HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 5: Resolution Adopting Amended SDC Methodologies and Rates
ECC
UGENE ITY OUNCIL
AIS
GENDA TEM UMMARY
Action: Resolution 4900 Amending Systems Development Charge
Methodology for Parks System; Affirming Systems Development Charge
Methodologies Adopted by Resolutions Nos. 4740, 4748, 4767, 4768, 4770,
4794, 4795, 4827, 4875, 4876 and 4883; and Repealing Resolution Nos.
4740, 4748, 4767, 4768, 4770, 4794, 4795, 4827, 4875, 4876 and 4883
Meeting Date: April 9, 2007 Agenda Item Number: 5
Department: Public Works Staff Contact: Fred McVey
www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5216
ISSUE STATEMENT
The proposed resolution implements modifications that reflect a comprehensive review and update of
the parks system development charge (SDC) methodology and rates. In addition, the proposed
resolution adopts other miscellaneous revisions to text within Eugene’s SDC Methodologies document
to update references, modify several transportation SDC use codes and correct typographical errors. The
proposed resolution also consolidates prior modifications to SDC methodologies by adopting an entire
SDC Methodologies document reflecting all prior amendments.
BACKGROUND
The parks SDC methodology has not been modified since adoption by Ordinance 19773, effective July
1, 1991. The council last adjusted the parks SDC rates in July 2003, by Resolution No. 4770.
Mayor Piercy and the City Council were notified on October 12, 2006, of notice to be provided to
interested persons of intended amendments to Eugene Systems Development Charge (SDC)
methodologies on October 13, 2006. A council work session on proposed amendments to the parks
SDC was held on October 25, 2006. A draft of the proposed modifications was made available for
public review on November 17, 2006, with this information made available for viewing in the Council
Office as well as on the City’s web site. A public hearing was held on February 20, 2007, to receive
public comment on the proposed SDC modifications; seven persons spoke at the hearing and four
written comments were received. Attachment B to the Agenda Item Summary (AIS) contains responses
to comments received.
RELATED CITY POLICIES
Growth Management Policy 14 is directly related to implementation and modification of SDCs.
The council’s adoption of the PROS Project and Priority Plan provides policy-level direction on
intended parks system projects and levels of service which are key factors in the proposed modifications
of the parks SDC.
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070409\S0704095.doc
COUNCIL OPTIONS
The council can adopt the resolution, direct the City Manager to modify the proposed resolution and
return to the council at a future date, or take no action on the resolution at this time, retaining the current
SDC methodology and rates.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager recommends adoption of the resolution.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to adopt Resolution 4900 amending Systems Development Charge Methodology for parks system;
affirming Systems Development Charge Methodologies adopted by Resolutions Nos. 4740, 4748, 4767,
4768, 4770, 4794, 4795, 4827, 4875, 4876 and 4883; and repealing Resolution Nos. 4740, 4748, 4767,
4768, 4770, 4794, 4795, 4827, 4875, 4876 and 4883.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution 4900
Exhibit A to Attachment A, Amendments to the SDC Methodology for Parks System
?
Exhibit B to Attachment A, the complete SDC Methodologies document
?
B. Responses to comments from public hearing and written comments received
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Fred McVey, Engineering Data Services Manager
Telephone: 682-5216
Staff E-Mail: fred.mcvey@ci.eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070409\S0704095.doc
ATTACHMENT B
Public Works
Engineering
City of Eugene
MEMORANDUMMEMORANDUM
858 Pearl Street
Eugene, Oregon 97401
(541) 682-5291
(541) 682-5032 FAX
Date:
February 21, 2007
To:
Mayor Piercy and City Council
From:
Fred McVey, 682-5216
Engineering Data Services Manager
Subject:
Response to Comments on Proposed Parks SDC Amendments
This memorandum provides information and clarifications to the City Council in response to
comments received through a February 20, 2007 public hearing on proposed amendments to the
parks system development charge (SDC) methodology and minor modifications to other
elements of the City’s SDC methodologies document. Comments and concerns were raised in
four areas related to the proposed methodologies:
1.Proposed imposition of a charge on office, commercial and industrial and other
nonresidential development;
2.Determination of parks SDC rates for residential development based on household size;
3.Relationship of the parks SDC to the Parks Recreation and Open Space (PROS)
Comprehensive Plan;
4.Request related to transportation SDC credits for right-of-way dedication for a bicycle
path.
Each of these areas of comment is addressed below.
1. Proposed imposition of a charge on office, commercial, industrial and other nonresidential
development
A number of comments were received expressing concern with the proposed imposition of a
parks SDC on office, commercial and industrial types of development. The most commonly
expressed concern was regarding the nexus or correlation between park capacity demand and
commercial and industrial development. Other concerns were specific to the proposed method
of establishing the nexus, a park user survey, and the methodology for assigning categories of
demand to individual development types.
The City Council examined these issues in a work session on October 25, 2006. Attachment A to
AIS for the October 25 Council work session on proposed park SDC provides additional
background and detail on considerations for implementing a charge for commercial and other
nonresidential development types.
The essential issue raised by those objecting to a nonresidential charge is the nexus or correlation
between park capacity demand and new nonresidential development. Fundamentally, park
users create demand for parks and capacity in the parks system. Parks SDC are intended to
recover the demand for park capacity created by growth in the community associated with new
development. For development of new residential dwelling units, the nexus is based on an
assumption that additional residential dwelling units are constructed to accommodate additional
population in the community, and that the associated additional population of park users creates
demand for additional parks and capacity in existing parks.
In the proposed SDC methodology, for development types other than construction of new
dwelling units, the nexus between growth and demand for park capacity is also related to
increase in the population of park users. For development of nonresidential uses, the nexus is
based on the assumption that the development of additional nonresidential units is to
accommodate more employees, clients, customers and other visitors. Additional population of
employees, customers and visitors and the associated increase in the population of park users
increases demand for parks capacity.
This nexus was demonstrated by intercept surveys of park users indicating that a portion of park
users are coming from and/or going to nonresidential development types immediately
preceding or following a park visit. For example, a portion of park users surveyed expressed
that their choice of a park to visit was directly related to the proximity of the park to their place
of employment or other nonresidential establishment they were visiting.
A number of communities in Oregon have determined that a nexus exists between
nonresidential development and parks capacity demand. A recent survey within the Portland
Metropolitan Area found that out of 17 jurisdictions that charge parks SDCs, nine assess parks
SDCs for nonresidential uses, and one (Portland) is considering implementation in the next fiscal
year. Communities that charge a nonresidential parks SDCs include Beaverton, Gresham,
Hillsboro, Lake Oswego, Oregon City, Sherwood, Tigard, Washington Co., and Wilsonville.
Other examples in the State include Lebanon and Woodburn.
It should also be noted that there are a number of models used across the state and the country
to establish a nexus for nonresidential development. The one used most frequently in the state is
the ‘hours of opportunity’ model. Staff favored a survey approach because it is based on actual
measured use of park facilities, as opposed to assumptions related to potential use. The survey
approach was also used in Phoenix, AZ to determine the extent of a nonresidential nexus.
Several comments were related to concerns on use of the results of the surveys and inclusion
survey respondents making a trip to or through a park by bicycle, given that primary bicycle
paths are part of the transportation system. A total of 1,746 intercept surveys in 21 parks of
various types were completed in 549 hours in the parks; 207 hours were spent on surveys during
the weekdays, 138 during weekends, and 204 during two holidays. Park visitors were surveyed
from all modes of travel to the park—vehicular, bus, skates, bicycle and pedestrian. Bicyclists
made up 20 percent of all visitors surveyed and were treated no differently from respondents
who arrived by other modes; their presence in the park was considered park usage, and
depending on other data collected, their use was attributable to residential or nonresidential
development.
Concerns were expressed that charging both residential and nonresidential development would
charge future residents twice for park capacity. In the proposed methodology the cost basis for
the SDCs is allocated between residential and nonresidential, such that 83.6 percent is charged to
residential, and 16.4 percent is charged to nonresidential, such that overall cost recovery equals
100 percent; no project or capacity cost is charged twice.
Several questions related to the percentage of park users that do not live in Eugene and of those
what portion are associated with commercial or other nonresidential development. Nonresidents
were 16.5% of total survey respondents and of those 40.9 % of nonresidents had an origin,
destination, or both that was a nonresidential land use, or were staying overnight in a
commercial establishment. The weighted percentage is 40.9% x 16.5% = 6.8% of total survey
respondents who were not residents of Eugene whose park usage was attributable to
nonresidential development. For nonresidents, usage attributable to nonresidential development
included users with either an origin or destination from a nonresidential land use.
For residents of Eugene (the majority of survey respondents) who indicated that their origin or
destination was commercial in nature, their use was not immediately assumed attributable to
nonresidential development. The majority of resident park users attributable to commercial
development indicated specifically that the proximity of the park to work or a commercial
establishment determined their choice to use a particular park. The only other resident park
usage attributable to commercial development was if both the origin and destination were to a
nonresidential land use. This more restrictive definition of usage associated with commercial
development was seen as appropriate for city residents, as any usage by residents not accounted
for in the nonresidential SDC would be recovered through the residential SDC.
Several comments questioned the assumption that parks demand associated with development
of k-12 schools is considered to be accounted for in the residential development charge. The
survey found that only 1.7 percent of park usage resulted from students on their way home from
school and 1 percent from students on their way to school (tables 11.10 and 11.11). By
comparison, commercial establishments and work related uses amounted to 7.5% and 5.9%
respectively for origins and 15.5% and 7.0% respectively for destinations. It was determined
reasonable to assume that most of the small percentage of park usage by students was by those
who were Eugene residents of a local neighborhood (since students who live a mile or more from
the school are usually transported to and from the school without an independent opportunity to
use the parks) and were thus attributable to residential development.
2. Determination of parks SDC rates for residential development based on household size
A concern was expressed that data used to develop the SDC rate schedule for residential
development categories was inconsistent with U.S. Census data on household size. In
articulating this concern data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2005 American Community Survey
was cited which provides overall household size, expressed in average number of persons per
household and size of owner-occupied households, without distinguishing between dwelling
types used in the proposed SDC methodology. The determination of average number of persons
per dwelling unit structure type is articulated in Table 18 of the proposed methodology. The
U.S. Census data used in Table 18 was obtained from the Census 2000, Summary File (SF) 3 -
Sample Data, Tables H32 and H33 – which is available on the U.S. Census Bureau’s website. As
this website notes, SF 3 is based on a 1-in-6 sample of the population that is weighted to
represent the total population. This information is not available from the 2005 American
Community Survey. The proposed methodology is consistent with household size data obtained
though the 2000 Census.
3. Relationship of the SDC to the Parks Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Comprehensive
Plan
Comments were received which questioned the parks SDCs reliance on certain aspects of the
PROS Comprehensive Plan, given a remand of that Plan by the Land Use Board of Appeals
(LUBA). The parks SDC does not rely on the PROS Comprehensive Plan but rather relies on the
PROS Project and Priority Plan which was adopted separate from the PROS Comprehensive
Plan. The use of the PROS Project and Priority Plan as a basis for the proposed parks SDC is
consistent with statutory requirements and is not affected by the status of a LUBA remand of the
PROS Comprehensive Plan.
Concerns were expressed about the scale and potential impact on land supply of planned parks
improvements within plans adopted by the City. These concerns regarding prior adoption of
plans by the City are outside the control of the proposed SDC methodology.
4. Request related to transportation SDC credits for right-of-way dedication for a bicycle path.
A written comment was submitted requesting waiver of future SDCs on a property whose
owner, PeaceHealth, previously dedicated bicycle path right-of-way to the City. No changes to
bike path or credit elements of the transportation SDC methodology are proposed at this time.
An SDC credit may be available for a public improvement that the City would have otherwise
constructed or acquired and funded with SDCs. Staff will work with PeaceHealth
representatives to determine if the referenced dedication of right-of-way for the bicycle path
would qualify for such a credit.
Exhibit A to Attachment A
Amendments to the SDC Methodology
For Parks System
Appendix E
Parks System Charge Detail
1.0 Parks SDC Methodology
The parks system development charge (SDC) consists of an improvement and reimbursement
fee, and is charged to residential and nonresidential development. The estimated cost of
capacity from future capacity-enhancing projects to serve new development, as contained in the
Parks Recreation and Open Space Project and Priority Plan, and the estimated capacity in the
existing parks system to be used by new development form the basis for determining the parks
SDC. All park and facility types in the parks system are considered in the basis for the charge.
The parks SDC methodology includes the following steps, discussed below.
. Determine growth capacity needs
. Determine the SDC cost basis
. Determine s,ystem-wide unit costs
. Develop the SDC rate schedule
1.1 Determine Growth Capacity Needs
Capacity in the parks system is typically expressed in terms of acres of parks and number of
facilities per population. The number of acres and facilities per capita is also used to
express the level of service (LOS) provided in the parks system. Capacity demand is
created by new development, in the form of additional park users, by attracting additional
population or equivalent population to the City parks system. Population growth, LOS and
related capacity needs are projected over a planning horizon as reflected in the Parks,
Recreation and Open Space Project and Priority Plan (Project List).
Capacity needs for all park and facility types, except for neighborhood parks are based on a
system-wide analysis. The capacity analysis for neighborhood parks is done on a service
area basis, reflecting more localized planning for these park types.
1.1'.1 Park Types Other than Neighborhood
Capacity requirements, for existing an'd future park users (growth), are based on the
planned LOS for each type of park (except neighborhood parks, as discussed
below) as defined by the Project List. The planned LOS for a particular park or
facility is defined as the quantity of future City-funded and owned park acreage per
1 ,000 population served. A large portion of land acquisition costs for some park
types (Le., linear and natural area parks) is assumed to be funded through non-City
agencies. This is in part due to the fact that the service areas for these parks are
regional in nature - drawing from beyond the city limits. Therefore, the LOS is
adjusted for this partner funded acreage; specifically, the total future planned
acreage is reduced by acreage assumed to be funded by partner agencies. In this
way, the future LOS is "discounted", to recognize the fact that these improvements
may be funded and owned by other agencies and will serve a broader popuration.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Parks~
The following equation shows the calculation of the planned LOS:
(Existing Inventory Q + Planned Q - Other Funded QJ / Future Population Served = Planned LOS
Where:
Q = quantity (acres of park, miles of trails, number of facilities), and
Future Population Served = projected 2025 population for all park types, except for
Natural Area parks which are based on 2050 population.
The capacity requirements - the number of park acres - needed for existing
development and growth are estimated by multiplying the planned LOS for each
park type by the population of each group.
Table 10 shows the determination of growth capacity needs for land acquisition and
d,evelopment for all parks except for neighborhood parks.
1.1.2 Recreation Facilities
A capacity analysis was also conducted for those facility types for which project
costs are itemized in the Project List. Table 11 shows the capacity analysis for
Outdoor Recreation Amenities, Natural Area Amenities, and Recreation Facilities.
Similar to the park acreage analysis, the capacity analysis for facilities is based on
the planned LOS. The need for existing park users is equal to the planned LOS
multiplied by the existing population. Existing users' needs are assumed to be met
first by the existing inventory of facilities; any shortfall is assumed to come from the
Project List. The facilities required by growth are equal to the product of the
planned LOS and the projected increase in population through 2025. Growth's
need is assumed to be met by new facilities from the Project List, and any "surplus"
facilities in the existing inventory.
1.1.3 Neighborhood Parks
Capacity analysis for neighborhood parks is treated differently from other park types
due to the nature of planning and development of neighborhood parks. .
Neighborhood parks are planned and developed to serve a localized area whereas
other park types tend to provide broader system-wide capacity. Growth capacity
needs for existing and future neighborhood parks are a function of 1) the growth
population served, relative to the total population served within neighborhood park
service areas, and 2) the number of acres of neighborhood parks, both existing and
planned to be acquired and developed. The capacity analysis is comprised of the
following steps:
1) -- Establish future neighborhood park service areas resulting from
implementation of the PROS Project and Priorities Plan projects
related to neighborhood parks.
Generally, the assumption of a neighborhood park service area boundary is
that it includes areas within a ~-mile safe walking distance of a
neighborhood park. Three types of neighborhood park service areas were
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
, Parks:
FIGURE 6
Parks System
Capital Project -
Based Methodology
System Value
(SDC-Eligible Costs)
~ Impact Measurement
Population or Equivalent Population
~ Improvement Fee
Future capacity-enhancing project costs - non SDC
eligible project cost
~ Reimbursement Fee
Replacement cost - non SDC-eligible cost
Formula:
Cost of Service
(Unit cost per Population)
SDC - Eligible Cost
[Projected Population (Residential) + = Cost per Person
Equivalent Population (Nonresidential)]
Formula:
Unit Cost of Service =
(Improvement Unit Cost + Reimbursement Unit Cost
- Adjustments or Credits per Unit)
NOTE: The costs per unit of measure, can be found in Table 17 and in Appendix F.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
;
Table 10
Land Acquisition and Development Capacity Analysis by Park Type
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) = (c+d) (f) = (b X pop) (g) = (f-c) (h)=(b X pop) (i)=surplus (g) (j) = (h-i)
Existing Population (167,081) Growth Population (43,819)
Existing LOS Planned LOS Existing Added by Existing From Existing
Park Type (acres/1 ,000 (acres/1 ,000 Inventory Project List Total Future Total Need (Surplus) / Total Need Inventory From Project
(see Table 12 for Neighborhood) population) population) (acres) (acres) (acres) ( acres) Deficit (acres) ( acres) (acres) List (acres)
~nd Acquisition ~~ --
Urban Parks 0.0066 0.0126 1.1 i 1.6 2.7 2.1 1.0 0.6 0.0 0.6
~ommunity Parks 1.3118 1 .8050 219.2 I 161.5 380.7 301 .6 82.4 79.1 0.0 79.1
~_e~ropolitan Parks 3.9170 3.1094 654.5 : 1.3 655.8 519.5 ( 134.9) 136.3 134.9 1.3
Natural Area Parks 8.8985 11.3765 1,486.8 I 1 ,388.0 2,874.7 1 ,900.8 414.0 498.5 0.0 498.5
Linear Parks 1.2038 1 .0153 201.1 ! 13.0 214.1 169.6 (31.5) 44.5 31.5 13.0
Special Facilities 0.7823 0.6212 130. i I 0.3 131.0 103.8 (26.9) 27.2 na 0.3
Total Acquisition 17.3806 19.1853 2,904.0 I 1,617.6 4,521.6 3,205.5 301.5 840.7 206.4 618.3
~~elopment
Urban Parks 0.0066 0.0052 1.1 0.0 1.1 0.9 (0.2) 0.2 0.2 0.0
Community Parks 0.8604 1 .1388 143.8 I 96.4 240.2 190.3 46.5 49.9 0.0 49.9
~--- I
Metropolitan Parks 1 .1456 1.0285 191.4 i 25.5 216.9 171.9 (19.5) 45.1 19.5 25.5
Natural Area Parks 0.1006 0.0797 16.8 I 0.0 16.8 13.3 (3.5) 3.5 3.5 0.0
Linear Parks 0.0443 ' 0.0729 7.4 i 8.0 15.4 12.2 4.8 3.2 0.0 3.2
Special Facilities 0.4820 0.3913 80.5 i 2.0 82.5 65.4 (15.1 ) 17.1 na 2.0
Total Development 3.2128 3.5274 536.8 i 207.1 743.9 589.4 52.6 154.6 41.5 117.5
Table 11
Capacity Analysis & Project List Allocations for Facilities
Existing Existing LOS Project List Planned LOS Existing Growth Existing
Inventory Facilities (1) Need Project Need Project List Inventory for
Facility Type Each Per Pop. Each Per Pop. (Each) List % (Each) 0/0 Growth
Outdoor Recreation Amenities unit per unit per
Basketball - Full Court
--
Basketball 38 1 4,397 24.0 1 3,402 11.12 460/0 12.9 540/0
Botanical Gardens 5 1 33,416 1.0 1 35, 150 (0.25) 00/0 1.0 1 000/0 0.2
Children's Play Areas 42 1 3,978 26.0 1 3,101 11.87 460/0 14.1 540/0
Community Gardens 6 1 27,847 5.0 1 I 19,173 2.71 540/0 2.3 460/0
I
Disc Golf Courses 2 1 83,541 1.0 1 I 70,300 0.38 380/0 0.6 620/0
i
Dog Parks 3 1 55,694 1.0 1 52,725 0.17 170/0 0.8 830/0
Golf Courses 1 1 167,081 1.0 1 105,450 0.58 580/0 0.4 420/0
Performance Space 17 1 9,828 1.0 1 11,71_? (2.74) 00/0 1.0 1000/0 2.7
f------ -~
Picnic Areas (Reservable) 7 1 23,869 3.0 1 21 ,090 0.92 310/0 2.1 690/0
Sand Volleyball 6 1 27,847 2.0 1 26,363 0.34 170/0 1.7 830/0
Skate Parks 5 1 33,416 2.0 1 I 30,129 0.55 270/0 1.5 730/0
Soccer 15 1 11 , 139 15.0 1 7,030 8.77 580/0 6.2 420/0
Softball/Baseball 28 1 5,967 8.0 1 5,858 0.52 70/0 7.5 930/0
Tennis Courts 23 1 7,264 8.0 1 I 6,803 1.56 190/0 6.4 810/0
I
Wading Pools/Spray Parks 8 1 20,885 5.0 1 i 16,223 2.30 460/0 2.7 540/0
Natural Area Amenities 2.99
Interpretive Facilities 3 1 55,694 8.5 1 18,339 6.11 720/0 2.4 280/0
Trails, Multi-Use 20.30 0.12 1 ,000 1.0 0.10 1 ,000 (3.43 ) 00/0 1.0 1000/0 3.4
Trails, Mountain Bike 3.80 0.02 1,000 - 0.02 1 ,000 (0.79) 00/0 - 1000/0 0.8
Trails, Pedestrian 1 0.96 0.07 1 ,000 30.8 0.20 1 ,000 22.08 720/0 8.7 280/0
Trails, Running 11 .82 0.07 1 ,000 1.5 0.06 I 1,000 ( 1.27) 00/0 1.5 1000/0 1.3
Trailheads 8 1 20,885 11.5 1 10,815 7.45 650/0 4.1 350/0
Recreation Facilities 4.7
Gymnasiums (courts) 0 N/A 0 I N/A
Swimming Pools 3 1 55,694 2 1 42,180 0.96 480/0 1.0 520/0
-- f------~~-.---
Community Centers/Sr Centers 10 1 16,708 3 1 I 16,223 0.30 1 00/0 2.7 900/0
delineated: existing park service areas; expanded park service areas due to
access improvements; and, future park project service areas.
2) -- Estimate existing population within existing and future
neighborhood park service areas.
Parks service for the existing population is estimated using address data
from the Regional Geographic Information System (GIS). Existing dwelling
unit types were identified by land use code and were multiplied by an
average household size factor for that dwelling type. Average. household
size factors used in the analysis were consistent with the City's parks SDC
methodology.
3) -- Estimate future . population within existing and future
neighborhood park service areas.
Future population growth within park service areas is estimated by applying
dwelling-unit-density and household size assumptions to potentially
buildable residential lands inside the Eugene Urban Growth Boundary.
4) -- Determine percentage of total population served within
neighborhood park service areas attributable to existing population
versus future growth population.
This is a simple calculation using the results of steps 2 and 3.
5) -- Multiply growth population share by the number of acres of
neighborhood park land to determine growth capacity needs.
Growth's share of the total population of existing service areas is used to
determine growth capacity needs of existing park land and development.
Growth's share of the total population of expanded service areas is used to
determine growth capacity needs of future land acquisition and
development.
Table 12 shows the results of the neighborhood parks capacity analysis.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
. Parks,
Table 12
Determination of Growth Capacity Needs for Neighborhood Parks
Existing Growth (thru Total
(2005) 2025)
Existing Park Service Areas
Population 86,415 19,764 106,179
Percentage of total population served 81% 190k 100%
Existing Acreage Allocation - Acquisition 170..6 40.0 210.6
Existing Acreage Allocation -- Development 77.6 18.2 95.8
Expanded & Future Service Areas
Population 23,669 22,528 ~........ .. 46,197
Percentage of total population served 510k 49%j 100%
Future Acreage Allocation - Acquisition 26.5 25.5: 52.0
Future Acreage Allocation - Development 38.352 36.848 [ 75.2
1.2 Determine the sDC Cost Basis
Development of the SDC cost basis involves allocation of planned park and facility
acquisition and improvements (and associated costs) and the portions of existing park
system capacity serving growth to future park users in proportion to their relative need, as
determined by the capacity analysis. The cost basis includes all park types: neighborhood
parks, community parks, natural areas, urban plazas, metropolitan parks, linear parks, and
special use facilities, within the City's park system1.
1.2.1 Reimbursement Fee
For the reimbursement fee, the cost basis is the sum of the value of the existing
system inventory that will serve growth. The land and facilities are valued based on
current replacement costs. The cost basis is adjusted for historical funding from
external sources (Le., grants and contributions). Only the portions of existing parks
funded through city funding sources are included in the cost basis. Tables 10
through 13 show the quantity of existing land and facilities by type that are assumed
to be required for growth's capacity needs. The reimbursement fee cost basis is
shown in Table 13.
1.2.2 Improvement Fee
For the improvement fee, the cost basis is the sum of growth's share of individual
projects from the Project List (with the exception of priority 5 projects). The project
list represents the community's desired level of service over the planning period, as
articulated through the PROS Comprehensive Plan development process. Projects
or portions of projects that are (a) identified as "renovation" in the Project Plan,
and/or (b) estimated to be funded through other City or non-City funds, are excluded
from the cost basis.
Table 14, derived from the Project List, shows the improvement fee cost basis.
1 The parks system includes some existing and planned park acres outside the urban growth boundary (UGB). These are included
in the SDC cost basis, consistent with applicable law and in order to fully recover growth's costs of capacity; parks outside of the
UGB were included in the planned LOS established by the community through the PROS planning process.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Parks.
Table 13
Reimbursement Fee Cost Basis
Existina Inventory Units Needed For Growth Unit Costs ($/Unit) Facilities
B (j) (j) "> ~
c ~ ~ Q) c
Q) <0 I B <0
"E a. I d.
<0 (f) "C "C
Developed Development Acquisition Facilities Trails Growth Cost (!) Q) "cu "~ Q) Q)
Total Acres Development Acquisition Facility Trails 0 .= "C "C
Acres (Acres) (Acres) (Number) (miles) (Cost Basis) ~ c ~ c C
<0 Q) :::J :::J
"2 E 0 C) U. LL
c
.!9 .g =? "2 ~ ~
0 :;::; c (3 (3
Park Type m Q) "3 :::J
a.. ~ 0::: eft. eft.
Neighborhood Parks
na 210.63 95.82 18.21 40.02 $63,170 $91,800 $4,823,867 48% 480/0
Urban Plazas
Subtotal 1.10 1.10 0.23 0.00 0.34 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 1 0.00 0.00 00/0 0%
Community Parks
na 219.17 0.00 0.00 $0
Metropolitan Parks
Subtotal 654.45 191.40 19.55 134.93 1.41 ,1.78 $69,790 $57,375 $697,900 $68,173 $10,208,500 3 4 5.00 5.36 420/0 30%
Natural Area Parks
Subtotal 1 ,487 17 3.49 0.00 0.61 $2,084 $5,814 $104,187 $71,004 - - 3 - 380/0 38%
Linear Parks I Greenways
Subtotal 201.13 7.40 0.00 31.49 2.30 $47,430 $52,203 $1,613,830 0 0 8.80 3.60 25%
Special Use Facilities
Bloomberg 20.80 4.32 $2,242 $9,689 8%
Campbell Center 1.43 1.43 0.16 $4,387 $707 1 8%
Cuthbert Amphitheater 0.16 $87,736 $14,140 1 8%
H~rd Community Center 0.16 $4,387 $707 1 8%
Lamb Cottage 0.21 $26,321 $5,469 80/0
Morse Ranch House 0.21 $43,868 $9,115 8%
Owen Rose Garden 8.30 5.20 0.41 0.26 0.05 $439 $28,024 $131,604 $13,859 1 80/0 80,.'0
Prefontaine Memorial 1.28 0.27 0.21 $28,024 $8,774 $9,276 8% 8%
Shelton _McMurphey Johnson 1.12 1.12 0.23 0.23 $439 $28,024 $6,623 80/0 80/0
-- -----f-- ----
South EUQene HiQh School $0
Subtotal 130.71 80.53 0.64 5.08 1.16 $69,585 1 3 0.00 0.00
TOTAL 2,903.96 393.05 42.12 211.52 2.90 4.69 $16,786,787 4 8 16.80 8.96
Table 14
Improvement Fee Cost Basis
Park
Type
b
'C
o
'C
D.
