HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.3 Attachment H, I ,J
"
.,
Economics Research Associates
Affiliated '/lith Ori'lers Jonas
November 3, 1994
RECEIVED
. ."""., ~ 19QL1,
\', ,J 'J S: .,J .
C\iY OF DUBUN
Richard C. Ambrose
Dublin City Manager
P.O. Box 23.40
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Project No. 11247
Dear:i\1r. Ambrose:
Economics Research Associates (ER.-\) is pleased to present our memorandum report on th.e
fiscal impacts of the Homart power center. We have also enclosed copies of the revised fiscal aIlalysis
projections of annexing approximately 1,500 acres in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Area to reflect
the most recent estimates of police costs. And finally you v.ill also find enclosed a memorandum
summarizing the combined impacts of both ac:ions.
\Ve have sent two courtesy copies of the ~st study directly to Homart, but we have not given
them copies of the other documents. We have also not sent a.Ilything directly to the Dublin Pla::lIling
Department.
l>
It is our sincere hope that this subfT1jrtal concludes the fiscal analysis of these hvo projects. \Ve
\'I,ill, of course, remairl receptive to questions and refinements if necessary. \Ve appreciate the
opportunity to help agairl with Dublin's planning for future grov,1h. .
\-'" 'e.-Clt'S (..~
-'.$'a..ftIT Ll
Wid 11..
388 Market Street. Suite 1580. San Francisco, California 9.1i11 . (.liS) 956-8152 Telex: 3.10890 (ECON RES 5:=0) ;=~~: (<i15j 956.527.1
Los Angeles. San Franc:scc . 52:: C:e~o . Chjcc~o . VVashir.~!on. D.C. . Lcnc::1
Table 1
SUMMARY OF REVENUES AJ~D EXPENSES, FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 TO 1998-99
Easlem Dublin AnnexD.tion AreD. and Homart Ret.1i1 Project
Revenue!Expense Items FY 94-95 I FY 95-96 FY 96-97 FY 97-98 I FY 98-99 I
Pro~rty Tax Revenue S - S 17,434 S 170,539 S 209,209 S 213.393
St.'1te Subventions or SD.]es Ta., Revenue S - S 418.275 S 9"6.42 ] S l.l84.'i71 S 1,421,4915
Total On-going Revenues S - S 435,709 S 1,126,960 S 1,393.779 S 1.634,888
Public Works S - S 39,092 S 52,123 S 52,123 S 52,123
Fin:lnce Dept. S - S 9,300 S 12,400 S 12,400 S 12,4CO
Fire Services - S 40,917 S 175,534 S 197,454 S 205,2~8 S 211,515
Police Services S - S 289.634 S 'i20.951 S 571.674 S <i8\4-l~
Tot.al On-going Expenses S 40,917 S 513,560 S 782,928 S 843,.~ ~5 S 861,486
Nd On-going Revenue (Expense) S (40,917) S (77,851) S 344,032 S 550~33~ S 773,402
Less One-Time Cost S - S (138,290) S (15,000) S - S -
Total Revenue (Expense) S (40.917) S (216,141) S 329,032 S 5.50~334 S 7i3.401
Source: City of Dublin; ERA
.I
'.J.
Economics Research Associates
Affiliated with Onvers Jonas
MEMORANDUM REPORT
DATE: November 3,1994
Project # 11247
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Richard C. Ambrose, City Manager, City of Dublin
Economics Research Associates (ERA)
Cembined Fiscal Analyses - Homan Retail Project and Annexation Area
TIlls memorandum combines and summarizes two fIscal analyses ERA has conducted for
the City of Dublin which are: 1) the fIscal impacts of annexing approximately 1,530 acres in the
Eastern Dublin SpecifIc Plan Area (with current uses) and 2) the fIscal impacts of the Homart
Retail Project. Table 1 presents the combined revenues and expenses projected for the two
projects. For more detailed tables and analysis, please refer to the two accompanying
memorandum repons.
The City of Dublin will accrue revenues from property tax, sales tax and state subventions,
with total revenues ranging from $436,000 in IT 1995-96 to $1.37 million in FY 1998-99. The
following City service providers will be affected by the proposed annexation: public works,
finance department, fire protection and emergency services, police protection, and parks and
recreation. One-time expenses amount to $153,000. On-going operating expenses are projected
to range from $41,000 in FY 1994-95 to $773,100 in IT 1998-99.
The net revenue and cost balance indicates that the two projects will generate an initial
shortfall of $41,000 in IT 1994-95 and $216,000 in FY 1995-96. In subsequent years, projected
revenues will cover costs with an estimated annual surplus of $329,000 to $773,000.
388 Market Street. Suite 1580. San Francisco. California 9~'" . \~15; 956-8152 Teiex: 3.10890 ;::CON FiES S;:O\ .-,,-~. ..1~5 956-52;"':
Los Angeles. Sa;; Francisco" 527': Die'~c .. Cr.icago .. \N2.s;;:rg~or:. :.C. .. !...~r.c:c;. .
\ :(
Economics Research Associates
Affiliated with Drivers Jonas
Los Angeles
San Francisco
San Diego
Chicago
Washington, D.C.
London
~m~~~
RSCALIMPACT ANAL Y$SOF
THE PROPOSED HOMARTDEVELOPMENT
WITHIN THE EASTERN DUBLIN
SPECIFIC PLAN AREA
Prepared for
The City of Dublin
3 November 1994
ERA Project No. 11288
388 \1;,,::;=: Si:ee!. Suite 1580, San Francisco. Caliiornia 9<111;
(415i 956.81::2 Te:ex: 340890 (ECON RES SFO) Fax: (415) 956.52:-~
Economics Research Associates
Affiliated wit/') Orivers Jonas
MEMORANDUM REPORT
DATE: November 3, 1994
ERA Project No.: 11288
TO: Richard C. Ambrose, City Manager, City of Dublin
FROl'Yl: Economics Research Associates
~
RE: Fiscal Impact of the Homan (Tri-Valley Crossings) Project
SUl'Yll'YlAR Y
Homan Community Centers has proposed development of an 800,000 square foot
retail "power center," Tri- Valley Crossings, in the Eastern Dublin Specif~Plan Area. The
fIrst phase of 500,000 square feet would be open in the fall oW~ w~ the remaining
300,000 square feet ope~ng 12 to 14 months later. Anal~..... o~'f}SCal i.mpacts of this
project on the City of Dublin requires two steps. First, ~~teriStiCS of the retail market
must be reviewed in order to project the net increase in sales revenues in the city resulting
from the new retail center. And second, the costs of providing municipal serviceS to the new
development must be compared with the new retail sales taxes and other revenues accruing to
the City.
In the Tri-Valley market area (Dublin, Pleasanton, Livennore and San Ramon), Dublin
has been the most successful city over the last decade at capturing retail sales. Dublin is
centrally located within the market area and has had more than its share of retail centers and
freestanding stores. \Vith only 14 percent of the market area population in 1993, Dublin
managed to capture 25 percent of the market area retail sales. Dub!iri's share of the market
area sales has been declining, however. Ten years earlier, in 1983, Dublin had been capturing
over 37 percent of the market. Pleasanton, with its more rapid . growth in population, and
especially its more rapid development of new retail facilities, has been increasing its share of
the market capture at the expense of the other three cities in the region.
The geographic redistribution of retail sales also is being strongly int1uenced by the
recent revolution in the retail industry, as traditional regional and community retail centers are
finding new competition from power centers, big box retailers, factory outlet malls, category
28S r.-1arh.e! Street. S;J:te 1580. San Franc:sco. Califor~;c ~J."~~ . ~~~ ~::':;-Ej5~ Te!ex: 3~C3'?J ;::,:::;1'; F.eS S;:O' =..
Las ;'.r:ge!es . S=.~ F"arcs::. ~2:-- :".::::;:: . C;::C2.~:. \V23:-::r:;:cn. C C. . L::~,c::'.:
..- --- -~-,
-:: ~:,:-':..:,-
"'f"
killers and other new format retail facilities. The indications for the future are that Dublin is
vulnerable to a continued erosion of its retail sales tax base. Not counting the Tri- Valley
Crossings project, there are 900,000 square feet of new retail facilities (most of them new
format facilities) planned to be open by the end of 1995 in the Tri-Valley market area.
Without any new development, Dublin will continue to lose market share, and will most likely
suffer some absolute decline in the amount of retail sales which will occur within City limits.
Future residential development in Eastern Dublin will mean more spending power will be
present in the city, but new retail facilities must be present as well to ensure new Dublin
residents~will be able to fmd the retail services they need within their own city.
The capacity of the new stores in the Tri-Valley Crossings project to capture regional
retail sales dollars has been estimated at an average of approximately $300 per square foot per
year. The detailed analysis in this repon has forecast that even if the new stores could average
this capture rate, not all of these sales would be new to the City of Dublin. ERA's forecasts
of net new retail sales for Dublin are equivalent to an annual capture of $200 per square foot
in the initial nine months that the first phase of the Tri- Valley Crossings project would be open
(FY 1995-96). The net new capture would increase only to $225 per foot in FY 1996-97
when the second phase would be opening. Net new sales are then expected to grow to $250
per foot in FY 1997-98, the first complete year of full operation, and to $300 per foot in
subsequent years.
The implications of these retail capture forecasts are presented along with other
'. municipal revenues and service costs in Summary Table 1. As can be seen, Dublin's 65
percent share of the local sales tax (35 percent flows to the County under the annexation
agreement) is the largest contributor to revenues from the project Propeny taxes are a
significant, but minor, contributor to Dublin revenues. On the cost side, the most significant
expenses will be for public protection services to the Tri-Valley Crossings project (police and
fire). Due to the need for start-up fIre protection services while the project is still under
construction, a minor operating defIcit is forecast for the City in Hseal Year 1994-95. As
soon as the retail project opens, however, revenues will be more than adequate to cover
operating expenses, as well as additional one-time pUrchase of equipment for expanding police
services. Over the long run, the Tn-Valley Crossings project is expected to produce a
substantial fIscal surplus for the City of Dublin, creating the revenue and service capacity to
allow residential uses and other development to occur in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
Area.
Economics Research Associates
II
p'
Summary Table 1
SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES, FISCAL YEAR 1994-95 TO 1998-99
Homart Retail Project
Revenue/Expense Items FY 94-95 FY 95-96 FY 96-97 FY 97-98 FY 98-99
Property Tax Revenue $ - S 17 ,434 $ 109,825 S 146,327 S 149,253
Sales Tax Revenue S - S 418.275 $ 955.175 $ 1.183.325 S 1.420.2'i0
Total On-going Revenues $ - S 435,709 $ 1,065,000 $ 1,329,652 S 1,569,503
Public Works $ - S 26,462 $ 35,282 $ 35,282 S 35,282
Finance Dept. $ - S 9,300 $ 12,400 S 12,400 S 12,400
Fire Services $ 40,917 S 175,534 $ 197,454 $ 205,248 S 211,515
Police Services ~ $ S 191.126 $ 370.627 $ 413.803 S 420.289
-
Total On-going Expenses $ 40,917 S 402,422 $ 615,763 S 666,733 S 679,486
Net On-going Revenue (Expense) $ (40,917) S 33,287 $ 449,237 $ 662,919 S 890,017
Less One-Time Cost S - S (27,700) S (11,340) S - S -
Total Revenue (Expense) $. (40,917) S 5,587 $ 460,577 $ 662,919 $ 890,017
Source: City of Dublin; ERA
FISCAL IIVIPACT ANALYSIS OF
THE PROPOSED HOMART DEVELOPMENT
WITHIN THE EASTERN DUBLIN
SPECIFIC PLAN AREA
INTRODUCTION
EG,onomics Research Associates (ERA) has been retained by the City of Dublin to
evaluate the fiscal impacts of a proposed regional serving retail project to be developed by
Homart Community Centers. The project, known as Tri-Valley Crossings, would be
located on 75 acres northeast of the interchange of 1-580 with Hacienda Drive. The
development proposed by Homart would be a two-phased 800,000 square foot regional
power center with eight value-oriented anchor tenants featuring electronics, sporting
goods, arts and crafts, men's and women's apparel and outerwear, videos, books, and a
state-of-the-art movie/entertainment theater complex. The single level, open air retail
center also will include 25,000 square feet of small shops and seven retail/restaurant pads.
The first phase of the project would include approximately 50 acres of the site, and
500,000 square feet of developed space. Phase II would encompass the remaining 25
acres and include approximately 300,000 square feet of retail space.
In order to assess the fiscal impacts of the Homart development, a two-part
analysis is required. The goal is to estimate the cost and revenue balance for the City of
Dublin in the second part. In. order to estimate fiscal revenues, however, the first part of
the analysis must consider the market perfonnance of the proposed retail facilities The
problem is more difficult than simply detennining how much taxable retail sales volume is
likely to occur in the project stores, because the distribution of sales dollars is also shifting
within the Tn-Valley market. Without the new project, other sites wi.thin the Tri-Valley
area will develop as retail space (and will lease up more rapidly), and sales dollars ",ill
migrate away from existing Dublin stores. Thus, th~ more global.issue for Dublin's fiscal
impact is to estimate what is the amount of retail sales captured by Tri-Valley Crossings
which would not have occurred in Dublin without the project
Economics Research Associates
1
PROJECTED MARKET PERFORMANCE OF
THE HOMART POWER CENTER
ERA evaluated the market performance of HC?mart's proposed project by first
documenting historical and projected population and average household income in the Tri-
Valley, followed by a review of historical retail sales trends. This is followed by an
overview of existing retail space in Dublin, competitive stores in other Tn-Valley cities,
and of new competitive projects expected to be built in the near future.
RegionafDemographics
As shown in Table 1, the Tri- Valley region, defmed as the cities of Dublin,
Livermore, P1easanton, and San Ramon, is expected to experience significant population
growth over the next 15 years. According to the Association of Bay Area Governments
(ABAG), population in the Tri-Valley is projected to increase from about 190,400 in 1995
to 290,600 in 2010, or by nearly three percent a year. About 40 percent of this growth is
attributed to Dublin which is expected to add approximately 39,300 new residents over
the next 15 years. Dublin will continue to become a focal point of the Tn-Valley market
as its share of the regional population increases. In 1980, Dublin's share of Tn-Valley
residents was about 13 percent and by 2010 it is expected to account for over one-fifth of
the region's total population.
Following national trends, the average household size in Dublin and other Tri-
Valley cities is expected to continue to decline gradually over the next 15 years. As such,
the number of households in the region is expected to grow at a slightly faster pace than
total population. By 2010, the Tri-Valley will have about 103,700 households of which
nearly 21,000 will be in Dublin.
The Tri-Valley is one of the more affluent regions in Alameda County, as shown in
Table 2. Over the next 15 years, all of the Tri-Valley cities are expected to have a higher
average household incomes compared to the County. Average household income in
Dublin is projected to increase, in constant 1990 doJIars, from ab,out $59,400 in 1995 to
approximately $83,000 in 2010.
Regional Sales Volumes and Capture by City
Table 3 presents a comparison of 1993 per capita retail sales in the Tri-Valley,
Alameda County, and California. The Tri- Valley region can be identified as being a strong
Economics Research Associates
2
retail market based on per capita sales of about $9,300, compared to Alameda County and
the State as a whole which have per capita sales of about $6,000. Most of the strength of
this market can be attributed to the higher incomes noted above, although the Tn-Valley
area is well situated to capture some spending from residents of more distant communities,
such as Tracy, Manteca, Danville, and Castro Valley. As shown in Table 4, a comparison
of taxable sales by category and Tn-Valley city on a per capita basis reveals even greater
disparities in retail sales capture within the Tri- Valley market area. Based on the per
capita sales of each city, Dublin is the most successful retail city in the market, attracting
resident spending from other Tri-Valley communities in every store type. Overall, Dublin
per capita sales at $16,500 are nearly 80 percent higher than the Tri-Valley average and
almost three times the state average.
Much of the growth in retail sales in the Tri-Valley can be attributed to strong
population growth, as shown in Figure 1 and Table 5. Between 1984 and 1993,
population in the region increased at an average annual rate of slightly over four percent.
