Ordinance No. 15-08 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE NO. 15- O S
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 95-28 AND 93-33 IN THEIR
ENTIRETY AND ADOPTING A METHODOLOGY AND OTHER
PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE IMPOSITION AND COLLECTION OF
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES FOR TRANSPORTATION
FACILITIES AND REPLACING TMC 3.24. " oto 4irrLQ
WHEREAS,the City has commissioned and authorized the preparation of a methodology
for calculation of transportation related system development charges (SDCs) for the City of
Tigard, resulting in a new"Parks SDC Methodology Report" and "Transportation SDC
Methodology Report," ;and
WHEREAS,the City intends to use its transportation SDCs as a way to balance the capital
funding needed for improved transportation facilities between existing residents and future
residents of this community,and,
WHEREAS,the City Council desires to adopt a revised and updated system development
charge program that reflects the current requirements and authorizations of ORS 223.297
through 223.314.
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: TMC 3.24 set by Ordinance No. 95-28 and 93-33 are hereby repealed in
their entirety
SECTION 2: The System Development Charge program in Exhibit A is hereby adopted
pursuant to ORS 223.297 through 223.314 and replaces TMC 3.24.
SECTION 3: 23e-mks-SAEtlied6F.@porr;n FY1,; Bic
R-e U Ise d
SECTION 4: The Transportation SDC Methodology Report in Exhibit Cis adopted.
SECTION 5: This ordinance shall be effective on July 1, 2015 after its passage by the
council,signature by the mayor,and posting by the city recorder.
ORDINANCE No. 15-08
Page 1
PASSED: By &A41UMd d-- vote of allcouncil members presen%afterbeig
read by number and title only,this ?R 5'�- day of ,
2015.
Carol A Krager,GtyRecordeV
APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this 2$ kday of -�2/1.1�C ,2015.
;on . Snider, Council President
Approved as to form:
r
Attorney
2J
Date
ORDINANCE No. 15-O8
Page 2
Exhibit A
System Development Charge Program
Sections
3.24.010 Purpose
3.24.020 Scope
3.24.030 Definitions
3.24.040 System Development Charge Established
3.24.050 Methodology
3.24.060 Authorized Expenditures
3.24.070 Expenditure Restrictions
3.24.080 Capital Improvement Plan
3.24.090 Collection of Charge
3.24.100 Installment Payments
3.24.110 Exemptions
3.24.120 Credits
3.24.130 Notice
3.24.140 Segregation and Use of SDC Revenue
3.24.150 Appeals and Procedure
3.24.160 Prohibited Connection
3.24.170 Penalty
3.24.180 Severability
3.24.190 Effective Date
3.24.010 Purpose
A. This ordinance is intended to implement the authority provided by ORS 223.297
through 223.314 adopting and imposing system development charges (SDC) for
capital improvements for the purpose of creating a fund to pay for the installation,
construction, extension, and expansion of capital improvements. The purpose of
the system development charge is to impose a portion of the cost of capital
improvements for water, wastewater drainage, streets, flood control, and parks
upon those developments and redevelopments that create the need for or increase
the demands on the system.
ORDINANCE No. 15-
Page 3
3.24.020 Scope
A. The SDC created and imposed by this ordinance is separate from, and in addition
to, any applicable tax, assessment, charge, fee in lieu of assessment, or fee
otherwise provided by law or imposed as a condition of development.
3.24.030 Definitions
For purposes of this Ordinance, the following definitions apply:
A. "Accessory dwelling unit" means a second residential dwelling unit created on a
single lot with a single-family or a manufactured housing dwelling unit. The
second unit is created auxiliary to, and is always smaller than, the single family or
manufactured housing residential dwelling unit.
B. "Administrator" means that person, or persons, appointed by the City to manage
and implement the SDC program or portions thereof.
C. "Applicant" means the person who applies for a building permit.
D. 'Building Official" means that person, or designee, certified by the State and
designated as such to administer the State Building Codes for the City.
E. 'Building Permit" means that permit issued by a Building Official pursuant to the
State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code Section 301 or as amended, and the
State of Oregon One and Two Family Dwelling Code Section R-109 or as
amended. In addition,"Building Permit" shall mean a Manufactured Home
Installation Permit issued by the Building Official, relating to the placement of
manufactured homes in the City.
F. "Capital Improvements"means facilities or assets used for the following:
1. Water supply, treatment, distribution, or any combination;
2. Sewage and wastewater collection, transmission, and disposal;
3. Drainage or flood control;
4. Transportation; or
5. Parks and Recreation.
G. "Capital Improvements Plan" also called the CIP, means the City program that
identifies facilities and improvements projected to be funded, in whole or in part,
with SDC revenues.
H. "City" means the City of Tigard, Oregon.
1. "Condition of Development Approval" is any requirement imposed on an
Applicant by the City, a City or County land use or limited land use decision, or
site plan approval.
J. "Construction Cost Index" means the Engineering News Record (Seattle)
Construction Cost Index.
K. "County" means Washington County, Oregon.
ORDINANCE No. 15-0
Page 4
L. "Credit" means the amount by which an Applicant may be able to reduce the SDC
fee as provided in this Ordinance.
M. "Development" means a building or other land construction, or making a physical
change in the use of a structure or land, in a manner which increases the usage of
capital improvements or which may contribute to the need for additional or
enlarged capital facilities.
N. "Duplex" means two attached single-family dwelling units on a single lot.
O. "Improvement Fee" means a fee for costs associated with capital improvements to
be constructed after the effective date of this ordinance.
P. "Multi-Family Housing" means three or more attached residential dwelling units
located on a single lot.
Q. "New Development" means development for which a Building Permit is required.
R. "Over-capacity" means that portion of an improvement that is built larger or with
greater capacity than is necessary to serve the Applicant's New Development or
mitigate for system impacts attributable to the Applicant's New Development.
S. "Permit" means a Building Permit.
T. "Permittee"means the person to whom a building permit, development permit, a
permit or plan approval to connect to the sewer or water system, or right-of-way
access permit is issued.
U. "Previous use" means the most intensive use conducted at a particular property
within the past 18 months prior to the date of application for a building permit.
Where the site was used simultaneously for several different uses (mixed use)
then, for the purposes of this Ordinance, all of the specific use categories shall be
considered. Where the previous use is composed of a primary use with one or
more ancillary uses that support the primary use and are owned and operated in
common, that primary use shall be deemed to be the sole use of the property for
purposes of this Ordinance.
V. "Proposed use"means the use proposed by the Applicant for the New
Development. Where the Applicant proposes several different uses(mixed use)
for the New Development then, for purposes of this Ordinance, all of the specific
use categories shall be considered. Where the proposed use is composed of a
primary use with one or more ancillary uses that support the primary proposed use
and are owned and operated in common, that primary use shall be deemed to be
the sole proposed use of the property for purposes of this Ordinance.
W. "Qualified Public Improvement" means any system capital facility or conveyance
or an interest in real property that increases the capacity of the City's System and
is:
1. Required as a condition of development approval;
2. Identified as a need in the SDC Methodology Report; and
ORDINANCE No. 15-016
Page 5
3. Not located on or contiguous to property that is the subject of development
approval, or
4. Located in whole or in part on or contiguous to property that is the subject
of development approval and, in the opinion of the Administrator, is
required to be built larger or with greater capacity (over-capacity) than is
necessary for the Applicant's New Development or mitigate for system
impacts attributable to the Applicant's New Development. There is a
rebuttable presumption that improvements built to the City's minimum
standards are required to serve the Applicant's New Development and to
mitigate for system impacts attributable to the Applicant's New
Development.
X. "Reimbursement Fee" means a fee for costs associated with capital improvements
that have been constructed or were under construction prior to the effective date
of this ordinance.
Y. "Remodel" or"remodeling" means to alter, expand or replace an existing
structure.
Z. "Residential Dwelling Unit" means a building or a portion of a building consisting
of one or more rooms, which include sleeping, cooking, and plumbing facilities
and are arranged and designed as permanent living quarters for one family or
household.
AA. "Row house" means an attached single-family residential dwelling unit on
a single lot.
BB. "Single-family dwelling unit" means one detached residential dwelling
unit, or one-half of a duplex, or one row house.
CC. "Parks SDC Methodology Report" means the report entitled Parks and
Recreation System Development Charge Methodology Report, dated April 27,
2015.
DD. "Transportation SDC Methodology Report" means the report entitled
Transportation System Development Charge Methodology Report, dated April 27,
2015.
EE."SDC Administration Procedures Guide"means that report entitled System
Development Charges Administration Procedures Guide, dated April 27, 2015.
3.24.040 Systems Development Charge Established
A. SDCs shall be established and may be revised from time to time by resolution of
the council. The resolution shall set the amount of the charge, the type of permit
to which the charge applies, the methodology used to set the amount of the
charge, and if the charge applies to a geographic area smaller than the entire city,
the geographic area subject to the charge.
ORDINANCE No. 15- p$
Page 6
B. Unless otherwise exempted by the provisions of this ordinance or any other
applicable local or state law, a SDC is hereby imposed upon all development
within the city. SDCs are imposed upon the act of making a connection to the City
water or sewer system within the City, upon all development outside the boundary
of the City that connects to or otherwise uses the sewer or water facilities of the
City, and whenever the City Council has authorized an intergovernmental
agreement which permits the City to impose a parks SDC outside the City limits.
3.24.050 Methodology
A. The methodology used to establish the reimbursement fee shall be based on
ratemaking principles employed to finance publicly owned capital improvements,
prior contributions by then-existing users, gifts or grants from federal or state
government or private persons, the value of unused capacity available to future
system users or the cost of the existing facilities, and other relevant factors
identified by the city council. The methodology shall promote the objective that
future systems users shall contribute no more than an equitable share of the cost
of then-existing facilities and shall be available for public inspection.
