CC RESOLUTION 5347RESOLUTION NO. 5347
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EL SEGUNDO (1) ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE NEXUS STUDY, (2) INCREASING THE EXISTING
POLICE, FIRE AND LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEES, (3) ESTABLISHING THE FOLLOWING NEW
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES: A PARK LAND
ACQUISITION & FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS FEE, A
CIRCULATION (STREETS, SIGNALS & BRIDGES)
FACILITIES FEE, A STORM DRAINAGE COLLECTION
SYSTEM FEE, A WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM FEE, A
WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM FEE, A GENERAL
GOVERNMENTAL FACILITIES, VEHICLES & EQUIPMENT
FEE, A PUBLIC USE (COMMUNITY CENTER) FACILITIES
FEE, AND AN AQUATICS FACILITIES FEE FOR NEW
DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY; AND (4)
DETERMINING THIS RESOLUTION IS EXEMPT FROM
REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT
The Council of the City of El Segundo resolves as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council finds as follows:
A. On April 1, 2021, the City awarded a Professional Services Agreement to Revenue
& Cost Specialists LLC to develop a comprehensive Development Impact Fee
Calculation Nexus Report for new development to fund improvements that address
the cumulative infrastructure impacts associated with new development.
B. On May 11, 2022, Revenue & Cost Specialists LLC submitted the final
Development Impact Fee Calculation Nexus Report (the "Nexus Study") which
analyzed the following infrastructure categories: Law Enforcement, Library, Fire
Protection Facilities, Park Land Acquisition and Facilities, Streets, Signals &
Bridges, Storm Drain Facilities, Water Distribution, Wastewater Collection
Facilities, General Government Facilities, Public Meeting Facilities, and Aquatic
Center Facilities. Each of these infrastructure categories has been identified
through the City General Plan and recent capital project studies as requiring future
improvements.
C. The Nexus Study estimated the cost of future improvements needed to ensure
each of the infrastructure categories referenced above in 1(B) maintains adequate
levels of service, and then allocated those costs against future development in the
City taking into consideration fair share payments already contributed by
development projects.
RESOLUTION NO. 5347
PAGE 1 of 5
D. Based on this analysis, the Nexus Study recommends that the current
development impact fees ("DIFs") (those for police, fire, and library facilities) be
increased for all development types (residential, commercial, Industrial, and
Institutional) and that new DIFs for Parkland Facilities, Streets -Signals & Bridges,
Storm Drain Facilities, Water Distribution, Wastewater Collection Facilities,
General Government Facilities, Public Meeting Facilities, and Aquatic Center
Facilities be allocated for residential, commercial, Industrial, and institutional
development based on their forecast of the infrastructure demand and analysis of
improvement needs. The fees are allocated by residential unit and
commercial/Industrial/Institutional square footage.
E. The proposed DIFs are consistent with the California Government Code Section
66000 et seq. that enables local agencies to charge mitigation fees.
F. Pursuant to Government Code §§ 6062a, 66016 and 66018, mailed notice of the
public hearing regarding the proposed increase of existing DIFs and creation of
new DIFs was provided to interested parties on June 8, 2022, and notice of the
public hearing was published in the El Segundo Herald newspaper on May 27,
2022, and on June 2, 2022.
G. Pursuant to Government Code § 66016, data and documentation supporting the
increase in existing DIFs and establishment of new DIFs was made available to
the public for public review on June 8, 2022.
H. On June 21, 2022, the City Council heard public testimony and considered
evidence in a public hearing held in accordance with Government Code §§ 66016
and 66018.
1. With respect to the proposed increases to existing DIFs, the City Council has
reviewed the assumptions of the Nexus Study supporting the original fees and has
evaluated the amount of fees collected under the original fee.
J. The Nexus Study, incorporated herein by this reference, identifies the purpose of
each DIF to be increased or adopted by this Resolution and the use to which each
of the fees is to be put.
K. Based upon the evidence set forth in the Nexus Study and the administrative
record as a whole, the City Councils finds that there is a reasonable relationship
between the proposed use of each DIF and the type of development on which the
DIF will be imposed.
L. Based upon the evidence set forth in the Nexus Study and the administrative
record as a whole, the City Councils finds that there is a reasonable relationship
between the need for the public facilities identified in the Nexus Study and the type
of development project on which the corresponding DIF will be imposed.
RESOLUTION NO. 5347
PAGE 2 of 5
M. Based upon the evidence set forth in the Nexus Study and the administrative
record as a whole, the City Councils finds that there is a reasonable relationship
between the amount of the DIF and the cost of the public facility or portion of public
facility attributable to the development on which the DIF is imposed.
N. The findings set forth herein are based upon the evidence set forth in the Nexus
Study, the agenda report, oral reports presented by staff, and the evidence in the
administrative record as a whole.
SECTION 2. Adoption of Impact Fee Nexus Study. The City Council hereby adopts the
May 11, 2022, Development Impact Fee Calculation Nexus Report prepared by Revenue
& Cost Specialists LLC and attached hereto as Exhibit A.
SECTION 3. Adoption of New Development Impact Fees and Approval of Increases to
Existing Development Impact Fees. The City Council hereby approves increases to the
existing Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles & Equipment Fee (the "Police Fee"), the
Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities, Vehicles & Equipment Fee (the "Fire Fee"), and the
Library Collection & Computer Stations Fee (the "Library Fee"). The City Council hereby
adopts the following eight new development impact fees: (i) the Park Land Acquisition &
Facilities Improvements Fee, (ii) the Circulation (Streets, Signals & Bridges) Facilities
Fee, (iii) the Storm Drainage Collection System Fee, (iv) the Water Distribution System
Fee, (v) the Wastewater Collection System Fee, (vi) the General Governmental Facilities,
Vehicles & Equipment Fee, (vii) the Public Use (Community Center) Facilities Fee, and
(viii) the Aquatics Facilities Fee The amount of the increased fees and the newly adopted
fees are set forth in Exhibit B, incorporated herein by this reference. Each of the
development impact fees will be automatically adjusted on an annual basis at the
beginning of each fiscal year starting with July 1, 2024, based on the most recent reported
March annual percentage of change in the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of
Labor Statistics Los Angeles -Long Beach -Anaheim, CA CPI-U. In the event the annual
change in the CPI-U is negative for the year, the amount of the impact fees will remain
unchanged.
SECTION 4. Phase -In of Newly Adopted Development Impact Fees. The eight new DIFs
adopted by this Resolution will be phased in over a period of two years as follows:
Beginning on September 1, 2022, new developments will be charged 50 percent of the
fees set forth in Exhibit B. Beginning on September 1, 2023, new developments will be
charged 75 percent of the fees set forth in Exhibit B. Beginning on September 1, 2024,
new developments will be charged the full amount of the fees set forth in Exhibit B
(including the applicable CPI-U adjustment).
SECTION 5. Partial Fee Exemption for Entitled Projects. In the interest of equity and
ensuring the City continues to meet its regional housing need allocation, any residential
development project that has received all required discretionary land use approvals prior
to September 1, 2022, will not be subject to any of the new or increased development
impact fees adopted by this Resolution. Rather, those previously approved residential
RESOLUTION NO. 5347
PAGE 3 of 5
projects will be required to pay 150% of the applicable development impact fees that were
in effect as of June 1, 2022. For purposes of this section, "approval" does not require the
issuance of a building permit.
SECTION 6. Effective Date: This resolution shall go into effect immediately upon
adoption. However, the new and increased fees approved in Section 3 will become
effective on September 1, 2022.
SECTION 7. The City Manager is hereby authorized to take any actions that are
necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution.
SECTION 8. All resolutions and other actions of the City Council in conflict with the
contents of this Resolution are hereby repealed.
SECTION 9. Severability: If any portion of this Resolution is declared invalid or
unconstitutional, then it is the intention of the City Council to have passed the entire
Resolution and all its component parts, and all other sections of this Resolution shall
remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 10: CEQA. This Resolution is exempt from review under the California
Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA")
and CEQA regulations (14 California Code Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.) because it
involves the creation of a government funding mechanism that will not result in direct or
indirect physical changes in the environment. Accordingly, this action does not constitute
a "project" that requires environmental review (14 CCR § 15378 (b)(4)).
SECTION 11: The City Clerk will certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution;
will enter the same in the book of original Resolutions of said City; and will make a minute
of the passage and adoption thereof in the record of proceedings of the City Council of
said City, in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of June, 2022.
ATTEST:
MA
Tracy Wea r, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
MARK D. HENSLEY, CITY ATTORNEY
- .. . ........... ... U;,- --
Joaquin auez Deputy City Attorney
Drew Bo es, Mayor
RESOLUTION NO. 5347
PAGE 4 of 5
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Tracy Weaver, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that
the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing
Resolution No. 5347 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by said City Council at a
regular meeting held on the 21st day of June, 2022, approved and signed by the Mayor,
and attested to by the City Clerk, by the following vote:
AYES: Mayor Boyles, Mayor Pro Tern Pimentel, Council Member Pirsztuk,
Council Member Nicol and Council Member Giroux
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
WITNESS MY HAND THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF SAID CITY this 211 day of June, 2022.
Tr cy Weaver, City Clerk
of the City of El Segundo,
California
RESOLUTION NO. 5347
PAGE 5 of 5
741.!]Millll�
Development Impact Fee
Calculation Nexus Report
For the
City of El Segundo, California
LEMMKIM
Reveiiue & Cost Speci.alji.sts
I
Sc�r'vbzp 1"oc('d
May 11, 2022
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Via Mr. Darrell George, Acting City Manager
City of El Segundo City Hall
350 Main Street
El Segundo, CA 90245
RE: 2021-22 Update to the Development Impact Fee (DIFs) Calculation and Nexus Report
Honorable Mayor, Council and Acting City Manager George:
The City recently committed to a major effort to identify all of the City's capital needs through
General Plan build -out and calculate a full schedule of development impact fees (henceforth
referred to as DIFs) with which to finance the proportional share of development -generated
capital needs. The City's inventory of existing infrastructure is important because it determines
the limits of the City's service levels to its residents and businesses.
Revenue & Cost Specialists, L.L.C., was contracted to provide theirtechnical expertise both in the
identification of capital projects and acquisitions as well as nexus distribution efforts. These
capital additions are necessary in order to preserve the existing Levels of Service (LOS)
currently offered to and enjoyed by the existing community from the diminution of those existing
LOS due to the addition of new residential and business development in El Segundo and
calculate the DIFs necessary to finance those required projects.
City Council and staff, responsible for providing services to a continually expanding residential
and business community, must recognize that the magnitude of the DIFs is a direct function of the
nearly $292.7 million cost of the capital projects that are identified in the Report's infrastructure
chapters. Approximately 54.7%, or $161.1 million, of the $293.3 million in identified project costs
could be financed by the imposition of these impact fees. Existing DIF fund balances will finance
approximately $0.8 million (0.30%) of the total project costs. There remains a shortfall of $131.6
million (45.0%) that will need to be come from other financial sources such as utility rates, grants
and general revenues to finance projects not eligible for Development Impact Fee financing.
The following DIF Report recalculates the three existing DIFs for the City of El Segundo as well as
eight additional infrastructures not currently covered by an impact fee. All are based on the
aforementioned changes and the City's General Plan and updated land use database and their
effect upon requirements for public safety, circulation, storm drainage collection, utilities and the
quality of life facilities (public use facilities, parks etc.).
The adoption of the updated DIFs will enable this City Council, as well as succeeding Councils, to
continue to ensure that the City will be able to meet the basic infrastructure needs of new growth,
without unduly burdening the existing population and business community for these
development -generated capital costs. Adoption of the maximum DIFs contained herein and
imposition upon the remaining development opportunities in El Segundo would generate
Page 2, May 11, 2022 Letter to the City of E/ Segundo Council and Staff
approximately $160.3 million in a combination of public improvement dedications and revenues
limited for use on the many development generated capital expansion projects that could be
expected over the General Plan build -out period (estimated to be an approximate 30 years).
A major element in this Report is the proportional analysis, or comparison of what is being asked
of future residents and businesses, in the form of dedicated public improvements or in lieu impact
fee payments, with the replacement cost of the City's existing infrastructure (land, improvement,
facilities, and equipment), contributed by the existing population and business community. The
dedications, taxes and assessments contributed to date by the existing community over
numerous decades of development have generated just over $831.7 million (at current
replacement costs) in spine or major infrastructure/capital improvements for the City. Removing
land costs of $175.9 million, as they do not depreciate, reduces the total to $655.8 million. Be
advised that the list below is limited to spine infrastructure and does not include (I.e. tract) utility
pipes which if included, would likely nearly double the $655.8 million in depreciable (exclude land
costs) spine streets, storm drainage, water and sewer system improvements for a total capital
replacement cost of over $1.3 billion. The following table identifies the existing spine infrastructure
capital improvement equity, by infrastructure.
.......
.. �....._ Infrastructure
Existing Capital
Type
Improvements
...._. ........�.w
Law Enforcement..�.._�M.. _�..�_�.._
�.............._w
$27,004 450
Fire Suppression
$34,953,965
Clrc_u......... _ ..
lation System (1)
$247 839,677
Storm Drainage System (1) ..
$27 838 853
,
Water System (1) ^n _
$155,960 792
Sewer System (1)
$105,814,626
General Facilities
IT....T $26,572,360
LibraryCollection/Computers uters .....
p _
$4,951,278
Public Use Facilities
$42,333,151
Aquatics facilities _.
$9,742,680
.�-...._.�..... �.....�,..
Park Land and Park Improvements
$148,700,364
Total City Spine Assets
$831,712,197
(1) NOTE: These infrastructure totals are limited to backbone
systems and do not include "local"
improvements.
(2) Some $175.9 million of the $831.7 million is in land assets
that do not depreciate leaving roughly
$655.8 million in depreciable major assets.
The recommended DIF schedules will not address all of the City's capital needs, as identified on
the various schedules in this Report. As per Government Code §66000 et. seq. and fairness,
DIFs cannot address existing capital deficiencies. The proposed DIFs will recognize and
accommodate the needs generated by the City's growing population and business community.
However, with the continued adoption of DIFs, other City discretionary revenue resources that
may have been used to meet growth -generated needs for expanded services and facilities will
remain available for those accumulating replacement and rehabilitation projects.
Page 3, May 11, 2022 Letter to the City of El Segundo Council and Staff
The DIFs contained herein calculate only the costs of infrastructure required to support services
provided only by the City of El Segundo. They do not include development impact fees imposed
by the school district(s) or any other government agency.
The information required to develop the City's capital costs and equity data was generated by the
El Segundo staff, without whose help and cooperation, this Report would have been impossible to
complete. In addition to the assistance of Joseph Lillio, Chief Financial Officer, indirection and in
communicating to staff of the highest priority of this project, we wish to extend our appreciation to
the management and technical personnel who were instrumental with RCS to generate the
update information and data so critically necessary for the legal support of the DIFs.
Michael Allen - Development Services Director
Daisy Benoit - Accountant
Jaime Bermudez - Police Chief
Mark Hebert - Library Manager
Deena Lee - Fire Chief
Liz Lydic - Management Analyst, Fire
Dino Marsocci - Treasury & Customer Services Manager
Jason Martin - Geographic Information Systems Analyst
Melissa McCullum - Community Service Director (no longer with the City)
Liana Osborne - Administrative Technical Specialist
Nicole Pasqueira - Fire Marshall
James Rice - Associate Engineer
Elias Sassoon - Director, Public Works Department
Eduardo Schonborn, AICP - Planning Manager
Julissa Solano - Management Analyst, Police
Carol Lyn Urner, MPA - Senior Management Analyst, Fire
Lifan Xu - City Engineer
Without their hard work and willingness to provide the best data available, this Report could not
have been completed to the degree of accuracy that it has. We would also like to highlight the
efforts of Eduardo Schonborn, Planning Manager, in compiling the critical land -use database
information and for his responses to RCS's many requests for demographic information.
Additionally, the efforts of Jason Martin, GIS Analyst, for the GIS generated land use information
and much needed actual police and fire calls -for -service were greatly appreciated and the quality
of that information and the resulting calculations were directly improved by his efforts.
This Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report is now submitted for your review
and consideration. RCS is prepared to assist in increasing the Council's and community's
understanding of this very significant part of the City's revenue structure.
Sincerely,
Scott Thorpe, Gregory Brown
Senior Vice President RCS Associate
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE CALCULATION AND NEXUS REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1 - Background and Introduction.. . ....... .......... ................... ..... 1
Chapter 2 - Demographics and Findings. ................ ......,.... ,..,...,.-.....,.,10
Proposed Development Impact Fees/Summary Schedules .......................................... 20-21
Chapter 3 - Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment......___.... .. .......... - _. ._...22
Chapter 4 - Fire Suppression/Rescue Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment- ............. ______30
Chapter 5 - Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) Facilities................................................40
Chapter 6 - Storm Drainage Collection Facilities ...................................... ...... ............. ......... __ 55
Chapter 7 - Water Distribution Facilities........................................................... .......,..,....,......... 66
Chapter 8 - Wastewater Collection Facilities.............................................................................77
Chapter 9 - General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment .......................... ....................... ,.,.„.....85
Chapter 10 - Library Collection/Computers............................................................................... 92
Chapter 11 - Public Use (Community Center) Facilities............................................................97
Chapter 12 - Aquatics Facilities ........ ......... ..................................,........ ____ ....... ,,..... 102
Chapter 13 -Park Land and Open Space Acquisition and Park Facilities Development ,.,__ 10
Appendix A - Summary of Recommendations.........................................................................114
Appendix B - Expanded Land Use Database....................................................................... -117
Appendix C - Park Improvements Construction Cost Estimates..............................................119
Appendix D - Calculation of ADUs as a Function of Detached Dwellings ,,,............. ......... .. 125
Endof Report ...................................... . ......„......__........... ......., ........,............. .,.... ..,....... 128
Commonly Used Report Terms, Acronyms and AKA's
ADU's.................................. „...... .............................................................. Attached Dwelling Unit
Detached Dwelling............................................................................ AKA Single Family Dwelling
Attached Dwelling ........................................................AKA Apartment, Condominium or Duplex
DIF................ ...._.......,...,,.........,....,......Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report
DOF...............................................................................................State Department of Finance
GIS............................................................................................. Geographic Information System
ITE..............................................„,.......,............................... Institute of Transportation Engineers
KSF........................................ .......................... ___ ........ ,,..,...,..... ,...,. _Thousand Square Feet
LOS.....................................................................................................................Level of Service
Mitigation Fee Act or AB1600.... .,... ,,....... ,.,,,„.„...............„.................. Government Code § 66000
Quimby Act ............................. ........................ „.......,......... ,................... Government Code 66477
Chapter 1
Background and Introduction
In 2021 the City of El Segundo retained Revenue and Cost Specialists, LLC to undertake a
comprehensive calculation of the future development impact costs for the City. This report will
address each the City's eleven separate infrastructure systems. The development impact cost
calculations are intended to identify the cost of additional infrastructure necessary to
accommodate long-term continued development within the City's existing limits in such a
fashion as to not decrease the levels of service currently enjoyed by the City's existing residents
and businesses. The development impact cost calculations, if adopted, can be formalized as a
set of Development Impact Fee (henceforth referred to as DIFs) schedules by City Council.
In light of inflation and other changing development factors, a periodic review and adjustment of
the City's DIFs would be appropriate and warranted in order to continue to assure that the City
collects sufficient monies to construct the additional infrastructure needed to accommodate the
anticipated growth demands of new residents and businesses expected to be developed in the
City. Such has been completed with the submission of this Development Impact Fee
Calculation and Nexus Report. The existing DIF schedules may have served the City well for
many years, but only for those limited infrastructures currently with impact fees. However, after
cumulative changes of DIF factors, the most significant being the effect of inflation on the older
project cost estimates combined with General Plan amendments has combined to require a full
update of all development assumptions, estimated demands and capital project costs was
prudent. For this and other reasons, the City entered into the intensive effort to recalculate the
amount of the existing and new DIFs.
This Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report effort remains consistent with the
previous report's intent to quantify development costs. This document includes a greater
amount of detail such as a complete list of all 31 proposed projects that may be financed (all or
in part) by the proposed DIF schedules, by infrastructure as well as a comparison with the
existing commitment of the existing community.
The Importance of Ca ital Infrastructure. The Levels of Service (LOS) of any one of the City's
infrastructure is based upon and (and limited by) the capacity of that infrastructure to support
the users, residents or businesses. The design of any municipal project has a finite capacity,
such as a four lane road, a 30" storm drainage pipe or a 10,000 square foot library. Each can
only meet the needs of a defined number of users. A four -lane street segment can only handle
so many vehicles per hour, especially at a speed that makes it worth using for driving over
longer distances. A storm drainage pipe that is 30" cannot handle storm flows twice its
capacity. A library can hold just so many collection items and serve only so many people. A
municipality with 0.40 square feet per resident of library space will be able to serve more
residents than a municipality with only a 0.10 square feet standard per resident of library space.
The following is a more precise example using law enforcement.
Consider the labor intensive service of law enforcement, regardless of the quality and
capabilities of the City's sworn police officers, the Department remains highly dependent upon
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 1
Chapter One Background -and Introe w
its infrastructure capacity. A police station of 11,250 square feet will have capacity to support
roughly thirty sworn police officers, at about 375 square feet per officer. If the station size
remains the same at 11,250 square feet but the sworn compliment doubles to sixty police
officers, the station will become exceedingly dysfunctional at 187.5 square feet per officer. The
same holds true for police response vehicles and law enforcement specialty equipment. If a
City adds thirty additional officers but cannot add station space, vehicles and specialty
equipment, the City has dealt with only half of the service equation. They have achieved little.
Further, if you add 30 police officers:
0 But the agency does not add police response vehicles the calls -for -services
responses will be very poor.
• But the agency does not create any additional station square foot space the
calls -for -services responses will be dysfunctional, and unpredictable.
9 But the agency does not provide the sworn officers with the required personal
and specialty equipment the calls -for -services responses will be dangerous,
certainly for the new police officers.
On the opposite side, if you add all of the above capital needs, but do not add additional sworn
officers, the result would probably be limited to a minor improvement in response times.
Good municipal service takes a balance of staff and infrastructure. However, make no mistake
about it, the amount of and complexity of any infrastructure defines (in part or all) of the level of
service (LOS). This makes the one-time DIF financing of any City's infrastructure that much
more important. It takes a balance to accommodate development with the police responses
within the desired standard. It will take additional properly equipped officers, law enforcement
station space, response and support vehicles and specialty equipment. The importance of
having a properly calculated and documented DIF schedule in order to accommodate
development -related demands cannot be over -stated. The same concept holds true for the two
labor-intensive public safety services and the infrastructure -intensive services such as
circulation, storm drainage collection, water distribution et. al. and wastewater collection et. al.
Of course, the DIFs can only be used for the capital acquisitions, the ongoing labor staffing
costs will need to come from other sources.
PROPORTIONAL ANALYSIS
A helpful component of this Report is the proportional analysis of the infrastructure needs
required to accommodate continued development of the City as compared to the existing
infrastructure that has been generated through years of taxes and other contributions and
currently serves the existing community. This proportional analysis is intended to recognize and
reconcile the difference between the City's desired level of service required of new
development, per statements in the various General Plan elements, with that of the de -facto or
actual level of service provided to the existing community. The inclusion of the proportional
analysis will assist the City Council in adopting a DIF structure that recognizes inter -
generational equity and assists the Council in making the difficult policy decisions regarding the
required capital additions needed to accommodate new development by increasing the lay-
person's understanding of fairness.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 2
C'tanter
One ii . ', � ! .. • • AM N
The proportional analysis is important, if for no other reason, than for community inter -
generational equity, i.e., fairness in the infrastructure investment that has been made by existing
residents and businesses with those of new residents and businesses that wish to use the
existing infrastructure. As an example, new development may be required to expand the
number of arterial and collector lane miles in the City but new development also benefits from
the immediate use of Maple Street constructed so many years ago just as an existing citizen
can use a newly constructed arterial street segment. In short, previous generations of
businesses and residents have contributed to the development of the City infrastructure and this
fact should be recognized by future residents and businesses by contributing a similar amount
of capacity towards completing the various infrastructure systems.
It is one thing to identify the many public improvement projects needed through build -out. It is
an entirely different thing to assume that all of the identified improvements are required to meet
the demands of the new development. Clearly, some projects will be replacements of the
existing infrastructure while others will be capacity increasing projects. Within the category of
the latter, they may also be further classified into two categories;
1. Projects dealing with existing deficiencies, i.e., projects required regardless of whether
there is additional development or not. An example would be a traffic intersection
currently controlled by stop signs that would meet demand warrants based upon
continued development.
2. Projects required as a result of the need to accommodate future development. An
example of this would be a signal that is currently controlled quite adequately by stop
signs, but because of development in the near and downstream areas will ultimately
need to be signalized.
This Report provides the documentation of the City's costs which serve as the basis for
calculating DIFs. The updated DIF Schedules and related information can be found in Chapters
3 through 13 and Appendices A, B, C and D of this Report.
RCS staff has worked with Finance, Police, Fire, Planning/GIS, Engineering and Quality of Life
infrastructure management staff to generate and review the supporting data which forms the
calculation of Development Impact Fee schedules. The results of this review can be found on
the schedules located at the end of each Chapter.
Development Impact Fee Structure. The General Plan provides a range of potential densities
for residential development, as such, the DIFs for residential uses need to be calculated on a
per dwelling unit basis to reflect more accurately the impacts from a specific development. For
example, a property zoned as detached dwelling residential development may contain from
three to six units per acre. If fees are calculated on an acreage basis, the developer proposing
three units per acre would pay the same amount as a developer constructing six units per acre.
Similarly, fees are calculated on a square footage basis for business (retail/service, office and
industrial, etc.) parcels to reflect the impacts of different building intensities for these types of
development. Some of the infrastructures have optional fee structure recommended for unusual
developments, such as a parking structure, which in itself does not create demand beyond
additional storm drainage runoff, where the structure requiring the additional parking does.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 3
A second reason for the proposed DIF fee structure recommended in this Report involves the
issue of building expansion or intensification of retail, office and industrial areas. For example, if
a property owner of commercial or industrial property proposes an expansion to his building, the
question exists about how to charge this proposed expansion for its impact on the City's streets,
storm drainage system, and other infrastructures. A fee calculated on a building square footage
(and an average Floor Area Ratio).basis simplifies this calculation.
CALCULATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
In California, State legislation sets certain legal and procedural parameters for the charging of
these fees. This legislation was passed as AB1600 by the California Legislature and is now
codified as California Government Code Sections 66000 through 66009. This State law went
into effect on January 1, 1989.
Government Code §66000 requires documentation of projects to be financed by Development
Impact Fees prior to their levy and collection, and that the monies collected actually be
committed within five years to a project of direct benefit to the development which paid the fees.
Many states have such controlling statutes. Specifically, Government Code §66000 requires
the following process:
1. Delineation of the purpose of the fee.
2. Determination of the use of the fee.
3. Determination of the relationship between the use of the fee and the type of
development paying the fee.
4. Determination of the relationship between the need for the facility and the type of
development project. NOTE: Numbers 2 & 4 will be reversed throughout the
chapters in this Report because it is apparent that need should be identified
before use.
5. Determination of the relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the
portion of the facility attributed to the specific development project.
This Report, with some additions, utilizes the basic methodology consistent with the above
requirements of Government Code §66000. Briefly, the following steps were undertaken in the
calculation of DI Fs for the City:
1. Define the level of service desired within the General Plan area for each project or
acquisition identified as necessary. In some areas, certain statistical measures are
commonly used to measure or define an acceptable level of service for a category
of infrastructure. Street intersections, for instance, are commonly rated based on a
Level of Service scale of "A" to "F" developed by transportation engineers. Most
agencies adopt a LOS of "C".
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 4
Chapter One Back round and Introduction
2. Review the Land use map and determine the existing mix of land -uses and amount
of undeveloped and developed land. The magnitude of growth and its impacts can
thus be determined by considering this land use data when planning needed
infrastructure. This inventory can be found in Table 2-1 in Chapter 2 and Appendix
B.
3. Identify all additions to the capital, facilities or equipment inventory necessary to
maintain the identified levels of services in the City. Then, determine the cost of
those additions. An infrastructure Master Plan is the highest form of data.
4. Identify a level of responsibility, identifying, as termed in this Report, the relative
need (or as referred to in the accompanying schedules as "PERCENT NEED") for
the facility or equipment necessary to accommodate "growth" as defined, and as
opposed to current needs.
5. Distribute the costs identified as a result of development growth on a basis of land
use. Costs are distributed between each land use based on their relative use, or
nexus, of the capital system. For example, future street costs were distributed to
each land use based on their trip generation characteristics.
OTHER ASSUMPTIONS OF THE REPORT
In addition to the land use assumptions contained in the next Chapter of this Report, other
important assumptions of this study include the following:
"Normal" Subdivision Imigrovements remitted. "Local' public improvements generally associated
with and identified as being the sole responsibility of the developer through the subdivision or
development review process are not included in either of the project lists or consequent
calculations. This type of "on site" and immediately adjacent improvement would include all
such capital construction within the boundaries of any development, such as street lights, curb,
gutter, sidewalks, neighborhood streets and all local utility pipes. These improvements would
continue to be the direct responsibility of the developer, with or without the addition of DIFs.
Land Acquisition Costs. Land acquisition cost estimates have been developed after discussions
with City officials over recent acquisitions, current negotiations or information about parcels
similar to what is needed by the City. Arguments for higher or lower costs can be made;
however, the herein contained per acre amounts appear to be the most appropriate current
figure for the purposes of this study. However, City finance staff has indicated that land
acquisition costs will be reviewed from time to time to adjust for any marked swings that can
occur to land acquisition costs, as opposed to the more predictable construction costs.
Exclusion/Resection of Any Ivpe,of "Credit" for Undeveloped Land. It has been argued by some
that a credit for capital -related revenues, such as gas taxes, should be made against the DIFs
calculated or imposed by a city. Using the state gas tax as an example, proponents of a DIF
credit argue that a city will receive increased annual gas taxes because of the additional
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 5
24,,00ter •,i-' B aw w w wr s
population generated by future residential development. It is therefore argued that a developer
should receive a credit for any associated gas tax revenues collected as a result of the residents
or businesses that occupy the new dwellings against any Circulation DIF imposed by the City
based on either of two separate arguments.
The first argument for a gas tax credit supposes that the additional gas taxes created by
residential development are needed and dedicated for the maintenance of existing streets,
which is the responsibility of existing development. Since the new streets constructed via DIFs
will not require rehabilitation or reconstruction for another 10 to 20 years, the gas tax generated
by new development is therefore a windfall to the City and should be credited against the DIF.
What this argument fails to consider is that any new resident or business to the City will begin to
contribute immediately to the use and deterioration of all City streets. A cursory review of City
finances will reveal that the amount of the State gas tax received by cities falls far short of
meeting the City's needed street improvements and repairs in any given year. The gas taxes
generated by new development simply cannot meet the maintenance costs of either the new
streets associated with the development or the existing streets used on a daily basis.
The second argument proposes that the developer pays his full share of constructing new roads
when the developer pays the City's Circulation (streets, signals bridges and roadbed protection
storm drainage) System Development Impact Fee and that the gas taxes generated by the
additional residents in a development are unfairly used to make improvements to the existing
street system. It is most cities experience that gas taxes are barely adequate to meet streets -
related operational costs, and if they are sufficient to meet these costs, the remainder is used
for capital -related maintenance projects.
