HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-29-11, Impact Fee Committee Materials, SettingTheStage Setting the Stage: Preliminary Changes to Impact Fee
Structure and Supporting Demographic Analysis
November 29, 2011
Prepared by
Tischled3, I ise,
Hsca ,Economic& 1�11anining consutints
IschlerBAN 4701 SANGAMC RE ROAD V SUITE S240 Q BETHESDA, MD 20816 l%% T: 800.424.431 8 II F. 301.324.4860
�IIInAIIfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiY�M1IfiIIfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiY�M1IfiIIfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiY�M1IfiIIfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiY�M1IfiIIfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiY�M1IfiIIfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiY�M1IfiIIfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiY�M1IfiIIfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiY�M1IfiIIfiYfifilfillfiYfifilfillfiYWfi�lY
NVar°IfIialp .. Bi� I�ILaIIN� ' ' 80 ANNANDALE ROAD II PASADENA, CA 91105-1404
Ts 818.790.6170 � F': 818.790.6235
WWW,TIS CHLERBISE.C',OM
Table of Contents
Introduction 3
StreetImpact Fees.................................................................................................................... 3
FireImpact Fees........................................................................................................................ 4
Water and Sewer Impact Fees.................................................................................................. 6
Updated Demographic Analysis and Development Projections 10
Summary of Growth Indicators............................................................................................... 10
Figure A1— Development Projections and Growth Rates................................................ 11
Recent Residential Construction............................................................................................. 12
Figure A2— Housing Units by Decade............................................................................... 12
Population and Jobs Forecast................................................................................................. 13
Figure A3 —City of Bozeman Population Share ................................................................ 14
Figure A4—City of Bozeman Job Share ............................................................................ 15
Jobs by Type of Nonresidential Development........................................................................ 16
Figure A5 —Jobs and Floor Area Estimate ........................................................................ 16
Employees per Square Foot of Nonresidential Development................................................ 17
Figure A6— Employee and Building Area Ratios............................................................... 17
Detailed Development Projections......................................................................................... 18
Figure A7—Annual Demographic Data............................................................................. 18
Persons per Housing Unit ....................................................................................................... 18
Figure A9—Year-Round Persons per Unit by Type of Housing ........................................ 19
Demand Indicators by Size of Detached Housing................................................................... 20
Figure A10 - Residential Trip Generation Rates by Type of Housing................................ 20
Figure A11—Vehicle Trips and Persons by Bedroom Range............................................ 21
Trip Generation by Floor Area of Single Unit Housing............................................................ 21
Figure Al2—Vehicle Trips by Size of Single Unit Housing................................................ 22
Average Number of Persons by Square Feet of Single Unit Housing..................................... 23
Figure A13 — Persons by Square Feet of Single Unit Residential...................................... 23
Trip Generation by Floor Area of Residential Structures with Multiple Units ....................... 24
Figure A14—Vehicle Trips by Size of Multifamily Housing............................................... 25
Average Number of Persons by Square Feet in Residential Structures with
MultipleUnits ......................................................................................................................... 26
Figure A15 — Persons by Square Feet of Multifamily Residential..................................... 26
2
INTRODUCTION
TischlerBise is under contract to update Street, Fire, Water, and Sewer impact fees for the City
of Bozeman. To set the stage for the impact fee update, which begins with demographic data
and development projections, the sections below provide excerpts from the previous impact
fee studies. Presenting the current fee structure and key demographic data provides context
for evaluating the updated information.
Street Iim a t 1::::ees
As stated on page 3 of the 2008 Bozeman Transportation Impact Fee Report, "This study is
based on a standards driven approach (consumption based). In the case of a standards driven
impact fee, roadway capacity is estimated to be consumed on all roads (state, county, and local
collector roads and above) by new development whether these roads are improved or not."
Even though the standards driven approach does not require specific development projections,
the Montana Impact Fee Act states [see Section 7-6-1602(1)(c)] "the governmental entity shall
prepare and approve documentation that ... forecasts future additional needs for service for a
defined period of time." To document the demand for transportation improvements, a forecast
of both residential and nonresidential development is essential, which is the purpose of this
report.
The current street impact fee schedule for residential development is shown below. Because
Section 7-6-1602(5)(a) the Montana Impact Fee Act states "the amount of the impact fee must
be reasonably related to and reasonably attributable to the development's share of the cost of
infrastructure improvements made necessary by the new development" TischlerBise is
proposing a couple of structural changes to the fee schedule. First, we recommend
consolidation of Singe Family Detached, Condominium/Townhouse, and Mobile Home Park
into a one category for all residential structures with only one unit. The proposed impact fees
would also vary by floor area and would be easier to administer because income
determinations would not be necessary. In contrast the one thousand feet thresholds, the
draft demographic analysis provides data in one hundred square feet increments, which could
easily be changed to 200-500 feet increments depending upon community input. The main
reasons for this change is the latest Census Bureau data often combines one-unit detached and
attached housing and provides no data on condominiums, which is a type of ownership that can
be applied to a variety of residential structures. Mobile Home Park is basically a legacy
category that is rare for new construction. Because townhouses and manufactured housing
units tend to be smaller than stick-built dwellings, fees that vary by floor area provide
proportionate demand indicators for these units. Second, this report also documents the
variation in demand indicators by unit size for residential structures with multiple units (e.g.
duplexes and apartments).