B. The methodology used to establish the improvement fee shall consider the
projected cost of capital improvements identified in the plan and list adopted
pursuant to Section 3.24.080 that are needed to increase the capacity of the
systems to which the fee is related and for which the need for increased system
capacity will be required to serve the demands placed on the system by future
users. Improvement fees shall be calculated to obtain the cost of capital
improvements for the projected need for available system capacity for future
users.
C. The methodology shall also provide for periodic indexing of system development
charges for inflation, as long as the index used satisfies the following criteria:
1. "(A) A relevant measurement of the average change in prices or costs over
an identified time period for materials, labor, real property or a
combination of the three;
2. (B)Published by a recognized organization or agency that produces the
index or data source for reasons that are independent of the system
development charge methodology; and
3. (C) Incorporated as part of the established methodology or identified and
adopted in a separate ordinance, resolution or order."
D. Except when authorized in methodology adopted under subsection 3.24.050, any
fees imposed or required to be paid, assessed, or collected as part of a local
improvement district or a charge in lieu of a local improvement district
assessment,or the cost of complying with requirements or conditions imposed by
a land use decision are separate from and in addition to the SDC and shall not be
used as a credit against an SDC.
ORDINANCE No. 15-
Page 7
E. The methodology used to establish the improvement fee or the reimbursement fee,
or both, shall be adopted by resolution by the council.
3.24.060 Authorized Expenditures
A. Reimbursement fees. Reimbursement fees shall be applied only to capital
improvements(and not operating expenses) associated with the system for which
the fees are associated, including expenditures relating to repayment of
indebtedness.
B. Improvement Fees.
1. Improvement fees shall be spent only on capacity increasing capital
improvements, including expenditures relating to repayment of debt for
the improvements. An increase in system capacity may be established if a
capital improvement increases the level of performance or service
provided by existing facilities or provides new facilities. The portion of
the improvements funded by improvement fees must be related to the need
for increased capacity to provide service for future users.
2. A capital improvement being funded wholly or in part from revenues
derived from the improvement fee shall be included in the plan adopted by
the city pursuant to Section 3.24.080.
3. Notwithstanding subsections 3.24.060.B.1 and .2, SDC revenues may be
expended on the costs of complying with the provisions of this Chapter,
including the costs of developing systems development charge
methodologies and providing an annual accounting of systems
development charge funds.
3.24.070 Expenditure Restrictions
A. SDCs shall not be expended for the following:
1. Costs associated with the construction of administrative office facilities
that are more than an incidental part of other capital improvements; or
2. Costs of the operation or routine maintenance of capital improvements.
3.24.080 Capital Improvement Plan
A. The council shall adopt a capital improvement plan that:
1. Lists the capital improvements that may be funded with improvement fee
revenues; and
ORDINANCE No. 15-Q g
Page 8
2. Lists the estimated cost,percentage of costs eligible to be funded with
revenues from the improvement fee for each improvement, and time of
construction; and
3. Describes the process for modifying the plan. If a SDC will be increased
by a proposed modification of the list to include a capacity increasing
capital improvement, the city shall provide, at least thirty (30) days prior
to the adoption of the modification, notice of the proposed modification to
the persons who have requested written notice under Section 3.24.130.
The city shall hold a public hearing if a written request for a hearing on
the proposed modification is received within seven(7) days of the date the
proposed modification is scheduled for adoption.
3.24.090 Collection of Charge
A. The SDC is payable upon issuance of:
1. A building or construction permit of any kind, including any permit or
permits issued in connection with the set-up or installation of any trailer,
mobile or manufactured home;
2. A development permit;
3. A development permit for development not requiring the issuance of a
building permit;
4. A permit to connect to the sewer system; or
5. A permit to connect to the water system.
B. If development is commenced or connection is made to the water system, sewer
system, or storm system without an appropriate permit, the SDC shall be
immediately due and payable upon the earliest date that a permit was required.
C. The Administrator shall collect the applicable SDC from the Permittee. The
Administrator shall not issue such permit or allow such connection until the
charge has been paid in full,or unless an exemption is granted pursuant to Section
3.24.110, or unless provision for installment payments has been made, pursuant to
Section 3.24.100, which follows.
3.24.100 Installment Payment
A. When a SDC is due and payable, the Permittee may apply for payment in twenty
(20) semi-annual installments, secured by a lien on the property upon which the
development is to occur or to which the utility connection is to be made, to
include the SDC along with the following:
ORDINANCE No. 15-P
Page 9
I. Interest on the obligation at the rate stated in the city's Master Fees and
Charges. If no rate is set,then the interest on the obligation will default to
prime rate as published by the Wall Street Journal the day of application
plus 4%;
2. Any and all costs, as determined by the Administrator, incurred in
establishing payment schedules and administering the collections process;
B. The intent of this section is to recognize that the payment of an SDC by
installments increases the administrative expense to the city. It is the intent of this
subsection to shift that added expense to the applicant, so that the city will not
lose SDC revenue by accepting installment payments on such charges. Subject to
the provisions of this section, all costs added to the SDC will be determined by
the Administrator.
C. An Applicant requesting installment payments shall have the burden of
demonstrating the Applicant's authority to assent to the imposition of a lien on the
property and that the interest of the Applicant is adequate to secure payment of
the lien.
D. The Administrator shall docket the lien in the lien docket. From that time, the City
shall have a lien upon the described parcel for the amount of the SDC together
with the costs in paragraph 3.24.100.A.I and .2. The lien shall be enforceable in
the manner provided in ORS Chapter 223, and shall be superior to all other liens
pursuant to ORS 223.230.
3.24.110 Exemptions
A. The following are exempt from a SDC.
1. Structures and uses established and existing on or before the effective date
of the resolution which sets the amount of the SDC are exempt from the
charge, except water and sewer charges, to the extent of the structure or
use existing on that date and to the extent of the parcel of land as it is
constituted on that date. Structures and uses affected by this subsection
shall pay the water or sewer charges pursuant to the terms of this Chapter
upon the receipt of a permit to connect to the water or sewer system.
2. Additions to single-family dwellings that do not constitute the addition of
a dwelling unit, as defined by the Building Code adopted pursuant to
Section 14.04 of this Code, are exempt from all portions of the SDC.
3. An alteration, addition, replacement or change in use that does not
increase the parcel's or structure's use of a capital improvement are
exempt from all portions of the SDC.
ORDINANCE No. 15-Q g
Page 10
3.24.120 Credits
A. A SDC shall be imposed when a change of use of a parcel or structure occurs, but
credit shall be given in an amount equal to the existing SDC as applied to the pre-
existing type and level use. The credit so computed shall not exceed the
calculated SDC. No refund or credit shall be made on account of such credit.
B. An improvement fee credit shall be given for the cost of a bonded or completed
qualified public improvement associated with a development upon acceptance by
the City of the improvement, subject to the following conditions:
1. Such credit shall be only for the improvement fee charged for the type of
improvement being constructed, and credit for qualified public
improvements under Subsection 3.24.030.W may be granted only for the
actual, estimated, or agreed-upon cost of that portion of such improvement
that exceeds the city's minimum standard facility size or capacity needed
to serve the particular development property or project. The applicant
shall have the burden of demonstrating that a particular improvement
qualifies as a Subsection 3.24.030.W qualified public improvement. The
request for credit shall be filed in writing no later than sixty(60) days after
acceptance of the improvement by the City.
2. When the construction of a qualified public improvement gives rise to a
credit amount greater than the improvement fee that would otherwise be
levied against the project receiving development approval, the excess
credit may be applied against improvement fees that accrue in subsequent
phases of the original development project, if any.
C. Credits shall be used within ten(10) years from the date the credit is given, after
which the credit shall expire, and be null and void, without the need for the city to
take any further action.
D. Credit shall not be transferable from one type of capital improvement to another.
E. Credits may be transferable from one development to another.
F. Credits for any SDC, or for the Washington County Transportation Development
Tax, shall only be used for obligations relating to the charge and capital
improvement type for which the credit was issued.
3.24.130 Notice
A. After the effective date of this ordinance, the city shall maintain a list of persons
who have made a written request for notification prior to adoption or amendment
of a methodology for any SDC. Written notice shall be mailed to persons on the
list at least ninety(90)days prior to the first hearing to establish or modify a SDC,
and the methodology supporting the adoption or amendment shall be available at
least sixty(60) days prior to the first hearing to adopt or amend. The failure of a
person on the list to receive a notice that was mailed shall not invalidate the city's
subsequent action.
ORDINANCE No. 15- 08
Page 11
B. The city may periodically delete names from the list, but at least thirty(30) days
prior to removing a name from the list the city must notify the person whose name
is to be deleted that a new written request for notification is required if the person
wishes to remain on the notification list.
C. A change in the amount of a reimbursement fee or an improvement fee is not a
modification of the SDC methodology if the change in amount is based on a
change in cost of materials, labor or real property applied to projects or project
capacity as set forth on the list adopted pursuant to Section 3.24.080 or the
periodic application of one or more specific cost indices published by a
recognized organization or agency and is incorporated as part of the established
methodology or identified and adopted in a separate ordinance, resolution, or
order.
3.24.140 Segregation and Use of SDC Revenue
A. All funds derived from a particular type of SDC are to be segregated by
accounting practices from all other funds of the city. That portion of the SDC
calculated and collected on account of a specific facility system shall be used for
no purpose other than those set forth in this Chapter.
B. The Administrator shall provide an annual accounting of SDCs showing the total
amount of system development charge revenues collected for each type of facility
and the projects funded from the account.
3.24.150 Appeals and Procedure
A. A person aggrieved by a decision required or allowed to be made by the city
recorder under this ordinance or a person challenging the propriety of an
expenditure of SDC revenues may appeal the decision or the expenditure to the
City Council by filing a written request with the Administrator describing with
particularity the decision of the Administrator or the expenditure from which the
person appeals.
