1996-22992-Resolution No. 96-086 Recorded 6/20/1996REVIEWED
96"22992 LEG COUNSEL
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
A Resolution Establishing a System *~s
Development Charge for Transportation *,
Within the Redmond Area Urban Growth
Boundary Outside the City of Redmond.
RESOLUTION NO. 96-086
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Off) D ,$CHUTES
COUNTY, OREGON, as follows: 0154-2482
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 Redmond Area Urban
Growth Boundary outside the City of Redmond. 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
Redmond Urban Area as set forth in Section 4 of this resolution.
Section 2. Transportation SDCs Methodology. The basic methodology
used to establish the transportation development charge in this
resolution is contained in a document entitled "System Development
Charges" prepared by DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, Inc., marked Exhibit A,
attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, and as amended
by the documents marked Exhibit B attached hereto and by this reference
incorporated herein.
Section 3. SDC Amount. The SDCs for transportation within the
Redmond Area Urban Growth Boundary outside the City of Redmond shall be
the SDC amount as set out below:
Residential
Single family
Multi family
Manufactured
Manufactured
Industrial
Commercial
home on a lot
home in a park
$404 per parking space
$325 per parking space
$404 per parking space
$244 per parking space
$411 per parking space
$517 per parking space
The number of parking spaces used for the purpose of calculating
transportation SDC's shall be the minimum number of required spaces for
the proposed structure or use.
Section 4. Capital Improvements. The improvement plan, marked
Exhibit C, is hereby adopted and shall be completed within ten (10) years
from the date of this resolution.
lJ
PAGE 1 - RESOLUTION 96-086 (6-19-96) JK I!„CR��MED
°5 ��ED 1996
JUN 2719%
0154-2483
Section 5. Effective Date. The SDCs provided in this resolution
shall be effective the 1st day of July, 1996, provided, however, that
transportation SDCs shall not be applied to those projects that have
completed plans submitted to the County on or before June 30, 1996.
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 Policy.
The credit policy for transportation SDC's of the City of Redmond,
Chapter 3, Public Improvements, Redmond City Code, are hereby adopted by
reference as the credit policy of Deschutes County for transportation
SDC's collected within the Urban Growth Boundary of the City of Redmond
outside the City of Redmond.
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.
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 19th day of June, 1996.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF/ DESCHUTEB COUNTY,. OREGON
, Cha
A7T: BARRY SLAUGHT R, Commissioner
e
Recording Secr tary R ERT L. NIPPER, issioner
PAGE 2 - RESOLUTION 96-086 (6-19-96)
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES 0154-2484
SEMON ONE - INTRODUCTION
Under the provisions of ORS 223.302 the City of Redmond ("City") is authorized to establish Systems Development
Charges ("SDC') for the purpose of financing necessary capital improvements to accommodate development.
Concerns have surfaced regarding the capacity of our arterials and collectors to meet their functional requirements.
The City of Redmond has determined that the capacity (or functional requirements) of these streets must meet the
following requirements:
1. The street must provide sufficient pavement area to allow the passage of vehicles through
intersections at no less than a Class level of service.
2. The street must provide for safe separation of vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians. This will require
the construction of bicycle paths as well as curbs and sidewalks with all arterials and collectors.
In the 1980s the City adopted an SDC fee for streets. The present charge is set at $100 per parking space. The
City has long recognized that this amount was inadequate to finance the street capital improvements which will be
necessary to accommodate the growth now occurring as well as the growth the City can reasonably anticipate within
the urban area over the next 20 years.
In 1995 the Redmond City Council directed staff -to review the list of qualifying improvements for the purpose of
expending SDC funds and to analyze the alternative sources of revenues the City can reasonably expect to assist
in the construction of those improvements.
This direction from the Council for a review of the street SDC's and other financing mechanisms for street
improvements was necessitated by a series of subdivision proposals both within the city limits of Redmond and in
the Redmond urban area The location of these proposed subdivisions on streets that were designated as arterials
and collectors, but were clearly substandard in their construction, triggered a focused policy discussion on the
condition of the Redmond street system. The Council found that increased traffic in the past and into the future
will pose a significant risk to the safe passage of pedestrians and bicyclists. The Council further found that increased
development activity (and the accompanying traffic) would lead to a rapid decline in effective traffic circulation in
many areas of the City.
To address both the short-term and the long-term traffic requirements of the City, the Council adopted a strategy
of requesting voter approval of a $4 million street levy and an increase in SDC fees'. The City employed the serves
of David Evans and Associates to assist with the analysis of needed street improvements, the cost of those
improvements and a proper allocation of those costs between the different users (residential, commercial and
industrial) to arrive at an appropriate figure for SDC fees.
' Since 1991 the City has been in the process of updating its
transportation plan. The draft transportation plan of May 1994
anticipated a sharp increase in street SDC fees (See Table 30, Draft
Transportation Plan, page 131).
PAGE 1 - SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES ^
\epf\redmond\method.sdc GV�,IBIT'A
_
Page-.,.. 1
0154-2485
From October 1995 through January 1996, the Council and the Board of Commissioners, through a series of
workshops and public hearings, approved a capital project list for the Redmond urban area. The project list
encompasses projects which are anticipated to be constructed within the neat 20 year period. This list does not
include state projects such as a relocation of Highway 97 or improvements to Highway 1262.
F -i t%yf•): io WiTI]O WT• -11% li M k.
As a result of the workshops, public hearings and the adopted transportation plan of the Redmond Urban Area, a
list for capital projects and the priorities of their construction was considered and then approved by the Redmond
City Council and the Board of County Commissioners. A copy of the project list and the priorities approved is hereto
is set forth in APPENDIX N.W.
A- Methodology
The basic methodology used to assess long-range transportation needs was to use the anticipated growth
in population and employment in Redmond to develop projections of future travel demand, and then to
identify street system improvements needed to meet the projected increase in traffic. The forecast year of
2015 is being used for the update to the City's Transportation Systems plan currently in preparation in
cooperation with the Oregon Department of Transportation.
Planned improvements to the collector and arterial street system within the City of Redmond's urban
growth boundary (UGB) were based on the Redmond Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. When the
Transportation System Plan element of the Comprehensive Plan is updated this year, it is expected that
additional capacity -enhancing projects will be included. The additional projects may increase the cost basis
for the transportation systems development charge, and the City may wish to consider a revision to the SDC
following adoption of the revised Transportation System Plan.
City of Redmond Staff used current City street improvement standards to define the physical characteristics
of the proposed improvements to the collector and arterial streets, and to estimate their anticipated costs.
Critical factors used int he calculation of costs included pavement width, right-of-way width, sidewalks, storm
drainage, bicycle facilities, traffic control and the presence of bridges or other structures.
This report describes the calculations upon which the SDC charges are based. The charge is calculated by
dividing the eligible costs of transportation projects by the forecast trips which cause the need for
improvements. The eligible costs are those which increase capacity and service. The cost calculation
excludes those costs attributable to increases in through traffic.
Finally, the fee levied against a development is derived by determining the number of trips forecast and
multiplying this by the per trip fee. For each land use category, the SDC fee was then expressed in terms
of the number of parking spaces per development, based on existing development code requirements.
B. Growth Assumptions and Forecasts of Future Traffic
Growth assumptions for the City of Redmond were taken from the year 2015 forecast developed by the City
of Redmond and Deschutes County for the update to the City's Transportation System Plan. These
forecasts are based on Redmond's Comprehensive Plan, and assume full build -out of available lands within
the UGB.
2 It is anticipated that all or a majority of the costs of those
improvements will be funded by monies from the Oregon Department of
Transportation.