3
E T I IIIIW1IP'A T IFEE SC HIEDULIE - GeneiraI
IT'E Type of Land Use Unliit,Measure
LUC Amount IDue IIP'eir
LI rniiV
RESIDENTIAL:
210 Siiinglle Farmiily (Detachiie^dI)
Less than 1,5O0 sf and very Ilow iiincoime(2) dwe1111iirng uniiit 1.,4:3O..02
Less than 1;,500 st and Ilow iiincor ne ( ) dlwelfling umiiit $2,072..90
Less than 1,50 0 sf dwelllliingl uniiit 2,O13..O,9
15OO to,2,499 sf dwelllliingl umiiit $3,55430
2,500 sf or llarger dwelllliingl uniiit 4.0016.1
220 Apartments dwelllliing umiiit $2,°099..37
230 Residential Condlorniniiiuirml TowinOmo ose dwelling uniiit $1,940..50
240 Mobile IHome IF"ark dwelllliing umiiit $1,04930
Fl ire ire himIlia t 1,,,,e e
In contrast to the current street impact fees, the fire impact fee schedule (shown below) does
not vary by unit size and only has two residential categories. Also, all nonresidential
development pays the same fire impact fee per one thousand square feet of building space.
FORE IMPACT' FEE SCHEDULE
Amount Due
TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT Per Unit
Detached res,iAential per d^wvelfing unlit $852..32.
Attached residential, per dwellllinug unit $715,55
Commeirciial llndustriall/institutiional per 1,000 $195.37
grass sq ft. of building space
As shown in the table below, the current fire impact fee methodology is based on projected
increase in developed nonresidential acreage, with the fee amount converted to building space
using an average floor area ratio. Although not presented in this report, City staff provided
TischlerBise a detailed parcel-level database with land use codes and floor area data that will be
used to evaluate whether fire impact fees for nonresidential development should be
disaggregated to ensure proportionality. The same database could also be used to derive fire
impact fees by square foot of residential development, to provide an alternative to the current
one-size-fits-all approach.
4
City of Bozem,ain
Fiire,aind EMS, Imp,act Fees
Allowable Commercial and lindustrial Impact Fees
Exhibit 6
Ccymimeirciall/IlindLg!striia,lI impact Fee Costs' $ 3,620,788
Cornimerciall Acres Designated fbr Devellopment(2007-2020)2 530
Industrial Acres Designated for Development(2007, -2020)2 44
1,0010 sq ft of Gross Commercial Building Area per Acre 3 37.07
1,0010 sq ft of Gross lindUstdal Building Area per Acre 4 37.07
Totd Gross Commercial Building Area (1,0100 sq ft) 19,639
Totall Gross Industriall Buidding Area(11,000 sq ft) 11,619
Totd Gross Building Area X1,0001 sq ft) 21,25-8
Impact Fee per 1,0001 sq ft of Gross IBuiddiing Area $ 17033
Administrabian Fee $ 0-52
Net CornmeirdM Impact Fee 178.84
(1) Fron?Exhibit 3.
(2) From?Exhibit 4. Repesents on)y 48%based on assurned deveiopment
(3) Based onn historical City developenent records
(4) Based onn histoijeal City devek)P(Def?l records
(5) Pei,1,00,0 sq. ft. of gross budding area.
In addition to trip generation rates for single and multiple unit residential structures that vary
by size, this report also documents average number of persons by residential type and size. The
additional demographic analysis will enable street and fire impact fees to share a consistent fee
structure. As shown in the table below, the average number of persons per unit is currently
used to differentiate fire impact by unit type.
5
City mfBozeman
Fire and EMS, Impact Fees
Allowable Residential Impact Fees
Exhibit 5
Detached Residential Unit IDensn: 2.26 persons per mnm
Attached Residential 0mitDensftv: ` 11S0lpemsms per mnit
Residential nmplactFee CoStSz $ 3.822,0,89
Residemma|PmPulatnmn Served 3 111,e25 (new population)
Cost per person $ 328.78
Detached Residential Unit $ 74305
Administration Fee 37.15
Net Detached Residential Unit
Impact!Fee $ 780.20
Attached Residential Unit $ 624.69
Administration Fee 3123
Net Attached ResidemtiaN Unit Impact
Fee
mnu*s:
(1) 2000 Census
(2)FromExsbit 3-
(3)See 2006 Fire Master Plan,
Water aind Seweir limpact F::ees
The 2007 water and sewer impact fees were based on the City's fixed asset records, future
capital improvements as identified in the City's Capital Improvement Plan, and planning criteria
from the facility plan entitled, City of Bozeman Water Facility Plan, prepared by Allied
Engineering Services, Inc. and Robert Peooia and Associates, dated October, 2006 (the water
facility plan). Water and sewer impact fees typically allocate the cost of infrastructure tothe
increase in demand to yield a cost per gallon of capacity. This approach provides a relatively
stable impact fee per equivalent dwelling unit that does not fluctuate with the rate of
development. If growth accelerates or decelerates, the tinning of improvements can be
adjusted to ensure utility capacity is available when needed. As shown in the table below, the
utility analysis included the projected increase in demand and equivalent dwelling units. This
report includes more conservative development projections that can be used to help the City of
Bozeman evaluate the tinning of planned water and sewer improvements.
6
City of Bozeman, Montana
Impact Fees for the Water System
Determination of LOS and Equivalent IDwelllliingl Units
Exhibit I
Peak Day Equivalent Addwi all
year Demanct' DweIftnq,Uhft"2' EDUs
21005 13-08 28:,08:5
2006 13-74 29,492 1,406
21007 14-42 301,969 1,477
21008 115, 15 32:,519 1,551
21009 1590 34:,148 1,629
241141 16-70 35:,858 1,710
21011 17-53 37:,649 1,792
21012 18-41 39:,531 1'661
2013 1933 41:,506 1,975
2014 20-30 43,579 2,074
21015 21-31 45:,756 2,177
21016 22-37 48,03:5 2,278
2017 23-48 501,426 2,392
21018 24-65 52:,937 2,511
21019 25-8.8 55,572 2,636
20201 2717 58:,339 2,767
2021 28-53 611,257 2,91'6
21022 29-96 64:,321 3,1064
21023 31-45 67:,539 3,217
21024 3303 701:,917 3,378
21025 34-68 74:,464 3,547
1 - See page 3'Section,4.A of Me Water Facility Rai?-
2- Peak day dea7131?d divided by Peak Day EDU Usage Factor
The table below indicates current water and sewer impact fees in the City of Bozeman, which
are imposed according to size of water meter.
