of the cities within Santa Clara County, including Cupertino. The model uses socioe conomic data, su c h as number of jobs and households, for different geographic areas (transportation analysis zones) to predict the e x pected travel between places in the future . The model is validated for the current socioeconomic data to predict current traffic volume, which is matched with the actual existing counts to calibrate the model. The calibrated model is then utilized to forecast future travel conditions based on the expected changes in the socioeconomic conditions in the future . The City of Cupertino General Plan model has 54 transportation analysis zones within the model to represent City. The 2040 socioeconomic data are generated by the ABAG and refined by VTA based on input from the City Planning Department. In this ne x us study, Stantec has used this model to derive both average citywide and link-specific characteristics of vehicle travel demand including the following: • Internal (trips that start and end in Cupert i no) • Internal/Ex ternal (trips that have one end either beginning or ending in Cupertino) • Through (trips that pass completely through Cupertino without stopping) Only the trips starting or ending in Cupertino (i.e., Internal trips and Internal/External trips) would be responsible for the TIF p r ogram costs. Econo mic & Pla nning Sys t em s, In c. 10 P: \ 161 OOOs\161 085Cupertino TIF\Report\Nexus5tudy808 J 7. docx Cupertino Transportation Impact Fee Ne x us Study Report 8/08/ 1 7 Table 6 illustrates the average citywide characteristics of vehicle travel demand. These methodologies would be applied to determine the percentage of the project costs that could be funded through the TIF program. Generally, two allocation methodologies were applied as follows: • Citywide Average -the cost allocation would be based on the average citywide characteristics of vehicle travel demand, which were determined for all the roadway segments within the City of Cupertino boundary as an average. The City-wide average is used where the traffic model does not provide sufficient detailed to estimate the origin and destination of trips associated with a particular transportation facility or improvement. As shown in Table 6, this method would be applied for all the freeway interchange projects, sidewalk projects, and bicycle projects. • Select Link -the cost allocation would be based on link-specific characteristics of vehicle travel demand for the project-related links (I.e., all the approaching and departure roadway segments of the intersection). This methodology is applied where the traffic model can be used to estimate specific travel demand characteristics associated with particular transportation facilities and improvements. As shown in Table 6, this method is applied for all the City-owned intersection projects. Ec onomic & Planning Systems, Inc. 11 P: \161 OOOs\161 OBSCupertino TIF\Report\NexusStudyBOB 17. docx Cupertino Tran sp ortation Impa c t Fee Ne x u s Study Rep ort 8/0 8/1 7 Ta b le 6 T I F Trave l D e man d Assu m pti ons Trip Type 1 • 2 Sha re Allocated ·------------------------------- TI F # Proje c t Name Co st A llo c ation 1-1 1-X X-1 X-X to New Methodology Development3 SR 85 NB Ra m ps a nd St evens C reek C itywide Avg. 5.7% 22 .9% 2 1.5% 49 .8% 50.2% l Blvd . 2 St e lli ng Road a nd St evens C reek Bl v d . Se lect Li nk 13.1% 32.5% 39.9% 14.5% 85.5% 3 Sunn yvale -Sa ra t oga Rd ./De Anza Blvd . Se lect Lin k 2.3% 20.3% 24 .5% 52.9% 47.1% a nd Ho m es tead Rd . 4 De Anza Bl vd . a n d 1-280 Ra mps Ci tywide Avg. 5.7% 22.9% 2 1.5% 49.8% 50.2% 5 De Anza Blvd. a nd St eve ns C reek Blvd. Se lect Link 9.9% 30 .5% 33 .4 % 26.2% 73.8% De Anza Blvd . a nd McC le llan Sel ect Lin k 6.4 % 25.9% 29.3% 38.4% 6 1.6% 6 Road /Pacifica Dr. 7 Wo lfe Road a nd Ho m es t ead Ro ad Se lect Li n k 1.1% 19 .8% 18.7% 60.4% 39.6% 8 Wo lfe Road and 1-280 NB & SB Ram ps 2 Ci t ywide Avg . 5.7% 22.9% 2 1.5% 49.8% 50.2% Wo lfe Road-Mil ler/Ave. and St evens Se lect Li nk 7.1% 39.3% 3 1.5% 22.1% 77.9% 9 Creek Blvd. No rth Tantau Ave./Qua i/ Ave. a nd Se lect Li nk 0.1% 19 .6% 19.2% 61.1% 38 .9% 10 Homest ead Rd . 11 Ta ntau Avenue a nd St eve ns Creek Blvd. Se lect Lin k 3 .3% 40.2% 34.8% 2 1.7% 78.3% M o nta Vist a Sidewalk (Oran g e and C itywide Avg. 5 .7% 22 .9% 2 1.5% 49.8% 50.2% 12 By rn e ) 13 M o nta Vis t a Sidewa lk (McCle ll an) C itywide Avg. 5.7% 22.9% 2 1.5% 49.8% 50.2% 14 Bicycle Projects -Tier l Citywide Avg . 5.7% 22.9% 21 .5% 49.8% 50 .2% 15 Bicycle Projects -Tie r 2 Citywide Avg . 5.7% 22.9% 21.5% 49.8% 50.2% 16 Bicycle Pro j ect s -Ti er 3 C itywide Avg. 5.7% 22.9% 2 1.5% 49.8% 50 .2% ( l J 1-1 = tri ps th a t start and end in Cupertin o , 1-X = tr ips t h a t origina t e in Cupert ino and end elsewhe re , X-1 = tr ip s that o ri g in ate elsewhere b ut e nd in C upertino , X-X = tri ps th a t pass-t hrough C upertion b ut do not end or o riginate th e re. [2] Tr avel d e m a nd analys is is d ocume nte d in St a ntec Nove m ber, 201 6 m emo, "La n d Use Proj ectio ns, Tra ffi c A nalys is , Cos t s Esti m ates , and Tra ve l De mand M o d e l An a lys is f o r Cup e rtin o Tra ffi c Im pact Fee (T IF) / Nex us Study. [3] Exclu des thr ough trips (X-X), o r th ose th a t do not o ri g inat e o r e nd in C u pert ino. A s shown , a p p ro x im ately 49 .8 pe rcent of the t rip s using Cupert ino ro a dway fac i l ities wo ul d pass throug h Cu pertino comp let ely wi t hou t st op p in g . T he r efore, approx i m ate ly 50 .2 pe r cen t of the p roject cos t s would be funded through t he TI F prog r am us i ng the Citywide Average a p proach described above . This al locatio n percentage is app l ied for all the free w ay interchange intersection p roje ct s, s idewal k projects, an d bicycle projects . As s how n, for the Select Li nk a nalys is, t h e p roport ion o f t rans port a t ion improveme nt costs a ll ocated to new deve l opment va r ies by facility or improveme nt. Ge n era l ly, approx ima t ely 14 .5 perce nt to 38.4 percen t of the trip s using the approaching o r departure roadway segments of the i ntersection would pass through Cupert ino w ithout stopping . Fo r the three i nte rsections along Homestead Road o n th e north border of Cupe r tino, such percentage goes up to between 52 . 9 percent and 61.1 pe rc e nt. In summary, approx imately 38 .9 percent to 85.5 p ercent of the project costs w ou ld be funded through th e TIF program for the city-owned i nte rs ec ti on project s . Eco n o mic & Pla nning System s, I nc. 1 2 P: \161 OOOs\161 OBSCupertino T!F\Report \Nexus5tudy8081 7. docx TIF Cost Allocation Cupertino Transportation Impact Fee Ne x us Study Report B/08/17 The TIF nexus analysis allocates costs based on (1) the amount attributable to new versus existing development, (2) the proportion of trips with at least one trip end in the City (i.e. excludes through trips), and (3) the amount covered by secured funding sources. As described in Chapter 3, none of the projects included in the TIF addresses existing deficiencies. Rather, they are a response to new development and limited to intersections currently operating at a level of service (LOS) within City's acceptable standards, but are expected to deteriorate to levels below City standards with proposed new developments. The Citywide sidewalk and bicycle facility installations are also in response to new development and a need to encourage shifts to modes such as walking and biking so that the roadway system is not overtaxed. Consequently, the entire TIF project list was selected to only include improvements attributable to new development. The cost allocated to new development is based on the analysis described above and summarized in Table 6. In addition, the analysis assumes that the Santa Clara County Transportation Infrastructure Tax, approved by the voters in November 2016, and private developer funding will cover 100 percent of the costs for the Wolfe Road/I-280 interchange improvements. Consequently, the costs of these improvements, estimated to be about $76.3 million, have been excluded from the TIF calculation. Table 7 illustrates the net impact of the cost allocations described above. As shown, overall this nexus analysis allocates approximately $59. 