Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-83-Ordinance No. 2023-017 Recorded 3/25/2024Steve Dennison, County Clerk Commissioners' Journal r Recorded in Deschutes County CJ2024-83 03/25/2024 1:49:14 PM 1111 1111 II 111111 I 1111 lI For Recording Stamp Only BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON An Ordinance Repealing and Replacing the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan's Transportation System Plan (TSP) ORDINANCE NO. 2023-017 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department planning staff initiated a Comprehensive Plan amendment in order to update the Transportation System Plan ("TSP") adopted by Ordinance 2012-005 on August 20, 2012; and WHEREAS, after notice was given in accordance with applicable law, a public hearing was held before the Deschutes County Planning Commission beginning on August 10, 2023 to consider the draft County Transportation System Plan update; and WHEREAS, on October 12, 2023, the Planning Commission forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") a recommendation of approval to adopt changes to the Transportation System Plan component of the County's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Board considered this matter after a duly noticed public hearing on November 29, 2023 and concluded that the public will benefit from changes to the Transportation System Plan component of the County's Comprehensive Plan as amended during the Board's deliberations on February 14, 2024; and WHEREAS, the Board finds it in the public interest to adopt the following Comprehensive Plan amendments; now, therefore, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS as follows: Section 1. REPEALING. Deschutes County Code 23.01(D), adopted by Ordinance 2012-005, is repealed to read as described in Exhibit "A", attached and incorporated by reference herein with repealed language set forth in strikethrough. Section 2. ADDING. Deschutes County Code 23.01(BK) is added as described in Exhibit "B", attached and incorporated by reference herein with new language underlined. Section 3. AMENDING. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Section 3.7 is amended by to read as described in Exhibit "C" attached and incorporated by reference herein with new language underlined and deleted language set forth in strikethrough. PAGE 1 OF 2 - ORDINANCE NO. 2023-017 Section 4. REPEALING. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Appendix C, Transportation System Plan, adopted by Ordinance 2012-005, is repealed. Section 5. ADDING. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Appendix C, Transportation System Plan, is added as described in Exhibit "D", attached and incorporated by reference herein. Section 6. AMENDING. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12, Legislative History, is amended to read as described in Exhibit "E", attached and incorporated by reference herein, with new language underlined. Section 7. FINDINGS. The Board adopts as its findings Exhibit "F," attached and incorporated by reference herein. Section 8. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance takes effect on the 90`'' day after the date of adoption or, if appealed, the date the ordinance is no longer subject to appeal. Dated this ) - of Ctral, 2024 ATTEST: Recording Secretary Date of 1 sr Reading: Date of 2" d Reading: Commissioner Patti Adair Anthony DeBone Philip Chang Effective date: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON PATTI ADAIR, Chair ANTHONY DeBONE, Vice Chair PHILIP CHANG, Comissioner day of M a,V& , 2024. day of rn-, 2024. day of Record of Adoption Vote: Yes No Abstained Excused 27k_ J U , 2024. PAGE 2 OF 2 - ORDINANCE NO. 2023-017 TITLE 23 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER 23.01 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN A. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the Board in Ordinance found on the Deschutes County Community Development Department website, i by reference herein. B. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2011-027, are incorporated by reference herein. C. [Repealed by Ordinance 2013-001, §1] D. [Repealed by Ordinance 2023-017] The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2012 005, are incorporated by reference herein. 2011-003 and s incorporated E. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2012-012, are incorporated by reference herein. F. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2012-016, are incorporated by reference herein. G. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2013-002, are incorporated by reference herein. H. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2013-009, are incorporated by reference herein. I. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2013-012, are incorporated by reference herein. J. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2013-007, are incorporated by reference herein. K. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2014-005, are incorporated by reference herein. L. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2014-006, are incorporated by reference herein. M. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2014-012, are incorporated by reference herein. N. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2014-021, are incorporated by reference herein. O. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2014-027, are incorporated by reference herein. P. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board 2015-021, are incorporated by reference herein. Exhibit A to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 23.01 in Ordinance in Ordinance in Ordinance in Ordinance in Ordinance in Ordinance in Ordinance in Ordinance in Ordinance in Ordinance in Ordinance in Ordinance in Ordinance Q. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-029, are incorporated by reference herein. R. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-018, are incorporated by reference herein. S. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-010, are incorporated by reference herein. T. [Repealed by Ordinance 2016-027 §1] U. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-022, are incorporated by reference herein. V. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-005, are incorporated by reference herein. W. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-027, are incorporated by reference herein. X. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-029, are incorporated by reference herein. Y. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2017-007, are incorporated by reference herein. Z. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-002, are incorporated by reference herein. AA. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-006, are incorporated by reference herein. AB. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-011, are incorporated by reference herein. AC. [repealed by Ord. 2019-010 §1, 2019] AD. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-008, are incorporated by reference herein. AE. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-002, are incorporated by reference herein. AF. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-001, are incorporated by reference herein. AG. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-003, are incorporated by reference herein. AH. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-004, are incorporated by reference herein. Exhibit A to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 23.01 Al. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-011, are incorporated by reference herein. AJ. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-006, are incorporated by reference herein. AK. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-019, are incorporated by reference herein. AL. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-016, are incorporated by reference herein. AM. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-001, are incorporated by reference herein. AN. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-002, are incorporated by reference herein. AO. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-003, are incorporated by reference herein. AP. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-008, are incorporated by reference herein. AQ. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-007, are incorporated by reference herein. AR. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-006, are incorporated by reference herein. AS. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-009, are incorporated by reference herein. AT. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-013, are incorporated by reference herein. AU. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2021-002, are incorporated by reference herein. AV. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2021-005, are incorporated by reference herein. AW. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2021-008, are incorporated by reference herein. AX. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2022-001, are incorporated by reference herein. AY. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2022-003, are incorporated by reference herein. Exhibit A to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 23.01 AZ. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2022-006, are incorporated by reference herein. BA. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2022-010, are incorporated by reference herein. BB. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2022-011, are incorporated by reference herein. (superseded by Ord. 2023-015) BC. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2022-013, are incorporated by reference herein. BD. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-001, are incorporated by reference herein. BE. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-007, are incorporated by reference herein. BF. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-010 are incorporated by reference herein. BG. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-018, are incorporated by reference herein. BH.The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-015, are incorporated by reference herein. BI. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-025, are incorporated by reference herein. BJ. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2024-001, are incorporated by reference herein. Click here to be directed to the Comprehensive Plan (http://www.deschutes.org/compplan) HISTORY Amended by Ord. 2011-027 §10 on 11/9/2011 Adopted by Ord. 2011-003 §2 on 11/9/2011 Amended by Ord. 2011-017 §5 on 11/30/2011 Amended by Ord. 2012-012 §1, 2, 3, 4 on 8/20/2012 Amended by Ord. 2012-005 §1 on 11/19/2012 Amended by Ord. 2013-002 §1 on 1/7/2013 Repealed by Ord. 2013-001 §1 on 1/7/2013 Amended by Ord. 2013-005 §1 on 1/23/2013 Amended by Ord. 2012-016 §1 on 3/4/2013 Amended by Ord. 2013-009 §1 on 5/8/2013 Exhibit A to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 23.01 Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Repealed & Reen Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. Amended by Ord. 2013-012 §1 2013-007 §1 2014-005 §2 2014-006 §2 2014-012 §1 2014-021 §1 2015-029 §1 2015-010 §1 2015-021 §1 2015-018 §1 2016-001 §1 2016-022 §1 acted by Ord. 2016-005 §1 Amended by Ord. 2016-029 §1 Amended by Ord. 2017-007 §1 Amended by Ord. 2018-002 §1 Amended by Ord. 2018-005 §2 Amended by Ord. 2018-008 §1 Amended by Ord. 2018-008 §1 Amended by Ord. 2018-008 §1 Amended by Ord. 2018-006 §1 Amended by Ord. 2018-011 §1 Amended by Ord. 2019-004 §1 on 8/8/2013 on 8/28/2013 on 2/26/2014 on 3/15/2014 on 8/6/2014 on 11/26/2014 on 11/30/2015 on 12/21/2015 on 2/22/2016 on 3/28/2016 on 4/5/2016 on 9/28/2016 2016-027 §1, 2 on 12/28/2016 on 2/27/2017 on 3/28/2017 on 11/1/2017 on 1/25/2018 on 10/10/2018 on 10/26/2018 on 10/26/2018 on 10/26/2018 on 11/20/2018 on 12/11/2018 on 3/14/2019 2019-003 §1 on 3/14/2019 2019-002 §1 on 4/2/2019 2019-001 §1 on 4/16/2019 2019-010 §1 on 5/8/2019 2019-011 §1 on 5/17/2019 2019-006 §1 on 6/11/2019 2019-019 §2 on 12/11/2019 2020-001 §26 on 4/21/2020 2020-003 §1 on 5/26/2020 2020-002 §1 on 5/26/2020 2020-008 §5 on 9/22/2020 2020-007 §1 on 10/27/2020 2020-006 §1 on 11/10/2020 2020-009 §4 on 11/17/2020 2020-013 §1 on 11/24/2020 2021-002 §3 on 4/27/2021 2021-005 §1 on 6/16/2021 2021-008 §1 on 6/30/2021 2022-001 §2 on 7/12/2022 Exhibit A to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 23.01 Amended by Amended by Amended by Amended by Amended by Amended by Amended by Amended by Amended by Amended by Amended by Ord. 2022-003 §2 on 7/19/2022 Ord. 2022-006 §2 on 7/22/2022 Ord. 2022-010 §1 on 10/25/2022 Ord. 2023-001 §1 on 3/1/2023 Ord. 2022-013 §2 on 3/14/2023 Ord. 2023-007 §19 on 4/26/2023 Ord. 2023-010 §1 on 6/21/2023 Ord. 2023-018 §1 on 8/30/2023 Ord. 2023-015 §3 on 9/13/2023 Ord. 2023-025 §1 on 11/29/2023 Ord. 2024-001§1 on 01/31/2024 Exhibit A to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 23.01 TITLE 23 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER 23.01 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN A. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2011-003 and found on the Deschutes County Community Development Department website, is incorporated by reference herein. B. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2011-027, are incorporated by reference herein. C. [Repealed by Ordinance 2013-001, §1] D. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2012-005, are incorporated by reference herein. E. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2012-012, are incorporated by reference herein. F. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2012-016, are incorporated by reference herein. G. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2013-002, are incorporated by reference herein. H. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2013-009, are incorporated by reference herein. I. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2013-012, are incorporated by reference herein. J. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2013-007, are incorporated by reference herein. K. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-005, are incorporated by reference herein. L. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-006, are incorporated by reference herein. M. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-012, are incorporated by reference herein. N. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-021, are incorporated by reference herein. O. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-027, are incorporated by reference herein. P. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-021, are incorporated by reference herein. Exhibit B to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 23.01 Q. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-029, are incorporated by reference'herein. R. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-018, are incorporated by reference herein. S. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-010, are incorporated by reference herein. T. [Repealed by Ordinance 2016-027 §1] U. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-022, are incorporated by reference herein. V. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-005, are incorporated by reference herein. W. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-027, are incorporated by reference herein. X. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-029, are incorporated by reference herein. Y. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2017-007, are incorporated by reference herein. Z. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-002, are incorporated by reference herein. AA. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-006, are incorporated by reference herein. AB. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-011, are incorporated by reference herein. AC. [repealed by Ord. 2019-010 §1, 2019] AD. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-008, are incorporated by reference herein. AE. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-002, are incorporated by reference herein. AF. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-001, are incorporated by reference herein. AG. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-003, are incorporated by reference herein. AH. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-004, are incorporated by reference herein. Exhibit B to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 23.01 Al. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-011, are incorporated by reference herein. Ai. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-006, are incorporated by reference herein. AK. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-019, are incorporated by reference herein. AL. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-016, are incorporated by reference herein. AM. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-001, are incorporated by reference herein. AN. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-002, are incorporated by reference herein. AO. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-003, are incorporated by reference herein. AP. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-008, are incorporated by reference herein. AQ. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-007, are incorporated by reference herein. AR. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-006, are incorporated by reference herein. AS. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-009, are incorporated by reference herein. AT. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-013, are incorporated by reference herein. AU. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2021-002, are incorporated by reference herein. AV. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2021-005, are incorporated by reference herein. AW. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2021-008, are incorporated by reference herein. AX. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2022-001, are incorporated by reference herein. AY. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2022-003, are incorporated by reference herein. Exhibit B to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 23.01 AZ. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2022-006, are incorporated by reference herein. BA. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2022-010, are incorporated by reference herein. BB. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2022-011, are incorporated by reference herein. (superseded by Ord. 2023-015) BC. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2022-013, are incorporated by reference herein. BD. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-001, are incorporated by reference herein. BE. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-007, are incorporated by reference herein. BF. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-010 are incorporated by reference herein. BG. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-018, are incorporated by reference herein. BH. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-015, are incorporated by reference herein. BI. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-025, are incorporated by reference herein. BJ. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2024-001, are incorporated by reference herein. BK. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2023-017, are incorporated by reference herein. Click here to be directed to the Comprehensive Plan (http://www.deschutes.org/compplan) HISTORY Amended by Ord. 2011-027 §10 on 11/9/2011 Adopted by Ord. 2011-003 §2 on 11/9/2011 Amended by Ord. 2011-017 §5 on 11/30/2011 Amended by Ord. 2012-012 §1, 2, 3, 4 on 8/20/2012 Amended by Ord. 2012-005 §1 on 11/19/2012 Amended by Ord. 2013-002 §1 on 1/7/2013 Repealed by Ord. 2013-001 §1 on 1/7/2013 Exhibit B to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 23.01 Amended by Ord. 2013-005 §1 on 1/23/2013 Amended by Ord. 2012-016 §1 on 3/4/2013 Amended by Ord. 2013-009 §1 on 5/8/2013 Amended by Ord. 2013-012 §1 on 8/8/2013 Amended by Ord. 2013-007 §1 on 8/28/2013 Amended by Ord. 2014-005 §2 on 2/26/2014 Amended by Ord. 2014-006 §2 on 3/15/2014 Amended by Ord. 2014-012 §1 on 8/6/2014 Amended by Ord. 2014-021 §1 on 11/26/2014 Amended by Ord. 2015-029 §1 on 11/30/2015 Amended by Ord. 2015-010 §1 on 12/21/2015 Amended by Ord. 2015-021 §1 on 2/22/2016 Amended by Ord. 2015-018 §1 on 3/28/2016 Amended by Ord. 2016-001 §1 on 4/5/2016 Amended by Ord. 2016-022 §1 on 9/28/2016 Repealed & Reenacted by Ord. 2016-027 §1, 2 on 12/28/2016 Amended by Ord. 2016-005 §1 on 2/27/2017 Amended by Ord. 2016-029 §1 on 3/28/2017 Amended by Ord. 2017-007 §1 on 11/1/2017 Amended by Ord. 2018-002 §1 on 1/25/2018 Amended by Ord. 2018-005 §2 on 10/10/2018 Amended by Ord. 2018-008 §1 on 10/26/2018 Amended by Ord. 2018-008 §1 on 10/26/2018 Amended by Ord. 2018-008 §1 on 10/26/2018 Amended by Ord. 2018-006 §1 on 11/20/2018 Amended by Ord. 2018-011 §1 on 12/11/2018 Amended by Ord. 2019-004 §1 on 3/14/2019 Amended by Ord. 2019-003 §1 on 3/14/2019 Amended by Ord. 2019-002 §1 on 4/2/2019 Amended by Ord. 2019-001 §1 on 4/16/2019 Amended by Ord. 2019-010 §1 on 5/8/2019 Amended by Ord. 2019-011 §1 on 5/17/2019 Amended by Ord. 2019-006 §1 on 6/11/2019 Amended by Ord. 2019-019 §2 on 12/11/2019 Amended by Ord. 2020-001 §26 on 4/21/2020 Amended by Ord. 2020-003 §1 on 5/26/2020 Amended by Ord. 2020-002 §1 on 5/26/2020 Amended by Ord. 2020-008 §5 on 9/22/2020 Amended by Ord. 2020-007 §1 on 10/27/2020 Amended by Ord. 2020-006 §1 on 11/10/2020 Amended by Ord. 2020-009 §4 on 11/17/2020 Amended by Ord. 2020-013 §1 on 11/24/2020 Amended by Ord. 2021-002 §3 on 4/27/2021 Amended by Ord. 2021-005 §1 on 6/16/2021 Exhibit B to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 23.01 Amended by Ord. 2021-008 §1 on 6/30/2021 Amended by Ord. 2022-001 §2 on 7/12/2022 Amended by Ord. 2022-003 §2 on 7/19/2022 Amended by Ord. 2022-006 §2 on 7/22/2022 Amended by Ord. 2022-010 §1 on 10/25/2022 Amended by Ord. 2023-001 §1 on 3/1/2023 Amended by Ord. 2022-013 §2 on 3/14/2023 Amended by Ord. 2023-007 §19 on 4/26/2023 Amended by Ord. 2023-010 §1 on 6/21/2023 Amended by Ord. 2023-018 §1 on 8/30/2023 Amended by Ord. 2023-015 §3 on 9/13/2023 Amended by Ord. 2023-025 §1 on 11/29/2023 Amended by Ord. 2024-001§1 on 01/31/2024 Amended by Ord. 2023-017§2 on TBD Exhibit B to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 23.01 Exhibit C to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Section 3.7 Secti,ow 3.7- Tra wsportatl,ow The Transportation System Plan was adopted in Ordinance 2012 005 2023-017 and is hereby incorporated into this Plan as Appendix C. The Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Map will be retained in official replica form as an electronic map layer within the County Geographic Information System and is adopted as part of this Comprehensive Plan. 34 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 3 RURAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT SECTION 3.7 TRANSPORTATION DESCHUTES COUNTY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN February 2024 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Deschutes County, Oregon Prepared for Deschutes County Prepared by: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. February 2024 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Contents 011 INTRODUCTION 5 Prioritized Investments For The Future 6 TSPC}ngenization 8 Purpose 9 Guiding Principles And Context 9 Regional Coordination & Community Engagement 10 02|GOALS AND POLICIES . . .''' ''''''''''''''''']1 Goal 1:Coordination And Collaboration 11 Goal Z: Safety 12 Goal 3: Mobility And Connectivity 13 Goal 4: Economic Development 14 Goal 5: Equity And Accessibility 15 Goal 6: SustainabilitvAnd Environment 16 Goal 7: Strategic Investments 16 03|NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION 17 Existing Transportation System Conditions 17 Basis OfNeed Assessment 18 Evaluation Of Transportation System Alternatives to Address Identified Needs 19 04|PROVIDING MU[TIKNODAL SYSTEMS 21 The Roadway System 21 County Roadway Cross -Section Standards Z] Federal Lands Access Program Roadways 25 State Highway Design Standards 25 The Pedestrian System 27 The Bicycle System 27 Transit Services 29 Rail Service 29 Pipelines And Waterways 29 Air Service 29 Bridges 30 Vehicular Performance Standards 30 05 |TRAK]SPORTATIOKj INVESTMENT PRIORITIES 31 Project Costs 31 Intersection Changes 32 Roadway Changes 35 Pedestrian Facilities 48 Bicycle Facilities 51 Bridges 56 Federal Lands Access Program Roadways 58 Transit 61 Transportation Safety Action Plan Projects 61 061FUND|NG 63 Funding Sources 63 Funding Projections —20YearEstirnate 64 Capital Funding Estimate 65 Road Moratorium Evaluation 66 Impacts ofLifting the Road Moratorium 66 Local Access Road Tools And FAC$ 68 01 I INTRODUCTION Deschutes County is located in the heart of Central Oregon with the Cascade Mountain Range to the west and the High Desert plateau to the east. The County covers 3,055 square miles of natural beauty, outdoor recreation, and is home to a growing economy. For the last two decades, Deschutes County has experienced rapid population growth and has become a national destination for new residents, visitors and a center for economic prosperity and progress. In the past 10 years, the population of the County has increased by more than 40 percent to more than 200,000 people today; only 33 percent of the County's residents live in the unincorporated and rural areas. With this unprecedented growth, Deschutes County faces the challenges of maintaining, funding, and planning for a transportation system that both enhances the health and well- being of residents and supports long-term economic resilience for businesses, tourism and recreation. The County's transportation system must accommodate traffic passing through enroute to destinations elsewhere in the region, the day-to-day travel needs of its residents and those employed here in addition to the influx of visitors during the winter and summer months. The County also is home to US 97 and the Redmond Municipal Airport, which are two of the crucial components of Oregon's Resilience Plan in the event of a Cascadia Subduction Zone Event (an earthquake and/or tsunami striking the Oregon coast). With limited funding for new transportation infrastructure, as well as built and natural environmental considerations, the County must balance the need to preserve its existing transportation system with strategic changes to the system that enables these needs to be met during the next 20 years. The County's Transportation System Plan (TSP) was last updated in 2012. This updated TSP provides a coordinated guide for changes to the County's transportation infrastructure and operations over the next 20 years. Planning for the County's future transportation reflects regional and community goals and values, supports local and regional economic development activities, and enhances the quality of life that residents and visitors enjoy and expect. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan PRIORITIZED INVESTMENTS FOR THE FUTURE The identified list of priorities for future transportation investments reflects the County's commitment to prioritizing changes to the transportation system that reflect its focus on preserving and maintaining its existing investments. This list of capital investments identified in the TSP will be reviewed and prioritized as part of the County's regular budgeting efforts. For reference purposes, Figure 1-1 shows how the County prepares its annual prioritization and budget for maintenance, operation, and capital expenditures. Figure 1-1: Hierarchy of Expenditures and Investment aintain the system - PaJnittojetn tttlatjtittnittrhnnht, Prontatir Stttustairretri - tttjtr,g giSP fere \syses tion 1sta a:11 k:4 rprttnt • Shot i',!trintr tatirrtntrttgra;nri - r tritti tlIte r at Jrt [aerate the sys tt rr • Showtthn 03 CIF, Z a Ida tic trlighlt Stintgoogge :12 E ment e , C: a pnitai Proj Mai -Of Maint enancss • :3 rely m p r (nem e nts Mcer Ezra I n The list of prioritized investments in the TSP is based on this hierarchy and was developed assuming: 1. Current maintenance and operational standards remain in place. 2. The County's existing Road Moratorium (Resolution 2009-118), which limits acceptance of new road miles into the County maintenance system, remains in place. 3. Existing funding levels remain in place and are occasionally adjusted legislatively to a level that will roughly match inflation. 4. No significant additional local funding mechanisms are developed or implemented. 5. State and Federal grant programs are available at approximately the same historical intervals and funding levels. Deschutes ConTransporta ion System Plan With this backdrop, the County refined the list ofpossible T3Pprojects h«working with its residents, policy -makers, and partner agency staff and performing technical analyses ofroadways, intersections, bike facilities, transit, walking routes, and transportation safety. Many of the identified projects help tosupport plans adopted by the local cities, the Oregon Department of Transportation ((J[}CD'), other County planning efforts, the [ounty'sTransportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) and/or local refinement and facility plans. Some ofthe other considerations that shaped the final list ofrecommended investments include: ° Balancing impacts to existing and developable parcels with County -wide and community needs; ° Minimizing impacts to Goal 5 resources (natural resources, scenic and historic areas, and open spaces); , Supporting and enhancing key state and regional economic plans and priorities; , Identifying key intersections that could be changed in the future to address known safety and/or anticipated capacity needs; , Prioritizing roadway corridors where strategic investments may beneeded to help support future growth and economic development in the region, enhance the safety ofall users and/or strengthen connections between areas of the County and tnother areas in Central Oregon; , Providing regional bicycle connections that could serve broad transportation functions, such as commuting, recreation, or daily services; , Modifying key bridges as funding and/or other opportunities arise; , Leveraging opportunities for future system changes that could be provided using funds from the Fedora! Lands Access Program (FLAP),particularly for transportation facilities providing connections to key recreational areas and economic development priorities adjacent to/and or located within Federal lands; , Coordinating with Cascades East Transit (CET) on projects that can help increase service to the unincorporated areas of the County aswell astothe High Desert K4us*unn and Lava Lands Visitor Center; , Enhancing access tothe Redmond Municipal Airport and Bend Municipal Airport; and, " Leveraging funding opportunities with key partner agencies and private investments. The list oftransportation investments are organized into the following categories for implementation based oncomplexity, likely availability of funding, and assessment of need: " Intersection changes; , Roadway segments, including changes to functional classification; ° C}[)CTintersections and roadways; , Pedestrian facilities; , Bicycle facilities; ^ Bridges; ^ FLAP projects; , Transit; and, • Safety. Table 1-1shows the Countv'scontribution towards the list of identified projects by category and by prioritization. In reviewing this table, it isimportant tonote that some projects may beaccelerated and others postponed due tochanging conditions, funding availability, public input, ormore detailed study performed during programming and budgeting processes. Further, project design details may change before construction commences aspublic input, available funding, and unique site conditions are taken into consideration. Projects identified herein may befunded through avariety of sources including federal, state, county orlocal transportation funds, system development charges (S[}Cs), through partnerships with private developers, oracombination nfthese sources. |naddition, aspart ofTSPimplementation, the County will continue to coordinate with C}[}CT and the local communities regarding project prioritization, funding, and construction. Table 1-1: Total County Contribution Towards Prioritized TSP Investments Intersection Changes Roadway Changes County Share of ODOT Intersections Pedestrian Facilities Bridges County Share of FLAP Projects Total $11,500,000 $15,000,000 $20,100,000 $2,300,000 $5,700,000 $600,000 $43,630,000 Cost by Prio ediium $14,900,000 $16,100,000 $ 3,500,000 $1,900,000 $2,400,000 $3,700,000 $ 52,600,000 $ 2,100,000 $57,500,000 $17,500,000 $ 2,100,000 $7,900,000 $4,500,000 93,100,000 $28,500,000 $88,600,000 $41,100,000 $6,300,000 $16,000,000 $8,800,000 $189,300,000 The remainder of this chapter outlines the organization of the TSP as well as a summary of public engagement activities and compliance of the TSP with some of the regulatory requirements. TSP ORGANIZATION The TSP is comprised of two volumes. Volume 1 is the main document and includes the items that will be of interest to the broadest audience. Volume 2 contains the technical memoranda, data, and related transportation plans that enhance and support Volume 1. Volume 1 includes the following: • Chapter 1 — a brief overview of the planning context for the TSP; • Chapter 2 — goals and policies that express the County's long-range vision for the transportation system; • Chapter 3 — the transportation system deficiencies and needs as well as the process to develop the TSP`s list of planned capital improvements and transportation programs; • Chapter 4 — an overview of the recommended projects for the multimodal system (this chapter also serves as the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan); • Chapter 5 — a list of the multimodal projects and the costs estimated for their construction; and, • Chapter 6 — a summary of transportation funding and implementation, including estimated revenue, cost of 20-year needs, and potential funding sources. Volume 2 includes the following technical documents: • Appendix A: Plans and Policy Review Memo; • Appendix B: Public Involvement Plan; • Appendix C: Methodology Memo; • Appendix D: Transportation System Conditions, Deficiencies, and Needs Memo; • Appendix E: Solutions Analysis Memo; • Appendix F: Preferred Alternatives and Funding Plan Memo; • Appendix G: Redmond Municipal Airport Master Plan; and, • Appendix H: Tumalo Community Plan (TCP) Active Transportation Update/Sisters Country Vision Action Plan Trails Outreach Update. While not all of Volume 2 is adopted as part of the TSP, all of the documents provide useful information regarding the basis for the decisions represented in Volume 1. Deschutes County Transportationon System Plan, PURPOSE The TSP addresses transportation needs in Deschutes County except within the Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB)for Redmond, Sisters, La Pine and Bend. The TSP goals, policies, projects, and implementation tasks are based on technical analyses and thoughtful input received from the community, Deschutes County staff, partner agency staff, and County policymakers.The TSP identifies transportation facilities and services that can support the County's adopted Comprehensive Plan and continued regional economic development. This TSP provides for a long-term vision tosupport growth injobs and population in the County aswell as improving the safety for all transportation -users over the next 20 years. The TSP serves as a resource for the County to make decisions about transportation and land use by providing: , Ablueprint for future County transportation investments that improve safety for all travelers; , Atoo| for coordination with state, regional and local agencies; ° Information toensure prudent land use and transportation choices; , Order ofmagnitude cost estimates for transportation infrastructure investments needed to support system needs, and possible sources of funding for these improvements; and, , Function, capacity and location of future roadways, sidewalks, bikeways, transit, and other transportation facilities. The TSP satisfies the state'srequirements as prescribed by Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 12:Transportation. GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND CONTEXT The TSP provides eflexible, adaptable framework for making transportation decisions in an increasingly unpredictable and financially constrained future. Decisions about the Countv's transportation system will be guided by the goals contained in ChapterZ, but ultimately the decisions will be made within the overall context ofthe Countv'sland use plans and support for local and regional economic development. These guiding plans and principles provide foundation for the TSP's goals, policies, and potential actions. The Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) require that the TSP be based on the Comprehensive Plan land uses and provide for a transportation system that accommodates the expected growth in population and employment. Development of this TSP was guided by ORS 197712 and the Department ofLand Conservation and Development (DLC[}) administrative rule known as the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR, (]AR 660-012-0060). Per the TPR, this TSP identifies nnultirnodal transportation needs to serve users of all ages, abilities, and incomes. Assuch, solutions to address existing and future transportation needs for bicycling, walking, transit, motor vehicles, freight, and rail, and improved safety for all travelers are included. Further, one of the implementation stops of the TSP will include proposed amendments tothe Deschutes County Code. As required by the TPR, this TSP was developed in coordination with local, regional and state transportation plans. , Project Management Team Meetings attended h»County staff; , Two Advisory Committee Meetings; , Four Agency Partner Advisory Committee Meetings; , Two Public Open Houses; ° Targeted outreach with community and social service organizations; and, , Updates with the Board of County Commissioners. Through these activities, the County provided community members with avariety offorums to identify their priorities for future transportation projects, programs, and policies. REGIONAL COORDINATION & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT The TSPreflects the Countv'scontinued commitment to coordinating transportation and land use planning within Central Oregon. This update was collaboratively developed hv community members, businesses, the freight community, C}[}OT, Sisters, Redmond, La Pine, Bend, Terrebonne,Sunriver,TurnaloCascades East Transit (CET), and the [ounty's Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC). Opportunities for engagement included: , Project website that included all technical reports, draft goals and objectives, and links toother relevant documents; _~ ' '- 10 Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 02 1 GOALS AND POLICIES The TSPprovides acoordinated guide for changes tothe Counh/stransportation infrastructure and operations over the next 20 years. The development ofthe TSPisbased on the assumption that the transportation system meets daily travel needs and also contributes tothe physical, social, and economic health ofthe County and ofCentral Oregon. The TSP strives to provide users with a safe and efficient transportation network. Assuch, planning for the County'sfuture transportation needs must be conducted within regional and community goals and values, support local and regional economic development activities, and enhance the quality of life that residents and visitors enjoy and expect. The TSPgoals provide the Counh/svisions for the future transportation system. The goals are aspirational in nature and may not be fully attained within the ZO-yearplanning horizon. The policies support the goals tohelp the County implement the TSPprojects and programs after the TSPhas been adopted. The policies, organized by goals, provide high-level direction for the [ounty'spolicy and decision -makers and for County staff. The policies will be implemented over the life ofthe TSP. The County'sZ012TSP goals and policies were used asafoundation for providing the updated TSP goals and policies outlined below. ������U n^ �-����U���U�����'U���� ����K� COLLABORATION ,~,,___ _~`~~___,~~~~,�,,,,,_,~,,,�~_ Promote 8 OlUltinlod@l transportation system that supports the C0untv's Comprehensive Plan and is consistent and coordinated with the adopted plans for the State, the region, @cUa[eDt counties, and the cities and incorporated communities within the County. Policies 1.1 Coordinate the design and operations ofthe [ounh/stransportation system with State, regional, and local planning rules, regulations and standards. 1.2 Coordinate future land use and transportation decisions with state, regional and local agencies toefficiently use public investments inthe [ounh'stransportation system, for people driving, bicycling, walking, orusing transit aswell asthe movement of freight, emergency responses, and evacuation needs. 1.3 Coordinate regional project development and implementation with the cities ofBend, Redmond, Sisters, and LaPine. 1'4 Provide notification tothe affected local and state agency partners regarding land use development proposals, plan amendments and zone changes that have the potential tosignificantly impact non -County transportation facilities. 1.5 Coordinate system management and operations with ODOT on major roadways. 1.6 Maintain anintergovernmental agreement with each ufthe cities toprovide specific timelines and milestones for the transfer of County roadways within the urban growth boundaries at the time of annexation, including the full width of right of way. 1.7 Provide regular outreach to residents and employers, schools, law enforcement and public health professionals toencourage participation with the County in identifying and solving transportation issues. 1.8 Coordinate with [ETto implement the Transit Master Plan recommendations within the County tosupport people taking transit. GOAL 2: SAFETY Provide a transportation system that promotes the safety of current and future travel by all users. Policies 2.1 Design and maintain County roadways consistent with their expected use, vehicular travel speeds, and traffic volumes. 2.2 Incorporate the Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) goals and action items into County planning projects and update the TSAP at appropriate intervals. 2.3 Coordinate with the Sheriff's Office to discuss enforcement activity on specific facilities in the County and jointly communicate safety issues when observed and encountered. 2.4 Continue the partnership with the County's BPAC to promote education and outreach activities and to inform future County investment decisions in facilities for people riding bikes and walking. 2.5 Coordinate with the emergency service providers in the County to prioritize the maintenance and investment in key lifeline and evacuation routes. 2.6 Coordinate with ODOT, railroads, and local communities to prioritize safety investments at rail crossings. 2.7 Prioritize investments in key crossing locations for people walking and riding bikes across major County roadways and/or ODOT highways, especially at locations that serve vulnerable populations. 2.8 Coordinate with ODOT for planning for grade -separate wildlife crossings of State highways using relevant wildlife migration information, crash data, and best management practices. Deschutes County Transportatio GOAL 3: MOBILITY AND CONNECTIVITY Promote a multimodal transportation system that moves people and goods between rural communities and Sisters, Redmond, Bend, La Pine, and other key destinations within the County as well as to the adjacent counties, Central Oregon, and the state. Policies 3.1 Maintain the County's roadway system in a state of "good repair." 3.2 Invest in new roadways only when a need has been demonstrated that benefits the economic growth of the County and/ or locations that address key gaps in the roadway system and there is sufficient long- term funding to operate and maintain the new roadways. 3.3 Monitor the safety, traffic volumes, and usage by people walking and riding bikes on County arterials and collectors to help determine when changes to specific roadways are needed and/or educational outreach to the traveling public. 3.4 Maintain a County -wide bicycle route map. 3.5 Partner with ODOT, Bend, La Pine, Redmond, Sisters, and neighboring counties to coordinate investment in transportation facilities that cross jurisdictional boundaries. 3.6 Pursue funding to provide secondary access roadways to isolated rural subdivisions. 3.7 Periodically review transportation performance standards used to review land use applications and modernization projects and revise if needed. 3.8 Periodically review and update the County design and construction standards related to roadways and facilities for people walking and riding bikes in unincorporated areas. 3.9 Periodically review policies and standards that address street connectivity, spacing, and access management. 3.10 Support transit service to improve mobility within the County and connectivity to transit stations in Bend, Redmond, La Pine, and other regional and state destinations. 3.11 Monitor the condition of County bridges on a regular basis and perform routine maintenance, repair and replacement when necessary. 3.12 Partner with local agencies, ODOT, and the public airports to periodically review airport master plans for Redmond, Bend, Sisters, and Sunriver to ensure they and County development code are consistent. 3.13 Partner with the US Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to maintain the County's system of forest highways to continue to provide key access to recreational areas such as campsites, lakes, hiking, and biking trails in the County. 3.14 Coordinate with ODOT to identify County routes to be used as detours when a crash or other incident closes a State highway. 3.15 At a minimum, seek dedication of public rights of way for extensions of existing roads or future roads on lands not zoned Exclusive Farm Use or Forest in order to develop a rural -scale grid system. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan GOAL 4: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Plan a transportation system that supports existing industry and encourages economic development in the County. Policies 4.1 Prioritize transportation investments that support access to allowed land uses, activities, airports, and recreational areas. 4.2 Maintain arterials and collector roadways for the movement of people and goods to employment centers in the County. 4.3 Update and continue to implement the County's Transportation System Development Charge (SDC) program. 4.4 Incorporate facilities for people walking and riding bikes to key recreational areas as part of changes to the roadway system. 4.5 Support bicycle tourism by prioritizing and improving designated County bike routes. 4.5 Incorporate improvements to the County arterial system that support freight service and provide access to US97, US 20, and OR 126. 4.6 Support economic development by encouraging ODOT to prioritize modernization, preservation, and safety projects on highways designated as Freight Routes. 4.7 Periodically assess the probability of providing passenger rail service to and through Deschutes County. 4 Deschutes County Transportation System Plan GOAL 5: EQUITY AND ACCESSIBILITY Provide a multimodal transportation system that supports a safe, efficient, and low -stress environment for walkers, cyclists and transit users as well as benefits the overall health and environment within the County. Policies 5.1 Prioritize investments in the County's transportation system that support users of all abilities, ages, race/ethnicity, income levels, and those with disabilities. 5.2 Design all new transportation facilities consistent with the requirements of the American's with Disabilities Act (ADA). 5.3 Maintain a partnership with CET, the cities, ODOT, and transportation options providers to promote walking and cycling, public transportation, micro mobility options, and rideshare/carpool programs through community awareness and education. 5.4 Accommodate bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities, when prescribed by design standards and various master plan documents, when new roads are constructed and/or existing roads are reconstructed. 5.5 Maintain road design standards that promote pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities to and from schools, community gathering places, grocery stores, and other services as prescribed within community plans. 5.6 Establish priorities for construction and maintenance of roadway shoulders or shared use pathways to provide for walking and bicycle travel. 5.7 Partner with ODOT, the cities, CET and other providers to secure funding for transit service to underserved areas of the County. 5.8 Support efforts of local agencies to develop and maintain a trail system along the Deschutes River, within Tumalo, and along major irrigation canals. 5.9 Support Commute Options' efforts to work with major employers, local business groups, non-profit agencies, school districts to support implementation of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies that provide options employees, residents, and customers to use transit, walk, ride bikes, carpool, and telecommute. Deschutes County Transportation S stem Plan. GOAL 6: SUSTAINABILITY AND ENVIRONMENT Provide a transportation system that balances transportation services with the need to protect the environment. Policies 6.1 Partner with BPAC, local agencies, CET, and non-profit groups to promote the use of walking, cycling and transit as viable options, minimize energy consumption, and lessen air quality impacts. 6.2 Ensure changes to the County transportation system are consistent with the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). 6.3 Comply with applicable state and federal noise, air, water, and land quality regulations as part of transportation investments in the County. 6.4 Preserve listed Goal 5 resources within the County. 6.5 Implement, where cost-effective, environmentally friendly materials and design approaches as part of County transportation projects (e.g., storm water retention/ treatment to protect waterways, solar infrastructure, impervious surfaces, etc.). 6.6 Prioritize transportation investments that support system resilience to seismic events, extreme weather events, and other natural hazards. GOAL 7: STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS Maintain the safety, physical integrity, and function of the County's multi -modal transportation network, consistent with Goal 6 of the OTP. Policies 7.1 Continue to pursue and implement Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) funding to prioritize County investments to support tourism and access to key recreational areas. 7.2 Maintain long-term funding stability for maintenance of the transportation system. 7.3 Prioritize investment in the existing transportation network through maintenance and preservation activities. 7.4 Coordinate with ODOT and local agency partners to implement intelligent transportation solutions that increase the life of transportation facilities and/or delay the need for capacity improvements. 7.5 Periodically review and, if needed, make updates to the County Code requirements to ensure that future land use decisions are consistent with the planned transportation system. 7.6 Coordinate with ODOT in the implementation of the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and Statewide Transportation Improvement Funding (STIF). 7.7 Coordinate with and provide guidance to CET in programming public transportation funds received by the County. 7.8 Pursue additional funding sources to support major reconstruction or replacement of County bridges. 7.9 Partner with federal and state agencies to seek funding that prioritize investments that support recommendations from the Bend, Redmond, Sisters, or Sunriver airport master plans. 6 Deschutes County Transportation System Pl'an'' 03 I NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION The TSP projects and implementation tasks were informed by technical analyses of existing transportation conditions, forecast year 2040 deficiencies, and an evaluation of possible system changes that can meet the transportation needs for all users (including the transportation disadvantaged) and address the need for movement of goods and services to support local and regional economic development priorities. The needs assessment, in combination with thoughtful input received from the community, Deschutes County staff, partner agency staff, and County policy makers, formed the list of recommended projects, the TSP goals and policies and the funding plan. This chapter summarizes the key elements of the existing and future needs analyses; further details of the needs analyses are provided in Volume 2. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM CONDITIONS Existing transportation needs, opportunities, and constraints reflect an inventory of the County transportation system conducted in 2019 and 2020. This inventory included all major transportation -related facilities and services at that time. Key roadway features (including number and type of roadway lanes, speeds, pavement type/condition, traffic volumes and roadway classifications), traffic conditions, safety performance, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and transit service, among other topics, were analyzed. Key findings related to the existing County system are highlighted below. • The areas within the County with the highest percentages of youth are primarily located in Tumalo and Terrebonne as well as adjacent to the Bend and Redmond Urban Growth Boundaries (UGBs). Connections for school students between their homes, the local community schools, and school bus stops were considered in identification of potential roadway, walking, cycling and transit projects. • The highest percentage of elderly populations is located in the Sunriver area and adjacent to the Sisters, Redmond, and La Pine UGBs. The areas adjacent to these three UGBs are also where the highest concentration of the population with disabilities and the minority populations reside. Coordination with Cascades East Transit (CET) to serve the existing and future needs of these residents is included in the recommended implementation task list for the TSP. • Continued coordination between the County and ODOT and the incorporated communities will help address and provide consistency of individual roadway functional classification designations. • Roadway repairs are and will continue to be monitored and accomplished as part of the County's ongoing maintenance program. • The County does not have any designated freight routes that provide connections to local industrial and employment lands. The TSP alternatives evaluation explored the need to designate County freight routes to serve key economic priority areas to supplement the ODOT freight system. • No roadway capacity deficiencies were identified under existing conditions. • The County's Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) identified key locations for monitoring and potential changes to the transportation system to address documented safety deficiencies. The TSAP is incorporated by reference as part of the TSP. • Many of the County bikeways and highways do not have paved shoulders that are at least six feet wide which is the standard for Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 17 ODOT highway while the County standard for paved shoulders is 3-5'. • The small, unincorporated communities in the County do not have dedicated bicycle facilities and several of the roadways adjacent to schools or other pedestrian trip generators (parks, trail connections, rural commercial areas, etc.) located in Terrebonne and Tumalo are missing sidewalks. Safe Routes to School funding may be an option to assist with implementation of TSP recommendations in small communities. BASIS OF NEED ASSESSMENT The TSP addresses the projects, programs, and policies needed to support growth in population and jobs within the County as well as the travel associated with regional and state economic growth between now and the year 2040. The identified set of recommendations reflects County policy makers' and community members' priorities to maintain existing facilities and reduce congestion, save money, improve safety, and provide community health benefits without costly increases to automobile -oriented infrastructure. Over time, the County will periodically update the TSP to respond to changing conditions and funding opportunities. The existing land use patterns, economic development opportunities, and population and job forecasts helped inform the analysis of year 2040 needs. This information helped identify future changes to the transportation system (and the supporting policies and programs) to address deficiencies and support economic development in a manner consistent with the County's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map. Growth in County Population By Oregon Revised Statute 195.034, incorporated cities and counties formulate and adopt coordinated population projections. Based on the June 2022 Coordinated Population Report prepared by the Portland State University (PSU) Center for Population Research, in 2020 the total County population was 198,253 and is forecast to grow to a total population of 275,905 by the year 2040. Much of the County growth is expected to occur within the Redmond, Bend, and Sisters UGBs. Within the unincorporated/rural areas, the 2020 population was 59,471 and is anticipated to grow to approximately 64,000 people by 2040. The anticipated growth in both urban and rural population within the County helped inform the estimation of year 2040 traffic volumes using the County transportation facilities. Traffic Volume Development The expected increase in traffic volumes on key roadways within the County was based on a review of past changes in traffic volumes as well as expected increases in population and area jobs. Further details on the anticipated growth in traffic volumes on roadways within the County is provided in Volume 2. The deficiencies evaluation included a review of County arterials and collector roadways. The roadway capacity needs associated with the State facilities within the County are addressed through other planning efforts by ODOT. The County will continue to partner with ODOT to monitor and identify additional needs through future planning and evaluation efforts. The deficiencies analysis compares the anticipated traffic volumes on the roadways to capacity levels associated with a Level -of -Service (LOS) "D" condition, which is considered by the County to reflect "acceptable" conditions. From a planning standpoint, two-lane rural roadways carrying a total daily volume of less than 24,000 vehicles per day is generally considered to operate with a LOS "D" or better. Baseline Roadway Analyses The baseline (future) analysis forms the basis of the project list reflected in Chapter 5. This baseline analysis was guided by the transportation needs identified in previously adopted plans and policies for the County, ODOT, and other agency partners, the 2040 population forecasts and the County's land use map, the anticipated growth in traffic volumes, and the fact that there are no major construction projects that are funded at this time that could materially change traveler behaviors or traffic volumes on the County's roadway network in the future. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Baseline (Year 2040) Transportation Needs In addition to the summary of existing deficiencies identified in the previous section, the future deficiencies analysis revealed: • Two County roadways that would exceed LOS "D" conditions, including Deschutes Market Road at Greystone Lane and S Century Drive at Venture Lane. • Following adoption of the TSP, the County will continue to monitor the need for changes to the transportation system to address roadway and intersection safety, especially at the locations included in the TSAP. • Although most County roadways do not have adequate width for comfortable and convenient connections for people walking and riding bicycles, providing shoulders on all County collectors and arterials in the next 20 years is not feasible due to constraints such as available right-of-way, environmental and/or property impacts and the high costs to construct. The County will continue to seek opportunities to provide shoulders, particularly in areas with significant roadway curvature, hills, bridges and other locations that could be beneficial for sharing the road among people driving, walking and riding bikes. Additionally, many County roads have low volumes of traffic, which offsets the substandard shoulders. • Additional public transportation services are needed to provide options for people who cannot or may choose not to drive vehicles. In the future, transit service will continue to be coordinated and operated by CET. The County will continue to collaborate with CET and ODOT on the prioritization of funding and operating public transportation services within and to the County. • The Redmond Municipal Airport Master Plan was updated in 2018 to identify needs through the year 2040. This updated Master Plan identified the provision of additional airside facilities, general aviation facilities, parking supply, passenger facilities, and non -aeronautical property development in the vicinity of the airport to support the Airport through the year 2040. • No changes to the existing rail or pipeline facilities were identified to serve the future needs of the County. EVALUATION OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES TO ADDRESS IDENTIFIED NEEDS The Advisory Committee (AC), Agency Partner Coordination Committee (APCC), Project Management Team (PMT), the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) and participants at open houses and other community forums identified transportation system alternatives that had the potential to address existing and future transportation needs. Many of the potential alternatives help to support plans that have been identified by the cities and unincorporated areas within the County, ODOT, other County planning efforts, the TSAP and/or local refinement and facility plans. The identified alternatives address all modes of travel and include programs that could reduce vehicular travel demand. Further, these potential system alternatives avoid principal reliance on any one mode of transportation and increase transportation choices for all users. The PMT developed these ideas into a potential project list that they screened considering the TSP`s goals and objectives and key County priorities. The potential solutions were reviewed and refined through community members and policymakers to form the 20-year list of projects reflected in Chapter 5. Through this process, evaluation of solutions that could address the identified needs as well as serve to accomplish key County objectives were identified. Some of the considerations that shaped the final list of recommended projects include: • Balancing impacts to existing and developable parcels with County -wide and community needs; • Minimizing impacts to Goal 5 resources (natural resources, scenic and historic areas, and open spaces); • Supporting and enhancing key state and regional economic plans and priorities; schutes County Transportation System Plan , Leveraging future transportation investments to reduce access, economic, safety and health disparities within the County, particularly those areas identified as serving populations oflow income, minority, youth and/or the elderly; , Providing additional connections within Terrebonnoand Turnalofor people walking; , Identifying key intersections where the roadway geometry and/or traffic control could be changed in the future toaddress known safety and/or anticipated capacity needs; " Prioritizing strategic roadway corridors where vehicular capacity and/or changes to the roadway characteristics may be needed tohelp support future growth and economic development inthe region, enhance the safety ofall users and/or strengthen connections between areas of the County and toother areas in Central Oregon; , Providing regional bicycle connections that could serve broad transportation functions, such as commuting, recreation, or daily services; , Modifying key bridges as funding and/or other opportunities arise; " Leveraging opportunities for future system changes that could be provided using funds from the Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP),particularly for transportation facilities providing connections to key recreational areas and economic development priorities adjacent to/and or located within Federal lands; , Coordinating projects included inthe CET Master Plan that can help increase service to the unincorporated areas ofthe County es well astothe High Desert Museum and Lava Lands Visitor Center; ° Enhancing access tothe Redmond Municipal Airport and Bend Municipal Airport; " Improving freight mobility; and, " Leveraging funding opportunities with key partner agencies and private investments. The resultant 2O-yearproject list isintended toaddress the identified transportation needs, meet the TSPgoals, and reflect the criteria included in {}R3 h6O-01Z-O035.The TSP projects are categorized as high, medium, and low priorities for future inclusion into the Counh/s Capital Improvement Program hC|P> based on the complexity, likely availability of funding, and assessment ofneed. The intent ofidentifying likely priorities allows the County with the flexibility toadapt tochanging economic development and community needs over the next 20 years. The project lists and maps of the potential locations were posted tothe [ounty'avvebsite prior to adoption. Details of the recommended project lists are provided in Chapter 5. pot 041 PROVIDING MULTIMODAL SYSTEMS The TSPisacoordinated set ofrnultinnmdal policies, programs, and projects that addresses the transportation needs within the rural and unincorporated areas ofthe County over the next Z0years. This chapter provides anoverview of those programs and projects; the detailed project list and associated cost estimates are shown in Choptor5. Although driving will continue tobothe primary mode oftravel inthe County and the preservation and improvement ofthe existing roadway system will remain important, the TSP projects, policies, and programs are intended to increase transportation choices, reduce reliance onthe automobile bybetter accommodating and encouraging travel by foot and bike for short trips, improve safety for all transportation users, and provide for improved transit service. The TSP and the County's adopted land use plans and regulations are intended to make walking, cycling, and use of transit convenient. THE ROADWAY SYSTEM People driving, walking, biking, and taking transit all rely on the roadway network to access destinations locally within the County aswell as regionally within Central Oregon. The identified roadway solutions inthe TSP address mobility, access, freight, and safety needs. Functional Classification The Counh/sfunctional classification system provides system hierarchy based nnthe intended function ofeach type ofroadway (e.g, moving people across Central Oregon or providing access to local destinations). (][}CT identifies the appropriate classifications for state facilities whereas the County identifies the appropriate classifications for roads under its authority. The classification levels also describe how the roadway "looks and foals^and provides recommendations for travel lane widths, roadside treatments, accommodating bicycles, and the need for sidewalk or trails adjacent to the road. The Countv'sfunctional classification is based on the following hierarchy: , Arterials are intended toserve more regional needs and provide connections tokey activity centers within the County. They are also intended to represent the key movement ofgoods and services throughout and to/from the County. These roadways also provide connections tothe incorporated UGBswithin the County. , Collectors primarily connect the rural areas ofthe county with the state facilities and the County arterials. These roadways provide important connections tomuch ofthe unincorporated areas of the County. , Forest Highways provide access to recreational areas such ascampsites, lakes, hiking, and biking trails in the County. Maintenance of these facilities is provided by the County and by the Forest Service, depending on location. " Local roads serve specific areas within the County and can be paved or unpaved. Figure 4-1 presents the Countv'sfunctional classification map. Figure 4-1: Functional Classification 4,0,,"A",441,4,141,10, 4160 'PON' "10, ,00441i. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN MASTEN.R 44,,r4 Redmond 41'47-1 UGB ORR_L Redmond UGB CK CANYON Ro FOR D RD sMCVE'AV YOl NG AVE Redmond UGB MORRILL Ro ENTURY R PARK DR LTAVA )RW[N D `I-555,1 RD S KYIINEVI La Pme UGB I Bend -04( UG rIkUlLINA LAKE RD NERSHALL RC 0 8 Miles La Pine, UGB Highway Arterial Future Arterial „, Collector - Forest Highway Parks Water Data Source: Deschutes County Deschutes County Transportation Syst Lan COUNTY ROADWAY CROSS- SECTION STANDARDS The County's cross-section standards are used to guide the construction of new roadways and/or changes to existing roadways. These standards are updated over time to support the needs of all users as well as continued economic development opportunities. Many existing roadways within the County area are not built to the standards shown in Table 4-1. The adoption of these standards is not intended to imply that all existing roadways be rebuilt to match these standards, rather the standards will help inform identified changes to specific roadways in the future. Further, because the design of a roadway or corridor can vary based on the needs of the area, these standards provide flexibility based on adjacent land use and specific topographic considerations. The unincorporated communities of Terrebonne and Tumalo have their own standards; these are shown in Table 4-2 and Table 4-3, respectively. The County standards do not require a sidewalk except for certain segments in Terrebonne and Tumalo; people walking or biking are assumed to use the shoulder or share the road on lower volume streets. Standards are presented within the TSP for reference only. DCC Chapter 17.48 (in particular Table A) contains the adopted County's roadway standards. Table 4-1: Minimum Road Design Standards, Rural County (outside of La Pine, Tumalo, and Terrebonne) Type/Clas State Hwy Minor Arterial Collector Local Road Industrial Private Frontage Road �VW - Paved . Travel Lane Width "Width 80'-100' 80' 60' 60' 60' 40'-60' 36'-70' 28'-46' 28'-46' 20', 24" 32' 20', 28' 28' 12' 11' 11' Paved Shoulder Width 6' 3'-5' 3`-5' Gravel Shoulder Width 2' 2' 2' Turn Lane Width Sidewalk Required 14' No 14' 14' No No No No No No Deschutes County Transpo on System Plan Table 4-2: Minimum Road Design Standards, Terrebonne Unincorporated Community Paved Travel Paved Gravel Turn Lane Sidew.311( Type./Class ROW Lane Shotilder Shotilder Width Width Required Width Width Width US97 80'-100' 60' 12' 6' 6' Minor Arterial 14' No* Smith Rock Way TeC Te R 60' 60 34' 34' 12' 12' 5' 5' 2' 2' 14' 14' Yes No Lower Bridge Way Collector 60' 34' 12" 5' 2' 14' No Commercial TeC Te R 60' 60' 24' 24' 12' 12' 2' 2' Yes No Residential Local Te R 60' 24' 12' 2' No** Commercial Residential Other TeC Te R Te R 60' 60' 60' 24' 24" 20' 12' 12' 12' 2' 2' 2' Yes No N o*** Alley (Commercial) Path/Trail 20' 20' 15' 10' 6'-8' 2.5**** No Source: Deschutes County Code 17.48.050, Table A 6-foot sidewalks are required on both sides of US97 between South 11th Avenue and Central Avenue with improved pedestrian crossings at B Avenue/97 and C Avenue/97 ▪ 5-foot sidewalks with drainage swales are required from West 19th to 15th Street on the south side of C Avenue • 5-foot curb sidewalks with drainage swales required along Terrebonne Community School frontage on B Avenue and 5th Street ▪ If path/trail is paved Deschtites County Trarlsportatton Systern Plan Table 4-3: Minimum Road Design Standards, Tumalo Unincorporated Community Type/Class US 20 Collector Commercial Residential Local Commercial Residential Other Alley (Commercial) Path/Trail 80'-100' 60' 60' 60' 60' 20' 15' Paved �1Viclth 60' 30' 36' 20' 20' 20' 6' unpaved 8' paved Travel lane; Width 12' 11' 12' 10' 10' Paved Gravel Shoulder Shoulder Width Width ;. 4' 4' 6' 6' 2' 2' 2' 2' 2.5'** turn Late Siidew di-tabu th Rego 14' 14' 14' Source: Deschutes County Code 17.48.050, Table A *5-foot curbless sidewalks on both sides for roads designated for sidewalks in Tumalo Comprehensive Plan Map D2. ** If path/trail is paved FEDERAL LANDS ACCESS PROGRAM ROADWAYS The Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) was established to "improve transportation facilities that provide access to, are adjacent to, or are located within Federal lands." This program is intended to supplement State and County funds for public roads, transit, and other transportation facilities accessing federal lands with a prioritized emphasis for "high -use recreation sites and economic generators." FLAP is funded through the Federal Highway Trust Fund and its allocation is based on road mileage, bridges, land area, and number of visits to the lands. FLAP provides funding opportunities to help the County deliver capital projects that increase access to Federal Lands. In addition, FLAP is a funding tool to help the County fund maintenance of existing roads that are designated as Forest Highways and other roads that provide similar access. alk reel No Yes No No* No No No As part of TSP implementation, the County will continue to coordinate with all of the federal agencies, BPRD, CET, and ODOT on the request for future FLAP -funded projects. STATE HIGHWAY DESIGN STANDARDS Any future changes to the state highways within the County will be informed by the OHP, the state's Highway Design Manual (HDM), and the Blueprint for Urban Design, which provides more flexible standards for urban areas. Access Management and Spacing Guidance Providing appropriate levels of access to adjacent lands is a key part of operating and planning for a transportation system that serves the needs of all users. ODOT and the County maintain standards to help balance the needs for both "through travelers" (including freight and public transportation) as well as serving the localized needs of residents, employees, and visitors. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan For state highways, access spacing guidelines are specified in the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan, Appendix C — Access Management Standards. Access to State Highways is controlled under Oregon Administrative Rule, Division 51 (OAR 734-051-4020(8)). The adopted County access spacing standards are included in DCC Chapter 17.48. Movement of Freight The movement of goods and services within the County and the overall region will continue to rely upon the state highways, especially those designated as freight routes. The TSP does not include a designated freight system of County roadways. Traveler Information/ITS Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) infrastructure enhances traffic flow, maintenance activities, and safety through the application of technology. The provision of reliable ITS infrastructure to inform motorists about incidents, weather conditions, and congestion has proven to be a useful and cost-effective tool for the County to manage its roadway system. ODOT and the County collaborated to update the Deschutes County ITS Plan in 2020. This update reflected identified needs, advanced and emerging technologies, and supports an integrated Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) strategy. The plan includes recommended TSMO strategies, a communications plan, and a deployment plan. This plan is incorporated by reference into the TSP. Safety The County's 2019 Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) provides specific projects, policies, and programs to address identified safety needs within the unincorporated areas of the County. The TSAP is adopted by reference into the TSP. As part of TSP implementation, the County will continue to identify future project refinements, as needed, monitor the timing of intersection changes at these locations, and seek funding opportunities and/or the potential to combine safety -related projects with other project development within the County. Several of the safety -based needs for the County reflect conditions best addressed through education, enforcement, or outreach programs. Others may be addressed through systemic intersection and roadway treatments at specific locations. The type of treatments that could be considered by the County are further detailed in the TSAP and include: • Roadway Treatments to Reduce Roadway Departure Crashes — With new road construction and roadway maintenance projects, the County may consider the construction of shoulders (as required by roadway standards), centerline and shoulder rumble strips, edge -line striping, recessed or raised pavement markers, and/or curve signing upgrades. • Roadway Treatments to Reduce Speed — With new road construction and roadway maintenance projects, the County may consider lane narrowing at targeted locations, transverse speed reduction markings, and speed feedback signs in conjunction with posted speed limit signs. At rural communities, changes in roadside elements can be used to indicate a change in context to reduce speeds. In addition, enhanced enforcement at key corridors could focus on driving at appropriate speeds. • Safety Data Monitoring — County staff, in collaboration with ODOT, will continue to periodically analyze crash data and identify the need for engineering, enforcement and educational treatments at specific locations. Tools such as ODOT's Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) and AM Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) programs may be used to assist with prioritizing locations. • Safe Routes to School — The County, Tumalo, and Terrebonne should seek projects that improve safety near schools and school routes, particularly for those walking and biking to school. These efforts should be coordinated with infrastructure projects such as ADA projects. 26 Deschutes County Transportation System Plan • Enhanced Intersection Signing and Striping Options — At collector and arterial intersections, the County may consider enhancements such as advanced warning signs, double advance signs, reflective striping and signage, oversized stop signs, double stop signs, stop ahead pavement markers, transverse rumble strips, and edge - line treatments to help increase visibility and awareness of an intersection. The County should prioritize the use of treatments that have documented effectiveness through the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) or documented Crash Modification Factors (CM Fs). The top sites for safety improvements in unincorporated Deschutes County are identified in the TSAP and will help inform future funding and prioritization in the County's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). THE PEDESTRIAN SYSTEM Outside of the urban areas, sidewalks are needed in portions of Tumalo and Terrebonne to provide walking facilities between the residential areas and schools and the neighborhood commercial areas. In addition, dedicated sidewalks are appropriate within one -quarter mile of transit stops. The County will work with the local communities, CET and the private sector to identify funding opportunities to add sidewalks in these areas over the next 20 years. Additional changes not specifically identified in the TSP to the sidewalks, pathways, and pedestrian crossings treatments at key intersections may be provided in the future based on project development and design as well as funding opportunities. Where applicable, the County will require sidewalk and/or multiuse pathway construction as part of future land use actions per the DCC Chapter 17.48 requirements. THE BICYCLE SYSTEM Deschutes County provides and maintains useable shoulders along roadways for use by people riding bikes though not all roadways are currently improved to include such facilities. The County has an aspirational designated bicycle route system ("County Bikeways") where useable shoulders will be provided, as practical, as part of ongoing maintenance and roadway improvements projects. Crossing improvements for people riding bikes, though not specifically identified in the TSP, may be provided when bicycle facilities are constructed that intersect major roads. The need for and type of crossing treatments as well as other facility changes will be evaluated at the time of project development and design. The County may provide such facilities as standalone projects or in conjunction with scheduled maintenance activities. As part of TSP implementation, the County will evaluate the need to modify existing DCC Chapter 17.48 requirements related to bicycle facility requirements as part of future land use actions. In addition, as part of implementation of the TSP, changes to the bicycle network will continue to be informed by the County's Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee (BPAC) activities. BPAC's mission is "to promote and encourage safe bicycling and walking as a significant means of transportation in Deschutes County" and focuses on both changes to the system as well as public education and awareness and a review of safety and funding needs as part of implementation of potential projects. The County will also continue to partner with ODOT to identify priority locations along the state highways for increased shoulder widths and/or shared use paths. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 27 The County, by reference, will adopt the Map 11 of the Bend Parks and Recreation District's (BPRD's) Comprehensive Plan (2018) identifying future trail connections to parks within the County but outside the Bend (UGB) as well as those within the Deschutes National Forest. As noted in the BPRD plan, the trails have been prioritized for implementation but the actual alignments in the map are approximate and subject to future easement/user agreements to enable trail construction, availability of funding, and securing agreements from affected property owners for trailheads and parking areas. The Redmond Area Parks and Recreation District (RAPRD) also provides access to trails and facilities outside of the Redmond City Limits, including those in Terrebonne and Tumalo and the Borden Beck Wildlife Preserve. As part of TSP implementation, the County will coordinate with RAPRD on the need for and timing of new trails outside of the Redmond City Limits. The La Pine Parks and Recreation District also provides facilities outside of the City Limits, such as the Leona Park and Rosland Campground. They are also planning for a working with BLM on a property transfer of 141 acres to the Park District that will house a future "South County Events Area" to include facilities for "campers, bikers, walkers, hikers, horse owners and others". The County will coordinate with Park District on the planning for this new facility as well as overall access to existing facilities outside the City Limits. As part of TSP implementation, the County will coordinate with BPRD, RAPRD, the La Pine Parks and Recreation District, and the Sisters Park and Recreation District on the planning for and timing of new trails outside of city limits. It is important to note that not all County roadways are currently or will be designed to provide roadside parking for trailhead users within the County. The County will work with each of these parks and recreation districts to identify appropriate locations in the future to provide safe access for trail users as well as to roadway users not accessing the parks/trails. Other Programmatic Considerations for the Pedestrian and Bicycle System Other policy/programmatic considerations that the County may incorporate as part of TSP implementation are dependent on funding opportunities and potential agency partnerships. These types of considerations could include: • Monitoring System — pending availability of resources, the County could establish a data monitoring or counting program that helps to identify and prioritize locations with higher levels of walking and cycling activity. In combination with safety reviews through TSAP and other ongoing regional efforts, this data monitoring program can help the prioritization of resources in the future. • Continued Education and Outreach — implementation activities might include topics related to providing the Sheriffs Department and other emergency services personnel with training regarding bicycle/ pedestrian safety and enforcement issues; encouraging and supporting efforts by County schools or other organizations to develop and add a bicycle/pedestrian safety curriculum for students of all ages; identifying opportunities to install signage along roadways where bicycle touring or other significant bicycling activity is expected advising travelers of the "rules of the road" pertaining to motorists and non - motorized travelers, etc. • Ongoing Maintenance Activities — further reviewing the budgets associated with maintenance activities along key cycling routes, including the periodic removal of debris including small branches and other roadside debris that could create safety hazards for a bicyclist or pedestrian. • Additional Funding Partnerships - exploring opportunities for coordination and cooperation with state and federal agencies in examining innovative means of providing or funding pathways, trails, and equestrian facilities. Deschutes Coun Transportation System Plan TRANSIT SERVICES In 2020, CET adopted its Master Plan to reflect the transit needs of the region through the year 2040. The CET Master Plan is adopted by reference into the Deschutes County TSP. Per the adopted Master Plan, CET will continue to provide high -quality, available, and reliable transit service that fundamentally supports the environment, economic development, and equity for all travelers. Within the unincorporated and rural areas of the County, the CET Master Plan identifies the following: • Increasing local circulation via local Dial -A - Ride and/or Community Connector vehicles; • Providing service to Crooked River Ranch via shopper/medical shuttles; • Potential service to Eagle Crest and/or providing a stop in Tumalo along Route 29; • Changes to the bus stop for Deschutes River Woods (e.g., Riverwoods Country Store) or an alternative way to serve Deschutes River Woods via Route 30; • Re-routing existing service lines to Sunriver; • Adding service to the High Desert Museum and Lava Lands Visitor Center (potentially seasonally based); and, • A new Route 31 and/or modification of Route 30 to connect La Pine and Sunriver. Finally, the transit capital investments identified in the CET Plan include fleet replacement and expansion and transit stops enhancement and additions. The County and CET will continue to partner on transit projects that serve the community. RAIL SERVICE Freight rail service will continue to be an important, energy efficient mode of transportation. The TSP supports the continued use of freight rail tracks and service provided in the County by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway and Union Pacific (UP) Railroad. The TSP also supports the continued use of the City of Prineville's short line freight railway that runs from Redmond to Prineville along OR 370. The nearest passenger rail service is and will continue to be provided in Portland and in Chemult. No passenger rail service is anticipated within the County within the next 20 years. PIPELINES AND WATERWAYS Today, there is one natural gas pipeline in the County that parallels US97. The TSP recommends continued coordination with the gas pipeline operator to provide continued services within the County. No additional pipeline facilities are anticipated within the next 20 years. There are no navigable waterways located in Deschutes County but there are several waterways and lakes that are used recreationally. As local and regional destinations, access to these bodies of water facilitate tourism, economic development, and environmental conservation efforts. Major bodies of water include Paulina Lake, East Lake, Wickiup Reservoir, Crane Prairie Reservoir, Sparks Lake, the Crooked River, and the Deschutes River. The TSP recommends enhancements to the roadways accessing these recreational areas to improve safety for all users. AIR SERVICE Within the County, the largest public use airport is the Roberts Field -Redmond Municipal Airport (RDM) located in southeast Redmond. The Bend Municipal Airport, Sunriver Airport, and Sisters Eagle Airport are also available for public use. The TSP supports the continued use of these airports for service within the County in the future. The TSP adopts by reference the City of Redmond's Airport Master Plan (as Updated in 2018) to reflect the needs of the Redmond Municipal Airport through the year 2040. This updated Master Plan includes a prioritized list of additional airside facilities, general aviation facilities, parking supply, passenger facilities, and non -aeronautical property development in the vicinity of the airport to support the anticipated 20-year growth at the Airport. The TSP supports continued coordination with the City of Redmond and ODOT to maintain safe and efficient connections to the airport for Deschutes County residents and visitors. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 29 BRIDGES The County regularly reviews the structural ratings of its bridges and addresses changes to the bridges as funding and other opportunities arise. The need for changes to existing bridge locations within the County will be addressed throughout the 20-year period of the TSP and incorporated as part of County budgeting and partner agency funding discussions, as appropriate. VEHICULAR PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The County uses motor vehicle Level of Service (LOS) standards to evaluate acceptable vehicular performance on its road system. LOS standards are presented as grades A (free flow traffic conditions) to F (congested traffic conditions). ODOT uses mobility targets based on volume to capacity (V/C) ratios as defined in the OHP for planning evaluations of existing facilities and in the Highway Design Manual (HDM) for design of future facilities to evaluate acceptable vehicular performance on state facilities. As V/C ratios approach 1.0, traffic congestion increases. In some cases, it may not be possible or desirable to meet the designated mobility target or LOS standards. In those cases, an alternative mix of strategies such as land use, transportation demand management, safety improvements or increased use of active modes may be applied. The County roadways and intersections are subject to LOS "D" whereas ODOT highways and intersections are evaluated using the applicable mobility targets in the Oregon Highway Plan (OHP). Within the urban areas of the County, each city's standards apply to their streets and intersections. 05 I TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT PRIORITIES This Chapter presents a list of prioritized transportation investments intended to serve the County in the future. These investments were identified and prioritized based on feedback obtained from County residents, partner agency staff and by technical analyses of roadways, intersections, bike facilities, transit, walking routes, and transportation safety. Many of the identified projects help to support plans adopted by the local cities, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), other County planning efforts, the Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) and/or local refinement and facility plans. For planning purposes and the County's future considerations related to the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the prioritized investments have been categorized as high, medium or low. Each of the identified investments have associated cost estimates. The transportation investments are organized into the following categories for implementation based on complexity, likely availability of funding, and assessment of need: • Intersection changes; • Roadway segments, including changes to functional classification; • ODOT intersections and roadways; • Pedestrian facilities; • Bicycle facilities; • Bridges; • Federal Land Access Program (FLAP) roads; • Transit; and, • Safety. Some projects may be accelerated and others postponed due to changing conditions, funding availability, public input, or more detailed study performed during programming and budgeting processes. Further, project design details may change before construction commences as public input, available funding, and unique site conditions are taken into consideration. Projects identified herein may be funded through a variety of sources including federal, state, county or local transportation funds, system development charges (SDCs), through partnerships with private developers, or a combination of these sources. In addition, as part of TSP implementation, the County will continue to coordinate with ODOT and the local communities regarding project prioritization, funding and construction. PROJECT COSTS The estimated construction costs are provided in the subsequent tables. These costs are order -of - magnitude (e.g., planning -level) estimates that account for right-of-way, design engineering, and construction and generally include a 30 percent contingency factor . The costs were calculated for each project using the methodology and procedures recommended by the American Association of Cost Engineers (Class 5 estimates). AM costs are rounded to the nearest $100,000 and provided in 2021 dollars. The detailed costs include all estimation assumptions as well as any deviations related to unique topographic, right- of-way, or other constraints. Where applicable, cost estimates include anticipated project funding that would provide bicycle or pedestrian facilities, including usable shoulder space. Costs for individual transit corridors are not provided. The County and Cascades East Transit (CET) will continue to collaborate on capital improvements and strategic policies that can help implement more robust transit service throughout the County. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan INTERSECTION CHANGES As discussed in Chapter 4, the needs assessment at intersections focused on both vehicular capacity as well as potential geometry changes identified by the Project Advisory Committee, public input, and those identified through the TSAP. The TSP is not inclusive of all of the intersection projects that the County will pursue over the next 20 years. Rather, these have been identified as projects that the County can pursue to strategically improve the operational efficiency of specific intersections and important roadways. These projects can enhance system operations and can be completed as opportunities arise. In all cases, the County will review the appropriate intersection control options at the time of project development and delivery. The projects are illustrated in Figure 5-1 and in Table 5-1. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Figure 5-1 - Intersection Changes TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Sg)4V1 30VOSVO 14i0, ° 0.1 1.1.1 z 73 75, Fy 0 L. 41) 44 QC) LL 73 2". ap c 4( i' --t 1,1 0 73 4.4 4, .,,. FS 49 Sisters UGB Ro ca p, SKYLIN- Hl >- CI La Pine UGB MASTEN RD 0 County Intersection Project 03scm, Parks Water UGBs Bend UGB PAUI-INA LAKE RD Rd mond UGB •Fn' (.1) m RD Ogi 0 RRiLL 4041 Sr' 0 0 Cid ALFALFA MA FOCKARD RD KET RD DODDS RO STDDKE RD FORD RD Er 0 0 1=-*- 0 (9 Lu 0 - 0 MERRILL 0 0 0 ----------- i a c6) ,x 0 0 CF } LILL .'l CY al 0 0 CI 0 I-- Z 1 0 2 I 0 St• -..r -,0 :?.. • Ck Z 0 X NERSHALL RD Lid 0 Data Source: ODOT, Oregon State Parks, Deschutes County Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Table 5-1. Intersection Changes and Associated Cost Estimates CI-1 CI-2 CI-3 CI-4 CI-5 CI-6 CI-7 CI-8 CI-9 CI-10 CI-11 CI-12 CI-13 CI-14 CI-15 CI-16 CI-17 CI-18 CI-19 CI-20 CI-21 CI-22 Powell Butte Hwy Butler Market Rd S Century Dr Huntington Rd NE 5th St Burgess Rd Coyner Rd NW Lower Bridge Way S Century Dr NW 43rd St Graystone Ln Deschutes Market Rd Venture Ln S Canal Blvd Cinder Butte Rd Johnson Rd Cline Falls Hwy S Canal Blvd Baker Rd NW Lower Bridge Way Old Bend Redmond Hwy NW Lower Bridge Way Baker Rd Spring River Rd South Century Dr O'Neil Hwy Day Rd Northwest Way NW 43rd St Vandervert Rd NW Chinook Dr/ Pleasant Ridge Rd Graystone Ln S Century Dr McVey Ave Cheyenne Rd Tyler Rd Cook Ave/Tumalo Rd SW Young Ave Cinder Butte Rd NW 19th St Swalley Rd/Kiowa Dr NW 31 st St Brookswood Blvd Projec Description Roundabout Roundabout Roundabout Realignment Signal Left Turn Lanes (Northwest Way Only) Realignment/ Left Turn Lane or Roundabout Roundabout Realignment, Left Turn Lane Realignment, Left Turn Lane Signal With Turn Lanes Roundabout Or Realignment Realignment Realignment Realignment Roundabout Or Realignment Realignment Intersection Improvements Turn Lanes/ Realignment Realignment Turn Lanes Signal/Turn Lanes High High High High High High High Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low $2,500,000 $2,200,000 $2,000,000 $100,000 $800,000 $400,000 $3,500,000 $ 2,100,000 $700,000 $2,700,000 $2,300,000 $2,100,000 $400,000 $200,000 $600,000 $1,800,000 $300,000 $1,200,000 $500,000 $200,000 $500,000 $1,400,000 ke/Ped Cor»pornent of Cost $200,000 $100,000 $200,000 $200,000 $100,000 Deschutes County Transpo tatlon System Plan. ROADWAY CHANGES As discussed in Chaoter4, the needs assessment identified strategic roadway corridors where vehicular capacity and/or changes tnthe roadway characteristics may beneeded tohelp support future growth and economic development in the region as well as to enhance the safety of all users. The identified projects also can help tostrength connections between areas nfthe County and toother areas inCentral Oregon. These projects are illustrated in Figure 5-2 and Table 5-2.The projects identified will be implemented over time toreflect changing needs for the various users of the transportation system and economic development opportunities. In reviewing the prioritized list, it is helpful to note that many existing roadways within the County area are not built tocurrent County standards and that not all roadways within the County will be rebuilt to match these standards over the next 20years. It is also important to note that changes to existing roadways (beyond those identified inthe TSP) may be required as part offuture land use approvals consistent with the roadway functional classification requirements. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 35 Figure 5-2 - Roadway Changes TRANSPORTATION 5YSTEM PLAN xmo 93)4v1 30V3 SVO 9 4-e FS 40 0 0 Sist,ers UGB co •rk- JoRnAN UGB 0 -n DGE 451 ' I 1— 1 r Seenet .Rednrinu ry. UGB pALKINA LAKE RD 1 MORRLL RO 1/4103.5.1\ MARKET RO KW:CP.290m 4,2-5 DODO s RD ,RICKAR STOOKEY RD YON RD co 1Vvy 1/401 z 7 a NW CONNER AVE EAGLE cResTkvb 0 NEWCOMB RD HARPER RD H Tr; NW SPRUCE AVE SiAl 77TH ST RO cr. SW MCVEY AVE ,4'44444444" NW 27TH ST NW ODEM AV 0 ond 4 rfil' NE IN LCO?c*VE ‘*'S gOCK WAY ‘4‘CCIA 0 0 NE 41ST ET NE UPAS AVE E ANTLER AVE' County Road Projects County Road Extension Projects Parks Water UGBs Data Source: ODOT, Oregon State Parks, Deschutes County Deschutes County Transportation Systm Plan Table 5-2. Roadway Changes and Associated Cost Estimates CC-1 CC-2 CC-3 CC-4 CC-5 CC-6 Hunnell Rd Hunnell Rd Smith Rock Way NW Lower Bridge Way Rickard Rd Sunrise Ln Loco Rd Rodgers Rd Highway 97 43rd St Knott Rd/27th St 300' North Of Shady Ln Rodgers Rd Tumalo Rd Railroad Crossing/UGB Terrebonne Holmes Rd Bozeman Trail Burgess Rd Project Description. New Road Reconstruction/ Pave Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Widening County Standard Improvement High High High Medium Medium Medium Cost Estima ikei_ Cormrponent of Cost $1,600,000 $500,000 $3,900,000 $600,000 $8,900,000 $2,300,000 $1,300,000 $1,200,000 $200,000 $3,500,000 $700,000 $400,000 CC-7 CC-8 CC-9 CC-10 CC-11 CC-12 CC-13 CC-14 CC-15 N. Canal Blvd 61 st St Tumalo Reservoir Rd NW 19th St NW Odem Ave SW Helmholtz Way NE lst St, Ne Knickerbocker Ave, And Ne 5th St NW Eby Ave, Ne 5th St, Ne Cayuse Ave, And Ne 9th St Whittier Dr, Wolf St, And Shawnee Circle Redmond City Limits S. Canal Blvd OB Riley Rd NW Lower Bridge Way NW 19th St OR 126 O'Neil Hwy US97 Whittier Dr - End of County Maintenance O'Neil Hwy Hwy 97 Collins Rd NW Odem Ave Hwy 97 Antler Ave Smith Rock Way Ne Wilcox Rd Lazy River Dr Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay County Standard Improvement County Standard Improvement Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay County Standard Improvement Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low $700,000 $1,800,000 $ 5,300,000 $2,700,000 $1,100,000 $900,000 $3,400,000 $1,700,000 $2,600,000 $200,000 $600,000 $1,600,000 $800,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $1,000,000 $ 500,000 $800,000 ©eschutes County Transpoi CC-16 CC-17 CC-18 CC-19 CC-20 CC-21 CC-22 CC-23 CC-24 CC-25 CC-26 CC-27 Stellar Dr, Upland Rd, Savage Dr, Winchester Dr, Browning Dr SW 19th St Cooley Rd 6th St Foster Rd Burgess Rd 5th St (La Pine) W Antler Ave O'Neil Hwy Gosney Rd 31 st St NW Almeter Way erect Description Stellar Dr EndoCounty Stage Stop Dr Mai tenance (@Browning County mrovementd (@Milky Way) Dr/Pitch Ct) p End Of Pavement — SW 19th St Urban Growth Boundary Masten Rd South Century Dr Day Rd Amber Ln NW 35th St N Canal Blvd US 20 NW Sedgewick Northwest Way US97 (In the Vicinity of SW Quarry Ave) Deschutes Market Rd 6th St - End Of County Maintenance La Pine State Rec. Rd Huntington Rd La Pine State Rec. Rd NW Helmholtz Way Highway 97 Canal, 1 Mile South of Us20 NW Lower Bridge Way NW Sedgewick Ave Illustrative Roadway Extension. May require statewide planning goals exceptions prior to implementation Roadway Extension Roadway Extension County Standard Improvement/ Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Low To be deter- mined Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Cost; Estima ike/Ped -Component of Cost $1,300,000 $400,000 $8,600,000 $2,900,000 $3,800,000 $4,100,000 $1,900,000 $800,000 $400,000 $1,100,000 $2,800,000 $1,000,000 $ 500,000 $2,600,000 $900,000 $1,100,000 $1,200,000 $600,000 $200,000 $100,000 $ 300,000 $800,000 $ 300,000 $200,000 De c hates County Transpo CC-28 CC-29 CC-30 CC-31 CC-32 CC-33 CC-34 CC-35 CC-36 CC-37 CC-38 CC-39 CC-40 Bailey Rd Bear Creek Rd Cinder Butte Rd NW Helmholtz Way Huntington Rd SW Wickiup Ave 4th St (Terrebonne) F Ave (Terrebonne) 5th St (Terrebonne) H Ave (Terrebonne) Amber Ln Day Rd NW Sedgewick Ave US 20 City Limits Baker Rd Maple Ave South Century Dr SW Helmholtz Way Majestic Rock Dr 4th St F Ave 11th St 5th St Amber Ln NW 19th Ave Tumalo Reservoir Rd US 20 Minnetonka Ln NW Coyner Ave Burgess Rd SW 58th St F Ave 5th St Central Ave 12th St Day Rd Burgess Rd NW Almeter Way Project' Description Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay, Excluding Portion from Riverview Dr to Riverview Dr Widen & Overlay County Standard Improvement County Standard Improvement County Standard Improvement County Standard Improvement Realignment Widen & Overlay Widen & Overlay Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low ike/Ped -Component of Cost $1,300,000 $400,000 $3,200,000 $1,300,000 $2,500,000 $6,600,000 $600,000 $200,000 $100,000 $ 300,000 $200,000 $ 300,000 $3,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $400,000 $700,000 $2,000,000 $200,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $900,000 $ 300,000 In addition to the roadway changes, the County is proposing changes to the existing functional classification system based on review by County staff, input from stakeholders, and coordination with partner agencies. These changes will occur as part of TSP implementation. These recommended changes are shown in Figure 5-3 and Table 5-3. Deschutes Coy my Transportation SysteSystem Plan Figure 5-3 - Functional Classification Changes TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN 3.5 qc' _ LOWEiRDRIDITiA'''Ty' 33,3, Ro SKYUNENt' PAULINA LAKE RD dt, bows RE 0 ) " 7.*0 t7 ( 7 770077 ,777,777,70027747277f77--3--- Redmond UGB ec, FORD RD U.I NERSHALL RD 0A)(7.F3P70 Redmond UGB IVIORRN_L RD 0 0 0 8 Mile5 F - - - ---E- - - - - —I ENTURY DR ' EAVA-th 4f 3 „A-AwsA•RD C0‘'.17RNA-R ErSINOREIRa _28 La Pine UGB til 777,1 Highway Arterial Future Arterial Collector Functional Class Upgrade Functional Class Downgrade Parks Water Data Source: Deschutes County Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Table 5-3. Changes to the Functional Classification Designations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 43rd St NW Maple Ave NW Maple Ave SW Quarry Ave Graystone Ln Pleasant Ridge Rd 19th St Morrill Rd NW Lower Bridge Way NW Helmholtz Way NW 35th St US97 Deschutes Market Rd Graystone Ln Deschutes Market Rd 19th St End Current Proposes NW Chinook Ave NW 59th St NW Helmholtz Way S Canal Blvd Pleasant Ridge Rd US97 Morrill Rd McGrath Rd Collector Arterial N/A Local Collector Collector Collector Collector Arterial Collector Arterial Collector Arterial Arterial Local Local One of the main roads NW of Terrebonne, main access to Crooked River Ranch, 1/2 access roads to CRR Possible database error, updating to match county mapping Future connection; called out in the city of Redmond tsp; from tsp- "proposed 3 lane arterial to improve connectivity between and within existing neighborhoods, employment, and commercial areas, to provide connections to newly developed or developing areas, and to provide alternative travel routes for all models to existing streets" Improve connection to canal which is an arterial road that runs parallel to US97, key road segment in connection to north Tumalo area from US97, 2 lane road with narrow gravel shoulders 1275' segment that is key in the eastern parallel roads to US97, Connection for US97 Access from Tumalo Rd/ Deschutes market road 600' segment that is key in connection for US97 Access from Tumalo Rd/Deschutes market road 1750' segment that connects to rural farmland area NE of Bend, no major traffic generators 1675' segment that connects to rural farmland and hiking area NE of Bend, no major traffic generators, the rest of Morrill Rd is local Deschutes County Transpc on System PI 9 McGrath Rd Morrill Rd End Functional C Current , Prtiposed Collector Local Road that connects to rural farmland area NE of Bend, no major traffic generators 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Dale Rd George Millican Rd Navajo Rd Minnetonka Ln Cherokee Dr McClain Dr Sage Steppe Dr S Century Dr Huntington Rd Burgess Rd Riverview Dr Deschutes Market Rd US 20 Cinder Butte Rd Cinder Butte Rd Minnetonka Ln City Limits McClain Dr Spring River Rd S Century Dr Day Rd Huntington Rd McGrath Rd County Line End Cherokee Dr Navajo Rd Sage Steppe Dr City Limits Deschutes River Xing City Limits Sunrise Blvd Huntington Rd Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Arterial Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Arterial Arterial Arterial Local 4,180' segment that connects rural land to Deschutes Market Rd Possible database error, updating to match county mapping Traffic from homes, driveways every 50-100', 1' paved shoulder, connects to cinder butte road which is a collector Traffic from homes, driveways every 50-100', no paved shoulder, connects to cinder butte road which is a collector Traffic from homes, driveways every 50-100', 1' paved shoulder, connects to Minnetonka Lane and Navajo road that are being upgraded as well Possible database error, updating to match county mapping 1580' segment in new developed area, continues McClain drive proposed upgrade of collector Connection to the communities of Three Rivers, Caldera Springs, and Crosswater Connection between La Pine, Three Rivers, and Sunrise; gravel shoulder and paved shoulder 0'-2' Possible database error, updating to match county mapping Parallel to Huntington Road, rural connections to river and homes, curvy road Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 21 Sunrise Blvd Burgess Rd 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Whittier Dr Wolf St Shawnee Circle Lazy River Dr Bonanza Ln Stage Stop Dr Browning Dr Winchester Dr Savage Dr Upland Rd Milky Way Solar Dr Stellar Dr La Pine State Rec. Rd Whittier Dr Wolf St Shawnee Circle S Century Dr Bonanza Ln Stage Stop Dr Browning Dr Winchester Dr Savage Dr Stellar Dr Milky Way Milky Way Day Rd Wolf St Shawnee Circle Lazy River Dr S Century Dr Stage Stop Dr Browning Dr Winchester Dr Savage Dr Upland Rd Milky Way Solar Dr Spring River Rd Spring River Rd Functional C. Current *posec Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Connection to many homes, driveways every 50-300', gravel shoulders, paved shoulders 0-2' Enhance connection route to La Pine state park from Three Rivers and other communities to the north; 1/2 is a gravel road, other half is paved with no striping Enhance connection route to La Pine state park from Three Rivers and other communities to the north; gravel road Enhance connection route to La Pine state park from Three Rivers and other communities to the north; gravel road Enhance connection route to La Pine state park from Three Rivers and other communities to the north Enhance connection route to west Three Rivers homes and big river group campground Enhance connection route to west Three Rivers homes Enhance connection route to west Three Rivers homes Enhance connection route to west Three Rivers homes Enhance connection route to west Three Rivers homes Enhance connection route to west Three Rivers homes Enhance connection route to west Three Rivers homes Enhance connection route to west Three Rivers homes Enhance connection route to west Three Rivers homes Deschutes Count `iranspQrtation System Plan ODOT Intersections and Roadways Future changes to ODOT intersections and roadways within the County have been identified in previously adopted and/or acknowledged transportation plans. ODOT and County staff prioritized the list of changes for inclusion in the TSP. These are shown in Figure 5-4 and Table 5-4. In addition to this list, the County will continue to partner with ODOT to monitor and identify future projects that help to address the needs of local, regional and statewide travel. As the road authority for projects on the state highway system, the timing, need, and funding for projects will be directed by ODOT rules and regulations. In some cases, the County may partner with ODOT on implementation whereas in others, the projects will be planned, designed and constructed by ODOT. 44 Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Figure 5-4 — ODOT Facility Changes TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN 1 )1v1 ]a'1ZSVZ State Highway Projects tat Parks Water UGBs Sisters8-99 UG'� " -DAN RD HASTEN RD 4.1 La Pane UGE3 VPAUt9NA LAKE. RO ORRILL ©� a d ALFALFA FA MARKET RO DODEPS RO I 0 FORD RD % cx - -.------------------- --- MERRLLL R_i�) C 0 Q z ' I ° ry 1 I i I I I NERSHALL RD 0 I" Data Source: ODOT, Oregon State Parks, Deschutes County T Deschutes County Transpo Table 5-4. ODOT Intersections Changes and Associated Cost Estimates Cook S-1 US 20 Ave/O.B. Riley Rd S-2 US97 Lower Bridge Way Two -Lane Roundabout Grade Separated Interchange From US97 ODOT project programmed for 2023 Interchange project identified via US97: Terrebonne/ Lower Bridge Way improvement project. ODOT project programmed for 2023. Bike/Ped Cost county . Component Contribution of County Contribution High $11,000,000 $9,100,000 $1,800,000 High $ 30,200,000 $10,000,000 $700,000 S-3 US97 Baker Road To Lava Butte Implementation Of Multiuse Path ODOT project currently in design phase High $ 3,000,000 S-4 S-5 S-6 OR 126 US 20 US97 SW Helmholtz Way Fryrear Rd Deschutes River Woods South Interchange Project Traffic Signal or Intersection Improvement Turn Lane on Highway, Realign Interchange Coordinate with city of Redmond & ODOT on specific project. Also identified within Redmond tsp. Intersection identified within Deschutes County TSAP This project will provide a grade separated interchange on US97 that will connect the Deschutes River Woods subdivision (west) and the High Desert Museum area (east). A future refinement process (interchange area management plan, or other) will determine the connection point to the DRW. A grade separation of the BNSF Railroad will also be required. Medium Medium Low $1,000,000 $3,000,000 $42,900,000 $500,000 $2,500,000 $10,000,000 $100,000 Deschutes County Transportatkoil System Plan S-7 S-8 S-9 5-10 Road Road 2 US97 US97 US 20 US 20 Pershall- O'Neil Hwy Quarry Rd Powell Butte Hwy Pinehurst Rd Implement Components of the Interchange Area Management Plan (TAMP) Adopted for This Area. Grade Separated Interchange From US97 Roundabout Turn Lane on Highway, Realign The county will coordinate with ODOT and the city of Redmond on the appropriate county involvement to implement IAMP projects. Illustrative Project. Timing and need to be further refined. May require statewide planning goals exceptions prior to implementation. Need for project likely driven by economic development within Redmond industrial lands Project timing and need to be further refined. Project timing and need to be further refined. Low To be deter -mined Medium Low Multiple Projects $50,000,000 $5,000,000 $ 3,000,000 County Contribution $5,000,000 $ 500,000 $2,500,000 ike/Ped; Con ponernt of County Conributicon S-11 S-12 us 20 US97 Locust St Baker Road Roundabout Implement Components of The Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP) For This Area. County contribution to ODOT/ city of Sisters project The county will coordinate with ODOT and the city of Bend on the appropriate county involvement to implement TAMP projects. High Low $6,000,000 Multiple Projects $1,000,000 3esChutes Coui'nty Transpt rtetior System Pi PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Figure 5-5 and Table 5-5 reflect priorities for changes tothe pedestrian system within Ternabonne and Turnalo. In general, the sidewalks identified inthe TSP reflect providing sidewalks between the residential areas and schools as well as to provide connections to neighborhood commercial areas in the two communities. Other changes tothe pedestrian system as well aspedestrian crossing improvements may be provided inthe future based on project development and design aawell asfunding opportunities. The County may require sidewalk construction as part offuture land use actions as well, consistent with the Development Code requirements. 4 cc t44,444,,c_cf tic 74:44;41.4„,444%,4,4„4,0„.„40,44,4,4,4„4„,,,c,,,,,,,,,0,444,,,,,,tact,„4-4,4,444-tmccutc,,44,441Ettet4:444% % 4 4 4 \ / „AtriStHI61. 4 ' ccic) c o "r C 4 c 4 0 4 4, lc 41. c c C rtsH,16,,,„cr,T,,,, 1 c ,t6 „rt.,...) 4`Acc"444,444=444' ccc. c 't s HL 441 l'clEtctfcc=c4=4,„ 1 , c I 1c' i 1 i c i. •4 C c cLU 4 4 A "—fliOrMt%10-15t5.7)1\UW,1 LI tit' ft—tftErc'EtEctl ISHI , 7 0 is,aN,„„,„..,r„,„1„ HL9 MN t c c'c'4 ' c 447 f f > < 1. ,...) iii C 0 0 Ect) % Ecti, S S ft% S HIL ccf „E44444,,,tflEctt„ , I f,ff fit f 1,--tccirc4 1 , 444.44.44, t . c ' A ' , J1 , w Cc) 444 ,4 44 cc, A ,,,CJ 4 4 J4c pr4.44,44,IccAd `4:!1,3o, dsi\ 44!`.4 cisic cagccp so 4,4 ,SSC - Pedestrian Projects Unincorporated Cities 0. E •n u 7 7 7 7 LL (13 77„ • 77)777.77„ 7 7 w 13Lfl 3 11 7 t 7. s ; s s , , 7 7 7 s , , • O., 1 F i \ 1 i g e14 1 7 7 a 7 7 7.44.73770 77 zi _77 7 I —770; z 77. I 7 7 7 ; 7 ; ; 7 ; ; 7 O §a7N1.771Ws7570.10777 i 1.7 77 777 7 7 ; 07 z ; i LL71 7 S .1 S 7 st, 07 r ' I S i 0 I is t 1 r 1 1 1 ri O r dr ri ei 1 le I ie 7 I i r; 7 r 1 1 1 4 ir 1 er re„ re e 1 1 11/ 1 e "" '111,1 Sere, er114 1 er 3 7 7 t , 7 r ss 7 7 i t st 7 S i 7 r rir \ S7 7sS i, S st , 7 1 „,====777,77,77:71,7777-77"7"7-777----"i "77" -A..91711rfaS r, 7 \ i 7 7 / 7 t Cq71 NONIS 7 , 7 7 , 7 7 7 7 7 7 , , ' 7,57,7z7=1= 7/.77177571.i5:77.:7.7.,z7J757.7zzi. vo71\7711,715175,a7717,77777,77,7,35 11 "77-55, I 1 5 1 7 a. 7 0 I . 1 5 77 777 I AMH 7 77: NC)47-7627877 at43778 erlo7 7 7 I ; 7 Z ; \ ; 7,77 7'. 077 P577771 CKI71 7 , 7 ; 7 7 1 e 4 e 0 't (n i n , / i 1 ' .77 0 1 I ; t LLS i S S si sr ti , 7 i r 1 S £ ss i S t rs S 7 st ,SS ss 71 777777 4 7 1 7 71. 47, 1 OS 0' 1 7 S, 7 0 r 7 1 7 7 7 S s 7 S , f i 7 7 7 7 I 7 ss GIN 13SWAI 0Millaltil 7777, Cli'ON117Filrlol 7 i 7 7 f 77 1 1 St.1 st S 1. S .77 S's S S. Sls . S SI S S St 7 s a w al i .„7,74,„7„,„„.7,444 n 7 777 1 10 I-7 7 10 7. ri) e i10 S , Mt 77 s i i LU . 7 S S Zs I 7 7 7 7 7 7 10 7 7 7 7 7 77 7 1 7 7 " Ifiriti"Xlons7777""""7 7 7 1 7 \ 77/ 7777,;77, I.I 7 7 7 7 7 I 1 7 7 77 7 7 7 7 7 777 7 7 777 cnN77743114- SO- srs— #7 , a811108VR.7F.43 7817 -7-777-7°777777777o=7/77= 0 77 7 ?,777 CII I 7 777 177 7 7 7 7 1117 7 7 ca7 -7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 7 1 7 7 a: I MI I 7 Iiil 7 7 7 77,7 7; 77 77 77 7.77 1 I , 7 w , 7777, 7 7 ; 7 si S T.7.7I Zs Sts1' 7 i 3E7 77 r i 7 ir i i i 1 r 7 71 7 7 7 7 77, Pr'at ,S,„,,s7s74°7:S ststr!Istorsi sqr.sscs07,77,: St's? \strs7,7'707, dS.L\ tst,sr\ rsSlArr—mstsb rtsrtsrorro 7,— t.,7,76t.,V,,,, \s7,774,07d—„,,,,r \ „7,07.,,,sacsprrti\o-S s Pedestrian Projects a) 5 Unincorporated Cities Table 5-5. Pedestrian Facilities and Associated Cost Estimates BP-1 BP-2 BP-3 BP-4 BP-5 BP-6 BP-7 BP-8 BP-9 BP-10 Road 7th St (Tumalo) 4th St (Tumalo) 2nd St/Cook Ave Sidewalks (SRTS- Tumalo) 5th St (Terrebonne) B Ave (Terrebonne) 5th St (Tumalo) C Ave (Terrebonne) C Ave (Terrebonne) 11 th St (Terrebonne) 8th St (Tumalo) eg US 20 Wood Ave Tumalo School B Ave 5th St Wood Ave 6th St US97 Central Ave Cook Ave End Cook Ave Bruce Ave Cline Falls/4th Street C Ave 6th St Cook Ave NW 19th St 16th St US97 Riverview Ave BICYCLE FACILITIES Deschutes County provides and maintains useable shoulders along roadways for use by people riding bikes though not all roadways are currently improved to include such facilities. The County has an aspirational bicycle route system, referred to as County Bikeways, where useable shoulders will be provided, as practical, as part of ongoing maintenance and roadway improvements projects. Facilities designated as County Bikeways are shown in Figure 5-. Crossing improvements, though not specifically identified in the TSP, may be provided when bicycle facilities are constructed that cross major roads. The need for and type of crossing treatments as well as other facility changes will be evaluated at the time of project development and design. The County may provide such facilities as standalone projects or in conjunction Des ip ion 5' Sidewalk On Both Sides 5' Sidewalks On Both Sides 5' Sidewalks In Areas Without 5' Sidewalk On East Side Only 5' Sidewalk, North Side Only 5' Sidewalks On Both Sides 5' Sidewalks On Both Sides 5' Sidewalk On South Side Only 5' Sidewalks On Both Sides 5' Sidewalks On Both Sides Prior High High High Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low Cost $300,000 $300,000 $1,700,000 $200,000 $200,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $600,000 $1,100,000 $400,000 with scheduled maintenance activities. At the time the TSP was written, the County was evaluating potential changes to the Development Code requirements (as included in the County Code Title 22 requirements) related to bicycle facility requirements as part of land use actions. Future changes to Title 22 will be considered as part of TSP implementation. In addition, as part of implementation of the TSP, changes to the bicycle network will continue to be informed as part of the County's Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee (BPAC) activities. BPAC's mission is "to promote and encourage safe bicycling and walking as a significant means of transportation in Deschutes County" and focuses on both changes to the system as well as public education and awareness and a review of safety and funding needs as part of implementation of potential projects. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan As part of that coordination, Table 5-6 and Table 5-7 identify regional bicycle connections that have been developed with input from BPAC. Table 5-6 identifies routes that would connect communities and serve broad transportation functions, such as commuting, recreation, or daily services. Table 5-7 identifies routes that primarily provide connections to recreational opportunities, which could also serve to improve transportation mode choices available to County residents and visitors. Over time, strengthening the identified connections will help to expand the overall bicycle infrastructure within the County. Specific routes, including roadways and projects needed to support or develop these routes, have not yet been identified nor has the funding to construct and maintain these facilities. In the future, these costs may be funded by the County and/or a variety of agency partners, pending the actual alignment and project elements identified. The County will work with BPAC and agency partners, including ODOT and local jurisdictions, to advance development and implementation of preferred routes as resources allow. Figure 5-6 - County Bikeways TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN tt' r/ S fry RAJ skyu County Bikeway Oregon Scenic Bikeways Parks Water UGBs Bend UGB RhOGE I Redmond UGB .0" 11/.4po RICKARD RD LFALFA MARKET RE) A DODDS RD o LLI P FORD RD 0 Cr 19 01, Of. 411919 0 C, NERSHALL RD 0 0 0 MERRILL Ro MONTGOMERY RD 1 9 ;(3 ne O G• ce- 4- z .7Er tt- O rz 0 8 Miles ZMJ 0 Data Source: ODOT, Oregon State Parks, Deschutes County Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Finally, the County, h»reference, will adopt the Map 11 of the Bond Parks and Recreation District's (BPRD's) Comprehensive Plan (7018) identifying future trail connections to parks within the County but outside the Bend (UGB) as well asthose within the Deschutes National Forest. As noted in the BPR[} plan, the trails have been prioritized for implementation but the actual alignments inthe map are approximate and subject tofuture easennent/useragreernents toenable trail construction, availability of funding, and securing agreements from affected property owners for trailheads and parking areas. Table 5-6. Bicycle Route Community Connections Aspart ofTSPimplementation, the County will coordinate with BPRDonthe planning for and timing of new trails. It is important to not* that not all County roadways are currently orwill be designed to provide roadside parking for tnailhead users. The County will work with BPR[) to identify appropriate locations inthe future to provide safe access for trail users as well as to roadway users not accessing the parks/trails. Bend To Redmond Various routes possible. Preferred route alignment has not been identified. Bend To Sunriver Route currently in design as multi -use path along U397 (project s-3). Would connect bend, lava lands, and Sunriver. Bend To Sisters Could include Bend tmTuma|oand/or Bend toTuma|o state park connection, which isalso apriority route, and would likely include county and OOOTfaci|ities. Future coordination will be required. Additional Sisters toTuma|oconnection may benecessary ifBend toSisters route does not include the Tuma|m community. Redmond ToSisters Route could occur adjacent toorwithin ODOThgN-of+wav Redmond To Terrebonne Redmond To Tumalo Route would likely occur adjacent toorwithin 0DOThght- of -way (US97) Route may overlap with other route development, such as Bend tmSisters orpossible Redmond toSisters. Sisters To Terrebonne & Smith Rock State Park Route is currently part of scenic bikeway. Improvements to the existing route, including improved crossings, are needed. Sisters ToBlack Butte Ranch Significant prior planning which assumed a multi -use path parallel toU52& Community Connection' ' tescript Deschutes River Woods to East Side of Bend Sunriver To La Pine Bend To Prineville Redmond To Powell Butte & Prineville Black Butte Ranch to Camp Sherman on Route would connect area south of Bend to new development areas and recreational opportunities within or near southeast bend. Route could benefit from trail construction within future SE Bend developments. ODOT is currently in the planning stages to identify preferred route location. Route could utilize state highways and/or county roads. Coordination with ODOT and crook county will be required. Route could utilize state highways and/or county roads. Coordination with ODOT and crook county will be required. Route would require coordination with Forest Service. Table 5-7. Bicycle Route Recreation Connections Corn urnty Connec on Bend To Redmond Bend To Sunriver Bend To Sisters Redmond To Sisters Redmond To Terrebonne Redmond To Tumalo Sisters To Terrebonne & Smith Rock State Park Sisters To Black Butte Ranch Description Various routes possible. Preferred route alignment has not been identified. Route currently in design as a multi -use path along US97 (project s-3). Would connect Bend, Lava Lands, and Sunriver. Could include Bend to Tumalo and/or Bend to Tumalo state park connection, which is also a priority route, and would likely include county and ODOT facilities. Future coordination will be required. Additional Sisters to Tumalo connection may be necessary if Bend to Sisters route does not include the Tumalo community. Route could occur adjacent to or within ODOT right-of-way (or 126) Route would likely occur adjacent to or within ODOT right-of-way (US97) Route may overlap with other route development, such as Bend to Sisters or possible Redmond to Sisters. Route is currently part of a scenic bikeway. Improvements to the existing route, including improved crossings, are needed. Significant prior planning which assumed a multi -use path parallel to US 20. Des pukes County Tr nsp nation Sy$teni di n' Community Connection Deschutes River Woods to East Side of Bend Sunriver To La Pine Bend To Prineville Redmond To Powell Butte & Prineville Black Butte Ranch to Camp Sherman Description Route would connect area south of Bend to new development areas and recreational opportunities within or near southeast bend. Route could benefit from trail construction within future SE Bend developments. ODOT is currently in the planning stages to identify preferred route location. Route could utilize state highways and/or county roads. Coordination with ODOT and crook county will be required. Route could utilize state highways and/or county roads. Coordination with ODOT and crook county will be required. Route would require coordination with Forest Service. BRIDGES In 2020, the majority of the County's bridges were rated as being structurally sufficient. The County regularly reviews the structural ratings of its bridges and makes changes as funding and other opportunities arise. Projects to address county bridge priorities are shown in Figure 5-7 and Table 5-8. These projects represent the County's current priorities but do not encapsulate all the bridges that may be modified over time. Deschutes County Transportation Sys ern Plan Figure 5-7 Bridge Projects .0101, 40, TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN w z • Sters UGIB, JC'RDAN RD 4r 73 73 PS 40 tnASTEN RD .117 • Bridge Projects nitya, Parks Water UGBs tf. RD / La Pine UGE3j 44 Cc' 44 oF te, 44 cvorEP DFUDGE Tz-r I ‘441 P' :PTA- g 4.4 ,4,214 Redmond UGB 44 44 MORMLL RD V\ ,' E44.10 • ALFALFA MARKET RD BendUGB 2, 14,(4/.? fiT,a-02 RICKAkEi RD PAULINA LAKE RD DODDS RD STOOKEY RD FORD RD 0 0 Z 44 0 Ff, 111 Z 0 Z Z 'S 0 =5;7 ,Q, 44 MERRILL. 1::0 0 cz ›.- 1111 o >- 1r 0 6 NERSHALL RD FREDERICK 5JTTE RD I c) -<k .------ —.-- — + 444 4..c\ '' 4 29„44 N 0 0 Miles ,c,c7I4)D R HO 1 44 44 4.4 44 44 44 Data Source: C_.)DOT, Oregon State Park5, Deschutes County Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Table 5-8. Bridge Projects and Associated Cost Estimates 1 BR-1 BR-2 BR-3 B R-4 BR-5 BR-6 BR-7 BR-8 BR-9 BR-10 BR-11 BR-12 BR-13 Road Smith Rock Way Gribbling Rd Hamehook Rd S Century Dr Wilcox Ave Wilcox Ave Burgess Rd Cottonwood Dr Spring River Rd Old Deschutes Rd Sisemore Rd Camp Polk Rd Wilcox Ave ovation North Unit Canal Central Oregon Canal BNSF RR BNSF RR Deschutes River Pilot Butte Canal FEDERAL LANDS ACCESS PROGRAM ROADWAYS The Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) was established to "improve transportation facilities that provide access to, are adjacent to, or are located within Federal lands." This program is intended to provide supplemental funding to be used in combination with State and County funds for public roads, transit, and other transportation facilities. In particular, FLAP helps prioritize funding for "high -use recreation sites and economic generators." FLAP is funded through the Federal Highway Trust Fund and its allocation is based on road mileage, bridges, land area and number of visits to the lands. Description Replacement Replacement Replacement Rehabilitation Removal Removal Replacement Replacement Rehabilitation Replacement Replacement Replacement New Bridge Priority Co; High High High High Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low $1,000,000 $900,000 $1,100,000 $2,700,000 $200,000 $100,000 $2,100,000 $3,800,000 $400,000 $400,000 $600,000 $1,400,000 $1,300,000 FLAP provides funding opportunities to help the County deliver capital projects to increase access to Federal Lands. In addition, FLAP is a funding tool to help the County fund maintenance of existing roads that provide access to Federal Lands, such as those designated as Forest Highways and other roads that provide similar access. Figure 5-8 and Table 5-9 identify the County's current priorities for future FLAP -funded projects. As part of TSP implementation, the County will continue to coordinate with all of the federal agencies, BPRD, Cascades East Transit, and ODOT on the request for future FLAP -funded projects. Deschutes County Transportation System Plain Figure 5-8 - FLAP Projects 4400400,... „tog. Nmosos„" 40;4 rI47), TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN • F- F-4 ''s44 01 Sisters UGB `1°REMN F-1 4 4 F-6 6)4, "Po mASTEN RD La „Pline UGB 01 01 01 01 Nei( 13MDGE I Redmond LIGa' I e9 I .., c'e a at i w us 01,;/MOR RI) 44' ' 1.....__ (20 isl.FALFA MARKET RD Bend UGB RICKARD RD F-7 pAULINA LAKE RD DODDS RD STOOKEY RJ TS, Z p :C 01 P 01 --i c X < CT w T- 0 01 DT 0 FORD RD 01 01 44" --_-_-_-_-_ 01 01 Q /01 01 01 MERRILL RD o T.. + 0 > <C, IIC 01 Ci.'>- 0 a_ p C, .. o 0 0 o.-. 13 0 'i-- , `t-- NER8HALL. RD tiCK BUTTE RD 0 01 01 0 8 Miles _____________------------ ----'- ' eDER-Rtr--1 I i '.:-). a) co i oo < i 0 01 01 Data Source: ODOT, Oregon State Parks, Deschutes County Federal Land Access Projets Parks Water UGBs Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Table 5-9. FLAP Roadways and Associated Cost Estimates F-1 Three Creeks Rd Sisters City Limits Forest Service Boundary �_�-_�i�`� county����������� ,` ,.�',.��'.��'.� | '� `�`<'��� ''� /�`� `� �`' cost''�'`.� '� ' ' ' Description:��— ' '-�-° of�CountyContribution I7'mi|e-|ongsegmentscmpedfmrvidening'pavementrehabi|haton'safetv improvements, and removal of BR #16060 High F-2 F-3 Buckhorn Rd Cascade Lakes Hwy Cascade Lakes Hwy Lower Bridge Way Milepost 21.08 OR126 SCentury Or Reconstruction/ pave Widen & overlay; improve side slopes; increase horizontal sight distance; install guardrail; install centerline rumble strips, post -mounted delineators and high - type pavement markings; install shoulder rumble strips or edge line rumble strips; possible structure adjustments and culvert extensions or replacements; install left - turn and right -turn lanes at major destinations Widen & overlay; improve side slopes; increase horizontal sight distance; install guardrail; install centerline rumble strips, post -mounted delineators and high - type pavement markings; install shoulder rumble strips or edge line rumble strips; possible structure adjustments and culvert extensions or replacements; install left - turn and right -turn lanes at major destinations Medium Medium Low $6'5OO,0OO $g'O0U'O0O $1']OO,00O $1'8OO000 $4O0'00O $700'00U F'5 F-6 F'7 Darlene Way Burgess Rd China Hat Rd Rosland Rd Sunrise Ct Knott Rd County Line South Century Dr One Mile South of Knott Rd at The Deschutes National Forest Boundary County standard improvement offull-length Darlene Way; assumed norow acquisition onexisting alignment across BLMland Widen & overlay Widen & overlay Low Low Low $6,800,000 $S'30O,0OO $1'10lUOO $400,000 om ����n Deschutes��._`_r`�_�_�-___ /._�---�`�`� �.`� TRANSIT By reference, the County will adopt the Cascade East Transit (CET) Master Plan. This Master Plan has a number of projects that can help increase service to the unincorporated areas of the County as well as to the High Desert Museum and Lava Lands Visitor Center. As part of TSP implementation, the County will continue to partner with CET to identify collaborative funding sources and future service enhancements. TRANSPORTATION SAFETY ACTION PLAN PROJECTS The County's 2019 Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) provides a range of projects, policies, and programs to address identified safety needs Table 5-10. TSAP Priority Locations & Status ection US 20/Ward Rd/Hamby Rd US97/Vandevert Rd US 20/Fryrear Rd Burgess Rd/Day Rd/Pine Forest Dr Bear Creek Rd/Ward Rd Alfalfa Market Rd/Dodds Rd US 20/Old Bend Redmond Hwy US 20/OB Riley Rd/Cook Ave US97/61 st St US97/11th St/Lower Bridge Way 61 st St/Quarry Ave/Canal Blvd Northwest Way/Coyner Ave Alfalfa Market Rd/Walker Rd within the unincorporated areas of the County. The County will adopt the TSAP, by reference, as part of the updated TSP. The top sites for safety improvements in unincorporated Deschutes County identified through the TSAP are shown in Table 5-10. This table also includes projects that have been identified to address these needs and relevant status. As part of TSP implementation, the County will continue to identify future project refinements, as needed, monitor the timing of intersection changes at these locations, and seek funding opportunities and/or the potential to combine safety -related projects with other project development within the County. Wed Ident Roundabout Intersection Improvement Turn Lane on Highway, Realign Fryrear Road (Project SI-5) Turn -Lanes None None Roundabout Roundabout Improved as Part of ODOT US97 Bend to Redmond Project Part Of US97: Terrebonne/Lower Bridge Way Improvements Improved as Part of ODOT US97 Bend to Redmond Project Add Turn Lanes None Status;' Project Complete Project Complete County to Coordinate with ODOT on Future Project Refinement. Project Complete County to Conduct Future Project Refinement. County to Conduct Future Project Refinement. ODOT Project Programmed for 2023 ODOT Project Programmed for 2023 Project Complete ODOT Project Programmed for 2023 Project Complete Project Identified in Deschutes County TSP. County to Conduct Future Project Refinement. Deschutes Conte Tian. on Systerra Plan US97/Smith Rock Way/B Ave Part 0fUSQ7:Tenebonne/Lower Bridge Way Improvements 2024 ODOTProject Programmed for Deschutes Market Rd/Hamehook Rd Roundabout County Project Programed for 2023 US97/Burgess Rd Traffic Signal Project Identified inVWckiup Junction Refinement Plan. County to Coordinate with City of La Pine and ODOTmnFuture Project Refinement and Implementation. US20/HawksBeard (Black Butte Ranch) El Camino Lane/Helmholtz Way S Canal Blvd/Helmholtz Way Add Turn Lanes County to Coordinate with ODOT on Future Project Refinement County toConduct Future Project Refinement. Project Complete Dickey Rd/Nelson Rd County toConduct Future Project Refinement. US97/Galloway Ave Butler Market Rd/Powell Butte Hwy Roundabout County to Coordinate with OOOT onFuture Project Refinement. Programmed For 2O23 Construction Butler Market Rd/Hamby Rd Butler Market Rd/Hamehook Rd Baker Rd/Cinder Butte Rd S Century Dr/Huntington Rd Intersection Improvement Roundabout County toConduct Future Project Refinement. Intersection Now Under City of Bend Jurisdiction Project Identified in Deschutes [ountyT3P. Project Identified in Deschutes [ountyT3P. Cline Falls Rd/Coopers Hawk Dr/ Falcon [nest Dr Lower Bridge Way/1 9th St Turn Lanes/Realignment (Project ['18) County to Conduct Future Project Refinement. Project Identified in Deschutes [ountyTSP. Lower Bridge Way/31 st St Turn Lanes (Project [-20 Project Identified in Deschutes [ountyT3P. Lower Bridge Way/43rd St Included inFuture Roadway Improvement Project (Project CC-4) Project Identified in Deschutes 06 I FUNDING Deschutes County receives transportation funding via a variety of state, federal, and local sources. Resources are initially budgeted to meet maintenance and operation standards; resources exceeding these needs are directed to the Road Department's Capital Fund to fund Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) projects. This Chapter provides a description of funding sources and a projection of capital resources available to fund CIP projects. FUNDING SOURCES State Highway Fund The State Highway Fund (SHF) is managed by the State (ODOT) and contains revenue generated from taxes on motor fuels (gas and diesel), taxes on heavy trucks (including weight -mile tax and truck registrations), and driver/vehicle fees (license, title and registration). Counties receive approximately 30% of SHF net revenue (whereas ODOT receives 50% and cities, 20%). Revenue increases to the SHF occur at irregular intervals at the discretion of the Oregon Legislature. Within the 20-year horizon of the TSP/CIP, the State Highway Fund model will most likely transition to a user -based fee structure to replace the traditional fuel tax. Federal Secure Rural Schools (SRS) and Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) Program Funding The federal Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Preservation Act (SRS) provides a federal payment to counties and school districts to offset the loss in timber revenue from federal land that is no longer received by counties due to environmental restrictions. Per federal code, a specific portion of SRS is dedicated to county road funding. In March 2023, the Deschutes County Road Agency (DCRA) was formed as an Intergovernmental Entity (per ORS 190) to receive SRS funding from the State via the federal government. Funds received by the DCRA will be internally transferred to the Road Department for expenditure. Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) is a federal payment to counties with significant federal land holdings to partially offset the loss in tax revenue. PILT funding is to be used for government purposes and its allocation occurs at the discretion of the Board of County Commissioners. Historically, the Board has provided the Road Department with a portion of PILT in recognition of the significant reduction in SRS funding (prior timber revenue) received by the Road Department. Federal Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Funding The Surface Transportation Block Grant program is a federal program which provides formulaic allocations to states to invest in federal -aid highways. The federal -aid system includes roads classified as collector and above, which includes county roads. A memorandum of understanding between the Oregon Department of Transportation, the League of Oregon Cities and the Association of Oregon Counties establishes a methodology for allocation of Oregon's portion of the federal funding. Historically, ODOT has operated a fund exchange program for local government in which federal funding is exchanged (90%) for state dollars to enable local governments to deliver projects outside of the federal process. Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) The Federal Lands Access Program is a federal program administered by the Federal Highway Administration for the purpose of improving transportation facilities that provide access to, are adjacent to, or are located within federal lands. Given the significant amount of federal land within Deschutes County, the Road Department has historically fared well in this competitive program for projects ranging from chip seal, bridge replacement, overlay and reconstruction efforts. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan System Development ChargesKSDQ System Development Charges are fees assessed to new development (or redevelopment) tofund capacity adding improvements necessary to accommodate new growth within the County's transportation system. Routine State Grant Programs The State ofOregon, via C}[>OT provides grant programs tofund various aspects oflocal transportation systems. Primary State programs ^ Safe Routes to Schools ° Local Bridge Program • All Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) Federal Grant Programs The Federal government funds various grant programs through occasional federal transportation bills, most recently the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (8|U. Primary federal programs , Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A); , Highway Safety Improvement Program (HS|P); , Rebuilding American Infrastructure Sustoinablyond Equitably (RAISE); , Infrastructure for Rebuilding American (INFRA); and, • Other programs. Local Funding " Due tostatutory limitations and other restrictions, it is difficult for counties to generate transportation funding via local sources. Noted restrictions include: " Prohibition infranchise fees from utility companies located in the public right-of- way; and, , Restriction in use of general fund tax dollars for road purposes. Notable funding sources, which require voter approval, include: , Local Fuel Tax; , Local Registration Fee; and, ^ Sales Tax. Deschutes County does not have a local funding source for transportation. FUNDING PROJECTIONS —20 YEAR ESTIMATE With transportation funding almost exclusively derived from state and federal funding sources, the nature of transportation funding can be very cyclical in Oregon. The legislature has approved fuel tax increases only four times since 1993.The federal fuel tax has not increased since 1993. The current state oftransportation funding in Deschutes County isstable due tothe passage of a phased -in 10-cent per gallon fuel tax approved via HB2O17 in 2017.The last remaining phase of the fuel tax will occur January 1,2024(3-cents per gallon). Counties inOregon receive approximately 3O96ofthe SHF;individual county distribution is determined based upon the proportion of registered vehicles ineach county. |n2023, Deschutes County received approximately 5.596 of the portion of the SHF allocated to counties in the state. Prioritization of Expenditures Based on the Road Department's hierarchy of investment, funding for capital construction is function of the total resources available, less the annual amount required to maintain and operate the system based on existing maintenance standards and operational levels -of -service. Maintenance standards and operation levels -of - service are derived from a combination of studies (exarnplo,annual pavement maintenance and budget options report),and operational policy (example, snow and ice plan). Figure 6-1represents the prioritization nf expenditures for maintenance, operation and capital expenditures asannually presented tothe County's Budget Committee. es arts Me Figure 6-1: Hierarchy of Expenditures and Investment Capital Funding Estimate Assumptions A projection of transportation funding resources available for capital investment has been prepared for the 20-year investment period of the TSP and Capital Improvement Plan based on the following assumptions: 1. Current maintenance and operational standards remain in place. 2. The County's existing Road Moratorium (Resolution 2009-118), which limits acceptance of new road miles into the County maintenance system, remains in place. 3. Existing funding levels remain in place and are occasionally adjusted legislatively to a level that will roughly match inflation. 4. No significant additional local funding mechanisms are developed or implemented. 5. State and Federal grant programs are available at approximately the same historical intervals and funding levels. CAPITAL FUNDING ESTIMATE A projection of transportation system revenues and expenditures for a 20-year horizon has been prepared with consideration to the noted assumptions and prioritization (hierarchy of expenditures and investment). For comparative and project placement purposes, the estimated available Capital Improvement Project revenue has been calculated in 2023 value and estimated across the High (0 to 5 years), Medium (6 to 10 years) and Low (11-20 years) priority timeframe. Table 6-1: Capital Project Revenue Estimate (Present Value) h Prioj Y 0 to 5 Years $44,000,000 tedium Priority 6 to 10 Years $ 53,000,000 The proposed Capital Improvement Program will need to account for project funding availability within the approximate amounts as noted in Table 6-1. The estimated total capital project revenue of $157M is approximately $32M less than the $189M project list per Table 1-1 (Total Cost of Prioritized TSP Investments). The estimated funding gap can be addressed via additional and aggressive pursuit of state and federal grant funding opportunities for select projects throughout the 20-year horizon period. ROAD MORATORIUM EVALUATION In 2006, facing an unknown future regarding transportation funding, the Board of County Commissioners passed a Road Moratorium (Resolution 2006-049) which suspended the establishment of new County roads. The resolution was modified and replaced in 2009 (via Resolution 2009-118) to allow for the addition of collector and arterial road miles to the County's system. A County road is a road that has been dedicated for public use, improved to County road standards, and accepted by the County for maintenance via Board action (ORS 368.001(1)). A road that has been dedicated for public use but has not been accepted for County maintenance is defined as a Local Access Road (per ORS 368.001(3)). While the transportation funding environment has improved since 2006, many of the concerns which gave rise to the creation of the moratorium remain, such as: 1. High reliance on infrequent legislative adjustment to the state fuel tax, weight -mile tax, and DMV fees. 2. Funding mechanisms, such as the fuel tax, which have no inflation hedge and are therefore eroded or outpaced by inflation. Priority 11 to 20 Years $60,200,000 Total 20-year CIP Funding $157,200,000 3. High reliance on fuel tax revenue which is negatively impacted by increasing fuel efficiency in vehicles, as well as an increasing number of hybrid and electric vehicles. 