Acquisition
Development
Totals
Units Quantity
Acquisition Development
Cost Cost
New Parks and Open Space
Acquire a neighborhood park site to serve this area (83) NP acres
Acquire a neighborhood park site to serve this area (84) NP acres
Acquire a neighborhood park site to serve this area (85) NP acres I
Acquire neighborhood park to serve this area (56) NP acres
Acquire a neighborhood park site (R1) NP acres
Acquire neighborhood park site (R2) NP acres $
Acquire a n~~~~~ P~r!~~~~ (R3 and R~ NP acres ,. ~_
Develop Ferndale Park Site NP I $ 526,4~_
Develop Rosetta ~ce as neighborhood park NP acres ! ~1,604 [ $
Acquire land for combined neighborhood park and Ridgeline I NP 4 I $ 765,000 i i $
"Gateway" (WC1) _____~~ ~ acres _----+-_
Acquire land for combined neighborhood park and Ridgeline ,I NP acres i 4 I $ 765,000 ! : $
"Gateway" (WC~____~_ i : i
Acquire land for neighborhood park (WC5) NP 1 acres 4 T$-76s:ooor--=-~ i $ -- 765,000
De_~elop Hawl<~~.!~ights as a neighborhood park (WC4) NP 3 acres 3 i 1$ 394,812 I $ 394,812
Develop neig~~~~~~park (~____~_ NP 2 acres 2 1_________:$ 263,208 ! $ 263,208
Develop Videra Park to serve WC-6 NP 1 acres 21~--i$ 263,208 i $- 263,208
Acquire landfu~-;~ighborhood p~rk (W11) NP 1 acres ~ - 765,~~~ ! $ 765,000
~~~~itfi:~:kenZie school site as neighborhood park, with play area I NP acres 5! ! $ 658,020 ! $ 658,020 I
~---------------- I-----'--~+------_-----+------________T____
Acquire a neighborhood park site to north, adjacent to Golden NP acres 4 I $ 765,000 I i $ 765,000 I $0
Gardens (81) , -----t--------
Develop RoyallDanebo _~_~ NP 1 acres 2 I $ 200,000 i $ 219,340 $0
Develop ~eighborhood park site (83) NP 4 acres 4 $ s26:416T$--- 526,416 $0
Develop neighborhood park site (84) NP 1 acres 4 $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0
Develop neighborhood park site (85) __ NP 3 acres 4 $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0
Develop neighborhood park site (81) NP 4 acres 2.3 I $ 302,689 i $ 302,689 $0
Develop neighborh~ park sit! (56) NP 4 acres 4 $ 526,416 i $ 526,416 $0
Develop Terra Linda Park as neighborhood park NP 2 4.3 -- 1$ 565,897 ! $ 565,897 $0
Develop Lone Oak park site_as neighborhood park with athletic field NP 3 3.9 _~... ---=l! --513,256 i L_ 513,256 $0
Develop Wendover P~rk site as neighborhood park NP 4 1 I ~_t!-_~1,604+~__ 131,604 $0
Develop recreational amenities along Amazon Greenway to serve NP 3 4 ! $ 526,416 i $ 526,416
neighborhood park needs (WC2) ~ _____-+____+---___
Develop Creekside Park as neighbolhood park __ _--j ~~ I 3.17 ~ I: $ 417,185 !L_ 417,185
Acquire a neighborhood park (W4) NP i 4 -t!-- 765,000 I i $ 765,000
Develop Chase Commons as neighborhood park NP 4 I $ 526,416 i $ 526,416
De~elop neighborhood park site (R1) NP -4-T _ $ 526,416 i $ 526,416
::::;~::~:::: ::::~:::)and R4) ~:L4_1;:: !_ :-t ___--j}_ :~:::::H== :~::::: I _
765,000 1
Renovation
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Other
Funding -
City
Other
Funding -
Partner
Other
Funding -
Partner
(Ownership)
Net Project-
Costs
Growth Share Growth Cost
(Cost Basis)
$765,000i 49%
$765,000! 49%
$765,0001 49%
---------------+----
$765,0001 49%
$765,0001 49%
$7~5,0001 ~%
$01 $0
$0 $0
$0 $01
$0 $0
$01 $01
$01 $0
$0 $0
$0 $01
$0 $0
$0 $01
$01 $01
$0 _ . .~ $01 $765,oooT-----49%
$0 $01 $Oi $394,812; 19%
$0 $O! __=-~_~ - $2_~~~E~=__ 49%
$0 $0 i $O! $263,208[ 49%
$0 =~--- $0 1__ ___!?!ip~___~=- 49%
$01 $0 $01 $658,0201 19%
$01
$01
$01
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$01
$01
$0
$0
$0
~-----~~~--_._--------t-
$0 I $O! $765,000[
I --+-----------+
$01 $01 $219,3401 49%
SO! $oi $526~- 49%
$O! $0 $526,4161 49%
$0 $0 $526,4161 49%
-+---
$0 $0 $302,6891 49%
$0 $0 $526,4161 49%
~--4--
$<i--__~_-~565,897 19%
$01 $01 $513,256 19%
___~ ~~- $131~~ 19%
SO! $01 $526,416! 49%
-SOI-- SO! _ --$417~1asi 19%
. $01_ ~$Orl_- $765,0001 49%
_ ~ $0 ~_~~__ 19%
$01 $0, $526,4161 49%
---~ $526,4~_ 49%
~~~_____~__~6,4161_ ____ 49%
49%
Improvement Fee Cost Basis
Develop Ridgeline "Gateway" park (WC 1) as both trailhead and
outdoor recreation area with picnic, play area, basketball, etc.
Develop Ridgeline "Gateway" park (WC3) as both trailhead and
~~or recreation area with picnic, play area, basketball, etc.
Develop neighborhood park site (W11 )
Neiaborhood Park Total
Acquire 100+ acres surrounding Golden Gardens ponds for
community park
Acquire Amazon Park inholdings along Hilyard for community park
~~-
~_community park site to serve Santa Clara
Develop Santa Clara Community Park, including lighted ballfields
DeVelop Golden Gardens and acquired property as community park
with significant natural area component and trails
Acquire portion of Union Pacific area for neighborhood and
community park, including improved connections, recreation and
open space
Community Park Total
Acquire land to provide urban open space within Courthouse
neighborhood
Acquire land for urban plaza to be developed in partnership with
transit
Acquire land to expand park blocks
Acquire land for an urban plaza in Santa Clara
Urban Plaza Total
Acquire land for Amazon Creek Greenway (WC2)
Implement plan for Jefferson Area Greenway and linear park
Develop millrace linear park
Implement greenway/linear park plan for Amazon Creek from
Headwaters to Fairgrounds in partnership with ACOE
~'!lent Rasor Park Master Plan
Acquire linear park along Roosevelt drainage channel
Linear Park Total
Acquire land on priority stormwater corridors that link with develope<
'p!rks, i!!clude trails
Acquire additional river frontage, including property to the north
Acquire land for natural areas within Willamette/McKenzie River
confluence
Acquire land for natural areas and access to Gillespie Butte
Acquire natu-ral areas to connect Ridgeline system east to Pisgah and
Willamette River system
Acquire natural areas to complete Moon Mountain to Spencer Butte
segment
~-dditional ridgeline to complete Fern Ridge to West Eugene
~ds i
Acquir~ additional ridgeline to_ complete Willo~ Creek to Bailey HiIIRo~
Park
Type
b
'C
o
'C
A.
Units Quantity
Acquisition
Cost
Development
Cost
Acquisition
Development
Totals
Other
Funding -
City
Other
Funding -
Partner
Other
Funding -
Partner
(Ownership)
Net Project
Costs
Growth Share
$011 $0 i $3,825,0001
! i
241.5 $ 16,065,00~ $ 7,896,24(1 $ 23,961,24tl $0 $0 $0 $ $23,961,240
acres I 0.75 1 $ 860,625 1 $ 860.625 $0 $0 $215.1561 $Oi $645.4691
UP I 4 I acres 1 0.5 T~-- 650,250: 1$ 650.250 I $0 $162.5631 $325.1251--- -- ". $oj ... $162.5631
UP T 4 acres 0.5 I $ 650,25O~ 1 $ 650.250 $0 $0 $162,5631 SOl -- $487,68St.
UP 4 acres 0.5 $ 650,250 -rr 650,250 $0 $0 $162,563 $01 $487,688
2.25 $ 2,811,37~ $ $ 2,811,37' $0 $162,563 $865,406 $ $1,783,4061
4 $ 765,000 1 I $ 765,000 $0 $191,250 $191,250 $01 $382,500~
4 1$ 526,416 T $ 526,416 $0 $131,604 $263,208 - $or $131,6041
! I I
acres I i $0 $0 . $0' SOl $0
acres i 3.97 ' 1$ 1,096,700 i $ 1,096;700 $0 $548,350 $548,350 3 $01
2 $ 263,208 $ 263,208 $0 $0 $0 $0' $263,208
10 $ 306,000 $ 306,000 $0 $153,000 $0 $0 $153,000
23.97 $ 1,071,00(1 $ 1,886,32.1 $ 2,957,3204 $0 $1,024,204 $1,002,808 $ $930,312
acres I 30 I $ 918,000 $ 918,000 $0 $459,000 $459,000 $0 $01
~ I --:-l- $011 ,-
1 acres 1 60 I $ 4,131,000 I ' $ 4,131,000 $0 $2,065,500 $1,032,750 $1,032,750f--
I I I I I ~
NA ' 4 'acres 1 100 1 $ 1,530,0001 +._ 1,530,000 $0 $765,000 $765.000, $O! $01
: : ::: I -:: I: :::::1- --=~I : :::: : : $210,3:i $420,7:1 ::::~:I
I, I -+- i ~i
~1f2 I acre~~ ~5~~ 4'972,!jOOt___f 4,972,500 $01 $01 ~_ _~i___~72,5OO!
NA 1 213 I acres! 500 ; $ 7,650,000' i $ 7,650.000 I $01 $01 $3.825,0001 $1,912,5001 $1,912,5001
NA I 1/2 I acre;[ - 300-rs-4-,590,000 ~-------n- 4,590,000 =~~_~~-- ~ -$4,590,0001
NP
5
NP
NP
4
5
CP
2 I acres
I acres
1 I acres
2 I acres
3 I acres i
I I
! acres I
CP
CP
CP
CP
4
UP
4
LP
LP
LP
2
3
5
LP
4
LP
LP
2
4
NA
NA
Renovation
acres
5
$
658,020 $
$0
$0
$0
$0
$658,020
658,020
126.67 $
100 I $
i
!
1.5 I $
40 $
40 !
i
9,945,00Q $
3,060,000
1,530,000 I
i
7,650,000 i
i$
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
9,763,66~ $
T
i$
i$
+----
l!-
3,948,120 i $
3,948,120 $
$
$19,728,003
$3,060,0001
$1,530,000
$7,650,0001
$3,948,1201
$3,948,1201
i
$0
$01
$01
19,728,00"l
3,060,000
$0
$01
$01
$0
$0
$01
--~
$01
- ---:-+-
~-
$01
+-
$0
$0
$0
$0
1,530,000
7,650,000
3,948,120
3,948,120
$
20
$ 3,825,000
$
$01
I
$0
3,825,000
acres
acres i
acres
acres
49%
43%
49%
49%
49%
52%
52%
49%
50%
35%
35%
35%
35%
35%
100%
40%
40%
40%
40%
100%
75%
36%
36%
36%
36%
36%
36%
36%
36%
Growth Cost
(Cost Basis)
$322,43(J
T
i
!
i
$8,507,158
$1,498,592
$749,296
$3,746,48(J
$2,043,15':l
$2,043,15
$1,873,24C
i
i
[
I
$11 ,953,914
$228,52':l
$57,554
$1!~
$172,66~
$631,402
$382,SOC
$52,73i
$0
$0
$105,46':l
$153,000
$693,695
$0
$370,931
$0
$116,775
$75,560
$1,785,964
$686,909
$1,648,582
Acquire additional ridgeline to complete Bailey Hill Road to Blanton NA' 1/2
Heights I I acres
Acquire natural area within Royal Mixed Use area
Acquire land for natural areas along McKenzie River (Rivers to
Ridges)
Acquire additional Amazon Headwaters property
Expand Ridgeline Trail natural area park to include Spencer Creek
area
Acquire land for natural areas to complete Rivers to Ridges farmlan(
connections
- _._~-
Develop and implement restoration plan for Green Island with partm r
agencies
Natural Area Total
Acquire land to provide significant riverfront open space within
courthouse/cannery neighborhood
Develop Prefontaine Memorial Park as a metropolitan park
Metropolitan Park Total
~~ in front o~_MJ House
Acquire land at 4J Admin site to expand River House and Rose
Garden for special event site
Acquire land for park with agricultural character, possible living history SF I
farm i 5 I
SpeCial Facility Total
New Parks and Open Space Total
New Recreation Facilities
Develop spray parks at Washington and or Monroe Parks NP 1 1 ea 2 I --1 $ 164,505 f $
Develop soccer fields at Bethel Community Park CP 3 ea I 2 I ~ 482,548 i $
Develop a running trail to serve the Bethel area CP 2 If I 2600 i i $ 48,474 I $
Develop soccer field at N. Westmoreland CP 4 ea I 1 i $ 241,274 $
Develop Striker Fields as community park with significant athletic CP 3 acres 40 I' $ 5,483,500 II $
fields, lighting, within sports complex model
Provide major community center on west side of Beltline to serve SF 5 ! I ! I
Bethel I +---------~-+-__----------+-
Provide synthetic surface field to serve BethellDanebo in partnershi~ I 1 I ea I 4 Ii I $ 4,386,800 i $
with school district I i I --+--- ! '
Provide additional dog off-leash facilities north ofbeltline (WK) CP 4 ~.___.1~-+________--1~_164,505 i $
~elop an off leash dog area in BethellDanebo CP 5 1 i ---t----- -1 _ i
Develop pedestrian trails within Golden Gardens CP I 3 I : $ 87,736 ! $
--t--- -- - ---------r-- ----------t--
Develop tennis courts at Bethel Community Park (4) --+-~~~ -i __ __-+_ _____~_~-- ~ i
Develop an off leash dog area in City Central I CP I 5 I '________+-___._ --t--~-~ _ I
Develop an off leash dog area in River Road/Santa Clara CP 5 --l-------+--~---+_~---------___+ I
Develop a disc 90lffacilily 10 serve Santa Clara and River Road CP. L 5 'I -1--- ....-.. _..--+-.! _.-. _.--...-.--.-.. _-----+---... I. -. ----- ; -. ------~.. l
~~;:::~. :~~::;::=otloserveWi."owCreek ---~+~+-t-=.-.. l~--.--t- ~_ n+. --L
Develop multi-usepath 10 Fem Ridge ==t~: . _~___~__.__ _L. I
300 i $ 4,590,000 i I $ 4,590,000 I
------+-- I I ~_
~!_-_._i65,000 : ------.-------l!-~~
80 i $ 1,224,000! I $ 1,224,000 I
_______________- - - .----------+ i i
50 i $ 765,000 ! I $ 765,000
500 'T$-;,650,~ 1$ 7,650,000 I
--------+- I
!
[
Improvement Fee Cost Basis
Park
Type
b
"C
o
"C
A.
Units Quantity
Acquisition
Cost
Development
Cost
NA
3
acres I
NA I
3
acres
NA
acres
NA I 3/4
!
NA I 5
NA ! 5
I
acres
I
I
-+-----t__
I
I
2351.7 I $ 39,952,12~
$
MP I
I
acres I
1.76
$ 2,295,000
UP
5
SF
1.76
0.3
$ 2,295,00Cl
$ 1,630
$
acres
SF
5
0.3 $ 261,63C1 $
2748.2 I $ 72,401,13C1 $ 19,546,22~
Acquisition
Development
Totals
:$
i
i$
-I $
39,952,12~
$
2,295,000
$
$
2,295,00Cl
261,630
$
261,63C1
$91,966,69E
164,505
482,548
48,4 74
241,274
5,483,500
4,386,800
164,505
87,736 '
Renovation
$01 $01
i --------f----.
$382,500 $0 I
$612,0001 $612,0001
$191.2sot--- $191.2501
$0 I $3,825,0001
!
$01
!
$01
$4,475,250 1
Other
Funding -
City
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$344,250
$0
$344,250
$0
$01
$0
$01
$6,006,267
Other
Funding -
Partner
Other
Funding -
Partner
(Ownership)
Net Project
Costs
Growth Share
Growth Cost
(Cost Basis)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$01
$01
$612,000
$0
$1,912,500
$oi
t--
$O!
$10,920,375 i $
$573,750[
-------+---
$01
$573,750 i $
$01
$0
4,857,75Cl
$0
$4,590,000[ 36%
$382,5001 __ 36% ----+-
$0 i 36%
$1 ,648,58~
$137,382
$0
$137,38~
$686,90~
$01
I
$01
$01
$13,362,339 i
$4,857,7~
$382,500:
$1,912,5001
36%
36%
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$O! I
$Oi I
$01 I
. ..... fat- ----j ..-
$01
!
I
$0
$oi
-+
$Oi
$0
$0
$0
$20,310,750 36% $7,294,975
$1,377,000l 100% I $1,377,000
$01 ._-~o~--r-$O
$1,377,000! 100% $1,377,000
$261,630! 21 % $54,359
r ~------
$0, 0% $0
$0]- 0% -l- $0
$261,630 I 21 % $54,359
$68,352,3411 45% $30,512,504
$0
$01
$01
$164,5051
$482,5481
$48,4741
$241,274
$5,483,500
54%
42%
100%
42%
$88,867
$200,519
$48,474
$100,260
$2,278,630
42%
$0
$O[ $4,386,800 42% $1,822,90.4
$01 $164,505 83% $136,718
I $0
$01 $O~.~ $87.736! _u28~_ $24.7~
I I I $0
I" : I I, . $0
I--+--. , .----------+-
I__+-__----+_~____+___-~+ $0
L-----t----,----+--~-J--_.-----+~---.----~
i I ! I, $0
: L~_.-l I I $0
$0
$0
$0
$01
$0
Develop trails, trailheads, and interpretive facilities throughout
Ridgeline
oe;~IOP _mountain biking trails and freeriding designated areas
Develop trails, trailheads, and interpretive facilities in WEW
Develop trail facilities throughout the Ridgeline system
~vide covered centrally located skate park with bicycle facilities
Provide interpretive facilities and trails at Skinner Butte Park, enhance MP
~ility
~vide children's play area in downtown area
Develop regional play area in Alton Baker Park
Develop multi-cultural community center/aquatic center in
~iteaker/Skinner Butte area
~evelop major indoor/outdoor aquatic facility and community center
Develop Environmental Education Center
Develop environmental education site behind River House
Acquire Civic Stadium for renovation and expanded community use
~~velop a major community/aquatic center to serve Santa Clara
Develop visual arts center
Provide full service South Eugene community center by upgrading
Amazon Community Center
~velop a Vellodrome
Develop a second Willamette River boat launch
New Recreation Facilities Total
Improving Existing Facilities
Upgrade State Street Park NP I 1 ea 1 ! $ 219,340 I $
~e Monroe Park NP 5 i I
Upgrade Charnel Mulligan NP 1 acres' 1.2 i $ 164,505 I $
Upgrade Tugman Park NP 4 ea 1! i $ -301,593 i $
Enhance Crest Heights prairie habitat NP 4 acres 31 : $ 82.2531 $
~pgrade Ac~rn Park ___ NP 5 I ~ . I
Upgrade Bond lane park __ NP Ilea: 4--- ~- 219.340 1 $
Upgrade Brewer Park NP I 5 i I . i
Upgrade Sladden Park ------ NP 4 acres I 1.2 I ~-$-- -- 164,50sT$
~pgrade Lafferty Park --~-1-~ ~t1-1__ --------f $ 109,6701$
Implement Frank Kinney Park plan , NP I 5 ~ I '
~:Z:: :~:::::~rk .- ----------~~~-~;m - ~:+ -I 5 r-t- -t~ ~_m =~ -==--- -~-j
5 i I + ' I
ImPlement Friendly Park plan NP 1; ea ~ i $ 109,670 i $
Improvement Fee Cost Basis
Develop pedestrian trails along Greenhill Tributary
!?evelop trails within West Eugene Wetland sites
~e!_~~~ primary Ridgeline trails
Provide trailheads and interpretive facilities within existing WEW site s NA
Park
Type
b
'C
o
'C
A.
Units Quantity
LP
NA T
NA
5
3
3/4
NA
4 I ea I
I mile I
3
NA I
NA T
NA
MP
5
4
4
1
MP
MP
I ea !
lea I
I
~ I :: I
4 I ea i
i ea
3
SF
SF
SF
SF
SF
SF
SF
2
1
4
5
5 I
5 I
5 I
SF
SF
X
5
4
Acquisition
Cost
Development
Cost
If
miles
I
10000 I
15
i $ 175,472 i $
! $ 1 ,480,54~_$
i $ 197,406 i $
I ------------i
f $ 789,624 i $
---+-~---~--------_.."_t-
--+---------~
I $ 65,802 : $
1$ 493,5151 $
: $ 219,340~
-----+=---------~---t--
! $ 603,185 i $
i-
3
ea
1 i
-t-
5 I
1 I
1 I
!
miles
:1
i $ 142,571 i $
I $ 1,096,700 L$
1$ 10,967,000 I $
ea I
i $ 15,353,800 i $
i $ 1,919,225 i $
i $ 219,340 [ $
ea
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
----t------~-i
I
ea I
i -+-
i $ 427,713 I $
I $ 45,210,580 I $
Acquisition
Development
Totals
175,472
1,480,545
197,406
789,624
65,802
493,515
219,340
603,185
142,571
1,096,700
10,967,000
15,353,800
1,919,225
219,340
----+----
427,713
45,210,580
219,340
164,505
301,593
82,253
219,340
164,505
109,670
109,670
Renovation
$219,340
$164,505
$301,593
$82,253
$0
$194,340
$164,505
$84,670
$109,670
Other
Funding -
City
$0
$0
$01
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0'
$0
I
I
I
$0
$0
-+-
$01 _ I
~-~--r---
$0 -.-1
Other
Funding -
Partner
$O!
$0
$01
$0
$87,7361
$370,136
$98,703
$197,406
$0
$0
$0,
$0
$01
$0
I
$0
$0
$Oj
$01
I
==1=-
1+
$01 $O[
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$32,901
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$oj
$0 $0
$0 $786,882
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Other
Funding -
Partner
(Ownership)
Net Project
Costs
Growth Share
I
$81',736 28%
$1,110.409 28%
$98,703 35%
$592,2181 28%
i
-+-
i
$32,901 28%
$493,515 28%
$219,340 73%
$603,185 28%
$142,571 54%
$1,096,700 54%
$10,967,000! 52%
$15,353,800 52%
$1,919,225 21%
$219,340 21%
$427,713 21%
$44,423,698 46%
$0 0%
$0 0%
$0 0%
_ ~-- 0%
$25,000 54%
$0 0%
$25,000 54%
I
$0 0%
Growth Cost
(Cost Basis)
$0
$24,726
$312,94i
$34,774
$166,90~
$0
I $9,272
$139,08J;
i $159,504
I $169,557
$77,47~
I $595,949
i $5,696,574
! $7,975,20-:
r $398,76C
L-~
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$88,867
$20,596,259
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$13,419
$0
$0
$13,419
$0
-~
$0
$0
Improvement Fee Cost Basis
Park
Type
b
'C
o
'C
A.
Units Quantity
Acquisition
Cost
Development
Cost
Upgrade Kincaid Park I NP I 4
Upgrade University 'Park I NP i 4
Enhance natural area at Bramblewood I NP ! 4
Complete Arrowhead Park 'I NP 5
Complete Awbrey Park NP 5
Upgrade Berkeley Park I NP I 4
Complete Skyview Park NP 5
Complete Irwin Park NP I 5
Complete development of Candlelight Park NP 5
Upgrade Scobert Gardens NP i 5
Complete Milton Park NP i 5 I
Provide play area at Shadow Wood park NP 5 i
Complete Oakmont Park _ __ I NP ,5 I ->- i
r;::: :::::m Park, including parking revisKlns _~ ~: Iii : t ~t--2 T -=-~--4 $ --438,680 I $
:~:::~~~:; ~:~ni~ Center and porn -1~: I ++--;;-t-+_ --.-1 =____ li~~~~~~~
:::::::t":::OWPa~aster plan I ~: 14 43 ~e:a: -141 ~.453-:-"'! -=~- ,!; $$$ ~:54:~:8':3~5~008111 $:
Implement Westmoreland Park master plan 1 CP I ~~
~~hance Spencer Butte Trail system NA I 1 ea 1 i ~ -- --- 548,350 I $
~~Iemen! Wild Iris Ridge Habitat Enhancement Plan NA ! 3 acres I 123 ' $ 674,471 1$
Restore Willow Creek between 11th&18th NA I 4 acres i 60 -T - __~~
Implement Ridgeline master Plan I NA 4 ea I 1 1----~---~ 548,350 I $
Enhance and develop Sorrel Ponds site NA I 5 j , I
Implement Skinner Butte Park Master Plan MP 3/4 acres 22.52 I i $ 6,275,317 $
Provide accessible trails within Hendricks Park Forest MP 4 If 3500 ~ $ 166,973 $
Implement Hendricks Park Forest Management Plan MP 3 acres 2 l!- 767,690 I $
Replace aging infrastructure at Alton Baker Park MP 2 acres 2 ~-----f!- ~'219,340 I $
~:~~:~::s~~~~e B:::~fic;noe Canal for kayaking, recreation, and MP 2 I [ _L__~_____~83,500 I $
Complete Alton Baker Park, update WABP Development Plan and I I I I
EABP Master Plan MP I 3/4 , acres i 30 i i $ 4,018,309 i $
Implement Morse Ranch master plan MP 4 acres 3 I ~-- 658,020 I $
ExpandPetersenBarnCommuni~Center .~ 5 I -r==r-- -----r
upgrade C~mpbell Center with fitness center --r SF I 3 ea -t--~---~~ ~ 2,851,420 i $
Develop parking and access to Laurelwood "Back 9" and Ribbon Trail I ._ I I I I
~ end SF I 2 I acres I 2 ,: : $ ~, 438,680 $
Enclose portion of Amazon Pool for year round use ~ SF 5 i I r 1 [
Replace Maintenance Buildings at Laurelwood I SF 0~L~_=r_~_~=-_~_~_--=~_1i--=~o35:2851 $
Improve Tennis Courts at WHS in partnership with Bethel School I SF I 4 i ea I 1 I ! $ 109,670 I $
qistrict 5~_____~___~_~ i l____---'--------L~_______L____ '
ea
1
1
4
i i $ 109,670 $
1 ! $ 164,505 $
-+------------ - I
: ------~--- 109,670 I $
--1-------~- -~ I
I
109,670 $
ea I
acres
ea
0.53 ;
I
-+
:$
+ I
, I
+--~------+---+-
i
Acquisition
Development
Totals
109,670
164,505
109,670 ,
109,670
I
438,680 I
82,253
6,360,860
4,935,150 !
3,014,828
548,350 I
548,350
674,471
329,010
548,350
6,275,317 I
166,973
767,690
219,340
5,483,500
4,018,309
658,020
2,851,420
438,680
1,035,285
109,670 I
$0
$01
$191,923
$0
$2,741,7501 :r
I
$1,004,5771
---~---~==----+--
-L i
SO! ~.. u__
$01 $01
----t--------t--
$1~_ -;f- - -sot-
$109,6~~_ $0 _ $54,83:J
Renovation
$59,670
$164,505
$109,670
$82,253
$329,010
$32,253
$6,360,860
$4,935,150
$2,614,828
$411,263
$411,263
$263,043
$0
$548,350
$2,823,893
$166,973
$567,690
$219,340
$2,741,750
$3,868,309
$526,416
$342,170
$219,3401
Other
Funding -
City
$0
$0
$01
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$164,505
$0
Other
Funding -
Partner
Other
Funding -
Partner
(Ownership)
$0
$0
$0
$0:
$0:
$01
--+--- -
$0
~-------~
$0
$0
$0
$0
$O[
$01
$01
I
I
-+
i
I
$0' I
- ~-=~~-----T
$01 i
$137,0881___ i
$337,2351 I
$164,505! i
$137,0881 I
!
$0;
$0[---
$0
Net Project
Costs
--+----
$109,6701
$50,000
$01
$01
I
$400,000
$137,088
$0
$74,192
$0
$0
$3,451,425
$0
$8,078
$0
$0
$0
$131,604
$2,509,250
$219,340
$50,000
$01
I
$O!
!
$27,418
Growth Share
$0
$0
54%
0%
0%
49%
52%
54%
0%
0%
66%
52%
0%
36%
0%
0%
100%
0%
64%
0%
0%
28%
100%
0%
21%
0%
0%
Growth Cost
(Cost Basis)
I
I
i
$27,170
$0
$0
$0
$0
$13,43~
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$56,754
$27,170
$0
$0
$264 , 52':l
$70,94~
$0
$26,647
$0
$0
$0
$3,451,421:;
$0
$5,174
$0
$0
$0
$131,6~
$0
$0
$45,573
$0
$0
$0
NP i 4 I ea i 1; · $
! i -+---+-~--+---~~----i--
I NP I ~~~ i --,J-~-~~-~~
I NP i 4 I ea [ 1 I I $ 109,670 I $ 109,670
I +----+----~--r~-----------~-~+-----
4 I ea i 1 i, '$ 27,418 : $
ea 11;----1I-~~~64,5051 $
Improve access to Fairmount and laurel Hill Park (See 51 on Map ':i) NP 4 I ea II 1 I i $ 164,5051 $
I I ' I I I
NP I 4 -; ea I 1 I i $ 164,505 I $ 164,505 $0
NP 4 I ea I ,1! II' $ 164,505 i $ 164,505 $0
~ I
NP 4: ea -i--~~--~ _ 109,670! $ 109,670 $0
NP 4 J ea ~ 1$ 109.670 ($. 109.670 $0
NP I 4 ea! ~~_+--____--1J__~09,67.<U-! 109,670 $0
! I Ii! i
Enhance access to Brewer & Bond lane parks (See W5 on Map 3) NP I 4,~ I _~~____~ i $_~~~~$ 109,670 $0
~ . 5 (5 W6 M 3) NP I 4 i ea + 1! i $ 109,670 I $ 109,670 $0
~prove connectivity to heldon ee on ap -+-~--t---~--~~------L~------~--L--------- _____~
Enhance access to Crescent Park (See W7 on Map 3) NP ! 4 i ~ 1 i ~ $ 54,835 I $ 54,835 ' $0
Improve access and parking at Cal Young Sports Park (See W2 on NP I 4 i i 1 I i $ 109670 I $ 109670 $82253
Map 3) ! I ea i I ----l '! ' ,
En!;,,;';" access to Willakenzie school and Ascot Park (See W9 a';dt~;t-;-T~al--;-r --_. . ! ~_. - . ;09-670 ! $. 109 670 I $0
W100nMap3) ! I ! : ! i ,! IU07,OIUI
~~nma~~C~~hrnSpo~park~ee~200M~~ I NP~~-~j==-t-~=--=1==== i ~~-~-~-~--~-~~
Enhance access to Oakmont Park (See W8 on Map 3) ! NP ! 5: i I ! i -----------r- I
RePlace pedestrian bridges at Amazon Park, add new bridges wherr-c-p-r, -2 -T-----I-~---1~~,!--~~-----T,. $------ --~54---8---3--+-50 I $--~----~;;r_~$4-~11 2631
needed. i i.____~_~L__~___~l___~__L___': ' I ' I
Improvement Fee Cost Basis
~mplete second phase of River House Master Plan
Implement SMJ House plan, including parking and access across
-'!!!!:oad tracks
-,-",-,prove Cuthbert Amphitheater
Provide for replacement of synthetic surface fields in partnership with
Implement Rose Garden master plan
~~place irrigation at laurelwood
Restore Bloomberg
Renovate park restrooms
p!'~~lop children's play area renovation program
Decommission wading pools
Renovate park irrigation systems
~ovate park lighting systems
~enovate tennis courts, including resurfacing
~evelop W. University
Implement habitat management plans
Improving Existing Facilities Total
Access Improvements
Improve access to Friendly & Lafferty Parks (See 52 on Map 3)
Improve access to Kincaid and Milton (See 54 on Map 3)
Develop access improvements to meet neighborhood park needs
(See B2 on Map 3)
Develop access improvements to serve this neighborhood (See B6
on Map 3)
l':l\
Improve access to Amazon Park (See 53 on Map 3)
Improve access to Tugman Park (See 55 on Map 3)
Improve access to existing parks (See R5 on Map 3)
Improve access to existing parks (See R6 on Map 3)
~~hance access to Striker Fields (See W3 on Map 3)
Park
Type
b
"C
o
"C
IL
Acquisition
Development
Totals
Acquisition
Cost
Development
Cost
Units Quantity
SF I 4 ea +-_______~_ _-+- [$ 1,316,0401$
I I I,
SF i 5 i '
+--+---~-+-----.- r---~-___+-~ - - ---~
SF i 5 i ! I ! ,
SF Ii 1,3,4 ea 10 I i$~741,750~$
---+- I +-
SF ! 5 I ! __+_____~~_
SF 1 5 I ! . !