Real retail sales were growing faster than population in the late 1980s, but the recession
had a dramatic impact on slowing, and then reversing, the growth in sales starting in 1990.
Retail sales over the last couple of years appear to again be tracking the growth in Tri-
Valley population.
Figure 1
Tri-Valley Population and Taxable Retail Sales
Annual Comparison ofIndices 1, 1984 - 1993
160
ISO
140
.
.
] 130
120
110
100
19&. 19&$ 1916
ITri.VaU", . 4diu4 .. lb. e......r thltllia.
l.ir trn;aou. PI... tlOl, ..4 S.. llra.l. PopalluOI
lid ~.ub" tluil.Iu.... i.d....." lO 1914. lOo.
1t."d..I...,. i. co...... U,. dOU.,S.
un
USI
1919
1990
1991
199% 1903
Y~.r
_ Population _Tl.uble Relail SakI
Soarer.. Stilt .IC.ijfona Jou4.f
Bq.,hubOI. $u~ of elido...,. ;>.,._..,
01 1iul<<_ ..4 2.eoloaua I... tdI AMOC......
Economics Research Associates
3
As shown in Figure 2 and Tables 6 and 7, taxable retail sales in Dublin have
remained relatively flat compared to the Tri- Valley region as a whole. Over the last
decade, retail sales (in constant 1994 dollars) in Dublin reached a high of about $480
million in 1988 and have since then declined to a pre-1985 level of about $434 million in
1993. In comparison, P1easanton and the Tri-Valley region as a whole experienced
significant growth in taxable retail sales over the last nine years. Between 1984 and 1993,
retail sales in the region increased at an annual average of five percent In 1993, taxable
retail sales region-wide totaled approximately $1.7 billion.
Figure 2
Taxable Retail Sales
Tri- Valley Cities, 1983 -1993 1
;;
'E $1.000,000
;;
U
'-
e
S800,ooo
$1,800,000
SI,600,ooo - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .
Sl.400,OC() ..... - - .. .- - .- .- ... - .- ... ... ...
~
.".
~ SI,200,000
'"
c
~
g
~
S60Q,000
S4OO,ooo
S200,ooo
so
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
Yeu-
I OOctTri&VaDcy~iKmo.
Li.venDOl'D.~...4 Su~.
. Dub!in IJ Other Tri- Valley Cities
_ sw...CMii..... B"". ..&p~
..4&o.omiCIRe-"~
-
Because Dublin's sales have remained relatively flat while taxable retail sales in the
Tri- Valley have experienced strong growth between 1984 and 1993, the portion generated
Economics Research Associates
4
in Dublin has steadily declined, as shown in Figure 3 and Table 7. In 1983, Dublin's
share of Tn-Valley taxable retail sales amounted to about 37 percent and in 1993 the
City's share had declined to about one-fourth of the region's retail sales. As shown in
Figure 3
Dublin Share of Tn. Valley
Taxable Retail Sales, 1983 ~ 19931
4()'J,
35%
30%
25%
...
...
:: 20%
1ii
15%
10%
5%
0%
19it3 1984 1985
1986 19!7 1988 1989 1990 1991
Year
1992 1993
I~Tri.VaJkyciU::aim::1.J:Ses
~Pb"QL()Q,.aOOSuR.JltXlCL
Scutc:.St&c-d CU!cc:it Bc.d of Sp.liz2QOQ
.<l~s~Aaccic.L
Figure 4 and Table 8, between 1984 and 1993, Dublin's share of Tri-Valley retail sales
have declined in all sectors, with the exception of home furnishings and appliances.
Economics Research Associates
5
Figure 4
Ci ty of Dublin Share of Tn-Valley
Taxable Retail Sales, 1984 and 1993 1
Apparel
GcneralMerchandise
...... ............................ _>.d.H. . .....nun ........ '.'
.:.:.....;.;_y...;....,....:.......-..........................~.......,J'......;...............-...c.-~.....':,;".......J'...-....:.................-.......
.. ,n n_" _. ._. _ .. HU_ ____ 'd.' ,n .....
Drug
.;.:_;.:.;.:.: ;.;.;.;.:.;.:_;_;.:.;.;,'.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.:.;.;.:.;.:_;_:.-.:_:.:.:-:-:-:.:_::~~_C":..c_:.,.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,,:.'
Food
................................. ........... .... .._.... ..................h.
-.......-.........................-.........-.............-......_..._....-....,-...._._._.~.-_._..._._..._-...............................................................
~ Eating and Drinking
E-<
~ lbne FurnI ApplialXeS
C
~ Bldg MalaiaWFarm IrnplmIS
....................... h ...._... n..................n.hn............................._..
.............. ......h........u......u.__~._u.. ....... ......................................
..... ......,. n.... , ... ....... ............__ "_'0"_' __h.._......_n.
:..:.:.;..;..;.:.:..:.:.:.;.:..;.;.:.;.:.;.:.:.:.;.;.;.;.:.:.:.;.;.;._.:.;.:.:.;.:-;.;....:..z..:.;..-;.:.:.~~;;.:~::-:,.;;.:.;.;.;-:.:.:.;.;..:.:.:.:..;.:.;.:.:..:-..0;.;.:.;.;.;.;.;.;....;...;.;.;.:,.:.-:.;.;.;.;.:.:.;.:.;.:.
Auto DealerslSupplies
Service SlStims
........nnn.....u _ .....................
.. .n. ..n'"" 'u, "'hhun'.""",, ...
r"__ . _ ......__..
Other Ret!il Stores
;';':';";';-:".;'..-;";';';':';-:-:'-;';:;';.;-;':';':';':'..;..;.;.;:..;::.:.:.;.;.;.;-:.:..;..;.;.:+;...:.:.;.;.;.;-;.:.;.:.;.;
Tolal
... ....
............................._'..._-.-_....-..._....,..._~...-.-.--"o..-""o'o.........,............................_......00.0--:.:.......:.-
. - . . - -. - . . -, . . .. . . . . . . . . ...
0%
10%
~
30%
40%
50%
6<')%
Percent snare
tTJi.Vallc-yiadciiaed utllc~cl
D.Jbu.Li...-mona. P-aaatc.. &ad s... R~.
C 198481993
_ sw. dColif<<aia _d
Equa!lulioo; sw. d cmt...;.~
ol FisIuce: ..dEco.cmia~ ~
Survey of Existing Competitive Retail Facilities
Figure 5 and Table 9 present a map and listing of existing shopping centers and
major retail stores in the City of Dublin. As shown, ~any of the larger retail stores
currently in Dublin serve similar markets to the proposed tenant mix at Tri-Valley
Crossings, including, to name a few, Montgomery Wards, Target, Mervyns, Strouds,
Super Crown, Home Express, and Ross. With the development of Homan's proposed
project as well as other new centers in the Tn-Valley region, sales at some of these older
facilities will likely continue to decline as consumers are able to cho?se from a greater
variety of shopping opportunities. Table 10 lists retail stores in San Ramon, Pleasanton,
and Livennore which would also likely offer goods and services s~i1ar to those from the
proposed tenant mix at Tri- Valley Crossings.
Survey of Planned and Proposed New Retail in the Tri-Valley
Planned, approved and under construction competitive retail projects in the Tri-
Valley are listed in Table 11. As shown, a total of about 900,000 square feet of
Economics Research Associates
6
Figure 5
EXISTING AND PLANNED, APPROVED, AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION
COMPETITIVE RETAIL PROJECTS IN TIlE TRI-V ALLEY 1
o
~
G}
'"
"1
....
0'
"AVr.:--
'"
1-_
I See Tables 9, 10, and II for Map Key.
Source: Califomia State Automobile Association and Economics Research Associates.
.n
.r
~.
\~
~ \
5
:;I,
11I1
~ g
~ ~
.'
.s.
....
HARtrORD
fASI
,.:
..
<I"
2,3 <"09.,.
.~009<"
o. <4
"tM~lA~ I:
VAll. Cl ~
., 1;. srADIW . :: ./~.
'>1
---
~
11,0".,
(IntiS"" Ill4J\,
6
/. .
3.1
"
,..- -.-.... - "', ---
l UHN. ~ CALI"
I ........He. 3.7
: U~IU'OHr -lUiii
I NAf'l4 tAl
AVf
o
o
..
=
AD
competitive retail space is expected to be built by the Fall of 1995. Of most significance
to Tri-Valley Crossings is the Wal-Mart and Metro 580 projects in P1easanton which have
a combined square footage of about 310,000 square feet Both projects will be oriented
to the value conscious shopper and will be located directly across 1-580 from Tri- Valley
Crossings.
Retail Sales Capacity at a Power Center
T~ble 12 presents a profIle of possible tenants for Tri- Valley Crossings which
would be desirable to the applicant. Homart Community Centers. Each tenant type has a
different typical experience with retail productivity (sales per square foot), but the
projected average in Table 12 is approximately $300 per square foot, not including a
planned 75,000 square foot cinema complex. ERA has compared a number of these
tenant productivity factors with current data and from market area leasing agents and has
found them to be high in some cases and low in others. The $300 per foot factor is used
frequently by other leasing agents in forecasting sales for power center types of retailers,
and $300 per foot was the factor used by the County's consultants in 1991 to project the
amount of space which would be supportable on the Santa Rita site. ERA will use this
recognized industry standard factor of $300 per foot to represent the potential sales
capturing capacity of new comparison retail facilities in the Tri-Valley market
Estimated Sales Performance at the Homart Power Center
From the foregoing data, several important findings and conclusions can be
gleaned:
. Dublin currently is an overachiever in the capture of regional retail sales (I.e.,
per capita capture is almost 3 times the state average, and 2.7 times the
Alameda County average).
. Although Dublin has been an overachiever for many years (i.e., capturing
spending from residents from other Tri-Valley cities, and even some from the
Central Valley and other Bay Area communities), Dublin's share of the Tri-
Valley market has been eroding over the last decade.
· Dublin's share of Tri-Valley population is about to begin increasing due to the
substantial inventory of developable residential land in Eastern Dublin.
Economics Research Associates
7
· Even so, Dublin is vulnerable to rapid loss of retail market share if it does not
keep up with changes occurring in the retail industry (e.g., a massive shift
towards conveniently located big box, power center, deep discount and factory
outlet centers).
· Not counting the Homart "Tn-Valley Crossings" project, 900,000 square feet
of new-format retail concepts are planned or approved or under construction at
freeway interchanges in the Tri-Valley market, most along the 1-580 corridor.
. Without a large new-concept retail project of its own, Dublin will suffer a
significant loss of retail sales volume starting in the fall of 1995.
· Including the 500,000 square feet in the fIrst phase of the Tn-Valley Crossings
project, 1,400,000 square feet of new retail space is scheduled to be open in
the Tri- Valley market in approximately the fall of 1995 (Wal-Mart in
Pleasanton and. Target in San Ramon may have been open for 6 months or
more at that time, but Mervyns in San Ramon may still be under construction).
With Phase II of Tri-Valley Crossings open in fall of 1996, the new inventory
in the market will climb to 1,700,000 due to just the]rnown new projects.
. The types of new retail stores proposed in the region have a capacity to
capture an average of $300 per square f90t.
Figure 6 presents the historical and projected trend in total retail sales in the Tri-
Valley market area. Growth occurred from 1984 to 1993 as a function of population
growth and a real increase in per capita capture of 1.0 percent per year on the average.
This real increase was faster in the 1980s, but was offset by the recession years since
1990. Future growth through the year 2000 has been projected by ERA based on
anticipated population and a 1.0 percent per year real increase in per capita capture (see
Table 13). By the end of 1995, the Tri-Valley market is expected to be capturing
approximately $2.0 billion per year in retail sales.
At an average of $300 per square foot, the n~w retail opening near the end of 1995
has a sales capture capacity of $420 million. This would increase to $510 million a year
later with the addition of Phase II. These capacity additions to the market area are
illustrated in Figure 6 by the boxed in area, and reflect an "absolute maximum" scenario
where everything that is currently planned opens on time. There is no chance that this full
capture could be achieved without atIecting existing retail stores in the Tn-Valley region.
Economics Research Associates
8
, ,
The spending power simply does not exist yet in the market, and it is not at all likely that a
redistribution away from the Central Valley or other Bay Area of that scale would take
place.
Figure 6
Historic and Projected Tri- Valley
ToW Retail Sales, 1984 - 2000 1
S3,OOO,OOO
Dpldly IIli!.rd In 1996 (3OO.COO sqll)
---
S2,SOO,OOO
~
..,.
'"
'"
- S2,CCO,OCO
.=
..
c:
o
U Sl,SOO,OOO
....
o
~
~
~ Sl,OCO,OCO
j
...
Capsciry IIli!.rd in 1995 (1.4 millim sqlt)
SSOO,OOO
So
19&4 1m 1986 19117 1983 1989 1990 1991 1m 1993 1994 1m 1996 1997 1m 1999 2C.oo
Year
Scut:e:SUfCdo.1i!cniJ Bcwdo(
Eq.lili::ttioct,Stlte r:iCilicr.ua Deptr'.n:ct
dFism::c;.ABAG~w~
. Tri.V~\c:y ilde.finaj alltlC ci.iudlAlbt.iA.
LivcrT'DJl'e,. Pka_ac.o.. UId .sa. Ramo&.
Several things are likely to happen to accommodate this new retail capacity. Most
likely, the new retail stores will not achieve their full capacity immediately. This can take
several forms. New stores may be occupied, but experience somewhat lower sales per
foot than they had hoped for. Second, some spaces may be developed but remain vacant
for a year or more waiting for tenant retailers. Third, the development process may
proceed somewhat slower than planned, leaving one or more retail pads undeveloped for a
number of months. This slow down in sales rate and absorption oJ development will most
likely be spread over most or all of the new development projects.
Another way the market 'kill accommodate this boom in retail capacity offered,
will be to redistribute shopping patterns away from existing stores and towards the new
ones. As noted above, Dublin is vulnerable to loss of existing sales volumes to new
Economics Research Associates
9
l '
Table 1
SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES, FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 TO 1998.99
E:I$ICm Dublin Annexation Area and Homart Retail Project
Rt:Vt:nudExpense Items FY 94-95 IT 95-96 IT 96-97 IT 97-98 IT 98-99
Pro~rty Tax Revenue S - S 17 ,434 S 170.539 S 209 ,209 S 213,393
Slate Subventions or Sales Tax Revenue S - S 418.275 S 9"6.421 S 1.184.571 S 1.421.496
Total On-going Revenues S - S 435,709 S 1,126,960 S 1.393,779 S 1,634,888
Public Works S - S 39,092 S 52,123 S 52,123 S 52,123
Finance Dept. S - S 9,300 S 12,400 S 12,400 S 12,400
Fire Services ~ S 40,917 S 175,534 S 197,454 S 205,248 S 211,515
Police Services S - S 289.634 S 520.951 S 573.674 S 585.448
Total On-going Expenses S 40,917 S 513,560 S 782,928 S 843,445 S 861,486
Nd On-going Revenue (Expense) S (40,917) S (17,851) S 344,032 $ 550,334 S 773,402
Less One-Time Cost S - S (138,290) S (15,000) S - S -
Total Revenue (Expense) $ (40.917) S (216,141) $ 329.032 $ 550,334 S 773.402
Source: City of Dublin; ERA
centers. Without the Tri- Valley Crossings project, a significant reduction in the sales
volume in the City of Dublin is likely to occur. With the Tn-Valley Crossings project, the
City of Dublin should be able to maintain most of its market share, although there is likely
to be a minor portion of previous Dublin customers who will now patronize the new
centers being developed in Pleasanton, Livermore and San Ramon. And while citywide
Dublin should be able to maintain most of its market share, older stores are likely to suffer
volume losses to all of the new retail centers.
In order to account for these various mechanisms of market accommodation to the
new retail facilities, ERA has projected the net new sales capture to the City of Dublin in
terms of the equivalent of net new sales per square foot in just the new space in the Tri-
Valley Crossings project. 'This sales volume is projected to increase over time with
population and income growth, but is not expected to grow dramatically on a per foot
basis in the initial years because the supply of space will be expanding with the
development of Phase II. Specific projections are as follows:
FY 1995.96: The net new sales in the City would be equivalent to $200 per foot
within the 425,000 square teet of stores in Phase I (not counting the
75,000 square foot cinema complex). The space would only be open for
three-quarters of the year, however, and the annualized capture would be
$150 per foot.