B. Appeal of an Expenditure: An appeal of an expenditure must be filed within two
(2) years of the date of the alleged improper expenditure. The council shall
determine whether the Administrator's decision or the expenditure is in
accordance with this ordinance and the provisions of ORS 223.297 to 223.314 and
may affirm, modify or overrule the decision. If the Council determines that there
has been an improper expenditure of SDC revenues, the council shall direct that a
sum equal to the misspent amount shall be deposited within one(1) year to the
credit of the account or fund from which it was spent.
C. Appeal of an SDC Methodology: Legal action challenging the methodology
adopted by the council pursuant to Section 3.24.050 shall not be filed later than
sixty (60) days after the date of adoption, and shall be contested according to the
ORDINANCE No. 15-0 b
Page 12
procedure set forth in ORS 34.010 to 34.100, and not otherwise.
D. Appeal of an SDC Calculation or Credit Determination.
1. A person aggrieved by a decision made by the Administrator relating to
the calculation of SDCs may file an appeal within ten(10) days of the
Administrator's action.
2. Appeals must be made by filing a written request with the Administrator
and must include a recommended solution to the issue that has initiated the
appeal.
3. Appeals may be filed to challenge only the trip generation rate or land use
category that is applicable to the project.
4. The City Council shall consider all appeals and shall render a decision to
affirm,modify,or overrule the decision of the Administrator.
5. The City Council's decision shall be made in accord with the intent of the
provisions of this ordinance.
3.24.160 Prohibited Connection
A. No person may connect to the water or sewer or storm systems of the City unless
the appropriate SDC has been paid.
3.24.170 Penalty
A. Violation of this Chapter is a Class A infraction punishable by a fine not to
exceed $500.
3.24.180 Severability
A. The provisions of this ordinance are severable, and it is the intention to confer the
whole or any part of the powers herein provided for. If any clause, section, or
provision of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any
reason or cause, the remaining portion of this ordinance shall be in full force and
effect and be valid as if such invalid portion thereof had not been incorporated
herein. It is hereby declared to be the Council's intent that this ordinance would
have been adopted had such an unconstitutional provision had not been included
herein.
ORDINANCE No. 15-0$
Page 13
Tigard, Oregon
TIGARD
lZJ2 VIE cd
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
METHODOLOGY REPORT
April 28, 2015
•:;> FCS GROUP
Solutions-Oriented Consulting
This entire report is made of readily recyclable materials,
including the bronze wire binding and the front and
back cover,which are made from post-consumer
recycled plastic bottles.
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page i
This page intentionally left blank
•:;> FCS GRDUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I: BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................... 1
A. Policy....................................................................................................................................................... 1
B. Project .................................................................................................................................................... 1
SECTION II: METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................3
A. Reimbursement Fee Cost basis..........................................................................................................3
B. Improvement Fee Cost basis .............................................................................................................3
C. Compliance Fee Cost Basis................................................................................................................3
D. Growth....................................................................................................................................................3
E. Geographic Allocation.......................................................................................................................4
F. Summary................................................................................................................................................4
SECTION III: GROWTH CALCULATION ........................................................................................ 5
A. Relevant Types of Growth ..................................................................................................................5
B. Growth in Trip Ends...............................................................................................................................5
B.l Expected Growth Levels.............................................................................................................5
B.2 Calculating the Eligible SDC Cost Share.................................................................................5
SECTION IV: COST CALCULATION.............................................................................................. 7
A. Reimbursement Fee............................................................................................................................. 7
B. Improvement Fee.................................................................................................................................7
B.l SDC-Eligible Costs ........................................................................................................................8
B.2 Adjustment for SDC Fund Balance...........................................................................................8
B.3 Improvement Fee Summary by District....................................................................................8
C. Compliance Fee Cost Basis................................................................................................................9
D. Summary Calculated SDCs................................................................................................................9
SECTION V: RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 10
A. Transportation SDC Calculation...................................................................................................... 10
A.1 Residential SDC Calculation................................................................................................ 10
A.2 Non-Residential SDC Calculation....................................................................................... 10
B. Annual Adjustment............................................................................................................................ 11
C. Credits and Exemptions.................................................................................................................... 11
C.l Credits.......................................................................................................................................... 1 1
C.].a Credit Policy........................................................................................................................ 11
C.2 Exemptions.................................................................................................................................. 12
D. Discounts.............................................................................................................................................. 12
E. Existing and Proposed SDCs............................................................................................................. 12
E.l SDCs with 50% Credit Policy for River Terrace Boulevard................................................... 12
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page iii
APPENDIX..................................................................................................................................... 14
Appendix A-Transportation Capital Project List......................................................................... 15
Appendix B-Capacity Share Assumptions..................................................................................20
Appendix C- Reimbursement Fee Calculation ..........................................................................21
•:;
ROUP
> FCS G
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 1
SECTION I : BACKGROUND
This section describes the policy context and project scope upon which the body of this report is
based.
A. POLICY
Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS)223.297 to 223.314 authorize local governments to establish system
development charges (SDCs). These are one-time fees on new development, and they are paid at the
time of development. SDCs are intended to recover a fair share of the cost of existing and planned
facilities that provide capacity to serve future growth.
ORS 223.299 defines two types of SDC:
• A reimbursement fee that is designed to recover"costs associated with capital improvements
already construct, or under construction when the fee is established, for which the local
government determines that capacity exists"
• An improvement fee that is designed to recover"costs associated with capital improvements to
be constructed"
ORS 223.304(1) states, in part,that a reimbursement fee must be based on "the value of unused
capacity available to future system users or the cost of existing facilities"and must account for prior
contributions by existing users and any gifted or grant-funded facilities.The calculation must
"promote the objective of future system users contributing no more than an equitable share to the
cost of existing facilities." A reimbursement fee may be spent on any capital improvement related to
the system for which it is being charged(whether cash-financed or debt-financed) and on the costs of
compliance with Oregon's SDC law.
ORS 223.304(2) states, in part,that an improvement fee must be calculated to include only the cost
of projected capital improvements needed to increase system capacity for future users. In other
words, the cost of planned projects that correct existing deficiencies or do not otherwise increase
capacity for future users may not be included in the improvement fee calculation. An improvement
fee may be spent only on capital improvements (or portions thereof) that increase the capacity of the
system for which it is being charged(whether cash-financed or debt-financed) and on the costs of
compliance with Oregon's SDC law.
B. PROJECT
In August 2014, the City of Tigard(City)contracted with FCS GROUP to prepare a new local SDC
for transportation facilities that take into account the projects identified in the Tigard Transportation
System Plan and the River Terrace TSP Addendum, June 2014. This report documents our findings
and recommendations.
We approached this project as a series of three steps:
•:;>FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 2
• Framework for Charges. In this step, we worked with City staff to identify the approach to be
used and the components to be included in the analysis.
• Technical Analysis. In this step, we worked with City staff to isolate the recoverable portion
of planned facility costs and calculate draft SDC rates.
• Draft Methodology Report Preparation. In this step, we documented the calculation of the
draft SDC rates included in this report.
For analysis purposes, the new Tigard Transportation SDC is intended to be consistent with the River
Terrace Funding Strategy, adopted by Tigard City Council in December 2014. This Transportation
SDC Methodology Report supports the creation of a special SDC overlay district within the River
Terrace Plan District boundary(Exhibit 1.1). Please refer to City of Tigard Community
Development Code: Map 18.660 for tax lots that are included in the River Terrace Plan District. With
the adoption of this SDC methodology, future development in Tigard would be subject to a citywide
SDC and development within River Terrace would also be subject to the River Terrace SDC overlay
fee.
Exhibit 1.1
f
Rivcr Tcrracc Plan District
tt
1 1 rWwww/atnan QO
0
no"c+rft.WyVISO
Qy
011
y
r
t '
1 '
r '
1 '
r '
t '
r '
t '
1
t
1
r
1
t /
-r
1 '
1 '
1
1
t
1
' SIN BULL MOUNTAIN RD
1
1
1
1
1
t
1
1
•
O
K
C
0
O
C
O
Cr
w
- ROUP
> FCS G
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 3
SECTION II : METHODOLOGY
This section provides a non-numeric overview of the calculations that result in SDC rates.
A. REIMBURSEMENT FEE COST BASIS
The reimbursement fee is the cost of available capacity per unit of growth that such available
capacity can serve. In order for a reimbursement fee to be calculated, excess transportation
infrastructure capacity must be available to serve future growth. For facility types that have no excess
capacity, no reimbursement fee may be charged. This analysis uses the original cost of all SDC or
Transportation Development Tax(TDT) infrastructure less the amount currently used as the basis for
the reimbursement fee.
B. IMPROVEMENT FEE COST BASIS
The improvement fee is the cost of capacity-increasing capital projects per unit of growth that those
projects will serve. Since the capacity added by most projects serves a dual purpose of both meeting
existing demand and serving future growth, growth-related costs for each project must be isolated
and costs that meet current demand or repair a deficiency must be excluded.
We have used the capacity approach to allocate costs to the improvement fee basis. Under this
approach, the cost of a given project is allocated to growth in proportion to the growth-related
capacity that projects of a similar type will create. The portion of each project that is attributable to
growth is determined and the SDC-eligible costs are calculated by dividing the total costs of growth-
required projects by the projected increase in demand.
C. COMPLIANCE FEE COST BASIS
ORS 223.307(5)authorizes the expenditure of SDCs on "the costs of complying with the provisions
of ORS 223.297 to 223.314, including the costs of developing system development charge
methodologies and providing an annual accounting of system development charge expenditures."To
avoid spending monies for compliance that might otherwise have been spent on growth-related
projects, this report assumes that compliance costs are equal to 3% of the SDC improvement fee
basis.
D. GROWTH
Growth for SDCs is in units that most directly reflect the source of demand. In the case of
transportation, the most applicable unit of growth is trips on the infrastructure. In this methodology
we have analyzed growth in terms of average daily person trips (ADPT) and P.M. peak hour vehicle
trip ends (PHVT).
