1995-20928-Resolution No. 95-066 Recorded 6/16/1995r
95-2092.8
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR DESCHUTES
REVI WAD
CF
..�..�-
LEG COUNSEL
COUNTY, OREGON
A Resolution Establishing a System
Development Charge for Transportation *
Within the Bend Area Urban Growth
Boundary Outside the City of Bend. * ''
RESOLUTION NO. 95-066 0146"'188
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES
COUNTY, OREGON, as follows:.
Section 1. Purpose of Transportation SDCs. Deschutes County Code
Chapter 15.12 and ORS 223.297 to 223.314 provide for the establishment
of system development charges (SDCs) by resolution. This resolution
shall establish the SDCs for transportation within the Bend Area Urban
Growth Boundary outside the City of Bend. The purpose of the SDCs
imposed by this resolution under authority of Chapter 15.12 DCC is for
a portion of the cost of capital improvements for streets and roads in
the Bend Urban Area as set forth in Section 4 of this resolution. As
used in this resolution, the term "Bend Area Urban Growth Boundary"
means the outer urban growth boundary and includes all areas designated
Bend Urban Reserve.
Section 2. Transportation SDCs Methodology. The basic
methodology used to establish the transportation development charge in
this resolution is contained in a document entitled "City of Bend
Transportation System Development Charges, October 1994, Final Report,"
prepared by Economic and Engineering Services, Inc., marked Exhibit A,
attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Portions of
this basic methodology have been revised and supplemented by data and
considerations which are contained in a document titled "Revision and
Supplementation to Economic and Engineering Services, Inc.,
Methodology," marked Exhibit B, attached hereto and by this reference
incorporated herein.
Section 3. SDC Amount. The SDCs for transportation within the
Bend Area Urban Growth Boundary outside the City of Bend shall be 70
percent of the SDC amount per unit as set out in the document titled
"Street SDC Rate Schedule" included in Exhibit B. This schedule of
transportation SDCs replaces the transportation SDCs set out in Exhibit
2 of Exhibit A.
Section 4. Capital Improvements. The improvement plan, marked
Exhibit C, and depicted on the map marked Exhibit D, shall be completed
within ten (10) years from the date of this resolution.
Section 5. Effective Date. The SDCs provided in this resolution
shall be effective the 15th day of June, 1995, provided, however, that
transportation SDCs shall not be applied to those projects that have
completed plans submitted to the County on or before June 15, 1995.
PAGE 1 - RESOLUTION 95-066 (6-14-95)
4 LJN 1995
t , 1
Section 6. Collection. The transportation SDC shall be payable
in full upon issuance of a building permit for which the methodology
adopted herein imposes a transportation SDC.
Section 7. Transportation Credit and Reimbursement Policy.
A. Purpose. It shall be the policy of Deschutes County that
expansions to the transportation system shall only be
accomplished as directed and approved by Deschutes County.
The timing and financing of expansions shall be as provided
in this policy.
Expansions to the transportation system that involve the
construction of collector and arterial streets shall be
accomplished pursuant to the County's Comprehensive Plan. It
is anticipated that these improvements will be financed by
funds generated from systems development charges, other
resources or by developers as provided below. The timing of
improvements to be constructed by the County will be subject
to the availability of County funds to finance them.
B. Procedure. Developers who wish to expand the
transportation system by dedicating land and/or
constructing streets may do so according to the
following procedure:
1. Prior County approval is required.
2. An executed agreement between the developer and
the County shall be required and shall set forth
the development requirements as well as an SDC
credit and/or SDC reimbursement, if available.
3. All improvements must be constructed according to
applicable County Standards, rules and
regulations, including the Comprehensive Plan, as
determined by the County.
4. All of the cost of such improvements shall be paid
by the developer.
5. The developer's costs associated with the
construction of these qualified public
improvements may be eligible for a SDC credit
and/or SDC reimbursement as provided in this
policy.
C. SDC Credit. The SDC credit shall be determined first
and shall:
1. Only be available for qualified public
improvements as defined in Oregon Revised Statutes
PAGE 2 - RESOLUTION 95-066 (6-14-95)
(ORS) 223.304(3) (i.e., improvements that are
required as a condition of development and
identified in the County's Comprehensive Plan).
2. Be a credit against only the improvement fee
portion of the SDC. The improvement fee portion
against which the credit may be applied shall be
calculated by using the methodology as it is
employed in the County's SDC Ordinance and
Resolution. If less than the maximum allowable
SDC is charged in the Resolution, the percentage
of the maximum allowable SDC used shall also be
used to determine that portion of the improvement
fee against which the SDC credit can be applied.
3. The amount of the credit shall not exceed the
improvement fee as calculated above.
D. SDC Reimbursement. In addition to the SDC credit, a
developer may be eligible for SDC reimbursement. SDC
reimbursement shall be determined as set forth in
subsections E through K of this Section.
E. SDC Credit and Reimbursement -Collection and Payment
Procedures. SDC credit and SDC reimbursement will be
collected and paid as follows:
1. The current SDC, as established by the Board of
County Commissioners, shall be collected by the
County on all building permits issued by the
County or with other agreements as applicable.
The SDC has one component; an improvement fee for
future system improvements.
2. SDC improvement fees collected by the County shall
be paid to developers and retained by the County
in accordance with this resolution.
F. Shared/Sole Recovery Areas.
1. The area served or to be served by the
transportation system will be categorized as
either shared recovery area or as sole recovery
area. Sole recovery areas shall be determined by
the County Engineer and shall include only the
developer's property that is to be served by the
approved comprehensive plan facilities constructed
by the developer. Shared recovery area shall
include all area served or to be served by the
transportation system that is not otherwise
designated as sole recovery area.
PAGE 3 - RESOLUTION 95-066 (6-14-95)
I
0146-1890
2. SDC improvement fees collected from each sole
recovery area shall be applied as follows:
a. SDC credit due the developer of the sole
recovery property, until paid.
b. SDC reimbursement due the developer of the
sole recovery property, until paid or until
the ten-year recovery period expires.
C. Once items a and b are met, the sole recovery
property shall become shared recovery area.
3. SDC improvement fees collected from the shared
recovery area shall be applied as follows:
To developers with outstanding SDC credit and SDC
reimbursement balances, including the County, in
proportion to the outstanding SDC credit and SDC
reimbursement balances, at the end of the
repayment period, of all developers, including the
County participating in the shared recovery area.
4. SDC improvement fees collected and paid to
developers from the shared recovery area shall be
limited to the amount of SDC credit and/or SDC
reimbursement that would not otherwise be
collectible from SDC improvement fees within a
developer's sole recovery area.
5. There shall be no payment made, for either the SDC
credit or SDC reimbursement, to the developer from
any SDC improvement fee collected within the sole
recovery area or shared recovery area until the
improvements are accepted by the County.
6. There shall be no SDC credit or SDC reimbursement
paid after ten years from the date the qualified
improvements are accepted by the District.
7. A sole recovery area shall become shared recovery
area when the developer has been paid the SDC
credit and/or SDC reimbursement in full, or the
SDC credit is paid in full and the ten-year SDC
reimbursement period expires.
G. Payment Schedule.
1. Payment of SDC credit and SDC reimbursement
amounts shall be payable annually by the County
for SDC improvement fees collected by the County
from January 1 through December 31 of each year by
January 31 of the year following collection by
County.
PAGE 4 - RESOLUTION 95-066 (6-14-95)
0146-189A
2. No interest shall accrue on SDC credit or C
reimbursement payable to developers.
3. There shall be no adjustments made to the amount
of any SDC credit or SDC reimbursement amount as a
result of inflation.
H. Assignment of Claims. Claims from SDC credit and SDC
reimbursement are personal and may not be assigned
without the written consent of County.
I. Future Changes to Maximum Allowable SDC. Future changes
by the County of the maximum allowable SDC or the
percentage of the maximum allowable SDC imposed shall
neither increase or decrease the SDC credit or SDC
reimbursement determined above, however, if the
percentage of the maximum allowable SDC is changed, all
active public improvement agreements will be reviewed
and, if necessary, SDC credit and/or SDC reimbursement
amounts to be collected and reimbursed developers from
sole and shared recovery areas will be recalculated in
accordance with this policy.
J. County's Obligation to Pay. The County's obligation to
pay or apply SDC credit or SDC reimbursement shall be
limited to SDC improvement fees actually collected by
the County as provided in this policy. County's
obligation to pay or apply SDC credit or SDC
reimbursement from SDC improvement fees collected shall
be further limited to the total of the SDC credit and
SDC reimbursement calculated as provided in this policy.
Payment of SDC credit and SDC reimbursement shall be
subject to prior reimbursement claims which are payable
from SDC collections. Persons who receive, or are
entitled to claim, SDC credit or SDC reimbursement shall
indemnify and hold the County harmless in the event the
County is subject to claims by others for SDC credit or
SDC reimbursement for the same improvements. County
shall have the right to set off the amount of any
competing claims for SDC credit or SDC reimbursement
against prior claims for the same SDC credit or SDC
reimbursement if in the County's judgment it becomes
necessary to do so.
K. Applicability. This policy shall apply to all eligible
improvements installed and accepted after Resolution
95-066 which established transportation SDCs effective
June 15, 1995.
Section 8. Continuing Resolution. The SDC established by this
resolution shall be effective until superseded by resolution of the
Board of County Commissioners of Deschutes County, Oregon.
PAGE 5 - RESOLUTION 95-066 (6-14-95)
0146-1892
Section 9. Expenditure. The SDC established by this resolution
shall be collected and expended in compliance with ORS 223.297 to
223.314 (including the provisions for credit for qualified public
improvements contained in ORS 223.304), and other applicable County
rules and regulations. Expenditure of SDCs collected under this
resolution may be expended pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement
on projects listed in Section 4 of this resolution.
DATED this 14th day of June, 1995.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
ATT T:
Recording Secret ry
PAGE 6 - RESOLUTION 95-066 (6-14-95)
VLq
H. SLAUGHTER, Chair
� --- f = X- I
, Commissi.one
n
L. NIPDER, Coikdn ssioner
0146-1893
CITY OF BEND
TRANSPORTATION
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
OCTOBER 1994
FINAL REPORT
Prepared By:
Economic and Engineering Services, Inc.
Bellevue, WA * Olympia, WA * Portland, OR
Vancouver, B.C. * Washington, D.C.