For these reasons, credits of existing operational tax receipts are not considered for Circulation
System DIFs in this Report. A similar discussion can be made for the other fees considered
herein, and therefore no credits against any such fees are included in this calculation of
development impact costs. Those annual operational tax receipts need to be dedicated to the
maintenance of the existing system.
Apgrooriate Expansion. Debt service is a reasonable cost of construction of many, but not
necessarily all, public facilities and infrastructure. The following example illustrates this. DIFs
are collected in incremental amounts, but facilities are not expanded in those same incremental
amounts. As an example, a community center fee, based upon a standard of 1.2 square feet
per detached dwelling residence, may be collected for each residential dwelling in the City, but
after collecting the fee for a 100-unit subdivision, it would be impractical to expand the
community center 120 S.F. Fees are collected, placed in a separate fund, generating interest
until such a time that a 2,000 to 3,000 S. F. expansion is possible. During that build-up time, the
community center will experience some temporary overcrowding as the standard drops from 1.2
S.F./dwelling to about 0.9 S.F./dwelling. This "temporary overcapacity" clearly may be an
inconvenience, bringing about some crowding and an increased unavailability for rental or
reservation until enough DIFs have been collected for a practical expansion to bring the
community center facility back up to the original standard. In short, a development of 120
residences may be occupancy approved and bring about a temporary reduction in community
center facility standards without endangering the citizen's health and safety.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 6
ChagLer One Backgroundand Introduction
However, such a temporary overcapacity in storm water roadbed protection is not possible
without the potential for damage to both private and public property. Capacity for the
collection/removal of storm water must be available prior to the construction that increases the
impervious surface (and thus storm water runoff) of the parcel. If the local storm collection line
is currently at capacity (peak or otherwise), no additional units may be brought on line until
additional collection capacity can be created. Again, there is a practical size of an addition to
construct and it is not likely practical for developers to wait until there is enough added demand
(and fees) to pay for the facility addition. As a result, financing through some type of debt
instrument may be the only alternative. Circumstances vary from city to city as to what facility
expansions are critical and which can absorb temporary overcapacity for limited periods of time.
OTHERISSUES
There are those who claim that the addition of DIFs unfairly creates an inflated resale price for
existing residences. The argument is that if the public agency adopts a $35,000 to $50,000
development impact fee per detached dwelling, then the price for an existing dwelling is
artificially increased by the same amount. We will use the example of a detached dwelling
detached unit that cost the developer $350,000 to construct and complete to a point that the
occupancy permit is approved.
Full Coast of a Residential Dwelling. The $350,000 represents only the above ground costs. The
true and actual cost of a new dwelling is the cost of acquiring the parcel, necessary government
approvals and permits, construction supplies, labor, debt service on the above, on -site (1) public
improvements, and the cost of extending public services to that dwelling.
These public service extension costs include (but are not limited to) (Z):
• The addition of law enforcement personnel requiring the expansion of the police station,
response vehicles and specialty equipment.
• The additional fire stations, response vehicles and specialty rescue equipment.
• Widening of road segment of traffic arterials, collectors, bridge and additional signals.
• Additions to water delivery capability, including source, storage and delivery.
• Additions to the wastewater capability including collection lines.
• Additional library, aquatics center, public meeting and developed park space for
recreational/social purposes. It must be stated here that these "Quality of Life" existing
On -site improvements include local streets and medians, curbs and gutters, sewer lines, water lines, street lights, storm gutter or
drainage pipes, electrical power lines and all of the other requirements of the City's development code on privately -held
developments, hence the reference of "On -site". These improvements are not of "General Benefit" to the entire community.
2 The City does not necessarily provide all of these services, they are only highlighted to make a point about the types of municipal
services typically required to support a residential dwelling or business facility.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 7
Chapter + Bagkground • pr r
standards for City of El Segundo are the highest calculated or seen in any of the past 18
cities where RCS has conducted a complete development impact fee calculation study.
Thus while the cost of constructing the above ground portion of a detached dwelling unit may be
$350,000, the previously identified "downstream" costs may be in the area of $35,000 to
$50,000 per detached dwelling unit or in the area of 10% to 15% of the above ground cost.
If this argument is not clear, picture a 2,800 square foot detached dwelling, costing $350,000 to
construct the above ground structure, located in the middle of an empty square mile, no roads,
no utility service, no public safety response, no flood control and no recreational facilities. What
is the market value of this detached dwelling? Probably not even the $350,000 that it cost to
construct the structure. All of a sudden, a $35,000 to $50,000 impact fee for the infrastructure
needed to make that one residential unit more marketable seems like a bargain. In short, new
development needs an existing system of municipal infrastructure to hook up to, or it is not a
viable development. In short, development requires a public agency that provides infrastructure -
based system in order for that private development to be viable.
Thus, the true and complete cost of a new detached dwelling unit is the cost of constructing the
structure and the cost of extending the municipal services to the dwelling regardless of who
pays for the actual costs of extending those services. To some degree these service -related
infrastructure costs have been recognized, the only question remaining is who should for pay
them, existing or new residents?
Effect on Market Price. Again, let us assume that a cumulative $35,000 to $50,000 impact fee
imposed upon new detached dwelling construction increases the market price of an existing
detached dwelling unit. Wouldn't this just be the recognition that the existing detached dwelling
already has those physical links to the municipal services? A slightly different way of looking at
this argument is that the existing family residences each have a "share" in a municipal
corporation(3) and the share is valued at the cost of the connection to the various municipal
utilities, transportation system, flood protection and public safety. It is a logical step then to
require any newly constructed detached dwelling to purchase a "share" at an equal cost.
CHAPTER ORGANIZATION
Within each "hard infrastructure" Chapter (Chapters Three through Nine) there will be a
minimum of three fee/cost comparison tables. They will be:
The first schedule, the Allocation of Project Cost Estimates identifies the projects, their costs
and the relationship, in an allocation percentage, to future development. These schedules will
begin with the number x.1 as in 3.1, 4.1, 5.1 etc.).
Minimum Needs -based Impact Fee - This schedule will calculate the DIF schedule that would
need to be adopted to meet the minimum capital needs identified in the Report (on the second
schedule at the end of the Chapter, i.e., 3.2, 4.2, etc.) for that infrastructure but limited to the
3 Not unlike a private corporation.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 8
General City needs. Strictly speaking this schedule is a calculation of the development impact
costs, suitable to be adopted as development impact fees, by the legislative body, in this case
the El Segundo City Council.
With adoption of this level of DIFs, one could claim that new development is occurring without
any additional cost to the existing residents and businesses. You could not, however,
necessarily claim that new development is paying its fair share.
Existing Community Financial Commitment Comparison This schedule, while not an impact
fee calculation, identifies the cost (in current nominal replacement dollar value) of the existing
infrastructure, including land, physical improvements and capital equipment. The distribution of
this replacement value equity total over the existing developed community is the average
amount that has been invested by the current community of residents and businesses and is a
good indication, or comparison, with what could be imposed upon new development. This
financial commitment will be expressed in terms of the cost to construct or acquire the assets at
current replacement costs. Significant differences between this schedule and the Minimum
Needs -based DIF rate schedule would certainly be worth additional analysis. These Schedules
would be numbered 3.3, 4.3, 5.3, etc.
If the average equity (for a detached dwelling for example) on this Existing Commitment
Financial Commitment Comparison Table is greater than the average cost on the previous
Minimum Needs -based Table, then that infrastructure system is front -ended with more of the
system, say 80% of it has been constructed while only at 50% of General Plan build -out and it
likely has excess capacity at that point in time. The excess capacity is the result of earlier
residents and businesses of the community having put more of the system into place than will
be necessary by the remaining un-built portions of the community. The existing community has
advanced money to build capacity into the infrastructure system to meet the needs of residents
and businesses not yet there. This table is intended to be instructive rather than legal.
Distribution of Existing Impact Fee Fund Balance. The existing City-wide DIFs have a combined
Fund Balance of $0.78 million and each was created to finance various infrastructure needed as
new residents and businesses locate in newly created residential dwellings and buildings.
There are no specific restrictions on the monies, beyond the restriction that they be used on
improvements within the Fund title and committed within a five-year time frame.
For the Quality of Life Infrastructure impact fees (Chapters 10 through 13) are limited to a one
page calculation, also at the end of each Chapter.
END OF CHAPTER TEXT
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 9
Chapter 2
Demographics and Findings
This Chapter represents the beginning and end of the DIF calculation process. It begins with an
inventory of fully developed, undeveloped and under -developed units and acreage within the
City and concludes with a summary of recommended DIF schedules with detailed infrastructure
explanations in the following chapters of this Report. El Segundo was incorporated in January
of 1917 and has seen a great deal of development during that time. The City is experiencing
what RCS has identified as a second General Plan "build -out". RCS staff has noticed that there
are (at least) two General Plan "build -outs" a City will experience. The first occurs when most of
the City's raw land or fully vacant parcels become developed. The second "build -out" occurs
when private property owners look at their developed land and determine if that is their highest
and best use of the property. Two examples of this would include (but would not be limited to):
s An owner of an acre -sized industrial zoned property wishes to upsize from an older 5,000
square foot industrial building to the probable maximum allowed 26,136 square foot
industrial building allowed by a 0.60 floor area ratio, or FAR. In effect, there is no zone
change but the application maximizes the amount of square foot allowed by the City's
zoning code. The result is an increase in the demand on all City services.
That same owner of the 5,000 square foot industrial building applies for a zone change to
construct a 15,246 commercial establishment on that same acre. Industrial uses are one of
the lowest demand generators of all of the City's land uses, commercial use is one of the
highest demand generator land uses. The result is also increased demand on all of City's
infrastructures/services. We are concerned about the net delta change in service demand.
The above are but two examples of how, what appears to be like a "built -out city", will continue
to experience increases in service demand within each of the City's major infrastructures.
Public safety calls -for service will increase, there will be additional daily trip -miles on the City's
circulation system, increased water delivery and wastewater collection demand on the utility
systems. The slight increase in the population will decrease the existing service levels of the
City's existing Quality of Life standards (i.e. the 7.43 library collection items per resident and the
3.437 square feet of public use community center space per resident).
This is not a new concept for the City to accept, it already has recognized the continued
development within the City's boundaries. These anticipated changes were highlighted in the
City's 1992 adopted General Plan, Section 3 - Land Use Element, stating in part:
Summary of Issues There are several issues for consideration, based on the trends
researched in the Existing Conditions Report; the residential trends include:
A. Increased multi -family development and reduced new single-family development. This
trend is likely to continue under existing designations, increasing the City's density.
B. An increase in the size of single-family homes, both through additions to existing homes
and the demolition of existing homes that are replaced with larger new homes. These
trends tend to maximize the land values, but they do create some impacts that affect the
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 10
streetscape, number of curb cuts in the street, number of street trees, light and air, and
private open space.
There are four important non-residential trends that should be addressed in El
Segundo. They are:
A. The reduction of manufacturing and heavy industrial uses, not including
Chevron.
B. The increase in commercial and professional uses such as hotels and
offices.
C. Decreasing availability of vacant land.
D. Increasing commercial uses that serve the daytime population. The
Economic Development Element has indicated that these types of uses
may have limited potential. Such uses may, therefore, be best located on
the ground floor of office buildings. Given the overall effect of these four
important trends, the community has considered the possibility of mixed -
use development. Mixed -use could mean any mixture of commercial,
service -oriented uses, offices, or research and development. By allowing a
mix of uses, the City may be able to effectively address solutions to future
potential problems such as traffic management, infrastructure constraints,
and parking.
This Report recognizes these anticipated changes, and they are reflected in the City's land use
database provided by the City that is the basis for future demand calculations contained in this
Report. The increased demands are then the basis for the projects required to maintain the
City's existing very high levels of service afforded by the infrastructure accumulated since 1917.
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
This Report contains an inventory of fully developed, undeveloped and underdeveloped land
within the City limits of El Segundo and is based upon the City"s most recent General Plan
update. The Undeveloped and the Underdeveloped delta land inventory„ identified as Potential
Development, combine to form the base for the distribution of the estimated costs of the service -
expanding capital projects necessary to accommodate that same anticipated development.
Without the expansion projects, the City would be unable to accommodate that new
development, effectively halting it. The developed land inventory forms the base for distributing
the replacement cost of the existing infrastructure. This action provides the basis for
comparison with the proposed DIF schedules and for the de facto identification of the many
existing Levels of Service (LOS) currently provided by the City's existing spine infrastructure
which is conservatively valued at well above 50 million.
Table 2-1, is the inventory of all private land -uses contained within the current City limits in what
is referred to as the General City area and is based on the General Plan's land use inventory, a
planning staff analysis of privately held parcels in General Plan area (excludes the City's Sphere
of Influence).
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 11
ws Mf _E1 SectundoVernographicsand e •
Table 2-1 consists of multiple horizontal blocks of information from the top to the bottom, they
are:
Total - Land -use Database - Total of All Areas - This block of information identifies
the amount of developed and undeveloped land in terms of acres and units for the City's
entire City limits and is the sum of the two areas identified following.
Land -use Database within the City's General City Area - Net - This block of
information identifies the existing development and development opportunities within the
General City area of the City in terms of acres and appropriate units. The information in
the Existing Development column will be used to identify the current investment to
compare the proportionality of the proposed DIFs as previously described in Chapter
One. The Potential Development column will be used as the denominator to distribute
the cost of infrastructure improvements needed to accommodate development in the area
to those generating the need for those same improvements. The area is the sum of four
General City Sub -areas (Appendix B, LUDB - Sections A to C).
A greater level of detail is available in Appendix B - Expanded Land -use Database.
Table 2-1
Detailed Land Use Inventory
� ;01,00�W, e
Existing Development
Potential Development
Total General Plan Build -out
Acres
#Units
Acres
# of Units
Acres
# of Units
Detached Dwelling Units (+)
1,390.20
3,822 1
3.64
20
1,393.84
3,842
Detached Dwelling Units (-)
0.00
0
(73.93)
(203)
(73.93)
(203)
Attached Dwelling Units
88.60
490
74.73
1,959
163.33
2,449
Commercial Lodging Units
33.10
2,691
2.00
232
35.10
2,923
Retail & Service Uses SF + - ( ) ()
110.20
1,313,245
137.48
6,887,925
247.68
8,201,170
Retail & Service Uses (SF) (-)
0.00
0
(1.00)
(11,917)
(1.00)
(11,917)
Office Uses (SF)
674.80
9,493,945
85.26
2,985,602
660.06
12,479,647
Industrial Uses (SF) (+) -
1,665.20
7,580,266
28.00
731,808
1,693.20
8,312,074
Industrial Uses es (SF) .
(SF)
1 0.00
0
(166.52)
(758,027)
(166.52)
(758,027)
Instltutional Use (SF)
17.30
233,7971
1.00
t�
13,504
18.30
247,301
Total - All City
3,879.40
4,312.00
90.66
78.37
11979
3,970.05
1,557.17
-
6,291
^^..
Private Residences (+)
1,478.801
Private Residences O
- ces
0.00
0.00
(73.93)
(203)
(73.93)
(203)
Commercial Lodging Rooms
33.10
2,691.00
2.00
232
35.10
2,923
Business Square Feet (+)
2,367.50
18,621,263.00
250.74
10,618,839
2,618.24
29,240,092
Business Square Feet(-)
Total for General Facilities DIF
0.00
3,879.40
1 0.00
(166.52)
90.66
(769,944)
(166.52)
3,970.06
(769,944)
1 28,479.159.00
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 12
Due to the El Segundo's unique circumstances of likely upsizing of underused parcels the land
use database depicted in Table 2-1 includes lines with (+) or (-) indicating a projected increase
or decrease in that land -use. As an example, Detached Dwelling Units (+) indicates an
additional 20 such units on vacant land but Detached Dwelling Units (-) indicates the removal of
203 detached dwellings, likely to be replaced with attached dwelling units. This recognizes the
net reduction of infrastructure service demand from the 203 detached dwelling units being razed
with the increased demand of the 20 detached dwellings to be constructed leaving a delta in
demand from the net 183 less detached dwellings. In short the Police and Fire Departments will
see a reduction in calls -for -service from the removed detached dwellings. Thus any line that is
italicized and has a (-) in the tables included in Chapters 3 through 9 are only included to
identify the net change in demand but do not calculate the actual impact fee.
DIF Land -use Types Definitions. This Report classifies private development into one of two
residential DIF Land -use Types or one of five different business -based DIF Land -use Types. For
purposes of the Report, the term DIF Land -use Type will refer to one of the seven broad types
under which the City's specifically defined zoning code land -uses will fall into. These DIF Land -
use Types are defined following:
Residential Land -uses:
Detached Dwelling Units - This DIF Land -use Type is generally defined as a
detached unit and corresponds to an allowable use within the City's land -use
designation of Single -Family Residential (R-1), Two -Family Residential (R-2),
and 540 East Imperial Avenue Specific Plan. This category would include the
construction of the unusual, detached condominium or townhome and a
manufactured unit on an individual lot.
Attached Dwelling Units - This larger category consists of apartments,
townhomes, condominiums or any other living unit that is attached to any other
unit. It generally corresponds to an allowable land -use designation of Two -
Family Residential (R-2), Multi -Family Residential (R-3), Neighborhood
Commercial (C-2), Downtown Commercial (C-RS), Smoky Hollow Mixed -
Use, and 540 East Imperial Avenue Specific Plan.
Business/Commerce Land -uses:
Commercial Lodging (keyed) Units - This DIF Land -use Type is found in the
General Commercial (C-3), Corporate Office (CO), Urban Mixed -Use North
(MU-N), Urban Mixed -Use South (MU-S), and 199 North Continental
Boulevard Specific Plan zones.
Retail/Service/Office Uses - As utilized in this Report, Commercial uses include
the general type of retail services and thus includes outlets ranging from
restaurants to auto repair shops to shopping centers. This category includes the
Neighborhood Commercial (C-2), Downtown Commercial (C-RS), Corporate
Office (CO), Commercial Center (C-4), Urban Mixed -Use North (MU-N),
Urban Mixed -Use South (MU-S), Downtown Specific Plan, Corporate
Campus Specific Plan, and El Segundo South Campus Specific Plan zones.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 13
Qhapterd• Derr ior aphLics and
Industrial/Manufacturing Uses - This DIF Land -use Type contains all
businesses engaged in heavy to light manufacturing or industrial development.
This category includes the Light Industrial (M-1), Heavy Industrial (M-2),
Smoky Hollow Mixed -Use, Urban Mixed Use -North (MU-N), Urban Mixed -
Use South (MU-S), 12 "' Street Specific Plan, Aviation Specific Plan, and
222 Kansas Street Specific Plan zones.
Institutional Uses - This DIF Land -use Type, based upon the specific use, may
be approved in just about any of the City's previously mentioned zones. It
consists of private schools, private meeting places, places of worship and similar
private facilities and could be located within many of the land use categories.
Definitions of DIF Application Categories Status. For each of the DIF land -use categories
detailed on Table 2-1, acreage is categorized as either Existing Development or Potential
Development. Definitions regarding the status of each land use are as follows:
Existing Development - Acres/Units - This column title reference identifies land in the City
which is developed or land which has received a building permit but may not yet be constructed.
Acreage in this category may include non -conforming use areas of the City which contain
extensive development prior to an annexation or before any changes to the General Plan.
Potential Development - Acres/Units - Refers to all non-public vacant acreage located within
the City. This category also includes any fully vacant parcel and those that can be upsized in
the future is it contains some remaining development potential on it.
POPULATION PROJECTIONS
A second component in determining the magnitude of impact of future development and the
necessary facilities needed to mitigate that impact is a realistic assessment of the build -out
population of the City. Many of the facilities contained in this Report are sized according to
either the estimated population at theoretical "build -out" or upon service levels which are based
in part upon an estimation of the population to be served. Library facilities, parks and recreation
facilities and community center facilities and equipment are examples of cost areas which rely
heavily on population projections to determine space and facility needs. Park standards are
usually stated in terms of the number of acres of park land per 1,000 persons, for instance.
There are at least two generally accepted methods for projecting future population levels in a
City: (A) past growth trends projected forward and (B) population holding capacity based on the
General Plan land -use element. Each of these methods can be useful even though both
possess certain limitations.
There are several serious flaws in projecting the build -out population of a community using the
past growth trends methodology. While this method is relatively simple and therefore easy for
the general public to understand, it does not give consideration to when an area is actually built
out. Eventually there comes a point in time where the amount of available land to build on is
negligible. This technique does not help explain when that point is reached,
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 14
Also, the past growth trends approach is not sensitive to policy changes made by Council or
land use issues contained in the City's General Plan. For these reasons, this technique is more
useful in projecting short-term population levels and should not be used to forecast the built -out
population of an area.
This Report relies on the methodology of holding -capacity (described in the following section)
to project future service levels and facility requirements.
Holding Capacity Analysis. The methodology used in this Report to forecast the built -out
population of El Segundo is the current holding capacity approach. This method calculates the
sum of existing development and potential development allowable under current land use
regulations, using average densities found in the City.
The first step in projecting the City's population using the holding capacity approach is to
inventory the remaining undeveloped acres within the City limits, which was previously
accomplished in Tables 2-1 and 2-2 of this Chapter. The next step is to estimate the potential
dwelling units allowed per acre and then multiply the potential number of units by the average
number of residents per unit.
The number of persons per unit for new residential units is based on the 2000 U.S. Census and
ranges from 3.025 and 2.876 persons for detached dwellings and attached dwelling
respectively. The 2000 Census data was selected over the recently released 2020 Census due
to a change in reporting the resulting data by eliminating the data.
Based on these 2000 Census dwelling density data, future residential development can be
expected to generate somewhere from 4,794 and 5,080 additional residents�4) to the City of El
Segundo, joining the 16,660 citizens already living in City, resulting in a total estimated
population at build -out (based upon the inclusion of existing City limits) of approximately 21,740
residents. The higher number is based upon full occupancy of all new dwelling units and the
lower figure is based upon the historical occupancy levels at the time of the census count. The
21,597 is the average of the two.
Table 2-2, following, uses the additional housing projected in the Land -use Database and
estimates the additional potential population for the City of El Segundo through build -out. The
number of potential new dwelling units was calculated by multiplying the amount of vacant
acreage for each land use zone by the average densities (i.e., number of units allowed per acre)
indicated in the City's General Plan.
The estimated GP build -out population of 21,597 (average between high and low) or more
residents using this bolding capacity approach is typically louver than the population forecasts
based on the mathematical models previously described. This implies that either the City's
period of residential build -out will actually take 25 to 30 years or that the City's growth rate will
increase from recent historical levels. As the residentially zoned land remaining to be developed
continues to be built on during the next thirty years, the City is likely to see the number of new
dwelling units developed decrease each year.
4 Depending upon the vacancy factor based upon the average of 96.05% for all residences.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 15
Chapter Segundo Demogra2hics and a #
Table 2-2
City of El Segundo
Average Dwelling Occupancy, by Type
(2000 United States Census Data)
Total
Vacant
Occupied
Total Number
Average
Percentage
Existing Residential
Units
Units
Units
of Occupants
I Occupancy
I Occupied
Detached Dwelling Units
Detached Dwellings 7,211 171 1 21,299 3.025 97.63%
(Attached Dwellino Units
Attached Dwelling Units
11044
24
1,020
_ 3,007
2.948
97.70%
Duplex to Ouadplex Units
1,860
80
1,780
5,167
2.903
95.70%
Five to Forty-nine Units
2,173
165
2,008
5,652
2.815
92.41%
Fifty or More Units
397
7
390
790
2.026
98.24%
Average
5,077
269
4,808
13.826
2.876
94. /.
Otter Dwelling Units
Other Dwelling Units 43 14 29 32 1.103 67.44%
G.P. Build -out Population Anticipated Occupancy Probable Dwelling Anticipated
At Historic Occuoancv Rates Net Units Rate Occunancv I I Density I Population
Potential Detached Dwellings
1 (183)
97.63%
3.02.5
(541)Potential
Attached Dwellin s (+)
1,959
94.70%
E(179)
2.876
5.335
G.P. Build -out Population Anticipated Occupancy Probable Dwelling Anticipated
At 100% Occu anc Rate Net Units Rate Occu anc 1 1 Density Population
Potential Detached Dwellings (183)1 100.00% (183) 3.025 (554)
Potential Attached Dwellings 1,959 100.00% 1,959 2.876 5,634
Population to be Added Via Development at 100% Occupancy
5,080
5,080
Current State of California Department of Finance Population
16,660
Potential Maximum "Build -out" Population.
21,740
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 16
Chapter- Ma Demo, ohics and Findings
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
City staff and RCS have identified over $292.7 in needed and identified and planned capital
improvement projects required through the City's General Plan build -out including both projects
related to existing deficiencies and those needed solely to support future growth. Roughly
56.3% of the total project list can be financed with DIF receipts imposed upon new
development. The proposed impact fees will generate just over $164.9 million from the DIF
schedule applied Existing impact fee fund balances will support $0.78 million or 0.30% of the
total. The remaining $127.0 million in project costs do not qualify for impact fee financing and
will need to be financed from other sources. Table 2-3 indicates the development fee -related
capital project costs by infrastructure.
Table 2-3
Total City-wide General Plan Build -out
Capital Requirements
DlFs for the general City Plan Area. Based on these costs and the schedules found at the end
of each of the remaining chapters of this Report, costs attributable to future development were
derived on a per unit basis for residential land -uses and on a per square foot of pad basis for
business land -uses. Schedule 2.1, found at the end of this Chapter, provides a summary of the
recommended DIF schedules for each type of infrastructure and land use category. The total
recommended maximum DIFs for each of the seven DIF Land Use Types within General City
area are summarized following.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 17
Table 2-4
Summary of Proposed Development Impact Fees
for the City's Existing General Plan Area
Specific DIF schedule rates for each land use can be found at the end of each chapter relating
to each infrastructure. Schedule 2.1 at the end of this Chapter also identifies the probable
development impact fee revenue of these proposed new development impact fees, the
estimated capital cost total and the difference, by individual infrastructure type (e.g. fire).
Schedule 2.1 requires two pages to summarize the many infrastructures, identify the individual
Infrastructure DIFs and combined DIFs by DIF Land -use Type and provide a calculation of the
potential collection through build -out at the proposed Minimum Needs -based DIF schedules and
the cost of the total infrastructure needs.
FORMAT OF THIS REPORT
The following chapters of this Report contain the detailed information relative to the calculation
of DIFs recommended by RCS for the entire City. Appropriate textual explanations are
contained in a specific chapter devoted to each of the eleven sets of differing infrastructure cost
schedules for City boundaries. The infrastructure chapters are listed following along with four
appendices, one of which contains a summary of DIF recommendations.
CHAPTER 3 - Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles, and Equipment
CHAPTER 4 - Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities, Vehicles & Equipment
CHAPTER 5 - Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) Facilities
CHAPTER 6 - Storm Drainage Collection System
CHAPTER 7 - Water Distribution System
CHAPTER 8 - Wastewater Collection System
CHAPTER 9 - General Facilities, Vehicles & Equipment
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 18
Chapter 2 City of El Segundo QernoqraRhics and Findina
CHAPTER 10 - Library Collection & Computer Stations
CHAPTER 11 - Public Use (Community Center) Facilities
CHAPTER 12 — Aquatics Facilities
CHAPTER 13 - Park Land Acquisition and Facilities Improvements
APPENDIX A - Summary of Recommendations.
APPENDIX B - Expanded Land -use Database.
APPENDIX C - Detailed Park Infrastructure Cost Schedule.
APPENDIX D - Application of Accessory Dwelling Units as a Function of a
Detached Dwelling.
NOTE REGARDING TEXTUAL MATHEMATICS: It is important to note that the use of a
computer provides for calculations to a large number extending over a large number
of decimal points. Such data, when included in text and supporting textual tables,
has often been rounded to usually no more than two or three decimals for clarity and
thus may not be replicated to the necessary degree of accuracy as the spreadsheet
schedules at the end of each chapter. If questions arise between the tables and
schedules, the schedules at the end of each chapter will prevail as the more accurate.
The schedules at the end of the Chapter are instructive to the recommendations. The
tables within the chapters are text summaries of the schedules at the end of the
chapter and are illustrative.
END OF CHAPTER TEXT
...�.m
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 19
Schedule 2.1
City of El Segundo General Plan Maintenance Costs (Non -entitled Parcels)
Summary of Development Impact Fees By Type of Fee (continued on next page)
(Costs/Fees per Residential Type Dwelling Unit, or Business Type Square Foot)
Calculated Develntlrnpact Costs
Detached Dwelling Units +)
$964
$115
$1,893
$2,482
$6,405
$3,001
$201
Detached Dwelling Units
$964
$115
$1, 893
$2, 482
$6, 405
$3, 001
$201
Attached Dwelling Units
$970
$276
$1,263
$1,297
$4,377
$2,625
$44
Commercial Lodging Units
$104
$52
$998
$89
$1,765
$1,750
$44
Retail & Service Uses (SF) (+)
$5.014
$0.133
$3.823
$0.340
$0.517
$0.225
$0,120
Retail & Service Uses SF -
$5.014
$0.133
$3.823
$0.340
$0.517
$0.225
$0.120
Office Uses (SF)
$1.375
$0.027
$2.185
$0.502
$0.739
$0.428
$0.120
Industrial Uses (SF) (+)
-
$0.327
$0.000
$1.172
$1.793
$0.900
$0.765
$0.120
Industrial Uses LSF -
$0.327
$0.000
$1.172
$1.793
$0.900
$0.765
$0.120
Institutional Lisa (SF)
$0.1991
$0.0001
$2.4951
$0.599
$1.916
$1.3871
$0.120
with 12arnmmandarl lmm& Fae Schedule
Detached Dwelling Units +
$19,280
$2,300
$37,860
$49,640
$128,100
$60,020
$4,020
Detached Dwelling Units -
-$195, 692
-$23, 345
-$384, 279
$59, 568
-$1, 300, 215
-$609, 203
-$40, 803
Attached Dwelling Units
$1.900.230
$540,684
$2,474,217
$31,128
$8,574,543
$5,142,375
$86,196
Commercial Lodging Units
$24,128
$12,064
$231,536
$10,324
$409,480
$406,000
$10,208
Retail & Service Uses SF +
$34536,056
$916,094
$26.332,537
$923,132
$3,561,057
$1,549,783
$826,551
Retail & Service Uses (SF a
-$59,752
-$1,585
-$45,559
$28,140
-$6,161
-$2,681
-$1,430
Office Uses (SF)
$4,105,203
$80,611
$6,523.540
$41,548
$2,206,360
$1,277,838
$358,272
Industrial Uses SF +
$239,301
$0
$857,679
$1.312,132
$658,627
$559,833
$87,817'
Industrial Uses SF -
-$247, 875
$0
-$888, 408
$24, 213
-$682, 224
-$579, 891
-$90, 963
Institutional Use (SF)
$2,687
$0
$33,6921
$8,0891
$25,8741
$18.7301
$1,620
Totall
$40,323,5661
$1,526,8231
$35172,815
$-2,487,914'
$13,575.441
r $7,822,804
$1,241,488
Potential DIF Receipts
$40,323,566
$1,526,8237
$35,172,815
$2,487,914
$13,675,441
$7,822,804
$1,241,488
Fund Balance and Other Revenues
$174,372
$333.588
$0
$01
$0
I $0
$0
Total - Other Resources
$40,497,938
$1,860,411
$35,172,815
L $2,487.914
$13,575,441
$7,822,804
$1,241,488
Required Capital Total
$40,491.360'
$1,861,5001
$130.175.0001
$15,200,000
$30,150.0001
$10,175,000
$1,628,895
Over or (Under) Collection
$6,578
-$1,089
-$95,002,185
-$12,712,086
-$16,574,559
-$2,352,196
-$387,407
ni
Schedule 2.1
City of El Segundo General Plan Maintenance Costs (Non -entitled Parcels)
Summary of Development Impact Fees By Type of Fee
(Costs/Fees per Residential Type Dwelling Unit, or Business Type Square Foot)
lrnpacl`o�
Calculated Development Impact Costs
Detached Dwelling Units (+) $907
$7,686
$1,769
$27,003
$52,426 per Unit
Detached Dwelling Units (- $907
$7, 686
$1, 769
$27,003
$52,426 per Unit
Attached Dwelling Units $863
$7,307
$1,682
$25,672
$46,376 per Unit
Commercial Lodging Units No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
$4,802 per Unit
Retail & Service Uses (SF) (+) No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
$10.172 per S.F.