4%4 FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 4
E. GEOGRAPHIC ALLOCATION
SDCs are often calculated and applied uniformly throughout a municipality, but such uniformity is
not a legal requirement.Municipalities can calculate and impose area-specific SDCs. Area-specific
SDCs allow a municipality to identify and isolate differential costs to serve particular areas within its
jurisdiction. SDCs are calculated separately for each area, and improvement fees must be spent on
projects in the improvement fee cost basis for the area in which those improvement fees were earned.
Area-specific SDCs can be implemented in two ways. The first way is to divide the municipality into
a set of non-overlapping areas. Under this method, the SDCs for a particular area are determined by
the assets, projects, and projected growth in that area. The second method is a layered approach. The
first layer consists of a citywide SDC based on assets and projects of citywide benefit. The second
layer consists of one or more overlays. Each overlay is a separate list of assets and projects that
benefit a particular area within the city.Development within an overlay pays both the citywide SDC
and the overlay SDC. Development outside of any overlay pays only the citywide SDC.
Given the City's desire to isolate the costs of serving certain areas and findings in the River Terrace
Funding Strategy adopted by Tigard City Council in December 2014, we recommend(and have
calculated in this report)both a citywide SDC and an overlay SDC for River Terrace.
F. SUMMARY
In general, SDC rates are calculated by adding the reimbursement fee component,improvement fee
component, and compliance cost component. Each component is calculated by dividing the eligible
cost by the growth of units of demand. The unit of demand becomes the basis of the charge. Exhibit
2.1 shows this calculation in equation format:
Exhibit 2.11: SDC Equation
Eligible costs of Costs of
Eligible costs of SDC per unit of
available capacity in + capacity-increasing + complying with = growth in
existing facilities capital Oregon SDC demand
improvements law
Units of growth in demand
Section III of this report provides detailed calculations related to growth in demand, which is the
denominator in the SDC equation. Section IV of this report provides detailed calculations on eligible
costs, which is the numerator in the SDC equation. Section V identifies SDC recommendations.
•:;> ROUP
FCS G
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 5
SECTION III : GROWTH CALCULATION
This section provides detailed calculations related to growth in demand, which is the denominator in
the SDC equation.
A. RELEVANT TYPES OF GROWTH
Transportation engineers commonly use peak-hour trip or average person trip estimates to assess
transportation performance and determine system needs. This transportation SDC methodology
utilizes both average daily person trips(ADPT)and P.M. peak hour vehicle trip ends (PHVT) in the
calculation of the SDC fee.
ADPTs include vehicle trips on collector and arterial streets and non-motor vehicle trips that utilize
bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities. The proposed SDC charges provide a PHVT to ADPT
conversion factor so that non-residential SDCs can also take into account linked trips for certain
types of developments, such as fast food restaurants and fuel stations, which have relatively high
rates of linked-trip activity.
B. GROWTH IN TRIP ENDS
Having established relevance of ADPT and PHVT, we now quantify expected growth rates.
B.1 Expected Growth Levels
As mentioned above, this methodology utilizes a citywide SDC with a River Terrace overlay.
Exhibits 3.1 and 3.2 show the growth in person trips (ADPT)and vehicle trips (PHVT)between now
and 2035 for River Terrace and the rest of Tigard. The modeled trip growth forecasts result in a
factor of approximately 0.047 for converting average daily person trips (ADPT) into peak hour
vehicle trips (PHVT). Conversely, for every 21 average daily person trip-ends that originate or
terminate in Tigard (including trips by vehicles,bicycle,pedestrian and transit), there is one P.M
peak-hour vehicle trip-end expected (PHVT).
B.2 Calculating the Eligible SDC Cost Share
The growth share for any project varies by the project type and the percent of the project that serves
future growth. See Appendix A for a complete list of projects with the appropriate growth shares. In
general, new collector or arterial facilities(including the roadways, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities)
that are needed only to serve growth are 100% SDC eligible. Existing roadways and
bicycle/pedestrian facilities that are planned for expansion to accommodate growth may only be
partially eligible for SDC funding.
The share of existing transportation facilities that are planned for capacity upgrades to serve future
growth needs varies by type of project and the rubric to determine future growth share is shown in
Appendix B.
•vo FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 6
Exhibit 3.1: Average Daily Person Trip-End (ADPT) Growth
Growth - 2015
2010 2015 2035 to 2035
River Terrace 469 1,083 30,737 29,654
Rest of Tigard 525,451 560,100 733,130 173,030
All Tigard 525,920 561,183 763,867 202,684
Source: Trip growth estimates and forecasts were compiled by DKS Associates using data derived
from the Metro Regional Transportation Plan model that's consistent with the River Terrance
Community Plan Transportation System Plan Addendum (June 2014).
Exhibit 3.2: Ti and Peak-Hour Vehicle Trip-End (PHVT) Growth
Growth - 2015
2010 2015 2035 to 2035
River Terrace 63 119 1,536 1,417
Rest of Tigard 28,319 30,019 38,341 8,322
All Tigard 28,382 30,379 39,877 9,498
Source: Trip growth estimates and forecasts were compiled by DKS Associates using data derived
from the Metro Regional Transportation Plan model that's consistent with the River Terrance
Community Plan Transportation System Plan Addendum (June 2014).
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 7
SECTION IV: COST CALCULATION
This section provides detailed calculations on eligible costs, which is the numerator in the SDC
equation.
A. REIMBURSEMENT FEE
As noted in Section II, the reimbursement fee is based on the present value of unused capacity that
the City has funded in Tigard. For analysis purposes, we have based the reimbursement SDC cost
basis on the actual amount of prior capacity investments the city has made using Transportation
Development Tax funds over the past nine fiscal years. The expenditures from previous years have
been discounted by the trip growth rate in this report to account for increased use since initial
construction. Exhibit 4.1 summarizes the cost basis for the reimbursement fee. Detailed calculations
are included in Appendix C.
Exhibit 4.1: Reimbursement Fee Basis Calculation
CalculationReimbursement Fee Total
Capital Project Expenditures $4,955,023
Less Capacity Used Up $369,470
Reimbursement fee basis $4,585,553
Source: City of Tigard, compiled by FCS GROUP.
Using the calculated growth in PHVT from the previous section and the reimbursement fee basis,
Exhibit 4.2 shows the calculated reimbursement fee. Note that the reimbursement fee is charged
irrespective of the SDC overlay district.
Exhibit 4.2: Reimbursement Fee Calculation
Reimbursement Fee per PMPHT Total
Cost of SDC/TDT Capital Project Expenditures $4,585,553
Change in ADPT (2015-2035) 202,684
Reimbursement Fee per ADPT $23
Equivalent Reimbursement Fee per PHVT* $483
Source: Previous tables and Appendix C, compiled by FCS
GROUP.*Assumes ADPT to PHVT conversion factor of 21.34
B. IMPROVEMENT FEE
City staff identified a list of project needs for the transportation SDC using several sources:
• The Tigard Transportation System Plan
• The River Terrace Transportation System Plan Addendum
• The Metro's Regional Transportation Plan
• The Tigard's Capital Improvement Plan
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 8
In addition, the current Transportation Development Tax Road Project List has been considered to
ensure that potential SDC project expenditures are not included on the TDT project list as well.
Exhibit 4.3 shows a summary list of the Tigard transportation project costs. Overall, the City
identified a total need of$625 million. For a detailed list of Tigard transportation projects see
Appendix A.
Exhibit 4.3: Trans ortation Project Capital Costs, City of Tigard, 2015-2035 (in $1,000s)
• - Arterial Collector Bridge Bike/Ped TSM* Total
Citywide $479,592 $39,000 $15,000 $34,030 $17,500 $585,122
River Terrace $0 $37,850 $0 $1,800 $0 $40,150
Total $479,592 $76,850 $15,000 $35,830 $17,500 $625,272
Source: City of Tigard, compiled by FCS GROUP. *TSM =transportation system management.
B.1 SDC-Eligible Costs
Total SDC-eligible costs are a percentage of total projects. The percent of each individual project is
calculated and then summed by infrastructure type. Because there is an overlay districts, each project
is categorized as either benefitting the overlay district or the entire city. Exhibit 4.4 shows a
summary table by SDC overlay and type of transportation costs. See Appendix A for detailed
calculations of SDC-eligible costs.
Exhibit 4.4: Transportation SDC Project Capital Costs, City of Tigard, 2015-2035(in $1,000s)
ProjectArterial Collector Bridge Bike/Ped TSM* Total
Citywide $222,818 $19,669 $5,250 $5,911 $13,882 $267,530
River Terrace $0 $14,623 $0 $0 $0 $14,623
Total $222,818 $34,292 $5,250 $5,911 $13,882 $282,153
Source: City of Tigard,compiled by FCS GROUP. *TSM= transportation system management (e.g.,
traffic signal synchronization and turning movement/access modifications).
B.2 Adjustment for SDC Fund Balance
There is no existing local transportation SDC in Tigard and therefore no fund balances to consider at
this time.
B.3 Improvement Fee Summary by District
Similar to the reimbursement fee cost basis above, we calculate the improvement fee cost basis by
district in PHVT using growth estimates from the previous section and the SDC-eligible projects
shown above. Exhibit 4.5 shows the potential improvement fee by district before discounts or
adjustments.
Exhibit 4.5: SDC Improvement Fee by District
SDC Fee
Improvement - Equivalent per Single-
Calculations •- - SDC-Eligible Growth in Fee per Fee per Family
• Project Costs ADPT ADPT PHVT* Residence
Citywide base charge $267,530,222 202,684 $1,320 $28,168 $15,924
River Terrace Overlay $14,622,750 29,654 $493 $10,523 $5,949
Total River Terrace SDC $282,152,972 232,339 $1,813 $38,690 $21,873
Source: Previous tables and Appendix, compiled by FCS GROUP. *Assumes ADPT to PHVT conversion factor
of 21.34; compiled by FCS Group.
•,;r FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 9
C. COMPLIANCE FEE COST BASIS
For the purpose of this study, we assume the compliance costs equal 3% of the SDC improvement
fee.