4. Reliance on federal programs, such as SRS and PILT, which require frequent reauthorization and are subject to reduction. 5. Legislative restrictions on the ability for counties to generate local revenue, such as a prohibition on establishment of franchise fees, and other mechanisms. The Road Moratorium has allowed the County to invest new revenue in a Capital Improvement Plan program and has also focused long-term maintenance investment in the preservation of the County's collector and arterial road network. IMPACTS OF LIFTING THE ROAD MORATORIUM Upon establishment of the Road Moratorium in 2006, the County ceased to accept new road infrastructure. Prior to 2006 road miles were added to the County system via new development as well as improvement of existing road miles via the Local Improvement District (LID) process. New development which has occurred since 2006 has been required to establish private road maintenance funding arrangements which have typically occurred via a homeowners association or other road maintenance agreements. Approximately 30 miles of new local road infrastructure have been constructed in the post -moratorium era; these road miles could be immediately eligible for County acceptance and maintenance if the Road Moratorium were to be lifted. Additionally, approximately 380 miles of Local Access Road exist in Deschutes County, of 66 Deschutes County TransportationSystem Plan' which over 120 miles exist within the 19 Special Road Districts within the County. The Road Moratorium limited the ability to form LIDs — which are districts formed under rules within County Code and State Statute in which the County contracts for the design and improvement of County roads within the district and is reimbursed for the expense via assessments applied to properties within the district. Lifting of the Road Moratorium would allow Local Access Roads to become eligible for the LID process. Lifting the Road Moratorium would result in increased costs associated with road maintenance for new local road miles added to the County system and the addition of staff to administer the LID program. An estimate of costs associated with the addition of new local road infrastructure has been prepared based on the following assumptions: 1. Estimated annual cost of local road maintenance (paved) and operation: $1 5,000/m i/year. 2. 30 miles of local road (previously constructed to County standard, post moratorium) will be added to the system in Year 1. 3. Twenty-five percent of Local Access Road mileage will be improved via the LID process in the 20-year horizon period (approximately 5 miles added per year). 4. Administration of the LID program will require 2.0 FTE (1-engineer and 1-administrative support personnel). Table 6-2: Estimated Costs of Lifting the Road Moratorium (Present Value) Acceptance of 30 miles of improved Acceptance of 5 miles per year of new local road infrastructure (starting year 3) Personnel costs associated with administration of the LID program TOTAL $450,000 so $250,000 $700,000 Lifting the moratorium would reduce funding available for capital projects by approximately $27,000,000 across the 20-year horizon period. Recommendation Given the financial impact of lifting the Road Moratorium and concerns related to long-term transportation system funding in Oregon, it is $8,550,000 $12,825,000 $4,750,000 $26,125,000 Total Cost for 20-year TSP/CIP Ho• rizon Period $9,000,000 $12,825,000 $5,000,000 $26,825,000 recommended that the Road Moratorium remain in place to extend Deschutes County's ability to maintain its existing infrastructure and sustain a viable Capital Improvement Program into the future. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 67 LOCAL ACCESS ROAD TOOLS AND FAQS To assist with explanation and provide information tocustomers seeking toimprove or establish maintenance on non -county maintained Local Access Roads (LARs),the Road Department provides the following information and explanation tocustomers: How are Local Access Roads maintained? LARsare typically maintained by adjacent property owners and road users. This usually occurs inone ofthree ways: 1. Informally: In which neighbors work together to hire a contractor orself-perform maintenance and ^pass-the-hat^toshare in the cost. Z.Fornnalk' Through homeowners associations (HOAs)orother formal agreements roshare inthe cost ofmaintenance. 3. Special Road Districts: In which area residents vote to establish a district which levies aproperty tax tofund maintenance. Deschutes County has 19 Special Road [>istricts—vvhich is the highest number of road districts within any county inthe state. By observation, all three methods work well in some areas and not very well in other areas depending upon avariety offactors. Frequently Asked Questions and Explanations: 7. //7oy taxes and receive no service from Deschutes County. Deschutes County does not utilize property tax to fund transportation maintenance improvements as that practice is restricted by State law. Regarding gas tax, the State currently charges 38-cents per gallon (and various [}K4Vfe*s) tofund the transportation system. The State distributes the gas tax revenue ina 50-30-20 proportion inwhich the State keeps 5O96tofund the state system, the counties receive 30Y6to fund the county systems, and cities receive 2096 tofund the city systems. When customers pay the gas tax, they don't individually fund the transportation jurisdiction in which they live, they fund the entire system of state highways, county roads and city streets. Everyone pays the same rate, whether or not they live in a city or the unincorporated areas. If you are paying e gas tax, chances are you are driving onthe system that is being maintained with gas tax funds. 2. Why can't the County maintain ynygravel Due tothe fiscal burden that would be placed on county road departments to maintain significant mileage of sub -standard road construction, state |avv restricts the ability ofcounties to spend road funds (fuel tax and [}K4Vfee revenue) onLARs.|f we add gravel, grade, or plow one mile we would beobligated tnprovide that same service toall ofthe other LARsinthe County. 3. How come the County maintains some gravel roads but not others? The County maintains approximately 125 miles of gravel road that have been lawfully established asCounty roads and accepted for maintenance. Most of these miles were gravel when Deschutes County was established in 1916 and had previously been accepted for maintenance, with gravel surfacing, when Deschutes County was a part ofCrook County. Current LARs have never been accepted by Deschutes County for maintenance. 4. Not everyone contributes t0help maintain my Local Access Road. ThisisthobiggestdownsidooflivingonaLAR- Sonne neighbors have different opinions on levels ofroad maintenance and some choose not topay for other reasons. This iswhere good neighborhood relations and communication pay dividends. There are many examples ofwhere this is taking place in Deschutes County. 5.We have public traffic 0nour [A/7that accesses public land. Living next to public land has positive and negative impacts to quality oflife. The attraction of the public to public land is one of the negative consequences. Use ofpublic roads, like LARs to access public land is logical and predictable occurrence and therefore something that property owners should factor into their decision to purchase property when conducting due diligence. Similarly, road maintenance costs associated with unrnaintained LARs should also factor into the decision to purchase property. Most LARs have been in existence for many decades as have the public lands they may serve. DESCHUTES COUNTY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Volu e 2: Appendix Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C -Transportation System Plan tgAitiVAIVAIVAIVO Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan LAND USE PLANNING TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROJECT MANAGEMENT MEMORANDUM Technical Memorandum 1: Plans & Policy Review Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Update DATE April 13, 2021 TO Deschutes County TSP Update Project Management Team FROM Darci Rudzinski, Clinton "CJ" Doxsee, & Emma Porricolo, APG CC Matt Kittelson & Julia Kuhn, KAI I. OVERVIEW This memorandum reviews existing plans, regulations, and policies that affect transportation planning in Deschutes County. The review explains the relationship between the documents and planning within the County, identifying key issues that will guide the Transportation System Plan (TSP) update process. This memorandum is intended to guide later decisions regarding the development and selection of preferred transportation solutions and necessary amendments to related plan documents and regulations. Some documents included in this review establish transportation -related standards, targets, and guidelines with which the TSP update must coordinate and be consistent with; others contain transportation improvements that will need to be factored into the future demand forecasting and otherwise reflected in the updated TSP. Regional policy and regulatory requirements described in this review, such as the Deschutes County Code, may be subject to amendments in order to implement the recommendations of the updated TSP; this memorandum helps set the stage for those potential amendments. Key findings include the following: • Significant updates to the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan were adopted in 2016 and the Deschutes TSP update can benefit from incorporating new state policy. • Several regional coordination plans, focused on Deschutes County or Central Oregon, have been adopted to promote a safer and more connected system that leverages technology. Those plans include the Central Oregon Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan (2018), Deschutes County Intelligent Transportation System Action Plan (2019), and Deschutes County Transportation Safety Action Plan (2019). ANGELO PLANNING GROUP 921 SW Washington Street. Suite 468 bi21611Mit40tWdii'gnce 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan angeloplanning.com p: 503.224.6974 f: 503.227.3679 Technical Memorandum 1: Plans & Policy Review 2 of 41 • For other local plans, to the extent that policies, standards, and recommendations therein have an impact on the transportation system, these will be considered for consistency as part of this TSP update. The following plans were reviewed and are summarized in this memorandum. I. Overview 1 II. Statewide Plans 3 Oregon Transportation Plan (2006) 3 Oregon Highway Plan (1999, last amended 2018) 4 Oregon Freight Plan (2014) 8 Oregon State Rail Plan (2014) 8 Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (2016) 9 Oregon Public Transportation Plan (2018) 10 Oregon Transportation Safety Action Plan (2016) 10 Oregon Aviation Plan V6.0 11 ODOT Operations Program Plan (2018) 12 ODOT Traffic Signal Management Plan (2020) 13 Oregon Statewide Transportation Improvement Fund 14 ODOT Funding Projections (2020) 14 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (2021 — 2024) 15 ODOT Highway Design Manual (2012) 16 Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660-012) (2011) 19 Access Management Rule (OAR 734-051) (2014) 20 III. Local Plans,Documents, agreements, and policies 21 2040 Bend Metropolitan Transportation Plan (2019) 21 Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan (2009) 21 Deschutes County Code 22 Central Oregon Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan (2018) 23 Deschutes County Intelligent Transportation System Plan (2020) 25 Deschutes County Transportation Safety Action Plan (2019) 26 Draft Terrebonne Refinement Plan 28 Wickiup Junction Refinement Plan (2020, In Progress) 30 Bend Transportation System Plan (2020) 30 Redmond Transportation System Plan (2020) 31 Sisters Transportation System Plan (2010, revised 2018) 33 La Pine Transportation System Plan (2013) 33 Bend Airport Master Plan (2013) 34 Cascades East Transit (CET) 2040 Transit Development Plan (2020) 35 Central Oregon Rail Plan (2009) 36 Cascade Lakes Highway Corridor and Bicycle Facilities Plan (2019) 37 Deschutes County Transportation SDC Ordinance and Methodology (2013) 39 Deschutes County Road Moratorium (Resolution 2009-118) 40 Transportation Growth Management Grant to Update the Tumalo Community Plan and Implement the Rural Trails Portion of the Sisters Country Vision Implementation Plan (ongoing) 41 Akifrbit eibeatiRisaRe611Y62 P66415rag•griVAABARagidix C - Transportation System Plan 4/13/2021 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 3m41 Ill. STATEWIDE PLANS Oregon Transportation Plan (2006) The Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP) is the state's long-range multi -modal transportation plan that addresses the future transportation needs of the State of Oregon through the year 2030. The primary function of the OTP is to establish goals, policies, strategies, and initiatives that are translated into a series of modal plans, such as the Oregon Highway Plan and Oregon Bike and Pedestrian Plan. The OTP considers all modes of Oregon's transportation system, including Oregon's airports, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, highways and roadways, pipelines, ports and waterway facilities, public transportation, and railroads. It assesses state, regional, and local public and private transportation facilities. In addition, the OTP provides the framework for prioritizing transportation improvements based on varied future revenue conditions, but it does not identify specific projects for development. The OTPprovides broad policy guidance and sets seven overarching goals for the state.'Through these goals and associated policies and strategies, the OTPemphasizes: • Maintaining and maximizing the assets in place. • Optimizing the performance of the existing system through technology. • Integrating transportation, land use, economic development, and the environment. • Integrating the transportation system across jurisdictions, ownerships, and modes. • Creating sustainable funding. • Investing instrategic capacity enhancements. The Implementation Framework section of the OTP describes the implementation process and how state multimodal, modal/topic plans, regional and local TSPs and master plans will further refine the OTP's broad policies and investment levels. Local TSPs can further OTP implementation by defining standards, instituting performance measures, and requiring that operational strategies be developed. The last chapter of the OTP provides implementation and investment frameworks and key initiatives tobeconsulted indeveloping TSPprojects andinnp|ennentationnneasures. Project Relevance: The OTP's policies and strategies will guide the TSP update planning process, specifically in the areas of system management, maximizing performance of the existing transportation system using technology and creative 1The seven goals are Goal I - Mobility and Accessibility. Goal 2 - Management of the System. Goal 3 - Economic Vitality. Goal 4 - Sustainability. Goal 5 - Safety and Security. Goal 6 - Funding the Transportation System. and Goal 7 - Coordination, Communication. and Cooperation. mc Transportation System Plan 4/13oo21 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 4m41 design solutions, integradngnnu|tinnoda| options, pursuing sustainable funding sources, and investing strategically in capacity projects. Consistent with a central OTP policy, the TSP update will seek to maximize the performance of the existing local transportation system using technology and system management before considering larger and costlier additions tothe system. Oregon Highway Plan (,laSt ameMded2018) The Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) is a modal plan of the OTP that guides Oregon Department of Transportation's (ODOT's) Highway Division in planning, operations, and financing. Policies in the OHP emphasize the efficient management of the highway system to increase safety and to extend highway capacity, partnerships with other agencies and local governments, and the use of new techniques to improve road safety and capacity. These policies also link land use and transportation, set standards for highway performance and access management, and emphasize the relationship between state highways and local road, bicycle, pedestrian, transit, rail, and air systems. The following OHP policies are relevant to the TSP update process. Polio 1A: State Highway Classification System The OHP classifies the state highway system into four levels of importance: Interstate, Statewide, Regional, and District. ODOTuses this classification system toguide management and investment decisions regarding state highway facilities. The system guides the development of facility plans, as well as ODOl~s review of local plan and zoning amendments, highway project se|ection,designanddeve|opnnent,andfaci|itynnanagennent decisions including road approach permits. � Statewide Highways /US97, US2C\and OR lZ6\typically provide inter -urban and inter -regional mobility and provide connections to larger urban areas, ports, and major recreation areas that are not directly served by Interstate Highvvays.A secondary function is to provide connections for intra'urban and intra'regiona| trips. The management objective is to provide safe and efficient, high-speed, continuous- flowoperation. � Regional highways (OR 3l\typically provide connections and links toregional centers, Statewide orInterstate highways, oreconomic oractivity centers of regional significance. The management objective for these facilities is to provide safe and efficient, high-speed, continuous -flow operation in rural areas and moderate to high-speed operations in urban and urbanizing areas. A secondary function istoserve land uses inthe vicinity ofthese highways. 0 District highways (OR 37O)are facilities ofcounty-wide significance and function largely ascounty and city arterials orcollectors. They provide connections and links between small urbanized areas, rural centers, and urban hubs, and serve local access and traffic. The management objective is to provide for safe and efficient, ixc Transportation System Plan 4/13/2021 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 5m41 moderate to high-speed continuous -flow operation in rural areas reflecting the surrounding environment and moderate to low -speed operation in urban and urbanizing areas for traffic flow and for pedestrian and bicycle movements. Policy 1C. State Highway Freight System The primary purpose ofthe State Highway Freight System istofacilitate efficient and reliable interstate, intrastate, and regional truck movement through a designated freight system. This freight system, made up of the Interstate Highways and select Statewide, Regional, and District Highways, includes routes that carry significant tonnage of freight by truck and serve as the primary interstate and intrastate highway freight connection to ports, intermodal terminals, and urban areas. Highways included in this designation have higher highway mobility standards than other statewide highways. US 97, US 20, and OR 126 are designated as state freight routes. Policy 1D:Scenic Byways Several highways throughout the state have been designated Scenic Byways which have exceptional scenic value. To protect the scenic assets of its Scenic Byways, ODOT has developed guidelines for aesthetic and design elements within the public right-of-way that are appropriate for Scenic Byways. The Cascade Lakes National Scenic Byway, US 20 north of Sisters, OR 242 west of U.S. 20, and OR 31 south of US 97 are all designated National Scenic Byways. Policy 1PHighway Mobility polio Policy lF sets mobility targets for ensuring a reliable and acceptable level ofmobility on the state highway system. The standards are used to assess system needs as part of long range, comprehensive planning, and transportation planning projects /suchasaT5P\,during development review, and todemonstrate compliance with the TPR. Significant amendments to Policy 1F were adopted at the end of 2011. These most recent revisions were made to address concerns that state transportation policy and requirements have led to unintended consequences and inhibited economic development. Policy 1F now provides aclearer policy framework for considering measures other than vo|unne'to' capacity/»/c\ratiosforeva|uatingnnobi|ityperhornnance.A|so,aspartoftheseannendnnents v/cratiosestab|ishedinPo|icylFvverechangedfronnbeingstandardsto''targets."Theoe targets are to be used to determine significant effect pursuant to TPR Section -0060. Table l includes the mobility targets for the state facilities in the [ounty. Pursuant to the OHP, US97and US 2Oare classified as Statewide Highway and a Freight Route. Highway 126 is classified as a Statewide Highway, and portions are a designated Freight Route. OR 31 has aRegional Highway designation. 8&mRwMm Re� �W2�r ixc Transportation System Plan 4/13/2021 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 6m41 Table 1:Volume to Capacity Ratio Targets Outside Motr02 Highway Category St7-SE HdLN 'VIS /OdVY-UON ouo um um uuo `0.75 0.70 Policy 1G:Major Improvements. This policy requires maintaining performance and improving safety onthe highway system by improving efficiency and management on the existing roadway network before adding capacity. The state's highest priority is to preserve the functionality of the existing highway system. Tools that could be employed to improve the function of the existing transportation network include access management, transportation demand management, traffic operations modifications, and changes to local land use designations or development regulations. After existing system preservation, the second phorityistomakeminorimprovements to existing highway facilities, such as adding ramp signals, or making improvements to the local street network to minimize local trips on the state facility. The third priority istomake major roadvvayinnprovennentssuchasadding|anestoincrease capacity on existing roadways. As part ofthis TSP process, Deschutes County will work with ODOT and other stakeholders to determine appropriate strategies and tools that can be implemented at the local level that are consistent with this policy. Policy 2B:Off-system Improvements This policy recognizes that the state may provide financial assistance to local jurisdictions to make improvements to local transportation systems if the improvements would provide a cost-effective means of improving operations of the state highway system. As part of this TSP update process, Deschutes County will work with ODOT and project stakeholders to 2 Portions of US 97, US 20, and OR 126 extend into the Bend. La Pine. Redmond. and Sisters Urban Growth Boundaries. &Wdbnc Transportation System Plan 4/13/2021 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 7m41 identify improvements to the local road system that support the planned land use designations in the study area and that will help preserve capacity and ensure the long-term efficient and effective operation of high functional class facilities. Policy 3A:Classification and Spacing Standards State policy seeks to manage the location, spacing, and type of road intersections on state highways in a manner that ensures the safe and efficient operation of state highways consistent with their highway classification. Action 3A.2 calls for spacing standards to be established for state highways based on highway classification, the type of area, and posted speed limit. Tables in OHP Appendix C present access spacing standards which consider urban and rural highway classification, traffic volumes, speed, safety, and operational needs. The access management spacing standards established in the OHP are implemented by access management rules in OAR 734, Division 51, addressed later in this report. The TSP update process will include discussion of how existing ODOT facilities in the study area compare to these standards. Policy 4A:Efficiency 0fFreight Movement This policy emphasizes the need to maintain and improve the efficiency of freight movement on the state highway system. US 97, U5 20\ and OR 126 are designated as state freight routes. A principal function of these routes is to accommodate safe and efficient freight movements by providingfree'f|ovv movements for through -traffic in the Interstate system and for traffic accessing existing (and future planned) industrial areas. Pnliov4B: Alternative Passenger Modes Policy 4B encourages the development of alternative passenger services and systems as part of broader corridor strategies. The policy promotes the development of alternative passenger transportation services in commute highway corridors, as well as those located off the highway system to help preserve the performance and function of the state highway system. Cascades East Transit (CET) provides public transportation service in the County. Improving safety, access, and mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists to local transit service and to community destinations throughout the County is an objective of this TSP update process. Project Relevance: The TSP planning process will be guided by policies in the OHP for any improvements, modifications,or|mca|cm|iciesthatwmu|daffectstate facilities within the County. OHP policies provide guidance in developing recommended improvements that would impact accessibility, mobility, or function of each highway. The TSP is being developed in coordination with ODOT so that projects, policies, and County regulations proposed as part of the TSP will comply with or move in the direction of meeting the standards and targets established in the OHP related tosafety, access, and mobility. 0&mc Transportation System Plan 4/13/2o21 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 8m41 Oregon Freight Plan (2014) The Oregon Freight Plan (OFP) is a modal plan of the OTP that implements the state's goals and policies related to the movement of goods and commodities. Its purpose statement identifies the intent to "improve freight connections to local, Native American, state, regional, national and global nnarketsinordertoincreasetrade're|atedjobsandinconneforvvorkersandbusinesses."The objectives ofthe plan include prioritizing and facilitating investments infreight facilities (including rail, marine, air, and pipeline infrastructure) and adopting strategies to maintain and improve the freight transportation system. The plan defines a statewide strategic freight network. US 97 and US 20 and parallel railroads are designated as a strategic corridor in the OFP. The following policy and strategic direction provided inthe OFPprioritizes preservation ofstrategic corridors as well as improvements to the supply chain achieved through coordination of freight and system management planning. Strategy 12 Supportfreightuccess to the Strategic Freight System. This includes proactively protecting and preserving corridors designated as strategic. Action 121.Preserve height included uspart ofthe Strategic Freight System from changes that would significantly reduce the ability of thesefocilities to operate usefficient mmponentsofthefre/ght system unless u/temutefocilitiesore identified orosofety're/otedneed arises. Strategy 2.4: Coordinate freight improvements and system management plans on corridors comprising the Strategic Freight System with the intent toimprove supply chain performance. Project Relevance: Maintaining and enhancing efficiency of the truck and rail freight system in the study area will be an objective of the updated TSP. The County will work closely with ODOT, including ODOT freight representatives, to ensure mobility along identified freight corridors is preserved. Oregon State Rail PlaM(2014) The Oregon State Rail Plan is a state modal plan under the OTP that addresses long-term freight and passenger rail planning in Oregon. The Plan provides a comprehensive assessment of the state's rail planning, freight rail, and passenger rail systems. |tidentifies specific policies concerning rail in the state, establishes system of integration between freight and passenger elements into the land use and transportation planning process, and calls for cooperation between state, regional, and local jurisdictions in planning for rail. Its goals, policies, and strategies are based on the vision that "Oregon will have a safe, efficient, and commercially viable rail system that serves its businesses, travelers and communities through privateresources|everagedaaneeded,bystrategicpub|icinvestnnents."|testab|ishesthefo||ovving goal areas: partnership, collaboration, and communication; a connected system; system H&mc Transportation System Plan 4/13/2ou1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review em41 investments and preservation; funding, finance, and investment principles; system safety; preserving and enhancing quality of life; and economic development. The plan categorizes rail as Class I or Non -Class I and accordingly identifies needs related to rail elements including track, signals, weight, clearance, speed, and bridges and tunnels. There is a Class |rai||ine/BNSFRai|vvay\thatextendsnorth'souththroughtheCnuntKvvithconneotionstoThe DaUestothe north and Klamath Falls to the south. Project Relevance: The TSP will consider the needs of the rail freight system in developing recommended policies and projects re|atedtoinnprovingsafetyand mobility in the County. In addition, the agency advisory committee will include [)DOTrepresentatives who will advise on rail and freight interests. Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (2016) The intent of the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (OBPP) is to create a policy foundation that supportsdecision'nnaWngforvva|kingandbikinginvestnnents,strategies,andprogrannsthathe|pto develop an interconnected, robust, efficient, and safe transportation system. The OBPP established the role ofwalking and biking asessential modes oftravel within the context ofthe entire transportation system and recognizes the benefit to the people and places in Oregon. The OBPP also provides background information related to state and federal law, funding opportunities, and implementation strategies proposed by ODOT to improve bicycle and pedestrian transportation. |toutlines the role that local jurisdictions play inthe implementation ofthe OBPP, including the development of local pedestrian and bicycle plans as stand-alone documents within TSPs. The Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Design Guide is the technical element of the plan that guides the design and management of bicycle and pedestrian facilities on state-owned facilities. It is an appendix to the HDIVI and provides best practices and design guidelines for bicycle and pedestrian Project Relevance: The TSP update process will consider OBPP policies and strategies for their applicability to the [ounty, including relevance to existing Deschutes County Code 17.48 which addresses bicycle and pedestrian development standards, and, where appropriate, the updated TSP will reflect the OBPP through policies and project selection. The state standards and strategies for pedestrian and bicycle improvements can serve as "best practices" and inform recommended bicycle and pedestrian improvements in the updated TSP. Within unincorporated communities, the TSP planning process will identify and address areas where enhancements are needed to improve sidewalk accessibility and connectivity. The TSP planning process will consider appropriate standards and designs where pedestrian and bicycle projects are recommended on, or parallel to, state facilities. &&mRw&dRr,�RwY62�r ixc Transportation System Plan 4/13/uoa1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 10m41 Oregon Public Transportation Plan /2018\ The Oregon Public Transportation Plan (OPTP) is the modal plan of the OTP that provides guidance for ODOT and public transportation agencies regarding the development of public transportation systems. The guiding vision is to create: • A public transportation system that is an integral, interconnected component of Oregon's transportation system that makes Oregon's diverse cities, town, and communities work. • Public transportation that is convenient, affordable, and efficient helps further the state's quality of life and economic vitality and contributes to the health and safety ofall residents, while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The OPTP is designed to respond to trends, opportunities, and challenges that exist today, while providing an adaptable foundation for the future. The policies and strategies advance public transportation as an important piece of the overall transportation system, linking people to destinations, services, opportunities, as well astocommunities in neighboring states. Key initiatives of the plan include plan integration, regional and intercity service, and transit technologies. Project Relevance: In developing the transit element of the updated TSP, the planning process will coordinate with Cascades East Transit long-range and strategic planning in the TSP study area. A representative from CET will be invited to participate in the agency advisory committee to ensure coordination between the recommendations ofthe TSPand transit plans. Oregon Transportation Safety Action Plan (2016) Anelement ofthe OTP the Oregon Transportation Safety Action Plan O3AP\provides long-term goals, policies and strategies and near -term actions toeliminate deaths and life -changing injuries. The TSAP addresses all modes on all public roads in Oregon. Over the long term, the goals of the TSAP are: • Infrastructure — Develop and improve infrastructure to eliminate fatalities and serious injuries for users of all modes. • Healthy, Livable Communities —Plan, design, and implement safe systems. Support enforcement and emergency medical services to improve the safety and livability of communities, including improved health outcomes. • Technology — Plan, prepare for, and implement technologies (existing and new) that can affect transportation safety for all users. The Plan identifies actions that jurisdictions can take to increase transportation safety.They include adopting a Safe Communities Program and Safe Routes to School, which is a collaborative partnership with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the ODOT to promote safety. The Safe Routes to School program is a local initiative supported by grant funding that targets safety improvements to encourage walking and biking to school. ff&mc Transportation System Plan 4/13/ooz1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 11m41 In addition, the TSAP also identifies activities and roles for counties that can improve safety. They • Evaluate local spot -specific systemic safety needs; develop plans and programs to address needs. • Collaborate with the state and stakeholder partners to educate the public about transportation safety -related behavioral issues. p Integrate safety programming, planning, and policy into local planning. Project Relevance: The TSAP will be used as a resource while updating the TSP to develop local goals, policies, and strategies to increase safety in the County. Additionally, Deschutes County has adopted its own Transportation Safety Action Plan with local goals, policies, and strategies. The Deschutes TSAP is reviewed under the Section III ofthis memorandum. Oregon Aviation Plan V6'0 The Oregon Aviation Plan (OAP) is a modal plan of the OTP that defines policies and investment strategies for Oregon's public use aviation system for the next 20years. The plan addresses the existing conditions, economic benefits, and jurisdictional responsibilities for the existing aviation infrastructure. The plan contains policies and recommended actions to be implemented by Oregon Department ofAviation incoordination with other state and local agencies and the Federal Aviation Administration. The OAP categorizes airports based on functional role and service criteria. Airports in Deschutes County and their classification are summarized below. Category 1, Commercial Service Airport (Redmond Municipal Airport — Roberts Field): These airports support some level of schedule commercial airline service in addition to supporting afu|| range ofgeneral aviation aircraft activities. Commercial service includes both domestic and international destinations. Category 11, Urban General Aviation Airport (Bend Municipal Airport): These airports support all general aviation aircraft and accommodate corporate aviation activity, including piston and turbine engine aircraft, business jets, helicopters, gliders, and other general aviation activity. The most demanding user requirements are business -related. These airports service |argp/rnu|ti'stategeographic region or experience high levels ofgeneral aviation activity. Category |\( Local General Aviation Airport (Sisters Eagle Air Airport and SunriverAirport\: These airports support primarily single -engine general aviation aircraft but are capable of accommodating smaller twin -engine general aviation aircraft. These airports support local air transportation needs and special -use aviation activities. Project Relevance: The TSP update will include address aviation as a transportation mode and will plan for how Deschutes County's residents and businesses access these facilities in deve|opingTSP policies and projects. N&ic TmnsmmationSystem Plan 4/13oou1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 12m41 ODOT Operations PyOgya0M Plan /2018\ The ODOT Operations Program Plan (OPP) analyzed the problems and gaps in ODOT programming through stakeholder input. Of the gaps identified, those pertinent to the Deschutes County regional transportation system are included below. • Planning and :Greaterbenefitsofprovenoperadonsactivitiesandsenvices—both their magnitude and extent-- can be achieved if operations solutions are more consistently considered in planning efforts and project scoping. • Communication and Outreach: Communication and outreach on the Operations Program will increase awareness of program activities, help to move away from reliance on champions, and ultimately achieve better consistency and coordination in program services. • Technology: Staying on top of developments in rapidly advancing technology and sharing innovative operational practices would strengthen and expand the Operations Progrann's benefits. The gaps identified informed the ODOT Operations Program. The program is a coordinated, multidisciplinary approach to ensure safe and efficient nnu|tinnoda| travel by /l\ optimizing the performance of existing infrastructure, (2) mitigating the causes and impacts of congestion and delay; and (3) reducing and eliminating exposure to safety risks. The mission is further broken down into six goals listed below. • Integrate Operations into appropriateogency projects, policies, plans and • Optimize the efficiencyand safety ofthe existing nnultinodo/transportation system. • Be agile and innovative in identifying, adopting, and accommodating effective operations technology and strategies. • Promote safe and efficient travel through communication nfaccurate and timely transportation system status information and collaboration with public and private partners. • Utilizeperhonnoncebosestnzteg/es todrive operations planning and decision making. • Achieve a sustainable Operations Program supported by good asset management practices. The program acknowledged both policy and operations strategies including active transit management, arterial operations, and more. The projects and services described in the OPP are expected to be sourced from several funding sources, including those already identified in the State Transportation Improvement Program /ST|P\, funding from operations programs, special programs, and maintenance. The OPP concludes with an action plan, identifying near term action items through 3020and long- term BusinessProcess/Planning and Programming: 2. Develop o /undingpnogro/n to handle Operations projects that are too b/g fbrkocu/ region1district budgets but are not lbig enough" to go through to STIP process. 2. Create an "Operations Guide" that clearly identifies and defines the Operations Program leadership structure, decision making authority, role and responsibilities, and key processes. H&mc Transportation System Plan w/13/oo21 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 13m41 I Coordinate with ODOTTransportation DevelopmentDivision (TDD)and planning staff leadership to develop a course of action that will raise the awareness and understanding ofOperations concepts among Planning staff. 4. Integrate Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) plans into Regional Transportation Plan. 0 Performance Measures 5. Continue implementation of actions identified in the Operations Performance Measures Plan. 6 Develop a Traffic Signal Management Plan to set clear targets for goals related to signal operations. Project Relevance: ODOT's role and funding impacts on the operations and programming ofthe Deschutes County transportation system should be acknowledged in the updated TSP. The TSP update will consult with ODOT's Operations Program for guidance on improvements that involve ITS, signal, or lighting management. ODOT Ty@ffiC Signal Management Plan (2020) The purpose of the Traffic Signal Management Plan (TSMP) is to provide a framework for the management of the traffic signal system by ODOT. The TSMP outlines ODOT's objectives related to the design, operation, and maintenance of traffic signals and strategies to accomplish those objectives and achieve good basic service. The Plan also establishes performance metrics to ensure objectives are being met. The TSMP is divided into several chapters that are organized around different elements of the traffic signal system, including Design, Operations, Maintenance, Management/Administration, and Interagency Coordination. Acting as the statewide guiding document for traffic signal system management activities that support the mission and goals of ODOT, the plan provides recommendations for operating in a regional and local context. Local agencies may also use the TSMP as a guide for operating their signal systems. The plan has five goals, with several objectives for each, classified into the following three categories design, operations, and maintenance. The goals are: l. optimize mobility and accessibility, 2. maximize operational efficiency, ]. provide safe right'of'vvayassignment for all modes at traffic signal, 4. support economic vitality, and 5. preserve traffic signal infrastructure. The Design, Operations and Maintenance chapters (Chapter 4 through 6) provide an overview of the various types of signals and intersections design and recommendations for compliance with ODOT standards. Additionally, there are individual action plans for each category — design, maintenance, and operations. Project Relevance: The TSMP serves as the statewide guiding document for traffic signal system management activities that support the mission and goals of ODOT. Local agencies, such as Deschutes County, may also use this TSMP as a guide for operating their signal systems. In updating the TSP, Deschutes County should consider the design, operations, and maintenance strategies found in the TSMP in 8Nmc Transportation System Plan 4/13/uo21 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 14m41 meeting transportation operations needs identified through the current planning Oregon Statewide Transportation Improvement Fund The Statewide Transportation Improvement Fund (STIF) is a dedicated funding source for improving or expanding public transportation service in the state. The funding is distributed according to developed programs and policies by the Public Transportation Division with oversight from the Oregon Transportation Commission. STIF funding is distributed through two funds: the Formula Fund Resource and the Discretionary Fund and Intercommunity Discretionary Fund. The Formula Fund distributes 90 percent of STIF funds to mass transit district, transportation districts, or counties with a mass transit or transportation district based onallocation formulas. Deschutes County is forecasted to receive over $3million per fiscal year from FY2O2OtoFY2U33. The Discretionary Fund and Intercommunity Discretionary Fund allocate five percent and four percent ofST|Ffunds, respectively, based on a competitive grant process. Deschutes County does not have projects awarded grant funding through this fund currently. However, Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council currently has three grants through the discretionary fund for improving transit service. They include the CET Community Connector Service, Hawthorne Station Renovation, and aplanning and feasibility study from Klamath Fall toRedmond. Project Relevance: Transit service and facilities are anticipated to grow in the County due to increased funding from the Formula Fund Resource. Most STIF funds received by the County are allocated to local transit agencies, such as CET. This TSP update will factor growth in transit as part ofthe transit element of the plan and consider, in coordination with CET, facility improvements or policy or code amendments to accommodate and facilitate transit growth. Further, transportation improvement projects identified in the TSP update may be eligible for discretionary ST|Ffunding in future funding cycles. ODOT Funding Projections (2020) This report summarizes revenue forecasts for ODOT. It is published twice a year to assist in financial planning, the formulation of transportation budgets, and to support other department decision- makingaotivities.Thereporta|soindudesinfornnationaboutfuturerevenueafronnsources|ike registration fees, weight -mile and flat fees, and gas taxes. The most recent update was released inJuly of2020,1 which updated the April 2020 forecast with actuals from March to May 2020. The recent and ongoing COVID-19 pandernic has imbued a degree 3 Typically, the ODOT Forecast Reports are released every six months. The July 2020 forecastupdate was developed to check the assumptions and fully capture the impact of COND-19. Afull report will be published in October 2020. N&mc Transportation System Plan 4/13ooz1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 15m41 of uncertainty in the forecasts. Revenues are anticipated to rebound in 2021, as the expected duration of the virus impact is felt most acutely in 2020, and grow through 2025 as HB 2017 is fully implemented. Beyond 2025, revenue growth stagnates overall as economic and demographic growth slows and fuel demand declines. In total, the state now estimates the loss in revenue due to the recession to be about $170 million over the 2019-21 biennium. As the recovery is likely to extend into the mid 2020's, the impact is expected to extend as well. However, the forecast is highly uncertain given the unknown future of the virus and its impact onOregon communities. The July 2020 report also included a section that documented the funding forecasts through 2025 for three new taxes adopted through House Bill 2017 — the Transit Payroll Tax, Vehicle Privilege Tax, and Bike Excise Tax. Additionally, local City and County forecast estimates were published in July 2020 and account for COVID-19 related losses in revenue. Table 2 below shows the forecasted revenues for Deschutes County from the 2020 to 2025 Fiscal Years (FY). The Base is revenue, not including HB2Ol7revenue, and the total isthe combination ofboth. Table 2. Deschutes County Forecasted Apportionment FY 2020-2025 2020 $l2'SS7398 _ _ $3'9ll'6O6 $ 16,469,085 2022 $12'O43'O6O $S'3O7'5UO ' $18/151,368 $5,626777 $S,7OZ,QOl _ $18. 62,801 2025 $l2'7847OU _ $6'14Z'OO6 $18,927,5O6 Project Relevance: State funding sources for projects identifiedintheTSPvviUbeinnpacted by available revenue. If revenue is expected to increase, new funding may be made available through the state for local projects. Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (2021 — 2024) The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is the four-year programming and funding document for transportation projects andprogrannsforstateandregiona|transportationsystenna, including federal land and Indian reservation road systems, interstate, state, and regional highways, bridges, and public transit. It includes state- and federally -funded system improvements that have approved funding and are expected to be undertaken during the upcoming four-year period. The projects and programs undergo a selection process managed by ODOT Regions or ODOT central offices, a process that is held every two years to update the ST|P. The currentST|P identifies planned improvements for 2O2l 2O24.The following projects |ocatedvvithinDeschuteaCountyare listed inthe ST|P. ORl26:Redmond — Powell Butte — Project nunnber:2Ol67.Pavennentpreservation, bike/pedestrian improvements, ADAupgrades, and signing to make travel more accessible for pedestrians and multi -modal travelers. AWrnmc Transportation System Plan 4/13/uou1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 16m41 US97:Multi-Use Trail (Baker Rd. LavaButte\—P jectnunnber20714.|denhfxandeva|uate planning corridors, design, and construction for a bicycle and pedestrian multi -use trail connecting Baker/Knott Road and the Lava Lands visitor center atLava Butte, tocreate a safe path for multi modal travelers. US97:Lower Bridge Way —NVVl[yh St(Terrebonne)—Pr jectnunnber:2ll62.Eva|uate, design, and construct safety improvements on US97 through Terrebonne; Potential measures include an interchange at US97 and Lower Bridge Way intersection, speed lowering interventions, and pedestrian safety improvements to reduce crashes and increase driver awareness. US97atVVickiupJct. (La Pine) Phase 2—Project number: 2l295.Develop arefinement plan that addresses the US97 highway corridor through the Wickiup Junction area focusing on safety for all modes of transportation, design and construct intersection safety and frontage road improvements developed from refinement plan, and perform geotechnical analysis of Wickiup Junction area to determine feasibility of a long term railroad/US97 overpass. US97Road Weather Management — Project nunnber: 2l50l.Installation ofroad and weather information system (RWIS), speed sensors, travel time readers and changeable message signs to provide ODOT's TripCheck system additional traveler information, improve maintenance resource allocation efficiency and performance measurements. US20:VVard / Hamby Rd. |ntersection—Projectnunnber: 21667. Intersection safety improvements to reduce accidents and increase safety in the intersection reducing intersection -related high severity crashes and better operations ofthe system for travelling public. Gribb|ingRd: Central Oregon Irrigation Canal bridge — Project nunnber: 22O39.Replace the existing bridge with one that meets current standards. OR242:McKenzie Pass Pavement Preservation — Project nunnber:Z2225.|nnproveconditions for drivers and cyclists by resurfacing roadway and rebuilding shoulders. Project Relevance: The 2021-2024 STIP includes several pjectsinthe[ounty.TheTSPana|ysis will take into account projects thatareprogrannnnedintheST|P.Anexpectedoutconneofthis planning process is proposed recommendations for a future STIP amendment to include projects from the updated TSP. The ST|P projects will most likely involve improvements that are eligible for funding through a competitive application process. ODOT Highway Design Manual (2012) The 2012 Highway Design Manual (HDM) provides ODOT with uniform standards and processes for project development for the state's roadways. The HDM is to be used for all pjectsthatare located on state highways. It is intended to provide guidance for the design of new construction; major reconstruction (4R); resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation (]R);orresurfacing /lR\ projects. National Highway System or Federal -aid projects on roadways that are under local jurisdiction will typically use AASHTO design standards (Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets AVRmRiac6i4t%RmV2�r ixc Transportation System Plan 4/13/2021 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 17m41 nnanua|,the"GreenBook\orODOT3Rdeeignstandards.Theflexbi|hxcontainedintheHDK4 supports the use ofPractical Design concepts and Context Sensitive Design practices. The Blueprint for Urban Design (BUD), published in 2020, furthers these concepts by recognizing how transportation needs and solutions are different in urban areas. The BUD is a "bridging document" that establishes revised criteria to be used when designing urban projects on the state system. The document provides guidance for urban design on Oregon state highways until such time that all ODOT manuals related to urban areas are updated to include the revised design criteria. Table 3 shows which design standards are applicable for certain projects based on project type, and whether the project involves a state route. State and local planners will also use the manual in determining design requirements asthey relate tothe state highways inTSPs, Corridor Plans, and Refinement Plans. Some projects underODOTroadvvayjurisdictiontraverseacrosa|oca|agency boundaries. Some local agencies have adopted design standards and guidelines that may differ from the various ODOT design standards. Although the appropriate ODOT design standards are to be applied on ODOT roadway jurisdiction facilities, local agency publications, and design practices can also provide additional guidance, concepts, and strategies related to roadway design. Table 3: Design Standards Selections Matrix, ODOT Highway Design Manual Project Type K8odernbat|on/Bhdge New/Replacement Presemation/8ridge Rehabilitation _ _ Preventive Maintenance _ _ Safety- Operations - Miscellaneous/ Special Programs Roadway Juriscriction State Highways Interstate Urban State ,High ways___ �ODOT ODOT NewUrban ODOT3R ODOT3R � Freeway � Urban -- .................. ------ 1R 1R - - ------' ODOT ODOT � Freeway Urban Rural State Highways - @?__ ODOT 4R/NevvRuro| _ ODOT3R Rural ---- -- 1R ODOT Rural Local Agency x Road Roads Urban . Rural AA3HTO ODOT3R � Rural AASHTO ODOT3R � Rural The HDK4includes mobility standards related toproject deve|opnnentanddesignthatareapp|icab|e to all modernization projects, except for development review projects (see Table 4, "Outside UGB"\. The v/c ratios in the HDM are different than those shown in the OHP. The v/c ratio values in the OHP are used to assist in the planning phase to identify future system deficiencies; the HDM v/c ratio values provide a mobility solution that corrects those previously identified deficiencies and provides the best investment for the state over aI0'yeardesign life. &ffm���RrqaRe��W2�r ixc Transportation System Plan 4/13ooz1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 18m41 Table 4: 20-YearLesign Mobility Standards (Vo/umelCapacity [VIQ Ratio Highway Category Interstate Hwy & Statewide UuMS Expressways Statewide (NHS, Freight Statewide (NH5,|Non-Freight Rte)_________ Regional/District _ Regional Highway District/Locald� _ |nsideUG8 Outside LIGB !� / ��� �� � �� o �zco �zccz � �0 ^- ' P. - ��� - w + Blueprint for Urban Design (2020) The Blueprint for Urban Design (BUD) is a "bridging document" that establishes revised criteria to beused when designing urban projects onthestatesystenn.Thedocunnentprovdesguidancefor urban design on Oregon state highways until such time that all ODOT manuals related to urban areas are updated to include the revised design criteria. The key takeaways from the BUD are: • Supplements and overrides existing HDM and other design manuals on any conflicting guidance, • Describes Planning and design by urban context in addition to existing roadway classification and designation, • Highlights flexibility in design, • Provides Performance based design approach, • Focuses onthe highest level ofprotection for vulnerable users, and • Includes new design documentation process. The key guidance from each chapter of the BUD are as follows. • Chapter 1,Introduction and Backgroundprovides anoverview ofthe BU[/spurpose and describes the connection toODOTprograms and current practices. • Chapter Z Refining Urban Contexts and Roadway Classifications provides new guidance to interpret existing land use areas and functional classification categories to more appropriately align with various urban contexts. The chapter describes six ODOT Urban Contexts and provides examples of each. The six urban contexts are Traditional Downtown/Central Business District, Urban Mix, Commercial Corridor, Residential Corridor, Suburban Fringe, and Rural Community. Practitioners will use Chapter 2 to identify the appropriate urban context for certain areas. • [hopter3, Design Flexibility otOC>(}T/n Urban Contexts, provides information to help identifvandeva|uatetrade'offsvvhi|econsideringtheoperations,safety,anddesignfor 'WM &ffimRibc6i4m Re& �W2�r ixc TmnswmativnSystem Plan 4/13/2oz1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 1em41 urban projects. |tinc|udesanovervievvofthevahousstreetrea|nnsfortheurbancontexts and their design elements. Practitioners will use the chapter to evaluate and identify the appropriate design elements based onthe context described inChapter 3. � Chapter 4,/\Multinodo/Decision-Making Framework, describes aperformance-based approach and a delivery process that supports decision -making from planning through design. Practitioners will use ODOT urban design concurrence to document design decisions through an overarching multimodal decision -making framework that embraces performance -based design asprovided inChapter 4. The BUD provides new design principals for ODOT owned and operated facilities, however local governments that are leading their own projects nnaketheirovvndesigndecisionsfor|oca|faci|ities. Deschutes County will coordinate with ODOT on the application of the BUD along applicable state facilities, ifnecessary, through the TSPupdate process. ODOTTraffic Manual (2020) The Traffic Manual provides guidance on state traffic engineering policies, establishes uniform methods and procedures, and includes information about traffic engineering and operations on state highways. The Traffic Manual complements the HDK4 itdoes not contain roadway design policies but rather contains standards and guidelines, as well as lists needed approvals and processes. Project Relevance: The HDM and Blueprint for Urban Design (BUD) provide design standards for state roadways; the Traffic Manual governs engineering methods and procedures for highway improvements. The analysis for the TSP update and final project recommendations will need to be consistent with requirements for state facilities in Deschutes County. The HDM and BUD can be referenced for additional guidance, concepts, and strategies for design during this planning process. Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 2) (2011) The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), OAR 660-012, implements Goal 12 (Transportation) of the statewide planning goals. The TPR contains numerous requirements governing transportation planning and project deve|opnnent,inc|udingtherequirede|ennentsofaTSP.|nadditiontop|an development, the TPR requires each local government to amend its land use regulations to implement its TSP (OAR 660-012-0045). It also requires local government to adopt land use or subdivision ordinance regulations consistent with applicable federal and state requirements: "to protect transportation facilities, corridors and sites for their identified functions." Loca|cnnnp|iancevvith'O045provsionsisachievedthroughavahetyofnneasures including access control requirements, standards to protect future operations of roads, and notice and coordinated review procedures for land use applications. Local development codes should also include process to apply conditions of approval to development proposals, and regulations ensuring that amendments to land use designations, densities, and design standards are consistent with the functions, capacities, and performance standards of facilities identified in the TSP. ixc Transportation System Plan 4/13/2oz1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 20m41 The TPR does not regulate access management. ODOT adopted OAR 734-051 to address access management and itisexpected that ODOT,aspart ofthis project, vvi||coordinatevviththeCbunty in planning for access management on state roadways consistent with its Access Management Rule. See the review of OAR 734-051 in the next section for a review of these access management rules. Amendments to the TPR adopted in 2012 include new language in Section -0060 that allows a local government to exempt a zone change from the "significant effect" determination if the proposed zoning is consistent with the comprehensive plan map designation and the TSP. The amendments also allow a local government to amend a functional plan, comprehensive plan, or land use regulation without applying mobility standards /V/[,for example) ifthe subject area iswithin a designated multi -modal mixed -use area /K4MA\. Project Relevance: The TPR directs local TSP development and requires specific transportation elements be implemented in the local development ordinance. Local requirements such as access management, coordinated land use review procedures, and transportation facility standards and requirements are meant to protect road operations and safety and provide for multi -modal access and mobility. They will be reviewed and amendments tothem will beupdated, asneeded, toensure consistency with the TPR. Access Management Rule (OAR 7(2014) Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 734'051 defines the State of Oregon's role in managing access to highway facilities to maintain functional use and safety and to preserve public investment. [)HP Policy 3A and OAR 734-051 set access spacing standards for driveways and approaches to the state highway system. The most recent amendments presume that existing driveways with access to state highways have written permission from ODOTas required by OAR 734.The standards are based on state highway classification and differ depending on posted speed and average daily traffic volume. The TPR does not regulate access management. ODOT adopted OAR 734-051 to address access management and it is expected that ODOT, as part of this TSP update, will coordinate with the County in planning for access management on state roadways consistent with its Access Management Rule. Project Relevance: Transportation analysis and final prjectreconnnnendationsvvi|| need to reflect state requirements for state facilities; the updated TSP will comply or move in the direction of meeting access management standards for state facilities. Implementation measures that will be developed for the TSP update may entail amendments to the County's Zoning Ordinance to ensure that it is consistent with these access management requirements as well as TSP recommendations related to access management. U&mc Transportation System Plan 4/13/2021 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 21m41 III. LOCAL PLANS,DOCLIMENTS, AGREEMENTS, AND POLICIES 2040 Bend Metropolitan Transportation Plan (2019) Consistent with federal regulations (23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 450), the Bend Metropolitan Planning Organization /BK4PO\ is responsible for regional transportation planning within the Bend UGB and portions of unincorporated Deschutes County outside of the Bend UGB. The primary function of the BMPO is to "conduct a continuing, cooperative and comprehensive transportation planning process that will result in plans and programs that consider all transportation modes and will support metropolitan community development and social goa IS.114 The Bend Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP), adopted in 2019, is the regional TSP and serves as a multi -modal transportation plan designed to meet the anticipated 20-year transportation needs within the BMPO planning area boundary. The Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MT|P), adopted in 2020, identifies transportation projects in the K4P[) that are programmed to receive funding between 2021-2024. The MTIP lists federally funded and locally funded projects anticipatedby|oca|agenciesandODOTthatvvi||occurintheBK4POp|anningarea boundary. Project Relevance: Proposed improvements on the regional transportation system that are included in the updated County TSP will need to be amended into MTP and adopted by the Bend K4POPolicy Board. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan (2009) The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan is a long-range policy guide for land use in the unincorporated areas within the County, outside of city urban growth boundaries (UGBs). The Comprehensive Plan includes background information and policies that address each of the 14 applicable Statewide Land Use Planning Goals. The County intends to update the Comprehensive Plan inZ02l. Transportation policies are included in the Deschutes County TSP, amended to the Comprehensive Plan in Appendix C. Existing policies will be refined as part of the TSP update process. A partial review of policies currently in the Deschutes County TSP is included in the Review of 2012 Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Memorandum. Several policies related totransportation improvements are also found in Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive Plan, Growth Management. Chapter 4 addresses unincorporated communities and rural service centers. Only local policies for the Sunriver community include tra nspo rtation -related elements; Section 4.5 describes transportation facilities in Sunriver. Most internal roads in Sunriver 4 2007-2030 Bend Metropolitan Transportation Plan. Chapter 1: Introduction. Poge1,1. Affibmc TmnupvnaonSystem Plan 4/13/2oz1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 22m41 are private roads, open to the public, and maintained by the Sunriver Owners association. Section 4.5 also identifies future transportation needs for Sunriver. Because they were not functioning at full capacity at the time of Comprehensive Plan adoption, there are no changes recommended to the community's public roads, South Century Dr. and Cottonwood Road. The pertinent Transportation System Maintenance Policies for the Sunriver area are included below. Pnlicv�5.3OPrivately-maintained mods within the SumriverUrban Unincorporated Community boundary shall continue to be maintained by the Sunriver Owners Association. Policy �5.34The path system in Sunriver shall continue to be maintained by the Sunriver Owners Association or as otherwise provided by a maintenance agreement. Policy 4.£3BThe County w0encourage thefuture expansion ofbicycle/pedestrian ooths within the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community boundary in an effort tnprovide un alternative to vehicular travel. Policy 4.5.36 All public roads maintained bvthe County shall continue tobemaintained bv the County. Improvements to County maintained public roads shall occur as described the County Transportation System Plan. Project Relevance: The updated TSP will be adopted as the transportation element of the County's Comprehensive Plan. Recommendations resulting from this planning process must either be consistent with existing policies, including those identified above, or the TSP process should result in proposed amendments to adopted policies. The County is embarking on a process to update its Comprehensive Plan, which may not be complete prior tothe completion ofthis TSPupdate. Deschutes County Code The Deschutes County Code (DCC) regulates development within unincorporated Deschutes County and implements the long-range land use vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan and TSP. The code contains requirements that address the relationship between land use development and transportation system development. Requirements in Title 22 Procedures Ordinance, Title 18 County Zoning, and Title 17 Subdivisions all have a bearing on how the transportation system is implemented. Titles 19 to 21 include zoning ordinances or districts related the unincorporated areas ofcity UGBsfor Bend, Sisters, and Redmond. The Subdivision ordinance includes design standards for transportation facilities. Minimum right -of' vvayandroadvvidthsareprovidedinSeotionl7.36.06{;requirennentsforfnontageroadsarein Section 17.36.100. Sidewalk installation requirements for urban areas are in Section 1736.130and are required on both sides of the road; outside of urban areas, sidewalk requirements are found in Section l7.48.l75.Also, Section l7.36.l50defines block lengths, requiring blocks are nolonger than 1,200 feet. Special provisions for blocks over 800 feet are provided in Section 17.36.140. Minimum design standards for bikeways, roads, and structures are found in DCC 17.48. Road H&mc Transportation System Plan 4/13/uoz1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 23m41 dedication procedures and approval criteria are described in DCC 17.52. Design standards for bicycle, pedestrian, and transit requirements are found in Section 17.36.140. Title 18, County Zoning, includes specific provisions for certain zones as well as supplementary provisions for development in unincorporated areas outside of UGBs. Section 18.116.031 has requirements for bicycle parking. Section l8.l28.2l0has requirements for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure in planned developments, which include nnu|tinnoda| connections. Traffic Impact Studies are described in Section 18.116.310, including when a study is required and guidelines for the studies. Chapter 19A addresses the Bend Urbanizable District (UA), which is located within the Bend UGB. The development standards for the district include this additional provision related to transportation improvements: 19A.02.04OB.Frontage improvements must bebuilt toCity Standards and Specifications when required under certain City of Bend reviews. Redmond Urban Area Zoning Ordinance DCC 20.16 requires standards for public improvements, where public improvements are initiated by City of Redmond, must conform with Redmond public work standards and specifications. Additionally, the section establishes clear vision areas and measurement procedures. Project Relevance: County Subdivision requirements related to roadway design will need to be consistent with the updated TSP. Amendments to DCC requirements related to access, traffic impact analyses, and parking standards may be recommended as part of this planning process to implement the updated TSP, ensure consistency between the code and TSP, and strengthen compliance with the TPR. Central Oregon Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan (2018) The 2018 Central Oregon Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan updates individual county plans, combining them into one regional plan with systemwide and individual strategies for the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, Deschutes, Crook and Jefferson counties. All jurisdictions are served by the same public transit system, Cascade East Transit. The purpose of the plan is to improve transportation services for people with disabilities, seniors, and individuals with lower incomes by identifying opportunities to coordinate existing resources and services, including general public services available in the area. The plan identifies priorities that are used to direct state and federal funds. An overview of existing transportation resources and services, a needs assessment, and prioritized coordination strategies are described in the plan. The following highest priority Regional strategies, those that apply to the regional transportation system, are found in Section4.a: l. Improve affordability of transit services to low-income individuals and veterans. Provide subsidized fares for low income clients and veterans needing access to health and human services. 2. Ongoing coordination. Establish a structure for ongoing dialogue on coordination needs and opportunities among public transportation providers and the human and health services 8ffimc Transportation System Plan 4/13/zoz1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 24m41 communities. This includes a proposal to explore developing one regional STF Committee for Central Oregon with members from Crook, Deschutes, and Jefferson Counties and the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, and to use this group for high-level regional coordination activities. ]. Expand public transportation services to late in the evening and on weekends. Work with human and health services stakeholders to identify priorities for expansion of services to later inthe evenings and when/where toprovide weekend services. 4. Education and Outreach. Develop a comprehensive marketing and awareness campaign. Provide more information to riders, the public, communities, and elected officials and leaders about the benefits of public transit and existing transit services. 5. Create a Dedicated Local Public Fundfor Transit. Identify priority geographies/communities and develop local public tax base to provide additional services. The Coordination Plan provides a set ofregion-scale priority strategies to guide transportation investments, summarized above. However, as there are still variations in need across Central Oregon, each local area also has its own set of priorities. The Deschutes County Priority strategies are found in Section 4.b.ii of the plan. The high and medium priority strategies for Deschutes County are listed below. The high priority strategies for Deschutes County are listed in rank order. l. Create a dedicated funding source for public transportation. 2. Support, maintain, and strengthen the existing transportation network, including both local service and community connector shuttles — leverage local public transportation investments to secure state and federal resources (Note: participants indicated that the "strengthen"part ofthis strategy was largely focused onproviding fixed -route service in Redmond). 3. Expand service tolater inthe evening and weekends. 4. Education and Outreach. Develop a comprehensive marketing and awareness campaign. Provide more information to riders, the public, communities, and elected officials and leaders about the benefits of public transit and existing transit services. The following are all considered medium priority strategies for Deschutes County, and are weighted • Create express bus routes. • Improve Bend Dial A Ride system (i.e. caregiver, child riding with parent). • Improve affordability of transit services to low-income individuals and veterans (e.g. subsidized fares and veterans ride programs) • Ongoingcoordination—estab|ish a structure for ongoing dialogue on coordination needs and opportunities among public transportation providers and the human and health services communities. • Develop electronic fare card system. Following are additional strategies that received votes in the Deschutes County meeting. The additional strategies are not listed in rank order. * Make winter transportation more usable. AVrut c Transportation System Plan 4/13/zoz1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 25m41 • Consider density and/or mixed housing stock (e.g. transit oriented development TODi • Travel training— provide travel training classes to individuals who use paratransit service toconvert tofixed-route service. • Create voucher system for ride -sharing programs. Project Relevance: Updated TSP policies should encourage ongoing coordination with Cascade East Transit, particularly regarding the Deschutes County strategies identified inthe plan. Deschutes CnWMfw Intelligent Transportation System Plan (2020) The 2020 Deschutes County Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Plan is an update to the 2011 ITS Plan. Since 2011, ODOT has worked collaboratively with Deschutes County and the cities of Bend, Sisters, Redmond, and La Pine to implement technology solutions to improve safety and management of the regional transportation system. The update incorporates newly identified needs and operations inthe County, embraces advanced technology, prepares for emerging technologies, and provides support for a more integrated, collaborative system of operations and management. This ITS plan integrates Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) strategies, as these are recognized as being crucial to effectively implementing and sustaining ITS The 2020 ITS Plan includes an overview of current and future transportation conditions in Chapter 2 and a user needs assessment in Chapter 3. Further, a communications plan is provided in Chapter 4, a Regional ITS Architecture in Chapter 5,and a Deployment Plan inChapter 6. The Deployment Plan includes unconstructedprojects fnonnthe2011DSP|anandidendfiesnevv projects based on the needs assessment in Chapter 3. Within the plan, Chapter 6 includes pject maps, descriptions, and costs with more detailed descriptions ofprojects andcostestinnates in Appendix E.Figure l6identifies locations and project nunnbers. Deschutes County isthe lead ononly two projects, listed below, and listed asasupporting agency onnumerous other projects inthep|an. • Project No. 124 — Deschutes County Fair Ingress.|nstaUconnnnunicadonsand[[TV. • Project No. 204 — Special Event Management System (Fairgrounds, Expo Center, and Amphitheatre). Deploy: traffic signal timing plans, portable dynamic message signs, parking management, and public transportation management. Supporting agencies: ODOT, Redmond, Bend. Project Relevance: The TSP update will review and integrate identified ITS Plan projects, as well as identify new projects through TSMO strategies to address safety and capacity needs identified through the planning process. The TSP will include objectives related to embracing technological advances and tools and their benefits tothe transportation system. 8Nmc Transportation System Plan 4/13/uo21 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 26m41 Deschutes County Transportation Safety ArfiQM Plan (2019) The State of Oregon has developed a statewide Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) and set a goal of zero fatal and incapacitating injuries on Oregon's transportation system by 2035. The Deschutes County TSAP is a specific action plan developed to help the County work towards the atate'sgoa| by identifying and addressing safety issues specific to the County. This TSAPevaluates crash trends and issues based on current data and identifies a broad range of treatments including projects, policies, and programs to address identified issues. Chapter 2 includes historic crash summary data. Chapter 3 through 6 are focused on solutions and actions for transportation safety, including systemic solutions, a speed management toolbox, location specific applications, and non -infrastructure measures. System solutions in Chapter address design elements that can be incorporated for enhanced safety on a variety of transportation systems — roadway segments, curves, and intersections. The Speed Management Toolbox in Chapter 4 recommends treatments for speed management including pavement markings, physical roadway improvements, and signage. Chapter 5, Location Specific Application, establishes the screening criteria for locations of concern and lists them in Table 5,Top Sites for Safety Improvements. There are numerous locations identified in unincorporated Deschutes County, shown in Table 4 (Table 5 of the TSAP). Where the table indicates a concept has been developed, the plan provides anoverview ofthe concept. 8&m��4Rr,�RwY62�r ixc Transportation System Plan 4/13/2ou1 Technical Memorandum 1: Plans & Policy Review 27 of 41 Table 5. Top Sites for Safety Improvement - Unincorporated Deschutes County Orfetdedikro Inv.:Ades din 0001 Faciffy? US20)Warcil Road/Ho rnby Rood US97/Vandevert Road 11S20/Fryrear Road Borges Road/Day Road/Pine Forest Drive Bear Creek Road/Ward Road No Alfalfa Martel. Road/Dodds Road No 1JLS2D/Old Rend Redmond Highway Yes L)320/0. Riley Road/Cook Avenue Yes US97/61st Street Yes US97/11th SireetfLower Bil e Way Yes 61si Street/Cuorry Ave/Canal Blvd No Northwest Way/Coynier Ave No Alfalfa Markel RoadiWalker Rood No 1JS97/Srriiith Rock "Aray/B Ave Yes Deschutes Market Roadi/Hamehook No Road US97/Burgess Road Yes 11520/Flowks Beard (Blimsk Butte Ranch) B Camino Lane/Helmholtz Way No No Canirr Blvd/Helmhottz Way No Dickey Road/Ns/son Road No Yes No No No No S Cerikwy and Hur,lint on* No No 1-397/Galloway Ave Butler Market Road & Rowel Butte 1-fghways Butler Market Road & Hamby* Butler Market Road & flornehook* Baker Road & Cinder Butte* Yes Yes Yes No Cline Falls Rd/Coopers Hsrtrir Drive/ Falcon Crest Drive* Lowe Bridge Way(191111 Lower Bridge Way/31st* Lower Bridge Vifay/43rd* No No No Yes Yes Yes Nurreer Of CrOxfors. 2012- 2016 Antorcifized EPDO Some 22 111 17 56 14 50 20 45 14 41 2 40 17 38 15 37 13 35 13 33 17 32 Yes 9 31 Yes 7 28 13 28 Yes 10 27 7 27 5 26 4 26 7 25 Yes 3 24 3 24 Yes 9 7 Yes 9 7 Yes 5 6 Yes 5 5 Yes5 5 Yes 2 2 Yes 1 2 Yes 3 2 Yes 3 2 Chapter 6 addresses other non -infrastructure safety measures including policy, planning, programming, and projects and identifies a list of related action items. Table 6 in the plan addresses safety culture and educational action items for Deschutes County along with project partners, and Agbit Ei8R1.51-LikrsaRe611/7621t1WP6biiii51-aVgrigABraOndix C - Transportation System Plan 4/13/2021 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 28m41 funding needed. The focus areas are safety culture, enforcement, pedestrian/cyclists, and impaired or distracted driving. Those relevant to updating the Deschutes County TSP include: • A3. Create a Deschutes County Safety Communications Plan, including an education and public outreach system, that promotes a roadway safety culture. • A6. Develop and maintain policies to support the actions identified in the TSAP and to better incorporate safety into long-range planning and the project deve|opnnentprocess. • AlI. Develop criteria for identifying and designating safety corridors within the County. * A34. Design roadways integrating pedestrian and bicyclist safety considerations by providing appropriate pedestrian and bicyclist infrastructure. • A35. Develop countywide bicycle route map that identifies the preferred bicycle routes (lower volume, lower speed, and available shoulders) and provide wayfincling to direct cyclists tothese routes. Illuminate pedestrian crossings near schools in the County. • A36. Complete the sidewalk system in unincorporated communities by closing gaps in the sidewalk system and providing appropriately designed crossings where needed. • A42. Integrate technology advancements to improve transportation safety. • A43. Evaluate options to collect and use traffic volume ' near -misses, and other data to understand where perceived safety issues may exist. • A44. Evaluate the ability to use crovvdsourcing technology to identify risks and locations for additional assessment. The complete list is found in Table 6 of the TSAP. Chapter 7, Plan Implementation and Evaluation addresses performance measures the County can use to evaluate the success of the plan and use it for future updates of the plan. The outcome measures are focused onfatal and sever injury crashrateson[ountyroads. Project Relevance: The TSAP, prjects,po|icyorprogrannnningreconnnnendations should be reflected in the updated TSP where appropriate. Goals and policies related to transportation safety will be echoed in the objectives ofthe TSP update planning process and will be used to update County transportation policy. DraffTeyrebmnMe Ref iMeMMent Plan The Terrebonne community, located in Deschutes County, is bisected by US 97. As US 97 highway traffic volumes have significantly increased in the last 10 years, side street traffic movements and pedestrian crossings have become more difficult. The purpose of the TerrebonneRefinennentP|anvvastodeve|opshort',nnediunn',and|ong'terrninnprovennents and management options on the US 97 corridor to improve safety and operations in the community. Toservenear-and|ong'ternnhighvvayand|oca|dennancithedraftRefnennentP|an recommends a grade -separated interchange at the US 97/Lower Bridge Way intersection and for US 97 to be repurposed as a couplet (two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes) that would utilize the existing ll,h Street asthe northbound highway alignment and the existing US 97 right-of-way as the southbound alignment. The plan also considered a 8Vrut c Transportation System Plan 4/13/2ou1 Technical Memorandum 1: Plans & Policy Review 29 of 41 five -lane cross-section that would provide additional capacity within the existing highway right-of-way (i.e., 11th Street would not become part of the state highway system). While the Terrebonne Refinement Plan was not adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, ODOT and Deschutes County are currently discussing the configuration of improvements for the highway through Terrebonne in association with the legislatively earmarked $21M investment for US 97 in Terrebonne per HB 2017 (2017). The TSP Update will address the future of US 97 through Terrebonne via identification of configuration options or identification of a future process to identify and select an option. In addition to highway improvements, the following are recommended local connections categorized by priority that improve circulation in Terrebonne. Each will be considered for inclusion in the Deschutes County TSP update. High Priority • Formalize 9th Street from E Avenue to F Avenue • Formalize E Avenue from 7th Street to 9th Street • A Avenue from 11th Street to COID Canal and North -South Connection over the COID Canal from A Avenue to Smith Rock Way • Construct H Avenue from 11th Street to 13th Street (Recommended for inclusion in the initial construction phase) Medium Priority • Formalize F Avenue from 19th Street to US 97 Frontage Road • 4th Street connection from Forster Drive north approximately 1,000 feet • Formalization of F Avenue Frontage Road to Barberry Drive • A Avenue Extension from COID Canal to future 16th Street Extension • 16th Street Extension from C Avenue to A Avenue • 13th Street Extension from B Avenue to E Avenue • E Avenue Extension from 11th Street to 16th Street Low Priority • 5th Street Extension from B Avenue south to Odem Avenue • 6th Street Extension from A Avenue to US 97 • 16th Street Extension from A Avenue south of Terrebonne • G Avenue Extension from 15th Street to 16th Street • H Avenue Extension from 15th Street to 16th Street Project Relevance: As recommended by the Refinement Plan, the Deschutes County TSP projects list should include design and construction of the local street enhancement projects. Improvements planned for US 97 should be incorporated, as coordinated through ongoing discussions between ODOT and Deschutes County. cubit rsaRY&& 2 °644»}e g-giVAABri- idix C - Transportation System Plan 4/13/2021 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 30m41 WiCkiWp UWMrMoM Refinement Plan (2020, In Progress) The VVickiupJunction Refinement Plan isaproject |edbv[)DOTandsupporteydbxthe[itvof La Pine, with adoption anticipated by early 2021. As the La Pine community has grown farther to the north and traffic volumes on US 97 have continued to increase, the highway has increasingly been a barrier to community cohesion. The City, Deschutes County, and the ODOT have engaged in the Wickiup Junction Refinement Plan to help identify transportation improvements, both along the highway as well as along the local street system to better serve both city residents and businesses aswell as regional traffic within the community. Several roads under Deschutes County ownership are included in the study area Burgess Road,Ros|andRoad,Dar|eneVVay,l"St/ReedRoad,andsevera|othernninorroads. OneoftheanticipatedoutconnesoftheRefinennentP|anareidentifiedpotentia|short', nnid',and long-term projects toenhancethetransportationsystennfornnotorists,cyc|ists, pedestrians, and freight. Some ofthe key aspects ofthe planning effort focus onhighway mobility, non'vehidetrave|, gateway transitions, and local circulation. As of August 2020, the alternatives analysis had been presented and workshopped with the public. Apreferred alternative is under review asofFall 2020\ with the final draft Refinement Plan to be presented at hearings before the La Pine City Council and Deschutes County Board ofCommissioners inin202l. Project Relevance: The proposed improvements for the Wickiup Junction Refinement Plan are generally within the City of La Pine and may not require incorporation into the Deschutes County TSP. The current planning process is an opportunity tofor the County tocontinue tocollaborate with the project partners ODOT and City of La Pine topromote anefficient, interconnected transportation system within the VVickiupJunction study area. Bend Transportation System PlaM(2020) The Bend Transportation System Plan (TSP) provides a policy and plan framework that will continue to enable Bend to design a balanced transportation system for the near -term and the extended future. Strategies for planning and implementing a wide range of transportation components are addressed in the TSP, including automobile, public transportation, bicycle, and pedestrian travel. The TSP addresses the transportation system within the Bend UGB. The TSP includes an overview of existing conditions, goals, future conditions, and improvement projects forthetransportation system, which includes public transportation, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, the street system (locations, designs, and functional classifications), and potential funding sources. There are various expansion areas identified in the Bend Comprehensive Plan that were brought into the UGB but not yet to be annexed, known as "Expansion Areas." Figures 3'1 and 3'2 in the TSP show the location and intensity ofprojected growthintheBendareathrough204O,inc|uding specific opportunity areas and expansion areas identified through the 2016 UGB update. The following are specific goals or actions included in the Bend TSP that are relevant to Deschutes County. H&mc Transportation System Plan w/13/zoz1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 31m41 Goal 6 — Have a Regional Outlook and Future Focus • Coordinate and partner with other public and private capital improvement projects and locallregionalplanning initiative • Create osystenr that is design to implement innovative and emerging transportation The Bend TSP addresses transportation in unincorporated LJGB areas in Goal 3, Facilitate Housing Supply, Job Creation, and Economic Development to Meet Demand/Growth: * Build new roads and upgrade existing roads toserve areas torgetedfor g opportunity and expansion areas) andjob creation. TSP Action 57 addresses funding in urbanizing areas: Funding for transportation infrastructure /n expansion areas, as identified in the2O16 urban growth boundary (UGB) expansion, will be determined either before or upon (unless exempted). Funding must be established prior to, or concurrently with, annexation. Transportation and infrastructure funding agreements will be memorializedfor each expansion area property or properties in a development agreement as a part of a master plan orarea plan approval onoYorannexation. There are several TSPprojects identifiedintheurbangrovvthboundaryoutsideofcitv|innhs.The Bend TSP identifies these as funding requirements of the City and possible funding sources to implement. Deschutes County is not expected to contribute to implementation of these projects. Project Relevance: Many roadway, intersection, pedestrian, and bicycle projects identified near the edge of the Bend city limits and LJGB will need to be coordinated with Deschutes County to ensure the City and County systems are compatible and supportive of each other, especially for the active transportation network. Since the expansion areas must be planned —through master planning or area planning prior to adoption, the County should encourage participation in those processes to ensure effective coordination of a compatible and supportive transportation system between the City and the County. Separately, the City of Bend and Deschutes County have entered into a Joint Management Agreement (2017) to guide and inform the transition and jurisdictional transfer of county roads to the City of Bend in association with development and annexation. Redmond Transportation System Plan (2020) The Redmond TSP was updated and adopted at the end of 2020. The Redmond TSP provides specific information regarding transportation needs within the City's LJGB to guide future transportation investment. The Redmond TSP identifies the following goals: ANUt c Transportation System Plan 4/1a/uo21 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 32m41 1Provide usafe and efficient transportation network tucomplement key economic development priority areas, the comprehensive plan, necrcuhnno/ needs, and adopted state, regional and local plans and policies. 2.Advance community and statewide emergency preparedness efforts through support of the Oregon Resiliency Plan. IProvide transportation choices and address the needs and safety of a// travelers, including people of a// ages, abilities, ethnicities, and incomes. 4.Provide comfortable, convenient and safe pedestrian and bicycle facilities for all users. 5.Provide reliable and convenient transit service toRedmond residents, its businesses, and its connection tmsurrounding cities, oswell osspecial transit options for the Oty'selderly and disabled residents. 6Ensune efficientand effective freight transportation infrastructure is developed and maintained tnsupport local and regional economic expansion and diversification consistent with City and Regional economic plans and policies, 7 ImplementMe plan inotimelyfashbmand keep ituptodate with respect to local and regional priorities. Policies explicit to Deschutes County include Policy 4.6, which states that the City will "coordinate with Deschutes County and other agencies to provide additional trail extensions throughout the community including connections beyond the city limits." Policy 7.1 calls for the City and County and other entities as applicable to work together to coordinate the design of Redmond's transportation system. Figure 10 shows existing and planned bicycle facilities within the City of Redmond UGB and proposes a shared -use path extending outside of the UGB along the SW/NW Helmholtz Way corridor. The TSPidentifies the US97South Redmond Corridor Facility Plan asaproject requihngnnu|d' agencycoordinationtoaddresstrafficcongestion,safety,|oca|accessneeds,andpedesthanand bicycle needs. While the Facility P|an'sproject studyareaex1endsbeyondtheCit/sUGBinthe south, there are no planned transportation improvements outside of the UGB. The TSPalso identifies along-range potential project torep|acetheexstingatigradeSVVOuanY Avenue/US 97 intersection with a new interchange and calls for the City, County, and ODOT to monitor transportation needs in that location over time. The TSP acknowledges that this improvement project would require Goal Exception and does not anticipate it to be reasonably likely tobefunded within the TSP'sI0'yearplanning horizon. Project Relevance: The Redmond TSP identifies transportation improvements that extend beyond the City's UGB. Improvements that extend beyond the City UGB will need to be factored into the TSP update, to the extent that these improvements 8Nmc Tm,mpvnaonSystem Plan 4/13/uou1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 33m41 have not already been incorporated into the current Deschutes County TSP or are already constructed and have been either programmed by ODOT or the City or have areasonable chance ofbeing funded by2O40. Separately, the City of Redmond and Deschutes County have entered into a Joint Management Agreement (2007) to guide and inform transportation planning efforts and annexation for area within the Redmond UGBand Urban Reserve Area. Sisters Transportation System PlaM(2010, revised 2018) The City of Sisters most recent TSP was completed in January 2010 and revised in 2018. The City has an overall transportation goal to provide and encourage a safe, convenient, and economic, transportation system. Transportation -related goals and policies include Goal 9,Compatibility, which calls for developing a transportation system "that is consistent with the Citx s[onnprehensive Plan and that coordinates with County, State, and Regional Plans." Policies under Goal 9 generally call for coordination between other jurisdictions todevelop projects thatco||ective|ybenefitapp|icab|eagencies,to collaborate so the transportation system can function as one system, and to ensure consistency between standards. There were no changes to functional classifications for roads that link Deschutes County and the City of Sisters in the TSP, nor were any new roadways proposed outside the Sisters UGB. The TSP identifies shared -use paths and single -use paths to increase connectivity throughout Sisters and improve connections to the surrounding tail system. Several of the existing or anticipated trails and shared -use paths extend into the County. Figures5'l and 6'1 in the 2018TSP illustrate path improvements. Project Relevance: Consistent with the Sister's coordination policies, the County's TSP update process will coordinate with the City on identified needed improvements on County roadways and highway intersections identified in the local TSP. Updates to the County TSP regarding trails may occur based on the TGM grant discussed below and the [ik/sexisting and planned connections. Currently, the County does not have a Park and Recreation District, nor does the County operate and maintain a trails system. La Pine Transportation System Plan (2013) The City ofLaPine adopted its TSPin20l3.The Plan focuses onpriority projects, policies, and programs to provide guidance for operating and improving the multimodal transportation system within the City's UGB. Deschutes County has jurisdiction over the majority oftheCitxsarteha|andcoUectorsystenn. Figure 3-2 in the TSP illustrates which agencies have jurisdiction on roadways within the City. The TSP states that the City should work with the County to outline a process by which urban improvements will be made to County maintained facilities. Identified items that need further 8ffimc Transportation System Plan 4/13/uo21 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 34m41 discussion include future funding sources, regular maintenance expenses, and jurisdictional transfer of improved roadways when an acceptable funding source has been identified and is in place. Roadways in the La Pine TSP are classified using arterial, collector, and local classifications. All of the classifications except for local streets apply to roads under the [ountv's jurisdiction. Table 4'4 in the Plan presents street design standards for street classifications, which include bicycle lanes, sidewalks, planter strip, pavement width, and total right-of-way. TSPTable 4'5summarizes nnu|tinnoda|projects identifiedintheP|anthatvvou|daddressexsdngor future needs within La Pine. Many ofthe projects listed inTable 4'5 call for upgrading streets in conformance with street design standards identified Table 4-4. Table 4-6 summarizes intersection improvement projects. K4anyoftheidentifiedpr jeotsareonroadsunderthe[ount/sjurisdiction. Project Relevance: The La Pine TSP calls for several roadway and intersection improvements on County -maintained roadways within the City's boundaries. In addition, the La Pine planning document also calls for discussion and coordination between the City and County for future funding sources, maintenance expenses, and jurisdictional transfers. The City and County should continue to coordinate on Deschutes County funding goals within La Pine city limits and eventual jurisdictional transfer ofCounty roads into City of La Pine's jurisdiction. Bend Airport Master Plan (2013) The Bend Municipal Airport lies to the east of the City of Bend on County -zoned and administered lands and employs close to 500 people.5 The Bend Airport Master Plan was last updated in 2013. An update to the 2013 Master Plan is currently underway and in the early stages of the process, having completed draft existing conditions exercises. The Master Plan calls for extending the runway north, extending taxiways on either side of the runway, and adding new aircraft hold areas. The runway extension would require a realignment of Powell Butte Highway and potentially Goal 3 (Agriculture) Exception. Right-of-way acquisition would be required for the northeast section of the realigned highway in order to connect to the highway, northeast ofMcGrath Road. Project Relevance: Deschutes County should again remind the City of Bend that any roadway improvements in the vicinity of the airport and any future roadway or intersection modifications needed to support future growth will require the City to apply tothe County for land use approval, including aGoal ] Exception. The Deschutes [ountyT5P should also incorporate the Bend Airport Master Plan as part ofthe TSPmodal plans. buainesses 8Wribmc Transportation System Plan 4/13/uou1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 35m41 Cascades East Transit (CET) 2040 Transit Development PlaM/2020\ The purpose of the Cascades East Transit (CET) 204OTransit Deve I opment P Ian is to create an updated regional transit master plan for Central Oregon. The Plan updates the previous Central Oregon Regional Transit Master Plan (2013) and the Bend Metropolitan Planning Organization's Public Transit Plan and Transit Corridor Land Use Assessment (2013). Because CET, which is operated by the Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council (COIC), provides public transit service to Bend and the region, transit in Central Oregon will benefit from having a single up-to-date plan to help guide itthough aplanning horizon of2O4O. The Transit Master Plan (Chapter 8), describes the Community Connector transit network, a network of fixed routes that connects riders between Bend and Redmond and the cities of Culver, La Pine, Madras, Metolius, Prineville, Sisters, and Warm Springs. Called a commuter bus service by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), this service is considered an intercity bus service. The Community Connector is open to the general public and operates Monday through Friday. The following modifications toexisting service are proposed: • Redmond -Bend Modifications toRoute 24for service between Redmond and Bend include re-routing within Bend to provide more direct service; increasing service frequency to all day and adding an evening trip; improving connections with local service in Redmond in coordination with a potential transition to f I ex/fixed- route service; and adding weekend service. • Prineville -Redmond Modifications toRoute 26for service between Prineville and Redmond include re-routing to serve the Redmond Airport and COCC; interlining with Route 24 for a one seat ride to Bend; increasing peak period trip frequency and adding an evening trip; adding midday service as shopping/medical shuttle trip; increasing local circulation in Prineville via local Dial-A-Ricle and/or Community Connector vehicles; and adding weekend service. • Sisters -Redmond Modifications toRoute 28for service between Sisters and Redmond include improving local stop branding and amenities within Sisters; increasing local circulation in Sisters via the Community Connector; and determining if smaller communities along route need service (e.g. Eagle Crest). • Sisters -Bend Modifications toRoute 29for service between Sisters and Bend include improving local stop branding and amenities within Sisters; providing stop atTunna|oand [ascadeVi||ageinBend;re'routingvvithinBend,|ikeRoute24`toprovidennoredirect service; increasing local circulation in Sisters via the Community Connector; and adding weekend service. • LoPine'Bend Modifications toRoute 3Ofor service between LaPine and Bend include identifying an improved/more efficient stop for Deschutes River Woods (e.g. Riverwoods Country Store) or alternative way toserve Deschutes River Woods; re-routing within Bend to provide more direct service todowntown; re-routing to serveSunriver; increasing frequency of weekday trips; adding a flex -route in La Pine; adding midday service via a AWdmc Transportation System Plan 4/13/2021 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 36m41 shopping/medical shuttle trip; adding weekend service; and adding service tothe High Desert Museum and Lava Lands Visitor Center (potentially seasonally based). New transit services in Deschutes County are also proposed, they are: • Redmond Airport Service New service tothe Redmond Airport includes modifying Route 26 between the Redmond Hub and a Redmond Airport mobility hub — including a stop at Redmond COCC — and supplementing Route 24 by a local route connection between the Redmond Hub and Redmond Airport, serving early morning departures and afternoon arrivals. • SunriverIervice Anew Route 3lprovides service between LaPine and Sunriver, connecting employees to jobs in Sunriver, with stops atthe Sunriver Starbucks and La Pine Fire Station on Huntington. An alternative tothis route is to modify Route]O. • ShoppinglMedical Shuttle Service — A new shopping/medical shuttle service blends features ofdemand-responsive services and the Community Connector routes and should be implemented inthe following communities asa midday service on existing routes: Sisters — Bend, Prineville — Redmond, LaPine — Bend (including Sunriver\.These new shopper/medical shuttles can provide service to new markets: Crooked River Ranch, Juniper Canyon, Deschutes River Woods, Warm Springs; Sinnnashoand other outlying communities Section 9.2 Transit -Supportive Strategies includes recommendations for jurisdictions in the CET service area to assist in implementing the Plan. The section includes recommended policy language and development provisions to including in local plans and codes. The Plan also includes specific guidance to each of the jurisdictions within the service area in implementing policies and development requirements consistent with the region'stransit objectives. Implementation recommendations are found in Local Agency Overviews and Implementation Plans, in Technical Appendix Volume 1. Recommendations specific to Deschutes County include that the County review existing, locally -adopted comprehensive plan policies to determine consistency with model transit policy language and update development requirement to include transit -supportive code language. Project Relevance: The TSP will reflect the transit service enhancements in Deschutes County, as well as be consistent with [ET Master Plan policy and recommendations regarding transit planning in the region. Implementation recommendations from the Development Plan that were specific to Deschutes County will be considered as part of the implementation phase of the TSP update. Central Oregon Rail PlaM/2009\ The purpose of the Central Oregon Rail Plan planning effort was to develop a common regional strategy for Crook, Jefferson, and Deschutes counties to address various safety and congestion issues associated with roadway/railway at -grade crossings and to enhance freight mobility. The reportaddressesvariousrai|'re|atedsafety,congestion,freightnnobi|ity,andecononnic development issues for central Oregon. The findings and recommendations are mostly focused around Deschutes County and Bend, but also include the following: H&mc Transportation System Plan 4/13/2021 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 37m41 • Existing at -grade railroad crossings high priority locations for bridging existing at -grade crossings for the following locations: o BNSF/COPR Lines (Prineville Jct)/O'Neil Highway (Deschutes County/Redmond), ~$l8M o BNSFLine / Airport Way (Deschutes [ount»/Rednnond\,~$l4K4 o BNSFLine / Cooley Road (Deschutes Countv/Bend),~$24K4 o BNSFLine / Reed Market Road (Deschutes [ounty/Bend\,~$lOK4 o BNSFLine / Baker Road (Deschutes Countv/Bend\,~$36K4 o BNSFLine /US97(Deschutes County/La Pine),~$3lM • Freight Mobility and Rail Service implementation strategies, including: o Take advantage of and maximize opportunities with the area's shortline railroad, [OPR, including industrial sites along the line, and freight terminal options such as at the Prineville Freight Depot and at the COPR interchange with BNSF at Prineville ]unction. o For the Class lunit train operating model, ensure adequate on- and off -site support track along the BN3F mainline, and seek orcreate compatible (critical mass cargo) markets. o Seek agreement by shippers in Central Oregon to use a single designated intermodal complex. • Discussion and recommendations for feasibility of a passenger or commuter rail in Central Oregon. Project Relevance: While the report is mainly focused on enhancements within the incorporated jurisdictions inCrook, Jefferson, and Deschutes Counties, the County may play role in implementation strategies, including future multi -party agreements for future passenger and freight rail services or consolidation of at- graderai|crossings. Cascade Lakes Highway Corridor and Bicycle Facilities Plan (2019) Deschutes County and the Forest Service applied for Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) funding in2Ol6for aplanning study. The scope ofthe planning project was to study the corridor and identify opportunities for safety improvements. As described in the Plans' Problem Statement, the following problems were identified through "discussion with project partners,researchonexistingconditions,conversationsvvithcorridor users, and [ountyinfornnation:" • Congestion, especially /nthe northern section ofthe corridor • Parking onside ofroadway which can cause safety issues • Sight distance /scompromised /nsome locations, due togrades, curves, and vegetation • Speeding, especially /nstraightaways • Unclear s/gnogeorlack ofadvanced s/gnoge • Enforcement ofspeeding and parking violations /slimited M&ic Transportation System Plan 4/13/uou1 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 38m41 * For some users, low awareness ofcyclists and pedestrians The goals of the project were to l\ improve safety for all users of the corridor; and 2\ provide a positive visitor experience. The existing conditions analysis described conditions throughout the corridor and site -specific issues, primarily related totrai|heads. The improvements recommended in the plan are shown in Figure 3 and summarized below: • Implement the "oreen"-co edVeryLowandLowoostimprovements. • Collect vehicle and bicycle traffic data (counts, turning movements, and speed if possible) to help determine the impacts of the Wilderness Strategy and to provide more information on the viability ofthe "yellow" -coded improvements. Key locations for traffic data are: o Study Begin /K4P2l.9O\ o Todd Lake Intersection o Green Lakes Intersection o Devils Lake Intersection o Elk Lake Resort Intersection o S.Century Drive Intersection • Collect counts during peak season, in 2019 (prior to Wilderness Strategy going into effect), 2020 (after Wilderness Strategy), then every 2 years for short term and every 5 years for long term. • There are no preferred shoulder widths recommended because additional traffic data is needed to validate the use and need throughout the corridor. Four options with varying costs were provided in the plan. Project Relevance: The improvements recommended should be reevaluated and incorporated inthe list ofimprovements inthe TSP,where feasible. AWribmc Transportation System Plan 4/13/2ou1 Technical Memorandum 1: Plans & Policy Review 39 of 41 Figure 1. Cascade Lakes Highway Corridor and Bicycle Facilities Plan Recommendations Relative Cost Near -Term (0-5 years} NW, Transit Pi gut Praject Timeline to I m ple ment M id -Term 0-10 years) hitfL7: Additional congestion, managerrientATS soinlions MitWiden to 511011116213 from begin through Elk take 'with TIfir101 areas of realignment Rita Widen to 5' shouldeis frorn begin throw , Elk take with minor areas of realignment ti113: Widen to 5' shoulders from begin through Elk 1akri with jno areas of real igrunent Mi4N. ewpass of existing Ce yds Lake alignment Long-Te rm (10+ years} LF12: Milder', to 5° shy klers froin k Deschutes County Transportation SDC Ordinance and Methodology (2013) System Development Charges (SDCs) are one-time fees imposed on new development, at the time of development, to recover a fair share of existing and planned facilities that provide capacity to serve growth. Consistent with state statutes, SDCs are the sum of two components: Aktfutei8c6141RisaRe&lAaltilff°64951-ArY4RigiABrafifAdix C - Transportation System Plan 4/13/2021 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 40m41 • Areimbursement fee, design torecover costs associated with capital improvements a|readx constructed or under construction, and • An improvement fee designed to recover costs for future construction projects. In 2013, Deschutes County revised its SDC methodology and rates. The rate was revised to $3,758 perpeak'hourthp,andisinc|usiveareinnbursennentfeeandadnninistrativerecoverycharge.The rate increases annually pursuant to an annual percentage increase or decrease in the construction cost index. The SDC ordinance establishes a Transportation SDC Fund for gathering fees and distributing funds for capital improvements that provide for the increased capacity necessitated by new development. The SDCordinance also establishes provisions for providing SOCcredits and areview and appeals process. The methodology calculates an improvement fee based on the number of PIVI peak hour trips added to the transportation system as a result of new development or redevelopment. The methodology does not include a separate reimbursement fee. The methodology includes updates to the Capital Improvement Project |ist,DeschutesCountyTransportationSDCRateSheet,andotherpo|icy considerations. The SD[ rates are based on land uses found in the |TE and are slightly different than those found inthe 2008methodology. Project Relevance: Transportation SDCs contribute funds to transportation infrastructure inthe County, including capital improvement program /C|P\ projects. The SD[ rates are determined in reference to the TSP, which identifies transportation needs. This TSP update process will reevaluate SDC costs and capacity estimates. Deschutes County Road Moratorium (Resolution 218) Since 2006, Deschutes County has been operating under a road moratorium in which the County has suspended the acceptance of new County Roads (local road classification only) for maintenance until such time that road funding is deemed adequate to accept additional roads for maintenance. The resolution suspends the establishment of Local Improvement Districts unless contained within a Special Road District (District) or incorporated homeowners association (HOA) and maintenance responsibility is assured by the District or HOA. With the moratorium in place, new development, through platting or other dedication instrument, creates Local Access Roads which are dedicated to the public, but not accepted for maintenance by Deschutes County. County code at 17.16.105 requires a maintenance agreement or covenant to be in place for new roads platted through the subdivision process. Project Relevance: The TSP will evaluate Resolution 2009-118 and provide guidance to the County Board of Commissioners related to the relevance of the resolution in the future. H&mo TranspoitationavmvmPwo 4/13/2021 Technical Memorandum 1:Plans & Policy Review 41m41 TyaM8p0ytafiQM Growth Management Grant to Update the TuMM@lQ C»MMMMWMifw Plan and Implement the Rural Trails Portion Ofthe Sisters Country Vision Implementation Plan (ongoing) The County received a $75,000 grant from the ODOT/DLCD TGIVI program to update the 2012 Tumalo Community Plan and amend the County TSP map to incorporate various proposed trails and connectors identified in the Sisters Country Vision Implementation Plan (2019). The Tumalo Update will emphasize gaps in the bicycle and sidewalk system in Tunna|o as well crossing US 20.The update will also look at potential transit stops inTunna|o. The rural trails portion will concentrate on potential bicycle, pedestrian and equestrian trails and connections between Sisters and Bend, Redmond, and Tumalo. With the cooperation of the USFS, several of these may be identified as future routes on the Deschutes National Forest. Project Relevance: The TGIVII grant may result in amendments to the BiGoals and Policies section of the TSP. The TSP update should monitor the TGIVI grant analysis and incorporate relevant outcomes. O&mc Transportation System Plan 4/1s/zoz1 tgAitiVAIVAIVAIVO Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan MEMORANDUM Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2023 To: Chris Doty, Cody Smith, and Peter Russell, Deschutes County From: Matt Kittelson and Julia Kuhn, Kittelson & Associates Subject: Deschutes County Transportation System Plan INTRODUCTION This Public Involvement Plan (PIP) will guide stakeholder and public engagement throughout the Deschutes County Transportation System Plan (TSP) update. The PIP reflects a commitment from Deschutes County to coordinate and carry out meaningful outreach activities and to actively engage with interested stakeholders throughout the project. PROJECT OVERVIEW AND STUDY AREA The Deschutes County TSP is the transportation element of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan. Last updated in 2012, the TSP sets a vision for the transportation system by providing goals, polices, and projects that address existing needs and support anticipated economic development and growth over the next 20 years. The Deschutes County TSP addresses the needs of people walking, riding bikes, taking transit, and driving in the areas outside the incorporated cities of Bend, Redmond, Sisters, and La Pine. Each of the cities have a TSP that is coordinated with the County, including how streets and pathways interface at the edge of the Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB) for each. In addition, the Deschutes County TSP Update will include coordination with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to help define the needs of the state highway facilities over the next 20 years, including US 97, US 20, OR 31, OR 242, and OR 126. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PURPOSE AND GOALS The TSP public involvement program will provide guidance on how the County will share information and gather input on the needs and possible ideas for facilities that help people walk, ride bikes, take transit, drive, and transport goods and services. This program will rely on active engagement and a robust outreach effort to a wide variety of stakeholders and interested parties. To achieve these objectives, the County intends to: Communicate complete, accurate, understandable, and timely information to the public throughout the project. Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan hechgioy\x8mmmondvmIDeschutes County Transportation System Plan • Actively engage residents, businesses, and organizations throughout the County to gain feedback on existing conditions, needs, deficiencies, and potential solutions. w Collaborate with interagency partners. w Comply with Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VI requirements and ensuring that the public involvement process is consistent with applicable state and federal laws and requirements, and is sensitive to local policies, goals and objectives. UUTUx,"U Key messages will continue toberefined and expanded asthe TSPprogresses, more information isknown, and the need for more detailed public information grows. Initially, the County will inform stakeholders that: ° The TSP is being updated to address existing needs and support growth consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan over the next ZOyears. • The TSP will include collaboration with all of the partner agencies, including ODOT,Bend, Redmond, Sisters, La Pine, Cascades East Transit, and other local, state, and federal entities to identify policies, projects, and programs to improve the transportation system within the county. • The TSP will be guided by an advisory committee composed of people who live and work in the county and byatechnical acommittee staffed byagency partners. m The TSP will address the needs of people driving, walking, riding bikes, and moving goods and services for the areas outside the UGBs of Bend, Redmond, Sisters, and La Pine. � The TSP website can be used to sign up for project updates: www.deschutescountvtsp.com. The website is also where you can get the latest information and provide input. N� �� U U The County will engage a variety of potentially affected and/or interested individuals, residents, businesses and organizations, such as: ° Deschutes County staff and elected officials w ODOT staff w City ofBend w City ofRedmond • City of Sisters � Local businesses and business organizations • Area residents • Bike and pedestrian interests ° Freight interests ° [ET w City ofLaPine 0 Tourism and recreation interests, including • Deschutes County Bicycle and Pedestrian the High Desert Museum Advisory Committee (BPAC) 0 Local state parks • Bureau nfLand Management 0 Bend —LaPine School District • USForest Service 0 Redmond School District w Accessibility groups Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan �cchgka\Moxnorz,v|vn.IDeschutes County Transportation System Plan 0 Emergency services providers * Local media PROJECT DECISION -MAKING STRUCTURE The decision -making structure for the TSP establishes a broad -based support for the planning process.All of the activities, engagement and technical work will beguided hvaProject K8anagennentTeann(PKAT) composed of County staff. The PMT believes the best way to build support is to have an open, inclusive process. The PMT will compile all of the recommendations from the public, agency stakeholders and technical work and advise the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners (Board of Commissioners), which is the pro]ect'sfinal decision maker. To support development of a credible decision -making process, the Advisory Committee (AQ and Agency Partner Coordination Committee (APCQ will be appointed by the Board of Commissioners to provide community and technically based recommendations and guidance. The AC and APCC will develop recommendations to the PMT. If an AC or APCC recommendation is not followed, the PMT will specifically note it. All AC and APCC meetings will be open to the public and include a public comment period. Exhibit I reflects the advisory and decision making process that will guide the TSP. Exhibit l'Decision-Making Structure Deschutes County Board ofCommissioners Project � -�'` �� �� Roles /� Responsibilities �^� Public / ��j��(-" n��������/(��������,���/����������`(����(������/�x�`����|���: ��4/^l�� � r Involvement | `��emen`* The following are the key project memberand their roles in implementing and overseeing the public involvement program: Deschutes County Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgioy\x8mmmondvmIDeschutes County Transportation System Plan • Chris Doty, Road Department Director. Chris serves asthe project manager for the T3P'providing key oversight and strategic visioning. • Cody Smith, County Engineer. Cody oversees engineering projects vvithinthe[nuntyandprovides an important link between the long-range planning of the TSP and near -term work the engineering department isengaged with. • Peter Russell, Senior Transportation Planner. Peter is the key transportation planning expert for the County and provides technical review, policy guidance, and key input on transportation needs and solutions within the County. = Whitney Hale, Communications Director. Whitney is the main point of contact for the County and provides guidance and direction onpublic engagement activities. • Matt Kitte|mon,Consultant Team Project Manager. Matt isleading the consultant team and providing oversight unthe p ject'soutreachstrategy. • Julia Kuhn, Consultant Team Project PhncipmL]uUaprovideskevstrotegicinputandovenightfor the project. • Carrie Theus, Consultant Team Lead Analyst. Carrie will lead operational and safety analysis for the � � UU �n U � �� m� U � Table I summarizes the engagement and informational tools and activities that will be used throughout the project to engage and inform potentially affected interests, stakeholders and the broader public. Table 1'Public Engagement Tools Tool/Activity Description Anticipated Schedule Stakeholder Database Adatabase that will include potentially affected interests inthe County, stakeholders, interested parties, and meeting attendees. The database will be updated after public events and will track those individuals and groups who express interest inthe project. Thedatabasevvi|| beused for notification ofthe online open houses, project nevvsandoutreach materials. / Deschutes County Ongoing Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgioy\x8mmmondvmIDeschutes County Transportation System Plan Tool/Activity Description Lead Anticipated Schedule Project Website The projectvveb»ite, vvvvvv.deochuteocountytop.cornisthe Kjtte|son Available throughout the TSPupdate process primary portal for public information and isanimportant tool tocollect public input. The site will include project description, aninteractive comment mapping tool, project documents (maps, reports, graphics),and all public meeting information and materials. Social Media Project information and updates will be shared inatimely fashion onthe [nunty's social media channels. County Ongoing Public Comment Log Public comments (and responses) collected atpublic events and online will be|ogged. Kitte|son Ongoing Newsletters Two newsletters will be created to int/oduceand inform the public outreach activities. Newsletters will beennai|ed to individuals nnthe stakeholder database. Kitte|son& County Prior toeach public meeting Stakeholder Ennai|s |naddition toennai|ed newsletters, the project team will send uptotwo additional ennai|stothe project mailing list to provide project updates. Kitte|sun As determined by Deschutes County Advisory Committee The Advisory Committee will meet upto three times toprovide community and technical review and toprovide guidance onthe Project. Members ufthe committee will be recruited from interested parties and participants inPublic Meeting #l. Kitte|son Meeting l:August 2O2l Meeting 2:December 202l Agency Partner Coordination Committee The Agency Advisory Committee will meet uptofour times toprovide technical review and regional input and coordination toprovide guidance onthe Project. Kitte|sun Meeting l:January 2l, 2021 Meeting 2:April 202l Meeting ]: August 202l Meeting 4:December 2O2l 2 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgioy\x8mmmondvmIDeschutes County Transportation System Plan Tool/Activity Description Anticipated Schedule Public Meetings The project will host public meetings at two key points in the process: Meeting lwill introduce the project and solicit public input onexisting conditions, needs, and opportunities. Meeting Zwill provide information and solicit feedback onpossible solutions, projects, and programs. Adetailed meeting plan and promotional fliers will bedeveloped for each public Kittelson Meeting 1:April 2O21 Meeting 2: August 2021 Media Outreach Press releases will bedistributed atkey points in the project to local media sources Deschutes County Ongoing a ox U n � w� 10 The PK8TvviUevaluate the public involvement process onanongoing basis todetermine the effectiveness of the outreach effort. At key milestones, the PMTwill assess how well the program is effectively engaging the public. As part of this review, the team will also consider the following measurable objectives: w Number and diversity ofparticipants attending meetings orevents. m Number of website hits or downloads occurring during a specific time period. • Number ofsocial media engagements. • Number ofpeople who have signed upfor the project nnai|ing|isL • Number ofproject connnnentsveceived(phone,ennai|,connnnentcards,on|ine). • Whether the comments are relevant tnthe project (indicatesproject understanding). • How project decisions have been modified because ofpublic input. The PNO'will review the public engagement plan with the Deschutes County Board ofCommissioners prior to finalizing for use in the TSP. This plan will be shared with the Agency Partner Coordination Committee in ]anuary2OZl. s Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan 04,0114,6114,0114,611Vei Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan DRAFT METHODOLOGY MEMORANDUM Date: Thursday, March 11, 2021 To: Chris Doty, Peter Russell, and Cody Smith, Deschutes County From: Matt Kittelson, Julia Kuhn, and Carrie Theus Project: Deschutes County TSP Update Subject: Methodology Memorandum This memorandum documents the methodology and key assumptions to be used in preparation of the existing and future conditions and alternatives analyses for the Deschutes County Transportation System Plan (TSP) Update. The methodologies included in this memorandum are based on guidance provided in the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Transportation System Plan Guidelines and the Analysis Procedures Manual (APM). The methodology and assumptions described in this memorandum will be used to help identify potential gaps and deficiencies in the transportation system related to: • Future capacity needs along key roadways within the County; • Roadway connectivity needs for people driving, emergency services, access to tourism, and the transport of goods and services; • Traffic safety needs along key County facilities; and, • Facilities and performance of the bicycle and pedestrian network. This information will serve as a baseline for identifying a list of existing needs (gaps and deficiencies), identifying and evaluating potential solutions (projects, programs, policies, pilot projects, and studies), and developing a prioritized list of improvements for the TSP update. The remainder of this memorandum summarizes the following: • Location of the roadway segments where safety and capacity analyses will be conducted; • Methodology for developing vehicular analyses volumes for existing and future conditions; • Methodology for identifying roadway segments that are nearing and/or exceeding capacity; • Crash analyses procedures; and, • Pedestrian and bicycle analyses parameters. Study Area The TSP update will address the transportation system needs associated with County -operated facilities in areas that are outside the Bend, Redmond, Sisters, and La Pine Urban Growth Boundaries (UGBs). Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Transportation facilities that are operated and maintained by ODOT, the Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and the four cities are not addressed. Figure reflects the roadway segments where capacity analysis wiUberevevvedaspartnftheTSP.The County has collected daily traffic counts at many of these locations each year, beginning in 2011 through 20l0.Totheextentpossib|e'the20l0countsvvi||beusedtodeve|npyear^2020proxyvo|urnes^tnrefect existing conditions. Traffic Capacity ^ , ���/ / »�� `_������('� ` o n��\/�f�\ r � For the purposes of performing a screening level review of both potential roadway capacity as well as connectivity needs along county roadways, we propose to apply the "Simplified Highway Capacity Method for the Highway Performance System" that was developed for use by the Federal Highway Administration.' The rural two-lane highway methodology within this report can be used as one of several helpful tools that can be used to help assess the future needs of the County's roadway system. For reference purposes, the methodology draws from the applicable roadway characteristics to assess a level of service, including: o Daily roadway volumes; o Posted speed; o Generalized terrain information; and, o Percentage nftrucks. However, for non -mountainous roadways, the methodology does not reflect any measurable differences in expected level of service for terrain and truck percentages. As an example, level -of -service "Y corresponds to the following: o PostedSoeedof45nni|espe/hour-dai|yvo|unlesof|essthanl3/)UOvehides o Posted Speed of 50 miles per hour - daily volumes of less than 19,000 vehicles o Posted Speed of 55 miles per hour - daily volumes of less than 24,000 vehicles We will use the level -of -service "D" as the metric for which to identify potential changes to the roadway system. This metric can be matched with an assessment of various roadways versus the TSP goals and identified roadway connectivity and/or specific roadway projects neededtusupportcondnuedecononnic development, emergency services, freight needs, resiliency efforts, etc. I .fhwadotgov/poUcyinformation/pubs/p|l8003/hpms cappdf Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive La hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Exi-stingYear Traffic Volumes With the ongoing COV|D pandennicand its effect on "typical" traffic patterns, we propose toapply a two - percent growth factor to the 2019 traffic volumes on most County roadways to approximate 2020 daily volumes. We will coordinate with County staff to identify any specific facilities where a higher growth may be appropriate relative to 2019 counts. Further, given the planning -level screening analyses that we propose to use, we are not intending to apply any seasonal adjustment factors to daily traffic volumes along County roadways. Forecast Year Traffic Volume Development The 2012Courty TSPrelied nntravel forecasts from the travel demand model developed byODOT's Transportation Planning Analysis Unit (TPAU). This model has not been updated with current land use information for existing conditions or future analysis years so we instead reviewed ODOT's future highway volume table for potential growth rates toapply tnthe ^cxisting^volumes tnapproximate year 2O40 conditions. This review revealed that a two percent per year (linear, non -compounded) rate could be used to reflect future growth along County roadways. This review was based on several locations along the state highway system within Deschutes County, such as: o U597atthe Jefferson County/Deschutes County line -l.9percent per year; o US07north ofl'tStreet inLaPine -l.8percent per year; o Powell Butte Highway west of Deschutes County/Crook County line - 3.2 percent per year; o McKenzie Highway west ofSisters -l.8percent per year; o McKenzie -Bend Highway near Cline Falls Highway - 2.1 percent per year; and, o SantiornHighway west ofSisters -0.4percent per year. Unless otherwise identified by the County at specific roadway segments, we will apply a linear two -percent per year growth rate for screening purposes. Crash - �� | V �_���/` xn[��/s��s � The County completed its Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) for the areas outside the City UGBs in 2019. As part of the TSAP, all roads within unincorporated areas of the county were screened for the need for near -term or longer -term safety -oriented changes. Through that work, high priority improvement needs as well as systemic investment strategies were identified. Long-term concepts which may require further refinement are also identified. As part of the TSP, we propose to include key outcomes of the TSAP, including both the near -term and longer- termprojects identified. We do not propose any additional quantitative review of crash history and/or crash countermeasures. We do, however, propose to evaluate the potential for incorporation of the safety -oriented projects into projects being considered to address other TSP goals. Locations where such analysis would be useful will be identified through the existing and future conditions analysis. dun Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Analysis e Cycli j a Transit Options The analysis of facilities for people walking, riding bikes and/or taking transit is anticipated to focus on the following: o Using available GIS data, field observations and online mapping, qualitatively identify key gaps within the bicycle system connecting unincorporated areas of the County with the City's UGBs as well as key recreational areas. o Within the Terrebonne, Deschutes River Woods, and Tumalo communities, qualitatively identify key gaps within the sidewalk and/or trail system, particularly related to connecting residents with school bus stops. o Incorporate the Central Eastside Transit (CET) Master Plan recommendations. lr corporation of Other Plans We plan to incorporate by reference a number of ongoing and/or recently adopted plans into the TSP update for the County. Examples of these plans include, but are not limited to: o Redmond TSP; o Bend TSP; o Sisters TSP; o La Pine TSP; o Deschutes County Transportation Safety Action Plan; o Redmond and Bend Airport Master Plans; o Applicable elements of local refinement plans, corridor plans, etc.; o Interchange Area Management Plans (e.g., Baker Road, Lower Bridge Way), etc. Next St l^ We look forward to collaborating with you on the next steps and receiving your feedback on the methodology and key assumptions outlined in this memorandum. Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 7 Comprehensive Plan Appendikt Transportation stem Plan ,e, tgAitiVAIVAIVAIVO Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan �U��U ��U��U����x����U�U^���������������� FINAL EXISTING un��� CONDITIONS xv.�u�~� �� FUTURE n ��U�u_ u�m_x_��~� MEMORANDUM Date: October 1'2021 To Chris Doty, Peter Russell, and Cody Smith, Deschutes County From: Matt Kitte|a}n,Julia Kuhn, Ashleigh Ludwig, and Carrie Theus Project: Deschutes County TSPUpdate Subject: Existing Conditions & Future Needs Memorandum This memorandum provides an overview of the existing and future transportation needs in Deschutes County. The needs were identified through feedback from the County and partner agency staff and by technical analyses of roadways, intersections, bike facilities, transit, walking routes, and transportation safety. Most of the inventory and analysis results are presented in figures and tabular form with supplemental text provided, as needed, to explain the illustrated information.The information presented herein will form the basis of a series of transportation alternatives that can address the identified needs. _����� �/_ � � ��������� �����`���s Existing Conditions & Future Needs Memorandum O Table ofContents 0 01 | Plan Area l 0J|Land Use and Population 2 Land Use J Activity Centers 2 Population and Demographics 5 03|Roadway System Inventory 7 Roadway System Characteristics 7 04|Roadway Capacity lQ Analysis Methodology and Performance Standards 79 Existing Roadway Traffic Volumes and Capacity Analyses 79 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo'o1r Comprehensive Plan Appendix o Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 05|Crash Data Analysis 22 Crash Review 22 Potential Safety Needs 35 06 | k4u|tinnoda|Transportation Analysis 35 Existing Bicycle Facilities 35 Existing Pedestrian Facilities 36 County Bikeway Standards 37 Public Transit System 42 Rail System 46 Air Transportation System 46 07|Bridge, Marine, and Pipeline System 47 Bridge System 47 Pipeline 50 Water 50 08|Summary ofNeeds 50 Roadway System Inventory Needs 50 Roadway Capacity Needs 50 Safety Needs 57 AWu/tinnVda/Needs 57 Bridge Needs 52 Appendices 52 i `/ ^ / ^�:��K� 8(z�� �1�| � � . The TSP addresses transportation needs in Deschutes County except within the Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB)ofthe incorporated cities ofBend 'Rednnond'Sistec�and LaPin��each ofvvhon�has its ovvnTSPs.The County TSPfocuses onthe prinnaryroadvvays,bicycle facilities, pedestrian facilities, and transit facilities serving people in the County. The TSP also addresses the rail, air, marine, and pipeline systems. Figure I illustrates the location nfthe County within Central Oregon. Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan A�V� �M �� �*` ��� ��� ��� Q[�� � �{��� u� | Land u �» r r « � The existing land use patterns, economic development opportunities, natural and protected resources, and population and job forecasts help inform the needs of people traveling within and to the County today and in the year 2040. This data can help provide for a discussion of opportunities and constraints related to future transportation system alternatives. For reference purposes, the [nuntv's Zoning Map isreflected inAppendix A.Development regulations for each of the County's zones are provided in the Deschutes County Development Code. Asshown, much ofthe County lands are zoned for forest use orfarm use with rural -oriented residential, industrial and commercial lands designated near the incorporated cities within the County. In addition to land use, the protection of natural resources can also help inform the TSP alternatives. A map in Appendix A reflects the known wetlands as of March 2021. Activity Centers Connecting people walking, driving, riding bikes and taking transit to key "activity centers" in the County can also help to inform gaps inthe existing transportation system as well potential changes to the existing system to help provide comfortable and convenient connections for people traveling. A map illustrating some of the key areas within the County is reflected in Appendix A. As shown in the Appendix, some of key areas for consideration include: • Smith Rock State Park, which is located in the northeast corner of the County, east of Terrebonne along the Crooked River. = Peter Skene Ogden State Scenic Viewpointwhich is located in the northeast corner of the County (along the Jefferson [ounty|ine). • Cline Falls State Scenic Viewportwhich is located on the Deschutes River west of Redmond. • Tunna|uState Park which isalong the Deschutes River north ofBend. • LaPine State Park which isalong the Deschutes River north ofLaPine. w Newberry National Volcanic Monument which is located inside of the Deschutes National Forest south ofBend. • The High Desert Museum which islocated south ofBend onUS97 • Mt Bachelor Ski Resort which is located in the southwest part of the County w Multiple parks and camping areas • Multiple golf courses and destination resorts • Schools and civic uses within Tervebonne,Sunriver,and Turno|o. • Badlands Wilderness approximately lS miles east ofBend on US2O = Trailheads on Cascades Lakes Highway for the Three Sisters Wilderness area Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan echnica Merl Deschutes County Transportation System Plan • High Cascade Lakes along Cascades Lakes Highway. • Newberry National Monument off of Paulina Road 3 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 060.641101a4„, 4,414811 40111, 4011'N TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN , Parks Water UGBs 14, 'Po 1.1.1 2 2 Sisters U GB 4r) u_ F.8 40 1 x 12 12 86L4R14/4LLow SKYLAIN 4)6, :971 La 'Pine UGB mAS TEN RO to„NER eRlDGE 0 12 12 12 12 I or uu A Redmond UrriiB I 12 11) 1,,1J (r) .,YMORRILL ROO gapi,LEA MARKET RD Bend U GB 1, DODEs D RiDKARD RD PAULANA LAKE RO STOOKEY RD FORD RD 12 12 ZS' ft: MERRILL 13r) ro '?9 o i C3 m T , al 1, C.;C'- 4- ,>- Cr 1 1,6 ,'§' al 0 I 0 -Cr.-!)" 0 I H z 1 0 .-------,---. ),, -1, ')'.. i.,.. t9, 0 e I z ...