NA 5 Iii I
X i 1 i ea I 7 ~ i $
X I~_ea I 1 I -U~--
X 2 I ea! 1: I $
X ! 2 !~ 1: i$
------+
X 1 I ea.. 1 i
X I ~-~--~-1_
i 1! _ 1.------1-
2 ea I 1 I
1,316,040
I
2,741,750
X
+-----
92~$ 921,228
219,340 I $ 219,340
548,350 ! $ 548,350
1,096,700 i $ 1,096,700
I $ 548,350 ; $ 548,350
LL _1,0_96, 700rs-- 1,096,700
I $ 65,802 i $ 65,802
I $ 1 :096~700~$ 1,096,700
I $ 51,019,855 i $ 51,019,855
164,505 , $
164,505
164,505
NP
27,418
VI IlCIfJ
NP
4
164,505
164,505
Renovation
$658,020
$2,741,750
$921,228
$219,340
$548,350
$1,096,700
$548,350
$822,525
$65,802
$1,096,700
$38,982,592
$41,126 ~____~--------J-~~3,3791 49% ['
$41,126 $OL______-----1__$12~ 49% ~
$27,4181 $01 ! $82,253 49% I
-+-~-______+-----------.--L---~-
$6,8541 $01 i
---+---~--~-
$41,126 ~--------t-
$41,126 $01 ' :
I
Other
Funding -
City
Other
Funding -
Partner
(Ownership)
Other
Funding -
Partner
$0
$01
--L------L-----+
I _ !
$0 i $1,370,8751
$0 $01
$0 $01
$0 $0
$0 $01
$0 $0'
$01 $01
I I
~ i
$01 $274,1751
$164,505 $6,414,050
- - ----------t--u---
I
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0'
$01 I
$01 I
$01 i
$O! I
I
$01 I
$01 !
=+-~----+
$0 I ---+--
~ I
I I
$0 I -1----
$01
+---------~---+-
I i I
-+-----+------+---
$137,0881 $01 i
I I
$41,126
$41,126
$27,418
$27,418
$27,418
$27,418
$27,418
$13,7091
$27,418
$27,418
Net Project
Costs
Growth Cost
(Cost Basis)
Growth Share
+----__~58,020
I
21% $136,718
.$0
$0
$0
I $0
$0
$0
0%1 I $0
0% $0
0% I $0
0% I $0
0% I $0
81% ---1- $220,74.:
0% ~ $0
0% -[--so
55% $4,504,714
-+--~----
$01
$0
I
- ~~-~---_._-----~
: $01
=~--------.. $0 I
$0
$274,175
$0
$0
$8,150,257
~-
$20,563
$123,379
$60,456
$60,456
$40,304
$10,076
$60,456
$60,456
$60,456
$60,456
$40,304
$40,304
$40,304
$40,304
$40,304
$20,152
$0
49%
49%
$123,379
49%
$123,379 49%
$123,379 49%
$82,253 49%
$82,253 49%
$82,253 49%
$82,253 49%
$82,253 49%
$41,126 49%
$0 49% I
$82,253 49%
$0 0%
$40,304
$0
$0
$0
Improvement Fee Cost Basis
Enhance access to Amazon Creek Greenway and Fern Ridge I
Bikepath in the Willow Creek area
Develop access improvements between parks, schools and
neighborhoods to WEW system and bike system
Develop connections from bikepath to ridgeline and pacific crest trai
system and proposed Willamalane riverfront system
Develop pedestrian improvements to link downtown with Skinner I
Butte Park, SMJ house, and riverfront system (excluding pedestrian
bridge at train station) I
Improve access north/south of Beltline
Provide underpass via Delta Ponds to riverfront bike system I
Complete comprehensive POS Sign age System I
Complete ADA improvements I
Improve Royal Avenue to enhance park/school connectivity I
Improve access to existing natural resource areas I
Develop pedestrian and bike access improvements between River 1'1,
Road/Santa Clara and Bethel Danebo and Fern Ridge Reservoir
Provide access to Golden Gardens
Acquire land to provide connectivity north and east to Santa Clara I
area
Access Improvements Total
GRAND TOTAL
Park
Type
l:'
'C
o
'C
~
LP
x
3
X 5
x
2/3
x ' 2 I ea
X iomplet ea
I '
~ t-ij-:
X : 4 I. ea
X i 5 :
X : 5 i
~1 II
X; ea
X! I
I 5 i
i
654
Units Quantity
Acquisition Development
Cost Cost
If
$
i
2000
ea
$ 1,535,380 $
$ 329,01 $
1 +__~__u_ _ ; $
1 $
~ 1$
I I ----=~~-==---
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
329,010 $
219,340 $
109,670 I $
I
!
i
I
.n_-~
i : $ 5,217,002 $
I $72,401,130 $120,993,664
Acquisition
Development
Totals
1,535,380
329,010 I
329,010
219,340
109,670
I
164.5051
5,217,002
$193,414,133
Renovation
I
i
$01
I
$493,515
$39,476,107
Other
Funding -
City
$0
$0
$767,6901
i
$329,010
i
$0
$0
$54,835
$0
$0
$0
$0
Other
Funding -
Partner
,774
Other
Funding -
Partner
(Ownership)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Net Project
Costs
$26,321
$767,6901
I
$329,010
$219,340
$54,835
I
I I
I ! :
$O~~-=~sor --- ... L
I i
$1,784,057 $0 i
$7,954,828 $20,563,2711 $4,857,750 i
I
$-164,5051
I
I
$2,939,430
$123,865,726
Growth Share
$0
21%
21%
0%
21%
21%
21%
21%
34%
46%
Growth Cost
(Cost Basis)
$0
$5,469
$0
$159,504
$0
$0
--t--~
$45,573
$11 ,39~
$0
$0
$34,179
$0
$999,564
$56,613,042
1.2.3 Park Acreage Allocation
Table 15 shows the percentages used to allocate Project List acreage and
development costs to existing development and growth. Separate allocation
percentages are provided for land acquisition and development, and for each park
type based on the capacity analysis. Land development and acquisition costs for
special use facilities are allocated based on growth's share of total future
population, which differs from the LOS approach used for most other park types. As
these are "special" facilities not associated with a standard park type, allocation is to
both existing and new development in proportion to future total population.
1.2.4 Facilities Cost Allocation
Outdoor recreation facilities standard to selected park types are included in the SDC
cost basis unless funded primarily through user fees (e.g., golf courses). Standard
natural area amenities are also included, unless funded through other sources (e.g.,
off-street bike paths). The allocation percentages for each facility type are shown in
Table 11.
1.3 Determine System-Wide Unit Costs
Development of system-wide unit costs involves the following steps:
1) -- Allocate cost basis between residential and nonresidential development.
The City conducted a Parks and Recreation Facilities' User Survey in 2004. The
objectives of the survey were to provide a more thorough understanding of park
usage and data to evaluate a nexus between residential/nonresidential
development and the use of parks, open space and recreation facilities in the City.
Based on the survey results 16.4 percent of park usage is attributable to
nonresidential development; the remaining 83.6 percent of the cost basis is
allocated to residential development.
2) -- Divide cost basis by total growth units to determine cost per unit.
System-wide unit costs are calculated separately for residential and nonresidential.
The residential unit cost is determined by dividing the residential portion of the cost
basis by the growth in resident population to determine a cost per person. For
nonresidential, the system-wide unit cost is equal to the nonresidential cost basis
divided by the growth in equivalent population2 to determine a cost per equivalent
population.
2 As residential use is 83.6 percent of total park users, then the total population of park users added by growth is calculated by dividing the growth in resident
population by .836. The difference between this total park user population and the resident population is the 'equivalent population' attributable to nonresidential
development.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Parks)
Table 15
Alt t. f R · t L · A
oca Ion 0 rOJec 1St creage(Cost
Project list
Acreage (1 ) Existing Deficiency Growth (thru 2025) (3rowtb (beyond :202~)
Park Type Acreage (1 ) Acreage % Acreage % Acreage %
;J..and Acquisition
Neighborhood 52.0' , 26.5 51% 25.5 49% - 0%
Urban 1.6 1.0 ,65% 0.6 ' 35% - 0%
'Com,munity 161.5 ~2.4 51% 79.1 49% - Q%
Metropolitan 1.3 - 0% 1.3 100% - 0%
Natural Area 1 ,388.0 414.0 30% 498.5 36% ,475.4 34%
Linear , 13.0 - 0% 13.0 100% - 0%,
Special F acUities 0.3 0.2 79% 0.1 21% - 0%
Total Acres 1,617.6, 524.2 32% 618.0 38% 475.4 ' 29%
Oevelopment
Nelghborh9Qd 75.2 38.4 . 51% 36.8 49% - 0%
~rban 0.0 - 0% 0.0 0% - 0%"
Community 96.4 46.5 ,48% 49,.9 52% - 0%
Metropolitan 25.5 - 0% 25.5 100% - .0%
::Natural Area 0.0 - ' 0% 0.0 0% - 0%
Linear 8.0 4.8 600/0 3.2 40% - 0%
Special Facilities 2~0 1~6 79% .0'.4 21% - 0%
Total Acres 207.1 91.2 . '44% 115.9 56% - 0%
.( 1) Net of partner funded/owned' acreage
Table 16
System-mde Unit Costs; Residential & Nonresidential Development per Component
83.~' 43,819 16.4% 8,696
Residential Unit Nonresidential Unit
Residential Cost Nonresidential Cost
Cost Basis Share ($/New Person) Share- ($/New Equri. Pop.)
New Parks 'and Open Space Improvement Fee
Neighborhood -Parks $8,507,158 $7,111 ;984, $162 $1,395,174 $1'62
Community P'l.rks $11,953,914 . $9,993,472 $228 $1,960,442 $228
Urban Plaza' $631,402 $527,852 $12 $103,550 $12
Unear Parks $693,695 $579,929 $13 $113,766 '$13
Natural Area Parks $7,294,975 $6,098,599 $139 $1,,196,376 $139
Metropolitan Parks $1,377,000 $1,151,172 $26 $225,828 $26
Special Use Facilities $54,359 $45 444 $1 $.8 915 $1
Sub-total $30,512,504 $25,508,453 $582 $5 004 061 $582 ;
New Recreation Facilities .,. $20,596,259 $1.7,218,473 $393 $3,377,787 $393
Improving Existing. Facilities $4,504,714 $3,765,941 $86 $738,n3, $86
Access Improvements $999.564 $835,636 $19 $163,929 $1'9
Subtotal IMPROVEMENT $56,61:3,042 $47,328,503 $1,080 $9,284,539 $1,080
existing Parks and Facllltlel ) Reimbursement ,Fee
Neighborhood Parks ' $4,823,867 $4,032,753 $92 , $791,114 $92
Community Parks $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Urban Plaza $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Unear Parks $1,613,830 $1,349,162 $31 $264,668 $31
Natural Area Parks $71,004 $59,360 $1 $11,645 $1
Metropolitan Parks $10,208,500 $8,534,306 $1.95 $1,674,194 $195
, 'Soecial Use Facilities, ' $69,585 $58,173 $1 ' , $11,412 $1
Subtotal REIMBURSEMENT $16,786,787 $14,033,754 $320 $2,753,033 $320
Total SYSTEM $73,399,829 ' $61,362,257 $1,400 $12,037,572 $1,400
Less Credit $293 $836
Net Cost per Unit \. $1,107 $565
'\
3) -- Determine credit for existing deficiency costs.
The SDC is designed to fully recover from new development the parks system
capacity demand created by growth. The Project List includes costs that are
associated with correcting deficiencies of existing parks and facilities, and with
increasing the level of service for existing park users. Assuming that the deficiency
costs are recovered through taxes -. used to retire general obligation (GO) bonds or
in the form of general fund support of the projects - new development will contribute
to these costs. New development is also contributing to the retirement of existing
GO bonds issued in 1998 to fund recent park acquisition and development. To
recognize this future contribution, a credit is calculated based on a projected stream
of GO bond debt service requirements, assuming one GO bond per Project List
priority phase to fund the deficiency costs. The credit is equal to the present value
of the future debt payments per person (for residential) or per equivalent population
(for nonresidential).
Table 16 shows the system-wide unit costs for residential and nonresidential
development for each SDC component.
1.4 Develop the sDC Rate Schedule
The system-wide cost and credit per unit is multiplied by the number of persons served to
determine the fee and credit for a particular type of development. The SDC schedule is
presented in Table 17.
Table 17
SDC Schedule
Category Persons or EP Gross SDC per Credit per Unit Net SDC per
per Unit Unit Unit
Residential per DU
Sinale-familv 2.64 $3 697 $773 $2,924
DuplexITown Hm/Mobile Hm 2.14 $2 997 $627 $2,370
Multifamilv 1.67 $2 339 $489 $1,850
Nonresidential per Room
A 1.93 $2,703 $1,613 $1 ,090
-- per TGSF
B 1.29 $1 ,806 $1,078 $728
C 0.79 $1,106 $660 $446
D 0.47 $658 $393 $265
E 0.19 $266 $159 -$f07
See Table 19 for nonresidential class definitions and Appendix A for cross-reference to HUD/BPR codes.
1.4.1 Residential sDC Assessment
US Census data form the basis for determining the average number of persons per
type of residential development, for purposes of SDC assessment. The US Census
classifies living quarters as either housing units or group quarters, as follows:
. Housing units - include a house, an apartment, a mobile home or trailer, a group
of rooms or a single room occupied as a separate living quarters or, if vacant,
intended for occupancy as separate living quarters. If the living quarters contain
eight or fewer persons unrelated to the householder or person in charge, it is
classified as a housing unit.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Parks~
· Group quarters - include the "institutionalized" population (prisons, nursing
homes, other), as well as the "non-institutionalized" population (college dorms,
military housing, other). If the living quarters contain nine or more persons
unrelated to the householder or person in charge (a total of at least 10 unrelated
persons), it is classified as group quarters.
1.4.1.1 Housing Units
The residential rate schedule differentiates between residential dwelling types
based on available Census data on number of persons per dwelling unit.
Dwelling unit types are aggregated into three groups, as reflected in Table 18.
Accessory dwelling units are included in the same category as attached one-unit
dwellings and two-unit dwellings; this recognizes the most current (2000) Census
statistics for Eugene that imply that this type of dwelling unit has fewer persons
residing per dwelling unit than a detached one unit dwelling.
TABLE 18
Average Number of Persons per Structure Type (Grouped), 2000 US Census
Type of Structure
Number of
Occupied Units
Persons per
Type of
Structure
Persons
per Unit
1, detached unit structure
31 ,759
83,719
2.64
Persons
per Unit
(Grouped)
2.64
1 , attached unit structure
3,870
8,489
2.19
2 unit structure
2,315
4,782
2.07
2.14
Mobile home
3,038
6,437
2.12
3 or 4 unit structure
3,309
5,840
1.76
5 to 9 unit structure
3,639
6,280
1.73
10 to 19 unit structure
3, 179
5,455
1.72
1.67
20 to 49 unit structure
2,361
3,576
1.51
50 or more unit structure
4,476
7,134
1.59
Total
57,946
131,712
2.27
2.27
1.4.1.2 Group Housing
The nature of the group housing will establish whether, for purposes of assessing
a park SDC, they are classified as residential or nonresidential development.
Group housing developed for those that reside independently and freely will be
assessed as residential development, whereas group housing developed to
incarcerate individuals or to provide housing for those wholly dependent upon
care by others, such as nursing homes or residential care facilities, will be
assessed as nonresidential development.
· Group Housing - Residential Park SDC Assessment. The parks SDC for
residential land uses is based . on persons per unit; at the time of
development, the proposed number of residents for which the group
housing is designed will form the basis of the fee.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Parks
· Group Housing - Nonresidential Park SDC Assessment. The parks SDC
for nonresidential land uses is based on categories defined by similar
employee densities (noted below). Since institutional group housing is
developed for individuals who are unable to use the City park system, but
supports employees and visitors who do use parks, the parks SDC for
such development is assessed using the category C nonresidential rate
schedule (discussed below), which contains comparable institutions.
1.4.2 Nonresidential sDC Assessment
The City's park SDC, like that for other systems (wastewater, transportation,
stormwater) is assessed on all nonresidential development types (industrial,
commercial, office use, institutional, etc.).
The nonresidential fee for specific nonresidential land uses is assessed as follows:
1. Determine nonresidential classes for purposes of parks SDC assessment.
2. Allocate equivalent population growth among nonresidential classes. .
3. Determine the equivalent population density (e.g., equivalent population per
Thousand Gross Square Feet [TGSF] of building) by class.
4. Determine the SDC per TGSF by multiplying the unit cost by the, equivalent
population density.
1) -- Determine Nonresidential Classes
Nonresidential developments are classified into five categories (A to E), based on
(A) number of guests and (8 to E) employee density, as summarized in Table 19.
Table 19
Summary of Nonresidential SDC Classes
Class Development Types*
.......................................................................................................................................................................................nn........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
A Hotels, motels, B&Bs, & other tourist accommodations
B
Office (financial, investment, real estate, government, medical, legal & other
business/professional services), institutional, grocery, eating & drinking establishments
C Industrial, wholesale, manufacturing, transportation, agriculture
o General retail & services, recreation
E Commercial warehousing & storage
Note that, on the basis of the park user survey results, K-12 schools are not included in nonresidential classes
as users associated with such schools are generally attributable to local residential land uses and related
demand is accounted for in residential development categories. * See Appendix A for detailed cross-
reference to HUD/BPR codes .
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Parks
2) -- Allocate Equivalent Population to Nonresidential Classes
The impact of tourist accommodation rooms is based on the average number of
guests per unit. As there is not local data on the total number of visitors to the
City (or visitors by land use, apart from tourist accommodation) - and there is
local data on the number of employees and TGSF per land use - employee
density per land use is used to allocate equivalent population across the other
nonresidential classes.
The equivalent population, net of tourist accommodation guests, is allocated to
the other classes of nonresidential development based on building size (Le.,
TGSF) and employment density (Le., number of employees per TGSF). Current
employment data by standard industrial classification were analyzed along with
data qn existing building square footage to determine estimated employment
density by nonresidential class. Based on the total employees attributable to
each nonresidential class, percentages are derived and used to distribute the
growth in equivalent population across the classes.
3) -- Determine Equivalent Population Density by Class
The equivalent population density (Le., equivalent population per TGSF) by class
is determined by dividing the total growth in equivalent population attributable to
each class by the projected growth in TGSF for that class.
4) -- Determine sDC per TGsF by Class
The SDC is the product of the equivalent population density and the system-wide
unit cost per person. Table 17 presents the SDC schedule for residential and
nonresidential developments based on the approach described above.
2.0 sDC Updating
Parks SDC updates will entail the following elements:
2.1 Annual Inflationary Cost Adjustments
On an annual basis, the City will:
. Apply the Engineering News-Record (ENR) 20-City national average construction cost
index (CCI) to the development and renovation cost components of proposed park
improvements; and
. Use the Lane County Assessment & Taxation office's published Sales Ratio Report as
the cost index to measure changes to the acquisition cost component of proposed park
land acquisitions. This cost index shall be determined using the vacant residential and
recreation lands categories of the areas best representing the Eugene urban area.
2.2 Biennial Evaluation of Existing and Planned Expenditures
Following adoption every two years of the city-wide Capital Improvement Program (CIP), a
review of actual parks project expenditures over the preceding two fiscal years and
projected near-term CIP expenditures over the next three fiscal years will be completed to
evaluate consistency with the average annual expenditure for the same period anticipated
by the adopted Project List. In the event that this analysis shows that average expenditures
of the review period vary more than 10 percent than expenditures anticipated in the Project
List, the issue will be referred to the City Council for consideration of updating the SDC.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Parks.
2.3 Periodic Project List Modifications
The parks SDC methodology assumptions and rate factors will be reviewed and updated
whenever the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Project and Priorities Plan (Project List)
is modified.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Parks~
Exhibit B to Attachment A
CITY OF EUGENE
ENGINEERING DIVISION
of the
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Systems Development Charge
Methodologies
EffectiU? April 3, 2007
As adopted per Resolution No. 4900
TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Eugene Systems Development Charges
General
Methodology ............................................................................................................................1
Table 1 ........... Summary of Systems Development Charges .................................................5
Figure 1 .......... Rate Setting Methodology ............................................................................... 6
Table 2 .......... Potential Impact Reduction and Credits.........................................................18
Appendix A..... Definitions of General Terms and Use Codes.............................................. A-1
Cross Reference of Wastewater & Park SDC / HUD BPR Use Codes......A-14
Appendix F ..... Local System Formulas and General Fee Schedule ................................... F-1
Transportation
Append ix B .... Transportation System Charge Detail ......................................................... B-1
Figure 2.......... Transportation System, Streets ................................................................. B-9
Figure 3.......... Transportation System, qff-Street Bicycle Paths ...................................... B-10
Table 3 ........... Transportation Trip Rates ................................................................... B-11, 12
Table 4 ........... Transportation System Valuation Assumptions.......................................... B-13
Table 5 ........... Transportation System Development Charge Analysis.............................. B-14
Wastewater
Local Appendix C1 - Local Wastewater System Charge Detail................,.......... C1-1
Table 6 ... Local Wastewater System Development Charge Analysis........................ C1-4
Table 7 ... Local Wastewater Plumbing Fixture Unit Rates......................................... C 1-5
Figure 4.. Local Wastewater System......................................................................... C 1-6
Reaional
Appendix C2 - Regional Wastewater System Charge Detail.................... C2-1
Stormwater
Appendix D .... Stormwater System Charge Detail .............................................................. D-1
Figure 5.......... Stormwater System ..................................................................................... D-4
Table 8 ........... Stormwater System Development Charge Analysis..................................... D-5
Table 9 ........... Stormwater SDC-Eligible Project List ................~......................................... D-6
Parks - next page
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued
City of Eugene Systems Development Charges
Parks
Appendix E .... Parks System Charge Detail ....................................................................... E-1
Figure 6.......... Parks System ............................................................................................ . E-3
Table 10 ......... Land Acquisition & Development Capacity Analysis by Park Type .............. E-4
Table 11 ......... Capacity Analysis & Project List Allocations for Facilities ............................ E-5
Table 12 ......... Determination of Growth Capacity Needs for Neighborhood Parks............. E-7
Table 13 ......... Reimbursement Fee Cost Basis.................................................................. E-8
Table 14 ......... I mprovement Fee Cost Basis...................................................................... E-9
Table 15 ......... Allocation of Project list Acreage/Cost....................................................... E-17
Table 16 ......... System-Wide Unit Costs; Res. & Nonres. Develop. per Component......... E-17
Table 17 ......... SDC Schedule ......~.................................................................................... E-18
Table 18......... Avg. Number Persons per Structure Type (Grouped), 2000 US Census... E-19
Table 19 ......... Summary of Nonresidential SDC Classes................................................. E-20
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Table of Contents
METHODOLOGY
City of Eugene Systems Development Charges
1.0 Introduction
The City's authority to establish and adopt system development charges (SDCs) is granted by
the Eugene Charter of 1976 and by ORS 223.297 - 223.314. By virtue of that authority the City
adopted Eugene Code, 1971 sections 7.700 - 7.740 and related provisions.
For the purpose of interpreting Eugene Code, 1971 sections 7.700 through 7.740 and this
document, the public record before the Council shall constitute the legislative history.
In addition to the methodologies for each system contained herein, the following appendice~ are
adopted and made a part hereof:
A: Definitions of General Terms and Use Codes; and
Cross Reference of Wastewater/Parks SDC / HUD BPR Use Codes
B: Transportation System Charge Detail
C1 : Local Wastewater System Charge Detail
C2: Regional Wastewater System Charge Detail
D: Stormwater System Charge Detail
E: Parks System Charge Detail
F: Local System Formulas and General Fee Schedule
1.1 Basis for Charge
Systems Development Charges (SDCs) have been collected and used by the City of
Eugene since 1978. They are presently collected on all new development in the City
and are used to fund that portion of the construction of infrastructure (Le., transportation,
wastewater, stormwater and parks system components) required to support new
development. These SDCs help the City provide for increased capacity needs, and
recoup a portion of the community's investment in specific infrastructure reserve capacity
that is already in place.
Sound planning requires future demands on each system be anticipated, and that
reserve capacity needed to serve future users be built in. By preparing for this growth,
standards for community infrastructure are maintained and the community can prosper
with new development.
The Metropolitan Area General Plan and amendments provide a basis for planning of
growth and development and includes the following goals and policies related to the
financing of new development:
· Generally reduce public subsidy for utilities and facilities in new development
(#5, p. III-G-5).
· In general, the amount of public subsidy for public utilities, services and facilities,
including schools in new development, shall be reduced (#1, p. III-G-5).
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
In addition, City Council adopted Growth Management Study (GMS) policies to provide
direction for provision of infrastructure services related to new development:
GMS Policv #14: Development shall be required to pay the full cost of extending
infrastructure and services, except that the City will examine ways to subsidize the costs
of providing infrastructure or offer other incentives that support higher-density, in-fill,
mixed-use, and redevelopment.
1.2 sDC Charges
The SDCs and the associated administrative charges and credits imposed by Eugene
Code, 1971 sections 7.700 through 7.740 shall be determined as set forth in these
methodologies. The current rates of charge for each system are listed in the adopted
SDC fee schedule in Appendix F. The methods of calculating administrative charges are
noted within section 2.3.1 Administrative Costs and the methods of calculating credits
are noted within section 7.2 Credits.
2.0 Exemptions and General Approach
This section outlines the general approach taken in calculating the City's development charges
and in determining and specifying appropriate expenditures of SDC revenue. For the purposes
of this document, the definitions in the Eugene Code, 1971 shall apply unless expressly
provided to the contrary. Appendix A contains definitions of words and phrases, which are used
throughout these methodologies.
2.1 Assignment of Use Classifications
Developments will be assigned use classifications that best reflect the developments'
use per system (transportation, wastewater, stormwater, parks) as set forth in these
methodologies. In the case of multiple uses that are proposed and/or exist within one
development, as determined by Staff, more than one use classification may be assigned
by which the SDC fees and credits will be calculated.
2.2 Exemptions
To simplify the administration of the SDC, no development involving then-existing
improvements on a site will be deemed to increas,e usage of or create the need for
additional capital improvements until one of the following occurs:
. For property improved with a residential use (e.g. single family dwelling, duplex
or other multiple-family use), when:
~ an additional dwelling unit is created,
~ there is an increase in square footage of living area, or
~ all or part of any structure on the site is changed to a use not permitted
outright in an any residential zoning distr,ict as noted in Eugene Code,
1971 section 9.2740.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
· For all property improved with a nonresidential use (e.g. recreation center,
convenience market) when:
~ an additional dwelling unit is created,
~ there is an increase in square footage of gross floor space or living area,
~ there is an increase in the number of nonresidential plumbing fixture units
on the site,
~ 60 square feet of impervious surface is added to the site (for the purpose
of calculating the stormwater SDC), or
~ either 3,000 or more square feet of floor space in a building changes use
or 500/0 or more of the gross floor space of the building changes use
· An additional connection to, or an increase in the size of, an existing connection
to the public wastewater or stormwater system is to be made.
· A property previously granted an exemption for housing for low-income persons
is subsequently used for other than housing for low income persons, subject to
the limitations and/or conditions imposed in Eugene Code, 1971 section 7.725(c).
2.3 General Method for City of Eugene sDC Rates
Table 1 provides an overview of the basis of the rate setting methodology; outlining the
basic rates, cost basis, service standards and means of implementation for each system
charge.
The intent of the methodology is that new development should not be charged for a
higher level of service than that currently provided to the community or to which the
community has committed future resources. Therefore, additional capacity needs are
determined using the City's existing level of service or the City's funded level of service.
In a similar manner, new development should be credited for past and future bonq
payments on infrastructure related existing debt as well as for future estimated user
charge payments used to fund capital projects included on the regional SDC project list
(Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission [MWMC]) and past trunk sewer
levies.
The general approach used to calculate the development charge for various systems is
based on requirements set forth in ORS 223.304:
· Reimbursement fees must be established or modified by ordinance or resolution
setting forth a methodology that is, when applicable, based on:
(A) Ratemaking principles employed to finance publicly owned capital
improvements;
(8) Prior contributions by existing users;
(C) Gifts or grants from federal or state government or private persons;
(D) The value of unused capacity available to future users or the cost of
the existing facilities; and
(E) Other relevant factors identified by the local government imposing the
fee.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
The methodology for establishing or modifying a reimbursement fee must
promote the objective of future system users contributing no more than an
equitable share to the cost of existing facilities and be available for public
inspection.
· Improvement must be established or modified by ordinance or resolution setting
forth a methodology that is available for pubic inspection and demonstrates
consideration of:
(A) The projected cost of the capital improvements identified in the plan
and list adopted pursuant to ORS 223.309 that are needed to
increase the capacity of the systems to which the fee is related; and
(8) The need for increased capacity in the system to which the fee is
related that will be required to serve the demands placed on the
system by future users.
. Credits are required for "qualified public improvements."
This general approach is illustrated in Figure 1 and can be outlined in the following
steps:
. Determine System Service Characteristics.
> System consists of several components (e.g., lines, pump stations, force
mains, manholes are components of the wastewater system).
> Establish impact measure - that feature of development that best reflects
use of system capacity (e.g., trips for the transportation system,
impervious surface for the stormwater system, etc.).
. Determine System Value, including associated costs such as design,
construction, right-of-way acquisition and project administration.
> Use replacement cost (current construction costs).
> Determine capacity-oriented cost of system, net of assessments and
grants.
> Determine ratio of Improvement and Reimbursement portions of charge, if
any.
. Allocate the system value to the unit of impact (e.g., cost per unit of impervious
area for stormwater system).
. Determine the service impact of specific development types (e.g., single-family
dwelling, motel, convenience market).
2.3.1 Administrative Costs
Administrative costs are estimated annually and include the periodic and on-going
direct and indirect costs associated with complying with the requirements of state
law and the cost of administering the SDCs. An administrative charge shall be
incurred when one of the following occurs:
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF LOCAL SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
(See Appendix C-2 for information regarding the Regional Wastewater SeC)
Transportation Wastewater Local (City) Stormwater Parks
Cost per Trip = $1,519.10 Cost per new residential units Total stormwater unit cost per Net Residential cost per Dwelling
(e.g., single-family, mobile home sq. ft.. of impervious surface Area Unit:
parks, duplexes, apartments) = a = $0.165. Charges are based on Single Family = $2,924.00;
base rate of $331.91 plus $0.0805 use. 1-2 Family development DuplexITH/MH = $2.370.00
per square foot of living area. under 3,000 sq.ft. have tiered Multifamily = $1,850.00
Residential additions will be rates based on est. imp. surface Nonresidential:
en charged $0.0805 per square foot areas. 1-2 Family over 3,000 sq.ft.. Class A = $1,090.00 per room;
CD
~ of increased living area. and Multi-Family & Nonresidential Class B = $728.00 per TGSF;
co
~ Nonresidential uses = $2.5145 per are based on actual imp. surface Class C = $446.00 per TGSF;
gallon of daily flow/discharge. area. Charges for Mfg. Home Class D = $265.00 per TGSF;
Parks are based on est. imp. Class E = $107.00 per TGSF.
surface area per space plus actual
impervious surface area of
additional common area.
