CC Resolution 2020-003 DIF Study UpdateRESOLUTION NO. 2020 – 003
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
WHEREAS, the City of La Quinta was incorporated in 1982; and
WHEREAS, since its incorporation, the City has been and continues to
experience development activity in the form of applications and proposals for
new residential and commercial land development within the City; and
WHEREAS, additional development and growth will result in the lack of
public improvements and facilities, including a deficiency in public safety
facilities, and the City is responsible for maintaining an appropriate level of
service to the present and future citizens of La Quinta; and
WHEREAS, the City’s existing circulation system is inadequate to
handle current and future traffic patterns and it is essential to widen City
streets, which have inadequate width, improve the circulation system to
accommodate an anticipated increase in traffic, and improve and develop
bridges and traffic signals suitable for traffic flow and to minimize conflicts
between vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian movement; and
WHEREAS, the continued and cumulative development of the City, with
the consequent increase in population and demand for the use of public
facilities, will impose increased requirements for such facilities, including but
not limited to fire stations, park and recreation facilities, major thoroughfares
and bridges and traffic signalization, public safety facilities and other public
buildings directly from new development and the need cannot be met and
financed from ordinary City revenues; and
WHEREAS, the most practicable and equitable method of paying for
such needed facilities is to impose a fee upon new development within the
City and the payment of such a fee enables the City to fund a construction
program to provide such public facilities as they are required and demanded;
that when a development pays the Development Impact Fee established by
this policy, the City Council will be able to fund that all necessary public
facilities and services will be available concurrent with the need and, in the
event such finding cannot be made, the City Council will be required to
disapprove the development as being inconsistent with the General Plan; and
Resolution No. 2020–003
Development Impact Fees
Adopted: February 4, 2020
Page 2 of 7
WHEREAS, in 1989 the California Statute took effect, which governs
the establishment, increase, and imposition of fees levied by local agencies as
a condition of development project approval “for the purpose of defraying all
or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project”;
and
WHEREAS, public facilities are defined in the statute to include “public
improvements, public services, and community amenities”; and
WHEREAS, these requirements are found in the Mitigation Fee Act
(Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.) and are commonly known as
“AB1600" requirements after the 1987 Assembly Bill in which they originated;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 66001, an agency establishing,
increasing or imposing impact fees must make findings to:
1. Identify the purpose of the fee;
2. Identify the use of the fee;
3. Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of a fee and the type of development on which it is
imposed;
b. The need for the facility and type of development on which the fee
is imposed;
c. The amount of the fee and the public facility cost attributable to
the development on which the fee is imposed; and
WHEREAS, the City Charter provides authority to the City to regulate
all municipal affairs under Article 1 Section 100; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of this fee program and procedures as set out
in this resolution are found to be a matter of local concern to implement in a
timely manner public infrastructures; and
WHEREAS, the City in 1999 conducted studies relative to future
community infrastructure needs; the funds necessary to meet said capital
improvement needs; and the relationship between those needs and future
Resolution No. 2020–003
Development Impact Fees
Adopted: February 4, 2020
Page 3 of 7
development; and based upon said studies and reports, on June 15, 1999,
the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1999-080; and
WHEREAS, the 1999 Development Impact Fee Study report was
previously updated in a report titled “2002 Development Impact Fee Study,”
and on March 5, 2002, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2002-034; and
WHEREAS, the 2002 Development Impact Fee Study report has been
updated in a report titled “2005 Development Impact Fee Study,” and on June
7, 2005, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2005-047; and
WHEREAS, the 2005 Development Impact Fee Study report has been
updated in a report titled “2006 Development Impact Fee Study,” and on July
5, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006-068; and
WHEREAS, the 2006 Development Impact Fee Study report has been
updated in a report titled “2008 Development Impact Fee Study,” and on
October 7, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2008-061; and
WHEREAS, the 2008 Development Impact Fee Study report has been
updated in a report titled “2013 Development Impact Fee Study,” and on
February 5, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2013-006; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, on the
4th day of February, 2020, held a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the
2019 Development Impact Fee Study and recommended updates to the City’s
DIF.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of La Quinta, California, as follows:
SECTION 1. Resolution No. 2013-006 adopted on February 5, 2013, is
hereby repealed, and this Resolution supersedes all prior Development Impact
Fee resolutions adopted by the City Council.
SECTION 2. Findings. Each WHEREAS paragraph, set forth above, is
hereby adopted as a specific finding of this City Council. The City Council
further finds that:
a. The report entitled "Development Impact Fee Study," dated September
23, 2019 (the “Fee Study”), attached as Exhibit A and incorporated
herewith by this reference, accurately states the City’s need of and lack of
Resolution No. 2020–003
Development Impact Fees
Adopted: February 4, 2020
Page 4 of 7
ability to provide for the described public buildings, facilities and services
to serve new development. The Fee Study sets forth a necessary and
reasonable method of funding said buildings and facilities. The Fee Study
shows that there is a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee
and the projected types of development; the need for the various public
facilities by the projected types of development pursuant to the City’s
General Plan; and the amount of the fee and the proportionate facility cost
related to the development. The Fee Study is hereby approved and
incorporated herein by this reference.
b. As set forth in detail in the Fee Study, in order to allow residential and
commercial land development to proceed in an orderly manner, while
insuring that all new development is consistent with the General Plan,
including the Public Infrastructure and Services Element, and the
Community Development Element, it is necessary and appropriate to
approve the following Development Impact Fees to be imposed upon new
development. Said fees will assist the City in funding a construction
program to provide such needed public buildings and facilities as they are
required and needed.
SECTION 3. Development Impact Fee Policy Amount. Prior to approval
of any zoning, re zoning, subdivision, or development proposal, the applicant
shall pay or agree to pay a Development Impact Fee for the following
development types as listed below in Table 1. The fees shall be paid prior to
the issuance of a building permit.
Table 1:
Development Type Dev.
Unit
Current
Fees
Effective
July 1, 2020
Effective
July 1, 2021
Residential - Single
Family Detached DU $ 6,894 $ 8,132 $ 9,380
Residential - Single
Family Attached DU $ 6,681 $ 7,182 $ 7,719
Residential - Multi
Family/Other DU $ 5,030 $ 5,552 $ 6,113
Office/Medical KSF $ 5,379 $ 6,474 $ 7,589
General Commercial KSF $ 6,456 $ 7,813 $ 9,191
Tourist
Commercial/Lodging Room $ 2,185 $ 2,542 $ 2,864
Golf Course Acre $ 957 $ 1,127 $ 1,306
Resolution No. 2020–003
Development Impact Fees
Adopted: February 4, 2020
Page 5 of 7
SECTION 4. Use of Funds Capital Outlay. All proceeds from fees
collected pursuant to this Development Impact Fee Policy shall be paid into
special capital outlay funds to be established by the City. Said fund or funds
shall be used only for the purpose of acquiring, building, improving, expanding
and equipping public property and public improvements and facilities
described as community infrastructure in this Resolution, as the City Council
may deem necessary and appropriate. Designation of expenditures of funds
available from the special capital outlay fund(s) shall be made by the City
Council in the context of approval of the City's annual operating and capital
improvements budget or at such other time as the City Council may direct.
SECTION 5. Exclusions and Exceptions. There is excluding from the fees
imposed by this policy, the following:
a. Any person when imposition of such fee upon that person would be in
violation of the constitution and laws of the United States or the State of
California.
b. The construction of any facility by the City of La Quinta, the United
States or any department or agency thereof or by the State of California or
any department, agency or political subdivision thereof.
SECTION 6. Credits. Other Methods of Providing Infrastructure. Unless
otherwise specifically provided herein, the Development Impact Fee shall be
in addition to and not in lieu of other valid exactions imposed upon new
development through the subdivision or other approval processes. Provided;
however, that payment of the Development Impact Fee shall be in lieu of
payment of the public facilities and equipment and traffic signalization funds
pursuant to La Quinta Municipal Code, 3.17.020.
Provided further that in the event developer is required to directly provide
infrastructure improvements specifically provided for in the fee structure,
developer shall receive a fair and equitable credit against the “Development
Impact Fee.”
The City hereby determines that the development impact fee is not intended
to be the exclusive method of installation of needed public buildings and
facilities and the City will consider alternative proposals to provide needed
infrastructure to particular development and, to the extent such alternative
proposal is discretionary approved by the City Council, developer shall receive
Resolution No. 2020–003
Development Impact Fees
Adopted: February 4, 2020
Page 6 of 7
a fair and equitable credit against payment of the Development Impact Fee.
Any developer seeking alternative methods of installation shall submit such
proposal to the City at the time of submittal of an application for development.
SECTION 7. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or
phrase of this resolution is for any reason held to be invalid, such holding or
holdings shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
Resolution. The City Council declares that it would have passed this Resolution
and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof,
irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences,
clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
In determining the amount of Development Impact Fee, the City Council has
been guided by the Fee Study mentioned in SECTION 2 of this Resolution. In
the event any category of such fee shall be declared invalid, such
determination shall not affect the validity of any other category. The City
Council further finds, declares and determines that the Development Impact
Fee on all remaining valid fee categories shall be increased by the amounts of
the fee categories declared invalid. Provided; however, that the amount of
the remaining valid fee categories shall not be so increased over and above
the amount recommended by Fee Study for each category.
SECTION 8. Administration and Enforcement. Effective Date. Repealer.
The Public Works Director shall be responsible for the administration and
enforcement of this policy. The Public Works Director’s decision may be
appealed to the City Council whose decision shall be final. The City Manager
is hereby authorized to execute necessary agreements for the administration
of this policy.
This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption. The fees imposed by
this Resolution shall go into effect 60 days following the effective date of this
Resolution.
City of La Quinta
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
CITY OF LA QUINTA
Revised Final DRAFT Report
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
nbsgov.com
Prepared by:
Corporate Headquarters
32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Toll free: 800.676.7516
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-003
EXHIBIT A
ADOPTED: FEBRUARY 4, 2020
City of La Quinta
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Table of Contents
Chapter 0. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................S-1
Organization of the Report ....................................................................................................................S-1
Development Projections ......................................................................................................................S-1
Impact Fee Analysis................................................................................................................................S-2
Recovery of Study Costs .........................................................................................................................S-5
Impact Fee Summary .............................................................................................................................S-5
Chapter 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................1-1
Purpose ..................................................................................................................................................1-1
Legal Framework for Developer Fees ....................................................................................................1-1
Impact Fee Calculation Methodology ....................................................................................................1-6
Facilities Addressed in this Study ...........................................................................................................1-8
Chapter 2. Development Data .........................................................................................................2-1
Background and Setting .........................................................................................................................2-1
Study Area and Development Scenario .................................................................................................2-1
Time Frame ............................................................................................................................................2-1
Development Types ...............................................................................................................................2-2
Residential Development and Population .............................................................................................2-2
Non-Residential Development ...............................................................................................................2-3
Demand Variables ..................................................................................................................................2-3
Demand Factors .....................................................................................................................................2-5
Existing and Forecasted Development ..................................................................................................2-5
Chapter 3. Parks and Recreation Impact Fees ...................................................................................3-1
Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................3-1
Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................3-1
Existing Facilities ....................................................................................................................................3-1
Quimby Act Fees in Lieu of Park Land Dedication .................................................................................3-2
Methodology and Level of Service Standard –Quimby Act ..................................................................3-3
Fees In-Lieu of Park Land Dedication –Quimby Act ..............................................................................3-3
Park Impact Fees ....................................................................................................................................3-5
Methodology-Park Impact Fees ............................................................................................................3-5
City of La Quinta
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Level of Service Standard –Park Impact Fees........................................................................................3-5
Cost Per Capita –Park Impact Fees .......................................................................................................3-5
Park Land Acquisition Impact Fees per Unit ..........................................................................................3-6
Park Improvement Impact Fees per Unit ...............................................................................................3-7
Projected Revenue .................................................................................................................................3-7
Updating the Fees ..................................................................................................................................3-8
Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................3-8
Chapter 4. Community and Cultural Centers ....................................................................................4-1
Methodology..........................................................................................................................................4-1
Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................4-1
Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................4-1
Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................4-1
Existing Facilities ....................................................................................................................................4-2
Cost per Capita .......................................................................................................................................4-2
Impact Fees per Unit of Development ...................................................................................................4-3
Projected Revenue .................................................................................................................................4-3
Updating the Fees ..................................................................................................................................4-4
Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................4-4
Chapter 5. Library ...........................................................................................................................5-1
Methodology..........................................................................................................................................5-1
Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................5-1
Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................5-1
Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................5-1
Existing Facilities ....................................................................................................................................5-1
Cost per Capita .......................................................................................................................................5-2
Impact Fees per Unit of Development ...................................................................................................5-2
Projected Revenue .................................................................................................................................5-3
Updating the Fees ..................................................................................................................................5-4
Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................5-4
Chapter 6. Civic Center ....................................................................................................................6-1
Methodology..........................................................................................................................................6-1
Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................6-1
City of La Quinta
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................6-1
Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................6-2
Existing Facilities ....................................................................................................................................6-2
Cost per Developed Acre .......................................................................................................................6-2
Impact Fees per Unit of Development ...................................................................................................6-3
Projected Revenue .................................................................................................................................6-3
Updating the Fees ..................................................................................................................................6-4
Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................6-4
Chapter 7. Maintenance Facilities ....................................................................................................7-1
Methodology..........................................................................................................................................7-1
Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................7-1
Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................7-1
Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................7-1
Facility Needs .........................................................................................................................................7-2
Park Maintenance Facilities Cost per Capita.........................................................................................7-3
Street Maintenance Facilities Cost per Weighted Peak Hour Trip........................................................7-3
Impact Fees per Unit of Development –Park Maintenance Facilities...................................................7-4
Impact Fees per Unit of Development –Street Maintenance Facilities ................................................7-5
Park Maintenance Facilities Impact Fees -Projected Revenue .............................................................7-7
Street Maintenance Facilities Impact Fees -Projected Revenue ..........................................................7-7
Updating the Fees ..................................................................................................................................7-8
Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................7-8
Chapter 8. Fire Protection ...............................................................................................................8-1
Methodology..........................................................................................................................................8-1
Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................8-1
Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................8-2
Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................8-2
Facility Needs .........................................................................................................................................8-2
Cost per Developed Acre .......................................................................................................................8-3
Impact Fees per Unit of Development ...................................................................................................8-4
Projected Revenue .................................................................................................................................8-6
Updating the Fees ..................................................................................................................................8-7
City of La Quinta
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................8-7
Chapter 9. Transportation ...............................................................................................................9-1
Methodology..........................................................................................................................................9-1
Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................9-1
Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................9-1
Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................9-1
Improvement Needs ..............................................................................................................................9-2
Cost per Weighted Peak Hour Trip ........................................................................................................9-2
Impact Fees per Unit of Development ...................................................................................................9-3
Projected Revenue .................................................................................................................................9-5
Updating the Fees ..................................................................................................................................9-6
Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................9-6
Chapter 10. Implementation .........................................................................................................10-1
Adoption ..............................................................................................................................................10-1
Administration .....................................................................................................................................10-2
Training and Public Information ..........................................................................................................10-7
Recovery of Study Costs and Administrative Costs .............................................................................10-7
City of La Quinta Page S-1
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
Chapter 0.Executive Summary
The City of La Quinta has retained NBS Government Finance Group to prepare this study to
analyze the impacts of new development on the City’s capital facilities and infrastructure and to
calculate impact fees based on that analysis.The methods used in this study are intended to
satisfy all legal requirements of the U. S. Constitution,the California Constitution and the
California Mitigation Fee Act (Gov ernment Code Sections 66000 et seq.)and The Quimby Act
(Government Code Section 66477) where it applies.
Organization of the Report
Chapter 1 of this report provide s an overview of the legal requirements for establishing and
imposing such fees,and methods that can be used to calculate impact fees.
Chapter 2 contains data on existing and future development that is used in this report .
Chapters 3 through 9 analyze the impacts of development on specific types of facilities and
calculate impact fees for those facilities.The facilities addressed in this report are listed by
chapter below:
Chapter 3. Parks and Recreation Impact Fees
Chapter 4.Community and Cultural Centers
Chapter 5.Library Facilities and Materials
Chapter 6.Civic Center Facilities
Chapter 7.Maintenance Facilities
Chapter 8.Fire Protection Facilities
Chapter 9.Transportation Facilities
Chapter 10 contains recommendations for adopting and implement ing impact fees, including
suggested findings to satisfy the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act.
Development Projections
Chapter 2 of this report presents estimates of existing development in La Quinta and
projections of future development through buildout of the area with the existing corporate
boundaries of the City.Because the City’s population fluctuates seasonally, this study uses
“potential population” in the impact fee analysis. Potential popul ation is based on full-
occupancy of all dwelling units in the City as any given time.
Future development projected in Chapter 2 indicates that the City’s potential population could
increase by about 28% to 82,300, as undeveloped residential land within the City’s existing
boundaries is built out.
The impact fees calculated in this report are in current dollars and do not require assumptions
about the rate or timing of future development. However, based on the City’s population
City of La Quinta Page S-2
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
growth rate over the last several years, it could take 25 years to absorb the land available for
residential development within the existing boundaries of the City.
Impact Fee Analysis
The impact fee analysis for each type of facility addressed in this report is presented in a
separate chapter. In each case, the relationship between development and the need for a
particular type of facility is defined in a way that allows the impact of additional development
on facility needs to be quantified. The impact fees are based on the cost of facilities and other
capital assets needed to mitigate the impacts of additional development .
All of the fees calculated in this report are based on capital costs and may be spent only for
capital facilities and other capital assets identified in this report. The following paragraphs
briefly discuss the approach used to calculate impact fees for each type of facility addressed in
this study.
Tables summarizing the impact fees calculated in this report and comparing them with the
City’s existing impact fees are presented later in this chapter.
Park and Recreation Impact Fees.Chapter 3 of this report calculates three types of fees for
park land acquisition and park improvements:
Quimby Act fees in lieu of park land dedication for residential subdivisions
Park land acquisition impact fees for residential d evelopment not involving a
subdivision
Park improvement impact fees for all residential developme nt
The City currently has an ordinance requiring residential subdivisions to dedicate land for parks
or pay fees in lieu of dedication . Those requirements are authorized by the Quimby Act.At
present, when the City collects fees in lieu of park land dedication, the amount of the fee is
based on the value of the land under the subdivision.An alternative employed by many cities is
to base in-lieu fees on the estimated average cost-per-acre for park land purchased on the open
market. Chapter 3 shows the amount of in-lieu fees calculated in that manner.
Chapter 3 also calculates park land impact fees for residential development that does not
involve a subdivision.Those fees are based on the City’s existing ratio of park acres to
population and the estimated cost-per-acre for park land
In addition, Chapter 3 calculates impact fees for park and recreation improvements. Those fees
are based on La Quinta’s existing rat io of improved park acreage to population and the
estimated cost per acre for park improvements.