-N 0 12 C.,‘ 06 12 '.0 -'- D co NERSHALL RD Z 0 Z 1.1.1 0 0 8 Miles 0 12 12 12 12 12 12 Data Source: ODOT, Oregon State Parks, Deschutes County Figure Plan Area Deschutes County, Oregon Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan hechgie\MemorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Population and Demographics Overall growth in population and changes in demographics will inform the TSP alternatives. By Oregon Revised Statute 195.034, incorporated cities and counties are directed to formulate and adopt coordinated population projections. Tab|e1shuvvsthe2014and2019cerbfiedpopu|ationestinnatesasvve||asthe population projections for 2020 through 2040. Table I illustrates the total County and incorporated City populations. Based onthe Certified Population Estimates prepared by Portland State University (PS0Center for Population Research, Deschutes County isanticipated toexperience apopulation growth ofapproximately 2.2 percent overall and 1.0 percent in the incorporated areas within the County. The anticipated growth in population will help inform the calculation of year 2040 traffic volumes using the County transportation facilities. Table 1. Population Projections Dhu1eDchu&sCour� ��� ��� Cy� ��o Year ^ ~ ~ ^ ~County (Total) (Unincorporated Areas) Bend Redmond Sisters La Pine Certified Population Estimates Projected Population Estimate Forecasts For reference purposes, the total population per block group within the incorporated areas of the County are shown in Appendix A (as reflected in 2019 American Community Survey (ACS)). As shown, the largest population blocks are located near the Urban areas within the County. In addition tothe overall population estimates, information demographicdata can help inform transportation needs specific to minority groups, elderly, youth, low-income populations, disabled persons, limited -English proficiency households, and for those who do not have access to a private vehicle or choose not to use one. Demnogn:pNcinforrnotinnottheb|ockgnoup|eve|forthe"transportationdisadvantaged"pnpu|ationsvvithin the County isreflected inAppendix A. Key findings related to the demographic information can help identify potential changes to the transportation system to address the needs and safety of all travelers in mind, including people of all ages and abilities. As reflected in Appendix A, the demographic information revealed the following: s Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmvmxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgie\MemorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan • The areas with the highest percentages ofyouth are primarily located inTunna|oand Tenebonneas well as adjacent to the Bend and Redmond UGBs. Connections for school students between their homes, the local community schools, and school bus stops will be considered as part of the needs analysis for the TSP. • The highest percentage of elderly populations are located in the Sunriver area and adjacent to the Sisters, Redmond, and La Pine UGBs. Coordination with Cascades East Transit (CET) service and master planning toserve these residents will beincorporated into the TSP. w The highest proportion of minority residents are in Tumalo and outside of the Redmond and Sisters UG8. ° The areas with the highest percentage ofhouseholds below poverty are inthe southwest corner of the County outside of the La Pine UGB and in the northeast corner of the County in Terrebonne. • The highest concentration of population with disabilities are in the rural areas around La Pine' Redmond, and Sisters UGBs. Coordination with Cascades East Transit (CET) service and master planning toserve these residents will beincorporated into the TSP. • The highest concentration of households with limited English is located in the rural northwest corner of the County outside of Sisters. Other areas with a high concentration are outside of the La Pine and Bend UGBs. w The [ounty'spercent ofhouseholds without vehicles isapproximately 2%.The 2Ol9State'spercent of households without vehicles is approximately 8%. The areas with the highest concentration of households without vehicles at 5-15% are to the west of La Pine and to the southeast of Redmond. k4u|tinnoda| options, including rural transit, will be important considerations for these areas. Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan �� a\/ � `' s���� � � K�����{��� . - � TheCountv's roadway system serves people driving, freight needs, people taking transit, and emergency response. This section summarizes the key findings associated with the existing roadway system and an identification ofgaps inthis system needed toserve travelers. �oadvVay Syst&roChaKacte[istics The following section summarizes roadway jurisdictions, functional classification, street characteristics, and freight routes for County and State roadways. ROADWAY JURISDICTION Aashown inFigure ], the majority of roadways within the County are owned and operated bvthe County, US Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), or ODOT. In March 2021, the County maintained approxirnate|y4l percent of the lane miles of roadways within the unincorporated areas, ODOT maintained approximately 10 percent, and the US Forest Service/BLM maintained approximately 12 percent. Local access roads, which are roads that the public has right to use, but are not maintained by ODOT, Deschutes County or any other government agency, comprise approximately 18 percent. The remaining 19 percent were maintained byavariety ofcommunity and private entities. OREGON HIGHWAY PLAN (OHP) DESIGNATIONS Per the Oregon Highway Plan, the state highways within the County are primarily designated as either statewide highways (i.e., US 97 and US 26) or district highways (i.e., the O'Neill Highway (OR 370)). The statewide highways are intended to serve the needs of travelers within Central Oregon as well as the overall state of Oregon. The district facilities are primarily intended to connect people within the County and the Central Oregon Region. Figure 3 shows the highways in the County and their corresponding OHP classification. The TSP alternatives will focus primarily on the county roadways as well as the intersection of those roadways with the state facilities. The classification of the state facilities at these key connection points can help inform transportation system alternatives intended to address the needs of local, regional and statewide travel. Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan ,x4401.0440, , TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN 5, ,rn ki-ARVI/A<4,-„ -466"m Prne UGB „,„.„,..„„,„„„„„ ° -Redmond —1 UGB , 6 Z. 0 0 0 ERRILL RD 0 ;GI 8 Miles State Roads County Roads BLM/Forest Service Local Access Road Private Unknown er Parks Water Data Source: Deschutes County Figure 2 Functional Roadway Classifications Deschutes County, Oregon Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan .4466000,, ,4170110' ,fikkROYIk?,,, 4w* TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Statewide Regional District LL f 1 4/ 0QQ -LOI/1/ /44 I ti— ANBER DMDBE 0 z 8 oi cc 0 CU 144 ,r-Ltil- S te rs (JOB c'4NRo Parks Water (.71 Redmond need cc UGB ciFS) cc ci) i LS' I CD Z 1.1.I 1 0, VL4R ' "NV 0 '''S'‘' 40" I ALVA Bend UGB " dB DODDS RD MCKARD RD PAOLINA LAKE RD MARKET RD w 0 0 fr- o F0rflRD frfr 0, 0, 0 111 Hmernwaamtvom%.,,,, C,N ro ?,9 m ,,-• 0, 0 ( NEFRSHALL RD FREDERICK BUTTE RD MERRILL q 01 1 0 1-- z 0 77 .4--' D 0 N4,I,, ''',,,,,,, N. - Q tr 8 Milni 5 Data Source: ODOT Figure 3 Oregon Highway Plan Designations Deschutes County, Oregon Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION The County and ODOT maintain a "functional classification" system that reflectshow roadways are intended to "look and feel" to people driving, walking, riding bikes, taking transit, and moving freight nswell as whether the roadway serves local or more regional/statewide needs. The County's functional classification is based on the following hierarchy: = Arterials are intended to serve more regional needs and provide connections to key activity centers within the County. They are also intended to represent the key movement of goods and services throughout and to/from the County. These roadways also provide connections to the incorporated UGBswithin the County. w Collectors primarily connect the rural areas of the county with the state facilities and the County arterials. These roadways provide important connections to much of the unincorporated areas of the County. = Forest Highways provide access to recreational areas such as campsites, lakes, hiking, and biking trails in the County. Maintenance of these facilities is provided by the County and by the Forest Service, depending onlocation. w Local roads serve specific areas within the County and can be paved or unpaved. The functional classification of the roadways the County are shown in Figure 4. The TSP alternatives focus on the Arterials and Collector Roadways. As part of the TSP, the County will coordinate with ODOT and the local communities to identify the need to address inconsistencies between the various agencies'designated classifications of roadways within the County. Based on a preliminary review, the consistency of the classifications of six roadways may need to be addressed, including NW Lower Bridge Way, Smith Rock Way, Alfalfa Market Road, George Millican Road, Burgess Road and the O'Neill Highway (OR 370). Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan ,e,ltets TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN tt NNN f '1 r Stststststsststststss ° 44 ttst t 91,1- SA 1„ . ,.. st.s , ..\ A s ) --....__--,—.-/-----_—,40 . . „ .4, css, veteRDettettets.kyrANER. - or. Redmond I UGa ORRILL RO. Bed .t, tsittOg7tatts„, ,X,‹ NtS,R,GKARONRO A 'A tts k te 1 ) 1, ) syst v ss g tt tt" —4— DODDS RD t t„ 'FAULINA LAKE KENN, Lat"PNne " 9 s ts t it 1 N. N .. FORD RD 0 „ NERSHA D ERRIL st; 0 rI 7 — 8 Miles NDER-R-0--1 Roadway Roadway Classification Highway Arterial Collector Forest Highway Local Unimproved Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Parks Water Data Source: Deschutes County Figure 4 Functional Roadway Classifications Deschutes County, Oregon hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan FREIGHT ROUTES Per the OHP, the designated Freight Routes in the County are shown in Figure 5. There are no freight routes on the County roadways, only on the state highways. Oregon's Motor Carrier Transportation Division's (MCTD) Freight Mobility Map classifies truck route mobility classifications and restrictions. The MCTD Freight Mobility Map for Deschutes County isshown in Figure 6.As shown in this figure, the following designations and characteristics will be considered as part of the TSP alternatives where County roadways intersect ODOT Orange Routes shown on Figure 6 are generally unrestricted freight and oversize/overweight routes. These routes require Single Trip Permits for loads greater than 14'vvideand may beused asunrestricted detour routes. All three routes are Reduction Review Routes. Reduction Review Routes are ODOT facilities that requires review ofduring planning, project development, development review, and maintenance toexamine any "hole in the air" capacity. Reduction Review Routes are all parts of the state highway(s) that must be travelled to complete the prescribed route and/or connect with other state highways. This includes couplets and onand off ramps. These routes include: ° US 97: a Reduction Review Route permitting freight vehicles up to 14'6" (designated high clearance route) aswell astriple trailer combinations. ° OR 126:a Reduction Review Route permitting freight vehicles upto 14'6^(designated high clearance route). w U32O: a Reduction Review Route permitting freight vehicles upto 14'6"(designated high clearance route) and triple trailer combinations (although these vehicles are restricted during the holidays). Blue Routes shown onFigure 8are unrestricted tostandard freight truck traffic but are either weight orwidth restricted for non -divisible and/or heavy haul loads. These routes include the Cascades Lakes National Scenic Bypass and [>R3l(the Fremont Highvvay). Black and Yellow Routes shown on Figure 6 are highly restricted to truck and oversize load traffic and not considered viable for detour routes for trucks. The routes include OR 242 (McKenzie Highway), portions of OR 37U(the O'Neill Highvvay),and OR27. Finally, Magenta Routes have some restrictions for both length and/or width and are also not considered to be viable detour routes for trucks. The only route in Deschutes County that is this designation is a small portion of OR 242 (McKenzie Highway) from MP 84.69 to 92.22 outside of Sisters. Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan otlY0WOON40, .,41410 4144.90^" 400'"V TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN PS 4 State Freight Routes Parks Water /440/ 0,NER BMDGE 0 L. 0 46, •":1 Sisters LIGB co lAN RE) eE'XPVPALL,Otli SKYLKE9' 73 73 40 4'0 43 ti4L3'"; <'4444,,p ,•41C 440 '4) LY Bend UGB juNA LAK Redmond U GB 8,0 RRILL RD 1:,,5ALFA MARKET RD DODDS RD POCKARD RD 0 >- Q cc n t. FORD 0 8' 0 0 ME RRILL 3q ro m ,,,,,?9 o I ,- 0( 0)0' ›.- 1 h,... Cr 0 I ( -Cr.-1')" 0 I F- Z 1 0 I Q .4-- --I \.• 9 ,3, 7 3 0 .: . . z NERSHALL RD 0 8 Miles 0 Data Source: ODOT Figure Freight Routes Deschutes County, Oregon Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 84 90 __Prineme -� °° m�S�� ������5. *0� � :SAO ' ~ 0 0 AS � � �� 11 —10 POSTED SPEED LIMIT AND PAVEMENT CONDITIONS ALONG COUNTY FACILITIES Information about current 2018 pavement conditions on roadways within the County can help inform the prioritization of maintenance activities and resources. Pavement conditions along County roadways are rated using a technical rating process based on the frequency and severity of signs of damage or wear such as cracks, holes, and fissures. A score is assigned, called the pavement conditions index (PCI), which ranges from OtnlOO. Qualitative ratings were assigned ranging from good (Category |)tupoor(Category U|)based onthe PC|score for each roadway classification. Figure 7 illustrates the pavement condition for County facilities as measured in March 2021. This information will continue to inform the County's maintenance program to address roads in need ofrepair. 14 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan "q414,e-40, TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN 7 44,4% County Pavement Conditions Fa ir Poor 44,44444, 85,:q)4,E4°, 't UGEi'4 tZ) , a0.., ... , . 00 '143 10 .IL lea; 4:,1740/1/00W RD , SKYUNE41,'" Ps 40 MASTEN RD r44m44,44.444,4 4;44•4 ,444RD 414PQ Parks 0t0 Water La Porte US ,,,444404444,,, vim BRIO I Redmond UG 4,9 , :Low ?) HIM 4,4 PAULANA LAKE FP ALVA MARKET 0444444441i DODDS RD) 0 co VLE,RR ILL 22,4, >4 .044,44 >-1 s4Y.. NERSHALL RD FREDE 0 8 Miles X i W H i F. .4.) I ro co 1 u) 1 < 1 J Data Source: Deschutes County Figure 7 Current Pavement Conditions Deschutes County, Oregon Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan ical Memorandum Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Posted Speeds along ODOT Highways Within the unincorporated areas of the County, the posted speed along ODOT highways primarily varies between 55 and 65 miles per hour (mph) with transitions to lower speeds adjacent to the City UGBs. COUNTY ROADWAY CROSS SECTION STANDARDS The County's cross-section standards are used to guide the construction of new roadways and/or changes to existing roadways. These standards correlate to the identified functional classification of a roadway. These standards get updated over time to reflect changing needs for the various users of the transportation system and economic development opportunities; therefore, many existing roadways within the County area not built to current standards. Further, the standards are not intended to imply that all roadways be rebuilt to match these standards, rather they are intended to help inform identified changes to specific roadways in the future. The County's current roadway standards are shown in Table 2. Because the design of a roadway or corridor can vary based on the needs of the area, the current standards provide flexibility for segments based on adjacent land use and demand. There are separate standards shown in Table 3 and Table 4 for the unincorporated communities of Tumalo and Terrebonne. Current County standards do not require a sidewalk except for certain segments in Terrebonne and Tumalo; people walking or biking are assumed to use the shoulder or share the road on lower volume streets. DCC Chapter 17.48 and its Table A contains the County's road and street standards. Table 2. County Existing Functional Classification and Cross Section Standards Functional Right of Pavement Travel Lane Classification Way (ft) Width (ft)' Width (ft) Paved Gravel Shoulder Shoulder Turn Lane Width (ft) Width (ft) Width (ft) State Highway 80-100 36-70 12 6 14 Minor Arterial 80 28-462 11 3-5 2 14 Collector 60 28-462 11 3-5 2 14 Local 60 20, 243 2 (1) Pavement widths are variable, depending on such factors as anticipated traffic volumes, and whether the road section involves turn lanes, bike lanes, and whether frontage roads border an arterial or collector, etc. (2) The larger of the two widths is necessary if a shoulder bikeway is required (4' for collector and 5' for arterial). (3) 20' allowed for cul-de-sac's and roads with low anticipated traffic volumes. 24' width required for circulator and primary subdivision access roads. Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan lecical Memorandum Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Table 3. Tumalo Existing Functional Classification and Cross Section Standards Right Functional of Classification Way (ft) Pavement Width (ft)1 Travel Paved Gravel Turn Lane Shoulder Shoulder Lane Sidewalk Width Width Width Width Required (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) US Highway 80-100 60 12 4 6 14 No 20 Collector - Commercial 60 30 11 4 2 14 Yes Collector - Residential 60 36 12 6 2 14 No Local - Commercial 60 20 10 2 Conditional2•3 Local - Residential 60 20 10 2 No Other- Alley (Commercial) 20 20 No Other- Patharail 15 6 unpaved 2.5 (if 8 paved paved) (1) Pavement widths are variable, depending on such factors as anticipated traffic volumes, and whether the road section involves turn lanes, bike lanes, and whether frontage roads border an arterial or collector, etc. (2) 5-foot curbless sidewalks with a drainage swale required on both sides of the road. (3) 5-foot curbless sidewalks with drainage swales required in Terrebonne from West 19th Street to 15th Street on the south side of C Avenue (see Terrebonne Comprehensive Plan Map D-3), or those roads in Tumalo designated for sidewalks (see Tumalo Comprehensive Plan Map D2). (4) The minimum width is 8 ft. However, 8 ft. wide multiuse paths are not recommended in most situations because they may become over -crowded. They should only be constructed as short connectors, or where long term usage is expected to be low, and with proper horizontal and vertical alignment to assure good sight distances. 10 ft is the standard width for a two-wat multi -use path but they should be 12 ft wide in areas with high mixed -use. Optimum width should be based on the relative use by cyclists and pedestrian. High use by skaters may also require greater width. Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan hechnie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Table 4.rerrebonme Existing Functional Classification and Cross Section Standards Right Functional of Classification Way Travel Paved Gravel Tmmm Lane Shoulder Shoulder Lane Sidewalk Width Width Width Width Required USHighway 97 100 60 12 6 6 14 Noz Minor TeC 00 34 12 5 2 14 Yes' Arterial - Smith Rock TeR 00 34 12 5 2 14 No Way Minor Arterial - Lower 00 34 12 5 2 14 No Collector Commercial TeR 60 24 12 2 No Collector- TeR 00 24 12 J CondhOona[ Residential Commercial TeR 00 24 12 2 No Local- TeR 60 20 12 Z Conditional' Residential Other- Alley 20 20 10 No Path/Trail 15 6unoaved 2.5 if 8 paved 6 paved (l)Pavement widths are variable, depending vnsuch factors aaanticipated traffic volumes, and whether the road section involves turn lanes, bike lanes, and whether frontage roads border aoarterial o,collector, etc (2)a-fomsidewalks required ooboth sides ofHighway p/between Sovthlnhxvenueandcentm|Avenuemnenemons.mdudespedem,mncnogno improvement at B Avenue and C Avenue intersection (see Te,ebonrmComprehensive Plan Map D-3). (3)ofnotcu,b|rosidewalks with adrainage swv|,required noboth sides ufthe road. (4) 5-foot curbless sidewalks with drainage swales required in Terrebonne from West 19th StreetmluhStreet n^the south side nfCAvenue (see Terrebonne Comprehensive Plan Map D-3), or those roads in Tumalo designated for sidewalks (see Tvma|uComprehensive Plan Map oz}. (5) 5-foot curbless sidewalks with drainage swales required along school frontage on B Avenue and 5th Street(see TenebonneComprehensive Plan Maro*). (n) The minimum width |snft. However, 8 ft. wide multiuse paths are not recommended in most situations because they may become over -crowded. They should only be constructed as short connectors, or where long term usage is expected to be low, and with proper horizontal and vertical alignment massure good sight distances. /nVis the standard width for atwn-watmulti-use path but they should be1zKwide inareas with high mixed -use. Optimum width should be based on the relative use by cyclists and pedestrian. High use by skaters may also require greater width. Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan State Highway Design Stmndavds Any future changes tothe state highways within the County will be informed hvthe OHP,the state's Highway Design Manual (HDM), and the Blueprint for Urban Design, which provides more flexible standards for urban areas. ACCESS MANAGEMENT AND SPACING GUIDANCE Providing adequate access to streets,land uses, and activity centers isakey part ofoperating and planning for a transportation system that serves the needs of all users. ODOT and the County maintain standards to help ba|ancetheneedsforboth"thnoughtrave|eo"(inc|udingfreightandpub|ictmnspnUation)osvveUos serving the needs ofarea residents, employees, and visitors. For state highways, access spacing guidelines are specified inthe lAQ0Oregon Highway Plan, Appendix [- Access Management Standards. Access tu State Highways is controlled under Oregon Administrative Rule, Division 51 (OAR 734-051-4020(8)). /`�l��`x i -r � Road, � �� Capacity '�V �� � � ,./ The evaluation of the ability of the existing roadways to serve both existing and future traffic volumes can help inform the TSP alternatives. The analysis presented herein focuses only on County arterials and collector roadways. The roadway capacity needs associated with the State facilities within the County have been previously identified through various planning efforts. The County will continue to partner with ODOT to monitor and identify additional needs through future planning and evaluation efforts. AnalysisR0etho,,*,,,,`,,'o1o*y anii Pe3 formnance Stanillar4lis The evaluation of roadway capacity needs was conducted based on the TSP's Methodology Memorandum. The Methodology Memorandum is provided in Appendix B. The County at DCC 18.116.31 O(H)(1) considers Level of Service (LOS) ID to be acceptable when identifying existing and future deficiencies. Existin 1�', oa Asdocumented inAppendix B,the existing capacity reflects acomparison ofyear 20l9traffic volumes to information contained in the Simplified Highway Capacity Calculation Method for the Highway Performance Monitoring System. The traffic volumes onall the roadway segments analyzed reflect "acceptable" levels of service under existing conditions. |naddition tothe analyses ufroadway capacity, the TSPalternatives will also consider areas with potential geometry, sight lines, or other characteristics that may be identified by the ProjectAdvisoryConnnnitteeasvve|| as the identified Safety Needs previously documented within the County. FUTURE NO -BUILD TRAFFIC CONDITIONS SEGMENT ANALYSIS To help inform TSP alternatives, estimated year 2040 traffic volumes were also compared to the capacity thresholds. The year 2040 estimates reflect a growth in traffic volumes of two percent per year (further details Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan of the forecasting methodology are discussed in Appendix B). As reflected in Figure 8, the traffic volumes anticipated onthe following roadways suggest the need toconsider TSPalternatives that address vehicular capacity needs, including: • Deschutes Market Road atG/eystoneLane • 5Century Drive atVenture Lane Given the location of these roadways in proximity to the Bend UGB and/or Sunriver, the County will coordinate alternatives at these locations with the City and local community. 20 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix o Transportation System Plan TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN LL L&J a Sisters UG ffr to rtc PS 44 c,D La Pine UGB 014 PAUL1NA LAKE RD J ,dyttint I 40Redmoid UGB t:tt, <Z9 t . RR1LL at4' STOOKEY RO FORD RD 0 ij- 0 I NIERRkt. Flo 3 0 - 'k-• 0 'Ee+' c) i NERSHALL RD cc 0 CN 0 < 7.3 0 8 Miles CL LLP Z1 crl ER-FFt7-1 CASRPE • Exceeds County Standards Railroads Meets County Standards Parks Water UGBs r r_7_1-1 County Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Data Source: Des c hutes County Figure 8 2040 Roadway Segment Evaluation Deschutes County, Oregon hechgie\MemorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 05 1 _ rash "Data Analysis Prior to the TSP update, the County completed its 2019 Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) that provided arange ofprojects, po|icies,andpvng»arnstoaddvessidentiOedsafetvneedsvvithintheuninco/po»atedaveas of the County. The enclosed section summarizes the key findings of the TSAP. Crash "!1i,evie The TSAP reflected information from ODOT's crash database for the period from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2016. These crashes are categorized by the severity of the crash, including: m Fatal w Injury A(incapacitating nrsevere injury) w Injury B(non-incapacitating o/moderate injury) m Injury (possib|e/rnino/injury — complaint ofpain) m Property damage only (PDO) (no injury) A total of 3,009 crashes were reported in unincorporated Deschutes County between 2012 and 2016. These crashes were relatively split between County and State facilities. FATAL AND SEVERE CRASHES The TSAP prioritized addressing fatal and severe crashes in the County. Figure 9 presentsthe year -over -year crash frequency in unincorporated Deschutes County including the number of crashes resulting in fatality or incapacitating injury. FiguvelOpvesentstheyear-over-yea/cuashfrequencyonCountyfaci|itiesin unincorporated Deschutes County including the number of crashes resulting in fatality or incapacitating injury. As shown, fatal and incapacitating injuries in Deschutes County have shown an increasing trend in recent years though similar crashes on County -owned facilities have been relatively stable. Table 5presents crashes that occurred oncounty facilities by severity. Among the l,5l9crashes, nearly half (48 percent) resulted in some level of injury. Five percent were fatal or incapacitating injury crashes. 22 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan lechnk-a Memorandum1Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Unincorporate 4, 7 800 700 600 SOO 400 300 200 100 (1 2012 2013 2014 2015 Crash Count (Unincorporated Deschutes County) —410—Fatai/Incapacitating Crash County {Unincorporated Deschutes County} Figure 9. Crashes by Year, Deschutes County (Unincorporated), 2012-2016 Total Crash Count 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2016 60 So 8 ID 40 'u lo 3'0 2 r`,5 'OP 6. .20, LEI 10 0 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Fatal Injury A Injury B Injury C PDO —0—Fatal/Incapacitating Count Figure 10. County Facility Crashes by Year, Deschutes County (Unincorporated), 2012-2016 23 Fatal/Incapacitating Crash Count Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan ical Memorandum Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Table 5. County Facility by Severity, Deschutes County (Unincorporated), 2012-2016 Fatal Injury A Injury B Injury C PDO Total Count 12 65 354 298 790 1,519 Share <1% 4% 23% 20% 52% 100% Source:ODOT The TSAP also identified crashes by location (intersection or segment crashes) and by mode (including motor vehicle, bicyclist, or pedestrian crashes). Crashes within 250 feet of an intersection were considered intersection crashes and constituted approximately half the crashes on county facilities within unincorporated Deschutes County (52 percent), as shown in Table 6. For state facilities, 31 percent of reported crashes occurred at intersections. Non -intersection (segment) crashes were more likely to result in fatality or incapacitating injury compared to intersection crashes for both facilities. Table 6. Crashes by Location, Deschutes County (Unincorporated), 2012-2016 Fatal Injury A Injury B injury C PDO Total (% Share) State Facility Intersection 3 23 96 101 242 465 (31 %) Non -Intersection 28 43 173 205 576 1,025 (69%) County Facility Intersection 3 26 171 170 418 788 (52%) Non -Intersection 9 39 183 128 372 731 (48%) Source:ODOT Figure 11 illustrates the locations of the fatal and incapacitating crashes in unincorporated Deschutes County between 2012 and 2016. The majority of fatal and severe injury crashes occurred on State highways, which carry the highest traffic volumes and speeds. Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN 0 Crash Severity • Fatal Injury A Injury B Injury C PDO sic o w LIJ (1) '0 • Z Q6.:{„ • at-_ -0 0 iie ell/4 4li /0 • ct 0 le 0 iltiNDIGG tie zii te ed 0 0 11 e • a e LARi,47- • Sisters GGG eit a REMUDA RD zitegig Parks Water v 4414 RD „.„ \\ies\t( RD GOODROCH RD 0 itzt" - „ .0 0 0-,re ,.„ >,1 KENT RD 0 044 CASCADE ESTATES DR 4TH AVE ▪ SAGE RANCH 3RD AVE to Pi A. qt. e • • 111 041, • 0 ••te' 0 itc re 4 0 (r: 0 0 11 ,,,re Data Source: ODOT Deshutes County Reported Crashes from 2012 to 2016 by Severity Sisters Area, Oregon Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan ,71 ____.__ 4'I, 7- ti LovEYvE,,,, • s • Q, • ,I, • '',7 'c' ' • " IC 6 <AVG: TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Aitit LowER smDGE WAY 0 • • • TEATER AVE H 2 2 co NW COYNER AVE 2 * EAGLE CREsTsjr L- 0 0 NEkNCOMB • • HARPER RD c/o 0, INNES MARKET RD• MARSH RD • Q 0 - JW BRoWN RE),„ <2, e X • C) • al CONNARN RD • Z 0 , z ,-, 2 • Crash Severity • Fatal •Injury A Injury B • Injury C PDO o 2 NVV 91ST ST NW SPRUCE AVE • 14\1\1 POPLAR DR 0 2 2 "" \000ER RD GRUBS 044 CI) 0 2 ▪ Op • YOUNG AVE ▪ • 0 • ‘1?:,,0 AVE GIFT RD t,3 • • a X • • • • 2 VEY * NO. a R;ve 2 .).- • Li —I i gct& <,- STURGEON ROu 1.- '10 0 -.4 2 -.11: a: 89 7ks, Parks Water oo 5) 5 ID • lib f , NW ICE AVE 0 cc• -5; • .51 • a MORRILL Rip C v • 2 • • Ficddiodd UOB" . ----_-____-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ ci 1 w 2 NE SVI w 2 0 z 0 0 z 0 2 2 c 2 0 0 1 NE WILCOX AVE 11.1 Z 4AV' NE °Nov •• • alk NE 41ST Si NE WALNUTAvE NE UPAS AVE E ANThER AVE 1.5Miles • • • T1 1 ,,,e Data Source: ODOT Deshutes County Reported Crashes from 2012 to 2016 by Severity Redmond Area, Oregon Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN • Crash Severity • Fatal • Injury A Injury B Injury C PDO tetestr 0 r- r- z cn 0 0 w -3J < • 0 0 • TLJNIALO RESERVOIR RD <ti' • •6t9r. • • • 6 • 1 a • -sAONE RD. Zift ORO • o • • •,..ettert•••••6•';' ••Jts itrt Parks Water • $ ,O tr,t4 83 8 8 8 o 0 4 0 :0) .z• z A 06 ,C''s= 0 4.4 0 (2r ••\ • * ‘--• 401 w A • (4' • I' • Z ..." • Z = 6 c20 -- 4Y0Np0 • • • • •00 A RACkrke • • 0 0 4 ,c;L_ ALE. RD,. ft, et, tr 7 • z 8 0 0 • • ' g I- O WI• -1 11r. O CC 1 < • 2 " u) • • 6IERY, tw o -Ss o (I) 0 : 0 M 0 x 2 z 0 • • • 0 o) w 0 ca • s ROGERS RD • SHOLES RD a 8 4s, 0 0 PtlONEER LOOP • MORRILL RD BUTLER MARKET EiD • • • • • 061.-, ca • uj>'s NELSON RO u.- 1* o 0. ERICKSON RD •-,NEFF RD 911111 O • 9 6 Cr 0 BEAR CREEK RD • ,•• so44/?O ••), 0 0 0 ARSEN 'RD RD ts • • 9 • VHT P • RICKARD RD• • 1,5Miles 0 0 -• 0 .re 1 1 Data Source: ODOT Deshutes County Reported Crashes from 2012 to 2016 by Severity Bend Area, Oregon Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN BURGESS RD co Crash Severity • Fatal • Injury A Injury B • Injury C PDO Parks Water 0 O 0 rt 0 4-1 tre es. OUNDARY RD LAVA D SPARKS DR PARKWAY DR cc 0 DAWN RD tt SPRING RNefL • a a s• saws COVINA RD ELSINORE RD HERMOSA RD JACINTO RD 01 • .LAPINE STATE RECR1 .„.„ • TWIN DR •• • GREEN FOREST RD 0 • 4,;?< • Le L ' a m• DYKE RD 0 DEDON RD C.) s w WIA6' s DAVIS AVE • QUI PIERCE RD JACKPINE LOOP • MASTEN RD s • • 31 • LaPr,e UGB „ 0 0 0 0006E RD • * NEVVBERRY RD "0). O's D_R ocoV Q- -eSe FINLEY BUTTE FRO • • • • 1.1 s .17 1.5Miles 40 fl piss —e Data Source: ODOT Deshutes County Reported Crashes from 2012 to 2016 by Severity South County Area, Oregon Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan hechnie\MemorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan CRASH TYPE Figure 12 shows a summary of the reported crash types as included in the TSAP. Lane departure crashes include those in which a vehicle exits its lane and hits a fixed object or animal, is involved in a head-on crash, or is overturned. As shown in the figure, these crashes together constitute the largest type of crashes in Deschutes County (1,921, 60 percent). Rear -end crashes are the second -most common crash type. Overturned _ Railway Train Turning Movement _�— SidesvmpenvertaNnQ_/ Sideswipe -meeting-) � 'Backing / Pedestrian Parking Maneuver! Figunel2. Countywide Crash Type (2Ol2'2Dl8) Animal Crashes Head-on \ `-Non-collision Fixed -Object orOther- Object Per the TSAP crashes involving animals are shown inFigure 13.|naccordance with Oregon House Bill (HB) 2834, the alternatives evaluation will also consider wildlife corridors, crossings, and safety. 29 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN ri) 0 op,vAONIA a co 0 Animal Crashes by Severity • Fatal •Injury A Injury B • Injury C PDO • '1NDIG0 0 0 LARIAT fr./ 0 0 -2 0 • • REMUDA RD Parks Water 0 0 z 0 0 0 -o ‘_\\JCSf\' 30 BUFFALO DR 0 0 0 <0 C" 0 0 0 0 0 0 FADJURLN ce 0 0 0 C4 w 0 KENT RD ° VARRIN RD 0 (Z▪ - "Z. r- 0 z 0 —1 '13 , 0 1 CASCADE ESTATES DR 0 < a 0 aSe 4TH AVF SAGE RANCH I-- a 3 < co x , z < PLAINVIEW. RD9LL'Ic-E- +ILuc') ,9 0 JERICHO RD • Figure Li Data Source: ODOT Deshutes County Reported Animal Related Crashes from 2012 to 2016 by Severity Sisters Area, Oregon Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 0 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN < oVEY AV VIC ; TEATER AVEH 0 NW COYNER AVE z GRUBS TA kp EAGLE CREST 8L1/0 ), ,... al 0 0 1-, .Y C..< 7 < -6--. 0 ,3 Z %-,-- INNES MARKET RD MARSH RD .n 0 CI 0 0 W 44- Ci 1- . to 0 6 uj JW BROWN RD 0441 • < al 2 CONN,ARN RD -0 Z .D 2 Zi a 04 .,•?: LLJ 5 • RUDi RD SWALLEY RD H (.0 CT) 0 co 0 4 NW SPRUCE AVE 073 O 3D 0 NEIAJCONtia RD HARPER RD STURGEON RD UtALORb 0 o ,c4 z (7) Animal Crashes by Severity • Fatal Injury A Injury B • Injury C PDO 42, od- , H- o (9 x o . • x a) ,---. 0 LIMESTONE AVE & C',4\ 1 a) s \i% MCVEY AVE (0 4° '4?)V c) 0) YOUNG AVE AVE GIFT RD - 1— .;.5, 4) 1--- 1--- 1— c, 0'1 CO CD - CC. 89 7 `,,,, An -., --,, DALE RD Parks Water oUARiPY. NW ICE AVE cr) 1 NW LOWER BRIDGE WAY - CAVE e• NW ODEM AVE COYNER AVE e >- N 1-- -4 0 I Z , " -I W I Lid z 03 MORRILL RD NE WILCOX AVE NE ONEIL WAY NE WALINUTAvE NE UPAS AVE 0 1.5Miies Figure 13 Data Source: ODOT Deshutes County Reported Animal Related Crashes from 2012 to 2016 by Severity Redmond Area, Oregon Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Ls) z w 0 0 0 1-- 0 0 r- ▪ iX x Z '1 ill LI 0 0 III Z 030 0 X 66- Z Z O a TUMALO RESERVOIR RD Si 0 Z z 0 0 14 sr 0 Z w r 0 ROGERS RD -A 0 0 _.F.,RY LN 0 0 ctl CP. z TUIALO RD ,?5)01-E6sA, co 0 1 SKYLINE RANCI-1 0 - eLf0KCAN'Y s \ADS H Otv. ZUNI lib 23 CH°C 7- BAKE ,0 > 0 1,// c6 •Q t ,6 cr go c7i / i ILI 0 .5- X Ili II 0 J:3 0 Z II I J '5' Z IT b < Lid 6i, Ili n < w „ z 4. i ,„,r 0 0,1; 0 31'0 a fl Animal Crashes by Severity • Fatal Injury A Injury B • Injury C PDO Parks Water 0 z 0 0 Bend UGB' „ . e i.„, . 0 t SHOLES RD Q < 0 0 t \'‘ 0 C) 0 2 0 2 1ESCHUTES MARKET "D 0 RONEER LOOP MORR L RD 0 0 BUTLER MARKET RD 0 2 z 0 Cr RD 0 ilaNELSON R 0. 6 EROKSON RD 0 z NEFF RD BEAR CREEK RD S 044, `7%,/, 0 2 Lu 0 L z IFTE 1-IWy 0 2 RICKARD RD 1,5Miles 0 0 0 L3 Data Source: ODOT Deshutes County Reported Animal Related Crashes from 2012 to 2016 by Severity Bend Area, Oregon Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan .17 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN fl n a c)6 Animal Crashes by Severity • Fatal Injury A Injury B Injury C PDO r-, 2 2 2 2 0 Parks Water OUNDARY RD SPRING RNE91 v:4 Oil V- COVINA RD 2 ELSINORE RD ° GLENDALE RD 0 0 JACINTO RD Cr '6? =77 Hio 0 LL 5 LAPINE STATE RECREAT‘av jib ARK DR LAVA DR 1- 4-6) &r) TWIN DR (1) W SPARKS OR -r Z lyx.„ lN PARKWAY DR T DAWN RD GREEN FOREST RD c) 3 DEEDON RD 0 z • a -J. W 0 Z 41 .}sE 5t-\JD6Z2 0 ALPINE OR DYKE RD LEONA LN PIERCE RD 2 DAVIS AVE Lo 9 Lf JACKPINE LOOP MASTEN RD 2 0 0 RIVERVIEW DARLENE WA 2 0 2 2 2 5 0 0 2 2 0 AZUSA RD q- Q 42- 0 2 2 Fv= N 2 NEVVBERRY RD • FINLEY BUTTE RD -A 5MiIos • • Figure 13 Desh utes Data Source: ODOT Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan County Reported Animal Related Crashes from 2012 to 2016 by Severity South County Area, Oregon Appendix C - Transportation System Plan dun Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Further detail on the analyses of the documented crash history on County roadway segments, intersections, severity, traveler behaviors, roadway conditions can be found in the TSAP. CRASHES INVOLVING "VULNERABLE USES" People walking, biking and riding motorcycles are more likely to be injured when a crash occurs. A more detailed review involving these users revealed that 139 crashes were reported within the County over the five- year time period. Key findings of this analyses revealed: Motorcyclists — 60 motorcycle crashes were reported on County roads, accounting for 4 percent of reported crashes on County roads and 26 percent of fatal/incapacitating crashes. Ninety-four percent of motorcycle crashes on County roads resulted in some level of injury, with 52 percent resulting in fatal or severe injury. More motorcycle crashes occurred on County roads (60 crashes) compared to State highways (32 crashes). Of the 60 motorcycle crashes on County roads, five involved alcohol or drugs, and 29 crashes involved speed. Pedestrians - four pedestrian -involved crashes were reported on County roads. See Appendix C for more details on the pedestrian -involved crashes. The pedestrian crashes were reported on the following roads: o Baker Road o Tumalo Road o Skyliners Road o Smith Rock Way Bicyclists (severity). Fifteen bicyclist -involved crashes were reported on County roads, and each of these 15 crashes resulted in some level of injury, including four incapacitating injury crashes. The TSAP did not identify any corridors with patterns of multiple bicycle crashes. The bicycle crashes were more common within or on the outskirts of developed areas (Bend, La Pine, Sunriver, Redmond, Terrebonne) and key routes between these communities. See Appendix C for more details on the bicyclist -involved crashes. The bicycle crashes were reported on the following roads: o S Century Drive (Sunriver) o Pioneer Lane o Day Road o Dorrance Meadow Road o Upper Deschutes Road o China Hat Road o Cheyenne Road/Cherokee Road o Powell Butte Highway/Nelson Road o Baker Road/Cinder Butte Road 3,1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Old Bend Redmond Highway Johnson Road 5th Street (in Tumalo) Pinehurst Road NW Lower Bridge Way NE Crooked River Drive Two bicycle crashes on state highways occurred at intersections with County roads: Highway 20 and Bear Creek Road; Highway 20 and Ward Road/Hamby Road Exhibit D to ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Potential Safety ee Top sites for safety improvements inunincorporated Deschutes County identified through the TSAPare listed below. These locations were identified based ona network screening ofall County intersections, which weighted more severe crashes higher than less severe crashes. These intersections has the highest total score. Several ufthese locations have projects p|annedorin-process.Thi»T3Pupdatevvi||further/evievvthe identified safety concerns and TSAPrecommendations atthese sites: * US2O/VVandRoad/Hamby Road w US97/Bu»gessRoad w US97/VandevertRoad 0 US20/HavvksBeard (Black Butte Ranch) 9 U520/Fry/ea/Road * E|Camino Lane/Helmholtz Way 0 Burgess Road/Day Road/Pine Forest Drive e Canal Blvd/Helmholtz Way w Bear Creek Road/Ward Road w Dickey Road/Nelson Road 0 Alfalfa Market Road/Dodds Road m US07/Ga||ovvayAve w US20/O|dBend Redmond Highway 0 Butler Market Road & Powell Butte Highway * US2U/O.8.Riley Road/Cook Avenue 0 Butler Market Road &Hamby 0 US07/6lstStreet 0 Butler Market Road &Hannehnnk 0 US97/llthStreet/Lower Bridge Way = Baker Road & Cinder Butte w 6lstStreet/Quarry Ave/Canal Blvd m SCentury and Huntington 0 Northwest VVaY/CoynerAve w Cline Falls Rd/Coopers Hawk Drive/ Falcon w Alfalfa Market Road/Walker Road Crest Drive l9th 0 US97/SrnithRock VVaV/BAve m LovverBridge VVa'�v/ 0 Deschutes Market Road/Hamehook Road * Lower Bridge VVav/3lst * Lower Bridge rd rX � Transportation �- /1 | ` ����\x��v x���������"��������� ������^\/��5 � � � The following section identifies the existing needs of people walking, riding bikes,and taking transit aswell as the rail and air systems. Existin,�,,,,. licycle Facilities Facilities for people biking in Deschutes County are shown in Figure 14. This inventory is based on available GIS data, including the shoulder width on state highways. This figure also reflects state roads where the paved shoulder width is at least six feet (which can be considered to be a minimum width for use by people walking 11) Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan and biking along ruralroadways).' On most of these facilities, there is no buffer between vehicles and people walking and biking on these roads, which can lead to a perceived high level of stress for walkers and cyclists, though low vehicle traffic, which is the case in most instances shown, can reduce level of stress when little or noshoulder isprovided. There are two Oregon Scenic Bikeways completely inthe County, the Twin Bridges Scenic Bikeway and the Sisters toSmith Rock Scenic Bikeway. The Twin Bridges Scenic Bikeway loops 36miles from Bend through Cent»a|(]veguntoshovvoffsnovvcappednnountains,/innvockcanyuns,high-desertnange|and,andthe Deschutes River. The Sisters to Smith Rock Scenic Bikeway is a 37-mile one way route that begins in Sisters and takes riders through pastures, a canyon, and Terrebonne. The McKenzie Pass Scenic Bikeway isconsidered a "partia|voute"vviththeOeschutesCountYsection|ocatedbetvveenthekAcKenzie»unnnnitandtheCityof Sisters; the western half is in Lane County. This route is closed during the winter months but is accessible to bicycles in the spring before it reopens to coo. Other County bike facilities include trails in Oregon State Parks and Bend Parks and Recreation District parks outside of the UGB areas. Oregon State Parks in the County with trails are Smith Rock State Park, Tumalo State Park, and La Pine State Park. Trails located in the unincorporated County owned and maintained by Bend Parks and Recreation District include Shev|in Park trails, canal trails, the Deschutes River Trail, the Rails w/Trails Corridor, the Cascade Highlands Trail, the TransCanada Trail, and the Powerline Trail. Various destination resorts also have private bike trails internal to the resort. Many other recreational and hiking trails exist within the County. While the trails themselves are not an essential component of the County's transportation system, access to those facilities, including numerous official and unofficial trail heads along County roads support the quality of life of visitors and County residents. Locations where additional planning or infrastructures is needed to support these activities will be further explored through this T3Pupdate. Facilities for people walking in Deschutes County are shown in Figure 15. This figure also shows the existing and planned pedestrian facilities in the unincorporated communities of Terrebonne and Turnalo. Roadways adjacent to schools or other key activity centers for people walking (e.g., parks, trail connections, rural connnnerdo| areas, etc.) located in unincorporated areas may beappropriate locations for dedicated pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Rural communities in the County generally lack sidewalks. In Te/vebunne, there are sidewalks along the frontage nfTervebonneElementary School but nosidewalks directly west ofthe school. In Tumalo, there is also sidewalk along the frontage of Tumalo Community School but this sidewalk does not connect to the other sidewalks in the community. Wide paved shoulders may be adequate in unincorporated communities but dedicated, separated sidewalks or trails may be appropriate to connect to key destinations such asschools within the rural communities. ,muuvyh,evvlowalking a,muu^ym~yvm,^xvumeo�euthan six feet wide, f0"'fe'muyene*yac*peuosthe minimum *uenu^avVm,om ^o^mmounte these Users. Six ke,wavSeua`n=minimum due mthe ye*me^yaounature v{the mo wjycpou,feeti,*emm.mvm"^nve^ shoulders, 3s Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechnie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan County Bikeway Standards The County's existing bikeway standards are shown in Table 7 and contained in DCC Chapter 17.48,Design and Construction Specifications, Table 8. Table 7. County Minimum Bikeway Design Standards Type Vertical Clearance Min. Stand. High Min. Stand. Min. Stand. Use Use Multiuse Path Off 81 10, 12' 81 10, 21 31 - Mt. Bike Trail Off 7' lCY 4'w/ open shoulder BikeOn ' Lane 5'w/ curb or parking Use unurban arterial ormajor collector, nrrural roads near urban areas with high anticipated bike use Shoulder Bikeway On 4' open shoulder 5'v/ curb or other barrier 6' Recommended on higher speed, and traffic volume rural roads Shared Roadway On Recommended only onlocal roads with speeds ofJ5 mph mrless, and <3,0UUADT (D loft|sthe standard width for atwo-way multi -use path; they should belzftwide inareas with high mmedo»e.Faster moving bicycles require greater width than pedestrians; vpumumvwdthshom|dbebasedvnthmre|auveua,bytheseuwnmodes.niohu,ebyskatenmayabnreqoire greater width. The minimum width is 8 ft. However, 8-ft. wide multi -use paths are not recommended in most situations because they may become wm,-cmwded.They should only beconstructed as short connectors, or where long-term usage is expected to be low, and with proper horizontal and vertical alignment to assure good sight distances. 37 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan The County designates certain roadways as Bikeways. Per County policies, shoulders onthese roads are widened or maintained through ongoing maintenance activities, as feasible, to 6 feet to provide space for those riding bikes. Many of the County bikeways do not yet have 6' paved shoulders. Given the rural context, the County's cross section standards do not specify the need for sidewalks along roadways except within areas of the unincorporated communities of Terrebonne and Tumalo. Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan 0 0 0 91. SA 0 ,A:37i00.1S 0 0 `cl HARMON RD 06 Duna ss-rcc 06 3 lin >iltlaG2ei OE! NIVINCie;N 0 0 0 0 cvol\tik HAT RD m`.Deschutes County County Bikeway County Bikeway - Proposed Addition Oregon Scenic Bikeways --t Oregon State Park Trails Bend Parks and Recreation District Trails EL - a) rt.) >, (f) t71 0 0. F 0 cu > a 0 .= E10. (DE as s-c) USD CN (.00 F.122 (DM IDC -CO Urn (141-1 60,1 e›Fi 676 \ \ --- Planned Sidewalk TRANSPORTATIO SYSTEM PLAN z z NVV SEDGEWICK AVE GO 1 z Existing Sidewalk Far Parks Water r-1 Unincorporated Cities CI) FOSS DR ; I ; 0 0 0 3 0 0 Z z ce BARBERRY DR CENTRAL AVE zH c ANGUS CT CD NW S 4,0440,4040,4,444,40.400404-400,0, g 4 A AVE :1 I , — co 4404000.00,44,0 H . , co z co w Figure 15 Data Source: Deschutess County Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Deschutes County Sidewalk Facilities Terrebonne , Oregon '02 TRANSPORTATION: SYSTEM PLAN RUM RD PINENURST RD 2 w a z Ea. TUMALO RESERVOIR RE) Existing Sidewalk ---------- Planned Sidewalk SADDLE DR SEE RD 0 z re; T10Z/ST°01:: 11111:0171 1 — F17/L:Ng A M 1 0, 0 CO LU Parks Water Unincorporated Cities f" -1104 JUNIPER LN 0.01'L 1‘4,,,,0 W : 0400 : °0000,000. DIROH,LN,.„ Te 0;0004 p w 2 47- ELDER LN 0 PUTNAM LN WINSTON LOOP EL DORADO TRL RODEO DR a 2 (7) a a BIRDSONG LN STURGEON RD Figure 15 Data Source: Deschutess County Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Deschutes County Sidewalk Facilities Tumalo , Oregon hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Pul'ilic TKansiKSVstenm Public transportation is provided by Cascades East Transit (CET). Both public and private bus transportation providers also serve intercity connections in Oregon. CET provides connections within the County and between Deschutes County with surrounding other counties. CET operates eight Community Connector fixed routes that connect riders between Bend, Redmond, La Pine, Sisters, Terrebonne, Madras, and Prineville, shown in Figure 16. These services are open to the general public and operates Monday through Friday. Table 8 summarizes the key service areas, hours, trips per day, and fare zones for routes between Z2and 30. CET Route 18 is a shuttle service in the winter season from Bend to Mt. Bachelor, which stops at Hawthorne Station, Mt. Bachelor Park -and -Ride, Meissner Sno-Park, and Mt. Bachelor's West Village Lodge. The shuttle operates Monday toThursday from 6:4Oam.to5:3Op.nn.and Friday and Saturday from 0:40a.nn.to8:3Op.nn, making multiple trips. Riders can purchase shuttle tickets at Mt. Bachelor's Guest Services, at Safeway on Century Drive, orfrom the bus driver using exact change. The Central Oregon Breeze offers daily bus trips between the Portland Area and Central Oregon, including stops within the Bend and Redmond UGBs,including atthe Bend bus station, Redmond transit hub, and the Redmond Airport. The Redmond transit hub stop is a "flag stop" that must be reserved at least 24 hours in advance. POINT provides connection to many cities throughout Oregon and Amtrack and Greyhound services. The Eastern Route provides service between Bend and Ontario, making atotal ofll stops atcities such a» Brothers, Hampton, and Burns. There is usually one 5-hour trip per day in each direction. The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT)'s Rail and Public Transit Division funds and manages the POINT service through contracts with private transit carriers. Tickets can be purchased from Amtrak, Greyhound, and local independent ticket agents. The Grant County People Mover has two routes with connections to Bend and Redmond. The services are open to anyone. One route goes from Monument, Oregon, to Bend and stops in Redmond among other cities outside the County. This service is offered every Wednesday and Friday and requires reservation. The other route goes from Prairie City to Bend and also stops in Redmond among other cities outside the County. This service is offered on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. On the days of service for both routes, there is an eastbound and westbound trip. Home pickup is available for an additional charge. Reservations can be made by phone. Pacific Crest Bus Lines offers a Eugene to Bend daily charter bus service. It can be reserved for sports teams, weddings, school field trips, or other group travel events. There is usually one trip per day available in each direction. Tickets can be purchased from Amtrak, Greyhound, and local independent ticket agents. Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan leclink-a Memorandum Deschutes County Transportation System Plan L CULVEA MI: BACHELOR sou RESORT Turnatt BEN SUMNER Seem* Sante Sunitver — La Pine Rt, 31 Figure 16. CET Routes in Deschutes County 0 1,00000000, PINE ADRAS 43 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Table 8. Deschutes County Community Connector Routes Service Summary Key Destinations Trips per Dam ^ Fare Zone w Redmond Transit 32— Center Madras- ° TervebonnePa/k& Redmond Ride * kAeto|ius City Hall * Madras Dk4V& Work Source S:3Oam- 5 6 2&3 _ * Bend Hawthorne Station Redmond * Cascade Village -Bend * Redmond Transit Hub Gam- 9 9 l&2 ° Redmond Transit Center Prineville- 0 Powell Butte School Redmond ° Crook County Library * Stryker Park • Prineville 38— S|sten- Nedmnnd w Redmond Transit Center • Cloverdale Fire Station • Sisters Gam- 29— S/szee- 8end 0 Bend Hawthorne Station ° Sisters 8:30m- 5pmn 3O— Bend-La Pine � Bend Hawthorne Station ° Deschutes River Woods • La Pine * VWddup Junction 8:3Om- 6:3u pm Rural Dial-A-Rideservice isoffered within LaPine, Redmond, and Sisters. This service isopen to the general public and does not have any eligibility requirements. Riders must call the day before service isneeded to reserve a ride. Ride times are scheduled based on availability. 44 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan TRANSIT NEEDS The following transit service needs were identified by CETforCommunity Connector routes within the incorporated portions of the County: • More frequent service between Bend -Redmond ° Increased service nnSaturdays and inthe later evenings • Increased frequency ofweekday trips • Interlining Routes 24 from Bend to Redmond and 26 from Prineville to Redmond = Increased service tothe Redmond airport w New service toSunriver,Deschutes River Woods With Bend's growing popularity for recreational and outdoor activities for residents and visitors alike, the following locations within the unincorporated areas of County have been identified for where CET may expand its recreational services (depending on partnerships, available funding, and vehicle capacity): w Sun/iver(aear-nuund) m Black Butte Ranch (xear-nound) • High Desert Museum (aear-vound) + Smith Rock (spring and fall) • Popular Central Oregon sno-parks(vvinter) = Mt. Bachelor and the Cascades Lakes (sunnnned CET also identified the need to provide expanded Dial-A-Ricle service coverage to areas along the County's geographic boundaries. |naddition, the needs ofthe transportation disadvantaged can beconsidered relative toCET'sidentification of future service for: ° Student transportation for regional schools ° Free Dial -A -Ride bus fare for older adults Finally, future capacity needs identified by CET include: New Route 24 stops at the airport and west of US 97 0 New Sunriver service m Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to transit stops (City, County, and State ownership and planning) • Further develop facilities that continue tosupport AOAaccess Within the unincorporated and rural areas of the County, the CET Master Plan identifies the following: • Increasing local circulation via local Dial -A -Ride and/or Community Connector vehicles; * Providing service toCrooked River Ranch via shopper/medical shuttles, • Potential service to Eagle Crest, providing a stop inTunna|oalong Route 29; 45 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan • Improved/ more efficient stop for Deschutes River Woods (eo.Riverwoods Country Store) oran alternative way to serve Deschutes River Woods via Route 30; • Re-routing existing service lines tnSunrk/er, w Adding service to the High Desert Museum and Lava Lands Visitor Center (potentially seasonally based); and, • A new Route 31 and/or modification of Route 30 to connect La Pine and Sunriver Finally, the transit capital investments identified in the CET Plan include fleet replacement and expansion and transit stops enhancement and additions. �ail Systen( The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) owns the rail line that parallels US 97 within the County. Union Pacific Railroad also has rights to use the line. The railroad passes through Terrebonne, Redmond, Bend, and La Pine and serves primarily industrial and agricultural purposes. The City of Prineville also owns a railway in the County that runs from Redmond to Prineville along OR 370. This a short line railway used for freight. These two rail lines in Deschutes County have connections at a junction north of Redmond. There are ten at - grade rail crossings located on County Roads throughout the County. The 2009 Central Oregon Rail Planning Report2 lists the following locations in Deschutes County as the highest priority for bridging existing at -grade cnnssings- • BNSF/[0PRLines (Prineville ]ct)/O'Nei| Highway • BNSFLine/ Airport Way m 8NSFLine / Cooley Road ° BNSFLine /Reed Market Road ° BNSFLine /Baker Road ° BNSFLine /USA7 There isnopassenger rail service inthe County. The nearest passenger rail service isprovided inPortland and [hennu|L AiKTrans,#,ortation Syste� n, The largest public use airport in the County is Roberts Field -Redmond Municipal Airport (RDM) located in southeast Redmond, south of OR 126 and east of Highway 97. The City of Redmond owns and operates the airport, which is the fourth -largest airport in Oregon by commercial passenger boardings, and it is primary a commercial service airport. Commercial service isprovided byAlaska Airlines, United Airlines, Delta Air Lines, American Airlines, Empire Airlines, Silver Air, /\nneriflight,and Boutique Air. These carriers offer arriving and departing flights daily with direct flights to Denver, Portland, Salt Lake City, San Francisco, Phoenix, Los Angeles, and Seattle. o 9) by Central 0�k,,gon Area Coitmd,�sioii on haw 46 / muon(CoAc|\page 11, Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan The Bend Municipal Airport is located 5.5 miles northeast of Bend on Powell Butte Highway.Itcaters tothe needs of general aviators, hosts two flight training schools, and is home to numerous businesses. It provides charter flights and rental cars. The Sunriver Airport is a privately owned general aviation airport located at the Sunriver destination resort 15 miles south of Bend and several miles west of Highway 97. The airport is open to the public year-round offering fuel and service. Rental cars can be arranged as well as transportation to the Sunriver Lodge. The Sisters Eagle Airport is a privately owned, public use general aviation airportwithin the northeast edge of the City of Sisters on Camp Polk Road. The airport is open to the public with fuel and other select services available. The airport is unattended and supports locally based aircraft, but primarily accommodates recreation -oriented traffic. The airport has certain operational limitations, which are associated with runway orientation, prevailing winds, and high elevation terrain located approximately 2,O0Ofeet northeast ofthe airport. In addition to the four public -use airports previously listed, there are a number of private "personal use" air strips within the County. [\-7 U Bridge, Marine, '4 [�` U` �� � �/ ����w���/����^ ����,������`ern Bridge System There are 94 bridges located within the unincorporated areas of Deschutes County, as illustrated in Figure 17. The County owns and maintains 48 bridges, the State owns and maintains 36 bridges, Oregon State Parks owns and maintains two bridges, and other agencies own and maintain eight bridges. There are 2 County bridges that have posted load ratings, summarized in Table 9. Table 9\Bridges with Posted Load Ratings Carries Crosses &4P Posting Status Sufficiency Rating Smith North Unit 15452 Rock Can/Smith 3'5 Bituminous Road Rock 3, 1O.0)l9.9% below Legal Loads for Load PPwsted Gribbhng COI Canal I Road Wood or Timber [\ EOpen, >39.996below temp 22 Inspectors rate the bridges onstructural integrity, funcdona|ity, scour rating, and other criteria, and assign a score called a sufficiency rating. The sufficiency rating is a numeric evaluation of a bridge's sufficiency to 17 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan hechgie\MemorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan remain in service. Sufficiency ratings range from zero to 100, with zero being entirely insufficient and 100 percent entirely sufficient. The sufficiency rating considers structural adequacy, serviceability, functional obsolescence, importance for public use, eligibility for federal replacement funds, and a few lesser factors. Bridges receiving low scores are posted to restrict the allowable maximum vehicle weight, rehabilitated, or replaced. A sufficiency rating below 50 implies that the bridge is in poor condition and may need to be replaced. Bridges rated between 50and 8Oindicate that the bridge isinfair condition, and that rehabilitation, ifoost effectivevvi||hringthebridgeuptocurrentstandards.8ridgesvvithsufficiencynatingsobove80rnayhave specific elements that do not meet current minimum standards, but overall are in good or adequate condition inall areas and are not eligible for federal funding. Based on the mostrecent bridge inspection reports, summarized inODOT'sdatabase, the majoritynfthe bridges within the County have sufficiency ratings higher than 80. There are three locations identified as "structurally deficient," as shown in Table 10. The status and other details of all existing bridges in Deschutes County, including bridges under ODOT control and those under County control, is tabulated in Appendix D. Table l(lBridges within Deschutes County Identified as Structurally Deficient Bridge Carries Crosses &4P ID Status Sufficiency Rating Sisemore Couch Road Lateral 6.77 Bituminous AOpen, no restriction 17[30 Gribbing COI Road Canal l Wood or Timber struct EOpen, temp 22 21706 Foot Crooked Bridge River 0 Wood or Timber restriction A Open, no `3 wm Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmvmxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan r- - I s 0407.--AN 1 81 I 1 I 0. oI gt* () 3t,i[a 0 0 • u- al • g U3 /1/14,41/3i-IQ SS c. ItA • 0 = 0 4 Q x _I 0 Ik2 _ 0 2 0 n tX 0 V FRYREAR 1:6) 0 ec az0 0 - AE)-1001S sjwtVIII OR 0 Ob' at_Ln9 ssvio I I I o I p,RMCN RD I i J I 01 Lu oA.ei'LNOEDINON C8 0t1fl >c3rtiF0a6 NERSHALL RD 0 0 0 0? NIVINnomi o ONWE) 0.411.4p, 14AT RD 16(36/1.UE,,ot: Pxacs.6DW,,P\1,,x10D,DJ,Psea-79,\, Data Source: ODOT Bridges by Owner Bridges by Sufficiency Rating State Highway Agency County Highway Agency o C \I 0 V CV • • o co co 73 2 it c D 0 1) D u 0 0 (0 CO ' 0 CO (0 A Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan As summarized in the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)'s National Pipeline Mapping Syste M,3 one natural gas pipelines run through Deschutes County. The pipeline runs north -south through the County and loosely follows US97 from Redmond to La Pine. The pipeline is operated by Gas Transmission Northwest LLC. There is also a permanently abandoned gas pipeline in the City of Bend that is roughly 0.38 miles in length. No needs were identified related to pipelines within the County. There are nonavigable waterways' located inDeschutes County but there are several waterways and lakes that are used recreationally. Aalocal and regional destinations, access tothese bodies ofwater facilitate tourism, economic development, and environmental conservation efforts. Major bodies ofwater include Paulina Lake, East Lake, Wickiup Reservoir, Crane Prairie Reservoir, Sparks Lake, the Crooked River, and the Deschutes River. ���U� m�N � u�/|�������arV�xx�ve��u5 This section summarizes the findings and needs identified throughout this memorandum. This information will help to inform the consideration of TSP Alternatives to address existing and future needs. ee • The County will coordinate with ODOT and the incorporated communities to ensure consistency of individual roadway functional classification designations. Five roadways within the County were identified to have different County classification than another governing jurisdiction. • The County will continue to address needed roadway repairs through the ongoing maintenance program. • The County does not have any designated local freight routes connecting to local industrial or other key destinations. The alternatives evaluation may explore County freight routes to serve key economic priority areas identified by the County. � Two roadway segments were estimated to facilitate year 2040 traffic volumes that may result inLOSE or F conditions. The need for additional roadway capacity along theses roadways will be further 0 Deschutes Market Road at Greystone Ln 0 S Century Drive at Venture Lane /bopsmmnu�z�o�v»ouu�»�uo�buv�&��*uvnu�d�',admu�� +ww,igame*ote^ways refers wall wmeu*mc are currently used, were,used .nthe past, o'way uesusceptible muse minterstate mfo�eig" comwerce, including cill miters subject To the (A)b and flow of lhe tide Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan dun Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Safety ee s • This TSP update will explore the identified safety concerns and initial improvement concepts developed at the top County sites identified in the TSAP: o US20/Ward Road/Hamby Road o US97/Vandevert Road o US20/Fryrear Road o Burgess Road/Day Road/Pine Forest Drive o Bear Creek Road/Ward Road o Alfalfa Market Road/Dodds Road o US20/Old Bend Redmond Highway o US20/O.B. Riley Road/Cook Avenue o U597/61 st Street o US97/11th Street/Lower Bridge Way O 61 st Street/Quarry Ave/Canal Blvd o Northwest Way/Coyner Ave O Alfalfa Market Road/Walker Road O US97/Smith Rock Way/B Ave O Deschutes Market Road/Hamehook Road ui ca al eeds o U597/Burgess Road o U520/Hawks Beard (Black Butte Ranch) o El Camino Lane/Helmholtz Way o Canal Blvd/Helmholtz Way o Dickey Road/Nelson Road o US97/Galloway Ave o Butler Market Road & Powell Butte Highway o Butler Market Road & Hamby o Butler Market Road & Hamehook o Baker Road & Cinder Butte o S Century and Huntington o Cline Falls Rd/Coopers Hawk Drive/ Falcon Crest Drive o Lower Bridge Way/19th o Lower Bridge Way/31 st o Lower Bridge Way/43rd • Many of the County bikeways and highways do not have paved shoulders that are at least six feet wide. This lack of paved shoulders requires people biking to share the lane on these high-speed roads. • There are two Oregon Scenic Bikeways in the County which connect Sisters with Terrebonne and Bend with Tumalo as well as a partial that connects McKenzie Pass to Sisters.. These route likely experience some of the highest recreational bicyclist traffic in the County and will be reviewed related to providing facilities for people biking. • Small unincorporated communities currently lack dedicate pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Many of the roadways adjacent to schools or other pedestrian trip generators (parks, trail connections, rural commercial areas, etc.) located in Terrebonne and Tumalo are missing sidewalks. These facilities may be appropriate to connect to key destinations within the communities. Safe Routes to School funding may an option to assist with implementation of TSP recommendations in small communities. • The CET Master Plan has identified a number of locations for increasing frequency and service levels via existing Transit routes and Dial -A -Ride service. Connection to the CET facilities will be considered as part of TSP alternatives. Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan = The County will further evaluate the needs of three bridges identified as structurally deficient: o 8sennnveRoad atCouch Lateral (MP 677) o Gribb|ingRoad atCoiCanal (MP l.0) o Foot Bridge atCrooked River (MP O.0) /��[]y]���ud.�ces �r Appendix A/Land Use and Demographics Appendix B:Methodology Memorandum Appendix C: Pedestrian and Bicycle -Involved Crashes Reported on County Roads Appendix O:Bridge Inventory 52 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan U) c (D E , I is .t‘lld oot 401 t C --a ----------------- tz 2 0 0 ON A300.1.S ceivzo I HARMON RE:, O I I 2i 0 0 ON .A.R_IttcoiNon I0 5d2, ad AEAJO0 aN Noltvcoddv ON ovals Nwe cvaNA HAT RD 045 R tit 06 Dilna ssvo ON CD 0 NERSHALL RD • a Source: Deschutes County CL5 Grade School CD 0 CD .(=T a_ Point of Interest Community Buildings tig U) Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan :3?)D_Lina ssr- 0 , 2 2 2 cal \ „ tn o 0 g E 0 " EY • aa „FRYRP?,V'. 2 0 . 2 OOELS O lAIOS)INOV4 AE.1A03 Gb,NIVINriOn ----- , , ' Gel avai:saNwp,,,,,a 0 0 ) J E 0 0 0 0 E CL5 Population Density (People per Acre by Block Group) 0.00 - 0.08 0.09 - 0.16 0.17 - 0.34 cc 0 0 CD 3 A- coa o >. 0 U 0) 0) 0 ci 1.02 - 5.83 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 001 z < 0_ Z H- cc 001N CAN ADO 0.8 NiVINCIOA C16 OV-?,_i_SN180 "INA 1-11.k.,:r FY) Qkrij HARMON RD LLI LU Oa aLins ssv-ie NERSHALL 4 ; ACS 5YR 2019 Data Source: American Comunity Su Minoity Population (Percentage by Block Group) 'cr CO N-LON L() cc 0 0 0 ED. 3 0 C *0 0 0 I 7 .9 °/0 - 1 0 . 8 °/0 10.9% - 23.4% 91 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan o-. at : American Comunity Su 0 Population Age 65 and Older (Percentage by Block Group) 5 aD 17.1% - 21.8% 21.9% - 27.5% C C 0 0 3 a_ 0 16 0 13 ru .45 C:] 27.6% - 44.9% 45% - 82% Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan O 311118 SS V1-0 z ° z z CC v) < cc 0 0 .11 4= co ,, 0) 0 a) 3 1- , 0.0 o < . a_ 4- D DO 0 C) , . a) , E 45 o U -C c O U E a) < a 0 0 0 0 0 '5 o CL Population Under Age 18 (Percentage by Block Group) 0% - 10.6% 15.3% - 20.5% 20.6% - 23.1% 23.2% - 32.8% Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan o E z ° Z p_ CC 0 W CC 0 I . 66 3_uns SSVD HARMON RD, 06 3111-12 >1313C3`tiri „ 0 A.a)400.1S Vali:SNr8P22---" HAT RD/ ACS 5YR 2019 B a) E 0 () a L2c0 E a) 0 6 0 Households Below Poverty (Percentage by Block Group) CD CD CD co E a) (/) 0. Ca Ca 0. Ca 0 a) > 55 a) _c E N- C CNJ c\I a) a co 0 _co 0 0 x 1-11 0 u 0 Data Source: Ame Population with Disabilities (Percentage by Block Group) 0% - 10.4% 10.5% - 12.4% 12.5% - 18.2% N O t O) S2 � O 0 V) F = O H N O D 3.0 Qu O (al ao 18.3% - 21.6% 21.7% - 50.3% 1 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan N N N U fr 0 E Households with Limited English (Percentage by Block Group) 3.5% - 6.2% o& 0 6.3% - 11.5% 11.6% - 52.7% Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 311.09 SSV-10 z ° z CC v) < VI C (1) 0 11 7) CO (I)0 > 45 1: 0 c _c n o 7 0 v) = C E o 0 D U a a) U ,y, VI in D a) < 0 C) 6 2 7`. 0 0 Households without Vehicles (Percentage by Block Group) CU F- I— CN C CU C (o Lo 0 (N U) n, e• "os Otz-' o o Lo w .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. M ........ DRAFT METHODOLOGY MEMORANDUM Date: Thursday, March 11, 2021 To: Chris Doty, Peter Russell, and Cody Smith, Deschutes County From: Matt Kittelson, Julia Kuhn, and Carrie Theus Project: Deschutes County TSP Update Subject: Methodology Memorandum This memorandum documents the methodology and key assumptions to be used in preparation of the existing and future conditions and alternatives analyses for the Deschutes County Transportation System Plan (TSP) Update. The methodologies included in this memorandum are based on guidance provided in the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Transportation System Plan Guidelines and the Analysis Procedures Manual (APM). The methodology and assumptions described in this memorandum will be used to help identify potential gaps and deficiencies in the transportation system related to: • Future capacity needs along key roadways within the County; • Roadway connectivity needs for people driving, emergency services, access to tourism, and the transport of goods and services; • Traffic safety needs along key County facilities; and, • Facilities and performance of the bicycle and pedestrian network. This information will serve as a baseline for identifying a list of existing needs (gaps and deficiencies), identifying and evaluating potential solutions (projects, programs, policies, pilot projects, and studies), and developing a prioritized list of improvements for the TSP update. The remainder of this memorandum summarizes the following: • Location of the roadway segments where safety and capacity analyses will be conducted; • Methodology for developing vehicular analyses volumes for existing and future conditions; • Methodology for identifying roadway segments that are nearing and/or exceeding capacity; • Crash analyses procedures; and, • Pedestrian and bicycle analyses parameters. Study Area The TSP update will address the transportation system needs associated with County -operated facilities in areas that are outside the Bend, Redmond, Sisters, and La Pine Urban Growth Boundaries (UGBs). Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Transportation facilities that are operated and maintained by ODOT, the Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and the four cities are not addressed. Figure reflects the roadway segments where capacity analysis wiUberevevvedaspartnftheTSP.The County has collected daily traffic counts at many of these locations each year, beginning in 2011 through 20l0.Totheextentpossib|e'the20l0countsvvi||beusedtodeve|npyear^2020proxyvo|urnes^tnrefect existing conditions. Traffic Capacity ^ , ���/ / »�� `_������('� ` o n��\/�f�\ r � For the purposes of performing a screening level review of both potential roadway capacity as well as connectivity needs along county roadways, we propose to apply the "Simplified Highway Capacity Method for the Highway Performance System" that was developed for use by the Federal Highway Administration.' The rural two-lane highway methodology within this report can be used as one of several helpful tools that can be used to help assess the future needs of the County's roadway system. For reference purposes, the methodology draws from the applicable roadway characteristics to assess a level of service, including: o Daily roadway volumes; o Posted speed; o Generalized terrain information; and, o Percentage nftrucks. However, for non -mountainous roadways, the methodology does not reflect any measurable differences in expected level of service for terrain and truck percentages. As an example, level -of -service "Y corresponds to the following: o PostedSoeedof45nni|espe/hour-dai|yvo|unlesof|essthanl3/)UOvehides o Posted Speed of 50 miles per hour - daily volumes of less than 19,000 vehicles o Posted Speed of 55 miles per hour - daily volumes of less than 24,000 vehicles We will use the level -of -service "D" as the metric for which to identify potential changes to the roadway system. This metric can be matched with an assessment of various roadways versus the TSP goals and identified roadway connectivity and/or specific roadway projects neededtusupportcondnuedecononnic development, emergency services, freight needs, resiliency efforts, etc. I .fhwadotgov/poUcyinformation/pubs/p|l8003/hpms cappdf Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive La TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN ci) 0 WONA C a Ca '0 Q /4 0 <T, LARIAT 14/ 11/INDIO 0 H cc Ca cc 0 • c, </r , -mi-011 1 J i ...... Sisters I — -I — — UGB I ,g7 0 'Sisters -2 I 11— L...7 --5 i I en 77, i.... 0 REMUDA RD * 4. RD BUFFALO DR Ca 5 • • Ca Ca C Ca a Ca 0 0 0 Ca 0 ° ',PARKIN RD >. KENT RD •S- 0 4- 0 CASCADE ESTATES DR FADJUR LN 4TH AVE SAGE RANCH R co F. C.0 PLAIN VIEW RD LIUZ cr Th 0 Ca Ca Ca JERICHO RD 0 Ca Ca 0 • Study Location 0000, Railroads Parks Water Cities UGB County Figure Data Source: Deschutes County Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Study Locations Sisters Area, Oregon E r I ql: /1/1„. Pc, • 0 it- c:Aov 1-- to 0 tr c-) 2 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN 0 •• U to Co Cr cc 0 7 „to Rgz MV MATER AVE DGE WAY tr.1 0 A z NVv sRuBsTAt-- 6 co NW COYNER AVE EAGLE CREST BLVD NEVLCOMB RD HARPER RD o J :JtVo FO1 , • ' , • ° 9F3 Oi HYNES MARKET RD ' MARSH RD 2O 0 O Q :',' - .f6 ,., ft c) JW BRO,WN RD 0 1H .,: .., Ce ,,''' ''', :. g-2 ' 6- : 6 cc- Co-666- CONNARN RD° '2' Zi (.9 Z q R. 4 Lu .-..-, ,-,-, 0 -7' .,:oRUDI RD co Co Co 0' A z NW SPRUCE AVE 0 Co Co Co 0 A Co Co co CAVE tAlO- 41! s NW °DEVI AVE ,..... O.- CP Co Co LU LU Co NE ALNUT Y sPiAti ONEIL WAN m Aktm -4 -.. J '. .,1 I' — i . : X Co , 4 I NE UPAS AVE in ' ..- 1 .7,.1 TiI •,'''' Z i---, —>C1:1 ' ' I I N.t, I to J X I xx ' . — I xi 7-3 z 0 J • NW MAPLE H Co 4x, Co —I 4 I Co xi A.' 1„ ' -21 1_,.., ‹. m I, P. , t w g W ANTLER, AVE z IlE ANTLER MitlE ANTLER AVE . , - '',, xx_ ,,,.) Red(ilopit r I x x UGB.' g Redmond LU 2 w • + f.o I— I • U) Ti Cs4 0 _ N IIVI .. o F.o - 0 SW OBSIDIAE .. Co ., 4 H U) SW 9UARTZ AVE; 0 U) SW SALMON AVE H co m _ III 0 Pt H U) — — — F.- .a 0 I F, !I.! ., rKati 0 i I e 0 0 4JL, I • () •,,,,,,F .." •••• ..0......ri'' Co x / I I ,110) - FT Z. co n Co SW MCVEY AVE to H Co A • YOUNG AVE .09 AVE GIFT RD Co cc 0' Li, Co 47' 0 53 • Study Location Railroads Parks Water Cities UGB County (i) H Co 200 a° 027.0- H CO Co X ' M 0 1.14Fo '0 Jr 0 LIMESTONE AVE r C') 9,17, .4 STURGEON RD cf) 2, A-, „.„...X H I i co o co 1-- 89.7CoH 1 0 F.- cn S29---, -,,, .. 0 sv SV1 4.,,' 4 DA A Co MORRILL RD Li Co -0 Co O 0 Co Co Co C Co 1 , 5i-iies Data Source: Deschutes County Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Study Locations Redmond Area, Oregon C 73, TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN LL. OO 06, a 69 co eN • L • Co 2 o Co O a Co c6 Co Co 0 Co Coee., TUMALO RESERVOIR RD <b. • Study Location Railroads Parks Water Cities UGB County 5KYL1NE RANCH R D 0 I. Co Co I 13= w r 0 --13 Co '-< 4S9 ..4'..1.. c3 ;,:1,-tll 6,-501 ,Lu Z 116 .:., .. 5 N...'. ' : W '' ' - - REPINE DRz°7) C,9 (4.-, Z.!..61-,Z. ' .., - \ " 0, -.„ " ,I ,. (r) Zi ' '', I 'Co17 -.0 0 LU 2I1 a L I RD 6 .k,1 ,,,, '0' PCo ........... •i:" ,-.4 LD X ''. th' i! L12.1 t ZNE NEFF RD Z' NW PORTLAND AVE:5; E- ....-.6. z W C° CO ito Co Z i I lo -r H z F-- s- CA IN u) Z Q M z 0 Co LLI TUMALO RD C cc z c (7) ..a. X 0 Z 0 0 w 0 0 cc Z H w w Co 0 cc zi R SERE RD .,z\eRY LH i -r— 2 o 0 u4 z • g 6, .., .,, H _,,p,_.,9•L., r — i Z ,0 1 U o Co 0 ‘ cipOLEY RD T ,z z Bend,, Bend UGB I Fri H SE RE:IIMARET RD EN'S RD I I rzzz — — So 011 Co reRG,- Oiv R MORRILL RD • BUTLER MARKET RD 41p NELSON RD LU 0 • ERICKSON RD O LU 3 Ct 0 • re • 01 cc -F- K- / , IL o /z Dzix u F iz Co CO .. X 0 1. 7/ rn 1, ''. Il< • SHOLES RE) Co a N. 00 e 0 Vi RD ?1, OR RD Z CH0c, 0 ••• -3 a iib .= R. 7. Co 0- °N),(' 4. Co > Z O ..S. Z. X' Li I ci ° Co COW SC Co r' 0 > >-. < 111 II < LIJ a Co 0 Z ; < -, Z 1 0 X u, Co Co if I CHINA HAT RD z i. 0 z' 1,1 — —400 • rt- , 0+ IS 4:z- svki REEDWARKEr N ,,,p';) --- - PO ME11-.° 1Co 0 ,S 10 > ..' Ili ,t7 MURPHY GRAF,- -RAE RD Co vaji000 ''' gii RD ni IF_/ 0 ‘ I au CK G-ANZZA I SEAR CREEK RD I -91,O 0 CoI z U Co < J.NZ RD • Co • • RICKARD RD RD L5TAiles 0 Data Source: Deschutes County Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Study Locations Bend Area, Oregon TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN • BOUNDARY RD • 0 C2 44/ CQ SPRING RIVER RD • if • • 6- 0E, s rib 4r. COVINA RD ELSINORE RD GLENDALE RD JACINTO RD ff) LU I‘Ct. ?t0 tti) • 1:11 cs a 0 0 Et 0 lij 01 %02 DR •_• a -k(5" N 'RK DR LAVA DR ri) TWIN DR • utt c.1 • co N. • PARKWAY DR sut DAWN RD GREEN FOREST RD 73 LN D ALPINE DR DYKE RD 3 DEEDON RD am LEONA LN 0 al n_ n • Study Location Railroads Egan Parks Water Cities UGB County N > 0 MASTEN RD JACKPINE LOOP NE STATE RECREATIoN R • • jAGLE RD II z z a I: , z a I / L L I Et I ti Lii <, OW 1 r Sib • ET _I II o x I La Pine w ..1 Q Z ct 0 Q k'. C2 cn DAVIS AVE Eti I Cil / ji. — — — i La Pine:, I W UGB, 0 I r ''''' I.1 gi RIM DR I It — — -1 c.,91 REED R It ,t,',k1 REED RD RD O <1 I ,H, cm ▪ I tH • 6TH ST L — • .---:,ir IEJ 1 I • H il S) PIERCE RD FINLEY BUTTE RD ' i 4.1, j Z O II ----1 Q O 11 ,..... Z I, ▪ it a i iAi PA ist.1/44 NEWBERRY RD IT z • Figure Data Source: Deschutes County Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Study Locations South County Area, Oregon hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Exi-stingYear Traffic Volumes With the ongoing COV|D pandennicand its effect on "typical" traffic patterns, we propose toapply a two - percent growth factor to the 2019 traffic volumes on most County roadways to approximate 2020 daily volumes. We will coordinate with County staff to identify any specific facilities where a higher growth may be appropriate relative to 2019 counts. Further, given the planning -level screening analyses that we propose to use, we are not intending to apply any seasonal adjustment factors to daily traffic volumes along County roadways. Forecast Year Traffic Volume Development The 2012Courty TSPrelied nntravel forecasts from the travel demand model developed byODOT's Transportation Planning Analysis Unit (TPAU). This model has not been updated with current land use information for existing conditions or future analysis years so we instead reviewed ODOT's future highway volume table for potential growth rates toapply tnthe ^cxisting^volumes tnapproximate year 2O40 conditions. This review revealed that a two percent per year (linear, non -compounded) rate could be used to reflect future growth along County roadways. This review was based on several locations along the state highway system within Deschutes County, such as: o U597atthe Jefferson County/Deschutes County line -l.9percent per year; o US07north ofl'tStreet inLaPine -l.8percent per year; o Powell Butte Highway west of Deschutes County/Crook County line - 3.2 percent per year; o McKenzie Highway west ofSisters -l.8percent per year; o McKenzie -Bend Highway near Cline Falls Highway - 2.1 percent per year; and, o SantiornHighway west ofSisters -0.4percent per year. Unless otherwise identified by the County at specific roadway segments, we will apply a linear two -percent per year growth rate for screening purposes. Crash � | V `_���//^����/s��s � The County completed its Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) for the areas outside the City UGBs in 2019. As part of the TSAP, all roads within unincorporated areas of the county were screened for the need for near -term or longer -term safety -oriented changes. Through that work, high priority improvement needs as well as systemic investment strategies were identified. Long-term concepts which may require further refinement are also identified. As part of the TSP, we propose to include key outcomes of the TSAP, including both the near -term and longer- termprojects identified. We do not propose any additional quantitative review of crash history and/or crash countermeasures. We do, however, propose to evaluate the potential for incorporation of the safety -oriented projects into projects being considered to address other TSP goals. Locations where such analysis would be useful will be identified through the existing and future conditions analysis. Exhibit D to Ordinance 17 dun Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Analysis o Cycli j kin a Transit Options The analysis of facilities for people walking, riding bikes and/or taking transit is anticipated to focus on the following: o Using available GIS data, field observations and online mapping, qualitatively identify key gaps within the bicycle system connecting unincorporated areas of the County with the City's UGBs as well as key recreational areas. o Within the Terrebonne, Deschutes River Woods, and Tumalo communities, qualitatively identify key gaps within the sidewalk and/or trail system, particularly related to connecting residents with school bus stops. o Incorporate the Central Eastside Transit (CET) Master Plan recommendations. Ir corporation of Other Plans We plan to incorporate by reference a number of ongoing and/or recently adopted plans into the TSP update for the County. Examples of these plans include, but are not limited to: o Redmond TSP; o Bend TSP; o Sisters TSP; o La Pine TSP; o Deschutes County Transportation Safety Action Plan; o Redmond and Bend Airport Master Plans; o Applicable elements of local refinement plans, corridor plans, etc.; o Interchange Area Management Plans (e.g., Baker Road, Lower Bridge Way), etc. Next St4 We look forward to collaborating with you on the next steps and receiving your feedback on the methodology and key assumptions outlined in this memorandum. Exhibit D to Ordinance 20237017 7 Comprehensive Plan Apoppdikt Transportation Sjstom Plan ,e, r- ..................................................................... ..... z zz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Oggggggggg M`dM `d3M;;;; `d;� `d g''a'a�'aa vaaaa ,33333333, ¢'0¢ VM;isM`d`d;`d M:44';3 `d `d �`d `d Aq ��a'aaaaxan�a'a�aaa�aa�aa���a�aaaa�'a�a���aa� zzzzz>zz»z»z»»»»»zzz»»»»»»»» »»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»zzz>z»> in U w w w w U U U F w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w 0 0 0 0 0 w 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 04 �z �z. 2 2 2 MOM 2 wGGOwwss(0� 0<0 > D D O O O O O O O IN CO �w �a �a q� �� w�❑�S o U o zz zz 2 2 2 2 S S'J S'2 LL S � O ror 0 0 r0r 2 0 2 2 2 2 00 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan \))))){))))))))))///\/)/)))))))))§)))))//) ________________________:_________ mmEl 000 zoo co Z 0 0 0 _0 0 0 0 0 0 _0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _0 00 :_ _________�� gggggg ##############7#####Z######ct of 7##77»»###7ctrnct ##»«###J#22»24h <tc # \\¥� §z!! !!» .zz /§ ) :K § Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan _(\ ! ¥§ .82 )\ 333336 48 /§ c,r„:¥ MMM ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZa::::::ZZZZZZ________ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ_=====aZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZTZZZZZZ_ZZZZZ \\\\\\\\ _______________________ :)/:)))))!))))))/ }//6861, 6686> ZZZZZDD ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::a::::::::::::a::::::a:::::a::::a::::::::::::::a:::::aa::::: §(„ §;,�§ �{{{{}{\\{(\6j nn / FFFF 333 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 6,00 444444 0000000.022222222 555 333 00 §§§/000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 7,3 \ZE 666 ggggggg ocociicocococomz gggggggggg 2,22222.22.2 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222 1111ill=lii:::::::;:::::::::::::::::::!!!!!!!!!!!38§H§§§§g33§§§H§3833§§§§§§SSESSSSSS 0' W 00W�z� {0 r K > Q > ' K U K W 0 0' w UCSUUUo 00 N � Q 0 8. ZZ N ¢ > Z 6 �0 V FE ES 8383. 0 0 0 4. Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan tgAitiVAIVAIVAIVO Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan DRAFT FINAL TRANSPORTATION PROJECT MEMORANDUM Date: September 23, 2022 To: Chris Doty, Peter Russell, and Cody Smith, Deschutes County From: Matt Kittelson, Julia Kuhn, and Daniel Bowers Project: Deschutes County TSP Update Subject: 2040 Transportation Projects This memorandum presents potential changes to the transportation system that could help address existing and future needs in Deschutes County. The needs were identified through feedback obtained from County residents, partner agency staff and by technical analyses of roadways, intersections, bike facilities, transit, walking routes, and transportation safety. Many of the identified changes help to support plans that are identified by the local cities, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), other County planning efforts, the Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) and/or local refinement and facility plans. For planning purposes and the County's future considerations related to the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the alternatives identified have been prioritized as high, medium and low, and cost estimates are provided for each. The information contained in this memorandum is presented primarily in graphical and tabular form with supporting text to further clarify/supplement the information. The recommended multimodal transportation projects are organized into the following categories for implementation based on complexity, likely availability of funding, and assessment of need: • Intersection changes, • Roadway segments, including changes to functional classification, • ODOT intersections and roadways, • Pedestrian facilities, • Bicycle facilities • Bridges, • Federal Land Access Program (FLAP) roads, • Transit, and, • Safety Some projects may be accelerated and others postponed due to changing conditions, funding availability, public input, or more detailed study performed during programming and budgeting processes. Further, project design details may change before construction commences as public input, available funding, and unique site conditions are taken into consideration. Projects identified herein may be funded through a variety of sources including federal, state, county or local transportation funds, system development charges (SDCs), through partnerships with private developers, or a combination of these sources. In addition, as part of TSP implementation, the County will continue to coordinate with ODOT and the local communities regarding project prioritization, funding and construction. Exhibit,D to Ordinance 2023-017m- Comprehensive Plan ApPendix C - Trans,,portation_Svstem Plan hechgie\MemorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan �| n�� ~�/� f |���l�8����������7 |�-����x����~��/�x�x�/ The May 2021 Existing Conditions and Future Needs Memo (herein referred to as the "May 2021 memo") summarized year 2021 and projected year 2040 needs related to people driving, riding bikes, walking, taking transit and moving freight. The needs were identified through feedback from the County and partner agency staff, through a technical analyses, and from feedback received from County residents. As summarized in that memo, there are a number ofchanges tothe transportation system that could be implemented in the next ZU years to enhance safety and mobility for all users. These potential transportation system changes formed the basis of the projects and associated costs outlined in the enclosed memo. PROJECT/-0S'TC The estimated construction costs for each project are provided inthe subsequent tables. These costs are onder' of-magnitude(e.g,p|annin8'|eve|)estimatesthataocountfnrright'of-way design engineering, and construction and generally include a 30 percent contingency factor'. The costs were calculated for each project using the methodology and procedures recommended by the American Association of Cost Engineers (Class 5 estimates). All costs are rounded to the nearest $100,000 and provided in 2021 dollars. The detailed costs include all estimation assumptions aswell as any deviations related to unique topographic, ri8ht'of-way' or other constraints. Where applicable, cost estimates include anticipated project funding that would provide bicycle or pedestrian facilities, including usable shoulder space. Costs for individual transit corridors are not provided. The County and Cascades East Transit (CET) will continue to collaborate on capital improvements and strategic policies that can help implement more robust transit service throughout the County. UQT��}��/—T-�/l��/—��������� o/v /u_v�_/x_��/ o��+� CHANGES' As discussed in the May 2021 memo, the needs assessment at intersections focused on both vehicular capacity as well as potential geometry changes identified by the Project Advisory Committee as well as projects identified through the TSAP. Two locations were identified where vehicular capacity changes would be needed in the next twenty years, including Deschutes Market Road at Greystone Lane, and S Century Drive at Venture Lane. Given the location of these roadways in proximity to the Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and Sunriver, respectively, the County will coordinate implementation of potential changes at these locations with the City and local community. The T6Pisnot inclusive ofall nfthe intersection projects that the County will pursue over the next twenty years. Rather, these have been identified as projects that the County can pursue to strategically improve the operational efficiency of specific intersections and important roadways. These projects can enhance system operations and can be completed ayopportunities arise. In all cases, the County will review the appropriate ,Contigency factor cleterridned hamd on the scope iiid scfle of Vie plaoiled project With larger projects typically utilizioq a lcirqerm^tigr"q/faom, hechgie\MemorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan intersection control options at the time of project development and delivery. The projects are illustrated in Figure 1and in Table l. co FRYREAR z 0 z cc cc I— Z < I w I w w Et w 0 En 0 0 --E cc cc -et 1 1 wcf*, w„03 lc' a cc a cc 0 cc Oi ,A3>{002S oeizsummll. OR DELIne SSVO I et. I 'CI'VZI-i I I HARMON RD I __Ocd I 4.2i„ I /A ! OR siine NERSHIALE RD OR Nt244-)Otv OR OVaLSNLR0 cvAINP. HAT RD Lu :11 0 0 ?I V 0 CASCADE LAKES HWY - w i 0. ----tr-'2-21\ —1\1 2 '2 -"Li rks, Deschutes County Data Source: ODOT, Oregon County Intersection Project Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan zzjizE 06 ,,:oc \ scio`0; o os0C0\%1 5,,,P5eG Deschutes County Transportation System Plan r i. 0 V } H C 0 N 0 CC 0 z 0 4 O ROUNDABOUT BUTLER MARKET RD POWELL BUTTE HWY O CD CN O N ROUNDABOUT SPRING RIVER RD S CENTURY DR N O O O 4 O O 4Nh ROUNDABOUT SOUTH CENTURY DR HUNTINGTON RD REALIGNMENT ONEAL HWY F- Ln F- w z O 0 o O O t/} o O O Q Z N 0 >- BURGESS RD S 2 LEFT TURN LANES (NORTHWEST WAY ONLY) NORTHWEST WAY COYNER RD O O O 4 O (NT 0 w ROUNDABOUT VANDERVERT RD S CENTURY DR REALIGNMENT, LEFT TURN LANE NW 43RD ST 00 Deschutes County Transportation System Plan T 0 a Z O ratTOMMIC 0 cc REALIGNMENT, LEFT TURN LANE PLEASANT RIDGE RD GRAYSTONE LN rn 4 O M SIGNAL WITH TURN LANES GRAYSTONE LN O U N ROUNDABOUT OR REALIGNMENT S CENTURY DR VENTURE LN O O O O O i!} REALIGNMENT MCVEY AVE S CANAL BLVD N V O O O O' O N yr REALIGNMENT CHEYENNE RD CINDER BUTTE RD en V O O O O O REALIGNMENT 0 CC LU J JOHNSON RD O O O O O N O O O O O en yr ROUNDABOUT OR REALIGNMENT COOK AVE/TUMALO RD CLINE FALLS HWY O O O O O M 0 w REALIGNMENT SW YOUNG AVE S CANAL BLVD O O O O O N INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS CINDER BUTTE RD 0 en CC L1 O] endix C - Trans C c6 .N C L N E O 0 N 0 r> N O: N 4T U c6 0 0 0 n L: LX : a. c rn Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 0 V O w W Z m0 a 0 V T z 0 a :Till too �T:Tl iGP N 0 0 CC rl 0 0 CC TURN LANES/REALIGNMENT NW 19TH ST NW LOWER BRIDGE WAY co O O N O J REALIGNMENT REDMOND HWY O J TURN LANES NW 31STST NW LOWER BRIDGE WAY U O 0} 711 O J SIGNAL/TURN LANES BROOKSWOOD BLVD 0 CC LU Y hechgie\MefnorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan ����8����8\y/-��M���ES As discussed in the May 2021 memo, the needs assessment identified strategic roadway corridors where vehicular capacity and/or changes to the roadway characteristics may be needed to help support future growth and economic development in the region as well as to enhance the safety of all users. The identified projects also can help to strength connections between areas of the County and to other areas in Central Oregon. These projects are illustrated in Figure 2 and Table Z The projects identified in Figure ZvviU be implemented overtime to reflect changing needs for the various users of the transportation system and economic development opportunities. In reviewing Figure Z, it is helpful to note that many existing roadways within the County area not built to current County standards and that not all roadways within the County will be rebuilt to match these standards over the next twenty years. It is also important to note that changes to existing roadways (beyond those identified in the TSP) may be required as part of future land use approvals consistent with the roadway functional classification requirements. |naddition tnthe roadway changes, the County iyproposing changes tnthe existing functional classification system based on review byCounty staff, input from stakeholders, and coordination with partner agencies. These changes will occur as part of TSP implementation. These are recommended changes are shown in Figure 3 and Table 3. 0 SHILMN 'cP MN 1)0 MN _LS _LS 1,tSN ONCC SN rrrrr ogIvw4E51 U - ▪ NVII 62ND ST a 0-£6 MN 53 0553 MN NW COEN ER AVE a_ a z 0 LU a IS IS AAN " '(+.0 1 MN z ad 0 ci S1-7* CONE BUU FIT RD C6. "liel-a-i3 3s 0 iS HiLL MS a a 9 HARPER RD S V10 ----- , - - --wit ....... MON411•07..Im mmmmm _ EN S 0,A i :, ' E° '1 frilli`J'4'S 9 0 : =J I 0 CS '6NVG FRYREAS 0 cC CC CS z 0 z Z t,4 a S' 7-7 7 1:t 0 Li., tX 41 7 4 0 0 4 0 U. 0 ...) EX 4 U-. ...J 4 a 0 OS AY>C0iS 05 Q RI SNWO cvIINA HAT RD FS 41 sweg sov"'"I DR , CO CD CASCADE LAKES HWY -- "n• rks, Deschutes Source: ODOT, Oregon County Road Projects County Road Extension Projects Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan ',vv.; sd,w; s.ww,ps<p\„s1. 50,405,DC. 7967, 11 Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 4'0Li V/ 0 O 6 LIJ Z LIJ • z cTi 0 LIJ I— CC VI O E t.) tel 0 [014441M211.1.1 0 cc z co cc NEW ROAD RODGERS RD Li HUNNELL RD LI Li CD CD en RECONSTRUCTION/ PAVE TUMALO RD RODGERS RD HUNNELL RD Li Li CN 6CD WIDEN & OVERLAY RR XING/UGB TERREBONNE HIGHWAY 97 SMITH ROCK WAY en Li Li IN 0 en WIDEN & OVERLAY BUCKHORN RD V) CC NW LOWER BRIDGE WAY Li Li C:) CD WIDEN & OVERLAY HOLMES RD BUCKHORN RD NW LOWER BRIDGE WAY Li Li en IN uJ 15 z z LLJ BOZEMAN TRAIL KNOTT RD/27TH ST RICKARD RD Li Li CD CD en uJ < • H CZ UJ 0 CC Z r3- = 0 L.) BURGESS RD M SUNRISE LN i L CD CD CD r•-• I UJ WIDEN & OVERLAY N. CANAL BLVD ONEIL HWY cia Li Li E tr) C 0 'C 0 C H C U 11) Ti 0 Cti 4„d (01 U 1• (16) Z w w • Z Fa' 0 o. 0 U tol O E LU 111,134111-211.101 cc w u.. cc 2 uJ WIDEN & OVERLAY S. CANAL BLVD Li Li CD en LU WIDEN & OVERLAY COLLINS RD OR RILEY RD TUMALO RESERVOIR RD Li C). co 2 LU NW ODEM AVE NW LOWER BRIDGE WAY NW 19TH ST Li CD CD en in- C CD I LU CC < HLU Z < Ln > 0 cC 0 U cs >- NW 19TH ST NW ODEM AVE en 0, 2 I LU WIDEN & OVERLAY ANTLER AVE SW HELMHOLTZ WAY en Li CD 2, c) en WIDEN & OVERLAY SMITH ROCK WAY ONEIL HWY uZi ct F- LU V1 V) L-) F- 1— 0 Ln Lc) co LU LU CC z LU UJ L.) Z 2 < .7r Ln 0} 9 WIDEN & OVERLAY NE WILCOX RD 6, LU Ln M Ui >- LLS < > < Lu Lu >- Z Z 00 Z Z H UJ Lr) > ▪ < Ln Li C). co 0} LU CC < • Z • LU LII > 0 Z O — L.) LAZY RIVER DR LU LL u • Z • < Z LU LU F- CC Z • < Cl L0 Li CC O • H • Z Z < 0 • > CC Z O — Li cc F_ O Ez L" H Li ° V) (.5 L1-1 Z < Z Li) 0 00 00 STELLAR DR END OF LU Li Z < H 74-C Y- 2 =, z L.) Z • - < r:L 00cC —10°0 LU 11±' ‘2' < — O > Z cc < < Li 0 7j CS Z LU CC Li nance 2023-017 Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 1,1 O 6 ca. "••••. Z 6,1 • z RI 0 o. 0 tol LU O E ratiorxiiiromituoridoi 0 z LU LLI 0 0 co 0 CZ) CN (5- rn 9 ROADWAY EXTENSION BNSF RR CROSSING END OF PAVEMENT - SW 19TH ST SW 19TH ST ROADWAY EXTENSION US 97 (@SW QUARRY AVE) BNSF RR CROSSING SW 19TH ST C L.) 0C 0, -L11- 9 ROADWAY EXTENSION DESCHUTES MARKET RD H c>• 2 o < n 1.3 z Z < 0 00 CC COOLEY RD C.) Li CD oo 0, 0 ROADWAY EXTENSION MASTEN RD H Li CZ) CD 0 9 0 < < O ZcrC ZLUUJ < > HLUO > ›- 0 F— CC Z Z 0- LU = ° O — LA PINE STATE REC. RD SOUTH CENTURY DR FOSTER RD C.) L.) VD CD cz5- 0 WIDEN & OVERLAY HUNTINGTON RD 0 cc >0 - BURGESS RD rn r-4 C.) Li 00 0, WIDEN & OVERLAY LAPINE STATE REC. RD z CC LU CC 5TH ST (LA PINE) 0. 0 WIDEN & OVERLAY NW HELMHOLTZ WAY NW 35TH ST W. ANTLER AVE C) Li L.) 0, CD CD CD 9 WIDEN &OVERLAY HIGHWAY 97 ONEIL HWY N. CANAL BLVD L.) o_ E C o_ C H C Li (1,C _co ci 1,1 U o ca. "••••. Z 6,1 z Fa- 0 o. 0 U col LU 0 E LU w LU ci ci C)ci ci 00 +Jr ci ci ci c ci 00 9 WIDEN & OVERLAY RICKARD RD ci rtt4 ci GOSNEY RD Li CD CD C:D ci ci +A - CD 8 ci ci ci ttzt- 0 WIDEN & OVERLAY NW LOWER BRIDGE WAY NW SEDGEWICK H LII CO Li ci ci ci ci ci CN ci ci ci ci ci WIDEN & OVERLAY NW SEDGEWICK AVE NORTHWEST WAY NW ALMETER WAY ry Li ci ci ci ci c, ci cc' ci ci LU WIDEN & OVERLAY TUMALO RESERVOIR RD ci ci ci ci >LU LU ci - cc, cc, Li ci CZ) ci ci ci ci ci ci CN 0, 9 WIDEN & OVERLAY 0 ci CITY LIMITS BEAR CREEK RD Li ci ci ci ci c, ci cc' ci ci LU WIDEN & OVERLAY MINNETONKA LN CC CC L1-1 00 CINDER BUTTE RD ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci 0, 0 LU WIDEN & OVERLAY NW COYNER AVE MAPLE AVE NW HELMHOLTZ WAY ci CZ) ci ci ci ci ci ci 0 LU 2 ci , cc LU >- LL 5 < z LU Ea' 0 LIJ F.: 7.7. 000 • cc z 0 UJ Z • E E Lici X W > ci BURGESS RD SOUTH CENTURY DR HUNTINGTON RD cn Li CD ci ci ci ci CN in ci ci CD ci c, ,r) in WIDEN & OVERLAY SW 58TH ST SW HELMHOLTZ WAY SW WICKIUP AVE cn Li c o ci at (1)1, Ci co a- .ci a)Cl UI co Ci 0 0' at -C LLI 0rr Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 0 U o a W Z w • Z m0 a 0 V • E Q V1 W C 0 172 Z 0 F- 0 W W CO 0 0 0 O J w } U- MAJESTIC ROCK DR 4TH ST (TERREBONNE) O J H H F AVE (TERREBONNE) m U 0 O J CENTRAL AVE Lu U- 5TH ST (TERREBONNE) H H H Ln H H AVE (TERREBONNE) 0 0. O O O O J REALIGNMENT 0 en Q 0 H Ln 2 H V} z J en W O WIDEN & OVERLAY BURGESS RD z J CC LU cen 0 en } 0 V U U 0 O O O O O J WIDEN & OVERLAY NW ALMETER WAY NW 19TH AVE NW SEDGEWICK AVE N V U IS OHEp 6 I LAS MO 0 Z , Is a d IS HILL MS •-• LJ r IS O'HSZ. 10. La 0 rr ir 0 ====44442 '4.2J (1`VF 3L OrthNiv foo •SP [M,WISEL DwYkO_C*SAN 4---1144-41th, I fa' OH 3nne 018S0,4, LIW,4,1,4yekt, CASCAOE LAKES C 0 (.3 a Source: Desch a) -cs -cs cs) cs) ca. D cr) (r) CO CO • 0 CD CD c c o o o o c c Li U CD a) Future Arterial CO (1) • c Co T, a) u •_ 4- o U >, vi 0 u ce 7D U u_ VP a 0 cr_ >, CO .c -a 8 i 2 a) E 2 ▪ 3 5. o o 'E 0 u_ _1 D Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 44),4.1 14,..1g4o44, 044,444d44,4 4.;4; \ 44.4o4'4 s44-44444,ps si6`„,54 4(4,1,3 (00�44,424742,.., w Deschutes County Transportation System Plan I- . r • i •I I i aui T ir.T r1IP Z 0 0 2 0 cc 0 Ja.Tz.114—C COLLECTOR NW CHINOOK AVE NW LOWER BRIDGE WAY H 0 cc M COLLECTOR NW 59TH ST NW HELMHOLTZ WAY NW MAPLE AVE } H r ✓ p cc w W j p O w HOUL¢0LU>=V z LL w Z H 5 LL Q O H ❑Zhz ❑cc LLw H CC Z V) W iJ LL W - a❑ X LL> O w H ❑ V W} W H N O UJZ0H00 Q 2 LL n J z u0ta. ,w,viwv~1 Q a O 0 0¢ w O < • H. Z O V l7 w H W p¢ W= CCz Z; Z Z E W O W❑ a H w V 0¢ m o O Z> W Q z V 00 0 ¢ H J LL J ETC w NW HELMHOLTZ WAY NW 35TH ST NW MAPLE AVE M z ¢ w O O z • w O J 0 � ¢ Q Z 0 w ZLLZcp • V Q J 0 p Z u z Q Z H z w H L/1 O = w ¢ �} w w p W Q¢ q Z ❑ 0 p � CC ❑ i7 Ov LU 0 H H } CC H ❑ LL • Q Z COLLECTOR 4 V J S CANAL BLVD rn 0 SW QUARRY AVE z 0 w Lei ▪ Q v w f— LU = W H Z CCz ❑ }VO L U < N � � Q ❑ H 2 H N oOC Z 0 LL • ¢ • W W W lJ Vt J ¢ ¢ V1 LL COLLECTOR PLEASANT RIDGE RD DESCHUTES MARKET RD GRAYSTONE LN u MARKET ROAD z p Z p ❑ H CC Z � � } ❑ CC YCLf.¢ v, �ww H ¢ V z ZLU N cC W ° CC LL O COLLECTOR rn L 0 GRAYSTONE LN PLEASANT RIDGE RD w J cCC Ca O ❑ NZLri UOQ zw< Z Ca CC 0 LL LU V O Z H w 2 ¢ V W Lt H CC LL Z ¢ ¢ LU 0H W Q O K N- ¢ LL COLLECTOR MORRILL RD DESCHUTES MARKET RD H v, S H N- 1675' SEGMENT THAT CONNECTS TO RURAL 0 Z WO Z w w CC CC LL W J ❑ _ ¢ w H V Z Vi O ¢ CC —IW ❑ V7 ¢ CC ¢ ZzCC ▪ W J_ E 0 Li cc cc Z � Q ❑ CC ¢ LL COLLECTOR MCGRATH RD H Ln 2 H MORRILL RD m endix C - Trans 2023-017 - Corn 0 0 0 Deschutes County Transportation System Plan q § / S '7ZeIZ0i9 § 0 g U u Lu <u < 0 //� /H //\ E /g I o £ o H 7 j /H� /j /222 z 0 5( y& <0 d zz }g= <0 50CC §� j 2 9 2E <z vs <zo\ §Z \I/ /\cc }\z �§ �\ j/s ju4� j/7< _� u z2= =o >_ �< >>± =++ 03 /< /® ©®3 ©00U ©E)@ }2 LU c00 /j\ ej} ca =% \)e /_�� \g=) jz jzu 0ym j£, /� �D °// 3W0 �= z\0 u=2 zz <\ \° /_< \_/° /___ <0 zu= 1<U §a% 3f <ƒ Io0 1cc i/\ as ° °0 °°Z c= e +u 7 %f §/) H < uo §z <+ a\� S>0 a\<= <+ 0 c< g±% y±/ 0<Y= 0< sy= z$ <z ®/ 5> E =o- z» LU Lu c� %5 3° - {\= uz {\/< — fz j < • < 0 <-Z <0 <-LU z 0 // § O \ + » ec e� H. / COLLECTOR \ MORRILL RD MCGRATH RD COLLECTOR 0 MCGRATH RD DESCHUTES MARKET RD 0 LLI CC % \ 0 COUNTY LINE GEORGE MILLICAN RD COLLECTOR 0 / CINDER BUTTE RD NAVAJO RD COLLECTOR 0 CHEROKEE DR CINDER BUTTE RD MINNETONKA LN COLLECTOR 0 NAVAJO RD MINNETONKA LN CHEROKEE DR COLLECTOR 0 SAGE STEPPE DR CITY LIMITS MCCLAIN DR Lit COLLECTOR CITY LIMITS MCCLAIN DR SAGE STEPPE DR < % \ COLLECTOR DESCHUTES RIVER XING SPRING RIVER RD S CENTURY DR { Lu cc \ \ Lu } / 0 / Lu 0 cC 0 \ - J LU / \ \ % \ COLLECTOR CITY LIMITS S CENTURY DR HUNTINGTON RD SHOULDER 0'-2' % \ COLLECTOR SUNRISE BLVD \ 0 BURGESS RD / I endix C - Trans / / / 2023-017 - Corn 0 a w Deschutes County Transportation System Plan q \ z ] cc @ rattsiatmlf U u }. �$ �\LCI CCo FE\ �\ �\ \_ j« 33Z �0 �o <0 H= }/ > 5=<= 5c£ 5=£ 5c= o < 3§ H< H< H< H< /3 9»5 /$c/ \ Z »g ill H zc /£0<02<0$§«o// < 2$I3y{o�< &E+ }_0 202 \= \)0//§ /\ E�j\\ Zu 0 j/0= p0> <>= uE p==z/ $ p=f z z~ = JL_)/d3i&2®/<£ £®%1 z21gz =zu 00= o� 2z=2 2< og e_.z e= zo=j =zo= zu =o0v °—§o zzoU 9 LU °2a>o= pa E\ 0 < °-I§ U<\±o< ° ±»» zu u zu<05f>z )% )% ) << � 02°z< Z<} 0 UI& LU& U = \ COLLECTOR HUNTINGTON RD HUNTINGTON RD RIVERVIEW DR 2 COLLECTOR 0 cc 0 >- 0 BURGESS RD SUNRISE BLVD COLLECTOR 0 & \ LA PINE STATE REC. RD WHITTIER DR COLLECTOR 0 SHAWNEE CIRCLE WHITTIER DR \ \ COLLECTOR 0 LAZY RIVER DR & \ SHAWNEE CIRCLE < COLLECTOR 0 S CENTURY DR SHAWNEE CIRCLE LAZY RIVER DR CV COLLECTOR 0 STAGE STOP DR S CENTURY DR BONANZA LN % ENHANCE CONNECTION ROUTE TO WESTTHREE RIVERS HOMES COLLECTOR 0 BROWNING DR BONANZA LN STAGE STOP DR \ \ \ / / / O 0 / %z %z %2 } 0 }0 }0 _ _ _ U• > U> U> Z ZZ Z Z Z j j 0 } } } Z Z Z COLLECTOR zic 0 WINCHESTER DR STAGE STOP DR BROWNING DR COLLECTOR 0 SAVAGE DR BROWNING DR WINCHESTER DR COLLECTOR \ UPLAND RD WINCHESTER DR SAVAGE DR rtation Svste endix C - Trans 2023-017 - Com E Deschutes County Transportation System Plan z v 31Phii�7JG1�K�1 z W W W W W 2 2 H H H H V7 W W LU O 0 H H W N W N H W H w 0 O 0 O 2 2 O cC 0 ce V > V W CC W CC z z z z O 0 V V w Lu ✓ U z z 2 2 z z w w COLLECTOR OV J SAVAGE DR UPLAND RD COLLECTOR V O J cc 0 cc J 0 N STELLAR DR ENHANCE CONNECTION ROUTE TO WEST THREE RIVERS HOMES COLLECTOR a ✓ O J SPRING RIVER RD W W cC 2 H H N W O H LU H w 0 CC O z 0 s W V W CC z z 0 V Lu V z a 2 z W COLLECTOR SPRING RIVER RD STELLAR DR en en hechgie\MemorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan I",F���-� [ � r�' r1 `���^� n ��.�����`.��)[�� ��u � ��aV � Future changes to a number of ODOT intersections and roadways within the County have been identified in previously adopted and/or acknowledged transportation plans. Through discussions between ODOT and County staff, Figure and Table 4 identify the key locations for inclusion into the TSP. In addition to the listed projects, the County will continue to partner with ODOTto monitor and identify future projects that help to address the needs oflocal, regional and statewide travel. As the road authority for projects on the state highway system, the timing, need, and funding for projectswill directed by ODOTrules and regulations. In some cases, the County may partner with ODOTnn implementation co --t....,... w NY,o I a g0E -ct ,t- < r 0 1 i - N113 0 go 4, ob Os, 11/Hor 04, ks,,k FRYREAR R" 0 9Fci3O 0 °9''° CID -LS I'Lifd 44 LL, (.9 'CT) Co I I 0 Ci I I CC 0 Ei_ Cle,/ A3L4COIS c&; Oa NVNfloh Ed aVaiSNIES4 AT RD I I ,43 ',--. E I w rD I ui Cd 31ino >1018E064 1, , ! i , 4 I ,.„ 2 I 4- 4 2 \F I A: s?r,-,• i c,,.., -,-, -20 I I —Nudvnti 0-rz —.1 FS 41 v 0.1 w i I 11 I 1 I i ,„,r• I , Lio 1 ! \ 0 0 Co Co < CASCADE LAKES KYa .00N js, ^-c j rks, Deschutes County Source: ODOT, Oregon State Highway Projects 5 cr IA C 13 o a) 9, a: 0 • _ U D 0 U a) in U (1) -C a) Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 46/ 0411 1 sLsc 4e4s, A.414ssieos ,c`--‘54 Ls44 s oLcoos \ \ dsi 4,4440D s qos -c461,6 4,6 4LL Deschutes County Transportation System Plan E C H w 2 r - r 0 Z r 0 M. Z CO m 2 0 0 z 0 z Z — 0 v Z 0 in LIJ 0 0 0 CC 0 z cs 2 L7 2 ODOT PROJECT PROGRAMMED FOR 2023 ROUNDABOUT COOK AVE/O.B. RILEY RD a cC a a co O W H Z w Z ✓ m> L 1 N W w0-w,o LUac Ccc cc G d Q LL- LIJ • Q ¢ Q =SO� S q W `L U >oO� W Z CO CC CC — w a LL z a O 0 WCC Z W H • L7 d = LU u VI cc LU W O • H • LL O LOWER BRIDGE WAY C) O O O a' a O vrn BAKER ROAD TO LAVA BUTTE C) 0 CD O 0 O a a a O O L 0, a O O a a O C) 0 cW L.L LL H yO W F 5LL5O w H Q H S 0 w Z w 0 0 _ cch0 L O O U Q w Ow cc a cc • z H q Q w Z H St L7 U w • N > LL • Z c — H SW HELMHOLTZ WAY N CC 0 O O O 0 O 0, O O O a a O C) 0 W Z 0� LU LL Z H _ zO w o U — z O H u= w U LU cc w LU0 H Z FRYREAR RD O N C) O J LU 0 - LU = — q Va W Z_ W wQHva=f=w w�H = w O = Q Q 0 W O > .0 z O~ w. g w H Q W z D ...., 0-Z 0 Z W q J l^� H U W a Y z J_ 0 — 0 J▪ > F < w w- Z H w w C O F q ��� z q W= LJ cc H w ..� W L.L w W q=C)Z= W LUH W O�HSOWZQz CC va r. U inH c g C Z vi�w>w=UOQ = 0q 0 0 0 n H w Z w F_� C)O HgHi 00 �0 Zn_ INTERCHANGE H N w O 0 O LI w CC 0 LU > Z q F w CC Z S LJ w 0 DRW. A GRADE SEPARATION OF THE BNSF RXR WILL ALSO BE REQUIRED. O J W W Z O Q H • } H k-w C U LI w w O O a LI O H q > LL < LIJ H Q q FZ Z Z• 00H� O O 0 = w , 2• �SL — H PERSHALL-O'NEIL HWY endix C - Trans Deschutes County Transportation System Plan E V ;(o U 1L1u1LIolO- 0 k 0 ( § 0 GRADE SEPARATED Lfi t ar \ \ INTERCHANGE 0 \ \ / FROM US 97 0 $ 5 ROUNDABOUT POWELL BUTTE HWY g rsi \ \ LU \ LULU O I < C \ j U ƒ PINEHURST RD / \ \ COUNTY CONTRIBUTION TO ODOT/ CITY OF SISTERS PROJECT ROUNDABOUT LOCUST ST = THE COUNTY WILL COORDINATE WITH ODOT AND THE CITY OF BEND ON THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY BAKER ROAD 03, INVOLVEMENT TO IMPLEMENT TAMP MANAGEMENT PLAN j } (TAMP) FOR THIS AREA. \ \ 0 endix C - Trans a hechgie\MemorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan [)�����—��|�����8/—NyUT)�« , u_��/_.� � /x+��x� : r��_uu " /x_, Figure 5 and Table 5 reflect priorities for changes to the pedestrian system within Terrebonne and Tumalo. In general, the sidewalks identified in the TSP reflect providing sidewalks between the residential areas and schools as well as to provide connections to neighborhood commercial areas in the two communities. Other changes to the pedestrian system as well as pedestrian crossing improvementsmay beprovided inthe future based on project development and design as well as funding opportunities. The County may require sidewalk construction as part of future land use actions as well, consistent with the Development Code requirements. SmtpM_FIam L 4, 0- -55 0.44. .,' .1 ; :sAppL:ED 1 ; BIRDSONC; LN 2 2 2 22 2 : :222 2j1 .2 .!. !Z. • : ''.''.-•• •••• • '''. ''''.'",=.7••••-r••74••••••••••7:•:•'741 } ,. • .1 i.n., ...., '•••. LL > i i 2 i I' ' ' • • • .. 1.1.1 W. !, 0; 4 i 01 4,,,I „ I , 1 1; . , 1555, 1 1 ();<-= MI) ii. i X X : X X : i X , ; X ; X 55, BILLMAKIN RD055? 2 X. 0 I I ITUMALO RESEROIR !i 1 PHAVIOWir,siG LN FD 15445555,5 55:55 2 ; 5 5 5 545.54 5 5 ; 41555155555-555515.5-551,554.54,4515,5555554,45Z ; 5 ca 0 ID,G;EV140,0D, OR_ DAR UTNAM LNLi ; ! I 5.1 , it ! 1 55 1 i .41 i Z 0 q , vmsToN LOOP co i t . ! , 44. .0" , - o; p . 9 .,,- P„ .5 1 ! i 5 4. 5,4541 tr, 445\ 44/ 'CI 0- <5 4 = 3 ;55 ; 1 Clr, , 5 01 ;05 52„1 111.1 iin .;— i" 1,.„.,.,° ,5 1f. 0 4 44 i i Cl);;;; ;1 1 552", i 1,51- CD, - „ 0 0; 0 ; 0, t : „ 0, Pedestrian Projects Parks Water Unincorporated Cities Figure 5A Data Source: Doschutess County Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Pedestrian Facility Projects Tumalo , Oregon E TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN I „ 3f:ft 553, 5-5 53\ 5, 5 BARBERRY DR rittztr."—; 5 35 '5 SAVE .;" -.NWSEDGEwicK-AVEi a Ti ittit t it it l'N'TRAL AV )3 1 I t ;tt 3 1 NW ODEM AVE 1 - CO ..; i i tt H tin 151 3. 53 3 \ ' GAVE titt , H ; 3 tt; 3 , , 3 \ 1 , 3 3 1 i 1 ; 0,25Miles Pedestrian Projects Parks Water Unincorporated Cities Figure 5B Data Source: Deschutes County Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Pedestrian Facility Projects Terrebonne , Oregon Deschutes County Transportation System Plan \ $ $ 2 E i- . rj CD rn § e E 2 / \ §»® §§\ �\ \ \3\ Z\ <- <z %e o <z <z <zI_ = �� 1 =jj)j°jj)j /j /§ H§/)\ /O/ °0 ®0 ®/ w5 ®} ®0 ®0 \ CV g 7TH ST (TUMALO) BRUCE AVE WOOD AVE 4TH ST (TUMALO) CO TUMALO SCHOOL g CC \ \ 5TH ST (TERREBONNE) /co j % \ / B AVE (TERREBONNE) CL CO \ \ WOOD AVE 5TH ST (TUMALO) 00 NW 19TH ST \ / C AVE (TERREBONNE) co CD 5' SIDEWALK ON SOUTH SIDE ONLY / / g C AVE (TERREBONNE) 00 CO E \ j CENTRAL AVE 11TH ST (TERREBONNE) CC \ RIVERVIEW AVE \ § / 8TH ST (TUMALO) c a. endix C - Trans a- / 2023-017 - Corn \ 0 / hechgioy\x8mmmondvmIDeschutes County Transportation System Plan ��|(—V�—K � FACILITIES u�,�_^`_/_u_ Deschutes County provides and maintains useable shoulders along roadways for use by people riding bikes though not all roadways are currently improved to include such facilities. The County has an aspirational bicycle route system, referred toasCounty Bikeways, where useable shoulders will be provided, as practical, as part of ongoing maintenance and roadway improvements projects. Facilities designated a»County Bikeways are shown in Figure 6. Crossing improvements, though not specifically identified in the TSP, may be provided when bicycle facilities are constructed that cross major roads. The need for and type of crossing treatments as well as other facility changes will be evaluated at the time of project development and design. The County may provide such facilities as standalone projects or in conjunction with scheduled maintenance activities. At the time this memo was written, the County was evaluating potential changes to the Development Code requirements (as included in the County Code Title 22 requirements) related to bicycle facility requirements as part of land use actions. Future changes toTitle ZZwill beconsidered aspart nfTSPimplementation. In addition, as part of implementation of the TSP, changes to the bicycle network will continue to be informed as part of the [ount/s Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee (8PAC) activities. BPAC's mission is "to promote and encourage safe bicycling and walking as a significant means of transportation in Deschutes County" and focuses on both changes tnthe system as well as public education and awareness and a review ofsafety and funding needs as part ofimplementation of potential projects. As part of that coordination, Table 6 and Table 7 identify regional bicycle connections that have been developed and prioritized with input from BPAC. Table 5 identifies routes that would connect communities and serve broad transportation functions, such as commuting, recreation, or daily services. Table 6 identifies routes that primarily provide connections to recreational opportunities, which could also serve to improve transportation mode choices available toCounty residents and visitors. Over time, strengthening the connections summarized in the tables will help to expand the overall bicycle infrastructure within the County. Specific routes, including roadways and specific projects needed tosupport or develop these routes, have not yet been identified. In addition, the funding to construct and maintain these facilities has not yet been identified. In the future, these costs may be funded by the County and/or a variety of agency partners, pending the actual alignment and project elements identified. The County will work with BPAC and agency partners, including ODOT and local jurisdictions, to advance development and implementation of preferred routes a»resources allow. Finally, the County, by reference, will adopt the Map 11 of the Bend Parks and Recreation District's (BPRD's) Comprehensive Plan (2018)' identifying future trail connections to parks within the County but outside the Bend (UGB) as well as those within the Deschutes National Forest. As noted in the BPRD plan, the trails have been prioritized for implementation but the actual alignments in the map are approximate and subject to future easement/user agreements to enable trail construction, availability of funding, and securing agreements from affected property owners for trailheads and parking areas. As part of TSP implementation, the County will coordinate with BPRD on the planning for and timing of new trails. It is important to note that not all County roadways are currently or will be designed to provide roadside parking for trailhead users. The County will work with BPRDto identify appropriate locations in the future to provide safe access for trail users as well as to roadway users not accessing the parks/trai|s. /-arksandieox� ExhibitDjo Ordinance 20,23-017 - Co gnsive Plan Api)endixt - Trans qatiop tern Plap., Co z 0 z Z 0 ' s S S Lu 2 c. a",:a>400.1.S IN1 CAI Dc.ne SSVF C. 1 (7112I-I I I 1 \-.1P,RNION RD I Ord j CI 0' ----------- I ,, a 0 0 0 li NI vitunotv 0VaLsmuo cot4A HAT RD FS 41 Eicns :`)13C13C CASCADE LAKES HWY NEF-R5. rks, Deschutes County Data Source: ODOT, Oregon County Bikeway Oregon Scenic Bikeways CO 0 C 5 0 CD 0 C D 0 V) ci D U Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 06 :00c 0...,s/r00,1Fj 9c \ sd0^; s,00100,,!5\0I ,e0,10,0 0,670000-i ical Memorandumdun. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Table 6. Bicycle Route Community Connections COMMUNITY CONNECTION DESCRIPTION PRIORITY BEND TO REDMOND VARIOUS ROUTES POSSIBLE. PREFERRED ROUTE ALIGNMENT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED. HIGH BEND TO SUNRIVER ROUTE CURRENTLY IN DESIGN AS A MULTI -USE PATH ALONG US 97 (PROJECT 5-3). WOULD CONNECT BEND, LAVA LANDS, AND SUNRIVER. HIGH BEND TO SISTERS COULD INCLUDE BEND TO TUMALO AND/OR BEND TO TUMALO STATE PARK CONNECTION, WHICH IS ALSO A PRIORITY ROUTE, AND WOULD LIKELY INCLUDE COUNTY AND ODOT FACILITIES. FUTURE COORDIATION WILL BE REQUIRED. ADDITIONAL SISTERS TO TUMALO CONNECTION MAY BE NECESSARY IF BEND TO SISTERS ROUTE DOES NOT INLCUDE THE TUMALO COMMUNITY. HIGH REDMOND TO SISTERS ROUTE COULD OCCUR ADJACENT TO OR WITHIN ODOT RIGHT-OF-WAY (OR 126) HIGH REDMOND TO ROUTE WOULD LIKELY OCCUR ADJACENT TO OR WITHIN ODOT RIGHT-OF-WAY (US TERREBONNE 97) HIGH REDMOND TO TUMALO ROUTE MAY OVERLAP WITH OTHER ROUTE DEVELOPMENT, SUCH AS BEND TO SISTERS OR POSSIBLE REDMOND TO SISTERS. HIGH SISTERS TO TERREBONNE & SMITH ROCK STATE PARK ROUTE IS CURRENTLY PART OF A SCENIC BIKEWAY. IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXISTING ROUTE, INCLUDING IMPROVED CROSSINGS, ARE NEEDED. HIGH SISTER TO BLACK SIGNIFICANT PRIOR PLANNING WHICH ASSUMED A MULTI -USE PATH PARALLEL US BUTTE RANCH 20. HIGH DESCHUTES ROUTE WOULD CONNECT AREA SOUTH OF BEND TO NEW DEVELOPMENT AREAS RIVER WOODS AND RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN OR NEAR SOUTHEAST BEND. ROUTE TO EAST SIDE OF COULD BENEFIT FROM TRAIL CONSTRUCTION WITHIN FUTURE SE BEND BEND DEVELOPMENTS. MEDIUM SUNRIVER TO LA ODOT IS CURRENTLY IN THE PLANNING STAGES TO IDENTIFY PREFERED ROUTE PINE LOCATION. MEDIUM BEND TO PRINEVILLE ROUTE COULD UTILIZE STATE HIGHWAYS AND/OR COUNTY ROADS. COORDINATION WITH ODOT AND CROOK COUNTY WILL BE REQUIRED. LOW REDMOND TO POWELL BUTTEE & PRINEVILLE ROUTE COULD UTILIZE STATE HIGHWAYS AND/OR COUNTY ROADS. COORDINATION WITH ODOT AND CROOK COUNTY WILL BE REQUIRED. LOW BLACK BUTTE RANCH TO CAMP SHERMAN ROUTE WOULD REQUIRE COORDINATION WITH FOREST SERVICE LOW Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023.-017 - Comprehensive Plan ,4Dpendix1C,- Transportation System Plan ical Memorandumdun. Deschutes County Transportation System Plan Table 7. Bicycle Route Recreation Connections COMMUNITY CONNECTION DESCRIPTION PRIORITY BEND TO CASCADES LAKES TRAILHEADS CASCADE LAKES HIGHWAY CORRIDOR AND BICYCLE FACILITIES STUDY (2019) DENTIFIES MANY NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE CORRIDOR. ROUTE WOULD PROVIDE ACCESS TO SIGNIFICANT RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIIES. ROUTE HIGHLY UTILIZED TODAY. MEDIUM BEND TO TUMALO STATE PARK CURRENT CONDITIONS RESTRICT THE ROUTE TO PEDESTRIAN ONLY. BPRD HAS CONDUCTED PRIOR PLANNING ON THIS ROUTE, INCLUDING A CONNECTION TO RILEY RANCH. MEDIUM TUMALO TO TUMALO STATE PARK ROUTE WOULD CONNECT TUMALO COMMUNITY TO RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES. COULD BE PART OF BEND TO SISTERS AND/OR TUMALO CONNECTION. MEDIUM LA PINE TO ROSLAND PARK ROUTE WOULD CONNECT PLANNED MULTI -USE PATH WITHIN LA PINE TO ROSLAND PARK TO THE WEST. MEDIUM REDMOND TO RADLANDS RECREATION AREA ROUTE WOULD CONNECT REDMOND TO RECREATION AREAS EAST OF TOWN. COORDINATION WITH REDMOND WILL BE NECESSARY. MEDIUM SUNRIVER TO CASCADE LAKES TRAIL HEADS ROUTE EXISTS AND IS HEAVILY UTILIZED TODAY. IMPROVEMENTS NECESSARY TO INCREASE SHOULDER WIDTH IN SOME AREAS. POSSIBLE COORDINATION WITH SUNRIVER AND ODOT. MEDIUM REDMOND TO RECREATION AREAS TO WEST ROUTE WOULD CONNECT REDMOND TO RECREATION AREAS, INCLUDING DESCHUTES RIVER, EAGLE CREST, CLINE BUTTE RECREATIONAL AREA, ETC. LOW BEND TO RECREATION ROUTE TO CONNECT BEND WITH RECREATION AREAS TO THE EAST INCLUDING RESORTS, AREAS TO THE BLM LANDS, BIKING TRAILS, ETC. LIKELY COORDINATION WITH BPRD. EAST LOW CLINE BUTTE RECREATION AREA TO TUMALO ROUTE INCLUDES PORITION OF TWO BRIDGES SCENIC BIKEWAY. IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXISTING ROUTE, INCLUDING IMPROVED CROSSINGS, ARE NEEDED. LOW In 2020, the majority of the County's bridges were rated as being structurally sufficient. Three bridges were noted as having rating associated with a "structurally deficient" categorization, including Sisemore Road at Couch, Gribbling Road across the Central Oregon Irrigation District canal, and Foot Bridge across the Crooked River. The County regularly reviews the structural ratings of its bridges and makes changes as funding and other opportunities arise. Projects to address these deficiencies and other county priorities are shown in Figure 7 and Table 8. These projects represent the County's current priorities but do not encapsulate all of the bridges that may be modified over time. Exhibit D to Ordinance 20237017 - Comprehensive Plan App,endiX C Transportation SYstem Plao, co 1 -7' 77,.s., Zi 4. E '7vfr E 0 Qa-is 0 et '0 0 .....J W hh g he Ui Ui 2 FR 1 Q. 9,0 60 e'ISNfd SI. SA 1 •*--*•- •••••• r- z 0 z 05 Ui a 0 a 5te a ./X Co 6 I Ui CO 0 CO a - a G'6 ANCCIS 0 o 0 a 06 NI V.L.Nn OR ovaLSNt80 cvAINA 14AT RD L LLI DLine SSVF NERSHALL RD ch Ui Ui 1 Ob, o7. Ui 0 3 '1,1\ k CASCADE LAKES HV'N' sr, CO uJ ..r1 " I I j rks, Deschutes County Source: ODOT, Oregon Bridge Projects • Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 6,:::0-a>; 06 obp!.c \sdovq sdov,ps dst seir,psec I Deschutes County Transportation System Plan .I- .. ;ri s - r•' i• REPLACEMENT NORTH UNIT CANAL SMITH ROCK WAY m 0 0 LJ REPLACEMENT CENTRAL OREGON CANAL GRIBBLING RD m LU REPLACEMENT HAMEHOOKRD m 0 0 LJ REHABILITATION CC CC LJ— CM S CENTURY DR m 0 0 0 0 0 QJ 0 cc W WILCOX AVE m 0 0 0 0 0 QJ 0 W cc WILCOX AVE 0 0 0 0 0 REPLACEMENT BURGESS RD m 0 0 0 0 o co a J REPLACEMENT CC C LJ— Li) z m COTTONWOOD DR C m 0 0 0 0 0 yr a J REHABILITATION DESCHUTES RIVER SPRING RIVER RD CP m 0 0 0 0 0 yr 0 J REPLACEMENT PILOT BUTTE CANAL OLD DESCHUTES RD 0 c m Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 0 cD 9 REPLACEMENT s|ssMonsnP cL 0 9 REPLACEMENT CO 8 en 9 NEW BRIDGE WILCOX AVE en 0_ NE (i) 0 C) LC, 0 Cl) CS5 F- C) C) 0_ .7) C) _c C) E cC en I— C C C15 0 -C LL.1 hechgie\MemorandvmI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan FEDERAL LANDS /\[~/~ESS PROGRAM ROADWAYS The Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) was established to "improve transportation facilities that provide access to, are adjacent to, orare located within Federal |ands.^ This program isintended toprovide supplemental funding to be used in combination with State and County funds for public roads, transit, and other transportation facilities. In particular, FLAP helps prioritize funding for ^hi8h'use recreation sites and economic generators." FLAP is funded through the Federal Highway Trust Fund and its allocation is based on road mileage, bridges, land area and number ofvisits tothe lands. FLAP provides funding opportunities to help the County deliver capital projects to increase access to Federal Lands. In addition, FLAP is a funding tool to help the County fund maintenance of existing roads that provide access to Federal Lands' such as those designated as Forest Highways and other roads that provide similar access. Figure 8 and Table 9 identify the County's current priorities for future FLAP -funded projects. As part of TSP implementation, the County will continue to coordinate with all of the federal agencies, BPRID, Cascades East Exhibit D.to Ordinance 2023-01T - (�pmpLehensiy.e Plan Appp�n i&,:,Trpnsp rtqfiq Plan co I I- I Ili JSORON Y rt ,,.,-...J.1 : Ia 0v .'. 1.. 0 I i I ?,1 II I I 04, FRYREENg 1 ‘Ce„" .Elity--ps OR232;VG NI10' OR AaCCIS LIJ 0 OR D_Line SSVO HARNION RD LuOR A.-6DIA101N00 0 0 0 0 OR MVINnctii NERSHALL RD OR avaLsNNE.,, cv.kkNA HAT RD FS 41 oyksu"'""T°R -„„ 0 4 4 Co 1 CASCADE LAKES 1-11,81Y "4. 1 j 6606/E1.16 zo rks, Deschutes County Data Source: ODOT, Oregon Federal Land Access Projets co Li) CO 0 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 0 0. 1:7 [ia*Nrarorie LU 0 0 3.7-MILE-LONG SEGMENT cD CD 0 LU LU Ui CC 2 Itt LU CY < HZ UJ VI 0 Lrs 0 0 SISTERS CITY LIMITS THREE CREEKS RD LL RECONSTRUCTION/ PAVE HIGHWAY 126 LOWER BRIDGE BUCKHORN RD CD o o 0 (‘i uJ L2.- VI LU LU > z < U —1 Vi ,-.,CC F-- 0 Z Lu '-- U- , ,z, CL V Z < CC LU z 0-<17Z1-.7)LU 007,Zz—,ZR--- 1-1,2 7_—, — LL,Zti0V-3LLI0<cc < 0 7 u — Li --1 = < Ul LU p_ — r:/-, = --- <—ICC C2ILJJ,Tt'OL.ri'LnE---12-,E7) E' C/T 0 010 0- I LU Lu LU V) CC CC UJ Li)o_czoxF—L.70 > 0-._, H 7 Z "Ed F— < ui z Ec- c, 0,:-2<=ZZI-1--LnwHH' 0 1-07j-DociivIi-u,,cC0—, Zw0-1LuZIZ-1Lu Lu1--L)< Lu°N<H , 02= LJD<liz ,__ 27-c2217),Jr,--Izcc foDoo_cc< o< Ozo<m cc LE= = — cL = LU - J LU MILEPOST 21.98 LUWLU LJLUUi CC > 0 LU cC < CC t11 z c• tLU UOLULULU < ° -cE'L;iLDODC LU L7) CC CC 1.11 LU LU < LU 1— C),<DZZ H • Z CC ▪ 0 ZU-OLULU LU • V) < O 7 E ua▪ z § ° ZU AND HIGH -TYPE PAVEMENT CD Ln 0 9 = 0 F-1- La LU LU Z U- O Z LU < CC U.J Z — 3 J J cc VI 0 —1 = Lu i— ,.,) —I LU O 0 Ln • L.Lj 2 — , .-,— VI = — , CY • F— z IT Z • p_ Ul H H • ,..rl --, H L'll' I Z H z Fc. 7, H ua L U H CCL.L1 0 _I CC z0 _,L.La co = > UJ Z 2 • u D 'LC Z < • m cc u_i cc 1-- cc H Lr) S CENTURY DR LU LU LU LU AT MAJOR DESTINATIONS Deschutes County Transportation System Plan [IJiIih Lu cc C:3 9 COUNTY LINE ROSLAND RD DARLENE WAY cD CD 9 WIDEN & OVERLAY SOUTH CENTURY DR SUNRISE CT BURGESS RD cD CD 9 WIDEN & OVERLAY LI_ °LUZ= MID< — =17<Z O<Z= w=won =11-EH LuZ01= ZL,10 o UJ LL. 0 z CC CHINA HAT RD LI- a- CC CD CD CC Deschutes County Transportation System Plan TRANSIT By reference, the County will adopt the Cascade East Transit (CET) Master Plan. This Master Plan has a number of projects that can help increase service to the unincorporated areas of the County as well as to the High Desert Museum and Lava Lands Visitor Center. As part of TSP implementation, the County will continue to partner with CET to identify collaborative funding sources and future service enhancements. TR PO TAT1O SAFETY A 11O Pt AN PR JECTS The County's 2019 Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) provides a range of projects, policies, and programs to address identified safety needs within the unincorporated areas of the County. The County will adopt the TSAP, by reference, as part of the updated TSP. The top sites for safety improvements in unincorporated Deschutes County identified through the TSAP are shown in Table 10. Table 11 also include projects that have been identified to address these needs and relevant status. As part of TSP implementation, the County will continue to identify future project refinements, as needed, monitor the timing of intersection changes at these locations, and seek funding opportunities and/or the potential to combine safety -related projects with other project development within the County. Table 10. TSAP Priority Locations & Status INTERSECTION PROJECT IDENTIFIED? STATUS US 20/WARD RD/HAMBY RD ROUNDABOUT PROJECT COMPLETE US 97/VANDEVERT RD INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COMPLETE US 20/FRYREAR RD TURN LANE ON HIGHWAY, REALIGN FRYREAR COUNTY TO COORDINATE WITH ODOT ROAD(PROJECT SI-5) ON FUTURE PROJECT REFINEMENT. BURGESS RD/DAY RD/PINE FOREST DR TURN -LANES PROJECT COMPLETE BEAR CREEK RD/WARD RD NONE COUNTY TO CONDUCT FUTURE PROJECT REFINEMENT. ALFALFA MARKET RD/DODDS RD NONE COUNTY TO CONDUCT FUTURE PROJECT REFINEMENT. US 20/OLD BEND REDMOND HWY ROUNDABOUT ODOT PROJECT PROGRAMMED FOR 2022 US 20/O.B. RILEY RD/COOK AVE ROUNDABOUT ODOT PROJECT PROGRAMMED FOR 2022 US 97/61ST ST IMPROVED AS PART OF ODOT US 97 BEND TO REDMOND PROJECT PROJECT COMPLETE US 97/11TH ST/LOWER BRIDGE WAY PART OF US97: TERREBONNE/ LOWER BRIDGE WAY IMPROVEMENTS ODOT PROJECT PROGRAMMED FOR 2023 61ST ST/QUARRY AVE/CANAL BLVD IMPROVED AS PART OF ODOT US 97 BEND TO REDMOND PROJECT PROJECT COMPLETE Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-01,7 Comprehensive Plan Appondi Trans ortation System Plan Deschutes County Transportation System Plan INTERSECTION PROJECT IDENTIFIED? STATUS NORTHWEST WAY/COYNER AVE ADD TURN LANES PROJECT IDENTIFIED IN DESCHUTES COUNTY TSP. ALFALFA MARKET RD/WALKER RD NONE COUNTY TO CONDUCT FUTURE PROJECT REFINEMENT. US 97/SMITH ROCK WAY/B AVE PART OF US97: TERREBONNE/ LOWER BRIDGE WAY IMPROVEMENTS ODOT PROJECT PROGRAMMED FOR 2023 DESCHUTES MARKET RD/HAMEHOOK RD ROUNDABOUT COUNTY PROJECT PROGRAMED FOR 2022 PROJECT IDENTIFIED IN WICKIUP JUNCTION REFINEMENT PLAN. COUNTY TO US 97/BURGESS RD TRAFFIC SIGNAL COORDINATE WITH CITY OF LA PINE AND ODOOT ON FUTURE PROJECT REFINEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION. US 20/HAWKS BEARD (BLACK BUTTE RANCH) NONE COUNTY TO COORDINATE WITH ODOT ON FUTURE PROJECT REFINEMENT. EL CAMINO LANE/HELMHOLTZ WAY NONE COUNTY TO CONDUCT FUTURE PROJECT REFINEMENT. CANAL BLVD/HELMHOLTZ WAY ADD TURN LANES PROJECT COMPLETE DICKEY RD/NELSON RD NONE COUNTY TO CONDUCT FUTURE PROJECT REFINEMENT. US 97/GALLOWAY AVE NONE COUNTY TO COORDINATE WITH ODOT ON FUTURE PROJECT REFINEMENT. BUTLER MARKET RD & POWELL BUTTE HWY ROUNDABOUT PROGRAMMED FOR 2023 CONSTUCTION BUTLER MARKET RD & HAMBY NONE COUNTY TO CONDUCT FUTURE PROJECT REFINEMENT. BUTLER MARKET RD & HAMEHOOK NONE INTERSECTION NOW UNDER CITY OF BEND JURISDICTION BAKER RD & CINDER BUTTE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IDENTIFIED IN DESCHUTES COUNTY TSP S CENTURY& HUNTINGTON ROUNDABOUT PROJECT IDENTIFIED IN DESCHUTES COUNTY TSP CLINE FALLS RD/COOPERS HAWK DR/ FALCON CREST DR NONE COUNTY TO CONDUCT FUTURE PROJECT REFINEMENT. LOWER BRIDGE WAY/19TH ST TURN LANES/REALIGNMENT (PROJECTC-18) PROJECT IDENTIFIED IN DESCHUTES COUNTY TSP. LOWER BRIDGE WAY/31STST TURN LANES (PROJECT C-20) PROJECT IDENTIFIED IN DESCHUTES COUNTY TSP. LOWER BRIDGE WAY/43RD ST INCLUDED IN FUTURE ROADWAY PROJECT IDENTIFIED IN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PROJECT CC-4) DESCHUTES COUNTY TSP. Exhibit D to Ordinance,2023-01„7 Comeprehensive Plan Ap endi -Transportation Sy stem PIanN technica\MemmrarcitimI Deschutes County Transportation System Plan [�T���[>� �m o STEPS c_x � The County will be conducting an on-line Open House in fall 2022 to obtain feedback on the projectslisted herein as well as to identify new potential projects for consideration. The results of the upcoming public engagement will enable the County to finalize the list of projects for inclusion into the updated TSP as well as to begin toidentify potential funding sources. Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Am)end��vo�ozflu tgAitiVAIVAIVAIVO Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN MARCH 2018 "The preparation of this document may have been supported, in part, with financial assistance from the Federal Aviation Administration through the Airport Improvement Program. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the FAA. Acceptance of these documents by the FAA does not in any way constitute a commitment on the part of the United States to participate in any development depicted herein nor does it indicate that the proposed development is environmentally acceptable in accordance with appropriate public law." Mead lunt PORTLAND 9600 NE Cascades Parkway Suite 100 Portland, OR 97220 Ph„503-548-1494 In association with: Century West Engineering GeoTerra ESA Exhibit © to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation SysterMAfikenzie Introduction Chapter Chapter Overview 1 Study Introduction 1 Why isitTime for aMaster Plan? 2 Study Goals and Process 3 Master Plan Goals /Central Questions of the Master Plan 3 The Planning Process and Timeline 3 Plan Participation 4 Agency Coordination 4 Airport Committee 4 Planning Advisory Committee 4 Key Technical Stakeholders S Public Outreach 5 SWOT Analysis G Chapteri—Airport|nvmntorV 1.0 Airport Inventory 1 1.1 Introduction to the Inventory 1 1.1.1 Chapter Purpose and Organization 1 1.2 Airport Overview 3 1.2.1 Airport Location 3 1.2.2 Airport and Community History 3 1.2.3 Airport Property 3 1.2.4 Operational Overview 7 1.3 Airside Facilities 8 1.3.1 Runway System 8 13.2 Taxiway System 10 1.3.3 Airfield Design Standards 10 1.3.4 Aircraft Aprons 14 1.3.5 Fixed Base Operators 14 1.3.6 Aircraft Storage 15 1.37 Support Facilities 15 1.3.8 Pavement 10 1.3.0 Navigational Aids and Instrument Procedures 23 1.3.10 C|imate—VVind and Weather Conditions 31 1.3.11 Airfield Marking and Lighting 34 1.3.12 [therAirside Facilities 37 1.4 Landside Facilities 37 1.4.1 Airport Access and Vehicle Parking 37 1.4.2 Utilities 40 1.4.3 Non -Aviation Facilities 48 1.4.4 On -Airport Zoning and Lease Restrictions 49 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo'o17 Comprehensive Plan Appendix o Transportation System Plan 1.5 Terminal Building 49 1.51 Terminal Building 49 1.8 Aviation Activity 61 17 Aeronautical Setting 62 1.7.1 Commercial Service Airports 62 1.7.2 General Aviation Airports 62 1.8 Community Setting 66 1.8.1 Socioeconomic Data GG 1.9 Airport Financial Overview & Economic Contribution 67 1.0.1 Historical Financial Information 97 1.0.2 Airport Economic Impacts 68 1.10 Environmental Conditions 90 1.10.1 Air Quality GA 1.10.2 Compatible Land Use GQ 1.10.3 Historiva|, Architectural, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources 70 1.10.4 Section 4(f)Property 74 1.10.5 Threatened and Endangered Species 76 1.10.6 Water Quality 76 1.10.7 Farmland 77 1.10.8 Critical Areas 78 1.10.0 F|oodp|aino 78 1.10.10 Recycling Plan 78 1.11 Conclusion and Summary 70 Chapter 2—Aviation ActvitvForecasts 2.0 Forecast Summary 1 2.1 Introduction toForecasts 2 2.2 Community Profile 6 2.2.1 Population G 2.2.2 Employment and Economic Development 10 2.23 Gross Regional Product 13 2.2.4 United States Forest Service 13 2.2.5 Tourism 14 2.2.6 Regional Airports 15 2.2.7 Catchment Areas and Competition 17 2.3 Aviation Activity Profile 22 23.1 Airline Service 22 2.3.2 General Aviation 32 2.33 Military 38 2.3.4 FAA TAF 39 2.4 Scheduled Service Forecasts 41 2.4.1 Pa000ngerEnp|anomonts 41 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017cvmmvhvns|ve Plan Appendix oTransportation System Plan 2.4.2 Air Cargo 47 2.4.3 Commercial Operations 49 2.5 General Aviation Forecasts 52 2.5.1 Itinerant General Aviation Operation 52 2.5.2 Local Operations 58 2.5.3 Based Aircraft 59 2.6 Peak Forecasts and Critical Aircraft 62 2.6.1 Peak Period Forecasts 62 2.6.2 Critical Aircraft 62 2.7 Forecast Summary 64 Chapter 3—Faci|itVRequirements 3.0 Facility Requirements 1 3.1 Introduction to Facility Requirements 1 3.2 Airside Facility Requirements 3 3.2.1 Airfield Capacity 3 3.2.2 Airfield Design 5 3.2.3 Runway System 10 3.2.4 Taxiway System 29 3.2.5 General Aviation Facilities 35 3.3 Landaido Facility Requirements 40 3.3.1 Passenger Terminal Roadway 40 33.2 Passenger Terminal Parking Area — Public Perking 40 3.3.3 Rental Car Facilities 42 3.3.4 Non -Aviation Revenue Development 43 3.4 Terminal Area Facilities 45 3.4.1 Airport Activity 45 3.4.2 Passenger Terminal Building 46 3.4.3 Gate Capacity Requirements 40 3.4.4 Terminal Building Development 51 3.4.5 Conclusions and Recommendations 53 3.5 Support Facility Requirements 53 3.5.1 Fixed Base Dperator(FBC) 53 3.5.2 United States Forest Service (U8F8) 53 3.5.3 Cargo Facilities 53 3.5.4 Air Support and Maintenance Facilities 54 3.5.5 Conclusions and Recommendations SG 3.6 Facility Requirements Summary 57 Chapter 4—Development Alternatives Chapter Summary 1 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan 4.0 Introduction 41 Airport Development Objectives 411 Airsk]eP|anning 41.2 Landsk]eP|enning 4.2 Alternative Development Process 4.2.1 Airport Master Plan Advisory Committee Input 4.3 Evaluation Categories 4.4 4.5 4.51 4.5.2 4.5.3 4.6/| 4.5.5 4.5.8 4.57 4.5.8 4.5.0 4.31 Operational Capabilities 4.3.2 Performance Requirements Benchmarks 4.33 Land Use Compatibility 4.3.4 Environmental Impacts 4.3.5 Stakeholder Feedback 4.3.8 Conotnuctabi|ity 4.37 Financial Costs/Impacts Evaluation Process Airport Development Alternatives Runway Alternatives Taxiway Alternatives Airport Vehicle Parking Alternatives General Aviation Development Alternatives Aviation Support Facilities Alternatives Passenger Terminal Alternatives Non -Aeronautical Development Alternatives Aircraft Reocue& Fire Fighting Building Alternatives Northeast Passenger Terminal Apron Reconstruction Alternative 4.6 Alternatives Summary 4.6.1 Preferred Development Concept 3 4 4 S 5 G 6 G G 7 8 8 8 g lO 10 24 29 39 43 B GS 72 77 79 80 ChaptmrS—FinancidFmanibi|itV 5.0 Financial Feasibility 1 51 Approach toCapital Planning 1 511 Project Phasing 1 51.2 Project Coats 2 51.3 Funding Participation and Commitment 2 51.4 Airport Funds 5 5.2 Capital Improvement Plan 7 5.2.1 Near -term C|P(FY2O1A'FY2O23) 8 5.2.2 Mid-term C|P (FY2024'FY-2028) 12 5.2.3 Long-term C|P(FY2O20'FY2O38) 15 5.3 Chapter Summary 19 Exhibit omOrdinance zouo'o17 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Appendices AppendixA—ALPandCheck|ist Appendix B—Supplemental Forecast Information AppandixC—Rocyu|ingP|on AppendixO—|mp|ementaUonQuide Appendix E—Coordination and Outreach Summary AppendixF—LandoideDeve|opmont AppondixQ—Noioe|nputa Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Introduction March 30, 2018 tChapter Overview The City of Redmond (City) initiated an update to the Airport Master Plan ("Plan") to assess the facility and service needs of the Redmond Municipal Airport ("thoAirport")throughout the next 2Oyears. The Plan serves as a roadmap for bringing projects, people, and funding together in a coordinated manner, and provides strategic direction regarding the Airport's 20-year capital development plan and investment of resources. The Plan is conducted in accordance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) guidance, as prescribed by grant assurances and mandated by regulatory standards. Conformance with FAA standards enables the City of Redmond to apply for federal and state funding in order to support the maintenance, expansion, and upgrade ofairport facilities aodemand warrants and funding isavailable. Sku�� Itow� t' �� m m�xort The Airport is owned by the City of Redmond, Oregon. The City of Redmond is a key stakeholder in the Plan. The Aviation Program Manager, Nettice Honn, is the daily project manager for the City. The City's planning and engineering departments are represented on the Planning Advisory Committee (PAC). The Plan evaluates the Airport's needs over a 20-year planning period for airfield, airspace, terminal area, and landside facilities. The goal is to document the orderly development of Airport facilities essential to meeting City needs, in accordance with FAA standards, and in a manner complementary with community interests. The Plan results in a 20-year development strategy envisioned by the City, reflective of the updated Airport Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and graphically depicted by the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) drawings. The approved Plan allows the City to satisfy FAA assurances, and seek project funding eligible under the respective federal and state airport aid program. The Master Plan will have the following core components, in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 1SO/5O7O'GB.Airport Master Plans: 1:Study Design 2:Project Management 3: Stakeholder Coordination and Outreach 4:Airports Geographic Information Systems 5:Airport Inventory G:Demand Forecasts 7: Facility Requirements 8:Improvement Alternatives O: Financial Feasibility 10: Implementation Plan 11:Airport Layout Plan 12:DocumentoUon mEDMVwnNIUNICIRNI.AInnzRT MASTER PLAN 1 Introduction ��hy is it][irme fora MmoterU»lmm? The Airport Master Plan was last updated in2OO5.with the ALP drawings last revised inNovember 2O13. Since the 2005 Master Plan, the FAA has updated airfield design standards and aviation activity trends have changed. The 2005 Master Plan does not include important developments as envisioned by the City. This Plan is funded by the City with a grant from the FAA Airport Improvement Program (AIP). Airport master plans are generally updated every 10 years, depending on the planning outlook and complexity of the airport. The aviation market has seen major changes since 2005, with fuel prices increasing, Next Generation navigation technologies becoming commonplace, the demand for pilots growing worldwide, the accelerated development of unmanned aerial systems, and new FAA policies on airport development. The assumptions and facts that formed the basis for recommendations in the 2005 Master Plan are in need of an update to reflect an evolving marketplace. The changes in the community around Redmond reinforce the need for a new master plan to reexamine growth projections and future facility needs. The Airport is centrally -located in Central Oregon, an area that has been experiencing unprecedented growth in population and business interests. The region's physical location on the east side of the Cascade Mountains contributes to the favorable weather experienced year round. This is a major factor in the attractiveness to both young families and those looking to retire. These growth patterns will be evaluated in the Plan and included in all facility design and analysis for the Airport's 20-year plan. REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 2 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Introduction March 30, 2018 Study Goals andProccGs Master Plan. Goals / Cmmtra1Quewtiovxw of the Master Plan The core questions for this Plan include the following: - How will Central Oregon's growth continue in the future, and what will the impact be on aviation activity? � What role will General Aviation (GA) and United Etotuo Forest Service (U8FS) activities play inthe future? ~/ - Is a runway extension justified, and if so, how long should it be, and in what direction? - What is the viability of runway and terminal improvements previously depicted on the ALP? / ~ ~ How can the passenger terminal and associated facilities accommodate continued passenger growth and additional carriers? ^� - What are the opportunities for increased airport revenue generation? ^� ` How much property will be needed to satisfy the demand for future aviation use? / ~ ^ What future changes in critical aircraft should the Airport plan for? V' Are aviation facilities adequate to meet the needs of the growing community? The Planning �» �1['o� �� mn���*�m mm� mc FIGURE I1:PROJECT TIMELINE &R0AOIVIAP 01, 11,11 .Whatdo wenew to change to meet —------ ------------ KcomnNoMxoqc/p^L AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 3 Exhibit owOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan 3,7777777 Introduction March 30, 2018 Plan Participation As a strategic visioning pnucena. the Plan is structured to be responsive 1oAirport needs while being inclusive of broader community considerations. This approach builds stakeholder support for Plan recommendations and facilitates acceptance. The P|an's public involvement program is targeted to engage key Airport stakeholders (City and County elected officials, community |oaders, on' and off -Airport stakeholders), address comments, and actively encourage public participation. ACoordination ��mC� oo �' mnu�mom The FAA Seattle Airport District Office (ADO) is the primary external reviewing agency for this Plan. A representative from the Seattle ADO will be provided Plan deliverables and invited to attend PAC and public meetings. A visit will be made to the Seattle ADO two times during the Plan development to review key deliverables since the FAA is not always able to travel to Airport events. The Oregon Department of Aviation (ODA) is a key stakeholder in the Plan. The Consultant and the Airport will keep ODA updated on Plan progress through routine communicatk/n, including scheduled teleconferences, and transmittal ofPlan chapters. Airport �� ��m ommmm e The purpose of the Airport Committee is to advise the City Council regarding issues that concern the development of the Airport. The Airport Committee supported Plan visioning, provided feedback on the Plan elements at key milestones, and will be essential to the Airport's ability to move forward with Plan recommendations. P&mmmimg v Adao C'kk Advisory mmmmx ee The PAC consists of aviation and non -aviation constituents selected to provide well-rounded Plan perspectives. The PAC serves in an advisory capacity to collectively review Plan recommendations and provide feedback to the Airport and Consultant. PAC input will be used to guide Plan developments. The PAC consists of members representing the following interests: _/ ' UGFG ~/ Redmond Economic Development, Inc. .� ' Redmond Chamber ofCommerce ~/ Airport Tenant (GA Representative) ~/ - Deschutes County ` City ofRedmond Engineering Dept. ~/ ' City ofRedmond Planning Division REDMOND MINICIRA/AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 4 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Introduction ^� ~ City ofBend Prineville (S39) Airport Management The Airport project manager serves as an ex-officio member of the PAC. The FAA and ODA are informed of PAC meetings and invited to attend in an observer role. Key Technical Stakeholders While the PAC will provide a continuous sounding board throughout the Plan, there are some stakeholders that are expected to be interested in specific Plan elements and disinterested in others. The Consultant will meet with these stakeholders to collect their feedback on Plan elements that are of interest to them. These include: Airport Inventory Demand Forecasts Improvement Alternatives Control Tovver Law enforcement Passenger and Cargo Airlines Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Aircraft rescue and firefighting k\RFF Businesses air port property ' Airport hangar tenants ' - - - Passengerand cargo airlines Control tower Control tower TSA ARFF Deschutes County Also, the City of Redmond is completing a Comprehensive Plan update and roadway engineering projects in the vicinity of the Airport concurrent with the Airport Master Plan. Close coordination between the Airport and community planning and development projects were pursued to help efforts of both organizations support common goals. PmblicOwtrea,ch This public involvement pnucoaa is used to infonn, educate, and solicit feedback from the public regarding the Plan process, major findings, and conclusions. Conducting public outreach meetings in an "open house" format provides the general public the opportunity to interact with the Airport and Consultant, ask questions, communicate concerns, and provide feedback. The two (2) public meetings occur at the following Plan milestones. nuuMowomrNuzmcAIRPORT MASTER PLAN S Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Introduction March 30, 2018 ^� ~ Facility Requirements and Initial Improvement Alternatives Refined Alternatives and Preliminary Capital Improvement Plan A summary of public involvement is included as a Plan appendix. SWOT Analysis Aspart ofthe strategic planning process, a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (8VVOT)analysis was conducted with the PAC to determine the appropriate strategic visions for the Airport, and specific goals and objectives tobeaddressed throughout the Plan. SWOT iaaprocess for synchronizing mtrategiodeciaion'making facturs, and helps categorize the Airport's internal and external characteristics, qualities, and merits. When compiled, the SWOT factors help formulate Plan goo|a, provide the basis to pragmatically assess recommendations, and guide the P|en'soverall developmental policy. The following SWOT factors were identified bythe Planning Advisory Committee during the project kick-off meeting held November S.2O18. SWOT TABLE Helpfu|r�/ Harmful To Achieving the Objective To Achieving the Objective Strengths Internal Origin ortunities - External Origin trengths: W°exneoyoy: Opportunities characteristics that provide unadvantage over others. characteristics that create ammuvomanacompared mvmem. outside potential that the Airport could capitalize on. outside risks that could uodetrimental mthe Airport. L REDMOND mmNxIrA.zAIRPORT MASTER PLAN G Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Introduction ths: -/ ' Runway wind coverage and physical access v Runway length ` Central location v ARFFpreaenoe - New terminal Security */ Business and tourist economy ~/ - Size ofAirport-owned property °/ Frequency offlights */ Air Traffic Control Tower presence v FAA grant assurances inplace tokeep the Airport intact Opportunities: -/ ` Business and industry diversity in the area V Hotel availability � Transportation network companies (UboA * Transportation systems/muKi'usepath ' Tonnina|—JetBhdgoa v/ East bound flights ,� - Additional connections ~/ Time offlights (more atnight) vEmergency preparedness v/ Airport land owned north ofairfield (golf course area) ' Airportname/branding ~/ ^ Improving access tothe airfield particularly on the north side Weakness: ` TS4and security requirements tuadhere to Y Limited infrastructure availability v U8F8ainsideexpansion potential limited bylack ofavailable land adjacent tocurrent taxiways Threats: v/ Not isolated from naUona0ntennaUona|thnuats ~' Availability ofskilled workforce orhigher education opportunities Lack ofFBOmaintenance technicians and training v/ BLK0and other open lands where transient population tends togravitate + GA competition in the region—usersoou|d go o|uovvhero ./ ' Coscadiaoarthquaka */ Could overshoot growth estimates and overbuild REDMOND MUNICIRAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 7 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 9 This Inventory Chapter documents 2O1Gconditions at the Redmond Municipal Airport (the Airport) and provides a foundation for the overall planning analysis in the subsequent chapters of the RIDM Master Plan. The Inventory Chapter includes an overview of environmental conditions and land uses at and surrounding the Airport toprovide abasis for evaluating planned improvements. 