SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL - Laserfiche WebLink

Memorandum May 29,2014 EPSP Economic Feasibility Analysis Page 2 • Preliminary Draft EPSP: Reflects 1,750 units ranging in densities between 4 and 30 dwelling units per acre. The 20 percent indusionary housing requirement (15 percent for multifamily) is accommodated on site through the 30 dwelling units per acre product type.2 • Parks and Open Space: An additional alternative for the EPSP to be utilized as open space/park has been considered in this analysis. pecifically, this alternativttould involve •,404 acres of land acquisition but minimal on-site infrastructure and associated costs (e.g., no El Charm Road, Busch Road, or Boulder Street improvements, no potable water, sewer or storm water, no school). This alternative is not evaluated to the same extent as the other five alternatives listed above because it is not expected to be generating revenues a would offset costs. To conduct this analysis, Economic B.Planning Systems (EPS) has developed an annual"time- series"economic analysis that considers infrastructure cost and phasing (based on input from Kier&Wright), development absorption (subject to the City's Growth Management Ordinance), achievable finished product prices and corresponding land values, among other factors. It also Incorporates the following infrastructure cost-related assumptions: • Cost Timing: Infrastructure costs are based on twn development phases with a detailed conceptual program developed by Kier&Wright and further discussed below. Infrastructure costs are assumed to be incurred over a seven year period in development alternatives of 1,300 units and above, and over a five year period In the development alternatives of 1,000 units and below. This assumption Is reflective of the shorter absorption period and associated need for the expedited infrastructure Improvements. • Cost Scenarios: EPS tested conservative and optimistic cost scenarios with-the difference b�. c a. - two attribu q to the •ote i'• • • new elementa school to-be fin-nced entkr iy twae_Fvcv development_The conservative scenario assumes that the developers '�wdi be responslbie_for$33.5 million foe a new school, assumed to be funded by the Project In year 12; whereas an optimistic scenario indudes school cost associated with the school fee payments only (rather than school construction). -For development altematives"of 1,000 units and below,:duly an optimistic costaceriarib;is tested. A student generation study would need to be completed as the next step.and has not been conducted as part of this analysis. Given,the limitation of new development under the City's Growth Management Ordinance, EPS assumes annual absorption of 100 market-rate units as a baseline (with higher absorption tested as a sensitivity). This cep has a substantial limitation on the absorption that could likely otherwise be achieved in the EPSP. 2 Indusionary ordinance requires 15 percent of multifamily units and 20 percent of single-family units as affordable. • c:uu2lmow1aSOE aia Mcsre.u:imo osz•a•.ao