Retail & Service Uses (SF) (- No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
$10.172 _per S.F.
Office Uses (SF) No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
$5.376 per S.F.
Industrial Uses (SF) (+) No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
$5.077 per S.F.
Industrial Uses (SF) - No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
$5.077 __perS.F.
institutional Use (SF) No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
$6,716 per S.
potential Collection with Recommended Impact Fee Schedule
Detached Dwelling Units (+)
$18,140
$153,720
$35,380
$540,060
Detached Dwelin Units -
-$184,121
-$1,560,258
-$359,107
-$5,481,609
Attached Dwellin Units
$1,690,617
$14,314.413
$3,295,038
$50.291,448
Commercial Lodiing Units
$0
$0
$0
$0
Retail 8 Service Uses SF +
$0
$0
$0
$0
Retail & Service Uses SF -
$0
$0
$0
$0
Ottica Uses SF
$0
$0
$0
$0
Industrial Uses SF +
$0
$0
$0
$0
Industrial Uses (SF (-
$0
$0
$0
$0
Institutional Use SF
$0
$0
$0
$0
Total
$1,24,636
$12,907,875
$2,971,311
$45,349,899
Potential DIF Receipts
$1,524,636
$12,907,875
$2,971,311
$45,349,899
Fund Balance/Other Revenues
$75,235
$0
$l
$193,862
Total - Other Resources
$1,599,871
$12,907,875
$2,971,311
$45,543.761
Re wired Capital Total
$1,599,183
$12,907,305'
$2,971,311
$45,543,761
Over or Under Collection
$688
$570
$0
$0
N
$1,048, 520
-$10,079,064
$88,340,889
$1,103,740
$68,645,210
$89,028
$14,593,372
$3,715,389
-$2,465,148
$90,692
$164,904 572
$164,904,572
$777,057
$165,681,629
$292.703,315
$127, 021,686
Chapter 3
Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles, and Equipment
The Existing System of Law Enforcement Assets or infrastructure. The El Segundo Police
Department currently operates out of 28,338 square foot facility on roughly a third of an acre at
348 Main Street. The building has an additional 6,000 square feet but that portion of the Police
Station is leased to a different but cooperating law enforcement agency thus has not been
included in this impact fee calculation.
The Department also has a significant inventory of:
• Vehicles (official and undercover) some with various added extra equipment;
• Assigned officer equipment such as various leathers, armament, clothing, and safety
apparel; and,
• Specialty and computer equipment.
Demand Don Infrastructure Created by the Development of. -Underdeveloped or Vacant
Parcels. Residents and businesses benefit from law enforcement services in three ways:
directly, indirectly and through standby availability. Direct services are those where a resident
or business owner requires a direct response, usually as a result of being the victim of a crime.
Direct service results in the form of a law enforcement officer contacting the victim. Indirect
benefits, such as crime prevention programs, free patrol time and other law enforcement
services that serve all businesses, citizens and visitors, are impossible to calculate for a specific
beneficiary. An example of indirect benefit would be the apprehension of a burglar in your
neighbor's residence or business yesterday. Had the burglar not been arrested he/she may
have broken into your dwelling unit or business tomorrow. Most residents and businesses may
go for many years before ever requiring a call -for -service. However, these fortunate residents
and businesses still benefit from law enforcement services, if in no other way than by the
knowledge that a law enforcement officer is available, through adequate planned stand-by, to
respond if required. Lastly, residents and businesses also benefit from the stand-by capability,
the ability to respond a police officer should you need service.
The addition of new residential units and new businesses will increase the demand upon the law
enforcement service level by creating more direct calls -for -service, more areas requiring
preventive patrol, and in general, more opportunities for crimes to be committed.
The development of vacant or underutilized parcels into residential or business units will also
generate more calls. The residents and business owners occupying those residences and
businesses will create the increase in law enforcement calls -for -service. More residences and
businesses will mean more responses to the burglaries, domestic disputes, noise complaints,
shoplifting and miscellaneous incidents that will occur in the new residences and businesses. If
the law enforcement force capabilities (the base) are not expanded, then the increasing number
of calls -for -service (the rate) will reduce the amount of "free" hours available for preventative
patrol. This inability to expand the capabilities would ultimately drive the Department into a
reactionary mode. The additional calls -for -service would limit the amount of time for training,
planning, pro -active crime prevention and other non -direct services.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 22
Chapter 3 .—_Law Enforcement. Facilities Vehicles nd E uw rnent
The Purpose of the Fee. Additional law enforcement calls -for -service are expected, and the
cost of adding sworn officers necessary to respond to those calls can be determined. Those
new costs can be translated to a fee, or an amount, necessary to be collected to offset the
added costs of the required additional staffing. These costs include equipping and housing the
additional officers. Providing that the fee is adopted and imposed, new development will finance
its proportional capital costs of expansion of the Police Station. The continued costs of the
annual salary and benefits for those additional officers will need to come from increases in
property and sales tax generated by the new residences and businesses and their occupants.
The Use of the Fee. The revenues raised from a properly calculated and legally -supported Law
Enforcement Impact Fee would be limited to capital costs related to that growth. The fees
would be used to expand the law enforcement station, increase the number of responses and
investigator's vehicles and properly equip additional officers. Conversely, the Law Enforcement
DIF receipts cannot be used to replace existing vehicles or replace normal vacancies. The
required projects/capital includes:
LE-001, Additional Police Station Space/Upgrades - The existing station will need to be
expanded by 42,884 to meet the space needs of the 71 additional officers (at 604 square feet
per officer) needed to meet the addition calls -for -service generated by new development.
LE-002, Additional Patrol/Detectives/Specialty/Staff Vehicles - This project is the acquisition
of 67 law enforcement vehicles in order to maintain the existing 0.94 vehicles/officer standard.
LE-003, Additional Police Officer Assigned Equipment - Officers in the field will require
personally -assigned equipment consisting of radios/electronic devices leathers, handgun,
helmet, and assorted protection as well as the costly recruitment costs of a background check
and other required exams. These costs have been included at $14,266 per additional officer but
are only included for successful candidates.
LE-004, Additional Specialty Equipment - This project is the acquisition of specialty
equipment such as advanced electronics, computer information sharing systems, special
weapons and tactics equipment, and other unique equipment.
The Relationship Between the Deed for The Fee and The T e of Development Pro`ect.
Department records were used to demonstrate that differing land -uses generate differing
numbers of calls. Police staff provided extremely accurate calls -for -service data by over -laying
the Department's computerized response records with the City's zoning map thus allowing
100% of the private sector calls -for -service to be categorized. Table 3-1, following, summarizes
an analysis of the calls -for -service received by the Police Department over a recent twelve
month period. The breakdown of calls into the land -uses that generated them, divided by the
number of developed units (during the same period) generating a calls -for -service nexus.
(This space left vacant in order to place the following table on a single page],
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 23
Chapter 3 taw Enforcement Facilities. Vehicles and E ui ment
Table 3-1
Law Enforcement Calls -for -Service Generated by DIF Land -use Type
(Over a 12 Month Period)
l +i vploped
ActudN? Calla
Tr t ) � lls per
DIend-use Type
Dwellings or
bx Service. �
Dwelling or
Ire fwee>Irrir
i r+afwths
1,000 $f(K$;F)
Detached Dwelling Units
3,822
2,372
0.621/Unit
Attached Dwelling Units
490
296
0.604/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
2,691
170
0.063/Unit
Retail & Service Uses
1,313,245
4,101
3.123/KSF
Office Uses
9,493,945
8,128
0.856/KSF
Industrial Uses _
7,580,266
_ 1,547
. 0.204/KSF
.............
Institutional-
Uses
233,797
29
0.124/KSF
As an example, there were approximately 2,372 calls -for -service that generated a response to
one of the 3,382 detached dwelling units in the City. The result indicates that, on average, each
dwelling will generate just over 0.621 calls per year. The same analysis was undertaken for
most land -uses. Since these calls -for -service by land use are an average, they were used to
project the number of additional calls that could be expected by multiplying the calls per
residential unit or business acre by the number of anticipated number of new residential
dwellings or business acres. To determine the number of additional officers necessary to meet
this increase from future developments, the number of increased calls resulting from new
development was then divided by the average number of calls that an officer responds to.
These calls -for -service rates are then applied to (multiplied by) all of the undeveloped land -use
database anticipated units to determine the number of calls -for -service in the future. The
additional calls -for -service, in this case 25,110 per year, were then divided by the number of
calls -for -service that a single officer can absorb.
The existing complement of 47 sworn officers currently absorbs the 16,643 annual calls -for -
service to privately held residences and businesses by responding to just over 354 calls -for -
service each to privately -owned and developed parcels annually. Based upon the addition of
these 25,110 calls -for -service, the City will need to successfully recruit 71 additional officers to
maintain the same response capabilities that are currently provided by the existing 47 officers
now. This is not to imply that the existing level of services or the ratio of officers to calls -for -
service is the desired level of service, it merely is the current level of service. To adequately
mobilize the 71 new sworn officers, the City will need to add 67 response vehicles at a total cost
of $3,581,622 to maintain the existing ratio of 0.94 vehicles per sworn officer (44 vehicles
divided by 47 officers) and for the personnel recruitment/officer-assigned equipment at a
combined cost of $1,012,886 (71 officers X $24,266 in assigned equipment costs).
The Relationship Between the Use of the Fee and the We of Devehgmeat Paying the Fee.
Again, use of the fee is a similar argument to the need for the fee. As the development occurs,
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 24
Chapter 3 Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicle and Equi rnent
the impact is generated, and the impact fee would be collected as the development occurs. The
collected DIF receipts would be put to use to acquire equipment for additional officers, vehicles
and additional building space necessary to respond to those additional calls, without reducing
the capability of responding to calls from the existing community.
The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the portion of the Facilit
Attributed to the Development Pro'ect. The Police Station size at 28,383 square feet, along with
the 42,844 additional square feet proposed in LE-001 will meet the needs for operations space
(and location) through General Plan build -out and the land -use database depicted in Table 2-1.
The build -out complement of 118 sworn officers, (47 current and 71 projected) will allow for the
maintenance of the average of about 600 square feet per officer.
Minimum Needs -based Fees, Table 3-2, following, summarizes the resulting DIFs (from
Schedule 3.2) for development to contribute $40,316,988 towards the expansion of the Law
Enforcement capabilities of the City in order to allow the City to extend the same level of service
to the City's newest citizens and businesses.
Table 3-2
Minimum Needs -based Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles
and Equipment Development Impact Costs
by DIF Land -use Type
Existing Financial Commitment Comparison Costs. The City invested, at current dollars, about
$22.1 million in the existing police station, or stated a slightly different way it would cost $22.1
million to replace the existing building. The Department staff uses 44 assorted vehicles with
various added extra equipment costing a total of $2,387,748 for an average cost of about
$54,267 per vehicle. The existing 47 sworn officers each have assigned equipment such as
personally -assigned radio and communication equipment, various leathers, armament, clothing
and safety apparel costing some $14,266 per sworn officer or a combined $670,502. Lastly,
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 26
Chapter 3 Law Enforcement Facilities, - * ■
there is $1,655,383 invested specialty equipment, computer capability and other electronic
equipment. There is also an existing positive Law Enforcement Impact Fee Fund balance of
$174,372. Combined, the City has invested, at current replacement costs, some $27,004,450
into the law enforcement assets.
When this combined replacement financial commitment cost figure is distributed over the entire
current community (via Table 3-3 following and Schedule 3.3), we find that the existing financial
commitment is quite similar to that of the calculated Law Enforcement Minimum Needs -based
DIFs (or cost), indicating that the existing community has invested nearly what be required from
future development. It also occurs due the straight line extension of the existing level of service.
Table 3-3
Existing Law Enforcement
Community Financial Commitment Comparison Data
Allodation
Development Impact
::�i tF aurr ase "f r `e
of De4elopmept
bs, R r Dolt
!Cost,
.
or Square "Foot
Detached DwellingUnits
48, 739
$3,8 ,
................ $1, 007/Unit
Attached Dwelling Units
g
$.._.��._
480,281
$980/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
$275,837
$103/Unit
Retail & Service Uses
$6,654,164
$5.067/S.F..
_.
....................................
Office Uses
$13,188,258
_
$1.389/S.F
Industrial Uses
$2,510,117
$0.331IS. F.
Institutional Uses
$47,055
$0.021IS. F.
RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
Since the Minimum Needs -based Impact Costs (necessary for expansion indicating the City's
investment in law enforcement capabilities) is nearly the same as the Existing Community
Financial Commitment Comparison, the Existing Community Financial Commitment
Development Impact Fee schedule identified in Table 3-2 and Schedule 3.2 would be the most
equitable DIF schedule to adopt.
RECAP OF RECOMMENDED LAW ENFORCEMENT DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
1. General City - Adopt Schedule 3.2.
END OF CHAPTER TEXT
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 26
Schedule 3. 1
LE-001
Additional Police Station Sace/Up qrades
$33,396,167�
LE-002
Additional PatroVDelective/Specialty/Staff Vehicles
$3,581,622
LE-003
Additional Officer Assigned Equipment
$1,012,886
LE-004
Additional Specialty Equipment
$250005
0.00%
$o F
-100-000%
$33,396.167
0.00%
$0
100.00%
$3,581.622
0.00%
$0
100.00%
$1,012,886
0.00%
$0 L
100.00%
$2 -500 flAr
ISub-Total General Plan Total Now Project Costs
$40,4�91360 so-!
10 0. �OO 9/6 S40,491.360j
ILESS:
Development Impact Fee Fund Balance
$1 74.3Z?j 0.00%1
100m%j S174,372j
ITotal General Plan Total New Project Costs
$40,316;988
0.00%1 $01
$40,316,988
I_109:0�9�1
F-SO"di --Z 4nk" td uW 3.
NOTES:
1. Costs distributed based upon recent actual twelve month El Segundo Police Department "Cal Is -for -Service" statistics.
Schedule 3.2
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Minimum Capital Needs -based Impact Costs
Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
-�
iit 3.
#tom
`' al
for
C�!
0110"pansiotrbui
�, YrlFis _ eIP1 _ a
..: Sq► Irpt !�
A
_
_ s,
Detached Owelli'n Units
3.64
20
0.621
12
0.05%
$19,268
$5,293 5.49 $964 per it
Detached Dwelling Units (-)
(73.93)
_
(203)
0.621
(126)
-0.50%
-$202,310
Attached Dwelling Units
74.73
1.959
0.604
1,183
4.71%
$1,899,467
$25.418 26,21 1 $970 perUnit
Commercial Lodi Units
2.00
232
0.063
15
0.06%
S24,085
$12.043 116.00 1 $104 per Unit
Retail &Service Uses(St (1
137.48
6,887,925
3.123
21,511
85.67%
S34,538,828
$251,228 50,101 $5.014 per S.F.
Retail & Service Uses (SF) (-
(1.00)
(11,917)
3.123
(37)
-0.15%
-$59,409
Office Uses (SF)
85.26
2,985,602
0.856
2,556
10.18%
$4,104.005
$48,135 35,018 $1.375 per S.F.
Industrial Uses (SF) +)
28.00
731.808
0204,
149
0.59%
$239,2401
$8.544 26,136 $0.327 per S. S.F.
Industrial Uses (SF) -
(166,52)
(758,027)
0.204
(155)
-0.62%
-$248,874
Institutional Use (SF)
1.00
13,504
0.124
2
0.01 %
$2,689
$2,689 13,504 $0.199 per S.F.
11 At
667777
25 1'lll'
' .. 10ti,—q,-
- 4 31 8 to €r.Enfb veld ent-tell GP prroj ..
tV
Schedule 3.3
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Existing Community Financial Commitment Comparison
Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
Ca1t
Ct0 tion
Eftfirig
Calls �, ' ;\
mil►�tsnftstridn
+ �
lrtf �
.
quit "
Af
v a trlits
...
ut Finarr�l
rtintif e L rt
.....
Act
Detached Dwelling Units
Attached Dwelling Units
1,390.20
88.60
3,822
490
0.621
0.604
2,372
296
14.25%
1.78%
$3,848YN
$480,281
$2,768
$5,421
2.75
5.53
$1,007 perUnit
980 W Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
33.10
2,691
0.063
170
1.02%
$275.837
$8,333
81.30
S103 r Unit
Retail & Service Uses (SF)
110.20
1.313.245
3.123
4,101
24.64%
$6,654,164
$60,383
11,917
$5.067 rS. F.
Office Uses (SF)
574.80
9,493,945
0.8561
8,128
48.84%
$13,188.258
$22,944
16.517
$1.389 per S.F.
Industrial Uses (SF)
1.66520
7,580,266
0.204
1,547
9.30%
$2.510,117
$1,507
4,552
$0.331 PerS.F.
Institutional Use (SF)
17.30
233,797
0.124
29
0.17%1
$47.055
$2,720
13.514
1 $0.201 BarS.F
<. 16A
79 40
`'
48,
00 tf0
27,�'
tal Ld f r edn t tit
-Iw=
ti#3 ,1 Assetsv
., rl LAW 6 ttf" ii iCt r
$1174 E`isting'>l, i a . or rni rri I' Lin lan 7 -•. .
A
Chapter 4
Fire Suppression Facilities, Vehicles, and Equipment
The Existing System. The City has invested in a system of fire facilities, response vehicles and
specialty equipment. The Fire Department responds to calls -for -service from two existing
stations. The Department has specific equipment and training for calls -for -service consisting of
fire suppression, emergency medical calls, vehicle extrication, high -angle rescue, trench and
collapse rescue, swift water rescue, confined space rescue as well as and hazardous materials
response. The Department is also available to handle other non -anticipated emergency calls -
for -service. The City has invested in a significantly asset rich system of fire suppression/rescue
system.
The fire station facilities are detailed as follows:
Fire Station #31/Headquarters is 13,355 square foot, four bays wide by two vehicles deep
facility and is located on a 52,750 square foot parcel at 314 Main Street.
Fire Station #32 is a 13,687 square foot four bay wide by two vehicle deep fire station on a
37,750 square foot parcel at 2261 East Mariposa Avenue. There are also 975 square feet of
storage structures on the parcel.
Both stations are the high end of number of bays/spaces (four bays wide by two vehicles deep)
with most cities having maybe one such large station with the reminder at two bays wide by two
vehicle deep stations. As such the City retains a great deal of response capacity. However, the
anticipated 75% increase in calls -for -service may require an increase in staffing somewhere into
the future
The land and replacement construction costs of the existing stations and training facilities is
approximately $24,487,179. Not surprisingly, the City also has a sizable fleet of equipped City -
owned response and prevention units consisting of:
• Three Type I response engines;
• Two aerial ladder vehicles;
• Two Command Vehicles (Chief and Battalion Chief);
• Two USAR vehicles (REMS/USAR);
• Four paramedic Vehicles;
• Two environmental vehicles;
• Three Fire Prevention vehicles; and,
• Five miscellaneous, administrative sedans and utility trucks.
The total investment in the 23 vehicle compliment is about $9,255,722. State or County
vehicles and equipment are not included in the financial commitment figure. The City's fire-
fighter assigned equipment and successful psychological/back-ground checks, at $14,820 per
fire-fighter, is approximately $622,400 total for the existing staff of 42 fire fighters. The specialty
equipment made up of Urban Search and Rescue, hazardous materials/mass casualty, confined
space equipment, as well as major communications equipment, reserve hose and
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 30
Chapter 4 Fire Suppression/Rescue Facilities,_ Vehicles, and Fquio ent
appurtenances total some $255,018. Lastly, the Fire Suppression Facility, Vehicle and
Equipment Impact Fee fund balance is $333,588.
The current financial commitment or investment, in fire stations, training facilities, response
fleet, specialty and communications equipment and fund balance is a sizable $34,953,965. This
figure represents what it would cost to establish the existing Department response capability at
current vehicle, equipment, land acquisition and construction costs. The relevance of this figure
will be established later in this Chapter.
Demand Upon Infrastructure Created by the Development of Underdeveloped or Vacant
Parcels. While it can be said that numerous factors are considered when determining the
number and location of fire stations in any city, it can be stated without fear of contradiction that
all new private development in the City will have an effect on the City's current ability to respond
to fire, rescue and emergency calls -for -service. The affect, simplified but not trivialized, is
twofold. Initially, each new residential and business development will create, on average, more
calls -for -service increasing the likelihood of simultaneous (and thus competing) calls -for -service.
Additionally, as development spreads further from any existing station or stations, as large-scale
development is often likely to do, the distances (and thus response times) will increase, taking
the existing fire companies out -of -service for greater periods of time.
The capacity of any fire station is finite and will reach practical limits (through call frequency and
total time). When that capacity is exceeded, the level of service afforded to existing
development will be greatly reduced. Or stated in another way, if development continues
without the addition of fire station capacity to respond, the existing stations could be
overwhelmed in terms of calls -for -service, making a timely response for emergency service a
virtual coin flip. That is, will the existing fire companies be available to respond to your needs or
will they possibly be out -of -service on a call in a different part of the community?
The Purpose of the Fee. The City staff has determined there is no need for the additional fire
station in order to continue to be able to respond to an ever-increasing number of expected
additional service demands calls, now and in the future. The two four bays wide by two vehicles
deep facilities have the capacity to absorb the additional calls -for -service anticipated from future
upsizing development, but only in terms of equipment and facilities space. Having the right
type, size, and number of fire stations in the right locations enables policy makers, the Chief and
City Council to house fire fighters, apparatus, and equipment in a rational way for maximum use
of capital resources at the lowest annual operations cost as is the case in El Segundo. While
having a two large fire stations and a base of response vehicles and specialty equipment, the
City may need to look at staffing at some point in the future.
Conversely, the penalties are high and extremely visible for poor fire station location or a lack of
one. Adverse effects are felt by the City staff, the council, and possibly by the existing
taxpayers. With poor location or no additional locations, response times via great distance or
out -of -service due to a previous call can become excessive, and if a tragedy occurs, the incident
would be well publicized.
Often, response time is mistakenly referred to for only the first -in unit, and this can be a grave
error. Instead, response time must consider all the forces necessary to place the incident under
control. If the first unit arrives within five minutes but cannot provide the necessary water flow or
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 31
harmer 4 Fire 8uoores ion/Rescue Facilities, Vehicles. gnd Equipment
perform the needed functions due to a lack of staffing, the five minute response becomes
insignificant and irrelevant. Thus, an increase in the number and type of response vehicles is
also necessary to match and equip the needed additional staff. The following sections identify
the manner in which the City plans to meet the demands of additional calls -for -service.
The Use of the Fee. The revenues generated from a properly calculated and legally -supported
Fire Suppression Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment Impact Fee would be limited to capital
costs related to that growth. The collected fees would only be used to acquire the projects
identified following and on Schedule 4.1. Conversely, the Fire Suppression Facilities DIF
receipts would not be used to repair any existing fire stations or replace any existing emergency
response vehicles. Additional equipment and facilities are planned to come on-line, as needed,
as development creates additional demands beyond the capability (volume or calls and
distance) of the existing stations. The capital acquisitions include:
FS-001, Acquire an Additional Standard Type I Engine/Pumper - Given the additional calls -
for service expected in the future, the Department would likely require one additional fully -
equipped response engine at approximately $888,117 plus an additional 20% necessary to fully
equip it with basic specialty equipment.
FS-002, Medic Response Vehicle - Acquire a fully equipped medic response vehicle. Given
the additional 2,640 additional calls -for -service in the future, most of which will likely be medic
calls, an additional medic response vehicle (and staff) will likely be required.
FS-003, Additional Training Facilities/Props - Acquire some additional props for
improvements to the City's training capacity.
FS-004, Fire Suppression/Rescue Specialty Equipment - The list would include tools,
expanded trench shoring devices, electronic and technological advancements, practice ladders
and other similar costly items. Additional devices for advanced training would be included.
FS-005, Traffic Signal Preemption System Additions - Apply and install state-of-the-art
signal preemption devices on the City's remaining non -preempted traffic signals in order to allow
for unfettered fire/medic and rescue calls -for -service. The City's anticipated 125% increase in
fire/medic/rescue calls -for -service will directly clash with the anticipated 75% increase in daily
traffic trip -miles. All efforts must be made to improve the Fire Department's ability to maintain
the NFIRS recommended five minute response @ 35 MPH by improving the Departments'
ability to control all major traffic signals during a response.
FS-006, Fire Standards of Service Study - Given the unusual generation of additional future
calls -for -service, i.e. significant upsizing of existing residences and business square feet, the
Department would benefit from an El Segundo specific Fire Standards of Services Study. Such
a study is equivalent to circulation, storm drainage or utilities Master Plan.
The proposed projects and costs of $1,861,500 are identified on Schedule 4.1. The total cost of
completing the fire infrastructure system is a net $1,527,912 after subtracting the existing
$333,588 in current Fire Suppression Facilities DIF Fund balance from the total capital needs.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 32
The Relationship.Between the deed for The Fee and The Type of Development Proiect. Fire
service response standards extended to new development should be consistent with the fire
response currently enjoyed by the City's existing citizens and business community by
constructing new facilities, or else the result will be in the deterioration of the level of service
(LOS) provided both to the existing residents and future citizens and businesses within the City
of El Segundo. It follows that it is appropriate to assess future development to contribute
additional fire facilities.
To project the impact of future development on fire services, it was first necessary to quantify
the current impact on services from each of the City's land -uses. Then, a determination of the
costs of future capital facilities necessary to meet this increased demand was made. The
following section illustrates the relative impact from each land use on fire services and facilities.
While the majority of these requests for service were made by El Segundo citizens from their
residences, a large percentage of requests were generated from new commercial and industrial
uses within the City. A survey of each land use and its existing effect on requests for calls -for -
service was conducted to project the impact of future development on fire services. The calls -
for -service survey was undertaken in a similar manner and concurrently with the process used
to determine law enforcement demand (specifically described in Chapter 3, Law Enforcement et
al.). Only requests for fire and medic/rescue services to privately held property were counted.
Requests for service to public property, such as City parks and public right-of-way or
intersections, were excluded thus distributing these calls pro-rata through the requests for
service from privately held property. This is based upon the argument that all public land serves
privately held land in some manner.
Table 4-1, The following table identifies the number of calls -for -service received by the Fire
Department during the past calendar year by the previously identified DIF categories. The
number of requests for service received by the Department during the year was then divided by
either the developed (1,000) square feet, or the existing number of units, to determine the
number of requests generated per business square foot, per dwelling unit or commercial lodging
unit.
[This space left vacant in order to place the following table on a single page].
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 33
Chapter 4 Fire Suppression/Rescue- a r
Table 4-1
Fire Suppression Calls -for -Service Generated by Land Use
(Over a 12 Month Period)
Of residential land -uses, an attached welling unit is more likely to require an emergency fire
service response at 0.480 annual responses per unit than a detached dwelling unit at 0.207
annual responses per unit. Retail use development is shown to generate the highest business
use demand at 0.231 responses per 1,000 square foot of building space, while industrial
development generates the least demand at 0.009 calls per 1,000 square feet. The lower
demand by industrial uses should be expected given the greater density of employees and
patrons in an office use establishment when compared to an industrial business of similar
square feet. However, it should be noted that while there are fewer calls for industrial
properties, significant training is required to be prepared for industrial responses, (i.e., trenching
response and hazardous materials training).
Based upon these calls -for -service and the anticipated development, future demands in the City
will increase from the 2,097 annual calls -for -service to private development by 2,641 to 4,738
calls -for -service per year. Continued development will benefit from the existence of the current
two large capacity stations and the fact that they a great deal of existing capacity.
Resulting General City ,Area DIF Schedule., The collection of the resulting DIFs through build -
out would allow the City to acquire or construct almost all of the proposed development -related
expansions and required equipment. Table 4-2, following, indicates the development impact fee
necessary to finance the cost to the additional stations, response equipment and fire-fighter
equipment.
[This space left vacant in order to place the following table on a single page].
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 34
Chapter 4 Fire Su ression/Rescue Facilities Vehicles and E ui ment.
Table 4-2
Minimum Needs -based Fire Suppression Facilities, Vehicles
and Equipment Development Impact Costs
by DIF Land -use Type
Di
iM�i-Yl>
ci'vMAprt'
st +el* t
,
6s
oim Sgltf+ ltt
.e
Detached Dwelling Units (+)
$2,292
$115/Unit
Detached Dwelling Units (-)
($24,141)
Attached Dwelling Units
_�...W..__
$541,492
$276/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
$12,071
$52/Unit
Retail & Service Uses (+)
$916,442
$0.133/S. F.
Retail & Service Uses (-)
($1, 681)
Office Uses
$80,674
(1) $0.027/S.F.
Industrial Uses (+}
$3,973
(1) $0.000/S.F.
Industrial Uses (-)
($3, 820)
Institutional Uses
$611
(1) $0.000/S.F,
(1) Allocated costs to these land uses are less than a tenth of a mil and thus truncate to zero..
W
The use of the fee is similar to the need for the fee. The DIF would be collected as the
development occurs (generally at building permit or some predetermined point in the process).
As the development occurs, the impact is generated. The collected DIF receipts would be put to
use to acquire the capital acquisition identified previously or on Schedule 4.1, without reducing
the capability of responding to calls from the existing community.
The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the Facility
Attributed to the Develo went Project. Detail regarding the full acquisition cost of the existing
project has been previously described.
The current community's commitment has been to establish the existing two -station capability
paid for via past General Fund receipts. To allow future residents to benefit by use of all of the
capital needs without contributing additional assets, would be clearly unfair to the existing
residents and would reduce their current level -of service. Table 4-3, following, summarizes the
distribution of the $34,953,965 in replacement costs of the existing assets to the existing
residents and business owners (Schedule 4.3 details this distribution).
The replacement value of the existing fire infrastructure (stations, response fleet and related
safety equipment) of $34,953,965 represents the current equity investment or community
financial commitment towards fire suppression capability by the existing community. When this
figure is distributed over the existing community in the same manner as the future costs, by the
land use demands, an investment, or financial "commitment" (or equity for that matter) per unit
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 35
Chaoter 4 Fire SuppressionlRescuew1 Eguipment
can be determined. As an example, each attached dwelling unit has invested about $3,445 into
fire suppression capital while the proposed DIF is a far lesser amount at $276 that could be
imposed upon newly developed attached dwelling units.