78 million in transportation improvement cost to the TIF. The amount represents about 31 percent of the approximately $193 .9 million in future transportation infrastructure costs considered in this analysis. Economic & Planning Sys tems, Inc. 13 P: \161 OOOs\161 OB 5Cupertino T!F\Report\NexusStudyBOB 17. docx Cupertino Tra n sporta tio n Impact Fee Nex us Study Report 8/08/17 Table 7 TIF Cost Allocation Assumptions and Calculations Total Project Share Allocated Cost Allocated TIF # Project Name Cost 1 to New To TIF Program Development l SR 85 NB Ramps and Stevens C reek B·lvd. $536 ,000 50.2% $268 ,8 09 2 Stelling Road and Stevens Creek Blvd. $1,318 ,000 85.5% $1,126 ,89 0 3 Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road/De Anza Blvd. and $3 ,210 ,000 47 .1% $1,5 11,910 Homes tead Rd . 4 De Anza Blvd. and 1-280 Ramps $1,840 ,000 50 .2% $922,777 5 De Anza Blvd . and St even s Creek Blvd . $145 ,000 73.8% $107 ,0 10 6 De Anza Blvd . and McC le ll an Road/Pacifica Dr. $9,707 ,000 6 1.6%. $5 ,979 ,5 12 7 Wol fe Road a n d Homes tead Road $7,13 1,000 39 .6% $2,823 ,876 8 Wo lfe Road a n d 1-280 NB & SB Ra m ps 2 $76,300,000 0.0% $0 9 Wo lf e Road-M ill er/Ave. a n d Steven s Creek Blvd. $1 53,000 77 .9% $1 19 ,187 10 North Tantau Ave./Qua il Ave . and Homes t ead Rd . $145 ,000 38.9% $56,405 l l Tan t au Avenue and Stevens C reek Blvd. $145 ,000 78.3% $113 ,535 12 Monta Vista Sidewalk (Ora n ge and Byrne) $4 ,000 .000 50 .2% $2 ,006 ,038 13 Mon ta Vista Sidewa lk (McClellan ) $2 .040 ,000 50 .2% $1,023 ,079 14 Bicycle Projec ts -Tier l $38 ,6 l l ,000 50 .2% $19 ,363,783 15 Bicycle Projects -Tie r 2 $15,399 ,500 50 .2% $7,722 ,9 95 16 Bicycle Pro jects -Ti er 3 $33, 168,500 50.2% $16,634,3 18 Total -Citywide Transportation Projects $193,849 ,000 30.8% $59 ,780,125 [l] See Tab le 5 and Append ix A. [2] Sin ce th e cos ts o f these p rojects are l o be cove red en tire ly by Measure B, they are exc luded from th e tr a ffi c im pact f ee ca lculationsremoved from the Impact Fee Ca lcula tions. Maximum Fee Calculation Table 8 shows the m axi mum supportable tran s portation i mpact fee pe r tri p . The ma xi mum fee per trip is calculated by div iding the aggregate fee program cost of $59. 78 million (see Table 7) by the total number of trips generated by new development, or 10,120 (se e Table 4). The results in an average TIF per peak hour trip of $5,907. Table 8 Maximum Fee per Trip Category Fee Program Share of Planned Transportation Facility Costs Growth in PM Trips Cost per Trip Source: EPS and Staniec . Eco n omic & Plann ing Systems, In c. Formula a b =a /b 14 Amount $59,780 ,125 $5,907 P: \16 1 OOOs\161 OBS Cupertino TlF\Report\NexusStudy8081 7. docx Cup ertin o Tra n sp orta tion Impact Fee Nexus Study Report 8/08/1 7 Finally, Table 9 calculates the ma x imum TIF for each land use category specified in th e General Pl an. The ma x imum allowable fee by land use includes a 2 pe r cent charge needed to cover t h e adm i nistrative cost of administeri ng the TIF p ro g ram. The ma x imum supportable fees are the fee levels that would generate sufficient fee revenues to cover the full TIF cost allocation of $59. 78 m illion . As discussed below, decis ions to cha r ge fees below t he ma x imum fee w i ll result i n fund i ng gaps that would need to be covered by other funding sources. Table 9 Maximum TIF Schedule Cost Per Trip Admin Land Use Trip Demand Raw Fee Charge2 Total TIF per Unit Factor1 Residential Si n g le Fa mil y $5,907 0.99 $5,85 1 2% $5 ,968 / unit Mult i-Family $5,907 0.61 $3,627 2% $3 ,700 / unit Non-residential Retai l $5,907 1.59 $9.4 1 2% $9 .60 / sqft. O ffi ce $5,907 2.79 $16.48 2% $16.81 / sqft . Hote l $5 ,907 0 .54 $3,207 2% $3,272 I room O ther $5 ,907 1.00 $5,907 2% $6,025 / trip [ 1 J PM Trips per dwelling unit, per 1,000 building square feet, or per hotel room. [2 ] Administrative charge of 2.0 percent of '"raw'" TIF for legal, accounting, and other administrative costs (e .g. re venue col lection, mandated public reporting, and Nexus Analysis). Economic & Pla nn i ng Systems, In c. 1 5 P: \161OOOs\16108 SCupert ino TIF\Report\NexusSt udyBOB 17. docx 5. TJF IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION This chapter describes implementation and administrative issues and procedures to be addressed in the TIF Ordinance and Nexus Study. It addresses matters related to TIF approval, program administration (e.g., fee amount, collection and accounting procedures, exemptions, etc.), and securing supplemental funding. Approval Process The TIF and corresponding fee schedule will need to be adopted by City Resolution and Ordinance. The City TIF Ordinance will allow the City Council to adopt a fee schedule consistent with supporting technical analysis and findings provided in this Report. The Ordinance approach to setting the TIF fee will allows periodic adjustments of the fee amount that may be necessary over time, without amending the enabling Ordinance. The TIF Ordinance will clearly define the TIF program policies and procedures as discussed further below. The TIF program policies and procedures may differ from other City development impact fees (e.g., the Parks Fee and Affordable Housing fee). Fee Amount and Collection As noted, the actual fee levels by land use will need to be approved by the City Council but cannot exceed the maximum allowable fees calculated herein. Other fee collection considerations are described below. Applicable Land Uses All new development that occurs within the City of Cupertino, except as specifically exempted by the TIF Ordinance, shall pay the TIF based on an approved Fee Schedule made available by the City and updated periodically. The amount will vary by land use, as described in the Nexus Study. While the maximum fee amount will be determined by the AB 1600 Nexus Study, the City may elect to charge less for a variety of reasons. It is possible that certain projects may not fit neatly into the land use categories defined in the fee schedule (see Table 9). In cases where such ambiguity exists, the City Manager or an authorized representative will need to make a determination as to the applicable fees. The Fee Ordinance can articulate guidelines for resolving discrepancies and/or disputes. For example, it may include the option for applicants to furnish information or analysis that will justify their project's inclusion in a particular land use category and/or a lower fee based on verifiable trip generation rates or other factors. Fee Escalation The City Fee Ordinance will allow for an automatic adjustment of the TIF to keep pace with inflation adjusted increases in construction cost. This allows the fee level to keep pace with inflation without requiring an annual approval process. This adjustment is based on cost ind i ces published by the Engineering News Record (ENR), a source widely used in the construction industry, and by many jurisdictions as a basis for making annual inflation adjustments to Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 16 P: \161 OOOs\1 61 OBS Cupertino TIF\Report\Nexus5tudy80817. docx Cupertino Transportation Impact Fee Ne x us Study Report B/08/17 their development impact fees. ENR's CCI has been published consistently every month since 1913 for 20 U.S. cities and a national average of the 20 cities. As such it is one of the most reliable and consistent indices that track trends in construction costs. Timing of Payment While the City TIF Ordinance will specify the timing for TIF payments, the generally accepted practice in Cupertino, and most other California cities, is to have the fee payment due upon issuance of a building permit, unless otherwise indicated or allowed. Fee Credits, Reimbursements, and Exemptions Impact fee programs frequently allow developers subject to the fee to obtain fee credits, reimbursements, and/or adjustments under certain and limited circumstances as determined by the City's Impact Fee Ordinance. Fee credits, reimbursements, or adjustments are generally not allowed by right but rather should be subject to discretionary review and approval by the City to ensure that they are warranted and appropriate . Fee Credits Impact fee ordinances frequently allow for fee credits if a developer provides a particular facility or improvement that replaces facilities that would have otherwise been funded