Loading...
4. 2015 Police Impact Fee DraftReport for City of Kalispell Draft Report Impact Fees for Police Service February 2015 k' I Introduction and Overview of the Study 1.1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Overview of the Study.............................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 Impact Fee Advisory Committee (IFAC).............................................................. 1-1 1.4 Disclaimer.................................................................................................................... 1-1 2 Legal Considerations in Establishing Impact Fee for the City 2.1 Introduction........................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Requirements under Montana Law......................................................................... 2-1 3 Determination of the City Police Impact Fees 3.1 Introduction........................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Present Police Impact Fees...................................................................................... 3-1 3.3 Update of the City's Police Impact Fees................................................................ 3-1 3.4 Key Assumptions...................................................................................................... 3-4 3.5 Implementation of the Impact Fees......................................................................... 3-4 3.6 Recommendations........................................................................................................3-4 Tables 3-1 Present Police Impact Fees...................................................................................... 3-1 3-2 Allowable Police Impact Fees.......................................................................... 3-3 Appendix A - Montana Code - Impact Fees Appendix B - Police Impact Fee Exhibits i Table of Contents City of Kalispell, Montana 1.1 Introduction HDR Engineering Inc. (d.b.a. HDR/EES) was retained by the City of Kalispell; Montana (City) to develop in 2006 and update in 2010 the City's cost based impact fees for the City's police services that comply with the Montana Code 7-6-1601 to 7-6-1604. This update is based on the methodology used in the previously adopted reports and on current capital improvement plans, planning data, and cost allocations. This report provides a summary of the update to the cost based impact fees for the City's police services. Impact fees are a one-time assessment against new development to pay for the cost of infrastructure required to provide service. Impact fees provide the means of balancing the cost requirements for new infrastructure (buildings and equipment) between existing customers and new customers. The portion of capital improvements that will provide service to new customers is included in the impact fees. In contrast to this, the City may have future capital projects and equipment requirements that are related to meeting existing deficiencies in police services. These costs must be funded by other sources and are not included within the impact fee. By establishing cost -based impact fees, the City intends to assure that "growth pays for growth" and existing residents and businesses will be sheltered from the financial impacts of growth. 1.2 Overview of the Study This report is divided into three distinct components. The next section of the report, Section 2, provides a summary of the legal requirements for the enactment of impact fees under Montana law. The cost based impact fee calculation for the City's police services is provided in Section 3. 1.3 Impact Fee Advisory Committee (IFAC) The Montana Annotated Code requires the establishment of an Impact Fee Advisory Committee (IFAC), which serves in an advisory capacity to the governing body of the City of Kalispell. The planning, capital improvements projects, methods and calculations were reviewed and discussed with the IFAC at various meeting since August of 2014. At the April 28, 2015 meeting the proposed methodology and impact fee as outlined in this Final Report Update was motioned and approved by the committee members. 