0 T E INVENT 0 '/Y This section summarizes the purpose and organization of this chapter, and defines the key elements that are included in the investigation. 1,1.1 C1 1AP][E1w, PKjAPOSEANI) OtGANIZA][ION The Inventory Chapter looks at the physical layout of the Airport and documents 2016 conditions in terms of airfield design standards and aviation activity. The Master Plan does not address management policies and procedures, staffing or operational rules and regulations. These topics are addressed in other airport documents. The chapter begins with an overview of the Airport that covers location, history, role in the community, property interests, and the components ofairport operation. The Airport isacomplex operation with three major facility areas: airside, landside, and the terminal building. The Inventory Chapter documents each ofthese three areas interms ofuse, design, and condition. v/ Airside facilities are those areas that are restricted from general public access — sometimes called "inside the fence." This includes runways and taxiways, facilities for general aviation parking and maintenance, air cargo and other private business facilities with direct access to the runway, airport safety and maintenance facilities and the area used by the United States Forest Service (USFG). ~/ Landside facilities are those that support airport activities without direct access to the airfield. They include internal roadways, parking areas, and non -aeronautical development areas. ~/ The terminal buildinq provides a transition between the airside and landside areas for commercial airline passengers and provides spaces for the traveling public, airline and airport administration, and the Transportation Security Administration (T8A). The chapter will cover airport activity and design standards, which will be used in later plan chapters to address the need for improvements, improvements that may be recommended, and as a basis for design REI)MOND MUNICHIALAIRPuRT MASTER PLAN 1 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 The chapter looks beyond the boundaries cfthe Airport toconsider surrounding land uses that are subject to aircraft overflight, and the catchment area from where the Airport draws its passengers and users. The Airport serves the businesses and residents of the City of Redmond, the nearby City of Bend, and Deschutes, Crook, and Jefferson counties. The community around the Airport drives the demand for commercial air service, general aviation, and air cargo. Other airports serving the region are documented aathey impact demand atthe Airport. Environmental factors are inventoried as they influence aircraft flight. Weather factors, such as temperature and wind direction, impact aircraft performance and drive facility design considerations. Environmental conditions such as wetlands, air quality, and aircraft noise are documented so future development can beevaluated interms ufpotential environmental impacts. Information was collected in several ways, including a site visit to the Airport in October 2016; review of documents and records provided by the Airport, the City of Redmond, the FAA, and other public agencies; and interviews with the Airport tenants. Results are presented in the following sections: ' Airport Overview v / Airside Facilities + Landak1oFaci|itiea /~ ' Terminal Building ~/ - Aeronautical Setting v Community Setting ,/ ` Aviation Activity - Airport Economic & Financial Conditions ~/ ` Environmental Conditions HE*NIONmN1myICumLAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 2 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 ma ^� � This section gives an overview of the Airport that covers location, history, role in the community, property interests, and the components of airport operation. P 1[L*CATI The Airport isincentral Oregon's high desert just east ofthe Cascade mountain range. The Airport is the only commercial service airport in the region, located 150 miles from Eugene to the west, 150 miles from Portland to the northwest, and 220 miles from Pendleton to the northeast. The Airport is located in Deschutes County, in the City of Redmond. Redmond's location has been important to its growth and prosperity in terms of the area's population and economy. Redmond has been the hub of the local transportation network since the railroad arrived in 1911. Today, Redmond's location at the intersection of Oregon's Highways 126 and 97 provides driving connections in four directions including to Interstate 5 to the west and Interstate O4tothe nodh, as shown in Figurmi-i. TA DC*N1N1U.N1TY.H1ST0R'Y The first runways were constructed in 1929 with the support of Redmond Ray Johnson American Legion Post and Redmond Commercial Club, which has since evolved into the Redmond Chamber of Commerce. The Works Progress Administration improved the Airport during the 1930s, and during World War 11, the US Army Air Corps used the Airport for training B-1 7 and P-38 pilots. The first commercial flight at the Airport was in 1946. After its service during the war, the Airport was sold to the City of Redmond. Airport property includes 2,518 acres surrounding two runways oriented in an "X" configuration. The passenger terminal area is southwest of the runway intersection. Aviation uses have been developed on the west and north side of the Airport along the major access routes of SE Airport Way, SE Veterans Way, and Highway 126. Property uses and development areas are shown on Figure 1-2, and key airport facilities are shown in Figure 1-3. � REI)MOND MWNKARNI, 3 )RT MASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Meadlunt Newport Hillsboro Beaverton Salem Albany Roseburg VV A S H~I 11 -- O Nl Portland Umpqua National Forest 6 Medford Ashland Klamath National ent City Forest Six Rivers National Forest Weed The Dalles Sisters IWinema National Forest Klamath Falls Redmond Movoc National Forest CAL -)RN A REDMOND MUNICIPAL Yakima Richland REDMOND, MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Burns Kennewick Walla Walla Umatilla National Forest Baker City ORREGON an Sheldon National Antelope Refuge Malheur National Forest La Grande 20,. au NIEVADA Figure I-1 REDMOND LOCATION MAP AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Ter inai Area a, V dd c a a► in a ea 0 ar R1 —a W aE c t a1 O a` a. 3 4.1 U- 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 1.24 OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW MANAGEMENT The Airport is owned by the City of Redmond. The Airport Director reports to the City Manager, and City employees are responsible for daily operations, progronls, and services. City Council mombem, elected by the citizens of Redmond, are the City's policy makers. The City established an Airport Committee in 1991 to act in an advisory role to the City Council on airport -related matters. The Committee is composed ofnine members: five appointed by Redmond; one appointed by the City of Bend; one appointed by Deschutes County; one appointed by Jefferson County; and one appointed by Crook County. Redmond recently instituted an Ex-Officio Youth member to help foster interest in aviation for young adults. FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS The Airport is a public -use facility supporting commercial, general eviaUon, military, and U8F8 users. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) National Plan ofIntegrated Airport Systems (VP|A8) classifies the Airport as a non -hub primary commercial service airport. The NPIAS is updated every two years and uses predetermined evaluation criteria including commercial service enplanements, proximity to other airports, and number of based aircraft to identify airports that are of importance to the national air transportation system. Airports that are included in the NP|A8 are eligible for FAA Airport Improvement Program (4|F) funding. Classification as e non -hub airport io based onthe Airport having more than 10.000 annual passenger enplanements, but less than 0.05 percent of total national commercial passenger enp|anemunte. Under the Code ofFederal Regulations (CFR).the Airport iscertified asaClass | FAA Part 13Qfacility, which means that the Airport maintains facilities intended to serve scheduled passenger aircraft with 30 or more passenger seats. The Oregon Department of Aviation classifies the Airport as a Category I - Commercial Service Airport. Airports in this category have scheduled commercial air carrier service. The Airport Reference Code (AR[), described in greater detail in Section 1.3.3. is C-|||, which means that facilities are designed for medium-sized commercial aircraft like the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320. Table 1-1 describes key facility AirpRq Owner NPIAS Airport Category itvofRedmond ___ _ �Non-Hub Ajrmort Reference Code Airport Acreage 2.518ecras � A�irpprtRmfmrence Point Coordinates N44^1524VV121^0O.0Q�_ Airport Elevation 3080fe: Above Mean Sea Level (AM0Q Airport Traffic Control Tower Open 1.4 hours da.ily Sources: FAA Airport Master Record (Form aum), Airport WebsueAirport Directory, wPmS. MASTER PLAN 7 Exhibit owOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 E FACILITIES "Airside" is a collective term for those areas of the Airport that are accessible to aircraft including runways, taxiways, aprons, and hangar areas. Facilities that directly support aviation activity include: ~/ ` Pavement: runways, taxiways and aprons v Structures: aircraft storage and maintenance hangars, fixed base operators (F8Os), fuel storage. snow removal equipment (SRE) storage, and an aircraft rescue and firefighting facility (ARFF) Naviqation aids: airfield and approach lighting, weather monitoring systems, radio beacons Airfield skqnmleand marNn0a: (indicators for precision and non -precision instrument runways) Airport traffic control tower (AJ'CT) Terminal bui|dinq: Passenger support and services and administrative areas Safety areas: Property set aside to comply with FAA -mandated setbacks and clear zones Runways are numbered using asystem that assigns anumber toeach runway end based onits magnetic alignment. The Airport's primary runway, Runway 5' 23. is aligned in a northeaot/southvvastfaohiun and the crosswind runway, Runway 11-2Q.isaligned ina northwest/so utheast fashion. DKUNWAY5-23 Runway S'23is7.O38feet long and 15Ofeet wide. The runway has anasphalt surface that is transverse -grooved to improve aircraft braking action, reduce hydroplaning, and improve directional control for aircraft when the pavement is wet and icy. The runway was reconstructed in 2016 and is in excellent condition. RunwayS'23 is senax] by full- length parallel taxiway on the west side. The runway to parallel taxiway separation is 4OOfeet, which meets C-|||design standards. Precision iuymunmcutcuuoay: A runway end having ouinstrument approach procedure that provides course and vertical path guidance conforming m Instrument Lauding S!stem(iL5)o, Microwave Lauding System (MLS) precision approach standards. Now-procixiuninutruroemtvnuivuy: An'm`ay end having nninstrument uppmxcbprocedure that provides course guidance without vertical path guidance. Runway 5'23isaprecision instrument runway with high -intensity runway lights (H|RL)and medium - intensity eppnoaoh|kJhUngaystomwithrunwaya|k]nmentindioator|kJhto(MALSR).These|kJhtapnnvide pilots with visual guidance for landings at night and during poor weather conditions. xnxwmoMnwICxs* 8 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory RUNWAY 11-29 Runway 11 -29 is 7,006 feet long and 100 feet wide. The runway has an asphalt surface and is transverse -grooved. Runway 11 -29 is served by two full-length parallel taxiways on the north and south sides. The runway to parallel taxiway separation is 400 feet, which meets B-111 design standards. Runway 11 -29 is a non -precision instrument runway with medium -intensity runway lights (MIRL). Table 1-2 presents data for Runway 5-23 and Table 1-3 presents data for Runway 11-29. NAVAIDs are defined in Sections 1.3.6mnd 1.3.7. Dimensions Length: 7.O38feet, Width: 150feat Bearng _.__ � Effective Gradient 060/240 (True) � Weight,Bearing Co9mci�tV Surface Markings Lighting Asphalt -grooved. Good condition. Precision instrument approach. Good condition High -Intensity Runway Edge Lights Runway End Identifier Lights (REIL) — Runway End 05 Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VA8|)—Runway End OS Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAP|) — Runway End 23 14OOfoot K8ALSR—Runway End 23 ' |Distance To Go Sions Sources: FAA Airport Master Record (Form 5010), Airport website. Dimensions Bearing Effective Gradient Weight Bearing Capacity Surface . Markings Lighting Length'. 7,U06feet, Width: 100fnnt 122/30(True) 0.5% Single-wheel:28.00O|bo, Double-wheel:4O.00O|bo. Asphalt -,grooved. Good Non -precision instrument approach. Good condition Medium Intensity Runway Edge Lights . RE|L VAS| - Runway End 1i PAP|—Ru . End2g ' Signoga Distance io{6oSigns Sources: FAA Airport Master Record (Form 5010), Airport website. xmIMoND MUN1CJVALA1RP`OWF NUSTER PLAN U Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxoo|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory ]0ELIPAD The Airport has one helipad, which is used by the USFS and not available for public use. The helipad is 48 feet x 48 feet and has a concrete surface. Military and GA helicopters land on the runways and hover taxi tothe FBOaprons topark. 1'3.2TAXIWAY SYS1[E The Airport has anextensive system of12asphalt taxiways that provides access between the runways and aircraft parking and storage facilities. Taxiways C.F.and Qare parallel tothe runways and the rest are connector taxiways. The parallel taxiways are 5O feet wide and the connector taxiways are 75feet wide. Taxiway C and Taxiway @ west ofRunway S'23were reconstructed in2O11 and are inexcellent condition. Taxiway Ceast ofRunway 5'23 was constructed in 2013. There are two areas onthe airfield that the FAA has labeled ao potential "hot upoto.^which is defined in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A, Change 1, Airport Design (AC-1 3A) as "a location on an airport movement area with a history of potential risk of collision or runway incursion, and where heightened attention by pilots and drivers is necessary." These two areas are the intersection of Taxiways Fand C;.and the intersection ofTaxiways Cand F. Parallel taxiways: Taxiways that run alongside —_-~- Cnouedor taxiways: All ntbruxiwosthat connect die aircraft mall facilities, 1-10(spo<y: Areas vbeoincidents are more likely moccur because nfairfield gunmc/'?. The airfield's original design was in compliance with FAA standards of the time; however, FAA standards have since changed. Some existing taxiway connectors do not meet FAA guidance defined in AC-1 3A. These standards seek to promote safer operations by simplifying airfield geometry, and reducing the risk that a pilot will accidentally taxi onto o runway. Examples of non-standard conditions are TaxkwayA'a direct access from the North General Aviation Apron to Runway 11 -29, and Taxiway H and E's direct access from the Air Carrier Apron to Runway 5-23. As these taxiways are reconstructed, they will need to be built to the latest design standards. The Airport is required to maintain facilities in line with FAA standards as part of an agreement for accepting FAA grant money. FAA design standards for runways are determined by the FAA coding system called the Runway Design Code (RDC), shown in Table 1-4. The RDC is made up of the aircraft approach category (AAC), the airplane design group (ADG), and the runway approach visibility minimums. The most demanding AAC and ADG at an airport sets the ARC. The FAA codes taxiways using estandard called the Taxiway Design group (TD@). "TER PLAN 10 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory | 1200 Lower than %mUe | Source: FAA xc,uo153oo/axAirport Design. ua`momu/moNxru*Lm 11 ~r RUNWAY CLASSIFICATION AND DESIGN The design aircraft isanaircraft that uses onairport onaregular basis, which the FAA defines asmore than 5OOoperations per year. The Bombardier C>4OO(operated by Alaska Airlines) is the most demanding aircraft that exceeds 5OO annual operations. The C>4ODhas en approach speed of12Oknots, a wingspan ofA3.3feet, and tail height 27.4feet. Per AACand ADQ standards, the Q4OOisclassified asa B'||| aircraft. Table 1-4depicts the Airport's RDC, as indicated in bold font. Runway Design Code (RD(.): The FAA coding system comprised of three standards that determine the ARC: the Aircraft Approach Category, Airplane Design Group, and Approach Visibility Minimums, /�irccu0i/tpPr*uch Cu<egory(fkAC): This first standard isbased outhe approach speed (in knots) of the design aircraft. Airplane Design Group (A0G): This second standard isbased vuthe wingspan and the tail height (in feet) nfthe design aircraft. Approach Visibility Minimums: These are based nxrun-way visual range (<Vn).the approximate visihUi/y(in feet) usmeasured hythe BVKlight transmission/reception equipment n,equivalent weather observer report mcasure mcins. The depicted numerical value for KV8relates /vmxvayvisibility xdui`m'msrepresented iu feet o,fhnvxndvisibility that have statute mile equivalents (40m)BYB~1/4udb). AAC � .�� Approach��������`���������� A Approach Speed less than 91 knots �j_krlq�s or more but less than 121 knots C Approach speed 121 knots or more but less than 141 knots ,p� h'speed 141 knots or more but less than 166 knots E Approach speed 10Oknots ormore Group � (in feet) ' Tail Height (in feet) �� � | <4Q' <2O' U 49'<7A' 20-<30 U| 79'-<118Y A/ ' ' 118'-<171' 30'-<45' 171'-< 214' SO''<GG' 214'-< 262 i 68 '<OO 9 06 wo eV ` RVR /ft\� ___ 1 VIS �Runways designed forvisua|a use only 6000 Not nlUe ' � , 4000 Lower than 1mile but not lower than %mile 2400 ' Lower than % mile but not lower than %mile 1600 Lower than %milebut not lower than %mile , Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory RUNWAY SAFETY AREAS The FAA defines the Runway Safety Area (RSA) asadefined surface surrounding the runway prepared or suitable for reducing the risk of damage to aircraft in the event of an aircraft undershoot, overshoot, or excursion from the runway. The runways at the Airport each have different RSA design standards. Runway 5-23 is designed to C-111 standards, which is the Airport Reference Code as of 2016 and the standard needed for commercial aircraft such as the Boeing 737. Runway 11-29 is designed to B-111 standards, suitable for handling aircraft with slower approach speeds. Table 1-5 depicts runway RSA dimensions. � � 10, | ' / 6-23 11-29 Runway Design Standard C-U| B'U| Width SOO' ` 400' ' Le,,gu/ :.uao o./-vo Length Beyond Runway Ends 1,000' 600' RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONES The Runway Protection Zone (RPZ)isatrapezoidal area off the end ofthe runway. This area isdesignated to enhance safety for aircraft operations and for people and objects onthe ground. The FAA recommends that incompatible land uses, objects, and activities bolocated outside of the RPZ. The FAA has issued a Memo titled Interim Guidance on Land Uses Within a Runway Protection Zone to help airport sponsors understand what land uses are and are not compatible within the RPZ. The FAA recommends that an airport operator maintain full control of an RPZ, ideally through fee simple property acquisition. If this is not feasible, land use control maybe achieved through the use easements. Highway 126 goes through the RPZ at the approach end of Runway 23. Veterans Way and Airport Way pass through the RPZatthe Runway 11 approach end. Since these roads are existing features, current FAA guidance does not require the roads to be moved. Actions that would introduce new incompatible land uauo to the RPZ either by airport or neighboring jurisdiction action, require coordination with FAA Headquarters. Table i-6depicts RP2standards for the Airport. Runway Protection Zone (RIIZ): & trapezoid -shaped area off the end vf zackmnwav defined hythe FAA mx zone menhance the protection vfpeople xnxnmnct-t,m`the "monx � Length"'( , Inner Width (ft.) Outer Width (ft.) Acreage 29.465 Source: Airport ALP, AC-13A xn�'mo�mmxu��AIRPORT "TER PLAN 12 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 TAXIWAY DESIGN AND STANDARDS The TDG determines taxiway design standards. The TDG relates to the undercarriage dimensions of aircraft, based on the overall Main Gear Width and the Cockpit to Main Gear Distance. TDG also determines the taxiway edge safety margin and shoulder width of taxiways. Taxiway protection is determined by the ADG of the design aircraft. The ADG of an aircraft determines the taxiway protection areas, taxiway separation, and required wingtip clearance for aircraft using the taxiways. The TDG and ADG are determined by critical aircraft, the Q400. The Q400 has a TDG of three and ADG of 111. Table 1- 7 depicts TDG three ondAD@ ||| standards. /TqxiWay,,Width Taxiway Edqe Safety Margin 10, �Safety Ane8/TF|4\ 118' Taxiway �Taxiway Object Free Area K]�A 186' � Taxilane OF - - �` 182' Taxiway Centerline to Parallel Taxiway/Taxi lane Centerline Centerline to Fixed or Movable Object 93' T@x|2OeCenterline 10Parallel Taxi|2O8Centerline ` 140' Taxi|oneCenterline to Fixed orMovable C)b'gct 81' 'Taxiway Wingt�p, Clearance T8x|8O9VWnudpClearance 27 Source: AC-13A 84' xemmu��omo��xmm�mw+nxUSzunrLxN 13 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwvxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 1.14 AltCA.AFT A 1) NS The Airport has four apron areas: the Air Carrier Apron, General Aviation North Apron, General Aviation South Apron, and the USFS Apron. The aprons serve the landside facilities including the passenger terminal building, the general aviation hangar facilities and FBOs, cargo facilities, and the USFS. The Airport's aprons locations, sizes, and surface pavements are listed below: � Air Carrier Apron, west of the runway intersection (378,675 square feet; concrete) � General Aviation North Apron, northwest of the runway intersection (672,003 square feet; asphalt and concrete) ~/ ' General Aviation South Apron, north of the Air Carrier Apron and west of the runway intersection (11O.475square feet; asphalt) ~/ - USFS, north of the runway intersection (473,175 square feet; asphalt and concrete) 13,5 FIXED MASE E FBOs support a wide range of GA aeronautical activitieo, providing services to aircraft and to pi|ots, the traveling public, and the airlines. There isone Apron, and onthe South QAApron. The FBO v/ Aircraft ground handling Aircraft parking (ramp orUadmwn) Fuel (10OLLand Jet /) Hangars Nitrogen QPU/Pmmaroart Passenger terminal and lounge Aoria|tours/aeria| sightseeing Aircraft charters Aircraft maintenance Aircraft clean ing/waahing/detailing Aircraft parts FBOatthe Airport. The FBOis located onthe North QA offers full service operations which include the following ~/ Catering Rental cars IV rl Courtesy cars (free for pilots tuuse inthe local area Public telephone Computerized weather Flight planning facilities Internet access Restnuomu De-ice truck and De-ice Cart (type1) unDNIwmoMnNImmL)UPWuRTMASTER PLAN 14 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory 1_3_6 AIRCRAFT STORAGE The Airport has box hangars and T-hangars on the north and south aprons. T-hangars store one aircraft while box hangars can accommodate multiple aircraft. Aircraft have direct access to Taxiway G for the south apron and Taxiway C forthe north apron. Both taxiways are parallel to Runway 11 -29 and have access to Runway 05-23. Figures 1-4 and 1-5 show examples of hangars at the Airport. Figure 1-6 shows the airport building layout. Figure 1-4. Box Hangars 1.3.7 SUPPORT FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND SNOW REMOVAL Figure 1-5. � w The Airport has one support facility that houses airport maintenance and Snow Removal Equipment (SRE). The facility is located next to the ARFF and its bays face Taxiway G for quick access. The three storage bays contain plows and other SRE. The storage bay section of the building is approximately 85 feet by 45 feet. The Airport owns and operates the following SRE equipment: ~ One 1AQSOshkosh model "HB"all wheel drive v One 1A76Huber Grader, with e12'reversible blade ^� ~ One 1985Cane Front End Loader ~ One 2OOGCat Front End Loader ~ Two 2O'Pro'Tecsnow pushers toattach toa front end loader ^� ~ One 12''Pno'Teusnow pusher toattach toa front end loader ~ One 22'reversibleramp plow ~ CNe2OOO Oshkosh nloda| ^P~series six wheel, all steer, all wheel drive truck v Two 8mmmonkAFK02Airfield Friction Meter K8ork3. ~ One 1984 Oshkosh model VVT'22O6all wheel drive with a2OOQslide in power plant and 20^ rotary broom. ~ One 2OO7Ford F'55Odeicing unit. ~ ^/ One 2014Wausau 8nuDozur3131 u+mmINu�%lmw/o]�,�LAIRI'oRT"zERPLAN 15 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmvmxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan LEADING EDGE JET CENTER AIRFIELD LIGHTING BUILDING FOREST SERVICE FOREST SERVICE FOREST SERVICE CASHE BLDG. W N n 0 I a La 2 z n 0 a J J J mill STORAGE BUILDING U.S. FOREST SERVICE AIR CENTER U.S. FOREST SERVICE AIR CENTER U.S. FOREST SERVICE AIR CENTER U.S. FOREST SERVICE AIR CENTER FOREST SERVICE FOREST SERVICE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER AIRPORT RESCUE & FIRE FIGHTING SNOW EQUIP. & MAINT. STORAGE WAREHOUSE USFS HANGAR SMOKEY HALL FOREST SERVICE OFFICE BUILDING BPA HELICOPTER HANGAR cc a w Z a x 0 co O O .- N M 10 h OD en O N M a1 0 N. en et of 0 N. a0 N N N M m M M M M M M et et et et et et W u1 in in of lel of of TERMINAL N cc 2 2 2 a a a cc cc cc a a cc 3 cc cc cc cc t7 a cc a cc 47 aaa 4cr444440et t7 U w J 0 l7 L7 0 0 0 0 Z Z C Z W Z W Z c o c F. z z z a a z m z z z z a z a z zzzmmm444 xxxxaxxxxx1:-x +'- N en et in 0h CO 0% O N en Cr N 0 N.N N N N N N J; J; J; LI LI LI LI LEADING EDGE JET CENTER Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory Airport personnel maintain the airfield and Airport -owned buildings. Figure 1-7shows the support facility used for maintenance and SRE. The support facility is in good condition. There is space between the support facility and the ARFF for future expansion of either facility should it be necessary. �k Figure 1-7 SREand Maintenance Support Facility ~ � AIRCRAFT RESCUE AND FIRE FIGHTING The Airport is required to maintain ARFF under Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 139, which governs the operation of airports with scheduled or unscheduled passenger service by aircraft of more than 30 seats. The Airport is classified with an ARFF Index B designation which applies to airports serving only aircraft that are shorter than 126 feet. The Index B designation specifies equipment types that must be on hand to respond to an aircraft accident. The Airport's ARFF facility is centered between the passenger terminal and the south GA apron with access to Taxiway G. ARFF vehicles include two crash trucks, one ambulance, and a mass casualty incident vehicle. The City of Redmond staffs the ARFF station with one active duty fire fighter at all times. FUEL FACILITIES Fuel is offered by the FBO to GA, airlines, military, and USFS. Both 100 low -lead (LL) and Jet A fuel are available from the FBO via full service fuel trucks as shown in Figure 1-8, and self-service 1 OOLL is available on the South GA Apron. A list offuel tanks, their ownership, and fuel type are listed below. ~ AtSIRE building, diesel fuel tank used for SREand maintenance South GA Apron, four tanks. Two are 20,000 gallons with Jet A fuel. One 500-gallon 100 LL fuel. ,� - North GA Apron, seven tanks. One private use 20,000 gallon Jet A. Two are out of commission and will eventually be removed. Two are out of commission and can be brought back if needed. One isa2O.00O'gaUonJet Atank and one 12.00O'goUon1DOLLtank. �u,muwoaxomxzm�.AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 17 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmvmxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 Figure 1-8. Fuel Trucks UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE (USFS) REDMOND AIR CENTER The USFS Redmond Air Center plays a major role in supporting firefighting efforts in Oregon, Alaska, and Washington. Operations depend on the severity of the fire season, which generally lasts from May to October, so the number of operations varies annually. The base typically experiences approximately 780- 800 operations per season. Aircraft operating in and out of the base include C130s, RJ 85s, King Airs, and Sherpas (A and B versions). The USFS has also acquired 16 C130s (H/Q models) that are expected to arrive once reconstruction of Taxiway B is complete in 2017. The base has two aprons capable of accommodating the C130s. The station has an air tanker base on their leased property; hosts training for firefighting and prevention; and processes firefighters and sends them to incidents throughout the service region. The FBO services the USFS base. The base has and will continue to be visited by traffic from other governmental organizations. Previous visitors include politicians, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Air Force One. The base is classified as a hub of operations, incident support base and critical asset for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and related emergency efforts in the event of a large scale natural disaster in the Pacific Northwest, such as an earthquake in the Cascadia subduction zone. The USFS is planning for an expansion of its facilities to include a visitor center and fire cache on the leased property. The major improvements the base facility needs are improvements to the old roads that lead to the station and the utilities. 18 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 1_18 PAVEMENT Pavement management reports are periodically updated to assist airports in the ongoing maintenance of airfield pavements. An airport Pavement Management Program (PMP) assesses the relative condition of the pavement sections and identifies pavement repair and rehabilitation needs and guides capital planning. Airfield pavements are assessed using a scale known as the Pavement Condition Index (PCI). The PCI inspection assesses the types, severities, and amounts of distress observed in the pavements through a visual inspection. The evaluation is quantified using ascale from O (failed) to 100 (new) with ratings applied to individual pavement sections, providing an overall condition report for the Airport. The condition is an indication of the needs for maintenance and/or repair that will be required over a seven-year period. The most recent PCI values at the Airport were calculated in August 2010, and have been updated to reflect construction that has occurred since. PAVEMENT STRENGTH Anairfield's required pavement strength isdetermined byaircraft fleet mix. There are two pavement strength classifications, ^Ub|ity"and "Other than UU|ib/.^Utility pavements are capable ofhandling aircraft upho12.5OOpounds maximum gross weight (&1QW).while Other than Utility pavements can handle aircraft over 12.5OOpounds K8GVV.When the design aircraft exceeds 12.5OOpounds aothe case atthe Airport, the Aircraft Classification Number (4CN)-PavementClassification Number (PCN)method iaused tocalculate what the pavement io capable ofaccommodating. The ACN-PCNmethod of determining pavement strength is intended to boused to report relative pavement strength, and not tobeused for pavement design. ACN: The number that expresses the relative effect of an aircraft atugiven configuration ouu pavement structure for o specified standard vf sohAmdcv/ongtb, PC N: & number that expresses the load -carrying capacity nfxpavement for unrestricted operations, Table 1-8 illustrates the standard ACN-PCN reporting format, as described in AC 150/5335-5, Standardized Method o/Reporting Airport Pavement Strength 'PCN. REDMOND MU NIC'nnI.AIRP0RT MASTER PLAN 10 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 A -High W— no limit >_ 13 CBR R -Rigid B —Medium T — Technical (>8 but < 13 1 X—182-254 Study Numerical , CBR) Value C — Low (>4 but 8 Y — 74-181 F - Flexible CBR) D — Ultralow (L4CBR) _ ###/RorF/A,B,C,orD/W,X,Y,orZ/TorU Source: Airport Records Z — 0-73 U — Using Aircraft Table 1-9 includes the 2016 published weight bearing capacities for Runway 5-23 and Runway 11-29. Runway, 05-2 Runway 11-29 Source: Airport Records 68,000 lbs. 110,000 lbs. 200,000 lbs. 28,000 lbs. 40,000 lbs. N/A Table 1-10 includes the recommended weight bearing capacity for Runway 05-23 and Runway 11-29 after using the ACN-PCN method for evaluating pavements. Runway 05-23 Runway 11-29 Source: Airport Records 20,000 lbs. 94,000 lbs. 250,000 lbs. 150,000 lbs. REDMOND MI) IC1_t t AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 20 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 - Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 Other airfield pavements' weight bearing and PCNs are included in Table 1-11. Taxiway A Taxiway B Taxiway C Taxiway D Taxiway E Taxiway F 68,000 lbs. 91,000 lbs. 26/F/C 68,000 lbs. 91,000 lbs. 26/F/C/X/T 74,000 lbs. 109,000 lbs. 28/F/A/X/U Taxiway G (East Taxiway G (West Taxiway H Taxiway J (South Taxiway J (North) Taxiway K Taxiway M (South Taxiway M (North) Taxiway N Air Carrier Apron GA North Apron GA South Apron Source: Airport Records 120,000 lbs. 120,000 lbs 81,000 lbs. 74,000 lbs. 120,000 lbs. 81,000 lbs. 74,000 lbs. 120 000 lbs. 81,000 lbs. 74,000 lbs. 120,000 lbs. 76,000 lbs. 74,000 lbs. 109,000 lbs. 28/F/A/X/U 54/F/C/X/T 54/F/C/X/T 191,000 lbs. 191,000 lbs. 121,000 lbs. 29/F/A/)(TT 109,000 lbs. 191,000 lbs. 121,000 lbs. 74,000 lbs. 23,000 lbs. 109,000 lbs. 191,000 lbs. 121,000 lbs. 109,000 lbs. 28/F/B/X/U 54/F/C/X/T 29/F/A/X/T 28/F/B/XIU 54/F/C/X/T 29/F/A/XTT 28/F/B/X/U 191,000 lbs. 54/F/C/X/T 100,000 lbs. 29/F/C/X/U 109,000 lbs. 28/F/B/X/U 8/F/C/X/T REDMOND \I1JNIC1I\LALRPORTMASTER PLAN 21 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 0 0 LI I- 0 0 a 0 tt o a.. > 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory [3,@�-XV �I ENT P. ()CEDUIkES GAT10NALAISS AN Aircraft taking off and landing atthe Airport rely oninstrument procedures, flight patterns, instrument and visual approach aids, and weather observation and communication for safe operations. This section describes these factors ingreater detail. INSTRUMENT PROCEDURES Aircraft that use the Airport operate under both visual flight rules (VFF) and instrument flight rules (|FF).The Airport has established instrument approach (|anding)and departure (take off) procedures that are provided bythe ATCTtopilots as they arrive ordepart the Airport. Instrument approach procedures are aseries ofpredetermined maneuvers established bythe FAA using electronic NAVA|DG. The procedures assist pilots in locating and landing atanairport during low visibility and cloud ceiling conditions. The eleven instrument approach procedures and effect atthe Airport are summarized inTable i-i2. maomomxmomuo,AL M 23 ^ N Xuw{zumxrut NkeienzmioicuJ Cooddimmm(I N10: When visibility ispoor and cloud ceilings are below udefined threshold, those are considered bstmniem ineteo to logical conditions (MC), FAA regulations refer wflight relying on instruments as instnmmuOighu rules (O,K).and 88Cisoccasionally referred mm''iFRcvxdWvuo." When visibility and cloud ceiling are above [MCpilots may elect mfly using 1rBv,visual flight rules (VFR). which iswhere the pilot uses visual cues to safely operate the aircraft. one instrument departure procedure in Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory oach Procedures Visbi|it Nautical Miles, NM 1/2 Descent KOiMirMurMs Feet ------------------ 200 RNAV(GP8)ZRVVY20 ' `1 286 ----^-------`--------'—�----~---^--------'---'---f----^—'------ JUNIPER VISUAL RVVY23 } Visual Departure Procedure Takeoff Minimums REDMOND THREE v/ RVVY5 v RVVY11 ./ ` RVVY23 ,� - RVVY2Q Visual Minimum climb nf3QDfeet per nautical mile (NM)to13OOD Minimum climb of4O6feet per N&1to13OOO Minimum climb of3S6feet per NK8to13OOD Minimum climb nf358feet per NK8ho13OOO In addition to the published instrument pnoceduroa, airlines generally have their own instrument procedures that are tailored to their operations apocificotiona, aircraft types, and levels of crew certification. Airline -specific instrument procedures are proprietary and not used by the public, therefore, they are not included in the Inventory Chapter. FLIGHT PATTERNS Flight patterns atthe Airport are depicted in Figure i-iO (Aniva0. Figure 1-11 U]epadureA.and Figure i-i2(Loce0.Arrival and departure routes show the typical flight patterns aircraft use when approaching or departing the Airport. Local patterns represent operations that occur around the Airport such aatouch and gooperations. The tracks shown inthe figures represent the majority offlight patterns atthe Airport. Weather, wind, ATCTdiroction. and pilot preference determine flight tracks and which runway end aircraft can use for arrivals and departures. . unmcmom��/om�mommzm&SzERruAN 24 Touch and Go An aircraft maneuver where auaircraft lands, slows, then accelerates and takes off without leaving the runway. |/iscounted mx,o npcoomm. Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 INSTRUMENT AND VISUAL APPROACH AIDS NAVAIDs are visual and electronic guides that assist pilot navigation. Visual NAVAIDs include lights and wind indicators that can be seen through aircraft windows. Reliance on sight limits the utility of visual NAVAIDs when visibility is poor and at great distances. Electronic NA\A|Da are acquired by instruments onboard aircraft and help pilots navigate and land when it is not possible to do so through visual cues alone. Electronic NAVAIDs include terrestrial antennae that use radio frequencies and satellites that use the global positioning system (GPS). NAVAIDs can be used during all flight conditions and must be used when visibility and cloud ceilings are low enough to be considered instrument meteorological conditions (IMC). NAVAIDs for the Airport are listed in Table 1'13. and described in more detail in the section that follows. ^� - QP8: AaateUita based navigational system � MAL8R: Medium Intensity Approach Lighting System with Runway Alignment Indicator Lights � |L8: Instrument Landing Systam—gnuund based landing system ^� ' RE|L: Runway End Identifier Lights � , ~ NDB: Non'Dinontiona|Beauon ~ PAP|: Precision Approach Path Indicator � VORYDK8E: aVHF omnidirodiona| range (VOF) and distance measuring equipment(DK8E) 1-�� 5_2� | 1 � � � � high intensity runway edge lights Runway End 5 REIL Runway End 23 I PA PI \yOF/DK0E Source: FAA Airport Facility Directory medium intensity runway edge lights Runway End 1 REIL \/A8| VOR A (Category A) GPG overlay _ Runway End 29 RBL PAR GP8 ` The Airport isequipped with two wind cones, which provide pilots with anindication ofwind direction and speed. One wind cone is located next to the intersection of Taxiways F and G and is lighted. The second wind cone is located between the GA north apron and Runway 11 -29 and is not lighted. �ummxv�o��n�*�omwam�mpLAN 25 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmwoxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 FFIC CONTROL AND COMMUNICATIONS FAA's Air Traffic Services division manages the National Airspace System (NAS) using a series of control centers that have control or authority over different segments of aircraft travel: v Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) — May berun byFAA, orContractor (The RDK8ATCTiorun bySERCO) — The vicinity ofthe airport ./ ` Terminal Radar Approach Control facilities (TRACON) — Multiple airports (The Airport approach/departure control is operated by Seattle Center) ~/ ` Air Route Traffic Control Centers (4RTCC) — Regional area (The Airport controlled bySeattle Center) — Controls aircraft en -route Airspace administered by the FAA is classified as either "controlled" or "uncontrolled," and defined as one of six classifications. Airspace designated as Class A, B, C, D, and E is controlled airspace, and Class G airspace is uncontrolled airspace. Class Fairspaue is not used in the United States. Figure i-i3depicts the airspace and aeronautical setting surrounding the Airport. wznmmD MmmCHm- AIP(PnRT MASTER PLAN 26 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 -Cl) 4 Lw „..,, oo 0 :I w H c4 4e4 o-f W A 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 1 l Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Mead Hunt ritiormomirmic 4.tila. 4;4 1.0 4',$TAtE, atAtt -tf Scale 1"— 10 Nautical Miles Source: Sectional Aeronautical Chart: Seattle (December 2016, Klamath Fails (March 2077) REDMOND MUNICIPAL J /5/ car Jy, NO -yki MO Figure 143 AIRSPACE/NAVAIDS SUMMARY AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 The ATCT, located just to the northeast of the terminal, is a contract tower run by a private company. It is not owned by the FAA and the staff are not FAA employees. The airspace around The Airport is Class D airspace when the ATCT is in service. When the ATCT is not in service, the Airport operates under a Class E airspace designation. |FR operations in vicinity ofthe Airport are in contact with the 8aatt|oARTCC. which provides pilots with altitude, aircraft separation, and route guidance. Pilots flying to the Airport are able to gather information about the Airport from a variety of information sources. The McMinnville Flight Service Station (F8S), another port of FAA's Air Traffic system, provides pilots with pre- flight briefings, assistance with opening and closing flight plans, pilot reports, weather reports, and notices to airmen. Weather information at RDM is broadcast by the automated surface observation system (ASOS). EATHEI� CON*ITIONS Wind observation data comes from the ASOS. The wind rose shows that prevailing winds come from the northwest and the south -south east. Figure 1-14 illustrates the all-weather wind rose for the Airport. Inner circle increments that expand outwards represent the total number of observations. Numbers on the outside of the circle from 0 to 36 represent the direction from which the wind is prevailing. Colors represent the speed of the wind in knots. Colors will stretch out towards the edge of the circle for directions from which the wind is prevailing during observations. The observations occurred between 2006 and 2015. Wind data is vital for aircraft operations. Aircraft performance is enhanced when taking off and landing into the wind, and there are limits to how much crosswind and tailwind aircraft can handle. Wind direction and speed information helps pilots and air traffic control select the most appropriate runway for operation. FAA standards for crosswind coverage are one of several factors that go into determining how many runways are needed, and what direction they should face. FAA standards state that runways should provide adleast 05' percentoovenogaforairuraftthadareexpectedtouoetheairport adleast 5OOtimes per year. Crosswind runways may be employed to improve wind coverage throughout the year and meet FAA criteria. The allowable crosswind component for each Runway Design Code is included in the Table 1-14 below: mmmuNO �Mt�Nlc��AIRIIowN4AmTEuxLAm 31 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 A -I and B-I* A -II and B-I1 10.5 knots 13 knots A -III, C-I through C-III, 16 knots D-I through D-lII A -IV and B-IV, C-IV through 20 knots C-VI, D-IB through D-VI E-1 through E-Vl 20 knots \Includes A -I and B-I small aircraft Figure 1-14. All Weather Wind Rose No-3 4-6 Of 7710 Dii.10 g,. 17-21 Source: FAA Airports Wind Rose Generator. :8 17 REDMOND M NICIPAL 32 RT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 In addition to wind, temperature and precipitation affect aircraft operation. For example, high temperatures can increase required takeoff distance, which could alter takeoff power settings and require payload reduction. Precipitation can negatively impact braking during landing. The frequency and amount of snow influences the type and number of SRE necessary, which has equipment and material storage implications. Weather data comes from the ASOS at the Airport to provide an idea of the local climate in the area. Key weather conditions are listed in Table 1-15 below. 10 'maximum ` 621,F ' Minimum 327" F ( - ' Averagem Average / July: D6'6^F Hottest Annual ` Month Temperature - - ` ' Average January: 22.2"F / ` Coldest Month | - | Averegn, 8.64|nches Annual ' PrecipitationTotal - _--_ Average January/December: � Monthly 1.60|nohns Maximum Average 1A7|nchea Snowfall Annual Total � , � ' | Source: Western Regional Climate Center, Redmond / WEATHER OBSERVATION AND COMMUNICATION Information about weather conditions isimportant h/pilots aathey make navigation decisions. The weather system inplace atThe Airport is an Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS). The monitoring units in this system are operated jointly by the National Weather Service, the FAA, and the Department of Defense. When the ATCT is closed, there are communication systems in place to help pilots communicate with each other and gather information about the conditions at the airport and in the surrounding area. These include: � Common Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF): A radio h*quenoy, specific to each oirport, used for communication between pilots operating at, and in the vicinity of, an Airport. The frequency for The Airport ia124.6.The CTAFiaused during hours that the ATCTisclosed. mumuwn�m,m��uAIRPuRT MASTER PLAN 33 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory Universal Communication (UNICOM) station: An air -to -ground communication facility. The frequency for The Airport is 122.95.A pilot might use a UN|CO&4to communicate fuel needs orother requests to aFBD. Automatic terminal information service (AT|S): A continuous broadcast of recorded infonnaUon, such as weather, active runways, available approaches and NOTAMs information, on a frequency specific to each airport. The frequency for The Airport is118.O2S. 13,11 AIRFIELD MARKING AND LIGHTING Airfield marking and lighting enhance pilot situational awareness and wayfinding. FAA guidance for airfield markings iadefined inAC1SO/534O'1.Standards forAirpnrt Markings and AC15O/354O'3OHDesign and Installation Details for Airport Visual Aids. This section describes these elements. RUNWAY MARKINGS Runway markings are white incolor and schematics depend onthe approach category ofthe runway. The markings include the runway end deaignator, centadine, athrasho|d bar, aiming point, touchdown zone, and runway edge markings. RunwoyOS'23 is marked with precision instrument runway (P|R)markings and Runway 11'2Qia marked with non -precision instrument runway (NP|) markings. Table i-i6lists the runway markings for Runway OS'23and 11-2Q. uEunomoMoNmz,u'a 34 Rnon,uymmddcsigoubmr Numbers that idemiATthe magnetic heading vfurunway. centerline: Dashed markings that denote the center nfthe mmvn?. Thr«m6vi6 bur: Denotes the beginning v[the runway available for landing. Ainmiog,pmixt: Provides avisual aiming point for lauding operations. l[ouchdnvvuzwuc: For landing operations, identifies the touchdown zone along uprecision m`u,uviu50V4hv/increments. Ruiivvuyxd%eoux,Lin8x: Provide enhanced visual contrast between the runway edge and the surrounding terrain v,runway shoulders and delineates the width ofthe suitable paved area for runway operations. mr2MASzERPLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmwvxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory Threshold bar Aiming Touchdown iRt zone Runway edge X markings Source: Airport Pavement and Marking Plan T� DWAY MARKINGS X Taxiway markings consist ofyellow centerline and enhanced centerline markings, and hold position signs painted with white inscriptions onred backgrounds. RUNWAY LIGHTING K'errhuJfioe: Continuous markings that denote the center ofthe taxiway, KInhmocedccn{cr}iue: Additional dashed markings on both sides vfthe ccmcdimcmprovide visual cues vfuuupcoming mmvxy bmN pvvibnm mamnnmmNI t � mqmLmRPuRTwASzER.ouAN 35 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory Runway 05-23 has high -intensity runway edge lighting (HIRL), consistent with the runway's precision instrument approach capability. Runway 05 is equipped with a four -box visual approach slope indicator (VASI). Runway 23 is equipped with a four -box precision approach path indicator (PAPI). Runway 11'2Qhas K8|RLRunway 11 isequipped with afour-box \0AQ|and Runway 20isequipped with ofour-box PAP|.Both runway ends are equipped with RBL.where the pilot sees all red lights when the approach istoo low, all white lights when the approach istoo high, and both red and white lights when onthe appropriate glide path. The taxiways atthe Airport are equipped with blue medium - intensity taxkmayedge|kJhUng. OTHER LIGHTING The Airport has arotating beacon mounted onatower support on the north side ofthe airfield. Rotating beacons are used hoindicate the location ofanairport topilots flying adnight orduring reduced visibility. The beacon provides sequenced white and green flashing lights that rotate 360 degrees. The Airport has alighted wind cone located onthe west corner of the Taxiway Qand Taxiway Fintersection. Additional overhead lighting is located inthe terminal area, aircraft parking aprons, and inthe hangar areas. There are red obstructions lights mounted onthe top ofseveral airport structures street lights. *RPomM 36 H0lRL/NIIRK~: DighAlediuuIntensity Runway Lights include white edge lights (with amber lights near the runway ends to indicate runway remaining) and runway threshold lights. The threshold fixtures have split lenses (green/red) indicating the beginning (goomand end (od) of the runway. R FX1,: Runway End Identifier Lights are two svnchronizedunidirectional flashing lights that help to identify the runway when it is less distinct from its surroundings n,during periods oflow visibilivy. VASQ: VASproject xbcxmoflight having white segment inthe upper part ofthe beam and red segment buthe lower part ofthe beam. YAShpczfozmxfunction similar tnthe PAP/. PAVV: pAplproject light along ustandard glide path murunway end, with red and white colored lights indicating the uiom0's vertical position (ohovu.below, v,ou glide path) relative /vthe defined glide and on near -airport obstructions including Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 I Elk, All'tSfItE FACILITIES Fencing and gates and service roads are airside facilities that fall outside of these previous categories are briefly discussed in this section. FENCING AND GATES The Airport has perimeter chain -link fencing with barbwire around the airfield perimeter to help prevent unauthorized access. Security gates provide access hnthe FBD. GA hangars, U8F8, and controlled movement areas of the airfield. SERVICE ROADS The Airport has a system of service roads that extend around the property perimeter to provide access to the various NAVAIDs and weather system and to transition between landside facilities. The air carrier apron has a white painted two-lane vehicle service road along the northwest side of the apron that provides access the terminal building. A paved vehicle service road extends from the south side of Taxiway Aaround the Runway 11 end tothe north side ofTaxiway A.Anadditional paved service road connects the ARFFstation toTaxiway F. The Airport has a gravel perimeter road that follows the perimeter fence around the Airport operations area. Additional gravel vehicle service roads provide access to the runway approach lighting systems, NA\A|Os. weather observation system, and the airport surveillance radar. u� SI E FACILITIES LOCAL ROAD NETWORK The Airport is aenax] by local two-lane, paved roads roh*rn*d to as the local road network. Airport Way, which is the main road serving the Airport, intersects Highway 97 south of the Airport at the Deschutes County Fairgrounds. Airport Way connects with Veterans Way near the northwest corner of the Airport. Veterans Way connects to Highway 97 approximately one-half mile west of the Airport and is the Airport's main access point. VEHICLE CIRCULATION FOR NON -AVIATION FACILITIES The primary roads serving the Airport include Airport Way and Veterans Way runs along the west side of the Airport. Additionally, a network of paved local streets serves the nearby non -aviation uses. Table 1-17 summarizes the Airport roadways, organized byclassification. msznuomm�ummnx��u 37 mmNIASTEuIII m Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 OR Highway 126. (Ochoco Highway) 19th Street Minor Arterial Airport Way Minor Arterial Major Collector lle Major Collector __�.. Local Street Local Street Veterans Way Salmon Drive Veterans Way st Street 2nd Court North Development Parcel North Business Park USFS Campus Fairg rounds Industrial Subarea Airport Way Subarea Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea South Apron Side GA Subarea West Business Park North Business Park North Development Parcel West Business Park West Business Park North Business Park West Business Park West Business Park Local Street 4th Street West Business Park Local Street 6th Street South Apron Side GA Subarea West Business Park Local Street 10th Street North Business Park _........m_._ Local Street 21st Street Fairgrounds Industrial Subar ea _._. Local Street 23rd Street Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea Local Street Badger Avenue Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea ... Local Street __._.. _�... '' Colle g.e Way West Business Park Local Street Deerhound Avenue Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea LocallStreetMt: Hood Drive Air .... port Way Subarea s _.__.:I � ._ Local Street Lake Road No rth Development Parcel Y Local Street ! Ochoco Way � USFS Campus Local Street Pumice Avenue West Business Park Local Street Reindeer Avenue West Business Park Local Street Salmon Avenue South Apron Side GA Subarea West Business Park Local Street Sisters Way North Business Park USES Cappu... Local Street Tamarack Court West Business Park Local Street Timber Avenue West Business Park Local Street Umatilla Avenue ._. West Business siness Park Local Street USFS Drive USFS Campus Local Street_...,.....__._. Wickiup Avenue Airport WaySubarea ......._ p The intersection at Veterans Way and Airport Way is planned to be realigned as part of a separate project. Preliminary designs by the City of Redmond propose a new roundabout near the intersection of 1st Street and Veterans Way to provide expanded access and service to the North Development Parcel. REt)MONI)MUNICIPAL AIRPORT a1'ERPN 38 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 AUTOMOBILE PARKING FOR NON -AVIATION FACILITIES Parking requirements for non -aviation uses at the Airport are defined by the City of Redmond Development Code, Section 8.0500. The City requires developments to provide a minimum number of parking spaces based on land use and specifies the dimensions of the standard parking and compact parking spaces as well as the width of the aisles. TERMINAL AREA AUTO PARKING AND GROUND TRANSPORTATION The passengers departing from the Airport have multiple options to access the terminal building. They may use the public parking lot for their private vehicles, can be dropped off at the curb by personal vehicles, or be delivered by taxis or shuffles. The employees have a separate parking area near the terminal separate from the passenger lot and the Airport vendors also have assigned parking separate from employee parking. The long and short term parking lot (combined facility) accommodates 1.Q83vehicles aterate of $1.00for each half hour, up to a daily maximum of $10.00. The seventh day is free. The employee parking lot accommodates 180vehicles and the vendor lot can accommodate 6vehicles in marked parking stalls. The vendor lot can accommodate more vehicles besides the marked parking stalls. GENERAL AVIATION AND OTHER FACILITIES AUTO PARKING Table i-iQlists the various aviation related parking areas at the Airport and provides a breakdown of the vehicle parking spaces by standard and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant spaces. FAA Airport Control Tower South Apron Private Hangar — RDD Enterprises _ Ajn�o�Rescue ondFlref�h�ng _ Snow Removal Equipment (SRE) South GA Apron FBO, Building #1 South GA Apron FBO Building #2 Public Department North GAApron FBD 6 _ 15 _ 15 9 North Apron Private Hangars — BPA and Les Schwab 28 10 U8F8 xn»mxnx*onv/,um�»xsux`xT "TER PLAN 39 1 O Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 1.4'2 UTILITIES Utilities are significant elements in the immediate and long-range planning for the Airport. The Airport's location on the eastern edge of the City of Redmond city limits is in a generally commercial and light industrial region. The Airport currently holds several property interests both adjoining the Airport facility and in the surrounding vicinity. To consider these properties for future expansions would require analysis of the existing utilities and the potential of utility enhancements. This section of the report addresses the location, size, and general feasibility ofusing existing Airport property utilities for new airport development alternatives. Figunai-iSkjenUfiosdovo|opmontaraaathoAirport isconsidering for future development alternatives: v USFS Campus: The northern area servicing the Redmond Air Center and Forest Service operations adjacent toTaxiway B. / ~ ` North Side GA: The apron, FBO, and hangars along the north side ofthe Airport, accessed by and south ofQVVSisters Avenue. ~/ North Business Park: The area south of Hwy 126 and north of SW Sisters Avenue characterized by rocky juniper and sage terrain with sparse existing development. ^, ' North Development Parcel: The old Redmond golf course land bound on the northwest by SE Lake Road. on the northeast, by Hwy 126. and to the soudh, byVeterans Way. v South Side GA: The hangars, FBO, and businesses bound to the west by Airport Way, to the south, by Salmon Avenue, and accessing the Airport byTaxiways Aand Q. ~/ - Terminal: The terminal area. ~/ ' West Business Park: The commercial/light industrial area to the west ofAirport Way in which the Airport holds several property interests. / ~ - Airport Way Subarea: The area of land west of Airport Way and immediately north of the Deschutes County Fairgrounds. ~/ ` Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea: The area of land west of 19th Street and south of Airport Way. The sub -areas identified for this report and designated for potential future expansion appear to have sufficient existing utilities in close proximity. The USFS Campus and potentially parts of the North Side GA are the exception. Most of the utilities in this area appear to be insufficient for future expansion because they were sized toserve only the area ofthe U8FGCampus. The following sections discuss each utility providing service on or in the vicinity of the Airport as depicted in Figure i-i6through i-i$. It mmuKY RASTER PLAN 40 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan • cu 4 i-r 4 adi 0 cu 1J 0 X elb.o" 4) Co E i" .,'-' ..1 '5 0 t;s1 © la, +4 bn 4. a 0 . 0... u t. • 8 u 1 cu t u 11 ,E cd ▪ 0 cd "0 10 E 0 co 0 t...1 0) 411 0 0 0'4'4 C4 all'4 4L) O ▪ 'a 0 zd, . . - . 0 8 a) 0 "0 0 ° ; ; ... 4 • 1.1 ___,•••4 ZI • 4.4 al 4) E 4. 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 z as Ca cL E a) 0 Ca 0 0 Q Ca F U X c 0 a a Cs 0 a) > N a) a) t E 0 U I- 0 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 A z W Ca E 0 0 a c FL U x c aa 0 a) ca a- 0 Cl) 0 t 0 a E 0 U N- 0 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 a as 0 E 0 Ca 0 0 c ln U X c a> a ca d 0 N 0 a) a E 0 U ti C) Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 zz V CO 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 ELECTRIC Pacific Power (PPL) provides electrical service to the Airport. Discussions with representatives of PPL for this report did not reveal imminent plans for expansion of services beyond the existing overhead and buried circuits servicing the Airport and its surrounding area. As of 2016, one circuit feeds the airport area. A second circuit around the fairground area may be able to be extended to airport, if needed. PPL's position is Airport load growth would drive any expansion. The suggestion is the 2016 level of electrical service in the vicinity of the Airport should suffice for some expansion alternatives, though development beyond the current reach of PPL's circuits would require extension. |nthe event ofdevelopment plans pnoceeding, early coordination with PPL would be required to discuss load growth in a specific location. Adthat time, PPLvvou|d determine whether or not a system impact study is needed, along with a re-evaluation the system. The City of Redmond provides sanitary sewer service to the Airport and its surrounding areas. Redmond's Water Pollution Control Facility is located in the northwest corner ofthe City. Figures 1-16and i-i7show the gravity mains that serve the areas considered for this report. Mains that follow Airport Way to Veterans Way heading northwest serve the West Business Park, Terminal, and South Side GA areas. A main that runs along Veterans Way and Sisters Avenue serves the North Side GA and abuts the southern edge of both the North Business Park and the North Development Parcel. Another main that originates at the U8F8 Campus before heading north to intersect Hwy 126 then runs northwest in parallel serves the northern edges of these two development areas. As with the water service at the USFS Campus, additional development adjacent to or requiring use of that area's sewer system would benefit from further analysis. The City of Redmond provides water service to the Airport and its surroundings. All ofRedmond's water is produced from subsurface wells, stored in reservoirs, and distributed throughout the city through its system of booster pump stations and pipes. The City's Public Works Department monitors, tests, and maintains this water system and stores utility inventory data on the department's Esri-based GIS mapping database. The development areas considered for this report except for the Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea are served by the City'oPressure Zone 2. Discussion with the Public Works Department indicates that the areas on and around the Airport are adequately served with water for the needs. As depicted in Figures 1-18 and 1-19, a water system consisting of pipes ranging in diameter from 12-inches to 18-inches serves the majority of the development areas under consideration. An 18-inch main extends north along Airport Way until SW 6th Street where it extends to the stroot'storminuo. This |arge'diametermain serves the Airport Way Subarea and the West Business Park. mamommPLAN 46 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory A 12-inch main follows Airport Way from the intersection nfAirport Way and Sth Street through the intersection with Veteran's Way. This 12-inch main and several 1 0-inch branches along their entire route effectively serve the Terminal area and the South Side GA area, and borders the southern edge of the North Development Parcel and the western edge of the North Side GA. An 18-inch main running parallel to Hwy 126 and angling south along Veterans Way serves the remainder of the North Development Parcel and the North Business Park. All of these areas are anticipated to accommodate development of future water demand. The LISFS Campus and potentially parts of the North Side GA are the exception to sufficiency of the 2016 service capacity for future expansion. An inconsistent series of pipes ranging between eight and 12 inches in diameter serves the LISFS Campus. Fire hydrant flow testing performed by the City of Redmond Public Works Department in December 2016 confirmed that flows are approximately 1, 100 gallons per minutes (gpm) for hydrants throughout the development areas under consideration. The USFS Campus, however, sees flows of approximately 850 gpm, which is insufficient for expansion of water demand without upgrades to the water infrastructure in this area as of 2016. The Public Works Department recognizes this area as one that most likely would require water infrastructure upgrades prior to any future expansion. Table i4$summarizes the fire flows determined through hydrant testing for this report. FH1682 65 ' 1162 Les Schwab Hangar (Inside fence) 54 1175 SW Airport Way (400' NE of Mt. Hood Dr.) *Test data from 2006, all other locations tested December 2016. TELECOMMUNICATIONS The Airport is adjacent to the commercial and light industrial operations of the WestBusiness Park, thus the area is well -served by telecommunications and fiber optic providers. CenturyLink, Bend Broadband, and LSNetworks are the primary providers in the Redmond area, though several smaller providers are also MASTER PLAN 47 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 0� Cascade Natural Gas serves the Redmond area. As of 2016, existing pressure mains run adjacent to each of the potential development areas being considered. The existing infrastructure, with extensions as needed, is considered capable of accommodating most future proposed development. Storm drainage onthe Airport iscontained within the Airport property. The majority ofstorm drainage, including that of the infield storm system, daylights to an open swale or regional low point, with two notable exceptions. Two large boulder -filled infiltration galleries accommodate storm drainage from the Terminal area and the South Side GA area. One of these is adjacent the north edge of the South Side GA area, and the other is at the southern tip of the Terminal area. These systems are considered to be fixed in their purpose, and not suited for future expansion. The remaining development areas would likely be subject tothe otormwatordeve|opmont requirements of the City of Redmond. These requirements draw largely from the Central Oregon Stormwater Manual (COSM), which outlines Best Management Practices for stormwater management. Given the basaltic subsurface conditions known to define Central Oregon, surface treatment of stormwater, such as swales and drainage basins, is a common management practice. Refer to Figures 1-16 and 1-17 for locations of stormwater management facilities. The existing non -aviation developments owned by the Airport and adjacent to airport property are detailed in Appendix A. The information includes known projects in the planning and design stage that may impact the Airport. Airports often own non -aviation parcels as a way to promote development that is compatible with aircraft operations, and to diversify revenue. The non -aviation facilities are divided into the following subareas based ontheir location: ~/North Development Parcel Subarea ~/ - North Business Park Subarea * South Side GASubarea West Business Park Subarea Airport Way Subarea Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea It EDN10 N mMUNIcm�aRPuRT MASTER PLAN 48 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix o Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 Appendix A includes a detailed listing of City of Redmond Zoning designations which occur in the Airport vicinity. The zoning information includes the "zone description" and a listing of permitted uses. 1,5TE * INAL � _ 0 UIL The terminal building is a modern, well maintained facility built in 2009. With the passenger enplanement growth and the expansion ofservices since it was built, the terminal will need expansion and alteration for more efficient use and adaptability for future growth. This section describes the terminal facilities that exist in 2016. Figures 1-20 through 1-25 show the terminal building floor plan by level. 1,5.1 TFI'RMINAL %Kl1L14\'G TERMINAL BUILDING FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTS PARKING / GROUND TRANSPORT The passengers departing from the Airport have multiple options to access the terminal. They may use the public parking lot for their private vehicles, can be dropped off at the curb by personal vehicles, or be delivered by taxis or shuttles. The employees have a parking area near the terminal separate from the passenger lot, and the Airport vendors also have assigned parking separate from employee parking. PRE -SECURE AREA The pre -secure area of the terminal is that portion of the building that precedes the TSA screening. The pre - secure area is comprised of administration offices, airline ticketing and offices, baggage claim, meeter/greeter lounge, food and retail convenience store, rental car agencies, and restrooms. ADMINISTRATION SPACE The airport management space is comprised of a reception area, six offices and a conference room. LAVV ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS (LEO) AREAS RAMS Specialized Security Service, Inc., who provides security for both pre -secure and secure areas, has an office adjacent to the security checkpoint. The City of Redmond Police Department also has an office in the terminal for officers to perform routine duties. While this police office is not staffed full-time, it allows officers to bonearby ifneeded for anemergency atthe Airport. mznmm 11*1mmcmmAImmnRT 1 40 ASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 TICKETING There are ten ticketing counters, and each airline has dedicated counter(s) with separate queuing lines and ticketing kiosks. Passengers can check in at either the counter or kiosks; however, only the Alaska kiosks allow passengers totag their own checked baggage. Asof 2O1G.there are three unoccupied counters available. Airline offices and storage spaces serving the airlines are located directly behind the ticketing counters. EETER/GREETER LOUNGE A maeter/graeterbunge immediately follows the inbound passengers' exit from the secure area. It is adjacent to baggage claim and the rental car counters. The waiting area provides seating and a children's play area. BAGCSAGECLA| The baggage claim consists oftwo baggage carousels and anoversize baggage claim area. Adedicated inbound baggage drop off area on the exterior of the terminal building serves these carousels. RENTAL CARS RDM has five counters for six rental car agencies with an office behind each counter. The agencies keep the rental vehicles in a parking lot adjacent huthe terminal. Renters access the rental lot via a marked walkway. The rental car agencies are: ./ ~/ ' Alamo ` Enterprise ~/ .� ~ Avis ~ Hertz ~/ ,/ ` Budget ' National CONCESSIONS Asingle news and gifts concession space is located inthe pre -secure area. The plumbing for this space supports beverage service, but no cooking or food preparation takes place as of 2016. UNFINISHED SPACE As of 2016, approximately 3,178 square feet of unfinished space is available for future tenant improvement located along the pre -secure central corridor area. SECURE AREA The two-story area beyond the TSA checkpoint is referred to as "secure," meaning passengers and employees have gone through TSA screening, or possess required credentials for access. The basement contains baggage screening, the TSA office suite, a maintenance shop, storage, and breakroom. The first floor houses a convenience store and holdroom for passengers, and the second floor contains a bar, restaurant, and umwm01MmMUNIoVNI.mRPORT NIAmzERmAN 50 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 another holdroom. There are restrooms on both the first and second floors. Access to the second floor is provided by two sets of stairs and an elevator. SECURITY CHECKPOINT The TSA screening area bridges the pre -secure and secure areas. The TSA operation has two lanes for screening passengers in an area approximately 75 feet long and 40 feet wide. Typically, both lanes are in operation daily during peak screening times — from 7to8a.m.and from 12'1 p.m.Asnf2O16.T8Adoes not implement apre-check lane. The space for TSA screening may need an expansion due to increasing passenger enplanements. There appears to be sufficient space to accommodate an adding an additional lane by opening the space to the east, but this would require the removal of the existing exit passageway. As modifications of TSA guidelines are updated periodically, any future design will have to be mindful of possible changes to current standards. TSA ADMINISTRATIVE AREA The TGAsupport areas are inneed ofexpansion. The Airport was reclassified h/aCategory 2airport bythe TSA in March 2016, after surpassing 250,000 annual enplanements for the three previous fiscal years. The enhanced classification increases the budget for staff and equipment. An increase in staff would necessitate improvements in the training areas, locker room space, and offices. BAGGAGE SCREENING As of 2016, baggage screening is located in the basement. The baggage handling system takes baggage from behind the airline ticketing counters, through the TSA screening equipment in the basement, and back up to the baggage make-up area, defined in the next paragraph. Alterations or reconfigurations to this area to meet updated TSA guidelines need to be balanced against the available basement area. BAGGAGE MAKE-UP Baggage make-up is where the airlines retrieve screened baggage. The baggage make-up system is one, large carousel with tug access to four sides. Some congestion at the baggage make-up has been noted. Adding another belt for outbound baggage screening would reduce congestion, and that addition would necessitate abuilding expansion. GATES The Airport has six gates, Gates A-F, for departing passengers. Gates serviced by the airlines are listed below: ~/ ' A—Alaoka ` B—Alaaka v C—United ~/ ' D—DaUa » E—Amehoan ~/ ` F—Unessigned ue�om woNcIRVI-AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 51 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 HOLDROOMS The holdrooms are the areas for passengers waiting to board their flights. The first floor area is a one-story space with a two-story circulation space leading to the second floor. The first floor contains seating with approximately 220 seats. The first floor holdroom area acts as a single space. Gate areas are loosely defined by their proximity to the airline gate kiosk. While this provides efficient use of the overall space, it makes it difficult tnconsolidate passengers with the airline they are flying. The second floor holdroom has a high, vaulted ceiling with excellent daylighting and good views. There is ample space with approximately 50 chairs. No gates are directly associated with the second floor area. PASSENGER BOARDING BRIDGES All aircraft at the Airport are ground boanded, with no passenger boarding bridges (zBBs). Boarding bridges can facilitate passenger boarding and deplaning especially in conjunction with the anticipated airline fleet expansion. The addition of PBBs could make better use of the underutilized second floor holdroom and should lighten the first floor holdroom congestion. The second floor has the space to accommodate additional gates oonaed by PBBo. Installing the PBBs at this location would require extensive modifications to the building. An exiting path likely containing escalators or additional elevators for deplaning passengers would need to be added to direct traffic to the secure exit. INTERIOR PASSAGEWAY TO AIRCRAFT RAMP Boarding passengers move through the holdroom gates to an enclosed passageway. The passageway contains access to eight ramp doors that open to the aircraft ramp. The passengers board the aircraft using movable stairs or ramps. Deplaning passengers enter the passageway from the exterior and proceed to a secure exit that leads to baggage claim, rental car counters and the meeter/greeter lounge. CONCESSIONS The first floor contains a small convenience store. There is inadequate storage/support space for this area, and the concessionaire has difficulty maintaining stock throughout the day. The second floor has a bar, restaurant and kitchen, with high chair seating at the bar, and table and chair seating near the serving area. As there are no gates on the second floor, the restaurant/bar area is removed from primary holdroom activity. Existing retail areas could be expanded to provide a broader range of merchandise and facilitate customer movement within the otores, especially when customers enter with luggage. Concessions ob/nogo is |imited, which leads to shortages and stock shortages during peak periods. There is a lack of cold storage for the food, and getting supplies through TSAsonaening is time-consuming. There is an opportunity for improved concession revenue with the addition of food service in the pre -secure area of the terminal. A coffee/sandwich shop would serve those waiting for passengers, as well as employees. Electrical and mechanical systems RHmmomnMoNIouRU.uRPoRT INAASI'EpnaN 52 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 need improvement to address issues related to the circuit breaker for the restaurant refrigerator, and the availability of hot water in the restaurant. Figure 1-20. Second Level of Passenger Terminal AIRLINE TICKETING OFFICES (ATO) As of 2016, the space for offices and storage behind the ticket counters is at capacity. Some of the ATO space is used for storage. An expansion of this area is needed to ease current constrictions and provide for future growth. GENERAL TERMINAL SYSTEMS/AREAS BUILDING STORAGE The terminal building lacks sufficient space for on -site storage. Maintenance equipment, supplies and other materials used at the terminal have to be held in mechanical rooms or remote locations, which is an inconvenience to terminal personnel. DEDICATED DELIVERY ENTRY As of 2016, when deliveries are made to the terminal items must be transported from curbside through the public space of the building to their destination. A dedicated delivery entry and unloading area would be more efficient, with distribution through a back -of -house passageway. This could eliminate congestion in the public spaces and provide a more secure entry for goods. 53 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 |KXPROVEDG|GNAGE The secure passageway leading to the gates could use clearer gate markings in conjunction with destinations indicated at each ramp exit door. The use of video monitors would aid in providing clear direction and information that could change with each flight. The expanded use of informational display units at the holdroom gates and other strategic locations could provide weather information, flight information, and advertisement space. PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTE The PA system provides an inconsistent level of performance in the hoNroom. It has been reported that announcements are difficult to hear. POV-JER ISSUES AT GATE AREA As of 2016, the gates have no back-up power. The gates doors stay in whatever position they are in when the power fails creating a security issue as well as access disruption. There is a desire to expand electrical power tuthe seating inthe terminal. REVOLVING DOORS The revolving doors atsecure exiting creates equeue aopassengers must wait for the slowdown oftraffic created by these doors. It was also noted that finding replacement parts for these doors is difficult. ELECTRIC GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT The airlines are moving to the implementation of an all -electric fleet for their Ground Support Equipment. Provisions to locate charging stations and provide power to these units need to be developed. GR[DUND8ETTLEK8ENT Some settlement has been noted atgates l and 2.These areas should bemonitored tosee ifthe settlement has subsided or presents an ongoing issue.. ENERGY EFFICIENCY The community has expressed an interest in energy efficiency. Where systems need to be update or replaced, energy efficiency should be a priority. There are currently photovoltaic panels on the terminal roof. There is further interest increasing solar generated power. uummmw�o�om�AMIuRT NIASzERmLAN 54 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan D W\N\\'',,N.'css'c\NN, OCIRTSNMNINN.NNENNZSAN a Ca 0E a) Q) 0 Ca eL Ca F 0. Ca 0a) > a a) .= E N- CN1 C\1 Ci Ca 0 .0 X LLJ 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 4 g c[731 (-7 z 0 P.4 0 ejr:4 CL .> .c 0 Exhibit omOrdinance uo2o L..) g z aZO Pm 0 E C.0 co (r) cci F C.) X a) a. a. cci > a a) .= a. E 0 c, Exhibit omOrdinance uouo f� 0 0 a z 0 V) 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 -(0 z 0 as Ca E Ca 0 Ca F U X c a a ca a N a) L O Q E O U r.- 0 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 1.6 AVIATION ACTIVITY Aviation activity for the Airport isshown below for based aircraft, annual operations (itinerant and loca0. passenger enplanements, cargo volume (cargo in and cargo out), and flight patterns. This information serves as the baseline for aviation activity forecasts that will help determine the proper facilities needed to eenm future aviation activity and demand. Aviation activity is described in detail in Chapter2. Aviation Activity Forecasts. Asummary of2O1G activity levels is presented in Table 1-20. = ActivityMeasure Totals Aircraft Operations* 40,162 � , �5'127 Air Taxi (8inen*nt) 6'340 General Aviation (Itineoant) 10.885 General Aviation /Loca0 10.829 and Local) Air Carrier PassengerEnp|anennents°° 322,176 Cargo Volume 9701 Number of Airlines 4 N Destinations Aircraft Si | Jet 6 .--__ Helicopters6 Other O Total Based Aircraft 80 ortwas osed for one month in 2016 for runway construction. Sources: *Terminal Area Forecast 2016, **RDM Monthly Report, RDM Performance Metrics, Annual totals are reported by FAA Fiscal Year, which runs from October 1 to 8eptembar3O. Aviation activity measures reflect one month of airport closure during the reconstruction of Runway 5-23. The aviation activity forecasts will provide additional historical data and investigate changes in aviation activity over the most recent ten year period. 10'1wIOND MoNl(,:I�I,AI�ORTMASI.'ER PLAN 61 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 1P AUTICAL SETTING This section details the aeronautical setting surrounding the Airport, including details about neighboring airports and their facilities. K, PORTLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Portland International Airport (PDX) is the largest airport inthe state, located 150 miles from RDK8. PDX offers domestic and international flights, and there are four non-stop flights a day from the Airport to PDX. Four other airports in the greater region are air carrier airports: Eugene Airport (EUG), Rouge Valley International -Medford Airport (MFR), Eastern Oregon Regional Airport (PDT), and Crater Lake Klamath Regional Airport (LMT). EUG is 135 miles west of the Airport, MFR is 189 miles southwest of the Airport, PDT io221 miles northeast of the Airport, and LMT is 160 south of the Airport. RDM does not have direct flights to these other Oregon airports. 1.7.2 GENE_M.,�L. AVIA][I*\ AIMP*.RT S Five general aviation airports are located within 30 nautical miles ofthe Airport: Bond Municipal (BDK). Madras Municipal (S33), Prineville (S39), Sunriver Airport (S21), and Sisters Eagle Air Airport (6K5). None of these have commercial service aoof 2016 and have no future plans for commercial service. BDN has 203 fixed wing based aircraft and G30has 122 fixed wing based aircraft. These two airports represent the greatest concentration of based aircraft in Crook, Deschutes, and Jefferson Counties. BEND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT BDN is 10 nautical miles south of the Airport, and has one 5,200-foot by 75-foot north -south lighted runway with non -precision instrument approach capability. The airport accommodates the highest volume of general aviation activity among all airports in Central Oregon, including flight training and on active glider community. BDN also has 19 helicopters based at the airport due to an extremely large volume of helicopter training activity. A number of small aviation businesses are located at the airport, including the Epic Aircraft manufacturing tooi|ity, which manufactures the Epic E1OOO single engine turboprop aircraft. Aviation businesses located at BDN total approximately 300 employees. A future extension of Runway 16-34 to an ultimate length of 6,260 feet is proposed based on the approved Airport Layout Plan for BDN. MASTER PLAN 62 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 MAD 0 A S MUNICIPAL AIRPORT S33is 25 nautical miles north of the Airport, and has two runways. Runway 16-34, the primary runway, is 5,089 feet long by 75 feet wide with medium intensity lights and existing visual approach capabilities. Runway 4-22, the crosswind runway, is2.7Ol feet long by5Ofeet wide. Runway 4'22ioprimarily used bysmall, single - engine gonono|aviaUonairuraft. Erickson Aenu Tankars, who contracts with the USF8 and other entities for aerial firefighting aircraft, uses the S33 as a maintenance base for their fleet. The fleet consists of three DC-7 and seven MD-87 air tankers. In addition, Daimler Corporation is constructing a new truck model testing site at S33. As of 2016, this facility is under construction and will include two new test tracks that simulate road conditions for heavy duty trucks. PRINEV8LLE AIRPORT 830is11 nautical miles east cf the Airport with two runways. Runway 1O'28.the primary runway, is5.751 feet long by 75 feet wide with MIRL and non -precision instrument approach capability. Runway 15-33, the crosswind runway is 4.054 feet long with a non-standard, 40'hucdvvidth. and is limited to aircraft with o maximum takeoff weight of 5,000 pounds or less. This secondary runway has low intensity runway lighting (L|RL)with only visual approach capability. S39 accommodates a fairly substantial on -site commercial pilot fixed wing training operation and a joint use Bureau of Land Management (8LM) ho|ibaoothat is home tothe Central Oregon Interagency He|itack Craw. Corporate traffic at S39 has increased as a result of the development of data centers for Facebook and Apple in Prineville. Hillsboro Aviation is a Fixed Base Operation at 83Qthat supports a growing pilot training operation. B0N00VER AIRPORT 821 is approximately 26 nautical miles south/southwest of the Airport and has a single runway. Runway 16-34 is 5.461 feet long by 75 feet wide with L|RL and non -precision instrument approach capability. This airport is privately -owned by Sunriver Resort, LLC, and is for public use. The airport primarily serves residents and visitors to the 3,300-acre Sunriver Resort, which is a planned, fully -contained private residential and resort community. The resort itself is bordered on the north, east, and west by the Deschutes National Forest and the unincorporated community of Three Rivers on the south. SISTERS EAGLE AIR AIRPORT GK5isapproximately 2Onautical miles west ofthe Airport and has asingle runway, 2'2O.Runway 2'2Ois 3,460 feet long and 60 feet wide with visual approach capability only. The airport isprivately-owned bySisters Eagle Air, Inc., and is for public use. The airport primarily serves residents and general aviation pilots who fly in the vicinity of the airport. The runway surface is made of asphalt and the airport has 1 OOLL fuel. u�xom *mmo�cmR13ORT "TER PLAN 63 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 Table 1-21 lists the nearby airports with a summary of available facilities and activity information. Airport locations are shown in Figure 1-27. Runway Designation Runway Length Runway Width Pavement Strength (000) Runway Composition Runway Lighting Taxiway Lighting Approach Aids Weather Airport Beacon Existing Future Local Itinerant Tota+..___.... Operations 16-34 5,200' 30 S Asphalt MIRL Reflectors REIL, PAPI-4L AWOS Clear/Green Non -Precision Non -Precision 70,030 70,044 140,074 16-34 5,089' 75' 75 S, 120 D, 180 2D Asphalt N.A. REIL, VASI-4L __.., AWOS Clear/Green Approach Visual Non -Precision 2015 Annual 9,192 6,128 15,320 Single en me Multi -Engine Jet Fixed Wing Ultra -Light Total Based 233 43 177 16 10 203.. 10-28 5,751' 75' 30 S Asphalt MIRL N.A. PAPI-4L AWOS Clear/Green Capability Non -Precision Non -Precision. Operations* 29,437 17,613 47,050 2015 Based Aircraft** 40 115 0 5 122 0 125 5,461' 30 S Asphalt LIRL Reflectors VASI-2L N.A. Clear/ Green 3,460' 4S Asphalt Non -Precision I Non -Standard Non -Precision I Non -Standard 2,518 6,189 26 11 4 41 0 2 0 43 400 1000 1,400 15 2 17 0 0 0 17 *: Bend = 2015 EA; Madras = 2010 Madras Master Plan Interpolated; Prineville = 2016 Prineville Master Plan interpolated; Sisters = FAA 5010 Airport Master Record; Sunriver = 2015 FAA Terminal Area Forecast (TAF). **: BDN, S33, S21, 6K5 = FAA 5010 Airport Master Record, Prineville based aircraft = 2016 Airport Master Plan interpolated. 64 RT MASTER PLAN Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Mead Hunt . . . Warm Springs 'Reservation, Camp Sherman Sisters Notional Forest Scale 1"--- 8 Miles Metolius Grandvie Crooked River Ranch Sisters Eagle Airpctrt Sunriv Tumalo stinriver Airport Three Rivers PDMOND MUNICIPAL Redmond Madras Municipal Airport Madras Terrebonne e—IREDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Powell Butte Bend Municipal Airport Alfalfa Ochoco National Forc.s Pineville Prineville Airport Roberts Millican Figure 1. ,27 SURROUNDING AIRPORTS AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 1.8 COMMUNITY SETTING This section presents socioeconomic data to provide a profile of the airport users and the community served by the Airport. Socioeconomic data is used to guide aviation activity forecasts in Chapter 2. t8.1SOCIOECONOMIC DATA In order to define an area of analysis, socioeconomic data was gathered by using data compiled by Woods & Poole Economics. Inc. Woods & Poole categorizes Deschutes County and the cities located inthe county, including Redmond, as the Bend -Redmond Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The Bend -Redmond MSA is the area of analysis because it includes data for all of Deschutes County where the Airport is located. The study comprised these socioeconomic indicators to help determine trends in the Bend -Redmond MSA: The data range was from 2006 to 2015. A longer period of time, rather than one or two years, is helpful for indicating trends more accurately, which is why a ten-year period was used. The accuracy of trends is critical, since trends are used to help determine future forecasts for airports. The selection of this ten-year period incorporates periods of growth and decline, such as the 2008 recession and the strong growth the Airport has seen since 2012. Table 1-22 shows the socioeconomic data for the Bend -Redmond MSA during 2006 to 2015. i� n� 01 ' Indicator Population ` ' ^- ' 2006 | 143.860 � 2007 ' 147�4O ' ! -- ' � ` 2008 150.690 ( ' 2009� 154.220 ' 2010 157.840 97,710 OR � Earning I � Income/Capita GRP Retail Sales $4.045 $40.619 $6.876 S3.262 $4'004 j $40.368 $7'062 $3'282 $3.864' $40.118 $7.232 33.301 $3.924 $39'869 $7.417 ' $3'821 _ $3.886 $30.622 $7.807 $3.341 '$3,868' $3.978 $41.377 $7.847 $3.860 2014 169.190 99.890 $4.373 $42.257 $8,411 $3.958 2016 172,5K00 102'090 �, $4'516 $42.075 �-_ $8,622 $4.071 � Source: Woods 4Poole (2o,a) i Note: Total Earnings (in millions, adjusted m20,udollars), Total Personal Income Per Capita (adjusted m20,udollars), GRP(in millions, adjusted to 2016 dollars), Total Retail Sales (in millions, adjusted to 2016 dollars). x�o�,o�ouuu�z�um/AIRPORT axaxzuuPLAN GG Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 � a ^� � Toi � mw VIE Commercial service airports are economic engines in the communities that they serve, facilitating the movement of goods and people to and from the community. Airports serve as employment centers, and as municipal entity that leases property and enters into contracts with private enterprise, their financial structure differs from other municipal departments. This section describes the revenues and expenses associated with airport operation, and the economic contribution that the Airport makes to the community it serves through jobs and wages, and business sales. F The Airport generates revenue to cover its expenses and operates as an airport enterprise fund (AEP), which means that it maintains separate accounting from the City of Redmond general fund. The AEP is primarily funded through revenue from passengers and airlines. Grants from the FAA Airport Improvement Program help offset much of the cost of eligible capital improvements. The AEP is organized into three cost -centers: the Terminal Program, the Airfield Program, and the General Operations program. There are three additional sub - funds for debt service, passenger facility charges, and capital projects that are separated out to keep these capital improvement and financing funds from comingling with operating funds. The Terminal Program uses a cost -recovery rates and charges basis, where the Airport looks to recover investment in facilities from users and tenants. The scope of this program includes the passenger terminal building. The Airfield Program covers operations and maintenance of the airfield, and rates and charges are set on a cost recovery basis. The General Operations Program includes hangars, parking |ots, rnadvvaya, and non - aviation development, and uses a market rate basis to set rates and charges. The General Operations program helps the Airport diversify revenue streams to guard against slowdown in the aviation industry. A summary of thaAEP is presented in Table 1-23. uFDmwmwMUNICJR;�1,m111"uRTMmzER PI 67 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 0 Year Type Total Resources General Operations Terminal Operations Airfield Operations Debt Service Reserve Passenger Facility Charge Capital Projects Total Expenditures General Operations Terminal Operations Airfield Operations Debt Service Reserve Passenger Facility Charge Capital Projects Net Program General Operations Terminal Operations Airfield Operations Debt Service Reserve Passenger Facility Charge Capital Projects Source: City of Redmond FY2016/17 FY2013/14 Actual $15,105,114 $7,757,230 $1,565,455 $1,282,264 Budget 2,247,6 1,082,796 1,169,675 $9,542,577 $4, 952, 535 $1,226,0 1,138,805 $988,743 $1,236,450 $5,562,537 $2,804,695 $339,411 $143,459 $2,247,694 $94,053 $(66,775) 1,9.2 AIRPORT ECONOMIC IMPACTS FY2014/15 FY2015/16 FY2016/17 Actual Budget Budget $18,742,348 $37,122,840$24,355,420 $8,754,158 $9,713,972 $8,570,154 $1,624,505 $1,547,364 $1,853,345 $1,174,730 $1 237 932 $1,349,270 $2,350,098 $2,539,651 $2,539,6 1,138,806 $933,921 ! $1,100,000 $3,700,051 $21,150,000 $8,943,000 $13,124,756 ' $37,122,840 $24,355,420 $5,923,221 $9 665 236 $8,848,222 $1,079,200 $1,536,043 $1,575,277 $1,233,063 ; $1,297,989 $1,349,270 $- $2,539,651 $2,539,651 $1,036,438 , $933,921 + $1,100,000 $3,852,834 $21,150,000 $8,943,000 $5,617,592 $ $- $2,830,937 4 $48,736 $(278,068) $545,305 $11,321 $278,068 $(58,333) $(60,057 $2,350,098 $102,368 $(152,783) The Airport is included in the 2014 Oregon Department of Aviation (ODA) Economic Impact Statement for NPIAS Airports. This report identifies the economic contributions of airports to the Oregon economy through on and off airport activities, the jobs created due to the airports, and the total payroll of the jobs created. Table 1- 24 represents the economic impact of the Airport on the Oregon economy is 2012 dollars. Jobs Payroll __.. as 810 $24,735,000 Source: 2014 ODA Economic Impact Statement for NPIAS Airports 68 Business Sales $81, 561, 000 ORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 ENTAL CON The following sections are included to provide a baseline of the existing environmental conditions on and around the Airport. The information presented is a high level overview provided for planning purposes and is not intended to satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 1,10.1 Alt * UALITY The Airport and surrounding areas are located within a National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) Attainment area for the State of Oregon (Oregon Department of Environmental Quality [DEQ], 2016). The EPA established NAAQS for a limited number of pollutants in response to enactment of the Clean Air Act of 1970 and the Amendments of 1975 and 1977. The pollutants of most concern in an and environment such as Redmond are particulates. The primary impacts to local air quality created by aircraft occur when planes are at or close to ground level during takeoff, landing, and taxiing. Airports have numerous other sources of pollutants including automobile traffic, service trucks, fuel trucks, and auxiliary equipment such as emergency generators. Aircraft engines emit carbon munoxide, carbon dimxide, particulate matter, volatile organic compounds, and oxides of nitrogen and sulfur. Fossil -fuel engines that combust diesel, aviation fuel, and gasoline fuels emit a variety of toxic compounds, which are primarily formaldehyde, benzene, and heavy metals. Changes in aircraft operations or development at the Airport would require air quality modeling to evaluate the emission of priority pollutants to see if they will approach or exceed the NAAQS. Air quality impacts will be modeled in conjunction with aircraft noise. The FAA Aviation Environmental Design Tool (4EDT) is the required model for aviation noise and air quality modeling and will be used to quantify those impacts for the Airport. I LE LA Several factors can go into the analyses of whether or not a proposed land use is compatible with an airport. For Redmond Airport, the factors the City has to measure against are provided through the following three avenues: Noise contours will be created for the Airport in a subsequent chapter of this Master Plan in conjunction with the forthcoming forecasted aviation activity. Once created, the noise contours will provide one factor for reviewing proposed land uses against. The FAA considers the DNL 65 dB an acceptable level at which residential land uses are compatible. Oregon Administrative Rule 340-035-0045 contains State of Oregon criteria for airport noise. The State of Oregon uses the 55 DNL contour to represent the "airport noise criterion." The airport noise criterion does not indicate liability orlegal obligation on the part ofthe airport; instead it defines the "airport noise impact boundary," which is used to identify noise sensitive properties near the airport that may experience regular aircraft noise exposure. Local jurisdictions may also implement tighter restrictions. u',I)>uNnPLAN 69 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory Airport airspace surfaces an defined in FAR Part77 Safe, Efficient Use, and Preservation n/the Navigable Airspace will be depicted in the Airspace Plan, a component of the Airport Layout Plan set. These airspace surfaces should be used by the City of Redmond as a basis for protecting the Airport against incompatible development onthe basis ofheight. The FAA's Memorandum Interim Guidance onLand Uses Within aRunway Protection Zone should serve aaa guidance document for allowable land uses within a RPZ. 1.10.3 HISTN CULTURAI R ICAL, AI�Cl. JITECTl��AL, A1,CHAE*L*G1CA-A. ES*URCES APPLICABLE REGULATIONS The following state laws protect archaeological sites and cultural resources in Oregon: Indian Graves and Protected Objects (ORS O7.74O-O7.7GO) and Archaeological Objects and Sites (]R8358.005'3S8.OG1). In order to conduct a survey for archaeological sites, the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) requires anarchaeological permit (ORS 30O.23S). If an archaeological site is recorded on public land, an archaeological permit is required to conduct ground disturbing activities within site boundaries. Under ORS 3S8.GS3the City isrequired toconsult with the 8HPOtoavoid inadvertent impacts to historic properties for which they are responsible; this relates primarily to buildings and structures which are listed on the National Register ofHistoric P|auoo or eligible for listing. QenenoUy, eligible historic properties are at least 50 years old, retain their historic appearance, and meet one of four National Register significance criteria. Airport buildings and structures may also be subject to the City of Redmond Historic Preservation Ordinance. BACKGROUND RESEARCH METHODS This effort consisted of a literature review of all areas within one mile of the Airport to identify cultural resources within the study area. The purpose of the review was to identify any cultural resources including Traditional Cultural Properties within the Study Area. The study area has already experienced 36 previous cultural resources studies in support of infrastructure and utility improvements (highvvay, noad, trail, gao, and fiber optic and transmission lines), land exchanges, testing at training centers, and the Redmond Caves. One archaeological survey previously conducted within the Airport boundaries used pedestrian survey methods and didnotidontifyanyaruheoo|ogica|resouroea.esdooumentedinRed/nondMunkcipa/AirpmtTaxiway"B" Rehabilitation Project - Phase I Field Survey and Section 106, prepared by Scott E. in 2016 for Morrison K8aier|o. Reviewed information included recorded cultural reaourcos, historionugistop|iatnd pnopedies, ethnographic studies, historical maps. government landowner records, aerial photographs, regional histories, geological maps, soils surveys, and environmental reports. Relevant documents were examined at the Oregon 8HPO via the Q|8 System for Archaeological Records Data and online research library. This literature review did not include fieldwork. wmmmmw�mmcu�.mmmvoWSTERruAN 70 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan NCO g O E 0 UPO Z17) cuE o U c 0 a a cws E L a r- 0 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 CULTURAL SETTING The type ofsoils at the Airport have the potential tocontain buried cultural remains that were present prior to the eruption of Mount Mazama over 7,500 years ago leaving what is now Crater Lake. Non -Native explorers arrived incentral Oregon inthe 182Oounder contract with the Hudson's Bay Company. Migration to Oregon began in the 1840s and followed the Oregon Trail. Frank and Josephine Redmond, who arrived in the area in 1904, founded the City of Redmond. Settlers constructed irrigation canals soon after and the town incorporated in 1910. Records of the Greater Redmond Historical Society accessed in 2013 state that, the following year, the Oregon Trunk Railroad was completed and provided improved economic and passenger transportation opportunities for city residents. Efforts to build an airport began in 1Q2Oand the first runways were constructed in 1829. The Works Progress Administration carried out improvements to the Airport during the 1930s, and during World War 11, the US Army Air Corps used the Airport for training activities. The first commercial flight at the Airport was in 1946, as shown in Figure 1`28. Figure 1-29Birst Commercial Flight utthe Redmond Airport 1946 � u Source City ofRedmond xo/6. ' United States Geological Survey data from 1962a, 1962b, and 1975 indicates development in the vicinity of the Airport after 1950 has been minor, with some new construction on the northern boundary of the Airport. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS A 2016 records search of SHPO's online GIS System for Archaeological Records Data was performed to identify any previously recorded historic or cultural resources surveys within the study area. A review of the Oregon Historic Sites Database was conducted to identify any recorded historic buildings within or directly adjacent tothe study area. xu`mumnmomxzu+l.AIRPORT "TER PLAN 72 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 RECORDED CULTU 6 1 L RESOURCES IN THE STUDY AREA There are 48 recorded archaeological sites within the study area. They include isolated archeological artifacts, vockohuU*rs (caves), rock alignments; and a historic -era homestead, wagon voad, canals, and railway. In addition tothese recorded sites, more than 20 isolated precontoct-ono and historic -era oihuo are mapped in the SHPO database that do not have Smithsonian site numbers. One, a single obsidian flake, was identified within the Airport boundaries near the intersection of SE Veterans Way and SE Sisters Ave. Sixteen other isolated finds are adjacent to the Airport boundaries. There is the potential for additional precontact archaeological sites to be discovered through an archeological survey of the Airport. An archaeological survey was not part of this study. The sites listed below are protected under the National Historic Preservation Act. These sites could be affected by changes in airport operations or development. Projects that could affect these sites will require consultation with the 8HPOtodetermine the potential project effects. REDMOND CAVES SITE (35DS173) The Redmond Caves Site ksimmediately adjacent tothe Airport's western boundary, along 8EAirport Way between GVV 13m GX and GVV6m St. During investigations in 1941, a sago bark sandal and projectile points were collected. Radiocarbon dating placed the sandal from approximately 1700 to 1900 years old, as noted on the US Bureau of Land Management website, accessed in December 2016. The site integrity has been impacted by looting and neunuaUono| use, as recorded by Lee R. Lyman onthe form onUUad. Oregon Archaeological Survey, Site 35DS173—Redmond Caves, filed in1083. REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT The Airport itself has been determined eligible for listing in the NRHP. Inventory and recording of buildings on the Airport property in 1997 led to five structures on the property being recommended as contributing to the Airport's historical significance: the Administration Building (105O).Warehouse #1 (1A4O).Warehouse #2/City of Redmond Public Works Shop (1940), the World War 11 Hangar (1940), and a storage shed (no construction date provided). H0NTINGTONWAGON ROAD East of the County Fairgrounds and south of the Airport boundary is an intact segment of the Huntington Wagon Road (c. 1845), which is recorded as archaeological site 35DS2579. This resource extends northward through the airport property in a gentle southwest -northeast trajectory, extending between in sections 33, 27, 22, 15, and 10, recorded on the 1872 map accessed through the US Surveyor General website. The Huntington Wagon Road was part of the section of Oregon Trail (c.1 845) between Bend and The Dalles (Cunninghame 1976). In 1864 J.P. Huntington, Oregon Superintendent of Indian Affairs, used the route to travel between Fort DaUesand Fort Klamath. muY*�IomoMomICu��AIRPORT NIASzERxuAN 73 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 IRRIGATION CANALS The North Unit Main Canal (1938), which has been determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, is immediately east of the Airport's eastern boundary. This resource is within a future RPZ. HISTORIC PROPERTIES ON AIRPORT Based on a review of an Airport property schedule and a 1997 historic inventory, there are at least five historic buildings within the Project Area as of 2016. Table 1-25 summarizes the information on the Airport property schedule. Old Administration � World War UHan Warehouse #1 Warehouse#2 � t� Sh��� __ _____ 1.10.4 SECT ION 4(f) PROPERTY 1S4O Unlisted Section 4(0 of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966 protects significant publicly -owned parks, recreational areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and public and private historic sites. Under Section 4(f), the Secretary of Transportation may approve a transportation program or project requiring the use of such sites only if there is no feasible and prudent alternative to using that land, and the program or project includes all possible planning tominimize harm resulting from the use. Section 4(f)properties include: � Parks and recreational areas of national, state, or local significance that are both publicly -owned and open tothe public; Publicly -owned wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance that are open to the public; and Historic sites of national, eteto, or local significance in public or private ownership regardless of whether they are open huthe public. xao�uwn»xom/cx��NuxruxT MASTER PLAN 74 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 PARKS AND RECREATIONAL AREAS The Redmond Caves are a group of five caves formed by volcanic flows of molten lava from the Newberry Caldera. They are immediately adjacent to the western boundary of the Airport, along SE Airport Way between SW 13th St and SW 6th St, and the caves are located inside the Redmond city limits. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in partnership with the City of Redmond manages the caves, which are open to the public. The collapse of a single lava tube created these five caves. The largest opening, Cave 1, enters a fairly deep and expansive cave, while Cave 3 has two openings joined by a narrow but easily passable connection. Caves 1, 3, and 4 are accessible and have deep, sandy soils, with scattered boulders and ceiling blocks. Native Americans used the caves, at least periodically, over the past 6,000 years. Today, the Redmond Caves are managed as a unique site where visitors can learn about geology, wildlife, and past human use. A Section 4(f) analysis may be needed to assess the potential effects to users of the caves as a result from changes to airport operations. WILDLIFE AND WATERFOWL REFUGES There are no publicly -owned wildlife or waterfowl refuges within the study area. HISTORIC SITES A literature review of all areas within one mile of the Airport indicates significant historic resources in the study area, as listed below, that would be considered Section 4(f) properties in or near the study area: v Five structures on airport property may contribute tothe Airport's historical significance: the Administration Building (1A5O);Warehouse #1 (1Q4O);Warehouse #2ACityofRedmond Public Works Shop (1940); the World War I I Hangar (1940); and a storage shed (no construction date provided). ' Huntington Wagon Road */ ` Two irrigation Canals: the North Unit Main Canal, which has been determined eligible for listing in the NRHP and is on airport property, and the Pilot Butte Canal, which has also been determined eligible for listing inthe NRHPbut isnot onairport property. v/ Redmond Caves, which are near, but not on, airport property. Oregon Trunk Railroad A Section 4(f) analysis may be needed to assess the potential effects to these resources as a result from changes to airport operations or development. AIRPuRT MkSTERruAN 75 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 E 11) AN E E Anofficial species list was obtained from the U.G. Fish and Wildlife Service (J8FVV8)webod*(2O1G).The only species listed under the Endangered Species Act with the potential to occur in the study area is the gray wolf. The Oregon Biodiversity Information Center (ORBIC) database also was queried to obtain records of known sensitive, threatened and endangered plant and animal species within a two-mile radius of the Airport (ORBIC 2016). There are no documented records of species listed as endangered or threatened, proposed for listing, orcandidate for listing asoccurring within ahmo'mi|e radius ofthe Airport. There is no designated Critical Habitat for any species within the study area. According tothe U8FVV8wobsitoaccessed in2O1G.the Airport isinthe East Wolf Management Zone where wolves are listed as Endangered. As of USFWS data in 2015, there are no recorded areas of wolf activity in the Redmond area, but given the 2016 population according to the UGFVV8weboite and the dispersal capabilities of wolves, at this point itis possible for awolf tushow up in almost any part ofthe state. Contact with the U8FVV8again prior h/future development etthe Airport isrecommended h/ensure no species listed under the Endangered Species Act are in the development area. 1.10.6 \� ATE,t * UALIT Y The City of Redmond has an Underground Injection Control (UIC) Management Plan that documents the City's stormwater management program. The plan also explains how the City protects groundwater quality from stormwater impacts of UIC facilities in compliance with their UIC Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) Permit (No. 103050). The City has no naturally occurring surface water within the Urban Growth Boundary, where the highest density development is, so the City's stormwater outfall systems uses drywells, drill holes, injection galleries, and outfalls to vegetated swales and infiltration basins. WETLANDS AND OTHER WATERS The following sections provide an overview of known wetlands and other waters on and surrounding the Airport /4PPUCA 9 LELAWS AND REGULATIONS Wetlands are protected under the State of Oregon Removal Fill Law and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Wetlands are under the jurisdiction of both Oregon Department of State Lands (DSQ and the US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Both agencies use the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and the 2008 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0) to determine what a wetland is and its extent. An area is determined to be a wetland if it has a dominance of plants that grow in wet conditions (called hydrophytic vegetation), hydric soils, and positive wetland hydrology. AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 76 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 BACKGROUND RESEARCH A literature review covered areas extending one mile in every direction from the study area. Reviewed information included the US Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey, the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory, the Department of State Lands Local Wetlands Inventory, and Deschutes County online property database. A site reconnaissance was performed on October 24, 2016. The National Wetlands Inventory shows the following wetlands within the study area: Two wetlands on the former Juniper Golf Course; ,/ ' Lateral ECanal and North Unit Main Canal; and _/ Two wetlands on the Forest Service Rappel Base Helipad. The two wetlands indicated on the former golf course are man-made water features and are not drained. These areas no longer meet the criteria of a wetland because the hydrology is no longer met. Both irrigation canals are not waterbodies under the jurisdiction of either DSL or the Corps because the canals are used for irrigation water conveyance and are turned on and off seasonally. The two wetlands indicated at the Forest Service Rappo|Base are paved areas. The Project Area is situated within the semi -arid shrub -steppe province (Franklin and Dymess 1988). Vegetation is dominantly western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis) and big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata).but a|soinu|udasnobbitbrunh(ChryoobharnunandE/ica/no/ia,spp.).bdterbruoh(Punrh/otridonbabo).|ovv sagebrushes (Artemisia spp.), and grasses, such as Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), needlegrass (4chnabharu/nopp.).oquirre|tai|(Sitan/onh}ontrix).and Sandberg bluegrass (Poeoocunda). The NRCS maps soils as Desch utes-Stu kel complex, dry and Stukel-Rock outcrop -Deschutes complex, dry. Neither of these soils series are classified as nor considered hydric soils. This further indicates that wetlands are unlikely to occur in the study area. A site reconnaissance performed on October 24, 2016, identified no wetlands or waters of the State/US within the study area. The undeveloped areas of the Airport support an upland plant community of western juniper/gray rabbitbrush/cheatgrass. During this same site reconnaissance, neither primary nor secondary indicators ofwetland hydrology were observed. Review of the 2016 NRCS Soil Survey of Deschutes County helped evaluate the presence of prime, unique, state or locally important farmland in the project area. The survey indicated the Airport property and study area donot contain soil types classified au"prime fenn|and.^ Asof2O16.noproperty within the study area isbeing used or was recently used or zoned for farming purposes. wam10,N4R),MuN10mLmm13/RYmmSoR PIm 77 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 Local jurisdictions may have critical areas that relate toOregon's 8tate-wideLandUseGoals.Thoreareno Critical Areas in the City of Redmond's Comprehensive Plan or Development Code. 1.10.9 FL FEMA maps floodplains all across the U.S. Specifically, the FEMA Flood Map Service Center collects data from Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and incorporates all the data into a national flood hazard layer to map where Ooodp|ainsare. There are noOoodp|ainsonairport property. The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FRMA) expanded the definition of airport planning to include "developing a plan for recycling and minimizing the generation of airport solid waste" and added a provision requiring airports that prepare a master plan to address issues related to solid waste recycling. A site visit and staff interviews took place on December 15, 2016, to collect information about recycling at the Airport. The study team toured the passenger terminal, airport offices, airline and other tenant spaces, SRE and ARFF facilities, and other airport buildings. Interviews of the staff from airport management and the facilities department clarified details about the recycling program in place in 2016. The Airport has an active recycling program; the Airport does not have a written recycling plan. Under this master plan project, a recycling plan document will be developed that describes the existing program and recommends strategies to improve recycling and waste management at the facility. The recycling plan will be anappendix tothis master plan report. maomomc �o�|ccow'm�mpoxmmea�zsaxcAN 78 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 1 — Airport Inventory March 30, 2018 1.11 CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY The facilities and conditions described in this chapter form the baseline of the Airport Master Plan. The research put into preparing this document will support further analysis and recommendations that will occur in subsequent chapters. A summary of key facilities is presented in Table 1-26. its, Runways • Runway 5-23: 7,038 ft. x 150 ft. •. Runway 11-29: 7,006 ft. x 100 ft Runways and Navigational Aids • Runway 5-23 o . Good Pavement Condition o High Intensity Runway Lights (HIRL) .. o Precision Runway Markings • Runway End 5 o Runway End Identifier Lights (REIL) o Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VAS I) • Runway End 23 o Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) • Runway 11-29 o Good Pavement Condition o Medium Intensity Runway Lights (MIRL) o Non -precision. Runway Markings • Runway End 11 o VAST • Runway End 29 o PAPI Airport Navigational Aids • VHF Omni -directional Range with Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) • Non -Directional Beacon (NDB) • Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS) • Two Wind Socks Emergency • ARFF Index B FAA Certification • Part 139 79 Instrument Procedures • Runway 5 o RNAV (RNP) o RNAV (GPS). o. REDMOND THREE • Runway 23 o ILS o VOR/DME o VOR-A o NDB o RNAV (RNP) o RNAV (GPS) o REDMOND THREE o Visual • Runway 11 o VOR A (Category A) o GPS o REDMOND THREE • Runway 29 o GPS o RNAV (GPS) o REDMOND THREE Building Area • Passenger Terminal and TSA • Airport Traffic Control Tower • Aircraft Maintenance • Aircraft Fuel (Full Service & Self Service FBOs) • Hangars and Tie -downs • Snow Removal Equipment and Maintenance • Aircraft Rescue and fire Fighting (ARFF) • United States Forest Service (USFS) • Business Park Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 ��l����� � .�.^^ FORECAST SUMMARY Central Oregon is growing across all indicators. |nthe ten years between 2006 and 2016.tho population of Deschutes County has grown by 23 percent, gross regional product has grown by 20 percent, and employment has recovered to pre -recession levels. Permanent migrants are drawn by the quality oflife and comparatively lower cost of living when compared to VVoatnrn Oregon and California, and tourists come throughout the year to partake in the tax-free shopping and outdoor activities. This regional growth has been reflected in the strong uptick in aviation activity. Passenger enplanements have grown atonannual average of2.1 percent per year, and 2O16onp|anemuntoare GGpercent above 2006 levels. Deschutes County has some of the fastest growing communities in the country, and RDM is one of the nation's fastest growing Airports. Historical and FAA -projected growth exceed the levels for Oregon and the U.8. Air cargo volume has declined by 40 percent over the last ten years. This decline is largely because of a global movement towards electronic substitutes for mail, and high fuel prices, and increased air cargo screening pushing cargo on to trucks. General aviation has spread to other airports in the region, and much flight training relocated from Redmond to Bend. Redmond, with its airport traffic control tower (ATCT), instrument landing system, and two fixed base operators, remains the primary regional airport for jet traffic. Asummary ofthe demand forecasts iapresented inTable 2-1. Category Enp|mnamnmnts Air Aircraft Operations Itinerant Operations Air Carrier Commuter / Air Taxi ,388 1,433 16,803 General Aviation 22'17O �ocalOperations �� General Aviation 27,376 �KA 24Q �� Based Aircraft � Single-Ensine Piston Multi-EnoinePiston Jet &Turbo -Prop Helicopter � Other O 1 29 92 31 3 _2016__� 288,322 970.1 4D1$2 ' 5.127 6,340 10,985 16,829 CAGR 1,6-3D3G 100�0 _ 0.2% 47,740 0.9% 13'140 4.8% 540 600-0.496 . 127� _i��� �_� 2.3% 78 1.0% 2 -.S�96 � -----� r -- Year corresponds to FAA Fiscal Year, October to September. Airport was closed for three weeks in 2016 for construction. 2016., Enplanements and Air Cargo — RDM Monthly Report and RDM Performance Metrics, Aircraft Operations — Tenninal Area Forecast 2010, Based Aircraft — Airport Mqna_ ent Records 2016, CA Compound Annual GroMh Rate REDMOND MASTER PLAN 1 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2 — Aviation Activity Forecasts March 30, 2018 2.11 T 10 UCTI TO FO Aviation activity forecasts evaluate the future demand at the Airport. This chapter forecasts the following: V/ Passenger Enplanements ✓ Cargo Volume V Based Aircraft v Aircraft Operations (Itinerant and Local) Forecasts have a base year of 2016, and use the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) fiscal year (October to September). The forecast period is 20 years with reporting intervals of every five years. Multiple forecasting methodologies are used with each activity, and are compared with the FAA Terminal Area Forecast (TAF). Forecasts help determine if existing airport facilities are sufficient to handle future demand (passengers, cargo, operations, and based aircraft), or if facilities need to be modified to meet future demand. The FAA Seattle Airports District Office will review forecasts for rationality and comparison to the FAA TAF. The chapter is organized in the following sections: ✓ Community Profile ✓ Aviation Activity Profile ✓ Scheduled Service Forecasts v General Aviation Forecasts ✓ Peaking and Critical Aircraft ✓ Forecast Summary ECASTS TERMINOLOGY Aircraft. Operation: A count of a takeoff, landing, or touch- and-go. Each time an aircraft touches the runway to takeoff or land, it counts as an operation. Aircraft Approach Category (AAC): Classification of an aircraft by approach speed, with "A" being the slowest and "E" being the fastest. Airplane Design Group (ADC): Classification of an aircraft by its size (wingspan and tail height) with "I" being the smallest and "VI" being the largest. Airport Reference Code (ARC): Used to determine facility size and setback requirements. The airport reference code is a composite of the approach category and design group of the critical aircraft. Based Aircraft: Aircraft that are stored at RDM. These aircraft may be stored full-time or seasonally. Critic al Aircraft: The most demanding aircraft (in terms of size and/or speed) to use an airport more than 500 times a year or to have scheduled operations at an airport. Enpia new era: The act of a passenger boarding a scheduled or charter aircraft operated by a passenger airline. General Aviation (general aviation): Aviation activities conducted by recreational, business, and charter users not operating as airlines under FAR Part 121, Part 135, or military regulations. Itinerant Operation: An operation that originates and terminates at different airports. An example is an aircraft flying from RDM to another airport. Local Operation: An operation that originates and terminates at the same airport. An example is an aircraft taking off from RDM, remaining near the airport to practice flight maneuvers, and then landing at RDM. Touch -and -Go: A maneuver where an aircraft lands and takes off without leaving the runway. A touch-and-go counts as two aircraft operations. REMIOND A111NICIPAL 2 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Table 2-2 describes the data sources used in this chapter. FAA Aerospace Forecast FAA Traffic Flow Management System Counts Data (TFMSC) Description The FAA TAF.published inJanuary 2O17.provides historical records and forecasts for passenger onp|anements.aircraft operations and based aircraft at RDK8.These forecasts serve osacomparison for forecasts prepared ospart ofthis planning effort, and provide historical information on aircraft activity. The TAF is included inAppendix 8osAttachment 1. The Aerospace Forecast 2O16'2O36ivanational-level forecast ofaviation activity. The Aerospace Forecast helps guide local forecasts byserving asapoint ofcomparison between local o|oa|trend�andnetiVna trends. _ �� _ ThoTFK88CinudesdsdacoUooted�omOightp|ana.The se operations are categorized byaircraft type, and used ho identify trends inthe RDK8fleet mix. The advantage ofthe TFMSC data is its degree ofdetail and its insights into the itinerant users ofRDM. Adisadvantage ofTFM8Cdata isit does not include local operations oroperations that did not file oflight plan. Assuch, the utility ofTFKASCdata ielimited to larger aircraft, including scheduled commercial passenger, cargo, and charter operators, and private business jets. U.S. Department Transportation (USDOTT-1DO Database U.S. Census Bureau Scheduled, charter passenger, and air cargo airlines fill out the T-1OOform monthly. The T-1OUdatabase is an online repository ofthe data recorded nnthe forms, such as _ number ofseats sold, number ofseats available, freight transported, aircraft used, and departures performed. The T- 100 provides a detailed look at the operations of passenger and cargo airlines. U.S. Census Bureau data was used to compare growth in Deschutes County bzother communities across the country. Highlights from the Census Bureau are included in Appendix B osAttachment 2. Airline Ticket Data Airline ticket data was used tnidentify the catchment area and fare trends atRDM.Two sources were used: The Airline Reporting Corporation (AR[)and Market Information Data Tapes. These sources provide insight nnthe zip codes (based onbilling information) that RDK0travelers came from, which defines the oetohn0ontarea. This information was then used tosee where 'else travelers inthe catchment area fly from, and determine how many potential RDK8passengers chose to fly from other airports. uo�/moN1UNrcmL At 3 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmvmxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Local Economic Development Data State Plans Description Socioeconomic data isprovided bydata vendor Woods &Poole, Inc. (VV&F).and the Portland State University College ofUrban & Public Affairs: Population Research Center (PR[). The local municipalities use PRC data for population projections. The City ofRedmond Comprehensive Plan was consulted; however, it is doted and does not reflect the best available information. The City ofRedmond's Comprehensive Plan was last completed in2OO1 (with updates through 2U15).and will befully updated in2O17/2O1O.The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan was adopted in2O12. VV&Pprovides data for gap years inthe U.G.Census. The VV&P datasetconsiders the Bend -Redmond Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA).and provides 124data categories with records from 1A7O to2D1G.and forecast through 2D4O.Data categories considered include population, employment, earnings and income, and gross regional product. Economic dlopmentdatah ¢m tellUm story behind the community's recent growth and shows where the community is focusing its efforts in terms of business recruitment. Data was provided by thnral Oregonisitors Association ( VA'' Redmond Economic Development, Inc. (REDI), and the Central Oregon Association of Realtors (COAR), Presentations prepared by these groups are included in Appendix B as Attachment 3. The Oregon Aviation System Plan (OA8F)was last prepared in 2OOT.and projects aviation activity through 3O2G.The forecast base year was 2OO5.The DAGPprojected that RDK0would grow from 174.008mnp|enementsto537.4OOnnp|anoments.based aircraft were expected togrow from 117toiS7.and total operations were going togrow from 82.7O8to 95.330. In 2015. DASPenp|enementprojections were 1Qpercent higher than actual enp|onements.operations projections were 21 percent higher, and based aircraft projections were 14percent higher Stakeholder Interviews The aviation forecasting team collected data firsthand from airport stakeholders and community members during aseries ofinterviews conducted October 24 and 25, 2016. Interviews were performed with representatives from the following groups,____ Airport Management |* Redmond Police Airport Security 0 SERCO (Air Traffic Control) 0 United States Forest Service e Leading Edge Jet Center American Airlines ° Butler Aircraft Services p Delta Air Lines |* Transportation Security Alaska Airlines ` |* Administration` | MASTER PLAN 4 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Part ofthe master planning pnouoaa includes getting the best available data for development offorecasts, and evaluating the quality of this data to address anomalies. Common forecast methods, such as regression analysis and time -series evaluation can be thrown off by anomalies in historical data. One such anomaly is the three-week airport closure that occurred in May for runway construction. The closure interrupted normal operations and reduced enplanement totals and operations counts. Extended closures are not part of normal operations for the Airport; therefore, it is important to understand how many operations might have occurred had the Airport not been closed for three weeks. The calculation for the effect ofthis closure is shown in Table 2-3. � May � Category _ - _- Adjust Method' Enplanements 7'113 Load Factor Air Carrier 166 Same as April Air Taxi 154 Same as April Itinerant GA 440 96ofYear � 1'1O7 ' ��� . � 96nfYear � � � ! Mi|dory 43 N/A � additional departures o{78percent load factor. Amorico:2O additional departures � percent load factor, Delta: 38additional departures mano4percent load faxWcuonou:84mud�ono|uopexummmon87p*mem � �ad�mo� ` � 2Uo�2D1 . Air Taxi Include and Operations: passenger cargo, iMilitary operations: Not adjusted. � Sources: Airport management records from airlines audArCT FAA LOpoNETdatabase, FAA Terminal Area Forecast. Ma y ____ _ _ 20,274 t. 520 362 . 881 1'O74 43 Passenger enplanements were calculated based on the number of scheduled operations that were canceled during the closure, using the average annual load factor to estimate number of passengers that would have been on the flights. Air carrier and air taxi operations were based on the prior month's schedule. Air taxi operations include both scheduled passenger and air cargo operations. General aviation operations were estimated through amulti-step process. 1. May 2016 operations were calculated by based on the percent of operations that occurred in May from 2006 to 2015. Records from the ATCT show that an average of 8.8 percent of annual operations occur in May. This means that 3,826 operations were likely to occur in May 2016. 2. Subtracting the air carrier, air taxi, and military operations leaves 2,755 general aviation operations. 3. The FAA Operations Network (OPSNET) database shows that there were 440 itinerant operations and 1,107 local operations classified as general aviation in May 2016. This ratio was applied tothe 2.756expected general aviation operations, producing 8O1 itinerant operations and 1.874local operations. xurm.muoxo�pu*zAod'Vnr»USzanPLAN 5 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 The adjusted enplanement and operations totals were used in forecast models to project future activity. Data reported in the chapter for 2016 matches FAA TAF values. Airport management did not report that based aircraft totals were impacted by the closure. Some tenants relocated their aircraft temporarily; however, overall based aircraft did not change before and after the closure. 2.2 COMMUNITY PROFILE Community profile describes the location of the Airport, and the community it serves. The Airport is located within Bend -Redmond Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and serves the Central Oregon region. There are five other general aviation (general aviation) airports within 30 nautical miles of the Airport: Bond Municipal Airport (BDN). Madras Municipal Airport (S33). Prineville Airport (S39). 8unhvorAirpnrt (S21). and Sisters Eagle Air Airport (GKS). RDM is the only commercial service airport in Central Oregon. This section describes the community population, employment and economic development, gross regional product (GRP), the activities of the US Forest Service (USFS), tourism, the regional airports already mentioned, and the catchment areas and competition. These characteristics comprehensively form RDK8'a community profile. 2.2'1 POPULATION Table 2-4 shows the population records from 2006 to 2016and the Portland State University Population Research Center (PRC) forecast through 2036. The PRC gathers population data on and collaborates with the state of Oregon, the counties, and cities within the state to create the forecast. The MSA grew at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of two percent from 2006 and 2015, increasing the total population by more than 33,000. The MSA population is forecasted to grow at a CAGR of 1.8 percent, reaching more than 262.000by2O3G. CAGR(20O6-2016) CAGR(2O16-2O3G) CAGR=Compound Annual Growth Rate Source: Research Center 1O�2Y6. - — 10.3% N/A` � � AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 The U.S. Census Bureau ranked the Bend -Redmond MSA as the seventh fastest growing metro area in the U.S. in 2014. and the 3m fastest growing metro area in the U.S. in 2016 (Appendix B' Attachment 2 — Census Data). Population growth is driven by two primary factors: job availability attracting workers and their families, and quality -of -life factors attracting retirees. Figure 2-1 shows the population distribution of the MSA from 1970 through to the forecast for 2020. From 1970 to 2020, the median age increases from 31 to 45, and the percent of population over the age of 60 grows from 16 percent to 30 percent. Working age population, particularly the more experienced workers between the ages of 40 and 59, have grown by atota| of4O.3O1 during the same period. MASTER PLAN 7 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts 1990: Median Age 36 1980: Median Age 30 o o 0 o o 0 r 0 0 0 , o 0 0 0 0 0 2020 Forecast: Median Age 45 r r o 0 O t Lrl r:) 0 0 • ( o 0 0 0 0 .T.Z.V.M.MM,MML" 0 ' 0i 0 0 .' 0 ( 0 (if , , 0 0 4.) C) I 0 2010: Median Age 40 r 0 0 t 0 0 0 0 C r 0 O t tr, 0 0 • t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 I CO 0 (1.) 8 ( cs) 6 , < ,-,, C • CO r 6 t 0 o Vttlttnd C to <cm C 0 0 0- ti) 0 0 Ci 0 cn Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix o Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 The changing demographics have significance for the incidence of air travel within the community. The 2014 Shape ofAir Travel Markets Overthe Next 20 Years report by the International Air Transportation Association (IATA) shows that working age travelers tend to fly more frequently than the population under the age of 19 and over the age of 65. Population growth, partially spurred by job growth and economic diversification discussed in Section 3.2, helps drive up the number ofaverage trips per capita in RDK8. A 2015 survey by Airlines for America (A4A), presented in the 2016 report Status of Air Travel in the USA, conforms that working -age U.8. travelers (age 18'54)make up7Opercent ofadult travelers. Apoint of distinction between the IATA and A4A reports is that the A4A report does not address trip frequency amongst the population directly, and does not include children. Travel by age group from the IATA and A4Areports are presented in Figure 2-2 Figure 2-2: Air Passenger Trips per Capita by Age � v i 1.6 /4 .0 - uD 0.6 oa (ln Ratio of air passengers by age group to population by age group compared to average 'Over- represented' age groups 'Under- represented' age groups otom zsto 19 zoto 24 25 tosx 35to44 wsto 54 55to59 soto 64 astory 75+ usoux`NoaooN/ruAcAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 0 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmvmxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts U.S.Air Traveler Composition 2 Male 0 Female Race/Ethnicity Source: IATA, 2014, Airlines for America, 2016 2 '2.2EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Per Woods and Poole data, the economy of the Redmond MSA has exhibited recovery since the end of 2007-2009 recession with total employment growing at an annual average rate of one percent from 2009 to 2016. Because of the recession, the MSA employment dropped by a total of 41 percent between 2OOG and 2011. Industries that saw the greatest decline in employment were construction with a 14 percent dac|ine, manufacturing with a 7.5 percent decline, and mining with a four percent decline. Professional services, such as finance, insurance, real estate, and professional and technical services were more resilient and posted employment growth between 2UOGand 2O11. Economic recovery and diversification have been occurring since the end of the recession. Top industries by total employment in 2006wmre construction (13 percent of]obo). retail (12 percent ofjobs). and healthcare (10 percent of jobs). By 2016, top industries were healthcare (12 percent of jobs) and retail (12 percent ofjoba).while construction dropped to sixth place with seven percent ofjobs. K8GAemp|oymont fluctuates by 6,000 jobs over the course of the year due to the seasonal nature of the ski season. Employment has kept pace with population growth, and the employment per capita ratio was 0.59 in 2O16.The decline from 2OOGto2O11 isindicative ofpopulation growth, coupled byadecline inlabor intensive industries (construction and mining) and growth in more automated industries like healthcare and professional services. Total employment and employment per capita are presented in Table 2-5. Top industries byemployment and sales are presented in Table 2-6. xenu»No»umwvnPM,AIRPORT aIASzanPLAN 10 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvm»mxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Calendar Year 2006 Total Employment P�rcmnt��hm 98,159 _ 92,312 Compound An|GrovthRotem '18-36 1.9Y6 -G.0% _���' �3.D96 10.6% � Jobs Per Capita = Total Employment / Total Population. � � MsAPopulation included ioTable u-o. Sources: Employment: Woods & Poole, Population: Portland State University l | Employment/Capita0.68 0.58 Job diversity has seen growth as the population and number of people employed has increased. Growing job sectors include aviation, engineering, health, technology, and social media. Below are examples of companies inthe K88Athat have shown recent growth: v RDD—Provider ofmajor systems and components for experimental aircraft. v/ Stratos Aircraft — Located on Airport, Stratos designs, manufactures, and maintains the Stratos 714, a very light jet. Bend Research — Medical and pharmaceutical research company. ^� ~ Pathoun —Aaupply'chain oriented pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical company. Facebook — A social network that houses a server hub in nearby Prineville. Les Schwab Tires — A tire retail chain with a hangar on the Airport and headquarters in Redmond. PCC E8mctunols. Inc. —G|obe| manufacturer ofcomponents are used in aircraft engines. airframes, power generation equipment, armaments, and commercial and medical needs. Nanometrics — Provider of advanced, high performance process control metrology and inspection systems used in the fabrication of products like semiconductors and solid-state devices. xnYNI..muMomum%LanPOmMASTER PLAN 11 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovm»mxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan iTAMTCDIWAIGEV r a ter viation ctivit. orecast U Q N '6 • t5 L U a) 2 C (U N QS O U7 • >L' = N O U a O OJ • t� N a) CD �N a) N N O O 0 N a) ° • cumN O u O c6 > O = O .50o O C U N co O - OU) C II QS "6 C6 - v � • °O cp. �- L a) 0) US O N G - a) O RS U) L •i• U ll 47 CU G Oa as 2 O c4 7 - C OS - 0 L -0 O N C !U � a O a. O ID O II O N yL O aa) = EW,O U CD U CDO O1 I Ca C L Ca U G Q7 a N — U 2 O O F- .=A 11 mac` Q c6 Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 Gross regional product (GRP) is the value of goods and services produced in the MSA. GRP serves as an index for the health of the overall economy. As the economy increases production— both by producing more goods and producing more valuable goodo. QRP inunuesoo. QRP per Capita shows the impact of the recession on2O11 GRP.which was down compared to2OOGGRPper Capita despite overall GRP being higher. Woods and Poole projections for GRP show that it will increase slightly faster than the MSA population. This is due to increases in efficiency and growth in the healthcare, professional service, and technical manufacturing industries, which produce higher value goods per person than traditional MSA industries that focus on raw material extraction (a0hcu|tunu, mining, and forestry). Table 2-7shows the GRPofthe K8SAfrom 2OOGto2O36. 2021 - -�.-52 �� $@,812 �O31 � ` �12,1O3 ' � ' 2036 $13.302 Compound Annual Growth Rates '06-'16 | 6196 ' "1G-36 2196 |` � _ GnPper �Capita Gm=isinflation-adjusted zm1ndollars Sources: GRP: Woods & Poole, Population: Portland State University__ Percent Change 12.1% 11.3% 10.8% � N/A 0.3% 2.2'4 L1�NITED STATES FOREST SERVICE The United States Forest Service (JGF8) Redmond Air Center (RAC) plays a major role in supporting firefighting efforts in the region. USFS aviation activities contribute an average of 500 annual operations, which includes flights by helicopters, tankers, and single -engine spotter aircraft., USFS operations are concentrated during the fire season from May to October. Total operations depend on the severity of the fire season, and the Airport has seen as many as 1,000 tanker flights and as few as 300. The RAC expects to see Lockheed C-1 30 air tankers following the reconstruction of former Taxiway B (now Taxiway D)in2O17. |naddition toaerial response, the RAC hosts firefighting and emergency response training, and acts aaa depot for firefighters headed out to events across the northwest. USFS and contract employees generally fly on scheduled commercial flights; however, charter flights have occurred when demand is sufficient. x�omx,movm~xz/x�uuo,�uzuxmTEnrL*N 13 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmvmxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 Governmental organizations, such as national law enforcement and elected officials, use the RAC when in town. The USFS classifies the RAC as a hub of operations, incident support base, and critical asset for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and related emergency efforts. FEMA and other disaster response agencies will use the RAC for large scale natural disasters in the Pacific Northwest, such asanearthquake inthe Casuadiaoubduntionzone. l� The Airport receives tourists throughout the year due to the multitude of activities and attractions in the Central Oregon area. The Central Oregon Visitors Association lists golf courses, ski resorts, hiking trails, and the natural beauty of Oregon as tourist attractions. The Central Oregon Golf Trail features more than two dozen golf courses, three of which are ranked by Golf Digest and GOLF Magazine in the top 100 public courses in the nation. These top golf courses are a strong attraction for visitors to fly to Central Oregon. Central Oregon is home to two ski resorts, Mt. Bachelor and Hoodoo where visitors can participate in winter outdoor activities between November and May. Both resorts are also open from June to October for hiking and biking, and complement the tnoi|o elsewhere in the community. Tourism activity is gauged by transit room tax (TRT) collection, which is provided by the Central Oregon Visitors Association (COVA). TRT is a percentage tax charged on hotel rooms. Growth in TRT shows two changes: an increase in average room price, an increase in hotel occupancy, and an increase in the number of rooms available. Table 2-8 shows that TRT declined during the recession in 2008 and 2009 due to decreased travel, and has grown since. Strong growth from 2013 to 2016 is indicative of new lodging that has been built in response to the demand. Tourism peaks in the summer. "TER PLAN 14 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Y Fiscal Year ffi TRT 2007 ' �7�Y634.