Table 4-3
Existing Fire Suppression Community
Financial Commitment Comparison Data
RECOMMENDED IMPACT FEES
The Existing Community Financial Commitment Comparison (Schedule 4.3) is just slightly
greater than the Minimum Needs -based Impact Costs (Schedule 4.2), which are necessary and
sufficient to maintain the established fire suppressions system in that area. Schedule 4.2 would
be a reasonable fee schedule to adopt for this infrastructure.
RECAP OF RECOMMENDED FIRE SUPPRESSION IMPACT FEES
1. General City Area- Adopt Schedule 4.2.
END OF CHAPTER TEXT
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 36
Schedule 4.1
City of El Segundo
!021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
allocation of Project Cost Estimates�Su
:Ire Suppression/Rescue Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment_
i
C a
Cyr
ewbov4 , f �
Rwr
�Pol post
F5-001 Standard Engine/Pumper, ulI Fqui pe . KOOK
i.000/0
0
100.00%
$1,050,000
FS-002 Medic Response Vehicle, Fully Equipped _ 591,500
0,00%.
$0
100.00%
$91. 500
FS 3 Additional Training FacllilieslProps $250.0DO
0,00%
so
100.00%
$250.000
- FS 4 Fire Sup2ressionRescue Sp al Equipment $150,000
Traffic S` naI Preeiription System Additions $225,400
FS t 6 Fire Standards of ServiceStud — $95,000
Stag -Total General Plan Total New Project Costsl $. 1, 0
0 000/0
0,00%
0.00%
TOO.,
$0
so
$0
01
100.00%
100,00%
100.00%
100.00%
$150,000
5225,O00
$95,00
'$ , 1,500
LESS;_
Development Impact Fee Fund Balance .5$S 0.000/11- $0 11 100,00% $3 3,585
Total General Plan Total New Project CostsI $ ,5 7e91 O 00% 0 1-00.00% $1 527,912
EMU to'sth
NOTES:
1. Costs distribution based upon the City of El Segundo Fire Department "Calls -for -Service" statistics.
W
v
�%
c
eel
Lj:
LC
ti
vi
vi
vi
vi
v
;
d
a
CL
as
F
N
44
r
O
O
O
Y
r
�0
V
NOO
O�
„Y'
0
M
N
CO
M
�O
CD
�_
CID
N
i77�
y
tJ�.
Jr d;
If
N
p)
N
C)
N
sY
W
V
n
cri
r
o
N
N
RO
'IT
(O
CIZ
OOO
C'i
N
V
N
(6
EA
a00
CY)
Cl).
*�z
613
6
69
�
69
9�
--t
O
m
O
V
O
ODC
C�
�
N
O
N
u7
N
O
40'7
to
O
Qi
O
to
O
O
O
�� H0
co,
h
R�
lY
�IF�,
......
f-
O
I—
O
O
Co
a)
OD
SO
c7
ti
O
0
O
0
t�
N
O
N
O
a
O
O
O
N
�O
N
O
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
lrvry� bt' G
N
Cl
O
M
N
CN
O
O
Y V
O
y, a
yq,
N
O
N
C
O)
c0
00
O
Lq
W
N.
{
OD
CO
t0
OI
N
4h
�f.-
Ln
I
/l , .
R
M
c7
O
W
O
(D
O
N
O
Y
LL
N
+
cm
cm
+C
N
lL
lL
(�
c
c
N
N
0
cc
U)
38
Schedule 4.3
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Existing Community Financial Commitment Comparison
Fire SuppressionlRescue Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
iT
P"crwavhw
'A vwaga(M
'ir unir
-0 -of-
Detached Dwelling Units 1,390.20
3,822
0.207
790
37.67%
$13,168,160
$9,472
2.75
$3,445 per Unit
Attacilted Dwelling Units 88.60
490
0.480
235
11.21%
$3.917,111
$44,211
5.53
$7,994 er Unit
Commercial Lod in Units 33.10
2,691
0.089
240
11.44%
$4.000,454
$120.860
81.30
$1,487 per Unit
Retail & Service Uses (SF) 110.20
1,313,245
0,231
304
14.560A
$5,067,241
$45,982
11,917
$3.859 Ber S.F.
Office Uses (SF) 574.80
9.493,945
0.047
446
21.27%
$7,434,177
$12,934
16,517
$0.783 per S.F.
Industrial Uses (SF). 1.665.20
7,580,266
0.009
70
3.34%1
$1,166,799
$701
4,552
$0.154 Rer S.F.
[Institutional Use (SF) .17.30
233,797
0.051
12
0.57%1
$200.023
L__ $11,562
13,5141
$0.856 per S.F.
Chapter 5
Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) System
The following Chapter will discuss the Circulation System capital improvements consisting of
major street segments, traffic signals and bridges required for the City through build -out of the
existing City General Plan as identified in the Land -use Database Table in Chapter 2. Initially,
RCS recommends continuation of the calculation of a comprehensive DIF schedule covering all
components of the circulation system within the General Plan area, those three components
consisting of major street segments, signals, bridge improvements and roadbed protecting
drainage improvements. The reasons are practical in that combining this infrastructure will
provide greater flexibility in establishing priorities in what is essentially a singular transportation
issue with a common nexus, a combination of trip -end (5) generation and average trip distance.
It is not uncommon that a single transportation capital project involves both a street
improvement and signal improvement.
The Existing System. The City currently has and maintains an extensive system of roadways
available for transportation of goods and services, as well as for educational, recreational, and
social purposes. Streets that fall under the jurisdiction of the City of El Segundo are classified
as one of three types of roadways for the purposes of this Report. (6) The types of roadways are
defined in the El Segundo General Plan Circulation Element.
Major Arterials
Major arterials function to connect traffic from collectors to the major freeway system as
well as to provide access to adjacent land uses. They move large volumes of
automobiles, trucks and buses, and link the principal elements within the City to other
adjacent regions. These facilities handle inter -city and intra-city vehicular trips in the
magnitude of 40,000 to 75,000 vehicles per day (vpd). They should be planned for eight
lanes of through traffic. In the majority of cases in El Segundo, curb parking will be
prohibited during peak periods. Bicycle traffic would travel with vehicular flow or be
separated by a path behind the curb. Raised medians can be used to separate opposing
flows of vehicular traffic as necessary. Access points, (i.e., driveways and minor
intersecting streets) should be minimized.
Separate left -turn lanes at major signalized intersections would be mandatory with
double left -turn lanes the rule rather than the exception. Separate right -turn lanes which
also serve as bus loading areas would be considered at locations indicating high turn
volumes. At some intersections up to three left turn and up to two right turn lanes may
be provided, if needed, and if acquisition of additional right-of-way is practical.
Secondary Arterials
Secondary arterials are similar to major arterials in function. They connect traffic from
collectors to the major freeway system. They move large volumes of automobiles, trucks
and buses, and link the principal elements within the City to other adjacent regions.
5 A trip is defined as a series of one or more trip -ends. A trip -end is a single stop in a trip. As an example, a drive from home to
work is a trip. Each individual stop along the way along the way to drop children off at a school, buy gas, get a lunch, drop off
laundry and the ultimate arrival at work or home is a trip -end. The term trap has no effect on the calculation and only means a drive.
e Allays are a part of the City's Circulation System but are not included in this list.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 40
Chapter 5 Circulation Streets Signals, Bridges) Facilities
These streets handle intra-city trips in the magnitude of 25,000 to 55,000 vpd and are
not as continuous in length as major arterials. At least six through lanes should be
provided to handle these needs along with single or double left -turn lanes (the latter
preferably) at major signalized intersections. Curb parking would be prohibited during
peak periods. Bicycle traffic would have to use paths behind the curb, separate bicycle
lanes, or travel in the street with autos, trucks, and buses.
Collector Streets
The collector street is intended to serve as an intermediate route to handle traffic
between local streets and arterials. In addition, collector streets provide access to
abutting property. Collector streets are anticipated to carry traffic volumes between
15,000 to 40,000 vpd and serve important internal functions within the community. A
collector street may have one through lane per direction; but more realistically, it should
have a minimum of two through lanes (at least during peak periods). In some cases, a 4-
lane collector may have a median divider. Curb parking can be accommodated if
abutting property owners have insufficient off-street parking. The function of the
collector, however, is to "collect" vehicles from the local street system and transport
them to the arterial system as efficiently as possible.
Signalization of collector/local street intersections should be timed to permit the majority
of the traffic flow on the collector while allowing local street access. Restriction of free
flow along collectors due to unwarranted STOP controls should be discouraged.
Local Streets
Local streets principally provide vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle access to property
abutting the public right-of-way. Cross sections of local streets vary, depending on the
abutting land uses, parking requirements, street trees, and other considerations. Where
both sides of the street are served equally in residential areas, the common right-of-way
width for a local street is 60 feet with a 36-foot pavement width.
In multi -family areas where there is continuous parking throughout the day, a minimum
of 40 feet of pavement may be required to provide room for two moving lanes of traffic in
addition to street parking on both sides. In commercial and industrial areas, a minimum
pavement width of 40 feet is considered necessary. In industrial areas, consideration of
the predominant type of trucking, and whether or not maneuvering of trailers must be
provided, may require a pavement width of more than 44 feet.
When pavement widths exceed 40 feet on local streets, rights -of -way should be
increased above 60 feet. Each parkway width should be 12 feet, including landscaped
area and sidewalk. Sidewalk width should be 4 feet in residential areas and 5 feet in
commercial or industrial areas.
The overall system design of local streets can greatly affect traffic. Unduly long streets
build up traffic volumes and act as collectors. Cross streets and intersections with acute
angles are likely to contribute to accidents. Good practice precludes carrying local
streets into arterials since such intersections create unnecessary friction points and
cause related congestion on the arterials. A far better approach is to bring local streets
into collectors which then feed into arterials.
In general, construction of local streets is the responsibility of the developer who then dedicates
the completed street to the City. The City will accept these local street improvements and the
responsibility to maintain them if they meet the City's requirements. For these reasons and the
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 41
errrft7mff 7r, r-
fact that local streets do not exhibit City-wide benefits to all circulation system users, the cost of
all "local" streets are not included in the Circulation System financial commitment calculation or
the proportionality test.
GENERAL CITY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
Demand -Upon ors Infrastructure Created by the Development of Undeveloped Parcels.
Undeveloped parcels create few trip -ends beyond an occasional visit to the site for weed
abatement purposes, planning purposes or to consider a sale or development of the vacant
parcel. None of these trip -ends are on a routine basis. However, a developed parcel will
generate a statistically predictable amount of trip -ends and trip -miles, depending upon the
specific land use of the development. Thus, it can be stated that a vacant parcel, when
developed into a specific use, i.e., residential or business, will generate more traffic than it did
when it was vacant. Similarly, a change in the use of the property may increase or decrease the
number of trip -ends, i.e., the demolition of a low trip -generating insurance office into
reconstruction as a new a high trip generating fast-food restaurant.
All new development contributes to cumulative traffic impacts, which are difficult to measure and
mitigate on a project -by -project basis, but which have significant and widespread cumulative
impacts on the City's existing road system. Factors that will increase the competition for
existing major street segment lane miles existing in General City area include the following:
The construction of just under 9.8 million square feet of private business uses on
the under or undeveloped acres will generate 599,861 additional daily trip -miles
or about 93.2% of the total new trip -miles expected at GP build -out. This figure
could vary significantly depending upon the type of commercial uses constructed
and possible zoning changes or conditional use permits issued.
An increase in the City's General Plan full-time population through the
construction of about 1,776 additional dwelling units contributing approximately
38,914 new daily trip -miles or just 6.7% of the newly expected daily trip -miles.
The addition of about 232 commercial lodging units will generate about 4,231
daily trip -miles, or about 0.7% percent of the total new trip -miles.
When all (or most) of the available vacant land within the City's limits is developed, the City can
expect an additional 643,006 daily trip -miles. For perspective, the City currently experiences
roughly estimated 836,628 daily trip -miles from/to the existing residences and businesses. The
roughly 643,006 newly anticipated, development generated trip -miles represent about a 77%
increase over the current 836,628 daily trip -miles.
The Purpose of the Fee. In the City, most of the planned arterials and collectors exist in some
form, perhaps not yet fully widened to allow for the full number of lanes. Stated another way,
there are few opportunities to construct any completely new arterial/collector lane miles. Thus
the collection of Circulation System DIF receipts becomes imperative as a revenue source to
finish off any existing, but, limited or incomplete, or not yet maximized roads. Additionally, the
fees would be used to complete the system of signals that insures the smooth movement of
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 42
Charter 5 Circulation (Streets. Sianals. Bridges) Facilities
vehicles through intersections. Efficient signalization (i.e. turn pockets and fully actuated left -
turn signals) is also important to keep vehicular traffic moving at the optimum efficiency through
major intersections.
Included are transportation projects needed to alter existing arterials, connectors or collectors
that currently exist, but due to additional trip -ends are becoming ineffective at moving vehicles.
The City anticipates approximate net increase of 2.9 million square feet of office uses to be built
at GP build -out and approximately 6.8 million additional square feet of retail uses (these include
retail and service uses). The result of these actions alone will generate an additional 601,781
additional trip miles within the City generated from commercial uses alone. When combined
with the additional 1,776 anticipated residential units, the total increase of trip miles within the
City will be a net 643,006. This significant increase in trip miles will likewise increase the
demand for limited lane miles throughout the circulation system. The proper funding of
circulation projects is critical to maintaining the current LOS for the citizens and business
community of the City. New arterials/collectors, traffic signals, and road additions will help
preserve the current LOS, while DIFs should be used to protect the general fund.
Traffic planners have long known that the critical constraint in a typical roadway network is the
intersections. While the street capacity may be theoretically adequate to carry traffic volumes at
GP build -out, motorists may experience congestion and even gridlock at the intersections of the
street. While the City of El Segundo will certainly undertake any remaining major street
widening projects, an equally important component of traffic circulation is the installation of
traffic signals and lane reconfiguration at critical intersections in the City. However, as
previously stated, there are extremely limited opportunities to expand major road lane miles.
The importance of traffic signals is two -fold. First, the City can build only so many major
collector/arterial streets and there are limits as to how many extra lanes they will have. Second,
north -south collectors will, by definition, intersect with east -west collectors assuring that
someone will have to stop, either at a stop sign or a traffic signal. The traffic carrying capacity
of each collector can only be maximized by assuring orderly flow of traffic by signalizing those
intersecting collectors.
The collection of Circulation System DIFs is not intended to eliminate the time-honored practice
of the developer constructing the full width roadway and being reimbursed for the portion of
costs greater than would otherwise be required of the developer in the calculated simple impact
fee amount. This impact fee calculation and resulting fee collection would simply improve the
City's capability for such reimbursements.
Schedule 5.1 identifies $130,175,000 in capacity increasing circulation improvements. Roughly
27.0% of this amount, or $35,175,000, has been identified as the responsibility of development
as these projects will increase the capacity of the circulation system. The remainder, 73.0% or
$95,000,000 are projects that are not development -generated and will require non-DIF revenue
sources. The individual projects and costs are identified on Schedule 5.1 at the end of the
Chapter.
The Use of the Fee. The collection of Circulation System DIF schedule receipts would be used
to construct the projects (or portions of projects) identified in Schedule 5.1 at the conclusion of
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 43
Chapter 5 Circulation Streets Signals, Bridges) Facilities
this Chapter's text. The collected fees will be used to create traffic signals, road additions, and
roadway reconfigurations with which to accommodate the additional 643,006 daily trip -miles
expected from further development of the City.
ST-001, Park Place Extension Grade Separation Project - Construct a 1,000 linear foot
overpass to connect Park Place from a point 950' east of Pacific Coast Highway to Park Place
at a point 875 feet north of Rosecrans. The overpass is necessary to connect the two separate
Park Place segments over several railroad lines.
ST-002, New Pedestrian, Bike Lane, Slow Vehicle Network Improvements - Construct
additional, construct additional Class I, II III and IV bike lanes throughout the City. Additional
bike lanes will make the roadway safer for cyclists and vehicle transit alike. CALTRANS defines
the four Bike Lanes Classes as follows:
Bike Route Class I bikeways, also known as bike paths or shared -use paths, are facilities
with exclusive right of way for bicyclists and pedestrians, away from the roadway and with
cross flows by motor traffic minimized. Some systems provide separate pedestrian
facilities. Class I facilities support both recreational and commuting opportunities.
Common applications include along rivers, shorelines, canals, utility rights -of -way, railroad
rights -of -way, within school campuses, or within and between parks.
Bike Lane Class II bikeways are bike lanes established along streets and are defined by
pavement striping and signage to delineate a portion of a roadway for bicycle travel. Bike
lanes are one-way facilities, typically striped adjacent to motor traffic travelling in the same
direction. Contraflow bike lanes can be provided on one-way streets for bicyclists travelling
in the opposite direction.
Bike Route Class III bikeways, or bike routes, designate a preferred route for bicyclists on
streets shared with motor traffic not served by dedicated bikeways to provide continuity to
the bikeway network. Bike routes are generally not appropriate for roadways with higher
motor traffic speeds or volumes. Bike routes are established by placing bike route signs
and optional shared roadway markings (sharrow) along roadways.
Bicycle Boulevard, A Bicycle Boulevard is a shared roadway intended to prioritize bicycle
travel for people of all ages and abilities. Bicycle Boulevards are typically sited on streets
without large truck or transit vehicles, and where traffic volumes and speeds are already
low, or can be further reduced through traffic calming.;
Buffered Bike Lane, A buffered bike lane provides greater separation from an adjacent
traffic lane and/or between the bike lane and on -street parking by using chevron or
diagonal markings. Greater separation can be especially useful on streets with higher
motor traffic speeds or volumes.
Separated Bikeway/Cycle Track, A Class IV separated bikeway, often referred to as a
cycle track or protected bike lane, is for the exclusive use of bicycles, physically separated
from motor traffic with a vertical feature. The separation may include, but is not limited to,
grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible barriers, or on -street parking. Separated
bikeways can provide for one-way or two-way travel. By providing physical separation
from motor traffic, Class IV bikeways can reduce the level of stress, improve comfort for
more types of bicyclists, and contribute to an increase in bicycle volumes and mode share.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 44
.. Circulation...-
ST-003, Roadway Maintenance Due to New Development Use - While future development
will indeed increase wear and tear on the City's many arterials and collectors, maintenance
costs are not valid uses of impact fees. It is merely use of an existing asset. Thus the City will
need to find other revenue sources for general maintenance of the street system.
ST-004, Circulation Master Plan — Undertake a Circulation Master Plan study to determine the
effect of new and significant up -sizing development upon the City's existing circulation system
and determine state -of -art solutions to the new demands. The result could alter many of the
projects described herein.
The Relationship Between the bleed for the Fee and The Type of Develol2ment Proiect.
Schedule 5.1 identifies the additional traffic to be generated by new development, by type of
development. The technical volume, Trip Generation (Manual) 7th Edition, produced by the
Institute of Traffic Engineers, has been used to identify the nexus, or relationship between the
type of development and the projected number of trips that development will generate.
A 150-unit attached dwelling development would generate about 3,465 daily trip -miles and a
one -acre retail/service development would generate a similar 3,501 daily trip -miles. Each would
pay its proportionate share of the total 643,006 newly created daily trip -miles expected in the
City's limits at GP build -out. In the case of the detached dwelling residential development, the
daily trip -miles generated by the 150 new residences represents about 0.5% of the total 643,006
new trip -miles anticipated at build -out, thus they would be required to pay or construct projects
on the list to an amount equal to 0.5% of the total development -related project costs. The three
acre retail/service/office development, also representing 0.5% of the total new daily trip -miles,
would also finance 0.5% of the development -related project list.
Circulation System Cost Distribution by Average Land -use Trip Frequency/Distance
New Trip Adjustment for Pass -by or Diverted Trips. Schedule 5.2 contains a sub -schedule that
identifies adjustments to new total trip -ends. As an example, an acre of general
retail/service/office uses (with a 0.40 FAR) would be expected, on average, to generate about
3,347 trip -ends daily. However, approximately 15% of those trip -ends, or about 562 trip -ends
per day, are pass -by trip -ends. The trip -end is not truly an end but is actually one in a series
of stops, i.e. at various commercial establishments, with a different location such as a residence
as the final trip -end or destination of the series of trip -ends. In order to be considered a pass -
by trip, the location of the stop must be contiguous to the generator route ('), i.e. the route that
would have been used even if the temporary stop had not been made. The Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) indicates that:
Thus when forecasted trips based upon the trip generation rates are distributed to the
adjacent streets, some reduction is made to account for those trips already there that
will be attracted to the proposed development.(8)
7 An example of a diverted trip -end would be a single trip -end where along the way from work, a motorists evening drive deviates
from the normal route taken home at perhaps a preferred grocery store, mail drop, or to pick up a child from a piano lesson before
continuing home. Each of these three stops would be considered d'Fverted trip -ends.
Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers„ 1000 141h 'Street, Suite 300 "rest, Washington D.C. 20005-3438. Definition
of terms, page 147.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 45
Chapter 5 Circulation JStreets, Signals, Bridges) Facilities
Pass -by trip -ends are fully adjusted (reduced at 100%) from the average trip -ends (per day)
generated by the seven land -uses identified in Schedules 5.2 and 5.3.
A diverted trip is similar to a pass -by trip -end in that it is an extra stop between, as an example,
a motorists' work site and his or her residence. The diverted trip differs slightly from the pass -by
trip in that it requires a minor deviation from the normal generator route and the temporary stop.
In short, a diverted trip creates a separate side trip using additional (and different) lane miles
from that of the normal route from the motorist's place of employment and his or her
residence.(6) Using our example of one acre of general retail/service/office uses, roughly 1,499
of the expected trips would involve a diversion to that basic planned trip. We could expect these
trips to increase the traffic volume of the generator route, but only for brief distances. The ITE
states that diverted trips:
are produced from traffic volume on roadways within the vicinity of the generator (route) and
require a diversion from that roadway to another roadway with access to the site. These
roadways could include streets or freeways adjacent to the generator but without access to the
generator.(9)
These diverted trips will be adjusted (reduced at 50%) from the full trip count for each of the
land -uses identified in Chapter 2.
Again, the sub -schedule at the bottom of Schedule 5.2 indicates the total trip -ends and the
reduction due to the number pass -by trips (at 100%) and diverted trips (at 50%). The trip pass -
by and diversion percentages were generated and are supported by a study conducted by the
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) in conjunction with various U.S. and
California government agencies (10)
Additionally, the same SANDAG data schedule referenced above provides information for a trip
distance factor component to the nexus. Based upon that data, a trip to an industrial work -site
has the greatest distance at 9.0 miles. A trip to an office averages 8.8 miles, residential trips
average 7.9 miles, a trip from a hotel or motel (once in residence) averages 7.6 miles, and an
average trip to a retail/service site is the shortest at 4.3 miles. This indicates that drivers
generally appear willing travel further distances to work and for treatment at medical offices than
they are to shop. Both frequency (trip -ends) and distance (average miles per trip) have been
combined into the nexus by multiplying average trip frequency by average trip distance. Trip -
mile rates have been calculated for the seven DIF land -use categories. They are demonstrated
at the bottom of schedule 5.2 at the end of the Chapter.
The Relationshio Between the Use of the Fee and the Type of Development Paying the Fee.
There is very little difference between this and the above category. The fee collected will be
based on the projected number of trip -ends the proposed development will generate in
9 Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1099 141h Street NW, Suite 300 west, Washington D.C. 2005-3438, Definition of Terms, page
146.
10 Trafic Generators, San Diego Association of Governments, 401 B Street, Suite 800, San Diego, CA 92101. Brief Guide to Traffic
Generators Rates. Compiled in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. U.S. Department of
Transportation, The California Department of Transportation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, July 1995.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 46
Chapter, __ Bridge
relationship to the total 643,006 net additional projected trip -miles at build -out. Any amount
imposed as a Circulation System DIF will be placed in a separate fund (collecting interest) and
is to be used only on the projects identified on Schedule 5.1 as development related.
From time to time the City may require an applicant for a private project to construct a street or
signal improvement (or portion thereof) that is on the list of required improvements at the end of
this Chapter. This method is often undertaken to expedite the project at the request of the
applicant/developer. The developer should receive a credit for any monies expended on this
required improvement against their Circulation System DIF.
The RelationshiI2 Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the Facility
Attributed to the Development Project. The calculation of the Circulation System DIFs is based
upon the recognition that differing types of developments generate differing amounts of trip -
miles. The fee is based upon the projected number of trips generated by the proposed private
development project. Circulation DIF receipts will be accumulated until they reach the amount
that could construct a meaningful project to alleviate or mitigate the demands of those new
developments. Table 5-1 (summarized from Schedule 5.2) on the following page identifies the
Minimum Needs -based Circulation System DIF schedule for the City of El Segundo's General
Plan area.
Table 5-1
City of El Segundo's General Plan Area
Minimum Needs -based Circulation System
Development Impact Costs
by DIF Land -use Type
At�ocat(r~t
velpp116t I;ga"'a;,
/p
uptifw��
Gf qq
f7 �JI� .: `
�r�
r
r'�64uadPr�'„,�
.
� ��u , � ,,, a,�'
q „ ✓,
c
Detached Dwelling Units (+),_
$37,855
$1,893/Unit
Detached Dwelling Units (-)
($384, 077)
Attached Dwelling Units
$2,474,973
...._._.._ $1,263/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
$231,453
$968/Unit
Retail/Service/Office Uses (+)
$26,333,575
_ $3.823/Unit
Retail/Service/Office Uses
Office Uses
$6,523,835
$2.185/S.F.
Industrial Uses (+)
$857,430
$1.172/S.F.
Industrial Uses (-)
($888,174)
Institutional Uses
$33,698
$2.495/S.F.
This set of proposed fees would generate the Minimum needs amount of revenue necessary to
construct the needed street, signal, and roadway reconfiguration projects. These figures then
need to be compared to the financial commitment demonstrated by the existing community.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 47
Chante.r.. ,, � a -Mm
Alternative Cost Methodology, A more precise calculation of costs for specific types of land -
uses (i.e., banks, hospitals, convalescent residences, etc.) can be determined by multiplying the
average cost per trip of $54.70 by the applicable daily trip -mile rate. An example of this
calculation can be found at the bottom of Schedule 5.2 and applied to Table 5-2, on the
following page. These tables list trip rates and costs for various residential, resort, industrial
and commercial developments. A fee system based on a lengthy schedule of trip rates
theoretically provides more accuracy and therefore financial commitment in determining specific
uses' impact on the City's circulation system, but at the same time may increase the City's costs
to administer the fee. A more extensive listing of traffic generators by land use is available in
Trip Generation as published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, New York, NY.
[This space left vacant to place the following table on a single page].
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 48
Cara ter 5 Circulation Streets Signals, Bridges), Facilities
Table 5-2
Detail of Circulation System Minimum Needs -based Development (rounded)
Impact Fees for Specific General City Area Commercial/Service/Office Uses
RESORVTOURIST (per Unit or Entry Door):
Hotel (multi -story)
6.29
7.6
0.5
23.9
$54.70
$1,307.33 /Room
All Suites Hotel
Motel
3.77
4.34
7.6
7.6
0.5
0.51
14.3
16.5
$54.70
1 $54.70
$782.21 /Room
1 $902.55 /Room
INDUSTRIAL (per 1,000 SF):
General Light industrial
6.17 9.0
0.5
27.8
$54.70
$1,520.66 /KSF
Heavy Industrial
5.97 9.0
0.5
26.9
$54.70
$1,471.43 /KSF
Manufacturing
2.73 9.0
0.5
12.3
$54.70
$672.81 /KSF
Warehousing
4.39 9.0
0.5
19.8
$54.70
$1,083.06 /KSF
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS USES (per 1,000 SF):
Office Park
9.06
8.8 0.5
40.0
$54.70
$2,188.00 /KSF
Research Park
7.18
8.8 0.5
31.6
$54.70
$1,728.52 /KSF
Business Park (Specific)
11.29
8.8 0.5
49.7
$54.70
$2, 718.59 /KSF
RETAIUSERVICE USES (per 1,000 SF):
Building Material Store
Garden Center
29.35
23.45
4.3
4.3
0.5
0.5
63.1
50.4
$54.70
$54.70
$3,451.57 /KSF
$2, 756.88 /KSF
Movie Theater
2.47
4.3
0.51
5.3
$54.70
$289.91 /KSF
Church
5.92
4.3
0.5
12.7
$54.70
$694.69 /KSF
Medical -Dental Office
22.21
8.8
0.5
97.7
$54.70
$5,344.19 /KSF
General Office Building
7.16
8.8
0.5
31.5
$54.70
$1,723.05 /KSF
Shopping Center
30.20
4.3
0.5
64.9
$54.70
$3,550.03 /KSF
Hospital
Discount Center
11.42
62.93
4.3
4.3
0.5
0.5
24.6
135.3
$54.70
$54.70
$1,345.62 /KSF
$7,400.91 /KSF
High -Turnover Restaurant
8.90
4.3
0.5
19.1
$54.70
$1,044.77 /KSF
Convenience Market
43.57
4.3
0.5
93.7
$54.70
$5,125.39 /KSF
Walk-in Bank
13.97
4.3
0.5
30.0
$54.70
$1,641.00 /KSF
Other: (not available per KSF )
Cemetary (per acre)
3.07
4.3
0.5
6.6
$54.70
$361.02
/Acre
Service Station/Market (av
107.69
4.3
0.5
231.5
$54.70
$12,663.05
/FP/Day
Service Station/Car Wash
99.35
4.3
0.5
213.6
$54.70
$11,683.92
/FP/Day
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 49
Si�gnals, Brid#
Table 5-3 following, (and summarized from Schedule 5.3) identifies the assets of the City's
existing circulation system (at current replacement costs). The total system costs $247,839,677
consists of the existing circulation plan arterial and collector lanes at $123,600,000, major
roadways right-of-way at $43,535,377, traffic signals and major intersections at $69,125,000,
directional and street signs at $3,069,300, and $8,510,000 in street lighting. When these
existing assets are distributed over the existing community, using the same nexus factor (e.g.
trip -miles) used for distribution of future costs, the existing community has contributed the
following, on average, by land use:
Table 5-3
Existing Circulation System Community
Financial Commitment
Comparison Data
�►relo�er� Illct„
�yyndlus,
o Dely Myra
'C�y7w,Ay,
yyW�y✓v yr/ty
P +r'N'+F�"I,'r"r •'Sty,
Detached Dwelling Units
$39,161,565
$10,246/Unit
Attached Dwelling Units
$3,352,507
$6,842/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
$14,539,283
$5,403/Unit
Retail/Service/Office Uses
$27,188,578
$20.703/Unit
Office Uses .......... ........
$112,340,550
....... ��_w................._...........
$11.833/S.F.
Industrial Uses
$48,096,648
$6.345/S.F,
Institutional Uses
$3,160,546
$13.518/S.F,
It should be noted that the existing community has contributed, on average, significantly more
than would be required of future development to meet the minimum needs for build -out and all
users. While there is clearly excess capacity in the existing system, it is usually the result of the
existing community absorbing the initial street construction costs including the costly right-of-
way acquisition, the later part of the community often finances only the smaller segment length
widening's which maximize the street segments capacity.
Recommended Circulation. S stern DII" Schedule. The adoption of Schedule 5.2 at the end of
the chapter (and as summarized in table 5-1), as the Circulation System DIF Schedule would
generate enough capital to construct the facilities needed by the new development. In addition,
the City should adopt the application of the per trip -mile fee from the bottom of Schedule 5.2
and multiplied by the specific use Table 5-2 or the more extensive listing of traffic generation by
land use available in Trip Generation as published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers,
New York, N.Y.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 50
Chapter 5 Circulation Streets Signals, Srid e Facilities
Construction Responsibility vs. DIF Payment. This DIF assumes that each developer,
contiguous to a planned Major Street would:
• Dedicate the needed right-of-way and would be responsible for last lane of
asphalt concrete or FCC;
• Construct the parkway landscaping; and,
• Construct the curb, gutter, sidewalk, striping and street lights.
