|
ATTACHMENT B
<br />Methodology = Based on an 3 -yr avg of shelter use (80%) and %of population (20%)
<br />ANIMAL CONTROL COSTS
<br />PROPOSED COST DISTRIBUTION -ESTIMATED LEASE AMOUNTS TO RECOUP CONSTRUCTION COSTS
<br />Shelter Use Shelter Use
<br />Calendar Year
<br />�>1t�,.Luu,0U0 520,200,000 I $24,800,000
<br />ESTANNUALLEASE ESTANNUALLEASE ESTANNUALLEASE
<br />Yr 12009 Actual Yr 2 2010 Actual Yr 3 2011 Actual Sheleter Use POPULATION % of Total AMT AMT I AMT
<br />Atherton
<br />1.12%
<br />1.00%
<br />0.36%.
<br />0.83%
<br />6,914
<br />1.0%
<br />$4,297
<br />$5,749
<br />Belmont
<br />3.26%
<br />3.54% '
<br />2.65%
<br />3.15%
<br />25,835
<br />3.6%
<br />$3.6,304
<br />$21811
<br />Brisbane
<br />0.99%
<br />0.99%
<br />0.71%
<br />0.90%
<br />4,282
<br />0.6%
<br />$4,211
<br />$5,633
<br />Burlingame
<br />3.51%
<br />3.48%
<br />320%
<br />3.40%
<br />28,806
<br />4.0%
<br />$17,713
<br />$23,696
<br />Colma
<br />0.61%
<br />0.98%
<br />0.60%
<br />0.73%
<br />1,792
<br />2.0%
<br />$3,191
<br />$4,268
<br />Daiv City
<br />8.52%
<br />9.57%
<br />10.16%
<br />9.42%
<br />101,123
<br />14.1%
<br />$52,087
<br />$69,679
<br />East Palo Alto
<br />6.61%
<br />6.75%
<br />8.44%
<br />7.27%
<br />28,155
<br />3.9%
<br />$33,205
<br />$44,420
<br />Foster City
<br />2.82%
<br />2.39%
<br />1.93%
<br />2.38%
<br />30,567
<br />4.3%
<br />$13,866
<br />$18,550
<br />Half Moan Bay •
<br />5.21%
<br />5.04%
<br />2.47%
<br />424%
<br />11,324
<br />1.6%
<br />$18,660
<br />$24,962
<br />Hillsborough
<br />1.59%
<br />129%
<br />1.14%
<br />1.34%
<br />10,825
<br />1.5%
<br />$6,912
<br />$9,247
<br />Menlo Park
<br />4.90%
<br />4.95%
<br />4.50%
<br />4.78%
<br />32,026
<br />4.5%
<br />$23,748
<br />$31,769
<br />Millbrae
<br />1.90%
<br />1.99%
<br />1.98%
<br />1.96%
<br />21,532
<br />3.0%
<br />$10,896
<br />$14,576
<br />Pacifica
<br />5.72%
<br />6.38%
<br />4.78%
<br />5.63%
<br />37,234
<br />52.0%
<br />$27,874
<br />$37,288
<br />Portola Valley
<br />0.90%
<br />0.76%
<br />0.16%
<br />0.61%
<br />4,353
<br />0.6%
<br />$3,053
<br />$4,084
<br />Redwood City
<br />12.91%
<br />13.24%
<br />13.25%
<br />13.13%
<br />76,815
<br />10.7%
<br />$63,647
<br />,$85,143
<br />San Bruno
<br />5.23%
<br />5.19%
<br />6.86%
<br />5.76%
<br />41,114
<br />5.7%
<br />$28,954
<br />$38,734
<br />San Carlos
<br />3.35%
<br />3.45%
<br />3.00%
<br />3.27%
<br />28,406
<br />4.0%
<br />$17,134
<br />$22,921
<br />San Mateo
<br />15.82%
<br />14.67%
<br />17.84%
<br />16.11%
<br />97,207
<br />13.5%
<br />$78,490
<br />$145,000
<br />S. San Francisco
<br />9.08%
<br />9.34%
<br />11.99%
<br />10.14%
<br />63,632
<br />8.9%
<br />$49,733
<br />$66,530
<br />Woodside
<br />4.41%
<br />1.27%
<br />1.07%
<br />2.25% •
<br />5,287
<br />0.7%
<br />$9,801
<br />$13,111
<br />County
<br />1.57%
<br />3.73%
<br />2.92%
<br />2.74%
<br />61,222
<br />8.5%
<br />$19,611
<br />$26,235
<br />-::Y:.. -.... :n .a
<br />HVAG+SoiarCoSts,.
<br />Total
<br />100.00%
<br />100.00%
<br />100.00%
<br />100.00%
<br />718,451
<br />100.00%
<br />$503,387
<br />$673,405
<br />' HVAC and Solar costs of $1.8 million removed from cities portion of costs and paid for by County of San Mateo.
<br />Overall total project cost with HVAC and Solar is $26.6 million.
<br />Resolution #073369
<br />7
<br />095
<br />241
<br />776
<br />650
<br />354
<br />008
<br />897
<br />784
<br />014
<br />-Pz, w
<br />
|