Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutChapter 1 - IntroductionEXHIBIT C ORDINANCE 2012-005 Page 30 of 268 CHAPTER ONE Introduction The State of Oregon requires cities and counties to comply in their comprehensive plans with 19 Statewide Planning Goals, of which Goal 12 is Transportation. Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) Chapter 660 Division 12, Transportation Planning, implements Goal 12. OAR 660-012 is known as the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) and requires cities and counties to prepare Transportation System Plans (TSPs) that have 20-year planning horizons. The TSP is the Transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan. The TSP must encompass all modes to ensure Oregonians have a transportation network at the state and local level that is safe, convenient, and economical as it serves their needs. The transportation network should provide a variety of modal choices and serve the transportation disadvantaged. Deschutes County adopted its first TSP in 1998 and began to update the TSP in January 2007. 1.1 Geographic Setting Deschutes County encompasses 3,055 square miles of widely varied terrain, ranging from the snow- capped crest and timbered slopes of the Cascade Range on the west to the sagebrush ocean of the High Desert to the east. (Figure 1.1.F1) The combination of mountains, lakes, rivers, open desert and a proximity of less than three hours driving time to each of the Willamette Valley’s three major population centers (Portland, Salem, and Eugene) has long made Deschutes County a recreational destination. The County, which was formed in 1916, also lies approximately midway between Washington and California. The County’s economy, like many other counties in the intermontane West, had long relied on timber and cattle with some agriculture. In recent decades, the County has relied more on tourism. An average of 12 inches of rain a year and a base elevation of approximately 3,600 feet may make farming a difficult endeavor, but those limiting factors for agriculture become positives for hunting, fishing, downhill and cross-country skiing, off-roading, and hiking. Yet, the County also contains areas of manufacturing, rural industry, manufacturing, and research. The County’s physical and recreational amenities led to a nearly two-decade population boom. According to the 2010 US Census, the County had a total population of 157,733; by comparison in 1995 the County had a certified population of 94,100. The County’s population resides in four incorporated cities Bend (76,639), Redmond (26,215), Sisters (2,038), and La Pine (1,653) and an unincorporated area totaling 51,188. In other words, about 65% of the County’s population is urban and 35% is rural. Bend and Redmond are the two most populous cities in the eastern two-thirds of the state and Bend is the only Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) east of the Cascades. The main highways to Deschutes County are US 97, which is the major north-south highway on the east side of the Cascades, US 20/OR 22 from the mid-Willamette Valley, OR 126 from the Upper Willamette Valley, and US 20 and OR 31 from eastern Oregon. The bulk of the vehicle movements in Deschutes County occurs on the state highway system, particularly on US 97 between Redmond and Bend, US 20 between Sisters and Bend, and US 97 between Bend and Sunriver. US 97 leads north roughly 113 miles to Interstate 84 and the Columbia Gorge and south approximately 152 miles to California. EXHIBIT C ORDINANCE 2012-005 Page 31 of 268 1.2 Transportation Planning The Deschutes County Transportation System Plan (TSP) synthesizes the transportation information, population, and land use patterns to identify short to long-term transportation needs. The timelines are defined as follows. Short-term is 0-5 years; mid-term is 6-10 years; and long-term is 11-20 years. The TSP in the short-term identifies and provides recommended solutions to immediate safety, operational, and congestion problems. For the 20-year planning horizon, the TSP identifies goals and policies and prioritizes projects to ensure the movement of people, goods, and services through the County. The Deschutes County TSP was coordinated with the TSPs for the cities within the County and with various state modal plans, including air, auto, bicycles, freight, pedestrian, pipeline, rail, and transit. The plan reflects existing land use plans, policies, and regulations that affect the transportation system and includes financial assumptions and concepts on how to finance future projects Goal 12 Goal 12 is the transportation goal in the nineteen separate statewide planning goals adopted by the State of Oregon in the 1970's. These goals were designed to be implemented through inclusion in regional and local comprehensive plans. Under Goal 12, local governments, regions and metropolitan areas (MPOs) must adopt transportation plans which: "...provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system." Specifically, each transportation plan: "...shall (1) consider all modes of transportation including mass transit, air, water, pipeline, rail, highway, bicycle and pedestrian; (2) be based upon an inventory of local, regional and state transportation needs; (3) consider the differences in social consequences that would result from utilizing differing combinations of transportation modes; (4) avoid principal reliance upon any one mode of transportation; (5) minimize adverse social, economic and environmental impacts and costs; (6) conserve energy; (7) meet the needs of the transportation disadvantaged by improving transportation services; (8) facilitate the flow of goods and services so as to strengthen the local and regional economy; and (9) conform with local and regional comprehensive land use plans." The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan was prepared in 1979 and codified in April 1993. The Plan included a chapter on transportation, which addressed County-wide issues in Deschutes County Code (DCC) 23.60. The County adopted its first TSP in 1998. The TSP was codified in the Comprehensive Plan at DCC 23.64. While the two chapters complement each other, they also introduce a slight bit of confusion and redundancy, so one result of the TSP Update was to just have one chapter in DCC for transportation. Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) In April, 1991, the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) adopted a new administrative rule, the Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660, Division 12), governing transportation planning and project development at local, regional and statewide levels. The rule was modified in 2004 and 2006, but its overall intent remains unchanged. EXHIBIT C ORDINANCE 2012-005 Page 32 of 268 Under the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), Deschutes County must identify a system of transportation facilities and services adequate to meet regional transportation needs outside of the Bend, Redmond, Sisters, and La Pine Urban Growth Boundaries (UGBs). Local and state TSPs must be consistent with one another. Local governments prepare and adopt city and county TSPs which are then submitted to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) for acknowledgement by the state. The Deschutes County TSP has been prepared in coordination with the TSPs for Bend, Redmond, and Sisters. La Pine is the State’s newest city and as of 2010 had not yet prepared a TSP. La Pine instead has relied on the Deschutes County TSP, as prior to the City’s 2006 incorporation, Deschutes County had planning authority for the area. Three important aspects of the TPR are that it 1) ties land use to transportation, 2) mandates that transportation planning reduce reliance on any one mode of transportation, and 3) requires a plausible financing program to implement the TSP. Components of a TSP Required by the TPR A transportation system plan (TSP) is defined as: "...a plan for one or more transportation facilities that are planned, developed, operated and maintained in a coordinated manner to supply continuity of movements between modes, and within and between geographic and jurisdictional areas." The TSP represents the "first phase" of transportation planning. The TSP establishes land use controls, through the establishment of goals and policies, and provides a map of a network of facilities and services to meet overall transportation needs. The "second phase" is transportation project development, during which the local government determines the exact location, alignment, and preliminary design of improvements identified in the TSP (OAR 660-12-010(1). The TSP must take into account the State’s coordinated population forecast, land use zoning and comprehensive plan designations, trends in traffic volumes and modal choices and/or opportunities, and financial assumptions to arrive at a 20-year transportation plan. Multi-Modal Planning The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) emphasizes the adoption of multi-modal TSPs rather than relying solely on expanding the capacity of the road network. The state, through the TPR, emphasizes the goal of having transportation choices, including walking, bicycling, and transit, rather than an over reliance on the automobile. The challenge is how to be consistent with that intent when planning for the rural areas outside the cities. The TPR also seeks to ensure the safe, efficient, and economic flow of freight and other goods and services via road, air, rail, and marine transportation. There is not any maritime shipping in the High Desert, but the other three are important. The TPR emphasizes multi-modal improvements in urban areas. However, goals and policies that support multi-modal solutions can be applied to the rural areas of the County and the larger unincorporated communities such as Sunriver, Terrebonne and Tumalo, particularly