However, construction of the extra lanes would be financed by the Circulation System DIF,
contributed to by all development within the City limits, thereby leveling the playing field
between privately held parcels contiguous to a four lane collector as opposed to those privately
held parcels contiguous to a two lane minor arterial. A given developer may undertake the
actual construction of the extra lanes at the same time that they construct the first lane, but they
would receive a reimbursement for construction of those extra lanes. However, it is important to
note that if the developer constructs all or a portion of a road, signal or other circulation system
improvement, and that project is not listed on Schedule 5.1, that project is assumed to be a
condition of approval and not subject to a reimbursement or credit from the City from this DIF
Fund. In short, the City cannot give a credit for a project that is not partially financed through this
calculation.
The DIF Adoption Ordinance should contain the necessary language for identifying the process
for calculating the reimbursement amount for the construction of extra lanes.
RECAP OF RECOMMENDED CIRCULATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
1. Create a DIF Fund titled Circulation System Impact Fee Fund,
2. Adopt Schedule 5.2 for most land -uses and the $54.70 per trip -end rate on Schedule 5.2
to be used in conjunction with the most current edition of ITE manual (and the trip
frequency/length figures (via SANDAG) at the bottom of Schedule 5.2) as well as Table
5-2 for unusual land -uses.
END OF CHAPTER TEXT
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 51
Schedule 5.1
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Allocation of Project Cost Estimates
Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) System
ST-001 Park Place Extension Grade Separation Project
$100,000,000
75.00%
$75,000,000
2 00%
$25,000,0001
ST-002 New Pedestrian, Bike Lane, Slow Vehicle Network Improvements
N$20 000,000
50.00%
$10,000,000
50.00%
$10,000,000
ST-003 Roadway Maintenance Due to New Development Use
$1 0'000-000
$1
100.00%
$10,000,000
0.00%
$o
ST-004 Circulation Master Plan
$1A75OOOOOn
0.00%
$n
1010.00%
$175,000
Sub -Total General Plan Total New Projects 1 $1 �,175,000 1 72,98%1 $95,000,000 11 27.029/61 $35.175,000 1
LESS:
Circulation Development Impact Fee Fund Balance (none)
0
Other:
$0
$0
0.00%1
$0
Other:
$0
—100.00%1
100.00%1
$0
0.00%1
$0
Development Impact Pee Fund Balance Total
1 $0
0=%]
$0
0.00%1
$0
JTotal Net General Plan Project Costs
$130,175,000
72M%J S95,
27,02%1 S35.175,000
NOTES:
1. Costs distribution based upon a frequency and distance factor.
(_n
rQ
Schedule 5.2
City of FJ Segundo
2021.22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Minimum Capital Needs -based Impact Costs
Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) System
\ \
a1
dp�n
4
Adfi�
e _
.,)nf'
:�
v
Cclri
2 Im C
r
Detached Dwelling Units(+)
3.64
20
34.588
692
0.11%
S37,8551 $10,4001 5.495 $1,893 per Unit
DetachedUnits(-)
(73.9)
(203)
34.588
(7,021)
-1.09%
- 3 ,077
'Dwelling
Attached Dwelling Units
74.73
1,959
23.095
45,243
7.04%
$2,474,973 $3 ,' 19 26.214 $1,263 per Unit
Commercial Lod ing Units
2.00
232
18.239
4,231
0.66%
$231.453 $115,7261 116.00 $998 per Unit
Retail & Service Uses (SF) (
137.48
6.887,925
69.888
481,383
74.86%
$26,333,575 $191,5451 50.101 $3.823 per S.F.
Retail & Service Uses (SF)(
(1.00)
(11,917)
69.888
(833)
-0.13%
-$45,568
Office Uses (SF)
85.26
2,985,602
39.944
119,257
1 18.55%
--
$6,523,835 $76,5171 35,018 $2.185 per S.F.
Industrial Uses (SF)
28.00
731,808
21.419
15,674
2.44%
$857,430 $30.6231 26,136 $1.172 per S.F.
Industrial Uses (SF) (-)
(166.52)
(758.027)
21.419
(16,236)
-2.53%
-$888,174
institutional Use (SF)
1.00
13.504
45.634
616
0.10%
$33,698 $33,6981 13.504 $2.495 erS.F.
- TOTAL
90.66
643,006
1 100.00%1
$35,175,000 in Development -related Circulation General Plan Pro`ec
_
1t$3
�.
m n
17 00 STl1 �aiiirri`
Trip -ends Adjustment
Calculation
Daily
Total
Trip -ends
Percent of
Diverted
Trips
Diverted
Trip -end %
Adjustment
Diverted Percent
Trip -end of Pass -by
Percent Trips
Combined
Diverted and
Pass -by
-
Remaining Adjusted Trip
Trip % as Rate, Adjustment
Adjustment % % X Total trips
Average Trip -ends
Trip X Length
Length X 50%
Land Use Title
Detached Dwelling Units (+)
9.57
11
0.50
5.5 3.0
8.5
91.5% 8.76
7.9 34.588
Attached Dwelling Units
6.39
11
0.50
5.5 3.0
8.5
91.5% 5.85
7.9 23.095
Commercial Lodging Units -
6.23
38
0.50
19.0 4.0
23.0
77.0% 4.80
7.6 18.239
Retail & Service Uses (SF) (
50.01
40
0.50
20.0 15.0
36.0
32.51
1 4.31 69.888
Office Uses (SF)
10.50
191
0.50
9.51 4.0
13.51
---66.0%1
-
86.5%1 9.08
8.81 39.944
Industrial Uses (SF) +)
5.38
191
0.50
9.5 1 2.01
11.51
88.6%1 4.761
9,01 21.419
Institutional Use (SF)
11.99
191
0.50
9.51 4.01
13.5186.50/6
10.37
1 8,81 45.634
Or
W
Schedule 5.3
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Existing Community Financial Commitment Comparison
Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) System
Undave7 Trip -end and
it P '
A1140cadon of '
a ge L!tra#s
t?evelop arr ,"
finialLen
1 C cr1 frorra
�r n i -
rtis�at on r r
r Unit-
Pro sed Lapd.Vie ,-
7ri (tes i`r1 . ites '
Cosy
i r re r_: <, et/Acr
or uare t
Detached Dwelling Units
1,390.20
3.822 34588
132,197 15.80%
$39.161 565
$28,170 275
$10,246 perUnit
Attached Dwelling Units
88.60
490 23.095
11.317 1.35%
$3,352.507
$37.839 5.53
$6,842 per Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
33.10
2.691 18.239
49.080 5-87%
$14,539,283
$439,253 81.30
$5,403 per Unit
Retail & Services Uses SF_)
110.20
1,313 245 69 888
91,780 10.97%
$27,188,578
$246.720 11,917
$20,703 per S.F.
Office Uses (SF)
574.80
9,493,945 39.944
379,226 45.33%
$112,340,550
$195,443 16,517
$11.833 per S.F.
Industrial Uses (SF)
1,665.20
7,580,266 21.419
162,359 19.41%
$48,096,648
S28,883 4,552
$6.345 per S.F.
Institutional Use (SF)
17 30
233,797 45.634
10.6691 1.28%
$3,160,546
$182.691 13,51,li
$13.518 per S.F.
A
Chapter 6
Storm Drainage Collection System
The City's existing storm drainage network is composed of street gutter facilities, inlets and a
network of storm drain pipe -lines which convey runoff to larger pipelines, washes and creeks
located throughout the City. However, as the City continues to develop vacant parcels with
rooftops, parking lots and driveways, the existing City -owned storm drainage lines will reach
capacity and the ability of the existing drainage lines to collect additional runoff from developing
areas will diminish regardless of the availability of a good system of wash channels.
Additionally, there are areas in the City, such as near safety facilities such as the Police Station
(existing and future) and numerous fire stations that require storm drainage improvements to
ensure adequate safety response times to a few large vacant areas to be developed. City
records indicate that there are roughly 84,161 linear feet of reinforced concrete pipe sized
averaging about 36", requiring 190 inlet boxes, 120 manholes and 50 junction boxes (based
upon average storm pipe construction).
Pro ert -based Benefit Reasoning. Initially, the use of separate zones was reconsidered for
each drainage basin within the City because each area has its own capital needs for storm -
water collection. Storm -water runoff from Main Street may not directly impact the homeowner
on Kansas Street; similarly, a small debris detention basin near East Grand Avenue required to
handle runoff from the businesses in that area may provide little direct benefit to a business on
North Nash Street. In each case, there can be some distinct property -related areas of benefit
for each drainage basin. However, the owners and users of all developed and undeveloped
parcels benefit, directly and indirectly, from all City-wide existing and future storm drainage
improvements. As the various systems within the greater community of the City of El Segundo
develop, concurrent with development of private property, the benefits are generally recognized
as:
Proposed development projects can only be approved by the City when precautions,
generally in the form of infrastructure improvements, have been made that assure that
developed and undeveloped downstream parcels will not be adversely affected (i.e.,
inundated, flooded, cut off from access in and out), by storm water from the project being
proposed. The avoidance of downstream or down -zone damage from the development
of an upstream parcel may not be a major concern to a developer, but the City must
concern itself with such issues when approving private development proposals.
2. The private development being assessed a DIF will receive the same storm -water
protection from other development projects upstream or up -zone from its own
development.
3. Storm water must be adequately controlled and removed to large scale flood control
channels or creeks to assure access by public safety vehicles to all parts of the City,
regardless of which zone a call -for -service is in. Fire and other rescue calls, as well as
law enforcement and public works responses, cannot wait during heavy rainstorms. To
the contrary, emergency calls -for -service probably increase during such storm events
and the City's public safety and maintenance units must be able to respond to all zones.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 55
Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection Syste
JM
4. The City of El Segundo's citizens and business owners/employees must also be able to
travel safely (and send/receive goods and services) in heavy rain through one zone to
another. An adequate and sufficient storm drainage system will provide such protection.
5. Storm drainage collection pipes protect the integrity of the roadbed of the very important
arterials and collectors.
Demand Don Infrastructure Created -by the Develo meat of Underdeveloped or Undeveloped
Parcels. The construction of flood control and storm drainage facilities is essential to the
preservation of private property, public streets, curbs and other facilities. The county or a
regional level of government is generally responsible for flood controls"), and cities are generally
responsible for storm drainage. The building of new residences and businesses on presently
undeveloped land will increase the amount of runoff and thus accelerate the need for additional
storm drainage facilities to handle increased runoff from these developing areas. As the vacant
land is developed and bare dirt or turf is replaced with impervious rooftop, parking lots,
driveways, pools, and sidewalks, greater amounts of the rainfall runs off of the developed
parcel.
The amount of the runoff varies with differing types of development (i.e. land -use) and the
varying amounts are referred to as the runoff coefficients. Approximately 0.775 (or 77.5%) of
rainfall that falls on a parcel developed with detached dwelling residences, exits that developed
parcel. The rate for an attached dwelling runoff is not much higher than a detached dwelling at
0.810 (81.0%). Most business uses such as lodging, retail/service, office, industrial and
institutional have a runoff coefficient in excess of 0.900 or 90.0% with the exception of Business
Park at a slightly lesser 0.875 or 87.5%.
Clearly, rainfall runoff increases with development. The cumulative effects of additional runoff
must be managed with the appropriate capital facilities. These costs of the new storm drainage
(and flood control revenue shortages) will be distributed by the coefficients of drainage, i.e., the
percentage of property that will end up with impervious coverage such as asphalt or cement -
based concrete drives or parking lots, rooftops, pools and any other hard surface that does not
allow any absorption into the soil.
The Purpose of the Fee. The costs of extending the same level of storm drainage protection to
the newly developing residences and businesses as is provided to the existing community (that
has largely paid for the existing system) can be calculated, a fee imposed and collected. The
Fee revenues can then be used to expand the storm drainage facilities necessary to extend the
same level of services. The City staff has identified a total of $15,200,000 in storm drainage
projects required to fully complete the City's network of pipes and small channels.
Of that figure, $3,850,000, or 25.33% of the storm drainage/quality projects, have been
identified as being able to be funded by DIFs. The remaining $11,350,000 do not qualify for DIF
funding and will need to be constructed using other resources.
"') Projects of major importance generally involving the control of large quantities of flood water through numerous cities and
unincorporated areas.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 56
Chaoter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System
The Use of the Fee. The construction of flood and storm drainage facilities in the City of El
Segundo is essential to the preservation of public and private property. The building of new
residences and businesses on presently undeveloped land will require the installation of
additional storm drains of sufficient capacity with an adequate number of inlets to handle
increased rainwater runoff from these areas where development reduces natural absorption
opportunities. This Chapter reviews the costs of storm drainage and flood control facilities
needed to serve future development.
The revenues raised from a properly calculated and supported Storm Drainage Collection
System DIF would be limited to the capitalized costs related to that growth. The fees would be
used to construct the additional or parallel storm drainage lines necessary to increase the
drainage capacity of the system to accommodate the additional rainwater runoff generated by
the continued development. Conversely, the Storm Drainage Collection System DIF receipts
would not be used to repair, replace or rehabilitate any existing storm drainage lines. The limited
exceptions would be if the replacement or rehabilitation project creates additional capacity, in
which case that proportional amount of additional capacity could be included as a DIF cost.
SD-001, Infiltration and Storm Water Quality Improvements - Construct a number of storm
water improvements intended to: (1) direct water to more permeable areas or detain water to
allow infiltration by intercepting and holding rainwater, and; (2) construct National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater capture/treatment requirements from
development required by the Federal Clean Water Act. Pollutants to be captured include but are
not limited to: rock, sand, dirt, other aggregates and agricultural, industrial, and other municipal
waste.
SD-002, Storm Drainage Master Plan - Undertake a Storm Drainage Master Plan study to
determine the effect of new and significant up -sizing development upon the City's existing
circulation system and determine state -of -art solutions to the new demands. The result could
alter many of the projects described herein.
The ReIationshI2 Between the Need for The Fee and The Type of Develo meat Project.
Upon the identification of the costs of storm drainage facilities generated by future development,
costs must be further distributed for each of the land uses (i.e., business and residential uses)
based on their estimated rainwater runoff. Residential detached dwelling development leaves
the greatest remaining turf percentage per parcel and thus the greatest percolation, and
conversely the least runoff of rainwater. As such, the detached dwelling residential land use
should not bear the same cost as the institutional or industrial development, which generally
have little or no turf area (or stated another way, a higher percentage of impervious area) and
therefore generates a higher amount of rainwater runoff. For this Report, costs were distributed
between land uses on established runoff coefficients. A listing of these runoff coefficients is
provided in Table 6-1(12) following.
[This space left vacant in order to place the following table on a single page].
(1 2) San Bernardino Hydrology Manual (1986). Williamson and Schmidt, Irvine, CA, Figure C-4.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 67
Chapter 6 Storm Draina Collection System
Table 6-1
Storm Drainage Runoff Coefficients (By Acre)
%,, DI = Lend -lie Type
Coy"J lien
x,
o
Detached Dwelling Units
0.740
Attached Dwelling Units
0.800
Commercial Lodging Units
0.800
Retail/Service/Office Uses (in SF)
0.900
Uses
0.900
_Office
Industrial Uses (in SF)
0.950
Institutional Uses (in SF)
0.900
As stated earlier, the El Segundo area requires $3,850,000 storm drainage projects. Table 6-2,
following, demonstrates the DIF schedule that would need to be imposed to fully fund the
completion of the Category A storm drainage system's collection of pipes and channels
identified in the Master Plan of Drainage necessary for the City. It would not be unreasonable to
require development, those generating greater amounts of rainwater runoff, to finance some
portion of the identified storm drainage needs providing there is no violation of the
proportionality requirement. Table 6-2 indicates the resulting fees required to fully fund DIF
funded storm drainage projects. Please note that the DIF, by land use, is in terms of units such
as residential dwellings or business square feet of building pad (adjusted for multiple floors).
Table 6-2
Minimal Needs -based Storm Drainage System
Development Impact Costs by DIF Land -use Type
r `0
777-77-7
O
a
)att{ o�
(oN��gyy; `
p13y�
dos
o#"aW� a v
fs
%Yrlt
Detached Dwelling Units
$125,946
$6,302/Unit
Attached Dwelling Units
$29,965
$1,249/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
$37,456
$323/Room
Retail/Services/office Uses (in SF)
$2,284,811
$0.842/S,F,
Office Uses
$84,276
$1.018/S,F.
Industrial Uses (in SF)
$1,245,409
$1.702/S.F.
Institutional Uses (in SF)
$42,138
$3.120/S.F
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 58
Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System
The Relationship Between the Use of the Fee and the Type, of Development Paying the
Fee. The Storm Drainage DIFs that are imposed and collected will be used to mitigate the storm
water runoff generated by the type of development. If the development is a commercial or
industrial property generating a significant amount of runoff, the fee collected will be
proportionally higher and will be enough to construct the required additions to the storm
drainage system downstream from this development.
From time to time the City may require an applicant of a private project to construct an
improvement (or portion thereof) that is on the list of required improvements at the end of this
Chapter. This is often done to expedite the project for the applicant/developer. The developer
should receive a credit for any money expended on this required improvement against their
calculated storm drainage impact fee.
The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the
Facility Attributed to the Development Project. Similar to the section above, the relationship
is based upon the projected amount of storm water that will need to be collected and safely
transported to flood control channels or rivers. The downstream collection lines (lines further
down from the proposed project but prior to the outfall into a river or flood control channel) need
to be sized to handle all the stormwater collected upstream. Stormwater that is collected in one
location accumulates with feeder lines along the way and thus the downstream system must be
built increasingly larger (at increasing higher material and construction costs) the farther it gets
away from its source.
Table 6-3, following, distributes the total equity replacement value of the existing storm drainage
system at $27,838,853 over the existing developed community. The total consists of the actual
existing storm drainage pipe and channel systems at $25,613,853, and storm drainage
detention basin at $2,225,000. The development impact costs figures represent the long-term
financial commitment contributed by the existing community through dedications (from the
developers of these established developments) and tax contributions.
Table 6-3
Existing Storm Drainage Community
Financial Commitment Comparison Data
7
„A YA r /fi,yt
, W f., ? r��✓
,y�4yyy■,, 1,r i +�yljky "y�NI ('.
Detached Dwelling Units
$10,376,733
$2,714/Unit
Attached Dwelling Units
$1,483,359
$2,936/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
$7,899,967
$2,936/Unit
Retail/Services/office Uses (in SF)
$363,259
$0.277/Room
Office Uses
$1,897,020
$0.200/S.F.
Industrial Uses (in SF)
$5,804,806
$0.766/S.F.
Institutional Uses (in SF)
$68,709
$0.251/S.F.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 59
Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System
Table 6-4, following, combines the total development -generated capital needs of $3,850,000
with the existing $27,838,853 asset replacement value of the existing storm drainage system to
form the General Plan build -out storm drainage collection system total cost. In short it is the
final storm drainage collection system that needs to be in place at General Plan build -out for
protection of the street system and travel. Given that most of the development upsizing
opportunities most likely have impervious surface consistent with the Runoff coefficients in
Table 6-1 and will not likely create any additional storm water runoff it sets a unfair burden upon
the remaining roughly 80 acres of truly vacant (or raw) land to finance the remaining storm
drainage needs. This a fairer method would be recognize a fair share at build -out methodology.
This is done by combining the existing $27,838,853 investment in the existing system with the
$3,850,000 in future storm drainage needs. The combined $31,688,853 is then distributed over
the General Plan Build -out land -use database (or the combination of Schedules 6.2 and 6.3).
The resulting impact costs are identified in table 6-4 following.
Table 6-4
General Plan Build -out Proportional Storm Drainage System
Development Impact Costs
by DIF Land -use Type
a
:,
,► Ilc c ..tloh,
,.°D6V*1opm"ent;,lt,lpatct
y5 I
Type
of bivol ►I•on uen
ldfyy'Md
,Ty M{ r l
,l
r%
�v x „
a yyytyr
ieYF" ; q+u `re� 6 tr
n 7,
Detached Dwelling Units
$9,547,401
$2,482/Unit
Attached Dwelling Units _
$666,744
$1,297/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
$250,029
$89/Unit
Retail & Service Uses
$1,370,529
$0.340/S.F.
Office Uses
$4,806,112
$0.502/S.F.
Industrial Uses
$14,899,873
$1.793/S.F.
Institutional Uses
$148,165
$0.599/S.F.
Of note is the fact that in Table 6-3, the investment "equity" of the current community is
significantly high. DIFs identified in Table 6-4, indicate that the existing community has invested
$23 million is far more than what is being asked of future development. Additionally, the City is
including NPDES requirements on all future development falling within the NPDES guidelines.
As such, it would be appropriate to require the undeveloped parcels to finance (via Table 6-4
and Schedule 6.4) the remainder of the Stormwater runoff collection system needs for the City.
Recommended General.City Storm Drainage Development Impact Fee Schedule, The adoption
of Schedule 6.4 and summarized in Table 6-4 as the Storm Drainage Collection System DIF
schedule would generate capital to construct approximately 87% the facilities needed by the
new development in the GC.
It is also recommended that the City calculate a separate NPDES in -lieu fee for the Clean Water
Act storm water quality requires placed upon all projects required, new and expansions to
separate it from ordinary storm co,llecfion,,,2i2e,.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 60
Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System
RECAP OF RECOMMENDED STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS DIFS
1. Create a DIF Fund titled Storm Drainage System Impact Fee Fund.
2. Adopt Schedule 6.4 for the seven land -uses and the Cost Distribution per Acre figure (from
the third column from the right side of the Schedule 6.2) for developments that do not
involve a building pad, (e.g. additional asphalt parking area).
3. Separately, calculate and adopt National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
In -lieu fee, via the Clean Water Act, for future development, additions or private
rehabilitations.
End of Chapter Text
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 61
Schedule 6.1
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Storm Drainage Collection System Facilities
Allocation of Project Cost Estimates
f$ T�
�t
tifeed
��o�
SD-001
linfiltration and Storm Water Quality NPDES) Improvement Projects
515.000.000
75.00%1
$11,250,000
1 25.00%
$3,750,000
SD-002
IStorm Drainage Master Plan
- $200,000
50.00%
$100,000
50.000%
$100,000
Sub -Total General Plan Total New Projectsi
$15,200,000
74.67%
$11,350,000
25.33oIo
$3,650,000
LESS:
Develo ment Impact Fee Fund Balance S0
0.00-R.1
$0
100.00%
$0
Other Mitigating Revenue Sources $0
0.00%
$0
100.00%
$0
Development Impact Fee Fund Balance Total $0
0.00%1
$0
0.00%
$0
Total Net General Plan Project Costs $15,200,000 74.6M61 $11.350.000 25.33%1 $3,650,000
F r ord f ,:Schedule `.
N
Schedule 6.2
City of El Segundo
Storm Drainage Collection System Facilities
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Minimum Capital Needs -based Impact Costs
0,4 #veh wfl_-i,-,�',
17—yaw i* Wt
Fee
Detached DwellinLtLnds
3.64
20
0.740
2.69 3.27%
$125,946
$34,601
5.49
$6,362 per Unit
AttachedDwellin Units
0.80
—
24
0.800
0.54 038%
$29,965
$37,456
30.00
$1,249 per Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
1.00
116
0.800
0.80 0,97%
$37,466
$37,456
11&00
$323 per Unit
RetE111 & Service Uses (SF)
54.22
2,715,095
0.900
48.80 59.35%
$2,284,811
$42,140
50,076
$0.842 per S.F.
Office Uses (SF)
2.00
82,764
0.900
1.80 2.19%
$84,276
$42,138
41,382
$1.018 per S.F.
Industrial Uses (SF)
28.00
1 731,808
1 0.950
1 26,60 1 32.35%1
$1,245,409
$44,479,
26.136
$1.702 per S. F,
lInsfitutional Use (SF)
1.001
13,5041
0.9001
0.90 1 09%
$42,138
$42,1381
13,504
1
$3.120 W S.F.
TA4
jn
ftn�-Gq*-__at-P
-Projects � �a
%art,
7!7777-
7777777
777777�7
0
LO
Schedule 6.3
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Storm Drainage Collection System Facilities
Existing Community Financial Commitment Comparison
-Want
2, �L-km,
&P-0
-0-
Detached DwelliN Units
1.390.20 3,822
0.740
1,029
30.81%
$8,576,701 $6,169
2.75
SZ243 er Unit
Attached Dwelling Units
88.60 490
0.800
71
2.13%
$591,784 $6,679
5.53
$1,208 per Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
33.10 2,691
0.800
26
0.78%
$216,710 $6.547
81.30
$81 per Unit
Retail & Service Uses (SF)
110.20 1,313,245
0.9001
99
2.96%
$825,164 $7,488
11,917
$0.628 per S.F.
Office Uses (SF)
974.80 9.4193,945
0-900
517
15.48%
$4,309,188 $7,497
16,517
$0.454 per S. F.
Industrial Uses (SF)
1,665.20 7,580,266
1950
1,582
47.37%1
$13,185.948 $7,919
4,552
$1.740 per S. F
Institutional Use (SF)
1
17.30 _233,797
0
161
0.48-/.f
$133,360]__ $7,7091
13,514
1_ S0.570 per S. F.
7,
OM
UYL pwfu *w
M
JN.
Schedule 6.4
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Stone Drainage Collection System Facilities
General Plan Build -out (Combined Existing and Future Developmento
Detached Dwelling Units
1,393.84
3,842
0.740
' 1,031
30.13%
$9,547,401 $6.850
2.76
-
' $2,482 per Unit
Attached trolling Units
89.40
514
0.800
72
2.10%
$666,744 $7,458
5.75
$1.297 per Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
34.10
2.807
0.800
27
0,79%
$250,029 $7,332
82.32
$89 per Unit
Retail & Service Uses (SF)
164.42
4,028,340
0.900
148
4.32%
$1,370,529 $8.336
24,500
$0.340 per S.F.
Office Uses (SF)
676.80
9,576,709
0.900
519
15.17%
$4,806,112 $8 332
16,603
$0.502 serS.F.
Industrial Uses (SF)
1,693.20
8,312,074
0.9501
1,609
47.02%1
$14.899.8731 $8.8001
4,909
$1.793 perS.F,
Institutional Use (SF)
18.301
247,301
0.900
16
0.47%
$148,165 $8.0961
13,514
$0.599 per S.F.
0
Chapter 7
Water Distribution Infrastructure
Assuming that an adequate water supply is available, the next critical components needed to
accommodate development are treatment facilities, water storage and distribution system. The
City's water source, as presently constituted, can be fully expected to completely support the
City's existing and future population. However, in order to meet all future water demands, the
City will need to collect sufficient monies to increase well capacity as well as new storage
reservoirs capacity.
Existing System. In addition to the City's distribution system and major water lines with a
replacement value of $135,933,272, the City has water pumping stations with a replacement
value of $4,924,800, and a 9.2 million gallon reservoir capacity with a replacement value of
$15,102,720. There is no existing impact fee fund thus there is no fund balance.
The Purpose of the Fee. As additional businesses and residential structures are constructed,
each one will generate a greater demand on the existing water system infrastructure. The
existing system of distribution pipe, reservoirs, pumping stations and the source of water itself,
will prove inadequate to meet all the anticipated water demands. The impact fee is based upon
the additional capital additions necessary to accommodate the water demands of individual
units of development outlined on Table 7-1.
Impact fees are necessary for the construction of the remainder of the water system for one
significant reason. Initially, the storage and delivery of water has, for many years, been
recognized by most public agencies as a utility. Utilities differ from general tax -supported
services in that they are similar to private sector utility businesses. Water rates are elastic,
within reason, and can be set to meet water delivery costs whereas taxes cannot. Therefore,
general taxes must be protected and reserved for services that do not have any such elastic
revenue source. These services include public safety, park maintenance storm drainage, and
others.
The use of water (consumer benefit) can be measured, unlike many City services, water rates
can, and should be, set to meet the Council's priorities and policies in terms of water use. As a
result of the above, the use of general taxes, where no relationship between the rate of taxation
and benefit exists, in support of any utility service would be inappropriate.
The Use of the Fee. The revenues collected from the potentially adopted impact fees outlined
and supported in this Chapter will be used to construct or acquire the list of projects identified on
Schedule 7.1. A stronger statement would be that they are limited to the projects identified on
that Schedule.
WT-001, New Water Reservoir - Construct a 5.0 to 7.0 Million Gallon Reservoir. Construct
a 5.0 to 7.0 million gallon water reservoir or combination of reservoirs to increase the City's
current standard and have future development maintain that standard. While nearly 75% of the
project cost is necessary to increase the reservoir capacity for the existing water users, the
remaining 25% is necessary for future water users.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 66
Chapter 7 Water Distribution System
WT-002, New Major Water Distribution Pipelines — The City staff, given the magnitude of the
potential long-range development demands, has recognized the need to upsize the water
delivery system capacity and has identified $10.0 million in water pipelines needed to
accommodate the increased demand generated by future development. However, because
most new development will be done by upsizing, citing the specific pipeline widths and lengths
needed to accommodate new development's needs is not possible at this time. A master plan
will be able to help identify the specific widths and lengths of pipelines needed. City
Engineering staff has cited that 50% of the $10 million needed for new pipelines to be the
responsibility of future development.
WT-003, Water Master Plan — Undertake a Water System Master Plan study to determine the
effect of new and significant up -sizing development upon the City's existing circulation system
and determine state -of -art solutions to the new demands. The result could alter many of the
projects described herein.
The Relationshig Between the Need for the Fee and the Type,of Development Project. Daily
water demands will vary by category/type of development, however, use within a category/type
tends to meet averages, thus making projection fairly accurate. The seven land -uses identified
for separate impact fees are used along with averages for each of those types of land -uses.
The service to be provided to the new users will mirror that of the existing level of service.
Water use, for residential users was calculated (and planned for) on either a gallon per dwelling
unit per day (GPD) basis for residential uses or gallons per acre per day (GPAD) basis for
business uses. Table 7-1 following, indicates the DIF Land -use Type averages that were used
as the nexus in the DIF distribution model. Since the City does not have a regional recycled
water program in the area for the watering of common areas, the capital -needs costs will be
distributed over new development based upon potable water demands at the meter and will not
include any distributed recycled water demands. The following water demands are from the
Master Plan of a similar sized public agency.
Table 7-1
General City Water Average Demand by DIF Land Use Type
Demand in GPD or GPAD
yrya�l�artj
ld;;
��taalNonrsr
Detached Dwelling Units
544
Attached Dwelling Units
372''u�
Commercial Lodging Units
150�;
Retail/Service/Office Uses
�;� ����;�,,;� �
2,200
Office Uses
'v N Y
2 200
Industrial Uses
2,000
Institutional Uses
.w
�.
2 , 200
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 67
Chapter 7 Water Distribution System
The Relationship Between the Use of the Fee and the Type of Develo meat Paying the Fee.
The use of the fee is similar to the need for the fee. The impact fee would be collected as the
development occurs. As the development occurs, the impact is generated. The collected fee
would be put to use to acquire additional water generation, storage and distribution facilities,
and additional equipment necessary to respond to those additional water demands, without
reducing the capability of providing water to the existing community.