Ex % tf�:l T
�E9
ECONOMIC AND ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC.0146-1894
, �1 [��1
=330 S W. dlacadarr. Aver_e Suite 395 V1 ®� rL
Por land. t:R ..'�_' j 89
5031223.3033.FAX,�-=71•_2==
File R
October 3, 1994
Mr. John Hossik, Director
Planning Department
City of Bend
PO Box 431
Bend, Oregon 97701
Re: System Development CharLyes - Transportation
Dear Mr. Hossik:
60110
Enclosed is Economic and Engineering Services, Inc.'s, (EES) final report on system
development charges for the City of Bend's (City) and Deschutes County's (County's)
transportation system. The conclusions and recommendations contained within this report
should enable the City and County to implement system development charges which are cost
based.
EES appreciates the opportunity to assist the City and County in this matter. We
would also like to thank you and your staff for your assistance in this project. If you have any
questions, please call.
Very truly yours,
ECONOMIC AND ENGINEERING
SERVICES, INC.
dall P. Goff
Vice President
RPG:PP
Winawam01
Otyno.a. WA Bellevue. WA Vancouver. B.0 Por- ?-d.OR Washington. D.0
Section
I
0
Gil
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES 0146-1895
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Description Page
b
Introduction 1
Introduction
1
Scope of Services
1
Organization of Report
1
Disclaimer
2
Executive Summary and Recommendations
3
Introduction
3
Proposed System Development Charges
3
Recommendations
5
Sample Resolution or Ordinance
6
Implementation
6
System Development Charges in Oregon
7
Introduction
7
Requirements Under Oregon Law
7
Economic Theory
9
System Development Charge Methodology
10
Introduction
10
Overview of Methodology
10
Daily Trip Rate and Average
Trip Lengths
12
Required New Lane Miles
13
Construction Costs
13
Credits
14
Compliance Costs
14
Net System Development Charge
15
System Development Charge Calculation
16
Introduction
16
Daily Trip Rate and Average
Trip Length
16
Capacity
16
Construction Costs
17
Credits
17
Compliance Costs
18
Net System Development Charge
18
Sample Changes
18
Conclusions
20
i
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit Description
I Sample SDC Resolution
2 Average Daily Travel
3 City and County Capital
Improvement Planning
11
i
0-146-1-096
Page
A-1
A-8
A-9
0-146-1-096
Page
A-1
A-8
A-9
SECTION I 0146-189
INTRODUCTION
A. Introduction
Continuing growth over an expanded area requiring additional streets and other
surface transportation has caused an increasing burden on municipal governments'
ability to finance this growth The construction cost of new infrastructure to permit
reasonable traffic flows can be quite large. To mitigate the cost of financing these new
facilities and ultimately the cost to residents, many communities have implemented
system development charges (SDC) or impact fees for new development. SDCs
provide the means of balancing new transportation infrastructure cost requirements
between existing and new residents or users. New users, under SDCs, are required to
"buy -in" to the system in terms of both existing capacity and future capacity addition
requirements in order to mitigate the effect of growth on existing users.
The 1989 Oregon legislative session passed House Bill 3224, Chapter 449 Oregon
Laws codified as ORS 223.297 through 223.314 (Oregon law), which set forth
requirements for the calculation and accounting of SDCs. In order for the City and
County to impose SDCs after July 1, 1991, the City and County must pass a resolution
or ordinance which complies with Oregon law.
B. Scope of Services
Economic and Engineering Services, Inc., (EES) has been retained by the City of Bend
(City) and Deschutes County (County) to review and calculate SDCs for the
transportation system. As part of this process, EES has determined SDCs for the City
and County which are fair and equitable for both existing and new residents, and are
cost based.
C. Organization of Report
This report is divided into five sections. The first section is this introduction and
discussion of the scope of services. The second section provides an executive
summary of our findings and recommendations. The third section provides an
overview of the requirements under Oregon law for the determination of SDCs and
provides a discussion of economic theory. The fourth section provides an overview
and general discussion of the methodology used in the calculation of street SDCs. The
fifth section of this report provides the detailed calculations determining SDCs for the
1
01 46-1898'
City's and County's transportation system. Various exhibits as referenced within the
report are provided in the Technical Appendix attached to the end of this report.
D. Disclaimer
EES, in its calculation of the street system development charges presented in this
report, has used generally accepted engineering and rate making principles. This
should not be construed as a legal opinion with respect to Oregon law or property tax
limitations. If a legal opinion is required, EES would recommend that the City and
County have the SDCs as provided in this report reviewed by their legal counsels) to
determine if they are in compliance with Oregon law and would not be considered
property taxes applicable to property tax limitations.
2
0146-1899
SECTION II
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Introduction
The automobile is the primary mode of transportation in the Bend urban area, a role
that is expected to continue. Thus, sufficient capacity must be provided on the street
and highway system to provide safe and efficient movement of people and goods in the
"urban" area. The movement of vehicles through and about the City and County must
be balanced with the need for local access to residents and businesses. Thus, different
types of streets are developed to serve specific purposes. Local streets provide access
to adjacent residences and businesses while discouraging through traffic. Arterial, on
the other hand, discourages direct access to provide for safe and more efficient traffic
movement.
B. Proposed Svstem Development Charges
EES has calculated SDCs for the City's and County's transportation system for 1994
based on generally accepted rate making principles. Details of the calculations used in
determining SDCs for the transportation system are provided in Section V of this
report. The cost and timing for capital improvements used in the calculations of the
SDCs were provided by the City and County. Planning criteria and other information
was obtained from the "City Streets Committee Agenda", dated January 6, 1992.
Other financial and accounting information was provided by the City and County.
The SDCs for the City's and County's transportation system presented in this report
are calculated using a formula based on chargeable daily trip ends per unit, average
trip length and cost per lane mile. This formula is based on new road construction
hence, the SDC as provided in this report is considered an improvement fee as defined
in Oregon Law.
Presented in Table II -1 is the formula used for calculating the City's transportation
SDCs. A listing of the chargeable daily trip rate and average trip length for various
types of customers are provided in Exhibit 2 of the Technical Appendix.
3
0146-1900
Table U-1
City of Bend - Transportation
Proposed System Development Charge
The formula for calculating the SDC shall be:
Attributable New Travel in Vehicular -Miles Per Day = (Vehicular Trip Ends Per Day x
Average Trip Length)/2
New Lane -Miles of Roads = Attributable New Travel/Capacity Per Lane -Mile in
Vehicles Per Day
Construction Cost = New Lane -Miles of Roads x Average Construction Cost Per
Lane Mile
Right of Way Cost = New Lane -Miles of Roads x Right of Way Cost Per Lane Mile
Credits = Present Value of Future Annual Payments + Allowable Developer Costs
SDC = Construction Cost + Right of Way Cost - Credits
= (ANT/7,500) * $314,352 + Right of Way Cost - Credits
Attributable New Travel. The relevant travel by land -use type and unit is calculated
by multiplying the number of average daily trips per day (ADT) times the average trip
length. The result is then reduced to one-half to adjust the number of trip. ends to the
number of travel trips (a travel trip, say from home to work, would have two trip -
ends, one leaving home and one arriving at work) but would count as only one trip.
The individual factors in this calculation and their sources are:
a. Daily Trip Rate. The Average Daily Travel (ADT), in trip -ends per day, is
taken from Trip Generation: An Information Report (5th ed), published by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). This information is arranged by
land use and then modified to reflect percentages -of -new trips for each land
use.
b. Average Trip Lengths. All trip lengths were taken from the National Personal
Transportation Study (NPTS), 1983-84 surveys. (See Trip Table). The NPTS
was conducted by the U.S. Department of Transportation.
0
0146-1901
Required New Lane Miles. This is calculated by dividing the attributable new miles
of daily travel by the capacity of a lane of roadway. The capacity used is 7,500
vehicles per day. This figure is based on an average lane capacity of arterial and
collector streets utilizing average weekday traffic volumes.
Construction Cost. The number of lane -miles of new roads, as discussed above, is
multiplied by the average construction cost per lane -mile of road. The average cost of
construction for arterials and collectors as of the effective date of this ordinance is
determined $996.47/lf _ 3.3 lanes x 5,28016mile = $314,352 per lane -mile. This cost
shall be redetermined annually by the City Engineer using the latest available data and
following the rule making procedure set forth in the SDC ordinance.
C. Recommendations
Based on our review and analysis in determining SDCs for the City and County, EES
makes the following recommendations:
1. That the City and County establish SDCs by resolution or ordinance that any
capital improvement being funded in whole or in part with SDC revenue shall.
be included in an approved capital improvements plan, public facilities plan,
master plan or other comparable plan which lists the capital improvements
which may be funded with SDC revenue.
2. That the City and County establish SDCs for the transportation system in 1994
which are no greater than the SDCs set forth in this report.
3. That the City and County update the actual calculations for SDCs based on the
methodology as approved by the resolution or ordinance setting forth the
methodology for SDCs on an annual basis or at such time when a new capital
improvement plan, public facilities plan, master plan or a comparable plan is
approved or updated by the City or County.
4. The City and County set up an accounting system that provides an annual
accounting of SDC revenue collected from improvement fees and the projects
that were funded with the revenue.
5. That the City and County establish in the resolution or ordinance enacting the
methodology used in the determination of SDCs a provision for administrative
procedures allowing protests within 60 days following the adoption or
modification of the SDC methodology.
0146-19�;2
6. That the City and County provide for an administrative review procedure by
which any citizen or other interested party may challenge the expenditure of
SDC funds. Such procedure provides that a challenge must be filed within two
years of the expenditure of SDC funds.
7. That the City and County adopt by resolution or ordinance that
"reimbursement fees" as such term is defined in ORS 223.299 be spent only on
capital improvements associated with the system for which the fees were
assessed, including expenditures related to the repayment of indebtedness.
8. That the City and County adopt by resolution or ordinance that "improvement
fees" as such term is defined in ORS 223.299 be spent only on capacity
increasing capital improvements including the repayment of debt.
D. Sample Resolution or Ordinance
Based on EES's review of Oregon law establishing the requirements for enactment of
SDCs, EES has provided a sample ordinance for the enactment of the transportation
SDCs in Exhibit 1.
E. Implementation
The methodology used to calculate the system development charges takes into account
the cost of money or interest charges and inflation. Therefore, EES would
recommend that the City and County examine the SDC charge each year to determine
the effect of interest costs and inflation on the calculation. The charge should be
increased by an escalation factor each year to reflect the cost of borrowing or inflation.
This method of escalation can be used for a four- to five-year period. After this, EES
would recommend that the City and County update the charge based on the actual cost
of infrastructure and new facilities from the master plan or capital improvement plan.