those that relate to bicycles, sidewalks, transit, or park and ride services. EXHIBIT C ORDINANCE 2012-005 Page 33 of 268 TSP As A Land Use Decision According to OAR 660-012-0025(1), adoption of the TSP is a land use decision: "...regarding the need for transportation facilities, services and major improvements and their function, mode and general location." The local adoption of a TSP is governed by DCC Title 22, Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance. The final decision by the Board of County Commissioners is subject to review by the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) and appeal to the State Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). TPR Requirements for Deschutes County The TPR applies differently to cities, counties, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). There are slivers of land in Deschutes County that are also within the Bend MPO. The Bend MPO boundaries include the area within the City of Bend UGB as well as areas that may be annexed into the UGB to accommodate growth and anticipated development in the next twenty years. The areas included in the Bend MPO that lie outside of the UGB can be generally described as Deschutes River Woods and the Woodside Ranch area to the south; an area east of the UGB from Stevens Road to US 20; an area east of the UGB from Neff Road to Butler Market Road; the Bend Pine nursery area; an area located northeast of the UGB (Juniper Ridge area); and an area along US 97 north of the Bend UGB. Of the roughly 88,000 people within the Bend MPO, approximately, 8,000 people live outside of the Bend UGB but within the Bend MPO. Of those 8,000, around 5,000 are within the Deschutes River Woods subdivision between the Deschutes River and US 97. In terms of land area, the Bend MPO Boundary encompasses 47.08 square miles of which 33.27 square miles are within the Bend UGB and 13.8 square miles are outside the Bend UGB but within the Bend MPO. The TSP was prepared in coordination with both the City of Bend TSP and the Bend MPO regional transportation plan. This was done to ensure consistency with road classifications, facilities management, and transportation policies. A Deschutes County Commissioner is a member of the Bend MPO Policy Board, and one of the Deschutes County planning staff is a member of the Bend MPO technical advisory committee (TAC). The Bend MPO manager was also a member of the Deschutes County TSP TAC. Thus the Deschutes County TSP complies with the coordination requirements for federally mandated plans as discussed at OAR 660-012-0016. EXHIBIT C ORDINANCE 2012-005 Page 34 of 268 The TSP identifies transportation needs. Transportation needs are defined broadly in the TPR as: "...estimates of the movement of people and goods consistent with acknowledged comprehensive plans and requirements of this rule. Needs are typically based on projections of future travel demand resulting from a continuation of current trends as modified by policy objectives, including those expressed in Goal 12 and this rule, especially those for avoiding principal reliance on any one mode of transportation" (OAR 660-12-005(32). Local transportation needs are defined as: “…movement of people and goods within communities and portions of counties and the need to provide access to local destinations.” (OAR 660-012-0005(33) Regional transportation needs are defined as: “…movement of people and goods between and through communities and accessibility to regional destinations within a metropolitan area, county, or associated group of counties.” (OAR-660-012-0005(34) State transportation needs are defined as: “movement of people and goods between and through regions of the state and between the state and other states.” (OAR 660-012-0005(35) Under OAR 660-12-055, cities and counties outside of MPOs (such as Deschutes County) were required to complete TSPs for their planning areas by May 1997. However, individual ODOT Region managers had the ability to grant contract extensions as funding allowed. Deschutes County was granted a contract extension until December 31, 1997. The County adopted its original TSP by Ordinance 98-044 on August 26, 1998. The Update of the TSP was begun in January 2007 and adopted by Ordinance 2012-005. The TPR requires the following broad plan elements in a TSP:  A determination of transportation needs  A road plan for existing and future arterials and collectors  A bicycle and pedestrian plan  A public transportation plan  An air, rail, and water transportation plan  A list of prioritized projects to meet needs and deficiencies  Cost estimates  A transportation financing plan  Policies and land use regulations to implement the TSP (OAR 660-012-0020) EXHIBIT C ORDINANCE 2012-005 Page 35 of 268 1.3 Major Changes Since the Adoption of the 1998 Plan Since the 1998 TSP was completed Deschutes County has witnessed a vast array of changes. The significant shifts relate to population growth, rise and