All of the in-lieu and impact fees in Chapter 3 are calculated as a cost per capita and then
converted into fees per unit of residential development based on the estimated average
City of La Quinta Page S-3
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
population per unit for the three types of residential devel opment defined in this report (Single
Family Detached, Single-Family Attached, and Multi -Family-Other).
Because parks and recreation facilities are intended to serve resident s of the City,the park and
recreation in-lieu and impact fees apply only to residential development.
Community and Cultural Centers Impact Fee.Chapter 4 calculates impact fees for community
and cultural centers.Up to now, this fee has been called the Community Centers Impact Fee
and was based on only portions of certain City-owned facilities such as the La Quinta Museum
and the Boys and Girls Club, in addition to the Wellness Center. In this study, the basis for this
fee has been broadened to include the Wellness Center,the entire Museum and the Boys and
Girls Club building,as well as land acquired for the Village Art Plaza and Promenade .
The amount of the fee is based on the value of the City’s current per-capita investment in the
relevant facilities,including land and furniture, fixtures and equipment.The community and
cultural centers impact fees are calculated as a cost per capita and then converted into fees per
unit of residential development based on the estimated average population per unit fo r the
three types of residential development defined in this report.
Because community and cultural center facilities are intended to serve residents of the City,this
fee applies only to residential development .
Library Impact Fee. Chapter 5 calculates impact fees for the library.The calculation of this fee
assumes that the existing La Quinta Branch Library has adequate capacity to serve all existing
and future residential development within the existing corporate boundaries of the City.
This fee is calculated by allocating the cost of the Library building,land,library materials and
furniture fixtures and equipment to the projected buildout population of the area within the
existing City limits.The building cost is defined as the original cost of the b uilding plus nominal
interest to date on the outstanding loan originally issued by the Redevelopment Agency to fund
construction of the library.
The impact fees are calculated as a cost per capita and then converted into fees per unit of
residential development based on the estimated average population per unit for the three
types of residential development defined in this report.
Because the library is intended primarily to serve residents of the City, this fee applies only to
residential development.
Civic Center Impact Fee.Chapter 6 calculates impact fees for the civic center. The calculation of
this fee is based on the relationship between the cost of the existing Civic Center and existing
developed acreage within the City.
This fee is calculated by allocating the cost of the Civic Center building, land,and furniture
fixtures and equipment to existing development within the existing City limits based on
developed acreage.The building cost is defined as the original cost of the building.
City of La Quinta Page S-4
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
The civic center impact fees are calculated as a cost per developed acre and then converted
into fees per unit of development based on the estimated average acres per unit for each type
of development defined in this report.
The Civic Center impact fees apply to all t ypes of private development in the City. Public
facilities, schools, and parks are excluded from the impact fee analysis because they do not
create a demand for services supported by the Civic Center.The Civic Center impact fee applies
to golf courses, but only 5% of golf course acreage is assumed to impact services supported by
the Civic Center.
Maintenance Facilities Impact Fee.Chapter 7 calculates impact fees for corporate yard
maintenance facilities, including some major equipment .The calculation of this fee allocates
costs for both existing and future maintenance facilities to all existing and future development
within the existing corporate bounda ries of the City at buildout.Costs for future improvements
to the City’s maintenance facilitie s are based on estimates for Phase II and Phase III of the
planned Corporate Yard improvements.
To calculate this fee, the City’s maintenance facilities are broken into two components —park
maintenance facilities and street maintenance facilities. Costs fo r park maintenance facilities
are allocated to development in the same manners as parks, based on population. Costs for
street maintenance facilities are allocated to development in the same manner as
transportation improvements, based on weighted peak hou r trips.
In the initial impact fee analysis for street maintenance facilities, impact fees are calculated for
public facilities, schools and parks because they do generate some traffic. However, because
the traffic created by those public uses is a seconda ry impact of private development, the costs
initially allocated to those uses are re -allocated to private development, resulting in a small
increase in the fees for all types of private development.
The maintenance facilities impact fees apply to all types of private development in the City.
Fire Protection Impact Fee.Chapter 8 calculates impact fees for fire protection facilities. The
calculation of this fee allocates the cost of both existing and future fire protection facilities to all
existing and future development within the existing corporate boundaries of the City at
buildout. This study assumes that the City of La Quinta will be responsible for one -half of the
cost of a fourth fire station in the Southeastern quadrant of the City.
To calculate this fee,costs for fire protection facilities are allocated to development based on
developed acreage.In the initial impact fee analysis for fire protection facilities, impact fees are
calculated for public facilities, schools and parks based on the acreage they occupy. However,
because the need for those public uses is created by private development, the costs initially
allocated to those uses are re-allocated to private development, resulting in a small increase in
the fees for all types of private development.
The fire protection facilities impact fees apply to all types of private development in the City.
City of La Quinta Page S-5
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
Transportation Impact Fee.Chapter 9 of this report calculates impact fees for transportation
improvements.For purposes of the impact fee analysis, transpor tation improvements are
divided into two groups: those that increase capacity for vehicular traffic and others such as
sidewalks and bike lanes.Costs for capacity-capacity-enhancing improvements are allocated
only to future development. Costs for non -capacity-enhancing improvements are allocated to
both existing and future development.Both groups include costs to repay remaining balance s
on reimbursement agreements.
To calculate this fee, costs for all types of transportation improvements are allocated to
development based on the number of weighted peak hour trips generated by various types of
development. Weighted peak hour trips reflect both the number of trips generated and trip
length for various types of development.
In the initial impact fee analysis for transportation facilities, impact fees are calculated for
public facilities, schools and parks based on the number of weighted pea k hour trips they
generate. However, because the need for those public uses is created by private development,
the costs initially allocated to those uses are re-allocated to private development, resulting in a
small increase in the fees for all types of p rivate development.
The transportation facilities impact fees apply to all types of private development in the City.
Recovery of Study Costs
In this report, the impact fee calculations include a small administrative charge designed to
recover the cost of this study. That charge amounts to about 1/3 of 1% of the impact fees.
Impact Fee Summary
Impact fees per unit calculated in this report are summarized in Table S.1, below.
Table S.1: Summary of Impact Fees Calculated in This Study
Ch.3 Ch.4 Ch.5 Ch.6 Ch.7 Ch.8 Ch.9
Development Dev Park Comm/Civic Maint 2 Trans-Grand
Type Unit 1 Imprvmts Cultural Library Center Facilities Fire portation Total
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 2,106$956$397$1,230$313$369$4,009$9,380$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 1,794$814$338$1,115$247$335$3,076$7,719$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 1,716$779$323$628$198$188$2,281$6,113$
Office/Medical KSF 522$374$151$6,542$7,589$
General Commercial KSF 522$461$151$8,057$9,191$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 698$106$201$1,859$2,864$
Golf Course Acre 251$53$72$930$1,306$
Note: Rows may not total precisely due to rounding
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 square feet of building floor area; Room = hotel/motel guest room or suite
acre = net acre
2 Fee for maintenance facilities includes both park maintenance and street maintenance
City of La Quinta Page S-6
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
Table S.2 shows the City’s existing impact fees.It is important to note that the existing impact
fees for transportation improvements were reduced 22%from the amounts that were
supported by improvement costs in the City’s 2013 impact fee study.
Table S.3 shows the difference between the proposed fees in Table S.1 and the existing fees in
Table S.2.
Table S.2 Summary of Existing Impact Fees
Development Dev Park Comm/Civic Maint 2 Transpor-Grand
Type Unit 1 Imprvmts Cultural Library Center Facilities Fire tation
3 Total
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 2,048$129$344$942$156$433$2,842$6,894$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 2,048$129$344$796$156$366$2,842$6,681$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 2,048$129$344$447$111$206$1,745$5,030$
Office/Medical KSF 373$190$171$4,645$5,379$
General Commercial KSF 373$232$172$5,679$6,456$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 363$65$167$1,590$2,185$
Golf Course Acre 179$27$82$669$957$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 square feet of building floor area; Room = hotel/motel guest room or suite
acre = net acre
2 Impact fees for maintenance facilities include both park maintenance and street maintenance
3 Existing impact fees for transportation improvements were discounted 22% from actual costs
Table S.3 Difference Between Existing and Proposed Impact Fees
Development Dev Park Comm/Civic Maint 2 Transpor-Grand
Type Unit 1 Imprvmts Cultural Library Center Facilities Fire tation
3 Total
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 58$827$53$288$157$(64)$1,167$2,486$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU (254)$685$(6)$319$91$(31)$234$1,037$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU (332)$650$(21)$181$87$(18)$536$1,084$
Office/Medical KSF 149$184$(20)$1,897$2,210$
General Commercial KSF 149$229$(21)$2,378$2,735$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 335$41$34$269$680$
Golf Course Acre 72$26$(10)$261$349$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 square feet of building floor area; Room = hotel/motel guest room or suite
acre = net acre
2 Impact fees for maintenance facilities include both park maintenance and street maintenance
3 Existing impact fees for transportation improvements were discounted 22% from actual costs
City of La Quinta Page 1-1
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Chapter 1.Introduction
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to analyze the impacts of development on the need for types of
public facilities provided by the City of La Quinta. This report documents the approach, data
and methodology used in the analysis of impact fees and Quimby Act park land dedication
requirements and in lieu fees.
The methods used to calculate impact fees and in-lieu fees in this report are intended to satisfy
all legal requirements governing such fees, including provisions of the U. S. Constitution, the
California Constitution, the California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Section s 66000-
66025), and, where applicable,the Quimby Act (Government Code Section 66477).
Legal Framework for Developer Fees
This brief summary of the legal framework for development fees is intended as a general
overview.It was not prepared by an attorney,and should not be treated as legal advice.
U. S. Constitution.Like all land use regulations, development exactions, including impact fees,
are subject to the 5th Amendment prohibition on taking of private property for public use
without just compensation . Both state and federal courts have recognized the impo sition of
impact fees on development as a legitimate form of land use regulation, provided the fees
meet standards intended to protect against “regulatory takings.” A regulatory taking occurs
when regulations unreasonably deprive landowners of property rights protected by the
Constitution.
In two landmark cases dealing with exactions, the U. S. Supreme Court has held that when a
government agency requires the dedication of land or an interest in la nd as a condition of
development approval, or imposes ad hoc exactions as a condition of approval on a single
development project that do not apply to development generally, a higher standard of judicial
scrutiny applies. To meet that standard, the agency must demonstrate an "essential nexus"
between such exactions and the interest being protected (See Nollan v. California Coastal
Commission,1987) and make an” individualized determination” that the exaction imposed is
"roughly proportional" to the burden c reated by development (See Dolan v. City of Tigard,
1994).
Until recently, it was widely accepted that legislatively -enacted impact fees that apply to all
development in a jurisdiction are not subject to the higher standard of judicial scrutiny flowing
from the Nollan and Dolan decisions. But after the U. S. Su preme Court decision in Koontz v. St.
Johns Water Management District (2013),state courts have reached conflicting conclusions on
that issue.
In light of that uncertainty, any agency enacting or im posing impact fees would be wise to
demonstrate a nexus and ensure proportionality in the calculation of those fees.
City of La Quinta Page 1-2
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Defining the “Nexus.”While courts have not been entirely consistent in defining the nexus
required to justify exactions and impact fees,that term can be thought of as having the three
elements discussed below. We think proportionality is logically included as one element of that
nexus, even though it was discussed separately in Dolan v. Tigard.The elements of the nexus
discussed below mirror the three “reasonable relationship” findings requir ed by the Mitigation
Fee Act for establishment and imposition of impact fees.
Need or Impact.Development must create a need for the facilities to be funded by impact
fees. All new development in a community creates additional demands on some or all public
facilities provided by local government. If the capacity of facilities is not increased to satisfy the
additional demand, the quality or availability of public services for the entire community wil l
deteriorate. Impact fees may be used to recover the cost of development -related facilities, but
only to the extent that the need for facilities is related to the development project subject to
the fees.
The Nollan decision reinforced the principle that development exactions may be used only to
mitigate impacts created by the development projects upon which they are imposed. In this
study, the impact of development on facility needs is analyzed in terms of quantifiable
relationships between various types of development and the demand for public facilities based
on applicable level-of-service standards. This report contains all of the information ne eded to
demonstrate compliance with this element of the nexus.
Benefit.Development must benefit from facilities funded by impact fees. With respect to the
benefit relationship, the most basic requirement is that facilities funded by impact fees be
available to serve the development paying the fees. A sufficient benefit relationship also
requires that impact fee revenues be segregated from other funds and expended in a timely
manner on the facilities for which the fees were charged. Nothing in the U.S. Con stitution or
California law requires that facilities paid for with impact fee revenues be available exclusively
to development projects paying the fees.
Procedures for earmarking and expenditure of fee revenues are mandated by the Mitigation
Fee Act, as are procedures to ensure that the fees are either expended expedi tiously or
refunded.Those requirements are intended to ensure that developments benefit from the
impact fees they are required to pay. Thus, over time, procedural issues as well as substant ive
issues can come into play with respect to the benefit element of the nexus.
Proportionality.Impact fees must be proportional to the impact created by a particular
development project. Proportionality in impact fees depends on properly identifying
development-related facility costs and calculating the fees in such a way that those costs are
allocated in proportion to the facility needs created by different types and amounts of
development. The section on impact fee methodology, below, describes metho ds used to
allocate facility costs and calculate impact fees that meet the proportionality standard.
California Constitution.The California Constitution grants broad police power to local
governments, including the authority to regulate land use and deve lopment. That police power
City of La Quinta Page 1-3
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
is the source of authority for local governments in California to impose impac t fees on
development. Some impact fees have been challenged on grounds that they are special taxes
imposed without voter approval in violation of Ar ticle XIIIA. However, that objection is valid
only if the fees charged to a project exceed the cost of pr oviding facilities needed to serve the
project. In that case, the fees would also run afoul of the U. S. Constitution and the Mitigation
Fee Act.
Articles XIIIC and XIIID, added to the California Constitution by Proposition 218 in 1996, require
voter approval for some “property-related fees,” but exempt “the imposition of fees or charges
as a condition of property development.”
The Mitigation Fee Act.California’s impact fee statute originated in Assembly Bill 1600 during
the 1987 session of the Legislature, and took effect in January, 1989. AB 1600 added several
sections to the Government Code, beginning with Section 66000. Since that time ,the impact
fee statute has been amended from time to time, and in 1997 was officially titled the
“Mitigation Fee Act.” Unless otherwise noted, code sections referenced in this report are from
the Government Code.
The Mitigation Fee Act does not limit the types of capital improvements for which impact fees
may be charged. It defines public facilities very broadly to include "public improvements, public
services and community amenities." Although the issue is not specifically addressed in the
Mitigation Fee Act, it is clear both in case law and statute (see Government Code Section
65913.8) that impact fees may not be used to pay for maintenance or operating costs.
Consequently, the fees calculated in this report are based on the cost of capital assets only.
The Mitigation Fee Act does not use the term “mitigation fee” except in its official title. Nor
does it use the more common term “impact fee.” The Act simply uses the word “fee,” which is
defined as “a monetary exaction, other than a tax or special assessm ent…that is charged by a
local agency to the applicant in connection with approval of a development projec t for the
purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development
project ….”
To avoid confusion with other types of fees, this report uses the widely -accepted terms “impact
fee” and “development impact fee” which both should be understood to mean “fee” as defined
in the Mitigation Fee Act.
The Mitigation Fee Act contains requirements for establishing, incre asing and imposing impact
fees. They are summarized below. It also contains provisions that govern the c ollection and
expenditure of fees and requires annual reports and periodic re -evaluation of impact fee
programs. Those administrative requirements ar e discussed in the implementation chapter of
this report.
Required Findings.Section 66001 requires that an agency establishing, increasing or imposing
impact fees, must make findings to:
1.Identify the purpose of the fee;
City of La Quinta Page 1-4
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
2.Identify the use of the fee;and,
3.Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the development typ e on which it is imposed;
b.The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed;
and
c.The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.
(Applies when fees are imposed on a specific project .)
Each of those requirements is discussed in more detail below.
Identifying the Purpose of the Fees.The broad purpose of impact fees is to pro tect public
health, safety and general welfare by providing for adequate public facilities. The specific
purpose of the fees calculated in this study is to fund construction of certain capital
improvements that will be needed to mitigate the impacts of pla nned new development on City
facilities, and to maintain an acceptable level of public services as the City g rows.
This report recommends that findings regarding the purpose of an impact fee should define the
purpose broadly, as providing for the funding of adequate public facilities to serve additional
development.
Identifying the Use of the Fees.According to Section 66001,if a fee is used to finance public
facilities, those facilities must be identified. A capital improvement pl an may be used for that
purpose but is not mandatory if the facilities are identified in a General Plan, a Specific Plan, or
in other public documents.In this case, we recommend that the City Council adopt this report
as the public document that identifies the facilities to be funded by the fees.
Reasonable Relationship Requirement.As discussed above, Section 66001 requires that , for
fees subject to its provisions, a "reasonable relationship" must be demonstrated between:
1.the use of the fee and the type of development on which it is imposed;
2.the need for a public facility and the type of development on which a fee is imposed;
and,
3.the amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development on which
the fee is imposed.
These three reasonable relationship requirements, as defined in the statute, mirror the nexus
and proportionality requirements often cited in cou rt decisions as the standard for defensible
impact fees. The term “dual rational nexus” is often used to characterize the standard used by
courts in evaluating the legitimacy of impact fees. The “duality” of the nexus refers to (1) an
impact or need created by a development project subject to impact fees, and (2) a benefit to
the project from the expenditure of the fees.
City of La Quinta Page 1-5
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Although proportionality is reasonably implied in the dual rational nexus formulation, it was
explicitly required by the Supreme Court in the Dolan case,and we prefer to list it as the third
element of a complete nexus.
Development Agreements and Reimbursement Agreements.The requirements of the
Mitigation Fee Act do not apply to fees collected under development agreements (see Govt.
Code Section 66000)or reimbursement agreements (see Govt. Code Section 66003). The same
is true of fees in lieu of park land dedication imposed under the Quimby Act (see Govt. Code
Section 66477).
Existing Deficiencies.In 2006, Section 66001(g) was added to the Mitigation Fee Act (by AB
2751) to clarify that impact fees “shall not include costs attributable to existing deficiencies in
public facilities,…” The legislature’s intent in adopting this amendment, as stated in the bill,
was to codify the holdings of Bixel v. City of Los Angeles (1989), Rohn v. City of Visalia (1989),
and Shapell Industries Inc. v. Governing Board (1991).
That amendment does not appear to be a substantive change. It is widely understood that
other provisions of law make it improper for impact fees to include costs for correcting existing
deficiencies.