X
0140-19m
SECTION III
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES IN OREGON
A. Introduction
The 1989 Oregon Legislative session passed House Bill 3224, Chapter 449 Oregon
Laws codified as ORS 223.297 through 223.314, (Oregon law) which sets forth the
requirements for calculation of system development charges (SDCs) and the use of
funds collected through SDCs. Oregon law also requires establishment of
administrative review procedures for the adoption of the methodology used in the
calculation of SDCs and the collection and expenditure of funds. The law applies to
SDCs collected after July 1, 1991.
The imposition of regulations on SDCs in Oregon is not a new concept. A similar
version of House Bill 3224 was first introduced in the 64th Oregon Legislative
Assembly at the request of the Oregon Home Builders Association. While the bill was
approved by the legislature, it was ultimately vetoed by the Governor. In vetoing the
bill, the Governor requested that the League of Oregon Cities and the Oregon State
Home Builders Association attempt to reach a settlement agreement as to the form
and content of appropriate law. As a consequence of the settlement negotiations,
House Bill 3224 was introduced in the 65th Oregon Legislative Assembly by the
League of Oregon Cities, Oregon State Home Builders Association and the Oregon
Builders Association of Metro Portland, and it was passed and approved.
A summary of the legal requirements under Oregon law as defined in House Bill 3224
are provided in this section. It is meant to be a summary recap of the Oregon law. It
in no way constitutes a legal interpretation of Oregon Law by EES. EES recommends
that the City's legal counsel review the SDC for compliance with Oregon law.
Additionally, a general overview of economic theory associated with the enactment of
SDCs is provided.
B. Requirements under Oreton Law
The purpose of the recently passed Oregon law for the enactment of SDCs is to
provide a uniform framework for the imposition of SDCs by local governments and to
establish that such fees be used only for capital improvements. Capital improvements,
as defined under the law, are as follows:
• water supply, treatment and distribution;
• wastewater collection, transmission, treatment and disposal;
• drainage and flood control;
6
• transportation;
• parks and recreation.
0146.19`34
A SDC means a reimbursement fee, an improvement fee, or a combination thereof. As
defined under Oregon law, "improvement fee" means a fee for the costs associated
with capital improvements to be constructed. "Reimbursement fee" means a fee for
costs associated with capital improvements already constructed or under construction.
As defined in Oregon law, the methodology setting forth the calculations for
reimbursement fees and improvement fees shall make the following considerations:
"Reimbursement fees shall be established by ordinance or resolution, setting
forth a methodology that considers the cost of existing facility or facilities,
prior contributions by existing users, the value of unused capacity, rate
making principles employed to finance publicly owned capital improvements
and other relevant factors identified by the local government imposing the fee.
The methodology shall promote the objective of future system users
contributing no more than an equitable share to the cost of existing facilities
The methodology for establishing such fees shall be available for public
inspection. "
"Improvement fees shall be established by ordinance or resolution setting
forth a methodology that considers the cost of projected capital improvements
needed to increase the capacity of the systems to which the fee is related The
methodology for establishing such fees shall be available for public
inspection. "
In addition to the definitive requirements for the establishment of a SDC as an
improvement fee and/or replacement fee, other requirements under the Oregon law are
as follows:
• The SDC must be based on an approved capital improvement plan,
public facilities plan, master plan, or comparable plan which lists the
capital improvements that may be funded with the improvement fee
revenues and the estimated costs and timing for each improvement.
• Proper administrative review procedures must be followed in the
enactment of a SDC resolution or ordinance.
• System development charge funds must only be spent on facilities for
which they were collected.
0146-1900.-
A
46-190-
A proper accounting system must be established which provides for an
annual accounting of SDCs showing the total amount of revenue
collected and the projects that were funded.
C. Economic Theory
System development charges are generally imposed as a condition to new service. The
objective of a SDC is not merely to generate money for the City and County, but to
ensure fair and equitable financing is available to support needed capital additions.
Imposing SDCs on new development will reimburse current customers for their
payments for existing excess capacity and contribute to the cost of constructing new
capacity. Through the implementation of fair and equitable SDCs, existing and future
customers will not be unduly burdened with the cost of new development.
D
SECTION IV
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY
A. Introduction
This section provides a generic discussion of the methodology used in the
determination of SDCs. A general theoretical framework is presented. The
calculations presented in this section are examples of a hypothetical transportation
system for illustrative purposes. Section V of this report provides the specific
calculations applicable to the City's and County's transportation system.
The methodology used to calculate SDCs under Oregon law is not specific, except as
it pertains to the facilities that can be included in the charge. Therefore, in defining the
methodology, a number of factors must be considered. These factors are as follows:
• The method must be easy to understand.
• The method must be easy to administer.
• The method should recognize the system planning criteria.
• The method must strike an equitable balance between existing
customers and new customers.
• The method should conform to accepted utility rate making principles.
• The method must conform to the requirements under Oregon law.
The methodology presented in this section is based on these criteria.
B. Overview of Methodology
In determining the SDC for streets, the most common methodology used relates the
amount of lane capacity required to serve new development and the cost of existing
excess lane capacity and new lane capacity. These factors are generally determined
based on detailed traffic analyses for the existing system and proposed improvements
to the system based on the projected traffic volume. The 'SDC attributable to each
type of customer is dependent on the amount of new lane miles required based on the
customer's usage of the transportation system and the desired level of traffic flow.
014 6-13 i
The basic formulas used as follow:
Attributable New Travel in Vehicular Miles Per Day = (Vehicular Trip Ends Per Day x
Average Trip Length)/2
New Lane -Wes of Roads = Attributable New Travel/Capacity Per Lane -Mile in
Vehicles Per Day
Construction Cost = New Lane -Wes of Roads x Average Construction Cost per
Lane -Mile
Right of Way Cost = New Lane -Miles of Roads x Right of Way Cost Per Lane -Mile
Credits = Present Value of Future Annual Payments + Allowable Developer Costs
SDC = Construction Cost + Right of Way Cost - Credits
(1) Attributable New Travel. The relevant travel by land -use type and unit is
calculated by multiplying the number of average daily trips (ADT) times the
average trip length. The result is then reduced to one-half to adjust the number
of trip ends to the number of travel trips (a travel trip, say from home to work,
would have two trip ends, one leaving home and one arriving at work) but
would count as only one trip. The individual factors in this calculation and
their sources are:
a. Daily Trip Rate. The Average Daily Travel (ADT), in trip -ends per
day, is taken from Trip Generation: An Information Report (5th ed),
published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). This
information is arranged by land use and then modified to reflect
percentages -of -new trips for each land use.
b. Average Trip Lengths. All trip lengths were taken from the National
Personal Transportation Study (NPTS), 1983-84 surveys. (See Trip
Table). The NPTS was conducted by the U.S. Department of
Transportation.
(2) Required New Lane Miles. This is calculated by dividing the attributable new
miles of daily travel by the capacity of a lane of roadway. The capacity used is
based on an average lane capacity of arterial and collector streets utilizing
average weekday traffic volumes.
(3) Construction Cost. The number of lane -miles of new roads, as discussed
above, is multiplied by the average construction cost per lane -mile of road.
11
t a
0140-1,!-" `
(4) Right of Way Cost. The average cost of right of way for arterial and collector
streets.
Based on this formula, the calculation of the street SDC reduces itself to a
determination of the various variables. For ease in understanding, these variables can
be broken down as follows:
• Determination of daily trip rate and average trip lengths
• Required new lane miles
• Construction costs
• Credits
• Compliance costs
• Net transportation SDC
Presented in the rest of this section is a discussion of each step.
C. Daily Trin Rate and Averave Trio Leneths
The Average Daily Travel (ADT), in trip ends per day, is provided in Exhibit 2 of the
Technical Appendix and is arranged by land use and then modified to reflect
percentage of new trips for each land use. Adjusting the ADT per percentage of new
trips is an accepted method of attempting to account for traffic which is already on the
road. For example, a trip from home to work in its simplest form consists of two trip
ends, but only one trip. If we added stops at the convenience store and a gas station
while the individual is going from home to work, according to the standard
methodology of transportation engineering, a total of six trip ends would be counted
as follows:
1. Leaving the home.
2. Entering the convenience store.
3. Leaving the convenience store.
4. Entering the gas station.
5. Leaving the gas station.
6. Arriving at work.
12
But, still only one trip has been made.
0140-1009
The convenience store and the gas station have experienced what is called "Passer-by
trip". In this example they were not responsible for generating any new traffic, but
were fsimply capturing an existing trip. Therefore, the number of trip ends assigned to
them by the ITE trip generation report needs to be modified to more realistically
reflect the percentage of new trips generated by each land use. The percentage of new
trips is, ultimately a professional judgment. Such judgments, however, are based upon
the ITE trip generation report, and is supplemented by articles in the ITE journal,
specifically upon an article that appeared in the May, 1984 issue of "Public Works".
These articles were guides in the establishment of percentage of new trips incorporated
into the trip tables provided in Exhibit 2 of the Technical Appendix.
The second variable, ,average trip lengths, was taken from the "National Personal
Transportation Study" (NPTS), 1983-84 surveys. The NPTS was conducted by the
US Department of Transportation.
D. Required New Lane Miles
This factor is calculated by dividing the attributable new miles of daily travel by the
capacity of a lane of roadway. The performance of existing highway facilities may be
measured in two ways. One way is to measure the level of service at which the facility
functions. The other method is to measure the percentage of capacity at a given level
of service. The measurements of roadway segment performance used will generally be
the percentage of level of service at which the facility operates under the stated traffic
conditions. These measures are expressed as a ratio between the volume and capacity
called the V/C ratio.
Levels of service range from level of service A to level of service F. The basis for
levels of service are generally defined in the highway capacity manuals, or as set forth
in the transportation engineering study.
E. Construction Costs
In determining the construction costs on a dollar per lane -mile basis, two
methodologies may be employed. The first methodology would look at the average
cost of existing excess capacity on the system and future capacity additions to the
system on a dollar per lane -mile basis. Since it is sometimes extremely difficult to
establish the amount of existing excess capacity on the system, the use of an average
cost per lane -mile for future improvements is also utilized in determining the cost per
lane -mile.
13
0146--1910
F. Credits
To ensure that new development is not charged twice for investment and capacity, a
determination of any credits must be made. Credits can come from a number of
different sources depending on the funding mechanisms utilized by the municipality in
the construction of its transportation system. These include the following:
Property tax payments.
Federal and state revenue sharing for highway construction.
• Gasoline tax.