plateauing of destination resorts, development of regional public transit, changes in federal and local funding of transportation, and changes to ODOT plans and policies. Regional Growth and Destination Resorts When the TSP began in 1995, Deschutes County had a population of 94,100 (40,850 in the unincorporated areas and 53,250 within UGBs). In July 2009 the statewide Coordinated Population Forecast certified the County had a total population of 170,705 (59,075 in the unincorporated areas and 111,630 within UGBs). That is an increase of 81% in the County’s total population and a 45% increase in the rural population. The latter takes into account the expansion of the Bend, Redmond, and Sisters UGBs plus the incorporation of La Pine and establishment of its UGB. The State of Oregon uses a coordinated population forecast so cities and counties can agree on the expected population and plan accordingly, including potential expansions of UGB’s. In other words, the coordinated population forecast is used for planning purposes. The coordinated population forecast factors in jurisdictional boundaries such as UGBs that are not recognized by the federal Census. The County’s coordinated population forecast is built upon trends from previous US Censuses as well as information from local jurisdictions regarding building permits, tax assessor’s data, zoning designations, migration rates, Census data, etc. The economic recession that began in 2006 has drastically slowed development in Deschutes County and the various cities. The traffic volumes have dropped commensurately on state highways and the County roads due to rising unemployment levels and increased fuel prices. In 1998 Deschutes County had one Goal 8 destination resort, Eagle Crest, and several pre-Goal 8 areas that functioned as destination resorts (Black Butte Ranch, Inn of the Seventh Mountain, Sunriver, and Widgi Creek). By 2010 Central Oregon had the greatest concentration of destination resorts in the state with Deschutes County as the epicenter. Eagle Crest had expanded twice and the County now has five approved Goal 8 destination resorts (Caldera Springs, Eagle Crest, Pronghorn, Tetherow, and Thornburgh (which was approved at the local level but is in now in civil court). There are three more destination resorts just across the line in southwest Crook County, another has been mapped in northern Klamath County, and Jefferson County has mapped sites for two potential destination resorts just north of the County line. The combination of the destination resorts in Crook County and the growth of Prineville, the Crook County seat, have brought increased traffic to the Powell Butte Highway and Alfalfa Market/Neff Road. The potential number of future destination resorts likely will be small in the next 20 years due to three factors. First, the County is remapping the lands suitable for a destination resort overlay designation with the anticipated result the acreage of mapped lands will decrease substantially from 112,000 acres to an expected 15,000. Second, the industry has changed and the business model of a destination resort with attached golf course has lost its viability. Third, the supply of undeveloped lots in the approved resorts is expected to exceed demand over this planning horizon. EXHIBIT C ORDINANCE 2012-005 Page 36 of 268 Urban Growth and County Coordination The urban areas have also grown. Bend has become a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) of which Deschutes County and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) are partners. Bend completed its TSP in 1998, although portions have been under remand. Bend also has a master plan for Juniper Ridge, a 1,500-acre mixed-use development on the City’s northeast side that will impact several County facilities, but especially Deschutes Market Road. A city-wide Bend UGB expansion was done in 2009, in concert with the County, to identify future road rights-of-way and policies regarding roadway expansion. The City’s proposal has been remanded by LCDC and County and City staff will work together to correct the cited transportation deficiencies. A revised Bend UGB proposal is expected to be completed by 2012. Redmond completed its TSP in 1997 and updated it in June 2008. In September 2006 ODOT and the City prepared a North Redmond US 97 Interchange Area Management Plan related to the Redmond Re-Route of US 97. In 2005 Redmond worked with Deschutes County to designate Urban Area Reserves to identify where the City would grow in the next 50 years and where transportation facilities would be located or expanded. Deschutes County Ordinance 2006-018 codified those results. The primary aspect from a transportation standpoint was identifying future rights-of-way and crafting policies that roads could be built to the narrower County standards but rights-of-way would be to the larger City standard. (Similar language was included in the Bend UGB expansion.) Setback requirements would