However, Section 66001(g) also states that impact fees “may include the costs attributable to
the increased demand for public facilities reasonably related to the development pr oject in
order to (1) refurbish existing facilities to maintain the existing level of service or (2) achieve an
adopted level of service that is consistent with the general plan.” (Emphasis added.)
Impact Fees for Existing Facilities.Impact fees may be used to recover costs for existing
facilities to the extent that those facilities are needed to serve additional development and
have the capacity to do so. In other words, it must be possible to show that fees used to pay
for existing facilities meet the need and benefit elements of the nexus.
The Quimby Act.The Quimby Act (Government Code Section 66477), which pre -dates the
Mitigation Fee Act, authorizes a city or county to require dedication of land, payment of fees in -
lieu of dedication, or a combin ation of both, for park and recreational purposes as a condition
of approval of a residential subdivision. The city or county must adopt an ordinance that
includes definite standards for determining the proportion of the subdivision to be dedicated
and the amount of the in-lieu fees to be paid.
Under the Quimby Act, land dedication and in -lieu fee requirements are based on the ratio of
park acres to population in the jurisdiction. That ratio may not exceed three acres per thousand
residents unless the existing ratio is higher, but is limited to five acres per thousand. The
population added by the subdivision is determined by the number of dwelling units and the
average number of persons per household.
The population and the average number of persons per hou sehold in the city or county are to
be based on the most recent federal census. Park acreage is to be based on the area of
neighborhood and community parks in the city or county at the time of that census.
City of La Quinta Page 1-6
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
The land, fees, or combination thereof are to be u sed only for the purpose of developing new
or rehabilitating existing neighborhood or community park or recreational facilities to serve the
subdivision. A 2013 amendment to the Quimby Act added a provision that in -lieu fees may be
used for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing park or recreational facilities
in a neighborhood other than the neighborhood in which the subdivision paying the fees is
located, if certain conditions are met (see paragraph (a)(3)(B) of Section 66477).
“Neighborhood” is not defined in the statute.
The Quimby Act requires that the legislative body adopt a general plan or specific plan
containing policies and standards for parks and recreational facilities, and that the amount and
location of land to be dedicated o r the fees to be paid shall bear a reasonable relationship to
the use of the park and recreational facilities by future inhabitants of the subdivision.
The Quimby Act provides that if park and recreational services and facilities are provided by a
public agency other than a city or county, the amount and location of park land to be dedicated
or fees to be paid shall be jointly determined by that other public agency and the city or county
having jurisdiction. The land or fees shall be conveyed directly to th e public agency that
provides park and recreational services on a communitywide level if that agency elects to
accept the land or fee.
Only payment of fees may be required for subdivisions containing 50 units or less, or for
condominium, stock cooperative or community apartment projects.
Impact Fee Calculation Methodology
Any one of several legitimate methods may be used to calculate impact fees. The choice of a
particular method depends primarily on the service characteristics of, and planning
requirements for, the facility type being addressed. Each method has advantages and
disadvantages in a particular situation. To some extent they are interchangeable, because they
all allocate facility costs in proportion to the needs created by development.
Allocating facility costs to various types and amounts of development is central to all methods
of impact fee calculation. Costs are allocated by means of formulas that quantify the
relationship between development and the need for facilities. In a cost allocation formula, the
impact of development is measured by some attribute of development such as added
population or added vehicle trips that represent the impacts created by different types and
amounts of development.
Plan-Based or Improvements-Driven Method.Plan-based impact fee calculations are based on
the relationship between a specified set of improvements and a specified increment of
development.The improvements are typically identified in a facility plan, while the
development is identified in a land use plan that forecasts potential development by type and
quantity.
Using this method, facility costs are allocated to various categories of development in
proportion to the service demand created by each type of development. To calculate plan-
City of La Quinta Page 1-7
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
based impact fees, it is necessary to determine what facilities will be needed to serve a
particular increment of new development.
With this method, the total cost of eligible facilities is divided by the total units of additional
demand to calculate a cost per unit of demand (e.g.a cost per capita for parks). Then, the cost
per unit of demand is multiplied by factors representing demand per unit of development (e.g.
population per unit) to arrive at a cost per unit of development.
This method is somewhat inflexible in that it is based on the relationship between a specific
facility plan and a specific land use plan. If either plan changes significant ly the fees will have to
be recalculated.
Capacity-Based or Consumption-Driven Method. This method calculates a cost per unit of
capacity based on the relationship between total cost and total capacity of a system. It can be
applied to any type of development, provided the capacity required to serve each increment of
development can be estimated and the fa cility has adequate capacity available to serve the
development. Since the cost per unit of demand does not depend on the particular type or
quantity of development to be served, this method is flexible with respect to changing
development plans.
In this method, the cost of unused capacity is not allocated to development. Capacity -based
fees are most commonly used for water and wastewater systems, where the cost of a system
component is divided by the capacity of that component to derive a unit cost. H owever, a
similar analysis can be applied to other types of facilities. To produce a schedule of impact fees
based on standardized units of development (e.g. dwelling units or square feet of non -
residential building area), the cost per unit of capacity is multiplied by the amount of capacity
required to serve a typical unit of development in each of several land use categories.
Standard-Based or Incremental Expansion Method.Standard-based fees are calculated using a
specified relationship or standard th at determines the number of service units to be provided
for each unit of development. The standard can be established as a matter of policy or it can be
based on the level of service being provided to existing development in the study area.
Using the standard-based method, costs are defined on a generic unit -cost basis and then
applied to development according to a standard that sets the number of service units to be
provided for each unit of development.
Park in-lieu and impact fees are commonly calculated this way. The level of service standard for
parks is typically stated in terms of acres of parks per thousand residents. A cost -per-acre for
park land or park improvements can usually be estimated without knowing the exact size or
location of a particular park. The ratio of park acreage to population and the cost per acre for
parks is used to calculate a cost per capita. The cost per capita can then be converted into a
cost per unit of development based on the average population per dwelli ng unit for various
types of residential development.
City of La Quinta Page 1-8
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Facilities Addressed in this Study
Impact/in-lieu fees for the following types of facilities are addressed in this report:
Park Land and Improvements
Community and Cultural Centers
Library Facilities
Civic Center Facilities
Maintenance Facilities
Fire Protection Facilities
Transportation Facilities
Each of those facilities is addressed in s separate chapter of this report, beginning with Chapter
3.Chapter 2 contains data on existing and fut ure development used in th e impact fee analysis.
City of La Quinta Page 2-1
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Chapter 2.Development Data
This chapter presents data on existing and future development that will be used to calculate
impact fees in subsequent chapters of this report.
The information in this chapter may be used to establis h levels of service, analyze facility needs,
and/or allocate the cost of capital facilities between existing and future development and
among various types of new development.
Background and Setting
La Quinta is located along Highway 111 in the desert res ort area of the Coachella Valley in
south-central Riverside County, adjacent to the City of Indian Wells to the west and the City of
Indio to the east. Existing development in the City is primarily residential and includes both
conventional residential development and gated residential and resort communities, some of
which contain one or more golf courses.
Major regional commercial development in La Quinta exists along Highway 111 in La Quinta and
more is planned. A significant portion of the land within th e City lies on the steep slopes of the
Santa Rosa and Coral Reef mountains. Much of that area is preserved as open space.
Study Area and Development Scenario
The study area for this impact fee study is the existing City, meaning the area within the exist ing
corporate boundaries of La Quinta.The future development scenario used in this study
assumes buildout of all developable land within those corporate boundaries.
La Quinta’s population fluctuates seasonally. Projections in this chapter indicate that
undeveloped residential land in the study area has the capacity to accommodate approximately
18,000 additional residents when all of the projected new residential units in the City are
occupied. That would be an increase of about 28% from the City’s estimat ed 2019 full-
occupancy population of 64, 531, and would bring the total population within the existing
corporate boundaries of La Quinta to just over 82,000 when all residential units are occupied.
As explained below, the term “potential population” is use d elsewhere in this study to mean
the population of the City when all residential units are occupied.
Time Frame
No time frame is assumed for the buildout of future development projected in this study. The
methods used to calculate impact fees in this stud y do not require assumptions regarding the
rate or timing of development.
City of La Quinta Page 2-2
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Development Types
The development types defined in this study are intended to reflect actual land uses rather
than zoning or general plan land use designations. The following breakd own of development
types is used throughout this study:
Residential -Single Family Detached
Residential –Single-Family Attached
Residential –Multi-Family/Other
Office
General Commercial
Tourist Commercial
Public Facilities
Public Schools
Parks
Golf Courses
Residential Development and Population
As indicated in the list above, this study classifies residential development into three categories:
Single-Family Detached, Single-Family Attached, which includes condominiums and
townhouses, and Multi-Family/Other which includes ap artments and mobile homes. Dwelling
units are used as the basic measure of the amount of the amount of existing and future
development in each residential category.
The graph at right shows the California
Department of Finance (DOF) official
January 1 population estimates for the
City of La Quinta for the years from 2010
through 2018.
DOF’s population estimate for La Quinta
has grown at an average rate of 1.2% per
year since 2010. The City’s estimated
January 1, 2018 population of 41,204 is
an increase of 3,737 or 10% from a
population of 37,467 at the time of the
2010 Census.
The figures shown above reflect the City’s total population, including both household
population and population in group quarters such as nursing homes. Th e group quarters
population in La Quinta is very small, amounting to only 57 people in 2018.
It is important to note that the official Census Bureau and Department of Finance population
estimates reflect only the City’s permanent population. A substantial percentage of the
City of La Quinta Page 2-3
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
dwellings in La Quinta are occupied seasonally, so the official population estimat es substantially
understate the service demand represented by residential development in La Quinta.
Once a dwelling unit has been approved and constructed , the City is committed to serve the
demand created by that unit, even if that demand is seasonal. Th e City has no control over
whether or when such units are occupied.
Thus, to better represent the City’s service commitments, this study uses “potential
population” to gauge the de mand for population-related public services and the facilities that
support them. As used in this study, “potential population” means the number of people who
would reside in the City when all dwelling units existing at a particula r time are occupied.
Unless otherwise indicated, when the term “population” is used in subsequent cha pters of this
report, it will mean potential population.
The potential population is estimated for each category of residential development by
multiplying the number of units (existing or future) in that category by the average population
per unit for that type of development.
This study uses data from the U. S. Census Bureau’s 2017 American Community Survey 5 -year
Estimates to calculate the population per d welling unit factors for each category of residential
development defined in this study. Those factor s are shown in Table 2.1.
Non-Residential Development
In this study, private, non -residential development is classified into three categories : Office,
General Commercial and Tourist Commercial. The Office category is equivalent to the Office
Commercial (CO) classification in the General Plan Land Use Element. Tourist Commercial is
equivalent to the Tourist Commercial (CT) classification in the Land Use Eleme nt. And the
General Commercial category used in this study encompasses all other types of commercial
development defined in the Land Use Element. La Quinta has no existing industrial
development and none is planned within the existing City.
For purposes of impact fee analysis, commercial development can be measured in a number of
ways. In this report, the basic measure of office and general commercial development is gross
building area in thousands of square feet, which is abbreviated “KSF.” Tourist commerc ial
development, which consists of hotels and associated uses, is measured in terms of “rooms,”
meaning guest rooms or suites.
Several other categories of non-residential development are also used in this study. Those
categories are Public Facilities, Schools, Parks and Golf Courses. The amount of existing and
future development in the Public Facilities c ategory is measured in terms of building area in
KSF. Schools, Parks and Golf Courses are measured in terms of acreage.
Demand Variables
To calculate impact fees, the relationship between facility needs and development must be
quantified in cost allocati on formulas. Certain measurable attributes of development (for
City of La Quinta Page 2-4
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
example, added population or added vehicle trips) are used as “demand variables” in those
formulas to represent the impact of different types of development on various types of
facilities.
Demand variables are selected either because they directly measure the service demand
created by various types of development, or because they are reasonabl y correlated with that
demand.
For example, the need for parks in a community is typically defined in terms of the relationship
between population and acres of parks. As population grows, more parks are needed to
maintain that relationship. Logically,then, the increase in population related to new residential
development is an appropriate yardstick,or demand variable, for use in measuring the impact
of development on the need for additional parks.
Each demand variable has a specific value for each t ype of development defined in this study.
Those values may be referred to as “demand factors.”So, if the demand variable used to
calculate impact fees for a particular type of facility is added population, the demand factor for
single-family residential d evelopment would be the p opulation per dwelling unit for that
specific type of development.
Demand variables used in this study are discussed below, and specific demand factors can be
found in Table 2.1.
Acreage.Acreage is a basic attribute of all development. In this report, net developed acreage
is used as a demand variable for some types of facilities.
Population.Resident population is used in this study to represent the need for facilities such as
parks and community centers that are intended to se rve residents of the City and are not
impacted substantially by non-residential development. As discussed above, because of
seasonality in La Quinta’s population, the population used to calculate impact fees in thi s study
is “potential population”
Weighted Peak Hour Trips.Both the number of peak hour trips generated by development and the
length of those trips affect the amount of peak hour roadway capacity needed to serve development.
The demand variable used to calculate impact fees for transportation facilities in this report is weighted
peak hour trips, which is the product of the number of peak hour trips per unit per day and a trip length
factor representing the relationship between the average trip length fo r a particular development type
and the system-wide average trip length.
The best available information on trip lengths by development type are those published by the San
Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) in the publication Traffic Generators.Although the trip
lengths presented in that publication do not specifically apply to La Quinta, we believe they reasonably
represent the proportional relationship of trip lengths for various types of development in the City.
Because the cost of street improvements is allocated to development projects in proportion to their
relative share of total demand, it is the relative relationship, rather than the actual trip length that is
important in the impact fee calculations.
City of La Quinta Page 2-5
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
It should be noted that the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) has developed trip
length data for the Coachella Valley. However, those trip lengths are calculated by trip purpose not by
development type. In addition, they are intended to reflect travel on regional facilities and do not
include the portion of trips on local street networks. Consequently, the CVAG trip length information is
not useful for purposes of impact fee analysis.
Peak hour trips-per-unit-per-day, trip length factors and weighted peak hour trips for each type of
development defined in this study are shown in Table 2.1.
Demand Factors
Table 2.1 on the next page shows the values of demand factors used in this study, by
development type.
Existing and Forecasted Development
Summaries of existing and forecasted development within the corporate boundarie s of La
Quinta, by development type, are presented in Tables 2.2 through 2.4 later in this section.
At present, La Quinta is about 78% built out in terms of the total residential units and potential
population forecasted for buildout within the existing co rporate boundaries of the City.
Commercial and Office development are approximately 63% built out based on square footage,
and Tourist Commercial is about 45% built out based on existing and forecasted h otel rooms.
Table 2.1 Demand Factors
Land Use
Category
Unit
Type
Acres per
Unit 1
Population
per Unit 2
Pk Hr Trips
per Unit 3
Trip Length
Factor 4
Wtd Pk Hr Trips
per Unit 5
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 0.245 2.70 1.01 1.14 1.16
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 0.222 2.30 0.78 1.14 0.89
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 0.125 2.20 0.58 1.14 0.66
Office/Medical KSF 0.104 1.49 1.28 1.90
General Commercial KSF 0.104 3.75 0.62 2.34
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Rooms 0.139 0.49 1.10 0.54
Public Facilities KSF 0.270 2.85 0.87 2.48
Schools Acres 1.000 1.30 0.61 0.79
Parks Acres 1.000 1.59 0.32 0.51
Golf Courses Acres 1.000 0.30 0.91 0.27
1 Acres per unit based on projected buildout conditions
2 Average population per unit based on analysis of data from U. S. Census Bureau, 2017 American
Community Survey (2017, 5-Year Estimate), Tables B25032 and B25033
3 Peak hour trips per unit per day from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)Trip Generation Manual,
8th Edition
4 Trip length factor = average trip length for each development type / a system-wide average of 6.9 miles;
trip lengths based on data from the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) publication,Traffic
Generators (see discussion in text)
5 Weighted peak hour trips per unit = peak hour trips per unit X trip length factor
City of La Quinta Page 2-6
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
As of 2019, single family residential un its make up approximately 80% of all residential units in
the City, with the other two categories of residential development comprising about 10% each.
That mix is projected to change very little as a re sult of future development forecasted for this
study.
Table 2.2 on the next p age shows estimated existing development in the City as of January 1,
2018, in terms of acres, units, potential population, and weighted peak hour trips.
Table 2.3 on the next page shows forecasted future development within the existing corporate
boundaries of the City of La Quinta through buildout.
Table 2.2 Existing Development as of January 1, 2019
Land Use
Category
Developed
Acres 1
Unit
Type 2
No. of
Units 3
Potential
Population 4
Wtd Pk Hr
Trips 5
Residential - Single Family Detached 4,824 DU 19,780 53,406 22,945
Residential - Single Family Attached 532 DU 2,417 5,559 2,151
Residential - Multi-Family/Other 317 DU 2,530 5,566 1,670
Office/Medical 78 KSF 753 1,431
General Commercial 423 KSF 3,692 8,639
Tourist Commercial/Lodging 207 Room 1,130 610
Public Facilities 88 KSF 360 893
Schools 115 Acre 115 91
Parks 242 Acre 242 123
Golf Courses 4,317 Acre 4,317 1,166
Totals 11,143 64,531 39,719
1 Existing developed acres estimated by the City of La Quinta Design and Development Department
2 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite;
Acre = net developed acre
3 Number of existing units estimated by the City of La Quinta Design and Development Department
4 Potential population = number of residential units X population per unit from Table 2.1
5 Existing weighted peak hour trips = number of units X weighted peak hour trips per unit from
Table 2.1
City of La Quinta Page 2-7
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Table 2.4 on the next page shows total development at buildout of the existing City.