1.4 Disclaimer Determination of impact fees originally presented, used "generally accepted" planning, accounting and ratemaking principles. This should not be construed as a legal opinion with respect to Montana law. Introduction and Overview of the Study 1-1 City of Kalispell, Montana 2.1 Introduction An important consideration in establishing impact fees is any legal requirements at the state or local level. The legal requirements often establish the methodology around which the impact fees must be calculated or how the funds must be used. Given that, it is important for the City to understand these legal requirements. This section of the report provides an overview of the legal requirements for establishing impact fees under Montana law. This legal summary has been updated from reports prepared by HDR/EES to reflect changes in the impact fee law as set forth in SB0231. The changes in Montana law since the development of the fees were minor language clarifications. Therefore, the methodology established in the previous reports was used as the basis for this update of the police impact fees. 2.2 Requirements under Montana Law In establishing impact fees, an important requirement is that they be developed and implemented in conformance with local laws. In particular, many states have established specific laws regarding impact fees. The main objective of most state laws is to assure that these charges are established in such a manner that they are fair, equitable and cost -based. In other cases, state legislation may have been needed to provide the legislative powers to the utility to establish the charges. The Montana law enabling legislation for impact fees was enacted in 2005 via Senate Bill 185. This was comprehensive legislation allowing public entities in the State of Montana to enact impact fees for various services. The legal basis for the enactment of impact fees is found in Title 7, Chapter 6, and Part 1601 to 1604 of the Montana Code. A copy of the full code is provided as Appendix A. Legal Considerations in Establishing Impact Fees for the City City of Kalispell, Montana 2-1 3.1 Introduction This section of the report presents the update of the police impact fees. The calculation of the police impact fees presented in this section is based on the City's planning criteria and future capital improvements as identified in the City's Capital Improvement Plan. The methodology was established in the previously adopted reports and updated with current capital improvements and planning data. To the extent that the cost and timing of future capital improvements change, then the impact fee presented in this section should be updated to reflect the cost of these adjustments. 3.2 Present Police Impact Fees The City currently assesses impact fees for police service. These are assessed for single-family residential units, multi -family residential units and commercial property. A summary of the current fees adopted in 2010 is provided in Table 3-1. Residential per unit Apartment per unit Commercial per 1,000 sq ft of build space 3.3 Update of the City's Police Impact Fees $41.00 31.00 16.00 The process of calculating impact fees is based upon a four -step process. In summary form, these steps were as follows: ■ Determination of planning standards ■ Determination of Police Impact Fees ■ Determination of any impact fee credits ■ Determination of Police impact fees by development type Each of these areas is discussed in more detail below. Determination of the City's Police Impact Fees 3-1 City of Kalispell, Montana 3.3.1 Planning Standards The planning horizon used for this report is from 2013 to 2035. The population projections from 2013 to 2035, uses a population growth rate of 2% and were derived from a memorandum dated October 17, 2014 from Tom Jentz, Planning Director. A copy of the memorandum and population projections are provided in Exhibit B-1 and Exhibit B-2. The only asset for the police department that is eligible for inclusion in the impact fee is building space. Equipment is not eligible since the asset life is less than ten (10) years. The building space needed for year 2035 is based on an analysis of three other Montana police departments that have either built a new facility or conducted recent space needs studies. The space needs summary is provided in Exhibit B-3 and B-4. 3.3.2 Building Costs The next step of the analysis is to review each major functional component of providing police service and determine the impact fee for that component. The components of the City's police service that were reviewed for purposes of calculating an impact fee were as follows: ■ New building space ■ Administration costs A brief discussion of the impact fee calculated for each of the components is provided below. BUILDING SPACE — To determine the amount of new building space that is required to serve growth, a survey was conducted using three other Montana police departments; Missoula PD, Bozeman PD, and Whitefish PD. We reviewed their planning documents and based off of their planning ratios projected out to the year 2035, determining the amount of square feet needed for future needs. The space needs summary is provided in Exhibit B-3 and B-4. After reviewing the square footage projections of the three identified police departments the IFAC agreed to 303 square feet per employee as the ratio for this report. The building space requirement per person (303 sq ft) was then multiplied by the population growth resulting in a space requirement for new development