7
WATER IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE
COST PER
SIZE QF WATER METER METER
3J4 inch $3,755.89
1 inch $9,389.74
1.5 inch $18,779.47
2 inch $30,047.15
3 inch $60,094.31
Greater than 3 inch Calculated
����������� 7�� 71—2 7~~~~~~�
��~~~.�.�^~�~~~~-----'�
SEWER UKUPACTFEE SCH�E00LE
COST PER
SIZE OF WATER METER* METER
1 inch $8,383.25
2 inch $26,824.57
3 inch $53,649.15
Greater than 3 inch Calculated
':Demand for service assumed to correlate with water intake.
'---------------------
If desired, the City could choose to impose water and sewer impact fees for residential
development by type of housing (single or multiple units per structure) and floor area. The
average number of persons per housing unit could be multiplied by gallons of capacity per
person to yield the average gallons of demand per housing unit. This is a policy decision that
we will discuss further with City staff. As shown in the table below, the current water impact
fee study already set the precedent for this approach.
8
City of Bozeman, Montana
�limpac,t Fees for the Water System
Determination of LOS and Eqluivallent ICDvw^elllliingl Units
Exhibil't 1
Average Usage IResidlentiiall 83.04 gplcdl
Average Usage I Residlentiiall with Mosses 88.04
NUMber of Persons per H0Uselh,cfl,d 2.3
Average Usage 4 202.49 per IEDU
Peak Day Usage 5 465.73 per IEDU
Storage Usage"' 213.77 per IEDU
I -See page 14 Section 3'.8 of the Water Facifit,v Plan -.Average of Table 3-B-8-
2-At 5 gpcd.
3-See page 6 of Section 2 of the Water Facility Plan.
4-.Average Usage Resdential times numberofpersons per Household-
5-Average Day Usage fimes a peaking factor of 2.30-See page 3',of Section 4.A
of the Water Faciihty Ran-
6- Tota)storage requirement it?2025 divided by 2025 EDos-See page 26
Section 5.Bof the Water Facifity Ran-
9
UPDATED DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTIONS
The following sections of this report provide supporting documentation on population, housing
units, jobs, and nonresidential floor area used to update development impact fees for the City
of Bozeman. Although long-range projections are necessary for planning capital improvements,
a shorter time frame of five years is critical for the impact fees analysis. Infrastructure
standards will be calibrated using fiscal year 2011-12 data and the first projection year for the
cash flow model will be fiscal year 2012-13. In the City of Bozeman the fiscal year begins on
July 1St
S inir a airy of Growth Iii iii ato r
Development projections and growth rates are summarized in Figure Al. These projections will
be used to estimate impact fee revenue and to indicate the anticipated need for growth-related
infrastructure. However, impact fees methodologies are designed to reduce sensitivity to
accurate development projections in the determination of the proportionate-share fee
amounts. If actual development is slower than projected, impact fees revenues will also
decline, but so will the need for growth-related infrastructure. In contrast, if development is
faster than anticipated, the City will receive an increase in impact fee revenue, but will also
need to accelerate the capital improvements program to keep pace with the actual rate of
development.
Bozeman specific base data for the demographic analysis and development projections are
2010 census counts of population and housing units plus Montana Department of Revenue data
on nonresidential floor area, as provided by City staff. The projected increase in housing units
is based on the City's population projection from the 2009 Community Plan, but instead of
54,500 residents by 2015, the projections for the impact fee analysis assume this population
level will not be reached until 2030. Projected population was converted to housing units using
the 2010 average of 2.13 year-round residents per housing unit. Given the five-year update
cycle for impact fees, TischlerBise did not vary this ratio over time or assume any changes to
vacancy rates in Bozeman, which was approximately 10% at the time of the 2010 census. From
the 2000 to 2010 census, Bozeman had an average annual increase of 589 housing units per
year. According to the City's building permits (see Year 2010 Annual Report from the
Department of Planning and Community Development), 2005 was the peak year for residential
construction with 955 housing unit. The low point for the past decade was 2009 with 182
housing units permitted. Residential constructed increased slightly in 2010 to 208 units. Based
on 54,500 residents by 2030, Bozeman would see an increase of 341 units in 2010, increasing
slowly over time to 368 housing units being constructed in 2016.
Because the 2009 Community Plan does not provide job projections for Bozeman, TischlerBise
assumed a constant jobs-to-housing ratio to forecast 39,500 jobs in 2030. Current ratios of
floor area per job, for three general types of nonresidential development, were used to convert
projected jobs into the floor area increase shown below. For both residential and
nonresidential development, the impact fee study assumes a 2.0% annual growth rate.
10
Figure A, Development,Projections and Growth to
Bozeman, Montana 2011 to 2016
Year Average Annual
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2020 Increase Growth Rate
Single Unlit Dwelling(56%) 9,967 10,158 10,353 10,552 10,754 10,960 11,825, 1,98 2.0%
2+ Units per Structure(44%) 7,832 7,9�82 8,135 1 8,290 8,4491 8,611 9,2911 156 2.0%
Nonresidential Scl Ft x 1000 13,600 13,861 14,128 114,399 14,676 114,958 16,142 272 2.0%
............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Bozeman Growth Indicators
18,000,
16,000,
14,0041
12,000,
10,0001
.......... ........ .........
8,000, ..........W,
6,000,
4,0
Single Unit includes detached,attached, and
00 ...............................................
2,000 mobile homes.
