Resolution No. 12-18 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 12- /q
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING PARK SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE (SDC)METHODOLOGY
WHEREAS, Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 3.24 establishes the authority and process for imposing park
SDCs;and
WHEREAS,this chapter of the code also specifies SDC methodology shall be adopted by resolution;and
WHEREAS,park SDCs were last updated seven years ago,in 2005;and
WHEREAS,since that time, the council adopted the Park System Master Plan in 2009 and accepted the Tigard
Greenways Trail System Master Plan in 2011;and
WHEREAS,the city recently prepared a Parks&Recreation System Development Charge Study;and
WHEREAS,adopting the updated SDC methodology outlined in the study will allow the use of SDC revenues
to fund council-approved park and trail capital projects identified in Park System Master Plan and the Tigard
Greenways Trail System Master Plan;and
WHEREAS, as required by state statute, a 90-dap notice of intent to update the park SDCs was sent to
interested parties,and the methodology was available for public review at least 60 days prior to this meeting.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
SECTION 1: The City Council hereby adopts the parks SDC methodology as outlined in the Parks and
Recreation System Development Charge Study attached hereto as Exhibit A.
SECTION 2: All previous park SDC methodology,including the methodology approved in Resolution No.
04-97, is hereby replaced with the SDC methodology outlined in the attached Parks and
Recreation System Development Charges Study dated March 23,2012.
SECTION 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage.
�--�PASSED: Thi41-0 day of 2012.
�4� �
May4i r-City of Tigard
ATTEST: CDun GLL-P(eSzdenf_
ity Recorder-City of Tigard
RESOLUTION NO. 12- 1g'
Page 1
Eichi 6; A
tD
Tigard, Oregon
■
Report for
PARKS & RECREATION
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
CHARGE STUDY
March 23, 2012
FCS GROUP
4380 SW Macadam Ave. Suite 220
Portland, OR 97239
T: 503.841.6543 1 F: 503.841.6573
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 Parks & Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23, 2012 page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I: BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................... 1
A. Policy.......................................................................................................................................................1
B. Project.....................................................................................................................................................1
SECTION II: METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................3
A. Reimbursement Fee .............................................................................................................................3
B. Improvement Fee.................................................................................................................................3
C. Compliance Costs................................................................................................................................3
D. Summary.................................................................................................................................................4
SECTION III: GROWTH CALCULATION ........................................................................................ 5
A. Relevant Types of Growth...................................................................................................................5
B. Population Growth ...............................................................................................................................5
B.l Expected Growth.........................................................................................................................5
13.2 Conversion to Dwelling Units......................................................................................................5
C. Employment Growth............................................................................................................................6
C.l Expected Growth.........................................................................................................................6
C.2 Conversion to Population Equivalents......................................................................................6
SECTION IV: COST CALCULATION..............................................................................................9
A. Facility Needs ........................................................................................................................................9
B. Facility Costs ........................................................................................................................................10
B.1 Neighborhood/Pocket Parks....................................................................................................10
B.2 Community Parks........................................................................................................................1 1
3.3 Linear Parks..................................................................................................................................12
B.4 Open Space................................................................................................................................13
13.5 Trails...............................................................................................................................................13
B.6 Allocation to Residents and Non-Residents..........................................................................14
C. Compliance Costs..............................................................................................................................14
D. Adjustments .........................................................................................................................................15
E. Summary...............................................................................................................................................15
SECTION V: SDC CALCULATION............................................................................................... 17
A. Residential Cost per Capita .............................................................................................................17
B. Residential SDC per Dwelling Unit ...................................................................................................17
C. Non-Residential SDC per Employee................................................................................................17
D. Summary and Comparison...............................................................................................................17
E. Annual Adjustment.............................................................................................................................18
•:> FCS GROUP
TIGARD,OREGON Parks& Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page ii
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Parks & Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 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 constructed, 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).
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 that 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).
B. PROJECT
On July 14,2009,the Tigard City Council adopted a new Park System Master Plan. On July 26,
2011, the Tigard City Council adopted a Trail System Master Plan.