PAGE 2 - SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
\epf\redmond\method.sdc EXH'B'� A
Page a
0154-2486
The forecasts of future development were based on the projected growth in five land use categories,
including three residential categories (single family, multi -family and manufactured housing), plus estimates
of the growth in commercial and industrial employment. The anticipated growth was used to develop
estimates of future travel demand, using a computer model that simulates travel behavior on the existing
and planned street network. Travel demand was calculated using estimates of trips generated for each land
use category. The per unit number of trips was based on nationwide averages published in the 5th Edition
of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's Trip Generation. The average ITE trip rates were adjusted
as part of the observed traffic counts in Redmond. The trip rates for Redmond fall within the range of
observations cited in 2Wp Generation. Trip rates per until for each land use category used int he forecasting
process are shown in Table 1.
The increase in development within the City's UGB by the year 2015 is estimated to result in an additional
157,487 trips on the City's collector and arterial street system, as shown in Table 1. Note that this only
includes trips generated within the UGB. In accordance with statutory requirements, through trips are not
included in the estimated increase in travel demand.
In 1990, housing within Redmond's UGB totalled about 2,900 units, with single family homes representing
approximately 76% of the housing supply. The remaining housing consists of multi -family housing (16%) and
manufactured homes (9%).
By the year 2015, the housing supply is projected to increase over 11,000 units, at an annual rate of growth
of approximately 5.5%. Multi -family housing is expected to grow to reach approximately 28% of the housing
market, with single family housing representing about 64% of the market, plus another 8% for manufactured
homes.
Commercial employment is expected to grow by over 2,000 jobs, while industrial development is projected
to absorb about 1,000 acres of land within the UGB.
Table 1
Forecasted Ina caws in Trips by Land Use Category (1995-2015)
1995 to 2015 Increase
Land Use
Category Unit
Trip Rate
Per Unit
Units Tri
Residential
Single Family Dwelling Unit
10.0
4,895 48,645
Multi Family Dwelling Unit
6.0
2,587 15,522
Mobile Home Dwelling Unit
6.0
659 3,953
Commensal Empkove
17S
A011 35,189
Industrial Acne
51.8
-
1,046 54,178
Total
11,165 157,487
PAGE 3 - SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
\epf\redmond\method.sdc EXHIBIT
Pap_ 3
C. Needed Transportation Facilities 0154-2487
Capital improvement projects were identified by City staff based on the existing transportation element of
the City's Comprehensive Plan. Because systems development charges are limited to funding improvements
which increase the capacity of the street system, projects were evaluated to determine the proportion of the
costs attributable to capacity enhancements, as shown in Appendix A: 20 Year Plan - Street Capital
Improvement Projects. The total of the eligible capital improvement costs shown in Appendix A is
$18,815,300.
In addition to the eligible capital costs listed in Appendix A, those costs associated with calculating, collecting,
record keeping, reporting and properly distributing system development charges are also eligible for the
transportation fee. These "compliance" costs can be included in the calculation of the transportation systems
development charges. For the purposes of the initial transportation systems charges, these costs were not
included in the cost basis. For future updates to the SDC program, the City may wish to consider adding
compliance costs to the calculation.
The capital projects required to maintain the City's street system include preservation projects as well as
projects that increase the capacity of the system. Thus, other sources of funds (in addition to the systems
development charge) will be needed to maintain and operate the City's Street System.
D. Calculation of Systems Development Charge
The concept behind a project -based systems development charge is to allocate the cost of needed projects,
plus the costs of establishing and administering the SDC program, proportionally to the development that
generates new trips.
The unit costs for each land use category are derived from the number of trips generated by each category
(see Table 1). To develop a system that would be readily understood, equitable, and straightforward to
administer, estimated trips were converted to the number of parking spaces required for each type of land
use. The number of parking spaces required by the City of Redmond Development Code for each proposed
development is proportional to the size of the proposed development, and thus is related to the anticipated
number of trips generated by that development. Because the ratio of development size to the number of
parking spaces is fixed for all development proposals within a given land use category, the number of
required parking spaces can, therefore, be used to proportionally allocate transportation system improvement
costs to individual land uses.
As shown on Table 2, the number of new trips generated by each land use category is used to proportionally
allocate overall costs to that type of land use. Then, based on the anticipated number of new parking spaces
within that land use category, a cost per parking space is calculated.
For new residential development, the future year forecasts prepared for the Transportation System Plan
included estimates of the number of new residential units for each of the three residential categories (single
family, multi -family and manufactured housing). The estimate of new units was expressed in terms of the
number of parking spaces created, using two parking spaces per unit for single family and manufactured
homes, and 1.5 spaces per unit for multi -family homes per the City of Redmond Development Code.
For the commercial land use category, the future year forecasts were based on the growth in the number
of employees. The projected number of commercial employees was converted to an equivalent number of
new parking spaces, based on the following formula:
Employees x (1,000 sf of gross floor area/1.82 employees) x
(1 parking space/200 sf gross floor area) _
2,011 emp. * (1,000 sf/1.82 emp.) * (1/200) = 5,525 commercial parking spaces
PAGE 4 - SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
\epf\redmond\method.sdc EXHIBIT
Page
Table 2 0154-2488
Calculation of SDC Charges
Land Use Forecasted Portion Of Allocation of Forecasted SDC
Category Increase in Total Total Costs Increase in Requirement
Trips Increase Parking per Unit
Single Family
48,645
30.9% $ 5,811,719
9,790
$594
Multi Family
151522
9.9% $1,854,446
3,881
$478
Manufactured
Home
3,9153
2.5% $ 472,273
1,318
$3W
Commensal
35,189
22.3% $ 4,204,103
5,525
$761
Industrial
54,178
34-4% $ 6,479759
10,695
$605
Total
157,487 100.0% $18,8.15,300
The ratio of gross floor area to employees was obtained from the 5th Edition of the Institute of
Transportation Engineers trip Gerrerafion, p. 1126. The ratio of parking spaces to gross floor area is per
the City's Development Code for retail stores, which is approximately equivalent to the average ratio of
parking spaces required for commercial developments.
The future year forecasts of new industrial development were based on the number of total acres absorbed
through development. The forecast of new industrial acres was converted to an equivalent number of new
parking spaces, using the following formula
Acres x (8,180 sf of grass floor arealacre) x (1 parking space/800 sf floor area) =
1,046 acres ` (8,180 sf/acre) • (1/800) = 10.695 industrial parking spaces
The ratio of gross floor area to gross acres was obtained from the 5th Edition of the Institute of
Transportation Engineers trip Generation, p. 82, for general light industrial development. The ratio of
parking spaces to gross floor area is per the City's Development Code for industrial properties.
E. Application of Transportation Systems Development Charge.
The transportation systems development charge shall be levied on new developments in addition to the other
systems development charges already in place. The transportation systems development fee shall be
collected at the time of issuance of a building permit or as otherwise provided for by City ordinance.
For all proposed developments, the fee is determined by multiplying the rate per parking space by the
number of parking spaces required by the City of Redmond Development Code.
PAGE 5 - SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
\epf\redmond\method.sdc
i
EXHIBIT
Page 5
SBMON FOUR - CREDITS 0154-2489
It is also 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.
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, but only for the right of way area over
and above that required for a local street. 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 by credits. No credit will be given for land deeded or dedicated prior to the effective
date of this ordinance.
Where it is a condition of development approval that the developer 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 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 participate 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.
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.