The credit for property tax payments needs to be accounted for in two ways. The first
is the amount of property tax that will be assessed in the future for payment of General
Obligation bonds associated with the construction of street facilities. The second
credit is associated with property taxes assessed on raw land prior to the collection of
the system development charge. For historical tax payments it is therefore necessary
to include both the principal and interest paid through historical tax payments.
The next credit is for federal and state revenues that the City and County will receive
for transportation purposes. The average cost per lane -mile must be reduced by any
federal and state revenue sharing grants that may have been or will be received by the
City and County.
The final credit is that associated with the use of gasoline tax for construction of new
infrastructure. The credit for gasoline tax is generally determined by the amount of the
tax per gallon, an assumed miles per gallon rate for average travel multiplied by the
annual number of miles of travel from the trip generation report. This amount is then
discounted using present value factors since the payments in future years through
gasoline taxes will be considerably less than those in the current year.
In addition to the above mentioned credits, a credit must also be provided for off-site
improvements required as part of the development process. An example could be the
installation of off-site signals as a condition of development. These credits are
generally determined by the City Engineer on a case by case basis.
G. Compliance Costs
As specified under Oregon law, the cost of complying with the law is allowed to be
included in the SDC. To mitigate the large cost associated with first time compliance
with Oregon law, it is recommended that the cost of compliance be averaged over a
14
®146-11
five- to six-year period. This ensures that new customers connecting to the systeJ
the first year of compliance with the Oregon law are not unduly burdened.
H. . Net System Development Charge
Once all the various variables utilized in the SDC formulas have been determined, the
SDC can be determined. The net SDC is determined by applying the variables to the
formula.
15
SECTION V
0146-1942 !-1942
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE CALCULATION
A. Introduction
Presented in this section of the report are the detailed calculations for the
determination of street system development charges (SSDCs) for the City's and
County's transportation system. The calculations are based on the methodologies
discussed in Section IV of this report. The calculations of the SSDCs presented in this
section are based on the planning criteria and future capital improvement costs as
provided by the City and County in their capital improvement plan. To the extent that
the timing and cost of future capital improvements change, then the SDCs presented in
this section will require updating to reflect the costs of these adjustments.
B. Daily Trip Rate and Average Trip Length
The average daily travel (ADT) in trip ends per day, was taken from Trip Generation:
an Information Report, (5th Ed) (published by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers, ITE). The number of trip ends assigned to different types of customers
have been adjusted to more realistically reflect the percentage of new trips generated
by each land use. This adjustment has been made based on professional judgments of
the City's planning engineers, and other information. Average trip lengths were taken
from the National Personal Transportation Study (NPTS), 1983 - 1984 surveys.
Presented in Exhibit 2 is the calculation of the daily trip rates, percentage reduction
and average trip lengths per type of customer.
C. Capacity
As discussed previously, the required lane -miles are determined by dividing the
attributable new miles of daily travel by the capacity of a lane of roadway. In
determining the capacity of a lane of roadway, the planning criteria as set forth in the
engineering report was utilized. Presented as Table V-1 is a summary of the design
elements utilized for the construction of major and minor arterials. As shown in the
table, the capacity ranges from 5,000 to 10,000 vehicles per day for major arterials and
2,500 to 5,000 vehicles per day for minor arterials. Since the majority of the
improvements as identified in the planning document are associated with major
arterials, 7,500 vehicles per day is utilized in the calculation of the SDC to represent
the average capacity volume.
16
0
E.
Design Element
Right-of-way (feet)
Pavement width (feet)
Through traffic lanes
Lane Width
Median width (feet)
(continuous left turn)
Parking
Traffic volumes, VPD
Per Lane Volume
Construction Costs
Table V-1
City of Bend
Street Design Criteria
MA
ior
80-100
52-64
4
12
16
Restricted
20,000 to 40,000
5,000 to 10,000
Arterial
0146-1913
Minor
60-80
40-52
2-4
12
Limited
5,000 to 20,000
2,500 to 5,000
Based on the recent construction bids received by the City and County, the cost for
road construction is determined to be $196.47 per linear foot which provides for 3.3
lanes. The $196.47/linear foot _ 3.3 lanes for 5,280 linear feet per mile results in a
cost per lane of $314,352. Provided as Exhibit 3 are the capital improvement plans for
the City and County.
Credits
As discussed in Section N, it is necessary to determine if any credits are applicable in
the determination of the SDC to assure that new customers are not charged "twice"
for the cost of infrastructure. Based on EES's review of the City's and County's
financing practices for the transportation system and financial records, no credits are
applicable in the calculation of the SDC. The City's and County's current budgeting
practices require that new infrastructure required to meet growth will be paid for
through SDC funds which are maintained separately within the City's budgeting
records. Furthermore, while the City and County receive gasoline tax receipts these
monies are used for the operation and maintenance of the system, they hence are
applicable as a credit against construction of capital infrastructure required to serve
growth.
The only applicable credit would be for off-site public improvements by developers.
This would have to be determined by the City Engineer on a case by case basis.
17
F. Compliance Costs
As allowed under Oregon law, the cost of complying with Oregon law is allowed to be
included in the SDC. This appears to be a very minor cost item for the SDC and
therefore has not been included.
G. Net System Development Charge
Based on the determination of the variables utilized for the calculation of the SSDC,
the net SDC can be determined for the various types of customers. The portions of
the formula which vary are the type of customer, the daily trip rate and the average
trip lengths. These are provided in Exhibit 2 of the Technical Appendix. For use in
the formula, the required new lane miles are attributable new travel divided by 7,500
vehicles per day. The construction cost is $314,352 per lane mile. No credits are
applicable in the calculation of the SDC except those associated with donated or off
site improvements. A summary of the formula is presented in Table V-2.
Table V-2
City of Bend
Transportation System Development Charge
(ANT/7,500) * $314,352 - Credits
Where ANT = (Vehicular trip ends per day x
average trip length) = 2
H. Sample Changes
A summary of SSDCs for various types of businesses is provided in Table V-3.
R-01
0146-'19-15
Table V-3
City of Bend
Street & Roads System Development Charges
Sample Changes
Description
Number of Units
SDC
Single Family Residential
1 1 unit
$1,328
Apartments
75 units
67,740
Mobile Home
50 units
33,265
Senior Care
100 units
29,738
Daycare
10 students
4,483
General Office Building
10,000 sq. ft.
20,570
Medical/Dental Office
2,500 sq. ft.
8,593
General Retail
4,500 sq. ft.
14,152
Restaurant
3,500 sq. ft.
42,514
Fast Food Restaurant
2,500 sq. ft.
101,656
Supermarket
8,000 sq. ft.
80,836
Bank
5,000 sq. ft.
81,645
Church
7,000 sq. ft.
$10,391
Shopping Center
100,000 sq. ft.
$614,722
Government
12,000 sq. ft.
$102,576
Golf Course
80 acres
$125,691
Motel
125 rooms
$121,118
General Industrial
50,000 sq. ft.
$54,045
19
U1-9�v
Sample SDC Ordinance .
Note: This SDC Ordinance is for illustrative purposes only. Any Ordinance actually
passed by the City should be reviewed by the City's legal counsel.
ORDINANCE NO.
0146-19-11
AN ORDINANCE establishing a system development charge for arterial and
collector streets.
THE CITY OF BEND ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Purpose of System Development Charge.
This ordinance establishes system development charges for capital improvements to
the arterial and collector street system in accordance with ORS 223.297 to 223.314. The
premise upon which the Street System Development Charge (SSDC) is based is that each
new development should provide to the arterial and collector street system an additional
amount of capacity proportional to the demand that it will cause and that the charges to the
developer will be proportional to the cost of that additional capacity. These charges will
provide a significant portion of the funding needed for capital improvements and each
developer will pay a fair and proportionate share. It is assumed that, in most cases, direct
construction of arterial or collector streets by a developer will not be necessary. In those
cases where a developer does have to construct or improve arterial or collector streets
within or outside the development as a condition of development approval, the developer
will receive a credit against the system development charge. The SSDC is an "improvement
fee" as defined in ORS 223.299 since the charge to the developer is for costs associated with
capital improvements to be constructed. It is assumed that all traffic generators in the city
impact the entire arterial and collector system and all SSDCs are calculated on the same
basis regardless of the location of the development The reasons for this assumption are:
(1) the city is fairly compact in size, (2) there are no significant barriers to traffic flow, (3)
residential generators are dispersed throughout the city and surrounding area, and (4) there
is no factual basis for breaking the city into smaller street improvement districts.
Section 2. Establishment of the Street System Development Charge.
There is hereby established a charge to be levied on all development within the City
to be known as the Street System Development Charge (SSDC). No building permit shall
be issued after the effective date of this section unless the SSDC for the development for
which the permit will be issued has been paid in full. As used in this section,
"development" means construction of a new building, structure, golf course, public park, or
the construction of any additions to or enlargement of any of the foregoing, in connection
with any use listed in the table in Section 6(6) of this ordinance.
Section 3. Administration officer designated.
The City Manager shall employ a qualified person as City Engineer. In addition to
such other duties and responsibilities as may be assigned to him, the City Engineer shall be
responsible for the administration of this ordinance. The City Engineer shall be responsible
for developing administrative procedures for calculation and collection of fees, developing
and administering capital improvement programs and related activities.
A-1
Section 4. Calculation of the SSDC.
The formula for calculating the SSDC shall be: Ql�+
Attributable New Travel in Vehicular -Miles Per Day = (Vehicular Trip Ends Per
Day x Average Trip Length) _ 2
New Lane -Miles of Roads = Attributable New Travel _ Capacity Per Lane -Mile in
Vehicles Per Day
Construction Cost = New Lane -Miles of Roads x Average Construction Cost per
Lane -Mile
Right of Way Cost = New Lane -Miles of Roads x Right of Way Cost Per Lane -Mile
Credits = Present Value of Future Annual Payments + Allowable Developer Costs
SDC = Construction Cost + Right of Way Cost - Credits
Section 5. Alternate Calculations.
The formulas and calculations used to compute the SSDC are based upon averages
and typical conditions. Whenever the impact of individual developments are present
special or unique situations such that the calculated fee is grossly disproportionate to the
actual impact of the development;, alternate fee. calculations may be approved or required
by the City Engineer under prescribed administrative procedures. All data submitted to
support alternate calculations under this provision shall be site specific and shall be
prepared and presented by a traffic engineer registered as such by the State of Oregon.
Major or unique developments may require a comprehensive traffic analysis.
Section 6. SSDC Methodology.
This section explains and defines the method of calculating the SSDC.