The City contracted with FCS Group to update its parks SDCs based on these recently adopted
master plans.
•:;>FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Parks& Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 2
We approached this project as a series of three steps:
■ Framework for Charges. In this step, we worked with City staff to identify and agree on
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.
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Parks &Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23, 2012 page 3
SECTION II : METHODOLOGY
This section provides a non-numeric overview of the calculations that result in SDC rates.
A. REIMBURSEMENT FEE
In order for a reimbursement fee to be calculated, excess(i.e.,not currently utilized) capacity must
be available to serve future growth. Our analysis of the two recently adopted master plans indicates
that the City currently has no excess capacity in its parks system. Therefore, no basis for a
reimbursement fee exists.
B. IMPROVEMENT FEE
The improvement fee is the cost of capacity-increasing capital projects per unit of growth that those
projects will serve. The unit of growth, whether number of new residents or number of new
employees,is the basis of the fee. In reality, the capacity added by many projects serves a dual
purpose of both meeting existing demand and serving future growth. To compute a compliant SDC
rate,growth-related costs must be isolated, and costs related to current demand 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. For example, suppose that a city's master plan
included the acquisition and development of 100 acres of new neighborhood parks. Suppose further
that our analysis determined that 30 acres were required to meet existing demand, and 70 acres were
required to serve future users. In that case, only 70 percent of the cost for any new neighborhood
park would be eligible for recovery with an improvement fee.
Growth should be measured in units that most directly reflect the source of demand. In the case of
parks,the most applicable units of growth are population and, where appropriate, population
equivalents. However, the units in which demand is expressed may not be the same as the units in
which SDC rates are charged. Many SDCs, for example, are charged in the basis of dwelling units.
Therefore,conversion is often necessary from units of demand to units of payment. For example,
using an average number of residents per household, the number of new residents can be converted to
the number of new dwelling units.
C. COMPLIANCE COSTS
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
•:;> FCS G ROUP
TIGARD,OREGON Parks & Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 4
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 includes an estimate of compliance costs in its SDC rates.
D. SUMMARY
In general, SDC rates are calculated by adding the reimbursement fee (if applicable) 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. Figure II.1 shows this calculation in equation format:
Figure 11.1 -SDC Equation
Eligible costs Eligible costs of Costs of
of excess capacity- complying SDC per
capacity in + increasing + with unit of
existing capital Oregon = growth
facilities improvements SDC law in
Units of growth in demand (e.g., new demand
residents)
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.
•:;
ROUP
> FCS G
i
TIGARD,OREGON Parks & Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23, 2012 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
Parks and recreation facilities benefit City residents,businesses, non-resident employees, and
visitors. The methodology used to update the City's Parks and Recreation SDCs establishes the
required connection between the demands of growth and the SDC by identifying specific types of
park and recreation facilities and analyzing the proportionate need of residents and employees for
each type of facility. The SDCs to be paid by a development meet statutory requirements because
they are based on the nature of the development and the extent of the impact of that development on
the types of park and recreation facilities for which they are charged. The Parks and Recreation
SDCs are calculated based on the specific impact a development is expected to have on the City's
population and employment. For facilities that are not generally used by employees (e.g.,
neighborhood parks), only a residential SDC may be charged. For facilities that benefit both
residents and employees (e.g., community parks), an SDC may be charged for both residential and
non-residential development.
B. POPULATION GROWTH
Having established the relevance of population, we now quantify expected growth in population and
convert the result to dwelling units.
B.l Expected Growth
Based on data from Metro and the Population Research Center at Portland State University, the
City's population is expected to grow from 47,838 in 2009 (when the Park System Master Plan was
adopted) to 63,042 in 2028 (the final year of the plan). In other words, the City is expected to add
15,204 residents over 19 years at a compound average growth rate of 1.46 percent per year.