Based upon Table 7-2 and the land -use database, the City currently (on average) delivers about
7.5 million gallons/day to private water users. This does not include the water demands from
public institutions, other non -private uses and system loss. Obviously, this is an annual average
and seasonal factors could be expected to affect use. Table 7-2, on the following page,
indicates the demand for water (on average) for existing development within the City water
delivery area.
Table 7-2
Existing Community Water Demand
in Gallons per Day (GPD rounded)
'iY�esfctw�tla)
r,N
°
wAs� r �
'
srI
�"
�ryj
IY�a ,l�f.r
i i
/,r r„'MRI e" ��
rrm���F '7" k1,'V�„�
�i�;NI'
i
y,•
,�i
_'""
�r�
Detached Dwellings
3,822
544/Unit
2,079,168
Attached Dwellings
,r'`
372/Unit-
182.280
Commercial n Units
g g
2 690
9
wl
n
150/Unit
nnnnnnn
403, 650-
Retail/Service/Office Uses�r
�' `��
2,200/Unit
242,440
- ..............
..
_......._.
Office Uses
574.80
2,200/Acre
1,264,560
Industrial Uses
...... ............................
1,665.20
2, 200/Acre
3,330,400
Institutional Uses
17.30
2,200/Acre
38,060
Total Gallons per Day',,,,
�:.
7,540,558
„�
'Again using the GPD demand data from Table 7-1 and the land -use database, the City will be
asked to deliver an additional net 876,984 gallons per day (average) to new users. Table 7-3,
following, indicates the demand for water (on average) for future development within the City's
water delivery boundaries. The 876,984 gallons daily figure results in a slightly lower actual
daily total water demand due to the use of Master Plan land -use demand averages applied to
the narrower seven DIF Land -use Types as opposed to the actual broad variety of business
uses. This will hold true for Tables 7-2, 7-3 and 7-4. Each of these tables Total Gallons per
Day will be slightly understated when compared to the Water Master Plan (if any) totals.
[This space required to place the following table on a single page].
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 68
Chapter 7 Water Distribution System
Table 7-3
Development -generated Additional Water Demand
in Gallons per Day (rounded)
The total projected average daily demand from all El Segundo privately held acreage at GP
build -out is about 8.4 million gallons daily. Although encouraged, widespread conservation
efforts are not currently mandated in the City.
PROJECTS NEEDED FOR PROPER WATER DISTRIBUTION
Utility infrastructure such as water is unique among all City infrastructures. Water demand
expansion simply cannot be ignored for long periods of time as can be police, fire, streets, and
park levels of service (LOS). Residents could be asked to allow the number of officers to
remain static, or wait a little longer for fire fighters, or even put up with the more congested
traffic or more crowded parks. However, a delivered water supply must be in evidence to even
consider additional growth. Even though Table 7-4 applies average daily use rates and creates
a total demand difficult to imagine, it is apparent that additional water pumping and storage
capability is necessary to allow for additional growth. Without adequate water distribution
capabilities, development will grind to a stop. It is a prerequisite system.
Since a water distribution system is a prerequisite to development (i.e. there is no development
without water), it tends to be a somewhat "front -ended" system, that is, the system develops
earlier and the existing community tends to have built more of the system at any point in time
than does the remainder of development. That is precisely the case with El Segundo's water
utility, the water system appears to have been front -ended by the existing community.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 69
Chapter 7 Water Distribution System
The Relationshio Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the Facility
Attributed to the Development Project, Schedule 7.1 identifies the water distribution system
improvements needed to insure the continued adequate flow of water as needed to proposed
development projects. There are three capital projects necessary for extending service to new
development ($6.9 million) or maintaining service to existing water users ($23.3 million) for a
total of $30.2 million. The $6.9 million figure was used to calculate the DIF schedule.
CALCULATION OF IMPACT COSTS
This Report identifies two methods of calculating potable water system delivery DIFs and
imposing said fees. They are:
.. Standard (Average) DIF Land -use Type DIFs, similar to the other fees in this Report.
• An impact fee based upon the meter size needed to serve a development, if needed.
Standard Use Cate o DIFs. Table 7-5, following, lists the seven major land -uses based upon
average water usage statistics, (see Schedule 7.2). The City will require $30.2 million in new or
replacement water capital expansion to properly accommodate the additional demand by new
development. Of the $30.2 million needed in water capital improvement projects, 34.2% (or
$10,316,667) has been identified as being able to be funded by new development. The
remaining 65.8% (or $19,833,333) has been identified as being non development related and
not able to be funded by DIFs. The $10.3 million is distributed pro-rata over the remaining
under -built and totally vacant acreage (with negations for the eliminated demands from razed
parcels) in the City's General City area as demonstrated in Table 7-5 following.
Table 7-5
Minimum Needs -based Water Distribution System
Development Impact Costs
by DIF Land -use Type
77
�'7L tad-u ' p
Iop�iyet�lc
9,
+i y,.
v / yryy
�
yyy^, dry 1y!y yy�y(y
Detached Dwelling (+)
$127,990
$6,405/Unit
Detached Dwelling (-) _.....
($1,299,100)
Attached Dwelling _Units
$8,572,8348
$4,377/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
$409,380
_�.__..m.........
$1,765/Unit
Retail &Service Uses {+)
$3,558,033
$0.517/Unit
-
Retail & Service Uses ()
�....
($25, 880)
..
Office Uses
$2,206,560
$0.739/S.F.
Industrial Uses (+)
$658,773
$0.900/S.mF.
Industrial Uses (-)
($3, 917, 817)
institutional Uses
$25,880
$1.916/S. F.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 70
Chapter 7 Water Distribution S stem
Cost and Financing of the Existing S stem. Typically, a water system is the oldest service
provided by any City. The City's engineering staff has identified the cost of the existing "spine"
system, consisting of distribution pipe, wells, valves, and reservoirs to be $155,960,792, This
figure does not include local (tract) lines and connections, estimated conservatively to be in the
area of an additional $62,398,374. It also does not include the value of any shares of water
rights. The system has been constructed from four sources, water user rates (more commonly
known as monthly water bills), exactions, DIFs, and requirements of development approval.
When this net $155.9 million in infrastructure contributions is distributed to the existing
community based upon the same nexus used to distribute future costs by land use, (see
Schedule 7.3) the results indicate that a detached dwelling has contributed, on average, an
astounding $11,248 towards the water system. This distributed equity is clearly greater than the
distributed - Minimum Capital Needs -based Impact Costs exemplified in Table 7-5 (and
Schedule 7.2) indicating there are no proportionality issues. Table 7-6 following demonstrates
the distribution of existing assets.
Table 7-6
General Plan Build -out Proportional Water Distribution System
Development Impact Costs by DIF Land -use Type
r
U �r 'oNe�et
Nf t
"«rl w
o"ei�,
�u t p
o �+iawdt;
F
Detached Dwelling Units
$43,003,275
$11,248/Unit
Attached Dwelling Units
$3,770,083
$7,695/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
$8,348,662
$3,102/Unit
Retail/Service/Office Uses
$5,014,368
$3.818/Unit
..........................__M._.........................................
Office Uses
$26,154,799
.......
$2.755/S.F.
Industrial Uses
$68,882,412
$9.087/S.F.
Institutional Uses _
$787,192
$3.367/S.F,
y g. DIFs are necessary for the construction of the remainder of the
Necessity of DIF Financing.
water system for one significant reason. Initially, the storage and delivery of water has, for
many years, been recognized by most public agencies as a utility. Utilities differ from general
tax -supported services in that they are similar to private sector utility businesses. Potable water
rates are elastic, within reason, and can be set to meet water delivery costs whereas taxes
cannot. Therefore, general taxes must be protected and reserved for services that do not have
any such an elastic revenue source such as public safety, park maintenance, storm drainage,
and others.
The use of water (consumer benefit) can be measured, unlike many of the City's other municipal
services. Water rates can, and should be, set to meet the Council's priorities and policies in
terms of water use. As a result of the above, the use of general taxes, where no relationship
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 71
DistributioLr=
between the rate of taxation and benefit exists, in support of any utility service would be
inappropriate.
Recommended DIF Schedule. The adoption of Table 7-5, based upon Schedule 7.2 at the end
of the chapter, as the water distribution DIFs would generate enough capital to construct the
facilities needed by the new development. The DIFs contained on Schedule 7.2 also contain
amounts less than the Existing Community Financial Commitment Comparison identified in
Schedule 7.3 thus do not violate any proportionate requirements.
CREDITS AGAINST DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
The City does not charge stand-by water rates. Vacant parcels are not charged water rates and
therefore they have not contributed to the capital development of the water system. As a result
there can be no credit for previous contributions to capital from vacant parcels, simply because
there were none made. Additionally, there have been no General Fund expenditures on water
projects.
Credit for Developer Constructed Improvements. Similar to roadway and storm drainage
construction, it will likely be advantageous to have the developer construct certain public
improvements contiguous to the private development. The adoption of the DIF schedules
encourages such agreements. It is recommended that the City continue the process of
agreeing to allow developers to construct water system capital improvements, identified within
the DIF calculation and then calculating a credit for that project contribution amount. The net
DIF would be the amount per the adopted schedules less the credit for the capital constructed
by the developer. Credits can only be given for private construction of any project that is listed
on Schedule 7.1. Thus any improvements that are project specific in nature and benefit will
likely be imposed as conditions of approval.
ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE METHODOLOGIES
There are two alternatives to the seven Minimum Needs -based area DIF categories. They are
primarily applicable to the more specific demands by the multitude of differing business uses.
Equivalent EDU Based on Meter Size. The standard detached dwelling residence has a 3/4"
meter at 15 gallons per minute normal (minimum -maximum) flow(13) which is defined as the
Equivalent Dwelling Unit, or EDU. Schedule 7.2 indicates that the smallest meter size at 3/4"
would cost $6,405 per connection, at the Minimum Needs based DIF schedule rate. The
following Table 7-7 indicates the cost for larger meters based upon the normal flow demands,
with again, the detached dwelling (detached) residence as the standard. A one inch meter is
rated at 25 gallons per minute, which is 1.67 times larger than the 15 gallons per minute than is
afforded by a 3/4" meter_ Thus the one inch meter fee would be 1.67 times higher ($7,605) than
the $6,405 for the 3/4" meter. Other meter sizes are as follows:
13 Meter Flow Ranges, based upon Minimum Maximum Continuous Flow Rates, American Water Works Association.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 72
Chapter 7 'later Distribution System
Table 7-7
Equivalent Water Meter Size Calculation
Based upon Minimum Needs -based Impact Fees
Itilorrrtal
tr
Cost firer
IIF os�k
I !ter r
iPa r I to r
I e a tl
. 9per-idtet;
Meter
15
1.000
$6,405
$6,405
V Meter
25
1.667
_ $6,405
$10,677
1 & %" Meter
50
3.333
$6,405
$21,348
2" Meter
80
5.333
$6,405
$34,158
3" Meter
240
16.000
$6 405
$102480
4" Meter
420
28.000
$6,405
$179,340
6" Meter
920
61.333
$6,405
$392,838
8" Meter
1,600
106.667
$6,405
$683,202
10" Meter._..
_
2,500
166.667
$6,405
$1,067,502
12" Meter
3300
,
220000
.,
$6405
$1N
,409,100
RECAP OF RECOMMENDED WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS IMPACT FEES
1. Create a DIF Fund titled Water Distribution System Impact Fee Fund.
2. Adopt Schedule 7.2 for the seven land -uses
3. Adopt Table 7-7, Equivalent Water Meter Size Calculation Based upon Minimum Needs -
based Development Impact Fees.
END OF CHAPTER TEXT
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 73
Schedule 7.1
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Allocation of Project Cost Estimates
Water Distribution System
WT-001
WT-002
WT-003
v
A
to 7.0 Mil
Plan
r<+%dd p eoC
_
,SpP �tef�
Wirer ,
t ongd
74.17%1
$14.833 333
25.83%
$5,166,667
50.00%1
$5,000,000
50.00%
$5,000,000
0.00%
$0
100.00%
$150,000
Srr Total General Plan Total New Pro $30.150M0 65.78% 516,833.3 34.22% $10,316,667
000.
Development Impact Fee Fund Balance (none)
$0.00
0.00%1
$0.00
100.00%
$0
Other Off -setting Revenues
$0.00
0.00%1
$0.00
0.00%
$0
Development Impact Fee Fund Balance Totall
$0.00
0.00%
$0.00
0.00/.
$0
Total Net General Plan Project Cosh 30„150,000.00 65.780kl $19,833,333 34,22%1 $10,31U6
twward' 1e �
Schedule 7.2
City o1 E1 Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Minimum Capital Needs -based Impact Costs
Water Distribution System
Crsr7ilaltis itpti
Cos
ent
Detached Dwelling Units (+)
3.64
20
544
10.880
1.24%
$127,990
$35,162
5.49
$6,405
per Unit
Detached Dwellin Units {-)
(73.93)
(203)
544
(110.432)
-12.59%
-51,299,100
$17,572
Attached Dwelling Units
74.73
1,959
372
728,748
83.10%
$8,572,848
$+114,718
26.21
$4,377
per Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
2.00
232
150
34,800
3.97%
540%380
$204,690
116.00
$1, 765
per Unit
Retail & Service Uses (SF) (+)
137.48
6,887,925
21200
302.456
34.49%
$3,558,033
$25,880
50,101
$0.517
per S.F.
Retail & Service Uses (SF) (-)
(1,00)
(11.917)
2,200
(2.200)
-0.25%
$25<880
$25,880
Office Uses (SF)
85.26
2,985,602
2,200
187,572
21.39%
$2, 06:560
$25,8 0
35.018
$0.739
eer S.F
Industrial Uses (SF) (+)
28.00
731,808
2,000
56,000
6.39%
$658,773
$23,528
26,136
$0.900
per S.F.
'industrial Uses (SF) -)
(166.52)
(758,027)
2,000
333,040)
-37.98%
-$3,917,817
$23,528
Institutional Use (SF)
1.00
13,504
2,200
2,200
0,25%
$25,880
$25,aBOJ
13,504
$1.916
per S.F.
s
::, .
11 , `t ,
t0,3 6 7 n t atal,lNater'
met= l ted ,
pro �• ., r
v
Cn
Schedule 7.3
City of El Segundo
2021.22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Existing Community Financial Commitment Comparison
Water Distribution System
h
�� trrtr�t�ve
ct In
1 {
Caast
Av�a tlrsts
knit .
Detached Dwelling Units
1,390.20
3.822 544 2,079,168
27.57%
$43,003,275
$30,9331
2.75
$11,248 per Unit
Attached Dwelling Units
88.60
490 372 182.280
2,42%
$3,770,083
$42,552
5.53
$7,695 per Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
33.10
2,691 150 403,650
5.35%
$8,348,662
$252,225
81.30
$3,102 per Unit
Retail & Service Uses (SF)
110.20
1,313,245 2,200 242,440
3.22%
$5,014,368
$45,502
11.917
$3.818 perS.F,
Office Uses (SF)
574.80
9,493,945 2,200 1,264,560
16.77%
$26,154,799
$45,502
16,517 _
$2.755 per S.F.
Industrial Uses (SF)
1,665.20
7,580,266 2,000 3,330,400
44.17%
$68,882,4121
$41,366
4,552
$9,087 per S.F.
Institutional Use (SF)
17.30
233,797 2.200 38,060
0.50%1
$787,1921
$45,502
13,514
1 $3.367r perS.F.
.
7
,E .:
3 �
rn
Chapter 8
Wastewater Collection System
As was mentioned in the prior chapter and will be reiterated here, a city or public agency
experiencing dramatic growth may put off the construction of needed parks, roads storm
drainage projects and the like and still function, perhaps minimally. However, nothing stops
development in its tracks any faster than the lack of a water distribution system and a sewage
collection system. These two systems were some of the earliest calculated DIFs, although they
were generally called hook -tap fees(14). In short, a residence or business cannot exist without
these important connections.
It should be noted that the City owns all wastewater collection assets, but the processing of the
wastewater is performed at either the Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant or the West Basin
Wastewater Treatment Plant. The City does not own or manage either of these facilities and
therefore these facilities have not been included in the calculation of the wastewater DIF.
The Purpose of the Fee.. The City has adequate and sufficient existing wastewater treatment
capacity. Additionally, the spine (or major) collection system is also largely completed.
However, some of the existing sewer pipes throughout the collection system will need to be
upsized to accommodate the additional wastewater demands from new development. It is a
commonly accepted principle in both water and wastewater expansion that DIF receipts can
finance the expansions as needed and required. If a development wanted to connect and there
were no close -by lines, the developer would finance the expansion with perhaps a
reimbursement agreement if appropriate.
The principle remains the same with these DIFs. This Chapter will calculate a fee schedule that
represents the proportional expense per unit of growth by DIF Land -use Type, i.e., a detached
dwelling unit, a commercial lodging unit or 1,000 square feet of business space.
The Use of the Fee. The revenues generated from a properly calculated and legally supported
Wastewater Collection Facilities System Development Impact Fee would be limited to capital
costs related to the additional residential and business -related growth anticipated in the City's
General Plan as depicted in Schedule 6.1. The impact fees would be used to construct
additional spine wastewater collection lines or upsize existing ones to provide collection
capacity for the additional demands from development that exceeds the capacity of the existing
system. Conversely, the Wastewater Collection and Treatment Facilities system DIF receipts
would not be used to repair or replace any existing line (unless up -sizing is required).
The City has a total of 289,694 linear feet of wastewater collection lines, roughly 146,040 linear
feet of which is spine system and not located within the footprint within any privately -owned
development footprint. The remaining 143,654 linear feet are considered "locals" and serve
smaller portions of the City.
SW-001, Additional Sewer Pipe and Sewer Pipe Upgrades — The City has recognized the
need to upsize and has identified $10 million in wastewater pipelines needed to accommodate
"Not to be confused with a "connection" fee which is a reimbursement for the actual costs of having a city -worker either set the
water meter or connect the privately owned sewer pipe from the home to the City's later sewer pipe.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 77
ChaDter 8 Wastewater Collection System
the increased demand generated by future development. However, because most new
development will be done by upsizing, citing the specific pipeline widths and lengths needed to
accommodate new development's needs is not possible at this time. A master plan will be able
to help identify the specific widths and lengths of the wastewater pipelines needed. The City
has cited only 50% of the 10 million needed for new pipelines to be the responsibility of future
development.
SW-002, Wastewater Master Plan - Undertake a Wastewater Master Plan study to determine
the effect of new and significant up -sizing development upon the City's existing circulation
system and determine state -of -art solutions to the new demands. The result could alter many of
the projects described herein.
Similar to the circulation/storm drainage and water DIFs, wastewater system infrastructure will
require a separate DIF schedule in order to insure that existing users are not placed in the
position of subsidizing private development.
EXISTING WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM
The City's major line wastewater collection system currently consists of an identified 289,694
linear feet of various sized (8" to 27") reinforced concrete pipe with over 148 junctions and
various backfill, road base and asphalt. The current cost of duplicating the entire system of
locals and collectors, would be approximately $172,029,560. There are also nine lift stations
with a replacement value $4,559,625. As is the case with Circulation Facilities and Water
Supply Infrastructure, local wastewater lines are typically the responsibility of the individual
developer and not included in the final figure. When the $70,774,558 cost of local waste lines is
removed the net system investment is $105,814,626.
GENERAL CITY WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
The Relationship Between the Need for the Facility (improvement) and the Type of
Development Proiect. Schedule 8.1 identifies two capital projects costing $10,175,000. Of the
$10.1 million needed in wastewater capital improvement projects, 49.74% ($5,061,250) has
been identified as being able to be funded by new development. The remaining 50.26%
($5,113,750) has been identified as being non development related and not able to be funded
by DIFs.
The Relationship Between the Use of the Fees and the T e of Development Paying the Fee.
The project costs related to growth needs were then distributed to the development categories
within the system design flows, or gallons per day/acre flow rates (GPAD) for business
development or gallons per day (GPD) for residential construction. The wastewater design flow
rates are based upon general engineering standard flow rates from a similar public agency and
are as follows in Table 8-1:
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 78
Chapter 8 Wastewater Collection System
Table 8-1
General City Wastewater Flow Rate
Demand by Land Use
Demand in GPD or GPAD
DISTRIBUTION OF CAPTAL COSTS
The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the Facility
Attributed to he Development Pro`ect. Table 8-2, following, is extracted from Schedule 8.2 and
demonstrates the results of distributing the $5,061,250 in wastewater system development -
related expansion costs over the remaining private sector development opportunities.
Table 8-2
Minimum Needs -based Wastewater Collection System
Development Impact Costs
by DIF Land -use Type
M�tiln
1act
Vell
u �
ot
Detached Dwelling Units (+)
$59,976
$3,001/Unit
.- ......................
Detached Dwelling Units (-)
($608, 919)
Attached Dwelling Units
$5,141,572
$2,625/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
................................ _.......... ..
$405,693
$1,750/Unit
Retail & Service Uses (+)
$1,546,414
$0.235/Unit
Retail & Service Uses (-)
($11, 236)
Office Uses
$1,278,725
$0.427/S.F.
Industrial Uses (+)
$559,926
$0.765/S.F.
Industrial Uses (-)
($3,329,898)
Institutional Uses
$18,727
$1.387/S.F.
Page 79
Chapter 8 Wastewater Collection System
The results indicate that the varying types of residential dwellings will need to contribute
anywhere from a low of $2,625 for an attached dwelling unit to a high of $3,001 for a detached
dwelling unit in either DIF payments or in contributed capital in the form of off -site wastewater
lines (to the same amount).
Existing,Contribution. Table 8-3, on the following page, distributes the current replacement
value of the existing system distributed over those who have contributed to the existing
wastewater system, the current users and rate payers. This has been done in the same manner
as the future costs were distributed against the future users, by the same average demand
statistics used for modeling master plans. The results indicate that the average attached
dwelling unit has contributed $4,559 per unit and a detached dwelling unit has contributed about
$5,207 per unit.
Table 8-3
Existing Wastewater Collection System Community
Financial Commitment Comparison Data
Divet+ l+an r�n�74 'c t,
JY^��"i7W AM1wt
'RJ ��P7t
�(rr
'.p�Ao.'
„PPAl
✓�, rp,. �* y(
,.
Detached Dwelling Units
$19,905,848
$5,207/Unit
Attached Dwelling Units
_.._.... ........ .._.
$2,232,689
$4,559/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units
$8,175,238
$3,038/Unit
Retail/Service/Office Uses
$2,152,270
$1.639/Unit
Office Uses
$14,968,537
$1.577/S.F.
Industrial Uses
$57,817,112
$7.628/S.F.
Institutional Uses
$562,934
$2.408S.F.
PROPORTIONATE SHARE ANALYSIS
Necessit for DIF . DIFs are necessary and appropriate for the construction of the remainder
of the wastewater collection system for one significant reason. Similar to the distribution of
water, the collection and treatment of sewage has long since been recognized by most public
agencies as a utility. Utilities differ from general tax -supported services in that they are similar
to private sector utility businesses and are financed by utility rates. Wastewater collection rates
are relatively elastic, within reason, and can be set to meet sewage collection costs whereas
taxes for general municipal services cannot. As a result, general taxes must be protected and
reserved for services that do not have any such an elastic revenue source such as public safety,
park maintenance, storm drainage, and others. Additionally, as long as the existing wastewater
users have an adequate system for their needs, they would have little interest in having
wastewater rates rise for any reason other than operating costs as opposed to meeting the cost
of adding new users. Clearly, the cost of adding to the system infrastructure to accommodate
additional private development demands should be imposed upon that same private
development.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 60
Chapter 8 Wastewater Collection Sys
The contribution to the wastewater collection system (benefit) can be measured, unlike many of
the City's services. Wastewater rates can, and should be, set to meet the Council's priorities
and policies in terms of the wastewater system use. The use of general taxes, where no
relationship between the rate of taxation and benefit exists, in support of any utility service
would be inappropriate.
Recommended DIF Schedule. The adoption of Schedule 8.2 at the end of the Chapter text (as
summarized in table 8-2), as the Wastewater Collection and Treatment Facilities system DIF
schedule is both reasonable and would generate enough capital to construct or pay for the
infrastructure facilities needed by the new development as well as a proportional amount of the
debt service that created the excess capacity. The DIFs contained in Schedules 8.2 also
contain amounts lesser than the significant financial commitment costs identified in Schedule
8.3 thus Schedule 8.2 does not violate any proportionate requirements.
CREDITS AGAINST DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
Like the water utility, there are no stand-by wastewater collection rates. Vacant parcels are not
charged wastewater rates and therefore they have not contributed to the capital development of
the wastewater system. As a result, there can be no credit for previous contributions to capital
from vacant parcels, simply because there were none. Additionally, there has been no General
Fund expenditures on wastewater projects.
Credit for Developer Constructed Improvements ContainedWithin the Cit 's MFP pno Im act
Fee Calculation. Similar to other infrastructure construction, it may be advantageous to have
the developer construct certain public improvements contiguous to the private development.
The adoption of DIFs should not preclude such agreements. Thus, it is recommended that the
City continue the process of agreeing to allow developers to make wastewater system capital
improvements that are identified within this report and that are part of the impact fee calculation,
and receive a credit for that constructed amount. The net DIF would be the amount per the
adopted schedules less the credit for the capital constructed by the developer.
RECAP OF RECOMMENDED WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS IMPACT FEES
1. Create a DIF Fund titled Wastewater Collection System Impact Fee Fund.
2. Adopt Schedule 8.2 for the seven land -uses.
END OF CHAPTER TEXT
Y 9 ........_......... _....__.._...._...�.
Cit of EI Se undo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 81
Schedule 8.1
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Allocation of Project Cost Estimates
Wastewater Collection System
Wastewater Master Plan
liva=
Rzm
Development Impact Fee Fund Balance (none)
--$0
100.000/01
$0
0.00%1
$
Other Off -setting Revenues
$0
0.00%1
so
I
100.00%
1 $n
Development Impact Fee Fund Balance Total
l
0.000/OF7--
$o
- 0.00%1
1
Tel Net General Plan PLoject Costs
n10, t7 a,0001
50.26%1
$571-1-3.-7-501
49,74%1 $5.061,250
Fqrwardto-Sb
Schedule 8.2
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Minimum Capital Needs -based Impact Costs
Wastewater Collection System
�e
l�
oi'
r t.
t�
G A to t
tmpa
Detached Dwelling Units [+)
3.6
20
240
4,800
1.19
$59,9761
$16,477
5-491
$3,001
per Unit
Detached D elfing its
(73 )
203
240
48, 720
-12.03y
608,919
Attached Dwelling Units
74.7
1,959
210
411.390
' 141.59%
$6.141, 72
$68.8021
26.21
$2,62-5
per Umt
ornmerdal Lodging Unite
2.0
232
140
32,480
8.02%
$405,963
$202.982
IBm-
S1.750
per Unit
Retail & Service Uses (SF)
137.5
6,887,925
900
123,732
30.55%
$1.546<414
$11,2481
50,101
$0.225
per S.F
fetarf & Sewice Uses (SF)
(11,31
900
(80+0)
=0 22
411,2463
Office Uses (SF)
85.3
2,9 5,602
1200
102,312
_-.-.-......
25-27%
$1,278J25
$14,998
35,018
$0.428
per S.F-
Industrial Uses S) {+}
28.0
731,808
1.600
44,800
11.06%
$559,926
$19,9971
26,136
$0,765
per S.F.
n ustnal Uses (SF) (
(166-5)
(758,027)
1,600
( 6.432)
-65.79%
- 3,329.888
Institutional Use (SF)
1.0
13,504
1,500
1.500
0.37%
$18,7271
$18,721
13.504
1 $1.387
per S.F.
i
$fs,
1 e I hYtt ° P i
00
w
Schedule 8.3
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Existing Community Financial Commitment Comparison
Wastewater Collection System
AW
its son
t�iop �tin-
rrif
Detached Dwelling Units 1,390.20
3,822
240
917,280
18.81% $19,905,848
$14.319 2.75
S5,207 rUnit
Attached Dwellinp Units 88.60
490
210
102,900
2,11%$2,232,689
$25.200 5.53
$4,559 perUnit
Commercial Lodging Units 3310
2,691
140
376,740
7,73% $8,175,238
$246,986 81.30
$3,038 per Unit
Retail & Service Uses (SF) 110.20
1,313,245
900
99,180
2.03% $2,152.270
$19,531 11,917
$1.639 perS.F.
Office Uses (SF) 574.80
9,493,945
1,200
689,760
14.15%' $14,968,537
—34-6-0.1
$26,041 16,517
$1.577 perS.F.
Industrial Uses (SF) 1,665.20
1 7,580,266
1,600
2,664,320
$57,817.112
$34,721 4,552
$7.628 perS.F.
Institutional Use (SF) 17.30
233,797
1,500
25,9501
0.53%' $562,9341
4
$2.408 per S.F.
1
_ , _.
87 , 0
„ i WO _. jl4,826 "1°d t
1 1'255��n .�tpr,Col eAsseb;-". ..,
trs1 _ teal 1tF FO)l Bala 0000 _ .
A
Chapter 9
General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
The Existing System. General Facilities are generally limited to general office or work buildings
and equipment used by City staff to undertake their daily duties. The replacement costs totaling
$26,572,360 are as follows:
City Hall Facilities ................................................. .............. ........... ..,. $25,297,360
Computer and Miscellaneous Electronic Equipment .............................. $1,200,000
General Fund Pool Cars............................................................................ $75,000
General Facilities Impact Fee Fund Balance (None) ..........................................$0
Parcels. As the City increases in both population and additional business ventures, the City Hall
will typically become overcrowded with a growing staff, even if major efforts are made to keep
the number of municipal workers to a minimum. The City of El Segundo current City Hall is
28,646 square feet.
City pool vehicles are generally made available to general employees assigned with general
code enforcement, intra-city mail delivery, planning and engineering field inspection projects
and other issues. These tasks often require on -site inspection or review. Other demand upon
pool cars is travel by employees that do not have assigned City vehicles, which will be checked -
out on an increasing basis requiring a minor fleet addition.
Lastly, the City's centralized and personal desktop computer processing capability and storage
space will also be impacted with greater amounts of data necessary to manage a larger city.
The Purpose of the Fee. The costs of extending the same level of service to the newly
developing community as is provided to the existing community that has largely paid for the
existing facilities can be calculated, a fee imposed and collected, and the fee used to expand
the facilities necessary to extend that same level of services.
The Use of the Fee. The revenues that are raised from a properly calculated and supported
General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment Impact Fee would be limited to capitalized costs
related to that growth. The fees would be used to construct additional general facilities.
Conversely, the General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment DIF receipts would not be used to
repair any existing general building with the exception of remodeling City Hall to increase
capability and capacity, which would be far less expensive than constructing a building addition.
The improvements necessary to contend with increased demand resulting from additional
residents and businesses would include the following:
o City Hall floor plan remodel to increase use.
Expansion of the administrative pool car fleet.
• Up -sizing of the existing centralized computer system capacity.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 85
Chanter 9 General _Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
GF-001, City Hall Remodel for City Staff Use - Remodel City Hall complex space to maximize
use by City staff as the City's population and business community expands.
GF-002, Expansion of Administrative Pool Car Fleet - Additional inspections such as in
business license and code enforcement can be expected so some pool vehicle expansion would
be expected.
GF-003, General Use Computer Hardware/Software - This project consists of minor computer
and software expansions needed to accommodate new users.