FY 1996-97: The net capture would increase, but would be limited somewhat by
the absorption of the next 300,000 square feet in Phase II, assumed to be
open for three-quarters of the year. The net new equivalent sales volume is
estimated for that year to be $225 per foot
FY 1997-98: In the first full year of operation, a net new sales productivity factor
of $250 per square foot is forecast.
FY 1998-99: By this time the population of Eastern Dublin should be growing
substantially, and the net new retail productivity ~hould increase to a full
$300 per foot, and remain there for future years.
Cinemas typically generate lower sales per foot than do retail stores. Furthermore,
only the portion spent on food, beverage and other concession sales is taxable. Ta.xable
concession sales is usually equivalent to about 25 percent of ticket sales, or about 20
percent of total cinema revenue. Thus, the cinema complex will be only a minor revenue
Economics Research Associates
10
source for the City of Dublin. For projection purposes, ERA has estimated net new
taxable sales at $600,000 in the opening year, ranging up to $1.0 million per year in
FY1998-99.
The implications of these new sales for stores and cinemas are presented in the
fiscal analysis below.
FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
This section estimates the cost and revenue balance for the City of Dublin. It -
incorporates the fmdings from the market analysis ERA conducted to arrive at the net new
sales tax revenue impact
Estimated Revenues
The City of Dublin. will accrue revenues from two sources: property tax revenue
and sales tax revenue (Table 14). Property tax revenue generation for the 75-acre
project is estimated to range from $19,000 in FY 1994-95 to,$166,OOO in FY 1998-99...,
This assumes that Homart will acquire the property in FY 1994-95 for approximately S7
per square foot of land. Construction of the first phase of the project (500,000 square
feet) is expected to be completed in FY 1995-96, with the second phase (300,000 square
feet) completed in FY 1996-97. Construction cost estimates are based on $50 per square
foot for the building shell and fmish, landscaping and tenant improvements.
Based on the market analysis conducted in the previous section, ERA estimates
that the project will generate total annual sales ranging from $64 million in FY 1995-96,
the first year of project operation, to $204 million in FY 1998-99. This estimate includes
425,000 square feet of retail space in Phase I with annual sales rate ranging from $150 per
square foot during the first year of operation to $300 per square fo?t in FY 1998-99.
Phase II will add another 300,000 square feet which is projected to generate annual sales
rate of $225 for three-quarters of the year in FY 1996-97 to $300 per square foot in FY
- -
1998-99. The cinemas (75,000 square feet) are also projected to add between $600,000
to $1 million in taxable sales. With a 65-35 percent split of the 1 percent sales ta.x
between the City of Dublin and the County of Alameda, the City of Dublin is projected to
accrue revenues ranging from $418,000 in FY 1995-96 to $1.32 million in FY 1998-99.
Economics Research Associates
11
Total projected revenues from property and sales tax generation range from
$436,000 in FY 1995-96 to $1.57 million in FY 1998-99.
Estimates of Ongoing Service Costs and Operating Capital
Estimates of ongoing service costs have been provided by the City's service
providers and are attached as appendices to this report The total estimated cost of public
service provision range from $41,000 in FY 1994-95 to $680,000 in FY 1998-99 (Table
15). The cost components are briefly described below:
· The City Public Works Department estimates an annual cost of $35,300
(expressed in 1994 dollars) for services not covered by fees or assessments.
Note that costs for FY 1995-96 are pro-rated to reflect the estimated
development date of October 1. 1995.
· The City Finance Department anticipates annual cost ranging from $9,300 to
$12,400 during the period analyzed for additional property ta.x analysis,
monitoring, review, and report generation.
· The City of Dublin, City of San Ramon, and the Dougherty Regional Fire
Authority have determined the need for an additional fIre station to serve the
Santa Rita property and the annexation area with current uses and the
proposed Homart project. The DFRA proposes an interim fIre station located
in the Santa Rita jail complex which would be modified at a cost of $120,000.
This cost would be funded by Fire Impact Fees generated by the project. The
Lin property project proponents are expected to provide the additional cost of
acquiring a Type 3 Engine required to serve the annexation area. No
additional fIre service operating costs were projected for the annexation area
under current uses (without the Homart project). With the project, additional
operating cost ranging from $41,000 in FY 1994-95 to $212,000 in FY 1998-
99 would be required to cover the cost of four fIrefIghters and a paramedic
program.
. Estimates of police service provision to the annexation area and the Homart
project represent a phased approach to the establishment of a beat system in
the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area. Police service provision would require
the following:
Economics Research Associates
12
- Addition of 5 patrol officers
- Purchase of 2 patrol cars & radio equipment (one time cost)
- Additional vehicle maintenance & dispatch costs
- Addition of one clerical position
- Addition of one detective position
The Homart project would require 3.78 new patrol officers and the annexation
area 1.22 patrol officers. Based on the ratio of new officers in each area to
total new officers required, the costs for clerical and investigations assume a
- split of 75.6 percent of the cost to the Homart project and 24.4 percent of the
cost for the annexation area. Total annual police cost attributable to Homart
ranges from $191,000 in FY 1995 to $420,000 in FY 1998-99.
. Fmally, the Parks and Recreation Department is projecting additional costs
which are currently unquantified but qualitatively described in the department's
memo.
In the analyses summarized above, and presented in the appendix, the top Dublin
city staff have estimated the marginal costs of extending municipal services to the Specific
Plan Area in such away/hlat these costs wili'i16timpact the residentS in the existing;'"
developed areas of the city at all. If the Homart retail center were located in the middle of
an already urbanized area, the average cost of providing the same services would be less
than the marginal costs of extending them today. Stated in the converse, once the services
are extended to encompass the Homart project and the annexation area, there will be
sufficient capacity present to also serve additional future development in the Specific Plan
Area.
Net Cost Revenue Balance
Table 16 summarizes the revenue and expense balance over the next five years.
The one time cost of $24,300 plus an initial year operating loss will produce a minor net
deficit of $41,000 in FY 1994-95. In subsequenLyears, projected revenues will cover
costs with an estimated annual surplus starting at $5,600 and ranging up to a substantial
$890,000.
Economics Research Associates
13
Tablc 1
HISTOUlC AND PROJECTED POPULATION AND
HOUSEHOLDS IN TIlE TRI-V ALLEY, 1980 - 2010
Suhrt..'glonlll Area 1
1980 - 1990 1990. 1995 1995 - 2000 2000 - 2010
Average Annual Average Annual Average Annual Average Annual
Annual Growth AnnulIl Growth Annunl Growth Annual Growth
1980 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Chanl!c Rate Change Rate Change Rate Change Rate
Total Population
Dublin
LiveffiHire
Pleasanton
San Ramon
15,299
49,612
35,519
20,245
23,308
57,711
51,538
35,403
26,700
66,600
56,500
40,600
37,200
77,000
63.200
41,900
51,800
87,600
71,600
43,800
66,000
98,200
79,900
46,500
801
810
1,602
1,516
4.3%
1.5%
3.8%
5,7%
678
1,778
992
1,039
2.8%
2.9%
1.9%
2.8%
2,100
2,080
1,340
260
6.9%
2,9%
2.3%
0.6%
2,880
2,120
1,670
460
5.9%
2.5%
2.4%
1.0%
. '/r.()~1I1 TrhY~ lIey:.:,,:: ';l~9~~7.$:l:J ~1;2~9: .iJ?~.~199. < ~l? ;~Q~~'U:7~4,8()O ,::~20;(i9n:;..H;:::4;#?,%::;:;,:(;.\,~,:~,:,:A.11~K.i::i:!i~ ;~.~:H:i!,:::$;7 &0. ! ",:, 2.9 %, ,7, PQ:::,:.~..? %
Iill b 1111St\i~'t~..,::,'nd~,t%.l~. ?%<i,i't 4.9% ,. .!j7;Q% ... U.~9 ~':3 (~ :<~2;'7%
Totul Households .
Dublin 4,039 6,834 7,630 11,030 16,080 20,880 280 5.4% 159 2,2% 680 7.6% 985 6.6%
Livermore 16,768 20,998 23,000 26,690 30,780 35,100 423 2.3% 400 1.8% 738 3.0% 841 2.8%
Pleasanton 11,392 18,960 20,360 22,880 26,620 30,150 757 5,2% 280 1.4% 504 2.4% 727 2,8%
San Ramon 6,393 12,895 14,690 15,670 16,580 17,830 650 7.3% 359 2.6% 196 1.3% 216 1.3%
'<T~)~i'J trf;y'~'U~y:i::::t:!;'/:~~~~$~~':::;::::(?2;~$7: :.:t~$;~ff9..i:'.!:d~;~1M:'}'Q6;()6i)::J9~,?@: ;:'t::i:~;li~r .:::j'jjiiU::iW;$%Hi:i;i'jH22::: ::::.::::;':..'::t;~:~::!::;:}'~;'jX$ .... 3,Orp,)~,19R: .. ]:::~ii%
DllbJlI~ Shllr~::,;:),;,:'.:'<.\:::i9;?~ . .':ll~~% [:U.&%i4;~~; '\/17.9% ':.2(()~'
Persolls pel' Houschold
Dublin 3.41 2.86 2,% 2.91 2.g8 2.87
l.ivermore 2.95 2.74 2,88 2.87 2.83 2.78
Plcasanlon 3,09 2.71 2,77 2.75 2.68 2,64
San Ramon 3.16 2.74 2.76 2.67 2.66 2.61
1 Subregional areas correspond to the Local Agency )1onnalion COlllmission (LAl ;CO) city spheres of infiucnce,
Source: Association of Bay AreH Governments (ABAG), rro,jcclions 94, December 1993; and Economics Research Associales.
. '
Table 2
mSTORIC AND PROJECTED AVERAGE
HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN THE TRI-V ALLEY, 1980 - 2010
::$:::::::~!;1~ii::I..~!:1'''~!~11~~ I!fi!~111:i:['!J;t~ilglli 'r!;~:I;~~I!~~:'~~';"~~~~?~::
47,132
54,577
62,365
Sub .onal Area 1
1980
Livermore
Pleasanton
San Ramon
In Constant 1990 Dollars
1990
1995
2010
2000
2005
56,518 54,800 59,400 63.900 69.300
70,670 69,300 73,900 78.700 86,300
76,584- 71,300 76,700 82,400 89,400
Alameda County
$ 39,949 S 48,993 S 46.600 $ 51,400 $ 55.600 $ 61,400
1 Subregional areas correspond to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) \
city spheres of influence. .
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), Projections 94. December 1993;
and Economics Research Associates.
'.
Table 3
TAXABLE UETAIlJ SALES COMPARISON
OF TilE TIU-V ALLEY, ALAMEDA COUNTY, AND CALIFORNIA, 1993
Taxable Sales In
Millions of Constant 1994 Dollars
Business T )e
Apparel $
General Merchandise
Dnlg
Food
Packaged Liquor
Eating and Drinking
Home Fum/Appliances
Dtdg MaterinlsJFarm Implmts
Auto Dealers/Supplies
Service Stations
Other Retail Stores
Trl-
Valle 1
Alameda
Count California
92 $
291
30
105
9
182
109
143
309
130
309
396 $
1,120
273
549
104
1,024
428
713
1,397
671
1,530
10,523 $
27,699
4,961
14,777
1,796
24,007
8,633
14,103
29,310
16,715
28,551
..
Per Capita Sales:l
In Constant 1994 Dollars
Trl-
VlIlIe 1
Alameda
Count California
497 $
1,582
164
570
49
988
594
778
1,678
708
1,679
;~:','.1'~i.!ii;..~i~9~!~i::1::j.l'~.~f?1~..$.:.'i.~i~:~i.;:
294 $
831
203
408
77
760
318
529
1,036
498
1,135
329
867
155
462
56
751
270
441
917
523
893
Tri.
VnlIe 1
1.51
1.83
1.05
1.23
0,87
1.32
2.20
1.76
1.83
1.35
1.88
0.89
0.96
1.31
0.88
1.37
1.01
1.18
1.20
1.13
0.95
1.27
CaUfornlll
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
. '.'.:!::':l#.;~~'~~::.l :l:$i;;i.j::i:.:;..;.;:~:~~~,!:
I '1'01:11 'I'd-Valley is defined as the cities of Duhlin, Livennore, Pleasanton, and San R:unon. For the Tri- Valley dala, amounts shown for the Gcncral
Merchandise and Drug cnlegories do not include San Ramon and the amoulll shown for Ihe Packaged Liquor category does not include Dublin,
Sales for these categories are included with Other Retail Stores.
2 nased January I, 1994 population estimates by the State of Caiifomia Department of Finance. Estimates are as follows: Tri-Valley 184,150;
Alameda County 1,347,900; and California 31,961,000.
Source: Stale of California Board of Equalization; Stale of Califomia Department of Finance; and Economics Resenrch Associates.
Talllc 4
.,
TAXABLE RETAIL SALF...5 COMI'AIUSON
OF TRI-VALLEY CITIES, 1993
Business l' lC
Taxable Sales in
Millions of Constant 1994 Dollars
Total
Liver- Plea- San Tri-
Duhlin more s,,'mton Ramon Valle I
Per Capita Sales 2
in Constant 1994 Dollars
Duhlin
Liver-
more
Plea- San
santon n:UllOI1
Total
Tri.
Valle I
Liver-
Ouhlin
more
Plea-
lklOtOI1
San
Ramon
Apparel $ 18 $ 9 $ 53 $ 12 $ 92 $ 678 $ 137 $ 958 $ 306 $ 497 1.36 0,27 1.93 0.62 1.00
Gcneral Merchandise 72 54 165 # $ 291 2,742 863 2,978 it 1,582 1.73 0.55 1.88 # 1.00
Drug 8 12 10 # $ 30 286 194 188 # 164 1.75 1.18 1.15 # 1.00
Food 18 31 36 21 $ 105 6&6 485 646 520 570 1.20 0.85 1.13 0.91 1.00
Package(1 Liquor If 4 3 3 $ 9 1/ 62 46 66 49 It 1.25 0,94 1.34 1.00
Eating and Drinking 30 38 75 39 $ 182 1.158 596 1.357 981 988 1.17 0,60 1.37 0,99 1.00
Home Fum/Appllances 54 10 36 9 $ 109 2,071 162 652 221 594 3.48 0,27 1.10 0,37 1.00
Bldg MaterlalslFann Implmts 29 26 75 13 $ 143 1,122 418 1.345 328 778 1.44 0.54 1.73 0.42 1.00
Auto Dealers/Supplies 119 65 120 5 $ 309 4.522 1,036 2,168 125 1,678 2.70 0,62 1.29 0.07 1.00
Service Stations 24 47 35 25 $ 130 914 741 629 633 708 1.29 1.05 0.89 0.89 1.00
, 1,679
Olher Retail Stores 62 68 98 81 $ 309 2,350 1,087 1,769 2,047 1.40 0,65 1.05 1.22 1.00
.,:~:1:ii:i::j:::1~1,'. ::~'ijiij:iii;:~:~1.::. ...~':"."j:j:::Z9~j" ::.fl,::.':'::~:9.1:;j "j:~:'::'~.:f7~'P' ~'~'~i~~9'. :.!*.:...~~li,!:i:: :ij: .. :i.:~'[i:.:~.;~~I:' !::i::[:ii!i:j!!i!!:~R:9:i
:;;:
If Sales omilted because their publication would result in the disclosure of contidential information. Sales for these categories arc included wilh Other Retail Stores.
I TOlal Tri- Valley is defined lIS the cities of Dublin. Livermore. Pleasanlon. llml San Rnmon. For the TrI- Vallcy data, amoulIlS shown for the General Merchandise nnd Onlg categories
do not Include San Ramon lInd the amount shown for the Packaged Liquor category docs not Includc Dublin. Sales for these catcgories arc Included with Olher Relail Slores,
2 Based January 1. 1994 population estimates by lhe Slale of California Department of Finance, Estimates are as follows: Dublin 26.250; Livermore 62,900; Pleasanlon 55,400;
San Ramoll 39,600; and Trl- Valley (sum of four cilies) 184,150.