D. SUMMARY CALCULATED SDCS
Exhibit 4.6 shows the calculated SDC per person trip (ADPT) by each fee basis and by district. Note
that this is the maximum defensible SDC that Tigard can charge based on forecasted growth in
person-trips.
Exhibit 4.6: Total SDC per ADPT(SDC per person trip before discounts)
SDC Fee
Compliance Total per
Reimbursement Improvement Fee per SDC per Dwelling
Fee per ADPT Fee per ADPT ADPT ADPT Unit
Citywide $23 $1,320 $40 $1,382 $16,675
River Terrace
Overlay $493 $15 $508 $6,12
River Terrace Total $23 $1,813 $54 $1,890 $22,802
Source: Previous tables and Appendix, compiled by FCS GROUP.
Exhibit 4.7 expresses the maximum SDC that Tigard can charge in terms of growth in PA peak-
hour vehicle trip-ends (PHVT) by each fee basis and by district. This is also the maximum defensible
SDC that Tigard can charge based on vehicle trip growth.
Exhibit 4.7: E uivaI nt Total SDC per PHVT(before discounts)
Total SDC Fee per
Reimbursement Improvement Compliance SDC per Dwelling
Fee Fee Fee PHVT Unit
Citywide $483 $28,168 $845 $29,495 $16,675
River Terrace
Overlay $10,523 $316 $10,839 $6,127
River Terrace Total $483 $38,690 $1,161 $40,334 $22,802
Source: Previous tables and Appendix, compiled by FCS GROUP. *Assumes ADPT to PHVT conversion
factor of 21.34;compiled by FCS Group.
•*%> FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 10
SECTION V : RECOMMENDATIONS
This section provides calculations of the residential and non-residential SDCs and recommended
SDCs after accounting for credit and discount policies.
A. TRANSPORTATION SDC CALCULATION
The transportation SDC is based on the number of trips that a change in land use generates. The
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual contains trip rates based on
studies conducted nationwide and provides the base data of unadjusted counts of trips generated by
various types of land use.
Unadjusted trip counts mean that certain land use types will have high trip counts including all traffic
entering or leaving a location but does not account for traffic that passes by or interrupts a primary
trip between origin and destination. Trips that interrupt a primary trip are called linked trips and this
SDC methodology recommends removing them from the non-residential calculation because they
would occur regardless of development activity.
A.1 Residential SDC Calculation
The proposed SDCs identified in this report include specific recommendations for initial SDCs to be
charged based on new single family detached and multifamily/other dwellings added to the City.
These types of calculations are relatively simple and take into account the net new dwellings added
multiplied by the SDC per dwelling unit. Residential land use types do not entail a linked trip
adjustment factor.
SDC rates for specific developments are to be determined using the ITE Trip Generation Handbook
in which there are land use categories depicting single family detached(code#210), apartments
(code#220), rental townhouses (code#224), and other residential types.
A.2 Non-Residential SDC Calculation
The proposed SDCs identified in this report include specific recommendations for initial SDCs to be
charged based on new PHVT added for non-residential development. New non-residential
development in Tigard may include land use types with linked trips. The number of new PHVTs
generated for non-residential land use should take into account the following formula:
ITE Vehicle Trip Rate x (1—%Linked Trips) = Net New PHUT
The SDC per unit of development is calculated for each type of land use by multiplying the new
PHVT for each land use by the SDC per PHVT.It is important to note that the Trip Generation
Manual may not contain some land use categories or may not include trip rates or number of net new
trips generated. For such land use categories without data, the City administrator shall use her/his
judgment to calculate the transportation SDC.
•:;> ROUP
FCS G
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 1 1
B. ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT
Annual adjustment of transportation SDCs as summarized in the City's "Master Fees & Charges
Schedule" shall be made with City Council approval. The index to be used for adjusting
transportation SDCs will based on the weighted average of the year over year escalation for two
measurements: 90 percent multiplied by the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index for
the Seattle Area percent change plus 10 percent multiplied by the Oregon Department of
Transportation monthly asphalt price (annualized) percent change.
C. CREDITS AND EXEMPTIONS
The Tigard SDC Procedures Guide will establish local policies for issuing credits and exemptions, annual
adjustments,and other administrative procedures.
C.1 Credits
A credit is a reduction in the amount of SDCs paid for a specific development.The Oregon SDC Act
requires that credit be allowed for the construction of a"qualified public improvement"which(1)is
required as a condition of development approval, (2)is identified in the City's capital improvements
program,and(3)either is not located on or contiguous to property that is the subject of development
approval,or is located on or contiguous to such property and is required to be built larger or with greater
capacity than is necessary for the particular development project.
The credit for a qualified public improvement may only be applied against an SDC for the same type of
improvement(e.g.,transportation right of way or improvements provided by a developer can only be used
for a credit for towards transportation SDC improvement fee payments),and must be granted only for the
cost of that portion of an improvement which exceeds the minimum standard facility size or capacity
needed to serve the particular project up to the amount of the improvement fee. For multi-phase projects,
any excess credit may be applied against SDCs that accrue in subsequent phases of the original
development project.
In addition to these required credits,the City may,if it so chooses,provide a greater credit,establish a
system providing for the transferability of credits,provide a credit for a capital improvement not
identified in the City's SDC Capital Improvements Plan, or provide a share of the cost of an improvement
by other means(i.e.,partnerships,other City revenues,etc.).
C.l.a Credit Policy
The City will establish the following credit policy for the transportation SDC.
The Tigard credit policy assumes that the City implements a credit policy which applies the
Washington County Transportation Development Tax (TDT) credit policy to SDC eligible projects in
the city with an exception made for the planned River Terrace Boulevard project. By expanding the
creditable portion of River Terrace Boulevard to 50% of the roadway improvement cost, the city
would need to fund the difference by increasing its SDC improvement fee.
The City also stipulates that credits provided within the River Terrace district cannot be used in
another part of the City. However, citywide SDC credits could be utilized anywhere within the City.
This would help ensure that any transportation SDC credits issued in River Terrace will result in
continued development investment in River Terrace.
•:;> ROUP
FCS G
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 12
C.2 Exemptions
The City may exempt specific classes of development(i.e.,minor additions,etc.)from the requirement to
pay SDCs.
D. DISCOUNTS
This Tigard Transportation SDC Methodology Report has documented the maximum defensible SDC
that can be established in Tigard(provided earlier in Exhibits 4.6 and 4.7).
The City can discount the SDC amount by reducing the portion of growth-required improvements to
be funded with SDCs and the City can decide to charge only a percentage(i.e., 50%, 75%, etc.) of
the SDC rates required to fund identified growth-related facility costs. The SDC Procedures Manual
will specify how discounts should apply to certain developments, such as transit-oriented
development. If the City discounts SDCs,revenues will decrease and amounts that must come from
other sources, such as general fund contributions, will increase in order for the City to maintain
levels of service.
In accordance with the River Terrace Funding Strategy, the City of Tigard desires to establish its
Transportation SDC at a level that is below the maximum amount that it can charge. The City's
currently policy objective for transportation SDCs is to establish an initial citywide average SDC of
$5,000 per dwelling unit; and a River Terrace average SDC of$7,312 per dwelling unit. For SDC
analysis purposes, this SDC methodology study analysis assumes that the residential and non-
residential SDC rate discounts are equal among the customer groups.
Since the Citywide and River Terrace SDCs would be lower than the maximum SDC the City can
justify, additional funding sources would be needed to ensure that all projects contained in the long
term capital project list can be funded by year 2035.
E. EXISTING AND PROPOSED SDCS
Exhibit 5.1 summarizes the existing and proposed total Transportation SDCs for the City of Tigard
for reimbursement, improvement, and compliance charges after accounting for discounts.
Once this Methodology Report is adopted, Transportation SDCs would vary by location. SDCs
within the city(outside River Terrace) would initially be charged $5,714 per single family dwelling,
and $3,333 per multifamily/other dwelling, and$2,872 per P.M. peak-hour vehicle trip-end (PHVT)
for non-residential uses.
Note that the City Council may decide to defer some of the SDC charges identified in the following
tables (for example, the City Council could vote to defer implementation of the SDC reimbursement
fees but charge SDC improvement fees).
E.l SDCs with 50% Credit Policy for River Terrace Boulevard
This scenario assumes that the cost of constructing River Terrace Boulevard is 50% credit eligible for
"local street" elements and 100% credit eligible for improvements beyond "local street" elements;
and all other transportation facilities would rely upon the current TDT credit policy.' The resulting
' Please refer to the Tigard Parks and Transportation Systems Development Charge Procedures Manual for
additional information.
•v, FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 13
SDCs within River Terrace would initially be charged $8,356 per single family dwelling, $4,875 per
multifamily dwelling, and $2,944 per PHVT for non-residential uses (Exhibit 5.1).
Exhibit 5.1:Tigard Transportation SDCs(Option B2)*
SDC-i(after discount)' Total SDC(after discount)
River
SDC Terrace Citywide River Terrace
Development Type Citywide Overlay Total Total
Residential Development 2
Avg,charge per dwelling n/a $273 $4,727 $2,312 $5,000 $7,312
Charge per single family detached dwelling n/a $312 $5,402 $2,642 $5,714 $8,356
Charge per multifamily dwelling n/a $182 $3,151 $1,541 $3,333 $4,875
Non-Residential Development 3
Avg.charge per PHVT` n/a $483 $2,389 $72 $2,872 $2,944
Notes:This option discounts the non-residential TS DC to be on par with the residential TS DC discounts.It increases the
citywide transportation capital funding gap by$19.7 M(from$423 M to$443 M)over 20 years.
*Credit policy assumes River Terrace Blvd."local'elements are 50%credit eligible and elements beyond local streets are
100%credit eligible;with increase in cost basis being recovered through SDCs and TDTs collected by future River Terrace
development.All other facilities would be subject to the current credit policy.
'Includes compliance fee.
2 Variance between single family detached and multifamily dwelling unit charges take into account peak trip adjustment
factors derived from the ITE Handbook.