B.2 Conversion to Dwelling Units
Residential SDCs are initially calculated based on costs per capita but are ultimately charged based
on dwelling units. To convert population to dwelling units, we analyzed data gathered for Tigard
from the 2005-2007 American Community Survey. Table III.1 shows the resulting conversion
factors:
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Parks& Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 6
Table 111.1 -Residents per Dwelling Unit
Type of - : Unit Residents
Single-Family 2.69
Multi-Family 2.15
Manufactured 1.63
C. EMPLOYMENT GROWTH
Having established the relevance of employment,we now quantify expected growth in employment
and convert the result to population equivalents.
C.l Expected Growth
Based on data from Metro and the Population Research Center at Portland State University,the
number of persons employed within the City is expected to grow from 43,929 in 2009(when the Park
System Master Plan was adopted)to 58,840 in 2028 (the final year of the plan). In other words,the
City is expected to add 14,911 employees over 19 years at a compound average growth rate of 1.55
percent per year.
As used here, "employee"means someone who works in the City regardless of place of residence.
Employees may live inside or outside the City. Later in this report,we will be more concerned with
non-resident employees in particular.
C.2 Conversion to Population Equivalents
The parks and recreation facilities described in the recently adopted master plans were mostly
designed with the needs of both residents and non-resident employees in mind. It is therefore
appropriate to allocate the cost of these facilities to both residents and non-resident employees. The
only exceptions are neighborhood parks. These facilities were designed for the needs of residents
only. It is therefore appropriate to allocate the cost of these facilities to residents only.
While most parks and recreation facilities benefit both residents and non-resident employees,these
two groups do not utilize parks and recreation facilities with the same intensity. To apportion the
demand for facilities between non-resident employees and residents in an equitable manner, a non-
resident-employee-to-resident demand ratio must be calculated based on differential intensity of use.
First,we estimate the potential demand for parks and recreation facilities. Table III.2 presents
potential use by different population groups in a manner that averages day-of-week and seasonal
effects. These averages are based on the maximum number of hours per day that each population
group would consider the use of parks and recreation facilities to be a viable option.
> FCS GROUP
TIGARD,OREGON Parks & Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 7
Table 111.2- Potential Daily Demand by Population Group
ResidentsNon-
Non- Work Work Work
Employed, Ages inside outside inside
Day, and Time Ages 18+ 5-17 City City City(June through September)
Weekday
Before work 1.00 1.00
Meals and breaks 1.00 1.00
After work 2.00 2.00
Other leisure 12.00 12.00 2.00 2.00
Total weekday 12.00 12.00 6.00 2.00 4.00
Weekend 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Total summer 12.00 12.00 7.71 4.86 2.86
Spring/fall (April, May, October, and November)
Weekday
Before work 0.50 0.50
Meals and breaks 1.00 1.00
After work 1.00 1.00
Other leisure 10.00 4.00 2.00 2.00
Total weekday 10.00 4.00 4.50 2.00 2.50
Weekend 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00
Total spring/fall 10.00 5.71 6.07 4.29 1.79
Winter(December through March)
Weekday
Before work 0.50 0.50
Meals and breaks 1.00 1.00
After work 0.50 0.50
Other leisure 8.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
Total weekday 8.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00
Weekend 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00
Total winter 8.00 3.71 4.43 3.00 1.43
Weighting factors
Summer 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
Spring/fall 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
Winter 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
Total weighting factors 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Daily weighted average hours 10.00 7.14 6.07 4.05 2.02
We then multiply the weighted average hours derived in Table III.2 by an actual count for each
population group. The counts in Table II1.3 are based on the 2000 Census. Although these data are
now stale, the accuracy of the individual counts is less important than the proportion of each group.
Table 111.3-Total Potential Daily Demand
ResidentsNon-
Residents
Employed,Non- Work Work
TotalAges 18+ 5-17 City City inside City
Census counts 9,140 7,270 5,798 15,821 27,382 65,411
Daily weighted average hours 10.00 7.14 6.07 4.05 2.02 4.56
Total potential daily demand 91,400 51,929 35,202 64,037 55,416 297,984
4%0> FCS GROUP
TIGARD,OREGON Parks & Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 8
We then apportion this potential demand among residents (four population groups) and non-residents
(one population group), as shown in Table III.4.