Source: Slalc of California Board of Equalization; Slale of Califomia Dcpartmcnt of Finance; and Economics Research Associates.
. ,
Table 5
COMPARISON OF POPULATION AND TAXABLE
RETAIL SALES IN THE TRI-VALLEY, 1984 _19931
Taxable Retail Sales
Pooulation Z Thousands of Constant 1994 Dollars
Annual Change Annual Cban~e Per Capita
Year Persons Absolute Percent Amount Absolute Percent Sales
1984 125,250 ---- ---- 1,104,026 ----- - S 8,502
1985 129,850 4,600 3.7% 1.212,681 108,655 9.8% 8,826
1986 137,400 7,550 5.8% 1.263,123 50,442 4.2% 8,839
1987 142,900 5,500 4.0% 1,389,771 126,648 10.0% 9,324
1988 149,050 6,150 4.3% 1,489.137 99.366 7.1% 9,458
1989 157,450 8,400 5.6% 1.628,408 139.271 9.4% 9,836
1990 165,550 8,100 5.1% 1.659.604 31,197 1.9% 9,803
1991 169,300 3.750 2.3% 1.608,011 (51,593) -3.1% 9,231
1992 174,200 4,900 2.9% 1,644,053 36,041 2.2% 9,108
1993 " 180,500 6,300 3.6% 1,710,209 66,156 ' 4.0% 9,287
1984 . 1993 Average 4,1%1 s.o%IG
Annual Growth Rate
1 T n- Valley consists of the cities of Dublin, San Ramon, Pleasanton, and Livermore.
2 January 1 estimates.
3 Annual taxable sales divided by the January 1 population estimate for the following year.
Source: S tate of California Board of Equalization; State of California Department of Finance;
and Economics Research Associates.
Tahle 6
TAXABLE HETAnJ SALES IN THE CITY OF DUBLIN
BY BUSINESS TYPE, 1983 - 1993
Inu,'n""Tlpe Change Change
Taxahle Sales In MIllions of Constant 1994 Dollllrs 1983.1988 1988.1993
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Amount Percent Amount Percent
Apparel $ 12 $ 13 $ 13 $ 16 $ 18 $ 18 $ 19 $ 20 $ 19 $ 20 $ 18 $ 6 52.7% $ (I) -3.7%
General Merchandise 62 58 55 54 56 70 74 77 78 81 72 8 12.4% 2 3.6%
Dmg #f 9 9 10 11 tI It #f 8 8 8 #I tI #/ #/
Food 28 38 46 44 21 19 19 17 20 21 18 (8) -30,6% (1) -5.9%
Packaged Liquor 11 II #I II #I #I #I 4 4 1 # 1/ # #/ #/
Eating and Drinking 32 34 35 33 34 37 30 29 29 30 6 18.3% (7) -18.9%
Borne FlIm/Appliances 15 29 31 32 37 54 57 53 54 54 38 247,9% 1 1.5%
Dldg Materials1Fann Implmts 26 30 35 37 35 39 37 27 26 29 13 50.5% (9) -24.1 %
Auto Dealers/Supplies 107 112 130 173 156 145 136 117 113 119 38 35,7% (26) -18.0%
Service Stntions 32 31 30 20 20 21 22 21 24 24 (11) -35.6% 3 15.5%
OUler Retail Stores 49 46 56 52 54 77 76 56 55 62 29 58.8% (16) -20.1%
:::-;.;.,.,.".....'0'. T:AI/
1H;U:\\ibt:;,::;:::;,:: :il>: t
';":':'.':'~:~. ::i:f;!:::!:!!:1'~~"'.,!:'::,::,:':!1:f.R;,;. ::.:~:i:i:i:::!~Z~;::. :.i:~:.;!:;::i.f1~':' :.i.!:!::::ii:!1:~'9:;:
....:,].11;, i,::';.['.~'~~~.~!::~::::':ii:;::!:~1~J ~""":;"';':::!:~:m
:'}~:~;,' ~'" ':;:
# Sales omitted because their publication would result in the disclosure of conlidential infonll~Jion,(Sales for these categories are included WiUl OUler Retail Stores,
Source: Slate of Califomia Doard of Equalization and Economics Research Associates.
Tahle 7
DISTRIBUTION OF TAXAHLE RETAIL SALES
IN TIm TRI- VALLEY, 1983 - 1993
.,
Taxable Sales in Thousands of Constant 1994 Dollars
Duhlln Livermore Pleasanton Sun Rllmon
Share of Share of Share of Share of
Trl- Y alley Trl-Valley Trl- Valley Trl- Valley Trl-Yalley
Year Amount Total Amount Total Amount Total Amount Total Totlll
1983 $ 361,904 37,2% $ 235,649 24.2% $ 265,875 27.3% $ 109,952 11.3% $ 973,381
1984 400,036 36.2% 274,462 24.9% 310,604 28.1% 118,925 10,8% 1,104,026
1985 439,985 36.3% 282,093 23.3% 333,338 27.5% 157,265 13.0% 1,212,681
1986 470,410 37.2% 274,500 21.7% 369,947 29,3% 148,266 11.7% 1,263,123
1987 441,905 31.8% 286,564 20.6% 500,299 36.0% 161,002 11,6% 1,389,771
1988 479,683 32.2% 312,535 21.0% 510,972 34.3% 185,948 12,5% 1,489,137
1989 474,647 29.1% 324,692 19.9% 597,495 36,7% 231,574 14,2% 1,628,408
,
1990 474,774 28.6% 310,990 18.7% 627,610 37.8% 246,229 14,8% 1,659,604
1991 433,060 26.9% 301,640 18.8% 651,220 40,5% 222,092 13.8% 1,608,011
1992 432,758 26.3% 316,793 19.3% (i84,523 41.6% 209,979 12.8% 1,644,053
1993 433,903 25.4% 363,639 21.3% 705,662 41.3% 207,006 12.1 % 1,710,209
Source: Stnte of Califomia Doard of Equalization and Economics Research Associates.
Table 8
CITY OF DUBLIN SHARE OF TRl-VALLEYTAXABLE
RETAlL SALES BY BUSINESS TYPE, 1984 AND 1993
Business Tvpe _
Apparel
General Merchandise
Drug
Food
Packaged Liquor
Eating and Drinking
Home Furn/Appliances
Bldg MaterialslFarm Implmts
Auto Dealers/Supplies
Service Stations
Other Retail Stores
1984
Taxable Sales in
Thousands of Constant
1994 Dollars
City of
Dublin
$
12,670 S
57,803
9,321
37,928
#
34,184
28,927
30,384
112,100
30,900
45,819
Total
Tri-VaUev1
55,667
180,452
33,497
109,533
14,605
126,516
65,793
69,416
213,100
114,774
120,675
Dublin
Share of
Tri-Vallev
22.8% $
32.0%
27.8%
34.6%
NA
27.0%
44.0%
.43.8%
52.6%
26.9%
38.0%
1993
Taxable Sales in
Thousands of Constant
1994 Dollars
Qty of
Dublin
17,808 $
71,983
1,520
18,007
:#
30,388
54,373
29,457
118,691
23,980
61,696
Total
Tri- Valley 1
91,601
291,300
30,150
104,885
9,056
181,920
109,453
143,291
308,931
130,470
309,153
:1:1:1.:.::j::: .. ____.......u.n..__......._
;,\'f::):))'P'P'P ..... p....p ..p,' mm. P' P."::"::.
i: . V 1~::r::::::.~;::"::::~~!9~~ ::$,1;:i04,~.~ :':::t:::.:.::::::!~:~~~~.~*:::i~~i~~:":~.},710~ 09
# Sales omitted because their publication would result in the disclosure of confidential information. Sales for
these categories are included with Other Retail Stores.
Dublin
Share of
Tri-Vallev
19.4%
24.7%
24.9%
17.2%
NA
16.7%
49.7'7,
20.6%
38.4'7c
18.4%
20.0%
.',:.:.
.1.q~
::-:J~
I Total Tri-Valley is defmed as the cities of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon. For the 1984 Tri-Valley
data. amounts shown for the General Merchandise category does not include San Ramon ~d the amount shown
for the Packaged Liquor category does not include Dublin. For 1993 Tri-Valley data, amounts shown for the General
Merchandise and Drug categories do not include San Ramon and the amount shown for the Packaged Liquor
category does not include Dublin. Sales for these categories are included with OtherRetail Stores.
Source: State of California Board of Equalization and Economics Research Associates..
Table 9
INVENTORY OF EXISTING SHOPPING CENTERS AND
MAJOR RETAIL STORES IN THE CITY OF DUBLIN
Total I
Year Gross Total Malar Tenants
Mnp Name of Shopping CenterlStore First Leasable Number Approx
Kev! and Location Opened Area of Stores Tenant Sq Ft
1 Shamrock Village 1960 72,000 22 NA NA
Amador Valley Blvd and San Ramon Rd
San Ramon Rd
2 Valley CeIlter 1966 13,000 14 NA NA
Amador Vailey Blvd and Village Pkwy
1 Dublin Place 1971 NA NA Montgomery Wards 130,000
Dublin Blvd and San Ramon Rd Target 100,000
Mervyns 85,000
Toys R Us NA
Copeland Sports NA
Cinema 6 NA
Payless Drugs 69,000
Albertson's 20,000
3 San Ramon Village Center 1975 48.388 13 NA NA
Alcosta Blvd and San Ramon Rd .... '.' ""
';..
.."c",.., ... ':;''0'' ",...{ . ',.."'",
4 Dublin Village 1976 32,500 9 Kragen Auto 4,972
Dublin Blvd and Village Pkwy
1 Strouds Plaza 1986 52,115 NA Strauds NAI
Amador Valley Blvd and San Ramon Rd
1 Enea Plaza 1992 NA 9 Super Crown NAI
Dublin Blvd and Amador Plaza Rd Good Guys NA
Mattress Discounters NA
1 Unnamed Center NA NA 6 Orchard Supply Hardware 40,000
Dublin Blvd and San Ramon Rd Home Express NA
Best Buy Furniture NA
Ross 30,000
1 Amador Plaza NA NA NA Circuit City 50,000
Amador Plaza Rd and Amador Valley Blvd TJ Man 30,000
5 Pak 'N Save Center NA 100,000 15 Pak 'N Save 35,000
Dublin Blvd and Dougherty Rd
2 Village Square NA 62,000 18 NA NA
Amador Valley Blvd and Village Pkwy
5 Office Depot NA NA NA NA NA
Dublin Ct and Dublin Blvd
1 See Figure 5 for map.
Source: National Research Bureau, Shovvin~ Center Directorv 1994; Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.;
and Economics Research Associates.
Table 10
INVENTORY OF EXISTING COMPETITIVE
RETAIL STORES IN OTHER TRI- VALLEY CITIES
Gross
Map Leasable Name of Shopping Center
Keyl Name of Store Area and/or Location
I SAN RA.t\10N I
6 Loehmann's 15,000 Crow Canyon Commons
Big 5 Sporting Goods NA Crow Canyon Rd and Camino Ramon
7 Super Crown NA Ma.,onolia Square
San Ramon Valley Blvd and Crow Canyon Rd
I PLEASANT ON I
8 Best 67,000 Best Plaza
Springdale Ave
9 Macy's Home Furnishings 2 48,000 Rose Pavillion
Santa Rita Rd and Rosewood Dr
')'i:\"Z,
10 Fry's Pro Sbop NA Trader Ioe's Plaza
Trader Ioe's ;. 'NA 'Pimlico Dr and Santa Rita
. ,
8 Emporium 179,000 Stoneridge Shopping Center
IC Penney 147,000 Foothill ReI. west of 1-580 and 1-680 Interchange
Macy's 190,000
Nordstrom 180,000
I LIVERIVIORE I
9 Big 5 Sporting Goods NA Plaza 580
Mervyns 75,000 Las Positas Rd and 1st St
Ross NA
Target 112,000
Payless Sboe Source NA
Total of Center 320,000
11 K-Mart 68,377 The Village at Livermore
Payless Sboe Source NA E. Stanley Blvd and S St
12 Wal-Mart 112,000 1-580 and N. Livermore Ave
13 Price/Costco 120,000 1-580 and AJrway Blvd
1 See Figure 5 for map.
2 To move into vacated Cost Less Foods space. Tenant improvements currently being done.
.f
Source: National Research Bureau, Shoppinl: Center Directory. 1994; and Economics Researcb Associates.
T;,hlc 11
PLANNED, AI'PHOVED, AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION
COJ\tI'ETlTIVE RETAIL PROJECTS IN THE TRI- V ALLEY
.,
Map Developer! Square
KcVI Name of Project A~pJic~mt Location Feet Comments
InUBLlN I
Approved
A PctSmart NA 6920 Amador Valley Blvd 25,000 Building permit needed. Construction expected
and Regional 5t ," to start soon.
SAN RAMON ' .,'
Undcr CcmstMlction
B Plaza at Bishop Ranch Day ton-l Iudson 261Q..2630 Bishop Dr 220,500 Includes Target at 130,000 square feet. Mervyns at
lInd Sunset Dr 78.000 square feet, nnd two small pads tOlaling 12.500
square feet, Target Is currently under canstruetlOllund
Is expected to open In March of 1995, There is no. date
set for the construction or opening of Mervyns.
PLEASANTON
Approved !'."
C Wal-Mart Wal-Mart Rosewood Dr and Owens Dr 126,000 The projcct site totals 15 acres and Is situated
I' immediately soulll of the planned Metro 580 project.
Project approval was received In December of 1993,
" Construction is expected to begin in October of this
.'. year, Anticipated completion date is March of 1995.
In ad(lIt1on to the 126.000 square feet, Wal-Mart
l' also has appraval for a 30,000 square faot expansion.
..
Planned
J) Mctro 580 Spieker Properties 1-580 and I Jadcmla Dr 184,400 The proJcct site totals 17 acres and is sHunted
immediately north of the approved Wal-Mart proJcct.
The projcctls comprised of three separate buildings
wilh square footages as follows:
T..hlc 11 (continucd)
PLANNED, APPIWVED, AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION
COMPETITIVE RETAIL PROJECTS IN THE TRI-VALLEY
.1
Map Developerl Square
Kcy' Name of Project A ImliC1mt LOC1llioll Fect Commcnts
Metro 580 (continued) Building 111: 18.000
Building 112: 13.600
IlullilinUJ:
Tenant A 42,000
Tenant n 40,000
'-
Tenant C 33,800
Tenant D 18,000
Buildings Itlund #2 arc expected to be divided lip into
slTh"\ller retail spaces. The project will most likely be a
value oriented center. It will go before the City Council
in mid November of tills year and Is expected to receive
approval. The projcct has a targeted completion date
, of October 1995.
LIVEUMO!tg
Under Conslnlctlon
E Vineyard Factory Outlet Farallon RE Services 1-580 and Greenville Rd 170.000 Phase I of project totals 100,000 square feet and is
currently under construction. Targeted date for com-
pletion is Spring 1995, Phase II of project totals 70,000
square feet. Original schedule called for construction to
begin Fall 1994. However, the applicant has requested
that construction be delayed to, at the latest, July of
1995. According to the applicant, construction schedule
A Pl)l'ovcd of Phase )( will depend on Ihe level of leasing activity.
F Super K-Mar! K-Mart Las Positas Rd and N. Liver- 178,000 Building permit and design review needed. Will be
more Ave. adjacent to 1-580 adjacent to the existing Wal-Mart. Targeted dale
for completion is November 1995,
I See Figure 5 for map,
Source: Planning Departments for the Cities of Dublin, San Ramon, Pleasanton, and [.ivermore; cn Commercial; ancl Economics Research Associates.
, .
.
Table 12
TRI- VALLEY CROSSINGS PHASE I - TENANTS AND ESTIMATED SALES
I Retalle, I Estimated
Annual Sales per
Square Sales Square
Feet ($OOO) Foot
Barnes & Noble 30.000 $ 9.000 $ 300
TJ. Maxx 30,000 7.500 250
MarshaUs 30.000 7.500 250
Linen 'N Things 35.000 8.000 229
Comp USA 25.000 15,000 600
SportMart 42.000 9.000 214
Best Buy 58,000 23,000 397
Sears Home Life 34,000 10,000 294
Beverages & More! 18,000 5,000 278
Old Navy Clothing 18,000 6,000 333
Krause's Sofa Factory 18,000 4,500 250
Office Supply Store 25,000 7,500 300
Theatre Complex 75,000 NA NA
Shop Space 40,000 10,000 250
Restaurants 25.000 6.500 260
Total with Theatre 503,000 NA NA
Total without Theatre 428,000 $ 128,500 $ 300
Source: Homan Community Centers and Economics Research Associates. .