3 Non-residential SDCs include similar discounts as the residential SDCs and will be based on average charges by PHVT and
shall vary by land use type using procedures established in the Tigard SDC Procedures Guide.Adjustments may include
reductions for linked-trips.
`Average charge per P.M.peak-hour vehicle trip-end(PHVT)is shown before making potential adjustments for linked-trips.
Source:compiled by FCS GROUP based on preceding tables.
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 14
APPENDIX
v%; FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 15
Appendix A-Transportation Capital Project List
City Cost After Capacity Growth Capacity Capacity TDT%of SEFC 7.at
R—d I.City Local Private COOTICourity I derstified Local Related Percent of Total SEC/TDT Related City Related City Elloble, Elloble
Project 11) Road Classification D—npr— P,.j-f Cash Share Funding Funding Total City Cost Funding Percent Capacity Eligible Costs Cost(TOT) Cost[SDC) Project Costs Project Costs Source
Project ID 23A 150th Ave Collector Improve I501h Ave.from Bull
Mountain Rd.to Beef Bend Rd. $40000 O24% $306.000 $94,000 $94.000 50% 5096 $23.500 $0 $23,500 0% 100% RT!SP Addendum
Bul
Project ID 21A Molurstan Rd Collector Upgode to urban standards $1.200,000 29% 5850,000 $350.000 $350.000 50% 50% $87,500 5350000 $0 100% 0% RT TSP Addendum
Bull Mountain Rd./N-S collectorProject ID IP Intersection collectorBull
«roundabout $1.500,000 10096 $1.500.000 $1.500.000 100% 100% $1.300.000 $0 $1500.000 016 100% RI TSP Addendum
Project ID 20 Intersection Collector Woodhue St./161st Ave.extension $2.000,000 0% 52.000,000 $0 $0 100% 100% $0 $0 $0 RT TSP Addendum
intersection or roundabout
Project ID NA 2 1 Interseclon Sheet Improvements where new sheets $500000 100% $500000 $D 50% 100% $0 $0 $0 RT TSP Addendum
meet exist' sheets-Phase I
Project ID 2 L«enzo Ln Collector Extend Lorenzo Ln.from West UG8 to $2500000 5% $2.380,000 $120,000 $120,000 100% 100% $120.000 $0 $120.000 0% 100% RT TSP Addendum
Roy Rodgers Rd.
Project ID 3 l«enzo Ln Collector Extend Lorenzo Ln.from Roshok Rd.to $3,500,000 100% $3,500,000 $3.500,000 100% 100% $3,500.000 $0 $3,500,000 0% 100% RT TSP Addendum
Roy Rodgers Rd.
Project ID NA I I River Bke/Ped River Terrace lral from Roy Rodgers $1,800,000 100% $I,BW,000 $1,800.000 0% 100% $0 $0 $0 RT TSP Addendum
Terrace Tray Rd.to I501h Ave.
Project ID SA RT&vol Co0ec1« to Lor N-5 collector from SchollPhases Ferry $6,030,000 43% $3,417,000 $2,613.000 $2,613,000 100% IOD% $2,613,000 $653.250 $1.959,750 25% 75% RT TSP Addendum
to Lorenzo of extension-Phase I
Project ID 58 RT Blvd Collecl« 31ane N-S collector from Scholls Ferry $2970,000 100% $2.970.000 $2,970.000 100% 100% $2.970.000 $742.500 $2.227.500 25% 75% RT TSP Addendum
to Lorenzo Ln.extension-Phase 2
3 lone N-S collector from Lorenzo Ln.
Project ID 6A RT Blvd Collector extension to Bull Mountain Rd.-Phase $4,875,000 48% $2,550,000 $2,325,000 $2,325,000 100% 100% $2.325,000 $581,250 $1,743,750 25% 75% RT TSP Addendum
1
3 lone N-S collector from Bull
ProjeC1 ID 7A PT Blvd Collector Mountain Rd.to the south Cly Knit- $4,125,000 46% $2,244,000 $1,881,000 $1,881,000 100% tOD% $1.881,000 5470,250 $1,410,750 25% 75% RT TSP Addendum
Phase I
Project ID 7B RT Blvd Collector 3lone N-S collector from south City $6250000 46% $3,400.000 $2.850.000 $2.SSO.l7W 10096 10096 $2,850,000 $712.500 $2.137,500 25% 75% RI 15P Addendum
Knit to the south UGB(phase 2)
Project ID B Collector 2lone E-W collector between Roy
Rodgers Rd.and N-S collector $2,500,000 O% 52,SOO.Ooo $O $0 0% 0% f0 $0 $0 RT TSP Addendum
Dowertaitim Beffiefill(included in citywide)
Meho Project ID Ash Ave Collaclor Extend Ash Avenue from Burnham, $10,000.000 100% $10.000,000 $10.1700,1700 50% 100% 55,000,000 $0 $5,000,000 0% 100% TSP.RTP.CIP
across the RR to Commercial Sheet
Bevel.
SI
70th to 7117 Beveland St Bile/Ped Fill 330'Sidewalk Gap $40.000 100% $41,000 $40,000 50% 100% $20,000 $0 $20,000 0% 100% City staff
v I nol
Red R11al Bke/Ped ock Cleek New hal parallel to and south of 99W OOD ODO 100%
Greenway in triangle $3.000,000 $3.000,O0D 25% 50% $375,000 $0 $375,000 0% 100% CBystaB
ie; FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 16
CityCostAffer Capacity Growth Capacity Capacity TDT 7.of SIDC%of
Road city Local Private ODOT,County I dentified Local Related Percent of Total SDC/TDT Related City Related City Eligible Eligible
Project I D Road Classification Descnipt— Project Costs Share Funding Funding Total COY Cost F.ndhng Percent Capacity Eligible Costs Cost(TDT) Cost(SDC) Project Costs Project Costs Source
121st Ave, 121It Ave Bke/Peri Add Sidewalks and like Lanes $3,500.000 100% $3.500.000 $3.500.000 50% 100% $1.750.000 $1."(111 xn,
121 It
Whistler 1e TppBt to 100% 0% City staff
121st Ave over 121st Ave Bke/Ped Pedestrian bridge on west side of
.� 100% $50.000 $50,100 50% IOD% $25.000 Eo $25.000 13% 100% City staff
Summer Creek rood
Walnut Sheet to North Dakota Sheet-
121 It Sheet 121 IT St Collector two lanes with turn lanes where $6.000.000 100% $6,000.000 $6,000,000 50% 100% $3,000,000 $6.000,000 $0 100% 0% City staff
Widening necessary plus bke lanes and
sidewalks
Metro Project ID 72nd Ave Arterial Widen 72nd Ave.to 5lanes from $35A000O0 100% $35,000.000 $35.000,000 80% 10D% $28.000.000 $9.269.598 $18.730,402 33% 67% TSP,RTP,CIP
10755 Hunker Rd.to Hwy.99
Meho Project ID 72nd Ave Arlerul Widen 72nd Ave.to 51ones ho m $28,166,850 101)% $28.166.850 $28.166,850 80% 100% $22.533.480 $7.261.185 $15.272.295 32% 68% TSP.RTP.CIP
10756 Hunker Rd.to Bonita
Metro Project ID 72nd Ave Arterial Widen 72nd Ave.to 5lanes from $15,425,000 1OD% $15,425,000 $15,425,000 80% 100% $12.340,000 $9,269,598 $3,070,402 75% 25% TSP.RTP,CIP
10757 Bonita Rd.to Durham Rd.
Provide Arterial Corridor Management
72nd Avenue /?rd Ave TSM along Corridor N 19(Hwy 217((Hwy $1,700,OD0 100% $1 700,000 $1.700,000 100% 100% $1,700,00o $0 $1,700,000 0% 100% City staff
2171 in the Metro TSMO Plan
Provide Arterial Carrico,Management
on 72nd Avenue along Corridor k2(1-
72nd Avenue 72nd Ave TSM 51(1-5)mar the Lipper Boons Ferry $1.600.000 IOD% $1.600.000 $1,600,000 100% 100% $1,600,000 $1,368.928 $231.072 86% 14% City staff
Road Interchange in the Metro TSMO
Plan
Barrows Road Barrows Rd Bke/Ped Add Sidewalks and bike lanes $3,000.000 100% $3.000,000 $3.000.000 50% 100% $1,500,000 $0 $1.500,000 0% 100% CRY staff
Metro Project ID Ronda Rd Arterial Widen Bonita Rd.to 4 lanes from $45000000 I00% $45,000,000 $45,000,000 80% 90% $32.400,000 $5,272,615 $27,127.385 16% 84% TSP,RTP,CIP
10752 ficunay to Hall Livid.