PAGE 6 - SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
\epf\redmond\method.sdc
EXHIBIT A
Pa®e
0154-2490
CITY OF REDMOND.O. N9 756
REDMOND
DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON REDMOND, OREGON
(541)548-2148-2148
FAX (541) 548-0706
Public Works Department
MEMO
DATE: - April 18, 1996
TO: Mayor and Council
THROUGH: Joe Hannan, City Manager
FROM: Mary Meloy, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Street System Development Charges - Update
AIRPORT 548-6059
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 548-2149
BUILDING 923-8397
PUBLIC WORKS 548-6068
Report in Brief:
This is to request for approval of the Street System Development Charge Methodology
as an amendment to the City of Redmond Facilities Plan.
Background:
On April 2, 1996 the City Council and Board of County Commissioners held a special
public hearing to take public comment on the proposal to increase the Street SDC fees.
The meeting was continued to April 23, 1996. No additional verbal comment will be
taken, however, written comment was received until April 16, 1996. At the writing of this
report, three written comments have been received from Wes Poe, Cleve Brock and
Tim Vezie.
Also at the April 2 special meeting, the Council asked for information defining Level of
Service for Arterials and Collectors. Attached you will find a letter from Jay Lyman of
DEA outlining his comments on the difference between Level of Service C and Level of
Service D. This analysis does not result in substantial reduction of the SDC fee
because proposed arterials and collectors do not typically contain continuous center
turn lanes or multiple lanes. Cost estimates do include left turn pockets and signals
when the traffic volumes warrant their installation.
A reduced SDC was introduce at the last meeting which eliminates the Maple Ave.
Bridge from the project list. Attached for your review is a revised comparison between
EXHIBIT Q
Page
0154-2491
the amended proposal (without the bridge) and fees adopted by the City of Bend.
Also attached are revised "Street Priority Projects and Funding Strategy" Alternative 1
with the Maple Ave. Bridge and Alternative 2 without the Maple Ave. Bridge. Both of
these proposals contain some changes related to traffic signal funding. (Some
numbers were in the wrong column.)
On April 15, 1996 the Urban Area Planning Commission reviewed the SDC
Methodology and made the following recommendation:
1. There is a need to increase the Street System Development Charges.
2. Manufactured homes on single family lots should pay the same fees as
site -built homes. (Mobile homes in parks should be in a separate
category.)
3. Cost of the Maple St. bridge should not be included in the SDC
Methodology. It is an important project and alternative funding should be
secured. Also, alternate construction options should be considered to
reduce the cost of construction.
4. A graduated fee implementation schedule should be implemented. (See
attached proposal prepared by Ron Leep as approved by the UAPC.)
Discussion:
Proposal #1.
Original methodology setting the fees uses a cost basis of $18,815,300 as follows:
Residential
Single Family
Multi -Family
Manufactured Home
Commercial
Industrial
$594 per required parking space
$478 per required parking space
$358 per required parking space
$761 per required parking space
$606 per required parking space
Proposal #2.
At the April 2 special Council/Commission meeting and at the April 15 UAPC meeting
an amended fee proposal was discussed. The alternate proposal is to eliminate the
Maple Ave. bridge ($5.9 million) from the proposed list of eligible projects. This project
may be funded by a special levy or be added to the SDC list at a future date. This will
in turn reduce the proposed fee for Street SDC's.
7
EXHIBIT
Page a
f
0154-2492
An amended methodology setting the fees uses a cost basis of $12,915,300 by
eliminating the Maple Street bridge project and separating manufactured homes in
parks from manufactured homes on single family lots as follows:
Residential
Single Family $404 per required parking space
Multi -Family $325 per required parking space
Manufactured Home - SF Lot $403 per required parking space
Manufactured Home - Park $244 per required parking space
Commercial
Industrial
$517 per required parking space
$411 per required parking space
Proposal #3.
UAPC proposed methodology setting graduated fees uses a cost basis of $12,915,300
by eliminating the MaDle Street bridae nroiect as follows -
Type
Years 1-5
Years 6-10
Years 11-20
Single Family
$250
$407
$594
Multi -Family
$225
$328
$478
Manufactured
Home in Park
$175
$246
$358
Commercial
$335
$522
$761
Commercial with
Drive up Window or
take out food
$400
$600
$850
Industrial
$260
$415
$606
NOTE: Cash flow charts are attached for each of the proposals.
Fiscal Impact:
Proposal #1 raises an estimated $18,815,000 over 20 years of collection and is
sufficient (in conjunction with other identified revenues) to fund the 39 proposed
projects.
EXHIBIT—L.
Page 3
a
N ap O (D M- n (D M a0 O W M n to N
�- -,r.-ono— ntnnM'[ LOCO) v
•--O0!- aONOOnMOO(Qrl- OOH n
co C to""wt-"-(OnLOLOM90MOM O
Z m - wLoNOMaOnnnr- LOMMN O
F- N �--�NM V_�M(OnMn(O(O(Or-W a0
r r r r r r r r r r 00
(A
Ovvtoa0cnnU')nn.-
N O(DN V MtoMO(OnM
7 V-( D O L N (' M n n � N N
0 tTNNNn�-nL V'N
N ON�(0WCO Min M0 M
� MMMMM V' V'tt V'tnc-
rdi ER
E y (D CO (O (O (O (O (O tO tO (O tO
o 619. nnnnnn
ovMmtn�nn�aocnM
O N v n O M O O M n LO
C V' v V V to to to CO (O CO N
N
0wmNr-mw V 0 m v w V MOM to
MM V' V'('M V'MOa0na0 V WV co
OtAN NtAr-O qqt O-Icgc (:Otntp O
V'OOMCO(7Mtna-oOtANOMoOn(O r
n r-WWMMC> C4 V) V• V•1000(0 M
r
O tp M a0 a0 O O aO a0 00 t10 00 OD M a0 M
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
v�vvvvvvvv�t�tvvvvv
tf')���A(OnOMnNaOV'N�OM) n
�(OnaOMONM'ct(DnM�MtnM V'
�--��-�•--NNNNNNNMMM� n
'- (DnMOO(sNcv)"TLO(DnCOMO�
M M m 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD C) -
O O O O O O Cl O O O O O O O O O
% r •- N N N N N N N N (V N N N
0154-2493
r
vi
X
co
w
a.
■
�
Nt- OMNCVWIDUi'I-tn�MM
I�aOM
NOCOOtt)Mc-NCOstMCD O
�
'cY
ton
0154-2494
O
.
:3
N O Cfl — 00 I� O � O Iq Ct I to e- 00
CO
N"NNNNNNMMM V-
00
,
w CV'OOOOIq"
Z
I*Mw MN�tMCDtnN
MO LO�CON00IT W MN'ct
LO
>
i-0W
fl- M CC) O M O O r N M to .o- U) M
00
co
0
6%GH
Ln
m
X
LU
a
C,"C)wC
N" W LOnMCMC)
ton
00MCOCQ(Otte-MI�I�M
O
00e-V00MMCC) MNN�
IT
O04V)V W r-MeMLOV)
00
N"NNNNNNMMM V-
00
.... N N N N N N N
tNnwU')tooUw W LOLa"
') LO
v}
O M 0 Cn to I-- � 00 0 CM
ONsI I-OCV) 000MIl-to
V' V' � st to to to t� CU CO N
ic
OO'Vr-Vt MMI-MOwvw to
`V MN to 00Me-'V'MM V Oacf)v O r
OOOOT,In--01-stOact OtneMItMCD O
OCMfl- C V W N W LO -CONWVLO M
to to to W W W Il- I,- O W M M O O r N
ER rrr N
00 00 M 00 M M M 00 CD Ol) M 00 M CC) M 00
N N N N N N
..........
�MMc7MMMMMMMMMMMM
U') � eh to co I- a M I- " CO 'd' N .- O CD I I,-
LOW['- COMa"M 'VWt-M �
,-
LOW['-COMONCM'VWt-M� MtncM R}'
�-�r-�-r-NNNNNNNCMMM— I.-
'
(O t, CO M O .-- N M I to CD CO M O
M M M M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.