Table 2.3 Additional Development to Buildout of the Existing City
Land Use
Category
Developed
Acres 1
Unit
Type 2
No. of
Units 3
Potential
Population 4
Wtd Pk Hr
Trips 5
Residential - Single Family Detached 1,294 DU 5,186 14,002 6,016
Residential - Single Family Attached 170 DU 743 1,709 661
Residential - Multi-Family/Other 118 DU 946 2,081 624
Office/Medical 54 KSF 512 973
General Commercial 104 KSF 1,358 3,178
Tourist Commercial/Lodging 138 Room 1,360 735
Public Facilities 32 KSF 84 208
Schools 0 Acre 0 0
Parks 54 Acre 54 28
Golf Courses 817 Acre 817 220
Totals 2,781 17,792 12,643
1 Increase in developed acres estimated by the City of La Quinta Design and Development Dept.
2 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite;
Acre = net developed acre
3 Increase in the number of units estimated by the City of La Quinta Design and Development Dept.
4 Increase in potential population = increase in residential units X population per unit from Table 2.1
5 Increase in weighted peak hour trips = increase in number of units X weighted peak hour trips per
unit from Table 2.1
City of La Quinta Page 2-8
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Table 2.4 Total Development at Buildout of the Existing City
Land Use
Category
Developed
Acres 1
Unit
Type 2
No. of
Units 3
Potential
Population 4
Wtd Pk Hr
Trips 5
Residential - Single Family Detached 6,118 DU 24,966 67,408 28,961
Residential - Single Family Attached 702 DU 3,160 7,268 2,812
Residential - Multi-Family/Other 435 DU 3,476 7,647 2,294
Office/Medical 132 KSF 1,265 2,404
General Commercial 527 KSF 5,050 11,817
Tourist Commercial/Lodging 345 Room 2,490 1,345
Public Facilities 120 KSF 444 1,101
Schools 115 Acre 115 91
Parks 296 Acre 296 151
Golf Courses 5,134 Acre 5,134 1,386
Totals 13,924 82,323 52,362
1 Developed acres at buildout estimated by the City of La Quinta Design and Development Department
2 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite;
Acre = net developed acre
3 Number of units at buildout estimated by the City of La Quinta Design and Development Department
4 Potential population at buildout = residential units X population per unit from Table 2.1
5 Weighted peak hour trips at buildout = number of units X wieghted peak hour trips per unit from
Table 2.1
City of La Quinta Page 3-1
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Chapter 3.Parks and Recreation Impact Fees
This chapter updates two different types of fees available for funding parks tha t serve the
added population associated with new residential development in La Quinta.
1.Quimby Act In-Lieu Fees -The Quimby Act (Government Code 66477) authorizes the
City to require that residential subdivisions dedicat e land for parks or pay fees in lieu of
dedication. This chapter calculates the in -lieu fees, which apply only to residential
projects that involve a subdivision.
2.Development Impact Fees –Impact fees for parkland acquisition that apply to
residential projects not involving a subdivision,and impact fees for construction of park
improvements that apply to all residential development projects.
Demand Variable
A demand variable is an attribute of de velopment that is used to represent the impact of
development on a particular type of facilit y. The need for parks is almost universally defined in
terms of the population to be served, so the demand variable used to calculate impact fees in
this chapter is added population.
Because the impact of development on the need for parks is created by an increase in
population associated with new residential development, the fees calculated in this chapter will
apply only to new residential development.
Service Area
La Quinta’s park facilities serve the entire City, so impact fees for those facilities w ill apply to all
new residential development within the existing corporate boundaries of the City.
Existing Facilities
Both Quimby Act and park impact fee calculations in this chapter reference a list of the City’s
existing parks as part of their basis.Table 3.1 lists La Quinta’s existing parks and breaks down
the acreage of each park into city-owned and city-improved acres.
City of La Quinta Page 3-2
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
All acreage of existing parkland shown in Table 3.1 is improved with the exception of two
nature preserve areas, Fred Wolff Bear Creek Nature Preserve and Cove Oasis. This analysis
estimates that 10 percent of the total acreage of those preserve areas, or 14 acres, is improved
as nature trails and public access points. Those 14 acres are treated as developed community
park acreage in this analysis.
The land under the sports fields at Paige Middle School is owned by the Desert Sands Unified
School District, but the City has paid for the impr ovements to that land.Similarly,the land
under the Sports Complex is also owned by the Scho ol District, but the City has paid for the
improvements to that park.
The City is currently developing two new parks not listed in Table 3.1: the 14 -acre Silver Rock
Event Venue which is out to bid, and the two -acre X Park skate park which is nearing
construction.
Quimby Act Fees in Lieu of Park Land Dedication
The calculation of fees subject to the stipulations of the Quimby Act differs in a number of ways
from park impact fees, which are discussed later in this chapter.
Table 3.1: Existing Parks
Park Park City-Owned City-Improved
Name Type Acres Acres
Adams Park Neighborhood Park 3.50 3.50
Civic Center Campus Community Park 7.90 7.90
Desert Pride Park Neighborhood Park 1.00 1.00
Eisenhower Park Mini Park 0.50 0.50
Fritz Burns Park Community Park 12.00 12.00
La Quinta Park Community Park 18.00 18.00
La Quinta Community Park (Frances Hack)Community Park 6.50 6.50
Monticello Park Neighborhood Park 4.00 4.00
Pioneer Park Neighborhood Park 3.20 3.20
Paige Middle School Sports Fields Community Park 0.00 7.00
Saguaro Park Mini Park 0.75 0.75
Sports Complex Community Park 0.00 16.75
Seasons Park Neighborhood Park 5.00 5.00
Velasco Park Mini Park 0.25 0.25
Fred Wolff Bear Creek Nature Preserve Open Space 26.00 2.60
Cove Oasis Open Space 114.00 11.40
Total 202.60 100.35
Source: City of La Quinta
City of La Quinta Page 3-3
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Methodology and Level of Service Standard –Quimby Act
The level of service standard used to calculate Quimby Act fees in lieu of parkland dedication is
based on the relationship between population and park acreage, but it must conform to rules
specified in the statute.
The Quimby Act (Government Code Section 66477) requires use of population data as shown in
the most recent available federal census, which at the time of this study is the 2010 Census
population. The statute authorizes municipalities to im pose a requirement on residential
subdivisions (including parcel maps) that they dedicate land for parks or pay fees in lieu of park
land dedication.
Those requirements may not exceed the 2010 ratio of park acreage to population if that ratio is
between 3.0 acres per thousand and 5.0 acres per thousand. If the 2010 ratio is lower than 3.0
acres per thousand, land dedication and/or in lieu fees may be based on 3.0 acres per
thousand. As shown in Table 3.2, La Quinta’s ratio is below the Quimby Act’s minimum
standard. Consequently, the park land in-lieu fees calculated later in this chapter are based on
the minimum of 3.0 acres per thousand.
Fees In-Lieu of Park Land Dedication –Quimby Act
Per Chapter 13.48.060 of the City’s Municipal Code, Quimby Act pa rkland acquisition in -lieu
fees “…shall be based on the fair market value of land within a subdivision.” As such, the City
calculates these fees on a case by case basis, depending on the market value of land under each
subdivision at the time the project i s approved using the following formula to determine the
fee:
Table 3.2: Level of Service - Quimby Act
Facility Acres1 Population2
Acres per
Capita 3
Acres per
1000 4
Total Park Acres - 2010 (Quimby)100.35 58,610 0.00171 1.71
1 All parks shown in Table 3.1 were in existence in 2010
2 Reflects 2010 potential population based on 100% occupancy of 2010 dwelling units
3 Acres per capita = existing acres / existing population
4 Acres per 1,000 population = acres per capita X 1,000
City of La Quinta Page 3-4
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Quimby Act Park Land Acquisition In-lieu fee =
Number of dwelling units
x
Population per dwelling unit by development type
x
.003 acres per capita
x
market value of land per acre
A review of the in-lieu fees charged by the City since 2010 shows that per-acre in-lieu fees have
varied widely from project-to-project.As an alternative, the City Council could choose to
establish a standardized schedule of in-lieu fees based on the estimated average Citywide cost-
per-acre for park land used in this chapter.Table 3.3 shows what those in-lieu fees would be if
the City Council chooses this alternative.
Table 3.3: Park Land In-Lieu Fees per Unit
Development Cost per Population Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Capita 2 per DU 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU $1,306.80 2.70 $3,528.36 $11.43 $3,539.79
Residential - Single Family Attached DU $1,306.80 2.30 $3,005.64 $9.74 $3,015.38
Residential Multi-Family/Other DU $1,306.80 2.20 $2,874.96 $9.31 $2,884.27
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 Cost per capita = 0.003 acres per capita X $435,600 per acre
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per dwelling unit
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
City of La Quinta Page 3-5
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Park Impact Fees
This chapter calculates two types of impact fees for parks:
1.Park land acquisition impact fees, which apply to residential projects that do not involve
a subdivision.
2.Park improvement impact fees, which apply to all residential development in addition to
any park land dedication,park land in-lieu (Quimby Act) fees, or park land acquisition
impact fees. Park improvement impact fees would be used to construct park
improvements to serve the added population associated with new residential
development.
Methodology-Park Impact Fees
The method used to calculate development impact fees in this chapter is the standar d-based
method discussed in Chapter 1. That method calculates impact fees using a level -of-service
standard and the estimated cost of new facil ities needed to maintain that standard. The level of
service standard used in this chapter is discussed below.
Level of Service Standard –Park Impact Fees
The level of service standard used to calculate the park impact fees in this chapter is the City’s
existing level of service, defined as the relationship between existing park acreage and existing
population.Table 3.4 shows the ratio of park acreage to population based on the estimated
potential population as of January 1, 2019. See Chapter 2 for a disc ussion of potential
population.
Cost Per Capita –Park Impact Fees
The following tables convert the acres-per-capita factor from Table 3.4 into costs per capita.
Table 3.5 calculates the cost per capita for park land acquisition impact fees, which can be
applied to residential projects that do not involve a subdivision.
Table 3.4: Existing Level of Service - Impact Fees
Facility Acres1
Existing
Population2
Acres per
Capita
Acres per
1000
Existing Park Acres 100.35 64,531 0.00156 1.56
1 See Table 3.1
2 The City's 2019 potential population based on 100% occupancy of all existing dwelling units;
see Table 2.2
3 Acres per capita = existing acres / existing population
4 Acres per 1,000 population = acres per capita X 1,000
City of La Quinta Page 3-6
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Table 3.6 calculates the cost per capita for park improvement impact fees.
Park Land Acquisition Impact Fees per Unit
Table 3.7 calculates park land acquisition impact fees per dwelling unit based on the cost per
capita from Table 3.5 and the population per dwelling unit from Table 2.1 and then adds a small
administrative charge to arrive at the adjuste d impact fee per unit. The 0.324% administrative
charge is intended to recover the cost of this study over five years. It is calculated by dividing
the cost of the study by estimated revenue that would be generated over five years by impact
fees calculated in this study (50,000 / 15,455,871 = 0.00324).
Table 3.5: Cost per Capita - Park Land Acquisition Impact Fees
Cost Cost per Acres per Cost per
Component Acre 1 Capita 2 Capita 3
Park Land Acquisition $435,600 0.00156 $677.39
1 Cost per acre estimated by the City of La Quinta
2 See Table 3.4
3 Cost per capita = cost per acre X acres per capita
Table 3.6: Cost per Capita - Park Improvements
Cost Cost per Acres per Cost per
Component Acre 1 Capita 2 Capita 3
Park Improvements $500,000 0.00156 $777.53
1 Cost per acre estimated by the City of La Quinta
2 See Table 3.4
3 Cost per capita = cost per acre X acres per capita
Table 3.7: Park Land Acquisition Impact Fees per Unit
Development Cost per Population Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Capita 2 per DU 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU $677.39 2.70 $1,828.95 $5.93 $1,834.88
Residential - Single Family Attached DU $677.39 2.30 $1,558.00 $5.05 $1,563.04
Residential Multi-Family/Other DU $677.39 2.20 $1,490.26 $4.83 $1,495.09
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 3.5
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per dwelling unit
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
City of La Quinta Page 3-7
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Park Improvement Impact Fees per Unit
Table 3.8 calculates park improvement impact fees per dwelli ng unit based on the cost per
capita from Table 3.6 and the population per dwelling unit from Table 2.1 and then adds a small
administrative charge to arrive at the adjuste d impact fee per unit. The 0.324% administrative
charge is intended to recover the cost of thi s study over five years. It is calculated by dividing
the cost of the study by estimated revenue that would be generated over five years by impact
fees calculated in this stud y (50,000 / 15,455,871 = 0.00324).
Projected Revenue
Table 3.9 shows projected revenue from the in-lieu fees and impact fees for park land
acquisition calculated in this chapter.Because the fees are different for subdivisions and non-
subdivision projects, the only way to project revenue from those fees is to make assumptions
about how many future units will be in subdivisions.
For purposes of projecting revenue, we are assuming that all new units in the Single Family
Detached and Single Family Attached c ategories will involve a subdivision, and that no future
units in the Multi-Family/Other category will involve a subdivision.Potential revenue from
future residential development is projected by applying the appropriate in-lieu fees or impact
fees per unit from Tables 3.3 and 3.7 to added units of residential development from Table 2.3.
Table 3.8: Park Improvement Impact Fees per Unit
Development Cost per Population Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Capita 2 per DU 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU $777.53 2.70 $2,099.33 $6.80 $2,106.13
Residential - Single Family Attached DU $777.53 2.30 $1,788.32 $5.79 $1,794.11
Residential Multi-Family/Other DU $777.53 2.20 $1,710.57 $5.54 $1,716.11
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 3.6
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per dwelling unit
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
City of La Quinta Page 3-8
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Table 3.10 shows projected revenue from the impact fees for park improvements calculated in
this chapter.Potential revenue from future residential development is projected by applying
the impact fees per unit from Ta ble 3.8 to added units of residential development from Table
2.3.
Updating the Fees
The in-lieu fees and impact fees calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated cost
of park land and improvements.We recommend that the fees be reviewed periodically and
adjusted as needed using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record
Construction Cost Index (CCI)
Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that
an agency establishing, increasing or imposin g impact fees, must make findings to :
Table 3.9: Projected Impact Fee Revenue from Park Land In-Lieu and Impact Fees
Development Fee per Future Projected
Type Units 1 Unit 2 Units 3 Revenue 4
Residential - Single Family Detached DU $3,539.79 5,186 18,357,361$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU $3,015.38 743 2,240,426$
Residential Multi-Family/Other DU $1,495.09 946 1,414,352$
Total 22,012,139$
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 Fee per unit for Single Family Detached and Single Family Attached from Table 3.3; Fee for
Multi-Family/Other from Table 3.7
3 See Table 2.3
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per dwelling unit
Table 3.10: Projected Impact Fee Revenue from Park Improvement Impact Fees
Development Fee/Unit of Future Projected
Type Units 1 Development Units Revenue
Residential - Single Family Detached DU $2,106.13 5,186 10,922,405$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU $1,794.11 743 1,333,026$
Residential Multi-Family/Other DU $1,716.11 946 1,623,438$
Total 13,878,869$
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 3.8
3 See Table 2.3
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per dwelling unit
City of La Quinta Page 3-9
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed;
b.The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is
imposed; and
c.The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development
project.
Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough
proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and
other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.)
The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those
requirements.
Purpose of the Fee:The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to mitigate the
impact of new development on the need for parks in La Quinta.
Use of the Fee.Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used t o provide additional parks to
mitigate the impacts of new development in the City.
As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may al so be used for
temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.
Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It
Is Imposed.The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional parks
to serve the needs of additional population associated with new residential development in La
Quinta.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on
Which the Fee Is Imposed.New residential development increases the need for parks to
maintain the existing level of service, as described earlier in this cha pter. Without additional
parks, the increase in population associated with new residential development would result in a
reduction in the level of service provided to all residents of the City.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to
the Development Project.The amount of the Parks and Recreation impact fees charged to a
residential development project will depend on the increase in population associated with that
project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of residential
development are based on the estimated average population per unit for that type of
development in La Quinta. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact
of that project on the need for parks in the City.
City of La Quinta Page 4-1
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Chapter 4.Community and Cultural Centers
This chapter calculates impact fees for community and cultural centers needed to serve future
development in La Quinta. This fee was formerly known as the Community Centers impact fe e.
The scope of the fee has been broadened in t his study to include cultural facilities such as the
La Quinta Museum. Previously, only portions o f the museum and Boys and Girls Club used as
meeting rooms were covered by the Community Centers impact fee.
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are ba sed on the City’s existing investment per capita
in community and cultural center facilities, and will be used to provide additional facilities to
maintain the current level of service as the City continues to grow.
Methodology
The method used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the standard -based method
discussed in Chapter 1. That method calculates impact fees using a level-of-service standard
and the estimated cost of new facilities needed to maintai n that standard.The level of service
standard used in this chapter is discussed below.
Demand Variable
A demand variable is an attribute of de velopment that is used to represent the impact of
development on a particular type of facility. See Chapter 2 f or a general discussion of demand
variables and demand factors.
Community and cultural center facilities are intended to serve residents of the C ity, so,
population will be used as the demand variable in calculating impact fees for those facilities.
Since the fees are based on the added population asso ciated with new residential
development, these impact fees will apply only to residential developm ent.
Service Area
La Quinta’s community and cultural centers serve the entire City, so impact fees for those
facilities will apply to all new residential development within the existing corporate boundaries
of the La Quinta.
Level of Service
The level of service standard used to calculate impact fees for community and cultural centers
in this chapter is the existing level of service, defined as the City’s current capital investment in
those facilities per capita of population. The fees calculat ed in this chapter are designed to
maintain that existing level of service as the City grows.
City of La Quinta Page 4-2
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Existing Facilities
Table 4.1 lists the City’s existing community and cultural center facilities and the estimated
value of the existing assets associated with those fac ilities, including land, buildings, and
furniture, fixtures and equipment . Costs for site improvements such as parking lots and
landscaping are included in th e building cost.
The City has acquired two sites adjacent to the La Quinta Museum for a Village Ar t Plaza and
Promenade, which are programmed for development in the 2020 -21 City budget. The cost of
those two sites is included in Table 4.1, but an estimated $3.3 million in future costs for
improvements on those sites is not included. The current balance in the Community Center
Impact Fee Fund is shown as an existing asset in Table 4.1 and represents additional f acilities
that will be constructed with funds t hat have previously been collected from development
projects in the City through impact fees.
Cost per Capita
Table 4.2 calculates an average replacement cost per capita for Community and Cultural Center
facilities based on the total impact fee cost bas is from Table 4.1 and the 2019 potential
population of the City. See Chapter 2 for a discussion of potential population.
Table 4.1: Existing Community and Cultural Center Facilities
Cost Building Est Building Est FF&E Site Est Site Impact Fee
Component Sq Ft 1 Value 2 Value 3 Acres 4 Value 5 Cost Basis 6
La Quinta Wellness Center 21,900 10,750,000$800,000$2.10 1,372,140$12,922,140$
La Quinta Museum/Historical Society 9,551 4,150,000$1,124,567$0.30 196,020$5,470,587$
Boys and Girls Club Building 5,000 2,200,320$16,018$1.50 980,100$3,196,438$
Village Art Plaza Site (Lumberyard)Actual Purchase Price 526,825$
Promenade Site on Ave Montezuma Actual Purchase Price 509,655$
Community Center Impact Fee Fund Balance 7 149,681$
Total 17,100,320$1,940,585$2,548,260$22,775,326$
1 Existing square feet from the City of La Quinta Asset Report
2 Estimated building value from City property insurance cost analysis
3 Estimated value of existing furniture, fixtures and equipment (FF&E) from the City property insurance cost
analysis and the City asset report
4 Site acres provided by the City of La Quinta
5 Estimated site value based on $653,400 per acre ($15.00 per square foot)
6 Impact fee cost basis = the sum of the amounts for the building, FF&E, and site value.
7 Community Center impact fee fund balance as of 12/31/18
City of La Quinta Page 4-3
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Impact Fees per Unit of Development
Table 4.3 shows the calculation of impact fees per unit of development by development type
for community and cultural center facilities. Impact fees per unit are calculated using the
impact fee cost per capita from Table 4.2 and population per unit factors from Table 2.1. A
small administrative charge is then added to arrive at the adjusted impact fee per unit. The
0.324% administrative charge is intended to recover the cost of this study over five years. It is
calculated by dividing the cost of the study b y estimated revenue that would be generated over
five years by impact fees calculated in this stu dy (50,000 / 15,455,871 = 0.00324).