in whole or in part by the TIF. For example, the City may elect to offer a fee credit to developers who provide transportation related improvements, consistent with those specified in the current TIF program. The fee credit is usually equal to the most current cost estimate of the infrastructure item (as defined by annual cost review or other recent evaluation of cost) regardless of the actual cost to construct. The City's Ordinance will allow for fee credits under specific terms. Fee Reimbursements Fee reimbursements are typically considered for developers who contribute more funding and/or build and dedicate infrastructure items that exceed their proportional obligation, especially if the project funded is a priority project. Such reimbursements should be provided as fee revenue becomes available and should include a reasonable factor for interest earned on the reimbursable amount. It should not compromise the implementation of other priority capital projects . A provision for including such interest payments as additional costs in subsequent fees can also be included in the Ordinance. Fee Exemptions and Other Adjustments The City may elect not to impose fees for certain categories of development or on project by project basis, though alternative funding sources to offset a loss in fee revenue should be considered in this context. Likewise, the City may enter into a Development Agreement that specifically exempts or adjusts all or a portion of the City fees, including its application. Generally speaking, cities consider waiving all or portions of a fee if it can be determined that a proposed project will have minimal or no impact on the improvements or facilities for which the Fee is co llected. Additionally, cities sometimes allow for fee ex emptions for ce rtain types of uses such as projects developed for use by not-for-profit organizations or other public benefits (e.g., affordable housing). By way of example, jurisdictions often exempt or adjust fees for the followi ng types of projects, subject to City revi ew and approval. Eco nomic & Planning Sys t ems, I nc. 17 P: \161 OOOs\161 085Cupertino TIF\Report\NexusStudyBOB 17. docx Cupertino Transportation Impac t Fee Ne x us Study Report 8/08/17 1. Any internal or external alteration or addition to an existing structure that increases total floor area (including outside storage) by more than a specified percent (e.g. 10). This exemption may not apply when the alteration or addition facilitates a change to more intensive use (e.g. one that generates additional vehicle trip). Some jurisdictions have further specified the number of expansions permitted under this exemption (e.g. no more than one expansion may qualify for this exemption in any ten (10) year period). 2. Any replacement or reconstruction of any structure that is damaged or destroyed as a result of fire, flood, explosion, wind, earthquake, riot, or other calamity or act of God. This exemption would not apply to the portion of a building replaced or reconstructed that exceeds the documented total floor area or change the use at the time of its destruction. 3. Any structure has been vacant for less than a specified period of time (e.g., one to three years), assuming the new tenant(s) are of a similar nature in terms of their impact on capital facilities. 4. New development that replaces existing development may be eligible for a Fee adjustment to the extent that the facilities to be funded by the new development are already provided to the existing development provided the existing development has not been removed more than one year. For example, a 20,000 square foot office building that is replaced by a 40,000 square foot office building could receive up to a 50 percent credit in the Fee (20/40 = 50%). City staff will determine the amount of the Fee credit at the time a site plan is submitted to the City. If a structure is replaced with a denser land use, such as replacing single family residences with a commercial building, an incremental fee will generally apply. 5. Any replacement of a structure and use, in kind, providing that the property owner can document that the structure was legally in existence at the time the Fee was adopted. 6. Residential accessory structures, as defined by the Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC). 7. Public facilities, as defined by the CMC. 8. Any temporary structure approved in accordance with the CMC for a period not to exceed a specified period (e.g. thirty (30) days in any calendar year). In some cases, temporary buildings that are authorized for more than thirty (30) days in any calendar year shall be required to pay the Fee. But when the building is removed at a later date, the Fee, or a portion thereof, may be refunded or credited to a permanent structure in the Project Area. All refunds are subject to a deduction of appropriate administration fees. 9. Upon approval by the City Council of the City of Cupertino, a portion of the fee may be reduced for housing development approved for very low-income occupants, as defined by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), in accordance with CMC (affordable housing incentives). The following are examples of times that the Fee may be collected for land uses that could be potentially classified as exempt from the fees. 1. Any project listed as ex empt but which nonetheless, in the opinion of the City Manager, increases the demand upon city facilities funded by the Fee. The City Manager may pro -rate Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 18 P: \161 OOOs\161 OBSCupertino nF\Report\Nexus5tudy80817. docx Cupertino Transportation Impact Fee Ne x us Study Report 8/0 8/1 7 the amount of the fee based upon the project's anticipated impact upon the subject facility or facilities. 2. Illegal facilities and buildings, constructed prior to the adoption of the Fee, which consequently obtain a building permit to legitimize the facility or building, shall pay the applicable Fee. 3. Accessory residential structures that are converted to a separate residential dwelling unit shall pay the Fee for multifamily development as long the primary residence remains on the property. Annual Review, Accounting, and Updates Annual review This Nexus Study and the technical information it contains should be maintained and reviewed periodically by the City as necessary to ensure TIF accuracy and to enable the adequate programming of fundin·g sources. To the extent that improvement requirements, costs, or development potential changes over time, the TIF will need to be updated. Specifically, AB 1600 (at Gov. C. §§ 66001(c), 66006(b)(l)) stipulates that each local agency that requires payment of a fee make specific information available to the public annually within 180 days of the last day of the fiscal year. This information includes the following: • A description of the type of fee in the account • The amount of the fee • The beginning and ending balance of the fund • The amount of fees collected and interest earned • Identification of the improvements constructed • The total cost of the improvements constructed • The fees expended to construct the improvement • The percent of total costs funded by the fee If sufficient fees have been collected to fund the construction of an improvement, the agency must specify the appro x imate date for construction of that improvement. Because of the dynamic nature of growth and infrastructure requirements, the City should monitor development activity, the need for infrastructure improvements, and the adequacy of the fee revenues and other available funding. Formal annual review of the Fee Program should occur, at which time adjustments should be made. Costs associated with this monitoring and updating effort are included in the Impact Fee as an administrative charge . Surplus Funds AB 1600 also requires that if any portion of a fee remains unex pended or uncommitted in an account for five years or more after deposit of the fee , the City Council shall make findings once each year: (1) to identify the purpose to which the fee is to be put, (2) to demonstrate a reasonable relat ionship between the fee and the purpose for which it was charged, (3) to identify all sources and amounts of fund i ng anticipated to complete financ i ng of incomplete improvements, and (4) to designate the approx imate dates on which the funding identified in (3) is ex pected to be deposited into the appropriate fund . Eco n o mic & Pla nning Sys tems, Inc . 