M M M M O O O O O O O O O O 0 0
}-���NNN,NNNNNNNN.
a
OO --CONY r- q- t-OCOMr-LO" M
LO O O M N O CD O t[) co to ti O v to M N
:3 -1 NO(DNI-Oa-O In13CD1�-a0- N
C C vc)c)CO04v0)COMtO00t)Lo(D M CO
0 ; OO a--'V'f-NCO'cYe- Ioi-- —toOMN co
N to to toWOO�NMf-0cD0f,-to LO
r
OONcONNf-COtoCM�
w
OstCDOfl-NWtOOw0
Co
OOtAtn— 'Itc-Ofl f"N
f�
Nr C)m mOicOc'MNNN
N
M cY to to cD f,- O � CM to M
N
cA
_:
E+-' u-)wwttotoNNNNN�
E /n c7MMc)cONNNNN(O
0Uc'MmmmmV)tototototoI-
co Ovt'ACDtOtOfl- —t>DcoM
+! ONvf-OmcoOMf,- to
C 'T�"vvtototocDcocoN
t0
to w m n M LO W to T- M v to v 0 0 0 Co
N r-W00MNM'srmmwvw" - V •-
C w O e- Io 0 0 e- v O CO w O O to to co
(D cOOe- vCONCOV-toNO(3COfl: 6 4
0)
MMMvsYCO1�1�COaOM �tvtocDtO
y fA r r r M
Y
EA
LO to to. to to CO M CO co O M m CO CO w CO
� NNNNNNNNNNI�I�f�l�f�f�
J eg,NNNNMMMMM'cf'�
to to'�t�toOf�OMf�NO�N�-OOI �
tncD1�C00)ONM �cD1�0�.-MtC�M �
C ��-•-��--NNNNNNNMMM� f�
J
-I M t- CO O O N M V' LO cO f` CO O O .-
(6 000)OOOOOOOOOOOc-�--
} 0) O) 0) 0) 000000000000
— •'- — N N N- N N N N N N N N
0154-2495
m
C)
LO
rtCvl
00
rtQVI
.�VCri
to
V
0154-2496
rtvC%
0
0
,.
o
�
o Nolo,�.
M
O
�*�0o
rtVV
�-
cQ
00 V
N
et
r 0
r-
o
M M L N
O
O
a�
r�
r'
at
O
•- N
N
N
r NNO� M
M
O
t0
O
O
st
t0
r
W
00
O
it
M
to
M
1l-
C)
to
CO
O
O
O
O
00
f`
ON
h
M
t0
v
N
vM
N
to O
a0
tp
�- M
O
to
O O w to It O
ci
r
00
m
00
00
M O
0"
ti
O tD � h h
ci
00
0
C)
N
�
CL
Cl a
h
0
co w h .- CO
ci
H
Q,
0 6ti
MLo
'►t
IN
r
(D
co
W)
to
►t
69
�p
H
ER
N CM 6M9
I-
�aaa�a�a
1
C)
N
H
m
N
N
N
M
co
a0
Lr)
C
69
M
co
0
M
0 co
L
st
M
top
69
M
N �� �
V-
m
MH
O
E
C)
LO
rtCvl
00
rtQVI
.�VCri
to
V
Cri
rtvC%
rtQI
rtVVI
C%
rtQI
O
C:
M
O
Ci
rtVV
O
co
Ci
+yV/
O
Ci
00
O
t0
O
O
a�
V•
N
at
O
to
O
h
N
N
M
O
t0
O
O
st
t0
r
W
00
O
it
M
to
M
1l-
C)
to
CO
O
O
O
O
00
f`
ON
h
M
t0
v
N
to
N
Lf)
ci
�
tt)
d
O
O
ci
r
ci
ti
d
ci
ti
ci
ti
LV:
ci
ti
C)
d
�
�
M
ci
d
h
ci
N
O
N
a0
'►t
r
(D
co
W)
to
►t
I-
�aaa�a�a
1
C)
N
v
N
N
N
M
co
a0
Lr)
C
69
�
6R
69
V-
m
MH
O
E
6Lf)R
6N9
dg
y
66%
M
to).
6%
!
Vl
H
O
�!
�t
H
O
N
6R
N
6R
6%
6%
6%
6%
6%
H
4%
ER
o0
t0
6%16%16%
O
t0
6R
O
ER
O
O
O
t0
h
>
e-
a0
O
M
h
O
40
co
O
O
h
O
00
00
t0
a)
a0
O>
40
O
ti
O
t0
t`
a0
O
O
N
O
40
ti
M
H
r
c
et
O
C
tq
r
e�
N
O
N
r
Go
P9
0
t0
O
>
v
H
>
N
H
CO)
H
>
t0
H
u;
C
C
C
LL:
ER
L ;
H
r
H
LL:
LL:
N
H
a-
H
LL:
40
N
LL:
T
H
S
H
N
H
ER
M
H
CO
c
c
c
c
c
c
0
0
c
fn
•pp
v
'°v
fA
U
fn
U
N
W
fn
W
fA
H
U
C6
ca
co
co
C
E
LO
1-
O
to
O
O
to
(%A
O
O
tt)
O
N
to
J
O
J
to
to
a0
W)
O
0
-
r
N
�-
r
Q
�-
M
N
Lr)r
N
0
ON
0
0
NMo
oleMN
s
co
'V
N
O
co
N
v-
t0
N�
a
LO
LO
t0
a0
00
r
st
v
LO
0)
O
to
t0
rn
O
co
m
to
a0
N
M
O
a0
�
O
O
M
O
tO
c0
O
O
o
O
O
O
tC�
O
OO
o
O
O
CC
tII
O
I-
�A
to
O
I�
N
CO
t`
M
fV
.-
r
r
C).
cr
t0
L
t0
r
v
r
.-
O
O
M
a0
r
�
t0
w
0
N
m
N
M
tV
N
N
to
)
�
�-
a-
O
tL
O
tLp
tC)
O
O
O
N
O
N
V
O
M
N
a0
to
O
LL. 0) N
r
r
p
to
t0
r
C
01
LO
r
CC
0
CLa._
ti
co
O
cOaD
a)
N
O
U
(n
o
U
N
N
N
�
O
N
O
O
p
NN
d
N
NO
O` O` C
E
°
NetN
•
E
1N
N
to
z,
c
z,
w
°
�,
'c
N
to
N
M
N
to
C
N
LO
N
to
o
c
Y.1
N
N
NNMNM
1
D V
6R
0%
Efi
H
o
6R
6R
a
a
c
tt)
6R
an
69
w
ER
tt)6R6R
6R
ER
S
a
O)
C�%
rtCvl
t7I
rtQVI
.�VCri
CI
V
Cri
rtvC%
rtQI
rtVVI
C%
rtQI
OI
C:
V
rtV/
Ci
rtVV
rtUCi
rtVCi
Ci
+yV/
rtvQ:
Ci
C:
rtW
VCri
Ci
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
a�
V
O
O
N
at
O
tf)
O
r
w
h
N
O
M
M
O
t0
O
O
st
t0
r
W
00
O
it
M
O
O
M
N
O)
O
LO LO
to
CO
O
O
aaaaaaaa
to
00
f`
O
N
h
M
t0
v
t0
v
ci
ti
ci
ci
�
ci
d
d
ci
ci
ci
ci
ti
d
ci
ti
ci
ti
ci
ci
ti
d
d
�
ci
d
ci
d
ci
ci
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa�aaaaa
v
O
a0
et
►t
I-
�aaa�a�a
1
L6r-
v
a�
V
O
O
N
at
O
tf)
O
r
w
h
N
O
M
M
O
t0
O
O
st
t0
r
W
00
O
it
M
O
O
M
N
O)
O
LO LO
to
CO
O
O
co
M'-
to
00
f`
O
N
h
M
t0
v
t0
v
h
C)
to
M
CO
O
U
00
LO
VV
O
ON
O
O
N
to
O
M
N
v
v
O
a0
et
►t
I-
NV:
1
L6r-
v
N
N
t0
6
L
tp
C
O
E
O
69,
6R
H
61%
6R
6R
64
6R
6%
6%
6%
6%
6%
H
4%
ER
6%
6%
6%16%16%
6%
6R
69
ER
H
E9
HER
1 6%
>
a)
c
c
c
c
c
C
>
>
>
>
>
>
u;
C
C
C
LL:
C
L ;
LL.