(1) TraveL The relevant travel by land -use type and unit is calculated by
multiplying the number of average daily trips per day (ADT) times the average trip length
The result is then reduced to one-half to adjust the number of trip ends to the number of
travel trips (a travel trip, say from home to work, would have two trip ends, one leaving
home and one arriving at work) but would count as only one trip. The individual factors in
this calculation and their sources are.
(a) . Daily Trip Rate. The Average Daily Travel (ADT), in trip ends per
day, is taken from Trip Generation: An Information Report (5th ed� published by the Institute
of Transportation Engineers (TIB). This information is set forth below in the Trip Table,
and is arranged by land use and then modified to reflect percentages -of -new trips for each
land use. Adjusting the ADT for percentage -of -new trips is an accepted method of
attempting to account for traffic which is already on the road. For example, the above cited
trip from home to work in it's simplest form consists of two trip ends, but only one trip. If
we added stops to work, according to the standard methodology of transportation
engineering, a total of six trip ends would be counted:
A-2
1. Leaving home. �
2. Entering the convenience store. 14 6-19 ~ q
3. Leaving the convenience store.
4. Entering the gas station.
5. Leaving the gas station
6. Arriving at work
But; still only one trip has been made.
The convenience store and the gas station have experienced what is called a "Passer-
by -trip". In this example they were not responsible for generating any new traffic, but were
simply capturing an existing trip. Therefore, the number of trip ends assigned them by the
][TE trip generation report needs to be modified to more realistically reflect the percentage
of new trips generated by each land use. The percentage of -new trips is, ultimately, a
professional judgment. Such judgments, however, are based upon the ITE trip generation
report; and supplemented by articles in the ITE journal specifically an article that appeared
in the May 1984 issue of "Public Works". These articles were guides in the establishment of
the percentage of new trips incorporated into the trip table in subsection (5) of this section.
(b) Average Trip Lengths. All trip lengths were taken from the National
Personal Transportation Study (NPM, 1983-84 surveys (See Trip Table). The NPTS was
conducted by the U.S. Department of Transportation.
(2) Required New Lane Miles. This is calculated by dividing the attributable
new miles of daily travel by the capacity of a lane of roadway. The capacity used is 7,500
vehicles per day. This figure is based on an average lane capacity of arterial and collector
streets utilizing average weekday traffic volumes.
(3) Construction Cost. The number of lane -miles of new roads, as discussed
above, is multiplied by the average construction cost per lane -mile of road. The average
cost of construction for arterials and collectors as of the effective date of this ordinance is
determined to be $196.47/if _ 3.3 lanes x 5280 if/mile = $314,352 per lane -mile. This cost
shall be redetermined annually during the month of February by the City Engineer using
the latest available data and following the rulemaking procedure set forth in Section 12 of
this ordinance.
(4) Right of Way Cost. The average cost of right of way for arterial and collector
streets shall be determined from time to time by' the City Engineer using the latest available
data and following the rulemaking procedure set forth in Section 12 of this ordinance.
(5) Credit
(a) If land is required to be deeded to the City for right-of-way for
collector or arterial streets as a condition of development approval, the development shall
be credited for that exaction. The value of such land will be determined by the true cash
value last recorded on the tax assessor's records for the parcel being developed. Land
required to be deeded to the City for any other classification of streets other than collector
or arterial will be deemed to be for the developer's benefit and will not be compensated for
A-3
by credits. No credit will be given for land deeded or dedicated prior to the effective date
of this ordinance.
(b) Where it is a condition of development approval
#ht tl-'doper
either provide in part or in its entirety a street improvement or traffic device that provides
additional capacity on a collector or arterial street of the City, the developer will receive
compensation by credit for the reasonable cost of that additional capacity, unless the need
for the improvement is specifically attributable to that development For example, a traffic
signal at a shopping center entrance would be considered specifically attributable to the
shopping center and no credit would be allowed. If, for his convenience, the developer
wishes to provide a greater facility than required or wishes to construct a facility prior to
the time that the City ordinarily would, the City, at its sole discretion, may elect to
participabe but shall not be required to do so. The credits provided by this paragraph apply
to both on-site and off-site improvements. Credit for improvements constructed prior to
the effective date of this ordinance will be allowed only on building permits issued within
three years after such effective date. Otherwise, credit will not be given for improvements
or contributions to improvements where the improvement or contribution was made prior
to the effective date of this ordinance, unless the City specifically agreed in writing to give
such credit Credit for improvements constructed after the effective date of this ordinance
will be allowed only on building permits issued within three years after completion and
acceptance of such improvements.
(c) Credit for right-of-way or street improvements will be given as an
offset to SSDC charges when due and no cash credits will be given unless specifically
authorized by the City Council. The credit will go to the person applying for the building
permit and is not otherwise assignable. The total credit allowed for a development shall be
calculated at the time of construction of the improvements and prorated to building
permits. The proration will be based on the ratio of the chargeable trips for each permit to
the total chargeable trips for the entire development using the numbers in the trip table in
subsection (6). If the developer constructed the improvements then the credit will be
calculated using the same cost per lane mile used to calculate the SSDC, regardless of the
actual cost If the improvements are constructed by the City and assessed against the
property, the credit shall be measured by the actual assessment In calculating credits for
right-of-way, exactions and assessments, no credit shall be • given for the time value of
money.
(d) In calculating credits for any development which was partially built
on the effective date of this ordinance, the total credit for the development shall be reduced
by the amount of the SSDCs that would have been paid if this ordinance had been in effect
when the prior building permits were issued.
(6) Trip Table. The following table shall be used in the calculation of the SSDC.
Where the units are "square feel?', this refers to the gross square footage of the entire
building as determined by the Department of Building Safety for the purpose of calculating
the building permit fees. Where the units are "acres", this refers to the total improved area
of the site.
M
A-5
0146-1921
'
Representative
Chargeable
Trip -Ends
Percent
Daily Trip -Ends
Average
Category
per unit
Reduction
per unit
Trip Length
1. Single Family Residential 9.60/unit
0
9.60
6.6
2. Multi -Family
(a) Apartments
653/unit
0
6.53
6.6
(b) Mobile Home
4.81/unit
0
4.81
6.6
(c) Senior Care
2.15/unit
0
2.15
6.6
3. Schools
(a) Elementary
1.09/student
0
1.09
4.6
(b) High School
1.38/student
0
1.38
4.6
(c) College
1.85/student
0
1.85
4.6
(d) Daycare
4.65/student
0
4.65
4.6
4. Church, Fraternal
9.32/1000 sq.ft.
20
7.46
95
5. Hospital
16.78/1000 sq.ft.
20
13.42
6.0
6. General Office Building
(a) 050,000 sq ft.
16.78/1000 sq.fL
20
13.26
7.4
(b) 50,000-175,000 sq.ft.14.03/1000 sqA.
20
11.22
7.4
(c) over 175,000 sq.ft.
11.85/1000 sq.ft.
20
9.48
7.4
7. Retail
(a) Medical/Dental
34.17/1000 sq.ft.
20
27.34
6.0
(b) General Retail
39.08/1000 sq.ft.
20
32.26
4.8
(c) Restaurant
150.94/1000 sq.ft.
20
120.75
4.8
(d) Fast Food Rest.
709.17/1000 sq.ft.
43
404.23
4.8
(e) Supermarket
143.50/1000 sq.ft.
30
100.45
4.8
(f) Banks
202.91/1000 sq.fL
20
162.33
4.8
8. Shopping Centers
(a) 0-50,000 sq.ft.
118.90/1000 sq. ft.
10
107.01
4.8
(b) 50,000-175,000 sq.ft.67.90/1000 sq.ft.
10
61.11
4.8
(c) over 175,000 sq.ft.
54.50/1000 sq ft.
10
49.05
4.8
9. Government
68.90/1000 sq.ft.
20
55.12
7.4
10. Recreational
Golf Course
8.33/acre
0
8.33
9.0
Community Center
2.61/acre
0
2.61
95
11. Motel
8.14/room
20
6.51
7.1
12. Industrial
(a) General
6.97/1000 sq.ft.
0
6.97
7.4
(b) Warehouse
4.93/1000 sq.ft.
0
4.93
7.4
13. Commercial Airport
60/commercial
flights per day
20
48
7.4
14. Cemetery
4.16/acre
0
4.16
7.1
A-5
Section 7. Exemptions.
(1) Building permit applications submitted with all required back-up material
and plan check fees on or before the effective date of this ordinance are exempt from the
SSDC, to the extent of the structure or use described in the application,, provided that the
permit is issued within 60 days after such effective date and the project is completed in
accordance with the application before the permit expires. If the project is not completed
before the permit expires and a new application for the building permit is filed after such
effective date, the new application is not exempt
(2) Additions to single-family and multi -family dwellings that do not constitute
the addition of a dwelling unit, as defined by the Uniform Building code, are exempt from
the SSDC.
(3) For uses other than single-family and multi -family residential, an alteration,
replacement or change in use that does not change the parcel's or structure's chargeable
traffic generation as determined under Section 6(6) of this ordinance is exempt from the
SSDC; provided, however, that additions to the square -footage of such uses are not exempt
Section 8. Appeal Procedure.
(1) A person aggrieved by a decision required or permitted to be made by the
City Engineer under this ordinance or a person challenging the propriety of an expenditure
of systems development charge revenues may appeal the decision or the expenditure to the
City Council by filing a written request with the City Recorder describing with particularity
the decision of the City Engineer or the expenditure from which the person appeals.
(2) An appeal of an expenditure must be filed within two years of the date of the
alleged improper expenditure. Appeals of any other decision must be filed within 10 days
of the date of decision.
(3) After hearing evidence presented by the appellant and the City Engineer, the
Council shall determine whether the City Engineer's decision or the expenditure is in
accordance with this ordinance and the provisions of ORS 223.297 to 223.314 and may
affirm, modify, or overrule the decision. If the Council determines that there has been an
improper expenditure of system development charge revenues, the Council shall direct that
a sum equal to the misspent amount shall be transferred from the General Fund within one
year to replace the misspent amount
Section 9. Installment Pa,
If the property owner exercises his right under ORS 223.208 to pay the SSDC in
installments and files an application as provided in ORS 223.215 and 223.220, the charge
shall thereupon become a first lien on the property occupied by the development and shall
have the same effect as an assessment lien for a public improvement and shall be duly
recorded in the docket of City liens.
Section 10. Se
grre gation and Use of Revenue.