.f
Table ~3
PROJECTED RETAIL SALES IN THE TRI-VALLEYMARKET, 1995 _20001
Dollar Amounts in Constant 1994 Dollars I
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Tri- Valley Market Population 190.400 195,858 201,472 207,248 213.189 219,300
Per Capita Expenditures Z
Apparel S 507 $ 512 $ 518 S 523 S 528 S 533
General Merchandise 1.614 1,630 1,646 1,663 1.679 1.696
Drug - 167 169 170 172 174 176
Food 581 587 593 599 605 611
Packaged Liquor 50 51 51 52 52 53
Eating and Drinking 1,008 1,018 1,028 1,038 1,049 1,059
Home FumI Appliances 606 612 619 625 631 637
B1dg MaterialslFarm Implmts 794 802 810 818 826 834
Auto Dealers/Supplies 1,711 1,728 1,146 1,763 1,781 1,799
Service Stations 723 730 737 145 752 760
Other Retail Stores 1,713 1,730 1,747 1,164 1,782 1,800
Tri-Valley Market
Resident Generated Sales ($(}()())
Apparel S 96,613 $ 100,376 $ 104,286 $ 108,349 $ 112,569 S 116,954
General Merchandise 307,241 319,209 331,643 344,561 357,983 371,927
Drug 31,800 33,039 34,326 35,663 37,052 38,495
Food 3 335,225 348,283 361,849 375,944 390,588 405,803
Packaged Liquor 9,552 9.924 10,310 10,712 11,129 11,563
Eating and Drinking 191.875 199,349 207,114 215.181 223,563 232,271
Home FumJ Appliances 115,442 119,939 124,611 129,465 134,508 139,747 I
B1dg Materials/Farm Implmts 151,132 157,019 163,135 169,490 176,092 182,9511
Auto Dealers/Supplies 325,836 338,529 351,715 365,415 379,649 394.438\
Service Stations 137,610 142,970 148,539 154,325 160,336 166,582 I
Other Retail Stores ;16070 338 771 351 967 365 677 3799" 1 ,9.1 no
Total S 2.028,396 $2,107,407 $2.189,496 $2,274.782 S 2.363,391 S 2,455,451
I
1 Retail sales in Dublin are assumed to be generated from residents of the Tri-Val1ey market which
consists of the cities of Dublin, San Ramon, Pleasanton. and Livermore.
2 Based on per capita spending in 1993 in the Tri- Valley market (see Table 7). Spending projected
to rise 1.0% annually based on observed real growth from 1984 to 1993 (see Table 4).
3 Assumes that 33% of total sales are taxable.
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), Proiections 94. December 1993; State of California Board of
Equalization; and Economics Research Associates.
Tahle 14
ESTIMATE OF FISCAL HEVENUES, FISCAL YEAH 199-1-9510 199H-19'J9
Homart Relail Project
Property Tax nevcnue Estimate FY 94-95 FY 95-96 FY 96-97 FY 97-98 FY 98-99
Properly Assessed Valuation in <A,V.) II .\
Land value @ $7/sqft, 75 acres 12 $ 7,623,000 $ 23,021,460 $ 23,481,889 $ 23,951,527 $ 24,430,558
ConslnJclion cost value @ $50/sqft, 800,000 sqft total $ - $ 25,000,000 $ 40,500,000 $ 41,310,000 $ 42,136,200
TOlal Properly Assessed Valuation $ 7,623,000 $ 48,021,460 $ 63,981,889 $ 65,261,527 $ 66,566,758
Property Tax @ 1 % of Previous Years A.V. $ - $ 76,230 $ 480,215 $ 639,819 $ 652,615
Property Tax Revenue to the
City of Duhlin @ 22.9% $ - $ 17.434 $ 109,825 $ 146,327 $ 149,253
SlIles Tux Revenue Estimate FY 94-95 FY 95-96 FY 96-97 FY 97-98 FY 98-99
Phase I: Square feet developed ( Icss cinemas) - 425,000 425,000 425,000 425,000
Annualized sales rate $ - $ 150 $ 225 $ 250 $ 300
Pll.1Se II: Square feet developed - - 300,000 300,000 300,000
Anoualized sales rate $ - $ - $ 169 $ 250 $ 300
Cincma (75.000 sO Taxable Food & Beverage Sales $ - $ 600,000 $ 700,000 $ 800,000 $ 1,000,000
.
Total Annual Salcs (Phase I and II) $ - $ 64,350,000 $ 146,950,000 $ 182,050,000 $ 218,500,000
Loc.1l Sales Tax Revenue @ 1 % $ - $ 643,500 $ 1,469,500 $ 1,820,500 $ 2,185,000
City of Duhlin's Share @ 65% of Salcs Tax Rcvcnuc $ - $ 418.275 $ 955 175 $ 1,183325 $ 1,420250
ITotal }lroj<.'Cted ncvcnues to the City of nuhli~l
$
. _.. ., $
435,709 $ l~06S,OOO $ 1,329/652 $ 1,569,503 I
11 Assesscd vnlualion inOnled at 2% per ycnr per Prop. 13.
/2 Assllmcs 50 acrcs of land will be bought on Jail I, 1995. 'Illc remaining acres would be bought hy July 1995.
Source: I [omart; ERA
Tahle 15
ESTIMATE OF l?ISCAL EXPENSES, FISCAL YEAR 1994-95 TO 1998-99
I lomart Retail Project
Puhlic Services FY 94-95 FY 95-96 FY 96-97 FY 97-98 FY 98-~9
ruhlic Works 11
Annual Cost: See allachments. $ - $ 26,462 $ 35,282 $ 35,282 $ 35,282
City Fillilll~Pt..L1.
Consultant services - Property tax analysis $ - $ 8,100 $ 10,800 $ 10,800 $ 10,800
Staff cost $ - $ 1,200 $ 1,600 $ 1,600 $ 1,600
Fire Sc(Yic~s It
One-time cost: interim fire station 12 $ -
Annual Cost: 4 personnel & paramedic program $ 40.917 $ 175,534 $ 197,454 $ 205,248 $ 211,515
Police COSI for both annex & I Iomart $ 289,600 $ 519,350 $ 571,500 $ 583,200
Eillicc $crYiccs.Ll
One-time cost: I-vehicle $ - $ 27,700 $ 11,340
Annual Cost: See atlachmenls. /3 $ - $ 10}']26 $ 370.627 $ 413.803 $ 42Q,489
I
Totul One-time Cost $ - $ 27,700 $ 11,340 $ . $ .
Totul Annual Cost $ 40,917 $ 402,422 $ 615,763 $ 666,733 $ 679,486
'fohll Cost $ 40,917 $ 430,122 $ 627,103 $ 666,733 $ 679,486
..
,.
/I See allachmenls. Cosl in FY 1995-96 pro-rated to renecl official annexation dnte of OCl1995,
/2 Modification for the cxisting Santa Rita fire station is nn estimated cost of $120,000. This would be funded from
Pin~ Impact Fees gcnerated by the project.
/3 Police expenses are derived from an Oct. 25 Memo from James Rose, Chief of Police, to Richard Ambl'O!>c,
Source: City of Dublin Police Services; Dougherty Regional Pire Authority;
City of Dublin Police Services; ERA.
..
Tahle 1 ()
SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES, FISCAL YEAR 1994-95 to 1998-99
IIomart Retail Project
Revenue/Expense Items FY 94-95 FY 95-96 FY 96-97 FY 97-98 FY 98-99
Property Tax Revenue $ - $ 17,434 $ 109,825 $ 146,327 $ 149,253
Sales Tax Revenue $ - $ 418.275 $ 955.175 $ 1.181.325 $ 1.420.250
Total On-going Revenues $ - $ 435,709 $ 1,065,000 $ 1,329,652 $ 1,569,503
Public Works $ - $ 26,462 $ 35,282 $ 35,282 $ 35,282
Finance Department $ - $ 9,300 $ 12,400 $ 12,400 $ 12,400
Fire Services $ 40,917 $ 175,534 $ 197,454 $ 205,248 $ 211,515
Police Services $ - $ 191.126 $ 370.627 $ 413.803 $ 420.289
Tottll On-golng Expenses $ 40,917 $ 402,422 $ 615,763 $ 666,733 $ 679,486
Net On-going Ucvermc (Expen'ic) $ (40,917) $ 33.287 $ 449,237 $ 662,919 $ 890,017
Less Onc-Tilne Cost $ - $ (27,700) $ (11,340) $ - $ -
Totul Ucvenoe (Exl)ense) $ (40,917) $ 5,587 $ 460 577 $ 662.919 $ 890.017
.'
Source: City of Dublin; ERA
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF DUBLIN
MEMORANDUM
September 21, 1994
J eri Ram, Associate Planner ~"o
Lee Thompson, Public Works Director~
Homart Fiscal Analysis
Listed are Public Works/Engineering cost impacts for the Homart project. We have assumed that one
half of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard will be improved fronting the project, as well as median
landscaping, street lights, and traffic signals at 5 intersections (DubIinlTassajara, Dublin/Hacienda,
two entrances on Dublin Blvd., and one entrance on Hacienda Drive).
The following are costs which are recovered by fees and assessment districts and are not considered
fiscal impacts:
1)
Street Lighting (assessment district)
36 lights
Annual cost:
Annual revenue:
$ 3,320.00
$ 7,150.00
2)
NPDES Expenses (paid by NPDES fees)
a) Street Sweeping
b) Additional staff cost
c) Additional program cost
d) Catch basin cleaning
Total annual cost:
S 703.00
$ *
$ *
$ 56.00
$
$ 8,775.00*
NPDES Fees:
* Cost of NPDES expenses offset by annual NPDES fee charged to property owner.
Following are annual costs which are not recovered by direct fees or assessment districts:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
Annual maintenance/energy cost, traffic signals:
Annual slurry seal ($12,000 in 5 years)
Traffic safety studies
Annual landscape maintenance cost, including utilities:
Annual tree maintenance cost
Annual sign repair cost
Annual curb/gutter/concrete repair cost
Annual striping and marking maintenance cost (annualized cost
based on $75.00 per year for marker replacement and $15,000 in
7 years for striping replacement)
Total annual cost:
$23,565
S 2,400
$ 1,500
S 4,101
S 1,254
S 194
$ 50
$ 2,218
$35,282
If you need any backup, please see Ginger.
a..'(9495)ls~pumber\11 homn1
City of Dublin Public Works' 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA 94568. (510) 833-6630
OCT-18-'94 TUE 17:46 ID:DUBLIN CITY MGR OFFC TEL ~U:51~ 833 6551
Ir.~b I-'l:::l:;:'
-
CITY OF DUBLIN
MEMOR.A.NDUM
,
TO: ,j fL Richard C. Ambrose, City Manager
FROM:~-paUl S. Rankin, Assistant City Manager
RE: Revised Analysis Of Esti:matedFinanceExpenses Attril;utable To
HOMkRT Development: Alameda county Santa Ri~a Proper~y
DATE :
October 10, 1994
As requested I have reviewed additional costs generated ~y the HO~~T
project. This is the first project on the county Property, which will
trigger additional work to comply with the Alameda County /Gity of DUblin
Agreement. The following is a rough analysis of the costs involving the
ci ty' s Finance Department:.
Consultant Services: $10,800.00
Specialized property Tax Analysis will need to be condli.ct-ad to track
both the sales tax and the property tax attrihutable to the specific
property. The additional cost of obtaining Property Tax c.ata is $10,800
on an annual basis.
Staf~ Costs: $1,600
The nature of the city/County Agreement will require cl~ser mo~itoring
of the taxes generated from this property. On a quarter~y basis it lS
estimated that 3 hours of the Finance Director time will ~e required to
review the data and prepare interim reports. On an ~.:mual basis an
annual report will be prepared, which is estima.ted to t'lke 8 hours of
Finance Director Time. In addition, 10 Hours of Financ~ Tech II time
and 10 hours of OFFICE ASSISTANT II.
FINANCE DIR / ASSISTANT CITY MGR
FINANCE TECHNICIAN II
OFFICE ASSISTANT II
SUB-TOTAL
20hrs
10hrs
10hrs
@
@
@
$56.67
$25.70
$18.07
:',133.40
257.00
180.70
1,571.10
Please advise in the event that additional information is required.
CITY OF DUBLIN
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeri Ram, Associate Planner
FROM:~ichard C. Ambrose, City Manager
RE:
F{re Service Cost for Homart Project
DATE:
October 10, 1994
I have had extensive discussions with the Fire Chief and the City
Manager of San Ramon regarding the provision of fire service to the
Santa Ri ta property and proposed annexation area by the Dougherty
Regional Fire Authority. These discussions have included the
identification of a site and funding Fire Station No.3, the level of
fire service and the allocation of cost for providing fire services.
The following report outlines our collective thoughts regarding this
service.
Fire Station No. 3
The Dougherty Regional Fire Authority Station Location Study and Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan anticipated the location of a new Fire Station in
the vicini ty of the Alameda County property. Currently the Fire
Authority provides limited service to the Alameda County Jail from Fire
Station No.1.
Wi th the development at the Homart Project, a
fire/medical presence will be required, and thus
development of Fire Station No.3,
more immediate
necessitates the
Since the street network is not completely developed on the Santa Rita
property, Authority Staff believe it would be unwise to commit
substantial capital funds to the construction of a permanent new station
and they are proposing the development of a interim fire station. DRFA
and Alameda County have entered into discussions regarding DRFA's
utilization of an existing Alameda County Fire Station within the Santa
Rita Jail complex. It is anticipated that the cost of modifying this
facili ty to accommodate use by DRFA Fire Personnel would not exceed
$120,000. Funding for these costs would come from the Fire Capital Fees
generated by the Homart Project as shown below.
Homart Phase I
Homart Phase II
400,000 sq ft
400,000 sq ft
$600/2,000 sq ft
$600/2,000 sq ft
$120,000
$120,000
$240,000
.! 'f
The balance of the Homart Capital Impact Fee would go toward equipment
and the construction of a permanent Fire Station No.3 in the future.
Eauipment Cost
In addition to Capital Costs associated with Fire Station No.3, the
following equipment will be required to make service to the Santa Rita
property and the Lin Annexation Area possible.
.
.
Type 3 Engine
Paramedic Equipment
$250,000
60,000
$310,000
Approximately $80,590 represents the incremental cost of upgrading an
existing fire patrol unit to a type 3 engine in order to provide
adequate equipment to serve the area. The Fire Patrol Unit is scheduled
to be replaced in FY 1995~96. The cost of this unit will be funded by
$169,410 from DRFA existing Fire Capital Replacement Fund and $80,590
annexation fee (advanced fire capital fees) from the proponents of the
Lin Annexation.
The Paramedic Equipment Cost will coIne from the Fi~~,;.j~apital 'Impast
Fund.
Operational Cost
DRFA Management is concurrently proposing the relocation of one engi~e
company from Fire Station No 2 to Fire Station No 3, the hiring of four
additional personnel for Fire Station No 2 (San Ramon) and the
implementation of a Firefighter Paramedic Program.
The cost of this proposal is less than one half of the cost of funding a
new engine company for Fire Station No 3, while at the same time
accomplishing the following.
1 . Maintain the level of fire service in South San Ramon
2. Improve fire response times to underserved areas along Dougherty
Road and the future Eastern Dublin BART Station. .
3. Provide fire service response times at current DRFA standards to
the Santa Rita property and a good portion of the proposed Lin
Annexation Area. _
4, Improve the level of emergency medical case to the entire DRE'A
Service Area.
This proposal will provide adequate fire service until substantial
residential and commercial development f,lecessitate funding a full fifth
engine company for the Fire Authority Service Area.