LL;
LL:
LL:
LL:
LL;
LL:
LL;
LL:
LL:
LL;
LL;
L ;
LL,
CO
c
c
c
c
c
c
0
0
c
fn
•pp
v
'°v
fA
U
fn
U
N
W
fn
W
fA
U
U
C6
ca
co
co
C
E
O
O
J
J
J
0
F-
F-
0
0
0
0
s
N�
a
LO
CO
N
t0
a0
.-
a0
r
st
v
et
r
0)
O
to
t0
rn
O
co
m
to
a0
N
M
Ln
t0
a0
�
1-
'�
ao
�?
M
O
tO
c0
O
CR
co
O
o
O
O
C>
O
tC�
rn
e-
M
o
to
M
CC
tII
O
CO
�A
�t
N
I�
00
CO
t`
M
fV
.-
r
r
C).
cr
t0
et
M
t0
r
v
r
.-
co
t0
O
M
a0
r
�
t0
w
0
N
m
N
M
tV
N
N
to
)
�
LL. 0) N
C
to
7 N a)
CC
0
CLa._
O
O
E
a)
O
U
(n
o
U
C
10
�
O
m
O
O
p
d
..
O` O` C
E
°
c
•
E
°
L
m
z,
c
z,
w
°
�,
'c
°
y-
�
CL
C
cL6
o
c
0
o
Lo
c�
Cc
'�
cc
D V
`�
o
p
`�°
a
a
c
0
°)
`o
U
E
CO
E
c=i
r j
`�
y y a
Cc
0
o
D
0
0
0
o
v
`�
o
CL
v
`°
U)
Q
U
M
CD
CO
a
c
m=
C9
U
W
2
0
o
ami
m
aci
t
ami
_= c
00
=
0
0
co
LL.
Co
m
c
F- F- Z
lz
CD
II 11 II
U. U.
0CD
(tr
J
O
t,
UHVID LVHNS & ASSOC PORTLAND
0154-249'7
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES,
April 17, 1996
Ms. Maxy Meloy
Director of public Works
City of Redmond
455 South Seventh Street
Redmond, Oregon 97756
SUBJECT: Street System Development Charge Program
Dear Mary:
P.1/4
2818 SW corbsu A -ma,
Pardand, ortgoe 97201
rot: So3.:23.666;
Pax -'503-223-2701
The Systems Development Charge Report submitted to the joint City and County Council meeting on
April 2 notes that arterials and collectors "must provide sufficient pavement area to allow the passage
of vehicles through intersections at no less than a Class C level of service." At the public hearing last
week a question was raised about how a reduction in the minimum acceptable level of service standard
(LOS) would affect the overall cost of the proposed street SDC program.
In response, you requested DEA to provide an explanation of what LOS standards mean, and to evaluate
whether a change from LOS C to D would significantly affect project costs.
LOS standards are a means to describe and compare traffic flow conditions. Typically, traffic conditions
are described based on a scale from A to F. * LOS A represents free flow conditions, with minimal delay
or interruptions in traffic flow, while LOS F reflects .a condition where the street system is totally
saturated ox jammed with traffic. The attached table presents the level of service criteria formterial-and
collector streets.
The minimum acceptable level of service for a Broadway or network of roadways is most often defined
as LOS C or D. However, it varies, depending on the type and function of roadway, as well as the
amount of congestion that is acceptable to a community. For example, ODOT has operating LOS
standards for its highway system that range from B (for rural statewide highways) to D or E (for district -
level highways in urban areas). The City of Portland accepts LOS E on many of its streets because it
would be impractical and extremely costly to try to improve the streets to operate at a higher LOS.
The level of congestion that is acceptable to a particular community is the most critical factor to consider
in selecting a winimum standard. We work with cities throughout the state, and most communities
outside of Portland are unwilling to live with congestion that is normal for Portland and other large
metropolitan areas. For the Redmond area, LOS C is a reasonable threshold to use when considering
the need for improvements to the street system. LOS C is the standard that ODOT uses when planning
for improvements to the statewide highways that pass through Redmond (Highways 97 and 126).
The City could also utilize LOS D as a minimum acceptable condition. If you choose to adopt that
standard, over the long run you can expect to see somewhat slower -travel conditions, with more delays
at heavily travelled intersections.
EXHIBIT_.___
�Q �FMLES
Page sITIALA
0154-2498
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIA'T'ES,
Ms. Mary Meloy
April 17, 1996
Page 2
We have evaluated each project on the SDC list to determine if cost savings could be realized by
changing the LOS standards_ Typically, the adoption of a less stringent standard will only affect the
project costs if it 1) eliminates the need for travel lanes (e.g., using a two lane road instead of four
lanes); 2) reduces the need for turning lanes at mid -block or at intersections, or 3) changes the traffic
control needed at intersections (i.e., the need for a traffic signal as compared mpared to stop -sign control).
Those types of changes in facility needs are more likely to be found in, larger urban areas. Since
Redmond does not have any multi -lane arterials (other than Highway 97, which is state-owned), streets
are developed to provide the minimum number of through lanes. Changing the minimum LOS from C
to D would not affect the provision of one through lane for each direction of travel.
Based on our review, it is not likely that there will be substantial cost savings from adjusting the
minimum level of service. The only differences -would be that 1) some of the sigzralixation projects
might potentially be delayed by a few years, and 2) projects that improve the minor arterials to include
left turn pockets at selected locations could also be delayed by a few years, but only where the principal
reason for the improvement is to provide the turn refuge. This would typically be a small portion of
the overall project cost.
Although it might be possible to delay implementation of some of the projects, or portions of them, each
would still be needed within the twenty year period covered by the SDC program, and would therefore
still be included in the cost basis for the SDC. One possible exception might be No. 33, S. Canal
Boulevard, which could potentially be delayed until after the year 2015, and thus removed from the
current project list. We would not recommend removing it from the project list, however, because
improvements to S. Canal Boulevard are closely tied to traffic operations on Highway 97. That is, the
long terra functioning of the highway depends, in part, on successfully diverting trips to local streets
such as S. Canal Boulevard.
In summary, we do not believe that a change in the lnrinimum LOS standard from C to D will affect the
cost basis for the proposed SDC program.
On a related matter, you requested that we review a proposal by the Redmond Planning Commission to
phase in the SAC fees, using a graduated scale with increments at five Year intervals. A phased
approach is one possible way to reduce the impact of the proposed fees. However, it will reduce the
amount of revenue collected to substantially less than your SDC cost basis. It will result in lower
revenues because the reduction in fees during the initial years cannot be offset in later years by fees that
exceed the proportional cost of the projects included in the cost basis. That is, .you can't charge a
development more than its' proportional share of the total system improvement costs.