Bull Mountain
Rood$Hwy 99W Bull Collector Widen to three lanes with bke tans $6000000 100% $8000000 $8000000 50% 100% $4,000,000 $8,000,000 $0 100% 0% RT TSP Addendum
to Benchview Mountain Rd and sidewalks
Ten
Cascade Ave Cascade Bke/Ped Pave northbound bike lam gap $30.000 100% $30.000 $30.000 50% 100% $15.000 $0 $15,000 0% 101)% City staff
Ave
Metro Project ID Dartmouth Colleclor Widen Dartmouth St.to 4lanes from $5.000,000 100% $5.000)00 $5.000,000 8096 100% $4,000,000 $1.853.920 $2.146.080 46% 54% TSP,RTP
10759 Si 72nd Ave.to 68th Ave.
Metro Project ID Durham Rd Arterial Widen Durham Rd.to 5lanes from 00
$20.000,000 100% $20.0 .ODO $20.000.000 8096 90% $14.410.000 $0 $14.400.000 0% 100% TSP,RTP,CIP
10753 Bowes Ferry to Hall livid.
Metro Project 1D Ha
Durham Rd Arterial den Durham Rd.to S lanes from
10764 Holl livid.TO Hwy.99 1010 10 0%$25. 0. 0 100% $25, 0,000 $25,000.000 8 95% $19.000.000 $0 $19.000.000 0% 100% TSP,RTP,CIP
Provide Arterial Corridor Management
Durham Road Durham Rd ISM along Corridor It 19(Hwy 2171 in the $1,500,000 100% $1,500,000 $1,500.000 100% 95% $1.425,000 $0 $1.425.000 0% IDD% City staff
Metro ISMO Plan
Far—Creek f anno Bike/Ped Durham Rd to Tualath River Troll $1,500.000 1 OD% $1,500.000 $1.500,000 25% 100% $375.000 $0 $375,000 0% 100% City stall
Trail Creek Trot
Metro Projecl ID Greenbug Arterial Widen Greenburg Rd.from Shady $7 7,000,000 $7,000,000 80% 95%
10748 Rd Lane to North Dakota 000000 100% 3 $5.320,000 $6.745,098 f0 100% 0% "Project Request'
Metro Project ID G(eenbug Arterial Widen Greenburg Rd.to 5lanes from $12.000.000 100% $12.000.000 $12.000,000 801y. I00% $9.600.000 $9,269,598 $330,402 97% 3% TSP,RTP
10750 Rd Tideman Ave.to Hwy.99
Metro Project ID tfall Blvd Arterial Ha11 Bvld.Improvements from Locust $16.000,000 110% $16,000.000 $16,000,000 50% 100% $8,000,000 $0 $8,000,000 0% 100% TSP,RIP,CIP
L1.220Who
am
Hall Blvd/ Replace with wider bridge with
Too—Creek Hall Blvd Bridge $6.100.000 100% $6,000,000 $ 10
6. 0.000 50% 100% $3,000.000 $0 $3.000.000 0% 100% City staff
Bne sidewalks and bke lands
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 17
Road ojecl Cash 7�C ty Local Private ODOVCounty "12 filled Local Re�crled PeTcenlo Tot.1SDC/tDT RelatedClty, Related City Eligible Eligible
Project ID Road Cla-ficalion Description P, Sho�e Funding Funding Total COY Cost F unding Pe cent Capacityl Eligib4e Costs Cost(IDT) Cost(SDC) Project Costs Project Costs Source
Cillyfelde Benefit(continued)
Provide Arterial Corridor Management
yi 0% 100% City si
Hall Boulevard Holl Rlvd TW and Transit Signal Priority on Hall $3.700,000 IOD% 100% 100
Boulevard from Highway 217 to $3,7010,000 $3.700.000 76 E3.700.cux $: � aN
jfiahway99W
Add an eastbound through lane on
Hall Boulevard Holl Blvd Arterial Hall Blvd.If—Pamelod Road to $500,000 I OD% $5100.000 $500.000 100% 95% $475.000 $0 $475,000 0% IOD% City Stott
Cireenbug Road
Hunker St(72nd Add sidewalk on north side:
to 771h) Hunker St Bke/Ped completes sidewalk from 72nd to Hall $1,000,000 1010% $1,000,000 $1,000,000 50% 100% $500,000 $0 $500,000 0% 100% City staff
Sidewalk
Hwy 217 Add a northbound through lane
Northbound Aux Hwy 217 Arterial oder the Ftwy 99W overpass to $20,ODO.000 0% $20,000,000 $0 $0 50% 100% $0 $0 $0 City staff
Lane address a capacilyinch point
Metro Project ID Hwy 99 AHerial Hwy.99 hteaecton improvements
10770 from 641h Ave.to Durham Rd. $50,000,000 100% $50,000,0100 $50.000.000 80% 95% $38,000,000 $9.860,000 $28.140,000 26% 74% TSP.RTP
Project ID 13 Intersection Arterial Roy Rogers Road/E collector $1,000,000 100% $1.000.000 $1.000.000 100% 100% $1,000,000 $0 $1,000.000 0% 100% RT TSP Addendum
haflic sranal
Project ID 14 tntersecton Arterial l
Roy Rogers Road/Bull Mountain Rd
traffics na $1,000,000 10076 $1,000,000 $1,000.000 IOD% 95% $950,000 $0 $950,000 D% 100% RT TSP Addendum
Project ID 16 IMersaclon Arterial Scholl,Ferry Road/N-5 collector $1.000,000 100% $1,000,000 $1,000,000 100% 100% $1.000.000 $0 $1,000,000 0% 100% RT TSP Addendum
traffic signal
Metro Project ID Intersection Arterial Intersection iforovements at Hall $8.000,0 1100% $8.000.0100 $8,0D0000 25% 80% $1.600,000 $0 $1.600,000 0% 100% TSP,RTP
10769 Bvd.And Tied—Ave.
Metro Project ID Intenecton Arterial H.11/H.nker/Scffirs Intersection $5,000,000 IOD% $5.000.000 $5,000,000 75% 100% $3,750,000 $3,862,332 $0 100% 0% TSP,RTP,CIP
11223 Realignment
Metro Project ID re
Intersection Arterial Cenbug/Todeman/N.Dakota
11224 Recon$ afion
$10.000,000 100% $10,000,000 $10,000,000 50% 80% $4)000,000 $0 $4,000,000 0% 100% TSP
Hwy 99W/72nd Intersection Arterial Turn lanes,aux lanes,sidewalks, e
Ave Intersection lanes crossin transit in ovements �'�'� 1010% $8,000,000 (8.000.000 80% 100% $6,400,000 $772,466 $5.627,534 12% f)8% City staff
Highway 217 SB
/Hall Blvd Intersection Arterial SB right-fun lore at Hall Blvd/OR 217 $5,000,000 100% $5,OOD,000 $5,000,000 25% 100% $1.250,000 $0 $1,250,000 0% 100% City staff
Interchange ramp
Improvements
Hwy 99W/68tnIntersection Improvements.Provide
Ave Inlorsec tion Arterial protected left at 681h:transit queue $4,000,000 IOD% $4,000.000 $4,000000 80% 100% $3,200,000 $2.394,646 $805,354 75% 25% City staff
bypass
Hall Blvd/ Install sntall new traffgnd:maintain
PI.Me St Imific Intersection TSM extthg lane coioion $1,000,000 100% $1,000,000 $1,000,000 100% 100% $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 100% 0% City stab
Signal
68th/Atlonta/Ha Intersection TSM Install a traffic signal and add turn 100% $500,000 $500,000 100% 100% $500,000 $173.805 $326,195 35% 65% City staff
Ines lanes where necessary
1-5/Upper
Boone,/ Intersection Arterial Add tun fanes and/or auxiliary $10,000,000 IOD% $10,000,000 $10,000000 80% 90% $7,200,000 $0 $7,200,000 0% 100% City staff
Carman through lanes,sidewalks,elc
Inlerchan
Relate eastbound right-tun lane
when 3rd lane added on Schdls Ferry
Scholl,Ferry/ Rd:Retain westbound right-hum lane
Nimbus Intersection Arterio) when 3rd Ione added on Schdls Ferry $6,000,000 20% $4,800,000 $1.200,000 $1,200,000 100% 100% $1,200,000 $1,200.000 $0 100% 0% City staff
Inlenecton Rd:southbound right-tun lane:
Improvements Reconfigure northbound and
southbound lanes to create exclusive
left-tun lanes
Scholl,Ferry Rd
/Nath Dakota Inlersecton Arterial Intersection Improvement $1,500.000 100% $1,500000 $1,500.000 80% IOD% $1.200.000 $0 $1.200,000 0% 100% City staff
IS,
125th Ave
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 18
Road 7,C Ity Local Private ODOT/County identified Local Related Percent of Total SVC/7DT Related City Related City Eligible Eligible
Project I D Road Classification De,cripti.o Project Costs Share F-ding Funding Total City Cost Funding Percent Capacity EligibleC.st, Cost(TDT) Cost(SDCJ Project Costs Project Costs Source
Clifitntricift Benefit(continued)
72nd/Upper
Boons Ferry Intersecibn Arterial Intersection Improvement $1,000,000 100% $1,000,000 $1,000,000 1007. 100% $1,000,000 $1.000.000 $0 100% 0% CRY staff
Cannan
Boma I Sequoia Intersection TSM Traffic Signal $1,000,000 100% $1,000,000 $1,000,000 80% 100% $?00,000 $1,000,000 $0 100% 0% City staff
Intersection
Tied. an Install o traffic signal:comfruct leff-
Sheet/Tgard IntersectlDn Collector turn lanes.skiewolk aro bke lanes $1'000'000 100% $1,000,000 $1,000.000 100% 100% $1,000,000 $D $1,000,000 0% 100% City staff
Sheet
121st/NoiX' Intersect Bke/Ped Traffic signal $.500,000 100% $500.000 $500.000 IOD% 1009, $500,000 $231,740 $268,260 46% 54% CRY staff
Dakota
Add turnlanes and auatiory lanes
McDonald/Hall Holl Blvd Collector with bike Ions nd sidewalks on Hall, $9,000,000 100% $9,000,000 $9,000,000 90% 90% $7,290,000 $766,702 $6,523.298 11% 89% CRY'fall
RT Lane McDonald,and Bonita to improve
Raiff.If—
Durham/Upper Intersection Bke/Ped Sidewalk on NW Comer.Curb Ramp $40.000 100% $40.000 $40,000 50% 100% $20,000 $0 $20.000 0% 100% CRY staff
Boons
Creenburg Rd/ Pedestrian Islands to faciBate
Shady Ln Intersection Bke/Pad crossing Shady Ln on east side of $30,000 100% $30,000 $30.000 50% 100% $15,000 $0 $15,000 0% IOD% CRY staff
G
uria
Bonita Rd near Intersecibn Bke/Pad Enhanced Ped Crosshg-RRFB? $20.000 100% $20,000 $20,000 25% 100% $5,000 $0 $5,000 0% 100% CRY staff
79th Ave
Greenburg Rd Intersection Bke/Ped Enhanced Crossing between $20000 100% $20,000 $20,000 25% 100% $5.000 $0 $5,000 0% IOD% CRY staff
Tied—and Center St-at 95th?