Projected Revenue
Table 4.4 shows projected revenue from the impact fees calculated in this chapter. Potential
revenue for the added residential development shown in Tabl e 2.3 is projected by applying the
impact fees per unit from Table 4.3 to added units of residential development from Table 2.3.
Table 4.2: Community and Cultural Center Facilities - Cost per Capita
Total Impact Fee 2019 Potential Impact Fee Cost
Cost Basis 1 Population 2 per Capita 3
$22,775,326 64,531 $352.94
1 See Table 4.1
2 See Table 2.2
3 Cost per capita = total impact fee cost basis / 2019 potential population
Table 4.3: Community and Cultural Center Facilities - Impact Fees per Unit
Development Cost per Population Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Capita 2 per Unit 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 352.94$2.70 952.93$$3.09 $956.02
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 352.94$2.30 811.75$$2.63 $814.38
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 352.94$2.20 776.46$$2.52 $778.98
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 4.2
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per unit
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
City of La Quinta Page 4-4
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the current value of Community and
Cultural Center facilities. We recommend that the costs used i n this chapter be reviewed
periodically and adjusted in the event that updated costs become available.
Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report,Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that
an agency establishing, increasing or impo sing impact fees, must make findings to:
Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship b etween:
a.The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed;
b.The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is
imposed; and
c.The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development
project.
Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough
proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and
other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact F ees” in Chapter 1.)
The following paragraphs expla in how the impact fees calculated in this chapt er satisfy those
requirements.
Purpose of the Fee:The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to mitigate the
impact of new development on the need for community and cultural center facilitie s in La
Quinta.
Table 4.4: Community and Cultural Center Impact Fees - Projected Revenue
Development Adj Impact Future Projected
Type Units 1 Fee per Unit 2 Units 3 Revenue 4
Residential - Single Family Detached DU $956.02 5,186 4,957,895$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU $814.38 743 605,087$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU $778.98 946 736,911$
Total 6,299,893$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 4.3
3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per unit X future units
City of La Quinta Page 4-5
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Use of the Fee.Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional
community and cultural center facilities to mitigate the impacts of new development in the
City.
As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for
temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.
Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type o n Which It
Is Imposed.The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional
community and cultural cente r facilities to serve the needs of additional population associated
with new residential development in La Quinta.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on
Which the Fee Is Imposed.New development increase s the need for community and cultural
center facilities to maintain the existing level of service, as described earlier in this chapter.
Without additional community and cultural center facilities, the increas e in population
associated with new residential development would result in a reduction in the level of service
provided to all residents of the City.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to
the Development Project.The amount of the community and cu ltural center facilities impact
fees charged to a residential development project will depend on the increase in population
associated with that project.The fees per unit of development calculated in this ch apter for
each type of residential development are based on the population per unit for that type of
development in La Quinta. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact
of that project on the need for community and cultural center facilities in the City.
City of La Quinta Page 5-1
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Chapter 5.Library
This chapter calculates impact fees for the La Quinta Library, which is owned by the City of La
Quinta and operated by the Riverside County Library System. The existing Library was designe d
to serve the projected buildout population of the area within the existing cor porate boundaries
of the City.
Methodology
The method used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the plan-based method discussed in
Chapter 1. That method calculates impa ct fees by allocating the cost of specific facilities to the
development served by those facilities.In this case, since the Library is designed to serve a
buildout population, new development is effectively buying -in to the existing Library through
impact fees. The Library impact fees calculated in this chapter represent new developm ent’s
proportionate share of the cost of the existing Library facilities and materials.
Demand Variable
A demand variable is an attribute of development that is used to repre sent the impact of
development on a particular type of facility. See Chapter 2 f or a general discussion of demand
variables and demand factors.
The La Quinta Library is intended to serve residents of the City, so, population will be used as
the demand variable in calculating impact fees for that facility. Since population increase is
associated with new residential development, these impact fees will apply only to residential
development.
Service Area
La Quinta’s library serves the entire City, so the library impact fees calculated in this chapter will
apply to all new residential development within the existing corporate limits of the City.
Level of Service
The level of service used in calculating the Library impact fees is the relationship between the
cost of existing Library facilities and materials and the projected potential po pulation at
buildout of existing and future residential development in the area within La Quinta’s existing
corporate boundaries. That relationship is defined by th e cost per capita shown in Table 5.2 on
the next page.
Existing Facilities
Table 5.1 shows the original cost of the existing La Quinta Library building, the building site, the
facility’s furniture, fixtures and equipment, and the books and other materials in the library’s
City of La Quinta Page 5-2
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
collection.Costs for site improvements such as parking lots and landscapin g are included in the
building cost.
Actual interest on the Redevelopment Agency loan used to fund a portion of the cost of the La
Quinta Library is also shown in Table 5.1. That interest cost has not been adjusted for inflation,
which would have increased the amount.
Cost per Capita
Table 5.2 calculates an average cost per capita for Library facilities based on the total impact
fee cost basis from Table 5.1 and the buildout potential population o f the area within the
existing corporate boundaries of the City.
Impact Fees per Unit of Development
Table 5.3 shows the calculation of impact fees per unit of development by development type
for Library facilities and materials. Impact fees per unit ar e calculated using the impact fee cost
per capita from Table 5.2 and population per unit factors from Table 2.1 and then adds a small
administrative charge to arrive at the adjusted impact fee per unit. The 0.324% administrative
charge is intended to recover the cost of this study over five years. It is calculate d by dividing
Table 5.1: Existing Library Facility and Materials
Cost Building Original Est FF&E Site Original Impact Fee
Component Sq Ft 1 Bldg Cost 2 Value 3 Acres 4 Site Cost 5 Cost Basis 6
La Quinta Library Building 20,517 8,500,000$1,025,000 2.40 313,632$9,838,632$
Library Materials (71, 480 volume @ $25.00 each)1,787,000$
Nominal Interest on RDA Library Loan since 2005 435,319$
Total 12,060,951$
1 Existing square feet from the City of La Quinta Asset Report
2 Building value from City property insurance cost analysis
3 Estimated value of existing furniture, fixtures and equipment (FF&E) from the City property insurance cost
analysis and the City asset report
4 Site acres provided by the City of La Quinta
5 Original site cost based on $130,680 per acre ($3.00 per square foot)
6 Impact fee cost basis = the sum of the amounts for the building, FF&E, and site value.
Table 5.2: Library Facility and Materials - Cost per Capita
Total Impact Fee Buildout Potential Impact Fee Cost
Cost Basis 1 Population 2 per Capita 3
$12,060,951 82,323 $146.51
1 See Table 5.1
2 See Table 2.2; see discusion of potential population in Chapter 2
3 Cost per capita = total impact fee cost basis / 2019 potential population
City of La Quinta Page 5-3
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
the cost of the st udy by estimated revenue that would be generated over five years by impact
fees calculated in this study (50,000 / 15,455,871 = 0.00324).
Projected Revenue
Table 5.4 shows projected revenue from the impact fees calculated in this chapter. Potential
revenue for the added residential development shown in Table 2.3 is projected by applying the
adjusted impact fees per unit from Table 5.3 to added units of residential de velopment from
Table 2.3.
Construction of the La Quinta Library was funded, in part, by a loan from the City’s
Redevelopment Agency (RDA) before the State of California eliminated redevelopment
agencies in 2012. That loan is now in the portfolio of the Successor Agency that is responsible
for winding down the business of the now-dissolved La Quinta Redevelopment Agency.
Impact fees collected for the Library will be used primarily to repay principal and interest on the
outstanding debt to the Successor Agency. The impact fees may also be used to pay for library
materials.
Table 5.3: Library Facility and Materials - Impact Fees per Unit
Development Cost per Population Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Capita 2 per Unit 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 146.51$2.70 395.57$$1.28 $396.85
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 146.51$2.30 336.97$$1.09 $338.06
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 146.51$2.20 322.32$$1.04 $323.36
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 5.2
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per unit
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
Table 5.4: Library Facility and Materials Impact Fees - Projected Revenue
Development Adj Impact Future Projected
Type Units 1 Fee per Unit 2 Units 3 Revenue 4
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 396.85$5,186 2,058,076$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 338.06$743 251,178$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 323.36$946 305,900$
Total 2,615,154$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 5.3
3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per unit X future units
City of La Quinta Page 5-4
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
There is no set repayment schedule or interest rate for that loan, so it is not possible to
estimate the ultimate cost of retiring that debt. The Successor Agency charges interest at th e
rate earned by the City’s investment pool, and repayment is based on the availability of impact
fee revenue. The current balance on that loan is approximately $1.552 million.
The total cost of the facility continues to increases over time because of int erest on the balance
of the RDA loan. However, the interest rate being charged on that loan is quite low, and the
revenue projected in Table 5.4 appears adequate to cover principal and interest payments until
that loan is retired. Based on the rate at whic h Library impact fees have been collected since
2008, full repayment of the RDA loan is likely to take many years.
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calcu lated in this chapter are based on the original cost of the library facility
and those costs are fixed . However, interest on the outstanding loan continues to a ccumulate,
so we recommend that these fees be reviewed periodically and adjusted if necessary to reflect
actual costs.
Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report,Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that
an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees,must make findings to:
Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed;
b.The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is
imposed; and
c.The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development
project.
Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexu s” and “rough
proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and
other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.)
The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculate d in this chapter satisfy those
requirements.
Purpose of the Fee:The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to pay for new
development’s proportionate share of the cost of providi ng library facilities to the residents of
La Quinta.
City of La Quinta Page 5-5
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Use of the Fee.Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to repay the Redevelopment
Agency loan that was used to fund a portion of the cost of the La Quinta Library and to acquire
additional materials for the Library’s collection.
As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for
temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.
Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It
Is Imposed.The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to retire debt that was used
to pay for future development’s share of the cost of the La Quinta Library.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on
Which the Fee Is Imposed.The La Quinta Library was constructed with adequate capacity to
serve the anticipated buildout population of the area within the existing City Limits of La
Quinta. Those impact fees are imposed on residential development because added residential
development drives the growth of the City’s population.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost A ttributable to
the Development Project.The amount of the library impact fe es charged to a residential
development project will depend on the increase in population associated with that project.
The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of residential
development are based on the population per un it for that type of development in La Quinta.
Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects that project’s proportionate share of
the cost of library facilities in the City.
City of La Quinta Page 6-1
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Chapter 6.Civic Center
This chapter calculates impact fees for the La Quinta Civic Center.When the most recent Civic
Center expansion was constructed, the City expected that the expanded facility would have
adequate capacity to serve all planned development within the corporate boundaries of the
existing City through buildout.However, that expectation has changed as the City began to
bring in-house more services that were formerly contracted out. So now, space in the Civic
Center is at a premium and additional space will be required as the City continues to grow.
Methodology
The method used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the standard-based method
discussed in Chapter 1. That method calculates impact fees using a level-of-service standard
and the estimated cost of new facilities needed to maintain that standar d.The level of service
standard used in this chapter is discussed be low.
Demand Variable
A demand variable is an attribute of development that is used to represent the impact of
development on a particular type of facility. See Chapter 2 for a general d iscussion of demand
variables and demand factors.
The City departments housed in the Civic Center provide services of one kind or another to all
private development in the City, but most of them are not line departments providing services
directly to City residents and businesses. In a number of cases, those departments are
responsible for management, administrative and support functions essential to City
government.
It is self-evident that the need for those functions in any city generally increases as th e City
grows. But given the variety of functions located in the Civic Center, and the indirect
relationship between development and the demand for some of those services, no single
attribute of development neatly represents the impact of development on spa ce needs in that
facility. Thus, it is reasonable to use a generalize d measure of development to represent service
demand for purposes of calculating impact fees for the Civic Center.
Acreage is the most common attribute of all types of development, and d eveloped acreage will
be used here as the demand variable representin g the impact of development on the need for
Civic Center facilities.
Service Area
La Quinta’s Civic Center serves the entire City, so the Civic Center impact fees calculated in this
chapter will apply to all new private development within the existing corporate boundaries of
the City.
City of La Quinta Page 6-2
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Level of Service
The level of service standard used to calculate Civic Center impact fees in this chapter is the
existing level of service, defined as th e City’s current capital investment in those facilities per
developed acre. The fees calculated in this chapter are designed to maintain that existing level
of service as the City grows.
Existing Facilities
Table 6.1 shows the original cost of the existing La Quinta Civic Center building, the building
site, and the facility’s furniture, fixtures and equipment.Costs for site improvements such as
parking lots and landscaping are included in the building cost.
Cost per Developed Acre
Table 6.2 on the next page calculates an average cost per developed acre f or the Civic Center
using the impact fee cost basis from Table 6.1 and the acreage of existing private development
within the corporate boundaries of the City. The developed acreage shown in Table 6.2
excludes public facilities, schools and parks which do not impact the n eed for Civic Center
facilities, and includes only 5% of golf course acreage. Golf courses have a very limited impact
on the demand for City services housed in the Civic Center.
Table 6.1: Existing Civic Center Facility
Cost Building Building Est FF&E Site Site Impact Fee
Component Sq Ft 1 Cost 2 Value 3 Acres 4 Cost 5 Cost Basis 6
Civic Center 54,553 30,297,716$2,000,000 5.50 718,740$33,016,456$
Total 33,016,456$
1 Existing square feet from the City of La Quinta Asset Report
2 Original building cost by the City of La Quinta
3 Estimated value of existing furniture, fixtures and equipment from the City property insurance cost
analysis and the City asset report
4 Site acres provided by the City of La Quinta
5 Estimated site value based on original costs of $130,680 per acre ($3.00 per square foot)
6 Impact fee cost basis = the sum of the amounts for the building, FF&E, and site value.
Table 6.2: Civic Center - Cost per Developed Acre
Impact Fee Adjusted Existing Cost per
Cost Basis 1 Dev Acreage 2 per Acre 3
$33,016,456 6,597 $5,004.88
1 See Table 6.1
2 Adjusted existsing developed acreage excludes public facilities, schools,
parks and includes 5% of golf course acreage; see Table 2.2
3 Cost per acre = impact fee cost basis / adjusted existing developed acreage
City of La Quinta Page 6-3
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Impact Fees per Unit of Development
Table 6.3 shows the calculation of impac t fees per unit of development by development type
for the Civic Center. Impact fees per unit are calculated using the impac t fee cost per acre from
Table 6.2 and acres-per-unit factors from Table 2.1, except for golf courses which are included
at a rate of 0.05 acres per acre of golf course. No impact fees are calculated for public facilities,
schools and parks which do not im pact the Civic Center.
Table 6.3 also adds a small administrati ve charge to arrive at the adjusted impact fee per unit.
The 0.324% administrative charge is intended to recover the cost of this study over five years. It
is calculated by dividing the cost of the study by estimated revenue that would be generated
over five years by impact fees calculated in this study (50,000 / 15,455,871 = 0.00324).
Projected Revenue
Table 6.4 shows projected revenue from the impact fees calculated in this chapter. Potentia l
revenue for the added private development shown in Table 2.3 is projected by applying the
impact fees per unit from Table 6.3 to added units of development from Table 2.3.
Table 6.3: Civic Center - Impact Fees per Unit
Development Cost per Acres Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Acre 2 per Unit 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 5,004.88$0.245 1,226.20$$3.97 1,230.17$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 5,004.88$0.222 1,111.08$$3.60 1,114.68$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 5,004.88$0.125 625.61$$2.03 627.64$
Office/Medical KSF 5,004.88$0.104 520.51$$1.69 522.19$
General Commercial KSF 5,004.88$0.104 520.51$$1.69 522.19$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 5,004.88$0.139 695.68$$2.25 697.93$
Public Facilities Acre 0.00$0.270 0.00$$0.00 0.00$
Public Schools Acre 0.00$1.000 0.00$$0.00 0.00$
Parks Acre 0.00$1.000 0.00$$0.00 0.00$
Golf Courses Acre 5,004.88$0.050 250.24$$0.81 251.05$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest
room or suite
2 See Table 6.2
3 Acres per unit; see Table 2.1; for golf courses, the share of acreage impacting the Civic Center is estimated
at 5%, so 0.05 acres per acre of golf course is used to calculate the
impact fee for golf courses
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per unit
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
City of La Quinta Page 6-4
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calcu lated in this chapter are based largely on the original cost of the Civic
Center, and those costs are fixed, so there is no need to review this fee until the City’s next
impact fee update.
Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report,Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that
an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees,must make findings to:
Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed;
b.The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is
imposed; and
c.The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development
project.
Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough
proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and
other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.)
Table 6.4: Civic Center Impact Fees - Projected Revenue
Development Adj Impact Future Projected
Type Units 1 Fee per Unit 2 Units 3 Revenue 4
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 1,230.17$5,186 6,379,656$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 1,114.68$743 828,210$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 627.64$946 593,745$
Office/Medical KSF 522.19$512 267,363$
General Commercial KSF 522.19$1,358 709,140$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 697.93$1,360 949,188$
Golf Courses Acre 251.05$817 205,112$
Total 9,932,414$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area;
Room = guest room or suite
2 See Table 6.3
3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per unit X future units
City of La Quinta Page 6-5
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those
requirements.
Purpose of the Fee:The purpose of the impact fees calcu lated in this chapter is to pay for new
development’s proportionate share of the cost of providing Civic Cente r facilities to serve
residents and businesses in La Quinta.
Use of the Fee.Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to pay for future expansion of
the Civic Center.
As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for
temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.
Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It
Is Imposed.The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used for future expansion of the
La Quinta Civic Center to meet the needs of additional development in the Ci ty.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on
Which the Fee Is Imposed.The La Quinta Civic Center serves all private development in the City
and the need for space in the Civic Center increases as the City grows.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to
the Development Project.The amount of the Civic Center impact fees charged to a
development project will depend on the amount of added developed acreage a ssociated with
that project. The fees per unit of development calcul ated in this chapter for each type of
development are based on the estimated a cres per unit for that type of development in La
Quinta. Thus, the fee charged to a development project refle cts that project’s proportionate
share of the cost of Civic Center facilities in the City.
