HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdnc 001 - Amend Traffic Code~O Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 -Fax (541) 385-3202 -www.deschutes.org
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
For Board Business Meeting of June 25, 2014
DATE: June 17,2014
FROM: Peter Russell CDD Phone (541) 388-6718
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
Consideration of Second Reading by Title Only and Adoption of Ordinance 2014-001 Amending
Deschutes County Code 17.16.115 to Move Traffic Study Requirements and Update Cross-reference
and Consideration of Second Reading by Title Only and Adoption of Ordinance 2014-017 Adding and
Amending Deschutes County Code Chapters 18.116 and 18.124 to Include Traffic Study Requirements
and Update Cross-references.
PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS DATE? NO
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The Board held a first reading of Ordinances 2014-001 and 2014-017 on June 4,2014. There have
been no changes to the ordinances since the first reading. The current traffic study requirement has
appeared since 2006 in Deschutes County Code (DCC) 17.16.115, which deals with master plans and
subdivsions. Traffic studies are required when a use will generate 50 new weekday trips. A more
logical location would be under DCC 18.116, Supplemental Provisions, as the County often receives
land use applications that are neither a subdivision nor a master plan, but will generate more than 50
new weekday trips.
Additionally, the County code now has different performance standards for existing roads and new
roads. The proposed ordinances will set the County's performance standard for all roads regardless of
age as Level of Service (LOS) D. Finally, the proposed DCC 18.116.310 will allow the County the
discretion to waive the traffic study requirement for low-intensity uses that meet the 50-trip threshold,
but are located in isolated areas and on County roads with adequate capacity.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.
RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REOUESTED:
Motion 1: Second reading by title only of Ordinance 2014-001.
Motion 2: Adoption of Ordinance 2014-001
Motion 3: Secton reading by title only of Ordinance 2014-017
Motion 4: Adoption of Ordinance 2014-017
ATTENDANCE: Peter Russell, Senior Transportation Planner, Planning Division.
DISTRIBUTION OF DOCUMENTS:
Peter Russell, CDD; Legal Department Assistants.
/II
REVIEWED
dk
LEGAL COUNSEL
For Recording Stamp Only
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Ordinance Amending Deschutes County *
Code 17.16.115, to Move Traffic Study * ORDINANCE NO. 2014-001
Requirements and Update Cross-Reference. *
*
WHEREAS, Deschutes County Planning Division staff requested a text amendment to Deschutes
County Code ("DCC") 17.16.115, 18.116.310, and 18.124.080, to move traffic study requirements from 17.16
(Approval of Subdivision Tentative Plans and Master Development Plans to 18.116 (Supplementary Provisions),
establishing 18.116.310 (Traffic Study Requirements) and updating 18.124 (Site Plan Review) reference to
traffic studies; the reason is many land use applications that are not for a subdivision or master plan can often
meet threshold for a traffic study; and
WHEREAS, after notice was given in accordance with applicable law, a public hearing was held on
January 9, 2014, before the Deschutes County Planning Commission and, on January 9, 2014, the Planning
Commission recommended approval of the text amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners considered this matter after a duly noticed public
hearing on June 4, 2014, and concluded that the proposed changes are consistent with the County's
Comprehensive Plan and that the public will benefit from changes to the land use regulations; now therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS
as follows:
Section 1. AMENDMENT. DCC 17.16.115 is amended to read as described in Exhibit "A", attached
and incorporated by reference herein, with new language underlined and deleted language set forth in
strikethrough.
PAGE 1 OF 2 -ORDINANCE NO. 2014-001
---
..
Section 2. FINDINGS. The Board adopts as its findings in support of this decision Exhibit "C"
attached to Ordinance 2014-017 and incorporated by reference herein.
Dated this ____-'2014 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OFDESCHUTESCOUNTY,OREGON
TAMMY BANEY, Chair
ANTHONY DeBONE, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary ALAN UNGER, Commissioner
Date of 1st Reading: day _____,2014.