The Relationship Between the Need for The Fee and The Type of Development, Project. The
need is based upon the recognition that additional developed parcels in the City will create the
need for more building space and specialty equipment, largely within the arena of overhead
space, i.e., administrative management, personnel, record keeping, financial accounting, etc.
The costs are distributed on an equal acreage basis as the most direct index of demand relating
to central management services.
The Relationship Between the use of the Fee and the Type of Development Paying the Fee.
General management of the City and General Plan issues transcend type of land use and the
use of the fee, as well as the need for the fee. Distribution of new demand will be based upon
an equal benefit in terms of general management of the City.
Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the Facilt
Attributed to the Development Project. The fee would be based upon the size of the
development. A fee has been determined for individual units, either residential dwelling units or
business square feet. A development of twelve residential units would have to pay a fee twelve
times larger than a single unit. No developer will be required to construct any portion of any
general facility as a condition of development.
Resulting DIF Schedule. Table 9-1 following, summarizes the Minimum Needs -based General
Facilities DIFs. The fees identified following represent the fees necessary to construct or
acquire the facilities identified on Schedule 9.1.
[This space left vacant in order to place the following table on a single page].
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 86
Chapter 9 General Facilities 'Vehicles and Equipment
Table 9-1
City of El Segundo's Entire City Area
Minimum Needs -based General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
Development Impact Costs
by DIF Land -use Type
It must be restated that the existing community has established the City Hall, general pool fleet,
and inventory of computer/electronic equipment. In short, the current community has created
more than adequate staff facilities for which future development attains immediate benefit from.
Table 9-2, following, identifies the average investment by residential dwelling units, commercial
lodging units and business square feet.
Table 9-2
Existing General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
Community Financial Commitment Comparison
RECOMMENDED IMPACT FEES
The Minimum Needs -based Impact Costs should be adopted for the two broad land -uses, per
Schedule 9.2 and summarized in table 9-3. The Existing Community Financial Commitment
indicates that the existing community has generated a great deal more infrastructure than will be
asked of future development.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 87
Chapter 9 General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
RECAP OF RECOMMENDED GENERAL FACILITIES ET. AL. IMPACT FEES
1. Create a DIF Fund titled General Facilities Impact Fee Fund.
2. Adopt Schedule 9.2 for the three common land -uses
END OF CHAPTER TEXT
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 88
Schedule 9.1
City of El Segundo
2021.22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Allocation of Project Cost Estimates
General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
GF-001
JCity gall Reconfiguration/Expansion
$1,3%895
GF-002
IExpansion Of Administrative Foal Car Fleet
$45,000
OF-003
Electronic Specialty Equipment/Computer Hardware./Software
$225,0Q0
Dula -Total General Plan Total New Project Costs $1,528.8g
LESS:
vei ntet lrnpact Fee Fund balance $0
Total General Plan Total New PLilnect Costs $1.628,89
OD
CO
20.00%
$271,779
20.00%
$9,000
20.00
$45,000
0 00% $0
20 00%0 1, $325 779
Cn� u*i .Ale '
Gen
Of
AppOW
one
f
Esoltatt .�
80-00% $1,087.116
80.00% $36,000
80.00% S180-000
80.000 $1,303,116
MOM"'MOTMM"MM
Schedule 9.2
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Minimum Needs -based Impact Costs
General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
71,t1n�oevOtOOMW
UW �
4
�
C0tlgre
' r hard
Private Residences +
()
78.37 1979
1.000
78.37
30.47%
$397,095
S5,067 25.25 201 r unit
Private Residences (-)
(73.93) (203)
1.000
(73,93)
-28.75°/b
-$374,599
$5,0671 116.00 $44 er Unit
Commercial Lodging Room
2.00 232
1.000
2.00
0.78%
$10,1341
+
Business Square feet ()
250.74 10618,839
1.000
250.74
97.50%
$1,270,485
$5,067 42,350 $0.120 perS. F.
Business Square Feet (-)
(166.52) (769,944)
1.000
(166.52)
-64.75%
-$843,747
n �'I .,
O matt -ref
,
° , _
A
- -
7A,,
t1
3O11 _i
Schedule 9.3
City of FJ Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Existing Community Financial Commitment Comparison
General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
�, M�Mml. -w =NMI
d 3 t � i 3•.
Private R idea
1,478SO
4,312
1.0001
1,478.80
38.12%1
$10,129,1971
$6,850
2.92
$2,349 per Unit
ommercial Lodgtritl fronts
33.10
2,691
1.000
1 33.101
0.85%1
$226,722
1 $6,850
181.30
$84 Ber Unit
Business Square Feet
2,367.501
18,621,253
1.000
1 2,367-501
61.03%
$16,216,441
$6,850
_ 7,8651
$0.871-per S.F.
Tbt � �
J773 79 40 10tk00% $28,572 6[} 7i csi t€g d$rtar }Ii CaFt Assam
-- $€27; iC " �11 aldli`�iliit
5OO;O Q,. ix i arrl isti t r td torlrc 1< its , nt
0 ti.eral°FundPool lfeicletl
' 1n ps 6t F Rind 1 tance,_
CO
Chapter 10
Library Collection Items and
Dedicated Public Use Computer Stations
The Existing System. The City's residents are served by the City -owned El Segundo Public
Library,, The facility provides access to a broad inventory of boobs, tapes, electronic books,
subscriptions called a collection of volumes and a number of dedicated public use computer
stations available to the public. Table 10-1, following, identifies the current inventory of library
offerings enjoyed by the City's residents.
Table 10-1
Identification of Current Library Inventories and Calculation of
Collection Items and Computer Stations per Resident Standards
C lfep■yy■ti+pn computer
Existing Collection Items 121,918 19
Collection Items Available Within Fund Balance 1,864 0.29
Total Collection Items/Public Computers 123,782 19.29
Current City Population 16,660 16,660
Current Standard per Resident 7.430 0.0012
The Purpose of the Fee. The purpose of the fee is to enable the City to add collection items
and additional computer stations to ensure that its citizens the same access to the collection
items and computer stations they do now. Table 10-2, following, indicates that the remaining
residential development and typical number of persons per type of residential dwelling will
generate a need for an additional 37,748 collection items in order to maintain the existing local
library collection facility standard of 7.430 collection items per person and six dedicated public
use computer stations to maintain the existing standard of 0. 00 12 stations per resident.
Table 10-2
Collection Items Required to Maintain Existing
Library Collection Items Standard
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 92
Table 10-3, following, indicates the additional number of residents (5,080) to be served by the
existing nineteen computer stations and the number of computer stations required (six) to
maintain the existing standard of 0.0012 computer stations per person in light of the additional
5,080 residents at build -out.
Table 10-3
Collection Items Required to Maintain Existing
Library Dedicated Public Access Computer Stations Standard
The Use of the Fee. The fee, if adopted, imposed and collected would be limited to acquiring
additional library collection items and dedicated public use computer stations, but not on the
replacement of either. The preservation of the existing Library standards must be maintained.
LB-001, Library Collection Expansion — Expand the Library collection by 37,748 collection
items in order to maintain the existing standard of 7.430 collection items per City resident. Were
the City unable to expand the current collection the standard would be reduced to 5.69
collection items per resident.
LB-002, Library Computer Stations — Expand the Library's inventory of public access
computers by six (from nineteen) in order to maintain the existing standard of 0.0012 computers
per 1,000 City residents. Were the City unable to expand the current computer standard would
be reduced to 0.266 computer items per 1,0010 residents. The computers could be any variety
of internet accessible items.
The Relationship Between the Need for The Fee and The Type of Development Project.
The development of any acreage zoned for residential uses, increases the demand on the finite
amount of library collection items and dedicated public use computer stations. Thus, those
residential Land -uses that generate higher amounts of residents (i.e., detached dwelling unit) will
be charged a proportionally higher amount. There is no information available demonstrating a
significant link or nexus between library use by local businesses.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 93
M it • - a, r ilw w s •: w •
The Relationship Between the Use of the Fee and the Type of Development Paying the
Fee. Additional collection items and dedicated public -use computer stations will be acquired
with the impact fee receipts collected from residential development.
The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the
Facility Attributed to the Development Project. The cost of acquiring additional volumes,
called the accession process,(15) is $40.00 per item per Schedule 10.1 The accession process
cost has been decreased steadily over recent years due to the contracting out this time -
intensive process. When the 123,782 collection items inventory is divided by the 16,660 existing
citizens establishes a standard of 7.430 collection items per resident. The standard of 7.430
collection items standard is multiplied by the $40.00 per item a charge of $297.20 per additional
City resident is determined.
Table 10-4
Establishment of the Library Collection Standard
and Cost per Person to Maintain the Standard
Library Collection Items123,782
Current Po ulation
16,660
Collection Items pe,r Resident 7.430
% uisition Cost of Collection Item $40.00
Cost per Additional Resident $297.20
The cost of acquiring a single computer station (per Schedule 10.1) is estimated to be $2,300
per computer, monitor, software license, workstation and installation. The nineteen existing
computer stations used by IFII Segundo residents„ when divided by the 16,60 net existing
residents create a standard of 0.0012 dedicated public use computer stations per City resident.
The standard of 0.0012 collection items multiplied by the $2„300 per (public computer station
results in a cost of $2.76 per additional City resident, in order to maintain the existing standard.
Table 10-5 identifies this:
[This space left vacant in order to place the following table on a single page].
15The accession process includes: need research, ordering, receipt, preparation, entering it into the computer and actual placement
on the shelves.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 94
Chapter 10 L.ibra Collection Ikems and Dedicated Public Lase Com afar Stations
Table 10-5
Establishment of the Library Dedicated Public Use
Computer Station Standard
and Cost per Person to Maintain the Standard
Libra Collection Items and Computer Station 0 F Schedule. The combined cost per new
resident is $299.96 ($297,20 for 7.430 collection items and $2.67 for 0.0012 additional computer
stations). Table 10-6, following, indicates the amount required for pro-rata expansion of the
library space per Schedule 10.1. If adopted and imposed on the remaining development, it
would collect enough to acquire an additional 37,748 library collection, volumes and sixteen
dedicated public use computer stations.
Table 10-6
Summary of Collection Items and Computer
Stations Impact Costs
er,
0,11 4�
sloe
e
Detached Dwelling.
3.025
$299.96
$ C9 71
Attached Dyv fl.�ts
2.876
$299.96
$863.00
RECAP OF RECOMMENDED LIBRARY AND COLLECTION VOLUMES IMPACT FEES
1. Create a DIF Fund titled Library Collection/Computers Impact Fee Fund.
2. Adopt Schedule 10.1 for the two differing residential land -uses
END OF CHAPTER TEXT
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 95
Schedule 10.1
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Library Collection Items/Dedicated Public Use Computers
Existin Number of Collection items
Existing Number of Dedicated Public Computer Stations
Libraa Items/Stations Represented by Existin Fund Balance
Total Library Componer Status
121,918
`N
19.00
1,864
0.29
123,782
19.29
Current Net City Population
16,660
16,660
Collection Items per Resident
7.430�
Computer Stations per, Resident'
a !
0.0012
Accessions Cost per Collection Item
$40 00
'Cost per Computer Station with Licenses, Installed
$2,-Ann .00
Collection Item Cost per Resident
$297.20y
�,�P
,, ;;
$2.76
Collection Item Cost per Resident
0efb ty er
. t l�
fN
yo/{+�npry
A;*.'iP,411
l Y/l.ryyFy,
yy�
4061
Mr�M
,��,p[V�,
Pro",
A;7w�4N4,.
Detached Dwelling Unit
3.025
$899 $8
$907
Attached Dwelling Unit
2.876
$855 $8
$863
Chapter 11
Public Use (Community Center) Facilities
This important component of the City's offerings to its citizens is distinct from the Park Land and
Park Improvements DIF as a separate DIF infrastructure category. This was undertaken for
three reasons.
First, few parks contain a community public use center. Secondly, it is difficult to ensure that the
cost for such a facility is properly included in the average park development cost per acre.
Lastly and perhaps most importantly, it has been the experience of RCS staff, that when the
cost for community centers is included as a cost of park development, these facilities simply do
not get built. This is because the park impact fee revenues get used on the costly demand for
turfed park acres with sports or passive -use park improvements.
The Existing System. The City has some facilities currently dedicated for public use. Such
facilities are available to community groups for meetings, classes, sports activities, and other
civic functions. This category of buildings differs from General Facilities which are those used
by the City staff to undertake their municipal service duties (City Hall and the City Corporation
Yards as good examples).
The City owns some facilities dedicated to a specific use, such as the George E. Gordon
Clubhouse and Joslyn Senior Center. Table 11-1 shows the City's existing public meeting
facilities.
Table 11-1
Inventory of Existing (Owned) Public Meeting Facilities
Based upon an existing population of 16,660, the 57,265 square feet creates an impressive
standard of 3.437 square feet per resident. This standard indicates that the City maintains a
substantial commitment to providing a community center or recreation space for public groups
and individuals. It should also be noted that the standard of 3.437 is not only impressive but one
of the highest standards RCS staff has seen in years. Table 11-2, following, demonstrates the
calculation establishing the square foot standard:
www
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 97
Chapter 11 Public Use Facilities
Table 11-2
Calculation of Public Use Facilities
Square Foot Standard
Existing Public Use Facilities Space Square Feet 57,267
Current Cit Population 16,660
Square Foot per Resident Standard 3.437
(Demand Upon. Infrastructure Created by the Development of Undlerdevelo ed or Undevelo ed
Paro l . Simply stated, additional residential dwelling units will increase the population, placing
greater demands for use of the existing community centers. The construction of a detached
dwelling unit will create, on average, 3.025 potential new community center users. The addition
of a new attached dwelling will create on average 2.876 potential new users.
The Pur ose of the Fee. The purpose of the fee is to determine the cost of expanding the
community center and public use type facilities by some 17,460 square feet to meet the added
demands created by the construction of additional residential dwelling units. It should be noted
that 17,460 square feet of public use facilities may not fully meet the needs of the build -out
community and that square feet may be desired by the community. The reference to the 17,460
square feet indicates that is the amount of additional public use facilities square feet that could
be financed by DIFs.
Table 11-3, following, demonstrates the calculation of the number of additional square feet
required to maintain the existing Public Use facilities standard:
Table 11-3
Square Feet of Community Center Space
Required to Maintain Existing Standard
The e of the Fee. The fee, if adopted, would be imposed, collected, and spent on the
construction of additional community center space that benefits City of El Segundo residents,
not rehabilitation of any existing public use facility.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 98
Chapter 11 Public Use Facilities
PF-001, Public Use Facilities Expansion — Construct up to 17,460 square feet of general
purpose public use facilities. Public Use Facilities include, but are not limited to, gymnasiums,
senior or teen centers, general purpose community centers, libraries, galleries etc. The 17,460
square foot figure is the amount of space would need to be added to the City's public use
inventory to maintain the existing standard of 3.437 square foot per resident standard at GP
build -out. Were the City unable to expand the existing publlc use facility inventory the standard
would decrease from the existing 3.437 square foot per City resident to 2.634 square foot per
City resident.
The Relationshi Between the bleed for The Fee and The Type of Development Project.
Different types of residential dwellings generally have differing amounts of people dwelling in
them. Census data indicates the following occupancy statistics for the City:
Detached Dwelling Units................ ,...... .,, ,_,,.._3.025 Persons/Unit
Attached Dwelling Units......... „............................................ .,.,,......... 2.876 Persons/Unit
The Relationshi Between the Use of the Fee and the Tyge of Development Pa in3 the Fee.
The fee will be used to expand the amount of community center square feet in proportions
consistent with the average persons per dwelling. Community centers would be expanded in
the following amounts following, by type of residential dwelling:
Detached Dwelling Unit.... 3.025 Persons per Unit X 3.437 Square Feet = 10.397 Square Feet
Attached Dwelling Unit ....... 2.876 Persons per Unit X 3.437 Square Feet = 9.885 Square Feet
The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the Facility
Attributed to the Develo ment Project. The cost of adding 3.437 square feet of building space
per person is roughly $2,540.80 based upon a $695 per square foot for construction, $13.50 for
parcel hardscape improvements based upon a $4.50 per square foot cost and a floor area ratio
of 0.333) and land acquisition cost of $30.75 per square foot. A detached dwelling unit with
3.025 persons would require 10.396 square feet of public meeting space at a cost of $7,686
(10.396 square feet X $739.24 per square foot, rounded). An attached dwelling unit requires
9.829 square feet of public meeting space at a cost of about $7,307 (9.884 square feet X
$739.24 per square foot).
Resulting DIFs, Table 11-4, following, indicates the proposed Public Use Facilities DIF.
Table 11-4
Summary of Public Use Facilities Impact Fee
m �
i
Detached Dwelling Unit $7,686
Attached Dwelling Unit $7,307
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 99
Chapter 11 Public Use Facilities
RECAP OF RECOMMENDED PUBLIC USE FACILITIES IMPACT FEES
1. Create a DIF Fund titled Public Use Facilities Impact fee Fund.
2. Adopt Schedule 11.1 for the two differing residential land -uses
END OF CHAPTER TEXT
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 100
Schedule 11.1
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Public Use Facilities
�wldll ��
Camp Eucalyptus Building
1,210
Check-out Building
1,000
George E. Gordon Clubhouse
7,500
Roslyn Senior Center
10,800
City library
31,275
Teen Center
5,480
Facilities Represented in Existing DIF Fund Balance (no existing DIF))
0
Existing City -owned Public Use Facilities Square Feet
57,265
Current Population 16,660
Square Foot per Resident Standard 3.437
Nverage Public Use Facility Construction Cost ,per Square Foot $695.00
Parcel Hardscape Improvements, $4.50 S.F. and 0.333 Floor Area Ratio $13.5C
Land Acquisition/Grading Cost $10.25 per square foot X 0.333 FAR $30.7E
Total Cost for a Single Square Foot of Public Use Space $739.25
Total Cost for one Square Foot of Public Use Space $739.25
Square Foot Ler Resident Standard 3,437
Cost per New A;;i;;ntj $2,540.80
Detached Dwelling Unit s.UZO I ;Pi,000
Attached Dwelling Unit 2.8761 $7,307
101
Chapter 12
Aquatics Facilities
This component of City infrastructure is also separated from the Park Land Acquisition and DIF
for the same reasons described in the previous Chapter regarding Public Use (community
center) Facilities.
The Existing System. The City owns and operates two impressive aquatics centers/pools
consisting of a total of 24,372 square feet of swimming pool surface and 1,794 square feet of
combination locker/utilities/office buildings. The existing facilities are available to individuals and
organized groups represented by the existing 16,660 residents for leisure, competition and
general fitness uses. Table 12-1 following, details the size of the four aquatic pools and building
structure. There is no existing fund balance.
Table 12-1
Existing City Pools/Utility Buildings
Demand Upon Infrastructure Created by the Development of Underdeveloped or Undevelo ed
Parcels. Simply stated, additional residential dwelling units will increase the population placing
greater demands upon the City's existing aquatics centers. The construction of detached
dwelling and attached dwellings will create, on average, 3.025 and 2.876 potential new potential
pool users, respectively. The current de -facto standards are 0.1077 square feet of
locker/office/maintenance building per person and 1.4629 square feet of pool surface per
person in the City.
The Purpose of the Fee. The purpose of the fee is to generate DIF revenue with which to
expand the aquatics centers capacity to meet the added demands created by the construction
of additional residential dwelling units.
The Use +f the Fee. The fee, if adopted, would be imposed, collected, and spent on the
construction of additional aquatics centers that would benefit City of El Segundo residents, but
would not be spent on rehabilitation of the existing aquatic center.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 102
Chapter 12 A uatics Facili ies
The Relationship Between the Need for The Fee and The Type of Development Pro`eot.
Different types of residential dwellings generally have differing numbers of people dwelling in
them. United States Census 2000 data (see Table 2-2. page 16) was used to determine the
occupancy density statistics for the City. They are summarized as follows
Detached Dwelling Units ................. ............. ...,.a,.,. .... .. 3.025 Persons/Dwelling Unit
Attached Dwelling Units ................................................ 2.876 Persons/Dwelling Unit
The fee will be used to expand the pool surface space and support building in proportions
consistent with the average persons per dwelling. The aquatic centerpools and
buildings wou!ld be expanded in the amounts on the following page, by type of residential
• -
Detached Dwelling Units... 0.326 S.F. of locker space and 4.425 S.F. of pool surface
Attached Dwelling Units.... 0.310 S.F. of locker space and 4.207 S.F. of pool surface
The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the. Facilit
Attributed to the Development Project. Schedule 12.1 indicates the pool and locker building
cost calculations. The pool construction costs are also based upon past pool construction costs
received from previous agencies.
The two separate square foot costs above total about $526.64 per person for the pool
expansion ($360/S.F. X 1.4629 S.F per resident = $526.64 per person) and locker building
expansion ($540/S.F. X 0.1077 S.F. per resident = $58.16 per person) or $584.80 per person
for both construction components. Thus, a detached dwelling detached unit would incur impact
costs of $1,769/dwelling, (3.025 persons X $584.80, rounded). An attached dwelling unit would
generate impact costs of about $1,682/dwelling, (2.876 persons X $584.80, rounded).
Resulting DIF Schedule. Schedule 12.1, as summarized by Table 12-2 following, indicates the
proposed Aquatics Facilities DIF schedule.
Table 12-2
Summary of Aquatics Facilities Impact Fee
Detached Dwelling Unit $1,769
Attached Dwelling Unit $1,682
[This space left vacant in order to place the Chapter recommendations on a single page].
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 103
Chapter 12 A uatics Facilities
RECAP OF RECOMMENDED AQUATICS FACILITIES IMPACT FEES
1. Create a DIF Fund titled Aquatics Facilities Impact Fee Fund.
2. Adopt Schedule 12.1 for the two residential land -uses
END OF CHAPTER TEXT
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 104
Schedule 12.1
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Aquatics Facilities
'"mil w
u pq
„ap8(w
�gp,�i}��f+4'yy5,
Aquatic Center - Competition Pool
15,808
Aquatic Center - Practice Pool
3,053
Aquatic Center Lockers/Shower/Restroom Buildin s
'` ��, ,;
1,794
'Urho Saari Swim Stadium - Plunge
4,534
15"
Urho Saari Swim Stadium - Junior Pool
977
Facilities Represented in Existing DIF Fund Balance
0
0
Current Pool Size (Surface Square Feet):
24,372
Current Aquatics Building` (Square Feet):
' f '° ,� A
1,794
Current Population 1 16,660 16,660
Existing Standards:
Square Feet of Surface /Resident 1.4629
��°°777"
Square Foot of Locker Buildin/Person
0.1077
Construction Costs
Pool Cost per Surface Square Foot
$360.00do
Facilities Construction/Square Foot
;,,,� 1; "
$540.0
Existing Standards per Resident 1.4629 0.1077
Adjusted Pool Cost per Resident $526.64
Adiusted Facilities Cost per Resident$58.16
Total Cost per Added Resident 7, , ,=, ;gym' $526.64 $58.16 $584.80
Detached Dwelling Unit 3.025 $1,593 $1761 $1,769
Attached Dwelling Unit 2.876 $1,515 $1671 $1,682
105
Chapter 13
Park Land Acquisition and
Park Infrastructure Development
This Chapter summarizes the City's existing inventory of parks and identifies the ratio of park
land per resident allowable under the Quimby Act (§66477 of the Government Code) (") for
residential developments involving the subdivision of land and the Mitigation Fee Act (§66000 of
the Government Code) for the construction of residential developments not involving the
subdivision of land. The existing per capita standard is then utilized to calculate the park
dedication requirement for future residential development.
EXISTING PARKS AND RECREATION SYSTEM
Intensive parks and park recreational facilities constitute one of the City of El Segundo's
greatest challenges both with respect to facilities for both current residents and future citizens.
The provision of a well -planned park system, with a variation in the size and nature of facilities
offered, is an important amenity to residents of any city, the City of El Segundo included. A
mixture of passive and active uses and facilities and programs which appeal to a broad
spectrum of potential park users is considered optimal in most urban cities. A city's park system
and inventory of open space is often a major factor in selection of a place to live. The current
acres dedicated to park use will serve well to meet the City's current needs. However, if the
number of improved active/passive park acres remains static at 62.47 acres, they will not
continue to meet recreational demands in light of the increase to the City's population.
Future residential development, by increasing the City's population, will impact the City's park
system by requiring additional baseball fields and adequate space for various athletic activities.
Given the magnitude of growth projected in this and other reports, the challenge facing the City
will be to provide new facilities and park land to serve the recreational needs of these new
residents. Without additional park land acquisition and continued development of currently
owned but underutilized park land during the next twenty to thirty years, the City's parks will
become overcrowded and overused, with the ultimate result becoming a negative experience for
park users.
Existing Parks., Currently, the City owns approximately 62.47 acres of park land, most of it
developed. Recreation, Campus El Segundo Fields, Civic Center Courtyard, Imperial Parkway
and Washington Parks are the City's largest developed parks, representing over 63% of the
park system acreage (when only traditional improved parks are considered) and provide the
greatest variety of sports and passive uses. Raytheon Employee Park and Richmond Field are
not owned by the City and while often enjoyed by City residents they are not included in the
calculation of the City -owned Parks standard of acres per 1,000 residents.
Table 13-1, on the following page, is an inventory of the existing park acreage.
16 Adoption of a Quimby Act Fee requires a park "plan".
City of El Segundo
g o 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 106
Chapter 13 Park land Ac Wsition and Parr Infrastructure Develo meat
Table 13-1
Inventory of Owned and Developed Park Land
, i inmr
` rk,Act
or or
Acacia Park
0.54
0.54
Camp Eucalyptus
0.31
0.31
Campus El Segundo Fields
5.00
5.00
Candy Lane Park
y
0.31
0.31
-
Civic Center Courtyard/Park
4.55
4.55
Clutters ParkmmITITITmmmmIT
0.90
0.90
....-..... .__....
__ ......
Constitution Park (1)
1.13
1.13
El Segundo Dog Park .................._.
1.96
1.96
................
Freedom Park (1)
3.25
3.25
Hilltop Park ........................................
1.22
1.22
Holly Valley Park
0.21
0.21
Imperial Parkway (2) __._ _........
4.88
............... ..- _._.__. 0.00
Imperial Strip/Memory Row (2)
7.75
0.00
Independence Park (1)
0.72
0.72
Kansas City Park
0.40
0.40
Library Park
3.44
3.44
Raytheon Employee Park
0.00
0.00
Recreation Park (includes Stevenson Field)
20.42
20.42
Richmond Field (School District Property)
................ �.........
0.00
_.... ...�
0.00
Sycamore Park
0.84
0.84
Washington Park (1)
4.56
2.74
Total Park Acres
62.47
48.01
City De Facto Park Standard. Table 13-2 following is a comparison of the acreage of parks to
the City of El Segundo's current population and indicates that the City presently possesses a
total standard of 3.750 acres of owned park land per 1,000 residents, (62.47 acres - [16,660
residents - 1,000], rounded). This average is significantly higher than the benchmark of 3.0
acres per 1,000 persons contained in Section 66477 of the California Government Code relating
to dedication of parks. It should also be noted that the park average for the City is not only high
when compared to the 3.0 standard set by Section 66477, but is the second highest when
compared to the last 18 cities RCS has worked with. The City should be commended for this
achievement.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 107
Cha ter 13 Park. Land Ac uisition pnd Park Inf[a ru ure gyplo en
Table 13-2
Calculation of Actual City -owned Improved Park Acres Standard
However, the Quimby Act, to be discussed later, allows a minimum standard of 3.0 acres per
thousand residents even if the City does not reach that standard. The Quimby minimum of 3.0
acres per 1,000 residents has been exceeded by the 3.750 acres per 1,000 residents and thus
the Quimby allowable minimum of 3.0 acres per 1,000 will not be used in the remainder of the
Chapter for park construction. The 3.750 acres per 1,000 residents will be the standard used to
calculate the park land acquisition and park improvements development impact fee. Though not
relevant to the City of El Segundo, the Quimby Act has a cap of 5.0 acres per thousand
residents (Government Code §66447 (a) (2).
Planned Park Improvements. In addition to the on -going improvement of the existing 62.47
acres (17), the City will need to acquire 19.05 park acres, per Table 13-3, and develop these new
parks to serve the additional 4,241 residents anticipated to live in City.
Table 13-3
Calculation of Required
Park Acres per Allowable Standard
................................. ..- .........�
General Plan Anticipated Population Increase 5,080
Additional Population Divided by 1,000 5.080
Allowable Standard in Acres/1,000 3.750
......... .... ....
Park Acres required to Maintain Standard 19.05
These general improvements are outlined below:
PK-001 Park Land Acquisition and Improvements — Acquire land for and make
improvements to a composite of 19.05 acres of parkland. The parkland could be any type of
park, community, sports, neighborhood, historical, etc. Should the City be unable to finance any
additional parkland by GP build -out of the net 1,776 anticipated residential dwelling units, the
17 The Quimby Act does allow for the use of receipts raised by the adoption of a Quimby Act park Impact Fee to be used for
rehabilitation of existing park configurations.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 108
Chaoter 13 -__ Park Land Acquisition and Park Infrastructure Development
standard would drop from 3.750 acres per 1,000 residents to 2.87 acres per 1,000 residents, or
a 23.4% decrease from the existing level of service (LOS).
The City may also consider adopting a park standard of 3.0 and maintaining this standard until
G.P. Build -out. If the City were to take this approach the total needed acres to maintain this
standard would be 65.22 total acres for the entire City at G.P. build -out (21,740 G.P. Build -out
Population T 1,000 = 21.74 X 3.0 Park Standard = 65.22 Acres). If this approach is used the
City would only need to acquire 2.75 acres of park land to maintain a 3.0 standard.
PK-002, Existing Park Fund Balance Projects — This represents the use of the $193,862 in
the existing Park Fund Impact Fee balance.
The 19.05 acres could be constructed in any of the following configurations:
Mini or "Pocket" Parks - This the smallest of the parks designations and though generally not
planned due to higher maintenance costs, usually are the result of acquiring an unusual parcel
of land sometimes with historical significance. The City's Camp Eucalyptus, Candy Lane and
Holly Valley Parks best demonstrate this category.
Local or Neighborhood Parks - These parks are generally five to ten acres and serve local
(1/4 mile walk-in distance) users. Not surprisingly, the City has a number of these parks.
Campus El Segundo Fields, Imperial Parkway, and Imperial Strip/Memory Row Park are good
examples of this category.
Community or Sport Parks - These parks are most functional when they are twenty acres or
larger and are designed to meet the needs of the entire community. Often, ten to twenty acre
parks are forced to act as community or sports parks. These needs include youth and adult
sports organizations, clubs or associations and large scale community events such as 4th of July
celebrations or festivals. Recreation Park is a perfect example of the community or sport park.
The park and recreation improvements that could be contained within the almost 19.05 needed
acres and the existing standard (Table 13-1) are both consistent with the City's Park and
Recreation Element of the General Plan. The City's 3.750 acres per 1,000 population standard
speaks well for the City as a three acre per 1,000 population standard is a common minimum,
but frequently unmet, target of municipalities and recreation/park special districts throughout
Southern California.