City of La Quinta Page 7-1
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
Chapter 7.Maintenance Facilities
This chapter calculates impact fees for the corporate yard maintenance facilities and equipment
needed to serve future development in La Quinta.
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the new development’s share of the
total cost of existing and planned maintenance facilities including equipment .The City has
developed a master plan for future improvements to the m aintenance facilities at the City’s
corporate yard. Those improvements are to be added in two phases. The existing facilities are
considered Phase I. Future improvements are designated Phase II and Phase III.
Methodology
The method used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the plan-based method discussed in
Chapter 1.That method calculates impact fees by allocating the cost of specific facilities to the
development served by those facilities.
In this chapter, separate impact fees will be calculated for the portions of the facilities devoted
to its two primary functions:street maintenance and park maintenance.
Demand Variable
A demand variable is an attribute of development that is used to represent the impact of
development on a particular type o f facility. See Chapter 2 for a general discussion of demand
variables and demand factors.
Because separate impact fees are being calculated for street maintenance facilities and park
maintenance facilities, two demand variables are used in this chapter. C osts for park
maintenance facilities are allocated using potential population, t he same demand variable used
for parks. And costs for street maintenance facilities are allocated using weighted peak hour
trips, the same demand variable used for transportati on facilities.
Service Area
La Quinta’s maintenance facilities serve the entire City, so the impact fees calculated in this
chapter will apply to all new development within the existing corporate boundaries of the City.
Level of Service
For the types of facilities covered in this chapter, level-of-service standards are generally
implied rather than explicit. That is, decisions are typically made to build required facilities
without formally adopting a standard.The level of service used here to calculate impact fees for
maintenance facilities is the level service implied by the relationship of facilities and
development at buildout of the area within the existing corporate boundaries of La Quinta.
City of La Quinta Page 7-2
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
Facility Needs
Table 7.1 shows the estimated value of the City’s existing corporate yard maintenance facilities,
and the estimated cost of future improvements in Phases II and III. The value of existing site
improvements such as parking lots and landscaping are included in the value of the existing
facilities.
Table 7.2 shows a partial list of the City’s existing maintenance equipment .
The impact fee cost basis shown in Table 7.2 is the original cost of the equipment, all of which
has been purchased in the last two years.
City staff estimate that approximately 20% of the City’s maintenance facilities are used for park
maintenance and 80% are used for street maintenance. Consequently, in the impact fee
Table 7.1: Maintenance Facility
Cost Facility Site Est Site Impact Fee
Component Value/Cost 1 Acres 2 Value 3 Cost Basis 4
Existing Maintenance Facilities 3,768,443$2.8 1,219,680$4,988,123$
Future Improvements (Phase 2)3,183,903$3,183,903$
Future Improvements (Phase 3)4,018,794$4,018,794$
Total 12,190,820$
1 The value of existing maintenance facilities based on original cost; cost for Phase II
improvements from the 2019/20 and 2020/21 CIP; cost for Phase III improvements
estimated by the City of La Quinta
2 Site acres provided by the City of La Quinta
3 Estimated site value based on $10.00 per square foot ($435,600 per acre)
4 Impact fee cost basis = the sum of the facility value/cost and site value
Table 7.2: Existing Maintenance Equipment
Equipment Impact Fee
Year Type Make Model Cost Basis 1
2018 Dump Truck Ford F650 88,416$
2017 Boom Truck Dodge Ram 5500 109,500$
2018 Backhoe John Deere 310HL 131,640$
2018 Skid Steer Quinn Cat 232D 44,149$
2017 Wood Chipper Vermeer 23,000$
2017 Gator Utility Veh.John Deere 8,600$
2018 Stump Grinder Vermeer 22,500$
2018 Dump Trailer (Single Axle)10 Foot 5,700$
2019 Dump Trailer (Double Axle)10 Foot 7,600$
2018 Trailer Butler 3,200$
2019 Trailer Big Tex 16 Foot 3,600$
Total 447,905$
Source: City of La Quinta Facilities Department
1 Impact fee cost basis = original cost
City of La Quinta Page 7-3
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
calculations that follow, 20% of the impa ct fee cost basis for the facilities and equipment will be
attributed to park maintenance and 80% will be attributed to street maintenance.
Park Maintenance Facilities Cost per Capita
Table 7.3 calculates an average cost per capita for the park maintenance share of the City’s
maintenance facilities and equipment,based on 20% of the total impact fee cost basis from
Tables 7.1 and 7.2,and the City’s projected buildout potential population from Table 2.4. As
explained earlier, potential population is the same demand variable used to calculate impact
fees for parks in Chapter 3. See Chapter 2 for a discussion of potential population.
Street Maintenance Facilities Cost per Weighted Peak Hour Trip
Table 7.4 calculates an average cost per weighted peak hour vehicle trip for the street
maintenance share of the City’s main tenance facilities and equipment, based on 80% of the
total impact fee cost basi s from Tables 7.1 and 7.2,and the City’s projected buildout weighted
peak hour trips from Table 2.4. As explained earlier,weighted peak hour trips are also used as
the demand variable in calculating street impact fees in Chapter 9.See Chapter 2 for a
discussion of weighted peak hour trips.
Table 7.3: Park Maintenance Facilities - Cost per Capita
Impact Fee Park Maint Park Maint Buildout Cost per
Cost Basis 1 Share 2 Cost Basis 3 Potential Pop 4 per Capita 5
$12,638,725 20%$2,527,745 82,323 $30.71
1 Sum of impact fee cost basis from Tables 7.1 and 7.2
2 Share of facilities devoted to park maintenance estimated by the City of La Quinta
3 Park maintenance cost basis = impact fee cost basis X park maintenance share
4 Buildout potential population; see Table 2.4
5 Cost per capita = park maintenance cost basis / buildout potential population
Table 7.4: Street Maintenance Facilities - Cost per Weighted Peak Hour Trip
Impact Fee Street Maint Street Maint Buildout Wtd Cost per Wtd
Cost Basis 1 Share 2 Cost Basis 3 Peak Hour Trips 4 Peak Hour Trip 5
$12,638,725 80%$10,110,980 52,362 $193.10
1 Sum of impact fee cost basis from Tables 7.1 and 7.2
2 Share of facilities devoted to street maintenance estimated by the City of La Quinta
3 Street maintenance cost basis = impact fee cost basis X street maintenance share
4 Buildout weighted peak hour trips; see Table 2.4
5 Cost per weighted peak hour trip = street maintenance cost basis / buildout weighted peak hour
trips
City of La Quinta Page 7-4
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
Impact Fees per Unit of Development –Park Maintenance Facilities
Table 7.5 shows the calculation of impact fees per unit of development by development type
for park maintenance facilities .Impact fees per unit are calculated using the impact fee cost per
capita from Table 7.3 and population-per-unit factors from Table 2.1.This portion of the
maintenance facilities impact fees will only apply to residential development because
population increase is associated with n ew residential development.
Table 7.5 also adds a small administrative charge to arrive at the adjusted impact fee per unit.
The 0.324% administrative charge is intended to rec over the cost of this study over five years. It
is calculated by dividing the co st of the study by estimated revenue that would be generated
over five years by impact fees calculated in this study (50,000 / 15,455,871 = 0.00324).
Table 7.5: Park Maintenance Facilities - Impact Fees per Unit
Development Cost per Population Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Capita 2 per Unit 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 30.71$2.70 82.90$0.27$83.17$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 30.71$2.30 70.62$0.23$70.85$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 30.71$2.20 67.55$0.22$67.77$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 7.3
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per unit
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
City of La Quinta Page 7-5
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
Impact Fees per Unit of Development –Street Maintenance Facilities
Table 7.6 shows the calculation of impact fees per unit of development by development type
for street maintenance facilities. Impact fees per unit are calculated using the impact fee cost
per weighted peak hour trip from Table 7.4 and weighted peak hour trips-per-unit factors from
Table 2.1.
Table 7.6 also adds a small administrative charge o n the same basis as in Table 7.5.
Table 7.6 calculates impact fees for public facilities, schools, and parks, even thou gh the City
cannot collect impact fees from those types of development. On the n ext page, costs allocated
to public facilities and parks are re -allocated to private development. It is not necessary to
reallocate costs from schools. No additional schools ar e planned for the service area defined in
this study, so no costs were allocated to schools.
In Table 7.7 on the next page , the street maintenance facility costs initially allocate d to public
facilities and parks are re -allocated to private development by adjusting the cost per weighted
peak hour trip for private development. Reallocation is justified by the fact that the demand
associated with public facilities and parks is a secon dary impact of private development,
because the need for public facilities and parks is created by private development.
Table 7.6: Street Maintenance Facilities - Impact Fees per Unit (Before Reallocation)
Development Cost per Wtd Wtd Pk Hr Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Pk Hr Trip 2 Trips per Unit 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 193.10$1.16 223.99$0.73$224.72$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 193.10$0.89 171.86$0.56$172.41$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 193.10$0.66 127.44$0.41$127.86$
Office/Medical KSF 193.10$1.90 366.89$1.19$368.07$
General Commercial KSF 193.10$2.34 451.85$1.46$453.31$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 193.10$0.54 104.27$0.34$104.61$
Public Facilities KSF 193.10$2.48 478.88$1.55$480.43$
Schools Acre 193.10$0.79 152.55$0.49$153.04$
Parks Acre 193.10$0.51 98.48$0.32$98.80$
Golf Courses Acre 193.10$0.27 52.14$0.17$52.31$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area;
Room = guest room or suite; Acre = net developed acre
2 See Table 7.4
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per wieghted peak hour trip X weighted peak hour trips per unit
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
City of La Quinta Page 7-6
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
In Table 7.7 above,costs attributed to public facilities are re-allocated to all types of private
development while costs attributed to parks are re-allocated only to residential development.
Table 7.8 on the next page recalculates the street maintenance impact fees per unit of
development for private development using the adjusted cost per weighted peak hour trip for
street maintenance facilities from Table 7.7 .Table 7.8 also includes the adjustment for an
administrative charge on the same basis as in Tables 7.4 and 7.5.The increase in impact fees
resulting from the reallocation amounts to 2.1%for residential development and 1.7% for non-
residential development.
Table 7.7: Street Maintenance Facilities - Cost per Weighted Peak Hour Trip with Reallocation
Initial Cost Reallocated Reallocated Adjusted
Development per Weighted Pub Fac Cost per Parks Cost per Cost per
Type Units 1 Pk Hr Trip 2 Wtd Pk Hr Trip 3 Wtd Pk Hr Trip 4 Wtd Pk Hr Trip 5
Residential - Single Family Detached DU $193.10 3.25 0.73 197.08$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU $193.10 3.25 0.73 197.08$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU $193.10 3.25 0.73 197.08$
Office/Medical KSF $193.10 3.25 196.35$
General Commercial KSF $193.10 3.25 196.35$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room $193.10 3.25 196.35$
Public Facilities KSF Reallocated 0.00$
Schools Acre No Allocation 0.00$
Parks Acre Reallocated 0.00$
Golf Courses Acre $193.10 3.25 196.35$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or
suite; Acre = net developed acre
2 See Table 7.6
3 Reallocated public facilities cost per weighted peak hour trip = 84 KSF of future Public Facilities X $480.83 per
KSF = $40,356.44 / 12,407 weighted peak hour trips for receiving facilities = $3.25 per weighted peak hour trip
4 Reallocated parks cost per weighted peak hour trip = 54 acres of future Parks X $98.80 per acre = $5,335.14 /
7,301 weighted peak hour trips for receiving (residential) development =$0.73 per weighted peak hour trip
City of La Quinta Page 7-7
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
Park Maintenance Facilities Impact Fees -Projected Revenue
Table 7.9 shows projected revenue from the park maintenance facilities impact fees calculated
in this chapter. Potential revenue is projected by applying the impact fees per unit from Table
7.5 to added units of residential development from Table 2.3.
Street Maintenance Facilities Impact Fees -Projected Revenue
Table 7.10 shows projected revenue from the street maintenance facilities impact fees
calculated in this chapter. Potential revenue is projected by applying the adjusted impact fees
per unit from Table 7.8 to added units of development from Table 2.3.
Table 7.8: Street Maintenance Facilities - Impact Fees per Unit (After Reallocation)
Development Cost per Wtd Wtd Pk Hr Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Pk Hr Trip 2 Trips per Unit 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 197.08$1.16 228.61$0.74 229.35$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 197.08$0.89 175.40$0.57 175.97$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 197.08$0.66 130.07$0.42 130.49$
Office/Medical KSF 196.35$1.90 373.07$1.21 374.27$
General Commercial KSF 196.35$2.34 459.46$1.49 460.95$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 196.35$0.54 106.03$0.34 106.37$
Public Facilities KSF 0.00$2.48 0.00$0.00 0.00$
Schools Acre 0.00$0.79 0.00$0.00 0.00$
Parks Acre 0.00$0.51 0.00$0.00 0.00$
Golf Courses Acre 196.35$0.27 53.01$0.17 53.19$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room
or suite; Acre = net developed acre
2 See Table 7.7
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per wieghted peak hour trip X weighted peak hour trips per unit
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
Table 7.9: Park Maintenance Facilities Impact Fees - Projected Revenue
Development Adj Impact Future Projected
Type Units 1 Fee per Unit 2 Units 3 Revenue 4
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 83.17$5,186 431,333$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 70.85$743 52,642$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 67.77$946 64,111$
Total 548,086$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 7.5
3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per unit X future units
City of La Quinta Page 7-8
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
The combined projected revenue of $3 million for the park maintenance and street
maintenance facilities impact fees amounts to approximately 42 % of the estimated $7.2 million
cost of future improvements to the City’s maintenance facilities shown in Table 7.1.The
balance of the cost will have to come from non-impact fee sources.
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based in part on estimated costs of futu re
maintenance facilities improvements. We recommend that these fees be reviewed periodically
and adjusted in the event that up dated costs become available.
Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report,Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that
an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:
Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed;
b.The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is
imposed; and
c.The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development
project.
Table 7.10: Street Maintenance Facilities Impact Fees - Projected Revenue
Development Adj Impact Future Projected
Type Units 1 Fee per Unit 2 Units 3 Revenue 4
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 229.35$5,186 1,189,434$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 175.97$743 130,746$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 130.49$946 123,448$
Office/Medical KSF 374.27$512 191,629$
General Commercial KSF 460.95$1,358 625,968$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 106.37$1,360 144,667$
Golf Courses Acre 53.19$817 43,453$
Total 2,449,345$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area;
Room = guest room or suite; Acre = net developed acre
2 See Table 7.8
3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per unit X future units
City of La Quinta Page 7-9
Development Impact Fee Study
September 23, 2019
Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough
proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions beari ng on impact fees and
other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.)
The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those
requirements.
Purpose of the Fee:The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to pay for new
development’s proportionate share of the cost of providing maintenance facilities to serve the
City.
Use of the Fee.Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to pay for additional
maintenance facilities needed serve new development in La Quinta .
As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for
temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.
Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type o n Which It
Is Imposed.The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to pay for additional
maintenance facilities needed to serve new development in La Quinta.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on
Which the Fee Is Imposed.New development increases the need for parks and streets and the
facilities supporting their maintenance. The City’s existing maintenance facilities don ’t have the
capacity to support future growth in La Quinta.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost A ttributable to
the Development Project.The amount of the maintenance facilities impact fees charged to a
development project will depend on the amount of added potential population and weighted
peak hour vehicle trips generated by that project . The fees per unit of development calculated
in this chapter for each type of development are based on the estimated increase in potential
population and weighted peak hour trips per unit of development . Thus, the fee charged to a
development project reflects that project’s proportionate share of the cost of additional
maintenance facilities needed to serve new development in the City.
City of La Quinta Page 8-1
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Chapter 8.Fire Protection
This chapter calculates impact fees for La Quinta’s fire protection facilities. The City contracts
with the Riverside County Fire Department fo r fire protection, fire prevention, rescue, Fire
Marshal and medical emergency services. The City builds and owns the fire stations in La
Quinta. Those stations are part of an integrated system of fire protection facilities used by the
Riverside County Fire Department to provide fire protection to La Quinta and surrounding
communities, including unincorporated portions of the County.
There are three existing fire stations in the City and preliminary plans call for a fourth fire
station to be constructed in or near the southeastern quadrant of La Quinta. That station will be
needed to provide an acceptable level of service to development in that part of the City and in
portions of unincorporated Riverside County. This study assumes that the cost of the fourt h fire
station will be shared equally between La Quinta and Riverside County.
Firefighting apparatus assigned to fire stations in La Quinta is owned by the County. Although
the City contributes to the cost of some apparatus through its contract payments to the
Riverside County Fire Department, costs for apparatus and vehicles are not included in the cost
basis for impact fees in this chapter.
Methodology
The method used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the plan-based method discussed in
Chapter 1. That method calculates impact fees by allocating the cost of specific facilities to the
development served by those facilities.In this case, the cost of existing and future fire stations
will be allocated to existing and future development so that all development in the City will
share proportionately in the cost of those facilities. The fi re protection impact fees calculated in
this chapter represent new development’s proportionate share of the cost of La Quinta’s fire
protection facilities.
Service Area
Although individual fire stations are assigned to provide the initial emergency respo nse in a
specific area, resources from multiple f ire stations are often needed to provide an adequate
response to an emergency call. A first alarm response to a smal l structure fire can require
resources from as many as five fire stations. So it makes sens e to treat the entire City as a single
service area for purposes of calculating fire protection impact fees.
That approach is further supported by the fact that cal culating separate impact fees for
individual fire stations could result in substantially di fferent impact fees for development in
different parts of the City receiving essentially the same level of service. This analysis will
allocate costs for fire protec tion facilities citywide, so the impact fees for a particular type of
development will be t he same throughout the City.
City of La Quinta Page 8-2
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Level of Service
The critical measure of level of service for fire protection and emergency medical services is
emergency response time. The number of fire stations needed to serve a particular area with
acceptable response times is determined by specific condition s within the area, and is affected
heavily by the size of the area to be served. In La Quinta’s case, the City and the Riversi de
County Fire Department have determined the number and location of fire stations needed t o
provide an acceptable level of service in the City. The impact fee analysis in this chapter is
based on the number of fire stations needed to serve the City at bui ldout.
Demand Variable
A demand variable is an attribute of development that is used t o represent the impact of
development on a particular type of facility. See Chapter 2 for a general discussion of demand
variables and demand factors.
The cost of capital facilities (i.e., fire stations) needed to provide fire protection and emergency
medical response services in the City with acceptable response times depends to a large extent
on the size of the area to be served. Acreage is the most common measure o f land area, so
developed acreage will be used as the demand variable in calculating impact fees for fire
protection.
Facility Needs
Table 8.1 on the next page lists existing and future fire protection facilities in La Quinta,
including costs for buildings , fire station sites and furniture fixtures and equipment (FF&E). The
impact fee cost basis shown in the right-hand column of Table 8.1 will be used in the impact fee
calculations. As indicated above, costs for apparatus and vehicles are not included in th is
analysis.