19 P: \ 161 OOOs\ 16 1 OBSCupertino T!F\Report\NexusStudy808 I 7. docx Cupertino Transportation Impact Fee Ne x us Study Report 8/08/17 If adequate funding has been collected for a certain improvement, an approximate date must be specified as to when construction on the improvement will begin. If the findings show no need for the unspent funds, or if the conditions discussed above are not met, and the administrative costs of the refund do not exceed the refund itself, the local agency that has collected the funds must refund them. Internal Loaning of Funds Inter-fund loans may be used from time to time to facilitate the construction of TIF facilities. Any such loan shall be made in accordance with applicable law, as interpreted by the City Attorney of the City of Cupertino, and all funds shall be placed in separate accounts on either a facility or geographic basis. The additional following requirements are also placed on inter-fund loans: • Funds may be transferred between accounts to expedite the construction of critical projects/faci I ities. • A mechanism to repay accounts shall be established. • Inter-fund loan repayments shall take precedence over reimbursements to developers. Five-Year Update Fees will be collected from new development within the City immediately; however, use of these funds may need to wait until a sufficient fund balance can be accrued. Per Government Code Section 66006, the City is required to deposit, invest, account for, and expend the fees in a prescribed manner. The fifth fiscal year following the first deposit into the Fee account or fund, and every five years thereafter, the City is required to make all of the following findings with respect to that portion of the account or fund remaining unexpended: • Identify the purpose for which the fee is to be put; • Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged; • Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing in incomplete improvements; and • Designate the approximate dates on that the funding referred to in the above paragraph is expected to be deposited in the appropriate account or fund. Once sufficient funds have been collected to complete the specified projects, the City must commence construction within 180 days. If they fail to do this, the City is required to refund the unexpended portion of the fee and any accrued interest to the then current owner. Securing Supplemental Funding The Impact Fee is not appropriate for funding the full amount of all capital costs identified in this Fee Study. The City will have to identify funding and pay for improvements related to existing and new developments and improvements not funded by the Fee Program or any other established funding source. Indeed, as part of the adoption of the fee, the City is likely to adopt a finding that it will obtain and allocate funding from various other sources for the fair share of Economic & Planning Sys tems, Inc. 2 0 P: \ 161OOOs\161085Cupertino TIF\Report\NexusStudyBOB 17.docx Cupertino Transportation Impact Fee Nex us Study Rep ort 8/08/1 7 the costs of improvements identified in this Report that are not funded by the Fee Program. Examples of such sources include the following: • Assessments and Special Taxes. The City could fund a portion of capital facilities costs using assessments and special taxes. For example, the establishment of a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District would allow the City to levy a special tax to pay debt service on bonds sold to fund construction of capital facilities or to directly fund capital facilities. • Federal, State or reginal Funds. The City might seek and obtain grant of matching funds from Federal, State and/or regional sources to help offset the costs of required capital facilities and improvements. For example, the current TIF assumes Measure B revenue will be used to cover the costs of I-280/Wolfe Road Interchange even though a portion of these are attributable to new development. As part of its funding effort, the City should research and monitor these outside revenue sources and apply for funds as appropriate. • General Fund Revenues. In any given year, the City could allocate a portion of its General Fund revenues for discretionary expenditures. Depending on the revenues generated relative to costs and City priorities, the City may allocate General Fund revenues to fund capital fac il ities costs not covered by the Fee Program or other funding sources. • Other Grants and Contributions. A variety of grants or contributions from private donors could help fund a number of capital facilities . For example, private foundations and/or charity organizations may provide money for certain bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Ec on o mic & Plannin g Sys t e m s, Inc. 21 P: \ 161 OOOs\ 161 OBS Cupertino TI F\Report\NexusStudy808 17. docx APPENDIX A: Detailed TIF Project List and Costs Estimates () Stantec To: File : Julie Chiu Associate Civil Engineer City of Cupertino Technical Memorandum -Cost Estimate for Cupertino Traffic Impact Fee (TIF)/Nexus Study From: Date: Joy Bhattacharya Stantec Consulting Ltd . Julyl8,2017 Memo Reference: Technical Memorandum -Cost Estimate for Cupertino Traffic Impact Fee (TIF)/Nexus Study The City of Cupertino adopted an amended General Plan known as "General Plan: Community Vision 2015 -2040." on December 4, 2014 . The City is also in the process of developing the TIF Program to fund the roadway infrastructure improvements that are necessary to mitigate impacts to accommodate future growth. To support the TIF program, the City needs to prepare a Nexus Study that will serve as the basis for requiring development impact fees under AB 1600 legislation . As part of the Cupertino TIF and Nexus Study, a TIF project list has been proposed. The projects included in the list cover the intersections/ segments where significant impact(s) were identified in the General Plan: Community Vision 2015 -2040 Draft Environmental Impac t Report (December 2014). In addition, the projects identified in the City of Cupertino 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan are also included in the list. The list of transportation projects identified in these existing planning documents was further refined as follows: • The TIF program e xcluded any projects that are outside the City of Cupertino • The TIF program excluded any projects where secured and dedicated funding source have already been established to cover the full cost (e.g. projects identified as mitigation in CEQA documents for Apple Campus 2, Marina Plaza and the Hamptons). Stantec conducted a cost estimate for each proposed TIF project. The co st includes all of the elements and activities necessary to complete the project (e.g. engineering, property acquisition , construction). Table 1 shows the proposed TIF projects along with the cost estimates . Appendix illu strates the cost estimate details for each proposed TIF project. As part of the Project No. 4 in Table 1, a significant impact was identified at the intersection of De Anza Boulevard and 1-280 SB Ramps in the General Plan: Community Vi sion 2015 -2040 Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) under the 2040 plus Project conditions. However, no mitigation m e asure s w e re provided in the DEIR . By using the volum es provided in the DEIR , Stantec dev eloped the mitigation measures for thi s interse c tion and include d it as part of th e overall cost e stimates. Design with community In mind () Stantec Julyl8,2017 Ju lie Chiu Page 2 o f 4 Reference: Technical Memorandum -Cost Estimate for Cupertino Traffic Impact Fee (TIF)/Nexus Study T bl 1 C a e -rf TIF & N upe mo exus St d P . t L" t U IV ro1ec IS Project No. Intersection General Plan Mitigation Measures Construction Cost SR 85 NB Ramps and 1 Stevens Creek A d d a n exclusive northbound left-tu rn la n e . $536,000 Boulevard 1 Ste lli n g Road and Add a seco nd excl usive eas tbo un d le ft-turn 2 St evens Creek la ne ; ri g ht-t urn s woul d sh are the b ike la n e . $1,3 18,000 Bou levard 1 Sunnyva le-Sara toga 3 Road/De Anza Wide n De Anza Blvd to 4 lanes