All funds collected pursuant to Sections 1 through 10 of this ordinance shall be
deposited in a special revenue fund known as the Arterial and Collector Street Construction
Fund and shall be used only for capital improvements on the arterial and collector street
system of the City and costs incidental thereto and to pay for the equitable share of the cost
A-6
U146 103f.
of accounting, management and government which is attributable to the fund, which shall
not exceed 5% of the gross revenues of the Fund during any fiscal year.
Section 11. Improvement Plan.
On or before July 1, 1991, the City Council shall adopt by resolution an Arterial and
Collector Street Improvement Plan, a copy of which shall be kept on file in the office of the
City Recorder. This document shall set forth the plan for expenditure of the funds collected
pursuant to Sections 1 through 11 of this ordinance and shall conform to the requirements
of ORS 223.309. This plan may be amended from time to time by ordinance, whenever the
Council deems it necessary to make a change in its capital improvement planning for
arterial and collector streets.
Section 12. Administrative Rules.
The City Engineer may prescribe administrative rules governing the
implementation of this ordinance. Prior to the adoption or amendment of such rules, the
City Engineer shall give 21 days notice by mail of the intended action to all persons who
have requested such notice. The notice shall contain a brief summary of the proposed rules
and shall also state the time, place and manner in which interested persons may present
their views on the proposed rules. After considering all timely public input, the City
Engineer may adopt the proposed rules or amendments with any changes that he deems
appropriate. The City Engineer shall make available for public inspection copies of all
proposed and adopted rules and copies of all adopted rules shall also be filed in the office
of the City Recorder.
Section 13. Incorporation into Code of Bend; Effective Date.
Sections 1 through 12 of this ordinance are added to and made a part of Chapter
of the Code of Bend. This ordinance shall go into effect ,1994.
PASSED by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this
day of ,1994.
ATTEST:
City Recorder Mayor
APPROVED: ,1994
win\Tg\bmd\ordimM
Mayor
A-7
r
Average Daily Travel
City of -Bend
Street & Roads System Development Charges
Exhibit 2
Capacity per Lane Mile in Vehicles per Day
Ave. Construction Cost per Lane Mile
Right of Way Cost
Credits
Category
Single Family Residential
Multi -Family
Apartments
Mobile Home
Senior Care
Schools
Elementary
High School
College
Daycare
Church,Fraternal
Hospital
General Office Building
0-50,000 sq. ft
50,000-175,000 sq.ft
over 175,000 sq. ft
Retail
Medical/Dental
General Retail
Restaurant
Fast Food Restaurant
Supermarket
Banks
Shopping Centers
0-50,000 sq. ft
50,000-175,000 sq. ft.
over 175,000 sq. ft.
Government
Recreational
Golf Course
Community Center
Motel
Industrial
General
Warehouse
Commercial Airport
Cemetery
TRIPEX.uK4
Representative
Trip Ends
per Unit
9.60 /unit
6.53 /unit
4.81 /unit
2.15 /unit
1.09 /student
1.38 /student
1.85 /student
4.65 /student
9.32 /1000 sq. ft.
16.78 /1000 sq. ft.
16.58 /1000 sq. ft.
14.03 /1000 sq. ft.
11.85 /1000 sq. ft.
34.17 /1000 sq. ft.
39.08 /1000 sq. ft.
150.94 /1000 sq. ft.
709.17 /1000 sq. ft.
143.50 /1000 sq. ft.
202.91 /1000 sq. ft.
118.90 /1000 sq. ft.
67.90 /1000 sq. ft.
54.50 /1000 sq. ft.
68.90 /1000 sq. ft.
8.33 /acre
2.61 /acre
8.14 /room
6.97 /1000 sq. ft.
4.93 /1000 sq. ft.
60.00 /commercial
flights per day
4.16 /acre
014
7,500
$314,352
0
0
Chargeable
Daily
Average
Percent
Trip -Ends Trip Length
SDC
Reduction
per -Unit
'les
per Unit
0.0%
9.60
6.6
$1,328
0.0%
6.53
6.6
$903
0.0%
4.81
6.6
665
0.0%
2.15
6.6
297
0.0%
1.09
4.6
$105
0.0%
1.38
4.6
133
0.0%
1.85
4.6
178
0.0%
4.65
4.6
448
20.0%
7.46
9.5
$1,484
20.0%
13.42
6.0
$1,688
20.0%
13.26
7.4
52,057
20.0%
11.22
7.4
1,741
20.0%
9.48
7.4
1,470
20.0%
27.34
6.0
$3,437
20.0%
31.26
4.8
3,145
20.0%
120.75
4.8
12,147
43.0%
404.23
4.8
40,662
30.0%
100.45
4.8
10,105
20.0%
162.33
4.8
16,329
10.0%
107.01
4.8
$10,764
10.0%
61.11
4.8
6,147
10.0%
49.05
4.8
4,934
20.0%
55.12
7.4
$8,548
0.0%
8.33
9.0
$1,571
0.0%
2.61
9.5
520
20.0%
6.51
7.1
$969
0.0%
6.97
7.4
$1,081
0.0%
4.93
7.4
-
765
20.0%
48.00
7.4
$7,444
0.0%
4.16
7.1
$619
0146-194'0
City and County
Capital Improvement Planning
City of Bend
Street & Roads System Development Charges
Five Year Capital Improvement Plan
Exhibit 3
Priority
0 = Continued
1 = Critical
2 = Essential
3 = Necessary
4 = Desirable
5 - Pending
0146-192"14
Definition
Construction contracted as of June 30, 1994
Imperative for reliable street operations
Absolutely necessary for operation of system
Needed for efficient operation of system
Useful for proper operation of system
Of no immediate consequence
Page 1 of 2
Project Description
Priority
(Amounts
9485
in thousands)
25/9696/97
97/98 98/99
4th Street Addison to Butler Construction
1
200
Butler, Studio to 4th Street Construction
1
250
ISTEA drill hole abandonment •
4
149
ISTEA program installing sidewalks •
4
342
ISTEA, Larkspur trail •
Replace traffic signals downtown
2
65
4th & 8th St. - Franklin to Revere construction/signals
8th & Penn signal
1
15
135
8th & Franklin signal
1
15
135
8th & Revere signal
1
15
135
4th & Greenwood signal
1
15
135
4th & Revere signal
1
15
135
4th & Franklin signal
3
15
135
Larkspur trail
4
175
Revere 4th to 8th modernization
1
20
180
City portion Revere RR rubberized crossing
replacement
1
36
27th & Neff signal •
2
15
135
Purcell & Hwy 20 (5108,000 paid by COSTCO
to ODOT) signal •
4
22
Bend & Colorado signal (1/2 funded by ODOT)
4
15 135
Franklin 3rd to Railroad underpass (ISTEA) curbs,
sidewalk, bike lanes'
3
265
3rd St. underpass - sidewalks, bike paths, lighting,
landscaping (ISTEA) •
4
63
Franklin - Hill to Lava curbs, sidewalks,
bike lanes (BDB) •
4
275
Franklin - 3rd to 8th modernization
2
650
Studio & Boyd signal •
2
15
135
Portland & Hill signal •
1
15
135
Wilson - neighborhood access
5
110
Reed Market - Hwy. 97 to Blakely •
5
250
8th & Studio (intersection & signal)
2
15
285
NW 14th modernization/signals
14th & Galveston signal
4
15
135
14th & Newport Signal
4
15
135
14th -Newport to Galveston modernization
4
300
Franklin railroad Underpass Widening
4
500
Newport & 9th signal
5
15
College Way & Newport intersection
4
40
9th Street - Wilson to Reed Market construction/signal
9th - Wilson to Reed Market modernization/signal •
4
40 360
9th & Wilson signal •
4
15 135
City of Bend 6
Page 24)( 2
Street & Roads System Development Charges
Five Year Capital Improvement Plan ��`- j
Exhibit 3 /°v
Priority
Definition
0 = Continued
Construction contracted as of lune 30, 1994
1 = Critical
Imperative for reliable street operations
2 = Essential
Absolutely necessary for operation of system
3 = Necessary
Needed for efficient operation of system
4 = Desirable
Useful for proper operation of system
5 = Pending
Of no immediate consequence
Project Description
Priority
(Amounts in
4195 95/96
thousands)
9b/97
97/98
8N9
Century Drive & Mt. Washington curbs, sidewalks,
bike lanes, signals
4
400
Bond - Kansas to Colorado Modernization
5
300
Newport Bridge replacement •
5
750
Wall -Newport to Hill Modernization
5
325
Galveston & Riverside Intersection
5
75
Wells Acres & Butler Intersection '
5
40
Purcell Extension Modernization •
5
300
4th & Butler signal
5
15
Olney/Pordand Construction Connection
5
430
12th 1& Newport intersection improvements
4
35
ML Washington Bridge at 3rd •
5
250
Neighborhood Traffic Management Devices
1
20 20
20
20
20
Chip Seal Program
1
66
69
73
77
Overlay (streets being considered for overlays for FY 94-95)
1
350 350
350
350
350
Galveston - Riverside to 14th
Franklin - Hill to Brooks
8th - Franklin to Greenwood
Shepard - Penn to Wells Acres
Newport - College Way to Greenwood
Penn - 8th to Edgecliff
Purcell - Neff to North End
Fleet Replacement
2
16 17
17
18
19
Street Portion Public Works Radio Upgrade
2
55
Rotating Plow
2
9
9
Roller Replacement
2
30
Sander Unit Replacement
2
14
14
Retrofitting 5 ton truck for Street use
3
15 40
45
Loader Attachments
4
18
Sweeper Replacement
3
125
100
Truck Center Blade
4
g
Front End Loader Replacement
4
125
Used Grader
5
95
TOTAL $1,663 $2,260 $1,976 $1,406 $5,096
Denotes funding avilable from other sources
K 'a
REVISION AND SUPPLEMENTATION
TO
ECONOMIC AND ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. METHODOLOGY
EC it Ise, a- 'r13
t Street SDC Rate Schedule l �' 1 (?� City of Bend
Chargeable Conversion: Average
Category* Trip ends Units % Daily trip trip length SDC
er unit reduction ends'per: unite.: O&Iinit
Industrial
Industrial 5.23 T.G.S.F. 0.00% 5.23 6.2 $709
Residential
Single Family
9.55 Dwelling Unit
0.00%
9.55
5.5
$1,149
Apartments
6.28 Dwelling Unit
0.00%
6.28
5.5
$755
Condominium
5.86 Dwelling Unit
0.00%
5.86
5.5
$705
Mobile Home
4.81 Dwelling Unit
0.00%
4.81
5.5
$579
Senior Care
2.15 Dwelling Unit
0.00%
2.15
5.5
$259
PUD - residential **
7.44 Dwelling Unit
0.00%
7.44
5.5
$895
Lodging
Motel 8.14 Rooms 20.00% 6.51 5.9 $841
Hotel 6.95 Rooms 20.00% 5.56 5.9 $718
Recreational
Golf Course ** 37.59 Hole 0.00% 37.59 7.5 $6,
Community Center 2.61 T G, 5.f. 0.00% 2.61 7.5 $1
itutional
Elementary School
1.09 Student
0.00%
1.09
3.8
$91
High School
1.38 Student
0.00%
1.38
3.8
$115
Community College
1.85 Student
0.00%
1.85
3.8
$154
Church
9.32 T.G.S.F.
20.00%
7.46
3.8
$620
Daycare
4.65 Student
60.00%
1.86
3.8
$155
tical
Hospital 16.78 T.G.S.F. 20.00% 13.42 5.0 $1,468
Medical/Dental 34.17 T.G.S.F. 20.00% 27.34 5.0 $2,989
General Office Bldg.