4u�,eLugrLa� /'I'll 4'111 1l . . (7)MUIur:ciilte <�u:)
I
EXHIBIT--!-
Page
XHIBITQPage 9
r
nl It 1� �� ul'�r�� �I UnV1L LVHI Y.7 a HJJVI. t'VKILHIYU
0154-2499
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES,
Ms. Mary Meloy
April 17, 19-596-
page
996page 3
A phased approach reduces the amount of funding available for projects, and it also raises the question
of equity (why should developments that occur later in the planning period pay more per trip than near
tern improvements). If you need to reduce the proposed fees, I believe a better solution would be to
eliminate one or more projects from the cost basis, such as by deferring the construction of the Maple
Avenue bridge, as has been previously discussed.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to call.
Yours sincerely,
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Jlay L .E.
Associate
enc.
o:L. ARMX0011V4ZWY417. kr
EXHIBIT
Page
i''
N. 4/4
1 N C.
Level of Service Criteria for Arterial and Collector Streets
Service
Level Typical Traffic ]Flow Conditions
A Relaivcly free flow of traffic with some stops at signalized or stop sign controlled
Intersections. Average speeds would be at least 30 miles per honor_
B Stable traffic flow with slight delays at signalized or, stop sign controlled intersections.
Average speed would vary between 25 and 30 miles per hour.
C Stable traffic flow by with delays at signalized or stop sign controlleduotersections. Delays
are greater than at level B but still acceptable to the motorist. The average speeds would
vary between 20 and 25 miles per hour.
D Traffic flow would approach unstable operating conditions. Delays at signalized or stop sign
controlled intersections would be tolerable and could include waiting through several signal
cycles for some motorists. The average speed would vary between 15 and 20 miles per
hour.
E Traffic flow would be unstable with congestion and intolerable delays to motorists. The
average speed would be approximately 10 to 15 miles per hour.
F Traffic flow would be forced and jammed' with stop and go operating conditions and
intolerable delays. The average speed would be less than 10 miles per hour.
Source: Trwupon'ation ,Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209. Nacional
Research Council, 1985.
Note: The average speeds are approximations observed at the various levels of service but could
differ depending on actual conditions.
EXHIBIT ---L—.
Page
DAVID EVANS & ASSOC PORTLAND
0154-2501
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES,
April 17, 1996
Ms. Mary Meloy
Director of Public Works
City of Redmond
455 South Seventh Street
Redmond, Oregon 97756
SUBJECT: Street System Development Charge Program
Dear Mary:
P.1/4
Per your request we have. evaluated the changes in the SDC program that would result from re-
classifying manufactured homes that are sited on a single family lot. Based on City of Redmond records
for January 1994 through March 1996, it appears that approximately 60 percent of the manufactured
homes approved for development in the city are located on single family lots. We have assumed that
future development would be similarly proportioned between single family lots (60 percent) and
manufactured home parks (40 percent).
Assuming that the trip generation characteristics of manufactured homes on single family lou are similar
to other single family homes, the total number of trips generated in the city will increase slightly over
previous forecasts (see Table 1). Because the total number of trips increases, the cost per trip will
decrease slightly, and the fees required for each land use category also change slightly. For the $18.8
million program as currently proposed, the revised fees are summarized in Table 2. If the program is
reduced to $12.9 million, the revised fees would be as shown in Table 3.
Please call if you have any questions.
Yours sincerely,
DAVID EVAXS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
enc.
0A ... UZED-X0011WEL0417b . kr
EXHIBIT
Page 10
HHR i"I '96 04:13PM DAVID EVANS & ASSOC PORTLAND
0154-2502
Table 1
P.2/4
City of Redmond Street System Development Charges
Forecasted Increases in Trips by Land Use Category (1995-2015) - Revised
Assumes manufactured homes on single family lots have similar trip generation
characteristics to other single family homes.
EXHIBIT6
Page ► 3
April 17, 1996
1995 to 2015 Increase
Trip Rate
Land Use Category
Unit
Per Unit
Units
Trips
WA Residential
Single Family
Dwelling Unit
10
4895
48,645
Multi -Family
Dwelling Unit
6
2587
15,522
Manufactured Home - SF Lot
Dwelling Unit
10
395
3,925
Manufactured Home - Park
Dwelling Unit
6
264
1,584
Commercial
Employee
17.5
2011
35,189
Industrial
Acre
51.8
1046
54,178
Total '
159,043
Assumes manufactured homes on single family lots have similar trip generation
characteristics to other single family homes.
EXHIBIT6
Page ► 3
April 17, 1996
APR 17 '96 04:13PM DAVID EVANS & ASSOC PORTLAND
P.3/4
Table 2
0154-2503
City of Redmond Street System Development Charges
Revised Calculation of SDC Charges Assuming Reclassification of Manufactured Homes on SF Lots
Cost Basis = $18,815,300
EXHIBIT
Page y
April 17, 1996
Forecasted ' Portion of
Forecasted
SDC
Increase in
Total
Allocation of
Increase in
Requirement
Land Use Category
Trips
Increase
Total Costs
Parking Spaces
per Unit
Residential
Single Family
48,645
30.6%
$5,754,860
9,790
$588
Multi -Family
15,522
9.8%
$1,836,303
3,881
$473
Manufactured Home - SF Lot
3,925
2.5%
$464,340
790
$588
Manufactured Home - Park
1,584
1.0%
$187,392
528
$355
Commercial
35,189
22.1%
$4,162,972
5,525
$753
Industrial
54,178
34.1°A
$6,409,432
10,695
$599
Total
159,043
100.0%
$18,815,300
EXHIBIT
Page y
April 17, 1996
WN 1-( '96 04:14PM DAVID EVANS & ASSOC PORTLAND
Table 3
P.4/4
0154-2504
City of Redmond Street System Development Charges
Revised Calculation of SOC Charges Assuming Reclassification of Manufactured Homes on SF Lots
Cost Basis = $12,915,300
Forecasted Portion of Forecasted SDC
Increase In Total Allocation of Increase in Requirement
Land Use Category Trips Increase Total Costs Parking Spaces per Unit
Residential
Single Family
48,645
30.6% .
$3,950,282
9,790
$404
Multi -Family
15,522
9.8%
$1,260,485
3,881
$325
Manufactured Home - SF Lot
3,925
2.5%
$318,735
790
$403
Manufactured Home - Park
1,584
1.0%
$128.631
528
$244
Commercial
35,189
22.1%
$2,857,570
5,525
$517
Industrial
54,178
34.1%
$4,399,597
10.695
$411
Total 159,043 100.0% $12,915,300
EXHIBIT g
Page
April 17, 1996
m'-
0 .
4rtj' r
w
W
W
t0
y
W
W
y
W
V
N
N
N
U7
A
fLf
W
N
O
/0
O
O!
N
�7
A
�/1
r
0
m
CD
p
V
p
—0.►
W
N
'A
41Ni
z
"
te
.►
r
O
t0
OD
V
N
Ol
171
A
4
N
rD`
�j
47
N
t%7 A
Oi
to"
S
+
+
D
S
STI
S
8=
S
D
rb v
m
m
-C
N
Q0
zNy
3
$
pN
8`S
o
o
Pol
0
r
N
10
N
N
N
N
N
W
r
N
{W71
N
N
N
fA
N
N
pN
N.
�p7
N
Np
M
N
.�
N
A
N
N'
tpp
N
��p7
N
AA
N
171
N
N
N
•+
.N►
"'�
�
M
�AAp
}
Jv
�7 pN
N
Np
M
1IJJ
�1
N
rj
�8p
N
Np
N
N
M �.