in eac h $3 ,210 ,000 Bou levard and directio n o r install triple left-turn lanes. Homestead Road 1 De Anza Bou levard and 1-280 NB Ramps : Restripe De Anza Blvd in the SB direction to provide room for right-turn veh icles to be separated from through traffic ; paint a bike 4 De Anza Boulevard box at the fron t of lane. $1,840 ,000 and 1-280 Ramps 1 De Anza Bou levard and 1-280 SB Ram p s: Adq a second eas t bound le ft-turn la n e a nd two add itiona l eastbound right-tu rn la n es on the 1-280 SB off-ramp . De Anza Boulevard Restripe wes tbound Stevens Creek to 5 and Stevens Creek provide room for right turn vehicles to be $145 ,000 Bou le v ard 1 separated from through traffic ; paint a bike box at the fron t of the lane . De Anza Boulevard Rea lign (currentl y o ffse t) suc h t ha t McCle ll a n 6 and McCle ll an Rd and Paci fi ca Dr legs are across fr om each $9,707 ,000 Roa d /Pacifi ca Drive 1 o th er; double le ft-turn lanes may be re quired to be added to De Anza Bl vd . Add a t hird sou th bound t h rough lane and a southbound exclusive rig h t-turn lane; add a third westbound though lane, an addition of Wo lfe Road and a westbound exclusive rig ht-t urn lane, and 7 Homestead Road 1 an additional westbound exclusive right-turn $7 ,131,000 lane; add an additional eas t boun d th rough lane, an additional eastbound receiving lane on Homestead , and a second eas t bound exclus ive le ft-t urn lane. Add a th ird north bound th ro ugh lane a n d Wo lf e Road and 1-280 extended north of t he in t erchange; may 8 NB Ramp & SB Ramp 2 pursue a redesign of the interchange to go $76 ,3 00 ,000 from a partial cloverleaf design to a diamond desiqn. Design wllh co mm unit y in mind () Stantec Jul y 18 , 201 7 Julie Chiu Page 3 of 4 Reference: Technical Memorandum -Cost Estimate for Cupertino Traffic Impact Fee (TIF)/Nexus Study Ta bl el-C upe mo Tl F t d & Nexus S u IY ProJec t L' t IS Project No. Intersection General Plan Mitigation Measures Construction Cost Wolfe Road-Re stripe the westbound leg to prov ide room 9 Miller/A v enue and so that right turn v ehicles could be $153 ,000 Stevens Creek separated from through v ehicles ; paint a Boule v ard 1 bike box at the front of the lane . North Tantau Restripe the southbound leg to pro v ide a Avenue/QucilAvenue 10 and Homestead Road separate left turn lane; require the remov al $145 ,000 I of on-street parking near the intersection. Tantau A v enue and Add a separate left-turn lane to northbound 11 Ste v ens Creek $145 ,000 Boulevard 1 Tantau Ave. 12 Monta Vista Sidew alk $4 ,000 ,000 (Orange and By rne) 4 13 Monta Vista Sidewalk $2 ,040 ,000 (M c Clellan) 4 14 Bicycle Projects Tier l 3 $38 ,611 ,000 15 Bic y cle Projects Tier 2 3 $15 ,399 ,500 16 Bic y cle Projects Tier 3 3 $3 3, 168 ,500 Total $193,849,000 Notes : l. Based on Stantec's ballpark opinion of cost estimate using the industry standards. 2. Based on cost estimates included in the 1-280 and Wolfe Road Alternative Analysis Study Report, October 4, 2016 . 3 . Based on cost estimates included in the City of Cupertino 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan , Appendix F and revised by City of Cupertino . 4. Based on cost es timates provided by the City of Cupertino . Source: Stantec, 2017 Desig n wit h co mmu nit y in mind () Stantec Memo Appendix -Cost Estimates Design with community In mind ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: SR 85 NB Ramps and Stevens Creek Boulevard Left-Turn Lane Prepared by: A. Ha Date: October 20 , 2016 Item Work Description Unit Qty. 1 Mobilization LS 1 2 Traffic control LS 1 3 Demol ition, clearing & grubbing LS 1 4 Remove existing AC SF 1,000 5 Install new curb ramps EA 1 6 New PCC curb & gutter LF 50 7 New AC SF 7,000 8 New PCC S/W SF 200 9 Roadway Excavation LS 1 10 Striping & Signing LS 1 11 Traffic signal modifications LS 1 12 Irrigation & Landscaping Modifications LS 1 13 Imported Borrow CY 1,560 SUBTOTAL: Subtotal--Bid Items Construction Contingency ( assume 15%) 15 % Testing , Staking 5% Construction Management 13% Subtotal: Construction Design 12 % Engineering Studies 3% Environmental 3% Construction Engineering 1.5% TOTAL PROJECT Propo sed CIP Budget Amount Total Design & Admin $184 ,353.75 Assumpt ions: Future demand for Left-turn lan e is 500' long by 12' wide New curb return , sidewa lk , and curb ramp to be installed Relocate existing 1-B pole with ped signa l and ped push button Imported borrow of 6 feet in depth over proposed left-turn lane Unit Price $ 45 ,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $5 .00 $4,100.00 $37.00 $10.00 $11 .00 $ 20,000.00 $ 15 ,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 50 .00 Total Price $45,000 $45,000 $20,000 $5,000 $4,100 $1,850 $70,000 $2,200 $20,000 $15,000 $35,000 $10,000 $78,000 $351,150 $351,150 I $52,672.50 $17 ,55 7 .50 $45,649.50 $115,879 .50 I $42,138 .00 $10,534.50 $10,534.50 $5,267.25 $68,474 .25 I $535,504 I $536,ooo I ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: Stelling Road and Stevens Creek Boulevard Left-Turn Lane Prepared by : A . Ha Date: October 20 , 2016 Item Work Description 1 Mobilization 2 Traffic control 3 Demolition, clearinq & grubbing 4 Remove existinq AC 5 Relocate luminaire/utility pole 6 PG&E Coordination 7 New PCC median 8 New AC 9 Relocate overhead utilities 10 Roadway Exca vation 11 Striping & Signing 12 Traffic siqnal modifications 13 lrriqation & Landscapinq Modifications 14 Riqht-of-Way Take Total Construction Cost SUBTOTAL: Subtotal--Bid Items Construction Contingency (assume 15 %) Testing , Staking Construction Management Subtotal : Construction Design Engineering Studies Environmental Construction Eng inee ring PG&E Design TOTAL PROJECT Unit Qty. LS LS LS SF EA LS SF SF LS LS LS LS LS LS 1 1 1 400 3 1 3,000 4 ,80 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 15 % 5% 13 % 12 % 3% 3% 1.5 % 15 .0% Proposed CIP Budget Amount Total Design & Admin $329,400 .00 Assumptions : Future demand for Left-turn lane is 400' long by 12' wide Modify median Relocate luminaires/utility poles and overhead utilit y lines Traffi c signal modification Unit Price $ 50,000 .00 $ 45 ,000 .00 $ 20 ,000.00 $ 5.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 5 ,000 .00 $ 11 .00 $ 10.00 $ 50,000.00 $ 20,000 .00 $ 15,000.00 $ 150,000.00 $ 20 ,000 .00 $ 500 ,0 00 .00 Total Price $50,000 $45,000 $20 ,000 $2 ,000 $30 ,000 $5,000 $33,000 $48,000 $50,000 $20,000 $15,000 $150 ,000 $20 ,000 $500 ,000 $488 ,000 $988,000 $9aa.ooo I $73 ,200.00 $24,400.00 $63,440.00 $1s1,04o.oo I $58 ,560.00 $14,640.00 $14 ,640.00 $7,320 .00 $73 ,200.00 $1sa,3so.oo I $1,311,400 1 $1,31a,ooo I ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road/De Anza Boulevard and Homestead Road Add 2 Lanes Prepared by: A. Ha Date: October 20, 2016 Item Work Description Unit Qty. 1 Mobilization LS 1 2 Traffic control LS 1 3 Demolition , clearing & grubbing LS 1 4 Remove existing AC SF 1,000 5 Install new curb ramps EA 4 6 New PCC curb & gutter LF 2,000 7 New AC SF 24,000 8 New PCC S/W SF 10,000 9 Storm Drain Improvements LS 1 10 Roadway Excavation LS 1 11 Striping & S igning LS 1 12 Traffic signal modifications LS 1 13 Irrigation & Landscaping Modifications LS 1 14 Relocate luminaire EA 6 15 Relocate utilities LS 1 16 Right-of-way take SF 6,000 SUBTOTAL (CONSTRUCTION): SUBTOTAL (WITH ROW): Subtotal--Bid Items Construction Contingency (assume 15%) 15% Testing , Staking 5% Construction Management 13% Subtotal : Construction Des ign 12% Engineering Studies 3% Environmental 3% Construction Engineering 1.5% TOTAL PROJECT Proposed CIP Budget Amount Total Design & Admin $588,35 1.75 Assumptions: NB lane is 400' long ; SB la ne is 600' long New curb & gutter, sidewalk, and curb ramp to be installed Traffic signal modification Right-of-way tak e Unit Price $ 45,000 .00 $ 45 ,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 5.00 $ 4,100.00 $ 37.00 $ 10.00 $ 11.