Date of 2nd Reading: __day of _____, 2014.
Record of Adoption Vote:
Commissioner Yes No Abstained Excused
Tammy Baney
Anthony DeBone
Alan Unger
Effective date: __day of _____, 2014.
PAGE 2 OF 2 -ORDINANCE NO. 2014-001
Chapter 17.16. APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION TENTATIVE PLANS AND MASTER
DEVELOPMENT PLANS
17.16.115. Traffic Impact Studies.
A. The traffic studies will comply with Dee 18.116.310. For purposes of DCC 17.16.115, the
transportation system includes public and prh.<ate roads, intersections, sidev;alks, bike
facilities, trails, and transit systems.
B. The applicant shall meet 'lAth County staff in a pre application conference to discuss study
requirements, then generate the traffic study and submit it concurrently with the land use
application.
C. The traffic studies will comply lNith DCC 18.116.310.Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies
1. All traffic impact studies shall be conducted under the direction of a professional traffic
engineer 'who is licensed in the State of Oregon and is otherv.1se qualified to prepare
traffic studies.
2. The final report shall be stamped and signed by the Registered Professional Traffic
Engineer responsible for the document.
3. The County Engineer shall determine 'llhen the report has satisfied all the requirements of
the development's impact analysis. Incomplete reports shall be returned for completion.
4. The follO\lt'ing vehicle trip generation thresholds shall determine the level and scope of
transportation analysis required for a new or expanded development.
a. N8 Report is required if there are fe\\'er than 50 trips per day generated during a
weekday.
b. Site TI'Hffle Report (STR): If the development or change in use will cause the site to
genemte 50 200 daily trip ends, and less than 20 PM peak hour trips, a Site Traffic
Report vAll be required.
c. Traffic Impact Analysis (TL4): If the development or change in use vfill generate
more than 200 trip ends and 20 or more PM peak hour trips, then a Tmffic Impact
Analysis (TIA) shall be required.
D. Tmffic Study Area
1. After consulting with other affected jurisdictions, the County Engineer shall determine
the impact analysis area.
2. The impact analysis study area shall include, at a minimum:
a. All site access points to the public roadway system via either a driveway or private
roadway;
b. Nearest intersecting collector or arterial roads to the development that would
experience an increase of25 additional peak hour trips;
c. Any other collector or arterial intersection requested by staff.
E. Study Time Frames
The analysis shall include the follovAng time frames:
1. Existing conditions (including approved, but not yet built developments as identified by
the County Engineer);
2. Completion year of each significant phase of the development;
3. Five year forecast after build out for each phase of development or the final phase of
development.
4. Generators of large volumes of traffic (>5,000 daily and >500 peak hour trips), 'Zone
changes, and any destination resort development will also require an analysis of tmffic
Exhibit A of Ordinance 2014-001
cOBditioBs iB a tw~Bty year horizoB.
F. MiBimum Study RequiremeRts for a Site Traffie Report (STR)
The miBimum study requiremeRts for a Site Traffic Report are:
1. A vicinity map shovt'iBg the 10catioB of the proj ect iB relatioB to the traB5portatioB system
of the area;
2. Trip geBeratioB forecast uSiBg data from the most receBt editioB of the IBstitute of
TraasportatioB EBgiBeers (lTE) Trip Generation Maooal UBless more appropriate data is
a....ailable aRd appro....ed by the COuRty EBgiBeer;
3. Trip distributioB and assignmeBt;
4. Safety analysis of the site accesses, iBeludiBg sight distance and operatioB characteristics;
5. DescriptioB of the proposed de ....elopmeRt and surrouBdiBg laRd uses;
G. MiBimum Study RequiremeRts for a Trame Impaet Analysis (TIA)
The miBimum study requiremeRts for a Traffic Impact Report are:
1. A ....iciBity map showiBg the 10catioB of the project iB relatioB to the transportatioB system
of the area;
2. All of the elemeBts ofa STR;
3. Traffic sigBal progressioB aaalysis aBd iBtercoflllectioB if a Bew sigaal is proposed;
4. A respoBse iB the fiBal report to any supplemeRtal study issues ideBtified by other
affected jurisdictioBs;
5. Appropriate traffic calming techniques if the proj ect distributes trips to a resideRtiai local
road and is projected to iBcrease the ....olumes OB that road to a ....olume greater than 1,000
+W!i
6. Trip geBeratioB forecasts USiBg data from the most receRt editioB of the IBstitute of
TransportatioB EngiBeers (ITE) Trip Gene1'6tion MaRual uBless the County EngiBeer
approves an alteFBate data source;
7. Trip distributioB assumptions are based OB historical data, existiBg and future travel
characteristics, and capacity constraiRts;
8. A complete descriptioB aRd drawing of the proposed de ....elopment.
9. Existing traffic ....olumes;
10. ExistiBg and future le ....els of service, a ....erage vehicle delay and volume Icapacity ratios
pI/C) for all intersectioBs and road sections within the study area for conditioBs '.vith and
without the proposed project;
11. Forecast traffic volumes 'n'ith and without the development;
13. Safety aRalysis of the site accesses, iBclude sight distance and operatioB characteristics;
14. Analysis of right aRd left turn lane vt'arraBts (ODOT standards);
15. i\nalysis of parkiBg needs of the proposed de ....elopmeBt;
16. WheB Reeded, vt'arrant analysis for traffic control devices;
17. FiBdiBgs and conclusions includiBg a recommendation of suggested poteBtial mitigation
for off site impacts and aB evaluation of the effectiveBess of those solutions.
H. Operation ABd Safety Standards.
The miBimum operatioBal and safety standards for use OB Deschutes COUBty'S roads are:
1. The miBimum level of service for intersectioBs aBd roads, duriBg the P.M. Peak Hour,
shall be LOS "D" OB existiBg couRty facilities aBd LOS "C" OB Bew couRty facilities.
2. For state highlNay intersectioBs, the performance standard shall be the volume/capacity
ratio (vic) set by the OregoB Highway Plan.
3. LOS for county intersectioBs is based OB delay.
a. LOS D for an UBsigBalized iBtersectioB is defiBed as more than 25 secoBds and less
than 35 secoBds delay OB average per ,<'ehicle.
Exhibit A of Ordinance 2014-001 2
b. For signali2ied intersections LOS D is defined as more thaft 35 seconds and less than
55 seconds delay on a"f'erage per vehicle.
c. LOS C fur aft unsignali2ied intersection is defined as more thaft 15 seconds and less
than 25 seconds delay on average per vehicle.
d. LOS C fur a signali2ied intersection is defined as more than 20 seconds aftd less thaft
35 seconds delay per average per vehicle
4. LOS fur county roadway segments is defined by average daily traffic volumes.
a. LOS D is defined as 5,701 to 9,600 a¥erage daily traffic.
b. LOS C is defined as 3,401 to 5,700 average daily traffic.
5. The minimum sight distance fur driyeways and imersections is defined in AASHTO's
"GeOMeTRIC DeSIGN OF HIGHWAYS AND STRBeTS" and the AASHTO "Design
Guidelines fur Very Lov,' Volume Local Roads « 400 ADT)".
I. Mitigation
1. The applicant shall be responsible to mitigate any safety or capacity problems that are
caused by their proposed del,zelopment.
2. At the County engineer's discretion, if there are pre existing safety deficiencies aftdlor
capacity failures at rele¥ant imersections or road fromages within the impact analysis
area, then no additional deyelopment shall be allov;:ed until a solution that accounts for
the proposed project's additional impacts is funded or built.
(Ord. 2010-014 §l, 2010; Ord. 2006-004 §1, 2006)
Exhibit A of Ordinance 2014-00 I 3