Size < 50,000 * * * 16.58 T.G.S.F. 20.00% 13.26 6.2 $1,799
50,000<= Size < 175,000 * * * 14.03 T.G.S.F. 20.00% 11.22 6.2 $1,522
175,000<= Size *** 11.85 T.G.S.F. 20.00% 9.48 6.2 $1,286
Government
Gov't Office Bldg. 68.90 T.G.S.F. 20.00% 55.12 6.2 $7,475
Retail
General Retail
39.08 T.G.S.F.
20.00%
31.26
4.0
$2,735
Shopping Center:
Size < 50,000 ***
118.90 T.G.L.S.F.
44.00%
66.58
4.0
$5,825
50,000<= Size < 175,000 ***
67.90 T.G.L.S.F.
44.00%
38.02
4.0
$3,327
175,000<= Size ***
54.50 T.G.L.S.F.
33.00%
36.52
4.0
$3,195
Restaurant
239.19 T.G.S.F.
56.00%
105.24
4.0
$9,208
Supermarket
143.50 T.G.S.F.
42.00%
83.23
4.0
$7,282
Banks
202.91 T.G.S.F.
45.00%
111.60
4.0
$9,764
Street SDC Rate Schedule !!,, �+ g City of Bend
Notes: V146-1(03
1
* The category that best fits the use proposed will be used to calculate the Street SDC. The City
Engineer or his/her designee, shall make this determination. If a use is substantially different from
the uses listed in this table, then the City Engineer at his/her discretion may use the trip rate, length
and percentage reduction of the next closest use delineated in the ITE Trip Generation Manual.
If the City Engineer makes a determination that the ITE Trip Generation source data is insufficient,
then additional traffic study information will be considered to make the SDC calculation.#
# Substitute "Public Works Director" as the designated official for use under Deschutes County
jurisdiction.
* * Golf courses and other recreational facilities included within a PUD shall be calculated as a part
of the PUD.
***The calculation for both the General Office and Shopping Center SDC categories shall be additive.
Example: The first 49,999 square feet shall be calculated at the higher SDC unit rate, the next 125,000
square feet at the next SDC unit and all square footage over 174,999 would be calculated at the lower
SDC unit rate.
T.G.S.F. = Thousand Gross Square Feet
T.G.L.S.F. = Thousand Gross Leasable Square Feet
arc s
CITY OF BEND, OREGON
Memorandum
01415
Larry Patterson, City Manager
Date: June 2, 1995
To: Larry Patterson, City Manager
Ron Marceau, City Attorney
From: Rick Root, Transportation Planner
Subject: Summary of Modifications to Economic & Engineering Services, Inc. (EES)
Street SDC Rate Schedule
The following is a summary of changes recommended to the City Commission by staff for
consideration in the adoption of Street System Development Charges. These items relate
specifically to recommended SDC rate changes from the original EES, Inc., report, dated October
3, 1994, and as modified by Randy Goff in a memorandum, dated March 30, 1995 (a copy of the
memo is attached).
The following is a summary of the substantive changes and the rationale and/or supporting data
to the recommended modifications:
1. The Industrial Trip Rate has been revised to 5.23 trips/TGSF.
Rationale: Industrial properties commonly change tenants over a period of time or may even
represent a mixture of uses. Therefore, the proposed trip rate represents an average of the
three most common industrial type uses illustrated in the ITE Manual; Light Industrial (110),
Manufacturing (140) and Warehouse (150).
2. The Single Family trip rate has been revised to 9.55 trips/dwelling unit.
Rationale: For consistency with the other trip rates used in the SDC rate schedule, staff
recommends use of the two decimal point trip rate found in the ITE Trip Generation Manual.
3. The Apartment Trip Rate has been revised to 6.28 trips/dwelling unit.
Rationale: This represents use of the "post 1973 " trip rate used within the ITE Trip
Generation Manual, rather than the report number which was an average of all studies (ITE
use 220) and Low Rise Apartments (ITE use 221). The recommended trip rate was felt to
better represent travel behavior in Bend.
4. NEW residential categories for Condominium and PUD Residential were added to the
schedule.
Rationale: There a number of these types of uses within the Bend area and due to the lower
trip generation rates associated with these uses, it was deemed appropriate to separate them
from the other higher residential trip categories.
P.O. Box 431, 710 N.W. Wall Street, Bend, Oregon 97709 • 503-388-5505 • Fax 503-388-5519 • TDD/VOICE 388-5571
0145-1933
5. Inclusion of a Golf Course activity within the PUD Residential use.
Rationale: Golf Courses and other recreational facilities have been included in the
calculation of the trip rates for residential PUD's. This distinction has been made to
recognize the difference between Golf Courses open to the general public and those that are
for private use by PUD residents and their guests. This reflects a trip characteristic that
contains most trips to within the PUD and produces significantlyfewer trips on the public
road system than a public golf course destination.
6. Addition of a Hotel under the Lodging category.
Rationale: This category was added to recognize a distinctively different travel behavior
between Hotels and Motels.
7. Revision of the Golf Course unit of measure to Holes instead of Acres.
Rationale: Due to the variation in size (i.e., acreage) of golf courses with the same number of
holes, this unit measure was deemed a more accurate and equitable measure of traffic
impact.
8. Revision of the trip length for Community Center (to 7.5 from 7.9) and Church (to 3.8 from
7.9).
Rationale: The trip schedule has been organized by "groups" of use categories. The trip
lengths for Community Center and Church have been modified to reflect consistency with
other uses within the respective groups.
9. Revision of the Chargeable Percent Reduction for Daycare (to 60% from 0%).
Rationale: Trips to and from Daycare facilities clearly have a linked trip characteristic
associated with parents dropping off and picking up children as apart of their trip to work.
While the ITE Trip Generation Manual did not provide specific data (i.e., no studies on the
subject) to document this factor, staff has made an assumption based on professional
judgement relative to a reasonable chargeable percent reduction to account for this linked
trip characteristic.
10. In the initial report two categories were provided for Restaurants; Fast Food Restaurant and
Restaurant. These two categories were combined and a weighted average for trip generation
was developed.
Rationale: The original SDC rate schedule established a high SDC for Fast Food
Restaurants. In order to develop an SDC rate that seemed more reasonable economically, a
survey of the number and type of restaurants within the Bend area was done and a
single "weighted average " trip generation rate was developed based on the local proportion
of these restaurant types; for Fast Food (ITE use 833, 834), High Turnover Restaurant (ITE
use 832) and Quality Restaurant (ITE use 831). Table I., is a summary of how the weighted
average figure was derived.
Table 1.
Restaurants in Bend
5/95
Fast Food:
Restaurant - Fast Food w/ Drive through
Restaurant - Fast Food NO Drive through
[ Restaurant - Fast Food (in malls) J***
High Turnover Restaurant:
Quality Restaurant:
Total =
0146-190`4
ITE ITE
Adjusted
%
Trip Rate % pass by (reduction)" *
ITE trip
P
total
per TGSF hi h
Rate
13
12%
680 56%
9
8.57%
632.12 56%
4
3.81%
786.22 n/a
[7]
n/a
68
65%
205.36 n/a
24
23%
96.51 n/a
105
Weighted trip rate average 1 239.19 56% 105.24
* Restaurant count from local inventory
* * Percent "pass by" per ITE 5th Edition, page 1-27. Recommend use of the high end value
due to character of high pass by tourist trade and linked highway trips within the Bend area.
* * * Fast food restaurants within malls NOT counted - were considered as a
use contained within the shopping center trips (included within S.C.. data)
10 03/30/95 13:15 $274 6248 EES, Inc. 0 002
ECONOMIC AND ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC.
4380 S.W. Me®dam Avenue, Suite 365
Podtand, OR 97201
(Sa3) 223 -303:1 -FAX (503) 274-5248 � � � r b��
MEMORANDUM i9 t
File p:
TO: John Hossick
Andy Parks
Rick Root
Catherine Morrow
Larry Ricc
George Read
FROM: Randy Goff
DA'Z'E: March 30,1995
SUBJECT: Street System Development Charges
I wanted to provide everyone with a summary of our conference call this morning with
regard to street system development charges for the City of )Bend and Deschutes County.
The items discussed were the average daily trip rate, average trip length, road
construction costs and road capacity.
1. Average Daily Trip Rate
The appropriateness of the use of national standards for the average daily trip rate
for the Bend Urban Area was discussed_ Based on the adjustment factors under
the national standards, a downward adjustment can be made for persons per
household. However, this is mitigated by the vehicles per unit within the urban
area. Additionally, the use of the national standards is comparable to the samples
taken within the Bend urban area. Therefore, noadjustment wBl be made to the
average daily trip rate.
2. Trip Length
The original SDC report used an average daily trip length of 6.6 miles for a single
family dwelling. Based on studies undertaken by the City of Bend and Deschutes
County, it was determined that the trip length should be shortened to .5 miles
consistent with the actual statistical data collected by the City and County. LI
other trip len chs will be reduced by this pro ortional amount to reflect the actual
size of the Bend urban growth area.
Olympia. WA Bellevue. WA Vancouver. B.0 P041atd,OR WastttrtgtM O.0
.+ .03/30/95 13:16 'a274 6248 EES. Inc. 0 003
Memorandum
March 30,1995
Page 2
3. Road Cxpacity
The SDC report used 7,500 average daily trips per lane. The current mode Ing
being undertaken by the City and County for road planning uses 7,200 average .
daily trips per lane. Therefore, the number will be adjusted to 7,200-
4. Lane Costs
The report uses a construction cost estimate based on Butler Road at $196.47 per
linear foot. This number includes two bila-, lanes and three larges of traffic.