Table 111.4- Demand by Place of Residence
Proportion
TotalPopulation Group Hours
Residents
Non-Employed, Ages 18+ 91,400 30.677o 37.687o
Ages 5-17 51,929 17.437o 21.41%
Work inside City 35,202 11.81% 14.51%
Work outside City 64,037 21.49% 26.4097o
Total residents 242,568 81.4017o 100.00%
Non-residents 55,416 18.60% 22.857o
Grand total 297,984 100.00% 122.85%
As shown in Table III.4, non-residential demand represents 22.85 percent of residential demand.
This is the non-resident-employee-to-resident demand ratio.
•:;>FCS GROUP
TIGARD,OREGON Parks& Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 9
SECTION IV: COST CALCULATION
This section provides detailed calculations on eligible costs, which is the numerator in the SDC
equation.
A. FACILITY NEEDS
The recently adopted master plans specify both (1) a level of service for each type of facility and (2)
the projects needed to meet that level of service by 2028, which is the end of the planning period.
Table IVA summarizes the recently adopted level of service for each type of facility and quantifies
the need for each type of facility:
Table IV.1 - Needs per Master Plans
2028
Adopted
Population Level of
and Service Needed
Facility Type Units Equivalents per 1,000 Inventory
Neighborhood/pocket parks acres 63,042 1.50 94.56
Community parks acres 76,484 3.00 229.45
Linear parks acres 76,484 1.25 95.61
Open space acres 76,484 4.25 325.06
Trails miles 76,484 0.26 20.24
For neighborhood/pocket parks, the "Population and Equivalents"column reflects projected
population only. For other facility types,because they benefit non-resident employees, this column
also includes a population-equivalent number of employees (calculated by multiplying the projected
number of non-resident employees by the non-resident-employee-to-resident demand ratio calculated
in the previous section).
The projects listed in the recently adopted master plans are eligible for SDC funding only to the
extent that the projects will benefit future users. As of 2009, no facility type met the adopted level of
service for the existing population. Therefore, not all project costs will benefit future users. Some
project costs will simply remedy existing deficiencies. Table IV.2 quantifies this distinction for
each facility type.
v%4 FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Parks & Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 10
Table IV.2-Components of Needed Inventory and SDC Eligibility
Neighborhood/ • Open
Component •rks Parks ParksSpace
Current developed inventory 60.13 155.16 47.40 190.10 13.00
Development of acquired land 5.30 18.47 6.10
Level of service deficiency 6.33 18.84 55.87 2.32
Subtotal-meeting adopted LOS before growth 71.76 173.62 72.34 245.97 15.32
Growth-related need 22.81 55.83 23.26 79.09 4.93
Total-meeting adopted LOS after growth 94.56 229.45 95.61 325.06 20.24
Deficiency-related need 11.63 18.47 24.94 55.87 2.32
Growth-related need 22.81 55.83 23.26 79.09 4.93
Total need 34.43 74.30 48.21 134.96 7.24
SDC-eligible percentage 66.23% 75.14% 48.26% 58.61% 68.02%
SDC-eligible percentage for land only 78.28% 100.00% 55.25% 58.61% 68.02%
Because some facility types have undeveloped land in their current inventory, there is less deficiency
of land within those types. Therefore,neighborhood/pocket parks, community parks, and linear
parks all have a higher SDC-eligibility percentage for land acquisition.
B. FACILITY COSTS
The recently adopted master plans identify new facilities to serve the parks and recreation needs of
the City through the year 2028.
B.1 Neighborhood/Pocket Parks
Projects for neighborhood/pocket parks have an estimated cost of$13,772,213, as shown in Table
IV.3. Of that, $9,601,430 is eligible for funding by SDCs.