of 7,272 sq ft. The current construction cost was determined from averaging three police public service building cost, which had been constructed or have an engineer estimate for construction in the next one to two years. Construction cost summary is provided in Exhibit B-3. Using the three construction cost figures, the average cost per square foot is $302. The IFAC approved $302 per square foot for construction costs for this report. This was then allocated to residential and commercial development based on the number of calls resulting in $1,207,879 for residential development and $988,265 for commercial development. This is a slight shift from residential to commercial when compared to the 2010 report. Based on recent call records, the allocation to residential development used in this report is 55%, and 45% to commercial. In the 2010 report, 54% of the calls were allocated to residential development and 46% to commercial. Details of the call by development type are provided in Exhibit B-5_ Details of the calculations are provided in Exhibit B-6_ Determination of the City's Police Impact Fees 3-2 City of Kalispell, Montana ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGE — Under Montana statute, an impact fee may include a fee for the administration of the impact not to exceed 5% of the impact fee collected. Therefore, the City has included a police impact fee administrative charge of 5% of the impact fee collected. 3.3.3 Credits The final step in calculating the police impact fee was to determine if a credit for payment from other revenue sources was required. No debt is outstanding for the police and no new debt has been or will be issued resulting in a credit of zero. 3.3.4 Net Allowable Police Impact Fees by Development Type Based on the sum of the component costs calculated above, the net allowable police impact fee can be determined. "Net" refers to the "gross" impact fee, net of any credits. "Allowable" refers to the concept that the calculated impact fee shown in the following tables are the City's cost- based impact fee. The City, as a matter of policy, may charge any amount up to the allowable impact fee, but not over that amount. Charging an amount greater than the allowable impact fee would not meet the nexus test of a cost -based impact fee. To determine the residential development police impact fee, the allocated portion of police service costs is divided by the population base that will be served to determine a cost per person. This cost is then multiplied by the number of persons per dwelling type to determine a police impact fee by residential development type. For commercial development, the allocated police service costs are divided by the estimated amount of new commercial building space (1,000 sq. ft.) that will be provided police service. Summaries of the calculated net allowable police impact fees by development type are shown in Table 3-2. Residential per unit Apartment per unit Commercial per 1,000 sq ft of build space $277 210 179 The total impact fee as shown for a single-family residential unit is $277. This results in an increase from the current residential development impact fees and an increase in the commercial fees. This is due to the change in projected needs in space, construction costs, and the number of calls related to residential development and commercial development. The details of the net allowable impact fee are shown on Exhibit B-7 and Exhibit B-8 of the Technical Appendices. Determination of the City's Police Impact Fees City of Kalispell, Montana 3-3 3.4 Key Assumptions In the development of the impact fees for the City's police service, a number of key assumptions were utilized. These are as follows: ■ KPD's space needs and costs were used in the calculation. ■ The number of calls by development type was based on recent updated historical call records. 3.5 Implementation of the Impact Fees The methodology used to calculate the impact fees takes into account the cost of money or interest charges and inflation. Therefore, it is recommended that the City adjust the impact fees each year by an adjustment factor to reflect the cost of interest and inflation. The most frequently used source to adjust impact fees is the ENR index which tracks changes in construction costs for municipal projects. This method of adjusting the City's impact fee should be used for no more than a two-year period. After this time period, as required by Montana law, the City should update the charges based on the actual cost of infrastructure and any new planned facilities that would be contained in an updated master plan or capital improvement plan. 3.6 Recommendations The following are recommendation based on the review and analysis of the City's police service. ■ The City should implement impact fees for police service that are no greater than the impact fees as set forth in this report. ■ The City should update the actual calculations for the impact fees based on the methodology as approved by the resolution or ordinance setting forth the methodology for impact fees every two years as required by Montana law. Determination of the City's Police Impact Fees City of Kalispell, Montana 3-4 Montana Code Annotated 2014 7-6-1601. Definitions. As used in this part, the following definitions apply: (1) (a) "Capital improvements" means improvements, land, and equipment with a useful life of 10 years or more that increase or improve the service capacity of a public facility. (b) The term does not include consumable supplies. 