0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2011 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
—4—Single Unit Dwelling(56%) -*-2+Units per Structure(44%) —1,-, Nonresidential Sit Ft x'1000
F eceiit F esiii eintiiialll Construction
Since 2000, Bozeman has increased by an average of 589 housing units per year. The chart at
the bottom of Figure A2 indicates the estimated number of housing units added by decade in
Bozeman. Consistent with the nationwide decline in development activity, residential
construction has slowed significantly since 2008. Even with the recent drop in housing starts,
Bozeman added more units during the past decade than any previous decade.
Figure A2,,,,,,,,,Housing Units by Decade
Bozeman, Montana
Census 2010,Population* 37,2.80 From 2000 to 2010,
Census 2010 Housing Units* 17,464 Bozeman added an
Total Housing Units in 2000 11,577 average of 589 housing
New Housing Units 5,887 units per year.
* U.S. Census Bureau S1.
Housing Units Addled Icy Decade in Bozeman
6,000
5,000
4,000 ........ .. ...
3,000 ........ ......... ......... ........ ......... .........
2,000
1,000N
N40 NCO
Source for 1990s and earlier is Table B25034;American Community Survey, 2008-2010..
12
Populatioin aind Jo F: iireca t
To provide context for population and job growth in Bozeman, TischlerBise recommends
comparison to Gallatin County projections published by Woods & Poole Economics (2011). As
shown below, July 1St population data for the entire county is compared to 1990-2010 census
data for the City of Bozeman (April 1S). Woods & Poole annually updates a database containing
more than 900 economic and demographic variables for every county in the United States.
Their economic and demographic projections use an integrated projection model, so that
changes in one county will affect growth or decline in other counties. The methods used by
Woods & Poole to generate county projections proceed in four stages. First, forecasts to 2040
of total United States personal income, earnings by industry, employment by industry,
population, inflation, and other variables are made. Second, the country is divided into 179
Economic Areas (EAs) as defined by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic
Analysis (BEA). The EAs are aggregates of contiguous counties that attempt to measure
cohesive economic regions in the United States. For each EA, a projection is made for
employment, using an "export-base" approach. The employment projection for each EA is then
used to estimate earnings in each EA. The employment and earnings projections then become
the principal explanatory variables used to estimate population and number of households in
each EA. The third stage is to project population by age, sex, and race for each EA on the basis
of net migration rates associated with employment opportunities. For stages two and three,
the U.S. projection is the control total for the EA projections. The fourth stage replicates stages
two and three except that it is performed at the county level, using the EAs as the control total
for the county projections.
Figure A3 indicates the City's share of countywide population over time. Bozeman's 2009
Community Plan projected a population of 54,500 by 2015 (see Table A-12 in Appendix B). Due
to the significant decrease in housing construction in recent years, the impact fee update
assumes this population level will not be reached until 2030. Given these projections of County
and City population, Bozeman would experience a decrease in population share over the next
20 years. To derive annual data for the impact fee analysis, TischlerBise used an exponential
growth formula to yield more conservative short-term development increases.
13
Figure A3 City of Bozernan Populatiori Share
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
Gallatin County(July 1) 50,811 68,369 93,268 122,726 152,522
CityofBozeman(Apri| 1� 22,660 27,509 37,280 45,075 54,SOO
Remainder ofCounty 28,151 40,860 55,988 77,651 98,022
Bozeman Share 45% 481% 40% 3796 36%
Sources: Gallatin[ountyƒhnmWoods& Poole Economics/2O22/ Appendix 8ufthe
Bozeman Community Plan(2Q09)expected the City mm reach 54,5001 residents by2Q1S.
Due to the significant decrease/n housing construction/n recent years, this population
is not anticipated until 2O�0.
180,000 -
County(July 1)
401,000 -
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2011S 2020 2025, 2030 203S
In addition to data on residential development, the calculation of impact fees requires data on
nonresidential development. Tisoh|erBise uses the term "jobs" to refer to employment by place
of work. Similar to the population share evaluation discussed above, countywide jobs are
shown in Figure A4 along with the City ofBozeman job share. Countywide jobs are from Woods
& Poole Economics (2011), scaled according to the year 2000 ratio of jobs reported by the
Census Transportation Planning Package ([TPP) compared to the Bureau of Economic Analysis
(BEA) job data used by Woods & Poole. For the purpose of transportation impact fees, [TPP
data provide a better representation of the demand for journey-to-work travel. BEA includes
self-employed, sole proprietors, and part-time employment. Even though 2010CTPPdata is
not yet available, the methodology for deriving these two data sets has not changed
significantly over the past decade.
14
For the City of Bozeman, TischlerBise assumed a constant jobs-to-housing ratio over time.
TischlerBise also used an exponential formula to derive annual jobs from 2010 to 2030, thus
minimizing short-term increases in jobs and nonresidential floor area. Jobs were converted to
nonresidential floor area using average square feet per employee multipliers, as discussed
further below.
Figure A4 Cats of Bozetnan..Iob Sliare
2000 2003 2006 2010 2020 2030
Gallatin County 37,247 33,581 39,283 45„911 55,805 66,472
City of Bozeman 22,887 22,7441 25,011 26,9901 32,6511 39,500
Remainder of County 14,360 10,837 14P272 18,921 23,154 26,972
Bozeman Share 61% 68% 64% 59% 59% 59%
Sources: Gallatin County and Bozeman 2000 are from Census Transportation Planning Package
(CTPP). County and City data for 2003-2006 are from QnTheMap, U.S. Census Bureau web
application. Gallatin County 2010-2030 projections ore from Woods&Poole Economics(2011),
scaled by the ratio of CTPP to W&P jobs in 2000. Projected Bozemon jobs in 2030 assumes a
constant jobs-to-housing ratio over time.
�JQb CarQWth,.