��S S��' � czmmmm � 4.3% s2.500,00! 2009 ' '12.096 -r. 2011 ` $7�14�47 8.6Y6 ~� .�� 2013, $9'008.940 13.8% 2014 Q11.061.570 2�.89� 201S .DQ2 � 24.796 � � � � 2016 $15.513.984 12.596 Compound � � � '06-'18 | 8.0% +S20MCOo 0� , TRT Collection by Month 1 u u 4 s o r a o m n 12 Month � TRT Tax TRTadjusted m match FAA fiscal �TRRis sum nfamount collected by City of Bend, City ofRedmond, City ofSisters, and Deschutes County Months: 1 =Docembev �Source: Central Oregon Visitors Association TRT growth exhibits strong correlation (0.91) with passenger enplanement growth from 2006 to 2016. This is to be expected as both indicators have common drivers. Growth in business and leisure visitors to the community help drive up TRT and passenger enplanement numbers. This, combined with population and employment growth (Section 3j and 3.2).explain the overall increase inpassenger enp|anements at RDM. 2.2,6 REGIONAL AIRPORTS RDM is the only commercial service airport within 100 miles of the main population centers in Central Oregon; however, there are five general aviation airports nearby (Bend (BDh). K8odroa (S33). Prineville (S39), Sunriver (S21), and Sisters (6K5)). These airports are within 30 miles of RDM and provide general aviation users with choices for aircraft storage and services. A detailed description of the facilities offered at these airports are described in Chapter 1. Markets served by each airport are described in Table 2-9. xummo�oxxo�xo/�/auxnouzmLASzanrL*N 15 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxoo|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts CMarkets Served _ _ Instrument Turbo - Runway Length iJet A&FBO|Large Jets |Small Jets Props Piston | | | 7.0@����Pn��n �Y� ___Y� _L �� �s l Yes 5,200 n � Yes � ` Yes Yes5.089feet | Non -Precision Yes N Yes | Yes Prineville| 5751 km Yes Yes Yes 8unrivor 5.461feat | Non -Precision Yes No Yea | Yes Sisters� . 5460haot | \/ismd __| _ No No | No Yes Sources: Airport Facilities: FAA Airport Facilities Directory; Primary Market: Consultant assessment derived from based aircraft records and available facilities (runway length, fuel, instrument procedure Yes Yes Yes Yes Determination of market does not indicate the most common aircraft type at an airport, or suggest that a market that isnot served will never use anairport. Rather, itreflects the presence offacilities atanairport that cater to the needs of a certain market. For example, piston aircraft are versatile in that they do not need Jet A fuel or a long runway, and due to their susceptibility to strong winds and turbulence, they tend not to be operated when visibility is particularly |ovv due to stormy weather. For this nuaoon, piston aircraft owners have fewer requirements for the airport where they based their aircraft than the owner ofa business jet. Large jets need a long runway to operate at their full potential, and owners generally need the aircraft available to fly rugand|ooa ofthe weather an airport instrumentation is more important. While large jets can use any of the regional airports under the right conditions, owners requiring year-round availability would be unlikely to base their large jet at an airport without the necessary facilities. xumuuNn,'%Imxlcu�LAImrom,NImzanPLAN 16 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts 2.2.7 CATC I I NIENT AREAS AND COM 1.) An airport's "catchment area" is the geographic boundary from which it draws its users, and airport activity is primarily influenced by the movement of people and products to and from the catchment area. Catchment areas are defined by the types of services offered at an airport, proximity of competitor airports, and the tendency of the local population to use the airport. The catchment area for RDM was split up into three different areas: air carrier, business jet, and general aviation. A map of the catchment areas is shown in Figure 2-3. The air carrier catchment area isthe largest ofthe three areas for RDK8.The air carrier catchment area includes Central Oregon due tothe Airport's location and the distance from other airports. The catchment area boundary isdefined byassessing ticket purchases in the area surrounding the Airport, and looking atthe zip codes ofthe passengers that traveled from RDK8.The catchment area shows where RDK8passengers are likely tocome from; however, itshould not be misinterpreted to mean that all air travelers in this area use RDK8.Some fly from other airport, shown inthe next section. TERN11NOLOGY Air Carrier (-uxchnmentArea: Defined hythe zip codes passengers live b`when they purchase xticket for xuoriginating Right from the Airpnr. Business Jet Cukhmmex"iArea: Defined by proximity /vother airports capable nfhandling business jets. General Aviation Catchment Area: DcDocd hythe towns near the Airport who base general aviation aircraft at RDNI The business jet catchment area is the second largest ofthe three areas and extends just past the city limits of Bend, Prineville, Madras, Sisters and Sunriver. This catchment area is based on the primary markets defined in Table 2-9. Surrounding airports do not have adequate facilities to serve large business jets throughout the year, which drives the size of the business jet catchment area. The general aviation catchment area, which is the smallest, includes the City cfRedmond and the areas halfway between the airports in Madras, Bend, Sisters, and Prineville. As shown in Table 2-9, the nearby airports in these communities have facilities that cater to small jets, turbo props, and piston aircraft. It is expected that aircraft operators will use the facility closest to their home or business provided space is KFmMzIND NIUNIURkLAIRPnRTwUSrERPLAN 17 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan t�iFTiliicTs�.IsJE+' a .ter — viation ctivit orecast i•ure - atc ment #reap x I+I E o ♦ramance I -I - om re enswe '.' an , sentlx ' : - ranS O a ion :: s em ' ar Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 AIR CARRIER CATCHMENT AREA The air carrier catchment area was determined based on a sample of passenger tickets issued between June 3Om2O1Sand June 3Om2O1G.This sample includes 24.457tickets out ofanestimated 747.325 tickets issued to travelers in the area over this period, meaning that the results are statistically valid at the Q6percent confidence level. True market for RDM is 747,325 tickets, which is the total number of tickets sold to the population of the catchment area. The true market includes travelers that used ROK8, and travelers that live near RO&1and used other airports. Ticket sales data indicate that 75 percent of the true market used RDM for air travel, 24 percent used Portland (PDX), and the remaining one percent diverted to Eugene (ELIG). When assessed based on international and domestic trips, RDK8 captured 76 percent (627.747) ofdomestic travelers and 59 percent (32,881) of international travelers. Table 2-10 shows airport use by communities near the Airport. Bend Redmond _ Sisters Prineville _ Torrebonne Madras La Pine Powell Butte Culver Bums Hines Silver Lake ' Christmas VaUa +� JohnDay Crescent-.----. -Mount K8ountVernon �� Camp Sherman Distance fmmRDM J 17 2 21 _ 8 127 36 VVar�|Gphnua i � 52 ' �' 2 ' Kimberly 116 57 Canyon City Total 7 | 43 Year�ndhlqJune��m'2016 � % Airport Use ' � _pDX | 23 28 ' 4A `- — ^ 24 17 '- 27 _ 44 41 N/A 7S � 24 1:Does not include markets with fewer than 1O0passengers.Sources: Airline Reporting Corporation, Market Information Data Tapys, and US, Department of Transportation � i | � 947 856 True Market 524,628 29,396 17,876 2,170 1.711 1,344 1,283 1,253 1.182 xcmmmNn»amwulumLAIa»VuzmxSTymPLAN 19 825 703 642 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 Travelers typically divert to other airports for non-stop Uk]hts, lower airfa/ea, and more convenient flight times. Distance from RDK0 isanother factor. Table 2-iOshows that the Airport retains 72 percent ofthe true market within 30 miles of the Airport, 58 percent of the true market between 31 and GOmiles, 67 percent ofthe true market between 61 and 0Omiles, and S5percent of the true market over 01 miles away. Table 2-10 shows the top 25 destinations true market estimates for passengers daily each way (PDEW) from RDM. PDEW numbers do not justify route existence on their own as many passengers flying from RDM connect in the airline hubs to other destinations. A passenger flying from RDM to Anchorage via Portland is part of the RDM-Anchorage PDEW total, and not part of the RDM-Portland PDEW total. RDM has non-stop service toeach of the top five markets, and six ofthe top ten markets. ThoAirportuaaotho information contained in Table 2-11 to advocate for new routes when meeting with the airlines. xa!VIomoMnmxu31.1'uFJIuRr NLASzERruAN 20 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2 - Aviation Activity Forecasts March 30, 2018 Rank 1 2 3 Destination Seattle, WA1 Los Angeles, CA1 San Francisco, CA1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2 1 Portland, OR1 Phoenix, AZ (PHX)1 Las Vegas, NV San Diego, CA Denver, CO1 Orange County, CA Chicago, IL (ORD) Dallas, TX (DFW) Anchorage, AK Salt Lake City, Ur 14 San Jose, CA 15 Kahului, HI 16 Boston, MA 17 Minneapolis, MN 18 Oakland, CA 19 Sacramento, CA 20 2 Ontario, CA Newark, NJ 22 Honolulu, HI 23 Orlando, FL (MCO) 24 Spokane, WA 25 Atlanta, general aviation Top 25 destinations Total domestic Total international All markets RDM Reported PAX 61,199 9,780 39,417 33,032 25,316 19,226 19,117 20,496 16,165 10,465 8,887 8,642 10,010 6,801 5,947 8,199 7,729 5,092 5,320 6,293 6,778 4,483 Diverted PAX 4,442 15,751 4,626 44,042 60.3 0 33,032 45.2 7,136 32,452 44.5 7,076 26,302 36.0 6,765 25,883 35.5 3,219 23,715 32.5 4,163 20,328 27.8 ,357 55,531 3,822 18.9 4,860 13,748 18.8 4,723 13,364 18.3 2,624 12,633 17. 5,096 11,896 16.3 5,947 11,893 16.3 3,160 11,358 15.6 2,540 10,268 14.1 3,907 8,999 12.3 3,587 8,907 12.2 1,981 8,274 11.3 1,450 8,228 11.3 3,665 8,148 11.2 5,169 2,613 7,783 10.7 5,710 1,404 7,114 9,7 4,948 1,693 6,640 9.1 384,217 105,784 490,002 671.2 527,747 164,405 692,152 948.2 22,292 55,173 75.6 186,697 747,325 1,023.7 32,881 560,628 1: Indicates routes with non-stop service. PDEW: Passengers Daily Each Way Airport codes used to identify specific airport used in cities with multiple commercial airports. Sources: Airline Reporting Corporation, Market Information Data Tapes, and U.S. Department of Transportation Ill [)\ION . „ .)A 21 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 2,3 AVIATION ACTIVITY PROFILE The aviation activity profile is the baseline of the forecasts. The profile shows trends in activity at the Airport and provides context that explains what, how, and why changes in aviation activity have occurred. Sources that have provided information include the FAA, Airport Management, ATCT staff; and airport tenants. This section is organized inthe following order: ~ Airline Service (Passenger and Cargo) - General Aviation ,� ~ Military V' Terminal Area Forecast The ATCT operates and tracks flights from 5 a.m. to 7 p.m. Arrivals and departures that occur outside of these hours are not included in operations records submitted to the FAA. Commercial airline operations are also reported to the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) and operations that occur when the ATCT is closed are captured using USDOT records. General aviation operations do not have such records; however, flight records captured by FlightAware.com show only 327 general aviation operations occurring outside of ATCT hours. F|ightAware records do not capture all operations, only those that file flight plans. Huwever, given the |ovv number of recorded operations, it is expected that total GA operations that occur when ATCT is closed make up a small percentage of overall operations. The absence of a more definite count is not expected to materially impact the forecast. GA operations when the ATCT is closed are shown in Table 2-12. Category Single Engine Piston Multi Engine Piston Jet Single Eng�eTurboprop ` Multi Engine Turboprop Total 18 124 - 8 327 Source: FlightAware Fiscal Year 2016 data. ATCT records show 40,162 operations in 2016 2.3.1 -AIRLINE SERVICE Airline service includes scheduled passenger and cargo flights, andnon-achaduledohaderflightsthat operate charters for casinos and the U.S. Forest Service. The sections that follow describe the airline profile, opportunities for new airlines to come to RDM, passenger enplanements, commercial operations, and air cargo service at the Airport. au)NIuNnmtj,NvxxL.mRIIoKFNMSzERPLAN 22 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 AIRLINE PROFILE The Airport has four scheduled passenger airlines: Alaska, United, Delta, and American. In 2017, all flights were operated by regional airlines on behalf of the mainline carriers. Each provides service to their hubs with Alaska flying to Portland and Seattle; America flying to Phoenix and Los Angeles; Delta flying to Salt Lake City and Seattle; and United flying to Denver and San Francisco. Non-stop service to the seven hub airports puts RDM within one stop of many major cities in the world. The 2016 market share for airlines in terms of passengers carried was not evenly divided amongst the airlines: 57 percent of passenger traveled on Alaska, 24 percent on United. 12 percent on Dalta, and seven percent on American. Scheduled cargo service is operated by Ameriflight on behalf of United Postal Service (UPS), and Empire on behalf of Federal Express (FedEx). Alaska Airlines carries cargo on their scheduled passenger flights. The 2016 market share for scheduled cargo carriers in terms of pounds of cargo carried was 51 percent for Ameriflight, 45 percent for Empire, and four percent for Alaska. The growth in passenger activity at RDM has corresponded with increasing seat capacity onthe scheduled carriers. Average seats per departure was 3Oin2OU6.7Oin2O11 (when AUegiantwas operating with 166 seat aircraft), and 64 in 2016 (after Allegiant left the market). Nationally, the FAA Aerospace Forecast 2017'2O37reports that the average seats per departure for regional airlines has grown from SOin2OO6to91 in 2016, and is projected to grow to 73 by 2037. The trend of larger aircraft is expected to continue at RDM based on the following fleet decisions made by the major airlines. Major changes in seat capacity for aircraft operating at RDM are described below. � Alaska Airlines replaced the 37-seat Q200 with the 76-seat Q400 in 2008. As a result, flight frequencies in RDM and other markets served by Alaska declined. Passenger numbers also declined at this time; however, this was primarily due to the recession that occurred in 2008- 2009.Alaska Airline's passenger numbers returned to growth in 2010 and exceeded 2008 levels in2O14. */ SkyWest (operating for United and Delta) has been replacing the 50-seat CRJ-200 with the 65 to 70-seat CRJ-700 and the 76 seat CRJ-900 during peak months. In conversations with airport management, United has indicated that the CRJ'200 will leave the ROK8 market and be replaced by the CRJ-700 and CRJ-900 in 2017, and Delta has indicated that they intend to phase out the CRJ-200 from the RDM market as soon as the CRJ-700 and CRJ-900 become available throughout the year. Delta did not specify adate when this would occur. nunw�o��n�-u�o�wASzER"LAn 23 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 Regional airlines are capped at a maximum of 76 seats per the terms of labor agreements between mainline pilot's unions and the airlines. Aircraft operated by regional airlines typically have fewer seats than they are capable of accommodating because of these agreements. For example, the Bombardier CRJ-900 can accommodate 90 seats in an all economy configuration. Airline purchases known as of April 2017 show that interest is focused on aircraft with greater seating capacity. Alaska, American, Delta, and United have indicated in the fiscal year investor filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that they are updating their fleets with more fuel efficient narrow body aircraft as described below. This list does not include conventional narrow body aircraft (e.g. A321 ceo), and wide body aircraft (e.g. 787'10)thot the airlines have on order. Alaska: 3OEmbnoor175aircraft (up to88oeate).3OA32Onooaircraft (up to18Gaeata).and 32 Boeing 737 MAX aircraft (up to 200 seats); .� ' American: 12Embnaer175aircraft, 1OOAirbus A321neoaircraft (up to24Oseats) and 1OO Boeing 737 MAX aircraft; ~/ - Delta: 75 Bombardier CG1OO aircraft (up to 135oeats). */ 8kywast:18Embraer175aircraft, 2OOMitsubishi &1RJ'0Oaircraft (up to0Oooats). ' United: 24 Embnoer175aircraft, QA Boeing 737 MAX aircraft While it isnot known how the airlines will deploy these aircraft intheir system, it isevident that there are no orders placed for aircraft with fewer than 60 seats. This means that as these smaller aircraft are retired, they will be replaced by larger aircraft. As seen through the retirement of the 37-seat Bombardier Q200 in 2008, communities that cannot fill the larger aircraft will face a reduction in frequency, and potentially lose service all together. The effect that this may have onRDK0isdiscussed inSection 4.i.3. NEW AIR SERVICE OPPORTUNITIES The most likely new candidate to service the Airport is Allegiant Airlines. As shown in Table 2- i.Las Vegas is the market without non-stop service from the Airport. Passengers either connect on flights from RDK8, or drive to another airport to fly direct. AUagiant provided service between RDK8 and Las Vegas between 2007 and 2012, with load factors (number of passengers divided by the number of seats) ranging from G3percent in2OO7to81 percent in2O11.AUogiantused the K8D'8Oaircraft with 16Gseats on the Las Vegas route. Allegiant ceased service in 2012 citing rising airport costs as the reason for leaving; however, the Airport and Allegiant are investigating reinstating the service as demand has remained strong. Allegiant is transitioning from their Boeing MD-80 fleet to a more modern Airbus narrow body fleet. The Airbus aircraft have comparable seating capacity to the MD-80; however, the Airbus are more fuel efficient and can operate on shorter runways at a given takeoff weight than the MD-80. The new aircraft would allow Allegiant to serve RDM throughout the year with a lower weight restriction on hot days, enabling the airline tocarry more passengers. Rf-DINIOND MUNmAPAL*RPnRT MASTER PLAN 24 Exhibit omOrdinance couo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 Allegiant is a niche market low-cost carrier that caters to leisure travelers and typically does not offer flights every day of the week, helping keep load factors high. Mainline carriers like Alaska, America, Delta, and United cater to business and leisure travelers and tend to offer multiple daily flight frequencies that coincide with connecting flights at their hubs. The Airport has non-stop service to every mainline airline hub within 1,000 miles. Regional jets that serve the Airport begin to become uneconomical beyond 1.000 miles because they need to remove passengers to take on more fuel. It is not expected that the Airport will see non-stop service to Midwest hubs until airlines begin serving the Airport with larger aircraft such as the Booing 737 and Airbus A320 series. Entry of these aircraft into the RD&1 market will depend on the local demand proving that they can fill these larger aircraft reliably. PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS AND AIRLDNEOPE m. A passenger enplanement is any passenger who boards any aircraft that is considered scheduled commercial and charter aircraft with more than nine seats for turboprops (or any number of seats for jet aircraft). The aircraft must be operating under Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 121, which pertains to passenger airlines. Passengers are not counted toward enplanements if they board aircraft that operate under 14 CFR 91, which pertains to general aviation, and 14 CFR 135, which pertains toon-demand air taxis (not aidines).Passenger enp|anementsinclude both revenue and non - revenue pasoengersvvhopaidtoxesandpassongerhoni|ityoharges(PFC)fortheircarriage.Passanger enplanements do not include the flight crew, flight attendants, and any other members of the airline crew. Passenger onplanomentoare classified byeither air carrier orair taxilcommuter. Air carrier enp|anemonto are anyonp|anomonts that occur on a mainline carrier, such as Delta. United. and American. Air taxi/commuter enplanements are those that occur on a feeder carrier, such as SkyWest Airlines, Mesa Airlines, and Horizon Airlines. RDM passenger enplanements have increased by 100,000 between 2006 and 2016, which is a CAGR of 4.2 percent. This includes years of decline in 2009, 2012, and 2013. The 2009 decline was caused by the economic recession, and the decline in2O11 and2O12 was caused byAUegiantexiting the market, shown by the drop of air carrier enplanements while Air Taxi/Commuter enplanements grew. RDM enp|anomentsfrom 2OOGto2O1Gare shown inTable 2-i3. xanmmn�o�cu�.aemuRTmUSTsnPLAN 25 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts 2009 2010 �U11 2012 A�Corher � A� | '� Total - � `-- ~ ^ � 1.427 195.796 197.223 91262� �_ _ 220,711 13.88G 229.311 26.618 � �191,2K08 ` 8 �� �O5�1A` � ��� ' � � � 1GGGO 214173 . . 430 CAG� � 'A�Y6 � 226,980 i55.6GO cAGn=Compound Annual Growth Rate. Source: 2016 TAF 2016 total is impacted by Airport closure in May. 230.033 16.6Y6 243.107 5.796 217J828 | '1O.4Y� � � � 225.561 3.6% 231,978 2.896 230.833 '0.5Y6 227'410 � '1.S5� ___ .269,132 _ !�5.2y% 298.323 19.7Y6 `4.2% | 'N/A As shown in Figure 2-4, growth at RDM exceeded growth experienced by the State of Oregon and the U.S. from 2006 to 2016. The State and the U.S. saw steeper declined during the recession than RDM. Growth at RDM since 2013 has been more pronounced. One reason for the periods of slower decline and more rapid growth over the past ten years is that the local economy has been adding jobs faster than the State and the nation, and the population of the MSA has been growing more quickly. Forecasts, which come from the FAA TAF published January 2017, project that RDM will grow more quickly than the State and the U.S. through 2036. A key reason behind the higher growth rate is that RDM is an emerging market, whereas the State and the U.S. are mature markets, driven by the medium and large hub airports. PDX made up 88 percent of Oregon passenger enplanements, and medium and large hub airports made up 89 percent of U.S. enplanements in 2016. Hub airports tend to remain more stable than non -hubs, hence the lower historical and projected volatility. The RDM TAF is discussed in Section xumuuNomom»ou�i,*nrnmra*mzaprLmN 26 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Figure 2-4:Passenger Enp|anmmmmntGrowth } ~ � 3.00 275 2.50 225 2.00 175 1.50 1.25 1DD 0.75 0.50 "Mm'"Wom— avumo:um7TAr U.S' W­ AjdineoporaUonaaneuatagorizedaaeitheraircenierorair taxi. Categorization isbased onthe seating capacity of an aircraft, regardless of which carrier is operating the aircraft. A seating capacity of 60 seats is the determining factor on how an aircraft is categorized. Aircraft such as 5O'seatCRJ'2U0with are considered air taxi, and aircraft such as the 76-seatC>4OOare considered air carrier. Total passenger airline operations at RDM have declined by an annual average of 2.2 percent from 2006 to 2016. The largest drop in operations was during the recession; however, total operations numbers have declined every year since except 2010, 2014 and 2016. The primary reason behind the decline in operations is the airline's transition of from air taxi aircraft to air carrier aircraft. The greater seating capacity offered by the air carrier aircraft has allowed the airlines to reduce flight frequencies while maintaining or increasing the number of available seats in the market. For example, Alaska cut their operations by a little less than half when they retired the 37-seat Bombardier Q200 in 2008; but they replaced these aircraft with 76-seat Bombardier Q400s, thereby offsetting the decline in operations and maintaining the number ofseats available inthe market. xeu�,mu^uv�xcm^�AIRPORT amozenPLAN 27 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Other airlines — American, Delta, and United, have been phasing out the 50-seat CRJ-200, an airtaxi aircraft, in favor oflarger regional jets, which are considered air carrier aircraft. These lagerjets increase the number of seats available in the market, which has accommodated the growth in passenger enp|anoments.Passenger airline operations and average seats per departure are shown inTable 2-i4. Fiscal Year Axtri^; .r^�� .—�~ .. I r/ � .,.vc rk / �m/o" ~x/ /�A� � /vu,/ � m `,nm//yo � n.,,- Cl_�.,. 380 14.368 14.728 39 2,484 13. 1 18.27G � 1O.596 1 � 4G ' 4.782 10.414 � 15.196 � -G.G96 ! 54 4,276 _6,360 _i 11.S64� l � � -23.9Y% � 8,234 11.802 2196 �87 70 |� � S�48 1O�32 _ � '-8.196 � 6.344 10.720 -0196 r 6,106 10,382 70 70 � -1296. 58 � 6.138 � G44O 11.57D 11.596 � 57 _�� 1 �'7�O 2015 5,292 -1GlY� |_ � ,_~---____-� __- 2Oi6 6.946 4.796 11.742 20.896 CAGR| �_ | . 34.496 � | 0.4% � N/A _ 64 - 64 cAGn=Compound Annual Growth Rate. Sources: 2oon-2u1numznTT'1uoDatabase Note: rAFand FAA orsmsTcounts include Charter, Air Cargo and Forest Service Tanker. Numbers above are for scheduled passenger flights only. SCHEDULED PASSENGER AIRLINE LOAD FACTOR Load factor is one metric used by the airlines to assess route performance, and is calculated by dividing the number ofpassengers bythe number ofseats available. Available seats represent the supply, and passengers represent the demand. Load factor grows as demand and supply move closer together, and load factor declines when supply grows faster than demand. Airline capacity discipline, which is where airlines reduce seats to a market to increase load factor is evident at RDM from 2010 to 2013, as shown in Figure 2-5. The airlines reduced supply by 150.000 seats between 2010 and 2013. Passenger numbers declined by a tenth of this amount during the same period, and average load factor grew from 65 percent to 79 percent. The airlines have added capacity since 2013 and average load factor has remained high. A reason for this is that there is strong demand for air travel in the community, and available seats are being purchased. The 2017 FAA Aerospace Forecast reports that the average domestic load factor for U.S. regional carriers was 8O.1 percent in2U1Gand RD&4had aload factor of8D.1 percent. Performing atorabove industry average helps the Airport market itself tothe airlines. As shown in Table 2-9. the Airport retains 75 percent of local passengers, and the population and economy of the Redmond MSA are expected to grow. These factors suggest that if RDM is successful in attracting additional air service in the future, the demand will exist to sustain the routes at industry -average load factors. xuummuX1ommoRA-1'AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 28 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwohom|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Figure 2-5: RDM Passengers, Seats, and Average Load Passengers and Seats 900,000 800,000 7OO^0OD 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 2008 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2016 2018 FAA Fiscal Year —Passengers —Seats —Average Load Factor Source: uSDol-1oo. Data presented included passengers, seats, and load factors for both inbound and outbound travel. SCHEDULED PASSENGER AIRLINE AVERAGE FARE AND AVERAGE YIELD Airfares play an important role in traveler airport selection. Airfares affect an airport's ability to retain passengers, and an airline's desire to increase service to a market. One-way airfares (excluding taxes and PFC) paid by travelers are used to measure the relative fare competitiveness between the Airport and competing airports. Table 2-15 shows the average airfares of RDM and competing airports for the top 2Sdestination from RDM. Multiple factors dictate the price of average airfares: availability of seats,etogekangth.numborofUk]htn. and airline competition. The average one-way airfare for the Airport was $197, which is $32higher than Portland ($165), and $19 higher than Eugene ($178). Part of Eugene's lower average airfare is due to the presence of Allegiant Airlines, which flies to Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Oakland, and Phoenix. Excluding Allegiant's impact in a few select markets at Eugene, the average one-way fare at RDM was lower than Eugene by $5. The Airport's fare was higher than Portland in every market compared in the analysis. The largest difference was to and from Denver, Chicago -O'Hare and Orlando at more than $70 one-way. When compared toEugene, the Airport had lower airfares insix markets, inu|udingGeett|e.Gon Francisco, Denvur, Anchorage, Honolulu, and Atlanta. xum..momommVALmxmXF MASTER PLAN 29 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovm»mxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2 — Aviation Activity Forecasts March 30, 2018 ornestio Average one-way fare RDM Rank Destination RDM PDX EUG Max A 1 Seattle, WA $123 $109 $127 $14 2 Los Angeles, CA $149 $109 $115 $40 3 1 San Francisco, CA $178 $126 $200 $52 4 Portland, OR $93 - $81 $12 5 Phoenix, AZ (PHX) $143 $141 $141 1 1 $2 6 Las Vegas, NV $141 $104 $89 $52 San Diego, CA $158 $122 $152 $36 Denver, CO $208 $128 $211 $80 9 Orange County, CA $143 $111 $133 $32 10 Chicago, IL (ORD) $257 $180 $250 $77 11 Dallas, TX (DFW) $226 $161 $212 $65 12 Anchorage, AK $206 $167 $212 $39 13 Salt Lake City, UT $195 $129 $176 $66 14 San Jose, CA $144 $118 $119 $26 15 Kahului, HI $272 $259 $270 $13 16 Boston, MA $262 $228 $239 $34 17 Minneapolis, MN $235 $202 $234 $33 18 Oakland, CA $148 $117 $63 $85 19 Sacramento, CA $168 $111 $161 $57 20 Ontario, CA $157 $129 $145 $28 21 Newark, NJ $310 $252 $271 $58 22 Honolulu, HI $289 $232 $305 $57 23 Orlando, FL (MCO) $274 $201 $259 $73 24 Spokane, WA $134 $106 $131 $28 25 Atlanta, general aviation $294 $253 $296 $41 Average domestic fare $197 $165 $178 $32 Note: YE 2Q 2016; Fares do not include taxes or PFC. Source: Dila Mi The average yield, which is measured as revenue per mile flown, is 18.2 cents for RDM. This is 26 percent higher than the national average of 14.5 cents. When comparing the Airport to others in the FAA Northwest Mountain region, the Airport was 31 percent higher than the average of 13.9 cents. Airlines are for -profit businesses and look to add service to markets that produce high yields. Average yields for the airlines that service the Airport are below: V Alaska Airlines: 19.2 cents, 44 percent higher than their U.S. average of 13.3 cents. v American Airlines: 17.3 cents, 11 percent higher than their U.S. average of 15.6 cents. " Delta Airlines: 18.1 cents, 9 percent higher than their U.S. average of 16.6 cents. '7 United Airlines: 17.9 cents, 19 percent higher than their U.S. average of 15.0 cents. REDMOND N,11.lNic.:11}AL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 30 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 SCHEDULED AIR CARGO RDK8 scheduled air cargo volume (expressed in tons) has been highly volatile over the past ten yeyrs, with a five percent average annual decline from 2006 to 2016. Operations by dedicated cargo aircraft have declined proportionally, showing a general decline of 4.7 percent per year since 2006. The U.S. domestic cargo market has experienced an average decline of 0.5 percent per year during the same period. The 2017 FAA Aerospace Forecast states that U.S. air cargo has been in decline due to economic uncertainty, high fuel prices, additional security screening requirements, and "a shift from air to other modes (especially truck) [ ... ]." Looking forward, the FAA projects that national cargo decline has bottomed out, and will grow slowly into the future. The 2017 Aerospace Forecast states that "the shift from air toground transportation has occurred." The FAA Aerospace Forecast indicates that air cargo is strongly linked to grow of gross regional and domestic product. As shown in Table 2-7, The MSA GRP has grown by an average of 2.1 percent over the past ten years. The mismatch between local GRP growth and air cargo decline is likely explained by the proximity of RDM to Oregon's cargo hub in Portland. While 75 percent of passengers avoid the three- hour drive to Portland, packages can easily be trucked over the Cascade Mountains. USDOT T-1 00 data shows that air cargo volumes at PDX have grown by an average of1.6 percent per year from 2011 to 2O1G.while RDMair cargo volumes fell byO.1 percent per year over the same period. Air cargo operations and volumes are shown inTable 2-iG. Redmond Total Cargo 2'O14 970.1 CAGR=Compound Annual Growth Rate. Sources: RoM:Airport M@»apemqnt§nu Database; U.S': FAA Aerospace Forecast 2017-2037_� U.S. Domestic Market Revenue Ton Miles (Millions) uo»woxwumoNmusLmxnpnuTi"TyuPLAN 31 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 2,3,2 GENERAL AVIATI General aviation describes flight activities that are not performed by passenger and cargo airlines, and the military. General aviation is broad in scope — activities include, but are not limited to, flight training, recreational flying, private and corporate air transportation, emergency response, and flight testing of new aircraft. This section describes general aviation businesses and activities at RDM. 0� U.AVIATION BUS8N]BBB]BB General aviation businesses include those that offer services to the flying public (e.g. fixed base operators), those that design and construct aircraft, and companies that use aircraft as part of their business (e.g. aerial photognophy, sightseeing, and employee transport). Key general aviation buainoaaan edRDK8are described below. ~/ ` There are two fixed base operators at RDM. These businesses sell 100 Low -Lead (LL) and Jet A fue|, and offer aircraft maintenanuo, de'iuing, aircraft detailing and u|oaning, an avionics shop, covered aircraft storage, and a pi|ot'o lounge. � There are two aircraft manufacturers based at RDM: Evolution and 8tratos. The Evolution facility specializes in final assembly and maintenance of single engine piston aircraft. Etnatos is in the process of building and certifying a very light jet. Evolution is a spin-off company of aircraft manutacturerLanuair. v/ There are corporate tenants, such as Les Schwab, that base their business jets at RDM. The aircraft are an integral part of business operations, allowing the companies to move employees around the country ./ ` Flight training occurs at RDM, but the flight school formerly located at the Airport moved to the Bend Airport in 2008. Features of the Airport, such as the airport traffic control tower and the instrument landing uystem, are attractive to student pilots preparing to become professional pilots. Students from nearby airports fly to RDK0 to practice from time to time. NT GENERAL AVIATION OPE 0 , Itinerant operations originate and terminate at different airports. Operators include business travelers to the community, student pilots performing cross country training OkJhts, and recreational pilots. Itinerant operations made up 39 percent of overall general aviation operations in 2016, and have been declining at an annual average rate of 6.8 percent since 2006. This decline is more pronounced at RDM than the national decline of two percent per year. Itinerant general aviation operations are shown in Table 2-17. va)NIo��NKA.RA1.AIRPORT NIASTERvuN 32 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2 — Aviation Activity Forecasts March 30, 2018 Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ROM Operations 22,170 0 Change 26,174 18.1% 20,221 -22.7% 16,014 -20.8% 14,767 -7.8% 3,610 14,709 13,414 12,372 11,551 10,985 CAGR -6.8% -7.8% -6.6% National Operations 18,707,000 18,575,000 17,493,000 15,571,000 14,864,000 14,528,000 14,522,000 % Change -0.7% -11.0% -4.5% -2.3% 0.0% -2.8% 14,117,000 -1.0% 13,979,000 -0.7% 13,887,000 0.1% -1.1% 13,903,000 -0.7% N/A -2.9% N/A "<miamwo,a040,40,04Wexa*ggar,akk* 9044,0,,,,ii&WW444,..lem**WOWAgi,046,..*.04,44W440,:' ' Wir*,0,240144400,4M*44.1,46ieg ' VA401,*410WvAKOMOMOWCW,04ateifaiki.KWitiKia.,, 50,000 45,000 40,000 1- 35,000 1. 30,000 25,00.0 1 20,000 1E3000 1' 50,000 45,000 40,000 0 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 CC 0 0 CC ,44444444444444,444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444,44444444444444444,444444444444444444444444444444444444444444,44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444.94444444444444 100000 10,000 5,000 54)00 NN (-) Year ovgaszoRDM Itinerant Operations 422=55*National Itinerant Operations CAGR = Compound Annual Growth Rate. Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecast REDMOND MUNiCIkALAERPORT MASTER PLAN 33 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 The decline initinerant operations isindicative cfanindustry that isadjusting tomodern realities, rather than one that is declining across the board. The 2017 FAA Aerospace Forecast shows that in 2016, aircraft with piston engines made up 72 percent of the national general aviation Oeot, and turbine oironoft made up the remaining 18 percent. Hours flown by piston aircraft have declined by an annual average of 1.4 percent since 2O1O. while hours flown by turbine (jet and turboprop) aircraft have grown by 1.9 percent per year. Similarly, the overall number of active piston aircraft has declined by an annual average of 17 percent while total turbine aircraft have grown by an annual average of 1.0 percent. The general aviation market isreadjusting hoone with amore even distribution ofpiston and turbine aircraft, albeit slowly. With the dominant piston market in dedine, ovonoU operations will continue to drop; however, there is a growing segment within the itinerant general aviation market. LOCAL GENE 0� L AVIATDONOPE 0 , Local general aviation operations originate and terminate at the Airport, and are generally performed by pilots (both student and licensed) that are practicing landings. Local operations are highly sensitive to the |ovo| offlight training atanAirport. Touch-and-go |ondingo, which iawhere the aircraft lands, slows, then accelerates and takes off without leaving the runway, count as two operations. An aircraft practicing touch and goes can perform upwards of six operations in an hour, depending on how busy the traffic pattern is. The flight school, located at RDK8 from 2OO7hu2000 increased |uco| aircraft operations by7O percent in the first year. Local general aviation operations at RDM and nationally are shown in Table 2-18. The largest decline in local general aviation operations was caused by the departure of the flight school in 2009. Despite the relocation of the school, the Airport still sees student pilots who come from flight schools in Prineville and Bend to practice touch -and -goes in controlled airspace, and to practice using the instrument landing system. The region isattractive for student pilots inthe Pacific Northwest because it has more sunshine than areas tothe west ufthe Cascades mountain range. Nationally, local general aviation operations declined after the recession and have remained essentially flat since 2010. A 2016 Current Market Outlook, produced by aircraft manufacturer Boeing, projects that North America will need 112,000 new pilots between 2016 and 2035. The 2017 FAA Aerospace Forecast projects that student pilots will grow steadily at 0.4 percent per year through 2037, and those entering flight training will primarily do so to earn a sport pilot license (for recreational purp0000), or an airline transport pilot (ATP) license (for professional purposes). FAA projections through 2037 have sport pilot license holders growing at4.1 percent per year and ATPlicense holders growing atU.5percent per year. REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT "TER PLAN 34 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2 — Aviation Activity Forecasts March 30, 2018 Year RDM Operations % Change National. -° hange .. _ � ..__ i � l° Change 2006 27,376 14,365,000 2007 I 48,990 79.0% 14,557,000 1.3% ° 2008 42,519 -13.2% 14,081,000 -3.3% 2009 25,261 _�----- __._-40.6% ._._-. 12,448,000 -11.6% .. 2010 22,416 -11.3% 11,716,000 -5.9% 2011 19,554 -12.8% 11,437,000 _ -2.4% 2012 18,565 -5.1% 11,608,000 1.5% 201 16,124 -13.1 % 11,688,000 0.7% 2014 17,213 6.8% 11,675,000 -0.1 2015 22,854 32.8% �� 11,691,000 0.1% 2016 16,829 -23.0% 11,776,000 0.7% CAGR j " 4.7 /° N/A -2.0% " N/A Ciu,0!20 .5,000 50,000 - 40,000 22,500 20,000 12,.500 10,000 1,500 00 5,000 00 a,000 mmEgamRDM Local General Aviation Operations National Local General Aviation Operations CAGR = Compound Annual Growth Rate. Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecast, FAA Aerospace Forecast REDMOND MUNJC I ALt PORT MASTER PLAN 35 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 2 — Aviation Activity Forecasts March 30, 2018 BASED AIRC FT TERMIN Single -Engine Piston (SEP): SEP have one piston - powered engine. These aircraft are generally smaller and are often used for flight training and recreational flying. SEP may be used for regional business trips. Depending on weight and operator certification, these aircraft generally require only one pilot. Multi -Engine Piston (MEP): MEP have two or more engines and are typically larger than SEP. Multiple engines make the aircraft more capable, and require additional flight instruction beyond what is needed to operate an SEP. MEP are primarily used for flight training and business aviation. MEP may require two pilots, but many variants can be operated with one. Jet: Jet aircraft are characterized for having a turbine engine instead of a piston engine. These aircraft may have turbojets, or a turboprop. Jet aircraft range in size from small four - passenger business jets to the largest airliners. They can generally fly faster and at higher altitudes than SEP and MEP, making them better suited for business travel and emergency response. It is less common, but not unheard of, to see a jet used for recreational flying and flight instruction. Some smaller civilian jets can operate with a single pilot; however, most civilian jet aircraft require two. OLOG1' lIelicopter: Helicopters are characterized by having a rotor mounted above the cabin for lift and propulsion. Helicopters are commonly used for flight training, by law enforcement and emergency response, and by aerial businesses such as pipeline inspection, forestry, and aerial agriculture. Helicopters can be piston or turbine powered, and depending on the complexity of the model, can be operated by one pilot Or two. Other: The categoly of -Other" includes experimental, sport, glider, and ultralight aircraft. These aircraft are used for recreational flying. Experimental aircraft refer to kit airplanes that are built by users, or third -parties besides the original manufacturer. Experimental aircraft share many characteristics with SEP — the key differentiator is how and where the aircraft is assembled. ▪ Sport aircraft are airplanes that have a specific weight and maximum speed in level flight. Sport aircraft require less training and a less strict medical certificate to pilot the aircraft. 17 Gliders are unpowered aircraft that are towed into flight, and use thermal uplift to sustain altitude. • Ultralight aircraft weigh less than 155 and do not require the pilot operating the aircraft to have a private pilot's license or medical certificate. Based aircraft are those that use a hangar and are stored at the Airport. Based aircraft do not include visiting, or itinerant aircraft. The FAA breaks down based aircraft into different categories based on an aircraft's propulsion system, engine configuration, and weight. As of 2016, there are 64 SEP aircraft at the Airport, making up 80 percent of the total based fleet. There are six jets, four MEP aircraft, and six helicopters. There were no "Other" aircraft are based at the Airport from 2006 to 2016. Table 2-19 shows based aircraft records from 2006 to 2026. The airport's counts for 2016 differ than TAF records for the same year. It is expected that the TAF will be updated with the most recent available information following FAA approval of the forecasts. REDMOND Mt,JN1Ct 1ALALRPORT MASTER PLAN 36 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 2 — Aviation Activity Forecasts March 30, 2018 Helicopter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 62 9 3 9 2015 63 9 3 9 2016 64 6 6 CAGR -3.6% -18.5% 7.2% 7.2% 140 120 Year Other Total 0 129-�_ RDM Based Aircraft vaxeriaNational General Aviation Fleet 0 Change 0.0% 13.2% 75 75 91 21.3% 83 -8.8% 83 1,2% 80 -4.8% -4.7% 50,000 2 ti,000 CAGR = Compound Annual Growth Rate. Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecast, FAA Aerospace Forecast -14.4% -5.6% -36,4% 0.0% 37 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 Based aircraft at RDM have been decreasing since 2006. Factors contributing to declining numbers include the 2009 Recession, rising oil prices, the departure of the flight school, competition from area general aviation airports, growing costs associated with earning a private pilot's license, and growing cost of aircraft ownership. The 2008-2009 recession saw the largest drop in based aircraft, and there was a brief recovery in 2013. RDM hangars are currently at capacity and the Airport has a waiting list for aircraft storage. Uncovered apron space is available, but not desirable due to winter snow and ice. The 2017 FAA Aerospace Forecast shows SEP and MEP aircraft have been retired and have not been replaced, with the combined fleet declining by 1.7 percent a year from 2010 to 2016. The national turbine fleet has grown by 1.3 percent per year, and the helicopter fleet has grown by one percent per year during this time. 2.3.3 MILITARY There one no based military aircraft at RDK8; however, military undo occasionally visit to train and refuel. These operations are typically itinerant; however, some military aircraft perform touch -and -goes while in the area. Military aircraft are generally serviced by the FBO, although they occasionally park on the USFS apron. Unlike other aspects of aviation, military activity is driven by the needs of the U.S. Department of Defense, and does not fluctuate in line with market forces. The Department of Defense does not provide projections of future activity or airport use; therefore, military activity is forecasted to grow or decline like other variables in the forecast. For planning purposos, military activity is considered to remain constant throughout the forecast period. Historic military operations are shown in Table 2-20. Fiscal Year � � 2008 2007 Local- Tota| 240 606 33G G42 303 615 134 3O7 _ 3OO 5�1 QS � 320_ 371 583 812 1.135 406 780 214 -� 455 � � �� 540 881 _ CAGR ` -0.7% �_ `8496 _ _ 3.896 wrnmmNnxamxxoxcmvPnnTMSzcnPLAN 38 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2-Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 The FAA TAFisthe official FAA forecast for airports, and isprepared annually byFAA Headquarters for each airport in the FAA National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems. ThoTAF uses the FAA fiscal year (October to September). TAF data comes from the USDOT T-1 00 database, airport traffic control tower records, and FAA Form SO1O.which airports submit annually tothe FAA. In Forecast Process for the 2016 TAF, the FAA states that passenger enplanement forecasts at airports like RDM are developed by looking at a 10 percent sample of passenger activity per quarter, and performing a "regression analysis using fares, regional demographics, and regional economic factors." Commercial operations are based on UGOOTT'10Odata for city -pairs (e.g. routes airlines serve from RDM). General aviation activity is based on time -series analysis of past trends. The FAA reviews forecasts prepared for the Master Plan by comparing them to the TAF. Forecaststhat are within 10 percent of the TAF over the five-year period, and 15 percent within the ten-year period can be approved by the Airports District offices. Forecasts outside of these tolerances go to FAA Headquarters for review. The TAF forecasts passenger enplanements, operations, and based aircraft. The TAF does not forecast operations byaircraft type, peak activity levels, critical aircraft, or air cargo. The TAF used for this forecast was published in January 2017. Table 2-21 summarizes the TAF for the Airport. Fiscal Year Enp|anmmments Operations _ Air Carrier Air Taxi Itinerant GA Itinerant Military Local Military Based Aircraft Single Engine Piston Jet Multi Engine Piston licopter 2021 ' � 2026 � �2O36 '| CAGF� -' �� � 394.570 434,335 � 47G,868 � 523,12S 2.896 � -- | - G� � 41 43'OD4 � 44�44 � 46.398 � O�7Y6 . -' 2� 10.139 11.691 � 12.835 14.080 � 5�96 4U �-- 3689 3333 �� 3530 758 -2�% ' '1 � ' �_. 85 1O8OT 1OA32 � 11OS7 � 11 182 O196 . . . . � � 41 � 341 � �341 � '� �341 � 341 O�96 --- 2A 1G.005 1G.167 � 18.332 � 1S.4A7 � 'O196 �-- � r- 4O 540 � 540 540 540 0�0Y6 86 86 109 124 139 2�Y� _ 851 75 88 103l 118 3.0% / � 0S � A� �g� ` Other 'i O mxer.-Light sport aircraft, gliders, experimental aircraft, ultraligms uemmOwDm,omux"m/x/vd)ouzMASTER PLAN 39 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 comvmxoo|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts While the TAF is generally reliable source of information, most recent data tends to lag a year behind airport records. FAA fiscal year 2016 data is marked with an asterisk, meaning that it has not been finalized yet. The 2016 TAF data does not match airport management records in certain areas, shown in Table 2-22. Given that Airport Management has the best available data, this information is used to model future scenarios and not the TAF. TAF discrepancies for the main categories (Enplanements, Operations, and Based Aircraft) are within the 1Opercent FAA tolerances. pAtegory Enp|anemmento Pmmratkone ��44,016 Air Carrier 7,302 Air Taxi i 8.810 Itinerant GA 11,426 Local GA Based Aircraft 8EP MEP Jet Helicopter 17'5QG 80 TAF � %O��mnma -- _ I_ ~._ 298,322 24,390 2.196 40162 . �863 _�]_ _ � 9.696 6127 2.175 � 42.4Y� _ � . G 470 _ _ 7.4% 10.985 44O � 4.O96 _ �__ 16,829 `�787 _ 4.696 86 -6 -7.0% 6 A -3 '33.3Y6 Military operations and "other" based aircraft match TAF records. Sources: Airport records, TAFissued January 2017. The TAF has exhibited a consistent underreporting of passenger enplanements when compared to Airport records. Airport records for passengers and commercial operations are presented and compared to the TAF in Appendix B, Attachment 4. xauaa\NnaaaSzy4vLaN 40 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 2^4 SCHEDULED SERVICE FORECASTS This section discusses the passenger enplanement forecasts, air cargo volume, and commercial operations. Each sub -section explains the methods used during analysis. Risk and uncertainty are addressed, and comparisons made with the FAA TAF. 7.4'1 PASSENGER ENPLANEMENT S Use of passenger enplanement forecasts determines the facility requirements for the passenger terminal building and airport parking and street access. The TAF classifies passenger enplanements as Air Carrier and Air Taxi, depending on the role of the airline transporting them. This distinction is more important for keeping records rather than planning facilities; therefore, passenger enplanements are presented in aggregate. The types of aircraft used to transport the passengers are presented in Section 7. The passenger demand forecasts employed trend analysis, single -variable regression, and multi -variable regression methods to project passenger enplanements. Regression models used variables that displayed a high level of correlation (greater than 0.8) with passenger enplanements over the past ten years: K88APopulation U.8.Gross Domestic Product (QDF).and &1SAGRP. The three variables were checked against passenger enplanements from 2006 to 2016 using regression analysis. The validity of each equation was measured using the R-squared technique, which describes how well the regression equation explains variability in the model. The closer the R-square value is to 1.00, the more confidence can be placed in the equation explaining the historical variability, and it not occurring by chance. Table 2-23 shows the results of the correlation and regression analyses. Variable �| Correlation Coefficien Regression umrm 0.75 U.S. �p 1 0.84 �� 0.71 � M8AGross Regional Prod uCt3 O—_ 0.69 Sources: 1)2»rtlapdState University, 2)�§,Bureau «MEconomic Analysis, 3)Woods & Poole _ The three variables were also arranged into multi -variable equations and run through a regression analysis. This time, the adjusted R-square statistic was used to assess the models as the adjusted R- square considers how many variables are being used. Unadjusted R-squared does not consider multiple variables and can produce misleading results. The results of the multi -variable regression analyses are shown in Table 2-24. xaumuNoaauNxu,*L^/nrnurMASTER PLAN 41 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmwoxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2 — Aviation Activity Forecasts March 30, 2018 Populationl, GRP3, GDP2 Populationl, GRP3 Population', GDP2 Variables GRP3, GDP2 1.75 ed R-Square 0.78 0.72 0.69 0.65 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 Year Enplanements MSA Population .S. GDP MSA GRP —2006 Baseline , ..Mmtv,v0VMMAVA GRP: MSA Gross Regional Product, GDP: U.S. Gross Domestic Product Sources: 1) Portland State University, 2) U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, 3) Woods & Poole Based on the results of the regression analyses, the equation accounting for population, GRP, and GDP was selected to prepare passenger enplanement forecasts. The equation is displayed below. Passenger Enplanement Regression Equation: y=mi(xi)+m2(x2)+m3(x3)+b y = Passenger Enplanements, b = Intercept from Regression Analysis (4.52 x MSA Population) + (94.49 x MSA Gross Regional Product) + (-46.58 x U.S. Gross Domestic Product) 730,835.51 REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASI ER PLAN 42 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 Forecasts exist for the three variables considered throughout the forecast period. The MSAPopulation forecast comes from Portland State University, and is used by the City of Redmond for their long-range planning. The MSA Gross Regional Product Forecast comes from Woods & Poole, and the U.S. Gross Domestic Product Forecast comes from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The forecasts for each variable are plugged into the regression equation to produce a passenger enp|anementforecast for the next 2Uyears. The regression -based method of forecasting incorporates a statistical analysis to give confidence that the variables chosen for forecasting have exhibited a degree of correlation with passenger enplanements in the past. The risk tothis method isthat future forecasts are ultimately based on one set of external projections. Forecasting, particularly over 20 years, will undoubtedly miss future events that will impact aviation activity at RDM. For this reason, the passenger enplanement regression equation goes through one more level ofprocessing toaccount for future uncertainty. ADDRESSING RISK AND ]UNCERTAINTY The forecasts developed in Section 5.1.2 rely on a fixed set of future variables. There is only one projected value for U.S. GDP in 2021 that is considered. The risk to this approach is that if the GDP is different than the forecast in the coming years, then the regression equation developed based on the old forecast is likely no longer useful. One way to mitigate for this uncertainty about the future value of variables that the passenger enplanement forecast is based on is to incorporate a range of uncertainty into the forecast for each variable. This is accomplished by reviewing the historical volatility of the three variables, and then assuming the future values may deviate from the forecast accordingly. As an example, the U.G. GDP in 2021 will be $21 trillion dollars based on the OECD forecasts. Historical volatility shows that U.S. GDP could sway by plus or minus $3 trillion dollars, which means that the actual value for 2O21 could be as low as $18 trillion (in an economic recession), or as high as $24 trillion (in a period of strong growth). Since the value of U.S. GDP is one of the drivers of the enplanement forecasts, it makes sense to account for this volatility in the future and not assume that the U.S. GDP is guaranteed to grow as it has exhibited contraction in the past. The method chosen to account for this volatility is known aoMonte Carlo simulation. Monte Carlo considers the range of future values for each ofthe three variables ineach forecast year using the process described above for GDP. Historical volatility is applied to the forecast value, which produces a range that the forecast value is likely to be within. Once this range has been established for each variable, thousands of trials are run for each of the forecast years. The three variables are permitted to independently and randomly fluctuate within the defined range for each trial. In some trials the variables all gnuvv, in some they all decline, and in some there's a mix between gnu*dh and decline. x�mm�/�v�cVs�AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 43 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 Monte Carlo partially mitigates subjectivity when it comes to setting up forecast scenarios. The range that the variables can fluctuate within must be defined, but after this range is established, the model will randomly pick the value of the variables. The Monte Carlo simulation can be run as many times as desired to reduce the impact of outliers (e.g. scenarios where all variables are at their maximums or minimums), and the results are interpreted using percentiles. Percentiles indicate what probability a value has of being higher or lower than the given value. For example, if the 50th percentile value for passenger anp|enementain2D21 is 400,000, then this means that, of the thousands of trials run for 2021, 50 percent of the results were below 400,000, and 50 percent were above. Another way of expressing this is that there's aSOpercent probability that 2O21 passenger enp|anementswill be4OO.00Oorbelow. PASSENGER AND TAF COMPARISON The passenger demand forecasts use the Monte Carlo simulation and the multi -variable regression model based on MSA population, MSA GRP, and U.S. GDP. The three variables are given a range based on historical volatility over the past ten years, which means they consider periods of economic recession and economic growth. The inclusion of local and national variables means that the model includes demand drivers, such as the population and economy driving the need for travel at RDM, and supply drivers, such as the national economy causing people to travel across the country and world. The Monte Carlo simulation was run 5,000 Un1as to reduce the effect of outliers. Multiple bia| runs produce a smoothing effect as the results coalesce around the mean. The law of diminishing returns applies in this situation, and the results differ less and less beyond 1,000 trials. An example of this effect is shown in Table 2-26. The average range of the Monte Carlo trial runs remains near 600,000 after 1,000 trials, and incremental growth slows asmore trials are performed. Using this example, it isexpected that fewer than 5.00Otrials could be run and similar results would be produced; however, running 5,000 trials does not skew the results. xanmm000N [CJMcAIFJ�uRT MASTER PLAN 44 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2-Aviation Activity Forecasts Average Standard Range � Deviation! 322000 81.898 495000. 34'558 � 3,000 S0��OO r-------- ' 5.000 600.000 i 6,000 . ii 802,000 14,248 12.638 11,366 11,012 8.718 ox 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20.000 10,000 m 100 /,000 1,500 2,500 3,000 5,000 muom The 5,000 trials are presented using percentiles, minimums, and maximums. A percentile can be any number greater than zero and less than 100; however, presentation becomes less useful if too many percentiles are used. The RDK8 Enp|onemantForecasts are presented for the minimum. 101h. 251», 60t». 75 th, q0th , and maximum percentiles. The results are plotted along with the 2017 TAF for purposes of uompahson, and shown in Figurm2-S. Figure 2-S:Passenger Enp|mnmnmentForecasts PoouengmrEnplanements | -0-°FAA TAFReonrds -0-25th QQth -410-MaetmrPlan Forecast Year ~4-10th -411�-75th ^1pNIClruAIRPORT "TER PLAN 45 N Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 As stated in Section 5.1.2, a key element in addressing risk and uncertainty in demand forecasting is acknowledging that the variable being forecast may decline. Traditional forecasting methods, such as trend analysis and time -series extrapolation, will not decline unless they are building on a model that has been in historical decline. Airport master plan forecasts tend to be more optimistic and project growth. The Monte Carlo analysis provides planners with a "decline" scenario, shown by the minimum, 1 01h, and 25 th percentile results. There are also high -growth scenarios, represented by the maximum, 75 th , and 90th percentile results. The TAF for RDM has a CAGR of 2.8 percent and projects 523,125 enplanements by 2036. This growth rate exceeds the TAF for Oregon, which has a 2.3 percent CAGR, and the 2017 FAA Aerospace Forecast, which has a 1.7 percent CAGR. The higher than average growth rate for RDM reflects strong growth that has occurred over the past ten years, and shows that FAA expects this growth to continue. The passenger enplanement forecast growth rates range between 0.9 percent for the minimum forecast to8.2percent for the maximum forecast. While Monte Carlo helps remove some elements of subjectivity from preparation of forecast scenarios, a decision must still be made on which percentile outputs to use for planning purposes. This decision is made by assembling relevant data that support picking one percentile over the others. TAF and FAA Aerospace Forecast growth rates are in line with the 2.9 percent CAGR of the 25m percentile forecast, while historical growth rates at RDM are between the 50th and 75 th percentile forecasts. Airlines have indicated that they will continue toadd seats tothe RDK8market. Calendar year 2O17 schedules from Alaska, American, Delta, and United show that larger aircraft will serve RDM, such as United's transition from the 50-seat CRJ-200 to the 76-seat Embraer 175. Flight frequencies and destinations are planned to increase in 2017, such as Delta's new Seattle service on the 50-seat CRJ- 200end65'oeatCRJ'700. The True Market assessment, described in Section 3.7, shows that RDM retains 75 percent of its true market due to the distance between it and other airports in Oregon. Leakage is primarily to PDX, at 24 percent, and primarily on routes where RDM has limited or non-existent direct air service. These include Los Angeles (28 percent leakage) where RDM has one daily flight, Las Vegas (26 percent leakage) where RDM has no daily flights, and San Diego (27 percent) where RDM has no daily flights. As air service develops and airlines add frequencies and new service, it is expected that market retention will improve. Socioeconomic indicators for the MSA suggest that population and industry (measured by GRP) are expected to grow; therefore, the demand for air travel will continue to increase as these variables have been highly correlated in the past. The Airport actively markets tothe airlines to attract additional air service, and has a track record of success with this marketing (new service on American Airlines to LAX and PHX and United adding larger aircraft and more frequencies to DEN and SFO). xEDmuNoMumICuRNLAInmORrMASTER PLAN 46 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix o Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Based on available information, historical performance, and known changes for the airlines operating at RDM, the 50th percentile forecast is preferred for long-range (5-20 years) passenger enplanement planning purposes. Due to recent passenger growth at the Airport, the short-range (1-5 year) forecast is expected to be between the 50tb and 75th percentiles. The 4.2 percent CAGR is lower than the Airport has historically seen over the past ten years, which hints towards market maturation, but is higher than the national Aerospace Forecast and TAF for the state, which are driven by mature markets. The preferred enp|anomont forecast is compared to the 2017 TAF in Table 2-26. � ~Near TAF � '�� 2Q8.32 476,868 434.335 F��m� � � 298,322 431.&78 496,750 595,800 623.125 680.750 2.5;%� � 37Y6 ��� � CAGR=Compound Average Growth Rate 1) 2016 value for 2017 TAF updated to reflect airport records. Difference 37,408 62.415 118]}32 1 �7,625' The passenger enplanement forecasts are reasonable and justified because they are based on variables (NGA population, K88AQRP. and U.S. GDP) that have exhibited e high degree of historical correlation with passenger enplanements. The population forecasts are the same as those used in local planning, meaning that stakeholders making municipal investment decisions at the cities in Deschutes County find them to be reasonable. While airlines are generally reluctant to share much of their long-range plans, what is known about future routes and fleet decisions support the growth in these forecasts. The use of Monte Carlo simulation in the forecasts allows for a sensitivity analysis of the forecasts should the MSA grow more quickly or less quickly than expected. The preferred passenger enplanement forecast is used to derive the scheduled commercial operations in Section 5.3 and the peak enplanement numbers in Section 7. 2.4.2AIR CARGO Air cargo volume has declined at a CAGR five percent since 2006, which is a steeper decline than the national CAGR of -0.5 percent over the same period. The FAA Aerospace Forecast suggeststhat the decline in air cargo volume can be attributed to changing security requirements, use of truck carriers, and the advent of digital substitutes to documents and media that used to be shipped. Air cargo will remain critical for certain items and particularly important for communities like those in the MSA that are separated from other urban areas by great distances. xnw.xvom��m�'*xm�NAAuannAN 47 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmvmxom|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 METHODS, FORECAST, AND PREFERRED METHOD Air cargo at RDM did not exhibit strong historical correlation with any of the variables considered. |nthe absence of correlated data, the analysis considers variables typically used to forecast cargo volume. The FAA Aerospace Forecast is based on a model that links air cargo to U.S. GDP; therefore, GDP growth is included. MSA GRP is considered as it better reflects the local economy. Regression analysis for both variables produces forecasts that continue the downward trend experienced since 2OOG.The FAA Aerospace Forecast suggests that "the shift from air toground transportation has occurred;" therefore, the decline due to substitution of other methods has likely bottomed out. The decline incargo volume atRD&lwas more pronounced from 2OOGto2O11 ataCAGRof'0.5percent than from 2O11to201G.when the CAQRwas 'O.1 percent. |tiaexpected that decline inair cargo otRDK8has also The three methods considered for air cargo forecast are a trend analysis using 2011 to 2016 data, a time- seriesana|yoisusingU.8.{;OPgrowth.andoUme+seheaano|ynisusingK88AGRPgrowth.Thono methods are presented in Exhibit 2-6. Figure 2-6: Air Cargo Forecasts !L � � ' « a ^ � � 400 200 0 2006 2021 2026 2031 —Historical -_--Trend Forecast —GDP Growth —GRPGrowW vcnINIONuNIommzVe'VLAnm,RTmASzERPLAN 48 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 The hand methodology has a CAGR ofO.3 percent and projects that air cargo volumes will remain flat, growing from 970 tons to 1,000 tons annually. The GRP growth methodology has a CAGR of 2.1 percent and projects that air cargo volumes will grow from 970 tons to 1,474 tons annually. The GDP growth methodology has aCAQRof 2.4percent and projects that air cargo volumes will grow from A7Otons to 1.552tons annually. As stated in Section 3.2, the economy of the MSA is changing and manufacturing is not as prevalent as it once was; however, there are several specialized manufacturers in town, including ROD. StratooAircraft. and PCC E8mctura|s. It is expected that these businesses, and those like them, will continue to rely on air cargo for part of their supply chain in addition to rail and truck transport. The growing professional services industry will further support air cargo; however, many items traditionally shipped by lawyers, accountants, and engineers can now betransmitted digitally. |tisexpected that the volume ofair cargo at RDK8 will remain Oat unless the area attracts new manufacturers that are more reliant onjuat'in'Ume supply chains, and industries that specialize in logistics and storage outside of those that use truck and The trend methodology is the preferred air cargo forecast. It is expected that cargo volumes have bottomed out and will remain stable at around 1,000 tons per year into the future. Air cargo operations are expected to remain consistent throughout the forecast period, and will primarily be performed by single- andbwin-enginapistonandturbo'pnupaircnoft. 2,4.3 C(AIMERCIAL *VEI�,ATI 0 Commercial operations are those performed by scheduled and charter passenger airlines and cargo aircraft. Operations by business jets that use the FBO and private hangars are not counted towards the commercial operations total, and are instead part of general aviation discussed in Section 6. Scheduled passenger and air cargo operations made up 97 percent of the 13,248 commercial operations in 2016, and the remaining three percent were performed by on -demand charter airlines and tankers working for the U.S. Forest Service. Scheduled operations are based on paooengorenp|anemont forecasts in Section 5.1 and cargo forecasts in Section 5.2. Tanker and on -demand operations are expected to remain attheir existing |ova|u and growth is expected to be Oat into the future. The U8F8 Redmond Air Center manager indicated that the level of operations will depend on the severity of the fire seeson, and airport landing nuoonda show that there were an average ofS5O operations per year from 2006to2016. x��xmmm�cux�*RPoRT MASTER PLAN 49 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 2-Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 Scheduled operations are organized based on TAF classifications. The two categories are air carrier, where the aircraft has 60 or more seats, and air taxi/commuter, where the aircraft has less than 60 seats. Forecasts are based onthe following assumptions: � Scheduled airlines will add service to meet the level of demand expected in the passenger enp|onementfoneuaata. �� ~ The SO'auat regional jets will be nuUnud by2O2G. in line with the FAA Aerospace Forecast projection that "Carriers remove 6Oseat regional jets vvhi|o adding 7O'AOseat jets, especially the E'2family after 2O2O." � , - As smaUerjots are replaced with larger aircraft, average seats per departure will grow. Airlines will adjust flight frequencies and routes to keep load factors at levels similar to what has been experienced inthe last five years, more than 8Opercent. The scheduled commercial operations forecasts are presented inSection 8.3.2. SUMMARY AND TAF COMPARISON Commercial operations are presented inthree tables. Tmble2-27 presents scheduled passenger operations only, and does not include air cargo, non-scheduled passenger, and air tanker operations. Table 2-28 presents total commercial openotiona, and the Table 2-29 compares commercial operations to thoTAF. I � 2006 107,223 2011 -| 231978 i56/ _ _� / - _-| �cc�- 2O1G 2Q8.322 � 6046 84Y6 2021 '��— 391.450 '1 iddbb�6DO Air Carrier Load Factor snnunomenm Ooerations Air Taxi /Commuter Load Factor ---Seats. oeam__�o»on�o� � 82 � 14.3G8 G�48 4,7 2031 575.350 12,400 86% 108 U 2036 661.600 12.600 1 84% 125 O CAGF1 � 4.2% � 3�896 � N/A �� N/A 1 '1OOY6 �����---� �` woTs-wvmuc�p`m�xnmumthis table will not match TAraathey contain scheduled passenger operations only, and not charter orm Total Scheduled operations 14.728 10,732 _ 11.742 50 `.12,000 N/A 12/N}O cargo. 1)cAoR from co1nmzouacAon=Compound Average Growth Rate Source: USDOT T-1 00 Database and Airport Records *anuONuM/NcuNt.MmPORT"TER PLAN 50 N/A 12,600 N/A 1 N/A0.7% Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2-Aviation Activity Forecasts 2006 2011 _ 2016 Scheduled pussonoo 209 ' 4'542 6,254 1O'OOO -Air Ca Non- Scheduled Passengi�r' 52 Tanker I Sub -Total Air Taxi /Commuter oc»«««w« | Air Cargo Sub -Total Passenger 887 14.455 3.313 17.768 5�X64 ' -- 6,697 40 500 1 10'540 626 514 422 11.GOO--.' 40 � SOO 12/K)U� � 4O '� SOO ---' ` -- r-- - 12.800 40 500 CAGR1 � | 3�96 � 3�396 � O�096 � � CAGR = Compound Average Growth Rate Source: —Historical data comes from airport records, included mAppendix oas Attachment 4. 6,283 ii 3.333 li 8,616 4.522 - 1.928 6.451 2.000�1 2`100 4,100 1.000 2.100 3.100 _O�2.100 O 2,100 0.4% OUR Wo 13'838 14'840 �- i--' 15,024 | . .6'240 1S.374 � 1S.O4O 1-- ..... - 17,838 � 15.240 � __ _ 2.2% 0.4% CAGR = Compound Average Growth Rate 1)CAGRfor umsm000s Difference As with passenger enplanements, the TAF underreports commercial operations. One reason for this is that the ATCTisclosed for the earliest and latest operations; therefore, they are not added tnFAA OPSNET. Airport records and T-1 00 data are a more accurate count of operations than the TAF. MASTER PLAN 51 18,655 1��� � 13.148 14,6.40 15,240 15,040, 15,240 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxoo|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 General aviation forecasts consider itinerant and local operaUono, and based aircraft. General aviation covers the aspects of terrestrial flight that are not commercial or military, such as recreational flying, business aviation, flight instruction, and emergency services. General aviation forecasts address itinerant and local aircraft operations, and the number ofbased aircraft atRDK8. 2.5.1. ITINERANT GENEMALAVIATI N ()Y'El�,A][I Itinerant operations are those that begin and end flights at different airports. Itinerant operations are conducted by a wide array of aircraft, from single engine pistons to large private jets. Trends in itinerant general aviation are described in Section 4.2.2. Itinerant general aviation operations have exhibited a strong historical correlation with national itinerant general aviation operations (0.97), national local general aviation operations (0.94), and the national single engine fleet (0.86). Strong positive correlation is likely the result of the decline that these indicators have experienced over the past ten years. RIDM and national itinerant general aviation operations have been in decline over the past ten years; however, much of the decline occurred immediately following the 2008-2009 recession. The average annual decline for RDyNwas '8.4percent from 2OO6to2D16and '3.4percent from 2O11to2O1G.That national decline slowed from '2.0percent from 2OOGtu2O1Gto'O.Qpercent from 2O11to2U1G.The 2O17 FAA Aerospace Forecast projects that national itinerant general aviation operations will grow at an average annual rate ofO.3percent over the next 2Uyears. Statistical analysis is only part of the considerations taken into account when establishing a forecast. Local demand drivers, such as those listed below, influence itinerant general aviation traffic at RDM. General aviation businesses, such as those described in Section 4.2.1, perform itinerant operations asthey move employees and products ontheir aircraft. Local aircraft manufacturers Stratos and Evolution Aircraft drive itinerant operations through testing and delivery of their aircraft. v/ RIDM is a destination market for outdoor recreation, such as golf, winter sports, and hiking. FBO staff indicate that some travelers fly general aviation when visitng the area. The FBO does not keep records ontheir passengers purposes for visiting the community. ~/ ` The Central Oregon Visitors Association reports that local ski resports have invested $800 million in development over past 10 years to compete with popular areas in other western states. FBO staff indicate that some winter visitors use GA to access the community; hovvever, they do not keep records ofwho orhow many. xa)NIoNnNAoNIruRkLmRPoRTmASzERPLAN 52 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix o Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Forecasts for itinerant general aviation operations use the following methods: applying the national growth rate from the 2017 Aerospace Forecast and a regression analysis using the top three correlated variables (national itinerant operations, national local operations, and national single engine fleet), using a market share analysis, ansd applying the FAA Aerospace Forecast growth rate. These forecasts are presented along side the 2O17TAFfor purposes ofcomparison inTable 2'3D. Year '� Regression �O16 � 11 .426 13'2OO 13,200 10,932 11.182 0.996 0796 ` 0.3% 0.1% 27,500 25.000 i 22.500 20,000 17.500 o 1�.00O 12,580 <10.O0O 7,500 � 5,000 2,500 �FAA2O17TAF —Regression Forecast —Aerospace Forecast —Market Share CAGR=Compound Annual Growth Rate. Source for Historical Data: FAA Terminal Area mz^nNoMASTER PLAN 53 Forecast Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2-Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 PREFERRED AND TAF COMPARISON There are two reasons that support itinerant operations retuning togrowth atRDM: restructuring ofthe general aviation aegmonts, and regional growth. Itinerant general aviation operations have experienced e period of restructuring following the 2008-2009 recession. As discussed in Section 4.2.2, the largest market within general aviation, single engine pistun, is in astete of decline. Smaller markets, including turbine, experimental, and light sport are growing. RDM has the longest runway length in the region, which is necessary to accommodate larger jet aircraft, particularly on hot days. The FBO provides the services and facilities needed bythese growing markets. Despite the decline in itinerant operations at RDM over the past ten years, itinerant operations are growing inthe Central Oregon region. Data from the TAFfor the other airports in the region (Bend (BDK). Sunriver (S21), Madras (S33), and Prineville (S39)), show that the region experienced a six percent annual average growth in itinerant general aviation operations over the past ten years. Itinerant operations declined at RDM, S21, and S39 were offset by growth at BDN and S33. Total itinerant operations within the region more than doubled over the last ten years, as shown in Table 2-31. Bend Fiscal ! U� | -' � 2006 27.026 Sunhvmr '!Sqi_> 10,089 2016 71,447 10.086 3.022 - 2021 | 2026 � 2031 102,526 11.057 3.363 2036 � .jRO8_1G`� i 3R1G-36 � K8admue Prineville � (G ' ~�)»~�^~/. � Total' 2,436 � 8.450 43.145 80,626 10.807 � 3.132 � 4,693 | 7'847 107'105 -------�--- ----/——!------- -'�-' - -- 90.918 10.932 � 3247 � 5.325 � 8.655 118.Q77 6 CA '034 i 0.314 11.182 3�81 � 6.839 � 10.133 ' 6196 '4]396 2 O.796 � 2.S96 118Q77 132,2894 147,250 NOTE: Sisters(6K5) is part for the Airport closure in Source: FAA TAF M of RDM's catchment area, but is not part of the TAF Operations numbers foreK5 are unknown. 2V1Onumbers for RoMare adjusted compensate m ay. Airport location and tenants are key drivers behind the regional growth. U.S. Census records for the City of Bend, where BDN is located, show that the population has grown by six percent from 2010 to 2015. The City is closer to the ski resorts than RDM is, and has facilities capable of serving piston and jet itinerant aircraft inall but the worst weather. The other key factor istenants - both BDNand S3Qhave flight schools and the other airports do not. Student pilots perform itinerant operations as part of their training, which is helping drive the overall operations numbers. xu`�omuauo�n�u��AIRPORT aMSzanPLAN 54 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmwoxvns|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2-Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 Forecasts shown BDN operations continuing to grow, and total airport operations (including local) could reach 230,000 in the next 20 years. BDN has one runway which means that it will be near capacity in 20 years, based on guidance in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay. As BDN approaches capacity, delays will increase, and the mix of quicker business jets and turbo props with slower fixed wing and helicopter flight training traffic will compound the congestion and delays. This can make BDN a less desirable for some users, and with RDM is 16 miles away, some traffic may choose to avoid the congestion. The forecast methods considered produce similar results. The range between the lowest and the highest fnnuuest in 2038 is 1.000. Key factors that influence selecting the higher forecast as preferred are described below. ^� ~ The MSA continues to grow, and development pressure in the City of Bend is pushing development in Deschutes County to other communities, such as RDM. As stated in Section 3.6, general aviation users tend to use facilities near their home or business when possible. The City of Redmond has more vacant industrial land with readily available infrastructure than other communities in the region. It is expected that there will be on increase in general aviation traffic from developers and prospective clients inspecting sites, and future tenants as this land ~/ - Aircraft manufacturer Gtratoscompleted the first flight ofits very light jet inNovember 2O1G.As the flight testing continues, additional traffic is expected. -/ ` The FBO is planning to add additional hangars to grow their business, and to be able to accommodate more aircraft. RDK8 is attractive during the winter because of the instrument landing system; however, more covered aircraft storage ianeeded. |fthe FBOcan develop more covered storage online, then itinerant operations will grow. The preferred itinerant operations forecast isthe one variable regression forecast, which isbased on RDM performing in line with national itinerant general aviation operations. These two variables have exhibited strong historical correlation, and local demand inducing factors, described above, are expected todrive future itinerant general aviation operations. As shown in Table 2-32.the pnuharnad itinerant general aviation operations forecast is within seven percent of the TAF in the five- and ten-year reporting periods. � TAF � | | / 2O81 1� 11'O67 -- -- - --'------- -- 2D3S 11.182 CAGR �- 01% 10,985 10,807 cAGn=Compound Average Growth Rate Source: TAF issued January 2017 1,793 2,068 2,443 2.818 un)NImNuMmw/onuAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 65 N/A Exhibit owOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 Local operations are those that remain in an airport's traffic pattern. These operations are generally by smaller aircraft such as single engine pistons, light sport, and experimental. Local operations are commonly performed by student pi|uts, recreational pi|ots, and pilots maintaining proficiency. Pilots flying in the traffic pattern generally land multiple times per hour, which causes high local operations numbers compared toitinerant operations. Local general aviation operations saw their peak in 2007 when there was a flight school at RDM. Operations declined substantially in the years that followed due to the recession, airline hiring freezes, and the relocation of the flight school to BDN. Historical factors that have influenced local general aviation operations are described inSection 4.D.3. Local general aviation forecasts employ market share analysis, growth rate analysis, and regression analysis methods. The market share analysis takes the percent of national local operations that have occurred at RDM over the past five years (0.16 percent), and forecasts that future local operations will maintain this ratio to national operations based on the 2017 FAA Aerospace Forecast projections. The growth rate analysis takes the variable that showed the highest degree of historical correlation (national local general aviation operations), and used the growth rates in the 2017 FAA Aerospace forecasts to project future activity. Despite the similar independent variables in the market share and growth note methods, the outcomes are different. The regression analysis began with a correlation assessment, which found that local general aviation operations exhibited strong correlation with national local general aviation operations (0.87). national itinerant general aviation operations (0.83), and the national single -engine fleet (0.79). Other indicators did not have a strong enough correlation to be considered for analysis. Local general aviation operations forecasts are shown inTable 2-33. AIR11oWr MASTER PLAN 56 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts 50.000 45,000 40,000 35,000 � 30,000 CL 25,000 0,000 0015,000 � 10,000 5,000 O / , � Historical 18,900 FAA 2Q17TAF —Regression —Aerospace CAQR=Compound Annual Growth Rate. Source: FAA 'Terminal Area Forecast PREFERRED AND TAF COMPARISON l8`332 16,497 -01% Market Share The TAF is forecasting a slight decline in local operations with a CAGR of -0.1 percent over the next 20 years. Given the historically higher levels of local operations activity and the demand for flight training over the next 20 years, it is unlikely that local general aviation operations will remain flat at RDM. The presence of flight schools in Prineville and Bend attract student pilots to the region, and the instrument landing system and airport traffic control tower at RDM are parts of the student's curriculum that are not found at other area airports. As noted in Section 6.2.1, the TAF for BDN suggests that the airport's single runway will near capacity over the next 20 years, which will displace some operations to other area airports. Regional local operations and expected growth at two percent per year, and are shown in Table 2'34. I(`z)Nx,NuxxoNxz/x/Auuv/uz»xapzsmPLAN 57 � � � Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmvmxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2-Aviation Activity Forecasts Fiscal Year 2.813 NOTE: Sisters (6K5) is part of RDM's catchment area, but is not part of the TAF. Operations numbers for 6K5 are unWnown. Source: FAA TAF. Regional local operations growth will be led by BDN and S33 at 2.4 percent per year, then S39 and S21. Aastated inthe FAA document Forecast Process for the 2016 T4F,QAoperations are assessed based on past trends. The TAF for RDM is likely so low because of the -3.3 percent average annual drop in local operations that the Airport has seen over the past ten years. Given that the regional market is projecting a two percent average annual growth and BDN is nearing capacity, it is expected that RDM local general aviation operations will grow faster than TAFprojections. The preferred local operations forecast is the one based on the 2017 FAA Aerospace Forecast growth rate. This methodology projects that RDM will see growth in line with national demand. As flight training increases across the country, RDM will see local operations grow in kind. One point for consideration when projecting future local general aviation operations is the location of regional flight schools. Schools have expressed interest in moving to RDM; however, the Airport does not have space to accommodate them. Should the Airport attract a flight school by developing e site for aircraft storage and c|easrooms, then growth could occur in line with the regression forecast. As shown in Table 2-35, the preferred local general aviation operations forecast is within ten percent of the TAF at the five-year reporting period, and within fifteen percent ofthe TAFatthe ten-year reporting period. � 2026 � 2031 16,332 2036 16.497 �CAGR ' � -0196 cAan=Compound Average Growth Rate Source: TAF issued January 2017 _16.82O 17�OO �� � 18,200 18,500 18,900 Difference_ _ O 0.0% REDMOND MUNICIPAL SD 10.0% 12.6% B6 - ------ 113 14.6Y6 N/A N/A mmuASzER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxrns|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 2.53 BASE1111111 AM 1� AFT Based aircraft are those that are stored at the Airport, either in hangars or tie -downs. Scheduled commercial aircraft that visit the Airport routinely and U.G. Forest Service aircraft that are temporarily stored at the Airport during fire season do not count as based. Based aircraft h/nouests are primarily used todefine aircraft parking and storage needs. Historical trends and the composition of the based aircraft fleet at RDM are discussed in Section 4.2.4. Three methods are used to project the size and composition of the based aircraft fleet. The first is growth ndo analysis based on the change by aircraft category (e.g. 8EP. MEP, and Jet) from 2011 to 2016. The second is a market share forecast that compares the number of based aircraft at RDM, by category, with the national fleet from 2011 to 2016. The third uses the growth rates for each category of aircraft inthe 2O17 FAA Aerospace Forecast to project future growth. PREFERRED AND TAF COMPARISON Based aircraft forecasts are done at the aircraft category level of detail — SEP growth rates are applied to SEP based aircraft, and jet growth rates are applied to jet aircraft. The 2017 FAA Aerospace Forecast shows that piston aircraft, the most common type at RDM, is expected to decline at -0.8 percent per year into the future. Growth markets include turbine, which are expected togrow at 1.9 percent per year, and helicopters, which are expected to grow at 1.6 percent per year, and Other, which are expected to grow at 1.2 percent per year. Each of the three forecast methods considers the impending change in general aviation fleet composiUon, and future projections expect that turbine, he|iuopter, and other aircraft will grow while piston aircraft decline. The Growth Rate forecast methodology projects 2.3 percent growth per year. In this methodology, MEP continue to decline, SEP remain stable, and other categories grow. The high growth markets of light sport and experimental aircraft, which were not based at RDM in 2016, are expected to arrive over the next 20 years as the types become more common and replace some of the retired SEP aircraft. The market share forecast expects that SEP will decline, jet will remain level, and MEP, helicopter, and Other categories will grow. The MEP projection is likely thrown off because RDM had as many as 14 based MEP over the past five years. Since the market share forecast is based on an average market share over the last five years, it may be projecting higher MEP than appropriate. The 2O17TAFfor based aircraft adRDK8isuncharacteristically high when compared tothe TAFfor local and itinerant general aviation operations. While the TAF expects that operations will largely remain flat, the number of aircraft is expected to grow by 2.4 percent per year. As stated in Section 2, the TAF based aircraft counts do not match airport management records. The TAF has 86 based aircraft at RDM in 2016 while airport management reports 80. Based aircraft forecasts are shown in Table 2-36. RYI)MOND MUINcmmmPWuRT MASTER PLAN 50 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Based Aircraft Growth Rate - - -- 80 140 120 100 80 OO 40 20 99 103 113 DG 2006 2011 2016 2021 79 79 139 2/N6 —Historical —FAA 2O17TAF—Growth Rate -- Market Share —Aerospace CAQR=Compound Annual Growth Rate. Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecas Based aircraft forecasts are ultimately determined by the amount of space available to park and store new planes. RDM hangars were full in 2016 and the Airport has a waiting list for new space. Although the Airport has held over14O based aircraft inthe past, many ofthese were parked outside and exposed to the elements. New aircraft have sensitive avionics and are more expensive than their older counterparts were. Aircraft owners prefer covered storage, particularly in climates like RDM where the summer sun and winter rain and snow can damage aircraft. xuYNIomoMoNIcuxxAIRPuRFMASTER PLAN 60 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmwoxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Airport management and tenants have expressed interest in expanding property for general aviation parking and storage. Location and scale of these improvements will be discussed in Chapter 4, Improvement Alternatives. Given that future aircraft storage will not always be constrained by lack of hangars, that the Airport is in a growing community, and that there are growth markets within general aviation the local growth rate forecast is preferred. A breakdown of the local growth rate forecast by aircraft type is shown in Table 2-37. OD96 8EP: Single Engine Piston MEP: Multi Engine Piston The preferred forecast projects strong growth in the number ofjets, helicopters, and Other aircraft. The jet category includes both jet and turbo -prop aircraft. The market assessment in Section 3.Gshows that RDK8 is the only airport in the region capable of handling large jets on o routine basis. It has the longest runway and only precision approach with a light land in the region, meaning that it offers year-round reliability. Table 2-3Gshows that the pnafonad forecast iawithin ten percent ofthe TAF in five years. and 15percent ofthe TAFwithin ten years. Year � �D17TAF ^ � �2O21 1 96 �— 109 124 86 Compound Average Source: TAF issued January 2017 Growth Rate z»�wwowo�/cu��»�nronrammzun"LxN 61 -A.2% -1O�96 _ -1D7Y6 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2-Aviation Activity Forecasts March 3O.2O18 2.6 PEAK FORECASTS AND CRITICAL AIRCRAFT 2.6.1 PEAK PERIOD FORECASTS Peak forecasts estimate when certain airport facilities will be at their busiest. Peak forecastsare used h/ assess level of service of airfield and terminal facilities and to right -size improvement projects. Improvement projects are not typically designed for the busiest hour of the busiest day of the year because such a design would lead to over -building. Instead, peak forecasts look atatypical busy period throughout the year. Forecasts use historical records to project future peaking; therefore, itioessential that peak forecasts be reevaluated if change in user oraircraft type occurs. Table 2-39 presents the peak forecasts. PeriodCategory.Factor._ 2016 � 2021_ 2026 Enplanementa Annual 100.096 298.322 394,500 496.750 and 3O�31 � 3Q6G7 �8/K�O � � � Oep|anonnenta PoekDay 3.8% 1.085 1.423 1.791 ur PeakHo_En-7�y� 1Q� 1Q - ----- -----� - - 4 �275 ---- - -- � � Peak Hour -Dep|.1 16.0% 163 175 252 Passengers Annual 100.096 596,644 789,000 903.500 �Aircraft Operations Peak Day38Y� 216Q 2.845 3�83 � � Peak Hour' __ _ ` Annua| Peak Month � PoakOay 1��896� 278 3B3 � 625 � � � _� 1OO96 4O.162 45.S4O 47.2�O 1O�096 � 4.���- ^ .Q82 5,168 � �� � � 2.148 2,456 32G � 38O � � 1.191,600 1.361.600 11Q,818�13G�QQ _ 4.287 4.910 i 7O3�� 940 47840 48,940 245 251 | Peak Hour 23� 24 - ---- --- ------ --- ---' ur asts adjusted to reflect average load factor, depicted in Table 2-26. Peak snplanmnems/ovpwoomvnw/Passengers: Month: FAA T'1ouDatabase. Day and Hour: Airline Schedules Peak Aircraft Operations: Peak Month and Day: FAA OPSNET, Peak Hour: ATCT Staff 2'6'2 CRITICAL AIRCRAFT The critical aircraft bthe most demanding type, nrgroup ofaircraft with similar characteristics, tooperate more than 500 times per year at an airport. Operations by aircraft type come from Traffic Flow Management System Counts (TFMSC), and the data shows that scheduled commercial and freight aircraft are the critical aircraft at RD&1. TFK88C only captures aircraft that file flight plans; therefone. flight training aircraft that operate more frequently than those listed below are not represented. Because flight training aircraft are smaller and slower than the critical aircraft shown, their absence from the TFMSC rankings has nobearing onthe critical aircraft selection. aumvx`Nu°uo,uzmuAmPnIUMAmzenPLAN 62 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts Critical aircraft are categorized by airport reference code (ARC), which is made up of the aircraft approach category (AAC) and airplane design group (ADG), as defined in Chapter I and inthe Terminology defined in Section 2.0 of this chapter. The critical aircraft will be used to design and scale improvement projects and setbacks in Chapter 3, Facility Requirements and Chapter 4, Improvement Alternatives. Table 2-40 identifies the critical aircraft. _ � Ranh | �1 / �3 � � � Passenger Airline � Cargo Airline Aircraft Bombardier Q400 Beech Aidinor83 Passenger Airline Cango/�dine L5 BombandierCRJ-70D Passenger Airline ReferenceTBD B'U| ---- C'U -- The existing critical aircraft is the Bombardier Q400, operated by Alaska Airlines. Alaska has announced that itwill supplement its fleet ufQ4OO aircraft with the Embraer176 regional jet (El 75) (reference code C-111), which operates in the same 76-seat configuration as the Q400. Alaska route planning staff and the airport station manager expect that the Q400 will remain in the fleet for at least the next decade and will continue to connect RDM to Alaska hubs in Seattle and Portland. The California market is expected to transition to the El 75 in the next five years, and if RDM sees new Alaska routes to California, they may beserved bythe E175. As shown in Table 2-26 in Section 5.3, the average seat capacity for air carrier aircraft at RDM is expected h/grow from 74seats in2D1Gto125seats in2O3G.The average will grow iflarger narrow -body aircraft, such as the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 lines, begin service at RDM. These aircraft are typically C-111 aircraft apart from the Boeing 737-900, which is a D-111. Exact composition of the future fleet is unknown. What is known is that new Boeing 737 Max and Airbus A320-NEO aircraft will eventually replace existing narrow -bodies. These new aircraft are designed to be more fuel efficient and technologically advanced than their existing countorpads, and have similar physical characteristics. In terms of regional jets, SkyWest (which flies for Alaska, American, Delta, and United) has placed an order for the Mitsubishi Regional Jet (reference code C-111), which can have up to 90 seats. The Bombardier C- Series and second generation of Embraer E-Jets (reference code C-111) are also in early stages of production. The future air carrier fleet mix will drive the critical aircraft for RDM in the future. Estimates are developed based on enplanement and commercial operations forecasts, aircraft seating capacity, and expected load factor. This estimate does not use aircraft classified as air taxi (less than 60 seats) as these aircraft are expected to be phased out by 2026. The future critical aircraft for Runway 5-23 will be the 737 and A319 (ARC ofC'|||). and the future critical aircraft for Runway 11'2Qwill bothe Q4OO (ARC ofB'|||). Tmb|e2-4i shows the projections for the future fleet mix. xunx'wuwonum�I,*onour"zanPLAN 63 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts CRJ-200 <70 __ ii KURJ490 90110 _� [-U 737��O ���� |�11U-13Ql [-U| � ` [-U A318(Nain|ine} 180150 [-U| 2026 1 '2031 [ '3036 - O 1,600 _! 2,0002,400 SOO | 2�0Q �1�0O -_ � _ 80O_1.000 � 3.000 500 �— 1.00O l 1,500 --, /-- l 200 400 300 Parameters: Based on airline order books and aircraft manufacturer production plans current as of April 2017. Operations growth.provides sufficient seats to meet.passenqer eripllaiLement forecasts at load factors >80%. 2.7 FORECAST SUMMARY The forecast summary ispresented inFiguno2-7andFigunu2-8.High|ightsnftheforecastarebelow. V/ RDM has experienced strong growth in scheduled airline service because of the migration to Central Oregon and growing tourism demand. ROK8 is the only commercial service airport in central Oregon and retains 75 percent of passengers in its catchment area. The Airport is equipped with an airport traffic control tower, an instrument landing system, two fixed base operators, and two runways that are both over 7,000 feet long. It is the best equipped airport in Central Oregon to handle commercial and business aviation. /~ ' Population is expected to grow at 1.8 percent annually. Median age will increase as retirees and job seekers move the community. Working age population is more likely to travel by air than other population segments. ,� ` The local economy is diversifying, adding jobs in healthcare, technical manufacturing and professional service industries. Tourism and hospitality will remain large employers. Passenger enplanement growth is expected to remain strong, driven by population growth and economic development in Deschutes County. Airlines achieve load factors near and above industry averages at RDK8, which helps the Airport market the airlines to attract additional routes and frequencies. ' Airlines will continue toincrease the average number ofseats per departure. This will hold commercial operations steady, which the total number ofseats offered increases. Air taxi aircraft (less than GOseats) will exit the market within 1Oyears. Air cargo will remain level at 1,000 tons a year. Trucks, security screening requirements, and electronic mail substitutes hamper the need for more air cargo. v/ Local and itinerant general aviation operations will remain Oat however, if nearby Bend Airport continues to approach capacity on its single runvvoy. RDK8 may see on increase in general aviation operations. REDMOND moNmzraxm/wpnuTwMnzanPLAN 64 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 2—Aviation Activity Forecasts March JO.2O18 ` Flight schools have expressed interest in locating at RDM aathey did in the post. |fthe Airport develops property to accommodate a flight school, general aviation activity will increase. * Single -engine and multi -engine piston aircraft will be retired faster than they are replaced. Jet, turbo -prop, helicopter, light sport, and experimental aircraft are growing segments. Growth in based aircraft is largely dependent on the Airport or a private developer preparing a site for new hangars. Existing hangars are at capacity. � The future ARCsfor Runways S'23 and 11'2Qwill remain the same. The critical aircraft for Runway 5-23 will be the Boeing 737 and Airbus A319 with ARCS of C-111. The critical aircraft for Runway 11'2Qwill bethe Bombardier C>4OOwith enARC ofB'|||. AIRPORT NAME: REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Airport Year Forecast TAF ARTAF PmseengmrEnp|mnmnmmnto Baooyr. 2018 298.322 298.322 0.0Y6 8aaoyr. +Sym. 2021 431.978 304.570 9.596 Baooyr. + 10yrs. 2028 490.750 434.335 14.496 Baooyr. + 15yns. 2031 595.800 476.888 24.9Y6 Commercial Operations Baooyr. 2010 11.487 11.487 0.096 Baaeyr. +5yo. 2021 14.640 13.838 5.896 Baaoyr. + 10yns. 2026 14.240 15.024 -5.2Y6 Beooyr. + 15yrs. 2031 15.040 18.374 '8.1Y6 Total Operations Baaoyr. 2016 40.162 Baoayr. +6ym. 2021 44.840 Baooyr. + 10ym. 2028 45.440 Beooyr. + 15ym. 2031 47.040 40,162 41,531 43,004 44,644 NOTES: TAF data is on m U.S. Government fiscal year basis (October through September). ouDNIoNnMomICumL AIRPORT NImzERrLAN 65 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan March 30, 2018 Chapter 2 — Aviation Activity Forecasts to' a) 0 ...$g D 6 0z 0 61 co cin a) 0.) I- t 1 0) 3 0 (0o 0) 2 Ea0). . 'R-';j•. 6oa -3: Z 0 2 2 o < (0 0 Ea wSiE c. vEE r.°6.' a 1.15 u-1 ..,,- _, - -. '-`5 8 i -- -t; ''. -,---,i ,'...2 ,f, g ,__, . 30 0 — E a = a, ,_ z 0 C N I `2. . , < . a, = a CD _ 0° H. 9 -g 8-' 83 07-) H = o.. 0 s. o.. c.) m a a 0 + k ARWENNMAVAWM moomfam 0", 'W., "WOO -"MmoRY CO COO m."0.4''''Wqmw*MPar6RW'raP'wm*Wigm'A'aWISMUMM'' . — LL F3 Base Yr. + 15 Base Yr. + 10 Base Yr. + 5 m Base Yr. Level 03 4 — 4 NONifs) 4 ifs) ) 1°- ci co; ci ci co; " ‹.9 N 0 gge..g g '30 F0 Ea N 03 sa, oi +-; ca; co; ci oci ci Erl 4 0 N 00))-g cri ci ci dUOdN 4 -N N Er c'lv-0 ls al N El El El z7, oo co ci r7; cri ca ci v- NO3 0 0 0 0 0 0 el- el- 00 030) 03 N CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0030 0300300 0003 N +- co co o co' 1,-NOOel-0 00 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v- 0 0 0 0 et 0) et 0 0 0 0 el- 0 el- 0 0 0 003 01 N 0 00 0 et 0 et 0 0003 o r-- co m 00 N 0 0 el- el- 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N et N N 03 t^) 00 N N 00 N 10 r-- NO cr) coo N N Base Yr. + 15 Base Yr. + 10 caracacarD cacao v-r-)c):, N cr) 0 N (') 0 0300300 0003 03NO GO 00 0 ,- 0 0 0 0003 h. 0 co r-: .-- -o- -a- + E. PI 0 M ei 00000 000 c--+--o co -a- N co co co LT_ -a-co+t-oo oo-cr N N 0 CO CO Cr) r-.. 0 v- 0 CO 0 (") SO 0 r-- ,--- g + ,-- -,1- a $ 0 8 ai st Nt co co o o rc::, Et' rai o''.0' 4- RI !:,i.' c.M4 1::'; Ki R.' m CO 7>-; v-ovi-mm 000,- 0, a) 6 d o -1 -4- cos m N < 0 v- Z 0 0 00 0 a) 0 o e. a 8 z r- co zg 03 zok" •c;;-`-' Et' 0 CO CO CO `9 003 L.? 0 0 CO CO 0115 per based aircraft +- cm EE oa co Ea) E. g g Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 3.0 FACILITY 0 �0 -� Ul a This Facility Requirements Chapter considers the availability and capability of facilities at the Redmond Municipal Airport (RDM or the Airport) to accommodate existing and projected aviation demand over the next 2Oyears. 3,1 INT 6 UCTI N7r FACILITY 0 �0 � This chapter compares current and forecasted activity levels (presented in Chapter 2 Aviation Forecasts) to the Airport's operational capacity, design requirements, and facility needs. Options for meeting the identified facility needs will be analyzed in Chapter Alternatives Analysis. Facility requirements are presented in the following organizational structure: v Airside Facility Requirements Airfield Capacity Airfield Design Runway System Taxiway System General Aviation Facilities .� ` Landoide Facility Requirements Passenger Terminal Roadway Passenger Terminal Parking Area Rental Car Facilities Non -aviation Revenue Development .� ` Terminal Area Facilities Airport Activity Passenger Terminal Building Gate Capacity Requirements Terminal Building Development Conclusions and Recommendations .� ` Support Facilities Fixed Base Operators United States Forest Service AivsideFod]dies: Facilities that are accessible maircraft, such mrunways and taxiways. Loudsi6e Facilities: Facilities that support airskb8oUihcs. but are not part nfthe aircraft movement area, such xs tc,utimd buildings, hangars, aprons, access roads, and parking facilities. Support Facilities: Facilities that can hueither aiskbv, |xodsbdokoiUties that aid iuthe operation of the airport. x�momoM1.Jmm1R'Vz^1RP01U MASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix1C Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 Cargo Facilities Airport Support and Maintenance Facilities Conclusions and Recommendations xEDNIONoNJUNImmAIxPOWT MASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance uuuo-017 Comprehensive Plan Avvvmui)?JC' Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements 3.2 AIRSIDE FACILITY REQUIREMENTS Anearly step inreviewing anairport's long-term needs istu assess capacity and delay issues because these concerns will influence the direction of airfield planning. An airport's annual capacity, known aathe Annual Service Volume (48\).isthe number offlight operations onairfield can accommodate during ayear. Existing and forecast annual demand iacompared with the ASV todetermine the percentage capacity atwhich the airport isoperating and to gauge the timing offuture airfield capacity improvements. Aa annual demand approaches ASV, average delays increase. Atypical goal istoconstruct anew runway prior totime delays averaging 10to 15 minutes per operation, and this requires the completion of planning, environmonta|, and design work before delays reach this threshold. 3.2'1 AIRFIELD CAPACITY Airfield Capacity - The maximum number of aircraft operations that xspecific airfield configuration can accommodate within uspecific time interval ofcontinuous demand. /tunuu|Service Vo|unme (Asv): Used bvthe FAA mauindicator n[ relative operating capacity, ASYism` estimate ofart airport's annual capacity that accounts for differences ixrunway use, aircraft mix, weather conditions, etc. encountered over u year's time. ASV assumes oo acceptable level o[aircraft delay us described ixFAA Advisory Circular (AC) i50/506V'5.Airport Capacity and Delay. The Airport's ASV and hourly capacity are calculated using the methodology the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) documented in AC 150/5060-5 Airport Capacity and Delay. Calculation in this method requires the mix index and runway -use configuration. The mix index is an equation (C+3D) that determines the percentage of aircraft operations that have a Maximum Takeoff Weight (MTOW) over 12,500 pounds. C represents the percent of aircraft over 12,500 but under 300,000 pounds. D represents the percent of aircraft over3OO.00O pounds. Fina||y, the runway -use configuration for RDK8 is number for crossing runvvayo, shown in Figure 3-1. Table 3-1 shows the mix index for RDM. General Aviation Operations (>12.5hlbs.)°°° ' Total RDM 2016 Operations C Mix Index Source: xo/xumonu-5 *Includes air carrierlair taxilcon7muterlair mnkerlair cargo for aircraft over /2,mmpounds —Operations = Landings xc ~~`s«opvincludes Flight Aware data for aircraft over /2,000pounds. REDMOND m/ovxupa-AIRPORT "TER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmnohom|ve Plan AppendOC Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 Figure 3-1 RUNWAY CONFIGURATION — CAPACITY AND DELAY AC 150/5060-5 9 . Oto 20 -21 to 50 51 to 80 81 to 120 121 to 180 98 59 230,000 77 57 200,000 77 56 21.5,000 7,6 59 225,000 72 60 265, 000 „.„ Runway Use Configuration #9 Source: AC 150/5060-5 Capacity (Operations/Hour) Hourly capacity is split into visual flight rules (VFR) and instrument flight rules (IFR) capacity. Table 3-2 above shows the hourly capacity and ASV for RDM. AIRFIELD CAPACITY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Airport is currently operating at 20 percent of its annual capacity, 27 percent of its VFR hourly capacity, and 36 percent of its IFR hourly capacity. As shown in Chapter 2 Aviation Activity Forecasts, the Airport is forecasted to handle 47,740 annual operations by 2036. The associated increases will not significantly change the capacity percentages. required for airport capacity and delay purposes. Annual Service Volume (Operations/Year) Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) Operations: Aircraft operations conducted by pilots with reference to instruments in the flight deck, with navigation accomplished by reference to electronic signals. Visual Flight Rules (VFR) Operations: Operations conducted by pilots with only visual reference to the ground, obstructions, and other aircraft. No major airfield changes will be REDMOND MA INICIPAE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendbk - Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 FIELD WESIGN The FAA's design standards, presented in a series of ACs, heavily influence design and construction of airside facilities. The primary AC that addresses airfield design is AC 150/5300-13A, Change 1, Airport Design (AC-1 3A). This section covers the specific design standards that apply to RDM. Additional information related todesign standards can befound inChapter i Introduction. DESIGN STANDARDS CONCEPTS AND TERMINOLOGY The FAA is responsible for the overall safety of civil aviation in the United States; therefore, FAA design standards are primarily driven by safety, with secondary goals including efficiency and utility also reflected in FAA standards and policy. Changes to improve safety and efficiency are constantly evolving as the aviation industry continues to develop, and the expectation is that design standards will continue to evolve alongside technologies and procedures. CRITICAL AIRC 10 A FT The initial step in airsk10 facility planning is to identify the critical aircraft. According to FAA OnderSO0D3C. Field Formulation oythe National Plan o/Integrated Airport Systems /KPI431.paragraph 3'4.the critical aircraft iathe most demanding aircraft that operates at the airport more than 5OOtimes per year oranaircraft used for scheduled passenger service. The characteristics used infacility planning include approach speed, wingspan, tail height, main gear width, cockpit to main gear length, aircraft weight, and takeoff and landing distances. CridmoJAircruW This isxuaircraft with chmxctcdobcs that determine the application vfairport design standards for uspecific runway, taxiway, uxilmm.apron, o/other NcUb}. This can hcuspecific aircraft model v,ucomposite vfseveral aircraft cuocmh,using, expected muse, o, intended muse the airport o,part vfthe airport, This ioalso called the "design aircraft" or "critical design aircraft." The existing critical aircraft are based on historical operations records and current airline schedules. The future critical aircraft is determined based on projections from Chapter 2 Aviation Activity Forecasts. CURRENT CRITICAL AIRCRAFT The most demanding aircraft currently using the airport isthe Bombardier Q4OOand Bombardier CRJ- 900. Together, these two aircraft are the critical aircraft for Runway 5-23. The Q400 is also the critical aircraft for Runway 11'29. FORECAST CRITICAL AIRCRAFT At RD&1, critical air carrier aircraft are expected to follow the general trend in airline operations nationwide, leading toalikely shift inaircraft types over the next 2Oyears. Routes into and out ofRD&1 will likely shift toward increased aircraft size and reduced frequency. For RDM, this means the potential fora transition to narrow body aircraft. As addressed in the Chapter 2 Aviation Activity Fonacaets, future critical air carrier aircraft are expected to be a combination of narrow -body jet and turboprop aircraft as shown in Table 3-3 below. xn�o���omcu�*RPuRT MASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan AppencliAIC Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements 'Typi:m|Airoraf ������ CRJ-��OD B737-7U0 ` A319 (Mainline A319(Low Cnat.8737- |15D-17DC-U| 800 ] i | 2,OUD� �1.80D ~ 600 1.000 3.600 500 T1,OOO ��1�UU � B737'000 >170 C-U| 40 200 400 Parameters: Based onairline order books and aircraft manufacturer production plans current axmApril co/r Operations growth provides sufficient seats to meet passenger enplanement forecasts at load factors >80%. AIRPORT REFERENCE CODE The FAA AC'13Auses acoding system todetermine design standards for onairport. The coding system isshorthand for the physical and operational characteristics ofthe most demanding aircraft that routinely use the airport. EXISTING ARC The existing ARC is designated as C-111 (E175). FUTURE ARC 300 Airport Reference CudekARQ: &" airport designation that signifies the airport's highest Runway Design Code (lD[).minus the third (visibility) component nfthe KD[.The ARC isused for planning and design only and does not limit the aircraft that may hcable m operate safely oxthe airport. Aircraft iu parenthesis are representative ofthe ARC category. / A change in fleet mix associated with the airlines will occur and the A319 will future ARC will remain C-111. RUNWAY DESIGN CODENXD0 The RDCisathree-component code that defines the design standards applicable toospecific runway. A|otter, ArE. depicts the first component and stands for the Aircraft Approach Category (\AC).The AACrelates tothe approach speed ofthe critical aircraft. ARomon numeral, |'V|, depicts the second component, which isthe Airplane Design Group (ADQ). TheADQ relates tothe greatest wingspan or tail height of the critical aircraft. The third component relates to runway approach visibility minimums expressed in Runway Visual Range (RVR) equipment measurements. Table 3-4 summarizes the RDC classifications. The critical aircraft and RDC determine the scale and setbacks of airfield facilities. dictate the future ARC. The RuuwuyViouu| Ruuge(RVR): The range vxthe centerline nfxnmvxy over which the pilot of anaircraft can see the runway surface markings n,lights delineating the ,mu,ay. oynncd in hundreds offeet. For example, 24VVBvD isequal mone-half mile. as xuNI.,mN4owvzmL*PWoRTxUnoERPLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxons|ve Plan Appendik Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements Future - Existing Future No Change C No Change TAXIWAY DESIGN GROUP (TDK) Approach Visibility Minimums 7/8 mile C2.400l No Change No Change �Design Aircraft� ' The TDG criteria are a new design standard incorporated into AC-1 3A. The previous RDM Airport Layout Plan (ALP) and Master Plan did not address this standard. The TDG takes into account the dimensions of the aircraft landing gear to determine taxiway widths and pavement fillets to be provided at taxiway intersections. Fillet pavement accommodates the inner wheel of the airplane as it turns. There are seven (1-7) TDG classifications distinguished by width of the main gear and wheel base (the distance from nose gear to main gear). TDG classifications are presented in Figure 3-2. Figure 3-2TAXIWAY DESIGN GROUPS /m /m n onn _ 40 m o " m 20 n/ MAIN GEAR WIDTH (FEET) m n' Source: Figure sefrom ACen0-1anChongez EXISTING TDG 40 w w e � x ' ~ The BombendksrQ4OO is the existing critical aircraft for all taxiways serving the runways. Due to its vvk]e main landing gear, it is a TDG-5 aircraft. No other aircraft now operating at the Airport is above TDG-3. ^umuu�oauo�xn��xuox�nzmamzenrLAv Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxons|ve Plan Appendix7C Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 FUTURE TDG The aviation activity forecasts indicate the Airbus A319 will become the future critical aircraft ifthe Q4OO is no longer inthe fleet. These future aircraft have a narrower main landing gear width, and are both in TDG-3. As of 2017, Alaska has announced it will supplement its fleet of Q400 aircraft with the Embraer 175 regional jet (El 75), which operates in the same 76-seat configuration as the Q400. Alaska route planning staff and the airport station manager expect that the Q400 will remain in the fleet for at least the next decade. Alaska Airlines will likely still operate a limited number of Q400s for short haul routes (e.g. RDM-Portland International Airport [PDX]) beyond the next decade. Exactly when the Q400 will be retired from Alaska's fleet is unknown. There is currently a taxiway construction project for fiscal year 2018 to change the connector taxiways of Runway 11/29 to TDG 4. TDG 4 has the minimum fillet dimensions that will allow the Q400 to taxiat RDK8.This allows the C>4OOtocontinue operating atROyNuntil it retires from service and allows the future critical aircraft (A310) todictate the future TDQ. Thenufone, it is recommended that TDG'3 be used for planning, and that standards for TDG-3 should be applied to both runways and all taxiways serving the runways once the C>4OUnolonger operates atRD&1. WIND COVE GE The primary factor influencing runway orientation is wind. The preferred design for runways is to align them so that airplanes take -off and land into a headwind. This minimizes the challenges associated with onusmwinds, and provides for more efficient aircraft performance. Small, light aircraft are more affected by crosswinds than larger, heavier ones. FAA runway design criteria state that runway orientation must satisfy 95 percent wind coverage based on annual wind conditions. A crosswind runway may be justified to satisfy the 95 percent wind coverage requirement for the combined runways. Observations for wind coverage are categorized into all weather, instrument meteorological conditions (|K8C), and visual meteorological conditions (VMC). Depending upon the RDC, runways must meet the allowable crosswind component of1O.5.13.1G.or2Oknots. Runways 5'23and 11-2Qhave RDCoofC'||| and B-111 respectively, and both must meet an allowable crosswind component of 16 knots. x���o�nmmzm'mmuRT i"zERnaN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendik Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements Y0�i Knots 1��Knots 16N�/oto 20Knota | | ` | . ( (12NLPJH) (45K8.P.Hj (18.5NlP.HL) (28 M.P.H.) ! Number of Observations 86,755 7 10�Knots 13 Knots 16Nnotm 20Knots i ! '—~^~~' ]M.P.H.)| (12 K&Pf)_ M5 K8.p.Hj ' M$J5 K8JPJHj , (�� . + / | 11-28 . A818Y6 . Q81296 0A7796 00�QSY6 | / ' | | < ') � / / 5-23 )04�796 ) Q8�04Y6� Q0�3896 ` | � 99.91Y6 | | Combined . 99.32%' 99.83% 8937% 100.00% | Oahn Wind Percentage (0-3knots) ` Number of Observations 7,457 � � / 10.5Nnmt� | 1��noto | 1�Kn�tm � �O�n�tm | Knots ' --�� ' Knots �� Knots | Runway \ _ | ` | M2K8JP}H { (15yN.pf1j � (18�yN.P.H] � (28 M.pJH] | | 11-20 94.5596 ' 06.0996 88.00% ' 99.78% | | 5-23 89.1796' �94]896 i 0878% \ Q0.8796 | | / | — — Combined | 97.49% � 99.35% 98.88% . 99.99% | / Calm Wind Percentage (O-8knots) � 38.3096 1 ' ^ | Number ofObservations | 79.413 | Table 3-5 shows annual average wind coverage for each runway direction during three weather conditions: all weather, VMC, and IMC. When calculated individually, neither runway alignment provides 95 percent coverage for operations during 10.5 knots under the three weather conditions. The alignment of Runway 11 -29 does not provide the required coverage during 13-knot all weather conditions and Runway 5-23's alignment does not provide the required coverage during 13-knot VIVIC weather conditions. However, the combined alignment of the two runways provides over 97 percent coverage during each weather condition, justifying the need for continued FAA investment in secondary Runway 11'29to maintain the required wind coverage. According to current FAA design standards, the historical wind data reported above does not justify a B-111 RDC onthe crosswind runway (11'20), however, the Airport has the intention ofmaintaining the B-||| designation throughout the planning period covered under this Master Plan. 'm;»xIOmownmxzmL»nmponTNWTaoPLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 oumwnxvns|ve Plan Appendik Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 OTHER DESIGN CONSIDE 0 1 v/ Airspace (approach and departure protection, 1enain, and obstructions): Instrument flight procedure minimum descent altitudes, glide paths, and climb gradients are determined by obstacle clearances. Obstacle clearance surfaces extend along the extended runway centerline. Runways are typically aligned toavoid terrain and tall structures that existed atthe time of design; however, tall objects and terrain can impose restrictions on aircraft operations if they inhibit the ability for aircraft to safely arrive and depart. |dea||y, airports work with nearby communities to adopt land use planning techniques tuminimize incompatible development. ~/ ` Independent versus dependent operoUnq streams: Runways that intersect or that have intersecting approach and departure corridors are dependent on each other. During high levels of activity, these dependencies cause delay. As delays increase, establishment of an independent operating stream may be necessary. This can be accomplished by providing a new parallel runway with sufficient lateral separation from existing runways. Airplane wake turbulence and instrument landing capabilities are considerations when determining the amount of space needed between parallel runways. v/ ATCT Line ofSiqht: Air traffic controllers require an uninterrupted line of sight between the air traffic control tower (ATCT) and approach and departure corridors, runways, taxiways, and aprons. Protection of controller line of sight is considered in airport development. NAVAID critical areas: Electronic equipment used for navigation, communication, security,and surveillance are commonly found throughout airport property. In order to function properly, most of these items require clear and graded areas, setbacks from certain objects and construction metoria|o, and a clear corridor between transmitters and receivers. Development and most activities are restricted inthese areas. ~/ Visual aids to navigation: Certain visual aids, including the airport beacon, runway approach lighting, and runway glide path indicator lights require unobstructed line of sight from aircraft in flight. This line of sight is considered in the planning and design of airport facilities. 3.2.3 M]��� ��'������� RUNWAY DESIGN STANDARDS FAA AC-1 3A stipulates the design criteria, surfaces, and dimensions for each runway.Dimensions for the design surfaces are based upon the critical aircraft and reference code plus the type of approach instrumentation available. A brief explanation of each design surface is presented below. All runway design surfaces and instrument landing system critical areas are illustrated on Figure 3-3. Summary matrices (Tables 3-7and 3-8)ore included following the explanations. RF�OND moNIcRkL*mnmi"zERPLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan AppendilQ Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements RUNWAY SAFETY AREA (RSA) The RSA provides agraded, clear area for aircraft incase of arunway excursion, and provides greater accessibility for firefighting and rescue equipment during such incidents. The RSA must beclear ofall objects and capable ofsupporting aircraft, maintenance vehicles, and rescue vehicles. The FAA does not grant modifications to RSA standards, meaning that non-standard R8Aamust becorrected assoon aspossible. R8As are illustrated with a red line in Figure 3-3. Runway Safety Ai -ea (RHA): Arectangular area surrounding arunway suitable for reducing the risk of damage maircraft bnthe event o[uuundershoot, overshoot, v,excursion from the mm'u?. Object Free Arou (OFA}: Arectangular area centered uuo n`m,uv,uvi"uy.vrud\u"ccenterline provided menhance the safety vf aircraft operations hyremaining clear ol objects. The RSA for each runway meets FAA design standards for the existing configuration. Impacts to the RSA from a potential runway extension will be explored in the Chapter 4 Alternatives Analysis. The Airport is required to continue to maintain a clear and graded area for each RSA lateral to, and beyond the runway end. Response to inspections by the FAA Runway Safety Action Team, who conducts inspections on a regular basis, will help maintain required grading. Runvvay5'23 has published dou|anud distances of 7.031 feet for the accelerate stop distance available (4GDA) and landing distance available (LOA). Declared distances that do not equal the full length of a runway mean the RSA has a penetration. The object identified as penetrating the RSA was the |oua|izaron Runway End S. Survey data collected for this master plan shows no objects penetrating any design surfaces of Runway 5-23. The latitude and longitude for the localizer and Runway End 5 were used in the inverse computation provided by the National Geodetic Survey website to determine the distance between the survey points. The distance between both points was greater than 1,000 feet, meaning the localizer did not penetrate the RSA. It is recommended that the declared distances change to the full length of Runway 5-23, 7,038 feet, due to the RSA being clear ofobjects. RUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREA(ROFA) ROFA standards require clearing of above -ground objects protruding above the nearest point of the RSA. Objects non -essential for air navigation must not be placed in the ROFA. Except where precluded by other standards, objects that need to be located in the ROFA for air navigation or aircraft ground maneuvering purposes are allowed to penetrate the ROFA. The ROFAs at RDM are illustrated with a purple line in Figure 3-3. The ROFAsfor both runways currently meet standards. RUNWAY OBSTACLE FREE Z0NE0ROFZ\ ROFZs are defined three-dimensional volumes of airspace centered above the runway centerline that must be kept clear during aircraft operations. The shape and size of the ROFZ is dependent on the size of aircraft using the runway and the approach minimums for a specific runway end. The ROFZextends 2OOfeet beyond each end ofeach runway. The width ofthe ROFZsfor both runways atRD&1io4OO feet. The ROFZo atRDM are illustrated with a black line in Figure 3-3. The ROFZofor both runways at RDK8meet FAA standards. xanmmomomWnmam*m"TER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Avvnmuil t Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 INNER -APPROACH OBSTACLE FREE ZONE/I&OFZO The IAOFZ only applies to the ends of runways that have an approach lighting system. Therefore, at RDMan|AOFZonly exists inthe area before the threshold for Runway 23. IAOFZsbegin 2ODfeet beyond the runway threshold at the same elevation as the runway threshold and extends 200 feet beyond the last light unit inthe approach lighting system. The width isthe same asthe RDFZ(4OOfeet) and rises at a slope of5O (horizontal) to l (vertical). The |AOFZ is shown with a black line in Figure 3-3. The IAOFZ for Runway 23 at RDM meets FAA standards. AIRPORT mASrERPLAN Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan AvpvmuiR Transportation System Plan Tea 'pz, LU —J Runway Safety Area LL 0 Runway Object Runway Obstacle Free Zone Precision Obstacle Free Zone N a) O N T CC z 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 NSITIONAL OBSTACLE FREE ZONE(8][OFZ) An |TOFZexists only for runways with instrument approach visibility minimums of less than % mile. Therefore, atRDK8an|AOFZonly applies toRunway 5'23. The |TOFZisadefined volume ofairspace along the sides ofthe ROF3and |AOFZ. Figure 3-4illustrates the shape ofthe |TOFZ. The |TOFZvviU boshown and analyzed onthe Airspace Plan sheets of the ALP, after the alternatives analysis. The ITOFZ meets FAA standards. Figure 3-4INNER-TRANSITIONAL OFZ RUNWAY OFZ -� INNER -TRANSITIONAL HORIZONTAL SURFACE 15QFT[46NqABOVE AIRPORT ELEVATION RUNWAYS SERVING LARGE AIRPLANES WITH CATEGORY | APPROACH MINIMUMS PRECISION OBSTACLE FREE Z0NE(POFZ) The POFZ is defined as a volume of airspace above an area beginning at the landing threshold, at the elevation of the landing threshold, and centered on the extended runway centerline (200 feet long by 800 feet wide), illustrated on Figure 3-3 in black. The POFZ is in effect when all three of the following criteria are met: v The approach includes vertical guidance; v The reported ceiling is be|mw25O feet orvisibility is less than 3/4 statute miles (orRVR is below 4.00Ofeet);and ~/ - Anaircraft ioonfinal approach within two miles ofthe runway threshold. When the POFZ is in effect, the wing of an aircraft on a taxiway waiting for runway clearance may penetrate the POFZ, but the fuselage and tail may not. Runway23 is the only runway end with a POF2. It meets FAA standards. uFI.)MomnMowI(JRNLmmORTMASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan AppendiA, Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONES (RPZ) The RPZisatrapezoidal area atthe end ofthe runway, the purpose ofwhich istoenhance safety for aircraft operations and for people and objects onthe ground. The FAA requests that incompatible land uses, objects, and activities bolocated outside ofthe RPZ.The FAA also requests that an airport operator maintain full control of an RPZ, ideally through fee simple property acquisition. If this not feasible, land use control may be achieved through the use easements. Runway Protection Zone (RPZ): The R9Zisutrapezoidal area with the intention nfenhancing the protection vf people and property on the ground, ^'^ Total acres for the existing RPZs located on and offRDM property are called out in Figure 3-5. and documented in summary Tables 3-7 and 3-8 at the end of this section. The RPZs within the existing airport property and under Airport control are shaded green, and those outside Airport property boundaries are shaded orange. is The FAA provides guidance on RPZ land use compatibility in AC-1 3A and more extensive guidance in the 2012 memorandum Interim Guidance on Land Uses within a Runway Protection Zone. Land uses and structures that are not inherently compatible in the RPZ include: bui|dings, especially habitable structures or structures of assembly; fuel facilities; hazardous material storage; recreational land uses; and transportation facilities and roads. The City of Redmond is currently in the design process for a realignment of the intersection of SE Veterans Way and SE Airport Way. This intersection is currently located in the central controlled access portion of the Runway 11 approach RPZ(see Figure 3-6).FAA standards discourage intersections located inthis portion ofanRPZ. The design for the proposed realignment shifts the intersection to outside of the controlled access portion of the RPZ and replaces a three-way stop intersection with a roundabout. The FAA does not have the authority to regulate local land use, so it relies on the airport sponsor to work with local jurisdictions to promote compatible development within the RPZ. Airport actions that introduce incompatible land uses into the RPZ, either by moving a runway end or increasing the size of the RPZ, require coordination with FAA headquarters. This coordination is not needed for existing incompatible land uses if the RPZdoes not move orchange size. The analysis ofrunway extension alternatives presented in Chapter 4 addresses property acquisition that would be required to support each alternative. xa�wm ��cmu*mmRT "TER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan AppendiA' Transportation System Plan Mead I lunt Runway 11 RPZ Runway 5 RPZ Runway 29 RPZ Runway 23 RPZ Runway 29 Approach & Departure RPZ On -Property ± 13.34 Acres Off -Property ± 0.44 Acres LEGEND RDM Property Boundary 11 Active Airfield Pavement Runway Protection Zone —".— Departure RPZ ;$,Orig4t.; RPZ On Property RPZ Off Property 00" 3,000" Figure 3-5 RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONES REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 Figure 3-6 RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE SUBAREAS 0 *40014404144$10404040400%***********10004$00001410.114$44200040011001100100901$104016441411004414110044140000144010440140:01100140$00004$044140100404001**04144 CENTRAL PORTION OF THE RPZ CONTROLLED ACTIVITY AREA OF THE RPZ RUNWAY OBJECT - FREE AREA RUNWAY SAFETY AREA 200 FT [61 — RUNWAY 40040040040004440400000040 00004404090000 0050000000,00000000000000 00000,000.0000100000000000,004400000A00000000A0r00000A000004000040040,000,00 REDMO ND MUN KIM, AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan AppendiAZ - Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 RUNWAY VISIBILITY ZONE Runway line -of -sight standards indicate intersecting runways must maintain an unobstructed line of sight from any point five feet above the runway centerline to any other point five feet above the intersecting runway centerline within the runway visibility zone (RVZ). The RVIat ROK8 is established by points located equidistant from the intersection and the runway ends. The RVZ precludes any fixed or movable objects that may limit line of sight between the runways, and is shown as a blue line in Figure 3-3. The RVZ line -of -sight at RDM is unobstructed. It is recommended that RDM continue to limit any permanent structures with the RVZ. HOLD POSITIONS RDC determines the holding position distance on each connector taxiway from the runway centerline. AC- 13A shows that, for RDC C-111 runways such as Runway 5-23, the holding position is 25Ofeet from the runway centerline. In addition, the distance is increased 1 foot for each 100 feet the airport is above sea level. Using this formula, at 3.080feet mean see |ovo| (M8L), the required distance for hold positions from the runway centerline ia281 feet ontaxiways connecting to Runvvoy6'23. Currently, the hold lines for Runway 5-23 are located at 200 feet from centerline and do not meet the 281 -foot requirement. As Runway 11-29 is designated as RDC B-111, the elevation factor does not apply and the hold positions should belocated 2OOfeet from the runway centerline. For Runway 11'20.the hold lines are currently located at 206 feet from runway centerline, slightly exceeding the requirement AC-1 3A. NAVAID CRITICAL AREAS Runway 23 is equipped with a glide slope and localizer as part of the instrument landing system (ILS) to the approach end of Runway 23. The FAA requires a critical area at each runway end to remain clear of objects to ensure aircraft using the equipment receive undistorted signals. The critical areas for Runway 23 are the localizer critical area (LCA) and the glide slope critical area (GCA). Dimensions of the GCA are for the "null reference" facility type glide slope. Table 3-6 shows the dimensions for the LCA and GCA for an|LGcategory | defined byFAA Order G76U.1GD.Siting Criteria for /LS.There are noknown penetrations to the GCA and LCA (additional information will be provided in the AGIS survey). The FAA requires vegetation not exceed twelve inches in height in the ILS critical areas. BLAST PADS Paved runway blast pads provide blast erosion protection beyond runway ends during jet aircraft operations. AC'13Arecommends runways serving ADG'|||have full-length paved shoulders. In affent, blast pads are an extension ofthe full-length paved shoulders beyond the runway end. Localizer Critical Area Glideslope Critical Area Source: Order 6750.16D, Siting Criteria for ILS xu*x,�umm~mu�'»xmx>uz"TER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmvmxvns|ve Plan AppendiA' Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 RDM does not currently have blast pads. Should the Airport determine blast pads to be beneficial in the future, for runways supporting ADG C-III aircraft, blast pads should be 200 feet by 200 feet. For runways supporting ADG B-III aircraft, blast pads should be 140 feet wide and 200 feet long. The tables below summarize design standards, existing conditions, and any proposed disposition. Item Runway Design Width 100 ft. Shoulder Width 20 ft. Blast Pad Width N/A Blast Pad Length N/A Crosswind Component (all weather) 99.13% @ 16 knots Runway TExisting Conditions Gradient (maximum) 0.51% Runway Protection Runway Safety Area (RSA) Len th beyond departure end Length prior to threshold Width Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) Length beyond departure end Length prior to threshold Width Runway Obstacle Free Zone (OFZ) Length prior to threshold 200 ft. Width 400 ft. Inner Approach OFZ N/A 600 ft. 600 ft. 300 ft. Inner Transitional OFZ N/A Precision Obstacle Free Zone (POFZ) N/A Approach Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Length 11: 1700 ft. Inner Width 11: 1000 ft. Outer Width Departure Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) 29: 500 29: 700 Length 1000 ft. Inner Width J 500 ft. Outer Width 700 ft. Runway Separation From Runway Centerline to: Parallel Runway Centerline N/A Hold Line2 200 ft. Parallel Taxiway Centerline 400 ft. 100 ft. 20 ft. 140 ft. 200 ft. 95% © 16 knots 1.5% 600 ft. 600 ft. 300 ft. 600 ft. 600 ft. 800 ft. 11: 1700 ft. 29: 700 1000 ft. 500 ft. 700 ft. 700 ft. 200 ft. 300 ft. 400 ft. Source: FAA Advisory Circular 15015300-13A, Change 1 Airport Design (February 2014) Aircraft Parking Area L 425 ft. B-111 Meets Standards? Disposition Yes No Action Yes No Action No Add to ALP No Add to ALP Yes No Action Yes No Action No Action No Action No Action No Action No Action No Action Yes No Action No Action N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A No Action No Action No Action No Parallel RWY No Action No Action No Action REDMOND mUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendil - Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 Runway 5-2 Item Runway Design Width Shoulder Width Blast Pad Width Blast Pad Length Crosswind Component (all weather) RDC: Existing Conditions FAA Design Standards 150 ft. 150 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. N/A 200 ft. - 99.07% @ 16 knots 200 ft, 95% @ 16 knots Gradient maximums 0.29% 1 5% Runway Protection Runway Safety Area (RSA) Length beyond departure end Length prior to threshold 600 Width 500 ft. Runwa Ob'ect Free Area (ROFAI Length beyond departure 1000 ft. end Length prior to threshold p _ 600 ft. Width I 800 ft. Runway Obstacle Free Zone OFZ Length prior to threshold ' 200 ft. Width 400 ft. Inner Approach OFZ 23: 2500 ft. x 400 ft. Inner Transitional OFZ - 23: 1991 ft Precision Obstacle Free Zone (POFZ) (Runway 23 onl Length Width Approach Runway Pro Length Inner Width Outer Width 'Departure Runway Pr Length Inner Width Outer Width 200 ft. 1000 ft. 1000 ft. 1000 ft. 600 ft. 200 ft. 400 ft. N/A N/A Meets Standards? Disposition Yes No Action Yes No Action No Add to ALP No _ Add to ALP Yes No Action Yes No Action Yes No Action Yes j No Action Yes No Action Yes I No Action Yes L No Action Yes No Action Yes Yes N/A N/A No Action No Action N/A N/A 200 ft. l Yes % No Action 800 ft. I 800 ft. I Yes I No Action ion Zone (RPZ) 5: 1700 ft. 23: 2500 5: 1000 ft. 5: 1510 ft. 23: 1000 23: 1750 ection Zone (RPZ) 1,700 ft. 500 ft. 1,010 ft. Runway Separation From Runway Centerline to: Parallel Runway Centerline Hold Line2 Parallel Taxiway Centerline Aircraft Parking Area Source: FAA Advisory Circular 150/ N/A 5: 1700 ft. 5 :1000 ft. 5: 1510 ft. 23: 2500 ft. 23: 1000 ft. 23: 1750 ft. 1700 ft. Yes 500 ft. Yes 1010 ft. Yes 700 ft. 250 ft. i 250 ft. 400 ft. B 400 ft. 540 ft. I 500 ft. 00-13A, Change 1 Airport Design (February 2014) No Action No Action No Action Na No Parallel RWY Yes No Action Yes No Action Yes.. No Action R LDMON I) M UN ICJ PA;L., AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan AppendiQ - Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 R0NWAYLENGTH The performance requirements ofthe critical aircraft designated for runway determine an airport's recommended runway length. Performance capabilities of individual aircraft are, in turn, affected by factors including the aircraft payload and fuel load, the runway elevation, wind conditions, and air temperature. Currently, Runway 5'23is7.O38feet long and Runway 11'2Ais7.00Gfeet long. Adthese lengths, the runways adequately serve the range of piston and jet aircraft now operating at the Airport. RDM has direct flights to seven airline hubs, all under 1,000 nautical miles (nm) from the Airport. With a few aircraft and time ofyear exceptions, the runway length is generally sufficient' for current aircraft and current destinations. However, as new airlines begin serving RDM, and existing airlines change fleetsand add new destinations, owide range ofaircraft could serve the Airport inthe future. Asnoted inthe discussion of critical aircraft earlier in this chapter, specific fleet mix changes anticipated at the Airport include: ~/ ' Replacement ufQ4OO2with ERJ'17S ' Regional jet (CRJ-200, 700 and 900) replacement with narrow body aircraft (A319 and B737) This section examines whether the available runway length meets the needs not only of existing users, but also those of future critical aircraft serving future destinations. To analyze the runway requirements for these new aircraft types, an understanding of the factors that impact aircraft performance is necessary. The following paragraphs explain the terminology and variables used in the runway length assessment. ELEVATION RDM has four runway ends from which aircraft can operate, ranging from 3.Q44 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) to 3,080 feet AMSL, which is the official airport elevation. INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ATMOSPHERE 0SA> This mathematical model describes how the earth's atmosphere, or air pressure and density, change depending on altitude. The atmosphere is less dense at higher elevations. |8A is frequently used in aircraft performance calculations because deviation from |QAwill change how an aircraft performs. |8Aed sea level occurs when the temperature is 59~F. |SA at RDK8'o 3.080 feotAK88L occurs when the temperature io4O~F. 1 CRJ-200 operations to certain destinations during summer months are occasionally weight restricted on departure fnmROM. 