1.N�
N
Np
M
N
�1
N
N
7p7
N
CD
M
p�
M
N
44
fJ
�p
N
p
4A
N
L
N N
p7
-•1
O
D
b+
0
0
pV
8
8O
0
ppOpQ
0
8S
0
ppOpQ
0
SOpQ
O
8Op
0
18VJ1
0
pV
0
8O
0
Ob8i
0
co
0
8N
0
ob11
0
10011
0
t0
A
88D pO
O O
8O
O
pa.
8O
p�p
N
��+(1�71111
888
�O/11
j�a�
j�A}� CpNpD�
SBO.
V
0
O8
8O
J�J1
A
S
10.1 �8pp
O
8N
pA
{O7p1 0W7
8O
W
O
O
co
ppN 8O
8O o
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N 0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O O
O
O O
O 101
Spp
O
�p
+
rs
t80
0
11A,
p
400
NN
40N
p
N
404
N
N
;z
m
8
O
S
t0
OD
p qm
jk�11
(pD
O
8
.�
(pp
qqm QCrpp
OD
ep
O
S
O
171 N�
NO
S �p
co
cp
N
N
N
N
N
t�pp
W
A
O
(17��
O
t1��
O
N
S
N
S
*7�07
747p�4
N
N
►Nye
N
W
{p�
1N.1
t�0
V
b"D
$A
A +
�i'2S
��ii
N
O
�i
'iA52G
�
r
y� �
N
y►
M
{�►
N
Wo
j N
.�
i.
N
N
yA
N
m
�
g8og88888888088888
O
O
IV71
V
r7
CD
O7
tp
W
co
ii1
=.�'26f".7�'
_i'ilni�'ao�
88
080��
o
88
to
a
O
OWD
IN.1
+
co
fN0
NV
{Ar►
N
4/
j
VNf
W
(M,1
18h
{Q�7 O
V
U
Olr
f�p01
44
00
N A
N
NN+�
m
T
0N�
8V
1Q71!
171
N
N
QQ�
8O
j1p..�7
1N7p1
gp0, gip►
tpp0�
�pA71 ppO�
8V
W
Op
N
.Oi
�a1
1 j
N
8W
N
tN(pp
180
1pW71
{�
W
J8O
�1
CO
M
±
p�
(pNq
44
O
1.pN�
Ni
$170
44
11701
N►
}aN�
N..
�pN7
w
(4p�7
1pW7�
T
pV
O
/N1
O
O
1OW7D1
O
O
O
O
{N7�
O
{�
8 O
G
8
O
t
O
O
O
O
O
N
O O
az
�
N
M
Nr
O
V
44
bd
b
Q
O
V
bD
A
W
W
io8
tOi1
toD
CD
O
N
r
pe
N
QQs�
�N7
O
�
N
j
3
D
n
•-1
m
C
Z
co
D
;Z
N
S
N
N
Np
O
o
;rn
Z
S
88
5
44
44
M
N
Z
r
O
1
1O
O
O
N
O
O
N
O
N
O
m
40
V
O
OD
n
0
Z
M
N
N
O
tN_7�
Op
1N_71
O
tN7p1j1
t7�1
(7�1
1j71
4A
N O
O
S
0
0
8
SN
O
{r�
O
{,�
O
S
O
8O
O
8O
O
O
8p
O
8O
O
8N
O
ppN
O
46
W
ONe
N
401
N
400
W�
401
�
401
404
N
C)
-D1
pq
O
p1
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
q8
O
O
O
O
O
O
8
O
O
O
8
O
p p
+
p
p
rj
X
D
19
3
d
�
01
N
c
8
8
8
O
w
W
tQ
�
�®
co
D
m
Z
0
I
D
0
R
N
0
cn
i
CA
a
o�
0154-250,
CITY OF REDMOND
REDMOND, OP.O. BOX 726
REGON 97756
DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
(541) 548-2148
FAX (541) 548-0706
AIRPORT 548-6059
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 548-2149
BUILDING 923-8397
PUBLIC WORKS 548-6068
Public Works Department
Al A -ir,Is]
DATE: April 2, 1996
TO: Mayor & Council/County Commissioners
FROM: Mary Meloy, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Street SDC's
Staff from the City and County has identified several issues that need to be resolved
before the Street SDC's are adopted for the Redmond Urban Area.
1. Methodology, page 3, SECTION THREE (B) -Growth Assumptions and
Forecasts of Future Traffic is incorrect. It should read "By the year 2015, the housing
supply is projected to increase to over 8,100 units, at an annual growth rate of
approximately 5.5 percent." Corresponding Table 1 is correct.
17
4.-
2. Methodology, page 6, SECTION FOUR - Credits, third paragraph, first
sentence; after the words "...developer will receive compensation by credit for the
reasonable cost of that additional capacity..." add the words "over and above the
cost a local street,"
3. Clarify the category "Unspecified projects - Oversizing". Add to adopting
resolution that arterials and collectors not specifically on the priority list may be
reimbursed for oversizing from the category, as long as they are on the City's adopted
transportation plan.
EXHIBIT 6
Page I�
0154-2508
Proposal #2 raises an estimated $12,915,000 over 20 years of collection and is
sufficient (in combination with other identified revenues) to fund 38 proposed projects
(eliminating the Maple Ave. Bridge project).
Proposal #3 also raises an estimated $12,000,000 over 20 years of collection and is
sufficient (in combination with other identified revenues) to fund 38 proposed projects
(eliminating Maple Ave. Bridge project), however legal counsel suggests that State
statues would prohibit a phased approach where persons developing later in the 20
year period would be forced to pay a higher rate ( and therefore a greater proportional
share) of the projects. It appears that the only way of achieving lower rates is to
eliminate projects or add additional revenues from another source.
Options:
1. Approve the original methodology setting the fees, Proposal #1 above.
2. Approve the amended methodology setting the fees, Proposal #2 above.
3. Approve the UAPC methodology setting graduated fees, Proposal #3 above.
4. Take no action.
MaryMel , Direct6r of P lic Works
cc: UAPC
EXHIBIT E ______
Page �8
0154-2509
The following collectors and/or arterials and traffic signals
shall be eligible for funding by system development charges as set
forth in Appendix A, Alternative 2.
(A) Arterials
(1) North-South
27TH STREET
Hemlock to Canal Blvd.
U.S. HIGHWAY 97 - 5TH & 6TH STREETS
HELMHOLTZ WAY / W. 43RD STREET
Maple Ave. to Wickiup Ave.
NORTHWEST WAY / W. 27TH STREET
Coyner Ave. to Canal Blvd.
9TH STREET ALT. ROUTE
King Way to Ochoco Hwy 126
AIRPORT WAY
Ochoco Hwy 126 to Hwy 97
CANAL BLVD.
North of O'Neil Way
South of Yew Ave.
Evergreen Ave. to Highland Ave.
(2) East-West
HWY 126 MCKENZIE HWY / OCHOCO HWY
MAPLE AVE. / NEGUS AVE.
W. 43rd St. (Helmholtz Way) to E. 9th St.
SISTERS AVE.
Canal Blvd. to Highway 126
YEW AVE.
Canal Blvd. to Hwy 97
(B) Collectors
(1) North-South
HELMHOLTZ WAY / W. 43RD ST.
South of Wickiup Ave.
W. 35TH ST.
Upas Ave. to Reservoir Dr.
W. 23RD ST.
Antler to Canal Blvd.
Exhibit C
Page 1
W. 19TH ST. / RIMROCK WAY
Maple Ave. to Hwy 126
O1 ��-510
W. 15TH ST.
Forest Ave. to Quartz Ave.
W. 10TH ST.
Pershall Way to Maple Ave.
W. 11TH ST.
Hwy 126 to Obsidian Ave.
W. 9TH ST. / CANYON DR.
Maple Ave. to Forest Ave.