70,000
0--City of Bozeman
u aMO ouMil
IIIIINn ”
60,000 ... Remaunder of Couinty
^
50,000 1111,-Gallatin County
U NUpypyulinouMUUnm
utiNUNIII IN
I IIIUNpIN1UlU
NyU
40,000 f ��llllli
110u\NY ONUS �,..nnnnn.r^"" 1
auw+"
30,000 µ.ms
20,000
�9
10,000
0
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
15
Jobs by "'rylpe of N inlre iii entiiialll Development
ent
Figure A5 indicates 2011 estimates of jobs and nonresidential floor area located in Bozeman.
Current floor area was derived from Montana Department of Revenue parcel data, aggregated
into three nonresidential categories using City of Bozeman land use descriptions. The
percentage distribution of jobs by type of nonresidential development was obtained from the
U.S. Census Bureau's On-The-Map web application. Average square feet of floor area per job,
for the three categories', helped TischlerBise select nonresidential prototypes to be used in the
transportation impact fee analysis, as discussed further below.
Figure AS,,,,,,,,,,,lobs and Floor Area Estimate
2011 Sq Ft Floor Area
Jobs (1) per Job (4)
Industrial 4,95,2,u u,u 18°ru, 555„ ,u,u,u,u2°,800,000
Retail/Restaurant(2) 7,703 28/"0 6881 5,300,000
All Other Services(3) 14,855 5,4%1 3701 5,500,000
TOTAL 27,509 100% 404 13,600,000
(1) Source: Percentage distribution by type based on jabs by
NAICS Sector, U.S. Census Bureau, Can-The-Map web application.
(2)Includes Accommodation and Food Services
(3)Major sectors are Health Care,Social Assistance, and
Educational Services..
(4) Square feet of nonresidential provided by City of Bozeman,
based on MT department of Revenue data.
' For Industrial, City of Bozeman Land Use Inventory includes Agricultural, Light and Heavy
Manufacturing and Industry. Retail/Restaurant includes Commercial Auto, Commercial Retail
Sales, Services, Banks, Restaurants, and Bars. All Other Services includes
Administrative/Professional, Church, Golf, Mixed Use, Public Facilities, Parks, Open Space,
Schools and Educational Facilities, and Undeveloped/Vacant.
16
Employees l per Squalre 1,,,, t of Noinlre iii elntiiialll Devellopillneint
In Figure A6, gray shading indicates three nonresidential development prototypes that will be
used by TischlerBise to derive vehicle trips and estimate potential impact fee revenue. The
prototype development for industrial jobs is "Manufacturing". Average weekday vehicle trip
generation rates are from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE 2008). The prototype
for retail and restaurant jobs is a "Discount Club" or typical big-box retailer. The prototype for
all other service jobs is a Research and Development Center, which is similar to a campus-style
industrial park but with more office space and less warehousing.
Figure A 6,,,,,,,,,Employee and Building Area Ratios
ITE Land Use7"Size Demand Wkdy Trip Ends Wkdy Trip Ends Emp Per Sq Lt
Code Unit Per Dmd Unit* Per Employee* Dmd Unit** Per Emp
Commercial/Shopping Center
820 1 Average Size 1,000 Sq Ft 42.94 na 100 500
1857 1�04,count Chub 1AOO Sq Ft 4LOO 32.21 L30 771
General Office
710 1 Average Size 1,000 Sq Ft 11.01 1 3.32 1 3.32 J 302
Other Nonresidential
770 Business Park*'*'* 1,000 Sq Ft 12.76 4.04 3.16 317
760 R`ese4r6&Dev Center 1,000S,4 Ft 8.11 2.77, 1.93 342
610 (Hospital 1,000 Sq Ft 16.50 5.20 117 315
565 Day Care student 4,48 28.13 0,16 na
550 University/College student 2.38 913 0,26 na
530 (High School student 1.71 19.74 0.09 na
520 Elementary School student 1.29 15.71 0.08 na
520 Elementary School 1,000 Sq Ft 15.43 15.71 0.98 1,018
320 Lodging room 5.63 12.81 0.44 na
254 Assisted Living bed 2.66 3.93 0.68 na
151 Mini-Warehouse 1,000 Sq Ft 2.50 61.90 0.04 24,760
150 Warehousing 1,000 Sq Ft 3.56 3.89 0,92 1,093
140 inuf cturi�n 1,000 q Ft, 3.82 2.111 3,11 1.79 558
110 Light Industrial 1,000 Sq Ft 6.97 102 231 433
* Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2008.
** Employees per demand unit calculated from trip rates,except for Shopping Center
data,which are derived from Development (Handbook and Dollars and Cents
of Shopping Centers, published by the Uirban Land Institute.
*** According to ITE, a Business Park is a group of flex-type buildings
served by a common roadway system. The tenant space includes a variety of uses
with an average mix of 20-30%office/commercial and 70-80%Industrial/warehousing.
17
Detaillled Development ent Piir jectiii n
Demographic data shown in Figure A7 will be used as key inputs to update development impact
fees in the City of Bozeman. Cumulative data are shown at the top and projected annual
increases by type of development are shown at the bottom of the table. Given the expectation
that impact fees are updated every five years, TischlerBise did not evaluate long-term
demographic trends such as declining household size. As discussed in the next section,
TischlerBise recommends the use of persons per housing unit to derive impact fees. Therefore,
vacancy rates and number of households are not essential to the demographic analysis.