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 30 ,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $380,270.00 $ 35,000 .00 $ 5,000.00 $ 10 ,000.00 $ 250.00 Total Price $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 $5,000 $16,400 $74,000 $240,000 $110,000 $40,000 $30,000 $15,000 $380,270 $35,000 $30,000 $10,000 $1,500,000 $1,120,670 $2,620,670 $2,s20,s10 I $168,100.50 $56 ,033 .50 $145,687.10 $369,a21.10 I $134,480.40 $33,620.10 $33,620.10 $16,810 .05 $21a.s3o.ss I $3,209,022 I $3,210.000 I ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: De Anza Boulevard and 1-280 NB Ramp Right- Turn Lane Prepared by: A. Ha Item Work Description 1 Mobilization 2 Traffic control 3 Demolition , clearing & grubbing 4 Remove ex isting AC 5 New AC 6 New PCC cu rb & gutter 7 Roadway Excavatio n 8 Striping & Signin g 9 Irrigation & Lands cap ing Modifica tio ns 10 Signal Modifications SUBTOTAL : Subtotal --Bid Items Construction Conting ency ( ass ume 15%) Testing , Staking Construction Management Subtotal: Construction Design Engineering Studies Environmental Construction Engin ee ri ng TOTAL PROJECT Proposed CIP Bu dget Amount Tota l Design & Admin Assumptions : Right-turn lane is 950' long Modify 500' of median to fit proposed striping No ulititly conflicts Traffic signa l equipment upgrade Unit LS LS LS SF SF LF LS LS LS LS Date : October 20, 20 16 Qty. Unit Price Total Price 1 $ 30,000 .00 $30,000 1 $ 30 ,000.00 $30,000 1 $ 15,000.00 $15,000 500 $ 5.00 $2,500 6,000 $ 10.00 $60,000 500 $ 37.00 $18,500 1 $ 10 ,000.00 $10,000 1 $ 15,000.00 $15,000 1 $ 10,000.00 $10 ,000 1 $ 50 ,000.00 $50,000 $241,000 $241,000 I 15% $36,150.00 5% $12,050.00 13 % $31,330.00 $79,530 .00 I 12% $28,920.00 3% $7,230.00 3% $7,230.00 1.5% $3,615.00 $46,995.oo 1 $367,525 ! $3sa.ooo I $126,525.00 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: De Anza Boulevard and 1-280 SB Ramp 1 EB Left, Turn Lane, 2 EB Right-Turn Lane Prepared by : A . Ha Item Work Description 1 Mobilization 2 Traffic co ntrol 3 Demolition, clearing & grubbing 4 Remove existi ng AC 5 In stall new curb ramps 6 New PCC curb & gutter 7 New AC 8 New PCC S/W 9 Roadway Excavation 10 Striping & Signing 11 Traffic sig na l modifications 12 Irrig ation & Landscaping Modifications 13 Imported Borrow SUBTOTAL : Subtotal--Bid Items Construction Contingency (as sume 15%) T esting, Staking Construction Management Subtotal : Construction Design Eng ineering Studi es Environmental Construction Engine ering TOTAL PROJECT Proposed CIP Budg et Amount Tota l Design & Admin Assumptions : 1 EB Left -turn & 2 EB Right-turn la nes are 550' Modify in Caltrans Right of Way No ulititly conflicts Traffic signal equipment upgrade Unit LS LS LS SF EA LF SF SF LS LS LS LS CY Date : November 2, 2016 Qty . Unit Price Total Price 1 $ 45,000.00 $45,000 1 $ 45,000 .00 $45 ,000 1 $ 20,000.00 $20,000 1,000 $5 .00 $5,000 3 $4,100.00 $12,300 100 $37 .00 $3,700 24,200 $10 .00 $242,000 200 $11 .00 $2,200 1 $ 50,000.00 $50,000 1 $ 20,000.00 $20,000 1 $ 200,000.00 $200,000 1 $ 50,000.00 $50,000 5,400 $ 50 .00 $270,000 $965,200 $96s,200 I 15% $144,780.00 5% $48,260 .00 13% $125,476.00 $31 a.s16 .oo 1 12% $115,824.00 3% $28,956.00 3% $28,956.00 1.5% $14.4 78 .00 $1aa,214.oo 1 $1,411,930 I $1,412,000 I $5 06,730 .00 Note: Use d Hot Mix AC SF unit pri ce from 2013 Caltrans Cost Data pp . 155 Item Code #394090. Note : Estim ated Imported Borrow unit price from 2013 Caltrans Cost Data pp. 93-94 Ite m Code #198010. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: De Anza Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard Right-Turn Lane Prepared by : A. Ha Item Work Description 1 Mobilization 2 Traffic control 3 Striping & Signing 4 Traffic signal modification SUBTOTAL: Subtotal--Bid Items Construction Contingency (assume 15 %) Testing , Staking Construction Management Subtotal: Construction Design Engineering Stud ies Environmental Construction Engineering TOTAL PROJECT Proposed CIP Budget Amount Total Design & Admin Assumption s: Right-turn lan e is 350' long Striping includ e s G reen Lanes and Bike Box Signal Modifica ti o n include equipm e nt upgrad es Unit LS LS LS LS Date: September 30, 2016 Qty. Unit Price Total Price 1 $ 15,000 .00 $15 ,000 1 $ 15,000.00 $15,000 1 $ 15 ,000 .00 $15,000 1 $50,000 .00 $50,000 $95,000 $9s.ooo I 15% $14,250 .00 5% $4,750.00 13% $12,350.00 $31,Jso.oo I 12 % $11,400 .00 3% $2,850.00 3% $2 ,850.00 1.5% $1,425 .00 $1a.s2s.oo I $144.a1s I $14s.ooo I $49 ,875 .00 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: De Anza Boulevard and McClellan Road/Pacifica Drive Re-alignment Prepared by: A. Ha Date: October 20, 2016 Item Work Description 1 Mobilization 2 Traffic control 3 Demolition , clearing & grubbing 4 Remove existing AC 5 Install new curb ramps 6 New PCC curb & gutter 7 New AC 8 NewPCC S/W 9 Roadway Excavatio n 10 Striping & Signing 11 Traffic signal modifications 12 Irrigation & Landscaping Modifications 13 Relocate luminaire 14 Relocate utilities 15 Backfill 16 Right-of-way take SUBTOTAL (CONSTRUCTION): SUBTOTAL{WITH ROW): Subtotal--Bid Items Construction Contingency (assume 15%) Testing , Staking Construction Management Subtotal: Construction Design Engineering Studies En vi ronmental Constr.uction Engineering TOTAL PROJECT Proposed GIP Bud get Amount Unit Qty . LS 1 LS 1 LS 1 SF 12,500 EA 4 LF 700 SF 9,400 SF 12,900 LS 1 LS 1 LS 1 LS 1 EA 2 LS 1 CY 6,700 SF 18,000 15% 5% 13 % 12% 3% 3% 1.5% Tota l Design & Admin $862,942.50 Assumptions: Re-alignment of Pacifica Dr; 300' adjusted New curb & gutter, sidewalk, and curb ramp to be installed Traffic signal modification Unit Price $ 80 ,000.00 $ 75 ,00 0.00 $ 200,000.00 $5.00 $4,100.00 $37.00 $10.00 $11.00 $ 200,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 250,000.00 $ 50 ,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 150,000.00 $ 40 .00 $ 400.00 Total Price $80,000 $75,000 $200,000 $62,500 $16,400 $25 ,900 $94,000 $141,900 $200,000 $20,000 $250,000 $50,000 $10,000 $150,000 $268,000 $7,200,000 $1,643,700 $8,843,700 $8,843,700 1 $246 ,555.00 $82 ,185.00 $213,681.00 $542,421.00 I $197,244 .00 $49 ,31 1.00 $49 ,311.00 $24,655.50 $320.s21.so I $9,706,643 I $9,701.000 I Right-of-way take Gas Station and parking lot; Unit cost based on adjacent price/sq ft lot area ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: Wolfe Road and Homestead Road Add 5 Lanes Prepared by : A. Ha Date : October 20 , 2016 Item Work Description Unit Qty. Unit Price Total Price 1 Mobilization LS 1 $ 75,000 .00 $75,000 2 Traffic control LS 1 $ 75 ,000 .00 $75,000 3 Demolition, clearing & grubbing LS 1 $ 60 ,000.00 $60,000 4 Remove existing AC SF 1,100 $5 .00 $5,500 5 Install new curb ramps EA 8 $4 ,100 .00 $32,800 6 New PCC curb & gutter LF 1,800 $37 .00 $66,600 7 New AC SF 30,600 $10 .00 $306,000 8 New PCC S/W SF 9,000 $11.00 $99,000 9 Roadway Excavation LS 1 $ 50,000.00 $50,000 10 Striping & Signing LS 1 $ 15,000.00 $15,000 11 Traffi c signal modifications LS 1 $ 300,000 .00 $300 ,000 12 Irrigation & Landscaping Modifications LS 1 $ 30 ,000.00 $30,000 13 Relocate luminaire EA 7 $ 5,000 .00 $35,000 14 Relocate utilities LS 1 $ 100,000 .00 $100,000 15 Right-of-way take SF 15,900 $ 250.00 $3 ,975,000 SUBTOTAL (CONSTRUCTION): $1,249,900 SUBTOTAL (WITH ROW): $5,224,900 Subtotal--Bid Items $6 ,474,aoo I Construction Contingency ( assume ·15%) 15% $187,485 .00 Testing, Staking 5% $62,495 .00 Construction Management 13% $162,487.00 Subtotal: Construction $412,461.00 I Design 12 % $149 ,988 .00 Engineering Studies 3% $37,497 .00 Environmental 3% $37,497.00 Construction Engineering 1.5% $18,748 .50 $243, 130.so I TOTAL PROJECT $1.13o,99a I Proposed CIP Budget Amount $1,131,000 I Total Des ign & Admin $656,197 .50 Assumptions : SB Right-Lane 300'; WB Thru-Lane 350'; WB Right-Lane 200'; EB Thru-Lane 300'; EB Left-Lan e 400' New curb & gutte r, sidewalk , and curb ramp to be insta lled Traffi c s ign a l mod ifi ca tion Right-of-way ta ke ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: Wolfe Road and 1-280 NB Ramp Diamond Interchange Prepared by: A. Ha Item Work Description 1 Diamond Interchange SUBTOTAL: Subtotal--Bid Items Co nstruction Contingency (ass ume 15 %) Testing, Sta k in g Construction Management Subtotal : Construction Des ign En gineering Studies Environ men ta l Construction En g ineerin g TOTAL PROJECT Proposed CIP Budget Amount Total Design & Admin Assumptions: Unit LS Date: October 20, 20 16 Qty . 1 15 % 5% 13 % 12 % 3% 3% 1.5% $0.00 Unit Price $ 38,150 ,000 .00 Total Price $38,150,000 $38, 150,000 $3a.1so.ooo I $3a.1 so.ooo I $38. 