ensure development would take place at a distance sufficient so that no buildings or structures would be constructed within roadway expansion areas. Redmond has also updated its TSP to show a “ring road” around the west side of the community using Helmholtz Road, which straddles the City/County border, to go from the north end of town to the south, connecting to a future Quarry Road interchange. The Quarry Road interchange was on the 1998 Deschutes County TSP but the link to Helmholtz was not. Sisters completed its TSP in June 2001 and updated it in January 2010. The City and County expect to coordinate on an Urban Reserve study in fall 2011. There is policy language in the Sisters TSP deferring to the County on extending Barclay Road east of the City and then south to OR 126 to allow traffic to skirt the US 20/Locust intersection. Based on projected traffic volumes and reserve capacity in the City of Sisters as well as the zoning of the affected properties, the County did not pursue a Barclay Extension in this TSP update. La Pine, which was previously an Urban Unincorporated Community, voted to become an incorporated City in November 2006. The County assisted the City of La Pine in 2010 with the development of the City’s first comprehensive plan, which has been adopted by the City but not yet fully acknowledged by the State. The City expects to begin a TSP soon. Public Transportation Public transportation has seen major changes since 1998. Bend has established a fixed-route bus system called Bend Area Transit (BAT), the first such system in the tri-county area. Begun in September 2006, BAT carried its one-millionth rider within three years. Meanwhile, the Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council (COIC), which oversees the transportation component of many social service programs in the tri-county area, began Cascades East Transit (CET). In April 2008, CET offered van shuttle service to and from the major cities in the tri-county area. In 2010 BAT and CET began discussions to have CET manage BAT to relieve the financial pressures of the City of Bend general fund related to BAT. The development of a nascent regionwide transit system has been one of the most critical developments in the tri-county area since 1998. EXHIBIT C ORDINANCE 2012-005 Page 37 of 268 Commute Options manages the park and ride lots. The increase in park and ride system, both new lots and expansion of existing ones, complements the CET network. While there have been gains in public transit, the private automobile remains the dominant mode in Deschutes County. Financial Impacts In 1998, timber payments were still a pillar of County funding, leaving Deschutes County hard hit by the subsequent loss of replacement federal funding meant to offset the loss of timber revenue due to federal restrictions on logging. The Road Department received approximately $3.0 million annually under the Secure Rural School and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000. The program provided bridge funding at a declining rate to soften the loss of timber revenues, but is due to end. As a result, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) passed Resolution 2006-049 which stated the County would no longer accept new roads into the system of County-maintained roads. The moratorium lasts until replacement funding, in the BOCCs opinion, has been restored to adequate levels as timber revenues and their replacement constituted approximately a third of the Road Department’s budget. Resolution 2009-118 modified the road moratorium to give the Board the discretion to add new arterials or collectors to the County-maintained system. One approach the County has used to address the funding shortfall was the development of transportation system development charges (SDCs). The County passed a limited SDC in 2006 for four future signals in South County (Burgess/Huntington; 1st/Huntington; 1st/97; and Finley Butte/97). The SDC, Resolution 2006-010, only applied to lands from La Pine State Recreation Road south. The 1st/Huntington signal was completed in 2006 and the Burgess/Huntington signal was done in 2008. With the incorporation of La Pine in November 2006, the County no longer collected SDCs from lands lying within Oregon’s newest city. The County in July 2008 adopted a County-wide SDC with Resolution 2008-059. The SDC applies to all lands outside of the Bend, Redmond, Sisters, and La Pine UGBs. Fees are collected no later than the issuance of certificate of occupancy. The BOCC set a phased approach, beginning at 85% of the full SDC and increasing it by 5% every July 1 until the full amount began to be collected after June 30, 2011. State Transportation Changes The 1998 TSP was done to be consistent with the 1991 Oregon Highway Plan (OHP), the modal plan ODOT uses to manage its highway system. One of the most dramatic changes was the wholesale revisions made to the OHP in 1999. The 1999 OHP altered ODOT’s performance