Estimated costs of Estimated non-assessable cost of Estimated non-assessable cost of Unit costs for various components.
arterial/collector Street system existing system using costs from system-wide capacity from future
en (non assessable cost per lane- "Gravity Sewer Lines System capacity-enhancing projects as
.; mile, costs of intersections, traffic Valuation Model" developed by contained in the Stormwater SDC
co signals, street lights, structures) CH2M Hill. Charges are net of all Project List and available existing
m
~ and off street bicycle paths. federal grants and outstanding stormwater system capacity.
en
0 debt.
0
en Existing levels of service for Design flow standards currently Design standards currently used Planned levels of service for
"C various components as used by the city for various land by the City to handle a Five-year various components, as
"-
co established by current City use types. PFUs equivalents are storm. established in the adopted Eugene
"C
c: transportation design standards. determined per Oregon adopted Parks, Recreation, & Open Space
co
~
UJ Plumbing Code. Comprehensive Plan's Project &
CD
u Priorities List.
.~
CD
en
c Street Component: Reimbursement fe~ Reimbursement fee Reimbursement fee
.2 CD ~ 400/0 Impr. Fee ~ 84 0/0 ~ 470/0 ~ 230/0
~C)
co "- ~ 600/0 Reim. Fee
~!
.iii 0 Bike Component: Improvement fee Improvement fee Improvement fee
en 'I- ~ 1000/0 Impr. Fee ~ 160/0 ~ 530/0 ~ 770/0
co 0
(3
Charges for new or expanding New or expanding residential uses Charges for new (all) or expanding Charges for new or expanding
development are based on the are charged based on a per (Multi-family, Nonresidential) development are based on a
cost per trip times the trip rate dwelling unit cost plus a rate per development are based on a tiered flat rate per dwelling unit for
assigned for a specific square foot of living area. Non- estimated or actual impervious residential development types and
c development type times the residential uses are charged surface areas and the total a tiered flat rate per room or per
0 number of units of measurement based on the number of PFUs at a stormwater unit cost per square thousand gross square feet of
~
co proposed. rate for the specific development foot. Stormwater impact not building area for nonresidential
~
c
CD type. Credit for past trunk sewer attributable to impervious surface development types-;-
E levy payments will be applied to area will be charged based on
CD
Q. the local charge. equivalent surface area and the
.E total stormwater unit cost per
square foot.
Note: Administration costs are not included in the fiaures above see section 2.3.1 for more information.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
FIGURE 1
Rate Setting Methodology
System Value
Replacement costs for
level of Service existing reserve capacity
Impact Measurement (plus)
expenditures
(minus)
Assessable costs & Grants
(equals)
SDC eligible costs
Formula
Cost of Service
SDc Eliaible Costs = SDc
Impact Measurement (PER UNIT OF SERVICE)
Apply SDc to
specific types
of development
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
~ When a redevelopment occurs that changes the use of a building in its
entirety and it is determined that usage of any capital improvement is
increased or there is need of additional capital improvements.
The administrative fee will be calculated either as a percentage rate of the
net charge after credits are applied or at a flat rate, whichever is higher, as
listed in the SDC fee schedule in Appendix F.
~ When a redevelopment permit application (other than for redevelopment that
changes the use of a building in its entirety) requires a detailed review to
determine that there will be no increased usage of any capital improvement
and no additional capital improvements will be needed.
The administrative fee will be applied at a flat rate as listed in the SDC fee
schedule in Appendix F.
~ When an SDC is imposed for all other development:
The administrative fee will be calculated asa percentage rate of the net
charge after credits for previous use and impact reduction are applied or at a
flat rate, whichever is higher, as listed in the SDC fee schedule in
Appendix F.
In no case will administrative fees be refunded, unless necessary as a result of City
error.
2.3.2 Maximum Administrative Charge
An administrative charge calculated shall not exceed a maximum amount of
$30,000.00 for a single permit issued. If. multiple permits are issued for different
phases of the same development, the maximum administrative charge shall be
applied to each permit independently.
2.4 Adjustment to the sDC Methodology and Fees
Modifications to the methodologies for the systems development charge shall be established
by resolution of the council. A change in the amount of a reimbursement fee or an
improvement fee is not a modification of the SDC if the change in amount is based on the
periodic application of an adopted specific cost index or on a modification to any of the
factors related to rate that are incorporated in these adopted methodologies. The city
manager may adopt fee changes, based on such a cost index or rate factors by
administrative order pursuant to section 2.020 of the Eugene Code, 1971, so long as the
fees are not revised administratively in an amount greater than five (5) percent within any
12-month period. Revisions to fees by more than five percent shall be established by
resolution of the council.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
2.4.1 Adopted Cost Index
SDC fees and credits may be periodically adjusted to account for changes in
construction costs and system valuation. The 20-city national average
construction cost index, as published by Engineering News-Record (ENR)
shall be used when preparing periodic cost index adjustments.
2.4.2 Rate Factors Subject to Administrative Revision
SDC fees and credits may be periodically adjusted to account for changes in
rate factors incorporated in the established SDC methodologies. Changes in
rate factors may occur to account for changes in the systems' characteristics
and related factors as noted in the methodologies document specific to the
systems' fees and credit rates as reflected in supporting analyses and
formulas.
2.5 Expending City of Eugene sDCs
T~e City of Eugene's SDC revenue, except for administrative fees, is comprised of two
components: an improvement fee and a reimbursement fee as defined in Eugene Code,
1971 section 7.010. Improvement fee revenue may be spent only on capacity increasing
capital improvements or debt related to such improvements. Reimbursement fee revenue
may be spent only on capital improvements associated with the systems for which the fees
are assessed and debt related to such improvements. Revenue from both types of fees
may be expended on direct costs of complying with related state statutes.
Major capacity-increasing capital improvements to be constructed using SDC revenue
appear in the City's long range plans. The City's long-range plans reflect the anticipated
facility needs required to support new development. The needs identified in the long-range
plans are generally included in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The CIP also contains
repair, replacement, and rehabilitation projects which may be funded in part with SDCs.
Given the limits on certain funding sources and the need to address existing as well as
future needs, the CIP does not necessarily reflect all the facility needs of new development
occurring within the six-year period covered by the CIP. Therefore, the planned
expenditures of SDC revenue include both the expenditures detailed in the CIP and the
needs identified in the long-range plans.
3.0 Transportation System
The Transportation Systems Development Charge (SDC) is made up of several components. The
costs of these components include the total cost of design, construction, right-of-way acquisition,
purchasing, testing, and project administration. The components included in'this analysis are:
. Collector and arterial streets
~ Non-assessable linear section construction costs
~ Intersection construction costs
~ Traffic signal costs
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
> Street light costs
> Bridge and other structure construction costs
· Off-street bicycle paths
> Bicycle path construction costs
> Bicycle path light costs
The cost impacts of new development on these components are allocated on the basis of p.m.
peak hour traffic on adjacent streets using either the trips specified in the Standard Calculation or
based upon an Alternate Calculation as set forth in Appendix B.
The detailed Cost of Service formula as well as the cost per trip for each component of the
transportation system is set forth in Appendix B. The cost per trip is the sum of all transportation
system components identified in Appendix B.
The transportation SDC for a proposed development is determined by multiplying the units which
describe the impact by the trip rate (to determine the number of trips assigned to the proposed
development) using the Transportation Trip Rates table in Appendix B and the cost per trip in the
current adopted SDC fee schedule in Appendix F.
4.0 Local (City) and Regional Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
(MWMC) Regional Wastewater Systems
Collection of the wastewater SDC includes both a local (City) and regional (MWMC) system
charge.
4.1 Local Wastewater System
The local wastewater SDC is based upon estimated wastewater flow discharge (impact on
and/or use of system capacity) from various development types. A unit cost of capacity in
terms of cost per gallon per day is established and used to determine SDC rates. For
residential development the rate is based on number of dwelling units and area of living
space. For nonresidential development the rate is based on number of PFUs and the
proposed development type. The detailed analysis, methods for calculating, and the Cost
of Service formula for the local wastewater system can be found in Appendix C. The local
wastewater SDC rates can be found in the current adopted fee schedule in Appendix F.
The local wastewater SDC for a proposed development is determined by:
. Number of Residential Dwelling Units (RDU) and area of living space for single-
family, duplex, multiple-family, and other residential development
. Plumbing Fixture Units (PFU) and proposed development type for other than
Residential Dwelling Units (e.g., recreation center, convenience market).
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
4.2 Regional Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC)
Wastewater System
The City of Eugene entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of
Springfield and Lane County in 1978, which established the Metropolitan Wastewater
Management Commission. On May 15, 1997, the Commission adopted the MWMC
wastewater Systems Development Charge which includes a regional administrative
charge. On April 1, 2004 the Commission adopted a modified MWMC regional wastewater
SDC methodology. The regional MWMC wastewater SDC methodology is located in
Appendix C2. Current regional rates are also summarized in the Appendix F fee schedule.
5.0 stormwater System
The stormwater SDC is based upon impervious surface area (e.g., rooftops, driveways, sidewalks,
parking lots, patios, and other non-porous surfaces). The detailed formulas for calculating the
stormwater SDC unit cost (rate) per square foot of impervious surface area is set forth in
Appendix D. The stormwater SDC is determined by multiplying the applicable rate by the unit of
measure for the proposed development type. The costs per unit of measure and resulting rates
can be found in Table 9 and the fee schedule in Appendix F.
Where the stormwater SDC is a fixed amount per dwelling unit or space, it shall be determined by
multiplying the applicable rate per dwelling unit or space times the number of units or spaces plus,
for manufactured home park development, the SDC is based upon the impervious surface area of
all additional common areas times the stormwater unit cost per square foot of impervious surface
area. Where the stormwater SDC is not a fixed amount per dwelling unit or space, it shall be
determined by multiplying the rate per square foot of impervious surface area times the total
impervious surface area of the proposed development. Where a development creates impact not
attributable to impervious surface area, the stormwater SDC shall be determined by evaluating
equivalent impervious surface area, multiplied by the rate per square foot of impervious surface
area.
6.0 Parks System
The parks SDC is based upon the estimated cost of capacity in future capacity-enhancing projects
to serve new development, as contained in the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS)
Project & Priority Plan, and the estimated capacity in the existing parks system to be used by new
development. The details for calculating the park SDC. unit costs (rates) for residential
development (per dwelling unit type) and nonresidential development (per room or per thousand
gross square feet) are set forth in Appendix E. The park SDC is determined by multiplying the
applicable rate by the unit of measure for the proposed development type. The costs per unit of
measure and resulting rates may be found in Table 17.
7.0 Credits and Impact Reductions
This section provides detail on the City's administration of SDC credits and impact reductions.
Potential sources, criteria for eligibility, and the basis for calculation of credit and impact
reductions are defined, in this Methodology and in Eugene Code, 1971 section 7.730. A list of
examples of facilities and programs which are potentially eligible for credit and impact reduction
appears in Table 2 of this section. (Note: As development standards change some examples
may no longer be considered eligible for reduction but may influence future rates.) In no case may
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
the sum of all approved credits and impact reductions for a single system exceed the amount of
the SDC assessed for that system for any approved building or development permit.
SDCs may be reduced by one or more of the following processes:
· Impact Reduction, based on quantified mitigation of demand generated by the
development for new identifiable capital improvements;
. Credit, based on the specific costs for privately engineered construction of certain
public improvements as part of the development;
. Credit based on previous payment or use.
Adjustment of SDCs due to credits and impactreductions:
. Shall not be given for improvements constructed or programs instituted prior to City
approval.
. Shall be applied up to the maximum SDC fee for each system.
. Shall reduce the SDCs paid on building permits at the time of issuance; credit or
impact reduction amounts applied will not be greater than the SDC fees.
. Shall be applied to a particular system (e.g., Transportation, Stormwater,
Wastewater, Parks); credits or reductions approved for a particular system can not
be transferred or applied to any other system charges.
. Shall be applied to the SDCs for the particular development, may only be further
applied to subsequent phases of the same development for which the improvement
was constructed or program instituted, and can not be transferred or applied to
other properties or developments.
7.1 Impact Reductions or Mitigation
Impact reduction will be based on private physical improvements (as defined in
Appendix A) constructed as part of the development or based on programs instituted in
connection with development, which will reduce the demand from that development for
future construction of identifiable capital improvements. Such programs and physical
improvements must be privately financed and are intended to be permanent. The
anticipated reduction in demand must be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City
Transportation Engineer (for Transportation system impact reductions) or to the City
Engineer (for all other system impact reductions). Calculation of impact reduction shall be
based on the ratio of the system impact with the program or facility in place, to the system
impact if the program or facility did not exist.
Prior to application of the impact reduction to the SDCs for the development, the City shall
receive assurances that will bind the developer, owner, and the owner's successors as is
necessary to ensure that the program or facility will function as planned for the agreed
upon time period. Such agreements may include, but are not limited to performance
bonds, maintenance programs, annual reports, monitoring and inspections, or other
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
pertinent items to document proper functioning as determined by the City Engineer.
7.1.1 Transportation System Impact Reduction
For the transportation system, an impact reduction may be granted if the applicant
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City Transportation Engineer, that the
improvement or program to be instituted in connection with the development will
materially reduce the number of automobile trips the development will generate and
that it will continue for at least twenty years after the development is occupied.
7.1.2 stormwater System Impact Reduction or Mitigation
For the stormwater system, an impact reduction may be granted based on two
forms of impact reduction:
~ Destination and Quantity Reduction
~ Pollution Reduction
These impact reductions will be granted after review and approval by the City
Engineer of the design documentation submitted in accordance with standards
specified in Eugene Code, 1971 section 9.6790 (3). Criteria for stormwater SDC
impact reduction for development can be found in Appendix D, section 6.0.
7.1.2.1
stormwater System Impact Reduction Criteria
Criteria for stormwater SDC impact reduction for development can be found
in Appendix D, section 6.0. A development that meets the required criteria
will be eligible to receive a reduction against stormwater SDCs at the time of
permit issuance as foll,ows:
SFD and Duplex Residential development:
~ 1000/0 flat rate stormwater SDC impact reduction for complete
containment of all on-site stormwater, with no direct or indirect
connection to the public system; or
~ 500/0 flat rate stormwater SDC impact reduction for any amount of
partial containment of runoff on-site.
Multi-family Residential, Commercial, Industrial, other development using a
common or shared facility:
~ The stormwater SDC will be reduced in the same proportion that the
mitigating facility reduces runoff leaving the fully developed site.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
7.2 Credits
City approval of credits shall be given based on one or more of the following:
7.2.1 Qualified Public Improvement Credit
For any qualified public improvement (as defined in Eugene Code) to be
constructed in connection with the development for which an SDC is collected.
7.2.2 Capital Improvement Credit
For any capital improvement (as defined in Eugene Code) to be constructed as part
of a development to the extent:
> that it reduces the need for construction of specific, identifiable public
improvements; or
> that it would otherwise have to be constructed or acquired at public
expense and is eligible for funding with Systems Development Charge
funds under the current policies of the City Council; or
> that the City can recover credits through collection of an equivalent
assessment from benefited properties, or for which the City Counci,1 has
formed a Local Improvement District in accordance with provisions in
Eugene Code, 1971 section 6.610 (6) or 7.407 (2).
7.2.3 Previous Payment or Use
SDC fees paid are not refundable and, in the case of an agreement to pay SDCs in
installments, the terms of the agreement may not be modified. A partial refund of
SDC fees will be made or a modification of an installment agreement will be
allowed when an active development permit is canceled or expires without being
used, a change of design of an active development permit is approved that results
in a less intense use of the property, or property previously developed asa
manufactured home park is partitioned and redeveloped. No portion of the
administrative fees will be refunded, and an additional administrative charge may
be imposed to cover the cost of calculating and processing the partial refund.
Credits for other types of previous payment or use may, however, be provided. In
calculating the credits given under this section, the City Engineer shall apply credit
for previous payment or use only to developments (e.g. structure, impervious area)
for which the previous use, including that for which developments have been
demolished, or payment can be verified and for which a credit has not been
previously given. The burden of proof is on the applicant to provide adequate
documentation (e.g. tax records, utility billing I water usage records, building permit
records). Credits for previous payment or use are provided in the following manner
when:
> Redevelopment occurs that does not change the use of a building in its
entirety. The credit will be based on the most previous verifiable use; or
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
~ Redevelopment occurs that will change the use of a building in its entirety,
the credit for previous use will be based on the previous most intense
verifiable use per system. In this case, the credit calculation will be
performed. independently for each system which may result in different
periods of the use of the site being the basis of comparison.
7.2.4 City Cost of Construction Credit
In calculating the credits given under section 7.2.1 and 7.2.2, the City Engineer
shall estimate the cost of the capital improvement based upon what the City would
pay were it to construct such improvements.
7.2.5 Revenue Collection for Equivalent Assessment or Special Benefit
Credit
When an equivalent assessment or a special benefit assessment is collected when
property connects to a public improvement for which the City has granted a credit
under 7.2.2 (3) above, the revenue collected (net of the costs of collection) shall be
deposited in the SDC fund for the system to which connection was made and for
which the credit was given unless the SDC fund has been reimbursed for the credit
from other City funds. If the SDC fund has been reimbursed in advance from other
City funds, the revenue collected will be deposited to the City fund which
reimbursed the SDC fund.
7.3 Revocation of Credit and Impact Reduction
A credit or impact reduction which has been applied to reduce SDC fees may be revoked
and the unpaid portion of the SDC reimposed as a lien against the property, within the time
required by these Methodologies, if:
· The associated capital improvement for which SDC credit has been given is not
constructed or completed as required, or fails to function as designed; or
· The associated reduction program for which an impact reduction has been
approved is not instituted or is modified without the approval of the City Engineer,
or ceases to function as designed.
Such revocation shall not occur until ten days prior written notice has been given to and an
opportunity to be heard afforded the applicant and property owner. If the credit or impact
reduction is revoked, the City Manager may add to the amount due, the cost of the
revocation proceedings.
7.4 Application for Credit and Impact Reduction
An application for a credit or impact reduction, including related documentation and
information, shall be submitted by the applicant in the manner prescribed by the City,
together with any fee set by the City Engineer pursuant to Eugene Code, 1971 section
2.020. The applicant shall have the burden of demonstrating the eligibility for a credit
and/or impact reduction. No credit or impact reduction shall be granted for an SDC that
has already been imposed, collected ,or agreed to be paid in installments unless resulting
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
from cancellation of an active permit, expiration of a permit without being used, or an
approved change of design of an active permit.
7.4.1 Application for Impact Reduction
Applicants must submit their request for an impact reduction in writing,
accompanied by documentation that supports the basic function and design
criteria for estimated impact reduction.
For commercial development, impact reduction will be applied uniformly for all
lots or building sites in the development phase approved. Impact reductions
granted under this methodology document may be used in subsequent phases of
a development when the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer that the program or improvements continue to provide the anticipated
reduction in demand, and the City has received assurances or agreements from
the developer, owner, and owners successors, as approved by the City Engineer
as is necessary to ensure that the program or facility will continue to function as
planned for the agreed upon time period. Changes to the mitigated program or
facility attributable to the connection of an additional phase which results in any
deviation from the previously determined impact reduction will be adjusted
proportionately.
7.4.2 Application for Credit Based on Construction of Public
Improvements
For credits derived from the construction of public improvements, the property
owner(s) will be notified in writing about potential credit availability, subsequent to
the approval and bonding of the construction plans. The property owner(s) will
have 60 days from the date of written notification to submit the SDC ,Credit
Application and complete the approval process. Applications that include
disbursement instructions for ineligible lots or which contain requests in conflict
with City code, state law, or current City policies/practices will be considered
incomplete applications.
7.4.3 Credit Distribution in the Absence of Directions from an Approved
sDC Credit Application
With the exception of cases where the recovery of credit through an equivalent
assessment is uncertain, if the owner does not comply with the requirements of
section 7.4.2, the credit will be distributed by the "equal lot" method. All eligible
lots or building sites will be identified, and the credit will be distributed in an equal
amount to each of these eligible lots or building sites. Credit applied under this
policy will not be eligible to be appealed. Development for which a building
permit is issued prior to administration of credit disbursal or approval by City staff
will not be ,considered eligible for credit distribution.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
7.4.4 Changes to an Approved Credit Application
Whether established by the City using the "equal lot" method or by the property
owner(s)/applicant(s), any modifications to the distribution of credits will require a
new completed application, must be approved by the City Engineer, and will be
effective only upon approval by the City Engineer of the revised credit
application. The revised distribution will apply only to the remaining credit
balances and undeveloped lots or building sites to which the credit originally
applied.
7.5 Decision on Application for Credit
The City Engineer shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny an application in writing,
setting forth the reason for the decision. Such a decision shall be mailed or personally
delivered to the applicant.
7.6 Credit and Impact Reduction Duration
Credits granted under this methodology document may be applied to SDC fees for a
development up to a maximum of 10 years from the date of the original written
notification.
Impact reductions granted under this methodology document may be applied to SDC
fees for a development until such time as the program or improvements no longer
continue to provide the anticipated reduction in demand and the City has determined
that assurances or agreements from the developer, owner, or owners successors, are
no longer adequate to ensure that the program or facility will continue to function as
planned for the agreed upon time period.
8.0 Appeals
An appeal by an applicant or a permittee of any decision of the City Manager under these
Methodologies shall be governed by Eugene Code, 1971 section 7.735 and must be filed and
the appeal fee paid within 15 working days of the date of the decision. Such appeals shall be in
writing and filed with Public Works Engineering Permit Technician staff located at the City's
Permit & Information Center. A separate appeal must be filed for each decision being appealed.
The appeal fee, as established under Eugene Code, 1971 section 2.020, can be found in the
current adopted SDC Fee schedule in Appendix F.
A person objecting to the City's final decision under Eugene Code, 1971 section 7.735
concerning the calcul,ation of a systems development charge may seek judicial review of the
decision pursuant to ORS 34.010 to 34.100.
9.0 Interested Persons Notification
The City. shall maintain a list of persons who have made a written request for notification prior to
adoption or modification of a methodology for any SDC. The City shall mail written notification
to persons on the list at least 90 days prior to the first hearing to adopt or modify a system
development charge. The methodology supporting the adoption or modification will be available
60 days prior to the first hearing to adopt or amend a systems development charge. The failure
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
of a person on the list to receive a notice that was mailed will not invalidate the action of the
City. The City may periodically delete names from the Interested Persons List or require a new
written request for notification be made if the person wishes to remain on the list. At least thirty
(30) days prior to removal of the name from the Interested Persons List, the City will send
notification to the person whose name is to be deleted. It is the responsibility of the person
requesting to maintain a current address with the City for the purposes of being included on the
Interested Persons List.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
TABLE 2
Potential Impact Reduction and Credits for Systems Development Charges
NOTE:
These are possible examples only; eligibility is established at time of
review of plans which approve the proposed improvements.
II 1. Tran$~ortati()n S~$tern II
REDUCTIONS:
Successful bus pass program for employees
CREDITS:
Street width in excess of assessable width
Off-site, non-contiguous arterial or collector intersection
Street light on arterial or collector street
Off-site arterial or collector right of way and easement acquisition
Traffic signal on arterial or collector street
Off-street bicycle paths identified in adopted City plan
Off-site eligible public improvements where equivalent assessments can be collected
2. Wastewatersystern
CREDITS:
Public Wastewater collection lines> 8-inch diameter
Public pump stations and pressure lines that serve more than the development
Off-site public improvements, where equivalent assessments can be collected
Prior payment of Metropolitan Wastewater Service District debt service
II
3. Slormwater System
REDUCTIONS:
Destination and Quantity: Reduction or elimination by retention of stormwater otherwise
discharged into public system
Pollution: Reduction of pollution via approved treatment techniques
CREDITS:
Stormwater collection lines > 24-inches in diameter
Major drainage channels: construction and off-site easement
Off-site public improvements where equivalent assessments can be collected or that
benefit existing developments
II
II
4. Parks System
CREDITS:
Land dedication (for sites accepted by City, consistent with adopted City plans)
On-site park facility dedication (for improvements accepted by City, consistent with
adopted City plans)
II
City of Eugene SDc Meth~dologies
Appendix A
Definitions of General Terms and Use Codes
Administrative Charge: The amount charged to each development to cover the cost of
developing the methodologies, providing an annual accounting of system development charge
expenditures, implementation and operational costs associated with the SDC program.
Accessory Dwelling Unit: As used in the determination of SDC rates, an accessory dwelling
unit is any additional residential dwelling unit added to a development site for which a secondary
dwelling unit is allowed per local code and typically has the following components:
· separate ingress I egress
· living area
· kitchen facilities including sink (in addition to bathroom sink), refrigerator, or stove
· separate bathroom
Note that while inclusion of all of the above would constitute the potential impact of an additional
dwelling unit, exclusion of any item(s) listed above would not preclude such an impact for the
purposes of calculating SDC fees.
Acquisition Costs: The indirect or direct amount expended to procure use, possession, rights,
or title as related to the construction of public improvements. This cost may be determined by
current market experience, or other reasonable and prudent methods approved by the City
Engineer.
Assessable Costs: The amount of capital improvement costs which are collected through the
City's local improvement assessment program as established in City code. This cost has been
removed from the total cost of capital improvements in determining the system-specific SDC.
Average Cost Determination:
· The average cost of inspecting and installing connections with the wastewater facilities
and with the stormwater facilities, which are not part of the SDC as defined in E.C.
7.010, is the connection permit fee established by the City.
· If an applicant to connect to a wastewater or stormwater facility would result in
extraordinary cost of inspecting and installing the connection, nothing in this definition
shall prevent the City from requiring the applicant pay such costs. The extraordinary
costs may be paid by the applicant in installments as part of the SDC.
Average Flow: The typical average daily flow of development, by type of land use. For
purposes of calculating the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission SDC, this flow
is expressed in terms of a unit of development.
BOD: Biochemical Oxygen Dema'nd. The quantity of oxygen utilized in the biochemical
oxidation of organic matter.
Change of Use of a Building in its Entirety: An existing building proposed to redevelop in
manner that changes all existing use classifications as determined by staff.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Definitions~
City Manager: City Manager or designee.
City Engineer: City Engineer or designee.
City Transportation Engineer: City Transportation Engineer or designee.
Construction Costs: The cost in current fiscal year dollars for construction of future capital
improvements.
Cost of Service: The calculation of a "per unit" cost to th~ City of providing system-specific
capacity (e.g., wastewater collection capacity).
Development Types: As used in determining SDC rates, development and uses of
development sites are categorized, per system, depending on the relative impact. Also referred
to as use codes.
EDU: Equivalent Dwelling Unit: EDU is used in the parks SDCs as a basis for determining the
relative impact or service used by different types of development. Represents the use of
capacity that is approximately equal to that of a single dwelling unit.
Equitable Share of Public Facility Costs: As used in the development of SDCs, the City's
cost of providing system capacity, allocated to new development relative to the development's
impact or use of system capacity.
FEU: Flow Estimation Unit. For the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission SDC,
the Flow Estimation Unit is the unit of impact upon which the rate per unit is based. The FEU is
typically per 1 ,000 square feet of building area for most commercial users, and dwelling units for
residential development.
ITE: Institute of Transportation Engineers
Impact Measurement: The unit of system capacity used to determine the relative effect of a
new development on the capacity of a specific system. For example, the number of gallons of
discharge flow per plumbing fixture unit is used to determine the effect of various development
types on the local wastewater system.
Impervious Surface: Impervious surface is used as an impact measure for the stormwater
SDC. An impervious surface is that which prevents or retards saturation of water into the
surface of the soil or causes water to run off the surface in greater quantity or at an increased
rate of flow compared to the natural condition of the property before development. Asphalt,
concrete, and roofing materials are examples of impervious materials.
Improvement Fee: The portion of the system-specific SDC charged to cover an equitable share
of the capital improvements required to increase capacity of the system to accommodate new
development.
Level of Service (LOS): (per unit of development) As used in development of SDC rates, LOS
represents the amount of system (or sub-system) capacity provided at a certain point in time.
The current level of service is used as the basis for determining the system impacts of new
development. This is presented in terms of the appropriate impact measure.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Definitions,
Living Area: As used in the determination of local wastewater SDC rates, living area is defined
as the gross floor area, to the outside perimeter, of a dwelling including floor area within
structures accessory to the dwellings that is intended for habitation, e.g. bonus rooms over
garages, some attic spaces.
Methodology: This document entitled "City of Eugene Systems Development Charge
Methodologies" and any amendment or modification made hereto.
MWMC: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission - responsible for regional
wastewater treatment.
Physica'l Improvements (for impact reduction/mitigation): A facility or asset, designed and
constructed at the developer's expense, which is owned and maintained by the property owner
or owner's agent; not a program or activity or naturally occurring physical attribute.
Proportionate Share of Public Facility Costs: The cost of capital improvements which are
reasonably attributable to new development.
PFU: Plumbing Fixture Units. PFUs are defined in the state Uniform Plumbing Code. A unit
equivalent is assigned to different drainage fixtures depending on drain pipe or fixture size. The
rate of charge per PFU will vary and is dependent upon a development's land use and
associated impact to the pubic wastewater system.
Peak Flow: For purposes of the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission SDC, peak
flow is the peak wet weather design capacity of the regional wastewater treatment plant.
Process Wastewater: Water which, during manufacturing or processing, comes into contact
with or results from the production of or use of any raw material, intermediate product, finished
product, byproduct or waste product.
Reimbursement Fee: The portion of the system-specific SDC charged to recoup the
community's past or current investment in extra capacity in anticipation of future growth. An
example is the facility charge established by MWMC to recoup the regional investment in extra
capacity in the wastewater treatment facility.
Replacement Costs: The cost (in current fiscal year dollars) of replacing existing system
capacity.
Residential Dwelling Unit (RDU): Residential Dwelling Units are used in the calculation of
wastewater SDCs as a basis for determining the relative impact or service used by residential
development. A base fee is applied to each RDU, such as one house, one accessory dwelling
unit, or each apartment unit, plus a rate per square foot is applied to the total living area. For
manufactured home parks, which are charged SDCs at the time a park's initial development
permit is issued, the local wastewater SDC will be based upon the maximum size of
manufactured home that can be placed on building pads located within the park. Each space
shall constitute an RDU and the rate per square foot shall be applied to the total gross floor area
of all additional proposed structures within the park.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Definitions;
55: Suspended Solids. The total elements and compounds which float on the surface of, or
are suspended in, wastewater and which are removable by laboratory filtration, expressed in
milligrams per liter.
SDC Eligible Costs: System value net of assessable costs, grants and outstanding debt. This
cost is allocated to all development in proportion to its impact on system capacity.
Single Family Dwelling (SFD): As used in EC 7.725(b) and this methodology, a "single family
dwelling" means a "Dwelling, single family detached" as defined in EC 9.015.