Figure A 7,,,,,,,,,Annual l etnogra lzlc Data
FY11-12
Bozeman,Montana 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016. 2020 2030
Cumulative Base Yr 1 2 3 4 5 9 19
Year-Round Population 37,280 37,995 38,723 39,465 40,222 40,993 41,778 45,075 54,500
Jobs 26,990 27,509 28,038 28,577 29,126 29,686 30,257 32,651 39,500
Housing Units 17,464 17,799 18,140 18,488 18,842 19,203 19,571 21,116 25,531
Jobs to Housing Ratio 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55
Persons per Hsg Unit 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13
Nonres Sq Ft in thousands(KSF)
Industrial 2,800 2,854 2,909 2,965 3,022 3,080 3,323 4,020
Retail/Restaurant 5,300 5,402 5,506 5,612 5,719 5,82.9 6,291 7,610
All Other Services 5,500 5,606 5,713 5,823 5,935 6,049 6,528 7897
Total 13,600 13,861 14,128 14,399 14,676 14,958 16,142 1.9,528
Avg Sq Ft Per Job 494 494 494 494 494 494 494 494
2011-2030
Annual Increase 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 1.5-16 19-20 Aver Ant
Population 728 742 756 771 786 848 869
Jobs 529 539 549 560 571 616 631
Housing Units 341 348 354 361 358 398 407
Industrial KSF 54 55 56 57 58 63 E4
Retail/Restaurant IKSF 102 104 106 108 110 119 122
All Other Services KSF 106 108 110 112 114 123 126
Total Nonresidential KSF/Yr=> 261 266 272 277 282 304 312
Persons l per I,,,,lousing n iii t
The 2010 census did not obtain detailed information using a "long-form" questionnaire.
Instead, the U.S. Census Bureau has switched to a continuous monthly mailing of surveys,
known as the American Community Survey (ACS), which is limited by sample-size constraints in
areas with relatively few residents. For cities like Bozeman, data on detached housing units are
now combined with attached single units (commonly known as townhouses). Part of the
rationale for deriving fees by housing unit size, as discussed further below, is to address this
ACS data limitation. Because townhouses and mobile homes generally have less floor area than
18
detached units, fees by house size ensure proportionality and facilitate construction of
affordable units.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a household is a housing unit that is occupied by year-
round residents. Impact fees often use per capita standards and persons per housing unit or
persons per household to derive proportionate-share fee amounts. When persons per housing
unit are used in the fee calculations, infrastructure standards are derived using year-round
population. When persons per household are used in the fee calculations, the impact fee
methodology assumes all housing units will be occupied, thus requiring seasonal or peak
population to be used when deriving infrastructure standards. TischlerBise recommends that
impact fees for residential development in the City of Bozeman be imposed according to the
number of year-round residents per housing unit. As shown at the bottom of Figure A9, census
data indicates Bozeman had 17,464 housing units in 2010. In 2010, dwellings with a single unit
per structure (detached, attached, and mobile homes) averaged 2.23 persons per housing unit.
Dwellings in structures with multiple units averaged 1.62 year-round residents per unit.
Figure A9 Year-Round Persons per Unit,by Type of Housing
2009 Summary by Type of Housing from American Community Survey
Units in Structure Renter& Owner
Persons House- Persons per Housing P'enrs6nsper
hold's Household Units frausingr unit
Single Unit* 20,571 8,753 235 9,726 2.12
2+ Units 11,793 6,813 1.73 7,642 1154
Subtotal 32,364 15,566 2.018 17,368
Group Quarters 4,759
TOTAL 37,123 15,566 17,368 114
* Single family includes detached, attached, and.mobile homes.
Source: Tables B25024, B2503Z B250,33, and B26001.
2008-2010 American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau.
2010 Census
Single Unit* 21,770 8,871 2.45 9,780 2M2 '
2+ Units 12,480 6,904 1.81 7,684 L62
Group Quarters 3,030
TOTAL 37,280 15,775 236 17,464 2..
* Single unit includes detached, attached, and mobile homes.
Source; Totals from Summary File 1, U.S, Census Bureau.
19
Demand a l lindicatoirs by Size of Detached I lousfing
As an alternative to simply using the national average trip generation rate for residential
development, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publishes regression curve
formulas that may be used to derive custom trip generation rates using local demographic data.
Key independent variables needed for the analysis (i.e. vehicles available, housing units,
households and persons) are available from the University of Missouri's website. TischlerBise
used American Community Survey (ACS 2008-2010) data for Bozeman to derive custom average
weekday trip generation rates by type of housing, as shown in Figure A10. A vehicle trip end
represents a vehicle either entering or exiting a development, as if a traffic counter were placed
across a driveway.
Figure A, - Residential Trip Generation Rates by Tyre of dousing
Bozeman, Montana Households(2) Vehicles per
Vehicles Single Unit 2+Units Total Household
Available(1) per Structure per Structure by Tenure
Owner-occupied 14,422 6,473 914 7,387 1.95
Renter-occupied 12,263 2,280 5,899 8,179 1.50
TOTAL 2.6,685 8,753 6,813 1.5,566 1.71
Housing Units(6)=> 9,7261 7,6421 17,368
Units per Persons Trip Vehicles by Trip Average Trip Ends per
Structure (3) Ends(4) Type of Housing Ends(5) Trip Ends Dousing Unit
Single knits 20,5711 53,251 16,056 92,807 73,029 7.5
2+ Units 11,793 40,857 10,629 42,172 41,514 5.4
TOTAL 32,364 94,108 26,685 134,978 114,543 6.6
(1) 'Vehicles available by tenure from Table B25046,American Community Survey, 2008-2010.
(2) (Households by tenure and units in structure from Table B25032,American Community Survey,
2008-20,10.
(3) (Persons by units in structure from Table B25033,American Community Survey, 2008-2010.
(4) Vehicle trips ends based on persons using formulas from Trip Generation (ITE 2008). For single unit
housing(IITE 210),the fitted curve equation is IEXP(0.91*LN(persons)+1.52). To approximate the average
population of the ITE studies, persons were divided by 37 and the equation result multiplied by 37. For 2+
unit housing(ITE 220),the fined curve equation is(3.47*persons)-64.48.
(5)vehicle trip ends based on vehicles available using formullas from Trip Generation(ITE 2008). For single
unit housing(ITE 210),the fitted curve equation is EXP(0.99*LIN(vehicles)+1.81). To approximate the
average number of vehicles in the ITE studies,vehicles available were divided by 62 and the equation result
multiplied by 62. For 2+unit housing(ITE 220),the fitted curve equation is(3,94*vehicles)+293.58.