2 "Connection charge" means the actual cost of connecting a property to a public utility system and is limited to e labor, materials, and overhead involved in making connections and installing meters. (3) "Development" means construction, renovation, or installation of a building or structure, a change in use of a building or structure, or a change in the use of land when the construction, installation, or other action creates additional demand for public facilities. 4 "Governmental entity" means a county, city, town, or consolidated government. 5 (a) "Impact fee" means any charge imposed upon development by a governmental entity as part of the development approval process to fund the additionalservicecapacity required by the developmentfromwhich it is collected. An impact fee may include a fee for the administration of the impact tee not to exceed 5 /o of the total impact fee collected. b) The term does not include: i) a charge or fee to pay for administration, plan review, or inspection costs associated with a permit required for development; ii) a connection charge; iii) any other fee authorized by law, including but not limited to user fees, special improvement district assessments, fees authorized under Title 7 for county, municipal, and consolidated government sewer and water districts and systems, and costs of ongoing maintenance; or (iv) onsite or offsite improvements necessary for new development to meet the safety, level of service, and other minimum development standards that have been adopted by the governmental entity. (6) "Proportionate share" means that portion of the cost of capital system improvements that reasonably relates to e service demands and needs of the project. A proportionate share must take into account the limitations provided in 7-6-1602. 7) "Public facilities" means: a) a water supply production, treatment, storage, or distribution facility; b) a wastewater collection, treatment, or disposal facility; ic) a transportation facility, including roads, streets, bridges, rights -of -way, traffic signals, and landscaping; d) a storm water collection, retention, detention, treatment, or disposal facility or a flood control facility; e) a police, emergency medical rescue, or fire protection facility; and f) other facilities for which documentation is prepared as provided in 7-6-1602 that have been approved as part of an impact fee ordinance or resolution by: (i) a two-thirds majority of the governing body of an incorporated city, town, or consolidated local government; or (ii) a unanimous vote of the board of county commissioners of a county government. History: En. Sec. 1, Ch. 299, L. 2005. Montana Code Annotated 2014 7-6-1602. Calculation of impact fees -- documentation required -- ordinance or resolution -- requirements for impact fees. (1) For each public facility for which an impact fee is imposed, the governmental entity shall prepare and approve a service area report. 2 The service area report is a written analysis that must: a describe existing conditions of the facility; b) establish level -of -service standards; c) forecast future additional needs for service for a defined period of time; d) identify capital improvements necessary to meet future needs for service; e) identify those capital improvements needed for continued operation and maintenance of the facility; f) make a determination as to whether one service area or more than one service area is necessary to establish a correlation between impact fees and benefits; make a determination as to whether one service area or more than one service area for transportation faci ,ties is needed to establish a correlation between impact fees and benefits; (h) establish the methodology and time period over which the governmental entity will assign the proportionate share of capital costs for expansion of the facility to provide service to new development within each service area; (i) establish the methodology that the governmental entity will use to exclude operations and maintenance costs and correction of existing deficiencies from the impact fee; establish the amount of the impact fee that will be imposed for each unit of increased service demand; and have a component of the budget of the governmental entity that: i) schedules construction of public facility capital improvements to serve projected growth; i,) projects costs of the capital improvements; ii,) allocates collected impact fees for construction of the capital improvements; and iv) covers at least a 5-year period and is reviewed and updated at least every 2 years. 