1 so.000 I Estimate for Partial Cloverleaf = $76.3 Mill ion (from 1-280 Wo lfe Alter Ana lysis Report 10/4/16) ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: Wolfe Road and 1-280 SB Ramp Diamond Interchange Prepared by: A. Ha Date: October 20, 2016 Item Work Description Unit Qty. Unit Price Total Price 1 Diamond Interchange LS 1 $ 38,150,00 0.00 $38,150,000 SUBTOTAL: $38,150,000 Subtotal--Bid Items $38, 1 so.000 1 Construction Contingency (assume 15 %) 15% Testing, Staking 5% Construction Management 13% Subtotal : Construction Design 12% Eng in eering Studies 3% Environmental 3% Construction Engineerin g 1.5% TOTAL PROJECT $38. 1 so.000 I Proposed CIP Budget Amount $38, 1 so.000 I Total Design & Admin $0 .00 Assumptio ns: Estim ate for Partial Clove rl eaf= $76 .3 Million (from 1-280 Wolfe Alte r Ana lys is Report 10/4/16) ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: Wolfe Road-Miller/Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard Right-Turn Lane Prepa red by : A. Ha Item Work Description 1 Mobilization 2 Traffic control 3 Striping & Signing 4 Traffic signal modification SUBTOTAL: Subtotal--Bid Items Constructio n Contingency (assume 15%) Testin g, Staking Construction Management Subtotal: Construction Design Engineering Studies En v ironmental Construction En g ineeri ng ·TOTAL PROJECT Proposed CIP Budget Amount Total De s ign & Adm in Assu mptions: Right-turn lane is 450' long Unit LS LS LS LS Striping in cludes Green Lanes and Bike Box Signal Modification include equipment upg rad es Date : October 20 , 2016 Qty . Unit Price Total Price 1 $ 15,000.00 $15,000 1 $ 15,000.00 $15,000 1 $ 20,000.00 $20,000 1 $50 ,000 .00 $50,000 $100,000 $100,000 I 15% $15,000.00 5% $5,000 .00 13% $13,000 .00 $33,ooo.oo I 12% $12,000.00 3% $3,000.00 3% $3,000 .00 1.5% $1 ,500.00 $19,soo.oo I $1s2,soo I s1s3 ,ooo I $52,500 .00 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: North Tantau Avenue/Quail Avenue and Homestead Road Left-Turn Lane Prepared by : A. Ha Item Work Description 1 Mobilization 2 Traffic control 3 Striping & Signing 4 Signal Modifications SUBTOTAL: Subtotal--Bid Items Construction Contingency (assume 15%) Testing, Staking Construction Management Subtotal : Construction Design Engineering Studies Environmental Construction Engineering TOTAL PROJECT Proposed CIP Budget Amount Total Design & Admin Assumptions : Unit LS LS LS LS Left Turn lane can be added in existing pavement width Signal Modifications for southbound movement Date : October 20, 2016 Qty. 1 1 1 1 15% 5% 13% 12% 3% 3% 1.5% $49,875.00 Unit Price $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000 .00 $ 15,000 .00 $ 50,000.00 Total Price $15,000 $15 ,000 $15 ,000 $50 ,000 $45,000 $9s,ooo 1 $14 ,250 .00 $4,750 .00 $12,350.00 $31,3so.oo I $11,400 .00 $2,850 .00 $2,850 .00 $1,425.00 $1a,s2s.oo I $144,a1s I $14s,ooo I ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: Project Name: Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard Left-Turn Lane Prepared by: A. Ha Item Work Description 1 Mobilization 2 Traffic control 3 Striping & Signing 4 Signal Modifications SUBTOTAL : Subtotal --Bid Items Construction Contingency ( assume 15%) Testing, Staking Construction Management Subtotal: Construction Design En gineeri ng Studies Environmenta l Cons tru c ti on En gineerin g TOTAL PROJECT Proposed CIP Budget Amount Total Design & Admin Assumptions : Unit LS LS LS LS Left Turn Lane can be placed in existing w idth. Signal modifications to add left turn lane signal head . Date: October 20, 2016 Qty . 1 1 1 1 15% 5% 13% 12% 3% 3% 1.5% $49,8 75.00 Unit Price $ 15 ,000 .00 $ 15 ,000.00 $ 15 ,000 .00 $ 50 ,000.00 Total Price $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $50,000 $95,000 $9s.ooo I $14,250 .0 0 $4,750.00 $12,350.00 $31,3so.oo I $11,400 .0 0 $2,850 .00 $2,850 .00 $1,425.00 $1 a.szs .oo I $144,875 j $14s,ooo I Cuptertino Traffic Impact Fee & Nexus Study Project Lisi -Bicycle Projects Project Total No. Project locaffon Star! End Notes MIies Score Rounded Cost Source Class IV Protected Stevens Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Bikewoy Creek Blvd Foothill Blvd Tantau Ave 3.43 91 $7,200.000 & City ot Cupertino C lass IV Protected McClellan Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan 2 Bikeway Rd Byrne Ave De Anzo Blvd 1.43 80 $5.000.000 & City of Cupertino Grade Separated Highway85 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan 3 Crossing Study Crossing Grand Ave Mary Ave 0 71 $20.000.000 & City of Cupertino Union Pacific 4 Class I Path Trail Prospect Rd SB!tvedvens Creek --2.1 71 $1.678,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Class IV Separated Stevens Creek Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan 5 Bikewoy Finch Ave Phil Ln Blvd 0.45 69 $1.090.000 & City of Cupertino 1-280 Ma,y Channel Ave/Meteor Tontau Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion 6 Class I Path Bike Path Dr Ave/Vallee Pkwy --2.87 61 $2,293,000 & City of Cupertino Bike Boulev ard lmplementatio · n Phase 1 $1.350.000 City of Cupertino er2 _ ", _ _ _ / _ ' ___ ~~ ___ , _____ ,~ _-_ -~----:_' j __ -_ _ _ _ --=-_ ~ Class II Buffered De Anza Homestead 8 Bike Lane Blvd Rd Bolnn ger Rd 1.73 65 $242.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Class IV Separated 250 South of Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan 9 Bikeway Stelling Rd Prospect Rd McClellan Rd 1.45 65 $580.000 & City of Cupertino Class IV 250 South of Separated McClellan Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan 10 Bikeway Stelling Rd Rd Alves Dr 0.7 1 64 $1.714,000 & City of Cupertino C lass IV Separated Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan It Bikeway Blaney Ave Bollinger Rd Homestead Rd 1.91 64 $766,000 & City of Cupertino Class IV Separated Stevens Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan 12 Bikeway CreekBlvd Foothill Blvd SI Joseph Ave 0.62 63 $248,000 & City of Cupertino Class IV Separated Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan 13 Bikeway Stelling Rd Alves Dr Homestead Rd 0.84 63 $248,000 & City of Cupertino Amelia Ct/Varian Way 14 Class I Path Connector Amelia Ct Varian Way 0.05 63 $100,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Stevens Grade Creek Separated Blvd-South Stevens Creek Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan 15 Crossing Study Carmen Rd Side Blvd -Norlh Side 0 62 $10.000,000 & City of Cupertino Class II Bike 16 Lone Vista Or Forest Ave SBtlvedvens Creek --0.24 60 $15.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Class II Buffered De Anza 17 Bike lane Bollinger Rd Blvd La w rence Expy 2 56 $278,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Stevens Closs II Buffered Creek 18 Bike Lone Mary Ave Blvd Meteor Dr 0.71 55 $100.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Closs II Buffered Calle de 19 Bike Lane Miller Ave Bollinger Rd Barcelona 0.48 54 $67,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Improve signoge/striping Configure to delineate bike/ped 20 Intersection Infinite loop Merritt Dr space in connector 0 54 $2.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Class II Buffered Homestead 21 Bike Lone Rd Mory Ave Wolfe Rd 1.97 52 $276,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Class II Buffered De Anzo 22 Bike Lone Prospect Rd Blvd Stelling Rd 0.42 49 $59.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Configure McClellan Rose Facilitate through bike 23 Intersection Rd Blossom Or --travel lo De Anzo 0 49 $20.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Redesign intersection of Homestead at Mory to betler facilitate bicycles Homestead exiting Mary Ave bridge 24 Tra il Crossing Rd Mary Ave path 0 49 $10.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Hyde Ave Hyde Ave at Class Ill Bike Bike Shadygrove Hyde Ave at 25 Roule Route (#6) Dr Bollinger Rd 0.24 49 $500 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Cuptertino Traffic Impact Fee & Nexus Study Project List · Bicycle Projects Project Total No. Project Location Start End Notes Mil es Score Rounded Cost Source Regnart 26 Closs I Poth Creek Poth Pacifica Dr Estates Dr -0.83 48 $664,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Connect bike blvd to proposed bike path on Reconfigure Perimeter Perimeter road, requires 27 wall/fence Wheaton Dr Rd --creating gap in existing wall 0 47 $10,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan :ner 3 ; 0 i' ,. ] J. ' , C~los·s II Bike- 28 Lane Rainbow Dr Bubb Rd Stelling Rd --0.5 46 $33.