Operational Costs include the following
. Annual operating expensp Station No 3
-2-
-
.,.,
/
. 3 new Firefighter II & 1 new Fire Captain
. Paramedic Program Manager (3 months start-up)
. Paramedic Incentive Pay
. Annual Paramedic Operating Costs
If Fire Station No. 3 becomes operational on March 1, 1995, these
operational costs will be as follows.
FY 94/95
$212,193
FY 95/96
$368,731
FY 96/97
$370,570
FY 97/98
$384,023
FY 98/99
$394,842
FY99/2000
$404,913
Cost Allocation
DRFA current method of allocating operational costs between Dublin and
San Ramon is based upon each agencies share of total assessed valuation
of the DRFA Service Area.
The DRFA Management Committee will be proposing that this method be
utilized for funding the above proposal for staffing Fire Station No 3
for the following reasons.
1 , A portion of the area to be served by Station No 3 is already
within DRFA Service Area boundaries.
2. Al though the implementation of a Firefighter paramedic program is
necessary to implement the opening of Fire Station No 3 without
hiring another full engine company, there are Authority wide
benefits to this proposal.
It's important to note that the DRFA Board of Directors have not yet
reviewed and approved this proposal and therefore, these costs could
fluctuate.
Based upon the current Assessed Valuation Data, the cost which would be
assumed by Dublin and San Ramon would be as follows,
Dublin
San Ramon
FY 94/95
$56,872
41,301
FY 95/96
$175,534
127,477
FY 96/97
$197,454
143,396
FY 97/98
$205,248
149,055
FY 98/99
$211,515
153,607
FY99/000
$217,349
157,844
It would seem reasonable that Dublin's share of the cost should be
allocated to the Homart/Lin Annexation Area Operating Costs, since this
area will increase Dublin's Assessed Valuation; and the Fire Service
Proposal is a threshold level of service to the project area.
If you have any questions, please advise.
cc: Karl Diekman
a:l010fire.rcaJl1
,
,
-3-
A
59
60
'11
J2
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
6
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
'10
,11
112
113
C:PARA2
STATION 3 AND PARAMEDIC PROGRAM VERSION 2
r. n J= J= ~ H I
roSI.J2F QPF;NJ.NJ:2.A~B;=qTATION 3 INaJWESfllBA-'r1 r=QICJ:.RQG ~M I
ITEM FY94-95 !FY9S-96 FY96.97 FY97-98 FY98-99 I FY99-00
FOR ANNEXATION I \
TYPE 3 ENGINE 50 I $250,000 $0 $0 $0\ SO
SUB-TOTAL 50T 5250,000 $0 $01 $01 SO
FOR STATION 3 1 1 I I I
COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT I $30.000 I $0 I $0 $0 I $01 SO I
FURNISHINGS ETC. $30.000 I $0 $0 $0 $01 SO
RENOVATIONS $25.000 I $0 $0 $0 $01 SO I
PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1 $25.620T $0 $0 $0 $01 SO
PROJECT CONTINGENCY $11,0621 $0 $0 $0 $01 SO I
ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSE $12,480 I $24,960 $24,960 $24,960 $24,960 \ $24,960 I
SUBTOTAL $134,162\ $24,960 $24,960 $24,960 $24,960 ! $24,9601
FOR PARAMEDIC PROGRAM I I I
EQUIPMENT (5 UNITS) $24,000 I $36,000 I $0 $0 $01 SO
PROJECT MANAGER $19,571\ $0 $0 $0 ;~I SOJ
TRAIN 9 MEMBERS $27,000 I SO $0 $0 sol
STAFF (3 FF2 & 1 CAPT) $112.9661 5255,949 $268.757 $282,210 $293.029 I S303.0991
PARAMEDIC INCENTIVE (1) $7,9691 535,343 I $54,053 $54,0531 $54,0531 $54,053
ANNUAL OPERATING COST (2) $8,2071 516,480 I $22,800 $22,800 $22.800 I $22.800
SUB-TOTAL $199,7131 S343,TI1 $345,610 $359,0631 $369,8821 $379.953 I
: ,."~,.,;,,!,;: TOTAL,jf};,;.'-.";:::~ '':',:>$333,8751-. '..:$618,731. :~$370,570 <$384;0231.:$394,842\ $404,9131
I I I I I
AVAILABLE REVENUES & UNEXPE/', OED FUNDS I I I I
I
EQUIP. REPLACEMENT RESERVES SOl $169,410 $0 $0 I SOl SO
ANNEXATION FEES SO I 580.590 I $0 $01 SOl SO
FiRE STATION 3 PROJECT (3) I $30,000 I 5184,000 I $246,000 $0 I $01 SO
VEH!CLE MAINTENANCE (4) I SOl $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 I $4,000 I $4,000 I
UNANTICIPATED REVENUE (HOMAR $120,000 I $0 $0 $0 $01 so I
AMBULANCE REPLACEMENT $90,020 I 525.720 $25,720 $25,720 I $25,720 I $25,720 I
I.QIA!" I .' $240,020 I. 5463,720 I .$275,720 $29,720! ~. $29,720 t $29,720 I
I I I I
I. FY94.95 JFF 8 MONTHS. lCAPT. J MO/'lTHS: ~95-98 JFF 12 MNOTHS 1 ~T. 12 MCNTHS. 9 FF a ~O/'lTHS: FY94-n JoN! BEYOND12FF~~~CAPT12MCNTHS I I
2. FY94.95 1 UNIT 8 MONTHS: FY95-98 1 UNIT 1~ MO/'lTHS & 2 AColTlo~L UNITS SJ.lCNTHS; FY9&-97 J UNITS 12.YO/'lTH I I
I
I I I I I
J. DEVELOPER FEES AllOCATED TO THE ?RO~ECT
4. SURPLUS 2 AMBUlANCE I I \ I I I
I I I I
SUMMARY OF EXPENSES AMD A VA/LABLE REVENUES I I I
ITEM FY94 - 95 IFY9S - 96 IFY96 - 97 FY 97 - 98 FY9a - 99 IFY99 - 00 I
TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURES $145.6821 5286,000 I $0 $0 $0 I SO I
TOTAL.GAPIT AL,REVENUES $150,000 I 5434,000 I $246,000 $01 $0 I SO I
!2YEB.J.ll!:JDEBl .'. ' ..~" . .'<~,;/,::-,$4,3181 5148,000 $246,000 . $0 $0 SO
I I
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $141,6221 $332,731 $~70,570 $384,0231 $394,842 I $404,913
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUE (1) $43,449 I 529,720 I $29.720 $29,720 I $29,720 I $29,720
OVER (UNDER) . . " ($98,173)1 {S303,011)1 {$340,850 ($354,303~ ($365,122)1 ($375,193)
I I I I I
TOTAL START-UP EXPENSE $46,571 I $01 $0 $01 $0 I SO I
START-UP REVENUE (1) $46,571 I $01 $0 $01 SOl $0
OVER (UNDER),' . . ; c' ,." '. '.. ,.~. ;', (SO)I.. SO $0 SO SOl SO
..
, I I I
1. AVAILABLE FROM AMBUlANCE REPAlCEME~
ADDITIONAL npl::r:?ATINt'i 1JISTRIB~N /RASED bN FY Q4AJ;' I
DUBLIN SHARE".. .;:.'," .;.;.:!:::>;,. ~'$56,8721 ,- .5175.534.1:;$197,454- > $205,248 .$211,5151 $217.349
SAN RAMON SHARE. ,..::oI,,~::"'..$41,30:11, ,5127,4771. $143,396 . $149,055 $153,607 1 $157,8441
THIS VERSION ASSUMES THE PURcf;ASE OF 2 UNITS oij PARAMEDIC EQUfP}..tENT IN FY94-9 & 3 UNITS IN FY95-95 I
-,
POLICE SERVICES
fA
DATE:
October 25, 1994
FROM:
James W. Rose, Chie
Police Services
TO:
~ Richard Ambrose, City Manager
Jeri Ram, Associate Planner
SUBJ:
HOMART PROJECT - POLICE SERVICES
The proposed "Santa Rita Commercial Center - Tri-Valley Crossing"
(Homart Project) is the first proposed development in the Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan that is being assessed for impact on police
services. This area and the proposed adjoining' annexation prompted
police services to consider how this growth would affect how we do
business.
To properly identify the staffing needs for" this area now and
wi thin the next two years will take a great deal of research,
consideration and development. The approach we use with the Homart
Project and annexation to the. east today, will affect police
services in the entire City for years to come.
As previously mentioned, this project is part of the recently
annexed property and adjacent to the proposed annexation east of
Tassajara Road. Considering current and near future conditions, it
works well for the patrol function to consider these areas as one
section.
There have been 1.22 patrol positions identified to accommodate the
anticipated needs of the proposed annexation; including these
patrol positions in this staffing pattern makes sense for patrol
and is cost effective.
A similar assessment prepared for the Homart Project, showed that
the workload generated by construction, can be absorbed on a short-
term basis. However, experience with construction projects within
the City and County have shown that having a private security
company on the construction site durinqoff hours greatly reduces
problems and reduces calls for service. It is recommended that the
contractor be required to have security on the site from 5:00 p.m.
to 8:00 a.m. during work days and 24 hours a day during non-work
days. .
Immediately upon Tri-Valley Crossing tenants assuming occupancy and
opening for business, the. center and surrounding area, will require
increased patrol services 24 hours a day.
The recent staffing assessment that was completed for the proposed
annexation showed that our existing patrol staff was insufficient
to accommodate growth in the east annexation without significantly
impacting services in the developed portion of town. Additional
patrol positions were identified to address this shortfall on an
interim basis. The Homart Project will also impact police
services. An assessment has shown that more patrol officers would
be required to accommodate the workload this project will generate,
anticipating that as residential and commercial development
proceed, corresponding calls for police services will increase.
The annexation and building of the Homart Project is the beginning
of this scenario. without the requested increase in staffing
levels there will be a significant impact on the level of service
to the existing residential/commercial areas of Dublin. Manpower
for emergency calls for service require two or more officers.
Calls such as "in progress crimes", alarms, suspicious persons or
vehicles, etc. require two or more officers to respond due to
officer and public safety concerns. The remoteness of the Homart
project and the proposed annexation with regard to the existing
residential/commercial boundaries, create response time and
coverage problems, if staffing levels are not increased.
Currently, officers are able to provide cover. timely due to their
proximi ty to any call wi thin the current boundaries, however,
response time will increase as we expand to the proposed annexed
area and the Homart project, causing safety problems for both
officers and the public. In addition, cover calls to Homart will
decrease the current ability of patrol to conduct normal patrol
functions wi thin the existing area, resulting in a drop in the
overall level of service. To avoid this it will be necessary for
police services to convert from our current distribution of patrol
to a beat system. This will be needed to accommodate the increase
in time and geographical requirements due to the size and
development to eastern Dublin. Any staffing level less than this
creates a decrease in the existing level of service and
jeopardizing the safety of both citizens and officers.
It is important to note that the patrol force has 24 hour
responsibility. Patrol officers must be assigned in a manner that
facilitates constant coverage of the jurisdiction. The request of
five new officers for the area amounts to ONE NEW OFFICER working
in the area during a complete 24 hour period of time.
-
Attached is the staffing and equipment analysis, as well as, a cost
analysis.
JWR: mop
cc: Charles C. Plummer, Sheriff
.Curtis L. Watson, Undersheriff
"
HOMAR.T
POLICE
PROJECT
SERVICES
Prepared by: James W. Rose
INDEX
ITEM
Patrol Officer Costs
Dispatch Costs
Clerical Costs
Detective-costs
Equipment Costs (start-up)
Equipment Costs (Reoccurring)
Overview of Cost/Phased Approach
PAGE
1
2
4
5
6
6
7
"
PATROL OFFICER ACTIVITIES
1. Determine the additional staffing necessary to provide
police services to the Eastern Dublin Annexations, including
the proposed Homart Project, without undermining the level
of service provided to the currently developed portion of
the city.
2. Staffing:
a. One semi-fixed posted position.
3. Project duty hours (#2 above)
a. 1 position X 365 days X 24 hours = 8,760 hours
DUTY TIME AVAILABILITY
SEMI-FIXED POSTED PATROL DEPUTY
BASED ON 1993 CALENDAR YEAR STATISTICS
l. PROJECT WORKLOAD: 8,760 hours
2. Total annual work ' hours per ... perSO~iV\( 40 X 52) ,080 hours
, 'i-,i' "i,:~ ,.,
3 . Annual leave time lost per person: ~ '. ".~-,
Vacation 20 days or 160 hours
Sick Leave 6.8 days or 54 hours
Military Leave 0 days or 0 hours
Training 5.5 days or 44.3 hours
Administrative Leave 0 days or 0 hours
Industrial Injury Leave 0.6 days or 4,8 hours
TOTAL LEAVE TIME LOST PER PERSON: 32.9 DAYS OR 263.1 HOURS
TOTAL ANNUAL TIME AVAILABLE PER PERSON (2-3): 1,816.9 HOURS
4. PERSONNEL REQUIRED FOR PROJECT WORKLOAD (1 / 3)
8,760 hours / 1,816.9 hours = 4.82 = 5 FTE patrol persons
5. PERSONNEL ASSESSMENT:
5 ADDITIONAL PATROL PERSONS REQUIRED FOR PROJECT WORKLOAD
Annex
Homart
TOTAL
PATROL OFFICER COSTS
$77,500 EACH OFFICER X 5 = $387,500
1.22 - 24.4% - $ 94,550
3.78 = 75.6% - $292.950
- $387,500
HOMART PROJECT..- DISPATCH RELATED ACTIVITIES
-1-
" -1'
DISPATCH COSTS
Dublin Police Services contracts with Alameda County Sheriff's
Department for dispatch services. Dispatch costs are based upon
Dublin's Pro-Rata share of radio contacts as compared to the total
number of law enforcement radio contacts handled by the Alameda
County Sheriff's Department Dispatch Center.
Dublin's cost per radio contact based upon the City's current
number of radio contacts (46,683) is projected by the county
Sheriff's Department to increase as follows:
Year
cost/Contact
FY 94/95
FY 95/96
FY 96/97
FY 97/98
FY 98/99
$4.72
5.66
6.80
8.16
9.77
Annexation Area
Dublin Police has estimated that the workload of the annexation
area prior to development..will result .in 3, 285radio.,yS~.,PI1tacts
year.
><',' ,ffl":;;~""',"""
Dispatch costs for the annexation area are calculated as follows:
FY 94/95 No service provided $ 0
FY 95/96 3,285 contact x .75 of a full year =
2,463.75 contacts $5.66/contact 13,945
FY 96/97 3,285 x $6.80/contact 22,338
FY 97/98 3,285 x $8.16/contact 26,806
FY 98/99 3,285 x $9.77/contact 32,094
Hornart
Dublin Police has calculated the number of contacts for the Homart
Project to be 4,028 per year. This calculation is b?sed on retail
space in downtown Dublin.
Since the Homart Retail Project will be phased ~eginning
October I, 1995, radio dispatch costs for Homart are calculated as
follows:
YEAR CALCULATION COST
FY 94/95
FY 95/96
No.services provided
4,028 x 500.000 (Phase I retail)
800,000
2,518 radio contact x .75 of a year =
1,888 contacts
$
o
-2- -
YEAR CALCULATION COST
FY 95/96 1,888 X $5.66/contact = $10,689
(cont'd)
FY 96/97 2,517 contact for 500,000 sq ft
1,132 contacts for 300,000 sq ft
3,649 X $6.80/contact 24,813
FY 97/98 4,028 X $8.16/contact 32,868
FY 98/99 4,028 X $9. 77/contact 39,354
SUMMARY OF DISPATCH COSTS
ANNEXATION
Homart AREA TOTAL
FY 94/95 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
FY 95/96 10,689 13,945 24,600
FY 96/97 24,813 22,338 47,200
FY 97/98 32,868 26,806 59,700
FY 98/99 39,354 32,094 71,400
ANTICIPATED WORKLOAD
The proposed Homart Project is comparable in size and floor area to
the area bordered by DUblin Boulevard on the south; Amador Valley
Boulevard on the north; Regional Street on the west and 1-680 on
the east. This area includes Mervyn's, Albertsons, Toys R' Us,
Target, Circuit City, Dublin Honda, Shamrock Ford and numerous
smaller establishments. Excluding the car dealerships, the types
of establishments in the downtown area are similar to those
proposed in the Homart Project.