Unit of Development (Unit): Unit of measure for deJermining the size of a development for use
in calculating the effect of the development on a system.
Example: Number of Units of Development x Impact Measure per Unit = Impact of Development
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Definitions~
Definitions of Transportation Use Codes
030 Truck Terminal
Truck terminals are facilities where goods are transferred between trucks, trucks and railroads,
or trucks and ports.
090 Park & Ride Lot With Bus Service
Park-and-ride lots with bus service are areas used for the transfer of people between private
vehicles and buses. They usually contain a bus passenger shelter, a parking lot, and circulation
facilities for buses, as well as for priv~te motor vehicles. In addition to park-and-ride, there are a
significant number of passengers who are dropped off.
100 Industrial
Industrial facilities have an emphasis on activities other than manufacturing which may include
printing plants, material-testing laboratories, assemblers of data processing equipment, and
power stations. Typically these facilities are freestanding and devoted to a single use. This use
code also includes development within an industri'al park which is characterized by a mix of
manufacturing, service, and warehouse facilities with a wide variation in the proportion of each
type of use from one location to another; may be highly diversified facilities with a large number
of small businesses or with one or two dominant industries. [Combines ITE use codes 110
general light industrial and 130 industrial park.]
140 Manufacturing
Manufacturing facilities are areas where the primary activity is the conversion of raw material or
parts into finished products. Size and type of activity may vary substantially from one facility to
another. In addition to the actual production of goods, manufacturing facilities generally also
have office,' warehouse, research, and associated functions. [Combines ITE use codes 120
general heavy industrial and 140 manufacturing.]
150 Warehousing
Warehouses are primarily devoted to the storage of materials; they may also include office and
maintenance areas.
151 Mini-Warehouse
Mini-warehouses are buildings in which a number of storage units or vaults are rented for the
storage of goods. Each unit is physically separated from other units, and access is usually
provided through an overhead door or other common access point.
170 Utilities
Utilities generally include office space, electro mechanical or industrial space, or parts and
equipment storage areas.
200 Other Residential
This category includes all residential development for which a unique use code does not exist.
Such development includes apartments, condominiums, townhouses, and mobile home parks.
[Combines ITE use codes 220 apartment, 230 residential condominium/townhouse, 240 mobile
home park.]
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Definitions:
--+------ --
210 Single-Family Dwelling I Duplex
Single-family detached housing includes II single-family/duplex detached homes on individual
lots.
250 Senior.Housing Development - Mul i-Unit
Retirement communities - restricted to adults or senior citizens - contain residential units
similar to apartments or condominiums, and they are usually self-contained villages. They may
also contain special services such as edical facilities, dining facilities, and some limited,
supporting retail facilities. [Combines ITE use codes 250 retirement community and 253 elderly
housing - attached.]
251 Senior Housing Development - Det ched Unit
Detached housing, restricted to senior citi ens, which contains residential units similar to single-
family housing. Is sometimes a self-c ntained village. Special services such as medical
facilities, dining facilities, and some limite ,supporting retail facilities may be provided.
252 Senior Assisted Living Care Devel pment - Multi-Unit
This congregate care category typically c nsists of one or more multi-unit buildings designed for
senior citizen living. The development ay also contain dining rooms, medical facilities, and
recreational facilities.
310 Hotel
Hotels are places of lodging that pro ide sleeping accommodations, restaurants, cocktail
lounges, meeting and banquet rooms or c nvention facilities, and other retail and service shops.
Some of the sites included in this use ca egory are actually large motels providing the facilities
of a hotel.
320 Motel
Motels are places of lodging that. provi e sleeping accommodations and often a restaurant.
Motels generally offer free on-site parking and provide little or no meeting space.
411 City Park
City parks are owned and operated by city and may vary widely as to location, type, and
number of facilities. Seasonal use of the individual sites differs widely as a result of the varying
facilities and local conditions (Le. weather.
430 Golf Course
The golf courses contained in this use code include municipal courses and private country
clubs. Some sites have driving ranges and clubhQuses with a pro shop and/or restaurant,
lounge, and banquet facilities. Many f the municipal courses do not have any of these
facilities.
435 Multipurpose Recreational Facility
Multipurpose recreational facilities contai two or more of the following uses combined at one
site: miniature golf, batting cages, video a cade, bumper carts, go-carts, and golf driving ranges.
Other ancillary facilities and refreshment reas may also be provided.
443 Movie Theater
Movie theaters consist of audience seatin , single or multiple screens and auditoriums, a lobby,
and a refreshment stand. Matinees may 0 may not be provided.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Definitions,
490 Racquet/Handball Sports Facility
Racquet/handball sports facilities may be! either publicly or privately owned and include indoor
and/or outdoor facilities specifically designed for racquet and handball sports. Other facilities
may include swimming pools and whirtlpools, saunas, exercise classes, and weightlifting
equipment. [Combines ITE use codes 491 tennis 'courts and 492 racquet club.]
493 Health Club
Health clubs are privately owned facilities that may include swimming pools, whirlpools, saunas,
tennis, racquet ball, and handball coulrts, exercise classes, weightlifting and gymnastics
equipment, locker rooms, and a restaurant or snack bar.
494 Bowling Alley
Bowling alleys are recreational facilities that include bowling lanes. A small lounge, restaurant
and/or snack bar, video games, and pool tables may also be available.
495 Recreational Community Center
Recreational community centers are facilities similar to and including YMCAs, often including
classes and clubs for adults and children; a day care or a nursery school; meeting rooms;
swimming pools and whirlpools; saunas; tennis, racquetball, and handball courts; exercise
classes; weightlifting and gymnastics equipment; locker rooms; and a restaurant or snack bar.
520 Elementary School
Elementary schools typically serve students attending kindergarten through the fifth or sixth
grade. Elementary schools are usually oentrally located in residential communities in order to
facilitate student access, and they have no student drivers. This use category consists of public
schools where bus service is usually provided to students living beyond a specified distance
from the school.
521 Private School (K-12)
Private schools in this category serve students attending kindergarten through the twelfth grade.
Students may travel a long distance to get to private schools.
522 Middle School/Junior High School
Middle schools or junior high schools selrve students who have completed elementary school
and have not yet entered high school.
530 High School
High schools serve students who have completed middle school or junior high school. The high
schools analyzed were generally separated from other land uses and had exclusive access
points and parking facilities.
540 Junior/Community College
This use category includes two-year junior colleges or community colleges. A number of two-
year institutions have sizable evening programs.
550 University/College
This use category includes four-year and graduate educational institutions.
City, of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Definitions,
560 Church
This type of facility is a building in which public worship services of any denomination are held.
It may also house an assembly hall or sanctuary; meeting rooms; classrooms; and occasionally
dining, catering, or party facilities.
565 Day Care Center
A day care center is a facility where care for pre-school age children is provided, normally
during the daytime hours. Day care facilities generally include classrooms, offices, eating
areas, and playgrounds. Some centers also provide after-school care for children.
566 Cemetery
A cemetery is a place for burying the deceased, possibly including buildings used ,for funeral
services, a mausoleum, and a crematorium.
590 Library
A library can be either a public or private facility that consists of shelved books, reading rooms
or areas, and sometimes meeting rooms.
591 Lodge/Fraternal Organization
A lodge or fraternal organization typically ilncludes a clubhouse with dining and drinking facilities,
recreational and entertainment areas, and meeting rooms.
610 Hospital
A hospital is any institution where medical or surgical care and overnight accommodations are
provided to non-ambulatory and ambulatory patients. The term "hospital" does not, however,
refer to medical clinics (facilities that provide diagnoses and outpatient care only) or to nursing
homes (facilities devoted to the care of persons unable to care for themselves).
620 Nursing Home
A nursing home is any facility whose primary function is to care for persons who are unable to
care for themselves, for example rest homes (which are primarily for the aged) and chronic care
and convalescent homes. This type of. facility is occupied by residents who do little or no
driving. Traffic is primarily generated by employees, visitors, and deliveries.
630 Clinic
A clinic is any facility that provides limited ;diagnostic and outpatient care but is unable to provide
prolonged in-house medical and surgical ~are.
700 Single/Multi Tenant Office Building
This use category provides for flexible . tenant space and lends itself to a variety of uses
including subdivision or planned unit developments containing general office buildings and
support services. Such uses may incl~de offices, retail and wholesale stores, restaurants,
recreational area, warehousing, manufactluring, industrial, scientific research functions, financial
institutions, service stations. [Combines ITE use codes 710 general office building, 714
corporate headquarters building, 715 single tenant office building, and 750 Office Park.]
720 Medical-Dental Office Building
A medical-dental office building is a facillity that provides diagnoses and outpatient care on a
routine basis but is unable to provide pro,onged in-house medical and surgical care. This type
of facility is generally operated by one or rpore private physicians or dentists.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Definitions
733 Government Office Complex
A government office complex is a related group of building where a variety of functions of a city, -
county, state, federal government, other governmental unit, or multiple governmental units are
carried out.
760 Research and Development Center
Research and development centers are facilities or groups of facilities devoted almost
exclusively to research and development activities. The range of specific types of. businesses
contained in this category varies significantly. Research and development ce'nters may contain
offices and light fabrication areas.
800 Discount Store
A discount store typically is free-standing: with off-street parking and usually offers a variety of
customer servic~s, centralized cashiering, and a wide range of products and typically maintain
long store hours seven days a week. Inl addition, a full-service grocery department under the
same roof that shares entrances and exits with the discount store area may be included.
Typically this store is the only one on the site, are sometimes on separate parcels within a retail
complex with their own dedicated parking, but can also be found in mutual operation with a
related or unrelated garden center or service station.
812 Building Materials & Lumber Store
A building materials and lumber store is a small freestanding building that sells hardware,
building materials, and lumber. The lumber may be stored in the main building or in a yard
storage shed. The storage areas are no~ included in the total gross floor areas. The buildings
contained in this category are less than 25,000 gross square feet in size.
814 Specialty Retail Center & Other
Specialty retail centers are generally smaU strip shopping centers that contain a variety of retail
shops and specialize in quality apparel, hard goods, and services such as real estate offices,
dance studios, florists, and small restaurants. This use category also includes miscellaneous
retail and services that may not fit into other available use categories, as determined by staff. A
specialty retail center is typically oriented along and parallel to the adjacent street.
816 Hardware/Paint Store
Hardware and paint stores are generally freestanding buildings with off-street parking.
817 Nursery (Garden Center)
A nursery or garden center is a freestandling building with a yard of planting or landscape stock
and .primarily serve the general public. Some have large greenhouses and offer landscaping
services. Most have office storage, and shipping facilities. May be characterized by ~easonal
variations in trip characteristics.
820 Shopping Center
A shopping center is an integrated group of commercial establishments that is planned,
developed, owned and managed as a unit. A shopping center's composition is related to its
market area in terms of size, location, and type of store and may contain non-merchandising
facilities, such as office buildings, movie theaters, restaurants, post offices, banks, health clubs,
and recreational facilities (e.g. ice skating rinks, indoor miniature golf). A shopping center also
provides on-site parking facilities sufficient to serve its own parking demands. A shopping
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Definitions
center, in addition to the integrated unit of shops in one building or enclosed around a mall, may
include out-parcels (peripheral buildings or pads located on the perimeter of the center adjacent
to the streets and major access points).
823 Factory Outlet Center
A factory outlet center is a shopping center that primarily houses factory outlet stores, attracting
customers from a wide geographic area, very often even from a larger area than a regional
shopping center.
830 Higher Turnover Restaurant, including Tavern/Bar/Coffee Establishments
A higher turnover restaurant consists of sit-down eating establishments that generally serve
lunch and dinner, may also be open for breakfast, and are sometimes open 24-hours per day.
Turnover rates are usually one hour or less. Some facilities contained within this land use may
also operate as a tavern or bar and serve alcoholic drinks or operate as coffee establishments.
[Combines ITE use codes 832 high turnover restaurant and 836 Drinking Place.]
831 Lower Turnover Restaurant
A lower turnover restaurant consists of sit-down eating establishments with turnover rates are
usually at least one hour or longer. Generally these restaurants do not serve breakfast, some
may not serve lunch, but all serve dinner. Often these restaurants are not of a chain
establishment.
834 Fast Food Restaurant
This type of restaurant is characterized by a large carryout clientele, long hours of service
(some are open for breakfast, all are open for lunch and dinner, some are open late at night or
24 hours), and high turnover rates for eat-in customers.
837 Quick Lubrication Vehicle Stop
A business where the primary activity is to perform oil change services for vehicles. Other
ancillary services provided may include preventative maintenance, such as fluid and filter
changes. Automobile repair service is generally not provided.
840 Automobile Care Center
An automobile care center houses numerous businesses that provide automobile-related
services, such as repair and servicing, stereo installation, and seat cover upholstering.
841 New Car Sales
New car sales dealerships are typically located along major arterial streets that are
characterized by abundant commercial development. Automobile services, parts sales, and
substantial used car sales may also be available. Some dealerships also include leasing
options and truck sales and servicing.
843 Automobile Parts/Sales
These facilities specialize in the sale of automobile parts for do-it-yourself maintenance and
repair. Items sold include items such as spark plugs, distributor caps, and batteries. These
facilities are not equipped for on-site vehicle repair.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Definitions
844 Gasoline/Service Station
Service stations are generally located at intersections or freeway interchanges and have
facilities for fueling motor vehicles. They may also have facilities for servicing and repairing
motor vehicles. This use includes service stations without convenience stores or carwashes.
845 Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market
Service stations are generally located at intersections or freeway interchanges. This land use
includes service stations with convenience markets where the primary business is the fueling of
motor vehicles, although they may also have facilities for servicing and repairing motor vehicles
and car washes. Some commonly sold convenience items are newspapers, coffee or other
beverages, and snack items that are usually consumed in the car. The vehicle fueling position
is defined as the maximum number of vehicles that can be fueled simultaneously.
847 Self-Service Car Wash
Self-service car washes allow manual cleaning of vehicles by providing stalls for the driver to
park and wash the vehicle.
848 Tire Store
A tire store's primary business is the sales and marketing of tires for automotive vehicles.
Services offered by these stores usually include tire installation and repair, as well as other
automotive maintenance or repair services and customer assistance. These stores generally do
not contain large storage or warehouse areas.
850 Supermarket
Supermarkets are typically freestanding retail stores selling a complete assortment of food
(sometimes in bulk), food preparation and wrapping materials, and household cleaning and
servicing items. They may also contain facilities such as money machines, photo center,
pharmacies, and video rental areas. [Combines ITE use codes 850 supermarket and 854
discount supermarket.]
851 Convenience Market (Open 24 Hours)
The convenience markets in this classification are open 24 hours per day. These markets sell
convenience foods, newspapers, magazines, and often, beer and wine; and they do not have
gasoline pumps.
852 Convenience Market (Open 15-16 Hours)
The convenience markets in this classification are open 15 to 16 hours per day. These markets
sell convenience foods, newspapers, magazines, and often, beer and wine; and they do not
have gasoline pumps.
860 Wholesale Foods Distributor
These uses generally include large storage and distribution areas for receiving goods and
shipping these goods to places such as grocery stores and restaurants. Generally, these
markets are characterized by little drive-in business, and truck deliveries and pick-up at all hours
of the day.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Definitions
861 Discount Membership Club
A discount club is a discount store or warehouse where shoppers pay a membership fee in
order to take advantage of discounted prices on a wide variety of items such as food, clothing,
tires, and appliances. Many items are sold in large quantities or bulk.
862 Home Improvement Superstore
Home improvement superstores are freestanding warehouse type facilities with off-street
parking. They generally offer a variety of customer services and centralized cashiering, and
they specialize in the sale of home improvement merchandise. They typically maintain long
store hours seven days a week. Examples of items sold in these stores include lumber, tools,
paint, lighting, wallpaper, paneling, kitchen and bathroom fixtures, lawn equipment, and garden
plants and accessories. These stores are often the only ones on the site, but they can also be
found in mutual operation with a related or unrelated garden center or found as separate parcels
within a retail complex with their own dedicated parking. The building contained in this use
usually range in size from 25,000 to 150,000 square fee of gross floor area.
863 Electronics Superstore
Electronic superstores are freestanding warehouse type facilities with off-street parking.
Electronics superstores generally offer a variety of customer services and centralized cashiering
and they specialize in the sale of home and vehicle electronic merchandise. They typically
maintain store hours seven days a week. Examples of items sold in these stores include
televisions, compact disc and cassette tape player, compact discs and tapes, cameras, radios,
videos, and general electronic accessories. Major home appliances may also be sold at these
facilities. These stores mayor may not be the only ones on the site and can be also found as
separate parcels within a retail complex with their own dedicated parking.
864 Toy/Children's Superstore
These stores are freestanding warehouse type facilities with off-street parking. They generally
offer a variety of customer services and centralized cashiering, specialize in the sale of child-
oriented merchandise, and typically maintain long store hours seven days a week. Examples of
items sold in these stores include board and video game systems, toys, bicycles/tricycles,
wagons, outdoor play equipment, and school supplies. Some may also carry children's cJothing.
These stores may not be the only ones on the site and can be sometimes found as separate
parcels within a retail complex with their own dedicated parking.
870 Apparel Stores
An apparel store in an individual store specializing in the sale of clothing.
880 Pharmacy/Drugstore without Drive Up Window
Pharmacies/drugstores are retail facilities that primarily sell prescription and non-prescription
drugs. These facilities may also sell cosmetics, toiletries, medications, stationary, personal care
products, limited food products, and general merchandise. These drug stores do not have drive
up windows.
881 Pharmacy/Drugstore with Drive Up Window
Pharmacies/drugstores are retail facilities that primarily sell prescription and non-prescription
drugs. These facilities may also sell cosmetics, toiletries, medications, stationary, personal care
products, limited food products, and general merchandise. These drug stores have drive up
windows.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Definitions:
890 Furniture Store
A furniture store specializes in the sale of furniture, and often, carpeting. Furniture stores are
generally large and include storage areas. The sites surveyed include both traditional retail
furniture stores and warehouse stores with showrooms.
895 Video Arcade
A video arcade is a building or space in which video game units are played for a fee.
896 Video Rental Store
Video rental stores are businesses specializing in the rental of home movies and video games.
Movies and video games may also be available for purchase. They typically maintain long store
hours and are usually open seven days a week
911 Walk-In Bank
Walk-in banks are generally free-standing buildings with their own parking lots. These banks do
not have drive-in windows. These banks mayor may not contain automatic.teller machines.
912 Drive-In Bank
Drive-in banks provide banking facilities for the motorist while in a vehicle; many also serve
patrons who walk into the building. The drive-in lanes mayor may not provide automatic teller
machines (A TMs).
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Definitions~
Wastewater & Park SDC I HUD BPR* Use Codes
* Bureau of Public Records, Housing and Urban Development
Eugene HUD BPR
Eugene Wastewater SDC Park SDC Land Use Land Use Description
Use Code Use Code Codes
1F SFD 1111 Single Family Housing
1F SFD 1119 Common or Open Area - Typically In Single Family Area
1F Duplex 1120 Two Family Housing Unit-Duplex
1F Duplex 1129 Common or Open Area - Typically In Duplex Structure Area
11 Multifamily 1130 Apartment Under Construction
11 Multifamily 1131 Quad
11 Multifamily 1132 Apartment With 1 To 4 Units
11 Multifamily 1133 Apartment With 5 To 19 Units
11 Multifamily 1134 Apartment With 20 Units or More
11 Multifamily 1139 Common or Open Area - Typically In Multi-Unit Structure Area
1F MH 1150 Mobile Home - Not In Mobile Home Park
1F MH 1151 Mobile Home - Temporary
1F MH 1159 Common or Open Area - Typically In Mobile Home Area
1F MH 1160 Houseboat-Separate
12C per Person 1210 Boarding & Rooming. Houses
12C per Person 1221 Fraternity & Sorority Houses
12C per Person 1231 Nurses Home
12C per Person 1232 College Dormitory
12C per Person 1239 Other Residence Halls or Dormitories
12A,B,orC per Person 1241 Retirement Home
12C per Person 1251 Convents
12C per Person 1252 Monasteries
12C per Person 1253 Rectories
12C per Person 1259 Religious Quarters
12C per Person 1290 Group Quarters (Military,. Forest Service)
13 per RmlMulti 1300 Residential Hotel or Motel With 75% or More Permanently Occupied
14 MH 1400 Mobile Home Park or Court
15 A 1510 Hotels, Motels, Lodges, Cabins, Resorts
15 MH 1520 Mobile Home, Temporary Weekly Lodging
15 per Person 1590 Other Transient Lodgings (YMCA or YWCA)
15 MH 1900 Moorages, Houseboat, Commercial
15 SFD 1910 Seasonally Occupied Family Quarters
21 C 2111 Meat Packing Establishments or Slaughtering Plants
21 C 2113 Poultry & Smali Game Dressing & Packing
21 C 2120 Creamery Multi-Dairy Products
21 C 2121 Butter, Creamery & Whey I Mfg
21 C 2122 Cheese Natural & Processed
21 C 2123 Condensed & Evaporated Milk I Mfg
21 C 2124 Ice Cream & Frozen Desserts I Mfg
21 C 2125 Milk Processing & Distribution
21 C 2131 Canning & Preserving Of Sea foods I Mfg
21 C 2132 Canning Specialty Foods
21 C 2133 Canning Fruits, Vegetables, Preserves I Mfg
21 C 2134 Drying & Dehydrating Fruits & Vegetables I Mfg
21 C 2135 Pickling Of Fruits & Vegetables
21 C 2137 Frozen Food Processing (Fruits, Vegetables, Specialties) I Mfg
21 C 2140 Grain Mill Products (Prepared, Concentrated, Supplemented Feeds)
21 C 2150 Bakery Products I Mfg
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
HUD/BPR~
21 C 2171 Candy & Other Confectionery Products' Mfg
21 C 2185 Beverages, Nonalcoholic, Bottled or Canned' Mfg
21 C 2195 Roasting Coffee & Coffee Products' Mfg
21 C 2190 Other Food Preparations & Kindred Products' Mfg
2X C 2220 Knit Goods , Mfg
2X C 2330 Women's, Misses, Girl's, Children's, Infant's Outerwear' Mfg
2X C 2361 Leather Tanning & Finishing' Mfg
2X C 2369 Other Leather Products' Mfg
2X C 2392 House Furnishings (Except Curtains & Draperies)' Mfg
2X C 2393 Textile Bags' Mfg
2X C 2394 Canvas Products' Mfg
2X C 2395 Pleating, Tucking, Decorative & Novelty Stitching For Trade
24 C 2400 Lumber & Paper Co.-Multi-Products
66 C 2410 Logging Camps & Logging Contractors
24 C 2421 Sawmills & Planning Mills, General' Mfg
24 C 2422 Hardwood Dimension & Flooring , Mfg
24 C 2429 Special Sawmill Products (Shingles, Hoops, Staves) , Mfg
24 C 2431 Millwork' Mfg
24 C 2432 Veneer & Plywood' Mfg
24 C 2433 Prefabricated Wooden Buildings & Structural Members' Mfg'
24 C' 2440 Wooden Containers' Mfg
24 C 2491 Wood Preserving
24 C 2499 Other Lumber & Wood Products (Except Furniture)' Mfg
2X C 2510 Household Furniture' Mfg
2X C 2520 Office Furniture' Mfg
2X C 2540 Partitions, Shelving, Lockers & Store Fixtures' Mfg
2X C 2599 Other Furniture & Fixtures (Cabinets, Carts, Stools)' Mfg
2X C 2620 Paper' Mfg
2X C 2642 Envelopes, Printed or Unprinted, Paper, Glassine, Cello' Mfg
2X C 2646 Pressed & Molded Pulp Goods' Mfg
2X C 2647 Sanitary Paper Products' Mfg
2X C 2649 Other Converted Paper & Paper Products (Except Containers)'Mfg
2X C 2650 Paperboard Containers & Boxes I Mfg
2X C 2660 Building Paper & Building Board (Fiber, Siding, Felt)' Mfg
2X C 2710 Newspapers, Publishing & Printing or Publishing Only I Mfg
2X C 2720 Periodicals, Publishing & Printing, or Publishing Only' Mfg
2X C 2730 Books, Publishing & Printing, or Publishing Only' Mfg
2X C 2740 '\ Commercial Printing' Mfg
2X C 2750 Business Forms, Manifold' Mfg
2X C 2760 Cards, Greeting, Except Hand Painted' Mfg
2X C 2781 Typesetting For The Printing Trade
2X C 2789 Other Printing Trade Service Industries (Decals)
2X C 2790 Other Printing & Publishing (Maps, Directories) , Mfg
3X C 2810 Industrial Inorganic & Organic Chemicals' Mfg
3X C 2820 Plastics, Synthetic Resins, Rubbers & Other Manmade Fibers' Mfg
3X C 2860 Gum & Wood Chemicals' Mfg
3X C 2850 Paints, Varnishes, LacQuers, Enamels & Allied Products' Mfg
3X C 2870 Agricultural Chemicals (Fertilizers, Herbicides) I Mfg
3X C 2899 Other Chemicals & Allied Products' Mfg
3X C 3140 Miscell~neous Plastic Products' Mfg
3X C 3190 Other Fabricated Rubber Products' Mfg
3X C 3200 Stone, Clay & Glass Products' Mfg
3X C 3229 Other Glass & Glassware Products (Pressed or Blown)' Mfg
3X C 3230 Cement, Hydraulic, Portland, Natural, Masonry, Puzzolan , Mfg
3X C 3249 Structural Clay Products' Mfg
3X C 3259 Pottery & Related Products' Mfg
3X C 3261 Blocks, Concrete & Cinder' Mfg
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
HUD/BPRl
3X C 3262 Concrete Products (Excluding Brick & Block) I Mfg
3X C 3263 Concrete (Ready Mixed) I Mfg
3X C 3270 Cut Stone Products For Building, Ornamental, Paving, I Mfg
3X C 3280 Abrasive, Asbestos & Misc. Nonmetallic Mineral Products I Mfg
3X C 3311 Blast Furnace, Steel Works & Rolling I Mfg
3X C 3320 Iron & Steel Foundries I Mfg
3X C 3360 Nonferrous Foundries (Aluminum, Bronze, Copper, Brass) I Mfg
3X C 3390 Other Primary Metal Industries I Mfg
3X C 3421 Engines & Turbines I Mfg
3X C 3423 Construction, Mining & Materials Handling Machinery & Equipment I Mfg
3X C 3424 Metalworking Machinery & Equipment I Mfg
3X C 3425 Special Industry Machinery (Sawmill Machinery) I Mfg
3X C 3426 General Industrial Machinery & Equipment I Mfg
3X C 3429 Other Machinery Manufacturing Pistons, Valves)
3X C 3433 Household Electrical Appliances I Mfg
3X C 3435 Radio & Television Receiving Sets I Mfg
3X C 3437 Electronic Components & Accessories I Mfg
3X C 3439 Other Electrical Machinery, Equip. & Supplies Manufacturing
3X C 3441 Motor Vehicles & Equipment I Mfg
3X C 3443 Ship & Boat Building
3X C 3449 Other Transportation Equip. (Campers, Trailers) I Mfg
3X C 3491 Metal Cans I Mfg
3X C 3492 Cutlery, H& Tools & Hardware I Mfg
3X C 3493 Heating Apparatus & Plumbing Fixtures I Mfg
3X C 3494 Fabricated Structural Metal Products (Awnings, Boilers) I Mfg
3X C 3496 Metal Stamping I Mfg
3X C 3497 Coating, Engraving & Allied Services
3X C 3498 Fabricated Wire Products (Misc.) I Mfg
3X C 3499 Other Fabricated Metal Products (Irrigation Equipment, Industrial Patterns).
3X C 3521 Mechanical Measuring & Controlling Instruments I Mfg
3X C 3542 Orthopedic, Prosthetic & Surgical Appliances & Supplies I Mfg
3X C 3913 Lapidary Work, Contract & Other Stone Polishing
3X C 3930 Toys, Amusement, Sporting & Athletic Goods I Mfg
3X C 3950 Costume Jewelry, Novelties, Buttons & Misc. Notions I Mfg
3X C 3997 Signs & Advertising Displays I Mfg
3X C 3999 Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing
4111 Railroad Right-of-Way
4112 Railroad Switching & Marshaling Yard
4X C 4113 Railroad Terminals, Passenger
4X C 4114 Railroad Terminals, Freight
4X C 4115 Railroad Terminals, Passenger & Freight
4X C 4116 Railroad Equipment & Maintenance
4X C 4119 Other Railroad Transportation
4X C 4211 Terminal, Bus Passenger, Intercity
4X C 4214 Maintenance Facilities For Passenger Bus Vehicles
4X 4219 Bus Stops
4X C 4221 Freight T~cking Terminals, With or Without Maintenance Facility
4X C 4222 Motor Freight Garaging & Maintenance Facility
4X E 4223 Moving & Storage, Household
4X C 4229 Other Motor Freight Transportation
4X C 4291 Taxicab Transportation
4X C 4311 Airport & Flying Field Landingrr akeoff Fields
4X C 4312 Airport & Flying Field Terminals I Passenger)
4X C 4313 Airport & Flying Field Terminals I Freight)
4X C 4314 Airport & Flying Field Terminals j Passenger & Freight)
4X C 4315 Aircraft Storage & Equipment Maintenance
4X C 4319 Other Airports & Flying Fields Necessary
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies ~
HUD/BPR
4X C 4391 Heliport Landingff akeoff Pads .