3) The service area report is a written analysis that must contain documentation of sources and methodology used for purposes of subsection (2) and must document how each impact fee meets the requirements of subsection (7)- (4) The service area report that supports adoption and calculation of an impact fee must be available to the public upon request. (5) The amount of each impact fee imposed must be based upon the actual cost of public facility expansion or improvements or reasonable estimates of the cost to be incurred by the governmental entity as a result of new development. The calculation of each impact fee must be in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. (6) The ordinance or resolution adopting the impact fee must include a time schedule for periodically updating the documentation required under subsection (2). 7) An impact fee must meet the following requirements: a) The amount of the impact fee must be reasonably related to and reasonably attributable to the development's share of the cost of infrastructure improvements made necessary by the new development. (b) The impact fees imposed may not exceed a proportionate share of the costs incurred or to be incurred by the governmental entity in accommodating the development. The following factors must be considered in determining a proportionate share of public facilities capital improvements costs: ,) the need for public facilities capital improvements required to serve new development; and ii) consideration of payments for system improvements reasonably anticipated to be made by or as a result of the development in the Norm of user fees, debt service payments, taxes, and other available sources of funding the system improvements. �c) Costs for correction of existing deficiencies in a public facility may not be included in the impact fee. d) New development may not be held to a higher level of service than existing users unless there is a mechanism in place for the existing users to make improvements to the existing system to match the higher level of service. (e) Impact fees may not include expenses for operations and maintenance of the facility. History: En. Sec. 2, Ch. 299, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 358, L. 2009. Montana Code Annotated 2014 7-6-1603. Collection and expenditure of impact fees -- refunds or credits -- mechanism for appeal required. (1) The collection and expenditure of impact fees must comply with this part. The collection and expenditure of impact fees must be reasonably related to the benefits accruing to the development paying the impact tees. The ordinance or resolution adopted by the governmental entity must include the following requirements: (a) Upon collection, impact fees must be deposited in a special proprietary fund, which must be invested with all interest accruing to the fund. b) A governmental entity may impose impact fees on behalf of local districts. c) If the impact fees are not collected or spent in accordance with the impact fee ordinance or resolution or in accordance with 7-6-1602, any impact fees that were collected must be refunded to the person who owned the pro erty at the time that the refund was due. (p2) All impact fees imposed pursuant to the authority granted in this part must be paid no earlier than the date of issuance of a building permit if a building permit is required for the development or no earlier than the time of wastewater or water service connection or well or septic permitting. (3) A governmental entity may recoup costs of excess capacity in existing capital facilities, when the excess capacity has been provided in anticipation of the needs of new development, by requiring impact fees for that portion of the facilities constructed for future users. The need to recoup costs for excess capacity must have been documented pursuant to 7-6-1602 in a manner that demonstrates the need for the excess capacity. This part does not prevent a governmental entity from continuing to assess an impact fee that recoups costs for excess capacity in an existing facility. The impact fees imposed to recoup the costs to provide the excess capacity must be based on the governmental entity's actual cost ofacquiring, constructing, or upgrading the facility and must be no more than ov a proportionate share of the costs to pride the excess capacity. (4) Governmental entities may accept the dedication of land or the construction of public