2 Some Q400 operations associated with short haul routes such as RDM-PDX will remain into the future. uazmwomm"TER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Av»vnmiRt Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 DENSITY ALT8T0DE(DA) This measurement comparing air density at a point in time and specific location to ISA is a critical component of aircraft performance calculations. DA is used to understand how aircraft performance differs than the performance that would be expected under ISA. DA is primarily influenced by elevation and air temperature. To examine the effect of changes to either variable, this calculation holds the other variable constant. ~ When elevation is constant: When air temperature increases, DA increases. When air temperature decreases, DA decreases. This comparison is often used when analyzing aircraft performance at an airport during different times of the day and different days of the year. When temperature is constant: When elevation increases, DA increases. When elevation decreases, DA decreases. This comparison, which is not often used, can be employed to compare aircraft performance at different airports under identical climate conditions. Figure 3-7 illustrates how DA is impacted when factoring in the average maximum temperature (85.5'F) for Redmond. The result is a density altitude increased to approximately 5,800 feet MSL. Figure 3-7DENSITY ALTITUDE FOR RDK8AVERAGE MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE � 2000 � +m -30 20 'm o'C m 20 31) 40 50 | / | / / / | / I | / I | / I | / / / | , | . | -50 ~m '20 o*F 20 40 60 so Temperature QF I |/| / i 100 oo �^~ For year-round planning purposes, density altitude of 5,800 feet MSL is assumed for the aircraft performance -based runway length analysis here. u*o`x`mo»xoNxv�,X/a/mpouzMASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmwoxons|ve Plan Append9Z Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 FUTURE FLEET AND DESTINATIONS DA, aircraft takeoff weight, and aircraft performance are the three primary factors to be considered when determining runway length requirements. Aircraft takeoff weight is directly related to the distance of the flight. For shorter distances, aircraft may be able to depart with a full passenger cabin and less than full fuel tanks. In those instences, the aircraft will typically be departing below &4TOVVand experience better takeoff performance. Aircraft will typically require a full load of fuel for longer trips. A full passenger cabin and full load offuel will be close tothe airuroft'o K0TOVV. This runway length analysis looks at the future fleet changes as discussed in Chapter 2 in conjunction with destinations likely to be served from RDM in the future. Destination distance is a critical factor in this analysis. RDK8 currently sees non-stop service to the airline hubs within 1.000 nm distance (Seattle - Tacoma International Airport, Portland International Airport, Salt Lake City International Airport, San Francisco International Airport, Los Angeles International Airport, Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport). The next step beyond those hubs would be direct flights to Midwest or midcontinent hubs such as Minneapolis -Saint Paul, Minnesota; Denver, Colorado; and Houston and Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas. Those cities are all within 1.500 nm, which is e reasonable range for the h/nucaot airline fleet, and likely destinations within the 20'yeorp|anning window. The following analysis documents calculated takeoff weights for each ofthe air carrier aircraft types b/ reach a1.5OOnmdestination. Those takeoff weights are then used with the aircraft manufacturer's performance tables contained in their respective airport planning manuals to determine a runway length requirement for the future. RUNWAY LENGTH RECOMMENDATION Using the 1,500 nm destination, as mentioned above, results in varying takeoff length requirements for the different aircraft types, as shown in Table 3-9. The CRJ-200 is not capable of flying for 1,500 nm. For the CRJ-700, 1,500 nm is near the range limits of the aircraft, and it must be weight restricted in order to carry enough fuel for the trip. The B737-700 and A319 can make the trip with a full passenger load, but not with the current RDM runway length. The CRJ'0OO.B737-8OO.and EK8B'175would require some weight adjustments (e.g.. blocked seats) inorder tomake the 1.5OOnmtrip. The 1,500 nm destination is near the range limit of the EMB-1 75. No additional runway length would improve the passenger carrying capacity for the EMB-1 75 at RDM when adjusted for DA. mumoKY MASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendg�_' Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 - Facility Requirements Aircraft Type Takeoff Length F����1�0��p Existing Fleet' (�F�-200 -- ----- C [7O --- ,-.100fa - - -- -- Future Fleet ____ ' CRJ-0UU � 11,OOOfeet B737-7DO 8'5OOfee 12,000 feet A319 �. �9,800h*et `ne Q400has been excluded from this analysis since they will v°eliminated from venm` exvep for very short haul flights (RoM-pDX)i 2 Weight restricted with areduction m/opassengers. 3Weight restricted with areduction or/apassengers. Figures 3-8.3-S,and 3-10 show three options to be considered in preliminary discussions for locating a runway extension: a split extension, northeast extension, and southwest extension. Variations of a 1 0,000-foot runway are explored in further detail in the Chapter 4 Alternatives Analysis. RUNWAY WIDTH Table 34Dsummarizes the runway width requirements according toRDCcompared with the current runway widths. Runway 11-29 B-U|Deaign | Existing Width | Meets Width Standards? 1O0^ 1OO' Yes 150' Yea As no changes in RDC code are anticipated within the 20-year planning period, no changes in runway width are required. RUNWAY PAVEMENT STRENGTH The FAA provides guidance for classifying and reporting pavement strength in AC 150/5335-5C, Standardized Method ofReporting Airport Pavement Sbength-PCKiThepavamentstnangthis represented by a value called the Pavement Classification Number (PCN). The PCN is calculated based upon the pavement section, total aircraft operations, and operations by the most demanding aircraft anticipated toutilize the pavement. uum.uwuN11),Nmm'AImOm1"zERPLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxons|ve Plan AppendiR+ Transportation System Plan Mead&Hunt EGEND RSA RSA ROFA RerA OF2 RDM Property Boundary Avigation Easement Future Runway Extension Runway Safety Area (RSA) Future RSA Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) Future ROFA Runway Obstacle Free Zone (OFZ) Glide Slope Critical Area (GCA) Localizer Critical Area (LCA) Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Future RPZ Runway Visibility Zone (RVZ) 0' 600' 1,200' Figure 3-8 RUNWAY EXTENSION - SPLIT REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Mead&Hunt EGEND RSA HOFA ROFA RDM Property Boundary Avigation Easement Future Runway Extension Runway Safety Area (RSA) Future RSA Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) Future ROFA Glide Slope Critical Area (GCA) Future GCA Localizer Critical Area (LCA) Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Future RPZ 0' 600' 1,200' Figure 3-9 RUNWAY EXTENSION - EAST REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Mead&Hunt Alr A • ,s A **am Pt44,1 1/"Asftil, LEGEND RSA ROFA ROSA RDM Property Boundary Avigation Easement Future Runway Extension Runway Safety Area (RSA) Future RSA Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) Future ROFA Glide Slope Critical Area (GCA) Localizer Critical Area (LCA) Future LCA Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Future RPZ 600" 1,200' Figure 3-10 RUNWAY EXTENSION - WEST REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 Airfield pavements strengths are detailed in Chapter 1 Airport Inventory. The aircraft types that currently operate at the airport are under the pavement strength limits for their respective areas on the airfield. However, as the airline fleet transitions away from regional jets to narrow body aircraft (13737 and A319), the pavement ratings will be exceeded. Pavement strength ratings are not necessarily a limit, but rather a design rating. That means aircraft weighing over the design rating will not cause the pavement to immediately fail, but with continued use, the life cycle of the pavement will be reduced. When the Airport does see these larger narrow body airline aircraft increasing in frequency at the airport, pavement strengthening projects should be studied. INSTRUMENT APPROACHES AND DESIGN SURFACES Instrument approaches in effect at RDK8 are described in the Chapter Airport Inventory. Asummary of the lowest minimum approach procedures are included in Table 3-11. The glide slope antenna, localizer antenna and medium intensity approach lighting systems (MALSRs) facilities make up the ILS. This system supports precision instrument approaches to Runway 23. More discussion on these facilities is provided inthe AinsideFacilities Section ofChapter i. Approach Procedures RNAV(GpE)RVVY11 Visibility (NM) 1/2 7/8 RNAV(GP8)ZR8yY20 1 ` � Descent Minimums (Fwet)� 200 ........... ....... __ 250 250 286 There are three principal standards used to protect the flight corridors to and from runways: � Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulation, Part 77, Safe, Efficient Use, and Preservation of Navigable Airspace (Part 77) � FAA Order 8260.3C, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) ~ Threshold siting surfaces (T8S)described inAC'13A Part 77 and TSS deal with runway threshold location and compatible land use and are used in airport planning. TERPS surfaces deal with instrument procedure development and are not commonly used in airport planning. The TERPS instrument departure surface is cross-referenced as a TSS in AC-1 3A. Part 77 imaginary airspace surfaces are determined by the runway type and the type of instrument approach procedure (e.g. visual, non'pnecision, and precision). Part 77surfaces are notification surfaces designed to identify and determine obstructions to air navigation. They are advisory, not regulatory; however, Oregon State Code (ORS) 836.530 provides regulatory authority for the State to enforce the standards. Penetrations to Pert 77 surfaces can make itdifficult for airports to extend or relocate runvvays, ortoadd new instrument procedures. uaowxumuxuv�x:ux�x|upouzm/mzEmrcaN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan ���A,' Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 - Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 TERPS surfaces are determined by the type of instrument approach procedure (e.g. ILS, global positioning system [GPS], VHF Omnidirectional Range [VOR]). TERPS surfaces are regulatory, and penetrations to TERPS surfaces will result in the modification or cancelation of an instrument approach TSS, also known as obstacle clearance surfaces, are determined by the type of instrument procedure and critical aircraft on each runway, and the visibility minimums ufthe lowest instrument approach. TGQ apply to both approach and departure ends of the runway, and determine the location of the runway thresholds. Penetration of TSS will require modification of departure climb gradient for penetrations to departure TSS, and/or relocation of landing thresholds or reduction in approach procedure capability for penetrations to approach TSS. Airspace surfaces are drawn and analyzed as part of the ALP set development. At this time, an upgraded approach to runway end 5 that supports LPV approach capabilities, similar to the |oca|izerond g|kjea|ope of an instrument landing system (|LS) approach into runway end 23, is under consideration. RUNWAY LIGHTING AND MARKING Runway 5-23 is equipped with high -intensity runway edge lighting, runway end identifier lights,anda MALSR to the approach end of Runway 23. Runway 11-29 is equipped with medium -intensity runway edge lighting and runway end identifier lights. No approach lighting system serves either end of Runway 11-29. Runway11-29 is marked with non -precision markings and Runway 5-23 is marked with precision markings inaccordance with FAA AC1SO/534O'1L.Standards for Airport Markings. No major changes, other than periodic maintenance and updates, to the runway markings or lighting systems are recommended within the 20-year planning period. RUNWAY SYSTEM CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Runway 5-23 will need an extension to a length of about 10.000 feet to accommodate the future airlines passenger fleet. Alternative means of serving this fleet are explored in the next chapter. 3,2.4 ]1.'AX1\kAYSYS1[E Al � Taxiways enable circulation of aircraft from the runways to terminal area facilities and between facilities within the terminal area. FAA design standards and guidelines intended to enhance safety and pilot situational awareness serve as the basis for this review of the adequacy of the RDM taxiway system. uawxON"nMomu/mLxmrmo"TER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmwnxons|ve Plan Appendg9-' Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 RDM already has full-length parallel taxiways and regularly spaced exit taxiways serving both runways. Therefore, the focus in this master plan has been on refining the layout to meet current FAA design standards and address hot spots (defined below). TAXIWAY DESIGN STANDARDS As with runways, taxiways standards are based upon the critical aircraft expected to use each taxiway. The existing critical aircraft are the El 75 for Runway 5-23 and the Q400 for Runway 11-29. The El 75 is in TDG 3 and the Q400 in TDG 5. Due to the higher TDG of the Q400 and the Q400 operating on both runways, TDG 5 is the existing design standard. As mentioned in section 3.2.2 Airfield Design, a taxiway construction project for Fiscal Year 2018 will change the connector taxiways of Runway 11 -29 to TDG 4 to allow the Q400 to continue operating at RDM until the Q400 is no longer in service and while the future critical aircraft changes tothe A310. TheA31Q is in TOQ 3 and will dictate future taxiway design standards. Once the Q400 is no longer in service, the parallel taxiways serving both runways (Taxiway F, G, and C) and all connector/exit taxiways should be designed to accommodate TDG 3. Taxiway standards are shown inTable 3-i1. Taxiway Design Group � *�,Please see Ao1au15xoo13Afor differ TAXIWAY GEOMETRY ANALYSIS Taxiway Edge Safety � Margin _ � 15 dimensions. AC'13Aincludes taxiway design recommendations for reducing the potential for runway incursions. The section that follows provides a review ofthose design standards relevant to the current airfield configuration. DIRECT ACCESS TO RUNWAYS ShoulderWidth RunnuyIocursioow: Dunvavincursions are events when an aircraft n,vehicle inadvertently proceeds onto u"active runway without air traffic control clearance. One of the ways to reduce runway incursions is to require pilots taxiing aircraft to make distinct, purposeful turns between leaving an apron area and accessing a runway. That is to say, there should not be direct straight-line taxiways leading from an apron to a runway and taxiway turns should be right-angle connectors An example of the direct access issue and resolution is shown below in Figure 3-11. An example of a right-angle connector is shown in Figure 3-12. There are several areas on the Airport where direct access currently occurs. These areas are listed below and identified on Figure 3-13. - TaxkwoyA(north sido): ataxiway centerline stripe leads directly from aUedmmnapron across Taxiway Ctothe threshold for Runway 11 xeDNIom,mmwn/cw*MPoRTMASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmpvxom|ve Plan Appendi;Q Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 V Taxiway A (south side): a taxiway centerline stripe leads directly from a row of box hangars across Taxiway G to the threshold for Runway 11 V Taxiway E: a taxiway centerline stripe leads directly from the commercial apron to the threshold for Runway 5 Taxiway H: a taxiway centerline stripe leads directly from the commercial apron to Runway 5-23 Figure 3-11. Example of Direct Access Issue and Resolution ""' grnArnakialagtieait.rnmaarnak'aita,g' .6vrikAigaiiqadkawiaMotatikaSafeakgiat,adiktigragdernigtiMiwasitabahatabiedgid&makirimsota. MAWNAMMEMEMADA11, ORM " MIVAMM New Location of Taxiway Connector eliminating Direct Access from Apron to Ta Relocate Existing TaXlway Terminal Apron Connector that Provided Direct Access from Apron to y Figure 3-12 Example of Right -Angle Connector .0"%frIaly txr 'Tax Ill/way/ Taxiway I rit er s.ect I cri 4 REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan AppendPt - Transportation System Plan MeadM lunt LEGEND --, ' — Taxiway Object Free Area 0 FAA Taxiway Hot Spot 0 Non -Standard Condition 411 REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 300' 600' Figure 3-13 TAXIWAY DESIGN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements COMPLEX INTERSECTIONS The AC-1 3A also recommends simplifying complex taxiway intersections. The AC defines complex taxiway intersections as those with more than three nodes (more than three possible directions of travel). Notaxiway junctions on the RDM airfield are complex intersections. No changes are required. HOT SPOT ANALYSIS Two areas ofthe airfield have been designated bythe FAA aoHot Spots: the Taxiway Cintersection with Taxiway F.and the Taxiway F intersection with Taxiway G. Ultimately the FAA will likely require proposed resolutions tothese two areas toreduce the risk ofrunway incursions. Chapter 4Alternatives Analysis will include analysis of potential designs. RLJNVJAY END CONNECTORS Hot SpoC & hot spot bdefined m ulocation vuuuairport movement area with u history nfpotential risk orcollision orrunway incursion, and where heightened uucofiouhy pilots and drivers is uccusmg/. Another design standard introduced inAC'13Awas intended toreduce or eliminate vvkje expanses of pavement, especially at runway crossing locations. Until recently Taxiway E and K had dual entrance taxiways without "no taxi" islands painted on the pavement. This nonstandard condition was corrected in2O17. RIGHT-ANGLE TAXIVVAY CONNECTORS The AC recommends that all taxiway connections to runways be 90-degree angles, except for high speed exit taxiways and parallel taxiways associated with one runway crossing another runway. The north and south segments ofTaxiway Aare both oblique -angled taxiways that do not fall into either ofthe exception categories just discussed. The modifications tothese two segments described above under the Direct Access to Runways section will provide the recommended right-angle taxiways. An example of a right- angletaxivvayconnectorioshovvninFigurm3-i2. EXDTT, DWAYANALYSDB The location ofexit taxiways can impact arunwey'scapacity. The quicker anaircraft can slow toasafe speed and exit the runway, the sooner another can land or takeoff. AC-1 3A states that, in general, each 1 00-foot reduction of the distance from the threshold to the exit taxiway reduces the runway occupancy time by approximately 0.75 second for each aircraft using the exit. Conversely, the opposite is true as well, each every 1 00-foot increase in the distance from the threshold to the exit taxiway increases the runway occupancy time by approximately 0.75 second for each aircraft using the exit. Table 3-12 below contains the exit taxiway distance from landing threshold for each of the four runways and the corresponding percentage able to use each exit taxiway. The information below is for dry runways only. When wet, the percent of aircraft able to use each taxiway will be reduced as the landing lengths will be increased. Since RDM does not currently and is not forecast to experience a capacity or delay problem, there isnoneed toadjust the current locations ofthese exit taxiways. uaJ)J,NwNoMvNIcuALAIRPORT RASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance uuuo-017 Comprehensive Plan AvvvnmiRZ Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements � � Nmwp Runway23 Taxiway E Runway Distance 1.SGO' 3'OO5 4�7O' =`" '- -- Taxiway Distance Taxiwa O F J K8 Runwayll Taxiiwa F O Distance 17700 2'75O' A 8'85O � *Small Single Engine =/2,000ummless � Small Twin Engine =/2,soommm'less Large =/2,monm,maml000mx *omvv=Greater than au8owomx Percent Able Small Single Engine 1OOY6. OU% Percent Able SmnaUSing��En^inm 39% __ Q596 ' 100% 100% Small Twin Engine 096 98% 1�0O96 1OO96 Percent Able- __'� SmnmUSing�yEngine .� � �nmm||TvvnE Pmru�ntAd�|o � � Small Sin ^he[ �n"ine Small Twin Err /na OY6 O96 TAX�0�'P�EI�ENT5TRE|�GT]0 Aad�ousaedunder the F�unvvayPmvemmentStrength aeoUonabove, the forecast aidineOoet�ons�ions honarrow body aircraft vviUexceed the ex�tingpavement strength raUngs.VVhenthe Airpo�does see these larger nannvvbody aidineaircraft increasing in�equenuyatthe airpu�.pavement strengthening pn�a�sshould bestudied. T��WAYSYSTE��CO�4CL08DO��AND RECOMMENDATIONS The ox�hngta�waysystem aunxymthe RDK8/�rpo�users weU.Nomajor inadequacies ax�tfor the cunantaidiek1con�gu�dionoract��y|ove�.Some areas are kjunt�odbelow that donot uompk/w�hthe latest geometry guidance hnmthe F/�`.Those areas are analyzed inC�hmptmr4and depicted vv�h so|uUonoonthe ALP. mu^mowo^unNxura.AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan AppendiH, Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 ~/ Taxiway A(south ok]e): add pavement and ren1hpe0oprovide aright-angle taxiway ~/ ` Taxiway E: replace existing taxiway segment between the apron and Taxiway F with a new connector taxiway located about 4OOfeet east ofthe existing taxiway v Taxiway H: replace the existing taxiway segment between the apron and Taxiway F with a new connector taxiway located about 175feet east ofthe existing taxiway Taxiway Chot spot: shift segment that crosses Runway 5-23tothe east ~/ ' Taxiway Qhot spot: shift segment that crosses Runway 5'23tothe west v Runway exit taxiways: retain current locations v Pavemen1ntrenqth: evaluate pavement strength requirements when narrow body airline aircraft begin regularly scheduled operations atthe Airport Aopresented below inthe General Aviation Facilities section, if the Airport moves forward with developing a new east field GA complex, the airport could ultimately benefit from a full-length parallel taxiway to the east of Runway 5-23. The existing GA facilities at RDM are constrained and a full-length parallel taxiway east of Runway 5-23 will provide access to the airfield for a new GA complex and allow for future airport development on property that is adjacent to the parallel taxiway. Figure 3-13 (above) highlights non -compliant areas of the airfield. 3.2,5 G ENE M A L A VIAT I FACILITIES Growth in GA based aircraft at the Airport is contingent upon adequate facilities and easy developable areas. Currently, the general aviation facilities at the airport are somewhat constrained. With a few exceptions, the easily developable areas with access to the airfield are occupied. The remaining areas available can be used for infill hangar development in an effort to accommodate some of the projected 33 new based aircraft at the Airport, which are forecast within the 20-year planning period. Figure 3-14 depicts conceptual hangar infill sites and one new development area on the north side of the MASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance uuuo-017 Comprehensive Plan Apvvmui;5-' Transportation System Plan Future Hangars Option 1 Z LLi J Future Hangars Option 2 Future Taxiway TO at. oa a© 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 Avigation Easement Z 0 ILI Aviation Related Development ted Development ar cc 0 Free Zone d v C ca Q E E a p ' ti E H H 2ca N • 0 C c E> • c_ u 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 Chapter 2Aviation Activity Forecast identifies an inc/ease cf5single-engine aircraft, 24jet aircraft, G helicopters, and S other type aircraft relocating tothe Airport within the 2O'yearplanning period. Some of these aircraft could be located in the infiUsites asshown in Figure 3-14. hmwever, in order to accommodate all 33 aircraft, at least one new GA development area should be planned. To protect for GA development beyond the 20-year planning period or growth exceeding this plan's forecast, an aviation reserve area is proposed in the east quadrant of the airport between the two runways. Figure 3-15 shows this location. If another Fixed Base Operator (FBO) is looking to serve the Airport, this would be a suitable location. However, development in this area will be costly due to the lack ofinfrastructure and the high cost ofsite preparation. Variations and alternative configurations of the hangar infill sites and GA development area will be further explored in the Chapter 4 Alternatives Analysis. Itinerant operations are also relevant tothis master plan. The Airport isforecast toexperience anincrease of approximately 3,000 itinerant general aviation operations within the 20-year planning period. The 3,000 annual operations equate to approximately 8 operations per day, or 4 aircraft visiting the airport. The existing FBO can accommodate the increase as currently configured. Additional support facilities are discussed later inthis chapter. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS To accommodate the forecast increase in general aviation based aircraft, the following facility improvements should be made: ` Identification ofhangar site alternatives ./Locate long-term general aviation development area PASSENGER TERMINAL APRON The passenger terminal apron isapproximately 1.S28feet wide and 2Q7feet deep (4S3.81Gsquare faot. Taxiway connectors H and E provide access to parallel taxiway F and Runway 5-23. The apron accommodates seven aircraft parked at terminal gate positions and one additional parking position. Based on current airline schedules, up to eight aircraft each day are scheduled to remain overnight (RON). As airline operations increase and schedules change this number may increase to 10 RON aircraft. Given that the passenger terminal apron is currently at capacity for RON aircraft, the airport should plan for an apron expansion as soon as practical. Figure 3-16 illustrates a conceptual apron expansion to accommodate the projected RON demand. Specific locations and alternatives will be explored in the following Chapter Alternatives Analysis. wJYmomoMomcuxL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance uoxo-017 Comprehensive Plan ApvrmuiA Transportation System Plan t a L ILI U) Runway Safety Area Runway Obstacle Free Zone rzo c° z W Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements 3.3 nA SI E FACILITY 3.3,1 VASSEXGER TEtN[ NA][ ?t*ADWAN' With the advent of Transportation Network Companies (TNC)such aoUberand Lyft.the Airport has identified a need for a separate curbside area to consolidate TNC vehicles dropping off and picking up passengers. Chapter 4 Alternatives Analysis will include various locations and options for this service. 3,3.2 PASS J,'� AtRDMpublic parking isesingle-level uncovered parking lot that accommodates bothshort-and long- term parking. As of 2017, the terminal parking lot accommodates 1,083 vehicles. This analysis compares parking spaces against enplaned passengers for forecast scenarios to determine whether the parking facilities will require expansion. ACRP Report No. 25: Airport Passenger Terminal and Design recommends that public parking supply should range from QOOhu1.4OOspaces per million enplaned passengers. Based onthis guidance, total public parking spaces atRDK8 exceed the recommended range for current enp|anement levels and fall within the recommended range through 2O3G. However, based onfirst-hand information supplied bythe Airport, the parking lot has exceeded capacity several times inthe last year. Given this information, itappears the suggested ratio of 900 to 1,400 spaces per million enplaned passengers is not appropriate for RDM. AirportsCompedive Research Rrogrurn(ACR11): Aximumry'driveuapplied oseuob pmgmmmanaged hy&o Transportation Research Board (TKB) that develops ucur-un^practical auk`/inm/vproblems faced hyairport npcmm,s. The Airport has reached parking capacity with current enplaned passenger levels of 322.17G.Aratio of 330 parking positions for every 100,000 enplaned passengers is based on capacity being reached in 2U1Gplus a1Opercent buffer. The Airport's parking lot requires expansion aosoon eopractical tomeet existing demand, as well as projected future growth. Based on the airport -specific ratio of 330:100,000 enplanements, RDM should plan to accommodate an additional 1,100 parking spaces to accommodate demand through the 20-year planning period, shown in Table 3-13. The parking expansion can be accomplished with phased development, allowing the Airport to develop smaller portions of the parking expansion as needed. Auto parking areas are shown on Figure 3-17. Specific locations and alternatives will be explored in the following Chapter 4 Alternatives Analysis. xanmm NIuNIcmaAIRPORT "TER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendi4QTransportation System Plan coo C 0 a 0 Z LLi J E C O. C 0 a E w >c 0 W • R Q W C7 c a c co co t @ Se- to' F. U _ Y 4a Ca 0► et O C O ._ E°>'� 7 �+ = a D: Eo • tiff C 0 E 0 C co O Z t�4 a. ?r co a d C W l9 0 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements Enp|anemmmnts Parking Rmquhed3 Capacity 1,083 O 1,292 2026 1 2031 2036 484.300 575.350 661.600 2,183 (209) (515) (816) � (1.100) ACRPrecommends 1.00feet as the maximum walking distance from aparking space to the terminal building before shuttle service should be offered. The farthest point at the northwest end of the parking lot is approximately 1,000 feet, while the farthest point at the southwest end is 1,250 feet. The far limits of the existing parking area are within the limits of pedestrian travel; however, the long walk from the southwest end ofthe parking lot isfarther than desirable. EMPLOYEEPARKING The employee and tenant parking lot isimmediately adjacent tothe terminal building onthe southwest side and accommodates 195 vehicles. Currently the airport has issued 277 employee and tenant parking passes. If conditions dictate all employees must be present on the same day, the parking lot will be over capacity. As the Airport continues to experience record growth in enplaned passengers, employee and tenant numbers will grow. Additional parking for employees and tenants should beidentified. For reference, the current ratio of parking passes allocated is 85.9 passes per 100,000 enplanements. Projecting this ratio out with the forecast enp|anemants nusuKo in a requirement of approximately 500 employee and tenant parking spaces in 20 years. Specific locations and alternatives for employee parking will be explored in the following Chapter Alternatives Analysis. 3.3'3 RENTAL CAR FACILITIES Alamo, Avis, Budg*d, Enterprise, Hertz, and National car rental agencies offer rental vehicles at the Redmond Airport. Vehicles are picked -up and dropped -off in a 224-space parking lot located immediately northwest ofthe terminal building. The Airport has near -term development plans for enoffsite rental car facility that will include doaning, stonogo, and a fueling station. The nanto| car agencies plan to continue using the 224 parking spaces next to the terminal building for the pick-up and return location. Long-term storage and support services will be accomplished at the future offsite location. Specific locations and alternatives will be explored in the following Chapter 4 Alternatives Analysis. »RaboofpadkinQspmstoenp|unemen/sb33OpurNngpodbonsforevery100000enp|anementsandbosedoffof 2016 enplanements and assumption of a full parking lot with a 10% buffer. Ratio was then applied to forecast enp|anementnumberc uu`m.xvomommzem1.AIRPORT "TER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxons|ve Plan Appendi4ZTransportation System Plan Chapter 3 - Facility Requirements 33,4 N* _A-VIATI*N AEVENUE *EVEL*P E The consultant conducted ananalysis toidentify the facility requirements for non -aviation businesses that complement the airport operations and are appropriate for the Redmond market, given local economic conditions. The analysis inits entirety iocontained inthe Appendix J.Asummary ofrecommended infrastructure upgrades to help facilitate the revenue development are described below. RECOMMENDED0PG 0 , DEB The following recommendations are offered based onecomparison of the existing utility and transportation facilities and the corresponding demands of the target industries. Figure 3- 8 depicts the nine subareas that are the focus cfthis section. In all subareas, sewer lines would need to be extended from nearby mains and storm water management facilities would need to be constructed in conjunction with site development. Local streets should be constructed tothe local industrial street standard (40'foot paved width with sidewalks) to accommodate necessary truck access for most of the target industry sectors. Improved access to Oregon Route 128vvi|| eventually be required to accommodate future growth with any ofthe target industry sectors and will likely include added turn lanes and traffic signals. Turn lanes at major intersections may also be needed to serve future development. Necessary improvements would be identified with the preparation of traffic impact studies for specific development proposals. ][ Non -Aviation Development l[ur�eLUnduy�z�c*: V " � � � / &ccvonoodubouand Food �n,,ices SpeculatiJ7 Light Industrial Buildings [vmtmckvu Manufacturing Wholesalers and Warehousing f\bUcAduduist,uinu Specific upgrade requirements for each subarea are noted below. v/ North Development Parcel Subarea: The existing water lines between Lake Road and Veterans Way are not well-connected. A loop system is recommended throughout the subarea to maintain necessary flows for high -demand industrial users. This subarea currently has no existing transportation infrastructure and will need to rely on the construction ofnew streets. Transportation improvements associated with the Airport Runway Extension will eventually provide access through the subarea. Local streets that provide direct site access will need to be constructed to local industrial standard (4O'footpaved width with sidewalks). North Business Park Subarea: The existing water lines between Veterans Way and OR 126 are not well-connected. A loop system is recommended to supply necessary flows for high -demand users. The local streets (1 Oth Street, Sisters Avenue, Ochoco Way) need to be upgraded to current local industrial standard (40'foot paved width with sidevve|ks). Veterans Way needs to be upgraded to meet the major collector standard (36'foot paved width with sidewalks). At the Veterans Way intersection with OR 126, an eastbound right -turn deceleration lane on OR 126 may be necessary as volumes increase, and separate left- and right -turn lanes may be necessary on the Veterans Way approach. Left -turn lanes on Veterans Way at other intersecting roadways may also boneeded. x�mow MASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendi4?-' Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 Chapter 3 - Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 ~/ ' South Apron Subarea: Salmon Avenue needs sidewalks on the north side ofthe street. V West Business Park Subarea: Airport Way and Veterans Way need ok]owa|k infiU, primarily along undeveloped property. ~/ ' Airport Wav Subarea: Airport Way needs sidewalk infill on both sides of the street. Mt. Hood Drive needs sidewalks along both sides of the street. Wickiup Avenue needs to be constructed or upgraded tocurrent local industrial standard (4O'footpaved width with oidowm|ka). v Fairqrounds Industrial Subarea: Airport Way needs sidewalks on the south side of the street. 3ATE����IFACILITIES I'�Il�S � The existing terminal is a relatively new facility constructed in 2010 to meet the requirements of the community in support of a modernization program that would both attract travelers from the region, including Redmond, and provide a better operating environment for the airlines. 14 OtT ACTIVITY The focus of the terminal area facility master plan is to develop additional capacity to meet current trends in airline operations reflected in the activity forecast. A migration to larger aircraft over the planning period is the primary trend. Airlines have been in the process of retiring smaller aircraft, the 35- to 50-seat jet aircraft that have served commuter operations since the mid-1 990s, and replacing them with larger 65- to8O'aeatoirnnoft.Thistrendhasa|soinduded|argernarnow'bodyaircnoftthatoomeamaUhub destination airports onspecific high demand and seasonal flights. This section addresses terminal area facility improvements over the next 20 years. Level of service major airline peaking activity for 2016 and 2036 derived from the avicharacteristics define the operation and are used to calculate operations -based program requirements. ation forecasts. These peaking modifications and upgrades to these facilities areas can be built as a series of projects that meet specific needs during the period. Table 3-14 provides the basis of design for this development, a summary of REDMOND AJ oNIomscAIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendi45-' Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements � Airline Activity Cornent ' Aircraft Aircraft Average Aircraft Seat Size Load Factor Passengers Total ens [Enplaned Passengers Peak Month Passen2ers -EPercent Peak Month Passengers - Deplaned Peak Month -PeolanedPercent - TVto|PeakDav Passenclers [Enplaned +Deplonndl ` f—ofa—I Peak Hour Passengers Peak Hour.EqplanedFasaongers Peak Hour Deplaned Passengers [PHDP] Enpl[anements Per [E/ql'AvemoEeAnnual Qev. EnpkanenlentsParDepaduna[E/D]-AverogaOayofPeak Month Aircrmft Operat�ns___ Toto|Annual Airline Operations P�ak\8Aaek/�rConie Operations � f i �f Operation- ��� Total DaUvF - -- -- — Source: Mead uHunt Airline Activity Fmv:avm E�h�in0U��Y6) �Forecast CF��7OO ` --- - — 69 B737/A310 ' 11O 84% 8496 `644,362 | 1.323,200 33.3Q6 66.524 1O1O9& � 1Q1O96 - � - � __- 32.3Q5 66.5�4 1O1O9� .� 1O1UY� _ - - _ 1.765 3.626 2'324 7,122 289 SO 290 42 1,060 580 _ 560 105 116 12,600 414 60 30 3.4.2 PASSENGER TERMINAL BUILDING Airlines embarked on a program of consolidation and capacity constraint during and after the 2007-2009 recession. Capacity constraint served to move fuel -inefficient aircraft out of airline fleets, replacing them with aircraft that would provide both fuel savings and increased seating capacity. As the industry recovered and then began to grow, airlines have replaced commuter aircraft with larger narrow -body aircraft. Airport terminal facilities have been straining to meet the demands generated by the new aircraft for |andsido.terminal building, and ramp apron capacity. The Redmond terminal building was designed for smaller commuter aircraft, those operating in the 50- to 70'seat range of seat capacity. It was also designed in a more traditional |eyout, in which a main departures hall serves as a waiting area, similar to a train station, where passengers await a boarding call and then proceed to their designated platform. In the airport terminal, tickets are lifted prior to entering the boarding corridor, which serves as the platform from which passengers are boarded onto the aircraft. These design elements place more limitations on capacity for passenger departures lounges than on other terminal components. One disadvantage to the current layout is that expansion requires moving other components. Expansion of the upper level concourse departures lounge is possible, and would have less impact on functional components, but that expansion is limited to either side, as moving into the ramp apron would reduce space required for larger aircraft. 1(u)NIomu~uoNzuNI,AIRPORT "TER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmwoxons|ve Plan Appendk,� Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 While this layout has merit in a smaller terminal, it can be counterintuitive to travelers who prefer to be as close to their transport as possible prior to boarding. Proximity provides a sense of calm, as passengers can see their scheduled departure posted at the gate and be readily aware of any airline operations interruption that would require their response. It is more than infonnetion, though, as passengers in close physical proximity to their transport often believe they will have some control over responding to any disruption intheir schedules. The present terminal layout might have served the operation longer had the airline industry not evolved so quickly, creating additional demand on terminal buildings throughout the country as well as at Redmond. Terminal expansion in 2010 provided much needed space, which has allowed the facility to absorb an increase in demand at almost all functional components. Future growth forecast for Redmond will require more terminal space to meet passenger demand. Terminal area ramp apron space can be reconfigured to accommodate larger aircraft at more gates than the present six commuter gate hardstands. A summary of the building improvements identified for the planning period are listed by functional component in Table 3-15. The recommended areas, when complete, represent a program for the year 2036. Some components will take priority over others in phased development and are listed from higher to lower priority based on passenger demand and available capacity. Second floor concourse and passenger departures lounges Ramp apron gate hardotondo and passenger boarding bridges An reconfiguration ofthe second level concourse level including vertical and relocated concessions aodtoilets.Thisdevaopmant will bephased hnsmaller projects. Vertical circulation for the eight -gate development will be builtihthe first phase, requiring `reconfiguration ofthe lower level departures lounge and concessions areas. Atotal ofeight ramp apron gate hardstandpositions, with corresponding passenger boarding bridges. The ramp apron area contains 243.2O5square feet. Each handstand position will accommodate the largest narrow body aircraft. The boarding bridges will bacapable ofhandling EK0B-145/CRJ-2OU aircraft, larger commuter jets and uptuB737-SUUK8axA\321neoaircraft. These component areas and equipment will bephased insmaller projects over the 2D-yearperiod to2O3O. Concessions Car rental, retail and gifts, food and beverage,goods, stock and cold storage on the non -secure and secure sides of the terminal. Concessions will also include a small, dedicated receiving and security screening area for all concessions stores delivered mthe terminal building, plus asmall office break room for the concessionaire. Continued on the next page. Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendi4_6 Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements Dapartures/TuketHoU Outbound Baggage Make-up Ticket hall expansion will involve both ticketing facility and main concourse expansion; the former tomeet current and near -term demand inairline ticket office space and greater ticket counter capacity tomeet growth indemand, and the latter tnmeet increases inqueueing and gathering ofpassengers in the main departures hall during seasonal peak travel. Given limits atthe terminal curb and roadway, this space could initially bamet byrelocating some ufthe functions from the front ofthe departures hall. Toward the end ofthe planning period, this requirement can bemet through ticket hall expansion and roadway relocation. The outbound baggage make-up facility will become constrained asmore flights are added tnthe schedule, requiring more cart staging atthe baggage make-up device.ExponukmufthiaaraeviUindudaanadUitiona| make-up device adjacent to the existing device. Terminal programmatic requirements were identified and calculated for functional components only. Table 3-iGlists program requirements based on the major components. Administration and ancillary area requirements are included as a percentage of the total programmed space. This includes facilities maintenance and services, workrooms, storage, and janitor closets. Mechanical and electrical support has been programmed asapercentage ofthe total additional programmed space above the 14O.00O' squanu'footmxisting building. Other equipment space such as vertical circulation e|evators, esca|ators, and stairs have been identified and included as line items in the program, as their footprints are quantifiable. Functional Component Entrance Hall Ticket Hall Checked Baggage Screening Outbound Baggage Make -UP. __ Passenger Security Screening Passenger Departures Lounge Second Level Concourse Corridor Basis of Analysi 25GF/Paooenger Queue, Counter, ATO Screening Capacity Capacity [Demand 420 038 10 � 15 Additional F�tquireIents 6,000 600BPH 465BPH None N8EOVF|ights 150 Passengers/Hour Peak Hour Seats Peak Hour Passengers 118 300 550 220 /G58 N/A 760 436 Second Level Concourse Toilets Concessions Baggage Claim & Inbound Drop___ Vertical Circulation Arriving Passengers ������irport Checked Baggage 3 ender N/A 12.800GF !4NBEQA 2N8SEQA� � 1Elevator 2/ �Direction 48 8.30DGF 2NBEQA Number of Processors _ _ N� 16 usmm�xwnomo�uzcm.AmPuo,"TER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendiff' Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 3,43 GATE CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS The airport terminal currently has six commuter aircraft gate hardstand positions, of which five are assigned to air carriers. Future gate requirements have been determined through formulas for growth based on historical measures of annual enplanements and operations per gate. For destination airports such as Redmond. o practical gsdo capacity can be set based on pnecedent, goognophy, markets served, and airline hub operations. Geography marks the distance from major hub markets,whichaffacttho number of flights that can reasonably be scheduled into the airport. Airline hubs operate arrivals and departures banks throughout the day, and flights to and from Redmond are coordinated with these operations. Historical precedent represents airlines' preferences for scheduling at Redmond to take best advantage of hub operations. Adding flights into other periods of the day should follow precedent and can beachieved through limited and/or seasonal scheduling totest markets. Determining a practical gate capacity provides o framework to indicate o need for additional gates so airlines can schedule into preferred periods of the day. Large hub airports will typically schedule eight to ten turns per gate or more, depending upon airlines' minimum objective ground time and aircraft size. With longer periods of no activity at small hub destination airports, an achievable number of operations per gate may be indicated with as few as five or six before additional gates may be required. Enplanements and operations per gate show there is more than sufficient capacity through the operating day to add flights. Forecast activity builds on the schedule carriers operate today. Using six aircraft as the current gate requirement, enplanements per gate calculations show that six will serve into the future. With the early morning departures bank activity, a higher number of gates would be supported. � |Annual i | --_� �Annual i —~~~'`~'` � 255.654 5.789 2015 � ' 2016 � Future Years - ) 2021 � 2026 2031 � 2036Source: Mead & Hun � 4�GO � � �� �-- 1 391.450 5.740 484,300 5,800 - 6�3OO-� xmmxxumxtypumvaxts & Analysis No. mfGates Enplanemen Per Gate s Enp|unemnmnts Per Departure 68 84 ` 93 05 Table 3-17 shows a requirement of seven gates based on a measure of enplanements per gate. Using forecasts for the four planning horizons within the period, six gates to represent current airline schedule activity, and enplanements per gate yields a total requirement of seven gates, which supports a close range of variance to meet airline schedule preference. Operations per gate yields a smaller total number of gates based on a higher efficiency in gate use. This method does not take into consideration multiple departures within ashort window. m/xxomo»uomrux/Mx,ouzmMSzEnPLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendi4IRZ Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 The use of historical precedent is a primary factor in forecasting future operations growth. Current airline schedules serve as records of how airlines prefer to operate based on hub schedules. Airlines may change schedules to manage seasonal time changes, adjusting flight departures and arrivals to meet operational requirements, but their core schedules remain relatively steady over time. From the airline activity schedule for current operations, early morning comprisesthe largest block of outbound activity, with seven departures over two hours and eight total during the period. Six of these departures occur within one hour. Overnight there are eight aircraft on the ground. This isanticipated to increase to nine aircraft by the end of the planning period. The terminal building has six gates, five of which are used by the carriers to manage eight aircraft operations in the first departures bank. Based on this schedule precedent and an increase in aircraft size, eight gates would be supported through the planning period. The airlines can manage this activity by towing aircraft from hardstand positions to contact gate positions; however, because there would be closely spaced departures within a limited operations area, a safer option would be to provide additional contact gates. Table 3-18shows the design day forecast early morning departures bank. m� 00* 'RDyN 0530 0550 0555 44 Equipment EM8RAER,175 A]RBU&319 -- MITSUB|SHI-SO 8OBNG-737 _ BOBN8-737 AIRBUS-318 AIRBUS-318 _AIRB US-319 Source: Mead & Hunt Airline Apti Destination PDN �SFQ DEN SEA LAX SEA SLC sic PDX Airline ALA8KA � UNITED � � UNTEO ALA�K)� ��-- AMER|CAN DELTA ­ DELTA OELTA ALASKA ALASKA Aircraft Seat Capacity (Average Number of Seats)70-90 Aircraft Seat Configuration 78 13O-150 ! .�- QD-11U � 138 100 1 '--' 13O 150 138 138 10O . 76 In meeting demand for future activity, eight contact gates with building departures lounges and passenger boarding bridges are supported. This development can be built in phases, with the first phase comprised of building expansion and reconfiguration of existing space and layouts to prepare for a transition to second -level departures lounges. A full complement of gates, departures lounges, and passenger boarding bridges would besupported bythe end ofthe planning period. The airlines may be forced to operate larger aircraft into their major hub airports sooner in the period due to limited gate resources at these airports. This will likely be evident in the early morning and late afternoon arrivals and departures banks, eventually migrating to midday periods. During this transition, there will still be a need for ground boarding commuter aircraft at hardstand positions, particularly with Alaska/Horizon operating the Q400 aircraft well into the future. Balancing the needs of the air carriers through gate resource planning will be key to meeting growth demands on the terminal building over time. 11O'13O 150-170 ua^n/`�o»aomxcu��AIRPORT mAvzsuPLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendi§Q Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 3.4.4 TERMINAL BUILDING DEVELOPMENT Figures 3-19 and 3-20 show development of first and second level building improvements to meet demand, including eight gate plans with corresponding departures lounge and aircraft hardstands. Figures 3-21 and 3-22 show potential phase one improvements. Figure 3-19 FIRST LEVEL TERMINAL BUILDING MASTER PLAN EXPANSION f ` <6* 4(.1 vo cAR „1( MAErRiVil , '—" lAmiomeAvAmo. A ma* t ,AA Figure 3-20 SECOND LEVEL TERMINAL BUILDING MASTER PLAN EXPANSION " A , rrTT 7 47:AAA:A reimpoweowigoommoolopow ri Ti U AA' REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendi§t - Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 Figure 3-21 FIRST LEVEL TERMINAL BUILDING MASTER PLAN EXPANSION — PHASE ONE Figure 3-22 SECOND LEVEL TERMINAL BUILDING MASTER PLAN EXPANSION — PHASE ONE [)MONU MI)Nl(:iP U,AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendi§Z - Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 34.3 C*NCLI1SU*NS AN D R.EC MME\IPATI*NS � Reconfigure second floor concourse and passenger departure lounges v/ Construct a total of eight ramp gate hardstand positions with passenger boarding bridges v Expansion and reconfiguration ofconcessions v Expansion ofticket hall and main concourse ,� ` Expansion ofthe outbound baggage make-up area � E AT The Airport is served by one FBO, located on either side of Runway 11 -29. The FBO has expressed a desire for expanded facilities, however, the development potential for both areas are limited due to other existing development in the area. The north apron area has the potential for expanded airside development behind the existing building line, but would likely be expensive due to site development As mentioned previously, the concept of a new separate general aviation development in the east quadrant of the airport could provide multiple new avenues for additional FBOs to be located at the airport. 15,7 UNITED STATES F REST SEMVICE /�l���� ` / The USFS has plans for expansion of their facilities to include additional training facilities, hangars and miscellaneous support facilities. All current plans fall within the USFS leasehold and are not expected to require additional land availability from the Airport. 3.5,3 �������'� FACILITIES Air cargo operators performed 1.Q2Boperations in2O1Sand the forecast shows air cargo remaining flat et 2,100 annual operations through 2036. The proximity to major trucking routes and lack of demand for overnight shipments has not dictated a high amount of air freight. Air cargo operators use the general aviation apron north of Runway 11 -29 to load and unload cargo, and handle processing off -site. No need for additional facilities for air cargo purposes are anticipated. xmmomnNJmw/cun1. AIR11oRT "TER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendi§:�_ Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 15.4 AIR SUPPORT AND MAINTENANCE FACILITIES SNOW REMOVAL EQUIPMENT (SRE) The Airport has plans underway to replace and relocate the SRE building to the north side of the airfield. The relocation will allow for an expanded building size and also open up valuable airside land for future aviation related development. The future size and location are being evaluated as of April 2017. The details will be incorporated into the Chapter 4 Alternatives Analysis. AIRPORT RESCUE AND FIRE FIGHTING (ARFF) The ARFFfacility iscentrally located northeast ofthe terminal building. Since RDM iscertified under 14 CFR Part 130, itmust comply with ARFFequipment, ataff, and operational requirements developed by the FAA and the International Civil Aviation Organization Rescue and Fire Fighting Panel. According to Part 139 and FAA AC 150/5220-1 OE, ARFF equipment and staff requirements are based upon the length of the largest air carrier aircraft that serves an airport with an average of five or more daily departures. Table 3-20 presents the ARFF Index, aircraft length oriteria, and representative air carrier aircraft. ARFF|ndmx Aircraft Lenath Criteria Less than 8Ofeet $Ofeet but less than i2Gfeet 126 feet but less than 159 feet 159 feet but less than200 feet E More than 200 feet Representative Aircraft � t CRJ-2OO 0400A-319,ERJ-145 B-757. MID-80.A-�1O B-787.DC�1O �� Source: Code of Federal Requiations, Part 138315 RDM currently falls under ARFF Index B based on the longest aircraft operating at the Airport with an average of five or more daily departures. The Airport currently meets the ARFF Index B requirements. No change to the ARFF Index is expected within the 20-year planning window. AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER No changes to the location, size, or function of the existing ATCT are anticipated within the 20-year planning timeframe. The existing ATCT line -of -sight is depicted on Figure 3-23. Several known areas of line -of -sight blockage have been depicted. ATC has an operational way of addressing these blocked areas. No new line -of -sight blockages should be created through future on -airport development. The ATCT line -of -sight will be an evaluation factor used in the Chapter 4 Alternatives Analysis. xumx,m,mnn/c/rx.AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmwvhom|ve Plan Append§+ Transportation System Plan RD Prope Boundary z I w 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023 Chapter 3 - Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 AIRPORT SERVICE ROADS The Airport currently has awell-established network ofperimeter service roads of varying types.A combination of dirt and paved service roads allow airport personnel to access all areas of the existing airfield. No changes to the airport service roads are anticipated for the existing airfield layout. Should the Chapter 4 Alternatives Analysis recommend a runway extension or the protection for an ultimate third runway, service roads would need to be reevaluated for those planned improvements. SECURITY GATES The perimeter fence line contains multiple gates. There aseveral types ofgates used according totheir purpose and need. Gates are located primarily near the north and south general aviation areas of the airport providing access to and from hangars, businesses and general aviation users. No areas of improvement have been identified for the existing airport configuration. As alternative airfield layouts are addressed in Chapter 4, so will the requirements for additional airfield access points. DISASTER PLANNING FACILITY REQUIREMENTS In the event of a Cascadia Subduction earthquake event or other similar magnitude disaster event, the Airport could very likely be called to serve as a critical transportation link to help supply people, equipment and supplies necessary to manage the event's aftermath. Preliminary discussion with personnel from the Office of Emergency Management and Oregon Air National Guard have indicated that the Airport could be used as a forward operating base where supplies and people would arrive by air and be redistributed where necessary. Inbound supplies would likely arrive via C-1 7 and C-1 30 military transport aircraft. Depending on the source, personnel could also arrive on those military transport aircraft or on chartered commercial flights. Physical space for both supplies and aircraft will likely be at a premium in the immediate days/weeks following an event. Long-term development plans generated in this Master Plan will consider what areas of the Airport could be used to accommodate the mobilization following a disaster event where RDM serves a critical role. In the days/weeks immediately following a Cascadia event or similar disaster, it islikely that scheduled airline service would behalted. 3.5,5 Co \ CLUSIW\ S AND tEC#N1N1 F_N *AT ' Identify location for relocated 8REbuilding � Identify on -airport areas for storage of supplies to assist with the response to a Cascadia Subduction event uunwONoNIomKAuRNL*RPomMASTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendi§15- Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 3.6 FACILITY 0 �0 �c P The following summarizes the facility requirements necessary for the Airport 1oaccommodate its projected 20-year growth, increase aviation and non -aviation related revenue generating development, and comply with required airfield design standards. ./ ' Runway 5-23 will need an extension to a length of about 10,000 feet to accommodate the future airlines passenger fleet ~/ ` The parallel taxiways and runway connector taxiways will be designated as TIDG3 Taxiway system geometry improvements: Taxiway A(north ak]e): add pavement and raothpetoprovide eright angel taxiway Taxiway A(south oide): add pavement and neothpatoprovide aright angel taxiway Taxiway E: replace existing taxiway segment between the apron and new connector taxiway located about 400 feet east of the existing taxiway Taxiway F with a Chot spot: shift segment that crosses Runway 5'23tothe east Taxiway Qhot spot: shift segment that crosses Runway 5'23to Pavement strength: Taxiway H: replace the existing taxiway segment between the apron and a new connector taxiway located about 175 feet east of the existing taxiway Taxiway F with Taxiway the - Runway exit taxiways: retain current locations west evaluate pavement strength requirements when narrow body airline aircraft begin regularly scheduled operations atthe Airport v General aviation development: Site aircraft storage hangars toaccommodate atleast 33aircraft. Locate additional long-term general aviation development area for future hangars and/or future FBOs Expand passenger terminal apron. / ~ ' Identify an area within the terminal loop road for transportation network companies to pick-up and drop-off passengers v Locate parking lot expansion for upto1.1OOparking spaces v Locate parking lot expansion for up to 500 employee and tenant parking spaces ~/ ' Evaluate alternative sites for off -site rental car service center REDMOND NJUN momAIRPORT i"rERPLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendi§-6 Transportation System Plan Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements March 30, 2018 ~/ Non -aviation revenue generating improvements: North Development Parcel Subarea: Install a loop water line system between Lake Road and Veterans Way are not vve||'uonnedod.Construct new streets. North Business Park Subarea: Install a loop water system between Veterans Way and Oregon Route 12G. Upgrade the local streets (1OthStreet, Sisters Avenue, OohouoWay) tocurrent local industrial standard (4O'foutpaved width with sidewalks). Upgrade Veterans Way to meet the major collector standard (36-foot paved width with sidewalks). South Apron Subarea: Construct sidewalks on the north side of Salmon Avenue VVoot Business Park Subarea: |note|| sidewalk infi|| as necessary along Airport Way and Veterans Way Airport Way Subarea: Install sidewalk on both sides of Airport Way and Mt. Hood Drive. Upgrade Wickiup Avenue to current local industrial standard (40-foot paved width with sidewalks). Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea: Install sidewalks on south aide ofAirport Way ~/ ` Terminal Improvements: Reconfigure second floor concourse and passenger departure lounges Construct a total of eight ramp gate hardstand positions with passenger boarding bridges Expansion and reconfiguration ofconcessions Expansion ofticket hall and main concourse Expansion of the outbound baggage make-up area ~/ ' Identify location for relocated SREbuilding ~/ ' Identify on -airport areas for storage of supplies to assist with the response to a Cascadia Gubductiun event Chapter 4 details alternative evaluations for each of the above facility requirements. AIRPORT mLASzERPLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan ����� Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 C APTl�� �SU~~ This chapter evaluates a series of alternative solutions to satisfy the Redmond Municipal Airport's (RDM or "the Airport") facility requirements, which are described in Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements. The purpose of this analysis is to enable development ofairport facilities that can realistically accommodate forecasted demand. The process of defining and evaluating alternatives is iterative, beginning with a broad range of possibilities that are then refined based on alternative evaluation criteria and Airport development goals. The alternatives evaluation process is structured to systematically evaluate options and provide the technical basis for arriving at a preferred development concept. Criteria utilized to evaluate development alternatives include: ~/ Operational performance ~/ ~ Environmental considerations ` Construction feasibility v' Financial impacts ~/ ~ Stakeholder feedback Various sets of improvement plans were developed for the Airport's airside, landside and terminal areas to accommodate projected needs throughout the planning period. Although they do not exhaust all the variations, the developed alternatives form an appropriate base to produce a "preferred" plan of development for the airport. The preferred alternative serves as a guide for capital improvement planning and is the basis of the Airport Layout Plan (ALP). A summary of the recommended alternatives is included below. The analysis that led to the selection of preferred alternative is described in this chapter. ~/ R that Runway 5-23 would have an upgraded approach that supports area navlocalizer performance with vertical guidance (LPV) approach capabilities. igation (RNAV) and unxvmyAltmrnmtivm—Altmrnativei The recommended alternative extends Runway 5-23 2,962 feet to the southwest for a total runway length of 10,000 feet, as shown in Figure 4-2. The runway extension of Runway End 5 would occur on airport -owned property, requires no additional land acquisition or easements, and does not require building demolition or relocation of existing highways and roads. It is assumed Taxiway Altemnatkve—Altemnatkve i The recommended alternative, as shown in Figure 4-8 identifies a new full-length parallel taxiway east ofRunway 5'23.addresses Federal Aviation Administration (FAA "Hot Spots" One and Two, and can be constructed in multiple phases as demand dedicates. Improvements toTaxiway A and Taxiway F are identified to comply with FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13A, Change 1.Airport Design. REDMOND MUNICImVaRPoRT MASTER PLAN 1 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 ~/ Vehicle PmrkingAltmrnatvm—Altmrnadvm 1 The recommended alternative, asshown inFigure 4- 0.adda4.000parNngo1a|lsandconvehs the existing hourly terminal parking lot in front of the terminal into a combination of hourly and premium long-term parking. The existing employee vehicle parking lot to the vvoat of the passenger terminal would be reduced to accommodate expanded vendor vehicle parking. A second employee vehicle parking lot would be developed within the central passenger terminal area. Additional long-term vehicle parking would be developed west of SE Airport Way and a remote vehicle parking lot would be developed north of the Deschutes County Fairgrounds Expo Center, along the west side of SE Airport Way. Rental car facilities would be developed just north ofthe additional long-term vehicle parking lot. ./ ` Q;enenm| Aviation Development Alternative —A|ternativm 2 The recommended alternative, as shown in Figure 4-15, identifies the expansion of aeronautical and non -aeronautical development north from the existing north development area. The resultant expansion would support o new flight school, hangar expansion for both corporate and general aviation users, and support non -aeronautical development. ~/ ` Passenger Terminal Alternative — Alternative 3 The recommended alternative, as shown in Figures 4-24, 4-25, and 4-26, identifies expansion of the existing terminal to the west and will expand passenger boarding and holdroom areas, outbound and inbound baggage operations, Transportation Security Administration (TSA) security screening, rental car counters and offices, ticket counters, queuing and airline ticketing offices, administration space, and mechanical support spaces. The terminal expansion supports seven new aircraft gates, with the ability to add an eighth gate, that accommodate Aircraft Design Group (AD@)'|||airunoft (Airbus A32OorBoeing B737)served through passenger boarding bridges (PBBs). The proposed expansion stays clear of the Airport's Runway Visibility Zone (RVZ). 4.01 T 0 UCTI This chapter introduces a variety of alternatives related to the Airport's runways, taxiways, vehicle parking, general aviation (QA)development, location ofsupport facilities, passenger terminal and non - aeronautical devo|opmont.Altennativaaareana|yzoduuingeva|uationuhtehadave|opodforthoK8aotor Plan and were agreed upon during the initial scoping of the project. The outcome of the analysis and the public process iathe selection of preferred alternative for the Master Plan. Each alternative was evaluated according to five categories: alignment with operational performance, environmental considerations, constructability, financial impacts/cost to the Airport, and stakeholder feedback. Feedback was collected throughout the planning process from the Master Plan Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) and the public. The PAC is a diverse group made up of elected officials, on- and off -airport businesses, and members of the broader community. The PAC's role is to help shape the Master Plan into a document that is reflective ofcommunity goals and interests vvhi|o satisfying FAA requirements for airport REDMONDMUNICIPAL AIRPORT mASTERPLAN 2 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 development. The preferred alternative identified in Section 4.6 is used to prepare the implementation plan described in a subsequent chapter. The implementation plan includes phasing of improvements, expected capital costs, and key decision points where the Airport will reevaluate implementation assumptions prior to further development. The preferred alternatives will be shown on the ALP. The chapter is organized as follows: 41 Airport Development Objectives 4.2 Alternatives Development Process 4.3 Evaluation Categories 4.4 Evaluation Process 4.5 Airport Development Alternatives 4.GAlternatives Summary ^� � ENT � 0 JECTIVES The Master Plan is intended to produce a cohesive set of alternatives that position the Airport to accommodate the forecasted demand over the next 2Oyears. Prior todeveloping and evaluating specific alternatives, the Airport's development objectives must be understood. Development objectives for this Master Plan include: v/ Accommodate future demand over the next 20 years and position the Airport to attract additional tenants and businesses v/ Increase revenue generation through the development of non -aeronautical land Provide development area for QAand United States Forest Service (J8FS) activities Develop the passenger terminal and associated facilities to provide high levels of service Develop facilities inanenvironmentally compatible manner Develop facilities in accordance with all federal, state. and local regulations Develop facilities consistent with Stakeholder needs Development to meet long-term demand requires consideration of both the airside and landside needs of the Airport. Airside facilities include runways, taxiways, support facilities, and non -terminal building areas, vvhi|o |andsida facilities include vehicle perking anoas, vva|kwayo, public 0000ns roado, rental car facilities, taxi and ground transportation, hotels, and any other areas accessible to the public. Those needs are presented inthe following aimidoand |andsidoplanning sections. maDNIoN`MUNICIPAL mMmRT MASTER PLAN 3 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 Ajrsk1eneeds include: � Analyze the ability of the Airport to meet design standards identified in the FAA AC 150/5300- 13A,Chonge1.4irportDeoip/ v Address FAA identified Hot Spots onthe taxiways */ - Analyze existing and future capacity constraints, which include an expanded passenger terminal and apron area, additional supporting taxiways, runway extension, and a future parallel runway ~/ ' Provide a variety of aircraft storage options including t-hangars, box hangars, and corporate hangars Identify location for a new fuel farm to support passenger airline and GA operations, and define fuel truck haul routes tominimize taxiway crossings Incorporate aflight school into proposed development Expand property available for development by GA and corporate aviation tenants Identify a storage location for emergency preparedness in support of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEK8/)orother emergency responding agencies ~/ Identify strategic land acquisition to support airport operation and future development Landsk10needs include: Remove roadways within the existing and future runway protection zones (RPZs) when feasible .^Maximize buildable property for aeronautical and non -aeronautical development */ ` Analyze locations for expanded short- and long-term passenger vehicle parking, rental car operators and associated support facilities, Airport employee and vendor parking, and overflow parking � Analyze existing |endoido access and roadway networks to support future development � Identify strategic land acquisition to support proposed improvements nEDmomoMUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 4 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 4,2 ALTERNATIVES DLOPMENT PROCESS The framework for the alternatives development was established in Chapter I — Inventory, Chapter 2 — Forecast, and Chapter — Facilities Requirements. Information contained in these chapters was used to develop layouts that support the Airport's ability to accommodate forecasted demand and prepare a 20-year facility plan for the Airport moving forward. Developing the alternatives included examining: ~ FAA Airport Design Standards ^� ~ Land Development Strategies ~ Revenue Producing Opportunities ^� ~ Aircraft Operations ^� ~ PossongerEnp|anomants These factors provide the framework necessary toformulate feasible development alternatives to meet future demand. The typical alternatives development and evaluation process is illustrated in the following Figurm44. Figure 4-1 Typical Alternatives Development Process ZW7046W;� � 'r airw*cia/ c«hol*M» 'Ati6roati4e, Alternative Alternative �c?'� "����� IML 4.2.1. AIRPORT MASTER PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE INPUT � W Throughout this planning process, public involvement and stakeholder outreach has been a continuous process involving educational, |istening, and collaborative components. Stakeholder groups include the PAC, Airport Committee, City of Redmond, and members of the public. The feedback received during the process is used to qualitatively compare the alternatives. REmmnmoMowIC/nxAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 5 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 4,3 EVALUATIO C&TEGO'KES The following evaluation categories provide the basis of analysis for each alternative and support a fact- basedoompahson: � Operational Capabilities (Specific toFunctional Area) ~� Performance Requirement Benchmarks (Ability toaccommodate demand) v' Land Use Compatibility ^/ ` Environmental Impacts ./ - Stakeholder Feedback .� ` Conotmctabi|ity ~/ ` Financial Cost/Impacts These categories were developed to ensure the selected alternative is consistent with the role of the Airport and are described in the following sections. This evaluation category is applied to the alternatives to determine their ability to satisfy the facility requirements identified in Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements. An analysis of the demand and capacity requirements, and geometric and other standards that govern the design of airport components, guided development ofthe facility requirements. ERF A \11, C1,'-?kE*111?kE \TS IE CHNIARK'S This evaluation category is applied to the alternatives to determine their ability to support demand identified in Chapter 2 — Aviation Activity Forecasts. Alternatives aligned with the forecasts if they provided the facilities necessary tumeet identified demand through 2O38. 4.3.3 LAND USE C*MPATA]MILI1[Y This category evaluates alternatives based on compatible land use and the potential impacts to land or other environmental factors that could influence an alternative. These include noise exposure, wetlands or stream impacts, or other factors that might be unique to developed alternatives. REDMOND mumICuRM.AIRPORT MASTER PLAN G Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 4.3.4 E V1-t0\'N11-;��TA.1-1 �Nll This category evaluates alternatives based on compatibility with existing environmental assets with the goal of developing in an environmentally sustainable manner. The following impacts to specific environmental elements were considered: ~/ ' Air Quality v Biological Resources (including fiah, vvik]|ifa, and plants) « Climate ` Coastal Resources ~/ ' Department ofTransportation Act, Section 4(f) ^/ ` Farmlands ~/ ' Hazardous Materials, Solid Waste, and Pollution Prevention v Historical, Architectural, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources v Land Use / . ` Natural Resources and Energy Supply ` Compatible Land Use v' Socioeconomic, Environmental Justice and Chi|dron's Environmental Health and Safety Risks V ` Visual Effects (Including Light Emissions) ~/ ` Water Resources (including Wetlands, F|oodp|ains, Surface Waters, Groundwater, and Wild and Scenic Rivers) Early identification of these environmental factors may help avoid impeding future development plans. The analysis is not intended to fulfill the environmental clearance requirements as defined in FAA Order 1OSO.1F.Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, and FAA Order SO5O.4B.National Environmental Policy Act. REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT wIASTERPLAN 7 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 4.3,5 STAKE 11 LIEt. FEEIZACK Stakeholder input was obtained from the PAC, Airport Advisory Committee, City of Redmond, FAA, various stakeholders, community members, and members of the public to assist in evaluating the alternatives. Public and committee meetings were held on the following dates: ` Stakeholder Interviews — September 26.2U1G ~/ Redmond City Council — October 25.2O1G / ~ ' PAC K8eeting#1 —NovemborQ. 2018 ' Airport Committee — November 1O.2O1G ` Redmond City Council — February 7.2O17 ' PAC Meeting #2—February D.2O17 � Redmond City Workshop — April 25.2O17 */ ` PAC Meeting #3—June 22.2O17 ` FAA Teleconference — August 4.2O17 ^� ` PAC Meeting #4and Open House — October 18.2O17 ~/ ` Redmond City Council — January O.2O18 ~/ PAC Meeting #5 and Open House #2 — Scheduled for Winter 2018 These public meetings were supplemented with prnoentaUono, oxhibito, and one-on-one interviews. Input was considered and incorporated into the development of the alternatives for RDM. 43.6 CONSTA.UCTAXILI][Y This category evaluates alternatives based on implementing the alternative in logical phases. Timing and the sequence of construction can create dokayo, increase cost, and impact airport operations. Each alternative was examined to determine the degree of its impact on airport operations. 4.3.7 F1 ANCIAL C*STS/L� I PACTS This category evaluates alternatives based oncost factors toassess feasibility and form arelative basis ofcomparison. The analysis looks atthe following for each alternative: v Ability tofund the required capital expenditures VAirport operating costs ` Potential revenues, operating and capital expenses, and potential funding sources for each alternative Capital expenses include demolition costs, construction and site preparation costs, environmental costs and lease buyouts. REDMOND MUNICIPAL D Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 4,4 EVALUATIO P ' 0 CESS This section defines the alternatives analysis process utilized in accordance with FAA AC 150/5070-6B, Airport Master Plans. Developing multiple alternatives represents the first ofamulti-step process that leads tuthe selection of preferred alternative. It is important to note that the current FAA -approved ALP identifies future improvements recommended in a prior master planning effort. The master planning process addresses facility needs, but also allows the components of the previous preferred alternative to beretained ormodified, ifthey meet current needs. Airport development alternatives are created to respond to defined facility needs, with the goal of identifying general preferences for both individual items and the overall concepts being presented. The process will allow the widest range of ideas to be considered and the most effective facility development concept to be defined. Elements of preferred alternative will emerge from the evaluation process that can boot accommodate all required facility improvements. Parts of the various alternatives will be consolidated into a preferred alternative based on the input of multiple stakeholders. The preferred alternative can be refined further as the City proceeds through the process offinalizing the remaining elements ofthe airport Master Plan. Public input and coordination with the PAC, FAA, and RDM throughout the evaluation process will also help to shape the preferred alternative. Once the preferred alternative is selected by RDM, a detailed capital improvement program will be created that identifies and prioritizes specific projects to be implemented. The elements of the preferred alternative will be integrated into the updated ALP drawings that will guide future improvements at the Airport. nED*mm wUNICIPUAIRPoRTmASTERpLAw g Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 ^� � P ENT ALTE " NATIVES The initial airport development alternatives are intended to facilitate a discussion and evaluation about the most efficient way to meet the facility needs of the Airport. The facility requirements identified in the previous chapter include a variety of airside, landside, passenger terminal, and other development needs. The airport development alternatives are organized into several groups: * Runway Alternatives ~/ ` Taxiway Alternatives ./ - GA Development Alternatives v Vehicle Parking Alternatives � Support Facilities Alternatives */ Passenger Terminal Alternatives v Non -Aeronautical Property Development Alternatives The airport development alternatives are described below and depicted in Figures 4-2 through 4-32 to illustrate the key elements of each alternative. Runway 5-23 is the Airport's primary runway and is 7,038 feet long and 150 feet wide. The runway has pavement strength of 68,000 pounds for single -wheel gear (SWG) aircraft and 110,000 pounds for dual wheel gear (DWG) aircraft and is designed to C-111 Standards. Runway 11-29 is the crosswind runway and is 7,006 feet long and 100 feet wide. The runway has pavement strength of 28,000 pounds for SWG and 40,000 pounds for DWG and is designed to B-111 Standards. Additional airfield capacity is not required as the existing primary runway can accommodate future demand through 2O36. Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements explained the potential need for a 2,962-foot-runway extension to Runway 5-23 for a total runway length of 10,000 feet to serve markets in the Midwest. To examine the feasibility of an extension at RDM, six runway extension alternatives have been identified and are evaluated in the following sections. The alternatives assume an upgraded approach to Runway End 5 that supports LPV approach capabilities, similar to the localizer and glideslope of an Instrument Landing System (|L8) approach into Runway End 23. The K8AL8R(Medium Approach Light System with Runway Alignment Indicator Lights) will remain within the RPZ and on airport property. Earthwork for the runway and supporting taxiway extension alternatives to the southwest requires significant fill due tothe uneven terrain and requirements to match existing grades of the runway and taxiway. Chapter also explained how the existing Runway 5-23 RSA had no penetrations and a recommendation was made to change declared distances tothe full length of the runway. Toensure that there are no future RSA penetrations REDMONDMUNICIekL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 10 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 and that declared distances can stay at 1O.00Ofeet, the RSA around any future extension must remain clear ofobjects. None ofthe alternatives would impact night operations. Runway extension alternatives consider RPZ requirements in FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Change 1, Airport Design and the 2012 memorandum Interim Guidance on Land Uses within a Runway Protection Zone (2012 RPZ Memo). Modifications to Runway End 23 will require evaluation of the relocation of Highway 126 to meet FAA design guidance. The alternatives comply with AC 150/5300-13A, Change 1, Airport Design standards for the runway safety area (RSA), runway object free area(ROFA), and taxiway object free area (TOFA). ALTERNATIVE 1—EXTEND RUNWAY 5-23 SOUTHWEST This alternative provides a1D.DO0- foot- long runway byextending Runway 5-23 to the southwest, as shown in Figure 4-2. The extension of Runway End 5 will occur on airport -owned property, requires no additional land acquisition or easements, and does not require building demolition or relocation of existing highways and roads. The construction of the proposed runway extension and supporting taxiways would require 79,092 cubic yards (CY) of material excavation and the supporting taxiway would require 10,792 CYofmaterial excavation for80.884 CYoftotal material excavation. This alternative would add 77.400 square yards (SY) of additional pavement. FAA runway and taxiway design criteria are met with this alternative. This alternative is straightforward relative to project phasing, contractor mobilization, and staging areas, and would have minimal impact on airport operations. The extension would increase the extent of the RVZ by 1,481 feet to the southwest. The aircraft rescue and firefighting (ARFF) building will obstruct the view ofaircraft arriving to orfrom the intersection ofthe two runways. The ARFF building will relocate to keep the RVZclear ofobstructions. Four obstructions (trees) have been identified within the future 501 Approach 8urfaua, however, these obstructions are on existing airport property and can be mitigated. The extension does not change any instrument approach capabilities and Navigational Aids (NAVAIDs) would be relocated appropriately. This alternative isestimated atetotal project cost of $48.4SO.00Oand includes engineering, environmental compliance, construction management services, relocation of the ARFF building, and extension ofTaxiway Ftothe new end ofRunway 5. ALTERNATIVE 2A—EXTEND RUNWAY 5-23NORTHEAST This alternative involves extending Runway 5-23 2,962 feet to the northeast with a parallel taxiway and separate exit and entrance connectors as shown in Figure 4-3. The extension of Runway 23 by 2,962 feet requires the relocation and realignment of Highway 126 by 1.75 miles, and 62 acres of additional REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPmRTmASTERvmm 11 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 property tocomply with AC16O/53OO'13Aand the 2D/2RPZMemo. The required acquisition off the end of Runway 23 is located outside City Limits and outside the Redmond urban growth boundary (UGB) in unincorporated Deschutes County. The property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU), for which state law severely restricts non-agricultural uses. As a result, extending the runway outside the UGB or rerouting a portion of Highway 126 outside the UGB would require seeking an Exception to Statewide Planning Goal 3 (Agricultural Lands) and receiving approval from the Board of County Commissioners. To obtain approval, the City would have to demonstrate that it performed an alternatives analysis demonstrating that other options within the UQB were not viable. This could subject the City and the County to potential appeals and project delays. The North Unit Main Canal, a Section 4(f) historic resource due to its age, would also be located within the RPZ, and FAA may require potential mitigation measures such as the placement of a cap on the canal in the RPZ area. The extension would increase the extent of the RVZ by 1.481 feet to the northeast; however, there would be no additional inclusions of facilities within the RVZ. The construction of the proposed runway extension and supporting taxiway and connectors would require 1,693 CY of material excavation and the supporting taxiway would require 718 CY of material excavation for2.411 CY of total material excavation. This alternative would add 77,400 SY of additional pavement. The complexity ofconstructing this alternative is straightforward relative to project phaoing, contractor mobilization, and staging areas, and would have minimal impact to airport operations. The extension does not change any instrument approach capabilities and all NAVAIDs would be relocated appropriately. Nonew obstructions tothe 5O:1 approach surface were identified with the proposed extension. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $37,550,000 and includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. ALTERNATIVE 2B—EXTEND RUNWAY 5-23 NORTHEAST This alternative is a derivative of Alternative 2A and similarly involves extending Runway 5-23 2,962 feet to the northeast with a parallel taxiway and separate exit and entrance connectors as shown in Figure 4- 4. Instead of relocating Highway 126 outside of critical runway geometric areas, such as the RPZ, Highway 126 would remain in its current alignment and a tunnel would be constructed underneath the Runway 23 to achieve the 2,962-foot extension. This alternative requires 63 acres of additional property to comply with AC 150/5300-13A and the 2012 memorandum 2012 RPZ Memo. The required acquisition off the end of Runway 23 is located outside City Limits and outside the Redmond UGB in unincorporated Deschutes County. The property is zoned EFU, for which state law severely restricts non-agricultural uses. As a result, extending the runway outside the UGB or rerouting a portion of Highway 126 outside the UGB would require seeking an Exception to Statewide Planning Goal 3 (Agricultural Lands) and REDMOND MUNICIRU ORT MASTER PLAN 12 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 receiving approval from the Board of County Commissioners. To obtain approval, the City would have to demonstrate that it performed an alternatives analysis ofother options within the UQ8that were not viable. This would be a high bar to meet and could subject the City and the County to potential appeals and project delays. The North Unit Main Canal will be located within the Runway 23 RPZ for this alternative as discussed in Alternative 2A. This alternative will require the same amount of material excavation and additional pavement as Alternative 2A. This alternative will also have no effect on instrument approach capabilities, relocates NAVA|Doappropriately, and has noidentified obstructions. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $58,440,000 and includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. ALTERNATIVE 3A—SPLIT RUNWAY 5-23 EXTENSION This alternative involves extending Runway 5-23by4OOfeet to the northeast and by2.B62 feet to the southwest for a total runway length of 10,000 feet with a parallel taxiway and separate exit and entrance connectors as shown in Figure 4-5. This alternative assumes the FAA would not require RPZ compliance for the existing alignment of Highway 126 through Runway 23's RPZ. Extending Runway End 23 to the northeast utilizes an existing avigation easement for a portion of the land that falls within Runway 23's RPZ. Runway 5-23 extends 400 feet to the northeast in this alternative due to the extent of the OFA stopping prior to Highway 126. Extending Runway End 5 to the southwest would occur on existing airport property and requires no additional land acquisition or easements nor any building demolition or relocation ofexisting highways orroads. The construction of the proposed split runway extension and supporting taxiway and connectors would require 72,092 CY of material excavation and the supporting taxiway would require 9,416 CY of material excavation for 81,508 CY of total material excavation. This alternative would add 85,300 SY of additional pavement. This extension would however increase the extent of the RVZ by 1,281 feet and include a portion of the existing passenger terminal aircraft apron and the ARFF building. The complexity of constructing this alternative is straightforward relative to project phaaing, contractor mobilization, and staging areas, and would have minimal impact toairport operations. Four obstructions (trees) have been identified within the future 501 Approach Surface for the **tended Runway 5; however, these obstructions are on existing airport property and could easily be mitigated. The extension does not change any instrument approach capabilities and all NAVAIDs would be relocated appropriately. nEDNIumuMUNICIPAL AIRPORT wmST:PLAN 13 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 This alternative isestimated atetotal project cost of$2Q.31Q.00Oand includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. ALTERNATIVE 3B —SPLDT RUNWAY 5-23 EXTENSION This alternative involves equally extending Runway 5-23 by 1,500 feet to the northeast and by 1,462 feet to the southwest with a parallel taxiway and separate exit and entrance connectors as shown in Figure 4- 6. The extension of Runway End 23 to the northeast requires relocating and realigning 0.8 miles of Highway 126 0.34 miles north and utilizes an existing avigation easement for a portion of the land that toUs within Runvvoy23'a RPZ. The realignment of Highway 126 is 1.25 miles and is outside of the future RPZ for Runway End 23. Extending Runway End 5 to the southwest would occur on existing airport property and does not require additional land acquisition, easements, building demolition, or relocation of existing highways o/roads. The North Unit Main Canal, a Section 4(f) historic resource due to its age, would be located within the Runway End 23 RPZ, and FAA may require mitigation measures such as the placement of a cap on the canal inthe RPZ.The extension would increase the extent ofthe R\Z tothe southwest by731 feet and tu the northeast by 750 feet; however, there would be no additional inclusions of facilities within the RVZ. The construction of the proposed runway extensions and supporting taxiway and connectors would require 11,893 CY of material excavation, and the supporting taxiway would require 6,416 CY of material excavation for 18,309 CY of total material excavation. This alternative would add 81,600 SY of additional pavement. The complexity ofconstructing this alternative is straightforward relative to project phasing, contractor mobilization, and staging oreos, and would have minimal impact to airport operations. This alternative has the same obstructions and mitigation identified in Alternative 3A and also relocates NAVAIDs as needed. This alternative isestimated atetotal project cost of $31.555.00Oand includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. nED*mmumUNICImAI, AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 14 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 ALTERNATIVE JC—SPLIT RUNWAY 5-23EXTENB8ON This alternative is a derivative of Alternative 3B and similarly involves extending Runway 5-23 by 1,500 feet to the northeast and by 1,462 feet to the southwest with a parallel taxiway and separate exit and entrance connectors as shown in Figure 4-7. The extension of Runway End 23 to the northeast requires relocating and realigning 0.8 miles of Highway 126 0.50 miles north and utilizes an existing avigation easement for a portion of the land that falls within Runway 23's RPZ. The realignment of Highway 126 is 3 miles and is outside of the avigation easement of Runway End 23. Extending Runway End 5 to the southwest would occur on existing airport property and does not require additional land acquisition, eaooments, building damo|iUon, or relocation of existing highways or roads. The North Unit Main Canal will be located within the Runway 23 RPZ for this alternative as discussed in Alternative 3B. The construction of the proposed runway extensions and supporting taxiway and connectors would require 11,893 CY of material excavation, and the supporting taxiway would require 3,416 CY of material excavation for 15,309 CY of total material excavation. This alternative would 81,600 SY of additional pavement. The complexity ofconstructing this alternative is straightforward relative to project phasing. contractor mobilization, and staging areas, and would have minimal impact to airport operations. This alternative has the same obstructions and mitigation identified in Alternative 3A and also relocates NAVAIDs as needed. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $36,850,000 and includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 15 Exhibit omOrdinance coun-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan RD Property Bou an Gro h Bou E o U, O O To E d R CC C Cr N Ri (0 r) Nu N._ cc a. E ci E C. O 0; V a1 O O c 0) Ca 4— cc tq 'O p o — a a c o a ' 0 E O cc mr O C In 0 a c 2 U' cu a tile, © co Zg z c:ZO 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to ROM Property Boundary Urban Growth Boundary i Runway Protection Zon Future RPZ g i 1 Gravel Road Relocation Alignment Distance: 0.4 miles 45 ta c e I- (sane zg) uomseitmy pus- aminA Future Parallel Taxiway Removed Airfield Pavement Runway Visibility Zone ( .0 a 0 e 0. 0. < _ 0 Lr) 2 c 0 = 0 co c o ... sz TS t • 0 cn .0 c * Avigation Easem Z W :U 0 0 a cc Road Relocation a as as 0 v a o as 3 0 c ''° Runway Visibility Zon t u as 0 a a o 0 « . v Q m c 0 y l0 © o Cn F- • 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to 0 Z LU C3 W ROM Property Boundary Growth Boundary Avigation Easem Runway Protection Zon Removed Airfield Pavement r C) 0 a a. a cr di c N til 0 ` O so o wW o o vs +a.1 in M Cii elJ 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to co co Q. 2 a. 2 Urban Growth Boundary Avigation Easement a. cc u. Relocation e: 1.25 miles 0 6 Removal Distance: 0.8 miles Gravel Road Relocation Alignment Distance: 0.4 m Parallel Taxiway Runway Visibility Zone .c 0 2 a. a. < Rt S o t 2 u %re tr) -a 0 co l— e 4) Alternative 3B - S 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit 0 to d Z W 0 LL! J Removal Distance:0.8 miles Gravel Road Relocation E c U c Co a C a) E c a, z U Co 0 Q a Q cr C o • - 7 12 V a 0t as �a © in 1- 4) 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Chapter 4 — Development Alternatives March 30, 2018 Surface Transportation Effect on Night Operations SUMMARY EVALUATION OF RUNWAY ALTERNATIVES Table 4-1 presents a summary and an evaluation of the various alternatives for a runway extension at RDM. Alternative 1 is the preferred alternative because the Airport owns the land on which the runway extension will be built. Description of Improvement Extend Runway,5 2,9621 E to the southwest • OPerationalCaPabilite$ Attract Larger Airplanes and Operating Weights and Range Critical Airspace Approach and Departure Surface Considerations Effect on All -Weather Capabilities NAVAI DS Relocate with extension Runway Protection Zone ConflictsHighway 126 in Runway End 23 RPZ lAirport perimeter road in Runway 5 RPZ; ,Highway 126 in Runway 23 RPZ Instrument lighting proposed for Runway 5 Potential with longer published runway length Potential with longer published runway length for 5-23 for 5-23 alive SA Alterriative iExtend Runway 23 2,962to,Extend Runway 5 2,562'1 Extend Runway 5 1,462' Extend Runway 5 1,462' end Runway 23 2,962' the northeast and Highway to the southwest and to the southwest and 1 to the southwest and to the northeast !„ 126 tunnel under runway 1 extend Runway 23 400' ;extend Runway 23 1,500'3extend Runway 23 1,500' and taxiway 3 to the northeast '1 to the northeast 3 to the northeast Instrument approach capabilities added to Instrument approach capabilities added to Runway 5 Runway 5 No Change No Change Potential with longer published runway length for 5-23 Instrument approach capabilities added to Runway 5 No Change Relocate with extension Relocate with extension None due to Highway 126 Highway 126 in Runway None None tunnel. End 23 RPZ None Instrument lighting proposed for Runway 5 Airport perimeter road in Runway 5 RPZ; Highway 126 in Runway 23 RPZ None Instrument lighting proposed for Runway 5 PerIorlYlarico ReqUirettleots Supporting Taxiways Obstructions Runway Visual Zone Extend Taxiway F southwest 2.962' to new end of Runway 5 0 obstructions to NE 4 obstructions to SW Extends southwest by 1,481: air carrier apron and ARFF bldg penetrate RVZ Extend Taxiway F northeast 2,962' to new end of Runway 23 No obstructions Extends northeast by 1,481, no additional inclusions Extend Taxiway F northeast 400' to new end of Runway 23 and 2,562' southwest to new, end of Runway 5 Extend Taxiway F northeast 1,500' to new end of Runway 23 and 1,462' southwest to new end of Runway 5 0 obstructions to NE 4 obstructions to NE 4 obstructions to SW 0 obstructions to SW Extends southwest by 1,281' and northeast by 200'. air carrier apron and ARFF bldg penetrate RVZ Extends southwest by 731' and northeast by 750', no additional inclusions Impacts to Off -Airport Land Use Impacts to Airport Property Use Potential decreased compatibility to the southwest Reduction in available building area southwest of relocated approach end of Runway 5 due to RPZ and approach surface shift Potential decreased Potential decreased compatibility to the compatibility to the northeast and relocation of southwest and northeast business required No Change Potential decreased compatibility to the southwest and northeast Reduction in available building area southwest of relocated approach end of REDMOND MUNICIPAL Al Runway 5 due to RPZ and approach surface shift ORT MASTER PLAN 22 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 4 — Development Alternatives March 30, 2018 Description of Improvement Property Acquisitions/ Easements Historic, Architectural, and Archaeological and Cultural Resources Section 4(F) of the Department of Transportation Act Material Excavation Quantities Impervious Surfaces (Runways and Associated Taxiways) On/Off Airport Related Impacts Project Risk Implementation Complexity Impact to Airport Operations PhasingComplexity Project Cost Extend Runway 23 2,962'to Extend Runway 5 2,562', Extend Runway 5 1,462' Extend Runway 5 1,462', !Extend Runway 5 2,962'i Extend Runway 23 2,962' } the northeast and Highway to the southwest and 1, to the southwest and i to the southwest and to the southwest t to the northeast 126 tunnel under runway extend Runway 23 400' {extend Runway 23 1,500'i extend Runway 23 1,500' and taxiwa to the northeast t to the northeast ; to the northeast None None None Runway: 79,092 CY Taxiway: 10,792 CY Total: 89,884 CY 62 acres (Runway 23 RPZ and property around RPZ) The North Unit Main Canal (Historic Resource) would be located in the RPZ The North Unit Main Canal (Section 4(f) Resource) would be located in the RPZ Runway: 1,693 CY Taxiway: 718 CY Total: 2,411 CY 77,400 SY of additional 77,400 SY of additional paeement. (includes paeement. (includes extension of Twy F); 1.75 extension of Twy F) miles of relocated Highway 126 Low Low Low Low Low $48, 450, 000 DETERMINATION Favorable Medium High High Low Low $37,550,000 Favorable 77,400 SY of additional paeement. (includes extension of Twy F) High High 58,440,000 Not Favorable None None Runway: 72,092 CY Taxiway: 9,416 CY Total: 81,508 CY 85,300 SY of additional paeement. (includes extension of Twy F) Low Low Low Low 29,319,000 REDMOND MUNIC(PAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN None The North Unit Main Canal (Historic Resource) would be located in the RPZ The North Unit Main Canal (Section 4(f) Resource) would be located in the RPZ Runway: 11,893 CY Taxiway: 6.416 CY Total: 18,309 CY Runway: 11,893 CY Taxiway: 3,416 CY Total: 15,309 CY 81,600 SY of additional paeement. (includes extension of Twy F); 1.25 miles of relocated Highway 126 Medium Hgh Hgh .... vi i,,pl � I,IR Low Medium 31,555,000 Not Favorable High 6,850,000 Not Favorable 23 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 AIRFIELD CAPACITY AND THIRD RUNWAY As discussed in Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements, RDM is currently operating at 20 percent of its annual capacity, 27 percent of its Visual Flight Rules (VFR) hourly capacity and 36 percent of its Instrument Flight Rules (|FF) capacity with the existing runway configuration. Flight school operations are expected to double total operations at RDM but will not change the percentage of the mix index because of the weights of aircraft in the flight school fleet. All aircraft in the flight school fleet weigh below 12,500 pounds, and only aircraft that weigh greater than 12,500 pounds can be used in the mix index equation to determine maximum annual service volume (ASV). Total operations at RDM will approximate to 80,000, only 40 percent of its ASV of 200,000 operations. It is anticipated that the aviation activity forecasted through 2036 will not significantly change airfield capacity thus not justifying the need for additional runway capacity. However, a third parallel runway was identified in the previous April 2005 Airport Master Plan and is included on the FAA -approved current ALP (February 2005). The runway is parallel to Runway 5-23 with 3,700 feet centerline to centerline separation and is to initially be constructed 6,200 feet long and 100 feet wide with supporting taxiways and connectors. The ultimate runway was identified as O.ODOfeet long and 1ODfeet wide. Though it is not anticipated RDM will need a new third runway through 2036, this improvement will be preserved and carried forward into the preferred alternative. Land use controls are in place to protect the third runway from encroachment by incompatible development. Keeping the runway on the ALP preserves long-range flexibility for the Airport should operations require additional capacity, or airport development moves farther west. 4.5.2 TAXI \X A.Y ALTER NATIVES Airports should provide a safe and efficient taxiway system to expedite aircraft movements to and from the runways and apron areas. The purpose of taxiway improvements is to develop layouts that are operationally efficient, enhance aafety, improve oiruu|ation, increase capacity and address needs identified inChapter 3—Facility Requirements. Alternatives are evaluated inthis section and recommended improvements tuthe taxiway system are identified below. Taxiway A (north side): additional pavement will be added to shift the point at which Taxiway C curves and becomes Taxiway A. Taxiway centerline striping on the apron will be modified to connect toTaxiway Cand require anadditional turn toaccess Taxiway A. */ Taxiway (south side): pavement will be added to shift the point at which Taxiway connects to Taxiway G. This will require aircraft using the apron taxilane to taxi on Taxiway G before turning to access Taxiway A. ~/ ' Taxiway E: the existing taxiway segment between the apron and Taxiway F will be removed. |twill be replaced with a new connector taxiway located about 400 feet east of the existing taxiway (measured centerline tuuentadine). nEDmomoMUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 24 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 Taxiwav H: the existing taxiway segment between the apron and Taxiway F will be removed. |twill bo replaced with a new connector taxiway located about 175 feet east of the existing taxiway (measured centerline to centerline). ALTERNATIVE 1—FULL-LENGTH PARALLEL T, DWAY This alternative involves addressing FAA -identified Hot Spots 1 and 2and refines the Airport's taxiway system toresolve issues related todirect access tothe runway from anaircraft apron area and non - standards pavementconditions.asahowninFigurm4-@.andandinuuaoodinFAAAC1SO/53OO'13A. Change 1, Airport Design. A new parallel taxiway would be constructed in three phases on the oaotoide of Runway 5-23 with new taxiway connectors to the runway and Taxiway F. The first phase of construction would add 34,379 SY of additional pavement. The second phase would add 24,765 SY of additional pavement, and the third phase would add 26,067 SY of additional pavement. Pavement from Taxiways C and G between the new parallel taxiway and Taxiway F would be removed to address FAA Hot Spots 1 and 2 and mitigate the potential of a runway incursion. The existing Taxiway H and E intersections that facilitate direct access from the passenger apron to Runway 5-23 would be moved to a location that mitigates the potential for aircraft toaccidentally cross Taxiway F and unintentionally enter the runway environment. An additional Taxiway connection to Taxiway F would be constructed to facilitate aircraft movement to and from the apron area. To resolve the non-standard pavement conditions, pavement would be added to both sides of the Taxiway A intersections to form a 90-degree turn and eliminate the vvido'pavementanuaa. Separately, in -fill pavement would be added to the existing aircraft apron area to increase the size of the apron and provide additional uses to include aircraft parking, ground service equipment staging, and storage or other as -needed storage or staging. The phased approach to project construction allows the Airport to add additional taxiway pavement as needed and minimizes impact on airport operations during construction. The runways will need to be closed temporarily when connector taxiways are added, and when Phase 2 crosses Runway 11 -29. Construction can bescheduled tominimize overall disruption. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $20,400,00 and includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. ALTERNATIVE 2—PA 0 , LLEL T, DWAY WITH OFFSET This oltennaUve, as shown in Figurm4-S. isaderivative of Alternative 1 and similarly addresses FAA identified Hot Spots 1 and 2 and resolves all pavement conditions identified in FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Change 1.Airport Design. The only difference between Alternatives 1 and 2relate todesigning the new parallel taxiway on the eastside of Runway 5-23 and eliminating the taxiway connectors between Taxiway C and G. New taxiway connectors would be constructed to prevent the creation of hot spots similar to the REDNIOND woNICIPkL AIRPORT MASTER nA? 25 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4 — Development Alternatives March 30, 2018 existing FAA identified Hot Spots 1 and 2 on the opposite side of the airfield. Other conditions remain the same. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $10,913,000 and includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 26 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan ane Object Free Area w it to be Ren isting Pavement nsion - Alternative 1 0 o. '5 C) OA, Azi*faaz,-riw 00 i** C14 • Tui as *.Z as 54 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit 0 to ne Object Free Area Cli Z rw W J fisting Pavement nsion - Alternative 1 ment to be Removed (1 asegd) luaweAed Aemixei amend Future Taxiway Pavement (Phase 2) Future Taxiway Pavement (Phase 3) Removed Ai Fiscal Year 2018 project Alternative 2 - Parallel T 4 RO 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Chapter 4 — Development Alternatives SUMMARY EVALUATION OF TAXIWAY ALTERNATIVES Table 4-2 presents a summary and an evaluation of the various alternatives for taxiway improvements at RD&4.Alternative 1 is the preferred alternative due to the taxiway connectors not being offset, resulting in afull length parallel taxiway. Description ofImprovement \Aidim|dOpmmmbi|ity&Access Presents Solution for FAA |dendfiod Hot Spots 1 &3 <Air|inmand GAAircraft Reduces Aircraft Taxi Times ____ Increases Potential for Development Expansion Capabilities �AC15V/53V0-13ADeficiencies ;Complies with Current Design iCriteria Impacts to Airport Property Use Aviation Compatible Use Property Acquisitions/ � Impervious Surfaces Parallel taxiway on east side New east and west access to Project can bocompleted in multiple Resolved Yes New airsidonr|anUaide development area east cf RvvY5-28 ,oy None Additional Pavement: Phase 1: +c84.878GY PUeao2: 24.7858Y � � Parallel taxiway oneast side � New east and west access to I Yes ------------ Yes TBD Yes Project can becompleted in multiple Resolved Yes Now ainoidem|anU ido development area east of RWY 5-23 '«» None Additional Pavement: Phase 1: 34.378 GY Phase 2:+c24.TO5GY ^� Impact to Airport Operations Phasing Complexity pmdmct Cost DETERMINATION Low Low � $20.400.000 � Favorable REDNIONDMUNICIPi , � Low Low $10.818.000 , Favorable mRT MASTER PLAN 29 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 Chapter 3—Facilities Requirements identified the need for additional vehicle parking. The airport reached the terminal parking lot capacity of 1,083 vehicles multiple times in 2016 and had to utilize overflow parking lots. An additional 1,100 parking stalls will be needed to meet demand through 2036. This section analyzes landside alternatives through options focused on adding hourly and premium vehicle parking. long-term vehicle parking, remote vehicle employee vehicle parking, vendor vehicle parking, and rental car facilities. It is noted that the Airport has begun to see service by transportation network companies (TNCs) like Lyft and Uber. Service by TNCs could theoretically reduce future parking demand if passengers opt to take TNCs to and from the Airport rather than using their own vehicles. It is recommended that the Airport monitor how TNCs impact parking demand and adjust planning assumptions accordingly. Since each community is different and TNCs are a relatively new entrant to the RDM market, it is unknown how much impact they will have onparking demand. A passenger vehicle parking garage was not considered as part of the alternatives analysis due to the abundance of available vacant land, operational impacts during construction, costs associated with long- termoponaUonsandmaintananoe.andimpactstothesoeniuviewatoandhomthepausengertennine| ALTERNATIVE 1—SOUTHWEST DEVELOPMENT This alternative adds anestimated 4.000parking stalls, asshown inFigure 44U.and involves converting the existing hourly terminal parking lot into a combination of hourly and premium long-term parking. The estimate for the number of parking stalls is based on the average space for stalls and circulation. Additional hourly and premium long-term parking would be developed directly adjacent to the existing hourly terminal parking. This vehicle parking lot would require the relocation of existing tenants and building demolition. The existing employee vehicle parking lot to the west of the passenger terminal would be converted to hourly or premium long-term parking. A new employee vehicle parking lot would be developed off Salmon Avenue, between the south GA apron and snow removal equipment building. Additional long-term vehicle parking would be developed west of SE Airport Way, and a remote vehicle parking lot would be developed north of the Deschutes County Fair Grounds Expo Center, along the west side of SE Airport Way. Rental car facilities would be developed just north of the additional long-term vehicle parking |cd. nEDmomoMUNIC3PALAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 30 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 For the Airport tuprovide aomice to these new areas, the Airport would need to implement a bus operation as the distance to the new passenger parking lot from the passenger terminal ranges from 1.2 to 1.5 miles. This would increase costs due to the need for procurement of a bus fleet, and the on -going costs for fuel, maintenance, and drivers. The complexity ofconstructing this alternative is straightforward relative to project phasing, contractor mobilization, and staging areas and would have minimal impact to airport operations. Potential existsfor the discovery of archaeological resources in the project area, and it is recommended that a field survey be conducted prior toany construction. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $21,400,000 and includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. ALTERNATIVE 2A—SE AIRPORT WAY DEVELOPMENT This alternative adds anestimated 3.1OOparking stalls, asshown inFigure 44i.and involves converting the existing hourly terminal parking lot into a combination of hourly and premium long-term parking. The estimate for the number of parking stalls is based on the average space for stalls and circulation. The existing employee vehicle parking lot to the west of the passenger terminal would beconverted to hourly or premium long-term parking. A new employee vehicle parking lot would be developed off Salmon Avenue, between the south GA apron and snow removal equipment building. Additional remote and long- termveNu|aparkingwmu|dbedeve|opedc|000rtothocentno|pasoangertermina|aveaeaotof8EAirpnrt Way and outside of critical Runway 5-23 design surfaces. Rental car facilities would be developed just north ofthe additional long-term vehicle parking lot adjacent tothe central passenger terminal area. For the Airport toprovide service tothese new areas, the Airport would need toimplement abus operation as the distance to the new passenger parking lot ranges from half a mile to one mile. This would increase costs duo to the procurement of bus Oeet, fue|, maintanonue, and drivers. The complexity of constructing this alternative is straightforward relative to project phasing, contractor mobilization, and staging areas, and would have minimal impact to airport operations. A potential exists, however, for the discovery of archaeological resources in the area of this alternative, and it is recommended esurvey beconducted prior toany construction. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $13,692,000 and includes engineering, environmental comp|ianue, and construction management services. It does not include increased operational costs or vehicle costs associated with bus service. nEDMumMUNICIRALmRPoRT MASTER PLAN 31 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 ALTERNATIVE 2B—BEAIRPORT WAY DEVELOPMENT This alternative adds anestimated 1.GOOparking stalls, aashown inFigure 4- 2.andisdorivedhnm Alternative 2A. Alternative 2B involves converting the existing hourly terminal parking lot into a combination of hourly and premium long-term parking. The estimate for the number of parking stalls is based onthe average space for stalls and circulation. The existing employee vehicle parking lot to the west of the passenger terminal would beconverted to hourly or premium long-term parking. A new employee vehicle parking lot would be developed off Salmon Avenue, between the south GA apron and snow removal equipment building. Additional long-term vehicle parking would be developed in multiple phases, with the first phase on property west of SE Airport Way on a vacant parcel within an industrial complex. The second phase would be on property east of SE Airport Way close to the terminal area. Additional remote vehicle parking and rental car facilities would be developed closer to the central passenger terminal area west of SE Airport Way and outside of critical Runway 5-23 design surfaces. These facilities would be adjacent to the second phase for long-term vehicle parking. For the Airport to provide service to these new areas, a similar type of bus operation as Alternative 2A would need to be implemented by the Airport as the distance to the new passenger parking lot from the passenger terminal ranges from half amile toone mile. The complexity of constructing this alternative is straightforward relative to project phasing, contractor mobilization, and staging areas, and would have minimal impact to airport operations. A potential exists, however, for the discovery of archaeological resources in the area of this alternative, and it is recommended asurvey beconducted prior toany construction. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $10,678,000 and includes engineering, environmental uomp|ianco, and construction management services. It does not include increased operational costs or vehicle costs associated with bus service. REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 32 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 ALTERNATIVE 2C—BEAIRPORT WAY DEVELOPMENT This alternative adds anestimated 1.7OOparking stalls, aashown inFigure 4- 3.andisdorivedhnm Alternatives 2A and 2B. Alternative 2C involves converting the existing hourly terminal parking lot into a combination of hourly and premium long-term parking. The estimate for the number of parking stalls is based on the average space for stalls and circulation. The existing employee vehicle parking lot to the west of the passenger terminal would beconverted to hourly or premium long-term parking. A new employee vehicle parking lot would be developed off Salmon Avenue, between the south GA apron and snow removal equipment building. Additional long-term vehicle parking would be developed in multiple phases with the first phase on property east of SE Airport Way. The second phase would require the relocation of existing tenants and building demolition; however, this parcel of land is close to the terminal area. Tenants would be relocated to a vacant peruo| within an industrial complex. Additional remote vehicle parking and rental car facilities would be developed closer to the central passenger terminal area west of SE Airport Way and outside of critical Runway 5-23 design surfaces. These facilities would be adjacent to the initial phase for long-term vehicle parking. For the Airport toprovide service huthese new areas, the Airport would need hnimplement abus operation as the distance to the new passenger parking lot from the terminal building ranges from one half to one mile. This would increase costs due to the need for procurement of a bus fleet, and the on- going The complexity of constructing this alternative is straightforward relative to project phasing, contractor mobilization, and staging areas, and would have minimal impact to airport operations. A potential exists, however, for the discovery of archaeological resources in the area of this alternative, and it is recommended asurvey beconducted prior toany construction. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $16,222,000 and includes engineering, environmental comp|innuo, and construction management services. It does not include increased operational costs or vehicle costs associated with bus service. nEDmommMUNICIRNcAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 33 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan N O. CC co Long Term Parking Remote Parking E ._ lo a,c E a) > co O. CD -0 in cti 2' 0.1 -c a ZLuc 0 a- 0. co z o 0 x u) x e: Z Ill ni CI C g CO CD a I :72 E 0 2). gai CD I- R3 —14 40. ■ CC VJ to CO \ -• N ■0.0 a. EL co c 2 ■ ■ CCCCCCj 2 w 0 W -J 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to RDM Property Boundary LLJ LU —1 N O. CC Rental Car co c w C E -J Long Term Parking Remote Parking Area 2 - New Employee Parking Alternative 2B - SE g./ cc co c ° • 0 ex N , • c c O 00 ra o 0 c g 0. Q. la O. tu 2 c c cc cc cc LU Iii — J Future RPZ E E I- 01 CM • C O 0 E E 0) 021 0 C 7 EL 0 • E cc 01 • 0 Area 2 - New Employee Parking C t• >w 13 '0 CD p. Z co ce) c as cu ,— al < O. Relocated Tenants 4) 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit 0 to Chapter 4 — Development Alternatives March 30, 2018 SUMMARY EVALUATION OF VEHICLE PARKING ALTERNATIVES Table 4-3 presents a summary and an evaluation of the various alternatives for vehicle parking at RDM. Alternative 1 is the preferred alternative because of the increase in the amount of parking stalls (estimated increase of 4,000) and the minimal impact to airport operations. Table 44* Vebiele Parking akernabeee bnirerlarYtealaatien MaOlk IMPaet CategerY Alternative 1 atIternative 2rt, AlterliatiVe 28 .Description of Improvement Reorganization of t existing vehicle parking : Reorganization of existing vehicle parking and additional long term/remote and additional long vehicle parking lots I: term/remote vehicle parking lots Operability & Access to Terminal Surface Transportation Transportation Cost Addition or Subtraction of Vehicle Parking Stalls Estimated Distance from Terminal to Vehicle Parking Lot Conforms to FAA Standards Impacts to Airport Property Use Property Acquisition Business Relocation Impacts to Off -Airport Land Use Property Acquisitions / Easements Historic, Architectural, and Archaeological and Cultural Resources Threatened and Endangered Species Stalreholde Feedba Supporting Services Compatible w/Existing Development Protection of Scenic View (Terminal) Increases existing parking stalls by 314%. Passengers are transported via bus to/from the terminal. Increased cost for procurement of bus fleet, fuel and continued maintenance Estimated 4,052 additional stalls 8,500' to 8,000' No Parking in RPZ Undeveloped property repurposed into vehicle parking. None Yes None None Potential exists for discovery of archaeological resources Requires Contact of USFWS - East Wolf M.mt. Zone. Increases existing parking stalls by 287%. Increases existing parking stalls by 153%. Increases existing parking stalls by 161%. Passengers are transported r,ia bus to/from the terminal. Increased cost for procurement of bus fleet, fuel and continued maintenance Estimated 3,109 additional stalls 2,000' to 5,000' Estimated 1,667 Estimated 1,744 additional stalls additional stalls 1,500' to 4,000' 1,000' to 4,000' Future parking in RPZ and no height conflicts with critical surfaces. Business relocation to None repurpose land into vehicle parking. None Yes None Yes Vacant property repurposed into vehicle parking. None None Vacant property repurposed for Commercial/Industrial use. Yes Potential exists for disco \cry of archaeological resources Requires Contact of USFWS - East Wolf Mgmt. Zone. Required Required Above Average Excellent Above Average Above Average No Impact No Impact Impact to Airport Operations Building Demolition Phasing Complexity oinonolaicosttiliopoots Project Cost DETERMINATION Minimal Construction near SE Airport Way and Central Terminal Area Yes No Yes Low Medium 21,400,000 Favorable 13,692,000 Favorable REDMOND MUNICIPAL Al $ 0,678,000 $16,222,888 Not Favorable ORT MASTER PLAN Not Favorable 38 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 4.5,4 GENE1,ALAVIATI*N DEVELO�P NIENl[ ALTER NATIVES As discussed in Chapter 4 — Facility Requirements, the existing GA facilities are constrained and lack easily developable areas with airfield access. Demand forecasts project additional based aircraft, corporate aviation related activities, and a potential flight school. This section analyzes GA development alternatives focused on accommodating anticipated demand with a maximum build potential. ALTERNATIVE 1—CENT 0 , L DEVELOPMENT AREA This alternative, ooshown inFigure 4- 4.focunesonthodeve|opmendofaveoand37.8-auroparne|of land southeast of the proposed taxiway parallel to Runway 5-23. This parcel has been identified for future aviation use and can be developed to accommodate many GA activities. This site does penetrate the existing RVZand has direct access toRunway 5'23. The complexity ofconstructing this alternative is straightforward relative to project phasing, contractor mobilization, and staging areas, and would have minimal impact to airport operations. Earthwork is a significant factor due to the significant grades and known presence of rock in the area that requires excavation and embankment quantities of 9,200 CY and 151,000 CY, respectively. This alternative isestimated adatotal project cost uf$10.4Q1.00Oand includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. ALTERNATIVE 2—NORTH DEVELOPMENT AREA This alternative, anshown inFigure 4- S.focunesontheredeve|opmendmfexistingQAtoci|itieyontho northwest side of the Airport while maximizing the development of vacant land north and south of SE Veterans Way for a total of 60 acres. Future aviation development would occur north of existing GA facilities and south of Highway 126. The development would require relocating segments of SE Airport Way, SW Sisters Avenue, and SE Sisters Avenue and provide new access to existing buildings, leasehold aream, and new facilities. The future aviation development would be the potential site for a new flight school, or fixed -base operator (FBO). A new single engine air tanker (SEAT) Base would be located adjacent to existing USFS buildings. New commercial development would surround proposed aviation development and border, but not impact, Highway 126. It is recommended that all Airport property on the north side of the Airport, that is outside of the RPZ for Runway End 11. the USFQ lease and GA development areas, be rezoned for airport compatible general commercial zoning. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $72,000,000 and includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. Total project cost reflects the full bui|doutofthis alternative. REDMONDwmNICInA] ORTwASTERPLAN 39 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan field Pavem ane Object Free Area CI Z LU f3 W Protection Zone c N 0 isting Pavement Runway Extension - Alt I vement to be Removed (1 aseyd) tuawaned Aemp e j aintni Future Taxiway Pavement (Phase 2) Future Taxiway Pavement (Phase 3) Fiscal Year 2018 proje 4) 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to o t r. am Q Z LL! O LU J a0 u dco cnu. CO wy a? a. D.w2.0 0 Q a d N Q nJ c) c Future Airport Pavement Future Road Future Future Comm Smoke Jumper Museum Stone Water Detention icular Access Gate P4 Zg z OF-1 g 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Chapter 4 — Development Alternatives March 30, 2018 SUMMARY EVALUATION OF GA DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES Table 4-4 presents a summary and an evaluation of the various alternatives for GA development at RDM. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative because development of the north area will have minimal impacts to airport operations and the airfield and will help meet demand for future based aircraft. Table 44 1Gene0 PIPPO' CategorY 1:e..v(016PlIt° t °Met Attitetna Ve ''Vea ZIEVat" "gflleeffieflgt"„ AtlOOl" Description of Improvement Expand GA development Expand north GA area for east of RWY 5-23. fijture based aircraft, Accommodates anticipated Operability & Access demand. New roadways 'required. Airfield Impacts Low Airline and GA Aircraft Yes Separation Hangar and Building Facility Additions Greenfield site - potential multiple uses. Accommodates anticipated demand. Roadway relocations required. Low Yes New flight school, FBO and hangar facilities for corporate and general aviation users 'Performance Regal *Mk Expansion Capabilities Increases Potential for Development Impacts to Airport Property Use lEstimated 1,642,054 Sq. FT. Estimated 2,574,000 Sq. FT. of new de Nmlopment , of new de \mlopment Yes Yes Undeveloped land repurposed into aviation use. Impact to Other Facilities None Environmental lintaot Peteolal Impervious Surfaces Unknown Property Acquisitions / Easeme nts Historic, Architectural, and Archaeological and Cultural Resources Section 4(F) of the Department of Transportation Act Tenant Relocation Required Threatened and Endangered Species None None No Requires Contact of USFWS - East Wolf Mgmt. Zone. Impact to Airport Operations Low Grading/Soil Conditions Complex Facilities Demolition None Phasing Complexity Low Undeveloped land repurposed into aviation use. Demolition of older hangar facilities Estimated 46,350 SY of additional airfield pa \Rment and 34,350 SY of additional roadway pavement Relocation of Veterans Way and 10th Street Removal of two of four historic structures on airport property (Warehouse #1 and #2, circa 1940) Potential removal of an identified Section 4(f) resource Yes Requires Contact of USFWS - East Wolf Mgmt. Zone. piaanoial costaillml)acta Project Cost .flAtEEVAllOA", DETERMINATION $19,491,000 Favorable REDMON.. NJCI.R41. Al Low Complex Yes Medium $72,000,000 Favorable ORT MASTER PLAN 42 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 4.5,5 AVIATI(')N SUPPO.tT FACILITIES ALTERNATIVES This section develops and evaluates alternatives for fuel farm expansion and the identification of fuel truck routes that minimize taxiway crossings. Aviation support facilities such as fuel farms are necessary to serve existing users but also encourage growth in aviation -related activities. Another important factor is the identification of a dedicated on -airport fuel truck haul route to expedite the delivery of fuel and provide for the highest |ava| of safety by minimizing airfield crossings. F0ELFARM During the busiest times of the year, the Airport requires multiple Jet A fuel deliveries per day to keep up with demand. The lack of storage capacity is operationally inefficient and puts the Airport at risk of not being able to meet demand should the supply chain be disrupted by a fuel shortage or natural disaster. Analysis considers an expanded fuel farm location that would increase Jet A fuel storage capacity. For planning purposes, all fuel farm alternatives include five 20,000-gallon Jet A tanks. This order of magnitude increase in fuel storage would allow the Airport to have approximately fifteen days of fuel capacity during the very busiest times of year, which meets the needs projected in the demand forecasts, and is similar to the storage capacity of other airports with a similar amount of jet and turbo -prop operations. There is potential for the development of two fuel farm locations to expedite delivery and minimize the crossing of Runway 11 -29, with one site to potentially serve the north GA users, and a second to support airline operations. All fuel farm alternatives can be expanded as demand dictates. All alternatives are estimated otetotal project cost of$5.2OO.00Othat includes site work, concrete pad. containment, five 2O.00O United States Gallon (USG) tanks, pennitUng, paved vehicle access, and other associated costs. Each of the alternatives involve the construction of a fuel farm. The proposed fuel farm can accommodate five 20,000 USG Jet A fuel tanks to increase Jet A fuel capacity by 100,000 USG over the Airport's existing capacity of 44,000 USG. The existing airfield perimeter fence will need to be reconfigured to account for two new access gates that allow the ingress and egress of fuel trucks to access the secure airside of the Airport, but with access limited to only the fuel farm. The fuel farm can be expanded to accommodate additional Jet Atanks orother types offuel. ALTERNATIVE 1—BE AIRPORT WAY This alternative, aoshown inFigure 4- 6.involvootheoonstruoUonofafue|fannoff Airport Way, south of the existing parking lots. This proposed location of a new fuel farm does not penetrate the existing or any future RVZ for Runway 5'23. The complexity ofconstructing this alternative is straightforward relative to project phasing, contractor mobilization, and staging areas and would have minimal impact to airport operations. mEDmOmoMUNmPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 43 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 ALTERNATIVE 2—NORTH DEVELOPMENT AREA: VETE a . NSAVENUE This alternative, aoshown inFigure 4- 7.involvestheoonstn/oUonofafuo|tonnNffVetonenaAvenuo.on the north GA apron. This proposed location of a new fuel farm does not penetrate the existing or any future RVZ for Runway 5'23. Construction of this alternative requires the demolition of an existing building that has been identified as a Section 4(f) historic resource (Warehouse #2, circa 1940). The method of construction is straightforward relative to project phasing, contractor mobi|izeUon, and staging areas, and vvuu|d have minimal impact to airport operations. A potential exists, however, for the discovery of archaeological resources in the area of this alternative, and it is recommended a survey be conducted prior to any construction. ALTERNATIVE] —NORTH DEVELOPMENT AREA: SISTERS AVENUE This altennaUvo, as shown in Figure 4- Q. involves the construction of fuel tonn off Sisters Avenue, on the north GA apron. This proposed location of a new fuel farm does not penetrate the existing or any future RVZ for Runway 5'23. The complexity of constructing this alternative is straightforward relative to project phasing, contractor mobilization, and staging areas, and would have minimal impact to airport operations. A potential exists, however, for the discovery of archaeological resources in the area of this alternative, and it is recommended esurvey beconducted prior toany construction. REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 44 Exhibit omOrdinance coun-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Paved Area around Fuel Farm 10 so O cc to ative 1 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Paved Area around Fuel Farm a U Road/Loop to Fuel Farm lo so O cc F 13 3 u. O 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Paved Area around Fuel Farm a 0 Road/Loop to Fuel Farm I lo so o cc o0 v Srf) •W cn Ci v laj 5 a, 0 Tul aJ A vig z M ca g 44 v 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Chapter 4 — Development Alternatives March 30, 2018 SUMMARY EVALUATION OF FUEL FARM EXPANSION ALTERNATIVES Table 4-5 presents a summary and an evaluation of the various alternatives for the expansion of the fuel farm at RDM. Alternative 1 is the preferred alternative because of the low impact to the airfield and airport operations. The location of the fuel farm is beneficial for commercial operations because fuel trucks will have a short commute time between the fuel farm and commercial apron, and the addition of Jet A fuel tanks near the commercial apron will negate the need for a fuel truck haul route. Description of Improvement Construction of five 20,000 USG Jet A fuel tanks (100 000 USG) Construction of five 20,000 USG Jet A fuel tanks (100,000 USG) Construction of fie 20,000 USG Jet A fuel tanks (100,000 USG) operational canabiltnes Airfield Operability & Access Airfield Impacts Serves Jet A users only. No 100 LL ormogas tanks. Tanker entrance off of Airport Way. None Serves Jet A users only. No 100 LL or mogas tanks. Tanker entrance off of Veterans Ave. None Serves Jet A users only. No 100 LL or mogas tanks. Tanker entrance off of Sisters Ave. None Performance Re' uireMents Level of Service ,Expansion Capabilities 15 day fuel reserve Additional tanks can be added in the future. 15 day fuel reserve Additional tanks can be added in the future. 15 day fuel reserve Additional tanks can be added in the future. Lend use cern. Impact to Other Facilities Impacts to Airport Property Use None None Demolition of existing building None Demolition of older hangar buildings. None EtiVit.oniTtental Imi)act Potential Permits/Code Requirements Historic, Architectural, and !Archaeological and Cultural Resources 'Section 4(F) of the Department of Transportation Act Tenant Relocation ,Property Acquisitions I Easements oonati*uttanilltv Impact to Airport Operations ,Facilities Demolition Phasing Complexity Federal, State, City permits and Code Requirements None None No No Low No Low Federal, State, City permits and Code Requirements Removal of one of four historic structures on airport property (Warehouse #2, circa 1940). Potential exists for discovery of archaeological resources. Federal, State, City permits and Code Requirements Potential exists for discovery of archaeological resources. Potential removal of an identified None Section 4(f) resource Yes Yes No No Low Low Yes Yes Low Low ,PloanniatPogsllorea„.„. REDMOND MUNICIPAL Al ORT MASTER PLAN 48 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 ON -AIRPORT FUEL TRUCK HAUL ROUTES Fuel trucks currently travel from the north GA apron to the commercial terminal apron to refuel aircraft because Jet A fuel is only stored at the north GA apron. Travel between both aprons requires fuel trucks to travel ontaxiways that are in the movement area. Fuel truck haul route eKennaUvon are designed to allow fuel trucks to deliver fuel from the north GA apron to the commercial apron and to stop fuel trucks from traveling on taxiways or runways. Fuel truck haul route alternatives can be ignored if Jet A fuel tanks are built on both sides of Runway 11 - 29. If Jet A tanks are built south of Runway 11 -29, in proximity to the commercial apron, fuel trucks will be able to deliver fuel to the commercial apron without having to travel on taxiways or runways. ALTERNATIVE 1—INNER ROUTE This alternative, amshown inFigure 4- 8.involvestheoonstnuuUonofaroadforfue|huckoh/de|iverfue| to aircraft on the commercial apron without crossing or traveling on a taxiway or runway. The proposed road starts at the north GA apron and connects with the service road that exists around Runway 11 to avoid thaTOFA. It then continues off the service road outside of the RPZ and crosses three taxiway connectors as the road avoids the TOFA. The road stays parallel with Runway 11 -29 until it crosses in front of the segmented circle at the intersection of Runways 11-29 and 5-23, and then it turns running parallel with Runvvay5'23. continuing straight tothe commercial apron, and staying outside ofthe TOFA. This alternative isestimated adetotal project cost cf $514.2OOand includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. ALTERNATIVE 2—CENT 0 1 This alternative, as shown in Figure 4-20, involves the construction of a road for fuel trucks to deliver fuel to aircraft on the commercial apron without crossing or traveling on a taxiway or runway. The road begins at the north GA apron and connects with the existing service road around Runway End 11 to avoid the TOFA. It then continues off the service road while in the RPZ and continues along the Airport's perimeter to the south GA apron and parallels Runway 11-29 to the area of the segmented circle and follows the same route tothe commercial apron that ioshown for Alternative 1. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $162,000 and includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. ALTERNATIVE 3—OUTER ROUTE This alternative, as shown in Figure 4-21, involves the construction of a road for fuel trucks to deliver fuel to aircraft on the commercial apron without crossing or traveling on a taxiway or runway. The proposed REDMOND MUNICIrAI,aIRPORT MASTER PLAN 49 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4 — Development Alternatives March 30, 2018 road follows the same route as Alternative 2 until it reaches the ARFF. It then follows the existing perimeter fence to the commercial apron. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $183,000 and includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. REDMOND MUNICIPAL Al ORT MASTER PLAN 50 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan CI Z W 0 W J Runway Protection Zon Departure RPZ Q co cr Runway Safety Runway Object Free Area (RO Runway Obstacle Free Zone (ROFZ) ne Object Free Area tf 0 Fuel Truck Route Fuel Truck Road I 4$) 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to C) Z W 0 W J Runway Protection Zon Departure RPZ Q co cr Runway Safety Runway Object Free Area (RO Runway Obstacle Free Zone (ROFZ) ne Object Free Area 3 if 0 Fuel Truck Route Fuel Truck Ro 40 Q C) 'd' O 13 a I 4.+ w= v V N OJ .w Ct 4.4 C) 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to C) Z w w J Runway Protection Zon Departure RPZ Q co cr Runway Safety Runway Object Free Area (RO Runway Obstacle Free Zone (ROFZ) ne Object Free Area ^ 0 Fuel Truck Route Fuel Truck. Road 4) 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Chapter 4 — Development Alternatives SUMMARY EVALUATION OF FUEL TRUCK HAUL ROUTE ALTERNATIVES Table 4-6 presents a summary and an evaluation of the various alternatives for the construction of a fuel truck haul route edRDK8.Alternative 1 isthe preferred alternative because ofthe minimal impact toairport operations and facilities. / ( �Conm�uot�no{otwo way ��Conatmcbnn��abwo*aym� . . ! — |Airfie|dOpomobi|hy8Access Airfield Operational Impacts Route Alignment Impacts to Airport Property 'Vou JmpamtnOtherPoci|itiao Construction of a two way on � / ok��|��h�|n� ����k�n� airport fuel truck haul route "' e""""a� "=�"0°"a U "'U"""""="'"C""='g 0 ' "'"""'"= "'=^'"=='g o acbvemn*uyo/toxkwaya. / uode actkmmn*aya8uxkwuya. Connects North GACentral ;Connects North GA, Central GA and Airline Operations. �GA and Airline Operations. Minimal / Minimal Eliminates taxiway and runway crossings. Penetrations tothe TDFA and ROFA. Crosses four tux||anecunneciocs. None None Eliminates taxiway and runway crossings. Penetrations tuthe TDFA and ROFA. Crosses four iux||onoconnoctors. None Crosses South GAApron Connects North GA, Central GAand Airline Operations. Minimal Eliminates taxiway and runway crossings. Penetrations tothe 7T}FA and ROFA. Crosses four taxilane connectors. None Crosses South GAApron /PnupenyAcquiskonm/ 'Easements Tenant Relocation Required Impact to Airport Operations Facilities Demolition | Phasing Complexity 04 Project Cost DETERMINATION Minimal Minimal None None Low Low $514,200 noDmnNuMUNnzwL A $162.000 None ___ wnno Minimal None _____ Low $183,000 54 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 4.5,6 ASSE_\ GEJ�, TER NII \ AL ALTER NATIVES As discussed in Chapter 3 — Facility Requirements, the existing passenger terminal was originally designed for smaller commuter aircraft with 35to5Oseats. AsaidinesretiredMhesoairunafttoh/cuson more fuel -efficient aircraft with 65to AO aeets, existing facilities have struggled to meet the existing passenger demand. The forecasted growth in passengers requires additional space in almost every functional terminal component. The following areas are specifically addressed in this chapter: ./ ' Passenger boarding and ho|dnooms v/ Outbound and inbound baggage operations TGAsecurity screening Rental car counters and offices Ticket counters, queuing, and airline ticketing offices Administration space Mechanical support spaces It is anticipated that airlines will operate even larger aircraft at the Airport within the 20'yearforacaat horizon to include variants of the Airbus A320 or Boeing 737, ADG-111 aircraft. This section develops and evaluates alternatives for the expansion of the current passenger terminal to serve the anticipated demand inpassengers and larger aircraft. ALTERNATIVES 1 & 2 —WEBT & EAST EXPANSIONS PASSENGER BOARD BRIDGES AND HOLDROOMS With the projected increase in passengers, and the airlines' planned transition from regional aircraft to larger and more efficient jets, the terminal will need physical improvements to accommodate these changes. The use of passenger boarding bridges (PBBs) provides a more efficient and comfortable way to board the larger aircraft. Smaller regional jets, like the CRJ 200, can be accessed from the current boarding floor with bridges, but largerjets can only be served from the second floor waiting area. The holdrooms and associated support spaces (e.g., restrooms, concession, etc.) will need expansion to meet the larger passenger capacity ofthe aircraft. 