CANAL BLVD. / E. 2ND ST.
E. 9th St. (future intersection)
to Evergreen
Hwy 97 to Yew Ave.
E. 3RD ST. / JACKSON ST.
Antler Ave. to Sisters Ave.
NEGUS AVE. / E. 13TH ST.
O'Neil Way to Canal Blvd.
(2) West -East
KING WAY
Canal Blvd. to E. 17th St.
KINGWOOD AVE.
W. 9th St. to Canal Blvd.
HEMLOCK AVE.
W. 35th St. to W. 19th St.
Canal Blvd. to E. 9th St.
ANTLER AVE.
From Helmholtz Way (W. 43rd St.)
to Canyon Dr.
From Hwy 97 (6th St.) to E. 9th St.
BLACK BUTTE BLVD.
From Canyon Dr. to Hwy 97 (5th St.)
OBSIDIAN AVE.
Helmholtz Way (W. 43rd St.) to Canal Blvd.
PUMICE AVE.
Canal Blvd. to Hwy 97
QUARTZ AVE.
W. 27th St. to Canal Blvd.
Exhibit C
Page 2
SALMON AVE. 0154-2511
Helmholtz Way (W. 43rd St.) to Canal Blvd.
ODEM-MEDO WAY
Canal Blvd. to Hwy 97
VOLCANO BLVD. / AIRPORT WAY
Canal Blvd. to Hwy 97
WICKIUP AVE. / RESERVOIR DR.
Helmholtz Way (W. 43rd St.) to Canal Blvd.
SOUTH SLOPE FORKED HORNE BUTTE (FUTURE STREET
Wickiup Ave. to Canal Blvd.
(C) Industrials
AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL ROAD (FUTURE STREET)
Wickiup Ave. to Canal Blvd.
(D) Signals
SIGNAL/Highland & Rimrock
SIGNAL/Hwy 97 & Sisters Ave.
SIGNAL/Hwy 126 & 27th St.
SIGNAL/Hwy 97 & Maple
SIGNAL/Quartz & S. Canal
SIGNAL/Antler & 19th
SIGNAL/Obsidian & S. Canal
SIGNAL/Salmon & S. Canal
SIGNAL/Yew & S. Canal
SIGNAL/Maple & Canyon
SIGNAL/Evergreen & N. Canal
SIGNAL/Hwy 97 & Quartz
(D) Local Streets
All other streets and roads in the planning area shall be
classified as local streets.
Exhibit C
Page 3
O X
o m D
G �
o ;
O m
r LO Z
M � O
•° X
o D
0
m
0
z
O
T-
C
z
0
z
G1
N
m
m
-C
D
7
v
N
C
O
O
V
Oi
N♦
O
N+
O
O
V
O/
N
+
O
/0
CO
V
O/
N 'A
W
N+
O
0W
V Ol
N
A W
N
�+
a
�Qg
lA
a0pA
0)
o 0
e
CC
i
O
'a
g
+
N
-+
a
'
M
S
'
z
i
s
-1
to
p
S
S
S
m
Q
g
W
mc
W
M
O
r -
•
D
p,
ai
�
go
to
p
�
r
O
YN
IJ
Ol
N
Cl
N+
N
A
N
W
N
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
N
g
M
N
O.
N.
N
8,
N
N
8
M
N
+
V
N
N
N
N
t3
{�►
A
N
N
N
N
N
N
+
U
+
+
�Ap
!'�
!"
O! pN
S
M
Np
M
N
N
M
N
Np
N
NN
M-
N.
tlNl
N
Np
N
O
{�
N
N
N
N
p�
N
''
10
N
O+
M M
N
N
pN
N yf
N A
W OD
N
V 61
D
r
j M
, LO
A+
100
tppNt�i�
O
W
O
V
O
O88
O
O
S
pp
O
SC
O
88
O
88
O
X8811
O
V
S
88
O
O88l
0
0880
0
8N
0
Acn
0
K)N�O (N�D
0#
00
i0
O
88
O S
O+
8S
O
App
O
88
O
N
+qqqq
0
1
88
0
O
88
0
Ol
pNON��
0
}}aa��
,
0
W
ppCpb�
O
O
88
O
V
O
S C
O
88
O
jJ
O
A
S
W �pWWp
O O
N
O
A Oqp �.t
S O O
O
88
O
W O
O O
N8 8O
O O
8 O L
O
44N
N
y
�
+
+
Ll"
N
N
T(0
m
N
W
+N
p10
W
O
N
(N�
M
N
p
Og5
N
p
Og5�
N
N
M
V
tl85l
x1
N
�►
W
O85f
N+
O85l
t0
N
+
W85
N
V
q
0�
�A N
N +
A �1
0p 08
N
t(p1({��
1
M
1.
i
•pp•�r
M
N
O8
N+
N►
+ o
M
N N tJ
N V
CD
N
N
V
co
N 1
m
m
to N
S
�N1pj�
O
S
8O
$�
25
25
25
25
25
yiVa��
75
�•1
b'
rg5l
25
25
25
25
25
8
80
8
p�
8O
8W
S
pp
�pAp� OCpDI
!J
S S
O8
NO
O
gO gN
0
O 10
1'4
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 O
O
O
O
O O
O
D
M
O
o"o
44
w
N
+
_4400
Ni�
1O
N
:8�
M
�1
yN
W
g
N
V N
N
lgpi
{p��
t(p0t
-
0
N N
So
N
-4 w
0
N
pA�+' {�
N9
(pJ�1
80
(2
pN
S
tpi� pp0
S
O
z
O
Y1
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
471
O
O
O
O
471
O
O
O O
O
N
N
-4
V
My
4
N
-4
M
A
WW40
N,1
0q0
t Np
tS0
N..
/pW�
{�
W
;8O
yM
Op
W
r
p
N
N
�p
8O
M
iwpil
r
t0
r
t{0�
r
b1
r 4A
V1 qWp
4
WUp
T
C
qNp+p
M
M
0
N
O
N44
S
{pip
{p�►p
p
{Q�1
{q�
(M.1
{W�
(,,1
44
N
O
to
to
�(O/�11
�Oq1
ty�
O
O
NV y�
1pGyp7
Npm
fJ
�J�p►f 8W
pp� jams ��1
8D
O
�+
3
v
>
S'e
o
S's
i
25
i
o
o
m
C
m
•z
z
N
{N�
N
880
N
O
M
z
8N
O
O
�
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
V
M
+
V
M
..
V
N
N
Z
y
D
o
S
�a'
�'
S
�0
0
0
m
V
m
V
oo
MM
V
O
V
Oo
C)
O
C
Z
to
ca
N
(iMN
1�
N_N
pMgp
44
44
�
Na
O
N.. 00
V
O
O88
t8il
S
0
8O
0
0
P
N
O
{�8
O
O
8O
O
8O
O
O
8�
O
8�
O
8N
O
8N
O
N
04o%
4gpi
{A
j
M
"'�
QNa�
MMiNN
V�
r^�i
N
pNl
M
iQ�7
+p
N
j
D
y
-p1
O
fOpN�e
O
N{�
O
O
O
O
O
{�
O
NN
O
O
O
8N
O
8N
O
{.►
O
y►pq
O
O
M
O
{�
O
M
O
�pWp+pp
O
O
8
O
8O
O
O8
O
N
O
M «
O O
O
S
N
O
X
A
a
M
Ypp1
Ng
6S
_m6N
O8
T
8O
O
O
O
1O
O X
o m D
G �
o ;
O m
r LO Z
M � O
•° X
o D
0
m
0
z
O
T-
C
z
0
z
G1
N
m
m
-C
D
7
v
N