4X C 4399 Other Aircraft Transportation
4500 Highway & Street Rights-of-Way
4508 Bridges - Railroad, Vehicular or Pedestrian
4510 Freeways, (i.e., Routes With No At-Grade Intersections)
4520 Expressways, (i.e. Routes With Grade Intersect Only At Major Streets)
4550 Collector/Distributor Streets
4570 Alleys, Public
4571 Bicycle Path
4575 Pedestrian Walkway, Stairway, Etc.
4580 Rights-Of-Way, Roads-Proposed Roadway
4590 Private Roads
4599 Other Rights-of-Way Related
4X 4600 Automobile Parking I Non-Structure/Retail)
4X 4601 Automobile Parking . Non-Structure/Service)
4X 4602 Automobile Parking Non-Structure/Government)
4X 4603 Automobile Parking j Non-Structure/Education)
4X 4604 Automobile Parking l Non-Structureff ransportation)
4X 4605 Automobile Parking I Non-Structure/Recreation)
4X 4606 Automobile Parking I Non-Structurell ndustrial)
4X 4607 Automobile Parking I Non-Structure/Utility)
4X 4608 Automobile Parking I Non-Structure/Religious)
4X 4610 Automobile Parking . Structure/Retail )
4X 4611 Automobile Parking I Structure/Service)
4X 4612 Automobile Parking Structure/Government)
4X 4613 Automobile Parking Structure/Education)
4X 4614 Automobile Parking Structureff ransportation)
4X 4615 Automobile Parking Structure/Recreation)
4X 4616 Automobile Parking Structure/I ndustrial)
4X C 4711 Telephone Exchange Stations
4X C 4719 Telephone EQuipment Repair & Servicing
4X D 4721 Radio Telegraph Message Center
4X D 4731 Radio Broadcasting Studios, Commercial & Public Educational
4X D 4732 Radio Broadcasting Transmitters & Towers, Commercial & Public Education
4X D 4739 Other Radio Communication
4X D 4741 Television Broadcasting Studio, Commercial & Public Educational
4X D 4742 Television Transmitters & Towers, Commercial & Public Educational
4X D 4749 Other Television Communication
4X D 4759 Radio & Television Transmitter, Combined, Commercial or Public Education
4X C 4810 Electric & Power Companies
4811 Electric Transmission Right-of-Way
4X C 4812 Electric Generation Plant
4X C 4813 Electricity Regulating Substations
4X C 4819 Other Electric Utility
4X C 4823 Gas Storage Tanks & Distribution Facilities, Mfg or Natural
4X C 4824 Gas Pressure Control Stations
4831 Water Pipeline Right-of-Way (EWEB Canal)
, 4X C 4832 Water, Domestic Supply, Treatment Plant
4X C 4833 Water Storage (Flood Control Dam, Water Tower)
4X C 4835 Pumping Station, Domestic Water
4X C 4839 Water, Domestic Supply, AQueduct
4X C 4841 Sewage Treatment Plant
4X C 4842 Sewage Sludge Drying Beds
4X C 4843 Sewage Pressure Control Station
4X C 4852 Garbage Grinding Station, Central
4X C 4853 Composting Plants
4X C 4854 Sanitary Land Fill
City of Eugene SD,C Methodologies
HUD/BPR.
4X C 4855 Refuse Disposal, Except Industrial Wastes
4X C 4856 Industrial Waste ,Disposal
4X C 4859 Other Solid Waste Disposal
4X 4911 Petroleum Pipeline Right Of Way
4X D 4921 Freight Forwarding Service
4X D 4922 Crating & Packing Service
4X D 4923 Travel Arranging Services (Information, Freight Agencies)
4X D 4924 Transportation Ticket Services (Trave.1 Agency, Ticket Office)
4X D 4990 Other Transportation, Communication & Utilities
51 C 5111 Automobiles & Other Motor Vehicles I Whsle
51 C 5112 Automotive Equipment I Whsle
51 C 5113 Tires & Tubes I Whsle
51 C 5121 Drugs, Drug Proprietaries & Druggist's Sundries I Whsle
51 C 5122 Paints & Varnishes (Shellac, Lacquers, Enamels) I Whsle
51 C 5129 Other Drugs, Chemicals & Allied Products I Whsle
51 C 5131 Dry Goods, Piece Goods & Notions I Whsle
51 C 5132 Apparel & Accessories, Hosiery & Lingerie I Whsle
51 C 5133 Footwear I Whsle
51 C 5141 Groceries, General Line I Whsle
51 C 5142 Dairy Products I Whsle
51 C 5143 Poultry Products I Whsle
51 C 5144 Confectionery I Whsle
51 C 5145 Fish, Fresh I Whsle
51 C 5146 Meat & Meat Products I Whsle
51 C 5147 Fruits & Vegetables I Whsle
51 C 5149 Other Groceries & Related Products I Whsle
51 C 5151 Cotton, Raw I Whsle
51 C 5152 Grain I Whsle
51 C 5153 Hides, Skins & Pelts I Whsle
51 C 5154 Exporters Of Leaf Tobacco
51 C 5155 Wool, Raw I Whsle
51 C 5156 Livestock I Whsle
51 C 5157 Horses I Whsle
51 C 5159 Farm Products, Raw (Except Cotton, Grain or Livestock) I Whsle
51 C 5161 Electrical Apparatus & Equipment; Wiring Supplies & Construction Equipment
51 C 5162 Electrical Appliances, TV & Radio Sets I Whsle
51 C 5163 Electronic Parts & Equipment I Whsle
51 C 5171 Hardware I Whsle
51 C 5172 Plumbing & Heating Equipment & Supplies I Whsle
51 C 5173 Air Conditioning, Refrigerated Equipment & Supplies I Whsle
51 C 5181 Commercial & Industrial Machinery, Equipment & Supplies/Whsle
51 C 5182 Farm Machinery & Equipment I Whsle
51 C 5183 Professional Equipment & Supplies I Whsle
51 C 5184 Equipment & Supplies For Service Establishments I Whsle
51 C 5185 Transportation Equipment & Supplies (Except Motor Vehicles)/Whsle
51 C 5189 Other Machinery, Equipment & Supplies I Whsle
51 C 5191 Metals & M'inerals (Except Petroleum Products & Scrap) I Whsle
51 C 5192 Petroleum Bulk Stations & Terminals I Whsle
51 C 5193 Scrap & Waste Materials I Whsle
51 C 5194 Tobacco & Tobacco Products I Whsle
51 C 5195 Beer, Wine & Distilled Alcoholic Beverages I Whsle
51 C 5196 Paper & Paper Products I Whsle
51 C 5197 Furniture & Home Furnishings I Whsle
51 C 5198 Lumber & Construction Materials I Whsle
51 C 5199 Other Wholesale Trade
5X D 5211 Lumber Yards I Ret
5X D 5212 Building Materials I Ret
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
HUD/BPR,
5X D 5220 Plumbing & Heating Equipment I Ret
5X D 5230 Paint, Glass & Wallpaper I Ret
5X D 5240 Electrical Supplies I Ret
5X D 5251 Hardware Stores I Ret
5X D 5252 Farm Equipment I Ret
5X D 5310 Department Stores IRet
5X D 5320 Mail Order Houses I Ret
5X D 5330 Lim'ited Price Variety Stores I Ret .
5X D 5340 Merchandise Vending Machine Operators J Ret
5X D 5350 Selling Organizations, Direct, Headquarters of Door- To-Door
5X D 5391 Dry Goods & General Merchandise I Ret
5X D 5392 General Stores I Ret
54 D 5410 Grocery Stores, With or Without Fresh Meat I Ret
54 D 5421 Meat Markets I Ret
54 D 5422 Sea Food Markets I Ret
54 D 5430 Fruit & Vegetable Stands I Ret
54 D 5440 Candy, Nut & Confectionery / Ret
54 D 5450 Dairy Products Stores I Ret
54 C 5461, Retail Bakeries I Mfg
54 D 5462 Bakeries, Nonmfg, Retail
54 D 5491 Egg & Poultry Dealers I Ret
54 D 5499 Other Retail Trade - Food
55 D 5511 New & Used Cars & Trucks I Ret
55 D 5512 Automobiles,'Used Cars & Trucks Only I Ret
55' D 5520 Tires, Batteries & Accessories I Ret
55 D 5530 Automobile Service Stations, With or Without Minor Repair Service
55 D 5591 Marine Craft & Accessories / Ret
55 D 5592 Aircraft Dealers I Ret
55 D 5599 Other Retail Trade - Auto trailers, Mobile Homes, Motorcycles
5X D 5610 Clothing Stores, Men's & Boy's ,/ Ret
5X D 5620 Clothing Stores, Women's Ready To Wear I Ret
5X D 5630 Women's Accessories & Specialties / Ret
5X D 5640 Children's & Infant's Wear I Ret
5X D 5650 Family Clothing Stores I Ret
5X D 5660 Shoe Stores, Family, Men's, Women's or Children's I Ret
5X D 5670 Custom Tailors / Ret
5X D 5680 Furriers I Retail
5X D .5690 Other Retail Trade-Apparel & Accessories
5X D 5711 Furniture I Ret
5X D 5712 Floor Covering Stores I Ret
5X D 5713 Draperies, Curtains & Upholstery / Ret
5X D 5714 China, Glassware & Metalware Stores I Ret
5X D 5719 Other Furniture, Home Furnishings & Equipment I Ret
5X D 5720 Household Appliances I Ret
5X D 5731 Radios, TV's, Stereos I Ret
5X D 5732 Music Supplies I Ret
5X D 5733 Calculators, Computers & Other Office Machines I Ret
5A/B/C B 5810 Eating Places (Food & Both Food & Alcoholic Beverages)
50 B 5820 Bars, Drinking Establishments
59 D 5910 Drug & Proprietary I Ret
59 D 5920 Liquor, Wine & Beer (Packaged) I Ret
59 D 5931 Antique Stores / Ret
59 D 5932 Secondhand Merchandise I Ret
59 D 5941 Book Stores, New / Ret
59 D 5942 Stationery Stores I Ret
59 D 5951 Sporting Goods I Ret
59 D 5952 Bicycle & Bicycle Parts Dealers I Ret
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
HUD/BPR~
59 D 5961 Feed Grain & Hay Stores 1 Ret
59 D 5969 Other Farm & Garden Supplies (Nurseries) 1 Ret
59 D 5970 Jewelry, Precious & Precious Metals, Including Custom Made/Ret
59 D 5981 Fuel Dealers, Coal, Wood, Ice 1 Ret
59 D 5982 Fuel Oil Dealers 1 Ret
59 D 5983 Bottled Gas 1 Ret
59 D 5991 Florists 1 Retail
59 D 5992 Cigars & Cigarettes 1 Ret
59 D 5993 Magazines & Newspapers 1 Ret
59 D 5994 Camera Shops & Photographic Supply Stores 1 Ret
59 D 5995 Gift, Novelty & Souvenir Shops (Ceramic Shop) 1 Ret
59 D 5996 Optical Goods Stores 1 Ret
59 D 5999 Other Retail Trade-Artist Supply, Luggage Shop, Pet Shop
61 B 6111 Banking Services
61 B 6112 Bank-Related Functions
61 B 6121 Savings & Loan Associations
61 B 6122 Agriculture, Business & Personal Credit Services (Credit Union)
61 B 6129 Other Credit Services (Loan Co.)
61 B 6131 Security Brokers, Dealer & Flotation Services
61 B 6132 Commodity Contracts Brokers & Dealers Services
61 B 6133 Security & Commodity Exchange
6X B 6141 Insurance Carriers
6X B 6142 Insurance Agents, Brokers & Services
6X B 6151 Real Estate Operators (Except Developers) & Lessors
6X B 6152 Real Estate Agents, Brokers & Management Services
6X B 6153 Title & Trust Companies
6X B 6154 Real Estate Subdividing & Developing Services
6X B 6155 Real Estate Operative Builders
6X B 6159 Other Real Estate & Related Services
6X B 6160 Holding & I nvestment 'Services
6X B 6190 Other Finance, Insurance & Real Estate Services
6A3, D 6211 Laundering, Dry Cleaning & Dyeing Services (Except Rug Cleaning)
6A1 D 6212 Linen Supply & Industrial Laundry Services
6A1 D 6213 Diaper Service
6A2 D 6214 Laundries, Self-Service
6A3 D 6215 Rug Cleaning & Repairing Plants
62 D 6220 Photographic Services (I ncluding Commercial)
62 D 6231 Beauty Services
62 D 6232 Barber Services
62 D 6241 Funeral & Crematory Services
62 D 6242 Cemeteries
62 D 6251 Pressing & Alteration, & Clothing Repair Shops
62 D 6252, Fur Garments, Cleaning, Repairing, & Storage
62 D 6253 Shoe Repair Shops
62 D 6290 Other Personal Services
62 D 6311 Advertising Agencies
62 D 6312 Outdoor Advertising Services
62 D 6319 Other Advertising Services, NEC
62 D 6320 Collection Agencies t Accounts (Except Real Estate)
62 D 6332 Blueprinting & Photocopying Services
62 D 6339 Stenographic Services & Other Duplicating & Mailing Services
62 D 6341 Window Cleaning Services
62 D 6342 Disinfecting & Exterminating Service
62 D 6349 Building Maintenance, Janitorial, & Similar Services
62 D 6350 News Syndicate Services
62 D 6360 Commercial Employment Agencies
63 D 6371 Farm Product Warehousing & Storage (Barns, Livestock Shelters)
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
HUD/BPR
63 D 6372 Stockyards (Not Exclusively For Fattening Livestock)
63 E 6373 Refrigerated Warehousing, Except Food Lockers
63 E 6374 . Rental Of Cold Storage Lockers
63 E 6375 Commercial Warehousing & Storage
63 E 6379 Industrial Warehousing & Storage
62 D 6391 Research Development & Testing Services
62 D 6392 Business & Management Consulting Services
62 D 6393 Detective & Protective Services
62 D 6394 Equipment Rental & Leasing Services
62 D 6395 Photographic Laboratories, Not Manufacturing
62 D 6396 Trading Stamp Redemption Store
62 D 6397 Automobile & Truck Rental Services
62 D 6398 Motion Picture Distribution & Services
62 D 6399 Other Business Svc (Garbage Collctn; Sewer or Answering Svc)
6B D 6412 Car Wash
64 D 6411 Automobile Repair Shops, General
64 D 6419 Other Automobile Services
64 D 6491 Electric Appliance Repair (Except Radio, TV, or Refrigeration)
64 D 6492 Television & Radio Repair Services
64 D 6493 Watch, Clock & Jewelry Repair Services
64 D 6494 Re-upholstery & Furniture Repair Services
'64 D 6499 Other Repair Services (Tool, Locksmith, Musical Instrument, Hydraulic)
6X B 6500 Professional Office Building
65 B 6511 Physicians Services
65 B 6512 Dental Services
65 .B 6513 Hospital Services
65 B 6514 Medical Laboratory Services
65 B 6515 Dental Laboratories
65 per person 6516 Convalescent Homes, Sanitariums, Nursing Homes
65 B 6517 Medical Clinic, Out- Patient Service
65 B 6519 Other Medical & Health Services
6X B 6520 Legal Services
6X B 6591 Architectural & Engineering Services
6X B 6592 Scientific & Educational Research Services
6X B 6593 Accounting, Auditing & Bookkeeping Services
6X B 6599 Other Professional Services
66 D. 6611 Building Construction-General Contractor Services
66 D 6619 Other General Construction Contractor Services
66 D 6621 Plumbing, Heating & Air Conditioning Services
66 D 6622 Painting, Paper Hanging & Decorating Services
66 D 6623 Electrical Work I Contractors
66 D 6624 Masonry, Stonework, Tile Setting & Plastering Services
66 D 6625 Carpentry Work I Contractors
66 D 6626 Roofing & Sheet Metal Services
66 D 6627 Concrete Construction, Other Than Paving, Foundation & Excavation
66 o -, 6628 Water Well Drilling I Contractors
66 D 6629 Other Special Construction Trade Services
67 B 6710 Executive, Legislative & Judicial Functions (Offices, Courts)
67 B 6719 Other Publicly Owned Properly
67 B 6721 Police Protection & Related Activities
67 B 6722 Fire Stations, Community Fire Protection
67 B 6729 Other Protective Functions & Their Related Activities
67 B 6730 Post Offices & Related Facilities
67 per person 6741 Prisons, State, Federal or Other Civil Government
67 per person 6749 Other Correctional Institutions
67 B 6755 Recruiting Station, U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, etc.
67 B 6759 Other Military Bases & Reservation
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
HUD/BPR>
6X 6810 School District Administration Office
68 6811 Nursery Schools
68 6812 Elementary Schools
68 6813 Junior HiOh Schools
68 6814 Senior Hioh Schools
68 6815 Private Handicap Schools
68 B 6816 Parochial Schools
68 B 6821 Universities & Colleoes
68 B 6822 Junior Colleoes
68 B 6823 Theolooical Seminaries
68 B 6831 Vocational or Trade Schools
68 B 6832 Business & Stenooraphic Schools
68 B 6833 Barber & Beauty 'Schools
68 B 6834 Art & Music Schools
68 B 6835 Dance Studios & Schools
68 B 6836 Drivino Schools
68 B 6839 Other Special Trainino & Schoolino (Language, Modeling)
69 D 6911 Churches, Temples, Sunday School Facilities
69 D 6919 Other Relioious Activities (Retreats, Camps, Diocesan Offices)
69 D 6920 Welfare & Charitable Services (Red Cross, Salvation Army)
69 D 6991 Business Associations, (Grange Halls, Trade or Farm Assn.)
69 D 6992 Professional Membership Organizations
69 D 6993 Labor Unions & Similar Labor Organizations
69 D 6994 Civic, Social & F ratemal Associations
69 D 6999 Misc. Services (Historical Clubs, City Clubs, Youth Projects)
68 0 7111 Libraries
68 D 7112 Museum, Historical Exhibit
68 D 7113 Art Galleries
68 D 7119 Other Cultural Activities
68 D 7123 Arboreta & Botanical Gardens
7X D 7212 Theater, Motion Picture, Indoor
7X D 7213 Drive-In Motion Picture Theater
7X D 7214 Theater, Legitimate Stage
7X D 7219 Other Entertainment Assembly
7X 0 7221 Stadium, FootbaJl, Baseball, Track & Field or Other
7X D 7223 RaceTrack Operation, Horse, Dog, Automobile
7X D 7231 Auditorium
7X D 7232 Exhibition Hall
7X D 7239 Other Miscellaneous Assembly
7X D 7290 Other Public Assembly
7X D 7311 F airoround
7X D 7312 Amusement Park
7X D 7391 Penny Arcades
'7X D 7393 Golf Drivino Ranoes
7X D 7399 Other Amusements (Pool Hall, Shooting Range)
7X D 7411 Golf Course, Without Country Club
7X D 7412 Golf Course, With Country Club
7X D 7413 Tennis Courts
7X D 7414 Ice Skatino Rinks
7X D 7415 Roller Skating Rinks
7X D 7416 Ridino Stable
7X D 7417 Bowling Alleys
7X D 7419 Other Sports Activities
7X D 7421 Play Lot or Tot Lot (Preschool or Elementary School-Aged Children)
7X D 7422 Playoround, EQuipped (Not Part of Another Facility)
7X D 7423 Play Fields or Athletic Fields
7X 0 7424 Recreation Center, General
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
HUD/BPR
7X D 7425 Gymnasiums & Athletic Clubs.
7X D 7429 Other Playground & Athletic Areas
7X D 7431 Swimming Beach, Designated
7X D 7432 Swimming Pool, Indoor or Covered (Not Part of Residential Use)
7X D 7442 Boat Rentals & Boat Access Sites
7X D 7449 Other Marinas
7X D 7491 Camping & Picnicking Areas
7X D 7499 Other Recreation Not Elsewhere Classified
7X D 7520 Group or Organized Camps (Girl Scout & Boy Scout, etc.)
7X D 7620 Park, Ornamental (Plaza or Monument or Traffic Circle, etc.)
7X D 7625 Park, Private Leisure
7X D 7630 Open Space, Natural Area, Wetland
7X D 7690 Other Parks
7X D 7900 Other Cultural, Entertainment & Recreational Activities
C 8010 Orchards, Tree Fruit or Nut
C 8020 Intensive Grain or Field Crop
C 8030 Bush, Fruit, Berries
C 8040 Pasture, Cows, Sheep, Cattle
C 8120 Farm, Predominant Crop - Cash Grain (Wheat, Com, etc.)
C 8130 Farm, Predominant Crop - Field Crop Except Cash Grain or Fiber
C 8141 Farm, Predominant Crop - Tree Fruits (Pear, Date, Lemon, etc.)
C 8142 Farm, Predominant Crop -Tree Nuts
C 8143 ~ Farm, Predominant Crop - Vegetables, Ground Fruits
C 8150 Farm, Predominant Product - Dairy Goods (Milk, Cheese, etc.)
C 8161 Farm, Predominant Activity - Cattle Raising
C 8170 Farm, Predominant Activity - Poultry Raising (Incl. Egg Products)
C 8180 Farm, General, No Predominant Crop or Activity
C 8192 F arm, Predominant Activity - Nursery or Flower Stock
C 8194 Farm, Predominant Activity - Horse Raising
C 8199 Other Agricultural & Related Activities
C 8213 Grist Milling Services
C 8219 Other Agricultural Processing Services
82 B 8221 Veterinarian Service
82 B 8222 Animal Hospitals & Other Veterinary Service
C 8223 Poultry Hatcheries
C 8229 Animal Breeding & Other Husbandry Services (Worm Hatchery)
C 8310 Timberlands
C 8321 Forest Nurseries
C 8390 Guard Station, Game Management Area & Other Forestry Activities
C 8542 Quarrying - Crushed & Broken Stone Including Riprap
C 8543 Quarrying - Sand & Gravel
C 8553 Crude Petroleum & Gas Field Services
C 8900 Other Resource Production & Extraction
9100 Vacant, Unused, Undeveloped Land
9101 Broadleaf Brush
9102 Stump Land, Cutover Land
9103 Sand Dunes
9220 Non-reserve Forests
9310 Rivers, Creeks, Streams
9320 Lakes, Ponds, Reservoirs
9390 Other Water Areas (Swamps)
9395 Sand Bars
9400 Unused Building or Structure
9410 Vacant Shop or Office
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
HUD/BPR
Appendix B
Transportation System Charge Detail
1.0 Transportation SDC Methodology
The transportation SDC methodology is based on a level of service (LOS) approach, and
consists of a street component and an off-street bicycle path component. The street component
is a combination of improvement and reimbursement fees.
Development of the SDC under the LOS methodology includes the following basic steps:
· Determine SDC cost basis
. Define system capacity
· Calculate the unit cost of capacity
· Develop SDC rate schedule
These steps are discussed below for the street and bicycle components. Related information is
displayed in Figures 2 and 3.
1.1 Street Component
1.1.1 Formula
The street component is determined based on the average cost per lane mile of
the arterial and collector street system and the estimated lane miles required by
an average trip, given a specified level of service. The SDC calculation under a
LOS approach is represented by the following formulas
Cost per Trip (street) =
A verage Cost Per Lane Mile of Street System X A verage Lane Miles Per Trip
1.1.2 Step 1 - Determine SDC Cost Basis
The cost basis is the average cost of constructing a lane mile in the arterial and
collector street system. The average cost per lane mile is based on a
Replacement Cost New valuation, whereby all facilities are valued in terms of
current year dollars, thus capturing any inflationary impacts, as well as changes
in market conditions since original construction of assets. In calculating the
average cost per lane mile in the transportation system, the following cost
components are considered:
. Collector and Arterial Streets
~ Non-assessable Linear Construction Costs
~ Intersection Construction Costs
~ Traffic Signal Costs
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Transportation~
~ Street Light Costs
~ Bridge and Other Structure Construction Costs
Cost basis assumptions and related factors are listed in Table 4. Specific system
valuation calculations for these cost components are reflected in Table 5.
Because new development trips will be served by a combination of existing and
new facilities, and because the costs of new and existing facilities vary according
to prevailing design standards and policies, the average cost per lane mile is
calculated based on a weighted average of existing and projected new lane mile
costs. The weighting between the existing system average cost and the new
system cost is based on new development's projected utilization of existing
system capacity versus new capacity-oriented improvements.
This weighted average cost basis approach also supports the development of
separate Reimbursement and Improvement SDCs. Oregon SDC law allows local
governments to charge an improvement SDC, a reimbursement SDC, or a
combination of the two. The Improvement fee is intended to recover the costs of
future capacity improvements needed to serve new development, while the
Reimbursement fee relates to the costs of existing facilities that provide capacity
for growth.
In determining the appropriate weighting of the existing system and future system
costs to be used in the development of the cost basis, projected vehicle trips
generated by growth were modeled and separated into 2 categories:
· Trips that conduct their travel entirelv on the existina Eugene arterial and
collector network (existing system); and
. Trips that rely on projected SDC-funded future improvement during their
travel on the Eugene arterial and collector network (future system).
Modeling and analysis of the future trips using this approach results in a split of
40 percent existing system trips and 60 percent future system trips. These
percentages are applied to the average costs per lane mile of the existing and
future systems respectively to determine the weighted average cost per lane mile
of the street system (see Table 5).
The formula for developing the street component cost basis is as follows:
SDC Cost Basis =
Avg. Cost Per Lane Mile (existing system) X Capacity % (existing system) +
A vg. Cost per Lane Mile (future system) X Capacity % (future system)
Table 5 details the calculation of the average cost per lane mile by component for
the existing and future systems. The development of separate costs for existing'
and new capacity allows for changes in building standards, system configuration,
assessable construction costs, and other assumptions between the existing and
planned systems to be captured in the cost basis. In developing the average
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Transportations
costs for the existing versus future system, the following factors were among
those considered:
· The average number of lanes per mile of arterial and collector street
· Typical street width
· The assessable and non-assessable percent of linear street cross-section
costs
· The density of components (e.g., bridges, street lights, traffic signals) per
lane mile
· Typical features included in streets, given changes in design standards.
1.1.3 Step 2 - Determine System Capacity
Street system capacity is measured by the average number of lane miles per trip.
The average lane miles per trip is calculated as follows:
Average Lane Miles Per One-Way Trip = (Averaae TriD Lenath in miles fA TLJ XO.5J
Capacity Per Lane Mile
The system-wide average trip length (A TL) used in the SDC calculation is based
on the miles traveled by an average one-way trip. on the arterial and collector
network in the Eugene Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). This figure is d~termined
by first determining the current or base year average vehicle trip length for all PM
peak hour (4-6 p.m.) trips with one trip end in the Eugene UGB on Eugene's
arterial and collector streets. The average trip length is divided in half because
trips are charged according to Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) trip
generation rates which are expressed as trip ends, accounting for both trips
entering and leaving a development. The origin of a trip pays for one-half of the
A TL while the destination pays for the other half.
Capacity per lane mile is determined by the community's adopted level of service
standard. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan adopted
transportation level of service standard of accepting LOS D but avoiding LOS E
correlates to the border between LOS D and E. This defines capacity as the
number of vehicles that can be accommodated on a given roadway segment at
the border between level of service D and E.
1.1.4 Step 3 - Determine Unit Cost of Capacity
The street component unit cost of capacity is calculated as follows:
Cost per Trip (Unit cost of Capacity) =
A verage Cost Per Lane Mile of Street System (Cost Basis) X
A verage Lane Miles Per Trip (Capacity Requirements)
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Transportation.
The total street SDC is allocated between the reimbursement and improvement
fees as follows:
Reimbursement SDC =
Cost per Trip (existing system) X Capacity % (existing system)
Improvement SDC =
Cost per Trip (future system) X Capacity % (future system)
1.2 Off-Street Bicycle Path Component
1.2.1 Formula
The off-street bicycle path component is determined based on the average cost
of off-street bicycle path per person and the estimated vehicle trips per person.
The SDC calculation under a LOS approach is represented by the following
formulas:
Cost per Trip = A veraae Off-Street Bicvcle Path Cost Per Person
Average Vehicle Trips per Person
1.2.2 Step 1 - Determine SDC cost basis
The off-street bicycle path component of the SDC is based on maintaining an
existing standard number of miles of path per thousand persons. The cost per
mile of off-street bicycle path is added to the cost per mile for off-street bicycle
path lighting and the total is divided by the population to derive ~ per person cost.
. Off-Street Bicycle Paths
~ Path Construction Costs
~ Path Light Costs
1.2.3 Step 2 - Determine System Capacity
Off-street bicycle capacity is defined as the average vehicle trips per person.
Based on path inventory and population data, the average vehicle trips per
person is 0.895. In order to provide a uniform basis for the SDC, per capita is
converted to per vehicle trip using the average number of vehicle trips per
person.
1.2.4 Step 3 - Determine Unit Cost of Capacity
The off-street bicycle component unit cost of capacity is calculated as follows:
Cost per Trip (unit cost of capacity) =
Average Off-Street Bicycle Path Cost Per Person (cost basis) X
Average Vehicle Trips per Person (system capacity)
Because the current standard level of service is based on current inventory and
population, no "excess'" bike path capacity is considered to exist, so the entire
fee is characterized as an improvement fee.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Transportation.
1.3 SDC Rate Schedule
1.3.1 Formula
The transportation SDC for an individual development is based on the total cost
per trip (including the street and bike components) and the number of trips
attributable to a particular development. This calculation is as follows:
Cost per Trip X Number of Development Trips = SDC for Development where:
Cost per Trip =
(Cost per Trip (street) + Cost per Trip (bicycle), and
Number of Development Trips =
Trip Generation Rate X Pass-by Adjustment X Nodal Development Adjustment X
Development Size
1.3.2 Assigned Trip Generation Rates
The standard practice in the transportation industry is to use Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates to ultimately determine the
SDCs for individual qevelopments. ITE trip rates by land use are based on
studies from around the country, and in the absence of local data, represent the
best available source of trip data for specific land uses.
Pass-by trip adjustments to ITE trip rates have been applied to the ITE trip rates.
Also referred to as linked trips or trip chaining, pass-by trips refer to trips that
occur when a motorist is already on the roadway (as in the case of a traveler
stopping by a fast food restaurant on the way home from work.) In this case, the
. motorist making a stop while "passing by" is counted as a trip generated by the
restaurant, but it does not represent a new trip on the roadway.
Pass-by adjustments are provided only when three or more studies as reported
in the ITE manual have established an average range for percent of pass-by trips
for a particular use category contained in the Table 3. If the minimum number of
studies is not available, no pass-by adjustment is assigned. An applicant may
choose to submit a request for an alternative pass-by adjustment through the
Alternate Calculation method.
Except when the City Transportation engineer has approved an applicant's
election to use the Alternate Calculation method or an alternative pass-by
adjustment, the City Transportation Engineer shall apply the description that
most nearly describes the type of development proposed ITE trip rates by land
use as published in Table 3 to determine the trip rate to be assigned to the
proposed development. A transportation trip rate may be assigned by the City
Transportation Engineer should a proposed use not be accurately represented by
one of the published transportation use codes. In addition, trip rates for
published use codes may be alternatively assigned as best available information
in the case that a revised ITE trip rate is published prior to an administrative
modification to the Transportation Trip Rate Table (Table 3).
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Transportation:
1.3.3 Alternate Trip Generation Calculation
Prior to the issuance of a permit requiring payment of Transportation SDCs, an
applicant may elect to use the Alternate Calculation method of determining the
trip generation for the type of development proposed, as provided here. This
election must be by written application to the City Transportation' Engineer, must
be accompanied with payment or the agreement to pay the transportation SDC
using the Standard Calculation and must be approved by the City Transportation
Engineer. Issuance of a final certificate of occupancy for the development will be
contingent on a final decision by the City Transportation Engineer on the
Alternate Calculation submitted for review. In the absence of the City
, Transportation Engineer's approval of the applicant's election to use an Alternate
Calculation, the Standard Calculation shall be used. All calculations shall be
based on the p.m. peak hour traffic on the adjacent street for a general type of
development similar to the proposal and not on the p.m. peak hour traffic on the
development site.
1.3.3.1 Existing Traffic Study Standards
If an applicant provides previously performed traffic studies that meet the
standards in this paragraph and have been approved by the City
Transportation Engineer, the trip rate based upon those studies may be
used to calculate the transportation SDC. Except that the studies may
come from geographic locations other than those listed in 1.3.3.3.3, the
studies shall meet the standards set in paragraph 1.3.3.3 and shall not be
more than ten years old.