(6) Housing units from Table 1325024,American Community Survey,2008-2010.
20
Custom tabulations of demographic data by bedroom range can be created from survey
responses provided by the U.S. Census Bureau in files known as Public Use Micro-data Samples
(PUMS). Because PUMS files are only available for areas of roughly 100,000 persons, the City of
Bozeman is included in Public Use Micro-data Area 00500, which includes five counties
(Meagher, Park, Gallatin, Madison, and Beaverhead). As shown in Figure A11, TischlerBise
derived trip generation rates and average persons per housing unit by bedroom range, from
PUMS data. Recommended multipliers were scaled to make the average value by type of
housing for PUMA 00500 match the average value derived from 2010 census data for the City
of Bozeman. Because single units are more numerous, with a greater range of size and value, it
is possible to derive four size categories. In contrast, residential structures with multiple units
are limited to three size categories.
Figure All VeNcle Trips and Persons by Bedrooin Range
Bozeman, Montana Recommended Multipliers(4)
Persons Trip Vehicles Trip .Average Housing Trip Ends per Persons per
(1) Ends(2) Available(1) Ends(3) Trip Ends Units(1) Housing Unit Housing Unit
Single Unit<3 Bdrms 654 1,960 717 4,202 3,081 497 5.5 1.5
Single Unit 3 Bdrms 1,309 3,686 1,255 7,314 5,500 630 7.7 2.3
Single Unit 4 Bdrms 709 2,110 637 3,738 2,924 284 9.1 2.8
Single Unit>4 Bdrms 368 1,162 297 1,7561 1,459 114 11.3 3.6
Single Unit Subtotal 3,040 8,918 2,906 17,009 12,964 1,525 75 2.2
2+Units<2 Bdrms 78 206 63 542 374 84 3.9 11
2+Units 2 Bdrms 160 491 128 798 644 104 5.5 1.7
2+Units a2 Bdrms 112 324 83 621 472 56 7.5 2.3
2+Unifs Subtotal 3s0l, 1,021 274 ' 1960 1;491 244 5.4 1.6
GRAND TOTAL 3,390 9,939 3,180 18,970 14,454 1,769
(1) American Community Survey,Public Use Microdata Sample for MT PUMA 00500(2007-2009 ulnweighted data).
(2) Vehicle trips ends based on persons using formulas from Trip Generation(ITE 2008). For single unit housing(ITE 210),
the fitted curve equation its EXP(0.91*LN(personls)+11.52). To approximate the average population in the ITE studies,
persons were divided by 6 and the equation result multiplied by 6.
(3)Vehicle trip ends based on vehicles available using formulas from Trip Generation(ITE 2008). For single unit housing
(ITE 210),the fitted curve equation is EXP(0.99*LN(vehicles)+1.81). To approximate the average number of vehicles in the
ITE studies,vehicles available were divided by 11 and the equation result multiplied by 11.
(4) Recommended multipliers are scaled to make the average values by type of housing for PUMA 00500 match the
average values for Bozeman,derived from American Community Survey 2008-2010 data.
rilriIII eineiratioin by F::11oolr Alrea of Single Unit I°°lousing
To derive average weekday vehicle trip ends by square feet of single unit housing, TischlerBise
combined demographic data from the Census Bureau and house size data obtained by City staff
from the Montana Department of Revenue. The number of bedrooms per housing unit is the
common connection between the two databases. As shown in Figure Al2, the average size,
single unit house with less than three bedrooms has 1,611 square feet of living area. The
average size of a three-bedroom unit is 2,101 square feet of living area and four-bedroom units
21
average 2,782 square feet. Single unit dwellings with five or more bedrooms average 3,377
square feet of living area (i.e. heated space excluding garages).
Average floor area and weekday vehicle trip ends by bedroom range are plotted in Figure Al2,
with a logarithmic trend line derived from the four actual averages in Bozeman. TischlerBise
used the trend line formula to derive estimated trip ends by size of single unit house, in 100
square feet intervals. The weighted average single unit generates 7.5 weekday trip ends. A
small unit with 1,400 square feet would pay 60% of the transportation impact fee for an
average size unit. A large unit of 3,400 square feet would pay 148% of the transportation
impact fee for an average size unit. In the 2008 transportation impact fee study, the fee
schedule for single-family units was also structured with size thresholds in combination with
income criteria, but in one thousand square feet thresholds. Size increments can be adjusted
based on community input.
Figure Al2 VeNcle Trips by Size e of Single le Unit Dwelling
Average sgluare feet of Single Unit Actoo Av rages per Hsg Unit F tteO-Curue'Volu s
dwellings in Bozeman from MT Bedrooms Square.Feet Trip Ends SquoreFeeti Trip Ends
Department of Revenue. Average two or less 1,611 5.5 1,400 4.5
weekday vehicle trip ends derived three 2,101 7.7 1,500 5.0
from IT8 formulas using Census four 2,782 9.1 1,600 5.5
Bureau data for Bozeman, five or more 1 3,3771 11.3 1,700' 5.9
1,800 J 6.3
Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends 1,900 6.7
........per Single Unit IDelling in Bozeman
2,000 7.1
2,100' 7,5
2,200' 7.8
12.0
2,300'. 8.2
10.0 2,400' 8.5
2,500 8.8
8.0 2,60'0' 9.1
ur
2,70'0 9.4
UJ 6.0 2,800'
9.6
IIIIIIII
4.0 y 7.4468in(x)-49.482 2,900' 9.9
R'=0.98028 3,000 10.1
2.0 31100' 10.4
3,200 10.6
0.0 3,3010' 10.8
1,100 1,600 2,100 2,600 3,100, 3,600 3,40'0 11.1
Sgluare(Feet
22
Average N iir llbeiir of Persoins by Squalre 1°°eet of Sfingle Unit Dwelling
Determining the average number of persons by square feet of single unit housing requires a
combination of demographic data from the Census Bureau and house size data from the local
property-tax database, with number of bedrooms as the common connection between the two
databases. The average size single unit house, by bedroom range, is based on living area, which
excludes garages.