CALCULATION OF PARK DEDICATION STANDARD
Unlike the other facilities discussed in this Report, the California Government Code contains
enabling legislation for the acquisition and development of community and neighborhood parks
by a City. This legislation, codified as Section 66477 of the Government Code and known
commonly as the "Quimby Act", establishes criteria for charging new development for park
facilities based on specific park standards. This Report will recommend the adoption of
Quimby -style park fees over an AB 1600-style DIF for developments requiring the subdivision of
land and an AB 1600 fee for non -subdivided land.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 109
Cha ter 13 Park Nand Agggisition and Park Infrastructure Develo meat
Allowable Park Standard As stated earlier, under §66477 of the Government Code, the City
may charge new residential development based on a standard of 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents
even if the City does not presently possess a ratio of 3.0 acres per 1,000 for the existing
population. The Government Code also enables a city to charge development based on a
standard higher than 3.0 acres (to a maximum of 5.0 acres) if the City currently exceeds the
minimum benchmark ratio of 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents.
The law states that "if the amount of existing neighborhood and community park area ...
exceeds the [3 acres of park area per 1,000 person) limit the legislative body may adopt the
calculated amount as a higher standard not to exceed 5 acres per 1,000 persons" ") . Park fees
may be required by the City provided that the City meets certain conditions including:
• The amount and location of land to be dedicated or the fees to be paid shall bear a
reasonable relationship to the use of the park by the future inhabitants of the subdivision.
• The legislative body has adopted a general plan containing a recreational element, and
the park and recreational facilities are in accordance with definite principles and
standards contained therein.
• The city ... shall develop a schedule specifying how, when, and where it will use the land
or fees, or both, to develop park or recreational facilities ... Any fees collected under the
ordinance shall be committed within five years after the payment of such fees.
Determination of a Park Standard. As previously identified, the City currently has a
demonstrated 3.750 acres of owned and developed park acres/1,000 residents and will be used
in the calculation. The Quimby Act allows the City to adopt a standard of 3.0 acres per
thousand as the low -end threshold. However, the 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents standard is the
highest standard that can be adopted under the Quimby Act, without actually maintaining a
standard higher than 3.0 acres/1,000.
CALCULATION OF IMPACT COSTS
Once a per capita standard for parks is determined, the cost of residential development's impact
on the City's park system can be computed as follows.
Park Land Ac uisition Costs. Land costs will vary significantly from one park to another. The
park land to be acquired must be suitable for park construction and is conservatively estimated
at approximately $2,000,000 per acre which is used in the park DIF calculation. However, the
use of this figure could be criticized if a developer can show that the cost of the residential land
they are developing is currently valued at less than the $2,000,000/acre acquisition figure. The
fee recommendation at the end of the Chapter will recognize this challenge.
Park im rovements Construction Costs. Park improvement construction costs are based upon
a schedule (Appendix C) of common park improvements by size of park and costs from various
18 California Government Code, Title 7, Division 2, Section 66447 (b).
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 110
Chaoter 13 Park Land Ac uisition and Nark Infrastructure Development
construction bids received by other clients as the City does not have any more recent full park
construction history. Again, public use facilities were not included in the cost calculation (see
Chapters 11 and 12).
Average Park. Ac uisition Development and Maintenance 'Vehicles and Facilities Cost per
C1t. The combined park land acquisition, park improvements development and support
facilities cost is $2,037,500 per acre ($2,000,000/acre for land acquisition, $37,500 per acre for
grading and contiguous infrastructure). If the City were to charge development for the maximum
allowable amount of park acreage as allowed in the Quimby Act and, then the City would need
to acquire 3.750 acres of new park land for every potential 1,000 new residents to the City. The
3.750 acres of land acquisition and development per 1,000 persons would be $8,926,451 or
about $8,926.46 per new resident. Schedule 14.1 calculates the cost to develop 3.750 acres,
which again represents the required park land cost for 1,000 persons.
Average Cost per Dwelling Unit. Schedule 13.1 further calculates the cost per dwelling unit
based on the per person park land acquisition and improvement costs of $8,926.46 (Schedule
13.1) and the average number of persons per unit for each category of housing. Detached
dwelling residential housing has the highest number of persons per dwelling unit (@ 3.025 per
unit) and consequently carries the highest impact fee, $27,003 per unit ($8,926.46 X 3.025
persons per unit, rounded). Attached dwelling units have an average of 2.876 persons per unit
and would need to be assessed $25,672 ($8,926.46 X 2.876 rounded). Table 13-4, following,
summarizes the calculated and recommended fees for each of these three residential
categories. Schedule 13.1 provides greater park calculation detail and a complete schedule of
Park Land Acquisition and Park Improvements DIFs for each of the three dwelling unit types.
Table 13-4
Summary of Park Development Fees for
Residential Dwelling Construction
'; Vr i l M�yyyl ldy, y ykAAaO
�m,pe;`.
Detached Dwelling Unit $27,003/Unit
Attached Dwelling Unit $25,672/Unit
The DIFs for detached dwelling residential development involving the subdivision of land, as
identified in Table 13-4, should be adopted under the auspices of the Quimby Act and the Fee
Mitigation Act. The Residential dwelling units not requiring the sub -division of a privately -owned
parcel will need to be adopted as a Government Code § 66000 supported DIF (19 F.
Lend Acquisition Cost Ad''ustment Challen e. As mentioned previously, the use of $2,000,000
as the park land cost is based upon the assumption that park acreage would likely be close in
proximity and thus similar in cost to residential land value of the project the park is intended to
19. This is required because the Quimby Act is referenced in the State Subdivision Code.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 111
Cha ter 13 bark Land Ac uisition and Park Infrastructure Development
serve. However, if the developer or contractor of a dwelling can provide evidence (acceptable
to the City) in the form of a recent appraisal of the property they will be developing that the
current land value is worth less than the pre -graded $2,000,000/acre or $46/square foot cost,
the DIF could be adjusted downward accordingly by placing the actual cost of land acquisition
into the calculation identified in Schedule 13.1. Again, if the City wishes to adopt such an
adjustment, the terms under which the challenge may be made and proved should be included
in the Impact Fee Ordinance.
RECAP OF RECOMMENDED PARK LAND ACQUISITION AND PARK INFRASTRUCTURE
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
1. Residential Housing - Adopt Schedule 13.1 for Park Land and Park Improvements for the
two basic residential land -uses.
END OF CHAPTER TEXT
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 112
Schedule 13.1
City of El Segundo
2021-22 Development Impact Cost Calculation
Park Land and Open Space Acquisition and Park Improvements
(both Quimby and Mitigation Fee Act Calculations)
n �
Imp�rVed
Acacia Park
0.54
0.54
Camp Eucalyptus
0.31
0.31
Campus El Segundo Fields
5.00
5.00
Candy Lane Park
0.31
0.31
Civic Center Courtyard/Park
4.55
4.55
Clutters Park
0.90
0.90
Constitution Park
El Segundo Dog Park
1.13
1.96
1.13
1.96
Freedom Park
3.25
3.25
Hilltop Park
1.22
! 1.22
Holly Valley Park
0.21
0.21
Imperial Parkway
4.88
0.00
Imperial Strip/Memory Row
7.75
0.00
Independence Park
Kansas Park
0.72
0.40
0.72
0.40
Library Park
3.44
3.44'
Raytheon Employee Park (privately owned)
0.00
0.00
Recreation Park (includes Stevenson Field)
20.42
20.42
Richmond Field (School District Property)
0.00
0.00
Sycamore Park
0.84
0.84
Washington Park
Park/OS Equivalent in Fund Balance
Total Acres (Owned/Developed)
4.56
0.08
62.47
2.74
0.08
48.01
Current Population
16,660
16,660
Population/1,000
16.66
16.66
Current Standard
3.750
2.882
Minimum Acres/1,000 Population Standard
3.750�
2.882
Construction
$446 158
Land Ac Acquisition Cost per Acre
$2,000,000
Grading/Contiguous Infrastructure
$37,500
Total Cost per Acre
$2,037,500
$446,158
Cost X 3.0 Acre/1,000 Residents Standard
$7,640625
$1,285,826
Population Served by Standard
1,000.00
1,000.00
[Acquisition/construction Cost per Resident
$7 640.63
$1,285�83
IR
Cost per Additional Resident $7,640.63 $1,285.83 $8,926.46
Detached Dwelling Unit
3.025
$21,113
1 $3,890
Attached Dwelling Unit
2.8761
$21.974
$3,698
$27,003
$25,672
113
Appendix A
Summary of Recommendations
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 114
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Chapter 3 - Law Enforcement Facilities and Equipment
• Adopt Schedule 3.2, page 28, General City — Minimum Capital Needs -based Impact
Costs
Chapter 4 - Fire Suppression Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
• Adopt Schedule 4.2, page 38, Minimum Capital Needs -based Impact Costs.
Chapter 5 — Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) System
• Create a DIF Fund titled Circulation System Impact Fee Fund.
• Adopt Schedule 5.2, page 53, - Minimum Capital Needs -based Impact Costs, and the
ALTERNATIVE COST METHODOLOGY, per single trip -end cost from Schedule 5.2 to
apply to Table 5-2 and the more specific ITE Trip Calculation.
Chapter 6 - Storm Drainage Collection Facilities
• Create a DIF Fund titled Storm Drainage Collection System Impact Fee Fund.
• Adopt Schedule 6.4, page 65, for the seven land -uses and the Cost Distribution per Acre
figure (from the third column from the right side of the Schedule 6.2) for developments that do
not involve a building pad, (e.g. additional asphalt parking area).
• Separately, calculate and adopt a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
In -lieu fee, via the Clean Water Act, for future development, additions or private rehabilitations.
Chapter 7 - Water Distribution Facilities
• Create a DIF Fund titled Water Distribution System Impact Fee Fund
• Adopt Schedule 7.2, page 75, - Minimum Capital Needs -based Impact Costs, Table 7-7,
p. 71, and Equivalent Water meter Size calculation based Upon Minimum Needs- based
Impact Fees.
Chapter 8 - Wastewater Collection Facilities
• Create a DIF Fund titled Wastewater System Impact Fee Fund
• Adopt Schedule 8.2, page 83, -Minimum Capital Needs -based Impact Costs.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 115
Chapter 9 - General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
• Create a DIF Fund titled General Facilities Impact Fee Fund
• Adopt Schedule 9.2, page 90, Minimum Needs -based Impact Costs.
Chapter 10 - Library Collection Items and Computer Stations
• Create a DIF Fund titled Library Collection/Computers Impact Fee Fund
• Adopt Schedule 10.1, p. 96.
Chapter 11 - Public Use (Community Centers) Facilities
• Create a DIF Fund titled Public Use Facilities Impact Fee Fund
• Adopt Schedule 11.1 page 101.
Chapter 12 — Aquatics Facilities
• Create a DIF Fund titled Aquatics Facilities Impact Fee Fund
• Adopt Schedule 12.1, p.105.
Chapter 13- Park Land Acquisition and Park Infrastructure Development
• Create Quimby Act Park land Acquisition and DIF Fund, Note (1).
• /OR - Adopt Schedule 13.1, page 113, for residential uses requiring the sub -division of
land for Quimby Act application.
• /OR - Adopt Schedule 13.1, page 113, for residential uses not requiring the sub -division of
land for AB1600 application.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 116
Appendix B
Expanded Land -use Database
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 117
�, �",
tarttrlatt,"V lftl. e(t s
w
l re)oe t �foteritlenf(GeiCe4riiFReg4,Su(It1Nt`s.
°, #tlUtrll".
irl of Milts"'^"
Aid W , , 0of Uit)te
Detached Dwelling Units (+)
1,390.20
3,822
3.64
20
1,393.84
3,842
Detached Dwelling Units (-)
0.00
0
(73.93)
(203)
(73.93)
(203)
Attached Dwelling Units
Commercial Lodging Units
88.60
33.10
490
2,691
74.73
2.00
1,959
232
163.33
35.10
2,449
2,923
Retail & Service Uses (SF) (+)
110.20
1,313,245
137.48
6,887,925
247.68
8,201,170
Retail & Service Uses (SF) (-)
0.00
0
(1.00)
(11,917)
(1.00)
(11,917)
Office Uses (SF)
574.80
9,493,945
85.26
2,985,602
660.06
12,479,547
Industrial Uses (SF) (+)
1,665.20
7,580,266
28.00
731,808
1,69120
8,312,074
Industrial Uses (SF) {-)
0.00
0
(166.52)
(758,50,027)
(166.62)
(758,027)
Institutional Use (SF)
17.30
233,797
1.00
134
18.30
247,301
Total -All City
1 ��
3,879.40
90.66
3,970.06
�/�
Private Residences .-..,,.
.. (+)
1,478.80
4,312.00
78.38.37
1,979
1,557.17
6,291
Private Residences (-)
0.00
0.00
(73.93)
(203)
(73.93)
(203)
Commercial Lodging Rooms
Business Square Feet (+)
33.10
2,367.50
2,691 .00
18,621,253.00
2.00
250.74
232
10,618,839
35.10
2,618.24
2,923
29,240,092
Business Square Feet (-)
0.00
0.00
(166.52)
(7691944)
(166.52)
(769,944)
Total for General Facilities DIF
3,879.40
90.66
3,970.06
28,479,159.00
i3i1 90 t t Iif%k (°
,,,,�,"��1��"iat�"'1.:a1"1 �.� ,� F���„
�il t1e 1 �(( ((exit u'r
V��,�7%, rYewrf� r h„pA,pi�li(�,1'fnite��f„��f
„.<P� 111 ��feld i ieli
iMrrydw.tirN-,"�y."wf VSff�
f�'„ ��,, j„�i, ii�.l i�{ts #,�;
f l? bB � - ti)ld if '
"N yw i,.y"""M" Em"
°,�; i&„��r ��I �)I �'t �.• '�
Detached Dwelling Units
1,390.2
3,822
3.64
20
1,393.84
3,842
AttachedDwellingUnits
88.6
! 490
0.80
24
89.40
514
Commercial Lodging Units
33.1
2,691
1.00
116
34.10
2,807
Retail & Service Uses (SF)
110.2
1 313,245
54.22
2,715,095
164.42
4,028,340
Office Uses (SF)
574.8
9,493,945
2.00
82,764
576.80
9,576,709
Industrial Uses (SF)
1 665.2
71580,266
28.00
731,808
1,693.20
8,312,074
Institutional Use (SF)
17.3
233,797
1.00
13,504
18.30
247,301
Sub -total -Vacant Land
3,879.40
MMMM 90.66
3,970.06
Detached Dwellina Units
Attached Dwelling Units
Commercial i_odainla Units
Retail & Service Uses
Office Uses ISF1
Industrial Uses (F')
Institutional Use (SF)
0.00
0
73.93
1,935
1,00
116
83.26
4,172,830
83.26
2,902,838
0.001
0
0.00
1 0
Subtotal - Upsizing 0.00 241.45 - 241.__
Detected Dwelll'it Units (-
Attached Dwelling Units
Commercial Lodging Units
Retail & Service Uses ISF)
Office Uses
Industrial Uses (
Institutional Use
Sub -total - Razed Uses 0.00 1 1 2'41.45 241.45
Appendix C
Park Construction Cost Schedule
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 119
Appendix C
Detailed Park Improvements - Unit Costs/Average Cost per Acre Calculation
ENR at January 2001 6281
1aed ENR Construction Cost Index 9516
ENR Percent Increase 151.50%
Public lm s, Road/curb, gutter. etc. $121 Linear Foot 151.5%1 $183.32 Linear Foot
Lar a Park Gradin /Irri gationTrurf $25,500 Acre 151.5%' $38,630 Acre
IRmnu Pork rrnr inn/IrrinatinnMjrf $30.600 Acre 151.5%1 $46,360 Acre
I�P�lil fY1i75�gPG7,.
Trees-5, 24 Gallon Box/Acre
$200.00 Each
151.5%
$303.01 Each
Trees-15, 15 Gallon/Acre
$100.00 Each
151.5%
$151.50 Each
Shrubs-10, Five Gallon
$19.00 Each
151.5%
$28.79 Each
Shrubs-30, One Gallon
ST 0 Each
151.5%1
$10.61 Each
r 1cly appal cstu-z
Play ApRaratus-La_ e
$120.000
Lot
151,5%
$181,810 Lot
La!e A _ aratoa Curbing, 450'
$18.50
Linear Foot
151.5%
$28.03 Linear Foot
Play _ aratus - Tedium
$80,000
Lot
151.5%°
$121,200 Lot
Medium A aratus Curbing, 376
$18.50
Linear Foot
151.5%
$28.03 Linear Foot
Play Apparatus - Small
$40,000
Lot
151.5%
$60,600 Lot
Srrall Aparatus Curbing, 226'
$18.50
Linear Foot
151.5%
$28.03 Linear Foot
Apparatus Safety Surface
$2.50
Square Foot
151.5%1
$3.79 Square Foot
Restroom - small
$60,450 Each
151.5%
$91,580 Each
Restroom - Large
Electrical Service Extension
$102,300 Each
$15,000 Each
151.5%
151.5%
$154,990 Each
$22,730 Each
Equipment Storage Facility
$55,800 Each
151.5%
$84,540 Each
Combined Restroorn/Goncession
$167,400 Each
151.5%
$253,620 Each
P r`
Parkin S 4" A.C. I/5" Rock base
$1,627.50 Space
151.5%
$2,465.74 Square foot
- utter
Drain Inlet
$7.44 Linear Foot
$744 Each
151.5%
151.5%
$11.27 Linear Foot
$1,127.19 Each
Drain Inlet Connector
$1,209 Each
151.5%
$1,831.69 Each
Storm Drainage Collection Line
$18.00 Linear Foot
151.5%
$27.27 Linear Foot
Drive Approach
$1,674 Each
151.5%
$2,536.00 Each
Perimeter Curbing$9.30
Linear Foot
151.5%''
$14.09 Linear Foot
Parkin Lot striping
$0.28 Linear Foot
151.5%
$0.42 Linear Foot
Exterior Street Li htin�a Standards
$1,674 Each
151.5%
$2,536.00 Each
Lot Si na a
$186 Lot
1 151.5%
$281.80 Lot
Storm DrainNe Facilities Qn park}
1,680 $307,978
_ 0 $0
5 $231,800
25
$7.575
75
$11,363
50
$1,440
150
$1,592
0
$0
0
_ $0
1
$121,200
375
$10,511
0
$0
0
$0
8,7891
$33,310
8
$19,726
96
$1,082
1
$1.127
1
$1,832
144
$3,927
1
$2,536
490
$6,904
80
$34
4
$10.144
1
$282
Appendix C
Detailed Park Improvements - Unit Costs/Average Cost per Acre Calculation
ENR at January 2001
6281
Used E IR Construction Cost Index
95161
ENR Percent Increase
151.500/6
� AIR Iht�t
6 . , :
_
Inlets
$744 Each
151.5%1
$1,130 Each
Connection to Arterial $1,860 Lot 151.5% $2.820 Lot
Line in Street $14.50 Linear Foot 151.5% $21.97 Linear Foot
Line in Park $12.50 Linear Foot 151.5% $18.94 Linear Foot
Fire Hydrant $2,790 Each 151.5% $4,230 Each
Walkway Lighting Standards $1,256 Each 151.5%1 $1,900 Each
Duct Work/Wirin $767 Each 151.5%1 $1,160 Each
Walkway Electical Wirin $15 Linear Foot 151.5% $20 Each
-
Water Facilities
3" Meter
Walkway Lighting Standards $1,256 Each 151.5%1 $1,900 Each
Duct Work/Wirin $767 Each 151.5%1 $1,160 Each
Walkway Electical Wirin $15 Linear Foot 151.5% $20 Each
-
Water Facilities
3" Meter
Water Facilities
3" Meter
$1,860 Each
151.5% $2.820 Each
W' Badcflow Device
$2,325 Each
151.5% $3,520 Each
Line in Street
$11.16 Linear Foot
151.5% $20 Linear Foot
Water Fountains
$651.00 Each
151.5% $90 Each
Fountain tines in Park
$11.16 Linear Foot
151.5% $20 Linear Foot
Benches/Tables
Concrete Picnic Tables
$750 Each
151.5%
$1140 Each
7' x 10' Cement Table Pads
$1,050 Each
151.5%
$1,590 Each
Individual BBQ Grills
_
$326 Each
151.5%
$493.90 Each
Concrete Benches
$325 Each
151.5%
$492.39 Each
3' x 6' Concrete Bench Pads
$270 Each
151.5%
$409.06 Each
Bleachers
$3,255 Each
151.5%
$4,930 Each
Ear e Covered Picnic Ramada
$57,660 Each
151.5%
$87,360 Each
Individual Covered Picnic Pad
$13,950 Each
151.5%
$21,130 Each
User Electrical Service
$9,300 Each
151.5%
$14,090 Each
Electrical Service per Group area
$1,163 Each
151.5%
$1,760 1=act•r
'..Game Courts
$75,600
Basketball Courts
$50,350 Each
151.5%
$76,280 Each
Basketball Court Li htir
$32,550 Each
151.5%
$49,310 Each
Fenced Tennis outs
$55,600 Each
151.5%'
$84,540 Each
`tennis Court Liolttino
$32,550 Each
151.5%
$49,310 Each
2
$2,260
$0
0 $0
0 $0
1 $4,230
0 $0
3 $3,480
0 $0
1
$2,820
1
$3,520
1,320
$26,400
1
$990
200
$4,000
4
$4,560
4
$6,360
2
4
$988
$1,970
4
$1,636
0
$0
0
$0
4
$84,520
0
$0
1
$1,760
Appendix C
Detailed Park Improvements - Unit Costs/Average Cost per Acre Calculation
ENR at January 2001
6281
Used ENR Construction Gust. index
9516
ENR Percent Increase
151.50%
Baseball Field - Competitive
$46,500 Each
151.5%
$70,450 Each
Ballfield Lttina.
$186,000 Per two fields
151.5%
$281,800 Per two fields
Baseball Field - Recreational
$13,950 Each
151.5%
$21.130 Each
Soccer Field (crownedL
$16,740 Each
151.5%
$25.360 Each
Skate ark
$17.50 Square Foot
151.5%
$26.50 Each
Pedestrian Walkway
5' wide
$75.00 Linear Foot
151.5%
$113.63 Linear Foot
6' wide
$81.00 Linear Foot
151.5%
$122.72 Linear Foot
9' wide
$108.00 Linear Foot
151.5%
$163,62 Linear Foot
Miscellaneous Flatwork
$1500 Square Foot
151.5%
$22.73 Linear Foot
Small Park Si na e
$4,650 Lot
151.5%
$7,040 Lot
Lag a Park Si na a
$15,000 Lot
151.5%
$22,730 Lot
Bike Rack/Pad
$1,395 Each
151.5%
$2.110 Each
Natural Element Improvement Lake, etc
$375,000 Each
151.5%
$568,140 Each
Small concrete stage
$29,060 Each
151.5%
$44,030 Each
Medium Am itheater/bandshell
$139,500 Each
151.5%1
$211,350 Each
Total Cost
Total Acres
Average Cost per Acre
Total Cost per Park
Number of Parks
15..00
Total Cost of Parks
$66,923,6*9
Total Improved Park Acres
150.00
Average Construction Cost per Park Acre
$46,167.66
N
N
0 $0
0
$0
1
$21,130
0
$0
0
$0
$1,441,004
5
$288,201
$1,441,004
9
$12,969,036
45
N
W
Appendix C
Detailed Park Improvements - Unit Costs/Av
ENR at January 20Q1
Used ENR Cor,atr action Cost Index
ENR Percent Increase
Public fm s, Road/curb, gutter, etc. 3,3601 $615,955 3,780 $6921950
e Park Gradin irri ation/T rf 15 $579,4501 20 $772,600
all Park Grad in glirrigationfTurf 0 $0-1 0 $0
Trees-5.24 Gallon Box/ACre
75 $22,726
Trees-15, 15 Gallon/Acre
225 $34,088
Shrubs_-10, Five Gallon
150 $4,319
Scrubs-30, One Gallon
450 $4.775
IDI- n-r�+i m
Play Apparatus - Large
1
$181.810
La r eA aratus Curbing, 450'
450
$12,614
Play Apparatus - Medium
2
' $242,400
WediumApparatus Curbing, 376
750
$21,023
Play Apparatus - Small
2
$121,200
3mali Aparatus Curbing.225'
450
$12,614
Apparatus Safety Surface
36,562
$138,570
Restroom - Small
1
$91.580
Restroom - Lar e
1
$154,990
Electrical Service Extension
2
$45,460
Storage Facility
0
$0
-Equipment
Combined Restroom/Concession
1
$253,620
[rr
Parking Space 4" A.C. W/6" Rock base
150
$369,861
V- utter
1,800
$20,286
Drain Inlet
8
$8,454
Drain Inlet Connector
8
$13.738
Storm Drainage Collection Line
2,700
$73,629
Drive Approach
4
$10.144
Perimeter Curbin
3,600
$50,724
Parking Lot Striping
1,500
$630
Exterior Street Lighting Standards
18
$45,648
LOt Si rra e
3
$845
IStorm Drainage Facilities lain park) i
50
$15.151
300
$45,450
100
$2,879
300
$3,183
1
$181,810
450
$12,614
1
$121,200
375
$10.511
1
$60,600
2251
$6,307
24,6091
$93,268
- 1
$91,580
- 1
$154,990
2
$45,460
1
$84.540
2
$507,240
400
$986,296
4.800
$54,096
20
$22,544
20
$36,634
7,200
$196,344
6
$15,216
9,600
$135,264
4,000
$1,680
20
$50,720
- 3
$845
N
Appendix C
Detailed Park Improvements -.Unit Costs/AV
ENR at January 2001
Used ENR Construction Cost Index
ENR Percent Increase
Inlets 30 $33,900
Connection_ s 6 $16,9 00
Lateral to arterial 4,725 $128,851
P.-r Gnrili4ioc
Connection to Arterial
2
$5,640
Line in Street
120
$2,636
Line in Park
630
$11,932
Fire Hydrant
4
$16.920
Pa rk
Walkway Lighting Standards 252 1 $478,800
Duct Wo*Mirin 12 $13,920
Wnikw v 1< prti t Wirinc 13,120 $262,400
40
$45,200
8
$14,640
6,300
$171,801
2
$5,640
120
$2,636
630
$11,932
5
$21,150
235
$446,880
5
$5,800
8830
$176,600
3" Meter
1
$2,820
1
$2.820
#" Backtlow Device
1
$3,520
1
$3,520
Line in Street
120
$2,400
120
$2,400
Water Fountains
8
$7,920
12
$11.880
Fountain Lines in Park
1,000
$20,000
1,000
$20.000
rra hlPc
Concrete Picnic Tables
60
$68,400
Tx 10' Cement Table Pads
60
$95,400
individual Bl3C Grills
30
$14,817
Concrete Benches
30
$14,772
3' x 6' Concrete Bench Pads
30
$12.272
Bleachers
0
$0
Lag a Covered Picnic Ramada
2
$174,720
Individual Covered Picnic Pad
20
$422,600
User Electrical Service
2
$28,180
Electrical Service per Group area
6
$10,560
Game Courts
Basketball Courts
2
$152,560
Basketball Court Lighting
0
$0
Fenced Tennis Courts
2
$169.080
Tennis Court Usahtin
0._
$0
4
$305,120
4
$197.240
6
$507,240
6
$295,860
Appendix C
Detailed Park Improvements - Unit Costs/Av
ENR at January 2001
Used ENR Constructon Cost Index
ENR Percent Increase
Baseball Field - Competitive
0
$0
Ballfield Li htin
0
$0
Baseball Field - Recreational
6
$126,780
Soccer Field crowned
0
$0
Skate ark
14.400
$381,600
Pedestrian Walkway
5' wide
1,680
$190,898
6` vide
1,680
$206,170
9' wide
2,940
$481,043
Miscellaneous Platwork
8,500
$193,205
Small Park Si na e
0
$0
Large Park Si na e
1
$22,730
Bike Rack/Pad
9
$18,990
Natural Element Improvement Lake, etc
1
$568.140
Small concrete stage
2
$88.060
Medium Airs itheaterlbandsbell
1
1 $211,350
$7,786,119
15
$519,075
$7,786,119
3
$23,358,357
45
6
$422,700
4
$1.127,200
0
$0
4
$101,440
21,600
$572,400
$10,198,752
20
$509,938
$10,198, 752
3
$30,596,256
60
Appendix D
Calculation of ADUs as a Function of Detached Dwellings
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 126
Application of Development Impact Fee on Accessory Dwelling Units
The approach that is recommended for the calculation of DIFs for application to the construction of ADUs
is to make it a function of the demand of one detached dwelling unit as is consistent with current State
statutes. One can assume that the State identified them as function of a detached dwelling DIF as they
more closely resemble detached dwellings, albeit smaller in size, as they are largely located within
detached dwelling neighborhoods and will likely function as such.
The application of an ADU DIF as a function of a Detached Dwelling is consistent with the recently
Chaptered Government. Code, Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 4, Article 2 (attached as Attachments A to E).
Section 65852.2, (f) (1).
(3) (A) A local agency, special district, or water corporation shall not impose any impact fee
upon the development of an accessory dwelling unit less than 750 square feet. Any impact
fees charged for an accessory dwelling unit of 750 square feet or more shall be char e
L?Lqportionately in relation to the s uare footage of the orimary dwellin unit.
The following Table is an example of a proposed 750 square foot accessory dwelling unit to be
constructed behind a 3,000 square foot primary dwelling unit. The 550 square feet ADUrepresents 25.0%
of the 3,000 square foot primary unit (750 SF/3,000 SF = 25.0%). The City will also receive a spreadsheet
application enabling staff to make other such calculations depending upon the facts presented within the
ADU application.
Exigting Mitig1tion Fee Act Findings, The five required Government Code §66000 findings within each
chapter would apply to the imposition/collection of ADU DIFs. The fees collected would be used to
finance the same projects limited for use in that DIF-defined area in each corresponding infrastructure
chapter in the 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report.
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 127
End of Report
City of El Segundo 2021-22 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Page 128
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B:
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES BY TYPE
Crrtl I Iv[ �tr I GW cm 3, LVLL
LAW
FIRE
STREETS,
STORM
WATER
WASTEWATER
GENERAL
PUBLIC
AQUATICS
PARKLAND
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
LAND USE
ENFORCEMENT
PROTECTION
SIGNALS &
DRAINAGE
DISRIBUTION
COLLECTION
GOVERNMENT
LIBRARY
MEETING
CENTER
FACILITIES
FEE TOTAL
FACILITIES
FACILITIES
BRIDGES
FACILITIES
FACILITIES
FACILITIES
FACILITIES
FACILITIES
FACILITIES
Detached Dwelling Units
$964
$115
$1,893
$2,482
$6,405
$3,001
$201
$907
$7,686
$1,769
$27,003
$52,426
PER UNIT
Artached Dwelling Units
$970
$276
$1,263
$1,297
$4,377
$2,625
$44
$863
$7,307
$1,682
$25,672
$46,376
PER UNIT
Commercial Lodging Units
$104
$52
$998
$89
$1,765
$1,750
$44
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
$4,802
PER UNIT
Retail & Service Uses (SF)
$5.014
$0.133
$3.823
$0.340
$0.517
$0,225
$0.120
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
$10.172
PER S.F.
Office Uses (SF)
$1.375
$0.027
$2.185
$0.502
$0.739
$0.428
$0.120
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
$5.376
PER S.F.
Industrial Uses (SF)
$0.327
$0.00
$1.172
$1.793
$0.900
$0.765
$0.120
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
$5.077
PER S.F.
(nstttut€omaI Use (5F)
SO.199
$0.00
52.495
$0.599
$1.916
51.387
$0.120
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
No Fee
$63 6
PER S.F.