1.3.3.2
Independent Traffic Study
If an applicant does not want to use the trip generation rates in 1.3.2 or to
have the rate determined under paragraph 1.3.3.1, with the prior written
approval of the City Transportation Engineer and by complying with the
standards in paragraph 1.3.3.3 below the applicant may conduct an
independent survey of the proposed development's trip generation rate.
1.3.3.3 Transportation Traffic Study Criteria
To be used to calculate the Transportation SDC for a proposed
development under this paragraph 1.3.3, a transportation study must
meet the following standards unless the City Transportation Engineer
modifies them because of unique circumstances:
1.3.3.3.1 Qualifications of Study
The completed study must be stamped by either a licensed civil
engineer qualified to conduct traffic studies or a licensed
transportation engineer, who has been approved by the City
Transportation Engineer.
1.3.3.3.2
Development Specifications
The study shall be based upon what a typical development like the
one proposed will generate in trips at build-out an when in full use
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Transportation
and production, rather than upon the specific proposed
development.
1.3.3.3.3
Specifications for Number of Sites
A minimum of five local sites with comparable land use shall be
proposed for the study and approved by the City Transportation
Engineer. If, in the sole discretion of the City Transportation
Engineer, there are insufficient local sites, the City Transportation
Engineer will consider alternate sites within the states of Idaho,
Oregon or Washington. The sites shall have land uses that are of
comparable general description to that proposed upon build-out.
1.3.3.3.4 Specifications for Traffic Study Design
The traffic study shall be designed in accordance with the
methodology described in the Institute of Transportation
Engineers Trip Generation Manual, current edition.
1.3.3.3.5
Specifications for Description and Drawings
The request to use the alternate calculation shall include a
detailed description and drawing of the proposed development
site, a description and drawing of each sampling site, a description
of why these sites are representative of the impact likely to be
generated by the proposed development and such other
information as may be required by the City Transportation
Engineer.
1.3.3.3.6 Specifications for Report Format
The completed report of the study shall be in a form approved by
the City Transportation Engineer and upon its completion shall. be
submitted to the City Transportation Engineer for approval.
1.3.3.4 Approval & Outcome of Alternate Calculation Traffic Study
The City Transportation Engineer may approve, approve with conditions,
or reject the trip generation rate calculated in a report prepared under
paragraph 1.3.3 hereof. Upon approval the trip rate for the proposed
development shall be used to calculate the transportation SDC. In the
event that the Alternate Calculation results in a transportation SDC less
than the Standard Calculation, upon approval of the Alternate Calculation
by the City Transportation Engineer, the City shall refund the excess
transportation SDC collected to the applicant or reduce the amount the
applicant agreed to pay. If the approved Alternate Calculation results in a
transportation SDC greater than the Standard Calculation, the applicant
shall pay the underage to the City or modify the agreement to pay to
include the underage. In the event the applicant fails to promptly pay the
underage to the City or to promptly modify the agreement to pay, the City
may suspend the permit for the development until payment is made or the
agreement to pay is modified to include the underage.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Transportation
1.3.4 Nodal Development Adjustments
The General Plan (Metro Plan) recognizes the plan designation of "Nodal
Development Area (Nodes)". The intent of this designation is to establish areas
for mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly development that will reduce reliance on the
automobile. There is evidence that shows that this type of development can
result in reduced automobile .trip generation rates. Furthermore, the Oregon
Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), in OAR 660-012-0060(5) states in part that:
. . . local governments shall give full credit for potential reduction
in vehicle trips for uses located in mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly
centers. . .
and,
. . . local governments shall assume that uses located within a
mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly center, or neighborhood, will
generate 100/0 fewer daily and peak hour trips than are specified in
available published estimates, such as those provided by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation
Manual. . .
Based on this information, the City will apply a ten percent reduction in the street (auto-
related) component of the transportation SDC to approved development types in
designated Nodal Development Areas.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Transportation
FIGURE 2
Transportation System
Streets
level of Service
Border of LOS D & LOS E
per Metro Area Plan
System Value
Impact Measurement
Lane miles used per
trip at adopted LOS
Non-assessable
construction cost
per lane mile of collector &
arterial street system
Formula
Cost of Service (PER TRIP)
Ave. cost per lane mile of system X Ave. lane miles per trip
= Cost per Trip
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Transportation,
FIGURE 3
Transportation System
Off-Street Bicycle Paths
level of Service
System Value
Impact Measurement
Ave. trips per person
Non-assessable
construction cost
per mile of
off-street bicycle path
Miles of off-street bicycle
paths per person
Formula
Cost of Service (Per person)
Miles of bicycle paths
per person X
Cost
per mile
Cost
= per person
Formula
Cost of Service (Per trip)
Cost per person
Trips per person
=
Cost per trip
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Transportation.
TABLE 3
Transportation Trip Rates
See next page for continuation of table and additional information regarding application of these trip rates.
(Definitions of use codes are located in Appendix A)
30 TRUCK TERMINAL ,PER TGSF 0.82 00/0 0.82
-- 90 PARK & RIDE LOT WITH BUS SERVICE PER ACRE 43.75 00/0 43.75
100 INDUSTRIAL PER TGSF 0.95 00/0 O.?~
140 MANUF ACTURING PER TGSF 0.74 0% 0.74
i--- 150 WAREHOUSING , PER TGSF 0.51 OOh 0.51
151 MINI WAREHOUSE ! PER TGSF I 0.26 0% 0.26
170 UTILITIES - ---- ----TPER TGSF 0.49 00/0 O.~
i
'200 OTHER RESIDENTIAL PER DU 0.58 00/0 0.58
210 SINGLE FAMIL Y DWELLING / DUPLEX I PER DU 1.01 0% 1.01
250 SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - MUL TI-UNIT I PER DU 0.19 00/0 0.19
251 SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - DETACHED UNITS I PER DU 0.23 00/0 0.23
252 SENIOR ASSISTED LIVING DEVELOPMENT - MULTI-UNIT ~RDU 0.17 00/0 0.17
310 HOTEL I PER ROOM 0.71 0% 0.71
320 MOTEL i PER ROOM 0.58 00/0 0.58
I
411 CITY PARK i PER ACRE 1.59 00/0 1.59
430 GOLF COURSE I PER ACRE 0.30 0% -030
435 MUL TIPURPOSE RECREATIONAL FACILITY PER ACRE 5.77 00/0 5.77
443 MOVIE THEATRE i PER TGSF 3.80 00/0 3.80
473 CASINONIDEO LOTTERY ESTABLISHMENT i PER TGSF 13.43 0% 13.43
490 RACQUET/HANDBALL SPORTS FACILITIES i PER COURT 3.861 00/0 3.86
493 HEAL TH CLUB I PER TGSF 4.30 00/0 -4~30
494 BOWLING ALLEY : PER TGSF 3.54 00/0 I 3.54
495 RECREATIONAL COMMUNITY CENTER I {75
--- j PER TGSF 1.75 00/0
i I
-- 520 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ! PER TGSF 3.12 00/0 3.1-2
521 PRIVATE SCHOOL (K-12) I PER TGSF 5.50 00/0 I 5.50
522 MIDDLE SCHOOUJUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL ! PER TGSF 1.23 00/0 -ill
~- 530 HIGH SCHOOL i PER TGSF 1.02 00/0 I __~
540 JUNIOR/COMMUNITY COLLEGE i PER TGSF 1.66 -K~=-- 1.66
~- 550 UNIVERSITY/COLLEGE --- -r PER STUDENT*** 0.21 _ 00/0 _~~
560 CHURCH i PER TGSF 0.66 0% 0:66
565A CHILD DA Y CARE CENTER I PER TGSF 6.01 00/0 6.01
565B ADUL T DAY CARE CENTER ! PER TGSF 2.64 00/0 - --2-:-&!
566 CEMETERY i PER ACRE 0.84 0% 0.84
590 LIBRARY i PER TGSF 7.09 00/0 7.09
591 LODGE/FRA TERNAL ORGANIZATION ; PER MEMBER 0.03 00/0 I O._Q!
610 HOSPITAL -rPER TGSF 0.92 00/0 0.92
620 I NURSING HOME : PER TGSF 0.17 00/0 0.17
-- : PER TGSF 5.18
630 I CLINIC 5.18 0%
--
i I
-- SINGLE/MUL TI TENANT OFFICE BLDG : PER TGSF 1.51 00/0 -~
-- 700
720 MEDICAL-DENTAL OFFICE : PER TGSF 3.661 00/0 3.66
731 DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES i PER TGSF 17.09 0% 17.09
733 GOVERNMENT OFFICE COMPLEX lPER TGSF 2.86 00/0 2.86
760 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CENTER : PER TGSF 1.08 =-~t---~-~~
f-- I PER TGSF
770 BUSINESS PARK 1.29 00/0 ---~~
I DISCOUNT STORE i 1
1--- ; PER TGSF 4.13 00/0 4.13
800
812 BUILDING MATERIALS & LUMBER STORE I PER TGSF 4.04 00/0 4.04
814 SPECIAL TY RETAIL CENTER & OTHER : PER TSFGLA 2.59 00/0' 2.59
816 HARDWARE/PAINT STORE : PER TGSF 4.421 00/01 4.42
817 NURSERY (GARDEN CENTER) I PER TGSF 3.80 0% 3.80
~-
NOTE:
TGSF = Thousand Gross Square Feet
TSFGLA = Thousand Square Feet Gross Leasable Area
DU = Dwelling Unit
Percentage based on "minimum studies" criteria whereas the ITE 6th edition trip rate is used in the absence of 3
or more available studies (with pass-by adjustments applied) published in the ITE 5th edition.
For instructional facilities only, otherwise choose use code that best fits the proposed development type.
**
***
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Transportation.
I SHOPPING CENTER < 25,000 Sq.Ft.
I SHOPPING CENTER> 25,000 TO 99,000 Sq~Ft.
SHOPPING CENTER> 100,000 < 199,000 Sq.Ft.
SHOPPING CENTER> 200,000 < 399,999 Sq.Ft.
I SHOPPING CENTER> 400,000' < 599,999 Sq.Ft.
SHOPPING CENTER> 600,000 < 999,999 Sq.Ft.
820G SHOPPING CENTER> 1,000,000 Sq.Ft.
8~-jFACTORY OUTLET CENTER
830 HIGHER TURNOVER REST, INCL T A VERN/BARlCOFFEE ESTBL.
831 LOWER TURNOVER RESTAURANT
834 FAST FOOD RESTAURANT
I PER TSFGLA
, PER TSFGLA
PER TSFGLA
i PER TSFGLA
I PER TSFGLA
PER TSFGLA
PER TSFGLA
PER TGSF
I PER TGSF
I PER TGSF
I PER TGSF
911
912
WALK-IN BANK
I DRIVE-IN BANK
PER TGSF
PER TGSF
---~- --~--
11.03 200/0 8.82
I
7.49 00/0 L-- __~ .49
33.48 450/0 i 18.41
5.19 O%j 5.19
3.38 OOJ'o I 3.38
2.80 =m= ---- 2.80
5.98 0%' 5.98
14.56 55% 6.55
13.43 0% 13.43
5.79 00/01 5.79
4.12 00/0 i 4.12
11.31 350/0 ! 7.35
53.73 650/0 18.81
34.57 600/0 I 13.83
0.21 ' 00/0 0.21
~~
3.80 ~----------------
0% I 3.80
~---~-~
2.87 00/0 I ~___~~_2.87
4.50 00/0 +-________ _~.50
4.99 00/0 I 4.99
-+_______H_ ___
3.83 00/0 i ___~__~ 3.83
7.63 0%' 7.63
10.40 00/0 10.40
0.45 00/0 ! 0.45
10.64 OOJ'o 10.64
13.60 00/0 I 13.6
33.15 00/01 33.15
I 54.77 ~-- 30.12
L- 450/0 I
I
837 . ~QUICK LUBRICATION VEHICLE STOP
840 I AUTO CARE CENTER
841 I NEW CAR SALES
843 AUTOMOBILE PARTS SALES
844 GASOLINE/SERVICE STATION
845 GASOLINE/SERVICE STATION W/CONVENIENCE MKT
847 SELF SERVICE CAR WASH
848 TIRE STORE
PER SERV.POS.
rER TSFGLA
PER TGSF
I PER TGSF
PER VEH.FUEL.POS.
PER VEH.FUEL.POS.
PER STALL
PER TGSF
850 SUPERMARKET PER TGSF
851 CONVENIENCE MARKET (open 24 hours) _ PER TGSF
852 CONVENIENCE MARKET (open -15-16 hours) PER TGSF
860 WHOLESALE FOODS DISTRIBUTOR I PER TGSF
m_________~______~_!
861 I DISCOUNT MEMBERSHIP CLUB I PER TGSF
862 HOME IMPROVEMENT SUPERSTORE -~~-----------1PER TGSF
863 ELECTRONICS SUPERSTORE PER TGSF
864 TOY/CHILDREN'S SUPERSTORE PER TGSF
870 APPAREL STORE iPER TGSF
880 PHARMACY/DRUGSTORE W/OUT DRIVE THRU WINDOW PER TGSF
881 PHARMACY/DRUGSTORE WITH DRIVE THRU WINDOW PER TGSF
890 FURNITURE STORE PER TGSF
895 VIDEO ARCADE PER TGSF
896 ,VIDEO RENTAL STORE PER TGSF
I
NOTE:
TGSF = Thousand Gross Square Feet
TSFGLA = Thousand Square Feet Gross Leasable Area
DU = Dwelling Unit
SERV. POS. = Service Position
VEH. FUEL POS. = Vehicle Fueling Position
**
Percentage based on "minimum studies" criteria whereas the ITE 6th edition trip rate is used in the absence of 3
or more available studies (with pass-by adjustments applied) published in the ITE 5th edition.
For instructional facilities only, otherwise choose use code that best fits the proposed development type.
***
Extraordinary Users: In the event that a development may generate more than 500 weekday peak PM hour trips, the City
Transportation Engineer may require that the Owner(s) enter into an agreement with the City to review the development's
impact at such time the development is in full use in order to provide the final basis of the transportation SDC fee.
City-Assigned Transportation Trip Rates: A transportation trip rate may be assigned by the City Transportation Engineer
should a proposed use not be accurately represented by one of the published transportation use codes.
Event-Based Development Use: A transportation trip rate may be assigned by the City Transportation Engineer should a
proposed use be oriented to intermittent peak events as opposed to typical on-going weekly use. The Owner(s) may also
choose to request an alternative calculation method and submit documentation that meets criteria provided per this
appendix, Section 1.3.3.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Transportation.
Co U) .~
Q) .- U)
.~ ~c
i.~ ~
c..c..c..
J1 ~ E
c: ~ 0
Q) 0 0
g 1;) E
c..oQ)
E 0 U)
8 =2 ~
:J Q)
~~2
..........:J
~~ ~
~.c.c
o~.....
~g~
E c.. E
:J :J ~
c: U) U)
. E ~
Q) Q) U)
6~~
~ U) c:
.~ Q) ~
Q)Q).....
U) -= u)
~~~
~ ~ ~
_=U)
o8~
Q) 06 Q)
~12~
~Q).c
~~~~
~~m~
~2 ~ ~
s-g~~
~ ~ ~ .~
o~~~
:;~~~
~.~ E~
~ ~ ~ ~
~""'U)o
U)=:=
.~ ~ ~ .9
~~ ~ -i
~Q)~1O
~ E ~.~
~~Lt~
~i2~~
:::: Q) ~ C.
~~t:.~
.....O"'CCO
~ Q) ~ ~
o=coo
z E .c .~
TABLE 4
Transportation System Valuation Assumptions
f/)
z
o
i=
Q.
:E
::)
f/)
~
z
o
~
::)
..J
~
:E
w
l-
f/)
>
f/)
z
o
~
I-
~
o
Q.
f/)
~
I-
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Transportation,
TABLE 5
Transportation System Development Charge Analysis
an
.....
CQ
t
~
;
.....
~
ui
~
~
N
o
en
eO
~
~
~
-1
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
i
I
I
I
I
1
1
IN
I~
I~
G'
.....
<0
U)
(j)
>
...J
c:(
Z
c:(
W
C)
0::
c:(
:J:
o
t-
Z
w
:E
Q.
o
...J
W
>
W
c
:E
w
t-
U)
>
U)
Z
o
i=
c:(
t-
o::
o
a.
U)
z
c:(
0::
t-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
~I
EI
.1
cl
~I
il
u1
. II
, fl
Sl
.51
.!!I
OS!
I il
11
il
Q,I
1;;
o
U
l!
~
U
2
~I
~
'0
al5
.
Ol
"
"C
Ie
I-!~
I ~ 8 8.
I ~ECi) .
~I ~~ ~
"I !~~ I
;':E1 E ~ ~ I
= h_~ I
;;, ~€~ I
;1 ~ ~ * _..~;;I
l! ~'X'~ -
1;; :5"'i:'Q1
~ ~~~ 1;;'
ii, ~8.~ ;
;a~' ~~E CD
- H~ il
!I ~I
I
I
I
~I
~I ~~
~I CDI
; !I
il
11 1;; I
_I 8
:, ~
~I ~I
~I U)
CD
Q,
1;;
o
U
E
!I
>01
i,l
1;;
CD
:ii,
CIII
tI)
i
tI)
CII
C
o
c
ii
~I
...
c
CD
c
o
Q,
E
o
U
j
1;;
.2
c
o
i
U
~
ii
~
o
e
Ie
u,,~
c ..
......
E~
CD <0
>00
e~
~E
N
an
Gi
,
~
~:il!l
~ It ..
;::.t
I
,,1It
~~I:~
I
':Ar
Ji...
I
:-il~]
::11::
;,:1:;
...
c
CD
c
o
Q,
E
o
U
~I
1;;
.2
c
JI
~I
I
u,,_
"0
;~
E ..
~~
~oo
~~
~~
~::.:::-:::::
:.:.t.:~*.::
::;~I: :,:
~ :~l~' ~:
C :,i;:: ';
~:::~I)
o
Co)
Q, I"
i i l~l
~ ~ t11:~
U -; ('
~ l!
! U)
~ CD
>0 Q,
U Q,
:ii ~
-;
l! :.
-;; -;;
= 0
o Co)
!I ~""<:
;.::
1
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Transportation
Appendix C1
Local Wastewater System Charge Detail
1.0 Local Wastewater System Methodology
1.1 Local Wastewater SDC Formula
The general methodology used to develop SDCs includes the following four steps:
· Determine value of growth-related capacity
· Define system capacity
· Calculate unit cost of growth-related capacity
· I Develop SDC rate schedule
Each step is discussed below and related information is displayed in Table 6.
1.1.1 Step 1 - Determine Value of Growth-Related Capacity
(In 1998 dollars -- see current values in Table 6)
In Eugene, as in most communities, a portion of the capacity needed to serve
new development will be met through a combination of existing available system
capacity, and additional capacity added by planned system improvements. The
reimbursement fee is intended to recover the costs associated with the growth-
related (or available) capacity in the existing system, and the improvement fee is
based on the costs of capacity-increasing future improvements needed to meet
the demands of growth.
Reimbursement Fee
Calculation of the reimbursement fee begins with a review of utility fixed asset
records to determine the value of the existing local wastewater system. The
system value is based on Replacement Cost New which is a method that
involves assigning asset values on the basis of what it would cost in current
dollars to construct an equivalent set of infrastructure assets subject to current
market conditions, regulatory requirements, and technological advances. The
total value of the existing local wastewater system, including gravity lines (net of
assessments), force mains (or pressure lines), and pump stations was estimated
to be $96.1 million. Approximately $8.9 million of assets were funded from
grants. Like assessments, grant funds are deducted from the system value in
the SDC analysis because general system users did not fund these assets. Net
of grants, the total value of the existing system is approximately $87.2 million.
Because reimbursement fees are intended to recover the value of the system's
unused or available capacity, the total equity in the system is split between
existing customers and new development based on the estimated proportionate
use of capacity. The reimbursement cost basis is equal to the system equity
associated with the capacity available to serve new customers. Approximately
520/0 of the existing system is available to meet the demands of new customers.
Therefore, the value of available (or growth-related) capacity in the existing
system is $45.3 million (net of grants).
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater,
Imorovement Fee
Calculation of the improvement fee begins with a review of the utility's
wastewater master plan to determine which, or what portion of, improvements
are needed to provide capacity for new development. System capacity may be
expanded through the upgrade of existing facilities or the construction of new
facilities. The costs of the capacity-increasing improvements are projected
based on standard cost-estimating techniques. The planned capacity-increasing
improvements are projected to total $8.6 million (in 1998 dollars). These
improvement costs are also net of assessments.
Combined, the reimbursement fee cost basis and the improvement fee cost basis
represent the value of growth-related capacity, which is $53.9 million.
1.1.2 Step 2 - Define System Capacity
As mentioned previously, the total growth-related capacity includes available
capacity in the existing system, and future capacity added by planned system
improvements. Wastewater system capacity is measured in terms of the amount
of flow that can be collected. Flow is measured in millions of gallons per day
(mgd).
The City's Wastewater Master Plan identifies build-out capacity as 48.9 mgd. In
order to reach that capacity, the City must construct an additional $8.6 million of
improvements. Assuming that the unit CO&t of existing and future capacity is the
same (in terms of replacement value), then the existing capacity of the system
can be estimated as 44.5 mgd (in proportion to the system value that has been
constructed.) The available capacity of 23.1 mgd (520/0) is simply the difference
between the estimated existing capacity and existing flows.
The additional capacity added by the improvements is estimated to be 4.4 mgd
(the difference between build-out capacity and existing capacity.) Therefore, the
total growth-related capacity is 27.5 mgd.
1.1.3 Step 3 - Calculate Unit Cost of Growth-Related Capacity
(In 1998 dollars -- see current values in Table 6)
The unit cost of growth-related capacity is determined by dividing the growth-
related costs identified in Step 1, by the growth-related capacity defined in Step
2. The unit cost is stated in terms of dollars per mgd. The total growth-related
costs are $53.9 and the growth-related capacity is 27.5 mgd. Therefore, the unit
cost of growth-related capacity is approximately $2 million per mgd.
1.1.4 Step 4 - Develop SDC Rate Schedule
The SDC rate schedule uses scaling ~easures that are designed with the intent
that customers who are larger, or use infrastructure systems more intensively,
pay the associated costs of capacity required to serve them. Fees for residential
customers are computed by multiplying the unit costs of capacity by the capacity
requirements of a typical user. Residential customers are then charged
differential fees based on the attribute of square feet of living space of the
development. Non-residential customers are assessed based on plumbing
fixture. units and land use type.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Wastewater,
For more detailed information on the local wastewater rate schedule, see
Table 7. For formula and calculation details, see Appendix F.
1.2 Residential Development Rates
An analysis based upon 1997 Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) residential
account data indicated a correlation between water usage and square feet of living area.
The resultant SDC rate structure, applies a charge for every residential dwelling unit (be
it a single-family home, a single-family accessory unit, each space of a mobile home
park, each unit of a duplex, or each unit of an apartment complex) of a base rate plus
the total living area in square feet multiplied by a rate factor. Additions to residential
units that increase the living area will be charged per square foot of increased living area
by the same rate factor. For current rates, see Appendix F.
1.3 Non-Residential Development Rates
The SDC rate structure for non-residential development applies a land use factor to the
number of Plumbing Fixture Units (PFUs) for a development. This factor is intended to
capture different intensities of use of plumbing fixtures by different types of non-
residential customers. The factors were developed based on an analysis of actual water
usage by land use category, correlated to PFUs. The number of PFUs for a particular
development is determined using the PFU tables and calculation methods contained in
the applicable Plumbing Code at the time of permit application.
The local wastewater rate schedule shown in Table 7 reflects rates per PFU for various
development types indicated by an SDC use code. Developments are assigned an SDC
use code based on the HUD/BPR land use code assigned at the time of permit
application. For development types that are not included in the HUD/BPR land use
codes a default PFU flow assignment, based on the average flow per PFU of all records
in the data sample used to determine flow per PFU by land use category, will be used to
calculate the SDC charge. When, due to extraordinary wastewater discharge flow, it has
been determined by the City Engineer that PFU flow assignment as reflected in the rate
table is not a reliable measure of the development's claim on system capacity, the SDC
charge will be based on the development's estimated daily wastewater flow when in full
use or production. The City Engineer may require that the owner(s) enter into an
agreement with the City to review water usage or wastewater discharge at such time that
the development is in full use or production.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Wastewater
TABLE 6
Local Wastewater System Development Charge Analysis
11.
$462,542,390
$17,657,513
$11,056,721
$3,624,317
12. Analysis of Assessable Amount
Size
6-inch
8 to 48-inch
Total Cost
49.0
21.4
27.6
$69,203,570
100.000/0
43.70/0
56.30/0
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Wastewater
TABLE 7
1 F Single-Family / Duplex Housing
1X SFD w/ Other Uses
11 Multi-Family Housin
12 A, B, & C Elderl Housing Attach, Detach, & Group/Retirement Home
13 Residential Hotel
14 Mobile Home Park
15 Hotels, Motels, Lod ing
21 Beverage/Food Mf
24 Wood Products
2X Light Mfg./Printin
3X Manufacturin
4X Transportation & Utilities
41 Fire Station
51 Wholesale Trade
54 Retail Trade / Groce
55 Retail Trade Automotive
59 Retail Trade Other
5A Restaurant - Fast Food
5B Restaurant - Low to Med Turnover
5C Restaurant - Higher Turnover
5D Drinking Establishments
5E Take/Bake & Pick Up/Delive Establishments
5X Retail Trade / Clothing & D Goods
61 Financial Offices / Banks
62 Other Services
63 Rental/Storage Services
64 Automotive & Other Repair Services
65 Medical Services
66 Construction Trade Services
67 Government Services, Office/Business Parks
68 Education / Cultural
69 Churches/Clubs/Or anizations
6A1 Laundry Services (Linen,Uniform)
6A2 Laundry, Self-Service
6A3 Dry Cleaning Service (with or w/out laundry services
6B Car Wash
6X Professional/Real Estatellnsurance
7X Entertainment, Recreation & Sports
82 Veterinarian Service
*The unit cost of capacit for the local wastewater s stem is $2.5145 per allon per day.
The flow per Plumbin Fixture Unit PFU) is stated as allons per da based on the size of development and type of land use.
Land use t pes that do not fit into the above categories will receive a default flow assignment based on the sample average.
The default flow is 47.93 ai/day x $2.5145 = a cost per PFU of $120.52.
$331.91 + (Sq Ft Living Area x $0.0805)
$331.91 + Sq Ft Living Area x $0.0805
$331.91 + (Sq Ft Living Area x $0.0805)
$331.91 + (Sq Ft Living Area x $0.0805)
$331.91 + (Sq Ft Living Area x $0.0805
$331.91 + (Sq Ft Livin Area x $0.0805)
19.05 $47.90
39.87 $100.25
47.93 $120.52
56.62 $142.37
58.65 $147.48
18.22 $45.81
7.75 $19.49
21.37 $53.73
55.46 $139.45
7.83 $19.69
39.91 $100.35
25.44 $63.97
62.47 $157.08
22.45 $56.45
54.98 $138.25
26.49 $66.61
12.35 $31.05
16.99 $42.72
28.51 $71.69
6.49 $16.32
16.17 $40.66
28.75 $72.29
13.69 $34.42
Based on specific use of development
15.66 $39.38
15.70 $39.48
538.96 $1,355.21
299.64 $753.44
36.30 $91.28
264.54 $665.19
67.76 $170.38
88.42 $222.33
24.79 $62.33
A rate per PFU may be assigned by the City Engineer should a proposed use not be represented by one of the published SDC use
codes and for which a default flow assignment is not representative of the proposed flow. In the case of those proposed
developments that are determined to have a potential for exceptional water usage, the City Engineer may require that the Owner(s)
enter into an agreement with the City to review water usage or wastewater discharge at such time the development is in full use or
production as the final basis of the local wastewater SDC. A complete list of wastewater SDC/HUD BPR use codes is provided in
Table 8.
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Wastewater.
FIGURE 4
Local Wastewater System
level of Service
System Value
Impact Measurement
Build-out replacement costs
- Assessable cost
= SCD eligible cost
Daily flow, wastewater discharge
I
Formula
Cost of Service (Per unit of capacity)
System valuation
(Value of existina + Value of olanned) = Unit of capacity
Build-out capacity (mgd)
I
Non-Residential Formula:
Cost of Service
(per flow estimation units [FEU]
Residential Formula:
Cost of Service
(per residential dwelling unit [DU])
(Cost per Gallon per Day I PFU (varies by
development type)) x number of PFUs
= charge for non-residential development
(Cost per Gallon per Day x base flow for RDU)
+ (Cost per square foot x square feet of living area)
= charge for residential development
City of Eugene SDc Methodologies
Wastewater,
System Development Charge
Methodology .
Pre,par~d for
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission .
~_::~,:!;=~~~~
- ;~
EUGENE
partners In wastewater management
Adopted'by City of Eugene, Effective June'12, 2006
Contents
System Pevelopment Charge Methodology.....~..................................................................... 4
Introduction.... ........... ......................... ...... .... .... ....... ..... .... .... ..... ..... .... ...... ..... ... ...... .......... 4
System Development Charge Methodology ................................................................5
Overview..... ..". ........ .... ... ..... .... ..... ....... ...... ... ....... ....... ..... .".. ................... ..~... ... ........ 5
Methodology Element One: Determine Growth Capacity Needs ............... 7
Step One -Capacity Parameters..,...........................~................................... 8
Step Two - Growth Capacity Requir~ments ............................................. 9
Methodology Element Two: Develop Cost Basis .........................................10
.' . Step One" -."System Valuation .................................................................... 10
Step Two - Existing System Allocation................................................... 10
Step llu'ee - Project Cost Allocation ........................................................ 12
Step Four - Adjustments .........................~.................................................. 15
Methodology Element Three: Develop SDC Schedule ................................ 16
Methodology Element Four: Calculate Revenue Offsets and, Credits....... 16
Past Payments ... .... ... .... ..... ......... ....... ................... ..... ... ..... ........... ............... 17
Future Payments............. ...................... .............. ... ..... .... ................... .... ..... 17
Methodology Element Five: Periodic modification of existing sytem and.