facilities in lieu of payment of impact fees if: a) the need for the dedication or construction is clearly documented pursuant to 7-6-1602; (b) the land proposed for dedication for the public facilities to be constructed is determined to be appropriate for the proposed use by the governmental entity; c) formulas or procedures for determining the worth of proposed dedications or constructions are established as part of the impact fee ordinance or resolution; and (d) a means to establish credits against future impact fee revenue has been created as part of the adopting ordinance or resolution if the dedication of land or construction of public facilities is of worth in excess of the impact fee due from an individual development. (5) Impact fees may not be imposed for remodeling, rehabilitation, or other improvements to an existing structure or for rebuildin a damaged structure unless there is an increase in units that increase service demand as described in 7-6-1602(2%). If impact fees are imposed for remodeling, rehabilitation, or other improvements to an existing structure or use, only the net increase between the old and new demand may be imposed. (6) This part does not prevent a governmental entity from granting refunds or credits: a) that it considers appropriate and that are consistent with the provisions of 7-6-1602 and this chapter; or between the governmental entity and the individual or entity being assessed the impact fees. (7) An impact fee represents a fee for service payable by all users creating additional demand on the facility. 8 An impact fee ordinance or resolution must include a mechanism whereby a person charged an impact fee may appeal the charge if the person believes an error has been made. History: En. Sec. 3, Ch. 299, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 358, L. 2009. Montana Code Annotated 2014 7-6-1604. Impact fee advisory committee. (1) A governmental entity that intends to propose an impact fee ordinance or resolution shall establish an impact fee advisory committee. (2) An impact fee advisory committee must include at least one representative of the development community and one certified public accountant. The committee shall review and monitor the process of calculating, assessing, ands ending impact fees. (3 The impact fee advisory committee shall serve in an advisory capacity to the governing body of the governmental entity. History: En. Sec. 4, Ch. 299, L. 2005. Exhibit B-1 - Planning Memorandum PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE P,5 (1)},YM TeX MEMORANDUM To: Susie Turner, Public Works Director From: Tom Jentz, Planning Director Date: October 17, 2014 Planning Department 201 V Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning Subject: Construction Trends/Projections for Commercial Development I have attached a worksheet showing commercial construction development trends in Kalispell along with projections through the year 2035. In brief this office anticipates that there will be approximately 290 additional acres of commercial development within the Kalispell city limits from 2015-2035. This projection utilizes commercial growth trends from 2006-2013 and add a 2% per year growth rate based on the projected Kalispell population growth rate. The commercial construction figures used for the above estimates are based on building permits issued from 2006 — 2013 within the city of Kalispell. Over this 8 year period the city has seen an average of 222,628 square feet of commercial development occur per year. Commercial development is generally described as non- residential uses including retail, office, medical, governmental, churches, schools and industrial uses. This office utilizes a ratio of 20,000 square feet of constructed area per gross acre of developed land. In other words a 20,000 square foot building along with the associated required parking, landscaping and setbacks would consume one acre of land. Using the above number of 222,628 square feet of constructed area per year, it is estimated that that this would equate to 11.13 acres of commercial land per year over the past 8 years. For comparison purposes inside the city of Kalispell in 2013 there were 1,200 acres of commercially developed land which again includes retail, office, medical, governmental, churches, schools and industrial uses. Outside the city but within the annexation boundary there are another 723 acres of commercially developed land. This would then total 1,923 acres of commercially developed land within the Kalispell annexation boundary as adopted by the city council by resolution 5404A on March 7, 2011. 