Sidewalks arc not included in the calculation. The original study divided the
number of lanes by 3.3 to reflect not only the actual lanes of traffic but also
adjustments for curbage. Based on discimsions with the County and City, it was
determined to use 3.5 I;= This takes into account the number of lanes which
would be develop if no bilce lanes were included as part of The road decision
and therefore more accurately reflects the number of lanes on the road. This has
the effect of lowering the cost per lane mile from $314352 to $296,389_
Additionally, it was determined that as part of the transportation plarming, street
signals would be added approximately one per mile, The average cost of a street
signal it $130,000. Dividing this by two gives the cost to each road. This is
farther divided by 3.5 lanes to come up with a cost per lane mile of $18,571. This
makes the total cost per lane mile $314,960.
The effect of all of these adjustments is to lower the system development charge for a
single family unit from $1328 to S 1,155.
Provided as an attachment to this memorandum is a summary of the cost of the SDC per
unit as well as an update of Table 4-3 which provides sample calculations for different
types of land use.
Thank you all for your time and effort in resolving these matters on the street system
development charge. if you have any questions or require additional information, please
call.
cc: Larry Patterson
SDC Calculations:
Capacity per lane mile in Vehicles per day =
Number of lanes
Aver. road construction cost per lane mile=
Average cost per lane mile traffic signal =
7200
3.5
$196.471f / 3.5 lanes x 52801f/mile = $296,389
$130,000/mi. /2 /3.5 lanes= $18,571
Total =S'314,960
Formula: SDC = [ (( trip ends x trip length ) /2) / 7200] X $314,960
05/30/95 page 1 of 1 08:56 AM
Page 1 of 2
5/18/95
BEND URBAN AREA 014"..
TRANSPORTATION PLAN PROJECT LIST (DESCHUTES COUNTY)
SDC EXHIBIT "B"
JUNE, 1995
MAP NO.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
$
COST
TRAFFIC SIGNALS
7
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
$
150,000
8
(new road segments)
$
150,000
1
Empire Avenue - Butler Mkt. Rd. to Yeoman
$
1,120,000
2
Empire Avenue - 18th St. to Boyd Acres Rd.
$
955,000
3
Reed Market Road - Hwy.97 to Blakely Rd. (County share)
$
515,000
4
American Lane Bridge
$
230,000
TOTAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
$
2,820,000
MODERNIZATION
(reconstruction to current road standards)
5 Ferguson Road - 27th Street to 15th Street $ 467,000
6 Franklin Street Underpass (County share) $ 500,000
F=: x #t 16 I T- "G n
TOTAL MODERNIZATION
$
967,000
TRAFFIC SIGNALS
7
Reed Market Road / S.E. 27th Street
$
150,000
8
Reed Market Road / 15th Street
$
150,000
9
Empire Avenue / Boyd Acres Road
$
150,000
10
Butler Market Road / 27th Street
$
150,000
TOTAL TRAFFIC SIGNALS
$
600,000
F=: x #t 16 I T- "G n
BEND URBAN AREA 0�0+ rl,
TRANSPORTATION PLAN PROJECT LIST (DESCHUTES COUNTY)
SDC EXHIBIT "B"
JUNE, 1995
MAP NO. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
COST
Page 2 of 2
5/18/95
TOTAL COUNTY PROJECTS $ 7,915,000
ASPHALTIC OVERLAYS (preservation projects)
11
Knott Road - China Hat to Brosterhous
$
209,000
12
Brinson Blvd. - Boyd Acres Road to New Construction
$
88,000
13
Romaine Village Way - Hwy. 97 to Ridge Drive
$
66,000
14
Reed Mkt. Road - Hwy. 97 to American Lane
$
187,000
15
SE 27th Street - Bear Creek Rd. to Reed Mkt. Rd.
$
239,000
16
O.B. Riley Road - Hwy. 97 to Glen Vista
$
324,000
17
SE 27th Street - Reed Mkt. Rd. to Ferguson Rd.
$
210,000
18
Butler Market Road - Deschutes Mkt. to Bend UGB.
$
94,000
19
Brosterhous Road - Knott Road to American Lane
$
363,000
20
Boyd Acres Road - Studio Road to Empire Ave.
$
220,000
21
SE Bear Creek Road - Bend City Limits to 27th Street
$
231,000
22
Ponderosa Street - Hwy. 97 to Poplar Street
$
132,000
23
Brosterhous Road - American Lane to Hwy. 97
$
154,000
24
Pettigrew Road - Reed Mkt. Rd. to Bear Creek Rd.
$
165,000
25
Reed Market Road - American Lane to Newberry Dr.
$
166,000
26
Cooley Road - Hwy. 97 to Ranch Village Drive
$
121,000
27
Parrell Road - Brosterhous Road to Murphy Road
$
275,000
28
S.E. 15th Street - Reed Mkt. Road to Ferguson Road
$
130,000
29
Murphy Road - Hwy. 97 to Country Club Road
$
154,000
TOTAL ASPHALTIC OVERLAYS
$
3,528,000
TOTAL COUNTY PROJECTS $ 7,915,000
0146-1940
1 46..E 940 Page 1 of 3
v 5/18/95
BEND URBAN AREA
TRANSPORTATION PLAN PROJECT LIST (CITY OF BEND)
SDC EXHIBIT B
JUNE, 1995
MAP NO. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
COST
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
(new road segments)
1 Reed Market - Hwy. 97 to Blakely Rd. (City share)
250,000
2 Olney / Portland
$ 430,000
3 Purcell Extension
$ 300,000
TOTAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
$ 980,000
MODERNIZATION
(reconstruction to current road standards)
4
Revere 4th to 8th
$
200,000
5
Revere R.R. Crossing
$
36,000
6
Franklin - 3rd to Railroad underpass
$
265,000
7
3rd Street underpass
$
63,000
8
Franklin - Hill to Lava
$
275,000
9
Franklin - 3rd to 8th
$
650,000
10
Wilson - neighborhood access
$
110,000
11
8th & Studio intersection
$
140,000
12
14th - Newport to Galveston
$
300,000
13
Franklin Street Underpass (City share)
$
500,000
14
College Way & Newport Intersection
$
40,000
15
9th Wilson to Reed Market
$
360,000
16
Century Drive & Mt. Washington Intersection
$
250,000
17
Bond St. - Kansas to Colorado
$
300,000
Page 2 of 3
5/18/95
BEND URBAN AREA
TRANSPORTATION PLAN PROJECT LIST
(CITY OF BEND)
SDC EXHIBIT "B"
JUNE, 1995
MAP NO. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
COST
MODERNIZATION (continued)
18
Newport Bridge Replacement
$
750,000
19
Wall - Newport to Hill
$
325,000
20
Galveston & Riverside Intersection
$
75,000
21
Wells Acres & Butler Intersection
$
40,000
22
12th & Newport Intersection
$
35,000
23
Mt. Washington Bridge @ 3rd
$
250,000
TOTAL MODERNIZATION
$
4,964,000
TRAFFIC SIGNALS
24
Replace Traffic Signal Downtown
$
65,000
25
8th / Penn
$
150,000
26
8th / Franklin
$
150,000
27
8th / Revere
$
150,000
28
4th / Greenwood
$
150,000
29
4th / Revere
$
150,000
30
4th / Franklin
$
150,000
31
27th / Neff
$
150,000
32
Purcell / Hwy. 20
$
150,000
33
Bend / Colorado
$
150,000
34
Studio / Boyd
$
150,000
35
Portland / Hill
$
150,000
0146-1 t,Ar-) Page 3 of 3
5/18/95
BEND URBAN AREA
TRANSPORTATION PLAN PROJECT LIST (CITY OF BEND)
SDC EXHIBIT "B"
JUNE, 1995
MAP NO. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
COST
TOTAL ASPHALTIC OVERLAYS $ 639,000
TOTAL CITY PROJECTS $ 9,348,000
TRAFFIC SIGNALS (continued)
36
14th / Galveston
$
150,000
37
14th / Newport
$
150,000
38
8th / Studio
$
150,000
39
Newport / 9th
$
150,000
40
9th / Wilson
$
150,000
41
Century Drive / Mt. Washington
$
150,000
42
4th / Butler
$
150,000
TOTAL TRAFFIC SIGNALS
$
2,765,000
ASPHALTIC OVERLAYS
(preservation projects)
43
Galveston - Riverside to 14th
$
110,000
44
Franklin - Hill to Brooks
$
80,000
45
8th - Franklin to Greenwood
$
56,000
46
Penn - 8th to Edgecliff
$
183,000
47
Purcell - Neff to North End
$
210,000
TOTAL ASPHALTIC OVERLAYS $ 639,000
TOTAL CITY PROJECTS $ 9,348,000
TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAP
SDC EXHIBIT A
— — BEND URBAN RESERVE BOUNDARY COUNTY MAINTAINED ARTERIALS N0 VAE "'"W
OGOY 7RANSPORTA770N PROJ9L78
CITY MAINTAINED ARTERIALS FUTURE COUNTY ARTERIALS O COMY rnwsaoxw7oN01r crs
— — FUTURE CITY ARTERIALS COUNTY MAINTAINED COLLECTORS 0 "Un= 7FARX :uC.V=
CITY MAINTAINED COLLECTORS — — FUTURE COUNTY COLLECTORS F-1 mw azrAm
eanv WUM CROWMAM
— FUTURE CITY COLLECTORS STATE HIGHWAYS BLVD MUM RUMVE MM
EJCFf1131T' 'D"
BEND URBAN AREA
TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAP
SDC EXHIBIT A
— — BEND URBAN RESERVE BOUNDARY
— COUNTY
MAINTAINED ARTERIALS
I aa. -w. ,. "aw
NO SCALE - JUN$5
CITY 7RANSP0RT:4TT0N PROJECTS
— CITY MAINTAINED ARTERIALS —
— FUTURE
COUNTY ARTERIALS
O
COUNTY TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS
— — FUTURE CITY ARTERIALS
— COUNTY
MAINTAINED COLLECTORS
OO
nnmE Ic -q'Gmus
® CITY MAINTAINED COLLECTORS —
— FUTURE
COUNTY COLLECTORS
BEND CITY AREA
BEND URBAN GROWTfi AREA
FUTURE CITY COLLECTORS
STATE HIGHWAYS
ED
BEND UUM RESERVE AREA
I -t
z