4%4FCS GROUP
TIGARD,OREGON Parks & Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 11
Table IV.3- Projects for Neighborhood/Pocket Parks
SDC-
Estimated SDC Eligibile
Project Phase Timing Cost Eligibility Cost
Bonita Park Improve Crossing 0-10 years $ 75,000 0.00% $ -
Jack Park Extension Design 0-10 years 15,000 66.23% 9,935
Jack Park Extension Bridge 0-10 years 100,000 66.237o 66,231
Jack Park Extension Park amenities 0-10 years 100,000 66.2317o 66,231
Jack Park Extension Trail amenities 5-15 years 212,000 66.237o 140,410
Metzger Elementary School Develop School 5-15 years 437,000 66.2317o 289,431
Park
Northview Park Improve park 5-15 years 295,000 0.00% -
amenity
Northview Park Design 10+years 15,000 0.0070 -
Northview Park Develop 10+ years 57,000 0.00% -
Proposed East Butte Design 0-10 years 60,000 66.2317o 39,739
Heritage Park (P10)
Proposed East Butte Develop 0-10 years 350,000 66.237o 231,809
Heritage Park (P10)
Proposed Local Park (P12) Acquire land 0-10 years 549,840 78.287o 430,417
Proposed Local Park (P12) Design 5-15 years 60,000 66.2376 39,739
Proposed Local Park (P12) Develop 10+ years 867,000 66.2376 574,225
Proposed Local Park (P9) Acquire land 5-15 years 1,202,775 78.287o 941,537
Proposed Local Park (P9) Design 5-15 years 60,000 66.2317o 39,739
Proposed Local Park (P9) Develop 10+ years 867,000 66.237o 574,225
Woodard Park Develop 5-15 years 60,000 0.00% -
Future Neighborhood Acquire land 10+years 4,811,100 78.287o 3,766,146
Parkland (20 acres)
Future Neighborhood Park Develop 10+ years 2,947,800 66.23% 1,952,366
Development (17 acres)
Undeveloped Linear Park Identify/Acquire 5-15 years 178,698 78.287o 139,885
(P6) Site
Undeveloped Linear Park Design 10+ years 15,000 66.23% 9,935
(P6)
Undeveloped Linear Park Develop 10+ years 437,000 66.237o 289,431
(P6)
$13,772,213 $ 9,601,430
This list satisfies the requirem encs of ORS 223.309()).
B.2 Community Parks
Projects for community parks have an estimated cost of$41,061,625, as shown in Table IVA Of
that, $34,859,120 is eligible for funding by SDCs.
-*%> FCS GROUP
TIGARD,OREGON Parks& Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 12
Table IV.4-Projects for Community Parks
SDC-
Eligibile
Pr oj ect Phase Timing Cost Eligibility Cost
Cach Community Park Design 0-10 years $ 150,000 75.1457. $ 112,717
(Approx. 22 acres)
Cach Community Park Planning 0-10 years 5,000 75.14% 3,757
(Approx. 22 acres)
Cach Community Park Develop 5-15 years 2,313,000 75.1417o 1,738,095
(Approx. 22 acres)
Cook Park Improve park 5-15 years 20,000 0.00% -
amenity
Fowler Property(20 acres Acquire land 0-10 years 6,755,000 100.00% 6,755,000
purchased, 28 acres
donated)
Fowler Property(48 acres) Design 0-10 years 200,000 75.147o 150,289
Fowler Property(48 acres) Planning 0-10 years 10,000 75.147o 7,514
Fowler Property(48 acres) Develop 5-15 years 2,459,000 75.147o 1,847,806
New Community Park (P11 Planning 5-15 years 60,000 75.14% 45,087
-Approx. 10 acres)
New Community Park (P11 Identify/Acquire 5-15 years 2,500,000 100.00% 2,500,000
- 10 acres purchased) Site
New Community Park (P11 Design 10+ years 200,000 75.147o 150,289
- 10 acres)
New Community Park (P11 Develop 10+ years 4,307,000 75.147o 3,236,479
- 10 acres)
New Community Park Identify/Acquire 10+ years 6,108,325 100.007o 6,108,325
Sports Complex(P13- 10 Site
acres purchased, 10-15
acres remaining)
New Community Park Design 10+years 200,000 75.14% 150,289
Sports Complex(P13-
Approx. 20-25 acres)
New Community Park Develop 10+ years 9,884,000 75.147o 7,427,294
Sports Complex(P13-
Approx. 20-25 acres)
Potso Dog Park Land acquisition 5-15 years 625,000 100.00% 625,000
Potso Dog Park Design 5-15 years 15,000 75.14% 11,272
Potso Dog Park Develop 10+years 295,000 75.14% 221,677
Jim Griffith Memorial Skate Improve park 0-10 years 150,000 0.001/0 -
Park amenity
Jim Griffith Memorial Skate Improve park 5-15 years 18,000 0.00% -
Park amenity
Fanno Creek Park-Urban Acquire 0-10 years 687,300 100.00176 687,300
Plaza
Fanno Creek Park-Urban Develop 0-10 years 4,100,000 75.147o 3,080,929
Plaza
$41,061,625 $34,859,120
This list satisfies the requirem encs of ORS 223.309(1).