standards, modified the functional classification scheme, added several overlay classifications, and incorporated changes to the OARs dealing with access management. ODOT changed from a delay-based Level of Service (LOS) performance standard, which the County still uses for its roads and intersections, to Volume/Capacity (V/C) Ratios. ODOT’s level of importance (LOI) functional classification system has been refined to include classification for specific segments by mile point instead of a single designation for a route’s entire length. The OHP has added segment overlays such as Expressway, Freight Route, and Special Transportation Area (STA). EXHIBIT C ORDINANCE 2012-005 Page 38 of 268 ODOT also changed its rules regarding access management approach. ODOT’s previous access management policy under OAR Chapter 734, Division 50 was arranged by the 1991 OHP Category 1 through 4 classifications for highways. Since then ODOT has overhauled its access management policies and implements them through OAR Chapter 734, Division 51 and the 1999 OHP. Access management now depends on functional classification, posted speed, and overlay designations. The 2000 Oregon Aviation System Plan (OASP) referenced in the 1998 TSP was redone in 2007 and renamed the Oregon Aviation Plan (OAP). Deschutes County incorporated many of the goals of the OASP in its development code in DCC Title 18 to ensure airport-land use compatibility, imaginary surfaces, and height restrictions. The 2007 OAP at Table 1.1 would indicate the County is consistent with the State’s aviation plan. The 1995 Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan used in the 1998 TSP was revised in 2008. The County has worked with the Deschutes County Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) and U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Deschutes County Commissioner Tammy Baney on the recommendations from their Central Oregon Recreation Assets Committee, and the related Three Sisters Scenic Bikeway proposal. As a result, the County will for the first time designate bike routes on selected arterials and collectors. 1.4 Updating the Transportation System Plan Under the Transportation Planning Rule, Deschutes County must identify a system of transportation facilities and services adequate to meet the regional needs and then prepare a transportation system plan which is consistent with the Oregon Transportation Plan (State TSP) and other local TSPs (Bend, Redmond and Sisters). The OTP contains specific criteria and guidelines for local and regional jurisdictions, which form the basis for determining consistency with the state plan. Performing the analyses and preparing the plan elements described in the guidelines enable Deschutes County and other communities to develop an efficient transportation system, comply with the Transportation Planning Rule, and achieve consistency with other planning jurisdictions including ODOT. Several key performance standards can be used as indicators to determine the adequacy of a transportation system plan. The following elements are addressed by the Deschutes County TSP in order to achieve an adequate plan for the region and satisfy the requirements of the TPR: • Public and Interagency Involvement • Plan Consistency • Consistency with State and Local Plans • Reduced Auto Reliance • Network of Streets Transportation Accessibility • Efficient Transportation Management • Safe and Convenient Walking and Bicycling • Minimize Adverse Economic, Social, Environmental, and Energy Consequences • Intermodal Linkage and Passenger Services Coordination • Minimizing Conflicts Between Modes • Fundable Plan EXHIBIT C ORDINANCE 2012-005 Page 39 of 268 • Enabling Ordinances • Facility/Corridor Protection Ordinances • Development Ordinances to Encourage Alternate Mode Usage The plan is broken down into the following specific tasks to be completed in a predetermined order. Review of Existing Plans, Policies, and Standards Chapter 2 provides a review and evaluation of all current plans and policies affecting Deschutes County, an inventory of the existing transportation system, and deficient transportation facilities in the County. As a part of the review process, initial meetings were held with ODOT, planning and public works staff from the County’s four cities and lone MPO, the Deschutes County Bike and Pedestrian committee, and open houses with the general public. Staff also held work sessions with the Deschutes County Planning Commission, Board of County Commissioners, and County Road Department staff. These meetings produced a set of goals and objectives for the Transportation System Plan. The review involved the following six-step process: 1) Review and evaluation of the existing comprehensive land use and transportation plans. 2) Review of local and state plans. 3) Analysis of existing land uses and vacant lands. 4) Review of existing ordinances, as well as zoning, subdivision, and engineering standards. 