2006-2013 Kalispell Annual Square Footage New Construction Kalispell Planning and Building Dept. Commercial 2006 - 95,748 2007 - 82,049 2008 - 33,334 2009 - 10,717 2010 - 201,725 2011 - 10,750 2012 - 196,598 2013 - 367,777 998,698 (125,000 sq. ft./yr - 6 % acres/yr.) Office 14,472 4,781 6,912 22,683 39,265 69,309 157,418 (19,500 sq. ft./Yr. - 1 acre/yr.) Industrial 1,720 18,841 129,498 150,059 (18,750 sq. ft./yr - 1 Acre/yr.) Gov., Public, church, etc. 60,539 160,855 43,168 12,599 14,050 78,098 105,541 474,850 (59,250 sq. ft./yr. - 3 Acre/yr.) TOTAL 1,781/025 ( 222,628sq. ft./yr. - 11.13 acre/yr) Notes: 8 years of building permit data from 2006 - 2013, assumes city limits only, 20,000 square feet of structure/acre. PROJECTIONS SHOWING COMMERCIAL (NON-RESIDENTIAL) DEVEOPMENT IN KALISPELL 2015-2035 Option A Using a multiplier equal to population growth (2%/yr-2015-2035) 2015 - 11.3 2016 - 11.5 2017 - 11.7 2018 - 11.9 2019 - 12.2 2015 - 2019 - 58.6 ac. 2020 - 12.4 2021- 12.7 2022 - 12.9 2023 - 13.2 2024 - 13.4 2020 - 2024 - 64.6 ac. 2025 - 13.7 2026 - 14.0 2027 - 14.3 2028 - 14.6 2029 - 14.8 2025 - 2029 - 71.4 ac. 2030 - 15.1 2031- 15.4 2032 - 15.7 2033 - 16.1 2034 - 16.4 2030 - 2034 - 78.7 ac. 2035 - 16.7 2035 - 16.7 ac. Total - 290.0 acres Option B Straight line projection using 11.13acres/yr. based on 2006 - 2013 historical construction 21 years x 11.13acres/yr = 234 acres. 2015 - 2019 - 55.65 acres 2020 - 2024 - 55.65 acres 2025 - 2029 - 55.65 acres 2030 - 2034 - 55.65 acres 2035 - 11.13 acres Total - 234 acres Kalispell Population Projections Prepared by Kalispell Planning Department October 20, 2014 2000 (census) - 14,223 2010 (census) - 19,927 2013 (census est) - 20,972 2015 (est.) - 21,800 2220 - 24,000 2025 - 26,600 2030 - 29,400 2035 - 32,400 Projections based on an assumed growth rate of 2%/year after 2013 which will compound for a 21.9% growth rate /decade. City of Kalispell Police Impact Fees Population Projections Exhibit B-2 Yearly Population Year Population' Growth Census 2013 20,972 2014 21,391 419 2015 21,819 428 2016 22,255 436 2017 22,700 445 2018 23,154 454 2019 23,617 463 2020 24,090 472 2021 24,572 482 2022 25,063 491 2023 25,564 501 2024 26,076 511 2025 26,597 522 2026 27,129 532 2027 27,672 543 2028 28,225 553 2029 28,789 564 2030 29,365 576 2031 29,953 587 2032 30,552 599 2033 31,163 611 2034 31,786 623 2035 32,422 636 TOTAL 11,450 1 - 2% annual growth rate Exhibit B-3 - Space Needs and Construction Cost Memorandum K pa-Li,c D 312 1- A v-& Ea,(- — PO 13ax,19 9 7 — V_ MT 59 903 T&Le p�,� (406) 758 -7780 - Fa�w (406) 758 -779 9 ei—ma,iL — kp"kzLt44YJ4tLGO'Vw Striving to Exceed Expectations' Kalispell Police Department 2015 Impact Fee Report Current Figures 2013 City population - 20,972 # of KPD fulltime employees (sworn and non -sworn) -44 Ratio of KPD employees per 1,000 residents - 2.1 Gross square footage of KPD-12,616 Ratio of square footage per employee - 287 2035 Proiections 2035 Population - 32,422 Maintaining 2 employees/1,000 residents ratio - 68 employees Maintaining 287 square feet per employee ratio-19,516 Additional square footage necessary by 2035 - 6,900 Glen Anacker, A.I.A, formerly of Architects Design Group (now defunct) who completed our last space needs study reported a new space needs study would cost $10,000- $30,000 depending on complexity. Comparisons Missoula Police Department 2008 space needs assessment recommended 39,000 square feet. This was projected for needs in 2025. Estimated cost of approximately $11.9 million ($305 per sq') Missoula Police Department projects 154 personnel in 2025 Ratio of square footage per employee — 254 Currently 129 personnel, 302 square feet per employee. Projecting out to 2035 using same growth rate as prior 10 year projection: 183 employees (213 square feet per employee). Missoula is currently seeking funds to build new facility based off of study. Bozeman Police Department Citizens this fall will vote on funding a new facility for the police department that will be 39,440 gross square footage. Construction cost, not counting property, is $361.20 per square foot. This facility is based on projections for year 2034 needs estimating 110 personnel. Ratio of square footage per employee — 358 Bozeman currently has 74 employees. Current ratio if constructed now: 532 square feet per officer. Whitefish Police Department Newly built Public Safety Department and Courts completed in 2010. 