Average floor area and number of persons by bedroom range are plotted in Figure A13, with a
logarithmic trend line derived from the four actual averages in the City of Bozeman. Using the
trend line formula shown in the chart, TischlerBise derived the estimated average number of
persons, by size of single unit house, using 100 square feet intervals. For the purpose of impact
fees, TischlerBise recommends a minimum fee based on a unit size of 1400 square feet and a
maximum fee based on a unit size of 3,400 square feet. The average single unit has 2.2
persons.
Figure A13,,,,,,,,,Persons by Square Feet,of Single Unit,Residential
.Average square feet of Single
Unit dwellings in Bozeman from Bedrooms Square Feet Persons Square Feet Persons'
M Department of Revenue. two or less 1,611 1.5 1,400 1.1
.Average number of persons per three 2,101 23 1,500 1.3
housing unit from Census Bureau f 2,782 2.8 1,600 1.5
data for Bozeman. 3,377 3.6 1,700 13
1,800 1.8
Average Persons per Single Unfit Dwelling in 1,900 1.9
2,000 2.1
Bozeman .
2,100 2.2
4.0 2,200 2.3
3.5 2,300 25
2,400 2.6
3.0
y 2,500 2.7
2.5 2,600 2.8
2.0 2,700 2.9
2,800 3.0
1.5 „, 2,900 3.1
1.0 y=2.69321n(x)-18.383 3,000 3.2
R2=0.9795
0.5 3,100 ]3.5
0.0 3,200
3,300
1,100 1,600 2,100 2,600 3,100 3,600
3,400
Square Feet
23
rrillp Geineiratioin by F::11oor Area of F e iii eintiiialll Structures with 2+ Units
Given Bozeman's balanced housing stock with a significant number of residential structures
with multiple units, TischlerBise also derived demand indicators by size for residential
structures with two or more units. For structures with multiple units, the average size dwelling
with less than two bedrooms has 977 square feet of living area. The average size of a two-
bedroom unit is 1,192 square feet of living area. Dwellings with more than two bedrooms
average 1,820 square feet of living area.
Average floor area and weekday vehicle trip ends by bedroom range are plotted in Figure A14,
with a logarithmic trend line derived from the three actual averages in Bozeman. TischlerBise
used the trend line formula to derive estimated trip ends by unit size for residential structures
with multiple units, in 100 square feet intervals. The weighted-average residential structure
with multiple units generates 5.4 vehicle trip ends on a weekday. The weighted-average trip
generation rate would be used to derive the updated transportation impact fee If City Council
makes a policy decision to not impose impact fees by size of multifamily housing. In the 2008
transportation impact fee study, fees for apartments are based on 6.64 trip ends per average
weekday. The proposed fee for a dwelling in a multi-unit structure with 900 square feet would
be 67% of the amount imposed on the average unit. A large unit with 1,800 square feet would
pay 139% of the amount imposed on the average dwelling in a multi-unit structure.
24
Figure A14 Vehicle Traps by Dwelling Size for + eats per Structure
MI/////////////////////////////O//////////////////////////r///////////% Elehan l Averages per Hsg Unit Fitt tl-G`urve'Molues
�/��f� f� I/ � ms Scare Feet Tri Ends S uare Feet Tri Ends
ll� /�r�//// rrr�l r1!%/�i/%/ll/�llr1/Oj%/,� �, 2 977 3.9 900 3.6
aJ%f1/iii%rr/f/�/ r1/� 1192 5.5 1000 4.2
�������f���//� fry ,
11 1111 lifll J f/% %%�/i0/ ��/ n 2 1,820 7.5 1,100 4.8
Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends per Dwellling for 1,300 5.7
2+ Units per Structure in Bozeman 1,400 6.1
1,500 6.5
1,600 6.9
8.0 1,700 7.2
7.0 1,800 7.5
6.0
C 5.0
C
Q 4.0
~ 3.0 y= 5.62311n(x)-34.618
R2=0.98018
2.0
1.0
0.0
800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000
Square Feet
25
F)eiirs ins Il per D elllllliiiii by F::11oor Area for 2+ Units Il per Structure
Average floor area and number of persons by bedroom range are plotted in Figure A15, with a
logarithmic trend line derived from the three actual averages in the City of Bozeman. Using the
trend line formula shown in the chart, TischlerBise derived the estimated average number of
persons, by dwelling size for residential structures with multiple units, using 100 square feet
intervals. For residential structures with two or more units, TischlerBise recommends a
minimum fee based on a unit size of 900 square feet and a maximum fee based on a unit size of
1,800 square feet.
Figure A15,,,,,,,,,Persons by Square Feet in + Units Per Structure
Actual Averages per Hsg Unit Fitted-Curve 1(alues
Average square feet from Bedrooms Square Feet Persons Square Feet Persons
Department of Revenue. Average rage
number of persons per housing less than 2 977 1.1 900 1.0
unit from Census Bureau data for two 1,192 1.7 1,000 1.2
Bozeman. more than 2 1,820 2.3 1,100 1.4
1,200 1.6
n, a ,n. . ,n, � . � ,n,
1,300 1.7
Average Persons per Bozeman Dwelling in 1,400 1.9
2+ Units per Structure
1,500 2.0
2.5 1,600 2.1
1,700 2.2
N 1,800 2.3
C 2.0
0
N
L
CU
a 1.5
1.0 y= 1.84971n(x)-11.54
R2 =0.95843
0.5 iiii fo i, i,? ,,ia oc f%il' iiliaa f iaaio iliirf llf o'lw' li ii
0.0
800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000
Square Feet
26