My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
15
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2014
>
020414
>
15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/18/2015 3:01:44 PM
Creation date
1/29/2014 3:30:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
2/4/2014
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Pleasanton General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis <br /> Final Report 01/16/14 <br /> Employment Projections <br /> Pleasanton is projected to add approximately 21,700 new jobs through buildout, as shown in <br /> Table 6. Employment estimates are based on average employee densities of 440 square feet <br /> for retail, 260 square feet for office, 425 square feet for R&D/flex, and 590 square feet for <br /> industrial uses based on the City's 1998 Development Impact Fee Report. These densities will <br /> range in specific orientation and location of commercial space. <br /> Service Population Projections <br /> Service population is a measure commonly used to incorporate job as well as resident growth <br /> into allocations of service demand and associated costs. Service population for the City of <br /> Pleasanton was derived based on a weighting of residents relative to nonresident employees. <br /> These calculations compare Pleasanton's residents and employees based on commute patterns <br /> and the estimated proportion of time spent at work, as shown in the Appendix. For example, <br /> residents who work outside the City are estimated to spend an average of about 50 percent of <br /> their time in the City relative to those who don't work or who both live and work in the City. <br /> After accounting for regional commute patterns, the typical worker is estimated to have a service <br /> burden of about 68 percent of the typical resident. As shown in Table 6, service population <br /> increase of about 25,500 is projected through buildout. <br /> This analysis also considers attraction of visitors to the City. While visitors are not directly used <br /> for revenue and cost estimating purposes, their secondary impact is considered for cost <br /> allocation between land uses, as further described in Chapter 7. Visitors are assumed to be <br /> attracted to the City and accommodated by new retail and motel uses. This analysis assumes <br /> that a visitor day results in 0.5 of a resident for service demand estimating purposes, as shown <br /> in Table 6. <br /> Economic&Planning Systems, Inc. 18 P.11210001121062PIeasanton\Report1121062Report FINAL.doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.