5) Review of existing, significant transportation studies. 6) Review of existing capital improvement programs and/or public facilities plans. Inventory of Existing Transportation Systems A significant part of developing a transportation system plan is to inventory the existing physical facilities, services and conditions of the transportation system (streets, bikeways, etc.). This task seeks to determine the extent, nature and condition of the facilities and systems already in place to determine how the current system functions. Inventory of Natural and Cultural Constraints Although a detailed inventory is not required for this level of strategic planning, any environmental features associated with the existing and planned transportation facilities need to be identified. Examples of environmental features are wetlands, significant natural areas, historic buildings, cemeteries, parks, schools and scenic areas. EXHIBIT C ORDINANCE 2012-005 Page 40 of 268 Population and Employment Forecasts Chapter 3 provides a transportation forecast in order to determine the future transportation needs in the County. The County inventoried existing land uses, as well as demographic and economic data outside of the Bend, Redmond, and Sisters Urban Growth Boundaries. Population, employment and traffic forecasts were made based on historic and existing data. In addition to trending historical growth patterns, existing and planned land uses were examined to predict future development growth and to forecast the traffic generated from that development. These forecasts help one to understand the existing transportation system and form the basis for projecting future travel needs. The Transportation Planning Rule requires that forecasts address a 20-year period beginning in the year that the TSP was originally planned for adoption in Deschutes County (2010), therefore, the projections were estimated out to the year 2030. Determine Transportation Needs Chapter 4 summarizes the transportation needs of the County based on the outcome of the forecasts and inventory analysis and the concerns of a wide range of Deschutes County residents. Other Roadway Needs Several additional needs of the transportation system are not specified in the TPR but they need to be included because they directly affect the transportation-financing plan, which is required by the Rule. The additional needs include: • Safety needs, including traffic accident data covering at least three years, knowledge of existing unsafe roadway sections or intersections, and a review of any existing traffic safety studies. • Bridge needs, an inventory of existing bridges and other structures in the transportation system and any needed repairs, widening or replacement. • Reconstruction needs, based on a prioritized list of existing, substandard roadway sections. • Operation/Maintenance needs, including the ongoing needs of patching, chip sealing, sweeping, etc., for the continued safe operation of public roadways. Public Transportation Needs This requirement addresses two separate needs, one being the mobility needs of the public and the other being the system design considerations (level of service). In general mobility needs fall into two categories: accessibility to jobs in urban areas and the mobility needs in rural areas. Primarily, Deschutes County has rural mobility needs since most of the areas outside the urban growth boundaries fall into the rural category. The TSP requires the determination of demand for public transportation and then the appropriate system design to satisfy that demand. EXHIBIT C ORDINANCE 2012-005 Page 41 of 268 Bikeway Needs The bicycle element of the plan addresses the County-wide needs for bicycle transportation and draws upon the existing Deschutes County Master Bikeway Plan (March 1992) and the 1998 TSP for recommendations for new and upgraded facilities. Additional recommendations are provided based upon community input and changes in land use and the street network as well as the proposed Three Sisters Scenic Bikeway network. Pedestrian Needs The need for sidewalks is limited outside of UGBs and the business districts of the larger unincorporated communities. In most cases the pedestrian volumes and width of the paved or graded shoulders are such that pedestrians can effectively travel without sidewalks. While the County developed a plan for US 97 in La Pine in approximately 2006, it is incumbent upon the City of La Pine to create a TSP within its boundaries to address pedestrian needs and connections Transportation System Plan Chapter 5 outlines the transportation system plan with recommended goals and policies, as well as a list of proposed transportation projects. The project list is prioritized based on various criteria including safety, costs and need. Financing Plan Chapter 6 addresses various financing options, provides context of past funding levels, and has scenarios based on a range of expected funding over the next 20 years.