Although there are differences between the two business areas they
are close enough in character for the sake of comparison, if the
differences are kept in mind.
Based on the comparison area described, 4,028 logged police
activities a year are projected for the Homart Project.
:,
-3-
CLERICAL RELATED COSTS
There are currently three clerical positions, one Secretary I and
two Specialist Clerks, assigned to Dublin Police Services. These
three clerical personnel support twenty-nine sworn staff members;
which equals 10.3% of each clerk's time is required per each
sworn staff member. This means that the addition of five patrol
officers will generate 51.5% of one clerk's workload; which will
require the addition of one Specialist Clerk position.
CURRENT STAFFING
29 = Current sworn positions
3 = Current clerical positions
10.3 = % of a clerk's time per officer (3 / 29)
PROJECTED STAFFING
5
= Proposed additional patrol officers
10.3
= % of a clerk's time per, officer
51. 5
= % ofa cl€rk's. workload;: increase
1
= Specialist Clerk position for increased workload
INCREASED CLERICAL COST BREAKDOWN
$39,009
x 51.5%
$20,090
AREA
TOTAL
= Specialist Clerk per annum
= % of~lerk's workload increase
= Annual cost of clerk's workload increase
= Annex 1.22 = 24.4% x 20,090 = $ 4,902
= Homart 3.78 = 75.6% x 20,000 = $15,188
ANNEX
HOMART
$20,090
$4,902
$15,188
-4-
DETECTIVE RELATED COSTS
There are currently 2.5 detectives assigned to support the patrol
section totalling twenty personneli 5 watch commanders and 15
patrol officers. This equates to 12.5% of a detective's time is
required per patrol staff member (2.5 / 20). This means that the
addition of five patrol officers will generate 62.5% of one
detective's workload; which will require an additional detective
position.
-,
CURRENT STAFFING
20
= Current patrol staff
2.5
= Current detective's positions
12.5
= % of a detective's time per patrol staff (2.5 / 20)
PROJECTED STAFFING
5
= Proposed' additional patrol officers
12.5
= % of a detective's time per patrol staff .member
62.5
= % of a detective 1.5 workload increase,,:}-;-)t'~_'
1
= Detective position for increased workload
INCREASED DETECTIVE COST BREAKDOWN
$81,056
= sergeant/Detectiv~ cost per annum
= Annex 1.22% = 24.4% x 81,056 = $19,778
= Homart 3.78% = 75.6% x 81,056 = $61,278
AREA
TOTAL
ANNEX
HOMART
$81,056
$19,778
$6:1.:,278
'.,
-5-
. ,
EQUIPMENT RELATED COSTS
ONE TIME/START-UP COSTS
SECTOR ANNEX HOMART
ITEM TOTAL GENERATED GENERATED
TWO PATROL VEHICLES $ 48,632(2) $ 24,326(1) $ 24,326(1)
$24,326 each
ONE UNMARKED VEHICLE
(Detectives) $ 15,000 $ 3,660 $ 11,340
PORTABLE 800 MHZ RADIO
$1,700 each 5,100(3) 1,700(1) 3,400(2)
TOTAL ONE TIME COSTS $ 68,700 $ 29,660 $ 39,066
REOCCURRING COSTS
ITEM
SECTOR
TOTAL
ANNEX
GENERATED
HOMART
GENERATED
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
$ 25,400
$ 13,835
$ 11,588
$ 11,588
TOTAL REOCCURRING COST $ 25,400
$ 13,835
Vehicle maintenance and operation costs are based upon
anticipated mileage driven and the city's current patrol mileage
charge.
Annexation estimated miles:
Patrol - 30,222
Investigations - 1,220
Total Miles 31,442 x .44 = $13,835
Homart estimated miles:
Patrol - 22,557
Investigations - 3,780
Total Miles 26,337 x .44 = $11,588
-6-
~
I , ~. ("
OVERVIEW OF COST
PHASED APPROACH
The costs represent a phased approach to the establishment of a beat system
in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area that includes the Santa Rita
property with current uses and the proposed BOO, 000 square feet Homart
Shopping Center and the 1,538 acre annexation area with current uses.
These costs include the provision of following services:
* Addition of 4 patrol officers
* Purchase of 2 patrol cars & radio equipment
(one time cost)
* Additional Vehicle Maintenance & Dispatch Costs
* Addition of one-half clerical position
* Addition of one Detective position
* Purchase of one unmarked vehicle & radio
equipment (Detective position)
* Addition of one patrol officer
10/1/95
10/1/95
10/1/95
10/1/95
10/1/96
10/1/96
10/1/96
Total Police costs for the annexation area and the Homart Project:
FY 94 /95 FY 95/96 FY 96/97 <" FY 97 /98 FY 98/99
Patrol $0 $2321500 ",$368,100 $387<1500 $3871500
Clerical 0 15,100 20,100 20,100 20,100
nvestigations 0 0 60,750 81,000 811000
Dispatch 0 24,634 47,151 59,674 71,448
Vehicle Usage 0 17.400 24,850 25.400 25.400
TOTAL OPERATIONS $0 $289,634 $520,951 $573,674 $585,448
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS ~ 53.700 15,000 0 0
TOTAL ALL POLICE COSTS $0 $343,334 $535,951 $573,674 $585,448
,:,
-7-
l J I".
.
Totals for the Specific Plan area between Annexation Area #1 and Homart:
ANNEXATION PROJECT POLICE SERVICE COSTS (REVISED)*
Patrol
Clerical
Investigations
Dispatch
Vehicle Usage
TOTAL OPERATIONS
TOTAL CAPITAL
TOTAL ALL POLICE
Patrol
Clerical
Investigations
Dispatch
Vehicle
TOTAL OPERATIONS
TOTAL CAPITAL
TOTAL ALL POLICE
FY 94/95
$0
o
o
o
~
o
~
COSTS 0
FY 95/96
$ 70,913
3,676
o
13,945
9.974
$ 98,508
26.000
$124,508
FY 96/97
$ 94,550
4,902
14,833
22,338
13.701
$150,324
3,660
$153,984
FY 97/98
$ 94,550
4,902
19,778
26,806
13.835
$159,871
o
$159,871
FY 98/99
$ 94,550
4,902
19,778
32,094
13.835
$165,159
o
$165,159
HOMART PROJECT POLICE SERVICE COSTS*
FY 94/95 FY 95/96 FY 96/97 FY 97i98 FY 98/99
COSTS
$0
o
.0
o
~
o
~
$0
*Unadjusted for inflation
$161,587
11,424
o
10,689
7,426
$191,126
27,700
$218,826\
$273,550
15,198
45,917
24,813
11,149
$3-70,627
11,340
$381,967
$292,950
15,198
61,222
32,868
11,565
$413,803
o
$413,80
$292,950
15,198
61,222
39,354
11,565
$420,289
o
$420;289
The above costs for clerical and investigations assume split of 24.4% of the
cost for the Annexation Area and 75.6% of the cost for the Homart Project
based upon the ratio of new officers in each area to the total new officers
required.
Annexation Area
Homart
1.22 = 24.4%
5
3.78 = 75.6%
5
-8-
..
CITY OF DUBLIN
MEMORANDUM
r ~ !'O,
RECEIVED
OCT - 5 1994
FROH
Jeri Ram, Associate Planner
~'Diane Lowart, Recreation Director
Fiscal Analysis of Homart Project on Parks & COll~unity
Services Department R ~ Y I ~ ~ D
""HmN PlANNING
TO
SUBJECT
DATE
October 4, 1994
1.
will this project create
Department provides? YES
any impact on
"-\..-
\...He
services
your
a)
Will your Department incur any additional
expenditures as a result of this project? YES
costs or
b) What are these costs?
At this time the actual costs associated with this development
are undetermined. However, based on past experience, Staff has
identified the following potential impacts on city parks &
recreational facilities and City recreation programs.
1. Increased use of future City Park by employees who work for
businesses located in the Homart Project. The future City
Park is sited across Tassajara Creek and is in walking
d~stance fro0 the.Homart project. Planned amenities at the
c~ty Park ~ncluGe a Commun~ty Center, an Aquatic Centerl
lighted softball fields and tennis courts, outdoor
basketball and volleyball courts, individual and group
picnic areas, tot and children's play areas, jogging trails
and possibly a lake and outdoor amphitheater.
a) increased participation in City sponsored softball
leagues by project employees; currently close to 50% of
participating teams in city sponsored leagues are
sponsored by local businesses.
b) increased use of outdoor basketball, volleyball c:.w....
tennis courts, as well as jogging trail by project
employees; given the proximity of the Park to the
Project it is reasonable to assume that project
employees will ta~e advantage of the park amenities on
lunch hours and after work.
c) increased use of both individual and group picnic areas
by project employees; individual picnic areas could be
used on a daily basis tor lunch while group picnic
areas may be used for large business/company picnics.
d) increased participation in recreation programs and
classes at comm~nity center by project employees.
,', /
I 1"''-:
..
'"-
Fiscal Analysis - Homart Project
Page T"'W'o
e)
~-~_____-'l ..__ _.t::
Ll1\.....L c::a~t::u u,::,c V.i.
project emp~oyees
evening lap s;./im
eruoll children
Aquatic Center.
Aquatic Center by proJec~ employees;
ma,il ta.l!(eadvantage of noon time arid
and water exercise programs and may
in instructional programs at the
f) increased use of COiill"iiunity Center by businesses located
within the Homart project either for meetings or social
events.
h) increased participation by children of project
employees In City sponsored afterschool and sUmmer
IJday-caren programs; often times project employees may
choose to have their children attend school in Dublin
(even if eney don't live here) and they may take
advantage of the City's low cost afterschool and summer
activities located at the schools.
2. Increased use of future City Park by customers who shop at
the Homart Project. The City Park is presently conceived as
"a memorable 21st century social hub and landmark public
destination which f,-'ould be a source of pride for the City'l.
High quality and innovative play structures are planned as
well as a water feature specifically designed for children's
play. Additionally an A~uatic Center and Community Center
are planned for the site as well as athletic facilities. It
is conceivable that people will choose to take advantage of
the park amenities either before or after shopping a~ ~he
Homart Project.
J. Increased use of proposed Tassajara Creek Trail to access
the Homart Development by both employees of businesses
located in the project and by customers coming to shoo or
take advantage of the services offered at the project.
Should you have any questions or need further information, please glve
me a call at X6647.
~~. City Manager
RESOLUTION NO.. - 95
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING AND ESTABLISHING FINDINGS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR A PD,
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING CONCERNING
PA 94-001 SANTA RITA COMMERCIAL CENTER
WHEREAS, Homart Development Co., a Delaware Corporation, and the Surplus Property Authority of
the County of Alameda (Applicants), are requesting a Planned Development Rezoning to establish General
Provisions and Development Regulations for a 75:1: acre portion of APN 946-15-1-4 (por) ; and
WHEREAS, Homart Development Co., a Delaware Corporation, and the Surplus Property Authority of
the County of Alameda (Applicants), have submitted a Land Use and Development Plan as required by Section
8.31-13 of the Zoning Ordinance which meets the requirements of said section; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold public hearings on said application on December 19,
1994; January 3, 1995; and January 17, 1995 and did adopt Resolution No. 95-01, recommending that the City
Council certity the Mitigated Negative Declaration and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program; Resolution
No. 95 -02, recommending that the City Council approve the Planned Development Rezoning request;
Resolution No. 95 -03 recommending that the City Council approve the Development Agreement; and
recommending further that the City Council support, in concept, the preparation of a Greenway Study along
Tassajara Creek and further recommending that the City Council support continuing to work with the East Bay
Regional Park District on trails consistent with the City's Parks and Recreation Master Plan and Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality
Act ("CEQA") and a Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH 94113020) has been prepared; and
WHEREAS, with the inclusion of mitigation measures and conditions of approval, it has been
determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that City Council approve the application
subject to conditions prepared by Staff; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use their independent judgment and consider all said reports,
recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth..
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby find that:
1. The Planned Development Rezone will be appropriate for the subject property in terms of
pI;Oviding a range of permitted and conditionally permitted uses which will be compatible with
existing vacant and proposed commercial, office and residential uses in the immediate vicinity, and
which enhances development of the Specific Plan area; and
2. The Planned Development Rezoning will not have a substantial adverse affect on health or safety
or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or public
improvement as all applicable regulations will be met; and
3. The Planned Development Rezoning will not overburden public services as the Dublin San Ramon
Services District has stated that public services are available; and
1
EXHIBIT z.
c: \planning\jeril9400 Irs I
4. As demonstrated-in the matrix attached and made a part ofthe Mitigated Negative Declaration,
the Planned Development Rezoning will be consistent with the Dublin General Plan and the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan including all the policies therein; and
5. The Planned Development Rezoning will provide efficient use of the land that includes
preservation of significant open areas and natural and topographic landscape features along
Tassajara Creek with minimum alteration of natural land forms; and
6. The Planned Development Rezoning will provide an environment that will encourage the use of
common open areas for neighborhood or community activities and other amenities through
conditions of approval; and
7. The Planned Development Rezoning will create an attractive, efficient and safe environment
through conditions of approval; and
8. The Planned Development Rezoning will benefit the public necessity, convenience and general
welfare and is in conformance with Sections 8-31.0 to 8-31.19 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance;
and
9. The Planned Development Rezoning will be compatible with and enhance the general
development of the area because it will be developed pursuant to conditions of approval and site
development review; and
10. The Planned Development Rezoning will create attractive, efficient and safe development because
it will be developed pursuant to conditions of approval and site development review.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby approve PA 94-001,
Santa Rita Commercial Center Planned Development, subject to the following General Provisions and
Development Standards which constitute regulations for the use, improvement and maintenance of the 75::1::. acre
parcel 946-15-1- 4 (por).
GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1. Intent: This approval is for Planned Development Rezone PA 94-001, Santa Rita Commercial
Center. This Planned Development District is established to provide for and regulate the development of the
Santa Rita Commercial Center. Development shall be generally consistent with the Land Use Development Plan
which consists of the following submittals:
A. Planned Development Rezone Application dated September 6, 1994; and
B. The "Conceptual Site Plan" dated September 23, 1994 which supersedes the document
entitled "Conceptual Site Plan" in the September 6, 1994 application.
2. The following principal uses are permitted in the PD District
A. Retail commercial establishments, including, but not limited to, the following:
1. General Merchandise Store
2, Discount/Warehouse Retail Store
3. ClothinglFashion Store
4. Shoe Store
5. Home Furnishing Store
6. Office Supply Store
7. Home Appliance/Electronics Store
8. Home Improvement Store
9. Music Store
c: \planning\jeri\9400l rs I
2
10. Hobby/Special Interest Store
11. Gifts/Specialty Store
12. Jewelry and Cosmetic Store
13. Drug Store
14. Auto Parts Store
15. Toy Store
16. Book Store
17. Pet Supplies Store (including in-store veterinary clinic)
18. Sporting Goods Store
19. Grocery/Food Store
20. Automobile Service
and similar uses that sell goods based on price and quality.
B. Eating, drinking and entertainment establishments, including, but not limited to, the
following:
1. Restaurant
2. Wine or liquor bar with on-sale liquor license
3. Micro-brewery
4. Nightclub
5. Indoor movie theater
6. Delicatessen
7. Specialty Food
8. Bakery
9. Ice Cream Shop
10. Sandwich Shop
11. Video ArcadeIRentals
12. Drive-through Facilities, including restaurants
C. Office and service establishments including, but not limited to:
1. Bank/Savings and Loan
2. Real Estate/Title Office
3. Travel Agent
4. Legal
5. Accounting
6. Medical and Dental
7. Optometrist
8. Architect
9. Employment Agency
10. Hair/Beauty Salon
11. Cleaner and Dryer
12. Shoe Repair
13. Key Shop
14. Tailor
15. Athletic Club
16. Formal WearIRental
17. Other Administrative and Professional Office
18. Technology Access Center
19. T ele-Commuting Center
3. The following are conditional uses in the PD District and shall be permitted only if approved by
the Planning Commission:
1. Community, religious and charitable institutional facilities
c:\planning\jeri\9400 I rs I
3
2. Public Facilities and uses
3 . Veterinary Office
4. Recycling Center
5. In-patient and out-patient health facilities as licensed by the State Department of
Health Services
6. Gas Station
7. Outdoor food vendors
8. Automobile sales
9. HotellMotel
4. Any structure, circulation, parking, landscaping and signage shall be subject to Site Development
Review (pursuant to Section 8-95 of the Zoning Ordinance) unless zoning approval is granted
upon the determination that the construction constitutes a minor project and that the Building
Permit plans are in accord with the intent and objectives of the Site Development Review
procedures.