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Stevens 1-280 Channel '29 Closs I Poth Perimeter Rd Creek Bwd Bike Poth -0 .59 44 $470,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan mary Ave to VollcoMoll Closs Ill Bik e Bike Route Memorial End of Wheaton 30 Route (#7) Park Dr --1.77 44 $4.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Tontau Ave Tantou Ave Closs Ill Bik e Bike at Tantau Ave at 31 Route Route (#9) Bollinger Rd Barnhart Ave --0.41 44 $500 Cupertino Bicycle Tra nsportation Plan Rose Rose Blossom/Hun Blossom Dr !ridge al Closs Ill Bike BikeRoute McClellan Huntridge Ln at 32 Route (#8) Rd De Anza Blvd .. 0.41 43 $1.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Rodrigues 33 C loss I Poth Wilson Park Ave Wilson Park Path --0.03 42 $50.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Stevens Son Creek. FernandoAv Carmen Rd C loss Il l Bike Bike Blvd eat at Stevens 34 Boulevard (#6) OrangeAve CreekBlvd --1.12 42 $47,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Configure Enhance bicycle crossing 35 Intersection Blaney Ave Wheaton Dr --across Wheaton 0 41 $50.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Closs II BufferedBike Stevens 36 Lane foothill Blvd CreekBlvd McClellan Rd -0.55 41 $77.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Study removal of slip lanes. Configure study potential for Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan 37 Intersection Stelling Rd Rainbow Dr --protected intersection 0 40 $150,000 & City of Cupertino Closs II Buffered Homestead 38 Bike Lane Rd Wolfe Rd Tontau Ave --0.49 40 $69.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Stevens Closs II Bu ffered Creek 1-280 Channel 39 Bike Lane Wolfe Rd Bl vd Bike Poth --0.4 39 $56,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Jollymon 40 Closs I Polh Pork Stelling Rd Dumas Dr ·-0.15 39 $119,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportat ion Plan Reconfigure Create gap in fence lo 41 wall/fence Imperial Ave Alcazar Ave --connect bike routes 0 39 $20.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan C lass II Buffered Stevens 42 Bike Lane foothill Blvd Creek Blvd 1-280 N Offramp -0.96 39 $135.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transporta tion Plan foothill loStevens Creek foothill Blvd Carmen Rdat Closs Ill Bike Bike Blvd al Stevens Creek. 43 Boulevard (#3) Starting Dr Blvd .. 0.99 38 $50.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Closs II Buffered 44 Bike Lane Lazaneo Dr Bandley Dr De Anza Blvd --0.09 38 $13.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Class II Buffered Perimeter 45 Bike Lane Wolfe Rd Rd Homestead Rd --0.62 38 $86.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Class II Buffered McClellan Stevens Creek 46 Bike Lane Bubb Rd Rd Blvd --0.53 37 $74,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Grade UPRR West Hammond Separated Cupertino Snyder Loop Slevens Creek. Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion 47 Crossing Study Crossing Trail Blvd -· 0 37 $15,000.000 & City of Cupertino Mory Ave Improved signage/stripinglo Bike/Ped Bridge Ped delineate bik.e/ped 48 Enhancement Bridge 1280 --space on Mory Ave bridge 0 37 $20.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Developmen I SBtlvedvens 49 Closs I Polh Bike Poth Creek Mory Ave --0.13 35 $102,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Closs II Buffered Colle de Stevens Creek 50 Bike Lane Miller Ave Barcelona Blvd .. 0.39 35 $54.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Closs II Bullered Stevens 51 Bike Lane Tonfou Ave CreekBlvd Pruneridge Ave --0.65 35 $91.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Cuptert ino Traffic Impact Fee & Nexu s Study Project List -Bic y cle Projects Project Tota l No. Project Lo c a tion Start End Noles Miles Score Rounded Cost So urce Union Pacific McClellan Railroad Coordinate crossing with 52 Trail Crossing Rd Path .. signal. 0 34 $10.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Class II Bike De Anza 53 Lane Pacifica Or Blvd Torre Ave .. 0.17 33 $11.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Add green point Freeway fointerchange approaches, interchange 1-280 stripe bike lane through Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan 54 enhancement Walle Rd Overpass .. in terchange intersection 0 30 $15.000.000 & City of Cupertino Aquino Sterling/Bar Creek nhart 55 Class I Path Trail Park Colvert Dr -0.37 30 $294,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Aquino Creek South of Stevens Creek 56 Class I Path Trail 1280 Blvd .. 0.17 30 $138.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan C lass II Buffered 57 Bike Lane Vallee Pkwy Tantau Ave Perimeter Rd .. 0.3 30 $42.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Dr/Stevens Creek Class II Bike Blvd Stevens Creek 58 Lane Connector Campus Or Bl vd .. 0.11 30 $7.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Stevens CreekBlvd Grand Ave Peninsula Ave C lass Ill Bike Bike Route at Alhambra a!Slevens Creek 59 Roule (#5) Ave Blvd .. 0.19 30 $1.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Class II Butlered De Anza 60 Bike lane Rainbow Or Blvd Stelling Rd .. 0.57 28 $79,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Civic Center lo Creekside Park Torre Ave at Estates Or al Class Ill Bike Bike Route Rodrigues Creekside Parle 61 Rou te (#2) Ave Path .. 1.24 28 $3.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Gorden Gale EMleemmoe rnitaol rPy ofrok GArnene Class Ill Bike Bike Route nAlreboof r 62 Roule (#4) DDrrot Memorial Park .. 0.42 26 $1.500 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Add green point Freeway toinlerchange approaches, interchange De Anzo Hwy85 stripe bike lane through 63 enhancement Blvd Overpass .. interchange intersection 0 26 $40,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Union Pacific Railroad Coordinate crossing with 64 Trail Crossing Bubb Rd Path .. signal. 0 25 $10.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Add green point to Freeway interchange approaches, interchange Stevens Hwy85 stripe bike lone through 65 enhancement Creek Blvd Overpass .. interchange intersection 0 25 $40.000 Cupertino Bic ycle Transportation Plan BCilkase s LIia Pruneridge 66 nBeuffered Tontou Ave Ave Homestead Rd -0.37 25 $52.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Add green paint Freeway tointerchange approaches, interchange De Anza 1-280 stripe bike lane through 67 enhancement Blvd Overpass .. interchange intersection 0 24 $40,000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Stevens Rancho Deep Class II Buffered Canyon McClellan Cliff 68 Bike lone Rd Rd Dr .. 0.23 24 $33.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan 200 feel East of C lass II Buffered Westlynn 69 Bike lane Bollinger Rd Way De Foe Dr .. 0.18 24 $26.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Undo Vista Park Undo Vista Parking l ot Park/Deep off Cliff Linda Vista 70 Class I Path Golf Course Dr McClellan Rd ·-0.46 24 $366.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Class II Buffered Pruneridge 71 Bike lane Ave Tantou Ave City limits • East .. 0.07 22 $9.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan 2015 Bike Plan Update. Configure study roundabout 72 Intersection Portal Ave Wheaton Or --conversion 0 20 $150.000 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Cuptertino Traffic Impact Fee & Nexus Study Project List -Bicycle Projects Project Total No. Project locatton Start End Notes MIies Score Rounded Cost Source 1501eet Class II Bike East of 73 Lane Cristo Rey Dr Cristo Rey Pl Roundabout -0.57 19 $37.00J Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Westlynn/Fall Bo llinger Rd Class Ill Bike enleaf Bike al Westtynn Fallenleaf Ln al 74 Route Route (#11) Way De Anza Blvd .. 0.37 18 $1,00J Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Pion Foolhill Blvd Closs Ill Bike Bike Route Palm Ave at Lockwood Dr of 75 Roule (#3) Scenic Blvd Stevens Creek .. 0.81 16 $1,500 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Union Pacific September to Hwy85 Oral Class Ill Bike Bike Route McClellan Jamestown Dr of 76 Roule (#10) Rd Prospecl Rd .. 1.48 13 $5,00J Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan