The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 10/21/2014 IN II City of Tigard Tigard Workshop Meeting—Agenda TIGARD TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE AND TIME: October 21,2014-6:30 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard-Town Hall- 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: Times noted are estimated. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting.Please call 503-639-4171,ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (11)D -Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request,the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments;and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers,it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting by calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD -Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). VIEW LIVE VIDEO STREAMING ONLINE: http;//live.tigard-or.gov Workshop meetings are cablecast on Tualatin Valley Community TV as follows: Replay Schedule for Tigard City Council Workshop Meetings-Channel 28 •Every Sunday at 12 a.m. 'Every Monday at 1 p.m. 'Every Thursday at 12 p.m. Every Friday at 10:30 a.m. 1 6 SEE ATTACHED AGENDA AIS-1886 3. Workshop Meeting Meeting Date: 10/21/2014 Length (in minutes): 45 Minutes Agenda Title: First Quarter Budget Committee Meeting Prepared For: Toby LaFrance Submitted By: Carissa Collins,Financial and Information Services Item Type: Budget Committee Meeting Type: Council Workshop Mtg. Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE This meeting is to inform the Budget Committee of the city's financial status for the first quarter of FY 2015. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Staff will be presenting a status/progress report. Input by the Budget Committee is requested. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The FY 2015 City Budget was approved by Budget Committee on April 28,2014. The budget was adopted by City Council with some technical adjustments on June 10,2014. At this meeting,staff will provide the following: 1.FY14 Audit Update 2.FY15 a.Q1 Financial Report b.Q1 Supplemental information 3.FY16 a.Calendar b.Process Changes/Improvements c•Issues likely to shape next budget i.River Terrace ii.Infrastructure Financing iii•Strategic Plan OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION N/A SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR _.L -t4.- .C-=L. ---2--1° - 1111111 City o Ti and (DATE OF MEETING) Y f g TIGARD Budget Committee Agenda MEETING DATE/TIME: October 21, 2014, 6:30 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard City of Tigard Budget Committee Meeting • Call to order FY14 Audit update-Debbie FY15 • Q1 Financial Report-Toby • Q1 Supplemental information-Toby/Carissa FY16 • Calendar-Carissa • Process changes/improvements-Toby • Issues like to shape next budget-Toby ➢ River Terrace ➢ Infrastructure financing ➢ Strategic Plan BUDGET COMMITTEE AGENDA- October 21, 2014 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 1 i ' City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: City of Tigard Budget Committee From: Toby LaFrance, Tigard Finance and Information Services Director Re: FY 2015 First Quarter Financial Report Date: October 21, 2014 Introduction I am pleased to provide you with the FY 2015 First Quarter Financial Report. Please bear in mind that the numbers on the following pages are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard. This means that the amounts represent the current fiscal situation of the City but may change with further accounting review. How to Read the Report The tables on the following pages report the progress against budget through the first three months of the fiscal year. Each page contains funds that are grouped to a similar purpose (e.g. transportation funds,water funds, etc). For each fund,the table provides the amount of the budget, the progress against budget and the percent of budget complete. At the top of the page are the resources for each fund. The resources start with the funds' Beginning Fund Balance,which represents the amount of savings in the fund at the beginning of the fiscal year. Next are the revenues of the fund grouped by revenue type. For more information on the particular revenues within a revenue type, see the Revenue Analysis section and the Fund Summaries section of the Adopted FY 2015 Budget Document. The Beginning Fund Balance plus the Revenues make up the Total Resources of the funds. The bottom half of the report shows the fund Requirements. The Requirements start with the Expenditures by type. For more information on the specific expenditures within a type, see the Program Summaries section and the Fund Summaries section of the Adopted FY 2015 Budget Documents. By subtracting the Total Expenditures from the available Total Resources, the Change is Fund Balance is calculated. By combining the Change in Fund Balance and the Beginning Fund Balance at the top of the page, the Ending Fund Balance is derived. Finally, the Ending Fund Balance is added to the Total Expenditures to calculate the Total Requirements. The Total Requirements equals the Total Resources to balance the budget. Summary of Findings This is a brief overall summary. Again, bear in mind that the financials here are not the official audited financials of Tigard, but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 1. One of the main assumptions in our General Fund forecast is that we spend at, or below, 95% of budget. At this point,we are above this expenditure rate. We will continue to monitor this development. 2. General Fund revenues are well below 25 percent. This is expected since Property Taxes are mostly received in November and December. 3. Another key assumption in our General Fund forecast is that we have a reserve equal to 22-24% of our expenditures to pay the bills while we wait for Property Tax. That amount is about$6.9 million in FY2015. Through the first three months of FY 2015, Fund Balance has dropped$5.9 million, supporting our assumption of need. 4. General Fund Public Works is at 26% spent. This caused by Parks and Engineering Divisions being slightly ahead of the 25%pace due to summer maintenance and personnel turnover. 5. Development related revenues are all slightly below pace. This is slightly concerning since the first quarter has good weather for building. Staff will continue to monitor this activity. 6. The Street Maintenance Fee fund (page 6) has most of the work for the year conducted in the first two months of year and Capital Improvement is 77% spent. 7. The revenue in the Gas Tax and City Gas Tax fund (page 6) is below budget. This is due to the timing in collections from the State. Finance expects to achieve the budgeted revenue. Finance will continue to monitor this item. Follow-up from Prior Quarterly Report of the Fiscal Year 8. There is no follow-up. Since this is the first report of the fiscal year. FY 2015 -October Report (July thru Sept. - 25% of the year) General Fund General Fund - 100 Budget YTD* %of Budget Resources Beginning Fund Balance 10.142.274 11.381.289 112% Revenues Taxes 13,404,815 77,550 1% Franchise Fees 5,799,632 504,253 9% Special Assessments - - 0% Licenses&Permits 1,177,412 329,535 28% Intergovernmental 5,318,600 179,360 3% Charges for Services 2,688,234 633,255 24% Fines&Forfeitures 993,232 203,203 20% Investment Earnings 103,722 36,174 35% Other Revenue 55,873 6,161 11% Proceeds from Loan Repayment 254,000 - 0% Transfers In - L70 metRVACIA Total Resources 39,937,794 13,350,778 33% Requirements Expenditures Policy&Administration 838,936 186,356 22% Community Development 3,047,095 704,837 23% Community Services 21,016,260 5,242,225 25% Public Works 5,865,265 1,535,507 26% Debt Service - - 0% Capital Improvement - - 0% Loan to CCDA 254,000 - 0% Transfers Out 834,967 162,296 19% 2 Contingency 1.385 000 �-- 0° :, "°IKr:gf' 'i/u , si,, i "` :,:zt, sY `,^iL 0 °�„q` MP, R 4'2° ■ €qtr-yr°�,�ti:;;", o {sR. r-.4 ..,e �*�{t� k ._, xA. +. ) #.rW RPf.sac' C n��*1. ��Y`R ., 'a'�`v.t T.i�� .. Change in Fund Balance (3,446,003) (5,861,731) 170% Ending Fund Balance 6,696,271 5,519,558 82% Total Requirements 39,937,794 13,350,778 33% *Note:Financials presented are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard,but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 10/20/2014 8:36 PM 1 of 13 • FY 2015 -October Report (July thru Sept. - 25% of the year) Central Service Funds Central Svc Fund - 600 Fleet/Prop Mngmt Fund - 650 Insurance Fund - 660 Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Resources Beginning Fund Balance 417-867 425.173 102% 60.269 87.008 144% 843.157 858.592 Revenues 0% 0% 0% Taxes _ - 0% - - 0% Franchise Fees °0% 0% % Special Assessments O ° O% _- - 00% Licenses&Permits - 05/o 0% - - 0% 0% Intergovernmental _ 0% Charges for Services 6,523,150 1,627,516 255% 1,646,995 411,749 25°/0 - 0% Fines&Forfeitures o - 0% Investment Earnings 593 7,284 1228% - - 0% 7,810 12,277 5 0% 29,392 - 0% 14,000 3,271 23°/0 Other Revenue _ 0% Proceeds from Loan Repayment - - 0% - _ 0% Transfers In 224.963 56.241 25% - 0% Total Revenues 6,760,983 1,691,047 25% 1,676,387 411,749 25% 21,810 3,271 15% .M mss., Total Resources 7,178,850 2,116,220 29% 1,736,656 498,757 29% 864,967 861,863 100% °/° Requirements Expenditures 0% 50,000 230 0% Policy&Administration 7,073,028 1,605,827 23% - , 0% Community Development - - 0% - - 0% Community Services - ° Public Works - - 0% 1,650,805 348,599 21% 0/s 0% - - 0% 0% Debt Service 0% - - 0% _ - 0% Capital Improvement - 0% 0% - - 0% Loan to CODA - 0% 0% 718 179 25% Transfers Out � 25 000 100.000 Qfs 75.000 - S contingency r M1 r .r .,... s � ,,. _ .r, 6;P,- .-v,i 3`sa ):.:.R ,-iii; ii.} :t, l - Wi7�Se'W",d , ,,a d 0-3 _T „ Change in Fund Balance (412,045) 85,220 -21% (49,418) 63,150 -128% (53,908) 2,861 -5% Ending Fund Balance 5,812 510,393 8782% 10,851 150,158 1384% 789,249 861,453 109% Total Requirements 7,178 840 2,116,220 29% 1,736,656 498,757 29% 864,967 861,863 100% > *Note:Financials presented are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard,but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 10/20/2014 8:36 PM 2 of 13 FY 2015 -October Report (July thru Sept. - 25% of the year) Development Funds Building Fund - 230 Elec. Insp. Fund - 220 Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Resources Beginning Fund Balance 2.055.678 1.968.281 96% 153.181 124.136 81 0 Revenues Taxes 0% - 0% - _ 0% - - 0% Franchise Fees 0% - - 0% Special Assessments Licenses&Permits 1,579,004 356,652 23% 191,043 44,407 23% 8,281 - 0% - - 0% Intergovernmental 8,2 5% _ 0% Charges for Services 7,035 381 0% - - 0%-Fines&Forfeitures o 19,782 911 5% 1,207 - 0% Investment Earnings 0% - 0% Other Revenue 923 Proceeds from Loan Repayment 180.000 ;)° - - 4L Transfers In 250 44,407 Total Revenues 1,795,025 357,944 20% 192, Total Resouiccs , 3,S O3 2,326,225 60"",, 345,431 168,543 49% Requirements Expenditures _ 0% Policy&Administration - - 0% 0 Community Development 1,608,518 408,826 25% -- -- 0% Community Services - - 0% Public Works _ - 0% Debt Service 0% 0% Capital Improvement 0% - 0% -Loan to CCDA o Transfers Out - - 0% 180,000 - 0 200.000 2 50000 ail y W Itl o :x 4.e14'i'+ i� .. . ..` .4 P Change in Fund Balance (13,493) (50,883) 377% (37,750) 44,407 -118% Ending Fund Balance 2,042,185 1,917,398 94% _ 115,431 168,543 146% Total Requirements 3,850,703 2,326,225 60% 345,431 168,543 49% *Note: Financials presented are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard,but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 10/20/2014 8:36 PM 3 of 13 FY 2015 -October Report (July thru Sept. - 25% of the year) Parks Funds Parks Capital Fund - 420 Parks Bond Fund - 421 Parks SDC Fund - 425 Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Resources Beginning Fund Balance 174.509 497.494 285% 2.346.595 2.395.068 102% 1.124.011 1.568.420 14Q14 Revenues 0%/% _ VA) _ 0% Taxes % 0°/% _ 0% Franchise Fees - - 0% - Special Assessments - 0% - - 0% 476,336 105,996 22% Licenses&Permits - 0% - _% 0% Intergovernmental 41,506 0% - - 0% Charges for Services - 0% 0%Oo%% - - 0% Fines&Forfeitures - - 0% Investment Earnings 3,015 - 0% 4,020 3,347 83% 19,782 723 4% 0% - - 0°/% 0% Other Revenue - Oo%% _ - 0% Proceeds from Loan Repayment 0% Transfers In 3.042 949 44.924 1% - • 0% , s i X4 —° A417014 r u F r ; sw g o , i,:l_ a 1:r .,,1, , t; i 4 Total Resources 3,261,979 542,418 17% 2,350,615 2,398,415 102% 1,620,129 ` 1,675,139 103%% Requirements Expenditures _ 0% 0% 0% - -Policy&Administration - 00°/% 0% - - 0% Community Development 0%/0 %0 - - 0% Community Services 0% - - 0% - - 0% Public Works _ 0%/O Oo%% -0 % Debt Service % 0% 12,000 1,922 16% Capital Improvement 3,042,949 70,836 2% 0%/% 0% an to CCDA 0%/0 Transfers Out 55,881 13,970 25% 1,997,143 27,296 1% 1,127,217 5,639 1% at 0% 75.000 ay2 Contingency "'Y i' til°l4 17 ° 4,O. ' . r (11,360) (39,882) 351% (1,993,123) (23,949) 4 1% (718,099) 99,158 -14% Change in Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 163,149 457,612 280% �2 2,371,119 671% 405,912 1,667,578 411% Total Requirements 3,261,979 542,418 17% 2,350,615 2,398,415 102% 1,620,129 1,675,139 103% *Note:Financials presented are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard,but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 10/20/2014 8:36 PM 4 of 13 FY 2015 -October Report (July thru Sept. - 25% of the year) Parks Funds Urban Forestry Fund Budget YTD* %of Budget Resources Beginning Fund Balance 1.121.300 1.349.861 120% Revenues Taxes - - 0% Franchise Fees - - 0% Special Assessments - - 0% Licenses&Permits - - 0% Intergovernmental - - 0% Charges for Services 26,250 - 0% Fines&Forfeitures - - 0% Investment Earnings 4,060 729 18% Other Revenue - - 0% Proceeds from Loan Repayment - 0% Transfers Ia n wir cf Tt��`t.,'-.Y .«i] .�tx..Y±_i ...+M�L.w .-'. Total Resources SB1,151,610 1,350,590 117% Requirements Expenditures Policy&Administration - - 0% Community Development - - 0% Community Services - - 0% Public Works - - 0% Debt Service - - 0% Capital Improvement - - 0% Loan to CCDA - - 0% Transfers Out 250,175 3,813 2% Contingency {- Q Change in Fund Balance (219,865) (3,084) 1% Ending Fund Balance 901,435 1,346,777 149% Total Requirements 1,151,610 _ 1,350,590 _ 117% *Note: Financials presented are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard,but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 10/20/2014 8:36 PM 5 of 13 FY 2015 -October Report (July thru Sept. - 25% of the year) Transportation Funds Gas Tax Fund - 200 City Gas Tax Fund - 205 Street Maint. Fee Fund - 412 Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Resources Beginning Fund Balance 363.400 985.270 271% 1,531.510 1.736,934 113% 1.317.786 1.370.438 104% Revenues Taxes - - 0% - - 0% - - 0% Franchise Fees - - 0% - - 0% - - 0% Special Assessments - - 0% - - 0% 0% Licenses&Permits 225 6,526 2900% - - 0% - - 0% Intergovernmental 2,990,443 486,246 16% 739,934 50,870 7% - - 0% Charges for Services - - 0% - - 0% 1,999,623 399,094 20% Fines&Forfeitures - - 0% - - 0% 0% Investment Earnings 55,732 55,944 100% 34,584 12,310 36% 2,043 - 0% Other Revenue 61,345 4,657 8% 31,735 - 0% 1,286 50 4% Proceeds from Loan Repayment - - 0% - - 0% - 0% Transfers In 100.000 - 12L - 0% 01°- Total Revenues 3,207,745 553,372 17% 806,253 63,180 8% 2,002,952 399,144 20°7; Total Rcsourccs 3,571,145 1,538,642 43% 2,337,763 1,800,114 77% 3,320,738 1,769,581 53% Requirements Expenditures ° Policy&Administration - - 0% - - 0% 0% Community Development - - 0% .. - 0% - - 0% Community Services - - 0% - - 0% 0% Public Works 2,205,002 417,022 19% - - 0% - - 0% Debt Service 599,676 - 0% 315,860 - 0% - - 0% Capital Improvement - - 0% - - 0% 1,900,000 1,465,278 77% Loan to CCDA - - 0% - - 0% - - 0% Transfers Out 686,133 73,060 11% 733,125 221,760 30% 207,805 26,951 13% Contingency 70.000 Doze 50 000 4L X00 000 0% - it■ i "z ':.pry ,I :i.i' `RM "j t pi., l ,:: :,,,,,7.Td '1;i13,11-T` 1.:!. '.Y1".—ii I .il:' .5:( _„A''. . Y'j'.,.. Change in Fund Balance (353,066) 63,290 -18% (292,732) (158,580) 54% (304,853) (1,093,085) 359% Ending Fund Balance 10,334 1,048,560 10147% 1,238,778 1,578,354 127% 1,012,933 277,352 27% Total Requirements 3,571,145 1,538,642 43% 2,337,763 1,800,114 77% 3,320,738 1,769,581 53% *Note:Financials presented are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard,but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 10/20/2014 8:36 PM 6 of 13 FY 2015 -October Report (July thru Sept. - 25% of the year) Transportation Funds (Continued) TDT Fund - 405 TIF Fund - 410 Underground Util. Fund - 411 Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Resources 106% 355.923 506.899 142% 526.832 576.579 11L Beginning Fund Balance 1.388.324 1.474.749 Revenues -- 0% 0 Taxes 0 0 0% 0% Franchise Fees - 0% - 0/o 0% - 0% 0% - Special Assessments 4 994 0% 35,574 12,842 30% Licenses&Permits 556,996 123,126 22% o 0% 0% 0/o Intergovernmental 0% - 0% 0% 0% 0% - Charges for Services Fines&Forfeitures 0% 498 0% 7,160 250 0%- Investment Earnings 11,279 587 - 0% 3% 0% 0% - 0% Other Revenue 0% - Proceeds from Loan Repaymen - Transfers III vi d,c. ,a,rA „?,. M jaiOb 42,7 Emu- s ivy ; t, .gy0� f§ �. a 82/0 355,923 512,391 144% 569,566 589,672 104% Total Resources 1,956,599 1;59$,463` ' 0% - 0% 0% Taxes 0% 00/0 - - 0°% Franchise Fees - 0% - 0% 0% - Special Assessments 22% 4,994 0% 35,574 12,842 36% Licenses&Permits 556,996 123,126 0% _ 0% 0% - 0% Intergovernmental 0% - 0%-Charges for Services 0% 0% 0% 250 3°/o - Fines&Forfeitures Earnings 587 5% - 498 0% 7,160 Investment Earnings 11,279 % 0% - Other Revenue - 0%0% - 0 0% - 0% Proceeds from Loan Repaymen 0% Transfers In 00/o 31% 22% 5,492 0% 42,734 13,092 568,275 123 713 _ � , � . Total Revenues � t3 �� . ' �t �' »,""� � ;.fie: �'�� ..�',�`�" �*�.;�z,�J��.:°.Q Requirements Expenditures 0% Policy&administration 0% _ 0% 0% Community Development - 0% 7of13 10/20/2014 8:36 PM FY 2015 -October Report (July thru Sept. - 25% of the year) Transportation Funds (Continued) Trans Capital Proj Fund - 460 Budget YTD* %of Budget Resources Beginning Fund Balance 356.422 247.331 69% Revenues Taxes - - 0% Franchise Fees - - 0% Special Assessments - - 0% Licenses&Permits - - 0% Intergovernmental 200,000 (169) 0% Charges for Services - - 0% Fines&Forfeitures - - 0% Investment Earnings - - 0% Other Revenue - - 000 Proceeds from Loan Repayment - - 0% Trumters In 2.81().443 599,396 21% Total Revenues ` 3,010,443 599,227 10°/d Total Resources 3,366,865 846,558 25% Requirements Expenditures Policy&Administration - - 0% Community Development - - 0% Community Services - - 0% Public Works - - 0% Debt Service - - 0% Capital Improvement 3,008,136 600,569 20% Loan to CCDA - - 0% Transfers Out 44,613 11,153 25% Contingency - 0ag Total Expenditures 3,052,749 611,722 : Change in Fund Balance (42,306) (12,495) 30% Ending Fund Balance 314,116 234,836 75% Total Requirements 3,366,865 846,558 25% *Note: Financials presented are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard,but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 10/20/2014 8:36 PM 8 of 13 FY 2015 -October Report duly thru Sept. - 25% of the year) Sani / Stormwater Funds Sanitary Sewer Fund - 500 Stormwater Fund - 510 Water Qual/Quant Fund - 511 Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Resources Beginning Fund Balance 4.566.728 5.367.481 118% 3.795.745 3.538.989 93% 1.199.825 1.253.044 1.Q.412 Revenues 0% 0 Taxes 0 0 0% _ 0% Franchise Fees 0% 0% - - 0% 0% Special Assessments 0% 9,713 550 74,506 6,205 8% - Licenses&Permits - - 0% Intergovernmental 0% 0% - - O% Charges for Services 2,096,904 343,051 16% 3,034,291 566,720 19% - 0% 0% - Fines&Forfeitures 0% 19% 15,102 543 0% Investment Earnings 100,333 2,327 2°/o 7,936 1,524 9% 0% Other Revenue 141,674 - 0% 3,069 0% Proceeds from Loan Repaymen - - 0% - 0% - - Transfers In 1.369 900 r 3 i 0%' i�__ 1.923 0 3703 �,izo r ' '�rl x753 1: r- `38'$�Y>� ,�° � , t., . k. _ it _`a Total Resources 8,350,045 5,756,097 69% 6,841,041 4,109,156 60% 1,224,640 1,254,137 102% Requirements Expenditures _ 0% 0% Policy 8c Administration 0% 00% - - 0%- Community Development 0% - - 0% Community Services - 0% 0% - - 0% Public Works 1,946,260 467,258 24°/o 1,580,912 335,185 21% 0% 0% - - 0%-Debt Service - - o Capital Improvement 2,944,011 981,880 33% 338,873 25,620 8� 0°/s an to CCDA - - 0% 2% 439,200 825 0% Transfers Out 79,849 (9) 0% 350,956 8,221 0% 400 000 0 Contingency � ° X rte lS- rt , . . �� # , , _ " -;� „>sc,( �,,�� 150;00 3��..� � . (439,385)I 268 0 Change in Fund Balance (1,586,803) (1,060,514) 67% 624,555 201,141 32% 2,979,925 979,925 4,306,967 145% 4,420,300 3,740,130 85% 760,440 1,253,312 165% Ending Fund Balance �� Total Requirements 8,350,045 5,756,097 69% 6,841,041 4,109,156 60% 1,224,640 1,254,137 102% *Note:Financials presented are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard,but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 10/20/2014 8:36 PM 9 of 13 FY 2015 -October Report (July thru Sept. - 25% of the year) Water Funds Water Fund- 530 Water SDC Fund- 531 Water CIP Fund- 532 Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Resources Beginning Fund Balance 16.125.957 16.233.500 101% 2.860.840 3.910.001 137% 43.359.624 48.062.886 111% Revenues 0% 0% Taxes - - 0% - - Franchise Fees - - 0% 0% - - 0% Special Assessments - - 0% - - 0% 0% Licenses&Permits 11,133 32,460 292% 943,805 200,162 21% - - 0% Intergovernmental - - 0% 0% - 0% Charges for Services 16,711,547 4,743,818 28% - - 0% - - 0% Fines&Forfeitures - 0% - 0% 0% Investment Earnings 30,644 6,295 21% 233 1,755 753% 13,096 2,100 16% Other Revenue 10,825 5,101 47% - - 0% 5,265 22,309 424% Proceeds from Loan Repaymen - - 0% - - 0% 52,000,000 - 0% Transfers lr? °0 0°'0 1.233.104 71.513 6% Total Revenues • 16,822,900 4,7876'1 y44,038ia(201,917.; 21% • 53,251,465 95,922 ,i. 0 Total Resources 32,948,857 21,021,174 64% 3,804,878 4,111,918 108% 96,611,089 48,158,807 50% Requirements Expenditures 0% 0% 0% - Policy&Administration - - Community Development - - 0% - - 0% - - 05/s Community Services - - 0% - - 0% 0% Public Works 8,376,282 1,738,190 21% - - 0% 0% Debt Service - - 0% 0% - - 0% - Capital Improvement - - 0% - - 0% 80,910,333 10,286,182 13% Loan to CCDA 0% - - 0% - - 0% Transfers Out 5,767,077 2,437,190 42% 345,263 66 0% 215,650 22,538 10% 500.000 °0 100.000 4L - 0% S nnunp�ncy 7t: �r ' r,r y:2 "M u7 i f 3;r 70 91 ^,�*. -•`°'�, =:�. •. F N; _�;..�. ..f jpy �it:q� Y ?.`Y�Y. ,.x `is.TM. �OQ"' f ;:.�° x^`.r-�'r......-FZ�...:*S .o-- .a.! �'{a.*,#.., Change in Fund Balance 2,179,541 612,294 28% 498,775 201,851 40% (27,874,518) (10,212,798) 37% Ending Fund Balance 18,305,498 16,845,794 92% 3,359,615 4,111,852 122% 15,485,106 37,850,088 244% Total Requirements 32,948,857 21,021,174 64% 3,804,878 4,111,918 108% 96,611,089 48,158,807 50% *Note:Financials presented are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard,but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 10/20/2014 8:36 PM 10 of 13 FY 2015 -October Report (July thru Sept. - 25% of the year) Water Funds Water Debt Svc Fund - 533 Budget YTD* %of Budget Resources Beginning Fund Balance 6.605,801 6.641.441 101% Revenues Taxes - - 0% Franchise Fees - - 0% Special Assessments - - 0% Licenses&Permits - - 0% Intergovernmental - - 0% Charges for Services - - 0% Fines&Forfeitures - - 0% Investment Earnings - 9,014 0% Other Revenue - - 0% Proceeds from Loan Repayment - - 0% Transfers In 4.719.850 2.359.925 °L Total Resources .11,325,651 9,010,380 80% Requirements Expenditures Policy&Administration - - 0% Community Development - - 0% Community Services - - 0% Public Works - - 0% Debt Service 4,881,033 2,359,925 48% Capital Improvement - - 0% Loan to CCDA - - 0% Transfers Out 3,010 752 25% Contingency 926 g ,. r 1,4.,:,..:1.,,4,':.:: �Io PT JU k .. ro.� �� ski a 1T,�. ,�� ! , e.�-r5-�� "�N''-°him°�:e e�' Change in Fund Balance (164,193) 8,261 -5% Ending Fund Balance 6,441,608 6,649,702 103% Total Requirements 11,325,651 9,010,380 80% *Note: Financials presented are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard,but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 10/20/2014 8:36 PM 11 of 13 FY 2015 -October Report (July thru Sept. - 25% of the year) Debt Service and Other Funds GO Debt Svc Fund-350 Bancroft Debt Svc Fund-300 Libr. Donations/Bequests-98(Criminal Forfeiture Fund-240 Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget Budget YTD* %of Budget jtesourceg Beginning Fund Balance 522.984 532.328 102% 323 473 151 31 Ct 47% 474 648 474 576 100% 122 480 18?978 149% Revenues Taxes 2,386,688 13,019 1% - - 0°./0 - - 0°/0 - - 0% Franchise Fees - - 0% - 0°0 _ _ 0% - - 00/0 Special Assessments - - 090 120,000 573 0% - - 0°o - - 0°%0 Licenses&Permits - - 0"0 - - 09-0 0°° - - 0% 0% 0' IIntergovernmental 0/o _ Oo a- - Charges for Services - - 00° - Oo p- 0% 0- 0^°°% 43,000 29,143 60% Fines&Forfeitures - - 0% Investment Earnings 4,612 1,373 30°/s - 185 0% - - 0% 1,892 4 0% Other Revenue (193) - 0% - - 0% - - 0% - - 0°/0 Proceeds from Loan Repaymen - - 0% - - 0% - - 0% - - 0% Transfers In - al - °% - - - Total Resources 2,914,091 546,720 Y 19% 443,473 152,073 34% X474 648 474,576 100% 167,372 212,125 25 '� 127% Requirements Expenditures % Policy&Administration - 0% 0 0%%'0 - - 0%u 0% 0- - 0%- - Community Development - - 0% - Community Services - - 0% - - 0°/s - - 0°0 50,000 2,500 5% Public Works - - 0% - - 0% - - 0% 0% Debt Service 2,194,701 - 0% 103,411 - 0 90 - - 0"0 _ - 0% Capital Improvement OQ'o 0°,'0 - - 0 0 0% 0°0 0% Loan to CCDA - - 0% - - Transfers Out 1,529 382 25% 239 60 25% 100,000 - 0% 455 114 25% Contin racy - 41s - - 4°L° - i' t" t „�r-,'‘. , ":tl ?',1111 ' .`;rva: ' > ,!k� 3 ! d°ISfi 'k`-tc.A O I ,...0- .. ' k �; .: _a.,.-'�», .. a s«..:ef' :a .r 1;�e t �:.; err.. -��..,. Change in Fund Balance 194,877 14,009 7°/s 16,350 698 4% (100,000) 0% (5,563) 26,533 -477% Ending Fund Balance 717,861 546,337 76% 339,823 152,013 45% 374,648 474,576 127%u 116,917 209,511 179% Total Requirements 2,914,091 546,720 19% 443,473 152,073 34% 474,648 474,576_ 100% 167,372 212,125 127% *Note:Financials presented are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard,but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 10/20/2014 8:36 PM 12 of 13 FY 2015 -October Report (July thru Sept. - 25% of the year) Capital Projects Funds Facilities Cap Proj Fund - 400 Budget YTD* %of Budget Resources Beginning Fund Balance 878.435 905.166 103% Revenues Taxes - - 0% Franchise Fees - - 0% Special Assessments - - 0% Licenses&Permits - - 0% Intergovernmental - 0% Charges for Services - - 0% Fines&Forfeitures - - 0% Investment Earnings 3,212 395 12% Other Revenue - - 0% Proceeds from Loan Repayment - - 0% Transfers In 1.031.891 153.403 15% Total Revenues 1,035,103' 1797 15% Total Resources 1,913,538 1,(158,964 55% Requirements Expenditures Policy&Administration - - 0% Community Development - - 0% Community Services - - 0% Public Works - - 0% Debt Service - - 0% Capital Improvement 674,900 158,920 24% Loan to CCDA - - 0% Transfers Out 8,742 2,186 25% Contingency 50.000 - (1°/0 Total Expenditures 733;642 161,105 22% Change in Fund Balance 301,461 (7,308) 2% Ending Fund Balance 1,179,896 897,858 76% Total Requirements 1,913,538 1,058,964 _ 55% *Note:Financials presented are not the official audited financials of the City of Tigard,but represent the current financial situation and may change with further accounting review. 10/20/2014 8:36 PM 13 of 13 FY 2015-2016 BUDGET PREPARATION CALENDAR: Key Dates for Council and Budget Committee OCTOBER 21 First Quarter Budget Committee Workshop. Confirm upcoming process. 30 List of CIP project priorities in Council packet for first review and comments NOVEMBER 5 CIP list of transportation projects presented to TTAC for comment 10 CIP list of parks projects presented to PRAB for comment 12 CIP list of parks and transportation projects presented to CCAC for comment 20 Final prioritized CIP list to Council (council packet) JANUARY 20 Second Quarter Budget Committee Workshop. Review instructions to departments,revenue forecasts,and results of CIP prioritization. FEBRUARY 19 Social Services Grant application review(6:00-9:00) 25 Community Events Grant application review Council Study Session APRIL 6 Proposed budget to Budget Committee 20, 27 Budget committee meetings MAY 4, 11 (if needed) Budget committee meetings JUNE 9 Council Hearing to Adopt the Budget AIS-1859 5. Workshop Meeting Meeting Date: 10/21/2014 Length (in minutes):20 Minutes Agenda Title: Photo Radar Prepared For: Alan Orr,Police Submitted By: Julia Jewett,Police Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Consent Agenda- Approve Minutes Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Provide council with Photo Radar information. STAFF RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that Photo Radar is not added to the police department at this time. Photo Radar could be considered in the future with adequate staffing,and the ability to operate the system without the involvement in the issuance of citations by a private entity. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Tigard is one of ten cities approved to operate photo radar through ORS 810.438 with the following fundamental requirements: •The photo radar equipment is operated by a uniformed officer •The photo radar is operated out of a marked police vehicle •The citation is mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle within six-business days of the alleged violation •A certificate of innocence may be sent in by the registered owner within thirty days of the citation mailing •The department shall,once each biennium,conduct process and outcome evaluation of the effect of the used of photo radar on traffic safety,the degree of public acceptance of the use of radar,and the process of photo radar administration.The department shall send this report to the Legislative Assembly by March 1st of each odd-numbered year. Bi-annual reports of three of the four agencies using photo radar are attached.All four agencies use a van that contains the radar and camera system.All four agencies have operating contracts with photo radar companies. Equipment leases are paid through the issuance of citations. The procedure used in the issuance of citation companies is as follows: •The operator tracks the violator as the system captures the radar data and photo of driver and license plate. •Violations are uploaded by the operator to the company. •The company reviews the data received from the radar and compares the photograph of the operator to the registered owner. Information is confirmed and the company sends the photo radar operator an email. • Citation information is returned to the photo radar operator via email to verify the information and send confirmation to the company advising to issue a citation. •The citation is mailed to the registered owner by the photo radar company. Of the four agencies who operate the photo radar programs,two are staffed with part-time employees who are typically retired police officers. Two agencies run photo radar programs with full-time police officers.All four agencies advise the operators of the system only spend less than half or their time in the field.This is in part to a large portion of time which is spent in court and/or for administrative duties. The agencies have reported the photo radar program does appear to reduce the average speed in areas where photo radar is routinely deployed.The photo radar programs are impersonal but appear to be a useful tool for traffic safety.Public perception and acceptance of the program ranges from 64%to 74%depending on the jurisdiction. Of the agencies who use full-time employees to operate the system,one reported that enforcement time in the field has been reduced to fifty to fifty-five hours per month. Our police department does not currently have the required full time staff to create or staff this program. In order to support a photo radar program,the department would need to hire several part-time officers and potentially a coordinator to implement the program. OTHER ALTERNATIVES An alternative would be to add a full-time employee to department staff and increase staffing of the traffic unit with a motor officer. With the agency goal to reduce traffic accidents and gain greater compliance with traffic laws,the addition of a traffic officer(motor)would provide the department a stronger tool to engage those that are violating laws pertaining to speed and to enforce traffic laws to reduce traffic crashes COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION August 16,2014 Attachments Exec Summary City of Portland City of Beaverton City of Milwaukie ORS 810.439 ORS 810.438 PHOTO RADAR 2013 ODOT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ORS 810.438 specifies the use and reporting requirements for municipal Photo Radar Programs in operation. The law allows the cities of Albany, Beaverton, Bend, Eugene, Gladstone, Medford, Milwaukie, Oregon City, Portland and Tigard to operate photo radar. In addition to individual cities reporting directly, it requires the Oregon Department of Transportation to review all submitted reports and provide an executive summary by March 1 of each odd- numbered year to the Legislative Assembly, focusing on the process and outcome evaluations for cities using Photo Radar programs in Oregon. Photo radar has been in use in Oregon for many years. A photo radar program uses a camera to capture the license plate of speeding vehicles. The camera and radar (or laser) device are mounted to a marked police vehicle that measures the speed of vehicles. A ticket is mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle. The owner has the opportunity to respond to the ticket claiming innocence through a"certificate of innocence"or"certificate of nonliability." This executive summary of the cities' reports was prepared by ODOT as required under ORS 810.438. It summarizes the cities' evaluation summaries of their Photo Radar programs. Copies of the cities' reports will be submitted to the Legislative Assembly directly from each city as required under statute. This report previously provided Photo Red Light information however that piece was removed in 2007 as it was deemed redundant to what the cities are already providing to the Legislature directly. PROCESS AND OUTCOME EVALUATION—Photo Radar Programs The Effects of the Using Cameras on Traffic Safety Beaverton reports that it has been operating a well-established photo radar program for the last 18 years. The program has been very successful in reducing speeds in Beaverton neighborhoods. Beaverton continues to see reductions in average speeds where photo radar is in use. Beaverton maintains a place for public comment on their website and also provides a police traffic hotline and reports that feedback remains mostly positive. Med ford reports that they are currently operating two vans within the city. One is radar equipped and one is lidar equipped. The vans are deployed five to six days a week and are operated by five part-time sworn officers. Vans are dispatched to areas that have received complaints of speeding vehicles and that meet the threshold requirement in regards to traffic counts and reported speeds. Speed surveys are conducted using a radar display trailer and the data gathered as the result of these surveys is used to justify establishing new radar van sites. Milwaukie: The goal of the Milwaukie Police Department's deployment of the photo radar van is to reduce traffic crashes and increase driver, passenger,and pedestrian, safety within the city by reducing vehicle speeds. In order to obtain the department's overall goal, the photo radar van will be deployed in school zones, highway work zones, residential streets,and other streets to include the two highways that Executive Summary Photo Radar Programs in Oregon Page 2 of 4 intersect in the city that the local jurisdiction has determined have an unusually high number of crashes or speeding complaints. In compliance with ORS 810.438(2) (b) the Milwaukie City Council has made a finding that speeding on both highway 224 and highway 99E have a negative impact on traffic safety, thereby meeting the legal requirement for deployment along these specific problematic areas. Initially, one officer who is certified by our vendor ACS, State and Local Solutions(ACS)was assigned to deploy the photo radar van.The department's initial deployments were dedicated to the Highway 224 Milwaukie Bypass corridor and Mcloughlin Blvd.traffic corridor within the city's jurisdictional boundaries. Currently the Milwaukie program has five officers trained in the deployment of the photo radar van.One officer is assigned full-time. The others are trained but, currently are not assigned to deployment of the van. Milwaukie's reported improvements in Traffic Safety The City of Milwaukie's photo radar program has been very successful in helping to reduce traffic crashes within the city boundaries. Traffic Crashes: 2006 2007 2008 Fatal- 0 Fatal - 1 Fatal - 1 Injury-42 Injury-44 Injury-32 Non Injury- 127 Non Injury- 123 Non Injury-98 Total- 169 Total - 168 Total- 131 Traffic Crashes: 2009 2010 2011 2012 Fatal -1 Fatal-0 Fatal-0 Fatal -0 Injury-28 Injury-38 Injury-60 Injury-44 Non-Injury- Non-Injury-94 Non-Injury- Non- Injury-112 107 118 Total- 136 Total-132 Total-178 Total - 156 Executive Summary Photo Radar Programs in Oregon Page 3 of 4 Portland has been operating a photo radar van since it was allowed by the 1995 legislature. Studies have shown that photo-enforcement has been effective in reducing speeding within the boundaries of the City of Portland.The trend is clearly visible that with increasing exposure to photo radar, the percent of vehicles that were exceeding the posted speed limit has been decreasing. A possible interpretation of this trend is that photo radar vans are decreasing vehicle speeds; in turn, this could be assumed to be decreasing speed related crashes.There are other interpretations of course. People are now more familiar with the photo radar vans and their deployments and learn to slow down. Degree of Public Acceptance Beaverton reports that 64% of Beaverton citizens believed photo radar worked very well (March 2011). The opportunity for public comment continues via the city website, city council meetings, police traffic hotline phone number and directly to the photo enforcement program coordinator. Medford reports that citizen acceptance of Photo Radar programs has grown since its inception in 2002. They believe this is a result of how the program is administered, in a fair and open manner. Of the 2,101 citations issued in 2012, only 19 were challenged in court, furthermore, 462 were dismissed by court clerks due to a "certificate of innocence" provided by the cited party. Again, this provides confidence to the community that the program is administered in an open and consistent manner that seeks to deter rather than punish. They received very few complaints in 2012 about the program and most of the complaints were questions regarding statutory requirements of speed van warning sign placement. Milwaukie: The Milwaukie Police Department enjoys a strong public acceptance of photo radar as reported through seven different city neighborhood associations. In January 2011, the City of Milwaukie conducted a review of the photo radar program with their Public Safety Advisory Committee. The committee voted unanimously to continue its support of the photo radar program. It should also be noted that in May 2011,the Milwaukie City Council voted to extend its contract with ACS and upgraded the technology to all digital equipment which has resulted in greater exposure clarity. Portland has been monitoring public opinion of photo radar over the years of deployment and enjoys a strong public acceptance of photo radar as a valuable tool against speeding. In September 2011, a public opinion poll was conducted that showed 74%of city residents approved of photo radar use in neighborhoods.This same poll showed that 89%of city residents approved of photo radar use in school zones. Administration Process for the use of Photo Radar Each city follows their own administration process to operate their photo radar units however all are very similar. Processes for each city are detailed in the individual city reports submitted. Executive Summary Photo Radar Programs in Oregon Page 4 of 4 Beaverton: The administrative process begins on page 6 of their report. Medford: The administrative process begins on page I of their report. Milwaukie: The administrative process is contained on page 5 of their report. Portland: The administrative process is contained on pages 1 I of their report. Summary: It appears from these reports and various conversations with each city that they are following the law as written and implementing legislative direction received during hearings for the operation of Photo Radar programs. The Photo Radar program has been in operation in Oregon for 18 years. It appears to have a positive impact on reducing average speeds within the communities in which it is used. With high public acceptance and safety benefits of reduced speeds in school zones, residential and other roadways, photo radar appears to be making a positive impact to safety in the communities in which it is used. Because of the limited number of photo radar vans in operation, it is impossible to make a direct correlation between crash reduction and the use of the systems. Unlike photo red light cameras which are 24/7 monitoring operations, photo radar vans are moved to different locations within a jurisdiction and is not allowed to be in any location more than four hours. Moving the photo radar vans is necessary so that drivers don't get used to the locations of the vans and adjust their speeds as they approach them. However, moving the vans frequently makes it difficult to identify speed and crash reductions over a long-term time-frame. CITY OF PORTLAND PHOTO ENFORCEMENT REPORT 2011 -2012 —�j'— Sat ? %NOW"' W Okdiss oORTLAAtO O,p�' I On 4Vittie POP,. 1851 CE AND Sergeant Todd Davis Portland Police Bureau Traffic Division 7214 N. Philadelphia Ave. Portland, OR 97203 503-823-2153 todd.davis @portlandoregon.gov .. ;, � °t i,»nom te l � a T �s'� .�.A"..» R . s.•�§ . .q : � k. m / 4 ,'v t � , i ,4-14" - ' ' . �' P ` 3 ,#, lir yy�y, *,• e 4 BACKGROUND—REPORT REQUIREMENTS The Oregon Revised Statute authorizing photo radar in cities was amended in the Legislative session of 2005. This amendment required cities using photo radar to conduct a process and outcome evaluation once each biennium. A copy of the amended Statute is included below: (3) A city that operates a photo radar system under this section shall, once each biennium, conduct a process and outcome evaluation for the purposes of subsection (4) of this section that includes. (a) The effect of the use of the photo radar system on traffic safety; (b)The degree of public acceptance of the use of photo radar system; and (c) The process of administration of the use of the photo radar system. (4) By March 1 of the year of each regular session of the Legislative Assembly: (a) The Department of Transportation shall provide to the Legislative Assembly an executive summary of the process and outcome evaluations conducted under subsection (3) of this section; and (b) Each city that operates a photo radar system under this section shall present to the Legislative Assembly the process and outcome evaluation conducted by the city under subsection (3) of this section. [1995 c.579 1; 1997 c.280 1; 1999 c.1071 1; 2005 c.686 31 -2 - PHOTO-RADAR I. PHOTO RADAR AND ITS EFFECT ON TRAFFIC SAFETY A. BACKGROUND Photo radar is a method of traffic speed enforcement that is used to detect speeding violations and record identifying information about the vehicle and driver automatically. Violation evidence is processed and reviewed in an office environment and violation notices are delivered to the registered owners of identified vehicles after the alleged violation occurs, rather than at the time of the offense. The City of Portland received authority from the 1995 Legislature to conduct a two year test of photo radar. After a successful test phase, the Legislature extended the use of photo radar. The City of Portland is now in its seventeenth year of photo radar operation and the program is a cornerstone of the Portland Police Bureau's efforts to reduce speeding. The year 2011 marked the first year of our full transition to using digital photo-radar equipment as opposed to the film cameras used since the program was developed. The digital equipment has out-performed the film- based equipment in every way. Most notable is the quality of the high resolution violation photos. These higher quality images are posted securely online for the violator to review upon receipt of a photo-radar citation. Using a PIN number specific to each violation, the recipient can log into the Xerox website and view high quality images of their violation. The transition to digital equipment has shown an increase in the citation issuance rate of approximately 25%. This is due not only to the higher quality digital images, but in the reduction of lost deployments due to operator error afforded by the new equipment. The goals of the Portland Police Bureau's Photo-Enforcement program remain unchanged: Reduce Speeding, Reduce Crashes, Save Lives - 3 - B. PHOTO RADAR DEPLOYMENT The Portland City Council, through City Ordinance #172517, has directed the Police Bureau to deploy photo radar in school zones, highway work zones, residential streets, and other streets determined to have an unusually high number of crashes or speeding complaints. The Traffic Division's emphasis on photo-enforcement has been: Y School zones D Work zones > Residential areas > High crash corridors D Areas with history of speed related crashes and complaints > Citizen and police officer requests for photo-radar deployments 471 -1 IT a , i5� ay ..e �h. School Zones The Portland Police Bureau remains dedicated to the ,-� TRAFFIC LA>�tS safety of the numerous school zones throughout our j PHOTO "_. city. Photo-radar has been used extensively for speed I ENFORCED enforcement in school zones city-wide. Requests for . IT ' photo-radar deployments in school zones have come SCHOOL I from school administrators, school resource officers, IN SESSION i..neighbors living near schools, and parents of children .. . attending the schools. We have strived to fulfill every an0V3,l„,1 HINZ IMO quest for a school zone deployment that we have received. -4- Our deployment signage complies with state law in regards to school zones without flashing beacons. The school zone deployment signs, meeting the dimensions required under ORS, indicate `SCHOOL IN SESSION' in addition to the standard admonishment that photo-radar is being deployed. These signs are placed 100-400 yards prior to any photo-radar deployment High Crash Corridors Based on crash data gathered by the Portland Bureau of Transportation, a number of streets and locations throughout the City of Portland have been designated as High Crash Corridors. These locations are taken into consideration when planning photo-radar deployments. Locations currently designated as high crash corridors are: NE/SE 82nd Ave. NE/SE 122nd Ave SE Foster Road SW Barbur Blvd. N/NE Marine Drive SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Highway SE Division St. W/E Burnside St. NE Sandy Blvd. SE Powell Blvd. Highway Work Zone In the spring and fall of 2009, the � r. Portland Police Traffic Division partnered with O.D.O.T. in a test project I , sl s rt.,1.4 V using photo-radar in a state highway work zone. This project encompassed a 3.2 mile stretch of N.W. Yeon St, which is also US Hwy 30. The use of photo- radar in this test was very successful, capturing an average of 10.75 violations per hour for a total of 2,065 violations for the five month test period. - 5 - Since this test project, photo-radar has been used to enforce work zone speed limits throughout 2011 and 2012. Photo-radar has been used in the following work zones: Highway 99-E/viaduct project, the Morrison Bridge re-decking project, and most currently in the Sellwood Bridge/Hwy 47 project. The use of photo-enforcement in state highway zones has proven to be a very effective use of police resources. Photo-enforcement in state highway work zones are done in strict compliance with ORS.81 1.439, Section 4: Sec. 4. Highway work zone. (1) The Department of Transportation may operate photo radar within a highway work zone that is located on a state highway, except for a highway work zone located on an interstate highway. (2) The department, at its own cost, may ask a jurisdiction authorized to operate photo radar under ORS 810.438 (1) or the Oregon State Police to operate a photo radar unit in a highway work zone on a state highway, except for a highway work zone located on an interstate highway. (3) A photo radar unit operated under this section may not be used unless a sign is posted announcing that photo radar is in use. The sign posted under this subsection must be all of the following: (7) Located on the state highway on which the photo radar unit is being used. (b)Between 100 and 400 yards before the location of the photo radar unit. (4) The department shall, once each biennium, conduct a process and outcome evaluation for the purposes of subsection (5) of this section that includes: (7) The effect of the use of photo radar on traffic safety; • (b) The degree ofpublic acceptance of the use ofphoto radar;and ©The process of administration of the use of photo radar. (5) The department shall report to the Legislative Assembly by March 1 of each odd- numbered year. (6)As used in this section, "highway work zone" has the meaning given that term in ORS 811.230. [2007 c.634,¢4] Sec. 5. Highway work zone;citation. (1)Notwithstanding any other provision of law, when a jurisdiction or the Oregon State Police,uses photo radar in a highway work zone: • (7) A citation for speeding may be issued on the basis of photo radar if the following conditions are met: (7) The photo radar unit is operated by a uniformed police officer. (B) The photo radar unit is operated out of a marked police vehicle. ©An indication of the actual speed of the vehicle is displayed within 150 feet of the location of the photo radar unit. (D) The citation is mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle within six business days of the alleged violation. (E) The registered owner is given 30 days from the date the citation is mailed to respond to the citation. (F) One or more highway workers are present. For the purposes of this subparagraph, "highway workers"has the meaning given that term in ORS 811.230. -6- i (G) The jurisdiction operating photo radar complies with the requirements described in section 4 of this 2007 Act. (b) A rebuttable presumption exists that the registered owner of the vehicle was the driver of the vehicle when the citation is issued and delivered as provided in this section. 0 A person issued a citation under this subsection may respond to the citation by submitting a certificate of innocence or a certificate of nonliability under subsection (3) of this section or may make any other response allowed by law. (2) A citation issued on the basis of photo radar may be delivered by mail or otherwise to the registered owner of the vehicle or to the driver. The citation may be prepared on a digital medium and the signature may be electronic in accordance with the provisions of ORS 84.001 to 84.061. (3)(a)A registered owner of a vehicle may respond by mail to a citation issued under subsection (1) of this section by submitting, within 30 days from the mailing of the citation, a certificate of innocence swearing or affirming that the owner was not the driver of the vehicle and by providing a photocopy of the owner's driver license. A jurisdiction that receives a certificate of innocence under this paragraph shall dismiss the citation without requiring a court appearance by the registered owner or any other information from the registered owner other than the swearing or affirmation and the photocopy. The citation may be reissued only once, only to the registered owner and only if the jurisdiction verifies that the registered owner appears to have been the driver at the time of the violation. A registered owner may not submit a certificate of innocence in response to a reissued citation. (b) If a business or public agency responds to a citation issued under subsection (1) of this section by submitting, within 30 days from the mailing of the citation, a certificate of nonliability stating that at the time of the alleged speeding violation the vehicle was in the custody and control of an employee, or was in the custody and control of a renter or lessee under the terms of a rental agreement or lease, and if the business or public agency provides the driver license number, name and address of the employee, renter or lessee, the citation shall be dismissed with respect to the business or public agency. The citation may then be issued and delivered by mail or otherwise to the employee, renter or lessee identified in the certificate of nonliability. (4) If the person named as the registered owner of a vehicle in the current records of the Department of Transportation fails to respond to a citation issued under subsection (I) of this section, a default judgment under ORS 153.102 may be entered for failure to appear after notice has been given that the judgment will be entered. (5) The penalties for and all consequences of a speeding violation initiated by the use of photo radar are the same as for a speeding violation initiated by any other means. (6) A registered owner, employee, renter or lessee against whom a judgment for failure to appear is entered may move the court to relieve the registered owner, employee, renter or lessee from the judgment as provided in ORS 153.105 if the failure to appear was due to mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. (7)As used in this section, "highway work zone" has the meaning given that term in ORS 811.230. [2007 c.634§5] Sec. 6. Sections 4 and 5 of this 2007 Act are repealed on December 31, 2014. [2007 c.634,¢6] - 7- One of the provisions of ORS 811.439 in regards to using photo-radar in a state highway work zone is that one or more highway workers must be present. To ensure compliance with this provision, officers deploying photo- radar on any given date will check-in with the project manager to ensure that work is being conducted. The officer will visually verify the presence of one or more "highway workers" and record that in a notation on the photo-radar deployment log. C. IMPROVEMENTS IN TRAFFIC SAFETY Studies have shown that photo-enforcement has been effective in reducing speeding within the boundaries of the City of Portland. The trend is clearly visible that with increasing exposure to photo radar, the percent of vehicles that were exceeding the posted speed limit has been decreasing. A possible interpretation of this trend is that photo radar vans are decreasing vehicle speeds; in turn, this could be assumed to be decreasing speed related crashes. There are other interpretations of course. People are now more familiar with the photo radar vans and their deployments and learn to slow down. The table below illustrates the decline in fatal crashes since the inception of the photo-enforcement program. TRAFFIC FATALITIES IN PORTLAND by mode of travel 7- 1996-2012 ...- - �. _......tip._._.. .._ -1 eR? 1 a 10 j i of � 11 I II 190 78'•7 t 1490 2 0 2001 ?f 2 3 2005;200.5 2006 24107 2105;2009 2010!2011 2012 a BikeFM31 I 5 3 00 5 4 4 4 0 6 0 4 0 2 2 s4=W F4tz1 17 9 13 75 10 19 11 15 9 7 6 - 1! 5 ` 11 IS 9 14 kHMkx wee f+.:ai 4 4 5 3 3 1 5 4 1 4 4 5 4 q 4 7 )1.4„446f446 37 31 25 15 14 20 24 24 26 15 16 14 i 9 7 19 13 - 8 - 1 t sv: e ..,.'"7"--7.----- i - ri. r ' 2011 2012 Enforcement Flours 1,855 1,784 Vehicles Monitored 1,043,221 958,622 Violations Captured 38,149 29,490 Citations Issued 27,565 19,945 Top 5 Photo-Radar Deployment locations in 2011: 1. S.E. McLoughlin Blvd @ 3300 Block [Highway 99-E work zone] 2. N.E. Willow St. @ 6100 Block [Residential Street] 3. S.E. Hawthorne St./2400 block [Pedestrian corridor] 4. SE Division St/10800 block [High crash corridor] 5. S.E 92nd Ave. @ 2200 block [Posted school zone] Top 5 Photo-Radar Deployment locations in 2012: 1. SE Hawthorne St./2400 block [Pedestrian corridor] 2. SE Division St/10800 block [High crash corridor] 3. SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy. [High crash corridor] 4. NE Lombard St/2200 block [Traffic safety issue] 5. SE 92nd Ave./2200 block [Posted school zone] - 9- H. PHOTO RADAR PROCESS OF ADMINISTRATION The basic steps involved in issuing a photo radar citation are: 1. Violation detection 2. Violation processing 3. Quality control checks 4. Citation review and approval by the police officer 5. Citation mailing 1. Violation detection occurs when a police officer operating a marked police vehicle visually observes a violation. The police officer also hears an audible signal indicating the violator speed. The officer maintains an observation log at each deployment and takes notes of each violation. At least three photographs are generated for each violation. These include the vehicle in the radar beam approaching the police vehicle, a close up photo of the driver in the violation vehicle, and a close up picture of the violation vehicle license plate. The violation vehicle's speed is displayed on a reader board at the back of the photo radar vehicle. The police officer maintains a checklist for each deployment to document that they are following all of the technical procedures for operating the photo radar equipment. 2. Violation processing: Violation images are downloaded from the laptop computer aboard the photo-radar van each day by our vendor, Xerox.State and Local Solutions [Formerly ACS]. Those images are sent electronically to the vendor's processing facility. If they can identify the license plate, they send a request to the Oregon Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for the registered owner information. The DMV sends this information back to Xerox. The pertinent details of the violation (such as location, date, time, speed, etc.) are reviewed by the vendor along with the registered owner information. - 10- - 3. The vendor discards violations where there is no gender match to the registered owner or owners. They also discard any violations where the driver is not identifiable due to factors such as glare, face blocked by a visor, etc. 4. Any violations that pass this first screening by Xerox are then sent to the issuing police officer as citations. The issuing police officer reviews the citations for accuracy and electronically signs them. The approved citations are sent back to Xerox for issuing. • 5. Xerox then mails this citation, along with a photo from the violation, to the registered owner. This citation must be mailed to the registered owner within six (6) business days to remain in compliance with Oregon law. The registered owner has thirty (30) days to respond to this citation. They are afforded all of the same rights as a defendant would have with any traffic violation. The citation is processed through the State of Oregon Court system. The presumption in Oregon is that the registered owner is the driver at the time of the violation. If the registered owner was not driving the vehicle when the violation occurred, they may file a Certificate of Innocence with the Circuit Court, at which time the citation will be dismissed. A Certificate of Innocence is included with each citation. The Police Bureau's photo radar program manager subsequently reviews these Certificates of Innocence for accuracy. III. PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF PHOTO RADAR The City of Portland has been monitoring public opinion of photo radar over the years of deployment and enjoys a strong public acceptance of photo radar as a valuable tool against speeding. In September 1996, a public opinion poll was conducted that showed 74% of city residents approved of photo radar use in neighborhoods. This same poll showed that 89% of city residents approved of photo radar use in school zones. • In 2003, a public opinion poll was conducted by Davis & Hibbitts, Inc. showed that 87% of city residents were concerned about speeding. - I1 - Again in 2005, the public opinion firm of Davis, Hibbitts and Midghall, Inc. (DIEM) conducted a telephone survey poll of Portland residents. Four hundred interviews were conducted and the purpose of the survey was to assess the impact of photo radar use in school zones. In this survey 68% of the respondents agreed with the use of photo radar in school zones. This survey also showed that 85% of the respondents would drive slower all of the time if they saw photo radar being used at least three times per week. In 2010 the Portland Police Bureau's photo-enforcement program was selected for review as part of a study done for the National Cooperative Highway Research Program [NHRCP]. Our program was one of only five programs nationwide to be selected for review. Our program was selected because of its longevity, continued success, and continued public support. In that review, we stressed the importance of maintaining the public's trust and running a transparent program. - 12 - CITY OF BEAVERTON Beaverton Photo Radar Speed Enforcement Report to the Legislature Process and Outcome Evaluation February 2013 Photo Radar Speed Enforcement Report to the Legislature Process and Outcome Evaluation City of Beaverton February 2013 Project Manager Adam Spang, Lieutenant Program Coordinator Peggy Porath Table of Contents I. Background — Legislative Report Requirements 1 II. Effect of the Use of Photo Radar on Traffic Safety 2 ORS 810.438 (3)(a) A.Background 2 B. Photo Radar Deployment Criteria 2 C. Improvements in Traffic Safety 2 D.Residence of Beaverton Photo Radar Violators 4 III. Degree of Public Acceptance of the Use of Photo Radar 5 ORS 810.438 (3)(b) IV. Process of Administration of the Use of Photo Radar 6 ORS 810.438(3)(c) A.Violation Detection 6 B. Violation Processing 6 C. Municipal Court Processing of Photo Radar 7 I. Background — Legislative Report Requirements Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 810.438 was amended in 2005 to require cities using photo radar equipment to conduct a process and outcome evaluation for the legislature once each biennium. The law reads as follows: (3) A city that operates a photo radar system under this section shall, once each biennium, conduct a process and outcome evaluation for the purposes of subsection (4) of this section that includes: (a) The effect of the use of the photo radar system on traffic safety; (b) The degree of public acceptance of the use of the photo radar system; and (c) The process of administration of the use of the photo radar system. (4) By March 1 of each odd-numbered year: (a) The Department of Transportation shall provide to the Legislative Assembly an executive summary of the process and outcome evaluations conducted under subsection (3) of this section; and (b) Each city that operates a photo radar system under this section shall present to the Legislative Assembly the process and outcome evaluation conducted by the city under subsection (3) of this section. [1995 c.579 §1; 1997 c.280§1; 1999 c.1071 §1; 2005 c.686§3; 2007 c.634§1; 2010 c.30§9; 2011 c.545.¢66] Beaverton Photo Radar Process and Outcome Evaluation—February 2013 1 II. Effect of the Use of Photo Radar on Traffic Safety ORS 810.438 (3)(a) A.Background Photo radar is a speed enforcement tool operated by trained police officers in a marked police vehicle. When radar detects a speeding vehicle, a camera takes a photograph of the driver and the vehicle license plate. A reader board mounted on the photo speed van displays the vehicle's speed to the driver. A citation is then mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle. The City of Beaverton along with the City of Portland received authority from the 1995 Oregon State Legislature to conduct a two-year test of photo radar. After the successful test phase, the Legislature extended the use of photo radar. The City is now in its 18th fiscal year of operation with the program, and it has become a cornerstone of Beaverton's efforts to reduce speeding throughout the City. B. Photo Radar Deployment Criteria The Beaverton City Council directs the Police Department to spend 20% of their operating time in school zones, 35% in neighborhoods, and 45% of their time on major streets determined by the City Council to have been negatively impacted by speeding. Locations are selected using the following criteria: history of excessive speeding, risk for traffic crashes, source of citizen complaints, mixed use of the roadway (pedestrians, bicyclists, automobiles), special circumstances such as construction zones, and use by emergency vehicles. C.Improvements in Traffic Safety The program has been very successful in reducing speeds in Beaverton neighborhoods. When the program was first introduced in the City, Beaverton conducted traffic safety studies to determine its effectiveness. Traffic engineers collected speed data on select streets prior to the City's use of photo radar (1995). This data was compared to speed data after the introduction of photo radar (1996) on the same streets. Traffic engineers were careful to look both at streets where the speed van technology was used and not used and to compare the differences. The comparison results demonstrated: • The percentage of vehicles exceeding 30 mph (more than five mph over the posted speed limit) declined by 28% on streets with photo radar and increased by 16% on the streets without photo radar. Beaverton Photo Radar Process and Outcome Evaluation—February 2013 2 • Average speeds decreased on the streets with photo radar by 1.6% and increased by 2.7% on the streets without photo radar. In the second study conducted in April 1996, Beaverton engineers collected speed data on streets using photo radar and from the other streets using no photo radar on the same day. The engineers collected the speed data from the same streets one week later when photo radar was not deployed on any of the streets. The study results showed that photo radar reduced speeds significantly. • Thirty-nine percent fewer vehicles exceeded 30 mph on the streets with photo radar than on the streets without photo radar during week one. Forty-five percent fewer vehicles exceeded 30 mph on the streets with photo radar than on the streets without photo radar during week two. • Average speeds on the streets with photo radar were 4.6% lower than on streets without photo radar in week one and 5.4% lower in week two. Today the photo radar program has proven itself to be consistent and reliable. The table below highlights program numbers from 2003 through 2012. In mid-October 2004 the City expanded the program by adding a second speed van. Photo Radar Speed Enforcement Program Statistics 2003-2012 Average 2011 2012 2003-2010 Hours of Enforcement 5,741 6,524 6,826 Vehicles Monitored 1,394,303 1,496,566 1,605,944 Violations Captured 11,877 5,527 9,417 Citations Issued 7,023 3,805 5,897 _ Average Amount OVER 12.0 11.7 11.9 Posted Speed Limit Beaverton Photo Radar Process and Outcome Evaluation—February 2013 3 D.Residence of Beaverton Photo Radar Violators The majority of speeders detected by Beaverton's photo radar vans do not live in the City of Beaverton. The City has tracked this number over the years and it remains consistent. On average, 79% of speeders detected by the City's photo radar vans do not live in Beaverton. Similar to the City's experience with the photo red light program, it is a constant challenge to attempt to modify driving behavior when so many drivers pass through our City. Beaverton Photo Radar Process and Outcome Evaluation—February 2013 4 III. The Degree of Public Acceptance of the Use of Photo Radar ORS 810.438(3)0) The City of Beaverton has conducted several different public opinion surveys over the years, both prior to using photo speed enforcement and after its introduction. The City hired Davis & Hibbits, Inc. to conduct the surveys. The results have been very consistent and demonstrate that Beaverton's photo radar program is strongly favored by Beaverton residents. In September of 1995, Beaverton residents were surveyed to gauge their support for photo radar speed enforcement and their preferences for its use. The following outlines support for the use of photo radar prior to the City's use of the technology. Question: How acceptable is the use of photo radar in the following? Response: Very or somewhat acceptable. On residential streets in neighborhoods 67% In school zones 80% In business districts 62% On freeways 55% On ANY city street 68% Over the years, the City has asked citizens for their views on how the photo radar program is working. The majority of residents believe the program is doing a good job addressing the problem of speeding. Question: In your opinion, has photo radar worked very well, fairly well, not very well, or not at all well? Response: Very well or fairly well. March 2001 64% June 2000 62% September 1999 62% March 1999 56% November 2012 (out of 668 people) 53% The opportunity for public comment is available via the city website, city council meetings, police traffic hotline phone number and directly to the photo enforcement program coordinator. Feedback remains mostly positive. Beaverton Photo Radar Process and Outcome Evaluation—February 2013 5 IV. The Process of Administration of the Use of Photo Radar ORS 810.438(3)(c) The administrative process for the use of photo radar speed enforcement encompasses many components. The steps for issuing a citation consist of: violation detection, violation processing, quality control checks, review and approval by the photo radar police officer, and finally citation creation and mailing. Intertwined in these steps are the city's compliance with legislative requirements dictated in ORS 810.438 and 810.439. After citations are issued they fall under the jurisdiction of Beaverton's Municipal Court. A.Violation Detection Beaverton has a well established photo radar program with 18 fiscal years of operating experience. An officer operates the photo radar van when violations are detected. The police officer maintains an observation log at each deployment and takes notes of each violation. The police officer also maintains a check list for each deployment to document that they are following all of the technical procedures. Four photographs are captured for each incident: the vehicle approaching the photo radar van, the vehicle passing the van, a close-up of the driver's face, and a close-up of the vehicle's license plate. In addition, the vehicle's speed is displayed on a reader board mounted on the van, so the driver has an immediate notification of their speed. B. Violation Processing Violations captured with the photo radar van are transmitted via the Internet to the City's vendor. Redflex looks at the images, identifies a violator's plate number and sends a request to the Oregon Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for the registered owner information. The DMV electronically sends back the registered owner's information to Redflex. The violation information containing details from the violation (such as location, date, time, direction of travel, speed, etc.) are reviewed by the operator along with the registered owner information. The operating police officer also cross-checks the data with their own observational notes from the deployment. The police officer is able to review the information over a web site and decide whether or not a citation should be created. If the officer approves the violation to become a citation, Redflex then mails the citation along with the photographs to the registered owner. This process from violation to citation mailing occurs within six business days in compliance with Oregon law. Beaverton Photo Radar Process and Outcome Evaluation—February 2013 6 The registered owner then has at least 30 days to respond to the citation. They are afforded all of the same rights as a defendant would have with any traffic violation. Once the citation has been created and mailed, the defendant now enters our justice system and their photo radar speeding citation is processed through the City's Municipal Court. C. Municipal Court Processing of Photo Radar The City of Beaverton has the first paperless Municipal Court in the nation. This accomplishment has streamlined the City's citation processing and increased the court's overall efficiency. A violator receiving a photo radar citation has all of the same rights and options as anyone with a traffic violation issued from an officer stop, with the addition of the Certificate of Innocence/Certificate of Non-Liability form. An important component of Oregon's photo radar statute is that the citation is issued to the registered owner of the vehicle. Oregon law requires drivers to maintain their updated address information with the DMV. The presumption in Oregon on photo radar citations, as with parking tickets, is that the registered owner of the vehicle is the driver at the time of the violation. The onus is on the registered owner to provide evidence if they were not the driver at the time of the violation, through the process of completing a Certificate of Innocence or Certificate of Non-Liability form. The majority of people who receive photo radar citations plead no contest and are convicted. Less than one quarter of the violations result in a dismissal due to completion of a Certificate of Innocence/Non-Liability form. The following chart highlights the outcomes of photo radar citations issued in Beaverton from January 2003 - December 2012. Outcome of Citation Number Percent of Total Convicted 42,343 70.2% Dismissed—Certificate of Innocence 10,850 18.0% Dismissed—Certificate of Non Liability 2,548 4.2% Dismissed—Includes Traffic School Diversion 4312 7.1% Pending 197 0.3% _ Other 104 0.2% TOTAL 60,354 100.0% Beaverton Photo Radar Process and Outcome Evaluation—February 2013 7 CITY OF MILWAUKIE PHOTO RADAR PROGRAM REPORT 2011 - 2012 ,o-cI E, o 46. 0, Sergeant Scott Guy Milwaukie Police Department 3200 SE Harrison St. Milwaukie, OR 97222 503-786-7435 guys @ci.milwaukie.or.us BACKGROUND—REPORT REQUIREMENTS The Oregon Revised Statute authorizing photo radar in cities was amended in the Legislative session of 2005. This amendment required cities using photo radar to conduct a process and outcome evaluation once each biennium. Milwaukie provided its inaugural report on photo radar to the Legislature in 2011. II. PHOTO RADAR AND ITS EFFECT ON TRAFFIC SAFETY A. BACKGROUND Photo radar is a method of traffic speed enforcement that is used to detect speeding violations and record identifying information about the vehicle and driver automatically. Violation evidence is processed and reviewed in an office environment and violation notices are delivered to the registered owners of identified vehicles after the alleged violation occurs, rather than at the time of the offense. The City of Milwaukie received authority from the 74th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY -- 2007 Regular Session by amendment of House Bill 2466 to implement a photo radar program. The City of Milwaukie's program has been in operation since March 27th, 2008. B. PHOTO RADAR DEPLOYMENT The ultimate goal of traffic law enforcement is to reduce traffic collisions. This may be achieved through the application of such techniques as geographic/temporal assignment of personnel and equipment and the establishment of preventive patrols to deal with the intent to target specific categories of unlawful driving behavior. Traffic enforcement techniques are based on accident data as well as enforcement activity records, traffic volume, and traffic conditions. This department provides enforcement efforts toward violations, not only in proportion to the frequency of their occurrence in accident situations, but also in terms of traffic related needs. -2 - Several factors are considered in the development of deployment schedules for traffic unit officers. Information provided by the Department of Motor Vehicles, Oregon Department of Transportation, and City of Milwaukie, are valuable resources for traffic crash occurrences and therefore officer deployment. Some of the factors for analysis include: • Location • Time • Day • Violation factors The Milwaukie Police Department purchased one van for the deployment of photo radar equipment in 2007. The department received the Ford F150 Van from the manufacturer during the month of December 2007. During the month of December 2007 the City of Milwaukie Public Works Department posted "Traffic Laws Photo Enforced" signs as required by the Oregon Revised Statutes. During the months of February 2008 and March 2008 the photo radar van was equipped with emergency lights, vehicle decals, and ACS, State and Local Solutions photo radar equipment. The department conducted a road test of the vehicle and equipment on March 25th, 2008. The goal of the Milwaukie Police Department's deployment of the photo radar van is to reduce traffic crashes and increase driver, passenger, and pedestrian, safety within the city by reducing vehicle speeds. In order to obtain the department's overall goal, the photo radar van will be deployed in school zones, highway work zones, residential streets, and other streets to include the two highways that intersect in the city that the local jurisdiction has determined have an unusually high number of crashes or speeding complaints. In compliance with ORS 810.438(2) (b) the Milwaukie City Council has made a finding that speeding on both highway 224 and highway -3 - 99E have a negative impact on traffic safety, thereby meeting the legal requirement for deployment along these specific problematic areas. Initially, one officer who is certified by our vendor ACS, State and Local Solutions (ACS) was assigned to deploy the photo radar van. The department's initial deployments were dedicated to the Highway 224 Milwaukie Bypass corridor and Mcloughlin Blvd. traffic corridor within the city's jurisdictional boundaries. From March 2008 to October 2008 the department worked with the Milwaukie Municipal Court to obtain a smooth photo radar citation process. Also during this period the department worked with ACS to modify the initial vehicle set up for optimum use. During the month of October 2008 six officers from the Milwaukie Police department attended an ACS Field Service Photo Radar Training class and obtained certification status. Currently the Milwaukie program has five officers trained in the deployment of the photo radar van. One officer is assigned full-time. The others are trained but, currently are not assigned to deployment of the van. C. IMPROVEMENTS IN TRAFFIC SAFETY The City of Milwaukie's photo radar program has been very successful in helping to reduce traffic crashes within the city boundaries. Traffic Crashes: 2006 2007 2008 Fatal-0 Fatal- I Fatal- I Injury-42 Injury-44 Injury-32 Non Injury- 127 Non Injury- 123 Non Injury-98 Total- 169 Total- 168 Total - 131 -4- Traffic Crashes: 2009 2010 2011 2012 Fatal-1 Fatal-0 Fatal-0 Fatal-0 Injury-28 Injury-38 Injury-60 Injury-44 Non-Injury-107 Non-Injury-94 Non-Injury-118 Non-Injury-112 Total- 136 Total-132 Total-178 Total- 156 The Photo Radar Summary for the period of January to December of 2012 shows a total of 2733.44 Enforcement Hours, 84,431 Vehicles Monitored, 9904 Violations Captured, and 7649 Citations Issued. III. PHOTO RADAR PROCESS OF ADMINISTRATION There are many components to the administrative process of photo radar enforcement. The basic steps involved in issuing a photo radar citation are: violation detection, violation processing, quality control checks, citation review and approval by the police officer, and citation mailing. 1. Violation detection occurs when a police officer operating a marked police vehicle visually observes a violation. The police officer also hears an audible signal indicating the violator speed. He maintains an observation log at each deployment and takes notes of each violation. At least three photographs are generated for each violation. These include the vehicle in the radar beam approaching the police vehicle, a close up photo of the driver in the violation vehicle, and a close up picture of the violation vehicle license plate. The violation vehicle's speed is displayed on a reader board at the back of the photo radar vehicle. -5 - The police officer maintains a check list for each deployment to document that they are following all of the technical procedures for operating the photo radar equipment. 2. Violation processing, quality control checks, citation review, and citation mailing involves taking the digital photographic record from the camera inside the photo radar van to our vendor ACS, after a deployment. The vendor develops digital photographic record and then looks at the photos. If they can identify the license plate, they send a request to the Oregon Dept of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for the registered owner information. The DMV sends this information back to ACS. The pertinent details of the violation (such as location, date, time, speed, etc) are reviewed by the vendor along with the registered owner information. The vendor discards violations where there is no gender match to the registered owner or owners. They also discard any violations where the driver is not identifiable due to factors such as glare, face blocked by a visor, etc. Any violations that pass this first screening by the vendor are then sent to the issuing police officer as citations. The issuing police officer reviews them for accuracy and signs them. ACS then mails this citation, along with a photo from the violation, to the registered owner. This citation must be mailed to the registered owner within six (6) business days to remain in compliance with Oregon law. The registered owner has thirty (30) days to respond to this citation. They are afforded all of the same rights as a defendant would have with any traffic violation. The citation is processed through the State of Oregon Court system. The presumption in Oregon is that the registered owner is the driver at the time of the violation. -6 - The registered owner must provide evidence that they were not the driver at the time of the violation. This process is usually done by the registered owner completing a Certificate of Innocence form and then returning it by mail to the City of Milwaukie municipal court staff. Once the form is received the citation is dismissed by the court. Dismissed Photo Radar citations are then sent by the court to photo radar trained Milwaukie Police Officer who then reviews these Certificates of Innocence for accuracy. Once the Certificates of Innocence are reviewed for accuracy they are then returned to ACS for any further required action. IV. PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF PHOTO RADAR The Milwaukie Police Department enjoys a strong public acceptance of photo radar as reported through seven different city neighborhood associations. In January 2011, the City of Milwaukie conducted a review of the photo radar program with our Public Safety Advisory Committee. The committee voted unanimously to continue its support of the photo radar program. It should also be noted that in May 2011, the Milwaukie City Council voted to extend its contract with ACS and upgraded the technology to all digital equipment which has resulted in greater exposure clarity. -7 - ORS 810.439 - Citations based on photo radar- 2011 Oregon Revised Statutes Page 1 of 6 2011 ORS § 810.4391 Citations based on photo radar • response to citation (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the jurisdictions using photo radar: (a) A citation for speeding may be issued on the basis of photo radar if the following conditions are met: (A) The photo radar equipment is operated by a uniformed police officer. (B) The photo radar equipment is operated out of a marked police vehicle. (C) An indication of the actual speed of the vehicle is displayed within 150 feet of the location of the photo radar unit. (D) Signs indicating that speeds are enforced by photo radar are posted, so far as is practicable, on all major routes entering the jurisdiction. (E) The citation is mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle within six business days of the alleged violation. (F) The registered owner is given 30 days from the date the citation is mailed to respond to the citation. (G) The jurisdiction operating photo radar complies with the requirements described in ORS 810.438(Photo radar authorized). (b) A rebuttable presumption exists that the registered owner of the vehicle was the driver of the vehicle when the citation is issued and delivered as provided in this section. (c) A person issued a citation under this subsection may respond to the citation by submitting a certificate of innocence or a certificate of non liability under subsection(3)of this section or may make any other response allowed by law. (2) A citation issued on the basis of photo radar may be delivered by mail or otherwise to the registered owner of the vehicle or to the driver. The citation may be prepared on a digital medium, and the signature may be electronic in http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/810.439 7/25/2014 ORS 810.439 - Citations based on photo radar- 2011 Oregon Revised Statutes Page 2 of 6 accordance with the provisions of ORS 84.001 (Short title)to 84.061 (Federal electronic signatures law partially superseded). (3) (a)A registered owner of a vehicle may respond by mail to a citation issued under subsection (1) of this section by submitting a certificate of innocence within 30 days from the mailing of the citation swearing or affirming that the owner was not the driver of the vehicle and by providing a photocopy of the owners driver license.A jurisdiction that receives a certificate of innocence under this paragraph shall dismiss the citation without requiring a court appearance by the registered owner or any other information from the registered owner other than the swearing or affirmation and the photocopy. The citation may be reissued only once, only to the registered owner and only if the jurisdiction verifies that the registered owner appears to have been the driver at the time of the violation. A registered owner may not submit a certificate of innocence in response to a reissued citation. (b) If a business or public agency responds to a citation issued under subsection (1)of this section by submitting a certificate of nonliability within 30 days from the mailing of the citation stating that at the time of the alleged speeding violation the vehicle was in the custody and control of an employee or was in the custody and control of a renter or lessee under the terms of a rental agreement or lease, and if the business or public agency provides the driver license number, name and address of the employee, renter or lessee, the citation shall be dismissed with respect to the business or public agency.The citation may then be issued and delivered by mail or otherwise to the employee, renter or lessee identified in the certificate of nonliability. (4) If the person named as the registered owner of a vehicle in the current records of the Department of Transportation fails to respond to a citation issued under subsection (1)of this section, a default judgment under ORS 153.102(Entry)may be entered for failure to appear after notice has been given that the judgment will be entered. (5) The penalties for and all consequences of a speeding violation initiated by the use of photo radar are the same as for a speeding violation initiated by any other means. (6) A registered owner, employee, renter or lessee against whom a judgment for failure to appear is entered may move the court to relieve the owner, employee, renter or lessee from the judgment as provided in ORS 153.105 (Relief from default judgment) if the failure to appear was due to mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. [1995 c.579§2; 1997 c.280§2; 1999 c.1051 §142; 1999 c.1071 §2; 2005 c.22§516; 2005 c.686§4; 2007 c.634§2] Note: Sections 4, 5 and 6, chapter 634, Oregon Laws 2007, provide: http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/810.439 7/25/2014 ORS 810.439 - Citations based on photo radar- 2011 Oregon Revised Statutes Page 3 of 6 Sec. 4. Highway work zone. (1)The Department of Transportation may operate photo radar within a highway work zone that is located on a state highway, except for a highway work zone located on an interstate highway. (2) The department, at its own cost, may ask a jurisdiction authorized to operate photo radar under ORS 810.438(Photo radar authorized) (1)or the Oregon State Police to operate a photo radar unit in a highway work zone on a state highway, except for a highway work zone located on an interstate highway. (3) A photo radar unit operated under this section may not be used unless a sign is posted announcing that photo radar is in use. The sign posted under this subsection must be all of the following: (a) Located on the state highway on which the photo radar unit is being used. (b) Between 100 and 400 yards before the location of the photo radar unit. (4) The department shall, once each biennium, conduct a process and outcome evaluation for the purposes of subsection (5)of this section that includes: (a) The effect of the use of photo radar on traffic safety; (b) The degree of public acceptance of the use of photo radar; and (c) The process of administration of the use of photo radar. (5) The department shall report to the Legislative Assembly by March 1 of each odd-numbered year. (6) As used in this section, highway work zone has the meaning given that term in ORS 811.230(Definitions). 12007 c.634§4] Sec. 5. Highway work zone; citation. (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, when a jurisdiction or the Oregon State Police uses photo radar in a highway work zone: (a) A citation for speeding may be issued on the basis of photo radar if the following conditions are met: (A) The photo radar unit is operated by a uniformed police officer. (B) The photo radar unit is operated out of a marked police vehicle. (C) An indication of the actual speed of the vehicle is displayed within 150 feet of the location of the photo radar unit. (D) The citation is mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle within six business days of the alleged violation. (E) The registered owner is given 30 days from the date the citation is mailed to respond to the citation. http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/810.439 7/25/2014 ORS 810.439 - Citations based on photo radar-2011 Oregon Revised Statutes Page 4 of 6 (F) One or more highway workers are present. For the purposes of this subparagraph, highway workers has the meaning given that term in ORS 811.230 (Definitions). (G) The jurisdiction operating photo radar complies with the requirements described in section 4 of this 2007 Act. (b) A rebuttable presumption exists that the registered owner of the vehicle was the driver of the vehicle when the citation is issued and delivered as provided in this section. (c) A person issued a citation under this subsection may respond to the citation by submitting a certificate of innocence or a certificate of nonliability under subsection(3)of this section or may make any other response allowed by law. (2) A citation issued on the basis of photo radar may be delivered by mail or otherwise to the registered owner of the vehicle or to the driver.The citation may be prepared on a digital medium and the signature may be electronic in accordance with the provisions of ORS 84.001 (Short title) to 84.061 (Federal electronic signatures law partially superseded). (3) (a)A registered owner of a vehicle may respond by mail to a citation issued under subsection (1) of this section by submitting,within 30 days from the mailing of the citation,a certificate of innocence swearing or affirming that the owner was not the driver of the vehicle and by providing a photocopy of the owners driver license. A jurisdiction that receives a certificate of innocence under this paragraph shall dismiss the citation without requiring a court appearance by the registered owner or any other information from the registered owner other than the swearing or affirmation and the photocopy. The citation may be reissued only once, only to the registered owner and only if the jurisdiction verifies that the registered owner appears to have been the driver at the time of the violation. A registered owner may not submit a certificate of innocence in response to a reissued citation. (b) If a business or public agency responds to a citation issued under subsection (1)of this section by submitting,within 30 days from the mailing of the citation, a certificate of nonliability stating that at the time of the alleged speeding violation the vehicle was in the custody and control of an employee, or was in the custody and control of a renter or lessee under the terms of a rental agreement or lease, and if the business or public agency provides the driver license number, name and address of the employee, renter or lessee, the citation shall be dismissed with respect to the business or public agency. The citation may then be issued and delivered by mail or otherwise to the employee, renter or lessee identified in the certificate of nonliability. (4) http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/810.439 7/25/2014 ORS 810.439 - Citations based on photo radar- 2011 Oregon Revised Statutes Page 5 of 6 If the person named as the registered owner of a vehicle in the current records of the Department of Transportation fails to respond to a citation issued under subsection (1)of this section, a default judgment under ORS 153.102 (Entry) may be entered for failure to appear after notice has been given that the judgment will be entered. (5) The penalties for and all consequences of a speeding violation initiated by the use of photo radar are the same as for a speeding violation initiated by any other means. (6) A registered owner, employee, renter or lessee against whom a judgment for failure to appear is entered may move the court to relieve the registered owner, employee, renter or lessee from the judgment as provided in ORS 153.105 (Relief from default judgment) if the failure to appear was due to mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. (7) As used in this section, highway work zone has the meaning given that term in ORS 811.230(Definitions). [2007 c.634§5] Sec. 6. Sections 4 and 5 of this 2007 Act are repealed on December 31, 2014. [2007 c.634§6] Notes of Decisions Presumption that vehicle was driven by registered owner does not improperly shift burden of persuasion to defendant. State v. Dahl, 185 Or App 149, 57 P3d 965 (2002), affd 336 Or 481, 87 P3d 650(2004) Where vehicle is registered to single owner, presumption that registered owner was driving vehicle has sufficient rational basis to meet due process require- ments. State v. Dahl, 185 Or App 149, 57 P3d 965(2002), affd 336 Or 481, 87 P3d 650(2004) This section and ORS 810.438(Photo radar authorized)are precitation procedural statutes that do not add to substantive requirements for commission of offense. State v. King, 199 Or App 278, 111 P3d 1146 (2005), Sup Ct review denied Enumerated conditions for issuance of photo radar citation supersede ORS 153.045 (Citation) requirement for officer certification regarding offense. State v. King, 199 Or App 278, 111 P3d 1146 (2005), Sup Ct review denied http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/810.439 7/25/2014 ORS 810.439 - Citations based on photo radar-2011 Oregon Revised Statutes Page 6 of 6 Related Statutes' • 153.054 Service and filing 1 Legislative Counsel Committee,CHAPTER 810—Road Authorities;Courts;Police;Other Enforcement Officials,http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/810.html(2011)(last accessed Mar.25,2012). 2 Legislative Counsel Committee,Annotations to the Oregon Revised Statutes, Cumulative Supplement-2011,Chapter 810,http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/annos/810ano.htm(2011)(last ac- cessed Mar.25,2012). 3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections.Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text.The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent. Currency Information Copyright 2013 by WebLaws.org www.oregonlaws.org http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/810.439 7/25/2014 ORS 810.438 - Photo radar authorized- 2011 Oregon Revised Statutes Page 1 of 3 2011 ORS § 810.4381 Photo radar authorized • evaluation (1) The following jurisdictions may, at their own cost, operate photo radar: (a) Albany. (b) Beaverton. (c) Bend. (d) Eugene. (e) Gladstone. (f) Medford. (g) Milwaukie. (h) Oregon City. (i) Portland. (j) Tigard. (2) A photo radar system operated under this section: (a) May be used on streets in residential areas or school zones. (b) May be used in other areas if the governing body of the city makes a finding that speeding has had a negative impact on traffic safety in those areas. (c) May not be used for more than four hours per day in any one location. (d) May not be used on controlled access highways. (e) May not be used unless a sign is posted announcing Traffic Laws Photo Enforced. The sign posted under this paragraph must: (A) Be on the street on which the photo radar unit is being used; (B) Be between 100 and 400 yards before the location of the photo radar unit; (C) Be at least two feet above ground level; and http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/810.438 7/25/2014 ORS 810.438 - Photo radar authorized-2011 Oregon Revised Statutes Page 2 of 3 (0) If posted in a school zone not otherwise marked by a flashing light used as a traffic control device, indicate that school is in session. (3) A city that operates a photo radar system under this section shall, once each biennium, conduct a process and outcome evaluation for the purposes of subsection (4)of this section that includes: (a) The effect of the use of the photo radar system on traffic safety; (b) The degree of public acceptance of the use of the photo radar system; and (c) The process of administration of the use of the photo radar system. (4) By March 1 of each odd-numbered year: (a) The Department of Transportation shall provide to the Legislative Assembly an executive summary of the process and outcome evaluations conducted under subsection (3)of this section; and (b) Each city that operates a photo radar system under this section shall present to the Legislative Assembly the process and outcome evaluation conducted by the city under subsection (3)of this section. [1995 c.579 §1; 1997 c280§1; 1999 c.1071 §1; 2005 c.686§3; 2007 c.634§1; 2010 c.30§9; 2011 c.545 §66] Notes of Decisions This section and ORS 810.439(Citations based on photo radar) are precitation procedural statutes that do not add to substantive requirements for commission of offense under ORS 810.439(Citations based on photo radar). State v. King, 199 Or App 278, 111 P3d 1146(2005) Related Statutes' • 810.439 Citations based on photo radar 1 Legislative Counsel Committee,CHAPTER 810—Road Authorities;Courts;Police;Other Enforcement Officials,http://www.Ieg.state.or.us/ors/810.html(2011)(fast accessed Mar.25,2012). http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/810.438 7/25/2014 ORS 810.438 - Photo radar authorized -2011 Oregon Revised Statutes Page 3 of 3 2 Legislative Counsel Committee,Annotations to the Oregon Revised Statutes,Cumulative Supplement-2011,Chapter 810,http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/annos/810ano.htm(2011)(last ac- cessed Mar.25,2012). 3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections.Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text.The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent. Currency Information Copyright 2013 by WebLaws.org www.oregonlaws.org http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/810.438 7/25/2014 AIS-1943 6. Workshop Meeting Meeting Date: 10/21/2014 Length (in minutes):35 Minutes Agenda Title: River Terrace Draft Funding Strategy Plan Follow-up Prepared For: Debbie Smith-Wagar,Financial and Information Services Submitted By: Toby LaFrance,Financial and Information Services Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Workshop Mtg. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Provide follow-up to Council on the progress of the River Terrace Funding Strategy STAFF RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUEST Staff will present additional information on the draft funding strategy for River Terrace. Staff is seeking input from Council to see if additional changes are needed prior to adoption of the plan on December 16,2014. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY At the September 23,2014 Council Meeting,city staff and project consultants provided Council with information on the draft River Terrace Funding Strategy.The funding strategy uses information from the River Terrace infrastructure master plans for water,sewer,transportation,parks and stormwater and was developed after extensive analysis of the city's existing fund balances and revenue sources. Key components of the draft River Terrace Funding Strategy are as follows: --It includes a funding recommendation for each infrastructure system. --It identifies at least one and sometimes several viable funding packages for each system and then scores them using evaluation criteria to demonstrate, for example,how equitable or financially sustainable a particular funding package is relative to another funding package. --It identifies which projects are likely to be needed in the near-term(0—6 years) and long-term(7 -20 years).The near term project list was developed by staff through a series of workshops using available information about each system and future development patterns.This list and the assumptions upon which it was based was then vetted by developers and other service providers. At the conclusion of the briefing on September 23,2014,Council requested follow-up information on the funding strategies for park and transportation improvements.To that end,the project team conducted some additional analysis and prepared a new transportation funding scenario for Council's consideration,which is attached to this report. The purpose of this briefing is to: --Walk Council through the new transportation funding scenario and park System Development Charge (SDC) analysis. --Seek Council feedback on the new transportation funding scenario and park SDC analysis. --Verify that Council has no additional changes to other recommendations in the River Terrace Funding Strategy. --Discuss next steps If no additional significant changes are requested,Council will be asked on December 16,2014 to approve a resolution adopting a final River Terrace Funding Strategy. The adopted funding strategy will not be binding. It will be a tool that guides how needed projects will be funded over time. It will also provide a work plan for staff to bring implementation tasks forward for Council consideration as needed. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council can choose not to provide direction on the River Terrace Funding Strategy. Council can instruct staff and consultants to make significant changes to the River Terrace Funding Strategy. This will likely require an additional Council meeting prior to approval of the resolution. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS Successfully complete River Terrace Community Plan Growth and Annexation DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION -The project team presented Council with the stormwater master plan and funding strategies on July 22,2014. -The project team presented Council with the parks and transportation master plan addenda and funding strategies on June 17,2014. -Council approved the sewer master plan addendum on June 10,2014 and the water master plan addendum on June 24,2014. -The project team presented Council with the water and sewer master plan addenda and funding strategies on May 20,2014. -The project team updated Council on the project on January 21,2014. -Council approved the contract for the River Terrace Community Plan (which includes the funding strategies) on June 25,2013. -Council considered the Draft River Terrace Funding Strategy document on September 23,2014. Attachments Funding Strategy v2 PowerPoint Presentation AgendaQuick®2005-2014 Destiny Software Inc.,All Rights Reserved 1 TIGARD RIVER TERRACE FUNDING STRATEGY ADDENDUM E. TRANSPORTATION (REVISED)1 E.1 Overall Findings Transportation infrastructure for River Terrace is required for new vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities. Traditionally, Tigard has worked in partnership with ODOT (responsible for upgrades to state facilities) and Washington County(responsible for county facilities). Tigard is responsible for upgrades to local routes, which include neighborhood routes and collector roads. Typically, developer construction/dedications are required for new neighborhood routes,and a mix of local funding sources are used to fund new collector routes and capacity expansion. The City of Tigard's existing transportation funds are generally committed and not available for investing in new transportation improvements in River Terrace over the next five years. Tigard is in the process of considering a new local city-wide and/or sub-district transportation SDC (TSDC) to supplement the funds it receives from the Transportation Development Tax (TDT), which was approved by Washington County voters in 2008 and enacted in 2009. The City will need to continue to work closely with Washington County to design/construct intersection connections with Scholls Ferry Road and Roy Rogers Road. In addition to developer funding of neighborhood routes, Development Agreements could be utilized to allow private developers to advance financing for road segments and intersection improvements (may be eligible for TSDC credits and reimbursement). E.2 Public Facility Costs Transportation infrastructure needs and costs are significant and often contingent on when and where new development occurs. Total transportation capital costs (for collector and arterial improvements and selected local neighborhood roads and trails) are estimated at $139.1 million. Within the next 20- years, the capital cost for city facilities are expected to be approximately$57.6 million, of which $36 million is expected to be the city cost after accounting for developer dedications and state/county project funding(see Exhibit 18). The near term project improvements include: the first phase of River Terrace Boulevard; a traffic signal at Roy Rogers Road/Bull Mountain road intersection; and a traffic signal at the Scholls Ferry Road/River Terrace Boulevard intersection.2 The long term project needs (by year 2035) are expected to include all other road extensions, intersection improvements, and selected multi-use trails listed in Exhibit 18. 1 This funding section for transportation was revised to take into account Tigard City Council input received at a City Council workshop on Sept.23,2014;and public input received on Sept.30,2014. 2 It should be noted that the timing of signalized intersections on Washington County facilities and local cost sharing funding responsibilities are unknown at this time and will depend upon subsequent county signal warrant analysis and full funding agreements. 2 In addition to the projects listed in in Exhibit 18, the River Terrace Transportation System Plan (TSP) addendum identifies additional projects that would likely be needed beyond year 2035 or would likely be led by Washington County or ODOT. The list of capital projects not reflected in Exhibit 18 includes: • A portion of the north-south 3 lane collector that is planned to extend from Lorenzo Lane to Bull Mountain Road(ID#6B) • Extension of 161'Ave. from Woodhue St. to Beef Bend Road(ID#1 l) • Widening of Roy Rodgers Road (ID#22) • Improving 150`h Ave. from Bull Mountain Rd. to Beef Bend Road(ID#23) • Some improvements where new streets meet existing collector streets • 99W/Walnut Street intersection, added turn lanes (ID#24) • 99W/Bull Mountain Road intersection, added north bound turn lane (ID#25) • 99W/Durham Road intersection, added turn lanes (ID#26) The transportation projects listed above and a portion of their capital cost may be considered as a component of a Tigard citywide TSDC, which has been estimated for River Terrace Funding Strategy purposes to be $5,000 per dwelling unit (average). E.3 Funding Scenarios Five scenarios have been evaluated for funding the transportation infrastructure in River Terrace, as shown Exhibit 19. Each scenario includes some allocation of the city's street fund(which utilizes local and state fuel tax), the TDT, and developer dedications (for neighborhood streets and portions of new collector streets). Funding Scenario A is considered to be most consistent with current practices used by the City of Tigard and would not be adequate for generating the amount of funding necessary to construct the transportation improvements listed in Exhibit 18. Funding Scenario B adds citywide and sub-district TSDCs to the mix of funding sources. Funding Scenario C includes a citywide TSDC and assumes the creation of a new River Terrace Urban Renewal District, which would require citywide voter approval. Funding Scenario D includes a citywide TSDC, sub-district TSDC, LIDs,and G.O. Bonds, and does not include a urban renewal district. Funding Scenario E includes a citywide TSDC and River Terrace district TSDC (in addition to the existing TDT) and assumes a transportation street utility fee surcharge of$18/month within the River Terrace district. After comparing these scenarios, using the evaluation criterial shown in Exhibit 20, Scenario E received the highest overall score. 3 Exhibit 18: Transportation Infrastructure Costs Potential Transportation Facilities,Costs and liming Capital Cost City Cost' Near Term Funding Lead Funding Options Project 1D 2 Extend Lorenzo Ln.from West UGB to Roy Rodgers Rd. $2,500,000 $725,000 ❑ City of Tigard Local TSDC,TDT and street fund Project ID 3 Extend Lorenzo Ln.from Roshak Rd. to Roy Rodgers Rd. $3.500.000 $875,000 ❑ City of Tigard Local TSDC,TDT and street fund Project ID 5 3 lane N-S collector from Scholls Ferry to Lorenzo Ln.extension Phase 1 99,262.500 $6.287.500 ® City of Tigard Local TSDC,TOT and street fund Phase 2 $4987.503 $3.342,500 ❑ City of Tigard Local TSDC,TDT and street fund Project ID 6 3 lane N-S collector from Lorenzo Ln. extension to Bull Mountain Rd. $6,000,000 $2850,000 ❑ City of Tigard Local TSDC,TDT and street fund (phase 1) Project ID 7 3 lane N-5 collector from Bull Mountain Rd.to the south UGB $9,750,000 $5,200,000 ❑ City of Tigard Local TSDC,TDT and street fund (phase 1) Project ID 8 2 lane E-W collector between Roy Rodgers Rd.and N-5 collector $2,500,000 $50,000 ❑ City of Tigard Local TSDC,TDT and street fund Project ID NA River Terrace Trail from Roy Rodgers Local TSDC,street fund,Metro/State Rd.to 150th Ave. $3,600,000 $3,600,000 ❑ City of Tigard grants and/or GO bond Project ID 13 Roy Rogers Road/E-W collector WA County, traffic signal $1,000,000 $1,000,000 ❑ City Local TSDC,TDT and street fund Project ID 14 Roy Rogers Road/Bull Mountain Rd W A Count traffic signal $1,000,000 $1,000,000 City y' Local TSDC,TOT and street fund Project ID 15 Roy Rogers Road/Lorenzo Ln. WA County, extension traffic signal $1,000,000 $1,000,000 ❑ City y Local TSDC,TDT and street fund Project ID 16 Scholls Ferry Road/N-S collector WA County, traffic signal $1,000,000 $1,000,000 ® City Local TSDC,TDT and street fund Project ID 18 Bull Mountain Rd./N-S collector WA County, intersection or roundabout $1,'�,� $1,500,000 ® City Local TSDC,1DT and street fund Project ID 19 E-W collector/N-S collector $2,000,000 $1,300.000 ❑ City of Tigard Local TSDC,TDT and street fund intersection or roundabout Project ID 20 Woodhue St./161st Ave.extension intersection or roundabout $2,000,000 $1.300.000 ❑ City of Tigard Local TSDC,TDT and street fund Project ID 21 Improve Bull Mountain Rd.from Roy WA Count Rodgers Rd.to Roshak Rd. $4,000,003 $3,431,000 ❑ City y' Local TSDC,TOT and street fund Project ID NA improvements where new streets meet existing streets $500,000 $500,000 I>ZI. City Street fund (Neighborhood)Near Term Project ID NA Improvements where new streets meet existing streets $1,500,000 $1,500,000 ❑ City Street fund (Neighborhood)Long Term Total Cost $57,600,000 $35,961,000 •reflects estimated city cost share after adjusting for the value-,developer dedications(not eligible for TDT/TSDC credits)and non-city funding contributior 4 Exhibit 19: Transportation Funding Scenarios Potential Funding Option: Funding Scenarios Funding Source A B C D E Notes Fund Transfers 0 0 0 0 0 City may transfer local or state fuel tax revenue to transportation projects Funds are dedicated to street maintenance Utility Fee(existing city wide) ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ not capital construction Transportation System ❑ 0 0 0 0 Development Charge (1500) City may establish new 1SDC on new development citywide River Terrace (R1)-TSDC (new City may establish new RT-15DC on new Subdistrict) ❑ 0 ❑ 0 development inRTsubdstrict TDT(existing) 0 0 0 0 0 Existing 1DT is charged to new development Special Taping District ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ LID or Reimbursement Dist. LIDs may provide Important a funding; (new) ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ mP gap" 9: requires 51%+property owner approval City voters may establish new URD in RT Urban Renewal District(new) ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ subdstrict Tax Levy(new citywide GO ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Citywide voters may establish GO bonds for bond) selected transportation improvements Grants ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Street Utiity Fee Surcharge In street Wilily fee surcharge in RT RT ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 subdstrict Developer la El El El 0 Developers to pro vide neighborhood transportation facilities crid can receive TOT SDC credits`or constn,ct:ng e+i gib,e pcbFic'oci it,es Preliminary Ranking 3 4 2 3 1 'Ceveixers•o roviaereigrcor coo rorsporari orfxditiesanacorrecelveTDTr,;CC rears for cors•rvcnnge.igcec_c : - E.4 Evaluation Scenario E is the recommended transportation funding scenario since it received the highest average rating with high marks for equity, facilitating development,reliability of funds, ease of implementation, and ability to address near-term and long-term costs. Scenario C placed second in the evaluation, but since it relies on the creation of a voter-approved urban renewal district, it is very complex and difficult to implement,and may not generate adequate funding which could delay facility construction and delay development for many years. Scenario D would also be difficult to implement, since it would rely upon a voter-approved GO Bond, and would not facilitate development, since it would rely on relatively high TSDC and LID costs per dwelling unit. Scenarios A and B are not likely to generate adequate long-term funding to implement the planned transportation facilities (see Exhibit 20). 5 Exhibit 20: Transportation Funding Evaluation Evaluation of Cost Burdens and Implementation Criteria Equity(1:lower cost burden-5:higher cost burden A B C D E Citywide Resident Cost Burden ICJ Citizens in Subdistrict Cost Burden M Developer/Property Owner Cost Burden 10111 1. AIM Evaluation Criteria(1:worst•5:best) Cost Equity• Reliability of Funds L Facilitates Development L iim 1111111111111 Ease of Implementation 411111 IE Ability to Address Near-Term Costs 1E1 11:=1 111: 1 1111111 Ability to Address Long-Term Costs Average Rating ELI 11111 Total Score(sum of Evaluation Criteria) . 12.1 111. 15.2 MI 19.1 1111. 17.1 21.5 •denotes relative variance from"uniform"equity(whereas developers,city,future residents and existing residents would split costs equally) E.5 Analysis of Preferred Funding Scenarios Funding Scenario E assumes that the City provides approximately$150,000/year in street funds (state or local fuel tax revenue) to projects in River Terrace, which equates to $3M over the next 20 years. Additionally, it is assumed that a new citywide TSDC is created(cost per dwelling unit assumed to be $5,000 at this time with 75% of funding allocated to RT); and a new River Terrace district TSDC generates an additional $3,000 per average dwelling unit (100% of funding allocated to RT); and 75% of the TDT revenue collected in River Terrace stays in River Terrace. A new River Terrace Transportation/Street Utility Fee surcharge of$18/month would also generate much needed funding ($5M over 20 years) for capital projects in River Terrace. Cost sharing among developers, Washington County and ODOT could result in additional funding for selected facilities listed above. See Exhibit 21 for details. Exhibit 21: Transportation Funding Strategy, Scenario E Draft Recommended Funding Strategy(Scenario E) Funding Mechanism Who Pays? How Much$? Notes Fund Transfers Citizens Avg.$150,000 a year Could come from local or state contributions gas tax funds SDC (Citywide) Developers(citywide) $5,000 per dwelling New citywide SDC;assumes 75% (avg) alloted to RT district TDT=$6,323 per dwelling Existing TDT(assumes 75%alloted TDT(existing) Developers(citywide) (avg) to RT district) Subdistrict Transportaion New subdistrict SDC(100% SDC (RT Subdistrict) Developers(RT only) SDCs=$3,000 per dedicated to RT) dwelling(avg) 'street Utility Fee Surcharge Property Owners(RT only) $18/month surcharge 100%dedicated to RT projects in RT Street Dedications Developers(RT only) Local street and ROW Focus is usually for on site dedications improvements Grants State/Metro citizens $900,000 focus on trails County property WA County(cost share) varies County roadway improvements owners/citizens ODOT/Metro (cost share) State/Metro citizens varies Hwy99 improvements 1 410 ct' Tigard River Terrace Draft Funding Strategy October 21 , 2014 City Council Work Session ••• GROUP Communit In • ut Consider.IT Developers • Growth should pay • Learn from North for growth Bethany. • Keep it affordable. SWG Survey • Costs should be split WA County equally amongst: • Don ' t count on MSTIP ✓ Future residents dollars. ✓ Tigard residents • Strategically refine ✓ Developers transportation project N/ Government p list. •:> FCS GROUP I Page 2 M & A . . roach • Developed Master Plans with project lists and cost estimates • Identified near term projects • Identified funding gaps and revenue sources • Developed funding scenarios and ranked with evaluation criteria • Obtained input on draft recommendations from City Council, Stakeholders and public at large • Revised Funding Strategy ✓ New Transportation Strategy ✓ New Parks Strategy •:> Id's GROUP I Page 3 F Strate . Re . ort Outline • Purpose • Contents p ✓ ‘7 Prepare a funding Methodology ✓ Community Input plan for major capital ✓ Evaluation Criteria facilities in River ✓ Potential Funding Sources Terrace for: ✓ Draft Infrastructure *Six years (near-term) Funding Plan *Build-out (long-term) ✓ Policy Considerations •:;>FCS GROUP I Page 4 Evaluation Criteria • Equity " evise • amp e Are costs equally Funding Scenario Equity(1:lower cost burden-5:higher A(status distributed? cost burden) quo) B C D Citywide Resident Cost Burden N:1 -1111 111 1111 • Reliability of Funds Citizens in Subdistrict Cost Burden Will funding generate Developer/Property Owner Cost Burden ME MiD AM predictable revenue? Evaluation Criteria(1:worst-5: best) Cost Equity' • Facilitates Reliability of Funds rg =El MEI 1111 Development Facilitates Development 0 am A Ease of Implementation M. El El ii Will funding leverage near- Ability to Address Near-Term Costs term private investment? Ability to Address Long-Term Costs ti 1111.I. AMIE Total Score(sum of Evaluation Criteria) 12 M. 19 _ 17 al 21 • Ease of *denotes relative variance from"uniform"equity(whereas developers,future residents and existing residents m p l e m e ntati o n would split costs equally) Voter approval required? Revised evaluation criteria Precedence? City staffing costs? City Council input: • Ability to Address Focus equity on 3 (not 4) Costs (Near-term and categories: citywide residents, Long-term) new RT residents, and developers •:;>FCS GROUP I Page 5 Potential Fundin • Sources in Urbanizin • Areas • Fund Transfers (e.g., gen . fund, street fund, etc.) • Utility Rates (streets, water, sewer, storm) • Transportation Development Tax (TDT) • Local Improvement Districts • Reimbursement Districts • System Development Charges (SDCs) • Urban Renewal District • Special Districts (e.g., drainage district) • Bonds • Grants (Metro, state, federal) • Developers (dedication of local improvements) • >FCS GROUP I Pages Water F Scenario Near term projects: Cach reservoir, trunk lines (city) , and 550 to 410 pressure reducing valve Recommended Scenario Scenario A nding Mechanism Who Pays? How Much $? Notes Utility Fees (Water Customers Avg. monthly water Planned water utility rate Fund) utility rates = $38 increases per account* SDC (City wide, Developers Water SDCs = $7,580 Developers pay SDCs and Water SDC Fund) per SFD* provide local water lines * these rates/SDCs are to be adjusted as part of citywide rate/SDC analysis for water by Jan. 2015. •:,>FCS GROUP I Page 7 Sanitary Sewer F Scenario Near term projects: River Terrace north/south force mains and pump stations, Barrows Road trunk upsizing, and Scholls Ferry trunk extension Recommended Scenario (Scenario A) Funding Mechanism Who Pays? How Much $? Notes Utility Fees (Sewer Fund) Customers Avg. Additional citywide sewer (within city monthly rate surcharge required with service sewer utility or without River Terrace district) rates = $54 per account SDC (Citywide, Sewer SDC Fund) Developers Sewer SDCs: Developers provide local $4,900 per lines and pay sewer SDCs SFD CWS Capital Fund Customers CWS (capital fund) in CWS •:>FCS GROUP I Page 8 Parks F Scenario B Near term projects: Land acquisition for future parks and trails Funding Mechanism Who Pays? How Much $? City General Fund Citizens Fund Transfers Parks SDCs = SDC (City wide) Developers $6,451 per SFD Developer SDCs (existing) Utility Fee (new city wide) Customers +/-$1 .00 per New parks utility fee (with or month without River Terrace) Bond costs New city $10M G.O. bond G.O. Bond Citizens $47/year for funded by levy of $0. 15 per $311, 100 $1,000 assessed value median home Grants Other +/- $186,000 Metro, state or federal grants Draft funding scenario would result in under funded parks improvements •:;>FCS GROUP I Page 9 Parks F Scenario D Near term projects: Land acquisition for future parks and trails Funding Mechanism Who Pays? How Much $? Notes City General Fund Citizens $250,000 Fund Transfers New funding Parks per = SDCs;Developer% scenario results in SDC (City wide) Developers $1,800 per SFD SDCs; 75% Parks avg) De alotted elo a RT greater equity and Parks SDCs= Developer SDC (RT District) Developers $4,700 per SFD SDCs; 100% (est. avg) alotted to RT more $ for parks New citywide +/-$1.11 per parks utility improvements Utility Fee (new citywide) Customers month (est. fee (75% avg) alloted to RT) New city$13 Bond costs M G.O. bond; G.O. Bond Citizens $63/year for $0.20 per $311,100 $1,000 AV median home (70%alotted to RT) Grants Other +/-$996,000 Metro, state •:>FC'S GROUP I Page 10 Stormwater F Scenario Near-term Projects: ✓ Stormwater modeling & design standards ✓ Development-Driven Facilities (as needed) ✓ Reimbursement District(s) Recommended Scenario(Scenario D) Funding Mechanism Who Pays? How Much $? Notes Avg. of$42,000 per Discretionary fund General Fund Citizens year to seed transfers reimbursement dist. SDC (Citywide) Developers Current fee of$500 Existing storm SDCs per dwelling may be adjusted Utility Fee (city wide) Customers (city Avg. monthly storm Existing rates may be wide) utility rates =$8.75 adjusted River Terrace $12/month New fee surcharge Utility Fee (RT subdistrict) for River Terrace Customers surcharge subdistrict Developers or Focus may be on City advances Assumes$1-2M per facilities involving Reimbursement Districts financing;with district (every 6 multiple property future payments years) owners with off site by builders impacts Developers Developers Developer dedications (on site) •::>FCS GROUP I Page 11 Transportation Funding Scenario C Near-term Projects ✓ Roy Rogers Signal ✓ Scholls Ferry Signal ✓ River Terrace Blvd. (segments) ✓ Local traffic calming Recommended Scenario(Scenario C) Funding Mechanism Who Pays? How Much$? Notes Fund Transfers Citizens Avg. $1 million a year Could come from local or City Coun�+��l contributions state gas tax funds Transportation SDC5 = New citywide SDC (with SDC (City wide) Developers $6,000 per dwelling input. (avg) dedicated to RT) TDT Customers TDT= $6,323 per Existing TDT(city could URDmaybe Urban Renewal dwelling (avg) dedicate%of funds on RT) See Note 1 Urban Renewal District in RT District better suited Street Dedications Developers Local street and ROW Focus is usually for on site dedications improvements in Tigard WA County(cost County share) Citizens varies by project Triangle ODOT/Metro (cost State/Metro share) Citizens varies by project Note 1: tax increment finance revenue derived from new property tax payments by property owners within district; results in opportunity cost impact to taxing districts; and impacts how city collects/spends new revenues. •:;> FCS GROUP I Page 12 Transportation F Scenario D Near-term Projects ✓ Same as Scenario C City Council input. Draft Funding Strategy(Scenario D) Funding Mechanism Who Pays? How Much 5? Notes many issues and Fund Transfers Citizens Avg. $1 million a year Could come from local or contributions state gas tax funds concerns Developers Transportaion SDCs= New citywide SDC (with% SDC (Citywide) (citywide) $6,000 per dwelling (avg) dedicated to RT) TDT(existing) Developers TDT=$6,323 per dwelling Existing TDT(city could _ (citywide) (avg) dedicate%of funds on RT) Developer input: Developers (RT Subdistrict Transportaion New subdistrict SDC (100%I SDC (RT Subdistrict) only) SDCs=$7,946 per dedicated to RT) market not ready for dwelling (avg) Property this level of cost LIDS(RT Subdistrict) Owners (RT varies by project source of gap funding only) burden Developers (RT Local street and ROW Focus is usually for on site Street Dedications only) dedications improvements But Property New city G.O. bond with Local Tax Levy(citywide) owners Bond costs$24/year for $5M to River Terrace(levy /00% credit for (citywide) $311,100 median home $0.075 per$1,000 assessed value County collector/arterial costs WA County(cost share) property varies by project owners/citizens is good ODOT/Metro (cost share) State/Metro varies by project citizens •:>FCS GROUP I Page 13 Transportation Funding Scenario E ( new recommended scenario ) Near-term Projects Draft Funding Strategy (Scenario E) Projects Funding Mechanism Who Pays? How Much $? Notes ✓ Same as Scenario C Fund Transfers Citizens Avg.$150,000 a Could come from local year contributions or state gas tax funds Long-term Projects Developers SDC (Citywide) (citywide) tbd New citywide SDC ✓ Focus on projects within Existing TDT(city could City of Tigard Developers TDT=$6,323 per y g TDT(existing) dedicate 75%of funds (citywide) dwelling (avg) on RT) ✓ Focus on city-owned facilities Subdistrict Developers (RT Transportaion New subdistrict SDC ✓ SDC (RT Subdistrict) Assume longer-term only) SDCs=$4,300 per (100%dedicated to RT) (year 21 + ) phasing for r dwelling (avg) projects outside city limits Street Utility Fee Surcharge in Property Owners $20/month 100%dedicated to RT RT (RT only) surcharge projects Other issues: Developers (RT Local street and Focus is usually for on site Street Dedications Partial credit for only) ROW dedications improvements collector/arterial Grants State/Metro $900,000 focus on trails citizens improvements assumed County property County roadway (like current TDT policy); WA County (cost share) owners/citizens varies improvements City policy regarding ODOT/Metro (cost share) State/Metro Hwy p ovements varies H 99 improvements r citizens TDT/SDC allocations tbd=to be determined •:,)I;CS GROUP I Page 14 Policy Considerations General • Consider adopting an Adequate Public Facilities ordinance • Continue coordination regarding cost sharing • Extend OP to six years • Update rates and SDCs to account for River Terrace • Update SDC credit policy • Consider SDC/TDT policies that dedicate portion of funding collected in RT to RT projects • >FCS GROUP I Page 15 Fall 2014 • www.oregonmetro.gov CLIMATE I SUPPL MENTAL PACKET SMART -1- I- - v` FOR �C' t9 6 e .zr r t`F P COMMUNITIES (DATE OF MEETING) SCENARIOS PROJECT .. Metro 4011 Pt_.' Whether you moved to Oregon l stweekortrace Public comment period your roots generations deep, you have your own reason for ' Monday, Sept. 15 to Thursday, Oct. 30, 2014 loving this place—and Metro wants to keep it that way. Help shape the future of the Your input today on the Climate Smart Communities Scenarios greater Portland region and discover tools,services and : Project will determine the future of the region for places that make life better today. i generations to come. Stay in touch with news, The Oregon Legislature has required the Portland metropolitan region to reduce per stories and things to do. : capita greenhouse gas emissions from cars and small trucks by 2035.Weigh in on a draft p g g Y g www.oregonmetro.gov/ approach and proposed actionsfor reducinggreenhouse gas emissions and building great connect communities. Your input today will help inform the Metro Council's decision in Metro Council President December. r Tom Hughes ' Your voice is important Metro Councilors Shirley Craddick,District 1 You are invited to providefeedbackduringthe publiccomment period from Sept.15 Carlotta Collette,District 2 i through Oct.30,2014. Craig Dirksen,District3 Kathryn Harrington,District4 • Takea shortsurveyonlineatmakeagreatplace.orgontransportation and land use Sam Chase,District 5 policiesandactionsthatcanshapeourcommunities. Bob Stacey,District6 Auditor To provide more in depth feedback,visit oregonmetro.gov/draftapproach to download and Suzanne Flynn , review the draft approach and implementation recommendations(Regional Framework Plan amendments,toolbox of possible actions and performance monitoring approach)and providecommentsin oneofthefollowingways: • Mail commentsto Metro Planning CSC Comment,600NE Grand Ave.,Portland,OR97232 • Email comments to climatescenarios @oregonmetro.gov • Phone in comments to 503-797-1750 or TDD 503-797-1804 • Testify at a Metro Council hearing on Oct.30,2014,at 600 NE Grand Ave.,Portland,OR 97232 inthe Councilchamber To learn more aboutthe Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project,visit oregonmetro.gov/climatescenarios ''SS Fall 2014 MIL �, , ! CLIMATE �: 1 Y,S 7 .y q. '1 d �R. , 9 SlVIAR1 -; . , ; s. iL COMMUNITIES _ l i' : i,r.,` - 4 �f... iF SCENARIOS PROJECT - '1( ,._ :; r V .I — (a , Metro KEY RESULTS The Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project responds to a state mandate to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and small trucks by 2035. Working together, community, business and elected leaders are shaping a strategy that meets the goal while creating healthy and equitable communities and a strong economy. On May 30, 2014, Metro's policy advisory committees unanimously recommended a draft approach for testing that relies on policies and investments that have already been identified as priorities in communities across the region. The results are in and the news is good. WHAT DID WE LEARN? Reduced greenhouse gas emissions We can meet the 2035 target if we make PERCENT BELOW 2005 LEVELS the investments needed to build the 'gARIO A SCENARIO R SCENARIO C kLCENT ADOPTED NEW PLANS DRAFT plans and visions that have already been TRENDS PLANS & POLICIES APPROACH adopted by communities and the region. However, we will fall short if we continue investing at current levels. The region has identified a draft approach 12% that does more than just meet the target. It supports many other local, regional and STATE MANDATED state goals, including clean air and water, TARGET transportation choices, healthy and equitable '0%REDUCTION BY 2035 24% communities, and a strong regional economy. The reduction target is from 290 2005 emissions levels after WHAT KEY POLICIES ARE INCLUDED reductions expected from IN THE DRAFT APPROACH? cleaner fuels and more uel-efficient vehicles. 36% El Implement adopted plans m Make transit convenient, frequent, accessible and affordable After a four-year collaborative process informed t; Make biking and walking safe and by research, analysis, community engagement and convenient t;, Make streets and highways safe, reliable deliberation, the region has identified a draft approach and connected that achieves a 29 percent reduction in per capita {, Use technology to actively manage the greenhouse gas emissions and supports the plans and transportation system M Provide information and incentives to visions that have already been adopted by communities expand the use of travel options and the region. ■ Manage parking to make efficient use of land and parking spaces oregonmetro.gov/climatescenarios WHAT ARE THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND ()Our economy benefits from improved public health ECONOMIC BENEFITS? ANNUAL HEALTHCARE COST SAVINGS FROM REDUCED By 2035, the draft approach can help ILLNESS (MILLIONS, 2010$) people live healthier lives and save $117 MILLION businesses and households money through $100 MILLION $89 MILLION benefits like: $52 MILLION ® Reduced air pollution and increased physical activity can help reduce illness and save lives. SCENARIO A SCENARIO II SCENARIO C DRAFT APPROACH F: How much would we need to invest by 2035? rfiriA11111111111116. TE CHNOLOGY TO TRAVEL INFORMATION �� MANAGE E INCENTIVES $206 MILLION\/$1851 MILLION ' • • .»' ..-�t�.. ,-----7' � .PR. A C T I V E TRANSPORTATION STREETS AND r «, ;T "e.r ay�, HIGHWAYS CAPITAL PITAL$2 BILLION $8.8 BILLION p�c• I' -r __` TRANSIT SERVICE OPERATIONS $8 BILLION �F _--- TRANSIT CAPITAL $4.4 BILLION 00,.„__ Investment costs are in 2014$.The total cost does not include road-related operations, maintenance and preservation(OMP)costs. Preliminary estimates WHAT IS THE RETURN ON for local and state road-related OMP needs are$12 billion through 2035. INVESTMENT? Local and regional plans and visions are Estimated costs of draft approach and 2014 RTP supported. The draft approach reflects local and regional investment priorities adopted in (billions, 2014$) the 2014 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Draft Approach to address current and future transportation needs in the region. At $24 billion over 25 years, the overall cost of the draft approach Full RTP* is less than the full 2014 RTP ($29 billion), but about $5 billion more than the financially constrained 2014 RTP ($19 billion).* Constrained RTP* $19 B I More transportation options are available. $0 $10 B $20 B $30 B As shown in the chart to the right, investment levels assumed in the draft approach are similar to those in the adopted financially $ Annual cost of implementation through 2035 constrained RTP, with the exception of (millions, 2014$) increased investment in transit capital and S400M operations region-wide. Analysis shows the $352 M high potential of these investments to reduce $320 M Draft Approach greenhouse gas emissions while improving $300M MI access to jobs and services and supporting Constrained RTP $240 M other community goals. S200M 5175 M Households and businesses experience multiple benefits. The cost to implement $tooM S88 M the draft approach is estimated to be $945 j"" million per year, plus an estimated $480 $8 MS6 M 47 M$3 M million per year needed to maintain and $o — — operate our road system. While this is about Streets and Transit Transit Active Technology Travel highways capital operations transportation to manage information $630 million more than we currently spend capital system and incentives as a region, analysis shows multiple benefits •The financially constrained 2014 RTP refers to the priority investments that and a significant return on investment. In the can be funded with existing and anticipated new revenues identified by federal, long run, the draft approach can help people state and local governments.The full 2014 RTP refers to all of the investments live healthier lives and save households and that have been identified to meet current and future regional transportation businesses money. needs in the region.It assumes additional funding beyond currently . anticipated revenues. - WHAT'S NEXT? . l'' The Metro Policy Advisory Committee and the Joint Policy - '' `}. • Advisory Committee on Transportation are working to finalize k ; ,• ,� i their recommendation to the Metro Council on the draft approach and draft implementation recommendations. 0r - ' September 2014 Staff reports results of the analysis and draft t , implementation recommendations to the Metro Council and , regional advisory committees HOW DO WE MOVE FORWARD? We're stronger together. Local, regional, Sept. 15 to Oct. 30 Public comment period on draft approach state and federal partnerships and legislative and draft implementation recommendations support are needed to secure adequate funding for transportation investments and Nov. 7 MPAC and JPACT meet to discuss public comments and address other barriers to implementation. shape recommendation to the Metro Council Building on existing local, regional and December 2014 MPAC and JPACT make recommendation to statewide activities and priorities, the project Metro Council partners have developed a draft toolbox of actions with meaningful steps that can be December 2014 Metro Council considers adoption of preferred taken in the next five years. This is a menu approach of actions that can be locally tailored to best support local, regional and state plans and January 2015 Metro submits adopted approach to Land visions. Reaching the state target can best Conservation and Development Commission for approval be achieved by engaging community and business leaders as part of ongoing local and 2015 and beyond Ongoing implementation and monitoring regional planning and implementation efforts. WHAT CAN LOCAL, REGIONAL AND Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project timeline STATE PARTNERS DO? 2011 2012-13 2013- 14 Everyone has a role. Local, regional and Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 state partners are encouraged to review the draft toolbox to identify actions they have already taken and prioritize any new actions Understanding Shaping Shaping and choices choices adoption of they are willing to consider or commit to as i preferred approach we move into 2015. Jan.2012 June 2013 June 2014 Dec.2014 iP" Accept Direction on Direction on Adopt preferred findings alternative preferred approach scenarios approach WHERE CAN I FIND MORE INFORMATION? The draft toolbox and other publications and reports can be found at oregonmetro.gov/climatescenarios. For email updates, send a message to climatescenarios @oregonmetro.gov. k Metro Sept.12,2014 I Printed on recycled-content paper.Job 14069 CLIMATE SMART COMMUNITIES SCENARIOS PROJECT Draft Toolbox of Possible Actions ( 2015 -20) Public Review Droll September 15, 2014 MAKING A GREAT PLACE CDI Metro About Metro Clean air and clean water do not stop at city limits or county lines.Neither does the need for jobs,a thriving economy,and sustainable transportation and living choices for people and businesses in the region.Voters have asked Metro to help with the challenges and opportunities that affect the 25 cities and three counties in the Portland metropolitan area. A regional approach simply makes sense when it comes to providing services,operating venues and making decisions about how the region grows.Metro works with communities to support a resilient economy,keep nature close by and respond to a changing climate.Together we're making a great place, now and for generations to come. Stay in touch with news,stories and things to do. www.oregonmetro.gov/climatescenarios Metro Council President Tom Hughes Metro Councilors Shirley Craddick,District 1 Carlotta Collette,District 2 Craig Dirksen,District 3 Kathryn Harrington,District 4 Sam Chase, District 5 Bob Stacey,District 6 Auditor Suzanne Flynn PART 2. DRAFT TOOLBOX OF POSSIBLE ACTIONS (2015-20) This is one of three parts of the draft implementation recommendations being presented for public review and comment from Sept. 15 to Oct. 30, 2014 This document includes a draft toolbox of actions with meaningful implementation steps that can be taken in the next five years to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and minimize the region's contribution to climate change. Building on existing local, regional and statewide activities and priorities,the toolbox is a comprehensive menu of voluntary policy, program and funding actions that can be tailored to best support local, regional and state plans and visions. TABLE OF CONTENTS Background 1 How to provide your input 1 What's next? 2 Where can I find more information? 2 Draft Toolbox of Possible Actions(2015-20) BACKGROUND The Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project responds to a 2009 mandate from the Oregon Legislature for our region to develop a strategy to reduce per capita greenhouse gas emissions from cars and small trucks by 2035.Metro is the regional government and federally-designated metropolitan planning organization for the Portland metropolitan area,serving a population of 1.5 million people.In that role,Metro has been working together with community,business and elected leaders across our region to shape a draft Climate Smart Strategy that meets the state mandate while supporting economic prosperity, community livability and protection of our environment. After a four-year collaborative process informed by research,analysis,community engagement and deliberation,a draft Climate Smart Strategy that meets the state target is being presented for your review and comment.The draft strategy relies on policies and investments that have already been identified as local priorities in communities across the region and in the region's long-range transportation plan. HOW TO PROVIDE YOUR INPUT • Take an on-line survey at www.makeagreatplace.org. • Submit comments by mail to Metro Planning,600 NE Grand Ave.,Portland,OR 97232, by email to climatescenarios @oregonmetro.gov,or by phone at 503-797-1750 or TDD 503-797-1804 from Sept. 15 through Oct. 30,2014. • Testify at a Metro Council hearing on Oct. 30 at 600 NE Grand Ave.,Portland,OR 97232 in the Council Chamber. Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project 1 Draft Toolbox of Possible Actions(2015-20)1 September 15,2014 WHAT'S NEXT? The Metro Policy Advisory Committee and the Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation are working to finalize their recommendation to the Metro Council on the draft approach and draft implementation recommendations. Sept. 15 to Oct.30 Public comment period on draft approach and draft implementation recommendations Nov.7 MPAC and JPACT meet to discuss public comments and shape recommendation to the Metro Council December 10 and 11 MPAC and JPACT make recommendation to Metro Council December 18 Metro Council considers adoption of preferred approach January 2015 Metro submits adopted approach to Land Conservation and Development Commission for approval 2015 and beyond Ongoing implementation and monitoring Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project timeline 2011 2012-13 2013- 14 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Understanding Shaping Shaping and choices choices adoption of preferred approach Jan.2012 June 2013 June 2014 Dec.2014 Accept Direction on Direction on Adopt preferred findings alternative preferred approach scenarios approach WHERE CAN I FIND MORE INFORMATION? Public review materials and other publications and reports can be found at oregonmetro.gov/climatescenarios.For email updates,send a message to climatescenarios @oregonmetro.gov. 2 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project Draft Toolbox of Possible Actions(2015-20)1 September 15, 2014 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT September 15, 2014 DRAFT TOOLBOX OF POSSIBLE ACTIONS (2015-2020) CLIMATE BACKGROUND I The Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project responds to a state mandate to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and small trucks by 2035. Working together, community, business and elected leaders are shaping a strategy that meets the goal while creating healthy and equitable communities and a strong economy. After considering prior public input and other information, on May 30, 2014, the SMARTMetro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) and the Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT) unanimously recommended a draft approach for testing that relies on policies and investments that have COMMUNITIES already been identified as local priorities in communities across the region. Analysis shows the region can meet the 2035 target if we make the investments needed to build the plans and visions that have already SCENARIOS PROJECT been adopted by communities and the region. The draft Climate Smart Strategy does more than just meet the target. It supports many other local, regional and state goals, including clean air and water, C*1\ietro transportation choices, healthy and equitable communities, and a strong regional economy. Building on existing local, regional and statewide activities and priorities, the project partners have developed a draft toolbox of actions with meaningful steps that can be taken in the next five years to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and minimize the region's contribution to climate change.The policies and actions are the result of a four-year collaborative process informed by research, analysis, community engagement, and deliberation. They will be subject to public review from Sept. 15 to Oct. 30, 2014 before being considered by MPAC,JPACT, and the Metro Council in December 2014. HOW TO USE THE TOOLBOX I The toolbox is a comprehensive menu of policy, program and funding actions that can be tailored to best support local, regional and state plans and visions. Local, state and regional partners are encouraged to review the toolbox and identify actions they have already taken and any new actions they are willing to consider or commit to as we move into 2015. Medium and longer-term actions will be identified during the next update to the Regional Transportation Plan (scheduled for 2016-18). POLICY TOOLBOX OF POSSIBLE ACTIONS 2015.2020 WHAT CAN THE STATE DO? WHAT CAN METRO DO? WHAT + 1:' 9 ' 61`i bws '. ' HAT CAN SPECIAi_DISTRICTS DO? . . ;. v ..,... 1., (e.g.,t ranst pro vii�rs,Port rt list;�t s,parks providers, ft ) Implement the 2040 Growth Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Concept and local adopted land ❑ Reauthorize Oregon Brownfield Redevelopment ❑ Implement policies and investments that align ❑ Implement policies and investments that align ❑ Implement policies and investments that align use and transportation plans Fund with regional and community visions to focus with community visions,focus growth in with community visions,focus growth in ❑ Support brownfield redevelopment-related growth in designated centers,corridors and designated centers, corridors and employment designated centers,corridors and employment legislative proposals employment areas areas areas ❑ Restore local control of housing policies and ❑ Support restoring local control of housing ❑ Support restoring local control of housing ❑ Support restoring local control of housing policies programs to ensure local communities have a full policies and programs through Legislative policies and programs through Legislative and programs through Legislative agenda, range of tools available to meet the housing agenda,testimony,endorsement letters or agenda,testimony,endorsement letters or testimony,endorsement letters or similar means needs of all residents to expand opportunities for similar means similar means ❑ Support reauthorization of Oregon Brownfield households of modest means to live closer to ❑ Support reauthorization of Oregon Brownfield ❑ Support reauthorization of Oregon Brownfield Redevelopment Fund through Legislative agenda, work,services and transit Redevelopment Fund through Legislative agenda, Redevelopment Fund through Legislative agenda, testimony,endorsement letters or similar means ❑ Begin implementation of the Statewide testimony,endorsement letters or similar means testimony,endorsement letters or similar means Near-term (2017-20) Transportation Strategy Vision and short-term ❑ Facilitate regional brownfield coalition to ❑ Participate in regional brownfield coalition to ❑ Seek opportunities to leverage local,regional, implementation plan to support regional and develop legislative proposals and increase develop legislative proposals and increase state and federal funding to achieve local visions community visions resources available in the region for brownfield resources available in the region for brownfield and the region's desired outcomes Near-term(2017-20) redevelopment redevelopment ❑ Share brownfield redevelopment expertise with ❑ Seek opportunities to leverage local, regional, ❑ Maintain a compact urban growth boundary Near-term (2017-20) local governments and expand leadership role in state and federal funding to achieve local visions ❑ Review functional plans and amend as needed to ❑ Pursue opportunities to locate higher-density making brownfield sites development ready and the region's desired outcomes implement Climate Smart Strategy residential development near activity centers ❑ Provide increased funding and incentives to local Near-term(2017-20) such as parks and recreational facilities, governments,developers and non-profits to ❑ Seek opportunities to leverage local,regional, commercial areas,employment centers, and encourage brownfield redevelopment and state and federal funding to achieve local visions transit transit-oriented development to help keep urban and the region's desired outcomes ❑ Locate new schools,services,shopping,and areas compact ❑ Expand on-going technical assistance and grant other health promoting resources and funding to local governments,developers and community destinations in activity centers others to incorporate travel information and ❑ Seek opportunities to leverage local,regional, incentives,transportation system management state and federal funding to achieve local visions and operations strategies, parking management and the region's desired outcomes Page 1 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT September 15, 2014 . POLICY TOOLBOX OF POSSIBLE ACTIONS (2015-2020) _£. ., _.F WHAT CAN THE STATE DO? WHAT CAN ME C)? WHAT CAN CITIES AND COUNTIES DO? WHAT CAN SPECIAL DISTRICTS DO? :.r::.. ,d-t.x.: »a„wM:,::.x. .�. ,.,..->��«d.�-,.,:::�.,-.w.�.».....:"., i .� a :�" =fir ',-al ,;.tea ,,+...:+« 7 ( , 1 > ,.. ,,.� -> :.� .. � ., . .: t .,' F•, ,, r�, .�� a :�> f>. tra�t_,it :�rovise�s,i'c,rt rli�;t�icts, arks ]rCV der;,e;ci ` m approaches and transit-oriented development in ❑ Develop brownfield redevelopment plans and , . . f; k.0'.'41* ' 4,, s� local plans and projects leverage local funding to seek state and federal ''''-:::1-.1' -� A r- ❑ Convene regional brownfield coalition and funding and create partnerships that leverage ' strengthen regional brownfields program by the investment of private and non-profit providing increased funding and technical developers assistance to local governments to leverage the investment of private and non-profit developers Make transit more convenient, Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) frequent,accessible and ❑ Begin update to Oregon Public Transportation ❑ Build a diverse coalition that includes elected ❑ Support and/or participate in efforts to build ❑ Support and/or participate in efforts to build affordable Plan officials and community and business leaders at transportation funding coalition transportation funding coalition ❑ Increase state funding for transit service local, regional and state levels working together ❑ Participate in development of TriMet Service ❑ Expand transit payment options(e.g.,electronic ❑ Maintain existing intercity passenger rail service to: Enhancement Plans(SEPs): e-fare cards)to increase affordability, and develop proposals for improvement of o Seek and advocate for new, dedicated o Provide more community to community convenience and flexibility speed,frequency and reliability funding mechanism(s) transit connections ❑ Seek state funding sources for transit and ❑ Provide technical assistance and funding to help o Seek transit funding from Oregon Legislature o Identify community-based public and private alternative local funding mechanisms establish local transit service o Consider local funding mechanism(s)for local shuttles that link to regional transit service ❑ Complete development of TriMet Service Near-term (2017-20) and regional transit service o Link service enhancements to areas with Enhancement Plans (SEPs): ❑ Adopt Oregon Public Transportation Plan with o Support state efforts to consider carbon transit-supportive development, o Provide more community to community funding strategy to implement pricing communities of concern',and other locations transit connections ❑ Begin implementation of incremental o Fund reduced fare programs and service with high ridership potential o Identify community-based public and private improvements to intercity passenger rail service improvements for youth,older adults, people o Consider ridership demographics in service shuttles that link to regional transit service ❑ Make funding for access to transit a priority with disabilities and low-income families planning o Link service enhancements to areas with ❑ Consider local funding mechanism(s)for local ❑ Consider local funding mechanism(s)for local transit-supportive development, and regional transit service and regional transit service communities of concern,and other locations ❑ Update Regional High Capacity Transit System Near-term(2017-20) with potential high ridership potential Plan ❑ Make funding for access to transit a priority o Consider ridership demographics in service Near-term (2017-20) ❑ Complete gaps in pedestrian and bicycle access planning ❑ Support reduced fares and service improvements to transit ❑ Consider local funding mechanism(s)for local for low-income families and individuals,youth, ❑ Expand partnerships with transit agencies to and regional transit service older adults and people with disabilities through implement capital improvements in frequent bus testimony, endorsement letters or similar means corridors (including dedicated bus lanes, Near-term (2017-20) ❑ Make funding for access to transit a priority stop/shelter improvements,and intersection ❑ Expand partnerships with cities,counties and ❑ Research and develop best practices that support priority treatments)to increase service ODOT to implement capital improvements in equitable growth and development near transit performance frequent bus corridors(including dedicated bus without displacement, including strategies that ❑ Implement plans and zoning that focus higher lanes,stop/shelter improvements,and provide for the retention and creation of density, mixed-use zoning and development near intersection priority treatments)to increase businesses and affordable housing near transit transit service performance ❑ Update Regional Transportation Plan by 2018 ❑ Partner with transit providers and school districts ❑ Partner with local governments and school to seek resources to support youth pass program districts to seek resources to support youth pass and expand reduced fare program to low-income program and expanding reduced fare program to families and individuals low-income families and individuals ❑ Support reduced fares and service improvements ❑ Expand transit service to serve communities of for low-income families and individuals,youth, concern,transit-supportive development and older adults and people with disabilities through other potential high ridership locations, etc. testimony,endorsement letters or similar means ❑ Improve and increase the availability of transit 1 The 2014 Regional Transportation Plan defines communities of concern as people of color, people with limited English proficiency, people with low-income, older adults, and young people. Page 2 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT September 15, 2014 • route and schedule information Make biking and walking safe Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) and convenient ❑ Adopt Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan with ❑ Adopt a Vision Zero strategy for eliminating ❑ Adopt a Vision Zero strategy for eliminating ❑ Adopt a Vision Zero strategy for eliminating funding strategy traffic fatalities traffic fatalities traffic fatalities ❑ Adopt a Vision Zero strategy for eliminating ❑ Fund construction of active transportation ❑ Support and/or participate in efforts to build ❑ Support and/or participate in efforts to build traffic fatalities projects as called for in air quality transportation transportation funding coalition transportation funding coalition ❑ Seek and advocate for new, dedicated funding control measures ❑ Advocate for use of Connect Oregon funding for ❑ Advocate for use of Connect Oregon funding for mechanism(s)for active transportation projects ❑ Advocate for use of Connect Oregon funding for active transportation projects active transportation projects ❑ Advocate for use of Connect Oregon funding for active transportation projects ❑ Leverage local funding with development for ❑ Complete Port of Portland 2014 Active active transportation projects ❑ Build a diverse coalition that includes elected active transportation projects Transportation Plan for Portland International ❑ Review driver's education training materials and officials and community and business leaders at ❑ Seek opportunities to coordinate local Airport certification programs and make changes to local,regional and state levels working together investments with investments being made by ❑ Prepare a TriMet Bicycle Plan increase awareness of bicycle and pedestrian to: special districts, park providers and other Near-term(2017-20) safety o Build local and state commitment to transportation providers Invest in trails that increase equitable access to ❑ Complete Region 1 Active Transportation Needs implement Active Transportation Plan,and ❑ Seek and advocate for new,dedicated funding transit,services and community destinations inventory Safe Routes to Schools and Safe Routes to mechanism(s) ❑ Maintain commitment to funding Safe Routes to Transit programs ❑ Seek opportunities to implement Regional School programs statewide o Seek and advocate for new,dedicated Transportation Safety Plan recommendations in ❑ Fund Safe Routes to Transit programs funding mechanism(s) planning, project development and development ❑ Adopt a complete streets policy o Advocate to maintain eligibility in federal review activities ❑ Partner with local governments to conduct site- formula programs(i.e., NHPP,STP,CMAQ) Near-term (2017-20) specific evaluations from priority locations and discretionary programs(New Starts, ❑ Develop and maintain a city/county-wide active identified in the ODOT Pedestrian and Bicycle Small Starts,TIFIA,TIGER) transportation network of sidewalks,on-and off- Safety Implementation Plan ❑ Seek opportunities to implement Regional street bikeways,and trails to provide ❑ Improve bicycle and pedestrian crash data ' Transportation Safety Plan recommendations in connections between neighborhoods,schools, collection planning,project development and development civic center/facilities, recreational facilities, ❑ Support local and regional health impact review activities transit centers, bus stops,employment areas and assessments Near-term (2017-20) major activity centers Near-term(2017-20) ❑ Provide technical assistance and planning grants ❑ Build infrastructure and urban design elements ❑ Provide technical assistance and expand grant to support development and adoption of that facilitate and support bicycling and walking funding to support development and adoption of complete streets policies (e.g.,completing gaps,crosswalks and other complete streets policies and designs ❑ Provide technical assistance and funding to crossing treatments,wayfinding signs, bicycle ❑ Expand existing funding for active transportation support complete street designs in local planning parking, bicycle sharing programs, lighting, investments and project development activities separated facilities) ❑ Review the regional transportation functional ❑ Invest to equitably complete active plan and make amendments needed to transportation network gaps in centers and along implement the Regional Active Transportation streets that provide access to transit stops, Plan schools and other community destinations ❑ Update and fully implement the Regional ❑ Link active transportation investments to Transportation Safety Plan providing transit and travel information and ❑ Update best practices in street design and incentives complete streets, including: ❑ Partner with ODOT to conduct site-specific o develop a complete streets checklist evaluations from priority locations identified in o provide design guidance to minimize air the ODOT Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety pollution exposure for bicyclists and Implementation Plan pedestrians ❑ Expand Safe Routes to Schools programs to o use of green street designs that include tree include high schools and Safe Routes to Transit Page 3 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT September 15, 2014 POLICY TOOLBOX OF POSSIBLE ACTIONS (2015-2020) WHAT CAN THE STATE DO? WHAT CAN METRO DO? WHAT CAN CITIES AND COUNTIES DO? WHAT CAN SPECIAL€ ISTRICTS DO? - krwa w<;r; au�+' 3:vvu'� ,r*W:.,, *'.i° +�. .� :' .., ,F... Yom.: plantings to su pp ort carbon sequestration ❑ Adopt "complete streets" policies and designs to o identify new pavement and hard surface support all users materials proven to help reduce ❑ Establish local funding pool to leverage state and infrastructure-related heat gain federal funds Make streets and highways safe, Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Near-term (2017-20) reliable and connected ❑ Maintain existing highway network to improve ❑ Build a diverse coalition that includes elected ❑ Maintain existing street network to improve ❑ Support and/or participate in efforts to build traffic flow officials and community and business leaders at traffic flow transportation funding coalition ❑ Increase state gas tax(indexed to inflation and local, regional and state levels working together ❑ Support and/or participate in efforts to build ❑ Support railroad grade separation projects in fuel efficiency) to: transportation funding coalition corridors to allow for longer trains and less ❑ Update the Oregon Transportation Safety Action o Ensure adequate funding of local ❑ Seek opportunities to implement Regional delay/disruption to other users of the system Plan maintenance and support city and county Transportation Safety Plan recommendations in ❑ Review driver's education training materials and efforts to fund maintenance and preservation planning, project development and development certification programs and make changes to needs locally review activities increase awareness of safety for all system users o Support state and federal efforts to increase Near-term(2017-20) Near-term(2017-20) gas tax(indexed to inflation and fuel ❑ Work with ODOT and Metro to consider ❑ Work with Metro and local governments to efficiency) alternative performance measures consider alternative performance measures o Support state and federal efforts to ❑ Support railroad grade separation projects in ❑ Integrate multi-modal designs in road implement mileage-based road usage charge corridors to allow for longer trains and less improvement and maintenance projects to program delay/disruption to other users of the system support all users ❑ Seek opportunities to implement Regional ❑ Invest in making new and existing streets ❑ Pilot new pavement and hard surface materials Transportation Safety Plan recommendations in complete and connected to support all users proven to help reduce infrastructure-related heat planning, project development and development ❑ Integrate multi-modal designs in road gain review activities improvement and maintenance projects to ❑ Use green street designs that include tree Near-term (2017-20) support all users plantings to support carbon sequestration ❑ Work with ODOT and local governments to ❑ Pilot new pavement and hard surface materials consider alternative performance measures proven to help reduce infrastructure-related heat ❑ Provide technical assistance and grant funding to gain support integrated transportation system ❑ Use green street designs that include tree management operations strategies in local plans, plantings to support carbon sequestration p rojects and project development activi i es ❑ Update and fully implement Regional Transportation Safety Plan ❑ Update best practices in street design and complete streets, including: o Develop a complete streets checklist o Provide design guidance to minimize air pollution exposure for bicyclists and pedestrians o Use of green street designs that include tree plantings to support carbon sequestration o Identify new pavement and hard surface materials proven to help reduce infrastructure-related heat gain Page 4 'I PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT September 15, 2014 POLICY TOOLBOX OF POSSIBLE ACTIONS (2015-2020) . r, .WHAT CAN THE STATE DO? WHAT CAN METRO Do' W T AN CITIE5 AND O • T CAN SPECIAL DISTRICTS D07 RA +` N. 5 Use technology to actively Immediate (2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) . Immediate (2015-16) Near-term (2017-20) manage the transportation ❑ Integrate transportation system management ❑ Seek Metro Council/JPACT commitment to invest ❑ Advocate for increased regional and state ❑ Partner with cities, counties and ODOT to expand system and operations strategies into project more in transportation system management and commitment to invest more in TSMO projects deployment of transit signal priority along development activities operations (TSMO) projects using regional using regional and state funds corridors with 15-minute or better transit service ❑ Expand deployment of intelligent transportation flexible funds systems(ITS), including active traffic ❑ Advocate for increased state commitment to Near-term (2017-20) management, incident management and traveler invest more in TSMO projects using state funds ❑ Expand deployment of intelligent transportation information programs Near-term (2017-20) systems (ITS), including active traffic ❑ Partner with cities,counties and TriMet to ❑ Build capacity and strengthen interagency management, incident management and travel expand deployment of transit signal priority coordination information programs and coordinate with along corridors with 15-minute or better transit ❑ Provide technical assistance and grant funding to capital projects service integrate transportation system management ❑ Partner with TriMet to expand deployment of operations strategies in local plans, project transit signal priority along corridors with 15- development, and development review activities minute or better transit service ❑ Update Regional TSMO Strategic Plan by 2018 Provide information and Immediate (2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate (2015-16) Immediate (2015-16) incentives to expand the use of ❑ Adopt Statewide Transportation Options Plan ❑ Seek Metro Council/JPACT commitment to invest ❑ Advocate for increased state and regional ❑ Expand employer program capacity and staffing travel options with funding strategy to implement more regional flexible funds to expand direct funding to expand direct services provided to to support expanded education, recognition and ❑ Deploy statewide eco-driving educational effort, services and funding provided to local partners local partners (e.g., local governments, outreach efforts including integration of eco-driving information (e.g., local governments, transportation transportation management associations, and in driver's education training courses, Oregon management associations,and other non-profit other non-profit organizations)to support Driver's education manual and certification and community-based organizations) to expanded education, recognition and outreach programs implement expanded education, recognition and efforts in coordination with other capital ❑ Review EcoRule to identify opportunities to outreach efforts in coordination with other investments improve effectiveness capital investments ❑ Host citywide and community events like Bike to ❑ Increase state capacity and staffing to support ❑ Provide funding and partner with community- Work Day and Sunday Parkways on-going EcoRule implementation and based organizations to develop culturally Near-term (2017-20) monitoring relevant information materials ❑ Integrate transportation demand management ❑ Deploy video conferencing, virtual meeting ❑ Develop best practices on how to integrate practices into planning, project development, technologies and other communication transportation demand management in local and development review activities technologies to reduce business travel needs planning, project development, and ❑ Provide incentives for new development over a ❑ Partner with TriMet, SMART and media partners development review activities specific trip generation threshold to provide to link the Air Quality Index to transportation ❑ Integrate transportation demand management travel information and incentives to support system information outlets practices into planning, project development ad achievement of EcoRule and mode share targets Near-term (2017-20) development review activities adopted in local and regional plans ❑ Promote and provide information, recognition, Near-term (2017-20) ❑ Partner with businesses and/or business funding and incentives to encourage commuter ❑ Expand on-going technical assistance and grant associations and transportation management programs and individualized marketing to funding to local governments,transportation associations to implement demand management provide employers, employees and residents management associations, business associations programs in employment areas and centers information and incentives to use travel options and other non-profit organizations to incorporate served with active transportation options, 15- ❑ Integrate transportation demand management travel information and incentives in local minute or better transit service, and parking practices into planning, project development, planning and project development activities and management and development review activities at worksites ❑ Expand local travel options program delivery ❑ Establish a state vanpool strategy that addresses ❑ Establish an on-going individualized marketing through new coordinator positions and urban and rural transportation needs program that targets deployment in conjunction partnerships with business associations, with capital investments being made in the transportation management associations, and region other non-profit and community-based Page 5 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT September 15, 2014 _._. ,.E..., .. '. _. .c M.I .,..,. i,. 5. .. <, -,.... ., ... > ,x,.,... .- i .-._.,,, , a:.:,°..., ,;c. .r. , .. ..: s .. .-,, x rcF a . .... . ,. ,.Sw f,-m .... 'fr. ''.7-=';':=7-:+'.`". � :tea � ,- ,•�- ,- . M, *. .. . ,. .. . ,r 4. am �' ,, .., e,..,, ._. ;.'!„.....:4',4 .. n >: » " .. . ,, fir_ a .., .�, ,>...,., ,„ a sr .,t* ..tR _ ,a. /''e ,.. . ,. >�... %,-P ..., ... .__. . �k s„a . ._s ..i... . ...” r `a .., r»vim._. __ :.' wa. -..<• -_ �,. r_ . : . . TCANM '., ,1 „ O '-aa- „:,... • ,.s. -r-k-3.. ;I VA ...c 4c ,:t.>. J! .. .».. .,,t: , e... ..,...... .. .. 4.. fR+ P s -,.. 1 g�� FF , .• ;.� .� » , rN y � ,-_ x , a 3,. `� k« ❑ Begin update to Regional Travel Options Strategic organizations Plan in 2018 Manage parking to make Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Near-term (2017-20) efficient use of parking spaces ❑ Provide technical assistance and grant funding to ❑ Build a diverse coalition that includes elected ❑ Consider charging for parking in high usage areas ❑ Provide preferential parking for electric vehicles, support development of parking management officials and community and business leaders at served by 15-minute or better transit service and vehicles using alternative fuels and carpools plans at the local and regional level local,regional and state levels working together active transportation options ❑ Increase safe,secure and convenient bicycle ❑ Distribute"Parking Made Easy" handbook and to: Near-term (2017-20) parking provide technical assistance, planning grants, o Discuss priced parking as a revenue source to ❑ Prepare community inventory of public parking model code language,education and outreach help fund travel information and incentives spaces and usage ❑ Increase safe,secure and convenient bicycle programs,active transportation projects and ❑ Adopt shared and unbundled parking policies parking transit service ❑ Require or provide development incentives for Near-term(2017-20) Near-term(2017-20) developers to separate parking from commercial ❑ Provide preferential parking for electric vehicles, ❑ Expand on-going technical assistance to local space and residential units in lease and sale vehicles using alternative fuels and carpools governments,developers and others to agreements ❑ Prepare inventory of state-owned public parking incorporate parking management approaches in ❑ Provide preferential parking for electric vehicles, spaces and usage local plans and projects vehicles using alternative fuels and carpools ❑ Provide monetary incentives such as parking ❑ Pilot projects to develop model parking ❑ Require or provide development incentives for cash-out and employer buy-back programs management plans and model ordinances for large employers to offer employees a parking different development types cash-out option where the employee can choose ❑ Research and update regional parking policies to a parking benefit,a transit pass or the cash more comprehensively reflect the range of equivalent of the benefit parking approaches available for different ❑ Increase safe,secure and convenient bicycle development types and to incorporate goals parking beyond customer access,such as linking parking ❑ Reduce requirements for off-street parking and approaches to the level of transit service and establish off-street parking supply maximums,as active transportation options provided appropriate,enacting and adjusting policies to ❑ Amend Title 6 of Regional Transportation minimize spillover impacts in adjacent areas Functional Plan to update regional parking map ❑ Prepare parking management plans tailored to and reflect updated regional parking policies 2040 centers served by high capacity transit (existing and planned) Secure adequate funding for Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) transportation investments ❑ Preserve local options for raising revenue to ❑ Update research on regional infrastructure gaps ❑ Support and/or participate in efforts to build ❑ Support and/or participate in efforts to build ensure local communities have a full range of and potential funding mechanisms to inform transportation funding coalition transportation funding coalition financing tools available to adequately fund communication materials that support ❑ Advocate for local revenue raising options ❑ Advocate for local revenue raising options current and future transportation needs engagement activities and development of a ❑ Support state efforts to implement a mileage- ❑ Seek and advocate for new,dedicated funding ❑ Seek and advocate for new, dedicated funding funding strategy to meet current and future based road usage charge program mechanism(s)for active transportation and mechanisms)for active transportation and transportation needs ❑ Support state efforts to research and consider transit transit ❑ Build a diverse coalition that includes elected carbon pricing models ❑ Support state efforts to research and consider ❑ Research and consider carbon pricing models to officials and community and business leaders at ❑ Consider local funding mechanism(s)for local carbon pricing models generate new funding for clean energy,transit local, regional and state levels working together and regional transportation needs, including Near-term (2017-20) and active transportation, alleviating regressive to: transit service and active transportation ❑ Work with local, regional and state partners, impacts to businesses and communities of o Advocate for local revenue raising options Near-term (2017-20) including elected officials and business and concern o Seek and advocate for new,dedicated ❑ Work with local,regional and state partners, community leaders,to develop a funding ❑ Increase state gas tax (indexed to inflation and funding mechanism(s)for transit and active including elected officials and business and strategy to meet current and future fuel efficiency) transportation community leaders,to develop a funding transportation needs ❑ Implement a mileage-based road usage charge o Seek transit and active transportation strategy to meet current and future program as called for in Senate Bill 810 funding from Oregon Legislature transportation needs Page 6 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT September 15, 2014 1)01.1F41 ... .., ��: : ,, a , . r, r �. ,. r �. .tea f.: .v,; �3 w ..... ,.....,:a,x fi.a N1YY �,+. .� .Sx. �'w .pp.OF - d r_:.:, .>:.,: ,,.... .., .v:: ...,-,. .. ... ...: .... ".x«n:b-s.�,,..••..waEx+. "M!^^'M'<.mm.s•,wm!ro-s.mw.... .aarex5' Fl T.. dv+fi "-, ... .... .. .<:. -v.y ..�. ..°..... , f e, '.w r,•i-„i •v+w 5` ...a..«+n r... svWk.,.. � a ,: .. �.., � ` r, . ! � � ;:F .�„.__ . . , , ,° WHAT CAN SPE.44 gp2g � p , r µµ a ..� x .. ..-,,. .:. ... yy, � t ,j 1.��3»Y P W Near-term (2017-20) o Consider local funding mechanism(s)for local ❑ Expand funding available for active and regional transit service transportation and transit investments o Support state efforts to research and ❑ Broaden implementation of the mileage-based consider carbon pricing models road usage charge o Build local and state commitment to implement Active Transportation Plan,and Safe Routes to Schools(including high schools)and Safe Routes to Transit programs o Ensure adequate funding of local maintenance and safety needs and support city and county efforts to fund safety, maintenance and preservation needs locally o Support state and federal efforts to increase gas tax(indexed to inflation and fuel efficiency) o Support state and federal efforts to implement road usage charge program o Discuss priced parking as a revenue source for travel information and incentives programs, active transportation projects and transit service Support Oregon's transition to Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) cleaner,low carbon fuels, more ❑ Reauthorize Oregon Clean Fuels Program ❑ Support reauthorization of the Oregon Clean ❑ Support reauthorization of the Oregon Clean ❑ Support reauthorization of the Oregon Clean fuel-efficient vehicles and pay- ❑ Implement Oregon Zero Emission Vehicle Fuels Program through Legislative agenda, Fuels Program through Legislative agenda, Fuels Program through Legislative agenda, as-you-drive insurance Program and Multi-State Zero Emission Vehicle testimony,endorsement letters or similar means testimony,endorsement letters or similar means testimony,endorsement letters or similar means Action Plan in collaboration with California and ❑ Support the Oregon Zero Emission Vehicle ❑ Support the Oregon Zero Emission Vehicle ❑ Support the Oregon Zero Emission Vehicle other states Program through Legislative agenda,testimony, Program through Legislative agenda,testimony, Program through Legislative agenda,testimony, ❑ Lead by example by increasing the public endorsement letters or similar means endorsement letters or similar means endorsement letters or similar means alternative fuel vehicle(AFV)fleet Near-term(2017-20) Near-term (2017-20) Near-term(2017-20) ❑ Provide funding to Drive Oregon to advance ❑ Lead by example by increasing public AFV fleet ❑ Lead by example by increasing public AFV fleet ❑ Provide electric vehicle charging and CNG electric mobility,and to other endeavors that ❑ Support state efforts to build public acceptance ❑ Expand communication efforts about the cost stations in public places(e.g., park-and-rides, advance alternative fuels of pay-as-you-drive insurance savings of driving more fuel-efficient vehicles parking garages) ❑ Work with insurance companies to offer and ❑ Expand communication efforts about the cost ❑ Pursue grant funding and partners to expand the ❑ Provide preferential parking for AFVs encourage pay-as-you-drive insurance savings of driving more fuel-efficient vehicles growing network of electric vehicle fast charging Near-term(2017-20) ❑ Partner with state agencies to hold regional stations and publicly accessible CNG stations ❑ Provide consumer and business incentives to planning workshops to educate local ❑ Partner with local dealerships, Department of purchase new AFVs governments on AFV opportunities Energy(DOE)Clean Cities programs, non-profit ❑ Expand communication efforts about the cost Develop AFV readiness strategy for region in organizations,businesses and others to savings of driving more fuel-efficient vehicles partnership with local governments,state agencies, incorporate AFV outreach and education events ❑ Promote and provide information,funding and electric and natural gas utilities, non-profits and for consumers in conjunction with such events as incentives to encourage the provision of electric others Earth Day celebrations, National Plug-In Day and vehicle charging and compressed natural gas the DOE/Drive Oregon Workplace Charging (CNG)stations and infrastructure in residences, Challenge work places and public places ❑ Adopt policies and update development codes to ❑ Encourage private fleets to purchase, lease or support private adoption of AFVs,such as rent AFVs streamlining permitting for alternative fueling ❑ Develop model code for electric and CNG vehicle stations, planning for access to charging and CNG Page 7 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT September15, 2014 infrastructure and partnerships with businesses stations, allowing charging and CNG stations in ❑ Remove barriers to electric and CNG vehicle residences,work places and public places,and charging and fueling station installations providing preferential parking for AFVs ❑ Promote AFV infrastructure planning and ❑ Update development codes and encourage new investment by public and private entities construction to include necessary infrastructure ❑ Provide clear and accurate signage to direct AFV to support use of AFVs users to charging and fueling stations and parking ❑ Expand communication efforts to promote AFV tourism activities ❑ Continue participation in the Pacific Coast Collaborative,Western Climate Initiative,and West Coast Green Highway Initiative and partner with members of Energize Oregon coalition ❑ Track and report progress toward adopted state goals related to greenhouse gas emissions reductions and AFV deployment ❑ Provide incentives and information to expand use of pay-as-you-drive insurance and report on progress Demonstrate leadership on Immediate(2015-16) Immediate(2015-16) Near-term (2017-20) Near-term (2017-20) climate change ❑ Update the 2017-20 Statewide Transportation ❑ Seek Metro Council/JPACT commitment to ❑ Sign U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate ❑ Prepare and periodically update greenhouse gas Improvement Program (STIP)allocation process address the Climate Smart Strategy in the policy Protection Agreement emissions inventory of transportation operations to address the Statewide Transportation Strategy update for the 2018-21 Metropolitan ❑ Prepare and periodically update community-wide ❑ Report on the potential greenhouse gas (STS)Vision and STS Short-Term Implementation Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) greenhouse gas emissions inventory emissions impacts of policy, program and Plan actions and the 2019-21 Regional Flexible Fund ❑ Report on the potential greenhouse gas investment decisions ❑ Support local government and regional planning Allocation (RFFA) process emissions impacts of policy, program and ❑ Adopt greenhouse gas emissions reduction for climate change mitigation Near-term (2017-20) investment decisions policies and performance targets Near-term (2017-20) ❑ Assess potential risks and identify strategies to ❑ Adopt greenhouse gas emissions reduction ❑ Amend the Oregon Transportation Plan to address potential climate impacts to policies and performance targets address the Statewide Transportation Strategy transportation infrastructure and operations as ❑ Develop and implement local climate action Vision part of 2018 RTP update plans ❑ Update statewide greenhouse gas emissions ❑ Update regional greenhouse gas emissions inventory and track progress toward adopted inventory and track progress toward adopted greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals greenhouse gas emissions reduction target ❑ Through the Oregon Modeling Steering ❑ Through the Oregon Modeling Steering Committee,collaborate on appropriate tools to Committee,collaborate on appropriate tools and support greenhouse gas reduction planning methods to support greenhouse gas reduction ❑ Report on the potential greenhouse gas planning and monitoring emissions impacts of policy, program and ❑ Report on the potential greenhouse gas investment decisions emissions impacts of policy, program and investment decisions ❑ Encourage development and implementation of local climate action plans Page 8 '` Metro HBA w NW Natural' Morn Builders Asvxiatior- d tiwv„y.drt.u.I1wTL„xl Q Bureau of Planning and Sustainability Innovation.Collaboration.Practical Solutions. , s Ala 0 0 QkyofPordund,Onpoe ' Charlie Hales,Mayor•Susan Anderson,Director �_y CLACKAPIAS COUNTY TON 00 64 M 'x' f (' ) Hillsboro PORTLAND METROPOLITAN OREG& ASSC)CIATIC)N AF REAL TC)RS• OREGON dhmRESEARCH . Portland State UNIVERSITY August 27, 2014 Executive summary: Preliminary results of a residential preference study for the Portland region . al„ r i, II A•• I i j Introduction We all make choices when buying or renting a home. Some of the factors we weigh include price, proximity to work, size of the home,size of the yard, and the type of neighborhood. Understanding what's important to residents of the metro area can inform local and regional policies,as well as public and private investment decisions. In the spring of 2014, a partnership of public and private sector interests conducted an innovative residential preference study for the four-county Portland metropolitan area.1 The study seeks to develop a better understanding of: • Preferences for different housing, community, and location characteristics • How factors such as income, number of household members, presence of kids, the age of the householder, and lifestyle relate to residential preferences 1 Clackamas,Clark, Multnomah,and Washington counties 1 The project partners consider this a first effort at gaining a better understanding of a complex topic and intend to conduct this study periodically in the future to gauge whether and how preferences may be changing. This document summarizes the study's preliminary findings. The project partners have also identified possible topics for research and plan to continue investigating trends in the data.Additional detail about the partnership, survey methods, and survey results can be found in the full report. Survey design This study seeks to go beyond typical opinion survey methods in order to gain a better understanding of how people make choices when faced with real-life tradeoffs.The survey presented respondents with two types of preference questions. In the first type, respondents were asked straightforward questions about their preferences. In the second type, respondents were asked with words and images to make tradeoffs like those they would consider when choosing where to live. For this tradeoffs section, respondents were asked to choose one of two housing situations that differed by housing type, commute time, house size, renting vs. owning, neighborhood type, and price. Repetition of those choices by thousands of respondents allows us to understand how important each of these factors is for people from different market segments. This study used an online survey tool. To ensure that the study produced valid results, the survey was completed by a managed representative panel of 800 respondents (200 respondents for each of the four counties—Clackamas, Clark, Multnomah, and Washington). In order to collect enough data for in- depth statistical analysis, the survey was also distributed via e-mail advertisement, including to Metro's Opt In panel, resulting in an additional 5,700 responses (the "public engagement panel"). In total, more than 6,500 people responded to the survey. For both panels, the survey responses were weighted by respondent county, age, and tenure (whether they currently rent or own) to ensure that the sample was representative of the region's population distributions as described in the 2010 U.S. Census.' A comparison of survey responses from the managed panel and the public engagement panel indicates that the demographic profile is comparable enough that the full data set can be used for analysis, but that there are some differences that warrant additional study. For any survey, the phrasing of questions and selection of images play a critical role in producing meaningful results. The project partners brought diverse perspectives to this study and sought to use words and images in the survey that clearly describe different housing and neighborhood types without introducing bias. Over the course of about six months, the project partners worked together to refine those words and images to describe the following housing and neighborhoods types for use in the survey. A description of these housing and neighborhood types can be found in the full report. Housing types Three different housing types were described in the survey: For example, before weighting, both panels under-represent renters and don't reflect the proportions of people living in each of the four counties. Weighting techniques such as these are standard practices used on any sample, including the U.S. Census. • Single-family detached • Single-family attached • Condo or apartment Neighborhood types Four different neighborhood types that illustrate a variety of activity and density levels were described in the survey: • Urban central or downtown • Urban neighborhood or town center • Outer Portland or suburban • Rural Even with a deliberate effort to use clear text descriptions and images, people will understand these neighborhood types differently, perhaps more so than housing types. Additional work could be done to understand how differing interpretations may influence responses. Preliminary results Overall, most respondents live in and prefer single-family detached homes3 When asked simple questions about their preferences, most respondents live in and prefer single-family detached housing. Single-family detached homes 65 percent of respondents currently live in a single-family detached home. 87 percent of the respondents living in a Key takeaways: single-family detached home prefer this housing type. 80 Most respondents live in a percent of all respondents prefer this housing type. single-family detached home and this is the most preferred Single-family attached homes housing type, not just for those 8 percent of respondents currently live in a single-family that live in this type of home, attached home. 11 percent of the respondents living in a but also for respondents who single-family attached home prefer this housing type. 7 percent of all respondents prefer this housing type. currently live in single family attached homes, condos and apartments. Results for this section are reported for the managed panel only.See the full report for a description of survey results from public engagement. 3 Condos or apartments 28 percent of respondents currently live in a condo or apartment. 26 percent of the respondents living in a condo or apartment prefer this housing type. 13 percent of all respondents prefer this housing type. Respondents typically live in their preferred neighborhood type4 When asked simple questions about preferences, most respondents prefer their current neighborhood type.Since the majority of respondents live in the outer Portland or Key takeaways: suburban neighborhood type, this is the most preferred Most respondents identified neighborhood type overall. However, current residents of their neighborhood type as outer Portland or suburban neighborhoods report the outer Portland or suburban lowest level of satisfaction with their current and about half of those neighborhood type, followed by residents of urban central residents prefer this or downtown neighborhoods. Residents of rural neighborhood type. Though a neighborhoods, followed by urban neighborhood or town smaller share of respondents center residents are most satisfied with their current neighborhoods. lives in urban central or downtown neighborhood • 11 percent of respondents currently live in an types, about half of them urban central or downtown neighborhood. 55 prefer that neighborhood type. percent of the respondents living in this neighborhood type prefer this neighborhood type. 13 percent of all respondents prefer this neighborhood type. • 25 percent of respondents currently live in an urban neighborhood or town center. 62 percent of the respondents living in this neighborhood type prefer this neighborhood type. 27 percent of all respondents prefer this neighborhood type. • 56 percent of respondents live in an outer Portland or suburban neighborhood type. 51 percent of the respondents living in this neighborhood type prefer this neighborhood type. 34 percent of all respondents prefer this neighborhood type. Key takeaways: • 8 percent of respondents live in a rural Current residents of rural neighborhood. 70 percent of the respondents neighborhoods, which account living in this neighborhood type prefer this for 8 percent of respondents, neighborhood type. 26 percent of all respondents are most satisfied with their prefer this neighborhood type. neighborhood. °Results for this section are reported for the managed panel only. See the full report for a description of survey results from public engagement. 4 Controlling for other factors such as commute time and price, people are most likely to choose their current neighborhood type This survey went beyond typical questions about preferences to collect information about how various factors affect housing choices.The next section of the survey presented respondents with multiple housing option choice sets where factors such as price, commute time, housing type, neighborhood type, size of residence, and tenure (own vs. rent) varied. All 6,500 plus survey responses (weighted to match Census distributions) are used for reporting the results of these choice sets.The larger number of responses makes it possible to conduct more complex analysis. To understand the importance of neighborhood type when people make housing choices, statistical analyses were conducted on the response data.Those analyses Key takeaways: held all other factors such as price, commute time and All other things being equal, housing type constant. If respondents could pay the same people are most likely (though price, have the same type of housing, same commute not a majority) to choose to distance, etc. but in different neighborhood types, they are most likely to choose the neighborhood type that they live in their current currently live in. However, in no case is there a majority of neighborhood type. As a respondents that would be likely to choose their current secondary choice, respondents neighborhood type. Residents of urban central or living in urban neighborhood downtown neighborhoods have the highest likelihood of or town center locations are choosing their current neighborhood type (44 percent split on whether to choose probability) and residents of outer Portland or suburban more or less urban neighborhoods have the lowest likelihood (31 percent neighborhoods. As a secondary probability). Controlling for other factors, residents of the choice, those living in outer urban central or downtown neighborhood type have a Portland or suburban secondary likelihood (32 percent) that they will choose an neighborhoods are twice as urban neighborhood or town center. As a secondary likely to choose more urban as choice, respondents living in urban neighborhood or town opposed to more rural center locations were split on whether to choose more or neighborhood types. less urban neighborhoods. As a secondary choice, those living in outer Portland or suburban neighborhoods were twice as likely to choose more urban as opposed to rural neighborhood types. Controlling for other factors, the importance of owning vs. renting varies by neighborhood choice Respondents that choose urban central or downtown neighborhoods are more likely to prefer renting their home. Respondents that choose rural neighborhoods are more likely to prefer owning their home. These preferences are less clear for respondents that choose the other two neighborhoods types, urban neighborhood or town center and outer Portland or suburban neighborhoods. 5 Some people's neighborhood choices change when they are asked to consider other factors Though people are generally satisfied with their current housing and neighborhood types, some make different Key takeaways: choices when they consider other factors.To understand People are most likely to how respondents make tradeoffs regarding neighborhoods, statistical techniques were used to test a choose their current series of"what if" scenarios.These "what if" scenarios are neighborhood type regardless not intended to be policy recommendations. They are of tradeoffs in price, commute used for illustrative purposes only to help understand how time, square footage, and people make housing choices. Different "what if" scenario ownership. assumptions would produce different results. What if housing prices increase? Additional context: Some people may change their neighborhood choices if Relatively small percentages of housing prices go up by one-third in their current the region's population neighborhood type. Current residents of the outer represent large numbers of Portland or suburban neighborhood type are most people. Seemingly minor shifts sensitive to increased housing prices; 11 percent would in housing or neighborhood choose different neighborhood types under this scenario. choices can thus have a large Of these suburban respondents that shift neighborhood impact on housing demand choices based on price, the most common response is to and traffic. For perspective, shift to more urban neighborhoods, but a portion would there are likely to be about also switch to a rural neighborhood (3 percent shift to urban central or downtown, 5 percent to urban 820,000 households inside the neighborhood or town center, and 3 percent to rural). urban growth boundary in 2035. Just five percent of that What if ownership of single-family detached homes is is 41,000 households. more limited? Some people may choose a different neighborhood type if Key takeaways: they are unable to own a single-family detached home in Residents of rural their current neighborhood type. Current residents of neighborhoods feel strongly rural neighborhoods place the most importance on about owning a single-family owning a single-family detached home and there is a 27 detached home. Over a percent probability that they will shift to a more urban neighborhood type to accommodate that housing quarter of them would choose preference. On the other hand, current residents of urban a more urban neighborhood central or downtown neighborhoods place the least type if that was their only importance on owning a single-family detached home; option to own a single family most would rather choose a different housing type than detached home. 6 leave their current neighborhood type. 6 percent would choose a different neighborhood type. What if commute times increase? Some people may choose a different type of neighborhood if commute times go up by ten minutes in Key takeaways: their current neighborhood type.' Current residents of the Most respondents don't urban neighborhood or town center type are most change their neighborhood sensitive to commute times. 7 percent of urban preference when faced with neighborhood or town center respondents would shift longer commutes. neighborhood choices based on increased commute time. 3 percent would choose an urban central or downtown neighborhood, 2 percent would choose an outer Portland or suburban neighborhood, and 1 percent would choose a rural neighborhood.6 Current residents of rural neighborhoods are least sensitive to increased commute times,with 3 percent shifting their neighborhood choice when faced with increased commute time. What if residences are smaller? Some people may choose a different neighborhood type if the size of residences in their current neighborhood type decrease by 500 square feet.'Current residents of the urban central or downtown neighborhood type are most sensitive to decreases in residence size. Making up the 12 percent of urban central respondents that shift neighborhood choices based on decreased home size, 7 percent choose an urban neighborhood or town center, 4 percent choose an outer Portland or suburb, and 2 percent would choose a rural neighborhood.8 Other factors that people consider when deciding where to liver In addition to asking respondents to weigh potential tradeoffs,the survey also included traditional opinion polling to address other factors that may influence residential choices, but that are not possible to quantify to present as tradeoffs. Safety of neighborhoods and public school quality are two such factors that were addressed with more traditional survey techniques. Respondents say that housing price, safety of the neighborhood, and characteristics of the house, in that order, are the most important factors when choosing a home. • 44 percent rank housing price as their top influencer when choosing a home. That increase is about a third of the average commute time. `' Numbers don't add up to 7 percent because of rounding. This would represent a decrease by about a third of average residence size. Numbers don't add up to 12 percent because of rounding. Results for this section are reported for the managed panel only. See the full report for a description of survey results from public engagement. 7 • Safety of the neighborhood (19 percent choose this as their top priority) and characteristics of the house (19 percent) are the next most influential factors. • Quality of public schools was the number one influencer for just 3 percent of respondents and was ranked in the top three by 11 percent. A majority of respondents prefer neighborhoods with a moderate amount of foot and vehicle traffic. Key takeaways: • 55 percent prefer moderate foot and vehicle traffic during the day with some activities within a Most respondents want to live 15 minute walk. in neighborhoods where they • Those living in Multnomah County were twice as can enjoy activities such as likely to desire "heavy foot and vehicle traffic" shopping and entertainment than those in Clackamas, Clark, and Washington within a 15 minute walk counties. The largest share of respondents,though not a majority, prefer a medium-sized yard. • 32 percent of respondents prefer a medium sized yard separating their home from a neighbor. • Owners are more likely than renters to prefer a medium sized or large yard. • Renters are more likely than owners to prefer no yard or little private outdoor space. Next steps This study provides initial insight into the complex topic of how people decide where to live.Together, we hope this work can inform public and private sector efforts, such as the upcoming regional growth management decision, to provide the diversity of housing and neighborhood choices that people desire. The project partners hope to improve upon and update this study to understand how preferences may change over time. The project partners have identified several topics that warrant additional research: • Even with text descriptions and images, people may have different perceptions about what is meant by the various housing and neighborhood types. How might this affect survey responses? How might we improve the survey instrument? • Every survey sample has limitations in its ability to represent the full population. This study attempts to account for that by weighting for housing tenure, age, and county of residence of the respondents. However, as with any sample, there are some variables that cannot be validated (for example, how to balance residents of different neighborhood types when there is no objective way to define neighborhood types). • This study relies on different respondent sources. Are there significant differences in how respondents from the different panels make choices? • What are the best methods for incorporating these survey results into forecast models? • This study represents a snapshot of preferences today. How might they change in the future? 8 September/2014 2014 URBAN GROWTH REPORT Revised Draft 40 Investing in our communities (c‘pri,....1r 2015 — 2035 0 1-7 , ■ ij? 0 Metro I Making a great place If you picnic at Blue Lake or take your kids to the Oregon Zoo,enjoy symphonies at the Schnitz or auto shows at the convention center,put out your trash or drive your car-we've already crossed paths. So,hello.We're Metro-nice to meet you. In a metropolitan area as big as Portland,we can do a lot of things better together.Join us to help the region prepare for a happy,healthy future. Metro Council President Tom Hughes Metro Councilors Shirley Craddick,District 1 Carlotta Collette,District 2 Craig Dirksen,District 3 Kathryn Harrington,District 4 Sam Chase,District 5 Bob Stacey,District 6 Auditor Suzanne Flynn 01 Metro Making a great place If you have a disability and need accommodations,call 503-220-2781,or call Metro's TDD line at 503-797-1804. If you require a sign language interpreter,call at least 48 hours in advance.Activities marked with this symbol are wheelchair accessible. t Bus and MAX information 503-238-RIDE(7433)or trimet.org Stay in touch with news,stories and things to do. oregon metro.g ov/connect ►z f To learn more about the growth management decision and the urban growth report,visit oregonmetro.gov/growth �n iet rcleA.�iiient paper,air.,.. Revised Draft 2014 URBAN GROWTH REPORT Investing in our communities 2015 — 2035 pg 13 TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDICES Introduction 5 APPENDIX 1A Population and Working together 6 employment forecast for the Portland- , Vancouver-Hillsboro Successes and challenges 7 metropolitan statistical area(2015-2035) Outcomes-based approach to growth management .7 APPENDIX 1B Frequently asked How has the region been growing? 8 questions about population and employment forecasting Residential development trends 8 APPENDIX 1C Summary of regional Employment trends 9 forecast advisory panel Lund readiness or lurid supply: discussions and 'Ivinges in our communities is conclusions Unintended consequences of redevelopment 12 APPENDIX 10 A brief description of 12 Metro's population forecast model 12 Commuting trends:The jobs-housing balance 13 APPENDIX 2 Buildable land inventory 3 methodology How many more people and jobs should we expect in the future? 14 APPENDIX 3 Buildable land inventory results i Population and job growth in the seven-county Portland/Vancouver APPENDIX 4 Housing needs analysis metropolitan area 14 APPENDIX 5 Residential development Population and job growth in the Metro urban growth boundary 15 trends How much room for growth is there inside the UGB? 16 APPENDIX 6 Employment demand analysis 1'` Estimating residential growth capacity 17 APPENDIX 7 Large industrial site 19 demand analysis 19 APPENDIX 8 Employment trends Estimating employment growth capacity 20 APPENDIX 9 Employment land site characteristics Is there a regional need for additional growth capacity? 21 APPENDIX 10 Opportunity maps 21 APPENDIX 11 MetroScope scenario Does the region need more land for housing growth? 21 specifications 22 APPENDIX 12 Housing and �3 transportation cost 23 burden analysis Does the region need more land for industrial job growth? 24 How should the region prioritize investments in large industrial site readiness? 25 Does the region need more land for commercial job growth? 26 Conclusion 27 Local leadership 27 Metro's role 27 Investing in our communities 27 Next steps 28 References 29 c. ow 1 lo• . t> 4a li -4.‘ M )476... y 4 f f, 4 i. .. „adoh A fi .....,_t . Z ... 4dr - , 4 w 4 . , , , . „Jr_ :- _ ` . ' _ L. elf, -¢;.7..._ . „._,,,,,, _.., ,...„..,,. 0 It - } • ! y..„: „ . „lir i „ .c... . _ . . - ) 4 , , ,,... ...;...:.;.....: , _, ..........„..„...:: # 4111Pr- /pi , 1 • f Introduction As the Portland metropolitan region Oregon law requires that every five years,the Metro grows, our shared values guide policy Council evaluate the capacity of the region's urban growth boundary to accommodate a 20-year forecast of housing and investment choices to accommodate needs and employment growth.The results of that growth and change, while ensuring our evaluation are provided in the urban growth report. unique quality of life is maintained for While complying with the requirements of state law, generations to come. the urban growth report serves as more than just an Metro,local jurisdictions and many other partners work accounting of available acres inside the urban growth together to guide development in the region.This means boundary.It plays a vital role in the implementation of the striking a balance between preservation of the farms and region's So-year plan that calls for the efficient use of land, forests that surround the Portland region,supporting the redevelopment before expansion,and the preservation of revitalization of existing downtowns,main streets and the region's resources for future generations. employment areas,and ensuring there's land available for new development on the edge of the region when needed. P9/5 WORKING TOGETHER ACHIEVING DESIRED OUTCOMES The population and employment range forecasts in the urban growth report To guide its decision-making,the Metro help inform Metro,local jurisdictions,and other public and private sector Council,on the advice of the Metro Policy partners as they consider new policies,investments,and actions to maintain Advisory Committee(MPAC),adopted six desired outcomes,characteristics of a the region's quality of life and promote prosperity. successful region: The urban growth report,once accepted in its final form by the Metro Council • People live,work and play in vibrant in December 2014,will serve as the basis for the council's urban growth communities where their everyday needs management decision,which will be made by the end of 2015. are easily accessible. But the work does not end with the council's decision.Implementation will • Current and future residents benefit require coordination of local,regional and state policy and investment actions. from the region's sustained economic In its role as convener for regional decision-making,Metro is committed to competitiveness and prosperity. building and maintaining partnerships and alignments among the different • People have safe and reliable transportation levels of government and between the public and private sectors. choices that enhance their quality of life. • The region is a leader in minimizing contributions to global warming. Past growth-future forecast • Current and future generations enjoy clean Population and job growth within the Metro urban growth boundary air,clean water and healthy ecosystems. 1990-2035 • The benefits and burdens of growth and change are distributed equitably. • ]ESTiMATEO RnNGc C E GE c co 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 Lf1 N1 N' 1990 2010 2035 1990 2010 2035 1990 2010 2035 Population' Jobs Acres URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY 'UG6) pg/6 SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES HOW WE ACCOMMODATE GROWTH The region's longstanding commitment to protecting farms and forests, investing in existing communities,and supporting businesses that export URBAN AND RURAL RESERVES Areas goods and services is paying off in economic growth.From 2001 to 2012, outside the current UGB designated by the Portland region ranked third among all U.S.metropolitan areas for Metro and the three counties through a collaborative process.Urban reserves are productivity growth,outpacing the Research Triangle in North Carolina,the the best places for future growth if urban Silicon Valley in California,and several energy producing regions in Texas.' growth expansions are needed over the • Likewise,the region's walkable downtowns,natural landscapes,and renowned next 50 years.Rural reserves are lands that restaurants,breweries,and vineyards are well known around the world.In won't be urbanized for the next 50 years. I 2013,visitors to Clackamas,Multnomah and Washington counties spent$4.3 /. billion dollars,supporting 30,100 jobs in the region."These successes are no INFILL Development on a tax lot where the accident-they demonstrate that prosperity,livability and intentional urban original structure has been left intact and growth management are compatible. the lot is considered developed. REDEVELOPMENT Development on a tax P However,Metro and its partners also have challenges to face when it comes to lot where the original structure has been planning for additional population and employment growth.These include demolished and there is a net increase in making sure that workforce housing is available in locations with access housing units. to opportunities,providing more family-friendly housing choices close to downtowns and main streets,delivering high quality transportation options VACANT LAND Land inside the UGB that's that help people get where they need to go,ensuring freight mobility,and not developed. protecting and enhancing the environment. , ,, - 1 r.- t - ',ail. 1 i 1 ,� l . �M■ - 4 it -- -- �. . "a Timant . Mir .--. -' f.: . 1 Mili* 7. . .- - .- '. : . ''7'------ .-..'1;47.9~1--- -r• '---*-- -. — 1r ..- . Outcomes-based approach to growth management A core purpose of the urban growth report is to determine whether the current urban growth boundary(UGB)has enough space for future housing and employment growth.Considerable care and technical engagement have gone into the assessment of recent development trends,growth capacity,and the population and employment forecasts provided in this report.However,this kind of analysis is necessarily part art and part science.State laws direct the region to determine what share of growth can"reasonably"be accommodated inside the existing UGB before expanding it but ultimately,how the region defines"reasonable"will be a reflection of regional and community values. P9/7 RESIDENTIAL BUILDABLE LAND ' INVENTORY a If the region's historic annual housing -, production records(high and low from 1960 1� to 2012)are any indication,how long might the residential buildable land inventory last? —, SINGLE FAMILY 10 to 52 years MULTIFAMILY 28 to 354 years Urban Growth Boundary ,,,—, History,1979-2014 ,,.,,..,,. My,2014(DRAFT) _ 1990 RCM a 1980 1992 't 2004 1981 1992 m 2004 1982 1993'1'x005 4500 191 / 4000 /00 1985 1998 , _ _ OUTER , 1987 1999 M.2012 r__ 3500 1988 2000.2011 I 3000 - 1989 2001-2014 Grand 8.ga, 2500 /,/Urban growth boundary.2014 .. la 2000 - Cowry baun0' - - - 1500 A • II mM1■ !■ ■ Maw ana a, `.� —' 15 1000 ' ■ ■ ■ «■ ■ ■ ■ ■ .n,anand,alaa Metro 31 MJe a 500 0 • ■ ■ ■ 1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MAP 1 Metro UGB expansions over time(1979 201 4) g .N, Q 'e+1 er e g e�y g g Z O 10 i A ati A 4 5••1 :—.' N N A 9-1 N N M M 9t lb O N N N Units per net acre How has the region been growing? FIGURE 1 Net new multifamily units by density inside UGB(built 2007-2012) The Portland region's original urban growth boundary was adopted in 1979.As depicted in Map 1,the UGB has been expanded by about 31,400 acres.During 160 the same time period,the population inside the UGB has increased by over half 140 P■ a million people.This represents a 61 percent increase in population inside an 100 : urban growth boundary that has expanded by 14 percent. ■ ■ 60 1 1 1 ■ ■ ■ RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TRENDS I 20 Noss ■ ■ ■ m 0 From 1998 to 2012,94 percent of the new residential units were built inside the V ' F3 Y� RiA ' � 8488 d .4. lb .. b 10 ~ ' N y4 N N M M •Z original 1979 boundary.During these 14 years,post-1979 UGB expansion areas '" '' produced about 6,500 housing units compared to the approximately 105,000 Units per net acre units produced in the original 1979 UGB.With a couple of notable exceptions, FIGURE 2 Net new multifamily developments UGB expansion areas have been slow to develop because of challenges with by density inside UGB(built 2007-2012) governance,planning,voter-approved annexation,infrastructure financing, • service provision,and land assembly.Development of Wilsonville's Villebois and Hillsboro's Witch Hazel communities demonstrates that new urban areas can be successful with the right combination of factors such as governance, infrastructure finance,willing property owners,and market demand.There are also challenges in our existing urban areas.Infill and redevelopment have been focused in a few communities while many downtowns and main streets _ have been slow to develop. The 2040 Growth Concept,the Portland region's 5o-year plan for growth,calls for focusing growth in existing urban centers and transportation corridors, and making targeted additions to the urban growth boundary when needed. To achieve this regional vision,redevelopment and infill are necessary.During the six years from 2007 through 2012,which included the Great Recession, the region saw levels of redevelopment and infill that exceeded past rates. P9/8 During this time period,58 percent of the net new residential units built inside l the UGB were through redevelopment(46 percent)or infill(12 percent)and Policy considerations 42 percent were on vacant land.There are a variety of views on whether the HEALTHY DEBATE AND INFORMED "i recession explains this uptick in redevelopment and infill or whether this is an DECISION-MAKING indication of people wanting to live in existing urban areas with easy access Though this report strives for completeness, to services and amenities.What is clear is that development challenges exist balance,and accuracy,there is always in both urban areas and past expansion areas.In some cases,however,market room for debate.At the end of 2014,the demand in existing urban areas appears to have overcome those challenges. Metro Council will be asked to decide if the report provides a reasonable basis During this same six years,new residential development was evenly split for moving forward and making a growth between multifamily and single-family units with a total of 12,398 single- management decision in 2015.Throughout family and 12,133 multifamily residences built.The average density of new this document,policy questions and topics single-family development was 7.6 units per acre(5,766 square foot average that have been raised by Metro Council lot size)and multifamily development was 41.8 units per acre.The highest and involved stakeholders are called out density multifamily developments also tended to be the largest,so while there for further discussion by policymakers and were many smaller developments,the statistics are dominated by the large members of the community. high-density developments.This pattern is clear in Figures 1 and 2(p.8),which depict the number of units and developments built per net acre,indicating levels of density. LAND READINESS OR LAND SUPPLY? EMPLOYMENT TRENDS For better or worse,our state land use As in most regions,many people in the Portland region lost their jobs in the planning system asks Metro to focus on Great Recession.With the ensuing recovery,total employment in the region counting acres of land to determine the was essentially unchanged when comparing 2006 and 2012. However,the region's 20-year growth capacity.Over the recession did lead to some major changes across industries.Private education years,it's become clear that land supply recorded the highest growth rate at 25.4 percent from 2006 to 2012,while alone isn't the cause or the solution for health and social assistance employers saw the largest net gain in employment all of the region's challenges.Working with the addition of just over 14,000 jobs during the same period.Construction together,we must make the most of the saw the largest decline,with a loss of around 9,600 jobs,or 20.2 percent of land we already have inside the urban total jobs,in the industry as of 2006.The loss of construction jobs reflects the growth boundary to ensure that those lands are available to maintain,improve,and housing crash that brought residential construction nearly to a halt for several create the kinds of communities that we all years.Appendix 8 describes the region's employment trends in greater detail. want—today and for generations to come. Aggregating to the sector level,industrial and retail employment declined Working together,we can: from 2006 to 2012 while service and government employment increased(Table 1). • ensure that communities have governance structures in place that can Sector 2006 2012 Net Change Percent Avg.Annual respond to growth and change Employment Employment Change Growth Rate Industrial 244,951 218,311 26,640 -10.9% -1.9% • provide the types of infrastructure and Retail 86.921 84.475 -2,446 -2.8% -0.5% services that signal to the development Service 0.9% community a site or area is primed for 396,470 419,516 23,046 5.8% Government 103,736 108,582 4,846 4.7% 0.8% investment Table 1 Employment in the three-county area by aggregated sector 2006-2012 • make the strategic investments needed (Clackamas,Multnomah,Washington)I Source Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages to clean up and reuse neglected lands. • pg/9 , ; Policy considerations a; LI CHANGES IN OUR COMMUNITIES c:::\t, N-i--......, --- .. People around the region are concerned 1 ' about new development in their �s �`... . communities.The concern exists not just Al .tier in existing urban areas experiencing a new {ENTII�I wave of development,but also in areas n _ added to the urban growth boundary.With .—..-. Nqff'.. population growth expected to continue, change is inevitable.What policies and ---1 - ,1 INNER investments are needed to ensure that 1 - change is for the better? '-1 ,. .- oV,Ell oI,En s , s t � Employment 2006 to 2012 °Lr pdst2014(DRAFr) LACKaPAPS dr •nxx-iox ..•.....w ri .r..... '-] .t ■mO% aI - am,... ,x . di ale a.E% i - - - ' .. All xaxrE.w 0METRO f ` y ■ •tln Map 2 Employment gains and losses in Metro UGB 2006-2012 From 2006 to 2012,there was also a change in where jobs were located in the three-county area(Map 2).While about 25 percent of all jobs could still be found in the central part of the region,the subarea experienced a loss of about 2,300 jobs,or 1.2 percent.The inner I-5 area saw a decline in employment of roughly 2,200 jobs,or 11.o percent of 2006 employment.This area was home to many firms involved in real estate and finance,industries that were hard hit by the housing collapse and recession. Many businesses in the area,like mortgage and title companies,contracted or closed during this time period.For example, the Kruse Way area in Lake Oswego had an office vacancy rate of 22.4 percent in 2012.In the southeastern part of the region,the outer Clackamas and outer I-5 subareas together lost about 3,400 jobs or 3.2 percent.In contrast,the outer Westside experienced the greatest increase in employment,gaining about 5,800 jobs,an increase of 5.6 percent.The East Multnomah subarea also gained jobs,increasing employment by 1,80o or 2.7 percent. 250,000 •2006 employment 200,000 •2012 employment E 150,000 1 100.000 W 50,000 _ `4.<1 SO 4.3 L y / i� c ,, 4%. .. de 04- 4, UGS subarea Figure 3 Total employment by subarea for 2006 and 2012 pg/10 • j _ r :.�.� \t �.tr mow.. aR .• � Case study VILLEBOIS, WILSONVILLE The Villebois community is one of only a few urban growth boundary expansion areas that has been developed.The roughly 500-acre area was brought into the UGB in 2000.With plans for about 2,600 households,the area quickly rebounded from the recession and is now about half built.Residents benefit from a variety of amenities such as parks,plazas,and community centers. ti Ia, try • Oil R of- .,tom. • • _ 0.. . ' '•._ • _ Case study HASSALO ON 8TH, LLOYD DISTRICT, PORTLAND Adjacent to MAX and streetcar stops,construction is now underway on a site that was previously a parking lot.Once built,the develop- . ment will provide over 600 rental apartments,plazas,office and retail space,more than i,000 underground car parking places,and space to park more than 1,000 bikes-all in a central location. p9/11 UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF REDEVELOPMENT Policy considerations Our region has made a commitment to ensuring its decisions improve quality OPPORTUNITIES FOR WORKFORCE of life for all.Yet,like many metropolitan areas,we've struggled to make HOUSING good on that intent.Investments made to encourage redevelopment and Market-rate workforce housing is typically revitalization have too often disproportionately impacted those of modest provided by existing housing stock,not means.The consequence has been that people with lower incomes have often new construction.Yet,existing housing in been displaced from their long-time communities when redevelopment in the locations with good access to jobs is often city center drives up land values and prices follow. too expensive for the region's workforce. What policies,investments,innovative Map 3 shows the change in median family income around the region over the • housing designs and construction last decade.There is a clear trend of incomes increasing in close-in Northwest, techniques could provide additional Northeast,and Southeast Portland,Lake Oswego,and West Linn,while workforce housing in locations with good incomes have stagnated or decreased elsewhere.Outlying areas like outer transportation options?Who has a role? east Portland,Gresham,Cornelius,and Aloha stand out as having decreasing incomes.In many cases,increases in incomes in central locations and decreases elsewhere indicate displacement of people from their communities as housing prices increase. ... .. ..„, ' -17 ' IE,. Ma, Change In Median Family Income By Census Tract,2000 to 2008-2012 a rew _ luly,2014(DRAFT) , • II30.1%m93.7% /N/wean growth nwraa,v tn . le"\ 10 .,,..i, 1%te 10.0% �•(aunty Wan 2.1%to IOA% '.44.arena. v 3!%1020% f man W We, ' Aft to-2O% 11 3131Ite 30.0% Metro ,. Map 3 Change in median family income 2000-2012 GROWTH WITHOUT SERVICES AND FACILITIES Over the last couple of decades,the trend of depopulation of the urban core and the movement of the middle class to the suburbs has reversed in many regions 1 in the U.S.The Portland metropolitan region is no exception.While there have been positive outcomes,this has also led to displacement and concentrations of poverty in places that lack adequate services and facilities like sidewalks and transit.Additional information about access to opportunity around the region can be found in Appendix io.Information about housing and transportation cost burdens can be found in Appendix 12. pg/12 COMMUTING TRENDS: THE JOBS-HOUSING BALANCE ' For years,leaders have talked about a jobs-housing balance-ensuring there ,• , are homes close to employment areas.But evidence and common sense tell us ''4,. . , that people's lives don't neatly line up with the available housing inventory. -g' .-w _ • Some people work at or close to home,some commute from one end of the a1 region to the other,and some live halfway between where they work and their '1 L spouse works.In other words,putting homes next to major employers doesn't y r necessarily cut down on commuting. P However,services and amenities near residential areas can make our lives `.,, ." ,j∎- outside of jobs and commutes easier and help create strong local economies. , .� , When people can go out to eat,do their shopping,visit the bank or see a doctor ' `*. ' close to where they live,they spend less time going somewhere and more time with friends and family,actively enjoying their communities and the region. Policy considerations Map 4 illustrates the region's commute patterns.Using Washington County as A BIGGER PICTURE an example(2011 data):"' Regional and local policies and investments also interact with actions taken in • about 120,000 people who live in Washington County also work there neighboring cities,Clark County and Salem. What are the best policies for using land • about 118,000 people who live outside Washington County work in efficiently and reducing time spent in Washington County traffic? • about 104,000 people who live in Washington County work outside Washington County. TRAVEL COMMUTE PATTERNS 2011 commute patterns from cities/places in the Portland metropolitan region Lines connect a person's place of residence to place of employment Line thickness represents number of people RANKS VANCOUVER. MONtH PLAINS - PO >t"'" POk NAND HILL -�' • .._ __ .� �f(E( f•llYfF N,.... - Or"411Wil ' -DHW '� i . ' x14', ^F- 5 S H A M -...nw ,.. /16+�-.! i 'TF'jTi AST � A *if 4 4 o Wit} J� ' 4/ Maf►*lll FY \ 411/4 4 � 1 ' ..,.,US Il :7:C'4 ICI'./ eft, ('-2 .:•014'.41.' 1 r .I w T�Y tN lMF 1 , / ■ ■ .(i i , (" OPEN N CITY pg'13 • Policy considerations How many more people and jobs should MANAGING UNCERTAINTY we expect in the future? • What are the risks and opportunities of A core question this report addresses is how many more people and jobs planning for higher or lower growth in the should the region plan for between now and the year 2035.In creating the forecast range? 2035 forecast,Metro convened a peer review group consisting of economists • Recognizing that the two forecasts are and demographers from Portland State University,ECONorthwest,Johnson linked,are there different risks when Economics,and NW Natural.The forecast assumptions and results in this planning for employment or housing report reflect the recommendations of this peer review panel.A summary of growth? the peer review can be found in Appendix iC. • ■ Are there different risks when planning However,even with a peer review of the forecast,some forecast assumptions for land use,transportation,or for other infrastructure systems? will turn out to be incorrect.For that reason,the population and employment forecasts in this report are expressed as ranges,allowing the region's • Who bears the public and private costs and policymakers the opportunity to err on the side of flexibility and resilience benefits associated with different growth in choosing a path forward.As with a weather forecast,this population and management options? employment range forecast is expressed in terms of probability.The baseline forecast(mid-point in the forecast range)is Metro staff's best estimate of what future growth may be.The range is bounded by a low end and a high end.There is a ninety percent chance that actual growth will occur somewhere in this range,but the probability of ending up at the high or low ends of the range is less. Appendix 1B describes the accuracy of past forecasts.These typically have been reliable,particularly when it comes to population growth.For example,Metro's 1985 to 2005 forecast proved to be off by less than one percent per year for both population and employment over the 20-year time frame. POPULATION AND JOB GROWTH IN THE SEVEN-COUNTY PORTLAND/VANCOUVER METROPOLITAN AREA To"show our work"and to understand our region in its economic context,this analysis starts with a forecast for the larger seven-county Portland/Vancouver/ Hillsboro metropolitan area.'Full documentation of the metropolitan area forecast is available in Appendix 1A.It is estimated that there will be about 470,00o to 725,000 more people in the seven-county area by the year 2035. Mid-point in the forecast range,or best estimate,is for 600,000 more people. This amount of growth would be consistent with the region's past growth; the seven-county area grew by about 600,000 people between 1985 and 2005 and by about 700,000 from 1990 to 2010.Adding 600,000 people would be comparable to adding the current population of the city of Portland to the area. The forecast calls for 120,50o to 648,500 additional jobs in the seven-county Portland/Vancouver metropolitan area between 2015 and 2035.The forecast • range for employment is wider than the forecast range for population since regional employment is more difficult to predict in a fast-moving global economy.Unexpected events like the Great Recession,technological advances, international relations,and monetary policy can lead to big changes.Mid- point in the forecast range,or best estimate,is for 384,500 additional jobs.This amount of growth would surpass the 240,000 additional jobs that were created in the seven-county metropolitan area during the 20-year period from 1990 to 2010,which included job losses from the recession. pg/14 2 The seven-county Portland/Vancouver metropolitan area includes Clackamas,Clark,Columbia, Multnomah,Skamania,Washington,and Yamhill counties. POPULATION AND JOB GROWTH IN THE METRO UGB A market-based land and transportation computer model is used to determine how many of the new jobs and households in the seven-county area are likely to locate inside the Metro urban growth boundary.The model indicates that about 75 percent of new households and jobs may locate inside the UGB. The share of regional growth accommodated inside the boundary varies depending on what point in the forecast range is chosen.More detail can be found in Appendices 4 and 6.It is estimated that there will be about 300,000 to 485,000 additional people inside the Metro urban growth boundary between 2015 and 2035(Figure 4).At mid-point in this range,the UGB will have • about 400,000 additional people.This would be comparable to adding more than four times the current population of the city of Hillsboro to the UGB.The population forecast is converted into household growth for this analysis. It is estimated that there will be abou •85,000 to 440,000 additional jobs in the Metro UGB between 2015 and 2035(Figure 5).At mid-point in this range, there would be about 260,000 additional jobs between 2015 and 2035.This job forecast is converted into demand for acres for this analysis. 2,000,000 1,750,000 • 1,500,000 0 1,250,000 —High a 1,000,000 o Mid-point 750,000 500,000 Low 250,000 —History 01 tG m N 3 .I CO L 8 i-I N N N N 0 0 Year Figure 4 Population history and forecast for Metro UGB 1979-2035 F I 2,000,000 1,750,000 1,500,000 N 1,250,000 —High 1,000,000 :: Pint 250,000 - History N !>0 G1 Q0 n 3 N N m ,1 .1 N N N 0 0 N Year Figure 5 Employment history and forecast for Metro UGB,1979-2035 pg/15 DIDN'T THE STATE LEGISLATURE JUST EXPAND THE UGB? Signed into state law in the spring of 2014,HB 4078 codifies the fundamental principles behind our region's decision rq , -..� about urban and rural reserves.The legislation provides greater protection for farms,forests and natural areas,offers -' I. 4.1 , sl' predictability to our communities,home builders and manufacturers,and makes - our land use system more efficient.The legislation also expanded the UGB in several locations in Washington County and described how Metro must account for - -those lands in this urban growth report. '_ - How much room for growth is there inside the UGB? Cities and counties around the region plan for the future and prioritize investments that support their community's vision.In most cases,however, long-term plans for downtowns,main streets and employment areas are more ambitious than what is actually built or redeveloped.One task of this analysis is to help us understand how the market might respond to long-term community plans in the next 20 years. To analyze the region's growth capacity,detailed aerial photos of all the land inside the urban growth boundary were taken.Factoring in current adopted plans and zoning designations,the photos were used to determine which parcels of land were developed and which were vacant.Methodologies for assessing the redevelopment potential and environmental constraints of the land were developed over the course of a year by Metro and a technical working group consisting of representatives from cities,counties,the state and the private sector(see pages 30-31 for a complete list of technical working group members). After settling on the methodology described in Appendix 2,Metro produced a preliminary buildable land inventory that local cities and counties had more than two months to review.The draft buildable land inventory described in Appendix 3 reflects refined local knowledge about factors such as environmental constraints including wetlands,steep slopes,and brownfield contamination.Maps 4 through 7 illustrate the buildable land inventory reviewed by local jurisdictions.They are available at a larger scale in Appendix 3.The buildable land inventory is considered a"first cut"at determining the region's growth capacity.For a variety of reasons described in the next section, not all of it may be developable in the 20-year time frame. p9/16 ESTIMATING RESIDENTIAL GROWTH CAPACITY Current plans and zoning allow for a total of almost 1.3 million residences inside the urban growth boundary after accounting for environmental constraints and needs for future streets and sidewalks.About half of that potential capacity is in use today.This urban growth report does not count all of this capacity since doing so would assume that every developed property in the region will redevelop to its maximum density in the next twenty years.A rational developer will only build products that are expected to sell. Redevelopment requires market demand,which is a function of a number of factors,including expected population growth.This affects whether a property will be redeveloped and at what density. `j: ', te Map 4 Employment e "0 $ e vacant buildable tax lots(reviewed by local , jurisdictions) • �,., �e 1 I.• 'L._ w , . K•. —.«"t• :V.. .ti <1''Si '- 2014 Vacant Buildable Land .l I. r.; .•., •+ S 20 (DRAFT) ,.:ti' A: e•.Mo.•.••.o M••••8••..•114•1••••• f• • .. 1 ,i"• t•• I.....3 M. • ...medal W _ 0; ':i • ,•} • 3-I0 • Mu•W I • :i' • 10-35 • MYNU. J • 2530 ._..._..r.. J: • . • Mem..n50 Aug. %'1i .'•, ^/Urban M.«•boundary V! P n....e u.« CM ETRO / 0 2 4 6 s1i••. D Map 5 Employment is e Et infill and w.. redevelopment ' ! candidate tax lots - •e L_ 3 _ _ _ (reviewed by local • -:c; jurisdictions) Al T .,..R L_, .,,.F._.. _� '�. ." a . -._.. 2014 Potential Redevelopment . ! .f "�� • ,.•V 4 T.• ��t�d September,2014(DRAFT) _ •... • I. l....-1•.•.de•1••••24M.i Tan. ! - ,:. • 1..•.w3 A«. • •ow««.W -_.„„ _ 5 • 0-10 • MMd., 1 1 • �!_ • .S'kT r • 35-52 _..._r_... . 1 • • Mw...so.«es Ai te ■,'Co.n•bound, C. op METRO i• 0 3 a _ . 1 ■••••• p9/17 Acknowledging this complexity,Metro staff convened representatives from cities,counties,the state and the private sector to establish consensus for estimating how much of the region's buildable land inventory might be absorbed by the year 2035(see pages 30-31 for a complete list of technical working group members).Redevelopment and infill are most common in locations where there is significant demand for housing,so the growth capacity from redevelopment and infill rises with assumptions for population growth.For this reason,the region's residential growth capacity is expressed as a range.The amount of growth capacity that the region has depends,in part,on the point in the household forecast range for which the Metro Council chooses to plan.Appendix 4 describes the approach for identifying the 20-year capacity range for housing. Map6Residential , '. •, to %vacant buildable tax • ,_ • lots(reviewed by local • '•_..\ jurisdictions) , - L • -- , • _. . ;• ! 4 `,: 17'x- r 1••1}.1t • 2014 Vacant Buildable Land '• ' < k "-.T•'..,,,,,...-rev,,-; Residential land •' ��° " Septenter,2014(DRAFT) •i•�,f *fr..% r ther..•..r We+rl••.r Maas Tam t ell tot lil , C • 16 60 • •6116sww �.. • 61-16. • M al. ..,y • 161-1000 .i. - .ryC v..n ee...... •I e 1.4.,arlermis •.......... ®METRO G 2 4 Map 7 Residential ti • redevelopment r candidate tax lots (reviewed by local 1._, _ i, jurisdictions) ice, ' 1 . 4. tr Ta .a ••.iv 1,-.yytillitit .lyti�• 4,....o..e.,.„i1L,211..? " .t., 1 , ,104,4-11(.., A•,•' ,, i • e 2014 Potential • j. .. •.l ▪ '7,-.}` ` �Mr..1 i...1) ass.•. ;i; '1 • • ,-•• • .. •_ • N-1.0 • YI..a 11.•m C • 01.1100 r • •..5 NS• ' • ' /../•.r•..w w....s 0 ice'o.•lr••••• 1 /".-------j 5*'- -•_. �., e lbws METR 0 4' • 2 4 sar•. pg/18 HOW DO DEVELOPERS EVALUATE REDEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL? _ The construction of new infill(original structure intact)and redevelopment(original structure demolished)projects is increasing in some places,fueled by a renewed interest in and market demand for housing and jobs close to the urban core.In order to realize a return on an investment,given the higher costs of urban redevelopment,investors will evaluate the redevelopment potential of the site by considering the following: • Where is the site located?Is it an up and coming area? �, .-s • What is the value of the existing building or structure on the site?What is the value of the _ land?At what point does the building become worth less than the land it sits on? ' _' • What is the developer allowed to build under the local zoning code? • What are the construction costs and fees for the new building? Policy considerations • How much will the developer be able to sell or rent space for in the new building? HOW SHOULD POLICYMAKERS EVALUATE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL? Since the adoption of the 2040 Growth Concept,there has often been skepticism about the viability of redevelopment as a source of growth capacity.Our region's history shows that developing urban growth boundary expansion areas is difficult as well.Aside from developing a concept plan, ;l ; �� .w what other factors support the likelihood that an urban reserve will be developed if • h4 Yy Ltd brought into the UGB? 2 0 ./-© ■ I I a • 11 11111 IIII1 f 'w 1'; ! Ili till P• Case study 4TH MAIN, HILLSBORO With a shared vision for an active,historic main street area,Metro, the City of Hillsboro and the Federal Transit Administration worked together to attract private sector redevelopment of a city block adjacent to the Hillsboro Central MAX station.4th Main offers 71 market-rate apartments,underground parking,and active retail along main street. The existing 195os era vacant bank building on site is being updated for restaurant and retail use.When 4th Main opened in May 2014,over half the units were leased. pg/19 ' itiliil' , ♦' a`t di l • * , 4i.:1 • 4 ; •N. ESTIMATING EMPLOYMENT GROWTH CAPACITY To determine the UGB's employment growth capacity,analysis began with the creation of a buildable land inventory.As with the residential analysis, employment capacity depends on demand since different types of jobs have different space needs.For instance,an office job will have very different location and space needs than a warehouse job.Metro staff convened a group of public and private sector experts to help update these employment demand factors.Appendix 6 describes the approach for identifying the 20-year capacity range.(See pages 30-31 for a complete list of technical working group members). Different jobs have different space needs n .,. - Ili - MI ' - • It' 7 . '-; , —+.---wl, 4,1 L. _. 'A Ai i 1 :. ''., ,,t f ,:., ,� a ]77` Y �J' its-i- p9/20 WHAT THE NUMBERS SHOW Population and employment forecasts in the urban growth report are expressed as '° ranges based on probability.Mid-point in -- VI �� -:.' the forecast range is Metro's best estimate of what future growth may be.It is less probable that growth will occur at the high or low ends of the range forecast. �- This analysis looks at long-term capacity • needs for: • ,.. • single-family and multifamily housing • general industrial employment uses • large industrial sites Is there a regional need for additional • commercial employment uses. growth capacity? This analysis finds that currently adopted Under state law,Metro's analysis must assess regional,not local or subregional, plans can accommodate new housing at growth capacity needs.While some local jurisdictions may desire additional the low,middle or high ends of the growth land for growth,this analysis is required to keep those needs in the regional forecast range.If policymakers choose to context,knowing that other locations in the region may have greater growth plan for the high end of the growth range, capacity. there is a need for additional capacity for new jobs. This analysis uses a probabilistic range forecast.The baseline forecast(middle of the range)has the highest probability.Though there is a 90 percent chance that growth will occur within the range,it is less probable at the low and high ends of the range. DOES THE REGION NEED MORE LAND FOR HOUSING GROWTH? Regional growth management policy alone cannot ensure adequate housing choices.Other elements that influence what kind of housing gets built include tax policy,lending practices,local plans and decisions,public investments, market demand,and developer responses.All of these factors impact housing production. Appendix 4 describes in detail the residential demand analysis and includes estimates of potential demand by housing type(single-family and multifamily),tenure(own and rent),average density,as well as detail about demand from different household income brackets.For accounting purposes, the detailed analysis uses rigid supply and demand categories-for instance, single-family and multifamily.In reality,demand for these two housing types is somewhat fluid,particularly as average household sizes continue to decrease. By 2035,about 6o percent of new households are expected to include just one or two people. PgI21 Policymakers have the challenge of balancing the type of housing and Policy considerations neighborhoods people prefer with funding realities,governance and WHAT ABOUT DAMASCUS? annexation challenges.They also must consider regional and community goals such as preserving the character of existing neighborhoods,reducing With its ongoing community and political carbon emissions,preserving farms and forests,and creating vibrant challenges,how much of Damascus' growth capacity should be counted during downtowns and main streets.To inform that discussion,Metro and a group of the 2015 to 2035 time frame is more of a public and private sector partners conducted a study on residential preferences policy question than a technical question. across the region and will make results available to policymakers in the early For this analysis,Metro staff followed the fall of 2014. advice of its technical advisory group and used a market based model to determine The capacity estimation method recommended by Metro's public and private that about half of Damascus'estimated sector advisory group recognizes that infill and redevelopment depend on buildable land inventory capacity could demand.Consequently,the capacity from those two sources increases with be counted in the"market-adjusted" greater household demand(i.e.,a higher growth forecast results in a greater residential supply.For modeling purposes, housing capacity). it was assumed that development challenges will persist in Damascus for Table 2 and Table 3 summarize the more detailed analysis of residential needs another decade,delaying its availability provided in Appendix 4.3 to the market.If Damascus'capacity is Single-family dwelling units not available,it may become somewhat Buildable land Market-adjusted Market-adjusted Surplus/ more difficult to provide new single-family inventory supply demand need housing inside the existing urban growth Low growth forecast 75,900 64,000 +11,900 boundary.Does the region have other Middle(baseline) options for making up for Damascus' growth forecast 118,000 90,000 76,900 +13,100 capacity if it is not counted? High growth forecast 97,000 90,800 +6,200 Table 2 Metro UGB single-family residential market analysis of existing plans and policies (2015-2035)3 Multifamily dwelling units Buildable land Market-adjusted Market-adjusted Surplus/ inventory supply demand need Low growth forecast 118,400 89,300 +29,100 Middle(baseline) 273,300 growth forecast 130,100 120,500 +9,600 High growth forecast 165,100 145,900 +19,200 Table 3 Metro UGB multifamily residential market analysis of existing plans and policies (2015-2o35)3 Over the last several decades,communities around the region adopted plans for job and housing growth that emphasize making the most of existing downtowns,main streets and employment areas.Based on those existing plans and estimates of what is likely to be developed in the next twenty years,this analysis finds that the region can accommodate new housing at the low,middle or high ends of the growth forecast range. This analysis should not be understood as prescribing a future for the region. It remains up to policymakers to decide whether these projected outcomes are desirable and,if not,what plans and investments are needed to achieve a different outcome that matches the public's preferences,values and funding priorities,as well as state laws governing growth management. 3 These tables reflect two necessary corrections identified by Metro staff in September 2014.First,in one step of the July 2014 draft report's calculations for housing demand,household data for the entire seven- county metropolitan area were used instead of data limited to the area within the Metro urban growth boundary.As a result the July draft report overestimated demand for single-family housing within the urban growth boundary.A second correction related to lands added to the urban growth boundary by the Oregon Legislature in March 2014 under House Bill 4078.At the request of the city of Forest Grove,this p9 22 revised report counts lands added near Forest Grove as industrial,rather than residential.This reduces regional capacity for housing,but increases the regional surplus of industrial land. Policy considerations IMPACT OF MILLENNIALS ON PROVIDING HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES HOUSING As policymakers consider their options for responding to housing needs,there are Millennials,those born since 1980,are the considerations to keep in mind. biggest age cohort the U.S.has ever had (bigger than the Baby Boomer cohort)and • If policymakers decide that a urban growth boundary expansion is needed to provide room will have a significant influence on the types for housing,where should that expansion occur?Metro is aware of two cities in the region of housing that are desired in the future. that are currently interested in UGB expansions for housing—Sherwood and Wilsonville.Both Today,36 percent of the nation's 18 to 31 cities had residential land added to the UGB in 2002 that they have not yet annexed.Sherwood year olds are living with their parents.IThis requires voter-approved annexation and voters have twice rejected annexing the area.What is a reasonable time frame for seeing results in past and future UGB expansion areas? has variously been attributed to student loan debt,high unemployment or fear of • Given that the region has ample growth capacity for multifamily housing but a more finite supply losing a job,and stricter mortgage lending of single-family growth capacity,should policymakers consider ways to encourage"family- standards.Builders have responded by friendly"housing in multifamily and mixed-use zones?To what extent might that address single- reducing their housing production and family housing needs in this analysis?Are there ways to ensure that housing in downtowns and focusing on apartment construction.What along main streets remains within reach of families with moderate or low incomes? will these trends mean for home ownership, • State land use laws and regional policy call for efficient use of any land added to the UGB. housing type,and location choices in the However,over the years very little multifamily housing has been built in UGB expansion areas. longer term? What is the right mix of housing types in areas added to the UGB in the future and how are they best served? • How might policymakers balance residential preferences with other concerns such as infrastructure provision,transportation impacts,affordability,and environmental protection? Aklii6 /1,0 -, /' l del .■ NMIii .,� I . .., j ' 1 i►tw, I _ t - - IIIL t i -.. F L,. - W p9/23 DOES THE REGION NEED MORE LAND FOR INDUSTRIAL JOB GROWTH? Industrial employment includes a wide range of jobs like high tech manufacturers,truck drivers,and metal workers.Since it is common to find • commercial jobs(offices,stores,restaurant,etc.)in industrial zones,this analysis shifts a portion of the overall industrial redevelopment supply into the commercial category. Table 4 summarizes regional needs for general industrial employment growth, expressed in acres.'Additional detail about this analysis can be found in Appendix 6.The need for large industrial sites(sites with over 25 buildable acres)is described separately.At mid-point in the forecast range,there is no Policy considerations regional need for additional land for general industrial employment uses.At INVESTING IN JOB CREATION the high end of the forecast range,there is a deficit.However,there are limited areas in urban reserves that may eventually be suitable for industrial uses. Metro has been actively engaged in the question of regional investment priorities General industrial employment(acres) since the release of the 2008 Regional Buildable land Market- Demand Surplus/ Infrastructure Analysis and consequential inventory adjusted supply need discussion with regional community and Low growth forecast 6,000 1,200 +4,800 business leaders through the Community Middle(baseline) Investment Initiative.From these growth forecast 7'3O0 5.200 3,800 +1,400 efforts,Metro established the Regional High growth forecast 5,200 6,500 -1,300 Infrastructure Supporting our Economy Table 4 Metro UGB general industrial acreage needs 2015 to 2035' (RISE)team to deliver regionally significant projects and new infrastructure investment Note:reflecting real market dynamics where commercial uses locate in industrial zones,the market adjustment shifts some of the region's industrial redevelopment supply into the commercial land to enhance the local and regional economy. supply.The amount varies by demand forecast. Are there areas where RISE should focus its attention to ensure the region can generate job growth? Case study TROUTDALE - REYNOLDS - INDUSTRIAL PARK Located between the Columbia and ..: n in _.,' Sandy rivers and bordered by the - t f; ---,-Troutdale Airport and Marine Drive, —_ this 700-acre superfund site is being redeveloped with a mix of industrial uses,natural areas and utility and trail access.The Port of Portland is working closely with local,regional and state jurisdictions to redevelop this former aluminum plant brownfield site and return it to productive industrial use with a traded-sector job focus.The Port has invested over$37 million in the acquisition and redevelopment of the site.Today,a portion of the site is home to FedEx Ground's regional 4 This table reflects a necessary correction distribution center.Another$48 million in investment is needed to make identified by Metro staff in September 2014.The correction related to lands added to the urban the remainder of the site ready to market to industrial employers.At full growth boundary by the Oregon Legislature in projected build-out,this industrial development is d to result in March 2014 under House Bill 4078.At the request P P ) 3,500 direct of the city of Forest Grove,this revised report jobs,$410 million in personal income and$41 million in state and local counts lands added near Forest Grove as industrial, rather than residential with a small amount of taxes annually(all jobs). commercial. pg/24 HOW SHOULD THE REGION PRIORITIZE INVESTMENTS IN • LARGE INDUSTRIAL SITE READINESS? 11111/11- ,1 / RI=Ell The region's economic development strategy focuses on several sectors with "' I I anchor firms that sometimes use large industrial sites(over 25 buildable acres).These firms are important because they often pay higher-than-average •� �'' �._ wages,export goods outside the region(bringing wealth back),produce spin off firms,and induce other economic activity in the region.However, forecasting the recruitment of new firms or growth of existing firms that use large industrial sites is challenging since these events involve the unique 111-' 41,1 decisions of individual firms.To produce an analysis that is as objective as att ��- possible,the estimate of future demand for large industrial sites is based on the employment forecast.That assessment and its caveats are described in Appendix 7. Policy considerations The analysis finds that there may be demand for eight to 34 large industrial sites between 2015 and 2035.There are currently 5o large vacant industrial THE PORTLAND HARBOR sites inside the UGB that are not being held for future expansion by existing The harbor is a unique environmental, firms.'This does not include sites added to the UGB in 2014 under HB 4078. recreational and economic asset that To exhaust this supply of sites by 2035,the region would need to attract five cannot be replaced elsewhere in the major industrial firms every two years.In addition to this inventory of 5o sites, Portland region.For more than a century, there are 24 sites inside the UGB that are being held by existing firms for future the harbor has played a critical role in expansion(growth of existing firms is implicit in the demand forecast).Given the history of trade and manufacturing in this total supply of 74 large industrial sites and the fact that there are only two our region.Today,the harbor needs to be cleaned up to continue providing benefits. areas in urban reserves(near Boring and Tualatin)that may be suitable for What is the appropriate balance between eventual industrial use,policymakers can consider whether to focus on land environmental and economic goals?What supply or site readiness. investments and policies can advance those There are a limited number of areas in urban reserves that may be suitable for goals? eventual industrial use.Therefore,this demand analysis may be more useful for informing the level of effort that the region may wish to apply to making its existing large industrial sites development-ready.Existing sites typically require actions such as infrastructure provision,wetland mitigation,site assembly,brownfield cleanup,annexation by cities,and planning to make sites development-ready.Many of these same development-readiness challenges exist in the two urban reserve areas that may eventually be suitable for industrial use.Metro and several public and private sector partners continue to work to understand the actions and investments that are needed to make more of the region's large industrial sites development-ready. 5 This inventory is preliminary as of June 16,2014,and will be confirmed by Metro and its partners before Metro Council consideration of the final UGR.This work is being conducted by Mackenzie for an update of the 2012 Regional Industrial Site Readiness project.However,the inventory is not expected to change enough to result in a different conclusion regarding there being no regional need for additional UGB expansion. pg/25 Policy considerations App, \ l`itr KEEPING SHOPPING AND App,URE& ii p SERVICES CLOSE BY R�`1E� 71111T..— V ill , .It makes sense to locate commercial uses '-_=t "'-• 1;—: � close to where people live.If the Metro �, 1 Council chooses to plan for a high growth r' - S `` t ` ' scenario,are there places where it makes ++.�_ -4 .'' ' a: ♦ P'''i - II` .5.ate^' - -J sense to expand the UGB fora mix of . ., . id 11_0 . " Air. 4, / residential and commercial uses? - '' + 1; . .., ..1 k - `( r I DOES THE REGION NEED MORE LAND FOR COMMERCIAL JOB GROWTH? The commercial employment category includes a diverse mix of jobs such as teachers,restaurant workers,lawyers,doctors and nurses,retail sales people, and government workers.Generally,these are population-serving jobs that are located close to where people live.Table 5 summarizes regional needs for commercial employment growth,expressed in acres.'Additional detail about this analysis can be found in Appendix 6.At mid-point in the forecast range, there is no regional need for additional land for commercial employment uses. At the high end of the forecast range,there is a deficit.However,it may not be desirable to locate commercial uses on the urban edge unless those uses are integrated with residential development. Commercial employment(acres) Buildable land Market- Demand Surplus/ inventory adjusted supply need Low growth forecast Middle(baseline) 4,200 growth forecast 4,400 3,600 +800 High growth forecast 5,000 5,700 -700 Table 5 Metro UGB commercial acreage needs 2015 to 20356 Note:reflecting real market dynamics where commercial uses locate in industrial zones,the market adjustment shifts some of the region's industrial redevelopment supply into the commercial land supply.The amount varies by demand forecast. 6 This table reflects a necessary correction identified by Metro staff in September 2014.The correction related to lands added to the urban growth boundary by the Oregon Legislature in March 2014 under House Bill 4078.At the request of the city of Forest Grove,this revised report counts lands added near Forest Grove as industrial,rather than residential with a small amount of commercial.Making this . p9/26 correction reduces the region's commercial buildable land inventory by 100 acres. Conclusion The 2014 urban growth report is more than an accounting of available acres and forecast projections.It provides information about development trends, highlights challenges and opportunities,and encourages policymakers to discuss how we can work together as a region to help communities achieve their visions.This region has seen tremendous change and progress over the last 20 years and we know change will continue.Our shared challenge is to guide development in a responsible and cost-effective manner so that we preserve and enhance the quality of life and ensure that the benefits and costs of growth and change are distributed equitably across the region. LOCAL LEADERSHIP Examples of strong partnerships abound already.At the local level,cities and counties are working closely with the private sector to bring new vibrancy to downtowns,more jobs to employment areas,and to provide existing and new neighborhoods with safe and convenient transportation options.Residential and employment areas as varied as Beaverton's Creekside District,Portland's South Waterfront,Hillsboro's AmberGlen,Wilsonville's Villebois,the Gresham Vista Business Park and many others,both large and small,are pointing the way to our region's future. METRO'S ROLE At the regional level,Metro supports community work with a variety of financial and staff resources.The Community Planning and Development Grant program has funded over$14 million in local project work to support development readiness.The RISE(Regional Infrastructure Supporting our Economy)program is designed to deliver regionally significant projects and spur infrastructure investment.The Transit-Oriented Development Program provides developers with financial incentives that enhance the economic feasibility of higher density,mixed-used projects served by transit.Corridor projects such as the Southwest Corridor and East Metro Connections Plan are bringing together Metro,local jurisdictions,educational institutions, residents,businesses and others to develop comprehensive land use and transportation plans for individual areas that will support local community and economic development goals. INVESTING IN OUR COMMUNITIES These are just a few examples of the kind of work that's happening all across the region.While the Metro Council's growth management decision must address the question of whether to adjust the region's urban growth boundary, the more difficult questions center on how to find the resources needed to develop existing land within our communities and new land in urban growth boundary expansion areas in a way that meets community and regional goals. Many of these questions and policy considerations are highlighted throughout this urban growth report to support policy discussions in the 2015 growth management decision and beyond. • pg/27 Next steps JULY THROUGH DECEMBER 2014 The urban growth report helps inform policy discussions for the Metro Policy Advisory Committee(MPAC)and Metro Council. DECEMBER 2014 The Metro Council will consider a final urban growth report that will serve as the basis for its growth management decision in 2015.The • Metro Policy Advisory Committee will be asked to advise the council on whether the urban growth report provides a reasonable basis for its subsequent growth management decision. JULY 2014- MAY 2015 Local and regional governments will continue to implement policies and investments to create and enhance great communities while accommodating anticipated growth. MAY 2015 Local jurisdictions interested in urban growth boundary expansions in urban reserves must complete concept plans for consideration by MPAC and the Metro Council. SEPTEMBER 2015 Metro's chief operating officer makes a recommendation for the Metro Council's growth management decision that becomes the basis for MPAC and council discussion during fall 2015.The recommendation will take into account the final urban growth report,assessments of urban reserve areas,actions that have been taken at the regional or local level- such as measures that lead to more efficient land use and adopted concept plans for urban reserves-and other new information that may influence our understanding of future growth in the region. BY THE END OF 2015 If any additional 20-year capacity need remains,the Metro Council will consider UGB expansions into designated urban reserves.The Metro Policy Advisory Committee will be asked to advise the council on the growth management decision. • ./1# yr dr. ■ I Ain Ph ite 1. AM References i U.S.Bureau of Economic Analysis,Per Capita Real GDP by Metro Area,accessed online 4/29/14 ii Dean Runyan and Associates,2013 Preliminary Travel Impacts for Portland Metro,accessed online 4/30/14 at http://www.travelportland.com/about-us/visitor-statistics-research/ iii U.S Census Bureau,OnTheMap Application and LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics (Beginning of Quarter Employment,znd Quarter of 2002-2011) iv Pew Research Center,A Rising Share of Young Adults Live in Their Parent's Home,August 1,zo13, accessed online 5/20/14 at http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/Files/2013/o7/SDT-millennials-living-with- parents-o7-2o13.pdf 29 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Metro staff Ted Reid,project manager for 2015 urban growth management decision Martha Bennett,chief operating officer Elissa Gertler,planning and development director John Williams,deputy director community development Roger Alfred,senior assistant attorney Betsy Breyer,GIS specialist Clint Chiavarini,senior GIS specialist Rayna Cleland,senior visual communications designer Sonny Conder,principal researcher Paulette Copperstone,program assistant Jim Cser,associate researcher and modeler Laura Dawson-Bodner,record and information analyst Dan Hunt,GIS specialist Peggy Morell,senior public affairs specialist Tim O'Brien,principal planner Juan Carlos Ocaria-Chiu,senior public affairs specialist Maribeth Todd,associate researcher and modeler Dennis Yee,chief economist THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE GRACIOUSLY LENT THEIR EXPERTISE TO INFORM THIS REPORT 2014 Urban Growth Report:buildable land inventory technical working group The following people advised Metro staff on the methods used for identifying the region's buildable land inventory.Additional review of the preliminary inventory was provided by numerous city and county staff. Jill Sherman,Gerding Edlen Eric Cress,Urban Development Partners NW Steve Kelley,Washington County Brian Hanes,Washington County Erin Wardell,Washington County Colin Cooper,Hillsboro Ali Turiel,Hillboro • Emily Tritsch,Hillsboro Ken Rencher,Beaverton Mike Rizzitiello,Beaverton Larry Conrad,Clackamas County Denny Egner,Lake Oswego(through June 2013),Milwaukie Chris Neamtzu,Wilsonville Chuck Beasley,Multnomah County Adam Barber,Multnomah County Tom Armstrong,Portland Tyler Bump,Portland(alternate) Brian Martin,Gresham Mike Tharp,Norris,Beggs,and Simpson Bob LeFeber,Commercial Realty Advisors pg/30 Drake Butsch,First American Title Company Stuart Skaug,CB Richard Ellis Dan Grimberg,Arbor Homes Jeff Bacharach,Bacharach Law Andrew Tull,3J Consulting Justin Wood,Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Portland Anne Debbaut,DLCD Jennifer Donnelly,DLCD Tom Hogue,DLCD Gordon Howard,DLCD Jerry Johnson,Johnson Economics Eric Hovee,E.D.Hovee and Associates 2014 Urban Growth Report:residential supply range technical working group This group advised Metro staff on how much of the residential buildable land inventory's redevelopment supply may be developable in the 20-year time horizon. Erin Wardell,Washington County Jeannine Rustad,Hillsboro Emily Tritsch,Hillsboro Gordon Howard,DLCD Anne Debbaut,DLCD Jennifer Donnelly,DLCD Tom Armstrong,Portland Justin Wood,Home Builders Association Jerry Johnson,Johnson Economics Eric Hovee,E.D.Hovee and Associates 2014 Urban Growth Report:employment land technical working group This group advised Metro staff on how various employment sectors use building space(square feet per employee and floor-area ratios). Bob LeFeber,Commercial Realty Advisors Mark Childs,Capacity Commercial Steve Kountz,Portland Tyler Bump,Portland Brian Owendoff,Capacity Commercial Mike Tharp,Norris,Beggs,and Simpson 2014 Urban Growth Report:regional forecast advisory panel Dr.Tom Potiowsky,Chair,Northwest Economic Research Center,PSU Dr.Jennifer Allen,Institute for Sustainable Solutions,PSU Jerry Johnson,Johnson Economics Dr.Jason Jurjevich,Population Research Center,PSU Dave Lenar,NW Natural Dr.Randall Pozdena,ECONorthwest Steve Storm,NW Natural pg/31 oregonmetro.gov/growth Fall 2014 2014 charter vote Measure 26-160 extends a 12-year-old law that prohibits Metro-mandated density increases in single-family neighborhoods. The Metro charter Measure 26-160 asks voters at the Nov. 4,2014 election whether to provision calls for keep an existing provision in the Metro Charter that prohibits Metro the creation of a from requiring local cities and counties to increase the number of homes regional vision and in existing single-family neighborhoods.Voters approved the provision policies while leaving in 2002. It requires the Metro Council to refer the provision to voters decisions about the again this November. number of homes If a majority of voters in the Nov. 4 election vote yes on Measure 26-16o, in single-family the existing provision will remain in effect until the question is again neighborhoods to local put to the voters in 203o. If a majority of voters vote no on Measure 26- cities and counties. 16o,this provision will be repealed on June 3o, 2015. Managing the growing metropolitan region involves many partners: Metro, cities,counties,water districts,parks districts,TriMet, businesses, community organizations, citizen activists and others. The Metro charter provision calls for the creation of a regional vision and policies while delegating decisions about the number of homes in single-family neighborhoods to local cities and counties. This information is also provided The ballot measure question reads as follows: online at oregonmetro.gov/measure 26-160.For more information,contact Shall Metro Charter provision prohibiting Metro from requiring Jim Middaugh at 503-797-1505 or density increases in single-family neighborhoods be retained,with jim.middaugh@oregonmetro.gov. 16-year sunset? Retains provision in Metro Charter prohibiting Metro from requiring local governments to increase density in identified existing single- family neighborhoods. Requires revote in 2030 to remain effective. This prohibition was approved by voters in 2002 and is required by Metro Charter to be voted on again at the November 2014 general election.A"yes"vote on this measure would retain the prohibition Wetro for 16 years; a"no"vote repeals the prohibition on June 30,2015. Making a great place Printed on recycled-content paper-101514 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR (k i r -.I ciLj (DATE OF MEETING) •M c o m m u n i t y p l a n Funding Strategy Stakeholder Working Group/Community Meeting Report 10/1/2014 Overview This was the first in a series of three meetings to gather community input on the proposed River Terrace Funding Strategy.The purpose of this initial meeting was to review the various funding scenarios for the River Terrace Community Plan.The Stakeholder Working Group (SWG), Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and the interested public were invited to attend. This meeting was intended to provide an informational overview only and did not seek to solicit feedback from participants at this stage. Meeting Format The format of the meeting included a mini-open house, followed by a short presentation and a question and answer session with panel speakers facing the audience. Mini Open House: Each infrastructure system station included a map that showed all the projects identified in the master plan. Participants had an opportunity to discuss these projects and their preferred funding scenarios with the project team. Participants were asked to record any questions they had for the panel discussion portion of the meeting. Background Presentation: Susan Shanks,Project Manager,explained that the projects identified in the River Terrace master plans formed the foundation of the Funding Strategy. The project team used their knowledge of each infrastructure system to identify near-term and long-term projects. This information was vetted by Clean Water Services,Washington County,Tigard Council,and developers. Based on their feedback on system needs and anticipated development patterns, the project team developed the draft Funding Strategy. Scenario Presentation: Todd Chase,FCS Group,presented the preferred funding scenarios for each infrastructure system.All scenarios were scored using evaluation criteria selected by the project team after considering the goals of the River Terrace Community Plan and the interests of the city and the community. The highest scoring scenario for each infrastructure system is the preferred scenario and collectively makes up the preferred Funding Strategy. Depending on the infrastructure system, the status quo may be the only scenario or multiple scenarios may have been evaluated. Evaluation criteria included alignment with project goals,city preferences/tolerances,affordability,and whether S. or not it facilitates development. The strategy will continue to be refined as the project team gets input from partner agencies and the public. Of note, the transportation scenario presented at the meeting differed from the preferred scenario in the draft Funding Strategy. This scenario is being revised to account for Council's desire to consider other funding sources besides urban renewal and local improvement districts. Question and Answer Panel Discussion: Panelists included Todd Chase,FCS Group;Toby LaFrance,City of Tigard Finance Director;Kenny Asher,City of Tigard Community Development Director;and Susan Shanks,City of Tigard River Terrace Project Manager. Results The following questions were asked by meeting participants: • Would it be possible to have the total cost of Collector Streets be fully creditable through TDT credits and River Terrace SDC credits?This is the policy in North Bethany. • Bethany has a built-in 5-year review process that is written into the Funding Strategy. It requires an annual report,and the transportation SDC requires a 5-year update. This is something the project team should consider. • Regarding projects in the transportation system plan outside the UGB:What will happen when school districts,developers,etc. come in over the next 5 years? • What happens after the Funding Strategy is adopted? In response,panel members discussed: • In order to make that assumption,you'd have to increase the proposed River Terrace SDC. Right now,we assume only a portion of Collector Streets would be creditable.As to how much the SDC would increase,additional analysis would be needed. ➢ It is important to ensure that the funds collected in River Terrace meet the city's needs. In addition to review,River Terrace funding should be completely in place before moving forward with zoning. The idea is get the fees adopted first.The city anticipates this by July 1, 2015. ➢ The project team is doing their best to anticipate what development will happen,and when. This is a good reminder that the Funding Strategy should be re-evaluated every few years, because we'll need to recalibrate. Part of the overall strategy is that it needs to be a living, breathing document. In addition,we need to keep our eye on the southern urban reserve area.These plans can and should be updated in the future to respond to current conditions. ➢ There are other things that have to happen prior to development,including an implementation list and changes to the development code. The city is also working on a parallel project known as the Infrastructure Financing Project (not to be confused with the River Terrace Funding Strategy).The Infrastructure Financing Project will enact new fees and rates, not just for River Terrace but also citywide.There will be estimates of fees in V December. Steve L. Kelley, from Washington County,provided input that funding will be easier to pass if everything for River Terrace is raised by River Terrace. The following questions were posed by city staff: • Will SDCs collected in RT stay in RT? • I'm a homeowner in RT and don't plan to develop. How will I be impacted by the financial plan? • I'm a developer, and I'm willing to pay my share. How does the city plan to pay their share? In response,panel members discussed: ➢ 75% of citywide System Development Charges (SDC) collected in River Terrace are assumed to be spent in River Terrace. If a River Terrace SDC were enacted, then 100%of the funds collected would stay in River Terrace. Carrie Pak,City of Tigard and Clean Water Services (CWS),provided input that by putting all SDCs into one big pot throughout Washington County,CWS is able to generate enough funding so that they can concentrate on the most necessary projects. She suggests the city lump everything into one SDC,and fund projects as we see fit. ➢ Utility fees will be increasing, and there will potentially be additional transportation fees. This means a River Terrace resident would be paying an additional$20 - 30 above another Tigard resident. Meeting participants asked when the proposed street utility fee would kick in. This has not yet been decided. Recognizing the difficulty of enacting new fees and raising existing fees,city staff and Council are working on how best to handle this. ➢ From Toby LaFrance,"That's what we're here to talk about—we have to discuss what a `fair share'is."The issue is less about inventing new revenue sources.A key question is how the city is going to invest this money to catalyze development in River Terrace.We have a backlog of projects in the city,and now River Terrace is the new project. In addition,we have to think about the long-term operations and maintenance in River Terrace that the city will be responsible for,and the staff time associated with those projects. Currently,the Community Development Department has put in a supplemental request for additional planning staff to Council;Council has a decision to make regarding staffing resources. Meeting Participants City Staff: • Toby LaFrance,Finance and Information Services Director • Susan P. Shanks, Project Manager • Lina Smith,Project Planning Assistant • Marissa Grass,Associate Planner • Kenny Asher,Community Consultants: Development Director • Todd Chase, FCS Group • Tom McGuire,Assistant Community Development Director • Anthony Martin,FCS Group Stakeholder Working Group Members: Technical Advisory Committee Members: • Jim Beardsley • Andy Braun,Clean Water Services • Joanne Criscione • Steve L. Kelley,Washington County • Fred Gast • Carrie Pak, Clean Water Services • Dan Grimberg Community Members: • Jerry Hanford • Steve Jacobson • Ed Bartholemy • Jamie Stasny • Rick Ferris • Barbara Jacobson • Jon Kloor • Clay Moorhead • John O'Neil • Sheri Ralston • Nancy Rasmussen It � iklve a: F 0 U c o m m u n i t y p l a n Funding Strategy Stakeholder Working Group/Community Meeting Report 10/15/2014 Overview This was the second in a series of three meetings to gather community input on the proposed River Terrace Funding Strategy.The purpose of this meeting was to solicit feedback from both the Stakeholder Working Group and the public regarding the various funding scenarios for the River Terrace Community Plan. The Stakeholder Working Group (SWG),Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and the interested public were invited to attend. Meeting Format The format of the meeting included a review of the October 1,2015 meeting,presentation of the updated transportation section of the Funding Strategy, a group discussion of the evaluation criteria, small group discussions on the preferred funding strategy for each system,and a brief presentation on the adoption and implementation timeline. Transportation Scenario Update Presentation: Todd Chase,FCS Group,discussed that in response to early City Council discussions about infrastructure funding in River Terrace, the project team developed a Transportation Addendum to the River Terrace Funding Strategy.This addendum revises the transportation section of the Funding Strategy to account for Council's desire to consider other funding sources besides urban renewal and local improvement districts. It includes an additional scenario (Scenario E),bringing the total to five scenarios that were evaluated by project consultants. Scenario E received the highest average rating,and incorporates the following new funding mechanisms: Citywide Transportation System Development Charge (TSDC) on new development,River Terrace TSDC on new development in River Terrace subdistrict,and street utility fee surcharge in River Terrace subdistrict. Results Transportation Scenario Update Presentation Todd Chase presented Transportation Funding Scenario E,a revision based on feedback from City Council. He first began with a discussion of near-term projects,or those that would be addressed 4 within the first six years,and long-term projects,or those that would be addressed in seven or more years. ➢ Steve L. Kelley,TAC member and Senior Planner,Washington County,suggested that improvements along Roy Rogers Road be moved into the list of near-term projects,as Washington County may require those improvements as a condition of approval for development. He also added that this will create issues balancing projects for Transportation Development Tax (1111) credit eligibility. ➢ Ernie Brown, SWG member and Superintendent of Tigard-Tualatin School District,raised concern about the proposed school site's need for infrastructure outside of the current urban growth boundary. The draft Funding Strategy Addendum moves these projects outside of the 20-year horizon,yet they may be needed by the school district much sooner. Evaluation Criteria The project team posed the following questions regarding the evaluation criteria: • Do the criteria provide a complete evaluation tool for making the SWG recommendation? • If not,what other criteria would you recommend? • Would you weight them differently? In response,attendees suggested: ➢ The evaluation criteria should address mobility needs in and around River Terrace. ➢ Dan Grimberg,SWG member,was concerned that proposed fees would be so high that development would be deterred.Todd Chase answered that one of the evaluation criteria considers how each funding scenario facilitates development,as this is an important consideration. Preferred Funding Scenarios Meeting participants were divided into small groups to discuss the preferred funding scenario for each infrastructure system. Groups were asked to respond to the following questions and then report back to the large group: • Are there any remaining questions about any of the scenarios? • Are there any concerns or misgivings about any of the scenarios? • How can those concerns/misgivings be resolved? • Is there any more information that would be important to have before making a recommendation? • How would you rate this scenario on a scale of 1 to 5 (one being the lowest and five being the highest). V By far,groups spent the majority of their time discussing the preferred scenario for Transportation. All of the concerns collected relate to transportation. Specifically,the following feedback was provided: There was general concern around the details for the two new SDCs. ➢ All groups reported concern about the political feasibility of adopting a citywide transportation system development charge (TSDC). For this reason,one TSDC specific to River Terrace was preferred by many attendees. ➢ Most groups reported concern about the administrative difficulties of calculating, tracking, and implementing two separate TSDCs in addition to the TDT. > Most groups reported confusion or concern about the 75%/25% split proposed for citywide TSDCs collected in River Terrace.Toby LaFrance,Tigard Finance Director clarified that this meant 75%of the citywide TSDC collected in River Terrace would be used on projects in River Terrace,with 25%reserved for use on projects citywide. For projects outside of River Terrace, 100%of the funds collected would be used on projects outside of River Terrace. Additional concerns mentioned in individual groups or by individual attendees included: • The unfairness of not allowing 100%of Collectors to be SDC or TDT creditable. ➢ The cost of River Terrace Blvd. ➢ The impact of projects that dropped off the list (pushed out to later years) that may be needed to support development in the near-term,e.g. to support development of the school site. > The Finance Strategy does not account for TDT credits,and is therefore overstating the amount of TDT revenue available for projects in River Terrace,e.g. for improvements to Roy Rogers Rd. When asked how concerns/misgivings could be resolved,the following ideas were suggested: ➢ Remove the citywide TSDC from the proposal,and adopt a single River Terrace specific TSDC instead. > Phase the adoption of the new TSDCs with the River Terrace TSDC going into effect first, followed by a citywide TSDC. Doing both seems like the city may be biting off more than it can chew. Why not see how it works in River Terrace first,and then expand the program to include the whole city. > TDT eligible projects could remain on the list to ensure that TDT credits are accurately accounted for. • Spend more time considering the 75%/25%split. Would this be used for projects on Pacific Hwy?Could the 25%be used as a gap filler as it is in North Bethany? Only one group had time to rate the preferred scenario for each infrastructure system (on a scale of 1 to 5): • Transportation—3 (noting that it is complicated) > Stormwater—2-4 (noting questions about the pipe needed outside the UGB) > Parks—3-3.5 (noting that it seems pretty fair) > Water—4.5 ➢ Sewer—4 (noting that it seems fair) Additional questions or requests for more information include: ➢ How does prevailing wage weigh into cost estimates for projects? ➢ How much money would the street utility fee generate over 30 years? ➢ Information requests: o A map of funded transportation projects should be included in the funding strategy o What is the bottom line when all systems are considered? (It would be great to see it all together.) o The table format in the transportation addendum is preferred over the format in the draft Funding Strategy o The Funding Strategy should clearly differentiate existing fees,existing fees proposed for increase, and proposed new fees. Meeting Participants City Staff: Stakeholder Working Group Members: • Susan P. Shanks, Project Manager • Jim Beardsley • Marissa Grass,Associate Planner • Ernie Brown, Tigard-Tualatin • Kenny Asher, Community School District Development Director • Joanne Criscione • Tom McGuire, Assistant • Fred Gast Community Development Director • Dan Grimberg • Toby LaFrance, Finance and • Jerry Hanford Information Services Director • Steve Jacobson • I.ina Smith, Project Planning • Jame Stasny Assistant Technical Advisory Committee Consultants: Members: • Todd Chase, FCS Group • Steve L. Kelley,Washington County • Carrie Pak, Clean Water Services Community Members: • Jon Kloor, Homebuilders Association • Clay Moorhead • John O'Neil • Nancy Rasmussen • J. Roberts • Don Roshak • Jenny Roshak • Zeb