5. Setbacks and Yards
A. Minimum Setbacks: The minimum perimeter setbacks for buildings, accessory structures,
parking areas, driveways and loading areas shall be as follows:
1. Along Interstate 580: 20 feet from right-of-way.
2. Along Dublin Boulevard: 20 feet from right-of-way.
3. Along Tassajara Creek: A minimum 100 foot setba,ck from the top of bank will be
maintained along Tassajara Creek.
The setback zones shall be fully landscaped with both hardscape (private sidewalks and other hard
surfaced areas) and softscape (trees, shrubs, ground cover, etc.).
B. Exceptions to the above setback requirements are the following:
1. Architectural projections (such as eaves, columns, balconies, arcades, awnings,
steps and decks) which may encroach up to a maximum of 10 feet into a required
setback, with a minimum setback of 10 feet from a street right-of-way.
2. Freestanding signage: As permitted in the Master Sign Program.
C. Minimum Yards: The required setback between all buildings within the project for all
yards is 0 feet.
6. Building and other structures will be limited to a maximum height of 75 feet in this District.
7. The overall maximum floor area ratio for this district will be .25 permitting a total of
approximately 800,000::1::. square feet of Gross Leasable Area (GLA) on 75 acres.
8. Parking and loading:
A. Parking and Loading Spaces. There shall be provided and maintained in accordance with
these standards, off-street automobile parking and loading spaces for every building and
use. No building or structure shall be erected or use established and no existing building
shall be structurally altered, unless there is already in existence, or unless provision
therefore is made concurrently with such erection or structural alteration or new use, the
number of parking spaces and loading spaces necessary to meet the minimum requirements
hereinafter set forth.
c: \planning\jeri\94001 rs I
4
c:\planning\jeril9400 Irs I
B. Continuing Character of Obligation. The maintenance of the parking and loading spaces
required shall be a continuing obligation of the owner of the real property upon which the
building or structure is located as long as the building or structure exists and the use
requiring such space continues. It 'Shall be unlawful for an owner of a building or structure
affected by these requirements to discontinue, change or dispense with or to cause the
discontinuance, sale or transfer of such building or structure, without establishing
alternative spaces which conform to those requirements; or for any person, firm, or
corporation to use such building or structure without providing such required parking or
loading spaces, in compliance with these standards.
C. Parking Spaces: Accessibility. These standards are intended to provide off-street spaces
for the parking of the automobiles of tenants of the premises and for clients, customers,
employees, and callers. They are required to be kept accessible for the purposes
continuously, and the use of any such required space or spaces other than these specified,
shall constitute discontinuance thereof in violation of Section 8-63. 1.
D. Parking Spaces: Size and Location. A standard parking stall shall be a minimum of nine
(9) feet wide by nineteen (19) feet in length. Compact stalls shall be a minimum of eight
(8) feet wide by a minimum of seventeen (17) feet in length. Compact parking spaces may
comprise up to 25% of the required parking spaces. Where parking spaces abut sidewalks
or landscape areas the length of a parking stall may be reduced by two feet. Minor
adjustments to parking space size and location may be made through the Site
Development Review process.
E. Loading Spaces: Size and Location. Required loading space for buildings with an
aggregate floor area less than forty-thousand (40,000) s.f shall be not less than ten (10)
feet in width and twenty (20) feet in length. Required loading spaces at buildings with an
aggregate floor area over forty-thousand (40,000) s.f shall be not less than ten (10) feet in
width and sixty (60) feet in length. Every required loading space shall be clear to a height
of not less than fourteen (14) feet. Every required loading space shall be on the same lot
as the structure it serves or on an abutting lot and shall be continuously accessible from
the street. No loading sp.ace shall occupy any part of a required parking space, or any
required street side yard of a corner lot.
F. Parking and Loading Spaces: Approval of Plan. A site plan showing the location of the
existing and proposed building or buildings and other improvements, the location of all
required parking and loading spaces, and all provisions for maneuvering space and access
thereto from a public right-of-way including .proposed curb cuts, shall be submitted and
approved as being convenient and functional prior to the issuance of Building Permit. No
approval of occupancy shall be issued upon completion of a building or structural
alteration of a building or for any land use when no buildings are erected or altered, unless
and until all such spaces as required and as shown upon approved plans and made a part of
the Building Permit are in place and ready for use.
G. Parking and Loading Spaces: Maintenance. All parking and loading spaces, access
driveways, and maneuvering areas required shall be graded and well drained and shall be
maintained with all weather dust-free surfacing. Lighting of parking and loading spaces
shall be so arranged as to be directed downward and away from any residential area.
H. Collective Action Permitted. Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent the joint use of
parking or loading space for two (2) or more buildings or uses if the total of such spaces
provided is not less than the sum of the requirements for the individual uses computed
separately in accordance with these standards.
I. Number of Spaces Required. The number of parking and/or loading spaces required shall
be calculated based on gross floor area for retail and office uses, and customer service
5
area for restaurant uses. When the calculation results in a fractional number, any fraction
up to and including one-half (Vl) shall be disregarded and any fraction over one-half (Vl)
shall be adjusted to the next. higher whole number.
1. Parking Spaces Required: The number of parking spaces required shall be not less than
specified in the following table:
USE
Parking Required
Retail
Restaurant
Theater
Office
4.5/1000 sq. ft.
7/1000 sq. ft.
1/5 seats
4/1000 sq. ft.
Exception: Where an attested copy of a contract between the parties concerned is filed
with the Application for Building Permit, which contract sets forth a valid agreement for
joint use of parking spaces for the life of the buildings or uses concerned and a parking
study has been approved by the Zoning Administrator demonstrating that a lesser number
of parking spaces would be appropriate for the proposed use, through shared use of
parking, then the number of required parking spaces shall be reduced in accordance with
the number indicated in the approved parking study.
K. Loading Spaces Required: Every allowable use which has an aggregate gross floor area of
fifteen-thousand (15,000) square feet or more, shall provide loading spaces in accordance
with the following:
Aggregate Gross floor Area (sq. ft)
15,000 - 40,000
over 40,000 - 100,000
over 100,000 - 160,000
over 160,000
Number of Loading Spaces required
1
2
3
3 plus 1 for each full
80,000 square feet in
excess of 160,000
L. Minimum Aisle Widths: Parking aisles with two-way traffic shall have a minimum width
of twenty-two (22) feet for parking angles of 0, 30, 45 and 60 degrees. Parking aisles
with two-way traffic shall have a minimum width oftwenty-five (25 ) feet for 90 degree
parking angle.
Parking aisles with one-way traffic shall have minimum widths as follows:
a) 15 feet for parking angles of 0, 30, and 45 degrees.
b) 18 feet for a parking angle of 60 degrees.
c) 25 feet for a parking angle of 90 degrees.
Minor adjustments to aisle width standards may be made through the Site Development
Review process.
M. Bicycle Facilities: Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided, at the minimum, at a ratio of
one space per 150 required automobile spaces. These facilities, which would provide for
convenient parking and locking of bicycles shall be located adjacent to the fronts of
buildings and dispersed throughout the shopping center.
9. The Master Sign Program will be submitted for review with the Site Development Review
package.
c:\planning\jeril9400 Irs I
6
10. A minimum ratio of twenty percent (20% )of the gross land area will be provided in open space,
which shall include landscape, entry, plaza and sidewalk areas. The minimum ratio of landscape
to gross land area shall be as follows:
Perimeter site areas:
Parking areas:
Ten (10%) percent
Five (5%) percent
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby approve PA 94-001
Planned Development Rezoning subject to the following conditions:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Unless stated otherwise. all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to final occupancy of any
building. and shall be subiect to Planning Department review and approval. The following codes represent those
departments/agencies responsible for monitoring compliance of the conditions of approval. [PL] Planning. [B]
Building. [PO] Police. [PW] Public Works. [ADM] Administration/City Attorney. [FIN] Finance. [F] Dougherty
Regional Fire Authority. [DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District. [CO) Alameda County Flood Control &
Water Conservation District (Zone 7).
11. Developer shall work with LA VT A to establish the need, routes and bus schedule for this project prior to
Site Development Review (SDR). [PW]
12. Developer shall design bus turnouts, transit shelters and pedestrian paths (sidewalks) to match proposed
LA VT A routes and stops and to the City of Dublin's requirements and standards prior to issuance of the
building permit. Construction shall be undertaken as part of the street improvement work. [PW]
13. Alameda County shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Dublin that, in addition to
other provisions, provides that when the property to the east of the Santa Rita Commercial Center project
develops, all the action measures of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and Mitigation Measures of the
Eastern Dublin FEIR pertaining to Tassajara Creek adjacent to this project will be activated and
completed or guaranteed for completion. [PL] .
14. Prior to obtaining building permits, the applicant must receive Site Development Review (SDR) approval
from the City of Dublin Planning Department. Said application for SDR approval shall include a visual
survey to insure scenic vistas as identified in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and FEIR are not blocked.
[PL]
15. Homart Development Co., Alameda County and the City of Dublin. shall enter into a development
agreement which shall contain provisions for sequencing of infrastructure, any financing plans, payment
of traffic, noise and public facilities impact fees and other provisions deemed appropriate by the parties.
[PL]
16. Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided at the Santa Rita Commercial Center in accordance with the
Planned Development Rezone general provisions and development standards filed with the Planning
Department. [PL]
17. The location and siting of project specific wastewater, storm drain and potable water system
infrastructure shall be consistent with the resource management policies of the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan. [PL, PW]
18. Any proposed modifications or alterations to Tassajara Creek shall be approved by the City of Dublin and
any required permitting agencies and shall be consistent with the policies of Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
and FEIR.. [pW, PL]
c:\planning\jeril9400 Irs I
7
19. Developer shall pay a Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) based on the adopted Eastern Dublin TIF. The TIF must
be paid prior to issuance of any building permit. [B, PW]
20. Developer shall participate in the BAAQMD's Traffic Systems Management Program and provide a
funding mechanism to LA VT A for free bus passes for employees prior to occupancy of any buildings.
[PW] .
21. Prior to any combustible construction, fire facilities shall be in place to serve the project to the
satisfaction of the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority. [DSR, F, B]
22. Prior to receiving a building permit, applicant shall pay school fees to the satisfaction of the Dublin
Unified School District. [B]
23. The refuse collection areas within the project shall be reviewed by the garbage service provider to ensure
that adequate space is provided to accommodate collection and sorting of petrucible solid waste as well
as source-separated recyclable materials generated by the commercial businesses within the Homart
project.
24. Prior to issuance of building permit, applicants shall provide written documentation that adequate
electric, gas, telephone and landfill capacity is available. [PW]
25. Developer shall submit plans for the water and sewer systems to service this development acceptable to
DSRSD, pay fees required by DSRSD and receive DSRSD's approval prior to issuance of any building
permit. Developer shall construct these facilities prior to occupancy. [B, PW]
26. Developer shall provide a "will serve II letter from DSRSD prior to issuance of the grading permit which
states that the Homart project can be served by DSRSD for water and sewer prior to occupancy. [B, PW]
27. Developer shall provide a recycled water system for the landscaping per City of Dublin, Zone 7 and
DSRSD requirements. The landscaping areas must meet City of Dublin Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance requirements. [PW]
28. Developer shall provide Public Utility Easements per requirements of the City of Dublin and/or public
utility companies as necessary to serve this area with utility services. [PW]
29 Developer shall participate, along with other Eastern Dublin developers who shall benefit, in financing
construction of needed new chlorination-fluoridation stations at the proposed Zone 7 turnouts in the
Eastern Dublin area. The details of this requirement are to be developed as part of the DSRSD reviews
and approvals. [PW]
30. Developer shall meet City of Dublin requirements for Dublin's Urban Runoff Program and shall apply for
and obtain a permit from the Regional Water Quality Board. All grading shall be performed during the
non-rainy season (April 15th to October 1st), or provide erosion control measures as part of the project
to keep mud and silt out of the storm drain system. [PW]
3 1. A preconstruction survey shall be submitted to the City that is prepared within 60 days prior to any
habitat modification to verity the presence of sensitive species, especially the San Joaquin Kit Fox,
nesting raptors, the red-legged frog, the Western Pond Turtle, the California Tiger Salamander, the Tri-
Colored Blackbird, and other species of special concern. Said survey shall be prepared by a biologist and
shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval. [PL]
32. Prior to issuance by the City of any building permit, all utility connection fees, plan checking fees,
inspection fees, permit fees and fees associated with a wastewater discharge permit shall be paid to
DSRSD in accordance with the rates and schedules established in the DSRSD Code. [PW, B]
c: \planning\jeril94OO Irs I
8
, .
33. All businesses will be required to secure a City of Dublin business license prior to opening for business
and provide the number, type and salary level of employees (on a form established by the City) for each
business in order to implement the housing and employment monitoring system.
34. The Developer shall contact the Alameda County Agricultural Department and develop and distribute a
handout to tenants regarding the safe use of rodenticides and herbicides within the project area. This
handout is to be deyeloped, delivered to the City of Dublin for review, and approved by the City prior to
the occupancy of any buildings.
35. Except as specifically modified by the provisions of this Planned Development (PA 94-001) this project
shall be subject to the regulations of the C-2, General Commercial, District.
36. All items listed in the matrix attached and made a part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration that have
not been made conditions of approval of this PD Rezone, will be required as conditions of approval on
the discretionary action so indicated on the matrix.
37. Prior to the occupancy of any portion of phase 1, the storm drainage systems to the site as well as on site
drainage systems to the areas to be occupied shall be complete to the satisfaction and requirements of the
Dublin Public Works Department and shall be in conformity with the Master Drainage Plan.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 31st day of January, 1995.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
c :\planning\jeriI94OO1 rs I
9
ORDINANCE NO. -95
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE
TO PERMIT THE REZONING OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD AND HACIENDA DRIVE
(APN 941-15-1-4 (POR))
The City-.Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.----------------------------
Section 1
Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Dublin Ordinance Code is hereby amended in the
following manner:
Approximately 75 acres generally located at the southeast corner of the intersection
of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive, more specifically described as Assessor's Parcel
Number 941-15-1-4 (por), are hereby rezoned from a Planned Development Business Park
Industrial: Low Coverage district to a Planned Development General Commercial District; and
PA 94-001 Santa Rita Commercial Center, as shown and described on Exhibit A (Rezone
Application), Exhibit C (Mitigated Negative Declaration) and Exhibit I (Findings, General
Provisions and Conditions of Approval), on file with the City of Dublin Planning Department,
are hereby adopted as the regulations for the future use, improvement, and maintenance of
the property within this~District.
A map of the rezoning area is outlined below:
~
$
~
CAMP PARKS
/ID001
."- ! CJCJc:=J
'~ IPRW,
\ " ~ 1j 'J
3 i '" "\
~\ ~~'
0'
~:
0, DUBLIN
~ ~ ~_ I) (;__
~ ~ ,~
_ RCUTE >.--___ __-
----- -----y\'- "" Q->-, HAC:ENOA DR I lIE
I \ '" "" QVE"'c=iOSS:NG
J
\~\
Ila II'
I "'-Ddu9fJ:-EiHY
QVE,.,H"AO
I~'
PL.AirON /" \ "
i
erty
1
I
DUBLIN 8L YO.
, ( \.. T ASSAJARA
: C8E:::K
BRIDGE
Section 2
This ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days from and after its
passage. Before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its passage, it shall be published
once, with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against same, in a local
newspaper published in Alameda County and available in the City of Dublin.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this 31st day
of January, 1995, by the following votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
/94001ord