8y2O2Git is anticipated that five passenger boarding bridges will be needed, and by 2036, an additional three bridges will be needed. To handle this expansion, the first and second floor holdrooms will need to increase in size. REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 55 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 There is only one recommended boarding bridge layout for 2026. The second floor will be slightly expanded over the existing ground floor concourse to accommodate two boarding bridges. These PBBa will service larger ADG-111 aircraft such as the A320 or a 737. The lower level gates 3, 5, and 6 will be reconfigured to house PBBs that will service small regional aircraft. Gates 2, 4, and 7 will remain as ground floor boarding. Two alternatives exist for the 2036 expansion. The first, identified in Figure 4-22, is to expand the terminal's second floor towards the west over an expanded baggage make-up area and the existing first floor pasoongerho|dnoom. In this e|temaUva, five additional PBBuvviU be installed for aircraft boarding from the second floor. Gate 3will remain aoafirst level accessed PPB. A second alternative, identified in Figure 4-23, is to expand the terminal's second floor towards the east over an expanded first floor holdroom and incoming baggage. Four additional PBBs will be added to provide aircraft boarding from the second floor. Gates 5 and 6 will remain as first floor accessed PPBs. The expansion of the gate and holdroom areas for both options is projected to be approximately 35,000 square feet (sf). OUTBOUND AND INBOUND BAGGAGE OPE 0 1 By2O10.it is expected that the outbound baggage system will be at capacity due to the increased passenger enplanements. In addition to the increase in enplanements, the first floor holdroom expansion to the west will occupy a portion of the existing outbound baggage system. The outbound baggage system will require anexpansion ofapproximately 3.5OOo[ Inbound baggage operations will also need expansion. The existing baggage claim has two baggage carousels. It is anticipated that two additional carousels will be needed to meet the increased passenger load. This expansion will move towards the east. The expansion of the inbound baggage area is projected tobeanadditional 7.8OOo[ p~ NBPORTATDONBEC0RITY ADM8N8BT 0 , TION SECURITY SCREENING The current Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screening area at the Airport consistsof two screening lanes and will be at maximum capacity in five to six years. The expected need, by 2036, is for four lanes to provide uncongested screening. The increased area needed for this expansion will be accomplished by appropriating the area currently occupied by the rental car counters and offices. Future screening options may also provide a separate screening lane for security badged personnel. The additional space required for the expanded TSA screening area will be 4,500sf. nED*mmoMoNIooNL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 56 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 RENTAL CAR COUNTERS AND OFFICES To accommodate the expansion of TSA screening, the rental car counters and offices will require relocation. Rental car operations will expand to the northeast corner of the terminal. This area will be directly connected to baggage claim and sized to meet the future needs of the Rent-A-Car (RAC) operations. TIC T AGENT POSITIONS, QUEUING, AND AIRLINE TIC T OFFICES There are currently 20 agent positions at the ticketing counters with an anticipated need to add an additional four positions by 2026 and an additional nine positions by 2036, for a total of 33 positions. Additional queuing space will also be required for the 13 new positions. A westward expansion will allow for these future needs. To support the expanded ticketing operation, additional Airline Ticket Offices (ATOs) will benecessary. The additional space required for the expanding ticketing operations and ATO offices is projected to be lD.8OOo[ ADMINISTRATION SPACE As the terminal expands, additional administrative space will be required to accommodate the growing staff. It is anticipated that a future administrative space would be provided on the second floor above the planned RAC expansion. MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, IT, AND OTHER SUPPORT SPACE To support the expansion of the terminal, additional space will be needed for mechanical, electrical, IT, and support space. ALTERNATIVE] —NEW CONCOURSE EXPANSION Development of Alternative 3 is based on comments about Alternative 1 from airport management and the general public from the open house meeting on October 18, 2017. Alternative 3 provides details on each phase ofthe terminal expansion. To facilitate future passenger capacity and the ability to handle large jet aircraft, renovations to the existing terminal would proceed in three phases: 1) renovating the existing ground UoorhoNroom (identified inFigure 4-24); 2)expanding the terminal west and adding anew concourse adjacent tothe existing second floor holdroom (identified in Figure 4-25); and 3) expanding the remaining areas of the terminal (identified inFigure 4-2G). -REDNIOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 57 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 PASSENGER BOARD BRIDGES AND HOLDROOMB Phase one will include reconfiguring the boarding corridor into extra passenger holdroom space to increase seating capacity. An expansion of the passenger holdroom will extend east past the exit lane. The ground floor of the passenger holdroom expansion will be 5 feet higher than the existing holdroom to facilitate PBBs. The extra 5 feet allows PBBato reach the larger aircraft on the apron. Throe PBBs are anticipated in the holdroom expansion. The exit lane will receive renovations to handle an increase in passengers. Norenovations will occur onthe second floor. TERMINAL EXPANSION AND NEW CONCOURSE Phase two will expand the terminal west and add anew concourse adjacent to the existing second floor ho|dnoom. In the interest of fiscal roaponsibi|ity, avoiding construction -related congestion, and alleviating space needs in the terminal, a new building will be built adjacent to and connected to the west side of the terminal. The new building will house the ticket hall and larger baggage handling area on the ground floor. The second floor uf the new building will contain a new concourse that is adjacent to the existing second Ooorho|dnoom. Access tothe concourse will be possible with escalators and elevators that will be in the ground floor holdroom. The new concourse will have four PBBs. Once the new ticket hall is operational, a portion of the existing ticket hall and ticket offices will be repurposed as the new security checkpoint to accommodate passenger capacity needs. Mechanical facilities will be relocated to the new building. Renovations will occur to the existing second floor holdroom to connect to the new concourse. TERMINAL EXPANSION OF REMAINING AREAS In Phase three, RAC operations will relocate to the existing airport administration area, baggage claim will expand into the area previously occupied by RAC operations, and the existing TSA security checkpoint will be reconfigured into a new exit lane. Completion of phase three of Alternative 3 will provide space for the expansion of program areas in order of emerging need in the future. There will be two possible configurations for aircraft boarding, the first being seven PBBs and three ground boarding positions, and the second being eight PBBsand one ground boarding position. Figure 4-26shows the first configuration for boarding. This configuration, when upgrading to an eighth PBB, will remove two of the three ground boarding positions and allow for the additional PBB to facilitate boarding from the ground floor holdroom orfrom the second floor ho|droom. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of 110,698,900 and includes engineering, environmental compliance, and construction management services. Total project cost includes the cost of the northeast terminal apron reconstruction alternative. nEDMomuMUNICIRAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 58 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan N z 0 'co �W w wo 0 CI C) v M O N c� CU v it O w .•P 4-1 0 N LU LU Holdroom Space C 0 0. C coa. cc E 0 CD 12 c I CT CT 0 Cn 2 0 0 416 0 0 0 Li- 0 CCI 0 Li N 0 bei 0 U) 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to N LU LU 0 — c 2 R3 70 CT X 0 UJ (.7 1.11 00, 0 - • IP w 0 a) u_ fi to 0 ° R0 I • c 0 (1) 0 a) 0 c.) 0 Li 0 0 co 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to co c 0 z LU LU SC 0 LL 0 CO u_ E rco hi I- E CO CO CO C C 0. C W 76 .c E a 3-c •c 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Chapter 4 — Development Alternatives SUMMARY EVALUATION OF PASSENGER TERMINAL ALTERNATIVES Table 4-7 presents a summary and an evaluation of the various alternatives for improvements to the passenger terminal at RDM. Alternative 3 is the preferred alternative because expanding the existing terminal to the west provides greater flexibility for future growth. 'Description oYImprovement � � Expona�nnfox��ng \ Expansion of existing Expansion of existingterminal facilities and ( 'n���o/n�m�w� n�ma/r�u�mz�o�l new concourse - , Ope ra bi|dy&Auceao 'Operational Impacts |AccommudateaAnticipated ,Passenger Demand xuuommoduteuAniuipatud ADG-IUAircraft (u32V/B737) 11 Reconfiguration ofinternal � � building space and temporary� placement offacilities � Runway 5expansion tnthe '. GE increases extent ofthe '. RVZ but does not include , aircraft parking positions Yes Yes 'impacts Im pact to Othe r Facilities Yes Reconfiguration ofinternal Reconfiguration of building space and '' internal building space temporary placement of d temporary placement facilitiesof facilities ______________-...... ...................... __'_---------------------- Runway 5expansion tuthe GEincreases extent ofthe RVZtoinclude aircraft parking Runway 5 expansion to the SE increases extent of the RVZto include aimom"arking Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes / PrupertyAxquisduna/ Easements Tenant Relocation Required None Yes None Yes None Yes lmpact to Airport /Fad|dieoDommditionlexity I Project Cost In Progress Favorable REDMOND wnNICInU,m Minimal Minimal Yes Yes Low Low In Progress Not Favorable Favorable mRT MASTER PLAN 64 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4-Development Alternatives March 30.2018 4.5.7 N*�,%'-AER*NA.LJTICAL* EVELOP NIENl[ALTER NATIVES The economic benefits generated from an airport's commercial, industrial, and aviation -related tenants provide substantial tax revenues and employment opportunities for the surrounding communities. Thus, it is in the Airport's best interest to develop future commercial/industrial uses, in addition to aviation -related activiUes, vvhonu feasible. Development around the Airport will diversify revenue streams and promote compatible development. &1u|Up|e subareas on and around the Airport were analyzed to examine their development potential tninclude the: Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea Airport Way Subarea West Business Park North Business Park North Apron South Apron North Development Parcel UGFQCompus Terminal Non -aeronautical alternatives were developed for the Fairgrounds Industrial and Airport Way Subareas in addition to the West and North Business Parks. The remaining potential development areas were excluded from non -aeronautical concept planning duo to their planned aviation use orother exclusive uses (a.g.. U8F8 use of its campus and potential emergency response training facility in the North Development Parcel). Non -aeronautical landside alternatives were developed to illustrate the following potential uses: vAccommodation and food services v Industrial (which includes speculative light industrial buildings, construction firms, manufacturing, and wholesalers and warehousing) ~/ ` Gas station/ convenience store v Office/flex (only inthe North Business Park) Conceptual building footprints were developed for the City -owned parcels within the Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea, Airport Way Subarea, West Business Park, and North Business Park. Additional buildings are likely to be constructed on privately held land as well, though those have not been illustrated within the development alternatives prepared for this Master Plan. REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 65 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4 - Development Alternatives Table 4-8 summarizes the approximate size of the resulting non -aviation building floor areas that could be accommodated on City -owned land within each of the four subareas and further described in the subsequent alternatives. VT., Accommodation a Fairgrounds ss Industriaf`'''' ^' Way���~ ^ Park, ' `, '��';P°�, 'ss North O 130,000 ' O O Food1restaurant'� ��/�,�'��^�� ������a'�����,'���11,1000^����������'�`&\��'�7'��'�������������'�'/���'. 'Gas station/ convenience store O O O ' ' `'' � ` �� ��� ^ �� ^' '` - ' ' � '�\C> |� � ��«��mpa�»mmm���s�.� �� ��..�'�� ��.,. � ^���mm� ` ` ��==�����,r'��*'"v����.../ Office/flex» | O O O 289,,000 �Notes: |' Gas store isnot epermitted use in the M-f Light Industrial zone xn azmne change of code amendment would be necessary to accommodate this, use. ~ Industrial buildings include light industrial buildings, construction firms,, manufacturing uses, wholesalers, and warehouse use. 3 Theillustrated portion of the North Business Parkis zoned C-5 Tourist Commercial, which does not . dustrial uses. Office uses have been illustrated in this area, as they are pennifted in the zon, e. permit in As a subsequent effort to the Master Plan update, the City may wish to consider amending the zoning near the Airport to accommodate a wider range of airport -compatible uses, including commercial, induatha|, and institutional uses. CunnnUy, nearby zones include Airport, Light Industrial (K84). Tourist Commercial (C-5), Open Space Park Reserve (OSPR), Park, and Public Facility (PF), each of which has its own set of permitted uses and development standards. Some communities have been able to capitalize on their public airports by applying zoning designations that allow for wide range of uses so long as they do not affect aviation operations. Permitting a variety of uses and imposing regulations to limit impacts on aviation may be a way for the City to stimulate economic development while maintaining and enhancing the viability of the Airport. To implement this option, the City may need to amend the Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Plan Map, Development Code, and Zone Map. FAIRGROUNDS INDUSTRIAL SUBAREA The Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea is zoned Light Industrial (Ml) and the majority is privately owned. The southernmost lot in this subarea is an 8-acre City -owned lot. The concept plan illustrates the potential for TD.00Oafofindustrial buildings on the City parcel. While not pictured on the diognoms, the privately owned land has the potential for up to 200,000sf of additional industrial buildings and 15,000-20,000sf of supporting commercial uses (e.g., restaurants). AIRPORT WAY SUBAREA The Airport Way Subarea is zoned Light Industrial (Ml) and the land is owned by the City. The southern 9 acres are currently developed with Peterson Caterpillar's facility. The concept plan illustrates nearly REDMOND MUNICIRU, AIRPORT mIASTERPLAN GG Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvm»mxvns|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 300,000sf of industrial buildings, plus 15,500sf of supporting commercial (gas station and restaurants) and a five -story, 130,000sf hotel (hotels may require additional soundproofing measures due to proximity to the railroad and runway). Of this, a hotel, 4,000sf of restaurant, and 195,000sf of industrial buildings are depicted west of Airport Way. If the land west of Airport Way is needed for rental car facilities and airport parking as envisioned in some aviation alternatives, then some or all these non -aviation uses would not be possible at this location. East ofAirport Way, the concept plan i||uotnotoo 7.000afof restaurant, 4,500sf of gas station/convenience store, and 104,500sf of industrial buildings. Due to the large parcel size east ofAirport Way, an internal circulation network with private nuodvvayo has also been WEST BUSINESS PARK The West Business Park area contains multiple zoning designations, including Light Industrial (M1). Public Facility, and Park. The concept plan illustrates 123,000sf of industrial buildings on City -owned land within the K81 zone. Potential building locations were selected to avoid the future westward extension of Salmon Drive and the future realignment ofthe Airport Way -Veterans Way intersection. VVhi|a not pictured on the diagrams, the privately owned land has the potential for up to 375,000sf of additional industrial NORTH BUSINESS PARK The North Business Park area contains multiple zoning designations, including Light Industrial (M1). Tourist Commercial (C5), and Open Space Park Reserve (OSPR). As the southern portion of this subarea is anticipated to be used for aviation purposes, only the northern portion by Highway 126 is available for non -aeronautical development. This northern portion is zoned C5 and industrial uses are not allowed, so the concept plan illustrates 289,000sf of office buildings. The C5 zone would also permit food services and accommodations, which have not been illustrated but may be considered if such uses are not developed along Airport Way south ofthe Airport. SITE, T 0 , NBPORTATDON,AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES Based on the illustrated non -aeronautical development, this section describes order -of -magnitude site preparation costs as well as transportation and utility costs that can be anticipated to serve the developments. REDMOND MUNICIpA-LAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 67 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 In general, the site preparation costs include site clearing and grading, stormwater management, installation of utilities, and construction of new roadways. Site development costs have been estimated on a square -foot basis and assume typical construction methods and design for commercial and industrial developments. The overall public utility systems within the non -aeronautical development areas appear to have capacity to accommodate the proposed uses, so a need for upgrades to existing utilities are not expected to be necessary. Some of the study areas require public utility extensions to serve new development. FAIRGROUNDS INDUSTRIAL SUBAREA Site preparation for the Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea is expected to include extension of SW Elkhorn Avenue toconnect h)the southern terminus ofSVVBadger Way, which will include 8^sewer and 12^ water public utility extensions within the new roadway. Site preparation construction costs are expected to total over $4 million, as outlined below: ~/ ' On -site earthwork, parking, and private roadways '$1.232.QOO � On -site private utilities '$818.QOO ~^ - Public roadways '$AGO.00D - Public utilities '$l.16O.00O Total site development costs: $4,171,800 ./ AIRPORT AY SUBAREA Site preparation for the Airport Way Subarea is expected to include extension of 12" public water lines along Mt Hood Drive and within the southern on -site private roadway, as well as extension of 8" public sewer lines within the southern private roadway. Site preparation construction costs are expected to total nearly $13 million, as outlined below: ~/ On -site earthwork, parking, and private roadways - $6,536,800 ' On -site private utilities '$5.S28.2OO � Public roadways '$O ' Public utilities '$855.00O ,/ Total site development costs: $12,920,000 REDMOND MMCJ1W_AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 68 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 EST BUSINESS PARK Site preparation for the West Business Park Subarea ksexpected toinclude extension ofGESalmon Drive to the western edge of the subarea, which will include 12" water and 8" sewer public utility extensions within the new roadway. The proposed realignment of the intersection of SE Airport Way and SE Veterans Way is not included in the non -aeronautical site development roadway costs listed below. Site preparation construction costs are expected to total over $8 million, as outlined below: - On -site earthwork, parking, and private roadways '$3.277.7OD � On -site private utilities ' $2.651.600 ~^ - Public roadways '$8SO.00O ` Public utilities '$1.232.5OO ~/ ~ Total site development costs: $8.011.800 NORTH BUSINESS PARK Site preparation for the North Business Park Subarea is expected to include upgrades of the existing SE 1 Oth Street and SE Veterans Way to meet city standard road sections, which will include 12" water and 8" sewer public utility extensions within 1Om Street. GEVeterans Way includes public utilities that do not need upgrades or extensions. The proposed realignment of the intersection of SE Airport Way and SE Veterans Way is not included in the non -aeronautical site development roadway costs listed below. Site preparation construction costs are expected to total over $8 million, as outlined below: ~/ - On -site earthwork, parking, and private roadways '$3.O45.4OO V On -site private utilities '$2.3O8.2OO ` Public roadways '$47O.ODU ~ Public utilities '$451.3OU - Total site development costs: $6.302.000 REDMOND MoNICInA&AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 69 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan ID c O 3. c O RD Prope Boundary CI z w W Right Of ay Protection Zone c O Ti 0 Future Road E O V) cri or w v CtS 0 aCl) .K x CI 4.1 CD v 0 0 i 0 z Ci E Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 4.5,8 AL]�Cl�,AFT RESCUE k, FIRE FIGHTING' UTILDIN ALTE' ' AlIVES The FAR Part 139 establishes certification requirements for airports serving scheduled air carrier operations. As an FAR Part 139 certified airport. RD&1 must provide Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) services in support of scheduled air carrier service. Part 139 requires that ARFF services must be able to meet a three -minute response time where an ARFF vehicle must reach the midpoint of the farthest runway serving air carrier aircraft from its assigned post or reach any other specified point of comparable distance on the movement area that is available to air carriers and begin application of an extinguishing agent. The exiotingARFF building will lie within the future RVZ ifRunway 5'23 extends to the southwest; in the need be relocated. The relocated site must remain . . � clear of all FAR Part 77 surfaces, existing, and future RVZ and not impact FAA Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) line of site. Three possible locations were identified for the ARFF building, as described below. ARFF RELOCATION SITE 1 This aKonnaUve, as shown in Figuno4-2S. involves demolishing the existing ARFFfacility and the construction ofanew ARFFfacility onaportion of the former footprint ofthe existing site, while shifting the future building a sufficient distance to remain clear ofFAR Part 77 and the RVZ. The nmwARFF location remains clear of all FAR Part 77 surfaces, does not impact the existing or future RVZ, and does not impact the existing ATCTline ofsite. This alternative isestimated atatotal project cost of $3.25O.00Uand does not include demolition, engineering, environmental compliance, or construction management services. ARFF RELOCATION SITE 2 This alternative, as shown in Figure 4-30, involves the construction of a relocated ARFF building on a vacant parcel nfland, northeast of the ATCT.adjacent tothe existing Snow Removal Equipment (8RE) building. The new ARFF location remains clear of all FAR Part 77 surfaces, does not impact the existing orfuture R\Z.and does not impact the existing ATCTline ofsite. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $2,877,280 and does not include engineering, environmental compliance, or construction management services. ARFF RELOCATION SITE 3 This alternative, as shown in Figure 4-31, involves converting the existing SRE building into the ARFF building. The new ARFF location remains clear of all FAR Part 77 surfaces, does not impact the existing orfuture R\Z.and does not impact the existing ATCTline ofsite. This alternative isestimated atatotal project cost of $2.877,28Oand does not include engineering, environmental compliance, or construction management services. RLDwmmuMUNICIeAL AIRPnmwASrERpLAm 72 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan U) Runway Safety Area p Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) 0 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to 0 z ILI ILI a co cc Runway Safety Area p p Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) z Ui ILI J U) cc Runway Safety Area Iu p Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Chapter 4 — Development Alternatives SUMMARY EVALUATION OF ARFF BUILDING ALTERNATIVES Table 4-9 presents a summary and an evaluation of the various alternatives for the relocation of the ARFFbuilding. Alternative 1 is the preferred alternative because the ARFF building will continue to be in range to meet required response times for emergencies and the alternative uses a portion of the existing ARFF building footprint for the relocation. � {Dnynnpfiunuv|mproveme 101 �Airfield Impacts fExpansion Capabilities Relocate ARFF mp���Relocate nmmmGRE '"' existing ' --- footprint. ' buildin ARFF will remain in response time distance for Low Yes ARFF will remain in response time distance for emergencies Low Yes SRE building. ' ARFF will remain in response time distance for emergencies Low Yes , i Impacts to Airport Property Use ' impact mnOther mci|mos Tenant Relocation Required !Requires Threatened and East Wolf Mgmt. Zone. Endangered Species |mpact to Ai rport Opemmmm Grading/Soil Conditions Facilities Demolition Phasing Complexity Yes Low Low Complex Complex Yes Yes Low Low aREbuilding oonexm1into ARFF None None nona ---'------ Yos ________________ nequimoouma�mUaFVVa 'East Wolf Mgnx. Zone. DETERMINATION 1 Favorable Favorable nEDmoINoMomnzPA1,m ORTmASTERpmN Favorable | ' 76 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 ovmvmxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 4 — Development Alternatives March 30, 2018 4.05,9 N :RT EAST ASSENGE TE I INA_L AP_ RE C; NST ICTI N ALTE ATIVE As part of the terminal expansion project, the northeast passenger terminal apron needs to be reconstructed with concrete to accommodate a parked regional jet Embraer ERJ-175 to have adequate support for the weight of the aircraft and tail height clearance of the FAR Part 77 transitional surface, and to remain clear of the future RVZ. The section of apron that would be reconstructed is located on the northeast side of the existing apron. The concrete area would be 135' in width and 30' in length for a total area of 4,126sf of Portland Cement Concrete Pavement (PCCP). The apron reconstruction would potentially require the relocation of two light poles, relocation of the vehicle service road, and relocation of ground support equipment storage on the apron. ALTERNATIVE 1— NORTHEAST APRON RECONSTRUCTION This alternative, as shown in Figure 4-32, involves the reconstruction of 4,126sf of pavement to PCCP to accommodate the weight of an ERJ-175. This alternative is estimated at a total project cost of $1,998,900 and does not include any relocation of light poles, service roads, demolition of existing facilities, engineering, environmental compliance, or construction management services. ND MUNICIPAL Al ORT MASTER PLAN 77 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan cc ca. 0 Cr 0 u. cc > r, .4, g .0 to © a)) ,02 cc fn C2. C M < < 0 CI Ca C CJ) C 2 00 cno. cn 13) C :14 Ct. ti CC) I- . M - ill 11 -7 cc LU C3 I - a. - 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 �9 The preferred Airport development alternative outlines the necessary development and facility improvements that will not only meet the forecasted demand presented in Chapter 2 — Forecast, but also ultimately supports competitiveness and financial viability for the Airport. It is recommended that the Airport acquire available property north of Highway 126 for future aeronautical and non -aeronautical uses, in addition to ensuring compatible uses. The following improvement alternatives are recommended. AJRS|DEFAC|UTlES Extend Runway End Stothe southwest by2.OG2 feet for atotal length of1O.00Ofeet for Runway 5-23 ~/ ' Upgrade the approach toRunway 5tosupport LPVapproach capabilities - Demolish existing taxiway connectors E and H that provide direct access to Runway 5-23 from the passenger terminal apron and reconstruct taxiway connectors E and H in a position that conforms to current FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Change 1, Airport Design standards � Construct a new taxiway connector from Taxiway F to the passenger terminal apron on the northeast side ~� Construct the first phase of a new parallel taxiway on the east side of Runway 5-23, and eliminate two segments ufTaxiways Fand C.hoaddress FAA identified Hot Spots 1 and v Construct the second phase of a new parallel taxiway on the east side of Runway 5-23 to facilitate aircraft movements and support future central GAdevelopment area v Construct the third phase of a new parallel taxiway on the east side of Runway 5-23 to facilitate aircraft movements ~/ ' Construct improvements to the north and south ends of taxiway connector A to conform to current FAA AC 150/5300'13A. Change 1, Airport Design standards ` Reconstruct the passenger terminal apron to allow the tail of a parked ERJ-1 75 to remain under the FAR Part 77 surfaces and have the weight of the aircraft properly supported ~/ ` Coordinate with the FAA, Oregon Department of Transportation — Highway Division, County of Deschutes, and the local Irrigation District for the relocation of a segment of Highway 126 outside of Runway 23's RPZ to comply with requirements in FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Change 1, Airport Deoignandthe2012RPZMe/no REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 79 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Chapter 4—Development Alternatives March 30.2018 GENERAL AVIATION DEVELOPMENT ` Expand existing GAfacilities onthe north side v Develop new QAfacilities east ofthe Runway 5End that would support future aviation uses upon bui|doutofthe north side GAfacilities VEHICLE PARKING ~/ ` Develop property near the Deschutes County Fair Grounds Expo Center for the expansion of rental car facilities, new long-term padking, and remote parking v Expand employee parking to include the vacant parcel within the central terminal area - Expand existing vendor parking to consume a portion of the existing employee parking lot SUPPORT FACILITIES ~/ ' Construct anew fuel farm south ofthe existing passenger terminal Relocate the ARFF building outside of the future RVZ PASSENGER TERMINAL BUILDING ./ ` Expand the passenger terminal building to the west to accommodate future passenger demand and |argorADG-U|aircraft NON -AERONAUTICAL PROPERTY DEVELOPr'v1ENT ^/ - Develop non -aeronautical property in the Fairgrounds Industrial, Airport Way, WestBusiness Park. and North Business Park Subareas � Explore amending the zoning near the Airport toaccommodate awider range ofairport- compatible usas.inu|udingcommarciaiindusthoiandinstituUuna|usea 4.6,1 Pl� EFE It M ED DEVEL*PNI ENT CONCEI"T Capital costs will be calculated and added to the improvement projects identified in the implementation plan. The preparation ofanupdated ALP will begin toshow how the Airport will look atthe end ofthe implementation plan. The preferred airport layout is shown in Figure 4-33. REDMOND MuNICIPA-LAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 80 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Runway Object Free Area (OFA u_ 0 a 0 N 0 C N y/Taxilane Obje Airfield Pavement vement to be Removed Future Commercial Area Future Pavement Future Auto Parking/Road C 0 U- C 0 C 0. 0) C 03 —01 C U. I I Aviation Reserve 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Chapter 5 — Financial Feasibility March 30, 2018 � 0 This chapter describes the 20-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Redmond Municipal Airport (RDM or the Airport). The CIP is a strategic year -by -year project development schedule for the continued development, upgrade, and expansion of facilities and equipment. The CIP is developed in accordance with federal and state aviation grant programs and iastructured tofit the Airport's financial capabilities. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Oregon Department of Aviation (ODA) reviewed and accepted the Airport's current five-year CIP, which RDM updates annually. Annual updates include improvement projects identified in this Master Plan through the 20-year planning horizon. The CIP is not intended to be rigid or inflexible. It does not require the Airport tobuild anything and does not require the FAA or ODA to fund identified projects. Projects that receive FAA funding will need to show that they meet FAA design standards, are justified based on FAA criteria described in this chapter, and undergo an environmental review pursuant to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).aoamended. 5,1 APP' 0 AC T 5���� Project ��x' , , ����c tig CAPITAL PLANNI G The CIP identifies individual projects, costs, and funding participation phased within the short term (1 -5 yaars).mid-term (6-1Oyears).and long-term (11'2Oyears) planning periods. The C|Pprojects are prioritized based on need identified in Chapter 2, Aviation Activity Forecasts, and Chapter 3, Facility Requirements. These considerations influenced project priority: v Ability toenhance efficiency and meet FAA design standards. ./ ` Ability torepair and upgrade facilities reaching the end ofuseful life. ~/ ' Ability tomeet user demand and desired level ofservice. ' Ability to support long-term airport strategic goals related to scheduled commercial air service, general aviation, the U.S. Forest Service, and emergency response. Several projects identified in this CIP can be phased over years. This approach helps distribute capital costs more evenly and allows the Airport to implement improvements as demand materializes. Project phasing supports accelerating or delaying project implementation in response to economic conditions and changing airport user needs. MASTER PLAN 1 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 5 — Financial Feasibility March 30, 2018 5,1,2 Project Costs Professional engineers and architects have developed cost estimates for each project contained inthe C|P. All project costs use 2O18dollars. For projects not occurring in 2018. the estimators adjusted for inflation at a nohe of three percent. Except where explicitly noted, project costs have fifteen percent contingency added to the construction cost to account for unknowns. Costs for environmental assessment, design, and construction management are included as appropriate. 5��]�mm���w » n� ' �/> ����wxn '�mm . . �� Em cx�r� m �m mnx ent The CIP identifies funding classified into one of three categories for each project: / FAA Airport Improvement Program (A|P) / Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) Local funds (Airport revenues, bonds, customer facility charge [CFC], and ODA grants) F, , AIP funds are classified as entitlement and discretionary. The FAA grants funding to airport improvements through the Aviation Trust Fund (ATF).which is financed byaviation system user fees and taxes (e.g., airline passenger tax, aircraft parts taxes, fuel taxes, and aircraft registration fees). The AIP provides the mechanism to reinvest the ATF at FAA -eligible airports. FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook (AIP Handbook) describes AIP funding eligibility. The AIP program requires the Airport to contribute local match ofG.G7 percent for A|Pgrants rem*ived, which is |ovvor than the typical 10 percent requirement. This is due tothe fact that the Airport receives a high federal share based the large amount of federal lands located in Deschutes County. More information can be found in FAA Order 5100.38D Appendix AA. The FAA distributes AIP entitlement funding annually, and the Airport can save the entitlement funds for up to three years, which helps pay for more expensive pnojecta. The FAA National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) defines RDM as a primary airport, meaning it is a commercial service airport with more than 10.000 annual passenger onp|anements. The NP|AG identifies airports eligible for AIP funding and estimates the amount of AIP funds needed to fund projects that will update airports to current FAA standards and increase capacity as needed. Primary airports are eligible for annual primary entitlement funding under the AIR The total amount of primary entitlement funding depends on the number of enplaning passengers (passenger entitlements), and the volume of landed cargo (cargo entitlement). The AIP Handbook defines how the FAA calculates primary entitlement. AIRPuWr MASTER PLAN 2 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 5 — Financial Feasibility March 30, 2018 In fiscal year (FY) 2018, the primary entitlements (PE) for RDM totaled $2,240,000. The FAA calculates entitlement based on the last calendar year of data prior to the FAA fiscal year that starts in October. FY2018 started in October 2017, and FY2018 entitlement is based on enplanement levels in calendar year 2016. The FAA projects future entitlement funds using the passenger enplanement forecast for two years prior and rounded to the nearest hundred thousand. RDM sees less than 1/10 of a percent of national cargo volume, so cargo entitlements are not included in future entitlement projections. Figure 5-1 shows the entitlement and passenger enplanement projections. Figure 5-1: AIP Entitlement Funding Projection &,KVAIMUI6likANUM5a0,4016Wal6.0a6WAWA.M.40..MKWOMMe. (0.65X.M.900.0401111W mom. „ ..,,VAgffiVOROWWW.04,00,Wairif "Widimakta*** $5,000,000 750.000 1,t) 700.000 $4.5oo,000 ›- 650,000 ,y) $4,000,000 600,000 550.000 0 $3,500,000 500.000 'L) $3.000,000 450,000 400,000 $2,500,000 LU 350,000 $2.000,000 300,000 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 0 Fiscal Year Grants (AP Entitlement) Enplanernents . i'MWMPAVOT . Wil.,.."051.51,1RAKft,M,11PROOttl . Passenger En1 Entitlement funds equal to current year dollars, not adjusted for inflation to 2018 values. Entitlement calculated using formula in AIP Handbook, Table 4-1, for when more than $3.2 billion is available in national AIP funding. Enplanement forecast described in Chapter 3 REDMOND .MUNICI.PAI, AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 3 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Chapter 5 — Financial Feasibility March 30, 2018 Projects eligible for AIP funding may receive discretionary funding if the total cost exceeds what can be covered by entitlement funds. Discretionary funds are not guaranteed and the project in question competes with others from across the NP|AG for funding. The demand for FAA AIP funds exceeds the availability. The FAA uses a national priority rating system to allocate A|Pgrant funds for specific airport projects. This formula system, which isoccasionally adjusted to nuUoct national prioritioo, considers the airport type and project role. The following are the FAAA|P funding categories and point system: V Safety/Security = 10 points ^, ` Statutory Emphasis Programs =Qpoints Planning / Reconstruction / Environment = 8 points - Capacity= 7 points p Standards = G points ~/ ` Other =4 points PFCs are a fee attached to airline tickets to pay for facilities that passengers on commercial airlines use. This fee can be used for airport improvement projects; however, the Airport isrequired toconsult with the airlines on which projects the fee will be used for. As of February 2018, the Airport collects $4.50 per enplaning passenger, and the proceeds are used for the debt service on the bonds that paid for the existing passenger terminal building. PFCo are allocated hothe existing terminal debt service through the City of Redmond (the City) Fiscal Year2O38/2O30. Local ffinds include, but are not limited to, Airport revenues from leases, fuel surcharges, landing fees, and automobile parking. Local funds may include bonds issued on the full faith and credit of the City, grants from ODA, and CFCs from rental cars. The Airport does not receive funding from the City general fund for capital or operating expenses. The Airport uses local funds to provide the 6.67 percent match on AIP-eligible projects, and to pay for projects that are not eligible for AIP funding. FAA policy states that CFCfunds can only beused for projects related tothe rental cars. The CIP identifies expected funding sources for each project based on cost and eligibility. The Airport updates it's five-year CIP with the State and the Airport annually and will update funding sources appropriately as the time nears to implement projects. Before projects included on the CIP can be implemented, they may require environmental assessment and property acquisition. The CIP allocates time and money for the Airport to complete these actions. The cost estimates include contingency for unknown expenses such as legal fees, design challenges, and changing regulation. It MR11oRYm1MaER PLAN 4 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 5 — Financial Feasibility March 30, 2018 5.14 Airport Fiatids The City reviewed the Airport's financial data to ascertain the availability of local funds to support the CIP. The City performed a financial analysis during the development of the CIP to identify if the expected local capital requirements could be met. The City's model considered revenue growth based on additional landings and passengers and the ability of the Airport totake ondebt tofinance more expensive capital Airport revenue consists ofgrants and fees collected from users ofthe air carrier terminal. Such fees include: PFCs. landing fees, rental car commissions, and parking fees. Fodono| and state grants for approved capital improvement projects make up a sizable portion of airport funding. The airport also receives revenue from non -aviation related land leases. The source of funds for operational and capital improvement projects at the Airport is the Airport Fund. The Airport Fund is divided into two sub -funds: Capital Projects and Operational Projects. The Capital Projects sub -fund is used to construct major capital projects. Operational projects are further divided into three programs: the Terminal program, the Airfield program, and the General Operations program: ~/ ' The Terminal program funds Airport Terminal operations and is collected through Airline tenants paying rent, maintenance, and overhead fees. ~/ ' The Airfield program funds Airport Airfield operations and maintenance. Costs for the Airfield program are recovered through landing and fuel flowage fees. The General Operations program funds maintenance, improvement, and leasing of industrial properties, private hangars, and vehicle parking lots for passengers and rental car agencies. Airport funds vary from year toyear depending onhow busy the Airport is. Large capital projects, typically paid for by AIP grants, are the primary cause of large variations of the past five years. For example, the Airport received $3 million in grants during FY2014, and more than $12 million in grants for FY2015. Table 5-1 shows the resource and expenditure by sub -fund. aFJY*4u;ND MwmomLmPWomMASzER PLAN 5 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 5— Financial Feasibility UkWW Total Beginning Fund Bo|enoem Total Current Resources Total Expenditures Operations Debt Service Reserve Customer Facility Charge DR 2013 2014 2015 2018' 2017 ~ $4620.801 $5'582'586 $5,617.5A2 ` $O.O3Q,651 $8'755947 _ $9.485.501 $11.283.728 $28.031.801 $14.576.848 $16.721.526 - $8.643.786 $11,228.872 $23'739,028 $22,618.499 $23/477'443 _ . $0 $O $O $2,515.917 $2'715'269 Capital Projects $1,280,450 $3j862,834 $13'808'488 $8,943,000 $8.716.000 Net Fund Total $5.562.536 $6.617.592 $9.910.457 $9.010.456 $9.910.466 �Total Resources iothe sum ofTotal Beginning Fund Balances and Total Current Resources. ' Total Expenditure is the sum of Operations, Debt Service Reserve, Customer Facility Charge, and Capital Projects. `NwtFundT�ta|ioth�d���m�nnmb�txxm�nT�t�|f�wmour��nmndTmta|E�p�ndhu�� � `Source: City of Redmond: The Airport Fund Figure 5-2 provides information on expenditures by sub -funds and total resources from FY2009 to 2017. FY2OOQtoFY2O15are income statements, and FY2U1Gand FY2U17are budgets. Thebudget are balanced: expenses equal projected revenues. The Total Resources category is the sum of current resources and the fund balance from the beginning of the previous year. The Airport has had surplus net funds with enough resources to cover expenditures. Additional details of the annual revenue and expenditure can bafound inthe City'sannual budget. Figure 5-2: Airport Fund Resources and Expenditures � , R., Total RF,.sources zoez 2013 2014 Total Expenditures == Net Funct Total uco^x,NoMUN/cuuLmuruxmMASzamPLAN G Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 5— Financial Feasibility 5,2 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN The Airport completed its latest C|PinJanuary 2D18.which covers projects for FY2OiQtnFY2O23.and reviewed itwith the FAA Seattle AirpodaOisthctOffice(ADC).TheF/AprefersthatU)enexithroeyears of capital projects remain consistent to assist in the allocation of funds across the NPIAS. Thus, near -term projects have a relatively firm timeline compared to mid- and long-term projects which have more flexible timelines. The Master Plan CIP focuses on projects that occur beyond FY2023; however, there are some recommendations for reordering projects in FY2022 and FY2023 based on conversations that occurred during Master Plan CIP development. Table 5-2 includes a summary of the costs and funding sources. Period � ! � 2O24'2��8 $2O. 148���O1 ��1r 861,480 �� _ __ 1-� 2O2Q-�O38 O3.0016G7 �4�.7O5.187 � �O1Q'2U38 '7D7� _ �� 681 $8O,5]O.O7O ��� Entitlement U3.633.4O3 $8,653,020 ,$.2,143,327 $75'040.521 Local _ $17,271,577 14143 04 $96.052.306 127,467,077 PFC funds are not shown as a source of up -front cap'tal improvement funds. PFCs are expected tobmused for terminal building debt service throughout the 20-yearC|P. This list includes only projects thataneoonsidenmdcandidmtmsfprA|Pfundin0. The CIP summary shown above does not include projects not eligible for AIP funding and does not include PFCs or CFCs as funding sources. Funding from the Airport and the State are part of the local funding category, and availability of State funding should be assessed closer to the time to implement the project. AIP discretionary funding can be variable, and the project may need to be advanced or delayed depending on funding availability. The components ofeach period ofthe C|Pare described in the following sections. ma7muwu/unm/c,,axxIvWovzN/mzaaPLAN 7 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 5— Financial Feasibility The near -term CIP includes construction of a new snow removal equipment (SRE) storage facility, acquisition of SRE and aircraft rescue and firefighting (ARFF) equipment, pavement rehabilitation, airfield lighting, and the first phase of the passenger terminal building expansion. Table 5-3 shows the near -term CIP, and the projects are described in the following sections. Figure 5-3 shows project locations. 2021 2023 ' Project SRE ing __ GREVehic|es GREBuikiin" Reimbursement Rehabilitate Taxiways F\E]H Widen Taxiway F Rehabilitate Electrical Vault Pavement Nan ntPlan- Terminal Terminal Phase 1, Part 2 . Near -Term C|PTotal 2019 Projects Discrebona _ _ $0 $1,873,930 $4,648,000 '~__.$y__ - $O $2,131,090 $8,653,020 ' Local - -- — $8,613,000 $106,667_ _ $O _�28Q'333 $332,000 $66,667 '-- $4,000 _$846'280 � $7,204,630 _ �17.271.577 $13.605.000 $39.558.000 The Airport plans to build an SRE building on the north side of the Airport. This building will provide crews with a centralized storage location for their supplies and vehicles that are presently dispersed around the airfield. The project isexpected tocost $11 million dollars and will b*funded by$3million inA|P entitlement funding, and $8 million in local funds. The Airport will be reimbursing itself $490.000via entitlement funding inFY2O2O. 2020 Projects The 2020projects include the second phase of the 8REbuilding and the purchase of two SRE vehicles. The Airport will carry the remaining $250,000 of AIP entitlement funding over to the next year, which will help cover the costs of the planned pavement and electrical projects. No environmental, design, or construction projects are planned for 2020. 2021 Projects The2D21 projects include rehabilitation of Taxiways F, E, H, N, and K, widening of Taxiway F, and rehabilitation of the lighting electrical vault. Taxiway F is the parallel taxiway to Runway 5-23, and Taxiways E, H, N, and K and the connector taxiways. Taxiway F is going to be widened near the passenger terminal apron to accommodate the wheelbase of the Bombardier Q400 aircraft used by Alaska Airlines. muoum�u^auwzcu�xAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 8 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 5 — Financial Feasibility March 30, 2018 The equipment inthe electrical vault, located onthe north side cf the Airport inthe general aviation area, is aging and in need of replacement. These projects include a mix of AIP entitlement, discretionary, and local funds. The Airport has coordinated with the Seattle ADO on the needs for discretionary funds in 2021. 2022 Projects The 2O22projects include an update of the pavement management plan and the start of the passenger terminal program. The pavement management plan will assess the condition of the airfield pavements and be used to plan future capital investment. The passenger terminal program is a multi -year project that includes terminal rehabilitation and expansion needed to meet the expected level of passenger demand. The terminal program begins with environmental permitting and design for Phase 1 A, reconfiguration of the existing holdroom and Phase 1 B, expansion of the holdroom and additional terminal apron to accommodate parked aircraft. Phase 1A, 1 B, and the terminal apron will occur over three years, starting with environmental permitting and design. It is expected that both phases of the project will be Catogorica||yExc|udodunderFAAOnder5O5U.4B0ationo/Envirnn/nonba/Policy/\ot/K8EFYV Implementing Instructions forAirport Actions as it involves the rehabilitation of an existing building and expanding the building into apaved area. The completion ofthe terminal progrom'sdesign and environmental review isexpected hubecompleted within one year. The project could experience a delay into early 2023; however, itisnot expected the delay will impact the 2O23terminal construction project. The availability of funds necessary to design and build the terminal improvements is a key consideration in implementing the project. Phase 1 A and Phase 1 B are expected to require more than $2.6 million in discretionary funds and $11 million inlocal funds. These shares were calculated assuming Q3percent of terminal square footage for Phase 1Aand 01 percent for Phase 1Bwould beeligible for any type ofA|P funding (entitlement or discretionary), and of that square footage, only 20 percent would be competitive for discretionary funds due to the nature of the project to enhance capacity. If discretionary funding is not available, or the terminal project does not compete as well for the funding as expected, then the local share will be higher. Airport operating revenues cannot cover the level of investment required and PFCs are needed for debt service onthe existing terminal. The Airport can issue a bond to cover construction costs and expects passenger growth will increase the operating revenues required for the debt service. The risk with this approach is that if passenger volumes decline, then the Airport may face a budget shortfall and need to reallocate funds to cover the debt. Demand projections and growth demonstrated by the Airport, the airlines that serve the airport, and the travelers coming to and from Deschutes County suggest that a severe decline is unlikely; howmver, it is recommended that the City perform a sensitivity analysis on this project prior to implementation. SO m�mom NLASTERvam g Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 5 — Financial Feasibility March 30, 2018 2023 Project The 2O23project is the construction of Phase 1A, 113, and the apron. Phase 1A and the apron will be built in one year. The 2023 project will be finished in 2024 when Phase 1 B is completed. The project should be designed to minimize disruption for the traveling public; however, there is a risk that construction -related disruptions may negatively impact passenger numbers during construction. The Airport dealt with construction impacts on passenger volumes and landing fees during May 2016 when the intersection of the runways was re -constructed. The |ooa ofPFCo. concessions and parking revenues, landing fees and fuel flowage fees should be accounted for when reviewing project financials. The terminal project is expected to be completed in 2024. Completing the entire project in 2023 may be possible. This would increase capital expenditure, but reduce operational impacts associated with construction. Construction phasing will be explored in more detail when the project is designed, and an implementation plan is developed. maomommaaoNzcz"m�muxrcnu'MmzsRPLAN 10 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan O 0. 2 cc Z w W J Fuel Truck Road U, to 0. U I 40 cn 4.4 V CU O 4-4 Po Po t.)-4 Mr� e,... N O N G1 O N E s-� GI) ti s_1 ct 4u z u p., Zc W cF-4 c1,14 g cc) 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Chapter — Financial Feasibility 5.2.2 Mid-teriiu CIP 0F��0��-���Q�@\ `- / The mid-term CIP includes the completion of Terminal Phase 1 B, acquisition of an ARFF truck, rehabilitation of the Taxiway G pavement and lighting, the environmental assessment for the general aviation expansion, a new Master Plan, a fuel truck haul road, and pavement maintenance. The mid-term CIP includes 500 additional stalls of automobile parking. Table 5-4 shows the mid-term CIP, and the projects are described in the following sections. Figure 5-4 shows the planned locations for these Year 1 � � Project- 2024 Terminal Phase 1.Part 3 _ [ARFFTruok M��nmAu�ParWng�O stalls) 2Q2S � Rehabilitate �� �avement ��'���� � RehoW|�otoTaxkwayGLk]hUng Mid-term Auto ----| �- ---Parking^--� — ' �OO� Nodhak1e{�� n � ' ` ���� Master Plan Update 202f] K8oatenPlan Update, continued Pavement Rehabilitation Mid -Term CIP Total 2024 Project Entitlement --��_ s2.ORS�G7 $933,333 |nn|kJibha_ In liqtbIq �ouo,o/ $625,333 $1,052.813 $12.798.980 DisonaUnne $O ` Ineligible Local e| $5,630,000 OO�nU .0� _ $6,420,000 ,3,980,000 $185,333 1 $42.333 $635.000 | - �43.333/$650,000 � $44.667 $670.000 $70,188 1,123/001� � Among the 2024 projects is the completion of construction for Phase 1 B. This project will increase the height of the passenger holdroom floor to allow passenger boarding bridges to reach larger aircraft on the apron. Additional projects in 2024 include ARFF truck acquisition and construction of mid-term auto parking. Acquisition of an ARFFtruck to nup|oco the exiating, older vehicle will require local funds. Construction of auto parking will create 300 additional parking stalls. This new lot requires removal of the United States Department ofAgriculture building and is not eligible for A|Pfunding. The project will help the Airport meet parking demand. Transportation network companies Uber and Lyft began operating at the Airport in 2017. It is recommended that the Airport monitor the effect of these companies on parking demand and adjust capital programming oodemand warrants. xao�u�umu�v�u/AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 12 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 5 — Financial Feasibility March 30, 2018 2025 Projects Taxiway G pavement and lighting rehabilitation projects will both occur in 2025. Both project timelines are flexible; however, while maintenance of existing pavement and lighting can keep them in working order, costs will increase overtime as pavement and equipment deteriorate. The lighting equipment can be upgraded to use LEDs for long term cost savings through lower power consumption, as the types of LEDs planned for use are functional in the winter months when snow piles around the base of the lights. Traditional incandescent lights melt snow with the heat they release where LEDs may not without being equipped with thermostatically -controlled heating units. The third project to occur in 2025 is the construction of2OO perking stalls. As with the parking project in 2024, the additional parking stalls will help the Airport meet parking demands. 2026 Projects The 2D2Gprojects include the environmental permitting phase of the Northside GA Expansion project and the reimbursement ofARFFtruck costs. DookJnandconatrudionofthoNorthsk1eGAExpansionwiUteko place in 2027. The project expands the available GA area with additional hangars and facilities and will also involve rerouting an existing road. This project will require an environmental assessment. The reimbursement of the ARFF truck costs is a financial transaction with which the airport is reimbursed through the entitlement funds for the ARFFtruck acquisition in2O24. 2027 Projects The design and construction phase of the Northside GA Expansion will take place in 2027. Due to the geology, there will be significant work required to bring the terrain to airport grade before construction of the facilities can occur. The Airport will prepare sites for private investment and construct automobile and aircraft access. Tenants will develop these sites and the speed at which this occurs can impact the Airport's return on investment. The project is a low priority compared to other CIP projects and not very competitive for discretionary funding due to it not being a necessity for Airport operations. The second 2O27project is the beginning of an Airport Master Plan. The Master Plan will likely revisit the need for the runway extension, assess long-term passenger terminal needs, and determine if additional automobile parking is needed. The implementation details of the Long-term Projects will be planned during the master plan project. 2028 Projects Projects in 2028 include completing the Master Plan, the fuel truck road, and a placeholder for pavement rehabilitation if needed. The road is intended to minimize the amount of time trucks spend on aircraft movement areas when transferring fuel from the northside to the southside. The Airport is considering building Jet A fuel tanks near the terminal building, which may negate the need for a fuel truck road. uamom��ns�o��mmIX)RT "zERxIAm 13 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Completed CIP Projects z w W J za z a 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Chapter - Financial Feasibility 5?� �.00 � ���]pQF������������ , , �� crmo ,- - / The long-term CIP encompasses the runway and taxiway extension projects as well as the ARIFF building relocation needed to accommodate the extensions. Phase 2 ofthe terminal project isscheduled totake place between 2035 and 2037. Three pavement rehabilitation projects are planned within that period but are considered "as -needed." Table 5-5 shows the long-term CIP, and the projects are described in the following sections. Figure 5-5 shows the planned locations for these projects. io Year -- 2035 pm�� ��� Runway Extension Environmental Taxiay Extension Environmental Taxiway Extension Design__ Rynway Extension of Taxiway Extension 1of2 Runway Extension 2 6-f-2' Taxiway Extension 2nf2 Pavement Rehab Term Phase � � Terminal Phase 2Design Terminal Phase 2(1of2) 2037 Termina|Phmse � T�of25 2038 Rehab �Long-Term CIP Total 2029 Projects Entitlement 373,333 $2.848.867 $513.333 $3k.00O $372,520 $4,456,667 $3.Q20.333 � ­ �3.8OO.00O $O $2,818,667 �,.--- $0.855.20O $5,593,600 $3,266,667 $39.361.587 Discretionary O O $O 22/382`147 �b $J , $4,592,000 $0 $O $0 � �O - ------- ,27 $O Local $125,333 $420,800 $42.860.600 �5.516.1O7 $233.333 The two 2029 projects are the environmental phases of the southwest runway extension and the associated parallel taxiway extension. The runway extension NEPA process may take 18 months or more. Justification for the runway extension is expected to occur as part of the 2027 Master Plan, and much of the environmental baseline work will occur at this time. The 2017 Master Planning process included the concept of runway extension in stakeholder meetings and the response was generally positive. The underlying goal of the extension is to open the Airport to additional markets in the Midwest that are out of range or payload -limited with the existing runway configuration. The runway length assessment is included in Chmpter3. u*mINn^No»u'mv/c/,v�AuuOoJom^SzauPLAN 15 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 5 — Financial Feasibility March 30, 2018 2030 Projects Both design phases of the southwest runway extension and the associated full-length parallel taxiway will occur in2O3O. The design phase of the ARFF building will also occur in 2030. The existing ARFF building lies within the runway visibility zone of extended Runway 5-23 and will need to be relocated. This project is considered part of the runway extension project as the building would not need to be moved if the runway was not extended. 2031 Projects Construction ofthe runway and taxiway extensions will begin in2O31 and isexpected totake two years. The ARFFbuilding relocation will also take place in2O31 and isexpected tobecompleted within oyear. The first year of work is expected to include earthwork and grading. There is an elevation change between the existing location of Runway End 5 and where future Runway End 5 will be located. Cost estimates include approximately 950,000 cubic yards of fill for the embankment required to meet runway and taxiway grading and safety area requirements. 2032 Projects Construction on the runway and taxiway extensions is scheduled for completion in 2032. Work completed in 2032 will include paving of the runway and taxiways and relocation of navigational aids. Runway 5­23 will need to be temporarily shortened during construction to keep aircraft clear of the construction equipment. Project phasing and implementation will be structured to minimize runway closure and downtime. 2033 Project There are no definitive capital projects for 2033; however, the Airport can use that year to catch up on pavement rehabilitation, ifneeded. It isrecommended that the Airport begin tnsave its primary entitlement funds this year tohelp offset the cost ofPhase 2of the passenger terminal building. The need for Phase 2 is expected to be validated by the 2037 Master Plan. The Master Plan will include new enplanement forecasts and an assessment of the performance of the passenger terminal building since Phase 1 was constructed. 2034 Project The 2O34project is the environmental permitting of Passenger Terminal Phase 2. This improvement extends the overall building footprint tothe southwest, over what isnow the vendor parking lot. Passenger Terminal Phase 2 is expected to be eligible for a categorical exclusion under NEPA because impacts are limited to previously disturbed parcels. Should an environmental assessment be required, it is expected that one can be completed within a year and not delay the start of construction. a�mwm uRP*mMAaTExxLAm 16 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Chapter 5 — Financial Feasibility March 30, 2018 2035 Project The 2O35project is the design of Passenger Terminal Phase 2. Phase 2 will expand the terminal and add a new concourse adjacent to the second floor holdroom. The new building will have the ticket hall and larger baggage handling area on the ground floor and a new concourse on the second floor adjacent to the existing second floor holdroom. The existing ticket hall and offices will be repurposed as the new security checkpoint after the new ticket hall iacompleted. 2030-2037D,nu'ectm Passenger Terminal Phase 2 will be built over two years and construction will be structured to minimize impact on existing terminal operations. It is possible that closure and relocation of terminal teci|itkso during construction may temporarily decrease airline activities; however, this impact is not expected to extend past construction. Passenger Terminal Phase 2 isexpected tocost more than $126million when it isconstructed (assuming 3 percent inflation), or roughly $72 million in 2018 dollars. Passenger Terminal Phase 2 will be funded by a combination of entitlement, discretionary, and local funds. PFCs are expected to be obligated for debt service on previously completed capital projects like Passenger Terminal Phase 1. Preliminary estimates suggest that 76 percent of square footage will be eligible for AIP funding, and of that, 20 percent will compete well for discretionary funding. The high-level funding split is 14 percent for entitlement ($18 mi||ion).14percent for discretionary ($18mi||ion).and 72percent for local funds ($Q1 million). This funding split isexpected toberevised aspart of the 2O27'2O28Master Plan. msznuomc momICuNcAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 17 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Completed CIP Projects Z w 0 W en .. 0 .o a a U I 4$) ILO CO O w Po 1-1 00 M O N ON N O N I 017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit D to Chapter 5 — Financial Feasibility March 30, 2018 5,3 C—APTE' SU The 20-year CIP provides a flexible guideline for the Airport to plan for near-, mid-, and long-term project goals. Project phasing allows the Airport to account for economic changes and adjust project priorities to meet the Airport's financial capabilities. The projects have been distributed across 20 years to reflect the airport needs and todistribute capital costs evenly. The near -term, five-year (FY2019-2023) CIP will help the Airport grow and meet demand by organizing resources to rehabilitate taxiways and runways as well as begin the large-scale terminal remodeling and expansion project. Including taxiway and runway rehabilitation in the near -term will help lower overall costs by mitigating the need for ongoing maintenance, which will increase in cost overtime. The mid-term (FY2024-2028) CIP projects include the continuation of the terminal phase and Taxiway G pavement and lighting rehabilitation. Additionally, the planned Northside general aviation expansion and additional parking is aimed at meeting the forecasted increase in activity at the Airport. The long-term (FY2029-2032) CIP projects consist of large-scale projects including runway extension, taxiway extension, and the second phase of terminal expansion. Many of these projects are multi -year and will require a large amount of funding. The long-term projects will increase the Airport's capabilities and contribute tohelping the Airport meet increased demand. ma,D_N10mm�mNIo1-1ALmPWnRT MASTER PLAN 10 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix March 30, 2018 APPENDIX A: L CHECKLJST in evelo ent) REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Appendix March 30, 2018 APPENDIX B: PLEMENTAL F CTFDTI RIDNIOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan taf.faa.govM om e/R unR eport APO TERMINAL AREA FORECAST DETAIL REPORT Forecast Issued January 2017 AIRCRAFT OP Local Operations Itinerant Operations Enplanements ec 0 ct Ey iw o H • U 1 01 AO in 00 in - M M in N 01 M in N O N Ln 00 N N d' N- N NC3s, 00 00 00 00 CY O, C., C O O O O 7-- 1 ,-- O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 L.0ML.0 00 O N AO in M N O 00 - O N N d• 7t- 00 M Lo O Ln -- M O oo N vO O M oo N O N M 01 Ln N a1 U N -, v0 0o O M Ln N O enO M • M • M • Ln O • O • O• - -ti N N • N M • M 01 00 to Ln d- d d V d- d• d 7• 1- d- d• 71- 71- b• b• 71- O kn \0 O 01 00 01 N O\ M v^+ N N OV L M M - Lo 77r. co C O d C O M 00 M N Lo 01 ON O M d- b d- Ln in Ln J N N N O• 1 N • to N • 0• 1 0• 0 AO N • M • N • ‘.O A. '15 VD .O d' d' (-1 N- O \O M d` O ‹) - N ti0 d' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d` M O M O O, O 71- 71- d` d d` d` 71- d` d` d` d` d` N M M --i M M 00 d' N Ln Ln Ln kn Lt`, in Vn Cr) 4 ,n Ln L0 O 01 - d• b• M 01 N a1 M Ln N 0\ ,~ d• N O N 01 LO Ln N N O d' N O M \O O M \O M Gt Ln N d" kn kn -- N 00 00 00 0t 01 01 O O O • 0• o N • �t N • O• ." o• o L.6N • N Ln Ln Ln vC) vO vO v0 vO v. vC) • d' d N O- O Ln Cr) d N CT v') Ap Cr) 00 Cr) M N d N --4 N AO O 01 a1 -+ O Cr) 0o O Len N O C 00 N \O N M N 00 Ln -- O N N -- dL.0 N CT N d N O N Ln O to 00 O • CT • v-. N • N • '- • ' • -71..d• • d• • L • L H d- d- M M N N • N • N N N N N N N N N N N • N • N N N Air Taxi & sr • U cat 0 H 0 U U STATE: OR OR T:ROBERTS FIELD H d' N M M - -� -- - - -- - -ti -- - -- - — L0 N N - N 00 d d' d' d' d' d' d' d' d' d d' d' d' M M M ,--i N N N M M N M M M M M M M M M M M M c6 d E 0 O d' N O 01 d- N Ln 1t'+ O1 M N N N N N N N1 N N N• kt; 00 --, M Ln 00 O Cr) Ln 00 O Cr) LnCA - - N O N N d en kn a. N N N N 00 00 00 00 01 01 01 N VD O AO St en d- c*i Cl" • O O O O O O O O O O O O.� N N N -- — --i — — -a — 0 a Cr) C3 Qr) O ® .O C\ N M 00 O in O1 -, `n C N N d' M M M 7- 01 00 O1 00 d- M N N it ' Ln 00 N in Cr M N 00 M N \0 M 00 N it; Ln M N L-0 01 M LD N N N N M Mn \O \O M • C31 (DC • co' 00 C AC) C• ).‘ kn d• ' d• ' M • M • M • M • M M • M U X 0 a M co O 00 kn N N N 00 AO G1 M 00 - M Q 00 d' kn d' M - O M M N 01 00 C in M M M d' \O Cr) d N d d 00 - CA N N M 00 A0 Lc,M- N O N d' \O Ch ct - d• - d' d• ' d• ' M • d• ' d• ' d• ' Ln C N • 0• 0 C• \ O • O • -- - - - ~ Li -ti e— I e— 1 —I —I --1 ,-1 0 > 7 M M N O -- 00 M O Ln N N 01 01 O O O L.o N O --- kn kn w N M 01 N \U N M --1 AO M N M N M 00 N d' - d" M N-a N O -1 00 V1 Gt 00 • 00 , M M 4n - en�n �n N 00 00 en�n a N O • M • N • �n - • O N • Ln 0• 1 0• 0 O G`1 00 LJ 1- N • O • N • kn 7• t N E 01 M d' -, N M M N kn ,.O 01 ''.O \O N 00 01 O , -- - N M `7r 0 -+ N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M d' d' d' d' d' d' U \O --+ —i 00 O 01 M O O 01 M M d' d' d' O \O d' kr) 01 010 01 N ---i O M -- N 00 'J N 00 O d' O1 d' M ,--, N N O 0-1 M A N N M N 1n N -, 01 Lr; 00 N 00 O kn 00 CD O N N en N O cr v'i O • O • -• i N v• 'i ' 'SO +n 0• 0 (---O• \ 0• , N • In d• ' N • 0• 1 N • kin M • N?.., O N N C', 0', O- N `n+ `.0OZ In D N 0", CD) O- N en d' a) +--- N N *----- N N N Cl Cl Cl M M M M M d' d' d' d' d' d' c 0 i 0 f 0 N Cl LO 00 -- C O O `n M �O `O LO ' LO 'C ' VD VD LOO Cd Cl \O 00 ,--- M cn \O M O O M M Cr) M M M M M M Cr) M M O d• Cl 00 ,..O O Cl d° M M `n In 1n 1n 4n `n In In kn In to 4n - 01 M \O o• 0 • AO - N N N -� 15 O O ▪ O O --) 1-1 -I N 00 Ol C) -� Cl Cr) d AO N w 0 0 0 0 C) 0 0 0 0 0 - ea -" ~ ~ Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl O O O O O O O O O O O O Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl a r taf.faa.govM om e/R unR eport 7r I O M l0 av N Len CA CA CA CA en -� ,--� - 4, C O O O O O O O O 71- i` O CO — <0 Cl \0 0 M \0 0\ M \U M Yl AO M <D Ol Cl Lon 00 C" O M N O M N 0 N oo oko oo 01 6, c O +0 +0 +.0 +. +.O 0 \0 C^ - - - ra —1 —+ —,1-1 O O O O O O Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Li") Lin M \p 0\ N Ln 00 7t° Cr) 01 M \0 N N N M M M 71- 71- \0 \O �D \0 D \0 —I —a M -. 0\ N Ln l` C +.0 N N 00 01 N 00 d" h O M \0 O `s0 N N C` 00 00 00 N N N N N N N N -- e — — —, 1-1 St et Ct 7t M M M M M M M M N[N C^ N I-- N r- ock O M Ln 00 O M Ln 0\ O O O O --I — — Ln N 0, N Lr) 0\ -� Ln 0\ M oo N \O -� M M ooM M M co" M L0 00 `n OooLn M VD G1 M h O Ln *-� M Ln 00 O M LI; 00 N N N N cfc M M f^ oo `n N M tin cr, 00 M 00 Ln O oo Ln 71- v0 N O 0",< Len" M Ln Ln oo CD O -� - 00 O N 0� 1,0 C® C 71- Z M O OZ O M 0, kr) M O 0, O C� O oo f" +.0 in M M N Ln in L0 71- C"t° � Ct 7t- ct Ln in M Cr) M M M M M M Ln Ln Lin Ln Lin Lin Li") Ll)a * * * * * * * * 00 0\ O — N M Ln N N M M M M M M p O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N an INAL AREA FORECAST DETAIL REPORT :I pi 44 Local Operations Itinerant Operations Enplanements . 0 C.D 0 c� Ey iw 00 C F, O 71-- N o N .• U C7 Air Taxi & N 7r 00 Ln N M O U O k. 00 w, .7 C) a U O H • ci U ct kra N N 47) as 0 a) w T (A 0 as 0 0 a c H U X 0 0 0. Q 0 0 > 0 0 0. E 0 U cB N 0 N 0 0 c6 c a v o 0 0 so 0 W 8 0 0 Q t Appendix B, Attachment 2 Source: https://www.census.govicontentidam/Censusinewsroomireleases/2015/cbl 5-56_table3.pdf The 20 Fastest -Growing Metro Areas from July 1, 2013, to July 1, 2014 Rank Metro Area Percent Change 1. The Villages, Fla. 5.4 2. Myrtle Beach -Conway -North Myrtle Beach, S.C.-N.C. 3.2 3. Austin -Round Rock, Texas 3.0 4. Odessa, Texas 2.9 5. St. George, Utah 2.9 6. Cape Coral -Fort Myers, Fla. 2.7 7. Bend -Redmond, Ore. 2.7 8. Greeley, Cob. 2.6 9. Midland, Texas 2.6 10. Naples-Immokalee-Marco Island, Fla. 2.5 11. Houston -The Woodlands -Sugar Land, Texas 2.5 12. Fort Collins, Cob. 2.4 13. Hilton Head Island -Bluffton -Beaufort, S.C. 2.4 14. Daphne-Fairhope-Foley, Ala. 2.4 15. Raleigh, N.C. 2.3 16. Orlando -Kissimmee -Sanford, Fla. 2.2 17. Charleston -North Charleston, S.C. 2.2 18. North Port -Sarasota -Bradenton, Fla. 2.2 19. Panama City, Fla. 2.2 20. Boise City, Idaho 2. 1 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Source: https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2017/cb17-44.html Cgilegig Newsroom FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: THURSDAY, MARCH 23, 2017 Maricopa County Added Over 222 People Per Day in 2016, More Than Any Other County March 23, 2017 Release Number: CB17-44 On the Move 114,!,='•,, MARCH 23, 2017 — Maricopa County, Ariz., replaced Harris County, Texas, as the county with the nation's highest annual population growth, according to U.S. Census Bureau population estimates released today. Harris County was the largest numeric gainer for eight years in a row. Maricopa County gained 81,360 people between July 1, 2015 and July 1, 2016, or about 222 people per day, while the nation's second-largest population gainer, Harris County, gained 56,587 people, or about 155 people per day on average. Maricopa County, home to Phoenix, primarily grew through the addition of 43,189 residents from net domestic migration, a measure of how many people move to or from an area versus other parts of the United States. The county also added 25,428 people from natural increase (more births than deaths) and 10,188 people from net international migration. Harris County, Texas, home to Houston, saw changes in net domestic migration, going from a net gain of more than 17,000 to a net loss of more than 16,000. Despite this, Harris County had the second largest gain in population due to high natural increase (46,412) and net international migration (27,922). "In the early 2000s, Maricopa County was in the top one or two counties by numeric growth. From 2009-2011, Maricopa County saw much lower net migration than in the years before or after, which caused the county to drop out of the top population -gaining counties," explained Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Peter Borsella, a demographer in the Census Bureau's population division. "While net international migration has not reached prior levels, net domestic migration and natural increase have continued to rise, making Maricopa County this year's largest numeric gainer." In addition, Maricopa grew the fastest among the top 10 largest counties at 1.95 percent, an increase from 1.90 percent from the previous year. Harris County remained the third -largest county with 4.6 million people, and Maricopa County remained the fourth -largest county with 4.2 million people. Los Angeles County and Cook County, Ill., remained the largest and second-largest counties, respectively. The statistics released today provide population estimates and components of change for our nation's 382 metropolitan statistical areas, 551 micropolitan statistical areas, and 3,142 counties, as well as Puerto Rico's metropolitan statistical areas, micropolitan statistical areas and municipios. Find more highlights from this year's release below and local -level statistics on census.gov. In the coming months, the Census Bureau will release 2016 population estimates for cities and towns, as well as national, state and county population estimates by age, sex, race and Hispanic origin. Some High -Population Counties or County -Equivalents Continued to Experience Population Loss These notable high -population counties continued to see population loss: • Cook County, Ill. (Chicago): -21,324. • Wayne County, Mich. (Detroit): -7,696. • Baltimore city, Md.: -6,738. Baltimore city saw an increase in population loss this year primarily due to a doubling of its net domestic out -migration. Fastest -Growing Areas in Utah Three of the 20 fastest -growing metro areas between 2015 and 2016 were located either partially or completely in Utah (St. George, Utah; Provo-Orem, Utah; and Logan, Utah -Idaho). • Provo-Orem, Utah, and Logan, Utah -Idaho, saw natural increase as a larger component of growth than either net intemational migration or net domestic migration, while St. George, Utah, saw net domestic migration as a larger component of growth than either net international migration or natural increase. • Also, San Juan County, Utah, was the fastest -growing county in the United States among counties with populations of 10,000 or more in 2015. It grew by 7.6 percent. Second -Fastest -Growing U.S. County in 2015 Fell to 2,858th in 2016 North Dakota counties no longer top the list of fastest -growing counties by percentage change. • McKenzie County fell from second -fastest growing by percentage change to 2,858th. • Williams County fell from third to 3,105th. • M ICc4tntIlyrfkidrom 2k*4( 15 2,315thinprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 111. I • Stark County fell from eighth to 3,103rd. All of these counties lost population due to people moving away to other parts of the United States (negative net domestic migration). Formerly fast-growing North Dakota counties have been replaced in the top 10 by counties in Iowa, Oregon and Washington. Other top 10 counties once again are in Utah, Texas and Florida. County Highlights ▪ Eight of the 10 counties with the most natural decrease (more deaths than births) were in Florida. Four of the top 10 counties with the most natural increase were in California, and 3 of the 10 were in Texas. • St. Louis County, Mo., dropped below 1 million for the first time since 2011, largely due to a rise in net domestic out -migration. ▪ Three counties reached a population milestone of 100,000 or higher: Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska; Highlands County, Fla., and Carver County, Minn. • Pasco County, Fla., reached a population of 500,000, and Tarrant County, Texas, reached 2 million. Metropolitan Statistical Area Highlights ▪ The nation's 382 metro areas contained approximately 277.1 million people in 2016, representing approximately 86 percent of the nation's population. This was an increase of approximately 2.3 million people from 2015. ▪ For the fourth year in a row, The Villages, Fla., a metro area west of the Orlando -Kissimmee -Sanford, Fla., metro area, was the nation's fastest - growing metro area, with a 4.3 percent population increase between 2015 and 2016. ▪ The Dallas -Fort Worth -Arlington, Texas, and Houston -The Woodlands -Sugar Land, Texas, metro areas were the two largest numeric -gaining metro areas between 2015 and 2016, increasing by more than 100,000 each. ▪ Four metro areas were among both the 25 fastest growing and the 25 largest numeric gaining between 2015 and 2016: Austin -Round Rock, Texas; Raleigh, N.C.; Orlando -Kissimmee -Sanford, Fla.; and Las Vegas -Henderson -Paradise, Nev. For all four areas, net domestic migration was a larger component of change than either net international migration or natural increase ▪ Among the 10 largest metro areas, the Chicago -Naperville -Elgin, III.-Ind.-Wis., metro area was the only metro area that did not grow in population between 2015 and 2016. Micropolitan Statistical Area Highlights • The nation's 551 micro areas contained approximately 27.7 million people in 2016, representing approximately nine percent of the nation's population. This is an increase of approximately 16,000 people from 2015. • Micro areas in the West grew the most. • Heber, Utah, was the fastest -growing micro area, with an increase of 4.7 percent between 2015 and 2016. The five fastest -growing micro areas were in the West: Heber, Utah; Prineville, Ore.; Ellensburg, Wash.; Bozeman, Mont.; and Cedar City, Utah. Among these five areas, net domestic migration was a larger component of change than either net international migration or natural increase. • Bozeman, Mont., had the largest numeric gain among micro areas between 2015 and 2016, increasing by approximately 3,800 people. Four of the five largest numeric -gaining micro areas between 2015 and 2016 were in the West: Bozeman, Mont.; Hilo, Hawaii; Kalispell, Mont.; and Oak Harbor, Wash. Puerto Rico • Overall, Puerto Rico's population has been decreasing since 2010. The Commonwealth total resident population decreased by 314,850 (or 8.4 percent) since 2010 to 3,411,307 on July 1, 2016. ▪ San Juan experienced the largest numeric decrease in population of any municipio, losing 8,497 residents between July 1, 2015 and July 1, 2016, followed by Bayamon (-4,448 residents) and Ponce (-3,748 residents). ▪ Of Puerto Rico's 78 municipios, only Gumbo experienced growth between July 1, 2015, and July 1, 2016, gaining 56 residents (an increase of 0.1 percent). ▪ All other municipios experienced a decline in population. The fastest -declining municipios were Penuelas, Lares and Guanica, featuring a decline of 2.7 percent each. To find where people are leaving from and moving to, visit Census Flows Mapper. The Census Census Bureau develops county, metro area and micro area population estimates by measuring population change since the most recent census. The Census Bureau uses births, deaths, administrative records and survey data to develop estimates of population. For more detail regarding the methodology, see .census.gov/programs-surveys/popestltechn ical- Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan documentation/methodology.html>. The Office of Management and Budget's statistical area delineations (for metro and micro areas) are those issued by that agency in July 2015. Metro areas contain at least one urbanized area of 50,000 or more population, and micro areas contain at least one urban cluster of at least 10,000 (but less than 50,000) population. Both metro and micro areas consist of one or more whole counties or county equivalents. Some metro and micro area titles may be abbreviated in the text of the news release. Full titles are shown in the tables. Top 10 Largest -Gaining Counties (Numeric Change): July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2016 County Population Maricopa County, Arizona Harris County, Texas 4,242,997 Clark County, Nevada King County, Washington Tarrant County, Texas Riverside County, California Bexar County, Texas Orange County, Florida Dallas County, Texas Numeric Percent Domestic International Change Change Births Deaths Migration Migration 81,360 4,589,928 56,587 46,375 35,714 35,462 34,849 33,198 29,503 29,209 29,161 2,155,664 2,149,970 2,016,872 2,387,741 1,928,680 1,314,367 2,574,984 Hillsborough County, 1,376,238 Florida 1.95 1.25 2.20 1.69 1.79 1.48 1.75 2.30 1.15 2.16 56,073 73,072 27,352 25,905 28,682 30,845 30,645 43,189 10,188 26,660 -16,225 27,922 16,501 27,735 6,566 13,580 8,511 15,500 12,903 13,411 6,348 17,092 16,961 3,099 13,458 13,077 5,361 8,198 10,083 11,078 16,407 -6,193 12,133 11,179 14,806 7,774 Top 10 Fastest -Growing Counties (Percent Change, Counties With a Population of 10,000 or More): July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2016 Numeric County Population Change San Juan County, 16,895 1,188 Utah Kendall County, Texas Hays County, Texas 42,540 2,088 204,470 Wasatch County, Utah 30,528 Dallas County, Iowa Coma! County, Texas Sumter County, Florida Crook County, Oregon Juab County, Utah 84,516 134,788 123,996 22,570 9,896 1,363 3,739 5,675 5,114 11,010 923 444 Kittitas County, Washington 44,866 1,809 Percent Change 7.56 5.16 5.09 4.67 4.63 4.40 4.30 4.26 4.20 Births Deaths Domestic International Migration Migration 2,500 4,760 4,873 886 319 1,563 296 109 55 7 -1 72 Top 10 Largest -Declining Counties or County Equivalents (Numeric Change): July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2016 Population umeric Change Domestic Migration International Migration Cook County, Illinois Wayne County, Michigan Baltimore city, Maryland Cuyahoga County, Ohio Suffolk County, New York Milwaukee County, Wisconsin 5,203,499 1,749,366 614,664 1,249,352 1,492,583 -21,324 -0.41 951,448 Allegheny County, Pennsylvania San Juan County, New Mexico St. Louis City, Missouri Jefferson County, New York 1,225,365 -7,696 -0.44 -6,738 -1.08 -5,673 -0.45 68,049 42,297 23,209 18,231 8,654 6,871 14,941 13,563 -5,320 -0.36 15,446 12,793 -4,866 -0.51 13,675 8,176 -3,933 -0.32 13,193 13,995 115,079 -3,622 -3.05 1,703 1,026 311,404 -3,471 -1.10 4,547 3,070 114,006 -3,254 -2.78 2,000 945 Top 25 Fastest -Growing Metro Areas (Percent Change): July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2016 Rank by Percent Change Metro Area 2015 2016 Numeric Population Population Change 10 11 The Villages, FL Myrtle Beach- Conway - North Myrtle Beach, SC - NC Bend - Redmond, OR Greeley, CO Cape Coral - Fort Myers, FL 118,882 123,996 5,114 432,493 449,295 16,802 174,942 181,307 6,365 285,053 294,932 9,879 700,285 722,336 22,051 St George, UT Provo- Orem, UT Punta Gorda, FL Austin - Round Rock, TX North Port- Sarasota - Bradenton, FL Coeur d'Alene, ID Lakeland- 12 Winter Haven, FL Sebastian- 13 Vero Beach, FL 14 Raleigh, NC Orlando- 15 Kissimmee- 2,382,132 2,441,257 59,125 Sanford, FL Percent Change 4.3 3.9 3.6 3.5 3.1 155,450 160,245 4,795 585,362 603,309 17,947 173,194 178,465 5,271 1,998,104 2,056,405 58,301 768,013 788,457 20,444 150,364 154,311 3,947 666,149 16,724 151,563 3,771 1,302,946 31,565 16 Port St 454,111 3.1 3.1 3.0 2.9 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.5 465,208 11,097 2.4 an Appendix C - Natural -66,244 -17,346 -11,008 -10,122 -11,278 -13,186 -5,821 -4,341 -6,189 -4,674 18,434 4,279 2,195 3,402 4,327 Net Increase Births Deaths Migration -1,241 501 1,742 4,928 2,505 3,479 42 981 345 Domestic International Migration Migration 4,873 -488 4,214 4,702 15,308 14,881 55 427 398 1,853 1,455 5,698 5,695 3 2,381 4,106 1,725 7,300 6,991 309 -658 6,666 7,324 20,780 17,769 3,011 1,206 3,285 3,267 18 2,343 7,765 6,893 872 2,658 6,154 5,800 354 10,304 40,273 33,395 6,878 9,772 21,138 18,913 2,225 1,026 2,232 10,004 12,347 -1,614 1,044 17,071 27,375 -3,227 6,545 480 1,834 1,354 3,169 3,123 46 892 7678 6,786 15,061 12,152 2,909 -766 1 284 2 050 3,828 3,530 298 8,414 22,607 18,510 4,097 10,798 28,849 18051 46,922 29,441 17,481 -890 4,357 5,247 10,724 9,759 965 a nsportatio Rank by Percent Change Metro Area 2015 Population 2016 Population Numeric Change Percent Change Natural Increase Births Net Deaths Migration Domestic International Migration Migration 17 Naples- Immokalee- Marco Island, FL Daphne- 18 Fairhope- Foley, AL 19 Boise City, ID 20 356,570 203,690 365,136 208,563 8,566 2.4 -220 3,270 Logan, UT - ID Deltona- Daytona 21 Beach - Ormond Beach, FL 22 Fayetteville- Springdale - Rogers, AR - MO Olympia- 23 Tumwater, WA 24 25 Charleston - North Charleston, SC Las Vegas- Henderson - Paradise, NV 675,777 133,093 691,423 623,378 513,449 136,159 4,873 2.4 161 2,274 3,490 7,434 2,113 4,289 5,292 4,046 2,142 15,646 2.3 637,674 525,032 269,183 275,222 744,603 2,109,289 Contact Public Information Office 301-763-3030 pio@census.gov 761,155 2,155,664 Related Information Press kit Detailed tables • Graphic: Embed, Download or Print • Spanish Version 3,066 2.3 14,296 2.3 11,583 2.3 4,157 1,991 -2,437 8,753 2,578 5,714 4,596 10,757 587 1,052 9,950 728 243 807 324 8,151 15,419 3,660 7,266 6,039 2.2 1,000 3,172 3,606 2,172 16,552 2.2 3,710 9,662 46,375 2.2 10,851 5,952 7,845 4,725 13,981 1,438 6,564 4,060 1,281 665 12,377 11,471 906 27,352 16,501 34,301 27,735 6,566 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Ui 0 t r©u • h C©mmunit an • Business Deve opmen L a C 1.0 a) 2 N U R3 a R1 a) 0 C 0 7.1 U In 0 ector Businesses Lu C `:Hafz0 ro U C -6.9% Increase'14-'15 11111111111111111. w 114 L .IJ a 00 M ra 0 -41% 2010-2015 -Bend/Redmond MSA: M N � N � OiOZ oa paxapui luaLuAoldtua guiJnp1Jnuehi W Q N N O ra p„ ry o '. u o -3 = * 0- 0- a6nary riaun)DA ionuud 0 T � �1 I� — fl 0 0 0 c ro C ro z z z 11$ 0 rehouse Lease Rate z z z 14 CL CL PROJECT NEED vt tinU Vt 0 0 co • CO (74 0 0 0 Tr - (ID 46- 0 0 0 r4 N lij 0 ro eneration -:,itot 0 7 I— I <F- wcL (Y 0 a Business a) c C OD 0 0 CO C C N N tB >-. Q L a) X no CC w w Recruitment Aviation ssac - m.r• • r R zloTellItsr40 A• r i Cif T3 C Lf) D 0 %-I 06 N � in LD N CI lli XI 1111 0 ® Over 100 $111,1pooptik E d mew rk Ready Commu LU C Tijj 0 C •IMIN. C. 0 *a CT CO 0 U w C 0 L) CO 0 „04100k 881$84488Ma8f8R444? Olt** „Olgt, ' 8 88888804888imepo8,$ 'RRORR8'888R,MIRRis RWRAIRR488441P " 'ORRR":11111R8R8 E Appendix B, Attachment 4 May 25, 2017 u.. 0 Chapter 2 - Aviation Activity Forecasts C 0 U) 0. 0 1 0 0 EL C LL 4 a) it Commercial Operations (AC + AT) TAF Airport A# A% 18,236 18,655 419 2% 19,130 20,551 1,421 7% 18,208 19,709 1,501 8% 14,124 15,734 1,610 11% 14,254 16,148 1,894 13% 13,026 14,680 1,654 13% 12,580 14,116 1,536 12% 12,433 13,970 1,537 12% 13,311 14,338 1,027 8% 10,913 12,446 1,533 14% 11,467 13,148 1,681 15% -2.3% -1.7% Air Taxi (Al) Operations TAF Airport A# A% 16,803 17,768 965 6% 16,349 17,508 1,159 7% 13,795 14,498 703 5% 9,680 10,119 439 5% 9,396 9,997 601 6% 8,886 9,616 730 8% 8,649 9,218 569 7% 8,232 9,185 953 12% 8,573 8,526 -47 -1% 6,578 6,586 8 0% 6,340 6,451 111 2% -4.8% -4.9% Air Carrier (AC) Operations TAF Airport A#A% 1,433 887 -546 -38% 2,781 3,043 262 9% 4,413 5,211 798 18% 4,444 5,615 1,171 26% 4,858 6,151 1,293 27% 4,140 5,064 924 22% 3,931 4,898 967 25% 4,201 4,785 584 14% 4,738 5,812 1,074 23% 4,335 5,860 1,525 35% 5,127 6,697 1,570 31% 6.6% 10.6% Enplanements TAF Airport A# 197,223 205,061 7,838 4% 230,033 239,096 9,063 4% 243,197 252,665 9,468 4% 217,826 229,987 12,161 6% 225,561 235,921 10,360 5% 231,978 242,888 10,910 5% 230,833 241,488 10,655 5% 227,410 236,586 9,176 4% 255,865 265,213 9,348 4% 269,132 277,157 8,025 3% 298,322 304,588 6,266 2% 2.1% 2.0% C.) ZZ CY CY CD 0 U) CD ii_ ›- C) RI CD CV C, CV C, CNI C, CV C, CNI C, CV C, (N C, c) cy CA CV (N 0 L 0 I- 00 Ca a) o_ 0) • '15 ca LI as>' cL ca q) Ca) cT1 a 76 (7) rt ca -o 2 -5. c Coo Ho 0 E 0 0 0 cr) E O 0 • 0 2 ii o 2_ Figure A4-2: Airport Commercial Operations Records r- LU a, C39. Cti 0 00 `c."0 00 0 c7i 0) CD Lo- a, 0) ✓ . LO 1 to co • Zr co LO 0 0 00 co to co Lo- 0 CO 0 CD CO CD- Lo Tr N 0 C) C) N N N CO., 0 CD (0 N CO 00 Co CO ✓ ▪ . 00 C-- Lo co Tr7 ZS; a, Lo co 0 CO Co co Tr 0 CO CO CO N 0) CD V. V. Tr co It, CO C., CO V. to 0) CO CD C, 0 N 7(-1- 00 111 toi co 00 0) 0) Co 1 CD 0, 0 C, Lri CD V. CD 114' CD 00 0) V. CS▪ " CO 0 0 C., ao V. V. N (0 CO co Tr 0) V. 0 0 CO CO N CD 0 0 C,1 00 co F- CD 0 0 C) co CO CO CD V. CD Co FAA Fisca I Yea r 0) Ca 0 Ca Er? a) E E a) FL00 cr) Ca ;<'=c Ca Ca Scheduled Commercial Passenger Scheduled Commercial Freight Sched. Corn. Pax + Freight Air Carrier + Air Taxi 3 3 :=T 4a Ca '2rc Ca 0 Ca O "3' CC) Ca "0 Ca 0 co ra 0 co Ca 0 Ca 0 Ca Source: Airport records depicting landing fees. Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan May 25, 2017 Chapter 2 — Aviation Activity Forecasts Figure A4-3: Airport Enplanement Records by Month Enplanement/Deplanement by Airlines t cc a`r St rqo St rn St r,o'Ln rnSt u'' oa°7 N r, r N N St ,,rn coa 0)sr cc o St St mr, Nr, N N St N co sr N r-1 oo o 01 cn St N 44 St sr CO N N St cc a sr COSt 01 co cc co r, r, St sr co N N 0 St 1-11 N O 0) CO N N 01 h 0 0 00 sr o 01 St r.1 St St St r, 01 St St 00 St 0 St o l0 1".. 0) O L.0 0 N St a 0 N N St o 0) N o o St M N St oo St r, St St St Cr 0 k.0 0 a 0 0 sr d" r, o 0 N N St h h ,r o St St St o ,..a cc LP, r, ,T co r, a r-1 ,-, rn sr h co a o o 0 St o ,I a a r, St. St a o r-1 ,-1 rn oo o St a co m N sr sr St 01 St r, N a a St o sr sr cn o rn m a N) ,T• St sr co 03 St 0 o 71St - 0 st St cn r, a a N 0 a rn 0) o al al co o o a a r, a a ‘-i ,1 ,i rn o, ,-1 oo cr, cr, m Sr r, 01 N 0 N ,-I oc 71- cr CO 00 M M a 0) cc CO a cn sr co rn ,i St ,i rn h N h .71- GT 00 0 0) 01 r, I", ,I" ,-I 0 0 St Source: Airport records, reported by the airlines. Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Appendix March 30, 2018 APPENDIX C: CYCLING REDMOND MUNiClii AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT RECYCLING, REUSE & WASTE REDUCTION PLAN 2018 Mead unt Morgan Turner 2605 Port Lansing Road Lansing, MI 48906 Ph, 517-908-3130 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 F C ~�7���~� ��~^,��� Executive Summary 2 1. Introduction 3 A. Regulatory Background and Project Purpose 3 B. Airport Description 4 C. Waste Definitions and Plan Focus 4 D. Key Airport Buildings and Plan Scope 5 2. Existing Program 12 A. Drivers 12 B. Alignment with Local Programs 12 C. Infrastructure 12 O. Operation and Maintenance Requirements /Roles and Responsibilities 51 E. Current Waste Reduction, Reuse, and Recycling Efforts 52 F. Tracking and Performance 52 3. Waste Audit 54 A. Quantity and Sources 54 B. Composition 55 Toiletries, Fond. and Beverages 'TGARestrictions 57 Liquids 58 C. Purchases 58 4. Review nfWaste Management Contracts 59 A. Custodial and Waste Hauling Contracts 59 B. Tenant Leases and Service Contracts 59 C. Expiring Leases and Contracts 82 O. Funding 62 5. Recycling Feasibility 83 A. Commitment and Support 63 B. Technical and Economic Factors 84 Recycling, Landfill, and Energy -from -Waste Facility Requirements 86 C. Guidelines and Policies 67 D. Other Incentives 72 8. Cost Savings nrRevenue Generation 73 7. Recommendations 74 A. Objectives and Targets 74 B. Tracking and Reporting 74 C. Reduce and Reuse 75 Donation of Food, BevnnoAno. and Toiletries 76 O. Recycle and Compost 77 E. Education and Outreach 81 F. Containers and Bins 82 G. Gignageand Labeling 84 H. Other Recommendations 84 |. Continuous Improvement 85 J. Recommendations Summary 87 8. Conclusion 89 0. References OO Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 E CUTIV SU mr The City of Redmond, [>nsgnn, operator of Redmond Municipal Airport (RDK8 or the Airport) is committed to environmentally responsible operations. The Airport is updating their master plan and is including planning for solid waste in keeping with the FAA Modernization and Rohonn Act uy2O/2 (FK8RA) requirements. The purpose of this task was to evaluate RDK8'a existing vvanto and recycling program and provide recommendations to increase landfill diversion through waste reduction, reuse, and recycling. The consultant conducted a facility walk-through and informal interviews with RDM staff to develop o baseline and identify areas nfopportunity tn divert waste from the |ond@i The consultant developed recommendations appropriate for the Airport's waste stream based on the baseline information and identified opportunities. Highlights nfthese recommendations include: v Establish goals and objectives ~/ Track progress and report regularly v/ Continue hopromote emptying ofwater bottles pre -security and refilling post -security Collect and donate food, beverages, and toiletries ~/ Continue paper, plastic, plastic bottle, aluminum can, cardboard, and glass recycling and expand tnother areas, including dep|onedwaste v Improve education and outreach for passengers, employees, tenants, and contractors ~/ Supplement, right size, collocate, and standardize recycling stations and garbage cans Expand and improve signage.specifically ntthe security checkpoint ' Update contracts/leases and establish purchasing policy V Maintain and improve recycling program according to Plan Do Check Act cycle This range of recommendations will allow RDM the flexibility to implement those that are compatible with changing conditions and available resources, while providing the opportunity increase landfill diversion over time through a phased, comprehensive program. Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 A. 1� FG.0 UN V ANX P.M O���C][ P�1M���S � Section 132(b) of the FIVIRA expanded the definition of airport planning to include "developing a plan for recycling and minimizing the generation of airport solid waste." FIVIRA Section 133 added a requirement that airports that prepare or update a master plan and receive Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Improvement Program (4|P) funding ensure that new nrupdated master plans address issues related to solid waste recycling. These issues include: 1) the feasibility ofsolid waste recycling 2) minimizing the generation ofsolid waste 3) operation and maintenance requirements 4) review nfwaste management contracts 5) the potential for cost savings orrevenue generation. In September 2014, the FAA released a memorandum titled "Guidance on Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plans." This memo details the FAA's expectations and suggestions for an airport's recycling plan. To comply with FIVIRA and according to the FAA's guidance memo. RDK8 is preparing this vacyc|ing, neune, and waste reduction plan. The purpose of this plan intndocument and assess RDK8's existing waste and recycling program based on the factors listed above and to recommend improvements. An airport's waste and recycling program and documented plan depend on several factors including: v"' the size, location, and layout of the airport ./ ` the amount and type nfwaste generated v markets for recyclable commodities v costs for recycling � available local infrastructure ~/ ` the willingness of an airport and its tenants to implement recycling and other strategies The extent and accuracy of available information governed the content of this plan. 3 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 . Al 1) ROK8 is in the high desert region of central Oregon in the City of Redmond within Deschutes County. The City of Redmond owns RDK8. The Airport Manager reports hnthe City Manager, and City employees are responsible for day to day airport operations. An Airport Committee advises elected City Council members on Airport matters. The Committee includes representation from Redmond. the City of Bend, Deschutes County, Jefferson County, and Crook County. RDM, a non -hub primary airport, serves as the high desert reginn's only commercial service airport. The Airport is o public -use facility and is included in the FAA National Plan uyIntegrated Airport Systems /KPIA31. The Airport is on FAA Class | Part 130 facility, with facilities and services to accommodate scheduled passenger oincnoft with 30 or more passenger seats. The Oregon Department of Aviation classifies RDK8oaoCategory |— Commercial Service Airport. The Airport serves commercial, general aviation (QA), military, and US Forest Service (J8F8) activity. In fiscal year 2O1G.ROK8saw approximately 546.7OOtotal passengers C278.351 enp|anements.saw 3Q.211 total nperadions, and had 40 based aircraft. Four airlines serve the Airport (American Airlines, Alaska Air, Delta Air. and United/United Express) and reach seven domestic destinations. Additional background and activity information is available in the Airport Master Plan. C. WASTI' DEFINITIONS AN# PLA\ F(_)CK1S Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) consists of everyday items that are used and then discarded. There are six primary types of MSW generated at airports: a. General MGVV consists of common inorganic waste, such as product packoging, disposable udennils, plates and cups, bntt|es, and newspaper. Less common d*ms, such as h/nnhune and clothing, are also considered general MSW. b. Food waste is either food that is not consumed or the waste generated and discarded during food preparation. Food waste and green waste make up a waste stream known as "compostable" waste. c. Green waste consists oftree, shrub and grass clippings, leaves, weeds, small bnonchon, aeedo, pods and similar debris generated bylandscape maintenance activities. Green waste and food waste together may be referred to as ''compnstob|ns." d. Deplaned waste is a specific type of MSWthat is removed from passenger aircraft. These materials include bottles and cans, newspaper and mixed paper, plastic cups, service ware, food waste, food soiled paper, and paper towels. e. Construction and Demolition VVoate (C&O) is generally categorized as K8GVVand in any non- hazardous solid vvos1e from land c|eoring, excovoUnn, and/or the cnnstruotinn, demn|iUnn, renovation or repair of structures, noads, and utilities. C&D waste commonly includes cnncnete, vvnnd, metals, drywall, carpet, plastic, pipes. land clearing debris, cardboard, and salvaged building components. ~ER PLAN _-�_—�' 4 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 This plan focuses nnthe management nfK8GVVand other materials that can berecycled o/disposed nfin a landfill. This plan does not address the management of other types of waste, specifically: v hazardous waste ~/ - universal waste ~/ ' industrial waste ~/ - waste from international flights � C&Owaste that issubject tn special requirements or requires special handling (asbestos, |aod. etc.). The handling, recycling, and disposal of these materials are regulated by federal, state, and local laws. Y Al R 1-10.?t][ UJILIWINGSA.\]t PIAN SCOPE The Airport's buildings include an airline passenger terminal, airport support taci|ities. GA facilities and tenant facilities. AIRLINE PASSENGER TERMINAL The passenger terminal serves airline passengers and provides space for airline -related services. Airport administration offices, airline ticketing counters and offices, restrooms, food and retail store, security queuing area, meeter/greeteranea. baggage daim, and rental car counters and offices comprise the pre - security or non -sterile portion nfthe terminal. The administration offices include a reception area, nffices, one conference nnom, and breokronm.The Unn providing airport security services has an office adjacent to the security checkpoint, and the City of Redmond Police Department also has anoffice inthe terminal. The ticketing cnunters, associated queuing lines and Noskn, and adjacent offices are allocated to each airline. A shop offering packaged food and drinks and retail items, including souvenirs, is in the non -sterile area. There are restrooms in the non -sterile area. The meeter/greeterarea connects the secure area exit with baggage claim and the car rental counters. This space also has a children's play area. There are two luggage belts in the baggage claim area, as well as a space for oversized baggage claim. Each rental car company has o counter and adjacent nffims for their use. Passengers access the security checkpoint via a queuing area at its entrance. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) operates the security checkpoint, which offers two lanes for screening of passengers and carry -on items. TSA personnel also have access to training areas, locker room space, and offices. .~--- PLAN -__� G Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 The post -security or secure portion of the terminal offers services for passengers already screened at the security checkpoint. The secure area includes a second food and retail shop, a barlrestaurant, restrooms, airline gates, and passenger holdrooms. Secure area food and retail space is occupied by a small convenience store that also offers packaged foods and drinks as well as souvenirs (Figure 1). Figure 1 : Terminal convenience store )ND Mt_!'Ni4;::.°IS AIRPORT MASTTIry,IT PI 6 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 The convenience store has a small coffee condiments area with a built-in trash can (Figure 2). Figure 2: Coffee condiments area in convenience store 7 RT MASTER PLAN -- Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 A bar/restaurant is located on the second floor of the secure area and features bar seating as well as tables and chairs with wait staff service (Figure 3). The restaurant also sells packaged beverages (Figure 4). a Figure 3 : Bar and restaurant in secure area Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 4 : Bar area and cooler with packaged beverages The secure area also has restrooms. Six gates serve deplaning and enplaning passengers with each gate is dedicated to one airline. Holdrooms, where passengers wait to board departing flights within the departure lobby, are loosely defined at RDM by their proximity to each gate; the first -floor departure lobby is one space with seating available throughout. Additional general departure seating is available on the second -floor atrium. Additional areas of the terminal are accessible only to credentialed staff and contractors. These areas include baggage screening, a maintenance shop, storage, and a breakroom. A,IRP RT MASTER PLAN 9 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 AIRPORT SUPPORT FACILITIES Airport staff maintain the property and perform snow removal and deicing activities. The Airport's p|ows, other winter equipment, and grounds maintenance vehicles are stored in the Snow Removal Equipment (SRE) Building. The City of Redmond provides personnel to meet ROM's aircraft rescue and firefighting (4RFF) requirements. C)n'duh/ firefighters. ARFF vahiden, and associated activities are housed in o dedicated facility at RDM. 4� D.AVIATION FACILITIES One fixed -base operatnr(FBO) offers services such as ground hand|ing, aircraft maintnnanos, hangar rental, fun|ing, and pi|oUpaoaengnrtaci|ities to support GA activity at ROM. The Airport has box hangars and T-hangars to store GA aircraft. Cargo facilities are made up of hangars that RDM leases and adjacent areas of the aircraft ramp/apron. The UGFS leases space ho operate the Redmond Air Center, afirefighting facility protecting areas in Oregon, Washington, and Alaska. The Air Center is a hub of USFS firefighting operations, such as training and dispatching, as well as an incident support base for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) efforts inthe event nfnnatural disaster inthe Pacific Northwest. PLAN SCOPE The facilities described above include buildings and areas in which ROK8 has direct control of waste management and others in which ROK8 has influence but not direct control. According to FAA guidance, areas over which RDM has "direct control" or "influence" should be included in the Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan; areas outside Airport control or influence may be excluded. The Airport has direct control over operations and activities related to waste management in these areas: - Passenger Terminal Building ° public use spaces • airport administration offices = other staff work areas ~/ ' AirpnrtSRE Building ~/ ` Airport maintenance activities RM)NIONDNIUNICIML AIRPORT KASTEP. PLAN 10 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 In addition, RIDIVI can influence the management of waste and recyclables in tenant spaces through lease agreements and contracts, including: v Passenger Terminal Building ° TSAspoceo ° Airline leased areas (including ticketing counters, offices, bnoaknooms.and dep|anedwaste) ° Rental car tenant areas ° Retail areas and bar/restaurant ~/ - FBOBuilding (leased byROK8) ~/ ` Aircraft hangars (leased byRDIVI) � UGFSfacilities (leased byRDIVI) ~/ - ARFFbuilding (coordination with City nfRedmond) The Airport does not have control or influence overwaste management in the FAA Air Traffic Control Tower (AJT3) nor areas adjacent to Airport property nordnoUad by neighboring businesses and property owners; therefore, they are excluded from this plan. Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 mm The Airport established its recycling program to reduce the quantity o/ material disposed of in the landfill and to conserve resources, including financial resources. The Airport staffs commitment and practices drive the program; it is supported by local recycling infrastructure. -ALIGNMENT\\IT11 LOCAL 11 ()GtAI\IS The City, who owns and operates RDK8, contracts with a waste hauling contractor to provide waste and recycling collection services for residents, multifamily units, and commercial businesses. RDK8's program aligns with the City's efforts; RIDIVI recycles all the material types collected by the City's contractor. C.I\Ft-ALSTtUCTU Employees, tenants, and passengers have access to a network of trash cans and recycling stations in the terminal. In general, there one many trash cons throughout the building and o few recycling stations in specific locations. The recycling stations and the garbage cans are lined/fitted with bags. In the ticketing lobby and airline counter area, there are tall round, metal garbage cans with round openings in the lids (Figure 6). These garbage cans are also available at the entrance hothe security screening checkpoint (Figure G), in the baggage claim and meeher/greeter space (Figures 7 and B), and throughout the sterile area, including in the ho|dnoom (Figure Q) and atrium (Figures 10and 11). 12 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Ott Figure 5 : Garbage cans in ticketing lobby "'''"44104000041hor ...44411,0 sittl REDMOND M UN ICI PA to AIRPORT MASTIR PLAN — 13 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 6 : Garbage cans at entrance to security screening checkpoint ---- REDMOND MUNICIPAL At ORT MASTER PLAN 14 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 7 : Garbage cans in baggage claim .4mownweitC,.0 . • — REDMOND MIJNICU'U AIRPORT MASTER PLAN -- 15 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 8 : Garbage cans in meeter / greeter area REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN -- 16 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 9: Garbage cans in holdraom 40,1,0, ,0 • 6 00 60 600600 6 ,orufave N •N 1AL AiRPORT MASTER PLAN 17 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 10 : Garbage can in atrium near restaurant 18 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 11 : Garbage can in atrium REL MUICIILMRPORT MASTER PLAN -- 19 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Recycling staUona, conjoined units with four labeled compartmanto, are positioned in four locations within the non -sterile and sterile areas: inthe security queuing area, at the base nfthe stairs leading tothe atrium (Figure 12), within the atrium seating area near the restaurant (Figure 13), and in the meetnr/graeteroneo near baggage claim (Figure 14). Figure zz:Recycling station mhvkdrovmarea, near stairs rnatrium Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 13 : Recycling station in atrium, near restaurant !AI. MEPORT 'ER PLAN 21 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 4,0410:6411***„..1 twituketAAPS>, ,,,A010144040,0104010644Kk Figure 14: Recycling station in meeter/greeter area near baggage claim V 22 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 At the curbside entrances to and exits from the terminal, there are large garbage cans featuring hoods with large openings (Figure 15). • Figure 15 : Curbside garbage can Or th,414., • F:UMOND MUNICHAL. MIWORT MASTER PLAN 23 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 The terminal restrooms feature paper towel dispensers and air hand dryers (Figure 16), with garbage cans positioned below the paper towel dispensers and small bins located in each toilet stall. Figure 16 : Terminal restrooms offer both hand dryers and paper towel dispensers At P it T tA PLAN 24 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Drinking fountains are available near the restrooms throughout the terminal; RDM has installed one water bottle refill station in the sterile area (Figure 17). Figure 17 : Water bottle filling station and drinking fountain in holdroom 3Ni;➢MUNICIPAL AIR t'L1RC fASTERPLAN-------------- 25 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 The restaurant kitchen and back of house area include space for food preparation, dishwashing, storage, and other activities. Space in this area is limited. Garbage is collected in a large container (Figure 18). "fq100(6,, •IIIPV440,40 IVMX0.06 vtlftlYr- lttka lotoot Figure 18 : Restaurant back of house area, including garbage can EDMON \It NK IPU AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 26 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Glass, plastic bottles, and cans are taken to the recycling station located in the atrium. Restaurant staff break down cardboard boxes and stack them throughout the day (Figure 19); they carry these to the terminal cardboard dumpster as needed to clear the space and at the end of the day. Figure 19 : Restaurant collection of cardboard for recycling The restaurant offers paper carryout containers, and restaurant employees use refillable water bottles. The retail areas have small trash cans near the register, and retail employees use the terminal recycling stations for paper, plastic bottles, cans, and glass. -Rt:QahiOND nSl1NiCIP .AAIRPORT MASTER tLAN 27 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 In Alaska Air's ticketing area, each station has space for a small trash can. The cargo desk also has a small trash can (Figure 20). The airline's office/breakroom space has two large trash cans (Figure 21); a low, squat recycling bin for paper (Figure 22); and a container for cans and plastic bottles (Figure 23). Figure 20 : Garbage can in airline cargo area 28 RT MASTER PLAN Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 21 : Garbage can in airline breakroom area REDNION D M UN I CI PA 1„ AIR 29 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 akkotriartam,a, Figure 22 : Recycling bin in airline office area „ t xt,400 -1PL AIRPORT MAST1R PLAN 30 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 23 : Garbage and recycling collection in airline office area 31 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 The Delta ticket counter also has a space for a "trash box" (Figure 24). In the Delta offices, there are small garbage cans by the desks (Figure 25), and the area also has a low, squat recycling bin for paper (Figure 26). Figure 24 : Airline ticketing counter with "trash box" NI) MUlvt flip; _� R RT ASTER PLAN 32 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 1,)+,40•4, • 1303ftaii01 406,0146* >k,411,0m6,01,, 04,,,gofgje.44," ANStnNi0•••••" Figure 25 : Garbage can in airline office REONIONID MIJNICIPAL AIRPORT 33 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 26 : Recycling bin in airline office RITAIOND MUNICII'Alo AERPORTMASTER PLAN 34 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 In the airline baggage handling area, a space shared by all the airlines, there are small trash cans located by the vending machine (Figure 27). Figure 27 : Vending machine and garbage cans in baggage handling area )ND MUNICIPAL At1 PORT v[A TER PLAN — 35 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 The car rental offices have containers for trash, and some use the terminal recycling stations for paper, plastic bottles, cans, and glass. In the administration offices, there are in -cabinet waste and recycling bins in the breakroom/kitchenette (Figure 28) and in the conference room (Figure 29). Figure 28 : In -cabinet garbage and recycling bins in Airport administration breakroom AIR RT MASTER PLAN 36 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 29 : In -cabinet garbage and recycling bins in Airport conference room ION D 1UNICIPALAIRPORT MASTER PLAN — 37 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 In the copy room, there is one bin each for garbage and recycling (Figures 30 and 31), as well as a small paper shredder. ;of; At t , . .44404,41404. 14`64t4,61,1 Figure 30 : Airport administration copy room REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT'TER PLAN 38 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 44,./WnqW .741:747. Figure 31 : Garbage can and recycling bin in Airport administration copy room NLUWAL M1PORT MASTRPt 39 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Each office/desk has a garbage can and some employees use copy paper box lids to collect paper for recycling (Figures 32 and 33). Figure 32 : Garbage can in Airport administration office Ri 47;94100 ,42.44003140, )NI) 'MUNICIPAL AiRPORT MASTER PLAN 40 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 33 : Garbage can and box lid for recycling in Airport administration office , 2 ripty4„„,,,440 otromvatoi 4,44,fr , Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 The labels on recycling stations in the terminal and on the bins in the administration offices are the primary method to convey messaging about and instructions related to recycling. The recycling stations in the terminal are labeled for plastic, glass, paper, and cans with graphics depicting a plastic bottle, glass bottle, stack of paper and envelope, and aluminum can, respectively (Figure 34). Additional signage posted on the recycling bins alerts passengers that there is a "Water bottle refill station in the boarding area" (Figure 35). Figure 34: Recycling station labeling )Nf t itiIC PA..AITtP RTM TER PLAN 42 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 35 : Recycling station sign alerting passengers about water bottle refill station located in the boarding area (holdroom) UNIC1PAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 43 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 RDM has also installed signage in the restrooms in the non -sterile area encouraging passengers to "Reuse your water bottle" (Figures 36 and 37). These signs instruct passengers to empty their bottles pre -security and refill them post -security at the drinking fountain in the boarding area. Figure 36 : Restroom signage encouraging passengers to reuse water bottles . AfRPORT MASTER PLAN 44 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 37 : Restroom signage encouraging passengers to reuse water bottles (closeup) REDMOND MUNK:WM, AIfiPORT MASTER.AN 45 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 At the Maintenance building, there are several garbage cans, including in the supervisor's office and in the breakroom. The ARFF facility has carts for waste and recyclable materials (Figure 38), and there are also several recycling bins and trash cans (Figures 39 and 40). "S* 043% 411:00 (`, 444, Figure 38: Carts for garbage and recyclables at ARFF facility -4 REDMOND N N1cIrALAInpoRr MASTER PLAN 46 ft Pr' *40 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 39 : Garbage cans or recycling bins in ARFF building kitchen 47 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Figure 40 : Container for recycling beverage containers in ARFF building ELThItJN1)'A , AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 48 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 A trash dumpster, cardboard dumpster, and cart for recyclables are in the GA area (Figure 41). n 44111E,..0. ' 1000040„ , ,;., • AvvoniONfri",.., 7 47, --440,04004 ,AAW04' • • oii#10,4411, Figure 41 : Dumpsters and carts located in GA area ,e0000000- 00000 0 '*000ftmoomom00*000001 00141A 7 **#3000t0,1440* 0,44Wie 4 , 44404 The FBO terminal has several garbage cans but no recycling bins. M. AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 49 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 The carts, dumpster, and compactor used to consolidate waste and recyclables materials generated in the terminal are positioned within o |andak1e fenced enclosure adjacent to the bsnnina| building (Figure 42). The four, 95-gallon carts are used for comingled recyclables, the six-yard dumpster for cardboard, and the 20-yard compactor for waste. Containers for glass recycling are also located in the enclosure. A second 2- yard vvoate dumpstor is in a |andaide enclosure near the terminal smoking area. The waste and recycling hauler provides these containers. Access to the enclosure is restricted to specific airport staff and the contractors' collection crews. The contractor uses its own vehicles to collect the waste and nooyc|ob|n materials from ROK8and transfer them for processing ordisposal. � I' .*�1 1,���� Figure 4z: Carts and compactor mfenced enclosure Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Waste materials (food waste and other MSW) are collected from the dumpster weekly and the compactor biweekly. These materials are transported for disposal atDeschutes CountysKnott Landfill. Recyclable materials (coming|ed paper, p|astic, and o|uminum, as well as segregated glass and condbnonj) are collected weekly and transported to a recycling facility atthe landfill where they are snrtnd, compressed into bo|ea, marketed, and sold. *PEI�*�Tl ANIt RES SliILITIES A 0 MAINTENA 1[S I RDM's recycling program is maintained by facilities staff, with support from Airport management personnel. The facilities manager is primarily responsible for the recycling program, including directing housekeeping activitien, adjusting the prognam, purchasing custodial supplies, and communicating with RDM's business coordinator about collection services. Airport facilities staff includes six full time personnel. Facilities staff are responsible for custodial activities in specific buildings and onaou, including collecting waste and necycab|es from cans and bins and transferring these materials to the appropriate dumpsters. Airport facilities staff are responsible for custodial .^in public spaces of the terminal v/ inTSAareas inRDK8offices in the SIRE building inother Airport spaces on the airfield in GA hangars leased through Airport Administration The Airport's terminal tenants (restaurant and shop, rental carcompanies, and airlines) and tenants in some of the outlying buildings (F8O and one GA hangar) are responsible for custodial activities in their areas including transferring waste to the appropriate dumps ers. The operators of the FBO. ATCT. and ARFF building are each responsible for securing their own waste and recycling services. The Airport's business coordinator is responsible for communicating with the collection service providers and tracking program invoices. The aviation program manager is responsible for supporting the program through allocation of resources (financial and other) and for coordinating tenant leases. Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 High County Disposal (formerly High Desert Disposal) is the primary waste and recycling hauling contractor fVrROK8. High County Disposal collects garbage from RDK8tdumpabera and transports this material to o transfer station for diapnao| at the Deschutes Cnunb/'s Knott Landfill. The transfer station is |ncohad approximately five miles south of the Airport, and the landfill is approximately 20 miles south of the Airport inBend, Oregon. High County Disposal also collects recyclable materials from ROIVI and transports them to one of the county's recycling facilities (located at the transfer station and the landfill) for processing. The Airport is also serviced by the parent company of High County Disposal, Bend Garbage & Recycling, for the collection of shredded paper and waste syringes. Deschutes Recyding, o sister company to High County Disposal, accepts yard waste for composting and sells compost to the public. The area does not appear to have a commercial food vvaatn compost facility. E. CUMME'NT ASTE EFF* tTS WASTE REDUCTION F, U I ECYCLING Also called "waste minimization," waste reduction refers to reducing the volume of waste produced at its source. This can be accomplished through changing habits and practices, such as printing and purchasing. ROIVI currently employs the following practices to reduce the total amount nfwaste generated: v Double sided printing in administration offices Email and internal websites for inter -office communication Shared drives for storage nfdocuments v Computer software to receive fax messages w/ On -screen print preview and PDF printer orother electronic printing � Outsourcing large print jobs In awaste management context, reuse refers to using materials and items more than once and as many times as possible before disposal. Reuse can include using items and materials for the original purpose or nepurpnsing something for different use. Reuse can require purchasing durable materials and items instead of disposable or single use options. 52 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 The Airport currently reuses: V Ceramic coffee mugs and durable si|venwano, p|otes, bowls, and cups (instead of plastic, paper, or Styrofoam) in Administration breakroom ~^ - Office supplies, including inter -office envelopes Towels/rags in maintenance areas ~/ - Office furniture RECYCLING Using the infrastructure and resources described above, RDIVI currently recycles three streams: cardboard; glass; and comingled paper, plastic bottles, and aluminum cans. Terminal tenants generate most of the cardboard in the form of shipping boxes. The paper stream includes printer paper, moi|, anve|opes, and other paper from the Airport Administration offices as well as paper items, such as newspapers and mogozines, collected in the public areas of the passenger terminal. The p|astic, a|uminum, and glass streams are primarily mode up of beverage cnntainors, collected from the public areas of the passenger terminal as well as the administration offices and restaurant. Some plastic bottles and aluminum cans may be collected by employees and tenants for refund under the State's bottle CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS, GREEN WASTE, AND OTHER WASTE The Airport reuses and recycles the waste generated during construction projects where possible. For example, asphalt millings from a runway project were used to improve the perimeter road. Removed lighting fixtures were donated for reuse. The Airport works with the City Department of Public Works and follows the City'ssurplus goods policy/practices. Green waste generated from the maintenance of the property is managed on -site where possible. The Airport collects hazardous waste; used oil and filters; batteries; paint; used tires; and scrap metal for beneficial reuse, recycling, or return to supplier programs. TENANT EFFORTS In addition to the recycling program operated by RDIVI, tenants at the Airport may be recycling on their own. In some instances, these tenants may be using the Airport's bins, carts, dumpsters, and compactor. F.][RAC KING A The Airport does not currently track overall waste goneroUon, recycled material vn|ume, or other metrics. At present, RDIVI does not have specific waste or recycling objectives, targets, or goals. 53 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 ^^^ ^^°T A~'~~IT RDK8 staff provided information about: vairport buildings and facilities ~^ areas that generate waste ` the types ofwaste generated ineach area the materials that can be recycled under the current program. Facilities staff have informally observed passenger and employee waste and recycling related behaviors and, for this document, described generally how waste flows through the facility. The staff also described waste and recycling collection and hauling practices. The consultant evaluated Airport information and records as well as aviation industry waste and recycling trends to identify the source, composition, and quantity of waste generated at RDM, including areas under RDK8'udirect control or influence. The consultant then used this information to identify opportunities to improve and monitor program effectiveness. A. *UAN1[UTYAM) S0�kJ1*,CES According to invoices provided by Airport staff, Bend Garbage & Recycling collects a 35'go||on roll cart of shredded paper approximately annually. Using conversion factors from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), this equates to approximately 8.5 pounds of paper. According to invoices provided by Airport staff, the waste compactor serviced by High County Disposal has a capacity of 20 yards and is collected every other week. Assuming a load factor of 75 percent and based on conversion factors from the EPA, each load is estimated to contain 15 cubic yards or 4 tons of compacted municipal solid waste each collection. This totals approximately 105tnnn a year. The Airport also uses o two -yard dumpoterfor waste; this container is serviced weekly. Based on the same load and conversion factors, this smaller container isestimated hocontain 4OOpounds ofwaste each collection for atotal nf1O tons a year. Together, these dumpsters represent an annual generation of 115 tons of waste each year. The invoices do not detail the size or collection frequency for the recycling carts and dumpaters. A representative from High County Disposal provided the following information about RDK8's other waste and recycling containers' capacities and service schedules: ~/ ` Cardboard: one 6'yanddumpoter;collected weekly � Cnming|ed necycab|es:fnur, OS'gaUoncads; collected weekly � Glass: collected weekly - PLAN� 54 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Based nna7Spercent load factor and conversion factors from the EPA, the consultant estimated that RDK8 recycles approximately 10 tons of cardboard and 10 tons of commingled reoycab|en. To estimate the annual quantity of glass recycled, information about the capacity of the glass recycling containers and their collection schedule isneeded. According to the invoices. the 4Jrpnd also rented two 30'yand dumpstem for airfield waste collection and scrap metal collection in 2017. The quantity of waste generated from these occasional collection events is not included inthe Airport's baseline annual generation. Based onindustry averages, the overall contribution ofwaste and recyclablesfrom various areas and activities at RDM is likely similar to the distribution shown in Table 1. R0M Estimated Percent Oepland 20% Estimated Weight 27 tons Other Airline Administration Public Areas . Concessions �Total 2496 35% 32tohs 4tons 48tons 24tonn Based on this disthbution, programs that focus on the airlines and public areas may represent the best opportunities to reduce waste generation and increase landfill diversion. A physical waste sort could provide more detailed information about the amount and proportion of waste generated in total and by each area, aotivity, tenant, etc. Based nnthe waste and recycling data presented above, the Airport's current recycling rate is about 15 percent. B. COMPOSITION Based on the activities taking place at RDM, a varied waste stream can be expected. According to industry case studies and previous waste planning pnojects, on airport's waste stream is approxnlotek/4O percent recyclable, 35 percent compostab|e. and 25 percent waste that cannot be recycled or composted due to current technologies and, asoresult, must beplaced inelandfill. Table 2 lists each area included in the scope of this plan and the type(s) of waste likely generated there. uuuaxnmmx/om|�'rx�xmPOW[MASTER PLAN SS Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan alsem uomlowaa pue uopruisuop --alstr/VV pJeA / ua.1E spnbn spnpoJd Jaded 311seldx sauve2ew saadedsmary Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 A physical waste sort could provide more detailed information about the specific composition of waste at RDK8.This information may include: ` the types of items included in each general category the contamination rate of the recycling stream (items that are not recyclable in the recycling bins) ~/ the recovery rate for recycling (the proportion of recyclable items that are segregated properly). The data from owoate audit can also be used to identify opportunities ho improve the composition of the waste stream (by item substitution, by improving recycling to reduce the volume of waste, etc.). The following sections describe inmore detail some nfthe waste and recyclable materials generated oton airport like RIDIVI: toiletries, food and beverages at security screening, and liquids throughout the facility. TOILETRIES, FOOD, AND BEVE 9 , GE8-TSA RESTRICTIONS The TSA restricts the volume of liquids, gels and aerosols that can be carried onto an aircraft. Passengers are allowed three -ounce containers of toiletries in one one -quart boggie (3'1'1) in thnircarq+on luggage. Even though these restrictions have been in place for longer than 10 years, toiletries, beverages, and food itemsthatdo not meetthe requirements are regularlyfound in passenger luggage during security screening. When these items are found, the TSA gives passengers three options: pack the item innchecked bag, give the item to a non -traveling family member nrfriend, orforfeit the dam. By law, the TGA cannot retain any items removed from passenger luggage, so items that are not repacked or handed off end up in the trash. In addition, when o restricted item is discovered in a passenger's carry -on or bag, the passenger may be subject to additional screening, which requires extra time and can interrupt the flow at a security screening checkpoint. Some problematic items that end upinthe trash cdsecurity checkpoints include: bottled water,n#herbnttled or conned beverages, toothpaste (larger than tnovo| aizo), shampoo and/or conditioner (larger than three ouncen), aunscnoon, and aloe gel. Some other. less obvious unallowable items are peanut butter, yogurt, applesauce, and maple syrup. It is expected that the garbage cans and recycling station located in the security queuing area receive a fair amount nfliquids and beverage containers due tnT8Arestrictions. These items end upinthe waste stream where the liquids are difficult to manage and the containers cannot be recycled. Liquids add significant weight tothe waste stnoam, contaminate other materials like poper, and may be rejected by a nocyder. which can result inthem being |ondfiUed. � 57 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix o Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Liquids contaminate and degrade other materials within the recycling stream and add weight to recycling or waste streams where they are found. In some cases, liquids are thrown away in their containers, which means the recyclable material found in water bottles, aluminum soda cans, and plastic beverage containers is not captured for recycling. C. P1 MCHASES The Airport does not currently track the quantity and type of disposable items and supplies purchased for the facility. This information could provide insight on some of the materials coming into the Airport which will go back out onwaste (other materials are broughton'nite by pauuengers, emp|oyeea, and vendors). The purchase list may include: ~/ ' items that have reusable nrrecyclable alternatives (foam cups) v some items which could be eliminated (by converting paper forms to digital to reduce paper waste generated) ` some which indicate scale nfthe activity atthe Airport (paper towel and garbage bags). 58 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 AST � /u A E E T K`NS T a ��`� ~~�� As noted in Section 1. the FyNRA lists the review of waste management contracts as an element of addressing solid waste recycling at an airport. The FAA memorandum titled "Guidance on Airport Recycling, Reuse. and Waste Reduction Plans" explains that the purpose of reviewing these contracts is to "identify opportunities for improving (waste) program scope and efficiency, as well as identify constraints." |ngeneral, the Airport's contracts and leases address housekeeping requirements and related expectations for managing trash and provide limited information about recycling. These contracts and leases do not necessarily impede recycling or otherwaste management strategies; however, they do not explicitly require conformance with or support of the Airport's recycling and related efforts. The following sections describe the content nfvarious Airport contracts related tnwaste and recycling. A. CUST*11AL AN, I 'ASTF HAULIM; C*N][RACTS RDIVI does not contract for custodial services forthe areas under airport control; these areas are maintained byCity employees. The City has an exclusive franchise agreement established by ordinance with High County Disposal for the collection of waste and recyclable materials. The Cit/s solid waste franchise ordinance outlines the responsibilities ofthe collection contractor, including: ~/ ' Dispose ofwaste otsite owned and/or operated byDeschutes County ~/ ` Provide opportunity to recycle in accordance with State law and the Department of Environmental Quality (DEO) rules ~/ ' Provide necessary collection vehicles, containers, facilities, and personnel The Airport isalso serviced byBend Garbage & Recycling, the parent company ofHigh County Disposal. The Airport does not have contractual agreements with High County Disposal or Bend Garbage & Recycling. The Airport is serviced by these companies under the City's franchise agreement and ordinance. TFINAN'T LEASES A\* SEMVICE' CONTI� kiCTS Two nfthe Airport's agreements with tenant and service providers reference recycling or recycled products; however, the nest have basic requirements pertaining hntrash removal and janitorial activities in leased areas. The Airport's template T-hangar lease agreement (dated 2016) specifies that the hangar tenant will perform nrpay for housekeeping services including trash collection and namnvn| in the leased space. The Airport uses a template titled, "Lease for Aeronautical Use Improvements." The lease template requires the tenant to perform maintenance including cleaning and trash collection and removal to keep the property clean and orderly. ' 59 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 An example agreement titled, "On -airport Rental Car Concession," dated October 2016 stipulates that the rental car company will provide janitorial and cleaning services and supplies for the leased spaces. It also requires that the rental car company provide for "handling and disposal of all tnosh, gnrbage, recyclable material, and other refuse" generated inthe tenant's areas. This agreement explains that the City k4irpnMU will provide receptacles for these materials for the tenant's use. Through the lease agreement, the rental car tenant agrees to bear any reasonable costs "associated with the implementation of any existing orfuture recycling program." The tenant can also propose on alternative recycling plan for the Cib/'s approval. The agreement also commits the tenant to undertaking "reasonable steps to minimize the impact of their operation on the envinonment." Because this agreement in more recent than the other described in this section, it's provisions about recycling may serve as an example for future contracts. The Airport's lease with one of the FBOa (dated July 2015) requires the operator to "make suitable arrangements for the storage, collection, and removal of all trash, garbage and other refuse resulting from (their) activities ... in accordance with any applicable |aws, ordinances, and rules and regulations of the Airport." This lease does not specifically mention recycling. The 2003 agreement between these parties required the tenant to provide "proper containers for trash and garbage" and to "keep the lease premises free and clear nfrubbish, debris, and litter atall Umes." An example agreement for commercial passenger air service dated July 2014 requires the airline to provide "arrangement for the adequaba, sanitary handling and disposal of all trash, gnrbage, aircraft sowoge, and other refuse." This agreement explains that the City (Airport) will provide ^cnmsned metal receptacles" for these materials. No reference is made to recycling. A 2014 addendum to the FBO's 2010 agreement with a tenant stipulates that the tenant will provide containers for trash and garbage. Recycling is not mentioned. The City has on intergovernmental agreement with one of the Cnunty's fire protection organizations for ARFFsnnvices. This agreement does not specifically address waste (or recycling); however, it does detail that the organization is responsible for the maintenance ofthe Airport Fire Station. The Airport has two agreements with afood and beverage service provider. The first, for food and beverage concession, specifies that the City (Airport) "will provide a common -use trash compactor or dumpsters with scheduled trash collection for the Airport tenants and concessionaries." The concessionaire agrees to provide arrangement for the handling and disposal of trash, gorbage, and other refuse and to maintain temporary collection areas in a sanitary and presentable condition. The concessionaire is required to handle vvnsto materials to "prevent the presence ofrodents" and to keep all garbage materials in durab|e, pest - proof, covered or lidded containers that are easily cleaned. When waste materials are transported within the Terminal, the concessionaire is required to package them in containers that prevent leaks and use only the routes established bythe City (Airport). This agreement also details the concessionaire's responsibilities as related to cooking oil/liquid grease. 60 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 The Airport's second agreement with the food and beverage service provider covers /etai|, cnffee, and snack food concession. This second agreement includes the some language regarding use of the compactors and dumpstem. maintaining leased areas in o sanitary condiUnn, and movement of materials. Neither agreement describes the recycling program. The Airport's 2001 agreement with the USFS (amended in20O and 2011)stipulates that the tenant pays rent based on costs forjanitorial services and garbage collection and removal. The Airport's agreement with a QAtonont/aviaUnn business requires the tenant to maintain the premises "in a nent, deon, sah*, and sanitary condition" and to pay charges for utilities such as garbage collection and removal and janitorial work. The Airport's contract with aparking management company, dated June 2O11.prohibits this company from accumulating trash or waste material and requires the company hn promptly dispose ofmaterials daily. This agreement does include a clause in conformance to EXado law that requires the company to use recycled material where app|icab|e, if the recycled product: ` is available /~ - meets standards � can substitute for onon-recycled product cost does not exceed the cost of the non -recycled by more than five percent. This agreementwas the only one reviewed underthis project that discussed recycled products; itmay serve asanexample for future contracts. The parking agreement also includes a mechanism for the City (Airport) to reimburse the company for cost and expenses according to an operating budget; however, the line item for cleaning and janitorial supplies was listed for zero dollars in the copy provided for review under this project. Two GA hangar leases dated 2008 and 2005. respecUvek/, contain the same language: "Tenant shall provide proper containers for trash and garbage and shall keep the leased premises free and clear of rubbish, debris, and litter at all times." This is likely standard GA hangar tenant lease language, which does not include information about recycling. A2002U.8. Government Lease for Real Property leased space at the Airport for use bythe TSA. This agreement describes the services provided by the Airport, including trash removal and janitorial service and supplies. It also outlines other requirements including: ~/ ~ cleaning tnbecompleted during Airport hours ~/ rent tobeadjusted annually based nnactual janitorial costs ./ ` the Airport to maintain the area in a clean condition and provide supplies and equipment ' 81 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 - daily emptying of trash receptacles, disposal of trash and garbage, and cleaning of cans used for collection of waste C,FIXII-MI (I LEAS FS ANX CO \,][IUCTS Specific information regarding the expraUnn, extension and/or renewal dates nfthe Airport's numerous leases was not reviewed under this project. As outlined in the FAA guidance memo, "this information can signal the Airport's next opportunity to add rnnyding, nouse, and waste reduction objectives to existing leases and nnntnocts.^ Waste and recycling collection are funded inROM'soperating budget. RDMdoes not currently receive payment or rebates for recycled materials. 62 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 5,'ECYCLI F ASI � wm Many factors impact the feasibility of recycling at RDM; some are universal, and others, specific to the facility. The following sections describe the more influential of these factors. A. COMNII][NIE\1[AN* SK]P110 ][ The willingness of ROK8 and its contractors and tenants to commit to and support the facility's recycling program are critical to the success of such a program. Without the commitment of resources such as funding, labor and time, space, and access to secure areas, a waste management program could struggle. AIRPORT POLICY AND CONT a I CTOR DEDICATION RDK8's administration has supported the recycling program in the paat, and it is expected that this will continue in the foreseeable future. The administration has implemented nthersuatainobi|dy pnojocts, for exemp|e, as o solar energy installation. Based on the resources allocated to these programs, the Airport Committee and City of Redmond appear to generally support recycling, practical waste management, and sustainable operations. TheCity's waste management contractor is"committed to providing outstanding customer service, being recognized as leaders in our industry, and maintaining a connection (the) community of Central Oregon by supporting charitable endeavors." High Country Disposal's goal is to "continue to be on the forefront offering new programs and ways for our customers to recycle more." These commitments and goals align with continued support nfthe City and the Airport's recycling programs. AIRLINE POLICIES All four airlines that operate at RDM have established sustoinobi|ity programs that include elements of waste and recycling. At least one of the airlines serving RDM separates and recycles materials deplaned from commercial service flights. American Airlines has implemented recycling programs on the ground and in the skies. American recycles in back offices and breakrooms at their major hub at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, at maintenance msnters, and in other offices/employee work areas. According to theirwnboite. the airline introduced the industry's first onboard recycling program and recycles aluminum cans, paper, and plastic in-flight. During information interviews, Alaska Air staff and contractors described the process for separating necydab|es in flight and during cabin cleaning activities. Alaska Airlines' environmental strategy includes working to reduce waste from flights and other facilities, including recycling and composting of coffee grounds. Alaska's 2015 goal was to increase recycling capture rate on flights from 79 percent to 85 percent. The airline specifically mentions that their recycling gno|a are "limited by |nna| infrastructure as many airports and municipalities have different protocols and capabilities k/rnn'ming|ed rncyc|ing.''Alaska has 63 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 worked with a reuse company to salvage leather from old plane seats and reuse the material in consumer goods. The airline is also working with inOightcrews tn keep unused disposable items such ascups and napkins on aircraft instead of returning them to the catering carts, where they one thrown away in the unstocking process. Alaska's goal is to ensure all inflight service ware items are recyclable, reusable, and/or oustainob|ysnurced. ,4|ooko has also taken steps to reduce dependence on printed paper using iPsds. iPhnnes.and tailored applications ('`appn'')intheir operations. Per corporate policy, Delta is "committed to minimizing waste streams through diversion and re -use, waste, recycling programs, and (waste reduction)." Delta has been working to increase the number of cities where they recycle and the volume of material collected. In addiUnn, they track employee recycling at the headquarters campus in Atlanta and upcycle life vests, carpet, and leatherseat covers. Aboard Delta flights, single stream motorin|o, including p|aaUc, a|uminum, and paper, are collected by flight attendants in designated bags. These materials are collected by cabin service and transported todesignated recycling containers. Empty cans and bottles left inthe beverage cods are recycled byOelta'scatering partners. United Airlines is "committed to operating sustainobk/ and responsibly" and has recycled over28 million pounds of aluminum cans, paper, and plastic from flights and facilities. In 2014, United began to replace its hot beverage cups with fully recyclable alternatives made from recycled plastic water bottles. Offering recycling for deplaned waste at RDM aligns the Airport with its airline partners. B.Ti"CHNUCALAN 1_,1'C*N0M1C FACT* HS LOCAL MARKETS AND 8NF W� STRUCTURE Markets for recycled materials fluctuate widely based on many factors and interactions. Local waste haulers typically accept materials that can be recycled cost-effectively in the area. Manufacturers purchasing recycled material want it to be predictable and ready for use; thenefono, recycling facilities one particular about what materials they accept and prefer materials that are of high value and clean and easy to separate. 