B.3 Linear Parks
Projects for linear parks have an estimated cost of$6,860,000, as shown in Table IV.5. Of that,
$3,131,408 is eligible for funding by SDCs.
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD,OREGON Parks& Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 13
Table IV.5- Projects for Linear Parks
,
• SDC Eligibile
Pr oj ect Phase Timing Cost Eligibility Cost
Tigard Triangle Area (P3) Planning 0-10 years $ - $ -
Tigard Triangle Area (P3) Develop 5-15 years 250,000 48.267o 120,643
Commercial Park Expand 5-15 years 545,000 48.2617o 263,002
Englewood Park Develop 5-15 years 1,104,000 48.26% 532,759
Englewood Park Add local 5-15 years 236,000 0.00,7 -
amenities
Fanno Creek Park-Lower Develop 0-10 years 2,115,000 48.2617o 1,020,639
Park
Fanno Creek Park-Fanno Improvements to 0-10 years 135,000 0.00% -
Creek House indoor space
Fanno Creek Park-Park Develop 0-10 years 850,000 48.2617o 410,186
Gateway
Fanno Creek Park-Upland Develop 0-10 years 1,100,000 48.26% 530,829
Park
Proposed Senn Park Develop 0-10 years 250,000 48.267o 120,643
Undeveloped Linear Park Design 5-15 years 15,000 48.2607o 7,239
(P7)
Undeveloped Linear Park Develop 5-15 years 260,000 48.26% 125,469
(P7)
$ 6,860,000 $3,131,408
This list satisfies the requirem encs of ORS 223.309(1).
B.4 Open Space
Projects for open space have an estimated cost of$1,391,783, as shown in Table IVA Of that,
$815,658 is eligible for funding by SDCs.
Table IV.6- Projects for Open Space SDC-
• • SDC Eligibile
Pfoject Phase Timing Cost Eligibility Cost
Open Space Acquire 0-10 years $ 206,190 58.61% $ 120,838
Open Space Acquire 0-10 years 206,190 58.61% 120,838
Open Space Acquire 5-15 years 206,190 58.61% 120,838
Open Space Acquire 5-15 years 206,190 58.61% 120,838
Open Space Acquire 10+ years 206,190 58.61% 120,838
Open Space Acquire 10+years 206,190 58.61% 120,838
Open Space Acquire 10+ years 154,643 58.61% 90,629
$1,391,783 $ 815,658
This list satisfies the requirem encs of ORS 223.309(l).
B.5 Trails
Projects for trails have an estimated cost of$11,700,000, as shown in Table IV.7. Of that,
$7,957,821 is eligible for funding by SDCs.