City of La Quinta Page 8-3
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Cost per Developed Acre
Table 8.2 calculates an average cost per developed a cre for fire protection facilities base d on
the total impact fee cost basis from Table 8.1 and the projected acreage of development to be
served at buildout within t he existing corporate boundaries.
The developed acreage shown in Table 8.2 encompasses all development expected within the
existing corporate boundaries of the City at buildout, including public facilities, schools, parks
and golf courses. However, while parks and golf courses have the potential to create a demand
for emergency medical services , they present a very low risk of fires relative to their acreage.
Consequently, only 5% of park and golf course acreage is included in the adjusted buildout
developed acreage in Table 8.2.
Table 8.1: Existing and Future Fire Stations
Year Building Est Building Est FF&E Site Est Site Impact Fee
Facility Completed Sq Ft 1 Cost/Value 2 Cost/Value 3 Acres 4 Cost/Value 5 Cost Basis 6
Fire Station 32 2009 7,500 3,500,066$100,000$1.2 522,720$4,122,786$
Fire Station 70 1985 5,750 1,298,269$170,000$1.3 566,280$2,034,549$
Fire Station 70 Expansion Future 1,200 480,000$0$0.0 0$480,000$
Fire Station 93 2002 7,690 2,420,350$125,650$1.5 653,400$3,199,400$
Southeast Fire Station 7 Future 7,000 4,550,000$100,000$1.5 653,400$2,651,700$
Total 12,488,435$
1 Building square feet provided by the City of La Quinta
2 Building value for existing stations from the City property schedule ; building cost for future station based on
$650 per square foot including site improvements
3 Value of existing furniture, fixtures and equipment (FF&E) from the City property schedule; estimated cost of
FF&E for the future Southeast fire station based on existing stations
4 Site acres provided by the City of La Quinta
5 Cost or value of site estimated based on $10.00 per sq ft ($435,600 per acre)
6 Impact fee cost basis = sum of building, FF&E and site cost or value
7 Impact fee cost basis for Southeast fire station assumes 50% of the cost will be paid by Riverside County
Table 8.2: Fire Protection Facilities - Cost per Developed Acre
Impact Fee Adjusted Buildout Cost per
Cost Basis 1 Dev Acreage 2 per Acre 3
$12,488,435 8,766 $1,424.73
1 See Table 8.1
2 Adjusted buildout developed acreage includes 100% of developed acreage
for all other development types and 5% of acreage for parks and golf courses;
see Table 2.4
3 Cost per acre = impact fee cost basis / adjusted buildout developed acreage
City of La Quinta Page 8-4
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Impact Fees per Unit of Development
Table 8.3 shows the calculat ion of impact fees per unit of developm ent by development type
for the fire protection. Impact fees per unit are calculated using the impact fee cost per acre
from Table 8.2 and acres-per-unit factors from Table 2.1, except for parks and golf courses
which are included at a rate of 0.05 acres per developed acre.
Table 8.3 also adds a small administrative charge to arrive at the adjusted impact fee per unit.
The 0.324% administrative charge is intended to recover the cost of this study over five years. It
is calculated by dividing the cost of th e study by estimated revenue that would be generated
over five years by impact fees calculated in this study (50,000 / 15,455,871 = 0.00324).
Note that Table 8.3 calculates impact fees for public facilities, schools,and parks, even though
the City cannot collect impact fees from those types of development. On the next page, costs
allocated to public facilities and parks are re -allocated to private development. It is not
necessary to reallocate costs from schools. No a dditional schools are planned for the service
area defined in this study, so no costs were allocated to schools.
In Table 8.4 on the next page, the fire protection facilities costs initially allocated to public
facilities and parks are re-allocated to private development by adjusting the cost per acre for
private development. That reallocation is justified by the fact that the need for public facilities
and parks is created by private development.
Table 8.3: Fire Protection Facilities - Impact Fees per Unit (Before Reallocation)
Development Cost per Acres Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Acre 2 per Unit 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 1,424.73$0.245 349.06$1.13$350.19$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 1,424.73$0.222 316.29$1.02$317.31$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 1,424.73$0.125 178.09$0.58$178.67$
Office/Medical KSF 1,424.73$0.104 148.17$0.48$148.65$
General Commercial KSF 1,424.73$0.104 148.17$0.48$148.65$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 1,424.73$0.139 198.04$0.64$198.68$
Public Facilities KSF 1,424.73$0.270 384.68$1.25$385.92$
Public Schools Acre 1,424.73$1.000 1,424.73$4.62$1,429.34$
Parks Acre 1,424.73$0.050 71.24$0.23$71.47$
Golf Courses Acre 1,424.73$0.050 71.24$0.23$71.47$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area;
Room = guest room or suite
2 See Table 8.2
3 Acres per unit; see Table 2.1; for parks and golf courses, the share of acreage impacting
fire protection facilities is estimated at 5%, so 0.050 acres per acre is used to calculate
impact fees for those development types
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per acre X acres per unit
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
City of La Quinta Page 8-5
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
In Table 8.4 above, costs attributed to public facilitie s are re-allocated to all types of priv ate
development while costs attributed to parks are re -allocated only to residential development.
Table 8.5 on the next page r ecalculates impact fees per unit of development for private
development using the adjusted cost per acre for fire protection facil ities from Table 8.4. Table
8.5 also includes the adjustment for an administrative charge on the same basis as in Table 8.3.
The increase in impact fees resulting from reallocation amounts to 5.5% for residential
development and 1.4% for non-residential development.
Table 8.4: Fire Protection Facilities - Cost per Acre with Reallocation
Initial Cost Reallocated Reallocated Adjusted
Development per Pub Fac Cost Parks Cost Cost per
Type Units 1 Acre 2 per Acre 3 per Acre 4 Acre 5
Residential - Single Family Detached DU $1,424.73 20.08 58.13 1,502.93$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU $1,424.73 20.08 58.13 1,502.93$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU $1,424.73 20.08 58.13 1,502.93$
Office/Medical KSF $1,424.73 20.08 1,444.80$
General Commercial KSF $1,424.73 20.08 1,444.80$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room $1,424.73 20.08 1,444.80$
Public Facilities KSF Reallocated 0.00$
Schools Acre No Allocation 0.00$
Parks Acre Reallocated 0.00$
Golf Courses Acre $1,424.73 20.08 1,444.80$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest
room or suite; Acre = net developed acre
2 See Table 8.3
3 Reallocated public facilities cost per acre = 120 Acres of future Public Facilities X $1,424.73 per acre =
= $170.967.60 / 8.516 acres for receiving facilities = $20.08 per acre
4 Reallocated parks cost per acre = 296 acres of future Parks X $1,424.73 per acre = $421,720.08 /
7,255 acres for receiving (residential) development = $58.13 per acre
City of La Quinta Page 8-6
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Projected Revenue
Table 8.6 shows projected revenue from the impact fees calculated in this chapter. Potential
revenue for the added private development shown in Table 2.3 is projected by applying the
adjusted impact fees per unit from Table 8.5 to added units of development from Table 2.3
Table 8.5: Fire Protection Facilities - Impact Fees per Unit (After Reallocation)
Development Cost per Acres Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Acre 2 per Unit 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 1,502.93$0.245 368.22$1.19$369.41$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 1,502.93$0.222 333.65$1.08$334.73$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 1,502.93$0.125 187.87$0.61$188.47$
Office/Medical KSF 1,444.80$0.104 150.26$0.49$150.75$
General Commercial KSF 1,444.80$0.104 150.26$0.49$150.75$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 1,444.80$0.139 200.83$0.65$201.48$
Public Facilities KSF 0.00$0.270 0.00$0.00$0.00$
Public Schools Acre 0.00$1.000 0.00$0.00$0.00$
Parks Acre 0.00$0.050 0.00$0.00$0.00$
Golf Courses Acre 1,444.80$0.050 72.24$0.23$72.47$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area;
Room = guest room or suite
2 See Table 8.4
3 Acres per unit; see Table 2.1; for parks and golf courses, the share of acreage impacting
fire protection facilities is estimated at 5%, so 0.050 acres per acre is used to calculate
impact fees for those development types
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per acre X acres per unit
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
City of La Quinta Page 8-7
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
The total impact fee revenue projected in Table 8.4 is about $280,000 less t han the $3.13
million in future facilities costs shown in Table 8.1. So assuming the impact fee revenue
projections are reasonably accurate, about 9% of the cost of future fire station improvements
would have to come from non -impact fee sources.
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calcu lated in this chapter are based in part on the cost of existing facilities and
in part on the estimated cost of future facilities. Over time those costs can change, so we
recommend that these fees be reviewed periodically and adjusted if necessary to reflect actual
costs.
Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report,Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that
an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:
Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed;
b.The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is
imposed; and
Table 8.6: Fire Protection Facilities Impact Fees - Projected Revenue
Development Adj Impact Future Projected
Type Units 1 Fee per Unit 2 Units 3 Revenue 4
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 369.41$5,186 1,915,765$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 334.73$743 248,706$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 188.47$946 178,297$
Office/Medical KSF 150.75$512 77,182$
General Commercial KSF 150.75$1,358 204,713$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 201.48$1,360 274,010$
Golf Courses Acre 72.47$817 59,211$
Total 2,957,885$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area;
Room = guest room or suite; acre = net acre
2 See Table 8.5
3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per unit X future units
City of La Quinta Page 8-8
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
c.The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the developmen t
project.
Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough
proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court deci sions bearing on impact fees and
other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework fo r Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.)
The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those
requirements.
Purpose of the Fee:The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to pay for new
development’s proportionate share of the cost of pr oviding fire protection facilities to serve
development in La Quinta.
Use of the Fee.Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be use d to pay for future fire
protection facilities needed to provide a reasonable level of cove rage for the City.
As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for
temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to anot her.
Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type o n Which It
Is Imposed.The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to pay for new
development’s proportional sh are of the fire protection facilities needed to ser ve all
development in La Quinta.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on
Which the Fee Is Imposed.The impact fees calculated in this chapter will pay for additional fire
protection facilities needed serve anticipated development through buildout of the area within
the existing corporate boundar ies of La Quinta.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost A ttributable to
the Development Project.The amount of the fire protection impact fees charged to a
development project will depend on the amount of added develo ped acreage associated with
that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each ty pe of
development are based on the estimated acres per unit for that type of development in La
Quinta. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects that project’s proportionate
share of the cost of fire protection facilities in the City.
City of La Quinta Page 9-1
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Chapter 9.Transportation
This chapter calculates impact fees for improvements to La Quinta’s transportation system,
including arterial streets, medians, roun dabouts,traffic signals,bridges, bike lanes and
sidewalks. Information on transportation infrastructure needs and costs is taken from the City
of La Quinta 2018 Transportation Infrastructure Needs Analysis by NAI Consulting , as revised
August 5, 2019. That study assigns shares of the cost of each improvement to impact fees and
to various other funding sources.
It is important to note that the California Complete Streets Act requires local governments in
the state to address the transportation needs of all users, including pedestrians, cyclists and
transit riders.
Methodology
The method used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the plan-based method discussed in
Chapter 1. That method calculates impact fees by allocating the cost of specific facilit ies to the
development served by those facilities.
In this case, costs for improvements that increase the traffi c-carrying capacity of streets and are
not funded from other sources are allocated to future development (see Table 9.1). Costs for
improvements such as sidewalks and bike lanes that do not increase the traffic -carrying
capacity of streets and are not fund ed from other sources are allocated propo rtionately to
existing and future development (see Table 9.2).
Service Area
The service area for La Quinta’s transportation system, as defined in the 2018 Transportation
Infrastructure Needs Analysis is the area within the existing corporate boundaries of the City.
Level of Service
The improvement needs identified in the 2018 Transportation Infrastruc ture Needs Analysis are
based on level of service standards adopted in the Circulation Element of the La Quinta 2 035
General Plan.
Demand Variable
A demand variable is an attribute of development that is used to represent the impact of
development on a particular type of facility. See Chapter 2 for a general discussion of demand
variables and demand factors.
The demand variable used in this analysis is weighted peak hour trips, which is the product of
peak hour trips per unit and a trip length factor representing the relationship between the
average trip length for a particular development type and the system -wide average trip length .
See Chapter 2 for a detailed discussion of weighted peak hour trips.
City of La Quinta Page 9-2
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Improvement Needs
Tables 9.1 and 9.2 summarize the improvement costs identified in the 2018 La Quinta
Transportation Infrastructure Needs Analysis by type. Table 9 .1 shows a breakdown of costs by
type of improvement and funding source for capacity -enhancing improvements. Table 9.2
shows a similar breakdown for non-capacity-enhancing improvements.
Note that in both of those tables, there is an item titled “Remaining Balance on Reimbursement
Agreements.”Those items refer to amounts the City has committed to repay developers for
improvements those developer s have constructed in excess of the amount for which they were
responsible, and for which the City has agreed to reimburse them from impact fees collected
from future development that shares responsibility for the improvements in question.
The City share of costs from Table 9.1 is allocated in this analysis to future development based
on weighted peak hour trips.
The City share of costs from Table 9.2 is allocated in this analysis to both existing and future
development based on weighted peak hour trips.
Cost per Weighted Peak Hour Trip
Table 9.3 calculates an average cost per weighted peak hour trip based on the City share of
costs for capacity-enhancing improvements from Table 9.1 and the number of weighted peak
hour trips associated with future development in Table 2.3.Weighted peak hour trips are
discussed in Chapter 2.
Table 9.1: Transportation System Capacity- Enhancing Improvements
Improvement City Cost Developer Hwy Bridge Total
Category Share Contribution TUMF Program Cost
New Roadway Construction 2,376,019$664,160$3,040,179$
Roadway Improvements - Capacity Enhancing)11,996,238$20,708,470$4,481,320$37,186,028$
Structure Improvements 4,259,250$7,188,750$12,442,000$23,890,000$
New Roundabouts 8,656,500$1,791,000$9,850,500$20,298,000$
New Traffic Signals 1,290,000$967,500$2,257,500$
Remaining Balance on Reimbursement Agreements 2,288,591$2,288,591$
Total 30,866,598$24,131,130$21,520,570$12,442,000$88,960,298$
Source: 2018 La Quinta Transportation Infrastructure Needs Analysis, Revised 8/5/19
Table 9.2: Transportation System Non Capacity- Enhancing Improvements
Improvement City Cost Developer Hwy Bridge Total
Category Share Contribution TUMF Program Cost
Roadway Improvements - Non-capacity Enhancing)29,575,145$4,628,855$34,204,000$
Median-Only Improvements 3,346,000$3,346,000$
Sidewalk-Only Improvements 5,882,691$904,309$6,787,000$
Bike Lane-Only Improvements 8,644,000$8,644,000$
Remaining Balance on Reimbursement Agreements 1,451,133$1,451,133$
Total 48,898,969$5,533,164$0$0$54,432,133$
Source: 2018 La Quinta Transportation Infrastructure Needs Analysis
City of La Quinta Page 9-3
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Table 9.4 calculates an average cost per weighted peak hour trip based on the C ity share of
costs for non-capacity-enhancing improvements from Table 9.2 and the number of weighted
peak hour trips associated with both existing and future development in Table 2.4.
Impact Fees per Unit of Development
Table 9.5 shows the initial calcu lation of impact fees per unit of development by development
type for the transportation improvements.These impact fees per unit are cal culated using the
sum of the cost per weighted peak hour trip from Tables 9.3 and 9.4, and the weighted peak
hour trips-per-unit factors from Table 2.1.
Table 9.5 also adds a small administrative charge to arrive at the a djusted impact fee per unit.
The 0.324% administrative charge is intended to recover the cost of this study over five years. It
is calculated by dividing the cost of the study by estimated revenue that would be generated
over five years by impact fees calculated in this study (50,000 / 15,455,871 = 0.00324).
Note that Table 9.5 calculates impact fees for public facilities, schools and parks even though
the City cannot collect fees for those types of development. On the next page, costs allocated
to public facilities and parks are re-allocated to private development. It is not necessary to
reallocate costs from schools. No additional schools are planned for t he service area defined in
this study, so no costs were allocated to schools.
Table 9.3: Capacity Enhancing Improvements - Cost per Wtd Pk Hr Trip
City Cost Added Weighted Cost per Weighted
Share 1 Peak Hour Trips 2 Peak Hour Trip 3
$30,866,598 12,643 $2,441.40
1 See Table 9.1
2 See Table 2.3
3 Cost per weighted peak hour trip = impact fee cost basis / added weighted
peak hour trips
Table 9.4: Non-Capacity-Enhancing Improvements - Cost per Wtd Pk Hr Trip
City Cost Buildout Weighted Cost per Weighted
Share 1 Peak Hour Trips 2 Peak Hour Trip 3
$48,898,969 52,362 $933.86
1 See Table 9.2
2 See Table 2.4
3 Cost per weighted peak hour trip = impact fee cost basis / buildout weighted
peak hour trips
City of La Quinta Page 9-4
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
In Table 9.6, the costs initially allocated to public facilities and parks based on traffic generated
by those uses, are reallocated to private development. That reallocation i s justified by the fact
that the need for public facilities and parks is created by private developmen t.
Table 9.5: Transportation Improvements - Impact Fees per Unit (Before Reallocation)
Development Cost per Wtd Wtd Pk Hr Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Pk Hr Trip 2 Trips per Unit 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 3,375.26$1.16 3,915.30$12.69$3,927.99$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 3,375.26$0.89 3,003.98$9.73$3,013.72$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 3,375.26$0.66 2,227.67$7.22$2,234.89$
Office/Medical KSF 3,375.26$1.90 6,413.00$20.78$6,433.78$
General Commercial KSF 3,375.26$2.34 7,898.11$25.59$7,923.70$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 3,375.26$0.54 1,822.64$5.91$1,828.55$
Public Facilities KSF 3,375.26$2.48 8,370.65$27.12$8,397.77$
Schools Acre 3,375.26$0.79 2,666.46$8.64$2,675.10$
Parks Acre 3,375.26$0.51 1,721.38$5.58$1,726.96$
Golf Courses Acre 3,375.26$0.27 911.32$2.95$914.27$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite;
Acre = net developed acre
2 Sum of costs per weighted peak hour trip from Table 9.3 and Table 9.4
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per weighted peak hour trip X weighted peak hour trips per unit
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
Table 9.6: Transportation Improvements - Cost per Weighted Peak Hour Trip with Reallocation
Initial Cost Reallocated Reallocated Adjusted
Development per Weighted Pub Fac Cost per Parks Cost per Cost per
Type Units 1 Pk Hr Trip 2 Wtd Pk Hr Trip 3 Wtd Pk Hr Trip 4 Wtd Pk Hr Trip 5
Residential - Single Family Detached DU $3,375.26 56.67 12.73 3,444.67$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU $3,375.26 56.67 12.73 3,444.67$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU $3,375.26 56.67 12.73 3,444.67$
Office/Medical KSF $3,375.26 56.67 3,431.93$
General Commercial KSF $3,375.26 56.67 3,431.93$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room $3,375.26 56.67 3,431.93$
Public Facilities KSF Reallocated 0.00$
Schools Acre No Allocation 0.00$
Parks Acre Reallocated 0.00$
Golf Courses Acre $3,375.26 56.67 3,431.93$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area;
Room = guest room or suite; Acre = net developed acre
2 See Table 9.5
3 Reallocated public facilities cost per weighted peak hour trip = 84 KSF of future Public Facilities X $8,370.65 per
KSF = $703,144.56 / 12,407 weighted peak hour trips for receiving facilities = $56.67 per weighted peak hour trip
4 Reallocated parks cost per weighted peak hour trip = 54 acres of future Parks X $1,721.38 per acre = $92,954.71 /
7,301 weighted peak hour trips for receiving (residential) development =$12.73 per weighted peak hour trip
City of La Quinta Page 9-5
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
In Table 9.6, above, public facilities costs are reallocated to all types of private development
while parks costs are reallocated only to residenti al development that creates the need for
parks.
