Page 217 - Littleton, CO Comprehensive Plan

Fiscal Impact Analysis
The City of Littleton, CO

▪ Scenario 2 (Larger Nonresidential Share) generates $214 million in revenue compared to $206
million in expenditures over the 20-year projection period. This generates an $8 million net
surplus. As discussed, both Scenario 2 and Scenario 3 generate positive results in contrast to
Scenario 1, because both scenarios assume substantially less population growth (half of that
assumed in Scenario 1), while projecting a significant increase in nonresidential development.
As a result, the growth projected in both scenarios places less overall demand on City services
and related infrastructure, while simultaneously producing more revenue. Although Property
Taxes account for a relatively small share of General Fund revenue, it is also worth noting that
because of their different tax assessment rates, commercial property generates more Property
Tax revenue than residential development. (Per State law, taxable value of residential property
is 7.2 percent of its appraised value, compared to an assessment rate of 29 percent for
commercial property).

▪ Scenario 3 (Largest Nonresidential Share) creates $321 million in revenue compared to $262
million in expenditures over the 20-year projection period. This generates a $58 million net
surplus. Scenario 3 yields the greatest revenue to the City because it calls for more
development by assuming an increase in the allowable Floor Area Ration (“FAR”) in certain
locations. In doing so, Scenario 3 generates significantly more Sales Tax revenue than both
Scenario 1 and Scenario 2. Although nonresidential development does place some significant
demand on certain operating and capital costs (public safety, for instance), it is generally less
costly to the City in that it places less demand on transportation, recreation, and
governmental facility infrastructure than does residential development. This is reflected by
the fact that although Scenario 3 calls for the most development out of the three scenarios,
it generates less net cumulative expenditures than Scenario 1.

29