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD,OREGON Parks & Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 14
Table IV.7- Projects for Trails SDC-
• Estimated SDC Eligibile
Project ID Timing Cost Eligibility Cost
Fanno Creek (already funded) 0-10 years $ 670,000 68.027. $ 455,704
Fanno Creek (already funded) 0-10 years 300,000 68.0217o 204,047
Westside Trail (to be ODOT-funded) 0-10 years - 0.00% -
Tigard Street A 0-10 years 634,000 68.02% 431,219
Krueger Creek B 0-10 years 160,000 68.027o 108,825
Fanno Creek C 0-10 years 1,040,000 68.0217o 707,362
Fanno Creek &Tualatin River D 0-10 years 1,609,500 68.02% 1,094,711
Pathfinder-Genesis E 0-10 years 715,000 68.0217o 486,311
Summer Creek F 0-10 years 742,500 68.02176 505,016
Fanno Creek G 5-15 years - 68.02% -
Fanno Creek H 5-15 years 206,500 68.027o 140,452
Tigard Street 1 5-15 years - 68.027o -
Tualatin River J 5-15 years 140,000 68.0217o 95,222
Tualatin River K 5-15 years 2,045,500 68.027o 1,391,258
Washington Square Loop L 5-15 years 183,000 68.027o 124,468
Fanno Creek M 10+years 1,631,500 68.02% 1,109,674
Ascension N 10+ years 461,000 68.0217o 313,552
Washington Square Loop O 10+ years 666,000 68.027o 452,984
Krueger Creek&Summer Creek P 10+ years 495,500 68.0217o 337,017
$11,700,000 $7,957,821
This list satisfies the requirem ents of ORS 223.309(l).
B.6 Allocation to Residents and Non-Residents
After determining the total SDC-eligible costs, these costs must be allocated between residents and
non-residents. As mentioned previously, neighborhood/pocket parks do not benefit non-residents, so
they do not receive an allocation of that facility type. Other facility types are allocated using the
percentages computed in Table III.4. This allocation is shown in Table IV.8.
Table IV.8-Allocation of SDC-Eligible Costs
EligibleSDC- Residential Non-Residential
Facility Type Costs
Neighborhood/pocket parks $ 9,601,430 100.00% $ 9,601,430 0.00% $ -
Community parks 34,859,120 81.4017o 28,376,386 18.607o 6,482,734
Linear parks 3,131,408 81.40% 2,549,062 18.607o 582,346
Open space 815,658 81.40% 663,970 18.607c 151,688
Trails 7,957,821 81.4017o 6,477,909 18.607o 1,479,912
$56,365,437 $47,668,757 $ 8,696,680
84.57% 15.437.
After this allocation, the residential share of SDC-eligible costs is 84.57 percent, and the non-
residential share is 15.43 percent.
C. COMPLIANCE COSTS
The City incurs costs in the development and administration of SDCs and may recover those costs as
provided in ORS 223.307(5). We estimate recoverable costs during the planning period of$660,000,
as shown in Table IV.9.
-%4 FCS GROUP
TIGARD,OREGON Parks & Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 15
Table IV.9- Estimated Compliance Costs
Estimated
Activity Services Required Cost
Master plan update Consulting, staff $300,000
CIP management (parks and Audit, consulting, financial 300,000
recreation portion) reporting, legal, staff
SDC methodology review and update Consulting, staff 60,000
$660,000
D. ADJUSTMENTS
On January 25, 2011, the City issued Series 2011A General Obligation Bonds with a par amount of
$17 million. The purpose of the bonds was to fund capital projects related to parks and recreation.
According to the issue's Official Statement, a bond levy will fund debt service of nearly$22 million
during the planning period (through June 30, 2028). Since the project list for the bonds largely
coincides with those projects listed earlier in this report, it is appropriate to reduce the total SDC to
be charged by the amount of taxpayer-funded debt service. Table IV.10 shows how this adjustment
reduces SDC-eligible costs by $16.5 million.
Table IV.10-Adjustment for Bond Levy
Fiscal
Year
Ending
PrincipalJune 30 . .