32,656 total square footage. Cost of the whole construction project was approximately $7,899,831 ($242/sq). Cost of land was excluded from this figure. Police Department consists of 9,826 square feet not counting common spaces (training rooms, lobbies and corridors, and mechanical/utilities). They have 20 employees. Average square footage per employee is 491. Whitefish estimated employees for 2035 based on average increase of the other departments (including KPD) at 44%: 29 (338 square feet per employee). KALISPELL POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE 2 Average Square Footage/Cost per Square Foot Average square footage of three above departments per employee based on current number of employees: 442 Average square footage per employee based on 2035 projected employees: 303. The Impact Fee Advisory Committee agreed at the March 24, 2015 meeting to use 303 square feet per employee for the 2015 Updated Police Impact Fee Report. Average construction costs of above three facilities based on actual construction estimates: $302 per square foot. This Impact Fee Committee agreed at the November 25, 2014 meeting to use the $302 per square foot figure for the 2015 Updated Police Impact Fee Report. (Whitefish costs include total facility and not just police department) Commercial Development Proiections The Kalispell Planning Department predicts there will be 290 additional acres of commercial development between 2015 and 2035. There were 1,200 acres of commercially developed land in 2013. Based on 20,000 square feet of constructed area per acre, the average of the past eight years, the estimate of additional commercial construction is 5,800,000 square feet between 2015 and 2035. KALISPELL POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE 3 City of Kalispell Police Impact Fees Space Requirements Exhibit B-4 Step 1 : Square footage per Police Department Personal PD Personal 44 Total Square Feet SF/Person Step 2: PD per Population 2013 Population PD/1,000 residents population/PD 2035 Population PD Ratio PD Required in 2035 Step 3: New PD Square Footage New PD (2013-2035) Required New Space Step 4: Total Costs Required New Space (sq ft) Cost per Square Foot Total Police Building Cost 15,752 303 20,972 2.1 486 32,422 2.1 68 24 7,272 7,272 302.00 2,196,144 Exhibit B-5 — Residential/Commercial Call Ratio Memorandum 312 1,+ Ave, Eax f — PO f3ax, 19 9 7 — KaLi,- , , MT 59 903 Teie fA,00-& (406) 758 -7780 — Fa w (40c.) 758 -779 9 e—VviGLt i, — {C fJ9���GOVw Striving to Exceed Expectations, Date: October 28, 2014 To: Impact Fee Advisory Committee From: Wade Rademacher Re: 2015 Police Impact Fee Review Residential/Commercial Call Ratios The last study comparing the ratio of residential to commercial calls was conducted in 2009. This was completed by tracking all "calls for service" in our record management system. The following were the results broken down into: residential, Commercial, and Other. Other includes traffic stops and other self -generated activities by police officers. TYPE 9 % % only using R &C Residential: 4,751 25.8 54.2 Commercial: 4,014 21.8 45.7 Other: 9,644 52.3 X I conducted an updated study in September 2014. I was unable to use our record management system in the same manner because of tracking differences with a new computer system. The old system was able to track every call that came into KPD. The new system only tracks this data if an officer writes a report (most calls do not generate reports). Instead, I selected eight days and manually tracked the calls for those days. Every day of the week was covered (Monday twice), with two days being in each of the months of January, April, July, and October (661 total calls). TYPE 9 % % only using R&C Residential 177 26.7 55.3 Commercial 143 21.6 44.6 Other 341 51.5 X City of Kalispell Police Impact Fees Cost Allocation Exhibit B-6 New Population (2013-2035) 11,450 Required New Space' 7,272 Cost per Square Foof $ 302 Total Police Building Cost $ 2,196 144 Residential Cost2 $ 1,207,879 Commercial Cost 2 $ 988,265 1 - From Exhibit B-4. Only new space is allocated to growth. 2 - 55% to residential and 45% to commercial based on actual call logs in 2014, see Exhibit B-5 3 - Cost per square foot, see Exhibit B-3 City of Kalispell Police Impact Fees Allowable Residential Impact Fees Exhibit B-7 Residential Impact Fee Costs Residential Population Served Cost per Person Single Family Dwelling Unit- 2.5 persons per Dwelling Unit Debt Service Credit Administration Fee Net Single Family Impact Fee Recommended Single Family Impact Fee Multifamily Dwelling Unit - 1.90 persons per Dwelling Unit Debt Service Credit Administration Fee Net Multifamily Impact Fee Recommended Mutifamily Impact Fee 1 - From Exhibit 8-5 $ 1,207,879 11,450 $ 105.49 $ 263.73 $ 13.19 $ 276.92 $ 277.00 $ $ 200.43 10.02 $ 210.46 $ 210.00 City of Kalispell Police Impact Fees Allowable Commercial Impact Fees Exhibit B-8 Commercial Impact Fee Costs $ 988,265 Commercial Acres 2 290 1,000 sq ft of Gross Building Area per Acre 3 20 Total Gross Building Area (1,000 sq ft) 5,800 Impact Fee per 1,000 sq ft of Gross Building Area $ 170.00 Debt Seniice Credit - Administration Fee 8.50 Net Commercial Impact Fee 4 $ 178.50 Recommended Commercial Impact Fee $ 179.00 1 - From Exhibit B-5 2 - Based on 2014 Planning Construction Trend/Projects for Commercial Development. See Exhibit B-1 3 -A ssum es 20, 000 sq. ft. per acre. 4 - Per 1, 000 sq. ft. of gross building area (or fraction thereof).