Hwy 217 58 RMersection Capacity,improvements
Ramps/Hghway Intersection Arterial Including 2nd right tun one from off $2,500.000 100% $2,500.000 $2.500,000 100% 100% $2,500.000 $0 $2500,000 0% IOD% CRY staff
991 am
Hwy 217 NB Add a second northbound left tum
Ramps/Highway Intersection Arterial lane $1.500.000 IOD% $1,500,000 $1.500,000 100% 100% $1,500.000 $0 $1,500.000 0% 100% City staff
99W
Who Project ID McDonald Arterial Mcdonald Rd.improvements from $8000000 10D% $8000000 $8000000 50% 50% $2000000 $0 $2000000 0% 100% TSP,RTP,CIP
11217 Rd Hall Bvld.To Hwy.99
McDnnold 51 W—Donald Bke/Ped Enhanced Crossing between Hall and $30000 100% $30000 $30,000 25% 50% $3,750 $0 $3,750 0% 100% City staff
Rd Hwy 99W-of O'Mara?97th?
Ray Rodgers Widen Roy Rogers Rd.to 5 Ln.from N
Project ID 22A Rd Arterial of Scholls Ferry Rd.to S.of Beef Bend $4,000,000 100% $4,000,000 $4,000,000 100% 100% $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $1,000,000 75% 25% RT TSP Addendum
Rd. Phase I half-freet segments)
Roy Rodgers Widen Roy Rogers Rd.to 5 Ln.from N
Project ID 22B Rd Arterial of Scholls Ferry Rd.to S.of Beef Bend $4,000.000 1OD% $4.000.000 $4,000,000 100% 100% $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $1.000.000 75% 25% RT TSP Addendum
Rd. Phone half-beet se mems
Scholls Ferry Rd Scholls Feny Widen to 7 lanes with bike lanes and
Widening Hwy RA Arleriol sidewalks $50,000,000 75% $12,500,000 $37,500,()00 $37,500,000 100% 100% $37,500,000 $18,745.186 $18.754,814 50% 50% City staff
217 to 121 s1
Scholls Ferry Rd Scholls Ferry TSM Provide Arterial Corridor Management $A1200.000 100% $4,200,000 $4,200,000 100% 100% $4.200,000 H7 $4.200.000 O% 100% CRY stall
Rd from River Road to Hall Boulevard
Tiedeman Ave Tledeman Bk./Ped Sidewalks from Tigard St to Greenburg $1,000,000 100% $1,000.000 $1,000,000 50% 50% $250.000 $0 $250,000 0% 100% CRY staff
Ave Rd
Tigard Sl(Fenno New bridge with bike cines and
Creek)Bridge )igord St Bridge sidewalks $3,000.000 100% $3,000.000 $3,000,000 50% 50% $750,000 $0 $750,000 0% 100% City staff
Replacement
Metro Project ID Trot Bk./Ped Neighborhood Fiats 8 Regional Trat $1,100,000 100% $1,100,000 $1.100,000 25% 50% $137,500 $0 $137,500 M. 100% TSP,RTP
11227 Connections
R%UP
FCS G
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 19
CRyC.stAfle, Capacity G—th Capacity Capacity TOT%.1 SDC%of
Road 0jeCt Cash 7,C ty local Private ODOT'Covnfy Cost I dentifiod Local R:Iated Percent a Total SDC TOT Related City Related City Eligible Eligible
Project ID Road Class,hcatio, Desc,ipfion Pr Sha�e Funding Funding Total C dy F ndmg P rcent Cop=dyT Eligible Costs Cost(TOT) Cost(SDC) Project Costs Project Costs Source
Metro Project ID Trnil Bk./Ped Portland d Western Rai Trail from $1,250,000 100% $1,250.mO $1.2.50.000 507. $156,251 $0 $156,250 07. 100% TSP,RTP
11228 T'ideman Ave.to Man St.
Tualatin River Dai Bke/Ped Complete multiuse path from Cook $10.000,000 100% 510,000,000 $10,000,000 25% 50% $1.250,000 $0 $1,250,000 0% 100% City staff
Trail Park to the Powenines Corridor
Tall rail ke/Pad Creek
Trail TBWoodard Park to Grant $670,000 100% $670,000 $670,000 25% 50% $83,750 $670,000 $0 100% 0% City staff
Fans Creek
Trail Trail Bike/Pad Tiedeman Crossing Realignment $250,000 100% $250,000 $250,000 25% 50% $31.250 $0 $31.250 0% 100% City staff
Complete gaps deg the Fans
F.."'
m Creek Trot Bke/Ped Creek multiuse path from,the Tualatin $6,000.000 100% $6,000,000 $6,000.000 25% 50% $750,000 30 $750,000 0% 100% CRY staff
Trot River to City Hall and from Highway
99W to T' rd Sheet
Upper Boons tipper Widen to five lanes with bike lanes
(Durham to µpones Arterial and sidewalks
100% $10,000,000 $10,000.001) 90% 90% $8,100,000 $4,106,784 $3993,216 51% 49% CRY staff
Sequoia)
Uppet Boone' upper Provide Arterial Corridor Management
Ferry Road Boones Ferry TSM along Corridor N2(1-5)n the Metro $1,300,000 100% $1,300,001) $1,300,000 100% 100% $1,300,000 $0 $1,300,000 0% 100% Gly staff
Rd TSM0 Plan
Metro Project 10 Walnut 51 Arteral Widen walnut St.to 3lanes from Hwy. $8.000.000 1OD% $8,000,000 381000.000 40% 100% $3,200.000 $4,325,812 $0 100% 0% TSP,RTP,CIP
11229 99 to Tideman Ave
Metro Project ID Arterial Hwy.217 overcrossng Hunker-72nd $30.000,000 100% $30.000,000 $30,000.000 80% 100% $24.000,000 $0 $24,0(0,000 0% 100% TSP
10751 Ave.
Hwy
99W/Dartmouth Arterial Turn lanes,aux Ions,sidewalks,bike 000000 100%
lanes.Crossigs:hamit inprovement'
51. $6,000.000 $6.000.000 100% 100% $6.000.000 $308,987 $5,691.013 5% 95% City sluff
Greenberg Rd. Widen to 5lanes from Locust Si to
(Hwy 217 to Hall Arterknl Greenburg Rd;add tum/aux lanes; $20.000.000 20% $16,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 80% 100% $3,200,000 $0 $3,200,000 0% 100% City staff
Blvd) add bke lanes and sidewalks
throughout corridor
1081h Sheet New bridge crossig north-south over
Crosshof Bridge the Tualatin River near 108th Avenue $3.000.000 100% $3.000.000 $3,000,000 50% 50% $750.000 $0 $750,000 0% 100% City staff
Tualath River
North Dakota St Bridge Replace with wider bridge with
Fanno Creek ge $3,000,000 100%sidewalks and bike lanes $3,000,000 $3.000,000 50% 50% $750,000 $0 $750,000 0% 100% CRY staff
DirkseAve T -121st Trail Bke/Ped Dirk—Dirk—Nature Park to 121st Ave New hail along Summer Geek from $1.000.000 101)% $1,000,000 $1,000000 25% 50% $125,000 $0 $125,000 0% 100% City staff
Ave trail
Washington
Square Area TSM Adaptive Signal Coordination $1.000,000 100% $1,000,000 $1,000,000 100% 100% $1,000,000 $0 $1.000,000 0% 100% Coy staff
Signals
Totals $625,271,850 $19,647,000 $53,300,000 $552,324,850 $551,824,M $392,345,980 $127,738,750 $277,069,222
Nola,
1.Project ID's are consistent with existl local or regional transportation plan project listings.
2.All projects listed are assumed to be completed by year 2035-
3.All widening and newly constructed road projects will include bkelanes and sidewalks,even i not called out specifically.
4.Capacity related portions of projects are consistent with parameters shown n Appendie B-
15.Growth shores are estimated by City staff using Meho 2035 hovel demand model,comparing 2010 to 2035 volume/capocity,ratios.
•:;> R-UP
FCS G
TIGARD,OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 20
Appendix B-Capacity Share Assumptions
Proportion of
Project related to
Improvementcapacity
New travel lanes added 100%
Turn lanes or new traffic signals 100%
New interconnected traffic signals 100%
Road upgrades (widen from 3 to 5 lanes) 80%
Road upgrades (change from local to collector standard) 75%
Traffic signal upgrades 75%
Road upgrades (widening & adding double left turn lanes) 50%
Road upgrades (widening with new bike/pedestrian facilities) 50%
Road upgrades (widening from 2 to 3 lanes) 40%
Access management & center turn lanes 25%
Roadway realignment 25%
Source:consistent with Washington County methodology per Appendix C, Amended TDT
Road Project List, Jan. 2014
•:; RVUP
>FCS G
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 21
Appendix C- Reimbursement Fee Calculation
Transportation Capital Project Expenditures
Reim-
Reimbursement Fee FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY bursement
Calculation2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fee Basis
Tigard Traffic Impact Fee
Fund $408,826 $460,540 $1,283,017 $611,167 $953,489 $0 $0 $359,140
Urban Services Traffic Impact $450 $2,554
Fee Fund
Tigard Transportation
D $0 $0 $0 $0 $875,840
Development Tax Fund
Total $409,276 $463,094 $1,283,017 $611,167 $953,489 $0 $0 $0 $1,234,980
Discount Factor (trip growth 12.98% 11.46% 9.96% 8.48% 7.01% 5.57% 4.15% 2.75% 1.37%
rate)
Net Present Value of $356,155 $410,034 $1,155,273 $559,366 $886,604 $0 $0 $0 $1,218,120 $4,585,553
Capacity Investment
Source: City of Tigard, compiled by FCS GROUP.
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Transportation System Development Charge Study
April 2015 page 22
This page intentionally left blank
*%4 FCS GROUP