2012 $ 395,000 $899,5367-T 1-294,536
2013 625,000 665,625 1,290,625
2014 645,000 646,875 1,291,875
2015 665,000 627,525 1,292,525
2016 685,000 607,575 1,292,575
2017 705,000 587,025 1,292,025
2018 725,000 565,875 1,290,875
2019 750,000 544,125 1,294,125
2020 780,000 514,125 1,294,125
2021 810,000 482,925 1,292,925
2022 845,000 450,525 1,295,525
2023 875,000 416,725 1,291,725
2024 910,000 381,725 1,291,725
2025 950,000 304,950 1,254,950
2026 990,000 304,950 1,294,950
2027 1,030,000 262,875 1,292,875
2028 1,075,000 216,525 1,291,525
$21,939,486
Overall SDC eligibility 75.377o
Adjustment for bond levy $16,535,648
Finally,because the City's SDC fund has a balance of$2,426,083, the costs to be recovered by SDCs
can also be reduced by that amount.
E. SUMMARY
Table IV.11 summarizes and allocates SDC-eligible costs after all adjustments.
•:;> FCS GROUP
i
TIGARD,OREGON Parks 8, Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 16
Table IV.11 -Adjusted Allocation of SDC-Eligible Costs
SDC- Residential Non-Residential
• •- Eligible
Facilities $56,365,437 84.57% $47,668,757 15.43% $8,696,680
Compliance 660,000 84.57% 558,168 15.43% 101,832
Bond levy (16,535,648) 84.57% (13,984,346) 15.43% (2,551,302)
Fund balance (2,426,083) 84.57% (2,051,760) 15.43% (374,323)
$38,063,706 $32,190,818 $5,872,888
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD, OREGON Parks & Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 17
SECTION V : SDC CALCULATION
This section provides a detailed calculation of the residential and non-residential SDCs.
A. RESIDENTIAL COST PER CAPITA
As shown in Table IV.11, total residential costs are $32,190,818. As shown in Section III, we
expect the City's population to grow by 15,204 residents during the planning period. Dividing these
numbers results in a cost per capita of$2,117.
B. RESIDENTIAL SDC PER DWELLING UNIT
When we convert population to the dwelling units described in Table III.1, we can determine the
total SDC per dwelling unit as shown in Table V.I.
Table V.1 -SDC per Dwelling Unit
Residents
CapitaCost per SDC per
Type of per Dwelling Dwelling
Dwelling Unit
Single-Family $2,117 2.69 $ 5,696
Multi-Family $2,117 2.15 $ 4,552
Manufactured $2,117 1.63 $ 3,451
C. NON-RESIDENTIAL SDC PER EMPLOYEE
As shown in Table IV.11, total non-residential costs are $5,872,888. As shown in Section III, we
expect the City's employment to grow by 14,911 employees during the planning period. Dividing
these numbers results in a non-residential SDC of$394.
D. SUMMARY AND COMPARISON
Table V.2 summarizes the calculated SDCs and compares them with SDCs currently in effect. To be
consistent with the City's"Master Fees & Charges Schedule,"all SDCs are calculated to the nearest
cent.
•:;> FCS GROUP
TIGARD,OREGON Parks & Recreation System Development Charge Study
March 23,2012 page 18
Table V.2-Comparison of SDCs
Fee Change
Type of SDC Current Proposed
Residential, Single-Family $4,048.34 $5,695.57 $1,647.23 40.69%
Residential, Multi-Family $3,254.20 $4,552.23 $1,298.03 39.89%
Residential, Manufactured $3,209.17 $3,451.22 $ 242.05 7.5476
Non-Residential, Per Employee $ 274.81 $ 393.87 $ 119.06 43.32%
E. ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT
We have reviewed the City's method for annual adjustment of parks SDCs as summarized in the
City's "Master Fees & Charges Schedule"and described more fully in Exhibit"A" of Resolution 01-
74,which the City Council adopted on December 18, 2001. Because the index constructed under this
method includes both land costs (based on data from the Washington County Assessor) and
construction costs (based on data from the Engineering News Record), it is an especially appropriate
index for adjusting parks SDCs. We therefore recommend continuation of the current practice.
•:;>FCS GROUP