64 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan The materials listed inTable 3are accepted under the Cby'scommercial recycling program. Asnoted abnms, inclusion in such programs typically indicates that the market and/or infrastructure for these materials is strong. ROK8 currently recycles all the mahehn|o the Cdy'a commercial recycling program accepts. b|ooMaterYals—CitwmfRedmond Commercial Program ' Cardboard Tin and aluminum Plastic bottles, tubs, and jugs Mixed paper, newspaper, magazines Glass Source: High Country Disposal Commercial Recycling websitp httco:l/highcountrvdisposaicom/service*2/commercia|*ervices/nemc|inncoUection/ ' Deschutes County operates one landfill and four transfer stations/recycling centers in the Redmond area. LOGISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND CONSTRAINTS To maintain a recycling program at ROK8, m*doin elements must be in place. These include: � aproactive and engaged custodial staff ^� - awilling and affordable hauling contractor ~ space for bins, dumpatnrs.and compactors ^" access to secure areas of the facility (including airside ramps and sterile terminal areas). At this time, these nkanlantu appear unconstrained; additional resources including custodial labor, waste hauling sonviceu, spoce, and airport access are anticipated to be available to support the continuation and/or expansion of the recycling program at RDM. REDMOND moNxC,u«/,*mVOuT*WTEaPLAN 65 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan ]k , CTUAD.ISSUES Adetai|ed evaluation of the Airport's contracts is included in Section 4. Any major contractual issues with maintaining and improving the recycling program at RDK8 are not anticipated. RDK8 and the waste and recycling collection contractor will need to continue to collaborate to support the facility's recycling program. C. IkECYCLING, LANI)FILL, A I FACILITY A F'*L]UA 1',MEIN][S The recycling facility and landfill that accept waste from RDK8 have specific acceptance criteria and requirements. Adherence to these specifications protects the safety of employees handling these materials; the integrity and operation of the equipment and infrastructure used to tnannhsr, snrt, and convert these materials; and the value ofthe recyclable stream. Information provided by High County Disposal indicates that the glass stream collected from the Airport has included contamination (non -glass materials); this presents challenges tnrecycling this material. Components that seem recyclable (plastic, glass, nrmetal parts) comprise some items generated adROK8; however, the recycling facility has specific material sbandonds, so it is important that non -recyclable dan1s are not included in the facility's recycling stream. VVashs items that may be generated at the Airport, but are prohibited at the recycling facility include: -/ ./ - Styrofoam ^ Popor/p|naticcups V/ Plastic bags °" Waxed cardboard ~/ / - Saran wrap ^ ~ Plastic lids and caps ~/ Frozen food packaging V Liquid in container ~/ ~/ ` P|osUcc|omshe||s ' Lightbu|ba ~/ ~/ ^ Bakery containers - Batteries ~/ °/ ^ Pape�p|asUcp|otes - Other garbage v/ Paper napkins Waste mabsho| that may be generated at ROK8 but is prohibited by the Deschutes Cnunty's Knott Landfill includes hazardous waste, radioactive waste, large batteries, paint, and C&D waste. Some waste dams cannot be recycled or kyndfi|led, for example hazardous waste and chemicals, paint, batteries, and C&Dwaste. These items must be managed through hazardous waste oruniversal waste programs ordisposed ofatospecialized landfill. MASTER PLAN 66 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 RDM strives to be as self-sustaining as feasible; therefore, it is imperative that programs implemented and maintained at the facility, including recycling, are as cost-effective as possible. . GUIDELINII'SAXI) P*LICIFIS To evaluate ROM's existing recycling plan in the context of |onoi stato, and national requirements, the consultant reviewed federal, State of Oregon, and local waste and recycling regulations and policies/factors. At the federal level, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for developing a solid waste management program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and related policies and guidance. RCRA provides the framework for management nfhazardous and non- hazardous waste. All generators of hazardous waste, including airports, are required to comply with RCRA and all other federal waste laws and regulations. Asdescribed inSection 1.the FAA's definition of"airport planning" was updated in2O12through FMRAto include planning for recycling and waste minimization. The Airport is required to address solid waste as part of airport master planning. The FAA provides guidance on airport waste and recycling in the September 2014 memo on the topic as well as in a synthesis document prepared in 2013 (both available on the FAA's 67 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 The EPA has developed a hierarchy of waste management strategies. This hierarchy, shown below, ranks these strategies from most- to least -environmentally preferred and places emphasis on reducing, reusing, and recycling. 4 .04xii.41' AVOVIPPOO' $40,"(, 115 N'ilbP 6 tH 041, A At, ook000044140$4010444,0*10% ',,,10,14 OLP doAtypluxikoop iN,4444 "owae , a, wylp f;} 5, '{eivf, qi,N,4 ? h':,,o? 09, NI.,, p 1 f , , ,f 410,04" OP 4 ‘04#0,0,04440,04444014 4 41`10010A4114114 ""igh0 , 4("A'"'" ,;00,140k4:0,14,0,4044WO ,,140k10'111,0t,)0(410A, 040,00s0g,3 iM 34MTA),, Mg; AVARI,AtiO,,, " '4,aitSbintgiT ND MI\CH'Ai AIRPORT 68 AN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 In addition to the general waste management hierarchy, the EPA has also developed a preference ranking of management strategies for food waste, as shown below. Food Recovery Hierarchy www.epa.govifoodrecoverychallenge Source Reduction Reduce the volume of surplus food generated Feed Hungry People Donate extra food to food banks, soup kitchens and shelters Feed Animals Divert food scraps to animal feed REL)MONti MUN1Cl1'LA1RI 69 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 The State of Oregon's bottle bill was the first of its kind in the country and was introduced in 1971 to reduce litter. Under the current form of this law, customers pay a ten -cent deposit when they purchase soft drinks, water, and beer in metal, glass, and plastic bottles and cans. Then, customers return the empty containers to stores and centers to receive a ten -cent refund per container. This bill is administered by the Oregon Liquor Control Commission. Outside of the bottle bill, the base recycling law isthe Opportunity toRecycle Act, first passed in1Q83and |out amended in 2015. The OEQ establishes Recycling and VVash* Reduction administrative rules to elaborate on the Act and is responsible for regulating oitieo, cnunUeu, and other local governments regarding waste. The DEQ has developed o policy and integrated plan for managing waste materials, Materials Management in Oregon: 2050 Vision and Framework for Action. The Opportunity to Recycle Act prioritizes certain waste management strategies over others in o|k]nnn*nt with the hierarchy promoted by the EPA: � Reduce ~/ - Reuse ~/ ` Recycle ~/ ' Compost _/ - Energy Recovery / ~ - Disposal The state's material recovery rate goal is 52 percent for 2O2O and 55 percent for 2O25. In odditinn, the state's recovery rate goals for food waste, plastic waste, and carpet waste are all 25 percent by 2020. Each county (and some metropolitan areas) set their own voluntary recovery goals by statute. Tnmake progress under the 2050 Vision, cities of a certain size or within a certain region must implement three to five listed reduction and reuse elements. All other cities must implement a minimum number of recycling program e|ements, based on their size and |ncaUnn, chosen from the thirteen options listed in Senate Bill 263. The utote's laws and plans oUmw the |nce| units to implement programs to meet the statewide mandatory and individual voluntary goals. --- REDNIONDMUNICINU, AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 70 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Deschutes County operates one landfill, Knott Landfill, Recycling, and Transfer Facility, which is expected to reach capacity in 2029. The County has set a goal to recover 45 percent of waste generated by 2025 to reduce the amount disposed of in the landfill. As of 2018, the County has formed an advisory committee, hired a consu|tant, and is preparing o comprehensive solid waste management plan. The final plan may provide additional guidance and support for recycling in Redmond and at RDM. According to the Cod* of the City ofRedmond, the City's goal is to make RDK8 the "best airport of its size in the country." Sections 2.55Othrough 2.570 of the Cit/s code describe the requirements hzrFBOs. aidinau, charter and taxi flight operators, aircraft and parts dealer, and provider ofagricultural services (crop dusting). The code also defines regulations for petroleum products sold and used at the facility, for leasing apnce, and for prohibiting unauthorized business as well as other aspects of the Airport's operation. The nn|a mention of waste or recycling appears in the section on commercial vehicle operations: drivers of commercial vehicles (car services, taxis, and courtesy vehicles) are to dispose of trash in the receptacles located on the sidewalk in the taxi parking area. Sections 2.590 through 2.588 outline the roles and responsibilities ofthe Airport Committee. The Code of the City of Redmond includes information about garbage service in Sections 4.400 through 4.420. As outlined in the code, the City has contracted for the "exclusive right to coUect, nemnms, and dispose of all refuse except recognized industrial by-products." The final section underthe garbage heading details the City's conformance with the EXate's Opportunity to Recycle legislation. The City requires the collection contractor to provide recycling collection service for recyclable materials at the minimum level as required by the State or higher level as permitted by the City Council. The code specifies that the contractor's recycling program must include: -/ ' One durable recycling container for each residential customer ~^ ' Expanded education and promotion v Multifamily recycling _ Commercial recycling ~/ Recycling depots (drop-off locations) The Code specifies that the promotion of the program is the responsibility of the contractor. However, the Code also recognizes that education on the need for recycling is a joint responsibility of the City, schools, community organizations, the contractor, the County, and other parties. Based on the availability of residential and commercial recycling, the project team assumes the residents of the communities surrounding the airpnrt, and therefore the employees and possangern, have been exposed to nocyc|ing, receive on -going messaging about its impnrtoncn, and are generally supportive of recycling efforts. REL),f%IONDNll-]Nf(.,,,Il�%1,,AIRPOf(l'tvLASTER PLAN 71 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 As noted earlier in Section 5, most of the airlines serving RDK8 have recycling programs and targets. Aligning the ROK8 program with the airlines' practices provides the opportunity for o win -win smsnehn whereby the facility can reduce its environmental impact and, by helping the airlines reduce their impacts, generate goodwill with the airlines. 72 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 � �� ^^uAvI S 0 * *EVE UE —E E TI The costs associated with a recycling program depend on available infnastrudune, material markets, and the type nfwaste generated otofacility. These costs sometimes include capital costs for containers, landfill Upping fees, hauling cnsts, mnhoha| rebates, and labor. An evaluation of the pnhonUo| cost savings and revenue generation opportunities in required for an Airport Recycling, Reuse. and Waste Reduction Plan according toFK8RA. Airport staff provided a garbage collection expenses tracking spreadsheet for review under this project. This spreadsheet included costs for terminal waste collection, airfield waste collection, and general waste collection (specific single collection nvents), with the haen for collection of recyclable materials included in the waste costs. Based on data from 2O15through 2017. on average, the Airport spends approximately $8.800 each fiscal year (July 1 to June 30) for collection of waste from the terminal. One scrap msdo| collection from a GA hangar conducted in August 2017 cost two thousand dollars. Calendar year 2017, the Airport spent approximately fifty dollars o month for collection of waste from the airfield. The Airport pays to have waste syringes collected from the nostnooms and shredded paper collected from the offices about once oyear. To estimate approximate annual costs for recycing, information about the charges associated with the collection of the recycling dumpster and carts and other services is needed. After supplementing the information compiled and analyzed inthis document, ROK8 can make informed solid waste management decisions over time. Using the information provided in this plan and cost information available to ROK8. RIDIVI can begin to analyze the program's financials, evaluate costs, and determine if enhancements should be implemented. If expansion of the program is not technically or economically feasible at this time, this information will help ROK8determine when improvements might be feasible. 73 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 ATI � � This section documents recommendations for the Airport, including waste raduchon, reuse, and recycling strategies, based on the information presented earlier, specifically the waste audit and feasibility discussion. A. / . It is recommended that the Airport set specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time -bound (SMART) goals for its waste and recycling program. Having on established set of objectives and targets provides o basis and foundation for subsequent activities and actions. Progress toward such goals does require tnacking, but can also provide information on progress and impnnmsments, which can be a valuable marketing and education tool. The waste source, quonUb/, and composition information in Section 3 provides baseline data for establishing objectives and targets, and Section 5 describes the goal and target established by the State of Oregon. The objectives and targets dnhm*d from this information can be used to calculate target levels fUrRDK8. A physical material sort would further inform goal -setting eMbha. These are potential objectives and targets RDM might adopt or use as inspiration for other goals: ~/ Recover 45 percent of waste generated by 2025 (based onDeschutes County goal, current rate ksestimated ot15percent) Recover 5Spercent nfwaste generated by2U25 (based onState nfOregon goal, current rate inunknown) v/ 1OOpercent nftenant leases include recycling provisions -/ - 100 percent ofROM employees completed simple training on recycling program (more details later in this section) In the absence of established specific objectives and torgats, the following sections present general, universal recommendations for increasing recycling and reducing waste generation at an airport like RDM. TRACKI-Mi AN As noted in Section 2. ROK8 does not currently track msdhcn associated with the waste management program. It is recommended that RDM begin to regularly estimate and track the volume of waste sent to the landfill and the volume of material collected for recycling as well as the costs associated with these services. Trends associated with waste generation, landfill, recycling, and cost can be assessed for issues nropportunities for improvement. R'r MASTER PLAN - 74 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 RDIVI's waste and recycling performance is not currently reported to stakeholders. It is recommended that ROK8 proactively provide this information to monogenent, omp|oyeos, tenanta, and interested external stakeholders nnoregular basis. The purposes nfthis reporting are: ~/ - to remind management employees, tenants, and contractors about the recycling program ` to communicate the Airport's commitment to its recycling program and its broader commitment to austoinobi|ity ~/ ` tosolicit feedback and suggestions for improving the recycling program. The frequency of reporting is up to the Airport, but it is recommended that reporting be completed at least annually. The reporting schedule should also be updated as needed to accommodate changes hnthe program. The schedule is expected to initially increase in frequency asthe program evolves and new strategies are implemented, and then potentially return to a lesser frequency as the program is maintained. C. 1�E-30K1C11,',A\ tEUSE To reduce the facility's environmental impada. RDyN should focus on moving materials up the waste management hierarchy. Waste reduction is the most environmentally preferred waste management strategy as determined by the EPA. Waste reduction can be accomplished in many ways, including reusing Itksrecommended that the Airport evaluate the following reduction and reuse strategies todetermine which. if any, are feasible and prudent for implantation at RIDIVI. ~^ - Substituting disposable items with durable alternatives inthe administration office and other staff work areas Reusing items and materials where possible ~/ ^ Working with the restaurant tenant tndonate edible food toacommunity food security organization � Collecting and donating unopened food, beverage, and toiletry items subject to TSA restrictions ~/ ` Encouraging reuse bypassengers, tenants, and contractors LIQUIDS It is expected that the garbage can located in the security queuing area receives a fair amount of liquids and beverage containers due to TSA restrictions. Unfortunately, when these materials end up in the waste stream, the liquids are difficult to manage, and the containers cannot be recycled. Liquids add significant weight tothe waste stream, contaminate other materials like pnper, and may be rejected by vecyc|er. which will result inthem being |andfiUed. � 75 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 To minimize the amount of liquid discarded in the security checkpoint area, it is recommended that RDK8 continue to promote emptying of water bottles in the reutnoom sinks and refilling post security. Existing colorful, graphic signs in the terminal restrooms encourage passengers to empty water bottles prior security and to nofi|| them after screening. These signs are positioned above oye'|nme|. The moaaogo might reach more passengers if the signs were lowered and supplemented, for example, with vinyl cling decals on the mirrors over the sinks and posters or other visuals in the checkpoint queuing area. In the future, these signs could be revised to also encourage passengers to recycle disposable water bottles if they do not wish to refill them. It is further recommended that RIDM make a recycling station available in the immediate proximity of the pre -security nestrnnms so that passengers who do empty their disposable containers in the sinks have a convenient place to recycle the items they do not wish to refill. D. DONATION OF FOOD, BEVERAGES, AND TOILETRIES It is recommended that RDM work with the food and beverage concessionaire to assess the possibility of donating edible food to a local food bonk, soup khchon, nrshelter for distribution to the populations they serve. Feeding people is the second preferred strategy for addressing fond waste according to the EPA. Federal and state laws protect organizations that donate food in good faith from liability. Some organizations will pick upfood otthe source which reduces the demand nnthe Airport and concessionaire. It is recommended that ROM investigate the feasibility of collecting unopened bottles of water, other beverages, food and toiletries that are restricted from carry -on luggage and donating them to a local charity or other organization. These items can be very heavy and add weight to the waste stream. In compliance with T8Arequirements, these items may need to be collected prior to the security checkpoint queuing area. RDK8would collect these items bylocating a container at the security checkpoint and managing storage of the items until the receiving organization could collect them. To implement this nannmmendoUon, coordination between ROM, the designated receiving organization, and the TSAwould boneeded. Anexample of an Airport with such a program is McCarron International Airport in Las Vegas, Nevada. ^ 7,7 _ Example Donation Collection at McCarron International Airport (LAS) —xEnmcmnoxnw|cmu/AIRPORT NUSTsa------ 78 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 CYCLE AN* #N1P#ST Recycling is the second preferred waste management strategy, according to the EPA, after waste reduction/reuse. Recycling allows waste danns to be processed into row materials to make new products. The FAA guidance expects on airport's nonyc|ing, neuse, and waste reduction plan tndocument, at minimum, the facility's existing program to recycle paper, plastic b«tt|es, aluminum cans, and plastic cups. The Airport recycles most ofthese materials aswell ascardboard and glass. The Airport is currently recycling paper (printer paper, mail, envelopes, and other items) collected from the administration offices as well osfrom the terminal (newspapers and magazines). Paper is also recycled from the other Airport buildings (Maintenance and ARFF.) These paper streams are comingled with other recyclables. Bend Waste & Recycling collects shredded paper from the offices under a separate service. Managing recyclable paper separately from plastic bottles and aluminum cans protects the value of the paper stream and increases its recycling potential by minimizing contamination from liquids and creating a stream that may not need to be sorted. It is recommended that the Airport ask Bend Waste & Recycling about adding non -shredded office paper, newspapers, or magazines to the shredded paper collection. K is also recommended that the Airport expand the program to additional orens, including the airline and rental car company nffines, and encourage increased recycling of paper by nmp|nyees, honants, and passengers. Doing so reduces the environmental impacts associated with |ondfiUing this material and manufacturing virgin paper. 77 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Waste magazines and newspapers are generated aboard commercial flights and when they expire on the newsstand; it is recommended that the Airport collaborate and coordinate with the airlines and concession tenant serving RDM to evaluate adding paper items from deplaned waste and newsstands to this program. Collaborate concession tenant toevaluate adding paper emfromnowsstomds to this program —xo)mmmo`xumm/�&.x/mPORTNIASI'EmnL 78 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 PLASTIC BOTTLES AND ALUMINUM CANS The Airport is currently recycling plastic bottles and aluminum cans collected in the terminal, Maintenance, and ARFF buildings. Some plastic bottles and aluminum cans may be collected by employees and tenants for refund under the Etate'u bottle bill. Recycled plastic bottles and aluminum cans are coming|nd with paper. It is recommended that the Airport continue the current program and expand to additional areas. It is also recommended that the Airport support return of containers included in the bottle bill refund program as these programs typically have a higher recovery rate than a comingled stream. Whether through recycling or return for refund, increased recovery of plastic bottles by employees, tenants, and passengers reduces the environmental impacts associated with landfilling this material and manufacturing virgin plastic. Plastic bottles are also generated aboard commercial flights; itksrecommended that the Airport collaborate and coordinate with the airlines serving RDK8ho evaluate adding plastic bottles from dep|aned waste tothis PLASTIC CUPS Plastic cups are typically generated aboard commercial flights. It is recommended that the Airport collaborate and coordinate with the airlines serving ROK8tn evaluate adding plastic cups from dep|annd waste to the recycling program. CA 0 a The Airport currently recycles cardboard collected from the terminal food and beverage tenants and the administration offices. This material is collected and managed separately from the cnming|ed recyclable and glass streams; this protects the value of the cardboard material by creating asing|n material stream (move desirable because it reduced contamination from liquids and requires less processing after collection). It is recommended that the Airport continue to recycle cardboard. It is also recommended that ROK8 provide feedback to the tenants on the progress and performance of this program and solicit their feedback regarding improvements that could be made to increase nrsupport their participation. Marketing this program to all the terminal tenants could result in additional participation and remind existing participants nfthe pnogrom'sspecific requirements. The Airport currently recycles glass collected from the terminal restaurant tenant and passengers. This material is collected and managed separately from the comingled recyclable and cardboard streams; this protects the value of the other material by reducing contamination glass. It is recommended that the Airport continue to recycle glass and work to reduce contamination in this material stream. It is also recommended that RDM provide feedback to the tenants on the progress and performance of this program and solicit their feedback regarding improvements that could be made to increase or support their participation. --`__�—RPOU _-_�--'PLAN r__^ 79 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 OTHER RECYCLABLES Asother recyclable materials are identified inRDK8's waste stream, hbrecommended that the Airport work with the waste hauling contractorto design and implement strategies to separate, collect, and process these materials. GREEN WASTE It isrecommended that the Airport evaluate how green waste ismanaged and explore opportunities hoalign the facility's practices with the waste hierarchy; for example, by reducing the generation of this n1atoha| at the source (mulching |mwnmmwers), reusing material vvhnne possible (chipped branches as mulch), composting (via the local facility), and disposing of the material on or off site as a last resort. FOOD WASTE COMPOSTING According to industry case studies, food waste is typically nmajor component of the waste stream atan Airport (on average, 35 porcen0.Andescribed in Section 5.the EPA'sfnnd recovery hierarchy assigns priority to composting of food waste over landfill of this material (after using it to feed people as discussed under Reduce and Reuse). Composting is the process of decomposing food and other waste into a nutritious soil additive. Composting of food waste at RDK8 is largely dependent on the availability of local composting facility interested in accepting this material. As noted in GeoUnn 2, there does not appear to be a commercial composting facility in the area. If a composting facility is found or established in the area, RIDIVI should evaluate implementing composting at the Airport. In o terminal, pn+cnnaumarfnnd vvnute (waste generated by food preparation activities) is generally easier to compost because restaurant employees are at a facility more frequently and on a more regular basis than passengers, so they are easier to train and educate on composting practices and requirements. The specific items accepted by a composting facility are dependent on that facility's design and the process used to break down the waste; some facilities accept all food waste (including meat and bones and breads) while others accept only vegetables and fruit. One option for easing into composting gradually is to first in�lennsrda composting program for coffee grounds generated by restaurants in the homninoi Coffee grounds have a pleasant odor, are easily identifiable (therefore easy to separate), are typically uncontaminated by other materials, and are generated in o predicable manner and quantity. Once tenants are comfortable composting coffee gnounds, other materials can be added by name (banana peels, apple cores, etc.) and/or by type (fruits, vegetables, etc.) until all food waste appropriate for composting isincluded. 80 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 PAPER PRODUCTS Once a commercial composting facility is available in the area, the Airport may wish to collect paper towels and other paper products (napkins and tissues) for composting. Composting is environmentally preferred over |nnd8Uingthis material. Because the Airport's reutnonmo are equipped with paper towel dispensers and nearby garbage cona, the waste stream collected in these cans will primarily consist nfpaper towel. This stream can be expected to contain low contamination and a steady volume of material, making it an attractive material for composting. No modifications to the papertowel dispensers or garbage bins would be needed to implement papertowel composting. Alternative bins would need to be conveniently located and dnody labeled to accept other waste generated in the nestronma that is not paper towel, and the bins reserved for paper towel should be labeled "Paper Towel Only — Collected for Composting" (or similar) to instruct use and explain how this material is managed. The Airport would also need a dedicated cart for this material and a procedure to collect and store it separately until it was collected by the vvantn hauling contractor for delivery to the composting facility. F. EDKjCATI 0 ANX *(1'lr EACH Under the existing prngram, education of and outreach to Airport emp|nyees, tenonts, contractors and passengers is primarily accomplished through container signage in the terminal. To supplement these aforts, it is recommended that ROK8 improve the in -terminal messaging for passengers and provide brief, dear instructions for recycling. Providing dear, instructional nkJnago at the recycling stations or recycling bins can improve passenger participation and reduce contamination. See Section G below for information obnutsignogo. It is recommended that RIDIVI provide simple, on -going training for employees, tenants, and contractors that explains the recycling prngnem, including its purpose and requirements. Such o training program will promote program participation and compliance, resulting in increased recycling and reduced contamination. In oddiUnn, training can designate o contact and a mechanism to receive feedback and ideas for improvement. The format of employee training could take any number of forms, including emails, meetings, posters, etc. The content of such training should include: ~^ - reminders about the materials that are accepted for recycling at the Airport and the location nfthe containers toLeused for the program, information about purchasing requirements, and Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix o Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 |nhorn1eUnn and participation from the waste collection contractor should also be incorporated into the training program. In addition, different stakeholders and organizations involved in collection, housekeeping, necyding, cnmpouting, and other waste activities could also be asked to provide content or to be present during training. Kksrecommended that the Airport include obrief overview ofthe recycling program during employee on - boarding training and recurrent refresher training at regular intervals. To use employee time as effectively as poasib|e, waste training could be combined with nthertxoinings or meetings. RIDIVI should consider providing introductory level information to new tenantsand provide training materials such as postings, postcards, etc. to existing tenants for use with their employees. As some airport tenants may experience significant employee tunnover, providing this information on n regular basis (for example, annually) will help keep everyone uptndate onthe program. Once otraining and education program isimplemented, it isrecommended that RDK8actively maintain such a program to facilitate its continued success. The content nftrainingn should be updated as the program changes and grows. G. C \TA1N.'E?tSA\]D t1XS The existing recycling stations in the terminal are conjoined units with four compartments, top facing ok]naAe, and restrictive lids; no changes to the design of the containers are recommended at this time. Conjoined containers ensure a consistent format at every recycling station location; top facing aignagnand restrictive lids have also been shown to educate and instruct passengers to separate materials appropriately. It is recommended that RDIVI install additional recycling stations in high tnoMic areas of the terminal asresources allow. The recycling containers in other areas at the Airport are typically blue and have varying sizes and designs. No major changes are recommended to the design of these bins other than to ensure they and their service schedule are hghtsized for the existing and future volume of material collected under the program and future improvements. NUNSTER PLAN 82 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Collocation of recycling containers with garbage cans has been shown to decrease contamination and increase recycling participation. It is hk]hk/ recommended that RO&4 move o garbage can next to any recycling station or container that does not currently have one paired with it (as space allows). Move garbage cans next torecycling stations and containers In addition, RIDM should consider removing some of the stand-alone garbage cans inside the public areas of the terminal. There are many garbage cans in the terminal, and they are typically closer/more available than o recycling station; thenefone, in many canes, it in more convenient for passengers, emp|oynns, and tenants to locate and use a garbage can for all moteho|o than to find and use o recycling station. These containers could be ropurpnsed as recycling containers in other spaces fnrcoming|ed or single stream rocyn|ob|ea (in offices for paper, in breaknnomofor bottles and cons. etc.) The design of the garbage cans varies by location. As these containers are retired or replaced, the Airport may want to consider standardizing the shape and color of the containers to ok1 in recognition. It is recommended that RIDM install additional recycling bins in other areas as the other areas are added to the program and resources allow. iTER PLAN Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 Airport maintenance staff conduct the day to day waste activities, their insight isvaluable inimproving and maintaining the recycling program at RDK8. Their insight on which containers are undorused or undersized can help inform changes to the location and size of existing and future recycling statinna, recycling containers, and garbage cans. 1~� The Airport's recycling signage could be expanded and improved. The recycling stations in the terminal are |obn|nd for each accepted material but RDIVI should consider providing additional sk]noge adjacent to recycling stations that elaborates on the Airport's program and provides direction for passengers. A key location for additional signage is in the security checkpoint queuing area in the terminal. As described in Section 3.the T8Arestrictions compel the generation of waste, and items discovered in passenger luggage must be disposed in accordance with the agency's policies. In addition, restricted items discovered in passenger luggage by TSA can prompt additional security screening that increases congestion and wait times in the security line. C|earsignoge in this area vvnu|d help educate passengers on the restrictions as well as their options to comply with the restrictions to reduce wait times and without throwing these items away. Signage pertaining to the emptying of liquids and refill of containers post -security is discussed above. Gk]nageand labeling for recycling bins inother areas nfthe Airport isinconsistent orabsent and could be improved with color, images, and short, clear, instructive text to improve understanding of which items are recyclable and which should be thrown away. 1. WTlHEI� �,EC*M_N.1EN'.*A-f1*]\S In addition to the strategies recommended above, the following strategies are recommended forRDIVI's waste and recycling program. CTS AND LEASES As described in Section 4, contracts are a vehicle through which the Airport can influence tenant behavior, including recycling. As contracts and leases expins, exhand, or nenew, it is recommended that the Airport consider revising the new contract language toinclude waste management requirements nrpreferences, for examp|e, support of the recycling program. This could be a general clause stating a preference that tenants neUuce, neusn, and recycle where practicable or specific information about rncyc|ing, nouae, or waste reduction objectives and requirements. Two agreements reviewed for this project include language regarding conformance with the 8tate's Opportunity to Recycle |ovv and recycled content purchoaing, respectively (see Section 4). Another approach is to update the City's Airport Ordinance to include recycling requirements and preferences and ensure each contract or lease requires adherence to these policies. 84 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 PURCHASING POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS The Airport's existing purchases may create waste; specific purchase information was not available for this project. K is recommended that the Airport (or City) consider adopting a purchasing policy that prioritizes items that are durable (versus disposable), nauonb|e, nocyc|ab|e, compnstob|e, and/or made from recycled content. Once eatab|ishad, this policy could be shared with the Airport's tenants to encourage their own adoption nfsustainabi|ity'mindod purchasing practices. ADDITIONAL FACILITIES AND NEW DEVELOPMENT The Airport may wish to consider expanding the recycling program to additional areas, for example, in the buildings and activities that were excluded from this plan. Expanding recycling and waste reduction to areas outside the Airport's control nrinfluence will require cooperation and collaboration with the operators of those oneoo as well anwith their housekeeping and waste hauling contractors. Expansion could be as simple as encouraging these areas to recycle and acting as o resource for their questions or as complex as assisting these areas with an evaluation of their facility and/or container selection and signage design. As the Airport grows and changes, it is recommended that recycling and waste management be considered as a part of designing and constructing new development projects. This could be accomplished by establishing construction specifications that outline waste management requirements or preferences for Airport projects (for example, any landfill diversion rate requirements or recycled -co ntent material preferences) and involving the waste collection contractor in the design and planning nfnew facilities. The operation and maintenance of new facilities underthe control or influence of RDIVI, once constructed, should be included in the Airport's recycling program (for example a new general aviation hangar development). Any expansions of the existing program should be designed with care to maintain consistency and compatibility with the program inthe terminal, administration offices, and other established areas. U. C��NTI[��]��K1S U��P��OVE��8�NT � It is recommended thatROIVI maintains and implements improvements to the recycling program byfollowing the Plan Do Check Act cycle. The recommended strategies and supporting references make up the "plan" portion of the process. Defining success (for example, something like 45 percent recycling by 2020). establishing materials and areas of fVcus, collecting baseline information (waste audit, ounmys, etcj, identifying oub'goa|s, and identifying strategies are all part of planning. In the hutune, additional areas of focus, baseline measurements, and goals will likely be needed. -xemw�wm%ovu��/AIRPORT rvtAx[FnPLAN 86 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 DO Implementation of strategies included in this plan represents the "do" portion of the process. This involves implementing the recommendations in this plan and making progress toward achieving the goals. In "doing," the Airport will continue developing a culture of awareness for waste management and will begin to shape the practices and processes for improving and optimizing its activities associated with nnduction, nause, necyc|ing, cnmpnsting, and other waste management elements otthe facility. Aastrategies are implemented, the "check"portion ofthe process involves reporting that requires regularly tracking and checking the progress toward meeting the goals. The Airport has finite resources (financio|, ntafhng, capito|, otc.), thenefnro, the management and tracking of the plan must not be unnecessarily arduous. If tracking and chocking become too difficult or time cnnsuming, the entire plan may suffer. Checking may require the Airport to develop and use tools for measuring success and identifying areas for improvement, including a mechanism for feedback and process for reviewing suggestions. The following scenarios may trigger re-evaluation of the program and/or the constraints described in this document: ./ ' New state recycling |ows, requinemenhs, or goals v New RDK8programs orgoals .� ' New City nfRedmond programs orgoals / ~ - New Deschutes County programs orgoals v New local infrantnuduna, for example, composting facility vChanges within or expiration of franchise agreement with waste hauling contractor(s) ACT The "act" portion of the process encompasses taking what has been learned in the previous stages and actively responding. It can be helpful to ask. "What did we learn?" and "How can we do better next Ume?^ Byre-evaluating the strategies, activities, gna|n, and methcs, adjustments can be identified and put into action. It is recommended that meetings on waste and recycling be held on a regular basis to drive the continuous improvement cycle (review the recycling program and plan and implement improve mnnbs/odustments). It is further recommended that these meetings include a representative from each of the following areas: the waste hauling company, the airlines serving ROK8, the restaurant tenant, other terminal tenants, a hangar tenant, the Redmond community, and the traveling public. 86 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 C M EIATI S SU MAY The recommendations outlined in this document do not require major capital improvements and were designed to be compatible with RDM's in -progress master plan, the existing recycling program, and other airport requirements. Table 4 summarizes recommendations for the RDM waste and recycling program. Ri MIOND MUNK:MAI AIRPORT MANITR PLAN 87 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 00 (NI L6 0 Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan C E 0 U ("rs. E U a' CD C4 CD CU ro C CD U CL) 0 C 0 CD V) V) CO 0 F— b1) v-) 0.) V) 0 cn 0 C CD CUCD C 0 4=i cliC C a.) 2 >- 0 _ • o E 0 si) CU CU 0 .47-1 (11 o _C 0 S.- -CD , 4-, 0 0- 0 _o +-) co 0 c tr) o a) o ro a)(T.) E 0 42 cn C1J C a-, 2 C eL a o -0 > C Co u co ro ao C,.- - o_ 0 u (1) u — E -05 CU o =C -0 sal m cu c u — *5 e t 0 0 (1) • - CL C CO CO (1.) C • - C CO ba C13 7) (I/ -5 E ,;••bO '47, .47) CD cy 0 OJ CL >. c13 C _c ro CD m -0 4=1 (cii.1 t10 cf) r° CDa)CD C to CC < -U I.- Reduce and Reuse U, E <11 -1--, . _ 131 s- • - 0 x C11 C CO cn 0.1 C . c 0 174 47, 0 MO vi a)CD 0.1 — cc 0 t ) OD 1._ C a) ro Cl1 CO s- a-. CD_ 01 >... 03 CD_ -1-• -0 ro ._ )._ a)0- - D CU -0 Lil (.-S 0 2 so 73 CU ro El_) a.) v) v) E -I-, 0 0 _C C cn cr) CD- 0 v) s_ -0 0 (11 o.) Ca U,_C C b-0 0.) 4-, co q6 _ 0 - = OD >*. C11 (A (11 . _ s_ 0 D Ca) 73 C • 0 C.) co = ro c s.._ . CU CO CO cn .O.0 ej 0 c7i tto 0_ vi E >•• •- tto csi2 0.., E -0 To cn C D _C CU C 0 -1--, CO Sc= t 0 4-' • - 2:-V; a)o_ 0 4-... -..... 4-.. 0_ V) 0 0 mu ro . s_ c -I-, CU MO c LC 1-1 C .7114-' 4-8 ro ro .) -I-) LIZ 711. 0 CU (1) CO W V) .-° S_ _a QJ _a ,...,„ s-- E0 c > 4_, 0_ iT3 -I-, O.) C '6' a3 7: 1.12 CD ,- tto c -a _0 r 0 E n cu c )- 'C -,--, • •- 0 -aej -0 46 Co >-.c L-, 0 ts0 15 -. C c c 0 -, v) 2 -a E •§- F -E' E a RI CD_ CU ro 'I-J C 75':: v) 50- a)CU .-F-,r0 CI) 011 b.0 C vi 4-E cu -) 4-, C C • - O.) WE TO C -1--' VI 4-, a) OJ tto C CD_ Lc) 7_, - CD_ 4 8 . 2 o 0 (.2 ao a, c mu' a, c C 0_ _0 (10) ru a) D L._ (_) D 0_ s- • _CD va > P•• 0 75 co tr_ -0 CU r° - 0V(1)a 'cr.) 2 >. , co cn C 0)1 CU 4-, 0_ 13.0 0 (0 1- 0 7 0 cDC C 0 co C cn CDC 2 t,•1 0_ t_ 0_ ..),5 v) 05 0_ (11 CU 0 D la cn 0..) v) 0.) _C -a El._.) 0 *-, a) 1: 3 . / ' ' _ co_ (1.1 CU E _, 5 0 -01 4-, C 4-, CO cca) 07ca -.4-:.; roc cottO (11 D CD- a) -I--, • - -I-) L_ C C _CD C "' cr) .47) 0 0 0 CL) 0 •-•, 03m E 0 c o_ >o =0 _0 D C D CU 0 0 v) X 0 V) CC U .>' U 1.1.1 U < 11.1 ss'Z ICIT) I 0. CD 0. V; S_ O.) C . - CO -I-, C 0 0 a) MO CD • CU P > cts 41 s_ ID OD 0 -0 s_ CU CD_ C -0 03 C 0_ p CD a) 4- s_. a 2 a) = 0_ .c •.,- 13.0 - C• - ct, (I) -I-, 0 >- 48 >. 0 To- _a (i)0 0.1 s_ = 7- -C C 0 -' 0 C 2 • - 0 E cn -a ct. D vi w C C 03 -CD (...) • - (1) D u E t_ ct, 0 _ U, CDTtIc v) CO s_ C.. 7:3 0 a) C C ' C13 75 CO AI 4-) co c u 0 -1.72 01 0 0 E Si E 4-) •F- 0 0 E o .--'- cD U,E ra tto D < CU 0_ '- C CU C CO -I-) SA C c 0 a) .475c cl: v,°-: 00 co uLu U 47) U, Al 0- 0 cc tto C cn C • - CD C11 _C lao C _C 0 CO 0_ CU COO C 0 U ro 0 0 C tta 0 >- CD 0 _0 5- CD 0 a) _c C C o u 0 CD U CD 0 0 (11 _C (1.1 CD F C 73 CO CD _0 CU CU 4- L_ 0.1 _C 0 0 cr) CD tto 2 0_ Ln 4- 0 CD C CD C11 0 -0 C CD CU tto 2 0_ C11 _C C 0 C CO C CU 0 CO _CD CU • CU Ln a)CD 0 C 5 (I) o cco cn CD a) C 4-) C OJ 7 sCiU_ 03 _0 01 SA 4- CO C •- 0 scLi -0 C 4- CO 0 E 0 80 u co ' CU ro s- C +-) C 2 c c 0 cl 0 0 0 bU) co +, C .0 .0 C 03 .= 7-) E c CD >••• 0 cij a.) 4-, 4-4 C CU c a) 0 ° s__ 4-, --, vr U, 0 U,CU RI vl 0 Tio T.) cD OJ CU 75 -a _C 03 CU (A _C D 0 CU .0 , -CD AI , C .47' 7__ 5 u c 0 o >,• 0 co 8 - 6" '- 4-, AG sti 16 CA .0 — 4-0 w 0 Green Waste with the EPA hierarchy. 0.0 CD opportunities t: managed and exp|or C: a) CO Evaluate ho CS 0 0 u. 0 CO tIC) C V) 0 a_ CO CO CD 5- CD aJ _c C -0 _C U, _0 CO a) 0 CD tto C cn 0 0_ U 0 ro 0 — a. CL)a. r a. C CD VI C 0 C 47) CO CO -.I t3.0 C • - c (1) >•• 05 vi 4_, a)CD CID iC CIO a •••• ul CDF C CD 1:10 C (7) 8 0 ct, C 13.0 OD 0 .0 U,t1.0 C 13.0 [13 CD U, a)CC E 72 a') u •F c 0.1 CUs o E z 0 w L" a > w ° o ro c E o — u CD laO 2 0_ 0 c11 -0 03 -0 r° . CU >'' TO CV co _C C 0 E C11 'rip' -..., aJ vi -1--, CO a)a) -:. Co s_ 2 ,- a a))._ _c cn CO 41:4 ..... +-, RI -8 . _j C 0 >. c RI *- CU v) _0 vl RI a-, c 4----- D OJ VI co 4- -0 S_ CO w CO Ct$ U -Co C ttO U, ro ro ttouc _00.0 -DU,ttO 0 CD LE 0)1 co S.) D 0_ a) '- 5 c cocct, to .- .,_ U, a) co .0- 5-c U, CD c' 0 C 0 CV _0 L_ CD CD *--s: _C 03 0 -a U, c 73 c 75 MO co _0 b.0 CD ..= U,C C CD MO MO _.0 U,C M CD s__ C C • - U,U, CD . 7., o C C 0.0 `-` >" 0 LE 15 c 0 CD MO tao C .- 0.1 ,- ._ >,.. ._ co 0 -65 um c >. -6 w c ›. 0 0 ,_ 0 . 0 , c 47, 0.1 ,_ 2 ra a) '4=1 '@ :i3 a 4-, SA NJ :15 (I) OD w NJ 4-, s__ ro -0 co •- v) ro > co _ CoCO CO -1--, +-, --C E c 541) U, 1 3 4 CU CU C :; 0 ro cn -I-) C C "CD •F) C 0 U pecifically, in the checkpoint queuing area 4-• (1) -0 73 (I) 7 2 -0 03 CD 0.0 0 0_ (1.) _C C 0 a) CD _a CD ,Tu 0 ao CD C al) • - (,) a) 2 0_ -a 7.) _a co CD -a C co C cri X b.0 CO C bA i7) Contracts and Leases 0 4o 1 a) C CD - CU s__ 0_ 55 cr) 01 CO -0 Drdinancet: 0 CD_ U OA) _C a) CD -CI 0_ s_ 0 0.0 CD IDA C CO C CD CU C c11 cn > -0 C CD _.0 CD 0 OCD S' _.0 U >. aJ -0 CD CD col CD_ cts C O.S CD 03 _C 4-)4. ‘1/ -0 *L7_, 0 ro OJ V) -.C. a) 4-4 01.0 5- 0 s- 0- 0 4-) Vi -.C. 0 C (1) 4-) E L)>" 2 0 .5- c cs- to a) _c 71. IS co 4- c C co s_ c : u U _C Cl5 0 4-, -LI) 0 bA 0 >- c CD a) •(.7„, < s- -C U a_ C (1) 0.. 0 au 73 E ra o 0_ 01) _C C -0 0 CO RI -a 0_ X C (D (11 0 ctlf3 C C CD o_ v) '-0 E 40 OCD CD_ -0 al -0 (DC X cjE 01.) C U,MO a) co cm o_ E > ci Tv' V) V) > co 0,1 0 aj -C3c a) o_ to Z o 0.0 -o C C CD §u >- :474- ea _0 73_ cv, o o u a O".) >.• _C 0 0 CD CT- 0 110 C CD 0.0 CD 0_ a) VI CO -0 C CD 13.0 0 C - (11 _C 0l-- o 2 ..17) Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 �-��T�� ==,��� ROIVI currently has asimple recycling program in place that includes basic elements and has the potential to be expanded in phases to further reduce the facility's environmental impact. This document has described the existing program and outlined recommended improvements that will allow RIDIVI to potentially increase both landfill diversion and recycling volumes. |naddition, this plan documents and supports RDK8's compliance with the FIVIRA of 2012 and FAA guidance for recycling, reuse, and waste reduction. 89 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 9, 'EF " C S Atkin, P, et oL "Trash Landings: How Airlines and Airports Can Clean UpTheir Recycling Programs," National Resources Defense Council, New York, N.Y., December 2006. Berry, F,F.GiUheopy.and J.Rogers, ACRPSynthesis Y0: Airport Susbainsab0tyPractices, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008. Black E., "Airport Sustainable Master Plan Pilot Program," FAA, Washington, D.C., May 27, 2010 [Online]. Available: ht¢>://www.taa.gov/airportn/envinonmentaVsustoinabi|ity/modia/intehn1_ guidance_ suntainab|e_master_p|on_pi|nLpdf[accessed December 3.2O14]. Buckner, K.. F.Pittem, and A. VVedding, ACRP3lx/thnnsis 81: Food and Beverage and Retail Cpenyhxnr The Costs of Doing Business atAirport, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, VVashington, D.C..2O17. Cosnadia Consulting Group and HF&H Cnnnultant, California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Cost Study unCommercial Recycling. January 2O11. Cascadia Consulting Group, LeighFisher Management Consultants, and Mary Loquvam Consulting, ACRP Report Y00Recycling Best Prantinea—AGuidebumkfor Advancing Recycling from Aircraft Cabins, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2014. Chicago Department nfAviation, Sustainable Airport Manual. Version 3.O. 2012. EPA, "Sustainable Management of Food." n.d. https://www.epa.qov/sustainable-manaqement-food EPA, Developing and Implementing an Airport Recycling Program. April 2009. FAA, Office of Airports, Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction at Airports — A Synthesis Document, April 24,2013 FAA, "Report on the Sustainable Master Plan Pilot Program and Lessons Learned," 2012. Haseman.Z..ACRP Synthesis 42: Integrating Environmental Sustainability into Airport Contracts, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2013. Katzev, R. and Mishima, H.R., The Use of Posted Feedback to Promote Recycling. Psychological Reports, 71(1).250'284. 1002. K8a|ick A, ACRP Synthesis 77 Airport Suobainoabilib/ Prantireo, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, VVoshinghnn, D.C., 2016 REDMOND %I UNICI N� L AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 90 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan April 5, 2018 K8adin'Nogke.R.and A.Klauber ACRP Synthesis 66: Lessons Learned from Airport Sustainability Plans, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2015. Ralston, Phil, ^PDXVVaoto Management" (zresenbaUnn, Airports Going Green Cnnhsrnnma. Chicago, |L. August G.2000). GanK8aMUn F. and D. Rinsler, "Guidance on Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reductions Plans," FAA, September 3O.2O14. 8zczepannk, M, "Wheels Up: A Look otHow U.G. Airports Manage Waste and Recycing.^VVontn36O. December 15.2O1G. hftp1Ywwwxvosto36O.com/business'operadinns/Wheok*|onk,how'uo-airpnrts' Werner, C.K8, R. SboU, P. Birch, and P.H. VVhd*. "Clinical Validation and Cognitive Elaboration: Signs That Encourage Sustained Recycing.^Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 24.185'203. 2002. --- KEDNIONDMUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN � 91 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan "Te �.,m Appendix March 30, 2018 APPENDIX D: P L EM EN TAT R1DMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Appendix D Project Title: Terminal Phase 1A Project Number: Project Description: Environmental, design, and construction of terminal holdroom remodel and reconfiguration. Total Cost (��1� Dollars): $6'16U'OUU Funding Sources: PE Discretionary,` ' Local Year: 2022'2023 Phased Project E3Yes 0No Project Components Planning NN Design $274,000 0@ Environmental $456'000 80 0� Construction S5'430'000 Enabling Projects: Equipment Acquisition None Comments: Environment and Design phases occur inYear lofZfor Terminal Phase 1B. Is project timeline flexible? Are any projects dependent on this project? aeuau�w�muImuzno/AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 1 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Planning and Zoning Project Conformity 00Conforms toexisting zoning 0NMay require rezone/Comprehensive Plan amendment Project compliance with minimum standards 00 Yes 00No Any potential controversy based on stakeholder feedback? Stakeholders generally support the project. Process description and duration Phase lwill renovate existing ground floor hn|dronmand includes reconfiguring the boarding corridor into extra ho|droomspace toincrease seating capacity. Environmental Level ofstate and federal environmental review required? The project isA|Pfunded and will require NEPAprocess. Expected to beacategorical exclusion ([atEx). Potential complications? FAA may potentially ask for anenvironmental assessment instead ofa[atEx. Cost ofmitigation Mitigation not expected. Description ofmitigation process and uncertainty Mitigation not expected. Process description and duration Any pre -implementation support facility construction mrsite prep required? 0NYes 0 No Potential challenges ofsite location? No Are there financial and operational risks based mnproject scale? Improvement suggestions mfdesign process Process description and duration uLDMOwuM17NImPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 2 Appendix D Can the Airport fund the project inits current state? NNYes R No Fiscal impact ofproject mnimmediate and ongoing Airport finances. Project costs exceed available funds. The Airport will need toissue abond tncover costs. How competitive isthe improvement for discretionary funding? How competitive isthe project for FAA priority compared tmother Airport C|9 projects? Operation and Maintenance Potential impact onairport operating costs? Project will increase terminal footprint which will impact operating and maintenance costs. Are additional staff needed? Project will increase terminal footprint which may require additional maintenance and/or janitorial staff. REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 3 Appendix D ` Project Title: � � Terminal Phase 1B ' Project Number: Project Description: Environmental, design, and construction phases ofthe elevated hn|droom expansion. Total Cost (�O1� Dollars): $11'UZU'UUU Funding Sources: Discretionary,` Local Year: 2022 Phased Project 93Yey 0Nn Project Components Planning NN Design $816'000 N0 Environmental $490'000 D� Construction $9'714'000 Enabling Projects: Equipment Acquisition None Comments: Is project timeline flexible? Are any projects dependent mnthis project? nrum«0mD,,%nU'mn�razAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 4 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Planning and Zoning Project Conformity 00Conforms toexisting zoning 0NMay require rezone/Comprehensive Plan amendment Project compliance with minimum standards 00 Yes 00No Any potential controversy based on stakeholder feedback? Stakeholders generally support the project. Process description and duration Phase lBwill elevate the ground floor nfthe ho|droombyS feet tofacilitate Passenger Boarding Bridge (PBBs).This will allow P88stn reach larger aircraft onthe apron. Environmental Level ofstate and federal environmental review required? The project i»A|Pfunded and will require NEPAprocess. Expected to beacategorical exclusion (CatEx). Potential complications? FAA may potentially ask for anenvironmental assessment instead nfa[atEx. Cost ofmitigation Mitigation not expected. Description mfmitigation process and uncertainty Mitigation not expected. Process description and duration Any pre -implementation support facility construction mrsite prep required? 00Yes 00 No Potential challenges of site location? No Are there financial and operational risks based onproject scale? Improvement suggestions mfdesign process Process description and duration R EDINmmD �Nl UNmI PA 1. AIRPORT MASTER PLAN S Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Can the Airport fund the project inits current state? NNYes 0 No Fiscal impact ofproject mn immediateA and ongoing Airport finances. Bond willneed to be considered for the greater terminal program. The City can issue bond that contribute tn local funds tncover construction costs. How competitive isthe improvement for discretionary funding? How competitive isthe project for FAA priority compared tmother Airport C|9 projects? Operation and Maintenance Potential impact onairport operating costs? Project will increase terminal footprint which will impact operating and maintenance costs. Are additional staff needed? Project vviUincrease terminal footprint which may require additional maintenance and/or janitorial staff. REDMOND MUNTCH-PAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 6 Appendix D ` Project Title: Terminal Apron Expansion Project Number: Project Description: Environmental, design, and construction phases ofTerminal Apron Expansion project Total Cost (�O1� ` Dollars): $1'998'900 Funding Sources: PE, Local Year: 2022'2023 Phased Project 0Yes 0Nn Project Components Planning NN Design $118'000 00 Environmental $73'000 Construction S1'808'000 03 Enabling Projects: Equipment Acquisition None Comments: Planning and Zoning Project Conformity 6Con�nnytoe�sdn8zonir� NNMay require rezone/Comprehensive Plan amendment Project compliance with minimum standards 6Yey NNNo Any potential controversy based mn stakeholder feedback? Stakeholders generally support the project. Process description and duration Asthe Terminal Phase 1B project will aUnxv PBBstn reach larger aircraft onthe apron, the apron expansion will increase the overall capacity nfthe apron. mo�vl LTN [mrmAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 7 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Environmental Level mfstate and federal environmental review required? The project isA|Pfunded and will require NEPAprocess. Expected to beacategorical exclusion ([atEx). Potential complications? FAA may potentially ask for anenvironmental assessment instead nfa[atEx. Cost ufmitigation Mitigation not expected. Description mfmitigation process and uncertainty Mitigation not expected. Process description and duration Any pre -implementation support facility construction orsite prep required? 0Yes 0 No Potential challenges of site location? No Are there financial and operational risks based on project scale? ABond will need tnbeconsidered for the greater terminal program. The City can issue a bond that contribute to local funds tncover construction costs. Improvement suggestions wfdesign process Process description and duration Can the Airport fund the project inits current state? 00Yes 0 No Fiscal impact ofproject mnimmediate and ongoing Airport finances. ABond vviUneed tobeconsidered for the greater terminal program. The City can issue a bond that contribute to local funds tocover construction costs. How competitive isthe improvement for discretionary funding? How competitive isthe project for FAA priority compared tmother Airport C|P projects? FILVMoND»aoN1CTpAI.AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 8 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D March 30, 2018 REDMOND MUNICIPAL. AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 9 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Appendix D ` Project Title: '^ Mid-term � ' Phase Project Number: Project Description: Design and construction nf3UOadditional parking stalls. Total Cost (2D17 Dollars): $5'305'250 Funding Sources: Local Year: 2024 Phased Project ES Yes NNNn 9n Components Planning N0 es8» Design Environmental N0 Construction 00 Enabling Projects: Equipment Acquisition None Comments: This isaNnn`4|Pproject |sproject timeline flexible? Are there any other projects dependent mnthis project? ueommmmN1 oNnzx*,AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 10 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxvns|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Planning and Zoning Project Conformity 00Conforms toexisting zoning 0NMay require rezone/Comprehensive Plan amendment Project compliance with minimum standards 00 Yes 00No Any potential controversy based on stakeholder feedback? Process description and duration Project will require removal of the USDA building. Environmental Level ofstate and federal environmental review required? Potential complications? Cost mfmitigation Description mfmitigation process and uncertainty Process description and duration Any pre -implementation support facility construction mrsite prep required? 00 Yes NN No Potential challenges of site location? Project requires removal of USDA building and tenants' potential reconfiguration of traffic circulation, and stormvvaterconsideratinns. Are there financial and operational risks based mnproject scale? Improvement suggestions ofdesign process Process description and duration REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 11 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Scheduled start date Expected cost Can the Airport fund the project inits current state? NNYes NNNo Fiscal impact ofproject onimmediate and ongoing Airport finances. How competitive isthe improvement for discretionary funding? How competitive isthe project for FAA priority compared tmother Airport C|9 projects? Operation and Maintenance Potential impact on airport operating Are additional staff needed? REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 12 Appendix D ` Project Title: '^ ` Rehab Taxiway G Pavement Project Number: Project Description: Total Cost (2017 Dollars): $3'331'333 Funding Sources: PE, Discretionary, Local Year: ZOZS Phased Project NYes 00No Project Components Planning NN Design $203'000 Q0 Environmental NN Construction $3'123'000 00 Enabling Projects: Equipment Acquisition None Comments: Is project timeline flexible? Are there any other projects dependent mnthis project? Project timeline is flexible but needs to happen sooner than later. Ongoing maintenance of existing pavement can keep it in working order, but costs will grow over time aythe pavement deteriorates. Planning and Zoning Project Conformity 6Conforms tnexisting zoning NNMay require rezone/Comprehensive Plan amendment Project compliance with minimum standards 8Yes NNNo Any potential controversy based mn stakeholder feedback? Project iynot controversial. Process description and duration RFoMOwumU7)mrmAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 13 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Environmental Level mfstate and federal environmental review required? The project isA|Pfunded and will require NEPAprocess. Expected to beacategorical exclusion ([atEx). Potential complications? FAA may potentially ask for anenvironmental assessment instead nfa[atEx. Cost ufmitigation Mitigation not expected. Description mfmitigation process and uncertainty Mitigation not expected. Process description and duration Any pre -implementation support facility construction mrsite prep required? 0ye» 80 No Potential challenges mfsite location? Are there financial and operational risks based mnproject scale? Pavement rehab i»asimple project and not considered a risk. Improvement suggestions ofdesign process Process description and duration Scheduled start date 2025 Expected cost $203'000 Can the Airport fund the project inits current state? FXI Yes UNo Fiscal impact mfproject mnimmediate and ongoing Airport finances. Nnmajor financial impact. How competitive isthe improvement for discretionary funding? The prnjyct'scompetitiveness depends nnwhat the scale of the project is anticipated to be. How competitive isthe project for FAA priority compared twother Airport QP Competitiveness depends onthe condition ofthe pavement and the scale ofrehabilitation. REDNIOND,V�10ICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 14 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Operation and Maintenance Potential impact onairport operating costs? Rehabilitation should reduce maintenance costs inthe short term. Are additional staff needed? Noadditional staff needed. REDMOND MUNICITIAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 15 Appendix D ` Project Title: � ^ � Rehab Taxiway GLighting Project Number: Project Description: Total Cost (2O17 Dollars): $453'300 Funding Sources: PE, Local Year: 2025 Phased Project 0Yeo 00Nn Project Components Planning N0 Design $28'000 08 Environmental NN Construction $425'000 B0 Enabling Projects: Equipment Acquisition Comments: Planning and Zoning Project Conformity 0Conforms tnexisting zoning 0 May require rezone/Comprehensive Plan amendment Project compliance with minimum standards 0 Yes El No Any potential controversy based mn stakeholder feedback? Project is not controversial. Process description and duration wu/mowDmowuzpAT,AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 18 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Environmental Level mfstate and federal environmental review required? The project isA|Pfunded and will require NEPAprocess. Expected to beacategorical exclusion ([atEx). Potential complications? FAA may potentially ask for anenvironmental assessment instead nfa[atEx. Cost ufmitigation Mitigation not expected. Description mfmitigation process and uncertainty Mitigation not expected. Process description and duration Any pre -implementation support facility construction mrsite prep required? 00Yes 00 No Potential challenges of site location? Are there financial and operational risks based on project scale? Light rehabilitation isnot considered arisk. Improvement suggestions ofdesign process Process description and duration Scheduled start date 2025 Expected cost $28'000 REnNIowDMUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 17 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Can the Airport fund the project inits current state? 00Yes 0Nn Fiscal impact ofproject onimmediate and ongoing Airport finances. Nomajor financial impact. How competitive isthe improvement for discretionary funding? The project'scompetitiveness depends onwhat the scale nf the project is anticipated to be. How competitive isthe project for FAA priority compared toother Airport C|9 projects? Competitiveness depends onthe condition ofthe lights and the scale ofrehabilitation. Operation and Maintenance Potential impact on airport operating Rehabilitation should reduce maintenance costs inthe short term. Are additional staff needed? Noadditional staff needed. REDMOND N1 U NICITIAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 18 Appendix D ` Project Title: '^ Mid-term � ' Phase Project Number: Project Description: Design and construction ofZUOadditional parking stalls. Total Cost (2D17 Dollars): $3'695'382 Funding Sources: Local Year: 2035 Phased Project EYey 0QNn Project Components Planning N0 Design $I26'000 00 Environmental NN Construction 53'469'000 0@ Enabling Projects: Mid-term Auto Parking Phase 1 Equipment Acquisition Comments: Non`4|Pproject Planning and Zoning Project Conformity NNConforms tnexisting zoning N0May require rezone/Comprehensive Plan amendment Project compliance with minimum standards 0 Yes NNNo Any potential controversy based mn stakeholder feedback? Process description and duration Scheduled start date Expected cost Is project timeline flexible? Are there any other projects dependent mnthis project? mDMomuHmAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 19 Exhibit owOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Environmental Level mfstate and federal environmental review required? Potential complications? Cost ufmitigation Description mfmitigation process and uncertainty Process description and duration Scheduled start date Expected cost Is project timeline flexible? Are there any other projects dependent mnthis project? Any pre -implementation support facility construction ursite prep required? 00Yes 0No Potential challenges of site location? Are there financial and operational risks based mnproject scale? Improvement suggestions mfdesign process Process description and duration Scheduled start date ZUZS Expected cost $226'000 |sproject timeline flexible? Are there any other projects dependent mnthis project? REDMOND MUNITIC,12AL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 20 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Can the Airport fund the project inits current state? NNYes 0NNo Fiscal impact mfproject onimmediate and ongoing Airport finances. How competitive isthe improvement for discretionary funding? How competitive isthe project for FAA priority compared toother Airport C|P projects? Operation and Maintenance Potential impact on airport operating Are additional staff needed? REDMONDMI��D���O���2 PLAN 21 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D ` Project Title: ^ ` NorthykdeGAExpansion ` Project Number: Project Description: Total Cost (2017 Dollars): S2'444'692 Funding Sources: PE, Local Year: 2036'2027 Phased Project 0Yes 00No Project Components Planning NN Design $100'000 Environmental $251'000 00 0� Construction $2'093'000 Enabling Projects: Equipment Acquisition None Comments: |sproject timeline flexible? Are there any other projects dependent on this project? REDMOND AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 22 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Planning and Zoning Project Conformity 00Conforms toexisting zoning 0NMay require rezone/Comprehensive Plan amendment Project compliance with minimum standards 00 Yes 00No Any potential controversy based on stakeholder feedback? Have not received controversial feedback. Process description and duration Environmental Level ofstate and federal environmental review required? Environmental Assessment required. Potential complications? Cost mfmitigation Description mfmitigation process and uncertainty Process description and duration Less than lyear Any pre -implementation support facility construction mrsite prep required? 6Yes 0No Potential challenges of site location? Site will need to be brought to Airport grade, requiring significant earthwork and rock excavation. Are there financial and operational risks based mnproject scale? Return oninvestment — high costs and potentially low rate nfreturn. Individual tenants are needed tnfill spots. Process description and duration Less than lyear REDMOND M ITNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 23 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix D Can the Airport fund the project inits current state? 00 Yes NNNn Fiscal impact ofproject onimmediate and ongoing Airport finances. There isrisk infinding tenants for new facilities. How competitive isthe improvement for discretionary funding? Very low How competitive isthe project for FAA priority compared toother Airport C|P projects? Very low Operation and Maintenance Potential impact on airport operating Increase airport surfaces therefore increased workload for administrative staff. Are additional staff needed? Noadditional staff needed. REDMOND MUNIC11-1ALAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 24 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix March 30, 2018 APPENDIX E: CI*FINATI REDMOND MUNICIPAL, AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan AppendixE—CmordinedonendC}utreaohSunnnnery a -----^ ^~ �Y 1P PU � na This appendix documents the coordination and outreach efforts utilized throughout the Master Plan process. Organizations involved, dates of meetings and general feedback are noted below. PLANNING VIS*NY C*MN]ITTEE(PAC) A Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) was setup to engage the input and review on working papers, materials and alternatives early in the planning process. The PAC consisted of members from the following organizations: v' Mayor of the City of Redmond ~/ United States ForeotSemioa— Redmond Air Center ~' RedmondMunioipa|Airport-FixedBaseC)penatuns ~/ CityofRedmond—EngineeringDepartment ^/ - City of Redmond —Community Development Director ~/ - CityofBend—BuainessAdv000ta ~/ CityofBend—AosistantCityMonager */ Prineville Airport / ~ - Redmond Economic Development, Inc. .� - DeschutesCountv—EmergencyServices w' Deschutes Countv— Planning Department v' Central Oregon Visitors Association REDMOND MUNxJTIAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 1 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwvxvns|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix E — Coordination and Outreach Summary March 22, 2018 PAC MEETINGS AND DATES The following PAC meetings were held: 117 PAC Meeting #1: Airport Administration Offices — November 9th, 2016 V PAC Meeting #2: Airport Administration Offices — February 8th, 2017 v PAC Meeting #3: Airport Administration Offices —June 22nd, 2017 PAC Meeting #4: Airport Administration Offices — October 18th, 2017 V PAC Meeting #5: Airport Administration Offices — March 14th, 2018 PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES Members of the public were invited to contribute to the planning process at two open house opportunities: PAC MEETINGS AND DATES The following public open houses were held: 'V Public Meeting #1: Redmond City Hall — October 18th, 2017 V Public Meeting #2: Redmond City Hall — March 14th, 2018 Public Meeting #2 - March 14th, 2018 f A VE•i40 1,0 ka4ef Public Meeting #2 - March 14th, 2018 'REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 2 Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Appendix E — Coordination and Outreach Summary March 22, 2018 ADVERTISEMENTS FOR PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES The following public postings are examples of the advertisements used to publicize the open houses. • ,40.41,...01.4V.M.,AMANIV., VatiVietWAVi'd Wan, RDMRedmondAirport ',wwww,45`."*"ww"wwwww'"4"' "wwww"nnwd" "'"'"54"""'"ww""'" m"ww"'"www' • " Q :11 RDMRedmondAirport AAA) W CitRDIAWiWrp0 rt Home Posts Reviews Videos Photos About 1 Events Community Poll 46? Mglr, 100 g, (040,i „Mt ,,Oft j„;,444§1500010 Like ;*N. Follow 2 Recommend Posts RDMRedmondAirport adc4e4i an event r) ' Airport to Present Master Plan Concepts for Public Feedback WHAT, Public Open House WHEN: October 18, 2017 430 to 6:30 p.m.. WHERE, Redmond City Hall, Second Floor Conference Room 411 SW 9th Street, Redmond WHY: Share your thoughts about our Airports future! The City of Redmond and the staff of the Redmond Airport invite you to attend a Public Open House to discuss the Airport Master Plan, The Master Plan will address proposed airport development over the next 20 years. Airport staff and planning consultants will be available to discuss aviation forecasts, needed airport facilities, and ideas for improvements that will help the Airport serve Central Oregon for years to come. We look forward to sharing our ideas with you, and we would appreciate the opportunity to learn what you think about our community's airport and its future! Please stop in any time during the two-hour open house. For more information, call the Airport, at (541) 504-3499, or visit the Airports website at: httpliWWW.flyrdm„cornr?Airport-Publications--Policies OREGON,....AIRPORT PROUDLY SERVING<ENTRAL •A A, ..,•,,AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA„A„,,,,.,•••,•,,•,,:,,,,x•:,,,,AA T Airport to Present Master Plan Con._ 1 8 Wed ,t 30 PM City of Redmond Oregon REDMOND \41 1CtPkl AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 3 * interested Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Appendix E — Coordination and Outreach Summary March 22, 2018 THE REDMCND MUN C PAL A RPORT CORD A_LY NV TES YOU TO AIRPORT MASTER PLAN OPEN HOUSE --=------ OCTOBER 18, 2017 4:30 P.M. TO 6:30 P.M. REDMOND CITY HALL The Airport Master Plan guides airport development over the next 20 years Airport staff and planning consultants wilt be available to discuss aviation forecasts, needed airport facilities, and ideas for improvements that will help the Airport serve Central Oregon for years to come. We look forward to sharing our ideas with you, and learning what YOUR thoughts are for the future of the Redmond Municipal Airport .116,,T401,410. .446k041,40V OUFSTIONS ABOUT Ti MA Hi Pt.. AN F'ROCESS? VISF WWW.FLYiTiDM.COM FOR MORE NFORMAT VO\D "A_ A +JOR[ S011- A \V S YO, PORT MASTER PLAN OPEN HOUSE MARCH 14, 2018 5:00 PM. TO 1:00 P.M. REDMOND CITY HALL The Airport MasterPlan guides airport development over the next 20 years. Airport staff and planning consultants will be available to discuss aviation forecasts, needed airport facilities, and ideas for improvements that will help the Airport serve Central Oregon for years to come. We look forward to sharing our ideas with you, and learning what YOUR thoughts are for the future of the Redmond Municipal Airport. 41; Rk; 1. QUEST ONS ABOUT THE MASTER P AN PROCESS? VI'S WNW. LYRDMEOM FOR MCHE II\TORMA ION it REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 4 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Appendix March 30, 2018 APPENDIX F: REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan March 8.2O18 a T FACILITIES EVEL � The research and analysis in this appendix identifies the facility requirementsfor non'a\Aationbusinesses that complement the airport operations or are appropriate for the Redmond market, gi\,en local economic conditions. Subareas described in this appendix can be \Aewed on Figure 3-19, contained in Chapter 3 of this Master Plan. TA?,'.GET IN 1J]ST?PA' SECT* I�S Based on an analysis of the Redmond economy, several market sectors were identified as target industries forthearea nearthoairport. FACTORS INFLUENCING SELECTION OF TARGET INDUSTRIES The following considerations were used inidentifying target industries: � Existing Business Clusters. Businesses have already agglomerated in Redmond and in the vcinity of the airport based on the collective competiti\,e advantages of the community and sites near the airport. Existing business concentrations were inventoried and evaluated in the socioeconomic analysis inChapter 2. ~/ ` Growth Outlook. The socioeconomic analysis further identified industries and subsectors likely to experience strong growth over the next ten years. This information was derived from Oregon Employment Department data, as well as the third -party data servce Moody's Analytics. ~/ ` Suitability of Site/Land Inventory. This assessment considered the suitability of available land among airport area properties toaccommodate potential uses. - Anecdotal I nput/Stakeholder Feedback. The proposed land use determination considered the economic de\elopment goals and objectives of the City of Redmond and the airport, input from stakeholders, and professional insights from the consultant team. REDNIOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 1 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan TARGET INDUSTRY SECTORS Based on the factors identified above, the following target industries have been identified for the airport / ~ ' Accommodation and Food Services. Both anecdotal and empirical inputs suggest the "airport district" (loosely defined here as land south of OR 126 and east of US 97) would benefit from expanded support seNces, specifically full -service restaurants serving daytime employment and potentially an airport -oriented hotel. The district has a daytime population of almost 3,000 people (not including airport passenger throughput) and is served by only a handful of full-servce restaurants. ` Speculative Light Industrial Buildings. The City of Redmond is almost de\toid of speculative industrial space suitable to accommodate small- to medium-sized emerging businesses. Speculative industrial development would face apositive real estate climate and serve agrowing need in the market. Hovvem*r, the extent towhich this use type could be achievable with a ground lease option is less certain (many businesses would prefer to own their land). ` Construction. Construction is a predominant industry in Central Oregon and is expected to exhibit considerable growth overthe next decade. The airport district has had success attracting construction finns.There are atleast 2Oconstruction firms inthe airport district. Construction firms are also a potentially compatible use for ground lease options, as their permanent capital needs are less intensive than other industrial uses. ` ,/ Manufacturing. The airport district has a competitive advantage in attracting manufacturing uses interested in co -locating near Central Oregon Community College and capitalizing on the steady supply ofworkers coming out ofits Redmond campus programs. Specifically, mete|o, equipment, and transportation equipment manufacturers may find opportunities. These are also uses with an established presence in the district. Food and beverage manufacturing is also a high -growth sector that has omeasurable presence east ofUGS7. ` Wholesalers and Warehousing. Wholesaling is anattractive use fbrtheairport disthot. given the transportation advantages in Redmond and the airport district —nearly 40 wholesaling firms are already in the airport district. Wholesalers commonly require limited investment in real property, often simple steel or concrete tilt structure. Wholesalers also typically operate on low margins. Combined, these are factors that may make a ground lease option more attractive for this sector. -/ - Public Administration. The airport district has a clear agglomeration of institutional and public administrative uses (e.g.. U.G. Forest Service). Public entities are solid targets for ground leases due to their creditworthiness, long-term functions/holding periods, and (sometimes) least -cost location selection. _/ ~ Gas Station and Convenience Store. Per the City of Redmond request, a gas station and convenience store is desirable to serve customers utilizing the oirport, including rental car returns. xv,mommwuJNrm+ mxmmvzM*STum"LmN 2 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cumnoxom|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan LAND USE CHARACTERISTICSOF TARGET INDUSTRY SECTORS This section describes the range of typical building and site sizes and outlines the parking requirements for the target industry sectors. Typical Building and Site SiaesforTarget Industry Sectors Table 1 below shows an approximate range of building and site sizes forthe target industry sectors listed above. This information was derived based on the sizes of similar existing uses in the Redmond and Bend areas. Hotels generally require large buildings on lots of 2 or 3 acres to accommodate parking. The size needs of food seNces vary widely depending on the restaurant and building type; restaurants in strip malls, for instance, generally require less space than what is shown below for stand-alone restaurants. Large lots are typically not required for food sorvceo. Speou|sdivelight industrial buildings for emerging small- or medium-sized businesses would generally require smaller spaces than the other industrial uses, though some light industrial uses in the area require large buildings and lots of over an acre. Warehouse, wholesale, and manufacturing uses require large buildings, ranging from just over 10,000 square feet to upwards of1OO.00Osquare feet ormore insome cases, though the average size for available properties in the Redmond/Bend area falls between 10,000 and 20,000 square feet. These industrial uses require site sizes ranging from several acres to over 100 acres for large regional warehouses, distribution centers, and heavy industrial manufacturing. Public administration size requirements also vary widely depending on the use. Some public administrative uses donot require large buildings orlots, but institutional campuses may require large buildings on multi -acre properties. 1,00 9 Accommodation hotels) Food Semioes(stand'alone) Speculative Light Industrial qMMM Construction i.Mmnufoctuhnq ���������I�� Pub|i��dmninh�r���n ^ Gas Station& Convenience Store Typical BuUdinQSize (squG feet 2,000-8,000 Typical Lot Size =~'"" Oj'O.25' Automobile Parking for Target Industry Sectors Parking requirements are established in the City of Redmond De\,elopment Code section 8.0500. The City requires de\,elopments to pro\Ade minimum parking spaces based on land use. Table J-2 summarizes parking requirements for land uses that fall within the target industry sectors. Note that some land uses demand more parking than the code minimum to meet operational needs. xn,m'muNToNuzum.a/xuv)aImwSIEmv 3 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan March 8.2D18 Land Use ` Commercial 8eNoeand Repair Contractor's Yard Eating and Drinking Establishment Equipment Rental, Sales, and Service Espresso Stand orBooth Industrial, Genereior8er\hceRelated Manufacturing and Assembly, K8odei Hotel Offioo Retail, General ' Lti|hxFaoilitWarehouse � Minimum Parxn . 1space per GOOsquare feet (o#retail floor area ' �1space parenlo|oyeeor1space per2OOsf ' of office area _1space per 1OOafofnet floor area 1GpoQepe[8OO8f¢fretai|floor area ` 1space per employee 1space per 8OQSf 1space per 8OOef _ 1Sjppce [n]o0�dus1space for nOanag [ 1sp, oeper 3OOsfnet office floor area 1sp@Ce per2OOSfofret@i|floor area 1 space (regardless offacility size) _ TRANSPORTATION NEEDS FORTARGET INDUSTRY SECTORS All of the target industries need to provde adequate transportation access for passenger vehicles and to varyinQintenaitieaoftnuoktrafhc.Efficientroutestothehighwoysystomarenecessorytosupport freight movement associated with the target industries. The existing street network within the study area includes several minor arterial and major co||ectorstreetsthsdpnovdeaccesotVthehighxvayovstem.Tunn|nnms are generally present aAmajor inte/sectiona.butadditiona|turn|onesonmajor streetmay benecessary to serve future de\,elopment, and local streets may need to be widened to accommodate trucks (see Recommended Upgrades nection). UTILITY DEMANDS FOR TARGET INDUSTRY SECTORS The target industries listed abo\te comprise a wide range of demands on the utility systems. Tables J-3 through J-7 summarize minimum recommended a\railable utility service to support industrial development. xw,m*moPLAN 4 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwoxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix F — Landside Development March 8, 2018 Target Industry Accommodation and Food Services Speculative Light Industrial Buildin•s Construction Manufacturin• j 6' 10" Wholesalers and 6' 8„ Warehousing Public Administration Gas Station & 6' 8" 4 Convenience Store 1 Minimum recommended main mains smaller than 6" diameter. 2 GPD / acre: Gallons per day per acre, based on gross property area Excludes high water users such as food processors, etc. 4Small-footprint buildings often do not include fire sprinklers. The fire line size listed applies to on -site hydrant service. Main Line Size 6 Fire Line Size 6 High Pressure De•endenc Not Required Not Required 500GPD ! acre _ 1 850 GPD ! acre 500 GPD! acre Not Required Not Required Not Required Not Required Not Required 1200 GPD! acre 500 GPD / acre size for domestic or process use. Utility providers typically do no Target Indu Main Line Size. Accommodation and Food Services 8" Speculative Light Industrial Buildings Construction Manufacturingl Wholesalers and Warehousing Public Administration Gas Station & Convenience Store 8" 8" 1 200 GPD ! acre 1.500 GPO / acre 500 GPD / acre 1850 GPD ! acre 500 GPD! acre 1200 GPD! acre 500GPD !acre install w ater 1 Minimum recommended main size for sanitary sewer. Utility providers typically do not install sewer mains smaller than 8" diameter, so this is the smallest recommended line size. 2GPD / acre: Gallons per day per acre, based on gross property area 3 Excludes hi. h water users such as food processors, etc. Target industry Accommodation and Food Services Speculative Light Industrial Buildings Construction Manufacturin Wholesalers and Warehousing Public Administration Gas Station & Convenience Store Major Communications Dependency Preferred Preferred Fiber Optic Dependency Preferred Required Preferred Re • uired Preferred Preferred Not Required Preferred, Preferred Preferred Preferred RU;I.) MUNICIPAL 5 Preferred ORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit D to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan March 8.2D18 Tareetindu rV Accommodation and Food Services Main ---Line—Size' 2" So�u|a�eL��|n |BuU�na/4^ Speculative � Industrial �����`�� Construction Mmnufaotuhn Wholesalers and Warehousing 2" 2" Public Administration Gas Station& Convenience Stone Targetindu Accommodation and Food Services Speculative Light Industrial Buildings Construction Manufacturing_ Who - xx -' - �--- o/e-sa-'snmxxmrehomsing Public Administration Gas Station & Convenience Store � 4" . � Close Proximity b} R0UuDdGDCy Substation Dependency Preferred P[8ferp~d- Not Re°uired Preferred �_ Not Required NotRe"uired NotRe"uin*d Preferred '� - Not Required " Not Required Not Required Not Re Not Re ^ uired uired ! Not Required Stormwater at the Redmond Airport is generally managed and contained on site. Swales and ditches are generally used todirect runoff tolocalized low spots orsubsurface infiltration galleries tobedischarged \,iainfi|trationtothe soil. Based on nearby existing facilities and development, we do not expect any issues forthe proposed de\telopments. All development will need to meet City of Redmond stormwater treatment regulations and Oregon Department of En\Aronmental Quality requirements for underground injection control discharge, as applicable. EVALKATIO N 0 F LAND SUPPLY FO R TARGET INDUSTRIES This section assesses each landside development subarea to determine whether the existing zoning permits some or all of the target industries; characterizes parcel sizes for developable land; and identifies FAA leasehold restrictions. All subareas are depicted onFigure 1-18inChapter 1ofthis Master Plan. In all affected subareas, sites with leasehold restrictions may be less attractive to developers who prefer to own their own sites or who require a long-term lease for financing. 1 Those subareas closest to the runway are also subject to FAA Part 77 height and use restrictions that could affect future development. 1 According to Redmond Planning Division staff, parcels denoted as having leasehold restrictions are those acquired by the City and/or County from the FAA that may not be sold. Therefore, any third -party users w ould need to lease the property. ue,mwmnwuwmzm*AIRPORT mUSIazPLAN G Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan North Development Parcel Subarea The North Development Parcel Subarea consists of 134 developable acres of City -owned land, including 17 acres zoned Light Industrial (M 1) land, 60 acres zoned Tourist Commercial (C5) accessible from OR 126, and 57 acres zoned Open Space Park Reser\te (OSPR) at the southern end. The entire subarea is subject toleasehold restrictions. Asnoted above, ground leases may be \Aob|eoptions for wholesalers and warehouse uses, as well as construction firms. The M 1 zone allows both of these uses, but light industrial users may be disinclined to develop a property that can only be leased, not purchased. The C5 and M 1 areas, especially off OR 126, could be de\teloped as restaurants (sit-down or drive -through), cafes, or diners. Brew pubs are allowed outright in C5 areas, but other bars and taverns would be a conditional use. Hotels and motels are allowed outright in the C5 zone and would be well -suited to these areas due to proximity to the highway and airport. Options are limited forthe large area of OSPR land, but public facilities are permitted outright inthinaonexvhenepprovedinthecompnahenoivep|anorothor public facilities plans for this zone. The City has had preliminary comtersations with emergency response agencies regarding use of this area for a future emergency training facility. North Business Park Subarea This subarea consists of 94 developable acres, with 44 acres zoned Light Industrial (M 1), 17.2 acres zoned Tourist Commercial (C5), and 57 acres zoned Open Space Park Reserve (OSPR). The same potential uses would apply forthe North Business Park Subarea as the North Development Parcel Subarea above. The entire subarea is subject to leasehold restrictions, so some industrial uses such as wholesale and warehouse might be �able options, while light industrial users may be less inclined to develop these properties through a ground lease. Construction firms could be a \Aable use for the M 1 zones. Food services could be developed on M 1 and C5 lots, though bars and taverns would be a conditional use in the C5 zone. As with the North Development Parcel Subarea, accommodation would be well -suited for the C5 areas because of convenient access to the highway and airport. Development options are limited in the OSPR zone, but there may be potential for public facilities in these areas. The southern portion of this subarea is being contemplated for future airport -compatible development (possible corporate, executi\te, and general avation facilities) with the northern portion by OR 126 targeted for future commercial development due to its Tourist Commercial /C50zoning designation. South Apron Subarea The South Apron Subarea contains 19 acres zoned Airport, and 5.8 acres zoned Light Industrial (M 1), with approximately 25 acres of de\teloped land excluding right-of-way. Twenty-three acres of this subarea, including both Airport and M 1 zoned land, is part of a much larger lot owned by the City and subject to leasehold restrictions. A two -acre lot at the southwest corner of the subarea, pri\rately owned and zoned M 1, could be used for speculative Light Industrial, Warehouse, or Manufacturing that do not require large lot sizes, or food servces uses, though the site is currently developed. In the Airport zono, development options are limited to uses that support and complement the airport. xw,woNoxxcwnzxv-AIRPORT muASzemPLAN 7 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmvmxons|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan VVest Musiness, Park Subarea The West Business Park contains 225 acres of land, including 193 acres zoned Light Industrial (Ml), 24 acres zoned Public Facility, and 8 acres zoned Park. There are approximately 93 acres of developable land, including several vacant M 1 parcels, and several acres of vacant area in the Park and Public Facility zoned lots. Most of the City -owned property is subject to leasehold restrictions (33 acres), while the remaining 8acres isthe Park -zoned property home totwo City water storage tanks. There are several large vacant private|y'mwnedLight Industrial (K81)zoned lots that could bepotential sites for speculative light industrial, wholesale, warehouse, or manufacturing. Portions of these sites could also be used for accommodation, food services, or construction -related business. The PF-zoned lot along the eastern edge ofthe subarea could besuitable for public administration uses. Airport VVaySubarea The Airport Way Subarea area contains 55 acres zoned Light Industrial (M 1), including approximately 9 acres of developed land (City -owned but leased to Peterson Caterpillar) and 46 acres of developable land owned by the City. The City -owned property is subject to leasehold restrictions. Four of the vacant city- owned|rdsoneover8auneoandcou|dbeidea|spacesfbrvvho|esa|ovvarehouoeusosor|arge construction firms that could operate under a ground lease. With several relatively large vacant lots adjacent or in close proximity to each other, this subarea could also be an opportunity for a regional warehouse distribution facility. Proximity to the railroad and surrounding industrial uses makes this area unappealing for accommodations such as hotels. Food services could be a viable option to serve employment in the area, as the area currently lacks food options, if it could be demonstrated that sufficient demand exists. Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea The Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea consists of5Gacres zoned Light Industrial (01).including 41 dewo|opeb|000res.The/eaveoewena|privade|y'mwnedvaoant|otscfapproximate|y1-2acnosinoizethcd could be used for small light industrial uses, construction firms, or food services uses to support the surrounding area. At the north end of the site is a larger vacant privately -owned site (8.8 acres) which, due to its size and zoning could be appealing for use as light industrial, wholesale warehouse, or manufacturing. The southernmost lot in this subarea is an 8-acre City -owned lot subject to leasehold restrictions. Wholesale and warehousing could beviable options fbrthio na|atiwo|y large site with aground lease option. REDNIOND N117NICI PAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 0 Exhibit omOrdinance uouo-0n Comprehensive Plan Appendix c Transportation System Plan DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND ROADWAYS SERVING LANDBKDE SUBAREAS This section e\raluates the existing public utilities and transportation network serving each subarea. Illustrations ofexisting utilities are found in___ North Development Parcel Subarea � Water: This subarea is currently served by a 1 0-inch main along the northern boundary in Lake Road, and bvn12-inohmain along the southern boundary inVeterans Way. Public mains donot traverse the interior ofthe subarea. v Sewer: This subarea is currently served by an 8-inch main which transitions to a 1 0-inch main within Lake Road to the north, and an 8-inch main within Veterans Way to the south. Public mains donot traverse the interior ofthe subarea. ~/ ' Transportation: This subarea currently has noexisting transportation infrastructure within its boundaries. Although OR 126 runs along a portion of the subarea, no existing connections are present. No connections to Veterans Way south of the subarea exist. To accommodate the Airport Runway Extension, plans to relocate the Airport Way/Veterans Way intersection and realign sevaral network streets are under development by the City. These plans currently show a realignment of Veterans Way into the subarea and an extension of 9th Street southward from OR 126 through the subarea to connect with Airport Way. The 9th Street extension will be a minor arterial street that should include a three -lane cross section. Veterans Way will remain a major collector and should hava a two-lane cross section with possible turn lanes at majorintemections. North Business Park Subarea Water: This subarea is currently served by an 18-inch main within OR 126 to the east, and within Veterans Way to the south. Public mains do not travarse the interior of the subarea. ^w Sewer: This subarea is currently served by an 8-inch main within Veterans Way to the south, and a12-inchmain within {}F{12Stothe north. � Transportation: This subarea isbisected byVeterans Way, which connects to[}R12Gonthe northern border ofthe subarea and US87tothe west. Veterans Way ioamajor co||eckzrbetvwem Airport Way and OR 126. It has two traval lanes with a shoulder bike lane west of the intersection with Sisters Avenue, but no paved shoulders northeast ofthat intersection. No turn lanes are present on any portion of Veterans Way between Airport Way and OR 126. The subarea also includes local street connections to OR 126 with 1 Oth Avenue connecting on the west side, and Sisters Avenue to Ochoco Way connecting on the east side. None of these local streets has been improved beyond nnarrow two-lane paved section. uu)mmmum/umuAnw'a/ononTmmoTemv 8 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan South Apron Subarea ~' Water: This subarea is currently served by a 12-inch main within Airport Way, and a 10-inch main connecting tothe terminal loop. / ° - Sewer: This subarea is served by 8-inch mains within Airport Way and the on -site access roads. * Transportation: This subarea is served by Salmon Avenue, which connects to Airport Way. Salmon Avenue is a two-lane local street with no sidewalks, with the exception of one short segment. This site has direct access tnthe airport taxiways. A ItusdnessPamkSubarea ~' Water: This subarea houses the existing water reservoirs at the north end of 6th Street. These reservoirs supply mains ranging from 1Oto18inches within the subarea. ~ ,� Sewer: This subarea ieserved bv8-inohmains within the streets throughout the subarea. ~' Transportation: This subarea has minor arterial streets along its northern boundary (Veterans Way) and eastern boundary (Airport Way). Veterans Way connects to both US 97 and OR 126 and has been constructed with a two-lane cross section that includes bike lanes but almost no sidewalks. It has no left -turn lanes at any of the local street intersections into the subarea. Airport Way connects to US 97 and has been constructed primarily with a two-lane cross section augmented with left -turn and right -turn lanes atintersecting streets. Bike|oneoeropartofthe roadway, but pedestrian facilities only exist along some developed parcels. This subarea also includes Salmon Street, amajor oo||ecbor. and local street network that serves existing development. To accommodate the Airport Runway Extension, plans to relocate the Airport Way/Veterans Way intersection and realign several network streets are under development by the City. A railroad spur from the BNSF tracks extends to the western boundary of this subarea. mzDNImmwmomICuyzAIRPORT "TER PLAN 10 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Airport VVmySubarea ^� Water: This subarea is currently served by an 18-inch main within Airport Way. n' Sewer: This subarea is currently served by a 12-inch main within Airport Way to the east and south. Sewer flows from this subarea appear to be split between two separate main lines ru nning north and west from the site. ^/ ` Transportation: This subarea is served by Airport Way, a minor arterial that connects southward to US 97 and northward to Veterans Way and OR 126. Airport Way has been constructed with a three -lane cross section (including bike lanes) with right -turn lanes at some interaectioms, but sidewalks are present on only some segments. Mt. Hood Drive was constructed as a four -lane local street eastward from Airport Way to the Fairgrounds but does not currently extend to the west, although a street stub has been constructed. The intersection of Wickiup Avenue (a local street) at Airport Way has been constructed, but no existing roadway connects to the intersection. The BNSF railroad tracks run along the western boundary, but has no existing rail spurs in this subarea. FaipgmmundsIndustrial Subarea '* Water: This subarea is currently served by a 12-inch main within 19th Street, and 8-inch mains elsewhere throughout the subarea. ~ Sewer: This subarea is currently served by a 12-inch main within 10thStreet, and 8-innh mains elsewhere within the subarea. ~ Transportation: This subarea iscurrently served bv 18thStreet, aminor arterial that connects to Airport Way approximately one -quarter mile from UG97.13thStreet has been fully constructed with a three -lane cross section, with sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides from Airport Way to Elkhorn Avenue. A network of new local streets west of 19th Street serve existing development. The BN8F railroad tracks run along the western boundary, but BNGF has no existing rail spurs in this subarea. RECOMMENDED UPGRADES The following recommendations are offered based on a comparison of the existing utility and transportation facilities and the corresponding demands of the target industries. In all subareas, sewer lines would need to be extended from nearby mains and stormwater management facilities would need to be constructed inconjunction vvithsitedewe|opment.Loce|stneet should beconstructed tothe local industrial street standard (40-foot pa\,ed width with sidewalks) to accommodate necessary truck access for most of the target industry sectors. Improved access to OR 126 will e\tentually be required to accommodate future growth with any of the target industry sectors and wil I likely include added turn lanes and traffic signals. Turn lanes otmajor interseotionomaya|sobeneedodtooewefutun*dema|opment. un`momu*/wwmznuAIRPORT mUozEuPLAN 11 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Necessary improvements would beidentified with the preparation cftraffic impact studies for speuifio development proposals. Specific upgrade requirements for each subarea are noted below. � North Development Parcel Subarea: The existing water lines between Lake Road and Veterans Way are not well-connected. We recommend installing a loop system throughout the subarea to maintain necessary flows for high -demand industrial users. This subarea currently has no existing transportation infrastructure and will need to rely on the construction of new streets. Transportation improvements associated with the Airport Runway Extension will eventually provde access through the subarea. Local streets that provde direct site access will need to be constructed to the local industrial standard (40-foot pa\ed width with sidewalks). ^� - North Business Park Subarea: The existing water lines between Veterans Way and OR 126 are not well-connected. We recommend installing a loop system to supply necessary flows for high- demandusero.The|ooa|streets(lUthGtreet.Gistevs/\venuo.Och000VVav)needtobeupgnoded to the current local industrial standard (40-foot pa\,ed width with sidewalks). Veterans Way needs toboupgraded tomeet the major oo||ectorobondand(3G'fbotpavedxvidthvvithsidewe|ka). At the Veterans Way intersection with OR 126, an eastbound right -turn deceleration lane on OR 126 may be necessary as volumes increase, and separate left- and right -turn lanes may be necessary onthe Veterans Way approach. Left -turn lanes onVeterans Way atother intersecting roadways may also baneeded. - South Apron Subarea: Salmon Avenue needs sidewalks on the north side of the street. ' ^/ West Business Park Subarea: Airport Way and Veterans Way need sidewalk infill, primarily along undeveloped property. ` Airport Way Subarea: Airport Way needs sidewalk infill on both sides of the street. Mt. Hood Drive needs sidewalks along both sides ofthe street. VViukiupAvenueneeds tobe constructed/upgraded to the current local industrial standard (40-foot paved width with sidewalks). � Fairgrounds Industrial Subarea: Airport Way needs sidewalks on the south side of the street. m�mmmu�nmuz�nAIRPORT mUSTEmPLAN 12 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 cvmwvxvns|ve Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix March 30, 2018 APPENDIX G: T REDMOND M1 N1C PAE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Appendix G — Noise Contour Inputs March 8, 2018 NOISE INPUT APPENDIX Existing (2016) and Future (2036) noise contours were generated with the FAA's A\Aation En\Aronmental Design Tool (AEDT)version 2d. Inputs were obtained from avahetv of sources including, Chapter Aviation Activity Forecasts ofthis Master Plan, Airport personnel, AirTraffic Control Tower personnel, published instrument procedures and traffic patterns and institutional knowledge. The following information formed the basis of the noise contour de\telopment. Air Cargo and Forest Service Beech98 :ss |GCn[awaO2 - BAE14G Ayres T34 Thrush � CdationU TOTAL ITINERANT OPERATIONS P-3 King Air 90 REDMOND MUNICHWLmxPORT MASTER PLAN 1 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix G — Noise Contour Inputs March 8, 2018 GASEPV GASEPF P-3 King Air 90 C-230 TOTAL TOUCH-AND-GO OPS TOTAL AIRPORT OPERATIONS* 90 83 83 28,673 82,356 *Airport operations include a 2x multiplier for touch-and-go operations as one touch- and-go represents two operations for counting purposes REDMONDORT MASTER PLAN 2 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Appendix G — Noise Contour Inputs March 8, 2018 Air Cargo and Forest Service TOTAL ITINERANT OPERATIONS 737-700A319 737-700 737-800 CRJ-700 CRJ-200 Ayres T34 Thrush Citation II Piaggio Avanti TBM850 Lancair Lancair Turbine REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 3 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Appendix G — Noise Contour Inputs March 8.2D18 General Aviation Helicopter Military TOTAL TOUCH-AND-GO OPS [�172 PiperSerninole KingAirSO ( 5.330 Lonuar { 2.363 LencairTurbine � 2.363 GASEPV / 2.3G3 GASEPF 2.383 _ R22 / 4.25D _ P'3 ` 83 83 TOTAL AIRPORT OPERATIONS* 90,377 *Airport operations include a 2xmultiplierfortouch -an d-go operations as one touch -an d-go represents two vvemmnnsm,counting purposes nEDNImNomuwIC/PALAIRPORT MASTER PLAN 4 Exhibit omOrdinance 2023-017 Comprehensive Plan Appendix Transportation System Plan Appendix G — Noise Contour Inputs March 8, 2018 REDMOND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 5 Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan 04,0114,6114,0114,611Vei '41?: Tu n e C Exhibit 0 to Ordinance 2023-017 - Comprehensive Plan Appendix C - Transportation System Plan Exhibit "E" to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12 Secti,ow 5.12 Leg tsLat%ve Astor j Background This section contains the legislative history of this Comprehensive Plan. Table 5.12.1 Comprehensive Plan Ordinance History Ordinance Date Adopted/ Effective Chapter/Section Amendment 2011-003 8-10- I I/ 1 1-9- I I All, except Transportation, Tumalo and Terrebonne Community Plans, Deschutes Junction, Destination Resorts and ordinances adopted in 2011 Comprehensive Plan update 2011-027 10-31-1 1 / 1 1-9- I I 2.5, 2.6, 3.4, 3.10, 3.5, 4.6, 5.3, 5.8, 5. I I , 23.40A, 23.40B, 23.40.065, 23.01.010 Housekeeping amendments to ensure a smooth transition to the updated Plan 2012-005 8-20-12/ 1 1-19-12 23.60, 23.64 (repealed), 3.7 (revised), Appendix C (added) Updated Transportation System Plan 2012-012 8-20-12/8-20-12 4.1, 4.2 La Pine Urban Growth Boundary 2012-016 12-3-12/3-4-13 3.9 Housekeeping amendments to Destination Resort Chapter 2013-002 I -7- 13/ I -7-13 4.2 Central Oregon Regional Large -lot Employment Land Need Analysis 2013-009 2-6-13/5-8- 13 1.3 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Residential Exception Area 2013-012 5-8-13/8-6-13 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, including certain property within City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary 2013-007 5-29-13/8-27-13 3.10, 3.11 Newberry Country: A Plan for Southern Deschutes County DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 201 I CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Exhibit "E" to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12 2013-016 10-21-13/10-21-13 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, including certain property within City of Sisters Urban Growth Boundary 2014-005 2-26-14/2-26-14 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, including certain property within City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary 2014-012 4-2-14/7-1-14 3.10, 3. I I Housekeeping amendments to Title 23. 2014-021 8-27-14/ 1 1-25-14 23.01.010, 5.10 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community Forest to Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community Utility 2014-021 8-27-14/ I 1-25-14 23.01.010, 5.10 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community Forest to Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community Utility 20I 4-027 12- 15-14/3-3 I - 15 23.01.010, 5.10 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Industrial 2015-021 I 1-9-15/2-22-16 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from Agriculture to Surface Mining. 2015-029 1 1-23-15/ 1 1-30-15 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from Tumalo Residential 5-Acre Minimum to Tumalo Industrial 2015-018 12-9- 15/3-27-16 23.01.010, 2.2, 4.3 Housekeeping Amendments to Title 23. 2 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 20 I I CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5. 12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Exhibit "E" to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12 2015-010 12-2- 15/ 12-2-15 2.6 Comprehensive Plan Text and Map Amendment recognizing Greater Sage -Grouse Habitat Inventories 2016-001 12-21-15/04-5-16 23.01.010; 5.10 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from, Agriculture to Rural Industrial (exception area) 2016-007 2-10-16/5-10-16 23.01.010; 5.10 Comprehensive Plan Amendment to add an exception to Statewide Planning Goal I I to allow sewers in unincorporated lands in Southern Deschutes County 20 16-005 11-28-16/2-16-17 23.01.010, 2.2, 3.3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment recognizing non- resource lands process allowed under State law to change EFU zoning 2016-022 9-28-16/ 1 1-14-16 23.01.010, 1.3, 4.2 Comprehensive plan Amendment, including certain property within City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary 2016-029 12-14-16/ 12/28/ 16 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from, Agriculture to Rural Industrial 2017-007 10-30-17/10-30-17 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Residential Exception Area 2018-002 1-3-18/1-25-18 23.01, 2.6 Comprehensive Plan Amendment permitting churches in the Wildlife Area Combining Zone 3 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 201 I CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Exhibit "E" to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12 2018-006 8-22-18/ I I -20-18 23.0 I.010, 5.8, 5.9 Housekeeping Amendments correcting tax lot numbers in Non -Significant Mining Mineral and Aggregate Inventory; modifying Goal 5 Inventory of Cultural and Historic Resources 2018-011 9-12-18/ 12- I 1-18 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Residential Exception Area 20 18-005 9-19-18/10-10-18 23.01.010, 2.5, Tumalo Community Plan, Newberry Country Plan Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, removing Flood Plain Comprehensive Plan Designation; Comprehensive Plan Amendment adding Flood Plain Combining Zone purpose statement. 2018-008 9-26-18/10-26-18 23.01.010, 3.4 Comprehensive Plan Amendment allowing for the potential of new properties to be designated as Rural Commercial or Rural Industrial 2019-002 1-2-19/4-2-19 23.01.010, 5.8 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment changing designation of certain property from Surface Mining to Rural Residential Exception Area; Modifying Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Inventory; Modifying Non - Significant Mining Mineral and Aggregate Inventory 2019-001 1-16-19/4-16-19 1.3, 3.3, 4.2, 5.10, 23.01 Comprehensive Plan and Text Amendment to add a new zone to Title 19: Westside Transect Zone. 4 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 201 I CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Exhibit "E" to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12 2019-003 02-12-19/03-12-19 23.0 I.010, 4.2 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment changing designation of certain property from Agriculture to Redmond Urban Growth Area for the Large Lot Industrial Program 2019-004 02-12-19/03-12-19 23.01.010, 4.2 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment changing designation of certain property from Agriculture to Redmond Urban Growth Area for the expansion of the Deschutes County Fairgrounds and relocation of Oregon Military Department National Guard Armory. 2019-0 I I 05-01-19/05-16/ 19 23.01.010, 4.2 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to adjust the Bend Urban Growth Boundary to accommodate the refinement of the Skyline Ranch Road alignment and the refinement of the West Area Master Plan Area I boundary. The ordinance also amends the Comprehensive Plan designation of Urban Area Reserve for those lands leaving the UGB. 2019-006 03-13-19/06- I 1-19 23.01.010, Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Residential Exception Area 2019-016 11-25-19/02-24-20 23.01.01, 2.5 Comprehensive Plan and Text amendments incorporating language from DLCD's 2014 Model Flood Ordinance and Establishing a purpose statement for the Flood Plain Zone. 5 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 20 I I CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5. I LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Exhibit "E" to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12 2019-019 12- I 1-19/ 12- I 1-19 23.01.01, 2.5 Comprehensive Plan and Text amendments to provide procedures related to the division of certain split zoned properties containing Flood Plain zoning and involving a former or piped irrigation canal. 2020-001 12- I 1-19/ 12- I 1-19 23.01.01, 2.5 Comprehensive Plan and Text amendments to provide procedures related to the division of certain split zoned properties containing Flood Plain zoning and involving a former or piped irrigation canal. 2020-002 2-26-20/5-26-20 23.01.01, 4.2, 5.2 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to adjust the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary through an equal exchange of land to/from the Redmond UGB. The exchange property is being offered to better achieve land needs that were detailed in the 2012 SB 1544 by providing more development ready land within the Redmond UGB. The ordinance also amends the Comprehensive Plan designation of Urban Area Reserve for those lands leaving the UGB. 2020-003 02-26-20/05-26-20 23.01.01, 5.10 Comprehensive Plan Amendment with exception to Statewide Planning Goal I I (Public Facilities and Services) to allow sewer on rural lands to serve the City of Bend Outback Water Facility. 6 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 201 I CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Exhibit "E" to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12 2020-008 06-24-20/09-22-20 23.01.010, Appendix C Comprehensive Plan Transportation System Plan Amendment to add roundabouts at US 20/Cook- O.B. Riley and US 20/Old Bend -Redmond Hwy intersections; amend Tables 5.3.T I and 5.3.T2 and amend TSP text. 2020-007 07-29-20/10-27-20 23.0 I.010, 2.6 Housekeeping Amendments correcting references to two Sage Grouse ordinances. 2020-006 0: 23.01.01, 2.1 I, 5.9 Comprehensive Plan and Text amendments to update the County's Resource List and Historic Preservation Ordinance to comply with the State Historic Preservation Rule. 2020-009 08- 19-20/ 1 I -17-20 23.01.010, Appendix C Comprehensive Plan Transportation System Plan Amendment to add reference to J turns on US 97 raised median between Bend and Redmond; delete language about disconnecting Vandevert Road from US 97. 2020-0 13 08-26-20/ I 1 /24/20 23.01.0 I , 5.8 Comprehensive Plan Text And Map Designation for Certain Properties from Surface Mine (SM) and Agriculture (AG) To Rural Residential Exception Area (RREA) and Remove Surface Mining Site 461 from the County's Goal 5 Inventory of Significant Mineral and Aggregate Resource Sites. 2021-002 01-27-21/04-27-21 23.01.01 Comprehensive Plan Map Designation for Certain Property from Agriculture (AG) To Rural Industrial (RI) 7 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Exhibit "E" to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12 202 I -005 06-16-21/06-16-21 23.01.01, 4.2 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Designation for Certain Property from Agriculture (AG) To Redmond Urban Growth Area (RUGA) and text amendment Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Designation for Certain Property Adding 2021-008 06-30-21/09-28-21 23.01.01 Redmond Urban Growth Area (RUGA) and Fixing Scrivener's Error in Ord. 2020-022 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2022-00 I 04- 13-22/07-12-22 23.0 I.010 designation of certain property from Agriculture (AG) to Rural Residential Exception Area (RREA) Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2022-003 04-20-22/07-19-22 23.0 I.010 designation of certain property from Agriculture (AG) to Rural Residential Exception Area (RREA) Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain 2022-006 06-22-22/08- 19-22 23.01.0 1 0 property from Rural Residential Exception Area (RREA) to Bend Urban Growth Area 07-27-22/10-25-22 Comprehensive Plan Map 2022-0I I (superseded by 23.01.010 Designation for Certain Ord. 2023-0I 5) Property from Agriculture (AG) To Rural Industrial (RI) Comprehensive Plan Map Designation for Certain 2022-013 12-14-22/03-14-23 23.01.010 Property from Agriculture (AG) to Rural Residential Exception Area (RREA) 8 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 201 I CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Exhibit "E" to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12 2023-001 03-01-23/05-30-23 23.01.010, 5.9 Housekeeping Amendments correcting the location for the Lynch and Roberts Store Advertisement, a designated Cultural and Historic Resource 2023-007 04-26-23/6-25-23 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Designation for Certain Property from Agriculture (AG) to Rural Residential Exception Area (RREA) 2023-010 06-21-23/9-17-23 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Designation for Certain Property from Agriculture (AG) to Rural Residential Exception Area (RREA) 2023-018 08-30-23/I 1-28-23 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Designation for Certain Property from Agriculture (AG) to Rural Residential Exception Area (RREA) 2023-015 9- 13-23/ 12-12-23 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Designation for Certain Property from Agriculture (AG) to Rural Industrial (RI) 2023-025 I 1-29-23/2-27-24 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from Rural Residential Exception Area (RREA) to Bend Urban Growth Area 2024-00 I 01-31-24/4-30-24 23.01.010 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain property from Rural Residential Exception Area (RREA) to Bend Urban Growth Area 9 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 201 I CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Exhibit "E" to Ordinance 2023-017 — Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12 2023-017 TBD/TBD 23.01(D) (repealed), 23.0 I (BK) (added), 3.7 (amended), Appendix C (replaced) Updated Transportation System Plan 10 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 20I I CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY TES Exhibit F to Ordinance 2023-017 - TSP Findings STAFF FINDINGS FILE NUMBER(S): 247-23-000507-PA/508-TA SUBJECT PROPERTY/ OWNER: N/A APPLICANT: REQUEST: STAFF CONTACT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Deschutes County Planning Division c/o Tarik Rawlings, Senior Transportation Planner P.O Box 6005 Bend, OR 97708 Replace the 2010-2030 Deschutes County Transportation System Plan with 2020-2040 Transportation System Plan and accompanying map, including updated traffic volumes, Goals and Policies, project list, and functional reclassifications. Tarik Rawlings, Senior Transportation Planner Phone: 541-317-3148 Email: Tarik.Rawlings@deschutes.org RECORD: Record items can be viewed and downloaded from: www.buildingpermits.oregon.gov Record items can be viewed and downloaded from: https://www.deschutes.org/cd/page/transportation-system-plan- u pdate-2020-2040-247-23-000507-pa-508-ta I. APPLICABLE CRITERIA Deschutes County Code (DCC) Title 22, Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance Chapter 22.012, Legislative Procedures Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) OAR 660-015, Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines OAR 660-012, Transportation Planning 1 1 7 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 I P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 1;IN(541)388-6575 @cdd@deschutes.org : www.deschutes.org/cd Exhibit F to Ordinance 2023-017 - TSP Findings Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan - Title 23 Chapter 1, Comprehensive Planning Chapter 3, Rural Growth Management II. BASIC FINDINGS PROPOSAL This is a legislative plan and text amendment to the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan to remove the 2010-2030 Transportation System Plan (TSP) and replace it with the 2020-2040 TSP. The TSP is Section 3.7 within the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan. The TSP contains goals and objectives to ensure the safe, efficient, and economical operation of the County's transportation system. The 2020-2040 TSP includes several new goals and policies; updates information for population and traffic volumes; assesses system deficiencies and prioritizes future road projects and/or policies to mitigate those deficiencies; and makes several functional reclassifications of County roads. BACKGROUND In 2010, County staff prepared a 2010-2030 TSP, which removed and replaced the 1996-2016 TSP. The 2010 plan is now halfway through its lifespan and the County has seen a large increase both in population and traffic volumes on County roads and State highways. The process began in 2020 to update the TSP. The previous TSPs were done in-house, but this version was done by a consultant based on Planning Division staffing levels and workloads. The Road Department funded the project. The update was done concurrently with a State Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant to update of the bike, pedestrian, and transit components of the Tumalo Community Plan (TCP) and look at rural trails in the area known as Sisters Country, i.e. the attendance boundary of the Sisters School District. REVIEW CRITERIA Deschutes County lacks specific criteria in DCC Titles 18, 22, or 23 for reviewing a legislative plan and text amendment. Nonetheless, since Deschutes County is initiating one, the County bears the responsibility for justifying that the amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goals and the County's Comprehensive Plan. III. FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS CHAPTER 22.12, LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES Section 22.12.010. 247-23-000507-PA/508-TA (Transportation System Plan, 2020-2040) Page 2 of 8 Exhibit F to Ordinance 2023-017 - TSP Findings Hearing Required FINDING: This criterion will be met because a public hearing will be held before the Deschutes County Planning Commission on August 10, 2023, and a future public hearing will be held before the Board of County Commissioners. Section 22.12.020, Notice Notice A. Published Notice 1. Notice of a legislative change shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least 10 days prior to each public hearing. 2. The notice shall state the time and place of the hearing and contain a statement describing the general subject matter of the ordinance under consideration. FINDING: This criterion is met as notice was published in the Bend Bulletin newspaper on July 20th, 2023 for the Planning Commission public hearing and additional published notice will be sent for the Board of County Commissioners' public hearing. B. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted at the discretion of the Planning Director and where necessary to comply with ORS 203.045. FINDING: Posted notice was determined by the Planning Director not to be necessary. C. Individual notice. Individual notice to property owners, as defined in DCC 22.08.010(A), shall be provided at the discretion of the Planning Director, except as required by ORS 215.503. FINDING: Given the proposed legislative amendments do not apply to any specific property, no individual notices were sent. D. Media notice. Copies of the notice of hearing shall be transmitted to other newspapers published in Deschutes County. FINDING: Notice was provided to the County public information official for wider media distribution. This criterion is met. Section 22.12.030 Initiation of Legislative Changes. A legislative change may be initiated by application of individuals upon payment of required fees as well as by the Board of County Commissioners. FINDING: The application was initiated by the Deschutes County Planning Division at the direction of the Board of County Commissioners and has received a fee waiver. This criterion is met. 247-23-000507-PA/508-TA (Transportation System Plan, 2020-2040) Page 3 of 8 Exhibit F to Ordinance 2023-017 - TSP Findings Section 22.12.040. Hearings Body A. The following shall serve as hearings or review body for legislative changes in this order: 1. The Planning Commission. 2. The Board of County Commissioners. B. Any legislative change initiated by the Board of County Commissioners shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to action being taken by the Board of Commissioners. FINDING: The Deschutes County Planning Commission held the initial public hearing on August 10, 2023. The Board will hold a public hearing on a future date to be determined. These criteria are or will be met. Section 22.12.050 Final Decision All legislative changes shall be adopted by ordinance FINDING: The proposed legislative changes will be implemented by ordinance, number to be determined, upon approval and adoption by the Board of County Commissioners. This criterion will be met. OAR 660-015, Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines Goal 1: Citizen Involvement: FINDING: Deschutes County involved the public via a web site and online meetings, held two advisory committee meetings, targeted outreach to with community and social service organizations, and held work sessions with both the Planning Commission (PC) and the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). The latter were open to the public both in person as well as broadcast online. The TSP Project Committee also worked closely with the citizen volunteers of the County's Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC). The 2020-2040 TSP is therefore consistent with Goal 1. Goal 2: Land Use Planning: FINDING: The TSP 2020-2040 does not change any Comprehensive Plan designations or zoning designations for lands the County administers under DCC Titles 18 (County Zoning), 19 (Bend Urban Growth Boundary Zoning), 20 (Redmond Urban Area), and 21 (Sisters Urban Area). The update is the subject of land use file, 247-23-000507-PA/508-TA, and will be processed under the County's procedures for a legislative amendment. The County on July 6, 2023, provided the required 35-day prior notice to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) before the first evidentiary hearing. The 2020-2040 TSP is therefore consistent with Goal 2. Goal 3: Agricultural Lands: 247-23-000507-PA/508-TA (Transportation System Plan, 2020-2040) Page 4 of 8 Exhibit F to Ordinance 2023-017 - TSP Findings FINDING: 2020-2040 TSP does not change any Comprehensive Plan Agriculture designations nor change any lands zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU). Future roadway projects are listed and prioritized in Tables 5-1 (Intersection Changes and Associated Cost Estimates), 5-2 (Roadway Changes and Associated Cost Estimates), and 5-4 (ODOT Intersections Changes and Associated Costs). The projects are shown on Figures 5-1 (County Intersection Projects), 5-2 (County Roadway Projects), and 5-4 (State Facility Projects). The only project shown on EFU lands is CC-17 to extend SW 19th Street to U.S. 97 in the vicinity of Quarry Road. The table notes this an illustrative project and staff notes an Exception to Statewide Planning Goal 3 (Agriculture) would likely be required prior to implementation. The priority of the project remains undetermined. The 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with Goal 3. Goal 4: Forest Lands: FINDING: The 2020-2040 TSP does not change any Comprehensive Plan Forest designations nor change any lands zoned F1 (Forest) or F2 (Forest). Future roadway projects are listed and prioritized in Table 5-1 (Intersection Changes and Associated Cost Estimates), 5-2 (Roadway Changes and Associated Cost Estimates) and shown on Figures 5-1 (County Intersection Projects), 5-2 (County Roadway Projects). County projects in F1 and F2 lands appear to be within existing rights of way. The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) projects are listed in Table 5-4 (ODOT Intersections Changes and Associated Cost Estimates) and shown on Figure 5-4 (State Facility Projects.) The only project that may be on Forest lands is S-6 (Deschutes River Woods South Interchange Project). At this scale it is hard to discern if this low -priority project is located on Deschutes National Forest (DNF) land or not. If on DNF land, then no Exception to Statewide Planning Goal 4 (Forest) is required. If not on federal land, then a Goal 4 Exception would be required prior to implementation. The 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with Goal 4. Goal 5: Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources: FINDING: No roadway projects are proposed that would adversely affect Goal 5 resources. Additionally, Goal 6: Sustainability and the Environment calls for balancing transportation needs with protecting the natural environment. Policy 6.4 states specifically to "Preserve listed Goal 5 resources within the County." Therefore the 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with Goal 5. Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality: FINDING: Goal 6 and its policies all pertain to protecting the quality of air, water, and land resources. Specifically, Policy 6.3 calls for compliance with applicable state and federal noise, air, water, and land quality regulations. Through the inclusion of policies to provide for alternate modes, the TSP will also ensure the quality of air, water, and land resources. Therefore the 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with Goal 6. Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards: FINDING: The Comprehensive Plan in Section 3.5 lists the following natural hazards endemic to Deschutes County: wildfire, snowstorms, flooding, and volcanic eruptions and earthquakes. The Road Department maintains a signed system of evacuation routes from isolated rural subdivisions in case of a natural disaster. Sustainability and Environment Policy 6.6 specifies prioritizing "...transportation investments that support system resilience to seismic events, extreme weather events, and other natural hazards." ODOT plows State highways and has Variable Message Signs 247-23-000507-PA/508-TA (Transportation System Plan, 2020-2040) Page 5 of 8 Exhibit F to Ordinance 2023-017 - TSP Findings (VMS) posted on selected roads to provide information about road conditions. The TSP does not change any existing building codes regarding fire, snow loads or structural resistance to earthquakes. Therefore, the 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with Goal 7. Goal 8: Recreational Needs: FINDING: The 2020-2040 TSP has numerous policies to benefit recreation. Besides having a well - functioning road system that leads to/from recreational areas, the TSP also includes policies for those who recreate by bicycle along those roadways. Specific examples include Safety Policy 2.4 to continue the partnership with BPAC to inform investment decisions for those biking and walking and Safety Policy 2.7 to prioritize investment in key locations where bicyclists or pedestrians cross major County roads or State highways. Mobility and Connectivity Policy 3.13 calls for continued coordination with U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) "...to maintain the County's system of forest highways to continue to provide key access to recreational areas such as campsites, lakes, hiking, and biking trails in the County." Economic Development Policy 4.4 calls for "incorporating facilities for people walking or riding bikes to key recreational area as part of changes to the roadway system." Economic Development Policy 4.5 states "Support bicycle tourism by prioritizing and improved designated County bike routes." Equity and Accessibility Policy 5.8 states "Support efforts of local agencies to develop and maintain a trail system along the Deschutes River within Tumalo and along major irrigation canals." Finally, Strategic Investments Policy 7.1 states "Continue to pursue and implement Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) funding to prioritize County investments to support tourism and access to key recreational sites." Table 5-7 (Bicycle Recreation Connections) also meets this goal. Therefore, the 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with Goal 8. Goal 9: Economic Development: FINDING: A functioning well -managed transportation network with sufficient capacity to move goods and services is a foundation of economic development. The 2020-2040 TSP has identified deficiencies in the County network and mitigations to address those deficiencies via its list of prioritized projects for County roads and State Highways, both segments and intersections. Goal 4 Economic Development states "Plan a transportation system that supports the existing industry and encourages economic development in the County." Economic Development Policies 4.1 and 4.2 support a well -maintained system of arterials and collectors for land use development and employment. Economic Development Policies 4.5 and 4.6 stress improvements to support the freight system and access to U.S. 97, U.S. 20, and OR 126, which ODOT designates as Freight Routes. Therefore, the 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with Goal 9. Goal 10: Housing: FINDING: The 2020-2040 TSP does not change any of the County's Comprehensive Plan designations or zoning codes related to residential uses. Therefore the 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with Goal 10. If Goal 10 is interpreted to require a mix of housing types, then it is inapplicable as a TSP only relates to various transportation modes as defined by OAR 660-012-0020 that serve existing land use designations. Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services: 247-23-000507-PA/508-TA (Transportation System Plan, 2020-2040) Page 6 of 8 Exhibit F to Ordinance 2023-017 - TSP Findings FINDING: The development of the TSP itself and the resulting list of prioritized road projects at Tables 5-1 (Intersection Changes and Associated Cost Estimates), 5-2 (Roadway Changes and Associated Costs), 5-4 (ODOT Intersections Changes and Associated Cost Estimates) 5-5 (Pedestrian Facilities and Associated Cost Estimates), 5-6 (Bicycle Route Community Connections) ensure adequate public facilities and services. These listed prioritized improvements will result in a timely, orderly, and efficient development of public roads and highways. The 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with Goal 11. Goal 12: Transportation: FINDING: The development of the TSP itself meets the goal. The TSP as cited in Goal 11 results in the timely, orderly, and efficient development of public roads and highways as well as accommodations for all modes. The TSP is based on a combination of planning requirements (Chapter 1). Goals and policies then set the 20-year vision for the transportation system, which includes all modes, not just motorized vehicles (Chapter 2). The TSP analyzes deficiencies and needs while developing a list of plan improvements and programs (Chapter 3). The recommended projects for a multimodal system are summarized and explained (Chapter 4). The proposed prioritized projects are listed along with cost estimates and mapped (Chapter 5). The financial assumptions and forecasts for funding the improvement are then detailed (Chapter 6.) The tables and figures for the various road projects are summarized above in the findings for Goals 3, 4, and 11. Amendments to the functional classifications for selected roads are provided in Table 5-3 (Changes to the Functional Classification Designations). The 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with Goal 12. Goal 13: Energy Conservation: FINDING: The 2020-2040 TSP proposes physical improvements to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians as well as policies to promote the development and use of alternate modes such as bicycling, walking, and transit. The various roadway projects will ensure roads and highways are not congested as vehicles in stop and go traffic consume more fuel and emit more emissions than vehicles in free -flow conditions. The 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with Goal 13. Goal 14: Urbanization: FINDING: The TSP update was prepared with input from cities within the County to ensure consistency with the respective TSPs regarding functional classification, future improvements, and transportation policies. The meshing of the County and urban TSPs ensures an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban. The County TSP, by definition applies only to lands outside of UGBs, however, the TSP contains policies to provide continuing consistency between the County's and the cities' transportation facilities. Specifically, Goal 1, Coordination and Collaboration states the TSP promotes a plan that is consistent and coordinated with "...the cities and incorporated communities within the County." Coordination and Collaboration Policies 1.1-1.18 also stress consistency with city and County transportation plans and projects. Specifically, Policy 1.3 states "Coordinate regional project development and implementation with the cities of Bend, Redmond, Sisters, and La Pine." Policy 1.6 states "Maintain an intergovernmental agreement with each of the cities to provide specific timelines and milestones for the transfer of County roadways with the urban growth boundaries at the time of annexation, including full width of right of way." The 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with Goal 14. 247-23-00 0 50 7-PA/508-TA (Transportation System Plan, 2020-2040) Page 7 of 8 Exhibit F to Ordinance 2023-017 - TSP Findings Goals 15 through 19 FINDINGS: Goals 15 through 19 are not applicable to the proposed plan and text amendments because the County does not contain these types of lands. OAR 660-012, Transportation Planning FINDING: The document was prepared in accordance with the requirements of OAR 660-012, including but not limited to the modal elements of a TSP, land use assumptions, needs analysis, traffic projections, selection of alternatives, financing aspects, and public outreach. The 2020-2040 TSP is consistent with OAR 660-012. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan FINDING: The relevant portions of the Comprehensive Plan are Chapter 1 (Comprehensive Planning), which sets the goals and policies of how the County will involve the community and conduct land use planning. These are specified in Section 1.2 (Community Involvement) and Section 1.3 (Land Use Planning). The Comprehensive Plan at Chapter 3 (Rural Growth Management) and the applicable element is Section 3.7 (Transportation). Section 1.2 sets a goal for an open and active community involvement program that engages the public during development of land use policies and codes. Policy 1.2.2 designates the Planning Commission as the Committee for Community Involvement. Policies 1.2.3 and 1.2.4 detail procedures for public outreach and avenues of outreach. As described above, the County complied with DCC 22.12 for a legislative amendment, including notice to the public, DLCD, and relevant agencies. Both the Planning Commission and Board will conduct separate public hearings and objectively evaluate the facts. Additionally, staff conducted extensive public outreach via email, online open houses, website, and work sessions with the PC and the Board, which were open to the public and broadcast online. Section 1.3 sets a goal of an open and public land use process to reach fact -based decisions. For the development of the TSP, the County has done public outreach using traditional methods (face- to-face meetings, work sessions with the PC and the Board) and newer methods (website, online public meetings, electronic records, video meetings, etc.) Section 3.7 is the Transportation System Plan itself and is incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan as Appendix C. Based on the above, the 2020-2040 TCP is consistent with the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan. V. CONCLUSION The proposed 2020-2040 TSP complies with all relevant Deschutes County and OAR requirements. 247-23-000507-PA/508-TA (Transportation System Plan, 2020-2040) Page 8 of 8