Table 9.7 recalculates the impact fees per unit of de velopment using the adjusted cost p er
weighted peak hour trip for each type of development after reallocation.It is worth noting that
the increase in impact fees for private development resulting from reallocation is very small on
a percentage basis,about 2.1 % for residential development and 1.7% for non-residential
development.
Projected Revenue
Table 9.8 on the next page shows projected revenue from the impact fees calculated in this
chapter. Potential revenue for the added private development shown in Table 2.3 is projected
by applying the impact fees per unit from Table 9.7 to added units of development from Table
2.3.
Table 9.7: Transportation Improvements - Impact Fees per Unit (After Reallocation)
Development Adj Cost/Wtd Wtd Pk Hr Impact Fee Admin Adj Impact
Type Units 1 Pk Hr Trip 2 Trips per Unit 3 per Unit 4 Charge 5 Fee per Unit 6
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 3,444.67$1.16 3,995.81$12.95 4,008.76$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 3,444.67$0.89 3,065.75$9.93 3,075.69$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 3,444.67$0.66 2,273.48$7.37 2,280.85$
Office/Medical KSF 3,431.93$1.90 6,520.68$21.13 6,541.80$
General Commercial KSF 3,431.93$2.34 8,030.73$26.02 8,056.75$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 3,431.93$0.54 1,853.24$6.00 1,859.25$
Golf Courses Acre 3,431.93$0.27 926.62$3.00 929.62$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area;
Room = guest room or suite; Acre = net developed acre
2 See Table 9.6
3 See Table 2.1
5 Administrative charge based on 0.324% of the impact fee per unit; see discussion in text
6 Adjusted impact fee per unit including administrative charge
City of La Quinta Page 9-6
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
The total impact fee revenue projected in Table 9.8 represents approximately 5 4% of the City’s
share of the total cost of transpo rtation improvements shown in the 2018 Transportation
Infrastructure Needs Analysis.
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on cost estimates in the 2018
Transportation Infrastructure Needs Analysis. We recommend that these fees be reviewed
periodically and adjusted when updated costs become available.
Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report,Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that
an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:
Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed;
b.The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is
imposed; and
c.The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development
project.
Table 9.8: Transportation Impact Fees - Projected Revenue
Development Adj Impact Future Projected
Type Units 1 Fee per Unit 2 Units 3 Revenue 4
Residential - Single Family Detached DU 4,008.76$5,186 20,789,425$
Residential - Single Family Attached DU 3,075.69$743 2,285,235$
Residential - Multi-Family/Other DU 2,280.85$946 2,157,680$
Office/Medical KSF 6,541.80$512 3,349,403$
General Commercial KSF 8,056.75$1,358 10,941,061$
Tourist Commercial/Lodging Room 1,859.25$1,360 2,528,579$
Golf Courses Acre 929.62$817 759,503$
Total 42,810,885$
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area;
Room = guest room or suite; Acre = net developed acre
2 See Table 9.7
3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per unit X future units
City of La Quinta Page 9-7
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8, 2019
Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough
proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and
other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.)
The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those
requirements.
Purpose of the Fee:The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to pay for new
development’s proportionate share of the cost of p roviding transportation improvements to
serve development in La Quinta.
Use of the Fee.Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to pay for transportation
facilities shown in the City’s 2018 Transportation Infrastructure Needs Analysis , as revised
August 5, 2019,and to reimburse developers for improvement costs expended for the benefit
of future development.
As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for
temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.
Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type o n Which It
Is Imposed.The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to pay for new
development’s proportional share of the transportation improvements neede d to serve all
development in La Quinta.
Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on
Which the Fee Is Imposed.Additional demand created by new development necessitates the
construction of improvements to the City’s transportation system. The impact fees calculated in
this chapter will pay for a portion of tho se improvements.
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost A ttributable to
the Development Project.The amount of the transportation impact fees charged to a
development project will depend on the amount of peak hour added traffic associated with
that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of
development are based on the estimated weighted peak hour trips associated with that type of
development in La Quinta. Thus, the fee charge d to a development project reflects that
project’s proportionate share of the cost of new transportation facilities in the City.
City of La Quinta Page 10-1
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8,2019
Chapter 10.Implementation
This chapter of the report contains recommendations for adoption and administration of
impact fees, and for th e interpretation and application of the development impact fees and in -
lieu fees calculated in this study. It was not prepared by an attorney and is not intended as
legal advice.
Statutory requirements for the adoption and administration of fees imposed a s a condition of
development approval (impact fees) are found in the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code
Sections 66000 et seq.). Requirements for park land dedication and fees in lieu of dedication
are governed by the Quimby Act (Government Code 66477).
Adoption
The form in which development impact fees are enacted should be determined by the City
attorney. The specific requirements are diff erent for impact fees under the Mitigation Fee Act,
and for park land dedication and in -lieu fees under the Quimby Act. The latter requirements
must be adopted by ordinance, and are subject to the same noticing and public hearing
procedures as any ordinance.
Procedures for adoption of fees subject to the Mitigation Fee Act, including notice and public
hearing requirements, are specified in Government Code Sections 66016 and 66018. It should
be noted that Section 66018 refers to Government Code Section 6062 a, which requires that the
public hearing notice be published at least twice during the 10 -day notice period. Government
Code Section 66017 provides that fees subject to the Mitigation Fee Act do not become
effective until 60 days after final action by th e governing body.
Actions establishing or increasing fees subject to the Mitigation Act require certain findings , as
set forth in Government Code Section 66001 and discussed below and in Chapter 1 of this
report.
Establishment of Fees. Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act, Section 66001(a), when an agency
establishes fees to be imposed as a condition of development approval,it must make findings
to:
1.Identify the purpose of the fee;
2.Identify the use of the fee; and
3.Determine how there is a re asonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the type of development project
on which it is imposed;
b.The need for the facility and the type of development
project on which the fee is imposed
City of La Quinta Page 10-2
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8,2019
Examples of findings that could be used for impact fees calculated in this study are shown
below. The specific language of such findings should be reviewed and approved by the agency’s
Attorney.A more complete discussion of the nexus for each fee can be found in individual
chapters of this report.
Sample Finding:Purpose of the Fee.The City Council finds that the purpose of the
impact fees hereby enacted is to protect the public health, safety and welfare by
requiring new development to contribute to the cost of park and recreation
improvements needed to mitigate the impacts of new development .
Sample Finding: Use of the Fee.The City Council finds that revenue from the impact
fees hereby enacted will be used to provide public facilities needed to mitigate the
impacts of new development in the City and identified in the 2019 City of La Quinta
Development Impact Fee Study by NBS.1
Sample Finding: Reasonable Relationship:Based on analysis presented in the 2019
City of La Quinta Development Impact Fee Study by NBS, the City Council finds that
there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fees and the types of development projects on
which they are imposed; and,
b.The need for facilities and the types of development projects
on which the fees are imposed.
Administration
The California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.) mandates
procedures for administration of impact fee programs, including collection and accounting,
reporting, and refunds. References to code sections in the following paragraphs pertain to the
California Government Code.
Imposition of Fees. Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act , Section 66001(a), when an agency
imposes an impact fee upon a specific development project, it must make essentially the same
findings adopted upon establishment of the fees to:
1.Identify the purpose of the fee;
2.Identify the use of the fee; and
3.Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between:
a.The use of the fee and the type of development project
on which it is imposed;
1 According to Gov’t Code Section 66001 (a) (2), the use of the fee may be specified in a capital improvement
plan, the General Plan, or other public documents that identify the public facilities for which the fee is charged.
The findings recommended here identify this impact fee study as the source of that inf ormation.
City of La Quinta Page 10-3
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8,2019
b.The need for the facility and the type of development
project on which the fee is imposed
Per Section 66001 (b), at th e time when an impact fee is imposed on a specific development
project, the City is also required to make a finding to determine how there i s a reasonable
relationship between:
c.The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable
to the development project on which it is imposed.
In addition, Section 66006 (f)provides that a local agency, at the time it imposes a fee for public
improvements on a specific development project, "... shall identify the public improvement that
the fee will be used to finance."The required notification could refer to the improvements
identified in this study.
Section 66020 (d) (1) requires that the agency, at the time it imposes an impact fee ,provide a
written statement of the amount of the fee and written notice o f a 90-day period during which
the imposition of the fee can be protested. Failure to protest imposition of the fee during that
period may deprive the fee payer of the right to subsequent legal challenge.
Section 66022 (a)provides a separate procedure for challenging the establishment of an impact
fee. Such challenges must be filed within 120 days of enactment.
Collection of Fees.Section 66007 (a), provides that a local agency shall not require payment of
fees by developers of residential projects pr ior to the date of final inspection, or issuance of a
certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first.
However, "utility service fees" (not defined) may be collected upon ap plication for utility
service.In a residential development project of more than one dwelling unit,Section 66007 (a)
allows the agency to choose to collect fees either for individual units or for phases upon final
inspection, or for the entire project upon final inspection of the first dwelling unit completed.
Section 66007 (b) provides two exceptions when the local agency may require the payment of
fees from developers of residential projects at an earlier time: (1) whe n the local agency
determines that the fees “will be collected for public improvements or facilities for which an
account has been established and funds appropriated and for which the local agency has
adopted a proposed construction schedule or plan prior to final inspection or issuance of the
certificate of occupancy” or (2) the fees are “to reimburse the local agency for expenditures
previously made.”
Statutory restrictions on the time at which fees may be collected do not apply to non -
residential development.
Notwithstanding the foregoing restrictions, many cities routinely collect impact fees for all
facilities at the time building or grading permits are issued and builders often find it convenient
to pay the fees at that time.
City of La Quinta Page 10-4
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8,2019
In cases where the fees are not collected upon issuance of building permits ( of grading permits
for golf courses), Sections 66007 (c) (1)and (2) provide that the City may require the property
owner to execute a contract to pay the fee, and to record that contract as a lien ag ainst the
property until the fees are paid.
Earmarking and Expenditure of Fee Revenue.Section 66006 (a)mandates that fees be
deposited “with other fees for the impro vement in a separate capital facilities account or fund
in a manner to avoid any commingling of the fees with other revenues and funds of the local
agency, except for temporary investments , and expend those fees solely for the purpose for
which the fee was colle cted.”Section 66006 (a) also requires that interest earned on the fee
revenues be placed in the capital account and used for the same pur pose.
The language of the law is not clear as to whether depositing fees "with other fees for the
improvement" refers to a specific capital improvement or a class of improvements (e.g., street
improvements).
We are not aware of any municipality that has interpreted that language to mean that funds
must be segregated by individual projects. And, as a practical matter,that approach would be
unworkable in any event because it would mean that no pay-as-you-go project could be
constructed until all benefiting development had paid the fees. Common practice is to
maintain separate funds or accounts for impact fee revenues b y facility category (i.e., streets,
park improvements), but not for individual proj ects.
Impact Fee Exemptions, Reductions, and Waivers . In the event that a development project is
found to have no impact on facilities for which impact fees are charged,such project must be
exempted from the fees.
If a project has characteristics that will make its impacts on a particular public facility or
infrastructure system significantly and permanently sma ller than the average impact used to
calculate impact fees in this study, the fees should be reduced accordingly.Per Section 66001
(b), there must be a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the
public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed. The fee reduction
is required if the fee is not proportional to the impact of the developme nt on relevant public
facilities.
In some cases, the agency may desire to voluntarily waive or reduce impact fees that would
otherwise apply to a project as a way of promoting goals such as affordable housing or
economic development. Such a waiver or redu ction may not result in increased costs to other
development projects,so the effect us such policies is that the lost revenue must be made up
from other fund sources.
Credit for Improvements Provided by Developers. If the City requires a developer,as a
condition of project approval,to dedicate land or construct facilities or improvements for which
impact fees are charged,the City should ensure that the impact fees are ad justed so that the
overall contribution by the developer does not exceed the impact created by the development.
City of La Quinta Page 10-5
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8,2019
In the event that a developer voluntarily offers to dedicate land,or construct facilities or
improvements in lieu of paying impact fees, the City may accept or reject such offers, and may
negotiate the terms under which such an offer would be accepted. Excess contributions by a
developer may be offset by reimbursement agreements .
Credit for Existing Development.If a project involves replacement, redevelopment or
intensification of previously existing development, impact fe es should be applied only to the
portion of the project that represents a net increase in demand for relevant City facilities,
applying the measure of demand used in this study to calculate that particular impact fee.
Annual Report.Section 66006 (b) (1)requires that once each year, within 180 days of the close
of the fiscal year, the local agency must make availa ble to the public the following information
for each separate account established to receive impact fee revenues:
1.A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund;
2.The amount of the fee;
3.The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund;
4.The amount of the fees collected and interest earned;
5.Identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the
amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the percentage of the
cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees;
6.Identification of the approximate date by which the construction of a public
improvement will commence, if the City determine s sufficient funds have been
collected to complete financing of an incomplete public improvement;
7.A description of each inter-fund transfer or loan made from the account or fund,
including interest rates, repayment dates, and a description of the improveme nt on
which the transfer or loan will be expended;
8.The amount of any refunds or allocations made pursuant to Secti on 66001, paragraphs
(e) and (f).
The annual report must be reviewed by the City Council at its next regularly scheduled public
meeting, but not less than 15 days after the statements are made public , per Section 66006 (b)
(2).
Refunds under the Mitigation Fee Act. Prior to 1996,The Mitigation Fee Act required that a
local agency collecting impact fees was required to ex pend or commit impact fee revenue
within five years,or make findings to justify a continued need for the money. Otherwise, those
funds had to be refunded. SB 1693, adopted in 1996 as an amendment to the Mitigation Fee
Act,changed that requirement in material ways.
Now, Section 66001 (d)requires that, for the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit of any
impact fee revenue into an account or fund as required by Section 66006 (b), and every five
City of La Quinta Page 10-6
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8,2019
years thereafter, the local agency shall make all of the following find ings for any fee revenue
that remains unexpended, whether committed or uncommitted:
1.Identify the purpose to which the fee will be put;
2.Demonstrate the reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for
which it is charged;
3.Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing of
incomplete improvements for which impact fees are to be used;
4.Designate the approximate dates on which the funding necessary to complete
financing of those improvements will be deposited into the appropriate account or
fund.
Those findings are to be made in conjunction with the annual reports discussed above . If such
findings are not made as required by Section 66001, the local agency could be required to
refund the moneys in the account or fund ,per Section 66001 (d).
Once the agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on
incomplete improvements for which impact fee revenue is to be used, it must, within 180 days
of that determination, identify an approxim ate date by which construction of the public
improvement will be commenced (Section 66001 (e)). If the agency fails to comply with that
requirement, it must refund impact fee revenue in the account according to proc edures
specified in Section 66001 (d).
Refunds under the Quimby Act.The Quimby Act, Section a.(6)(A) requires that a City, County or
other agency to which park land or in-lieu fees are conveyed or paid shall develop a schedule
“specifying how, when and where it will use the land or fees or both to develop park or
recreational facilities to serve residents of the subdivision…. Any fees collected under the
ordinance shall be committed within five ye ars after the payment of the fees or the issuance of
building permits on one-half of the lots created by the subdivision, whichever occurs later. Any
fees not committed within five years must be refunded.
Annual Update of the Capital Improvement Plan . Section 66002 (b) of the Mitigation Fee Act
provides that if a local agency adopts a capital improvemen t plan to identify the use of impact
fees, that plan must be adopted and annually updated by a resolution of the g overning body at
a noticed public hearing.The alternative, per Section 66001 (a) (2)is to identify improvements
by applicable general or specific plans or in other public documents.
In most cases, the CIP identifies projects for a limited number of yea rs and may not include all
improvements needed to serve future development covered by the impact fee study.We
recommend that the City Council cite this development impact fee study as the public
document identifying the use of the fees.
Indexing of In-Lieu/Impact Fees. Where impact fees calculated in this report are based on
current costs, those costs should, if possible,be adjusted periodically to account for changes in
the cost of facilities or other capital assets that will be funded by the impact fees.That
City of La Quinta Page 10-7
Development Impact Fee Study
August 8,2019
adjustment is intended to account for escalation in costs for land, construction, vehicles and
other relevant capital assets. We recommend the Engineering News Record Building Cost Index
as the primary basis for indexing construction costs .Where land costs are covered by an
impact fee or in-lieu fee, land costs should be adjusted based on changes in local land prices.
Training and Public Information
Effective administration of an impact fee program requires considerable preparation and
training. It is important that those responsible for collecting the fees, and for explaining them
to the public, understand both the details of t he fee program and its supporting rationale.
Before fees are imposed, a staff training workshop is highly desirab le if more than a handful of
employees will be involved in collecting or accounting for fees.
It is also useful to pay close attention to ha ndouts that provide information to the public
regarding impact fees. Impact fees should be clearly distinguished from other fees, such as user
fees for application processing, and the purpose and use of particular impact fees should be
made clear.
Finally, anyone responsible for accounting, capital budgeting, or project management for
projects involving impact fees m ust be fully aware of the restrictions placed on the expenditure
of impact fee revenues.Some fees recommended in this report are tied to spe cific
improvements and cost estimates. Fees must be expended accordingly and the City must be
able to show that funds have been properly expended.
Recovery of Study Costs and Administrative Costs
To recover the cost of periodic impact fee update studies a nd ongoing staff costs for managing
those updates and preparing annual reports and five-year updates required by the Mitigation
Fee Act, an administrati ve charge may be added to the impact fees calculated in this report. The
administrative charges are included in the calculation of impact fees in this report.