. fut:u.re project values ................................................... ~ . . . . .. . . .... . . ... 21
Ap'pendixes
A Sys'em Component Definitions
B Capacity Parameter Allocation
C Growth Capacity Allocation Documentation
D User Capacity Requirements
E GO Bond Credit Calculation
Tables
1 Summary of Key Methodological Requirements .................................................................... 4
2 Example Calculation for Single (Average Flow) Capacity Parameter................................. 6
3 Summary of Facility Process Component Allocation to System Capacity Parameters .... 9
4. Existing System Available Cap~city. by Parameter ............................................................... 11
5 Summary of Prqject Type Allocation Criteria....................................................................... 14
6 Growth Allocation Percentages by Project Type ..................................................................15
B-1 Design Criteria Basis For Unit Processe~ Driven By Peak Flow...................................... B 22
C-l Capacity Summary of MWMC Liquids Facilities................................................~~............ C 27
C-2 Projected 2025 Peak Flow Breakdown .................................................................................C 29
C-3 Capacity Summary of MWMC Biosolids Facilities (annual average dry tons per
year) ........... .... .............. ......... ......... ........... ..."..................... ...... .......~.. ......... .... ............... ............ C 31
E-1 GO Bond Credit per $1,000 Assessed Value By Annexation Year .................................. E 34
Figures
1 Overview of ~C SDC Metl)odology......~........................................................................2
2 Existing System Allocation....................................................................... ~............. ................. 3
3 Project Cost Allocation.... ........ ........ ....... .......... ... .......... .......... ...... ....... .............. ..... ............... 9
4 SOC Schedule Development .......................~....................................................................... 12
System Development Charge Methodology
Introduction
This_document serves as the system development charge (SDC) methodology for the
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission' (MWMC) Regional Wastewater
System. The MWMC is the regional wastewater treatment agency for the Eugene-
Springfield metropolitan area. System development charges may be collected from ,all
development that connects to the Regional Wastewater System, including development that
changes the use of existing development, whe!l the ch~ge of use results in a greater impact
on the system.
The methodology contained in thiS document was developed in accordance with Oregon
SDC legislation (ORS 223.297-22'3.314), and with the guidance of a Citizen Advisory
Committee (CAC) appointed by MWMC. Table 1 provides a comparison of key
methodological requirements from the Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) to elements of the
MWMC methodology.
TABLE 1
Summary of Key Methodological Requirements
Oregon Law Requirement
Reimbursement Fee
MWMC Methodology
Determine that ~xisting capacity exists
Methodology based on, when applicable:
(a) Rate-making principles employed to finance
publicly-owned capital improvements
(b) Prior contributions by existing users
(c) Gift or ,grants
(d) Value of unused capacity or cost of existing
facilities
(e) Other relevant factors
Promote objective of future system users
contributing no more than an equitable share of
existing system costs
. Explicitly calculates the portion of. existing capacity available to
new users based on rated design capacities.
Methodology includes:
(a) Consideration of capital financing .costs
(b) Adjustment for grant-funded facilities
(c) Valuation based on appreciated cost (i.e., adjusted for
inflation)
(d) Determination of unused capacity
(1) Includes a credit against SDCs for properties subject to
past general obligation bond debt service ch~rges through
property tax payments.
(2) Provides guidance to calculate a credit against SDCs for
'future estimated user charge payments-used to fund capital
inc~uded on the SDC project list.
Improvement Fee
Methodology demonstrates consideration of
projected costs of capital improvements identified
in an adopted plan or list
Provides a structured process for allocation of capital project
costs that is to be applied to an, adopted project list.
TABLE 1
Summary ot'Key Methodological Requirements
Oregon Law Requirement
Methodology demonstrates consideration of the
need for increased capacity in the system to meet .
future users' demands
, Combined Fee
Demonstrate that charge is not based on
providing the same capacity
MWMC Methodology
Allocates future improvement costs to growth in proportion to
capacity requirements
Determines total growth capacity, requirements and the portion
of capa'city to be met through. existing system available
capaCitY and Mure capacity expansion. Calculates a weighted
average cost of capacity.
System Development Charge Methodology
.Overview
The SDC methodology for MWMC i$ based on a combined reimbursement and
improvement structure, as shown in Figure 1. The methodology consists of the followirig
elements: '
. Determine capacity needs
. Develop cost basis
. Develop SDC schedule
. Calculate revenue offsets and credits
FIGURE 1-oVERVIEW OF MWMC SDC METHODOLOGY
New facilities
r_;~B~~~;;;Y:' x,: y~"",~ ~:' ,~~~ ,',,~<^ ~/.'(~:^,;,,'~v, ";~<,~(,, >>~J:+' ',>:~tllII_I~>>~~i';W~~~~v ,'~~: N>/.~;,,~~
Jt~ti' :;;,>~Pfr"~ "~ x<>, '" , ' A /:> < D) ..), f I. ~ '1 f ~ 1 ~" ~1 I$: }. ~'\ l ~ ~> ~ ....{ "'~~4t~ ~,,~ '%' )w>>, ~" $ " ;K~'l.'~"'>.
~Yfr*~%M~;@~tI}I~~~(:\~:{~;; ~,' ,~t~:.:=;w; , ,'^'< ',:,-C .~~~,~;, ~^~ ~,"'5,' :,1;, , ':, . ~ " ;':N' ^ '~'d~':0Mhrlr*,,;, ii;ffit@~}.,~~itd -" 'v :~:v v ,'" ,:', (:~i:~
L j . :
Existing . . , '.~
Capdy ($) n... ............;.. ..~~.~J~L.... ........ ....... J
~ . GfOYJIh units (Avg. Flow, Peak Flow, BOD, TSS) ~
......... ... ... ................. ... ........ .... ........ ..... ...... ..... ......... .............
The reimbursement fee is based on the valu~ of available capacity in the system that will
serve growth. The improvement fee is based on future facility costs associated with
providing growth' s ~dditional capacity needs (above what is already available in the
system). Together, the reimbursement and improvement fees recover costs equal to
growth's capacity needs.
Existing system available capacity and future improvement costs needed to expand capacity
for growth are distributed to capacity parameters (average flow, peak flow, biochemical
oxygen demand [BOD], and total suspended solids [TSS]), and spread over the total growth
wiits projected for the p.eriod to determine weighted average reimbursement and
improvement unit costs. The SDCs for individual developments are then determined by
applying the unit costs (by fee element and capacity par~eter) to the individual
development estimated capacity requirements, and summing the results. The total SDC for
each development is then reduced by any applicable credits for past and future capital
.
payments.
. Table 2 provides an example calculation for a single capacity parameter. The numbers
included in the table are'intended to illustrate the methodology only (when applied to the
single capacity parameter of average flow); the numbers do not represent MWMC planning
,criteria or cost data. Furthermore,' the totalSDC would include similar calculations for other
capacity parameters (i.e., peak flow, BOD, and TSS). In the example provided, total system
capacity needs at the end of the planning period are 60 million gallons per day (mgd).
Existing users are estimated to require 45 mgd (90 percent) of existing capacity, leaving
5 mgd (10 percent) available for growth. However, growth's total needs are 15 mgd,
meaning 'that additional investment will be required to expand system capacity by 10 mgd.
TABLE 2
Example Calculation for Single (Average Flow) Capacity Parameter*
'60
45
15
E~isting Future
Syste-m Expansion
50 10
----
45 0
5 10
10% 1000/0
$50,000~000 $12,000,000
$5,000,000 $12,000,000
$333,333 $800,000
0.00035 0.00035
$116.67 $280.00
Element
Total
Determine Capacity Needs
Systemwide Capacity (mgd)
Existing Users (mgd)
Growth (mgd)
Deterl11ine Cost Basis Needs
Systemwide Cost
Growth C~st
Determine SDC Schedule
Weighted Average Unit Cost ($/mgd)
User Capacity Requirement (mgd)
Total SDC
$17,000,000
$1,133,333
0.00035
$396.67
t
TABLE 2
Example Calculation for Single (Average Flow) Capacity Parameter*
Element
*Example only; not MWMC specific "
T atal
Existing
System
Future
, Expansion
The example reimb~sement fee cost basis includes 10 percent ($5 million) of existing
. system value, associated with providing 5 mgd of capacity. The improvement fee cost basis
includes the costs to expand the facilities by 10 mgd, in this case estimated to be $12 million.
The total costs allocated to growth are equal to the total capacity required by growth (5 mg~
existing +10 mgd expansion) = 15 mgdtotal. .
At this point the SDC schedule can be developed. First, the weighted average unit costs are
developed. This is accomplished by dividing the r~imburs~ment fee and improvement fee
cost bases by the total growthc~pacity units (15 mgd in this case). By'dividing the individual
fee elements by the total growth units, th~ combined fee is based on a weighted average cost
per unit., This is demonstrated in Table 2 where the individual unit costs are $333,000 per
mgd ($5 million/IS mgd) and, $800,000 per,mgd ($12 million/IS mgd), re$pectively, for
reimbtirsementand improvement elements; and $1.1 million per mgd ($17 million/IS mgd)
overall. The SDC for a user who requires 350 gallons per day (.000350 mgd) would equal '
$116.67 reimbursement ($333,333 X 0.000350) + $280 improvement ($800,000 X 0.00035) for a
total of $396.67. The same fee would result from using the total c<?st per unit ($1.13 per
gall9nper day) multiplied by the 350-gallon-per;..day user requirements.
As the'example de'monstrates, the methodology meets the key requirements of the law, as
identified in Table 1:
. Determines the amount of available capacity that exists and allocates costs to growth
accordingly.
. Allocates improvement costs to growth in proportion to future capacity needs.
. Does not recover the costs of the same capacity through the reimbursement and
iffiprovement fees. Recovers cost associated with e~ting capacity through the
reimbursement fee, and recovers costs associated with new capacity through the ,
improvement fee. The charges to individual developments ,are based on a weighted
average cost of cal?acity.
Each element of the. methodology is discussed in more detail below.
Methodology Element One: Determine Growth Capacity Needs
The Oregon SDC law requires explicit analysis, of capacity required to serve growth - and
demonstration of how those capacity needs will be met through existing and future
facilities. Therefore, it is necessary to first determine the appropriate capacity parameter(s),
and growth's capacity requirements.
Step One · CapacityParamete'rs
The appropriate capacity measure relates to the sizing criteria of the wastewater system, and
may, to improve equity, require consideration of multiple paranieters to assess the impact 'of
the utility's various types of users. As wastewater systems must be sized to meet all of their
customers' demands, flows and strength loadings are important sizing criteria. MWMC
provides service to a diverse customer base,so consideration of varying flow and load
requirements of different customer types is one facet that ensures the equity of the SDCs.
The four capacity m~~sures,or,parameters used in the methodology are:
. Average flow
. Peak flow
. BOD
. TSS
These parameters are defined as follows:
. Average Flow- The average daily flow in the dry season as defined in the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDFS) permit. Because the NPDFS permit
requires the Eugene-Springfield Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) to meet permit
discharge limits on a monthly basis, the average flow is presented in terms of dry season
maximum month values when discussing "capaqty." The dry season maximum month
flow includes base flow (customer flow) and the baseline or dry season infiltration and
inflow (III).
. Peak Flow - The peak hour flow in the wet season associated with ,the 5-year, 24-hour
storm event. Peak flow includes ~yerage flow and the additional increment of wet
weather III. .
. Biochemical Oxygen Demand - The quantity of oxygen used in the biochemical
oxidation of organic matter in a specified time and at a specified temperature. BOD is ~
,~easurement of wastewater strength.
'. Total Suspended S,olids - Solids in the wastewater that ar~ removable 'by laboratory
filtering and approximate the quantity of solids that are' available to be removed from
the wastewater.through sedimentation. TSS is a measurement of wastewater strength.
Table 3 provides the allocations of. existing and future facility process components to the
system capacity parameters: average flow, peak flow, BOD, and TSS. A 'description of
process components is provided in Appendix A. The rationale for the allocation percentages
is provided in Appendix B. These allocations are used to determine the pr~jected costs of
capacity to be used by ,new development that establish the reimbursement fee and
improvement fee cost bases. The underlying approach is to evaluate the following criteria
for each facility process component: '
. Functional performance'
. Design basis
The functional performance criterion considers the actual' purpose of the facility on a daily
basis. Is the purpose of the facility to remove BOD or TSS from the wastewater? Or is the
purpose of the facility to simply pass the flow (average an~1 or peak) and remove some
other parameter not represented by BOD or 1SS such as screenings, grit, or pathogens?
These questions are answered by the functional performance component. The design basis
co~~ders what system capacity parameter or combination of parameters drives the sizing of
the facility and, therefore; the constructed cost. The allocation basis for each,facility
, component presented in. Table 3 combines both the functional performance and design basis
considerations. In addition. to these system parameters, because there can be proj-ec:;ts'that
provide overall support-for the wastewater system, a separate catego~ of lIindirect"
, support facilities is used to provide for reallocation of these support-type, costs across all of
the system capacity parameters. '
TABLE 3
Summary of Facility Process Component Allocation to System Capacity Parameters
System Capacity 'Parameter
Average Peak
Facility Process Component Flow Flow BOD TSS Indirect Total
Collection system pipeline % ~ 1
Collection system pump stations % ~ 1
Preliminary treatment % ~. 1
Primary treatment % % % '1
Secon~ary treatment % % % 1
Disinfection/outfall % ~ l' ,
Biosolids (same for all three subcomponents) % % - 1
Tertiary fjlters % % % 1
Reuse ,facilities 1 1
Odor control % % 1
Peak flow management 1 1
Support facilities (Indirects) 1 1
Step Two · ,Growth Capacity Requirements
In developing SDCs, costs related..to growth (see 'Cost Basis' below) ,are spread over
, growth's total ,capacity requirements over the study period to determine the overall cost per
unit of growth by capacity measure. The, study period is defiited asa 20-year period,
consistent with facility planning requirements. The Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ) stipulates that entities that own and operate wastewater facilities assume a 20-year
pla.mUng horizon when developing facility plans (see DEQ Guidance for Development of
Wastewater Facilities Plans, 20(0).
To determine the capacity required by growth, the capacity required by exi~ting users is
subtracted from the capac;ity projected in the facility plan to be required at the end of the
planning period. For peak flow estimates, existing users' current capacity requirements are
adjusted for anticipated III reductions (see Guidelines for the Preparation of Facilities PlanS
and Environmental Reports for Community Wastewater Projects, 1999).
Methodology Element Two: Develop Cost Basis
The cost basis represents the total costs that the SDCs are intended to recover. .The following
methodological issues . were addressed in developing the reimbursement and improvement
fee cost bases:
. Existing System Valuation (Reimbursement Fee) -- The method for valuing existing
facilities with capacity to serve growth.
--..
. Existing System Allocation (Reimbursement Fee) - The method for allocating existing
system 'facility value to growth.
. Pro,ject <;ost Valuation (Improvement Fee) The method for valuing future projects.
. Project Cost Allocation (Improvement Fee) - The method for all~ating future projects
to growth.
. Adjustments - Deductions or additions to the cost basis to recognize past or future
capital funding methods:
Each issue is discussed below.
Step One · Existing System Valuation
Calculation of the reimbursement fee begins with a review of MWMC's fixed asset records
to determine the value of the existing system. The system is valued based on the inflation
adjusted original cost approach. Under this approach, the original cost of existing system
assets is adjusted by the Engineering News-Record national20-city average Construction Cost
Index from the time of construction to estimate current values. The inflation adjusted cost
approach recogt}izes appreciation in the system since assets were constructed and assumes
that the wastewater system is maintained in perpetuity.
Step Two · Existing System Allocation
The existing system allocation methodology, for use in determining the reimbursem~nt fee
cost basis, is a three-step allocation process 1 comprised of the following steps, as illustrated
in Figure 2:
R-l. Allocate existing facility costs to facility process components (e.g., primary treatment,
secondary treatment)~
R-2. Allocate costs by component to system capacity parameters (e.g., average flow, peak
flow).
R-3. Allocate costs to growth based on estimated C}vailable capacity by service parameter.
The allocation of existing facility costs to facility process components is fairly straight-
forward, as most projects relate directly to an individual co~po~ent (e.g., secondary
clarifiers are ,a part of secondary treatment), or support the entire treatment system (e.g.,
control systems). Existing facility costs (valued in terms of inflation-adjusted costs) by
1. The numbering of the steps for the existing system allocation process is preceded by an -R- to identify these steps as relating
to the Reimbursement Fee calculation. Later processes relating to the Improvement Fee calculation are indicated by an -I" in.
the number sequence.
process component are then allocated to capacity parameters based on the- allocation
fractions in Table 3. '
The final step in the allocation process is to multiply the costs by capacity parameter by the
percent of capacity available by parameter. To determine the available capacity for a
parameter, the amount of capacity that is currently being used (or required for existing
users) is subtracted from the current rated capacity. H the current capacity requirement ~
equal to or greater than the existing capacity, then there is no available capacity, and none of
the costs related to. that paramete'r ,is included in the reimbursement fee ,cost basis. Table 4
shows existing system available capacity by parameter based on system planning criteria. -
The documentation for th~se figures is provided in Appendix C.
FIGURE 2-EXISTING SYSTEM AlLOCATION
NO
.' .... .".. 'd'" . _ _. . . _. _ . " ,... _, .....-............--....
. ~ - .. .., . . . . - ... - . ."... ~ : :: .....
. .. . .,." d' _. ., .. .. __.
.... , .,. - .. ..... ... .. .q' -, -. ......
._ 0' . .... _.,. ... ...... ... .
i_I
TABLE 4
. Existing System Available Capacity by Parameter
Average Flow Peak Flow BOD TSS
Variable (mgd) (mgd) (Ibs/day) (Ibs/day)
Existing capacity 49.0 175 66,000 71,600
Current loading (current capacity required) 43.8 264 54,800 64,700
Available capacity (value) . 5.2 None 11 ,200 6,900
Available capacity (0/0) 10.5% 0% 170/0 9.60/0
Source: 2004 'Facilities. Plan
Step Three -- Project Valuation
Calculation of the improvement fee begins with a review of MWl\1C's adopted 20- Year
Project List to determine the value of future 'projects. Future projects are valued based on the
inflati<?nadjusted original cost estmate approach. Under this approach, the original
estimated cost of future projects is adjusted by the Engineering News-Record national2Ckity-
averageConstructi<?n Cost Index from the time of the original,es~te to estimate CWTent
values. The inflation adjusted original cost estimate approach recognizes inflation since the
original estimate.
Step Four - ProJect Cost Allocation
The project cost allocation methodology, for use in determining the improvement fee cost
basis, is a four-step allocation pro~ess consisting of the following steps:
1-1. Allocate project costs to facility process components (e.g., primary treatment, secondary
trea tInent).
1-2. Allocate costs by components to system capacity parameters (e.g., average flow, peak
'flow).
. 1-3. Allocate project costs to type (capacity improv'ement,performance upgrade, or
rehabilitation). '
1-4. Allocate costs to user ty,pe (existing customers'orprojecte~ growth).
The project cost allocation methodology provides an equitable basis for determining th~
projects or porti~1lS OfPIOjects that are related to growth capad;tyneeds and are, thereby,
included in the improvement fee portion of the SOC. calcUlation. The methodology is not
tied to a specific list of ,projects'.,intended to be fwrtded by SDCs (2Il.;.year project list), but is
intended to provide a consistentfram.~work for allocation of future projects to growth.
Each step of the methodology is described below. The gene~al allocation process is also
presented graphically in Figure 3.
.
STEPI-l .. ~
, '
/"( .. ;, yl i ~ ::" ~ ~ ") j ~ ~.. '^ ~ 0.: ; ~ ~ ~... "~.. ~
.
Allocation Basis
O/o,'ofToW'l1Iwe
Lea'
fJ~Q
STEPI-2 .. ~
STEPI-3 .. ~
STEPI-4 .. ~
FIGURE3-PROJECT COST ALLCOATION
The allocation of future projects to facility process components is generally fairly
straightforward, as most proJeots relate directly to an individual component or support the
entire treatment system. The refinement of the facility component allocation process for
M~C relates'to recognition of peak flow management costs. While it is likely that future
project lists will include projects entirely.related to peak flow management, it is also likely
that portions of projects relating to ,various aspects of the treatment process (e.g., secondary
~eatment) will also playa role in future peak flow,Ill.a!lagement.
The following question needs to be answered when allocating project costs' to facility
components: "Which specific facility component does the project expand or. improve?" If the
project expands or improves more than one facility component, then project costs should be
apportioned rel~ti.ve to the expansion or improvement of each applicable component.
The allocation fractions from Table 3 are used to distribute costs by facility compon~nt ,to
capacity parameter, as was done for the existing system cost allocations. The basis for these
allocations is described in Appendix B.
Step 1-3 of the project cost allocation methodology is to allocate costs to project types. The.
three project types, which are intended to be'representative of the complete project list, are:
1. Capacity - Projects or portions of projects that are related to increasing liquids andf or
biosolids conveyance, treatment, and disposition capacity beyond existing design
standards (i.e., projects that provide the next capacity increment within the planning
period).
2. Performance. ImprQvements - Proj"ects that increase system capacity by increasing the
level of performance provided by facilities. Unlike I capacity' projects that relate only to
the next increment of capacity, performance upgrades are generally sized based on. total
projected capacity needs at the end of the planning'period (existing and future).
3. Rehabilitation -'Projects designed to remedy an existing system deficiency and do not.
enh~ce system capacity.
Capacity and performance upgrade projects can be new facilities, orupgradef expansion of
existing facilities. Rehabilitati~n projects are the replacement of outdated or worn out
eqmp.ment or faciliti~s. .
The majority of the projects' will typically fall completely into one project type. However,
some' projects may be split between capacity and 'performance types. The general criteria for,
allocating projects to the above categories are sho.wn in Table 5. 'These criteria should be
applied in the development of specific projects for iI1.clusion in the appropriate planning'
document 'o~ project list and should be considered and evaluated as part of the process of
adoption of such a plan or project list. '
TABLE 5
Summary of Project Type Allocation Criteria
Perfonnance Improvements
Potential Criteria
Adds new facilities/expands existing facilities
-Provides new liquids treatment or biosolids capacity beyond existing
system design standard or beyond the current pennitted capacity
Adds new fa~ilitieslimproves existing facilities
Provides capacity/enhanced capability sized f~r total Mure capacity ,
ne~ds
Driven by new regulatory requirement
Driven by increase in community perfonnance standard
T echnologieal efficiencies
Replaces existing facility or portion of facility
Does not serve growth either through existing available or new
capacity
Preserves existing facil"ity performance/capacity
Project Type
Capacity
Rehabilitation
Once project costs have been allocated to system component and project type categories,
and the ~osts have been distributed to the system capacity parameters, the final step in the
project cost allocation process is to assign costs to user types. For the purposes of the SDC
methodology, there are two user types: 1) existing customers, and 2) new customers or
. growth. Costs that are allocated to growth are incorporated into the SDC improvement fee
calculation. Costs allocated to existing customers must be paid' through some. other funding
sources (e.g., existing reserves or future user rates).
As indicated in Figure 3, the allocation of project costs to growth is a function, of the type of
project and a detailed capacity analysis that identifies growth's share of; 1) planned capacity
expansion, and 2) total future load. '
Costs by capacity parameter are allocated to growth as follows:
Capacity Projects: Growth's share 'f capacity expansion (%) X project cost ($)
Performance Upgrades: Growth's share of total future System capacity (%) X project cost ($)
Rehabilitation Projects: Allocation to growth = 0%
Where:
1. Growth's share of capacity e'Wansion = Projected ,growth capacity requirement (not met
by existing available capacity) divided by additional capacity to be 'added to the system
by planned improvements.
, 2. Growth's share of total future system capacity = Projected growth capacity requirement
(total) divided by total future system capacity requiremeJ'lt.
Table 6 summariZes the growth allocation p~rcentages by project type.. The documentation
for these figures is provided in Appendix C.
TABLE 6
Growth Allocation Percentages by Project Type
Project Type
Capacity (growth's share of capacity
expansion)
Perfonnance (growths share of total
future system capacity)
Rehabilitation
Source: 2004 F acUities Plan
Average Flow
100%
Peak .Flow .
BOD
TSS
29.4% .
1000/0
100%'
26.10/0
10.8%
25.90/0
26.'1 %
00/0
0%
0%
0%
Step Four · Adjustments
The methodology includes the following adjustments to the reimbursement and '
improvement fee cost bases:
. Gifts or grants from federal or state government or privatepe~sons. Existing (and if.
applicable in the future, planned) ass~t costs are reduced by the percent of the asset that '
is funded by grants. .
. Ratemaking principles employed to finance .t~e capital impro;vements. Projected
capital financing cost (i.e., interest expense) is added to the cost basis, based on the
recqmmended project phasing an4 the need to borrow funds.
Methodology' Element Three: Develop SDC Schedule
Unit costs for each capacity parameter are determined by dividing the adjusted cost basis by
the projected growth capacity requirements. The unit costs are then multiplied by the
estimated capacity requirements of different types of users, as determined from industry
reference data. Figure 4 illustrates this. process. -
FIGURE 4-SDC SCHEDULE DEVELOPMENT
.
ysing industry reference data f()rch~ging SDCs -is consistent with the approach MWMC :
has previously used to charge SDCs. This type of approach.uses flow and strength
assumptions that are consistent with the system capacity parameters described previously.
Unit Costs
x
x
x
x
Capacity
Requirement /
SDC/Unit
For e'.'ample, average flow is defined as dry season maximum month flow. This capacity
measure is used in estimating user capacity requirements. The peak-to-average flow ratio
reflects the system planning assumptions. The flow and strength assumptions for various
land uses (development types) are presented in Appendix D..If information for a particular
development is not found in AppencUx D, the SDC will be formulated using average data of-
like or similar development as determined by the City Engineer. -
Methodology Element Four: Calculate Revenue Offsets and Credits
To comply with Oregon SDC law, the SDC methodology must ensure that future system users
contribute no more than an II equitable share" of the capital costs of existing' facilities. Before
real property ,is developed, it may have been subject to taxes that supported capital funding of
some of the Regional Wastewater System. Mer a development connects to the system, it will
pay rates and, possibly taxes as. well, that may also support some level of capital funding. The
SDC methodology, therefore considers past and future payments to be made' by new
developments, which'may partially fund the same facilities for which the:SDCs were paid.
Past Payments
A portion of MWMC's existing facility costs were funded through general obligation (GO)
bonds. The debt,service on the bonds was retired through property taxes. Undeveloped land
in the cities of Eugene and Springfield was subject to property taXes, and therefore a GO
bond credit is included in the methodology. The credit is equal to the present value of past
.payments on bond principal, expressed in dollars per $1,000 of assessed valuation. The
credit shall accrue from the year of annexation, and be based upon the assessed value of the
reai property at the time of applica~on for connection to the system.
Appendix E shows the calculation of the GO bond credit.
Future Payments
The methodology considers whether growth will provide a net contribution through
wastewater user fee rates to the cost of capital improvements that benefit existing
customers. If such a contribution is indicated, a credit is provided. The credit is based on a
p~esent-worth analysis, structured as follows:
.. 1. Annual capital costs (adjusted for inflation) associated with 'existing customers' share of
the project list costs (net of rehabilitation'costs) are estimated based on the
recommended phasing schedule.
2. The annual capital expenditures are reduced by revenues from reserves and
reimbursement fees to estimate required debt funding
3. Debt services costs are estimated f~r repayment of borrowed funds
4. Future billing units (average flow and pounds of BOD and TSS) are" estimated for the
planning period based on system planning criteria
5. The annual user rate supported debt service per billing unit is determined for the life of
the debt.
6. The present value of the future stream of rate payments is determined for each year of
the planning period.
, A credit amount per unit of capacity is determined based on the year of development ~d
the projected length of future payments. .
At the time of adoption of the project list upon which SDCsare to be based, or any periodic
modification to such list, an estimate of project financing costs will be made, based upon the
assumed timing of projects and other available funding sources. The proportion of this debt
financing to be funded by use.r rates attributable to users estimated to connect in each year is
calculated, and the net present value for each year of the planning period of this series of
cash flows is applied as a credit against the improvement SDC generat~d' by the
methodology. '
Methodology Element Five: Periodic modification of existing sytem and future
project values '
The value of existing available capacity and future available capacity maybe adjusted from
time to time as stated in Methodology Element Two: Step One' and Step Three.
~ Append'ixes
APPENDIX A
System ComponentD,efinitions
The below facility process. components were selected because they represent existing
distinct processes/ components, as well as new processes/components anticipated in the
future (e.g., tertiary filters and effluent reuse). These facility components also relate
differently to system capacitY parameters (discussed in Methodology Element Two), so the
initial allocation of project costs to facility components facilitates the n~xt step of allocating
costs to capacity parameters, and ultimately to user type. As regulatory requirements
change in the ~ture, MWMC should review the facility component categories, and update
as appropriate.
Collection System Pipeline - The pipelines owned and operated by MWMC that collect
sewage from individual customers and deliver it to the treatment plant.
.Collection System Pump Stations - MWMC pump stations that impart energy into the
wastewater so that it flows through the collection system pipes or is lifted to a higher
elevation. The influent screw pumps at the E~gene/Springfield Water Pollution Control
Facility (WPCF) are included in this c9mponent.
Preliminary Treatment-Screenings and grit removal facilities. Preliminary treatment
facilities are sometimes referred to as headworks facilities because they are located at the
front or head end of treatment plants.
Primary Treatment - The sedimentation process intended to remove suspended solids from
the wastewater. This component includes the primary sediffientation settling tanks and
associated pumping systems for material that is removed from the top (scum/skimmings)
and bottom (primary sludge) of the settling tanks.
Secondary Treatment - A biological process to remove the soluble and :colloidal organic
matter that remains after primary treatment. Facilities typically include aeration basins and
the associated blowers that provide air to the basins, and secondary clarification settling
tanks and the associated pumping facilities that transport the settled biological sludge to
subsequent biosolids processing facilities.
Disinfection/OutfaIl- Process elements at the downstream end of the treatment process.
Disinfection kills or inactivates remaining pathogens contained in the treated wastewater,
and the outfall co~veys 'the treated wastewater to the Willamette River where it can be
distributed throu~h a diffuser in an environmentally sound manner.
Biosolids - Management and disposal of the organic and inorganic suspended solids that
have been removed from the wastewater through the treatment" processes. This facility
component is divided into three subcomponents because of differences in available and
future required capacity. The three subcomponents are as follows:
. General- The general subcomponent consists of biosolids thickening. and anaerobic
digestion at the WPCF; the biosolids pump station/force main syste~.that conveys
.
digested biosolids from the WPCF to the Biosolids Mariagement Facility (BMF); and
facultative sludge, storage lago.ons and drying beds at the.remote BMF. The majority of
the infrastructure, associated with this II General" subcomponent were constructed in the
1980s and early 19908.
. Dewatering - MWMC-installed mechanical biosolids dewatering at the remote BMF for
the purpose of removing water from the biosolids so that the remaining biosolids
,volume is redu~ed.This'dewatering facility was designed to acco1l1:I1lodat~ 7,000 dry
tons of biosolids on an annual average basis.
. Biocycle Farm- MWMC is in the process of expanding the capability of the biosolids
'management program by constructing a poplar plantation or biocycle farm (BF) that can
accept non-dewater~d biosolids, therefore J.imiting dependence on the cooperative farms
land application program that typically uses dewatered biosolids.
Tertiary Filters ~Filters to remove 'TSSand to a lesser degree BOD/ ammonia from the
secondary effl~ent.
Reuse Facilities - These facilities enable reuse of effluent and include UV disinfection;
pumping of filtered, disinfected effluent; pipelin~s to convey the \yater to. the end use site;
and irrigation distribution/ application systems.
Odor Co,ntrol- Facilities that collect and treat odorous air generated by the .trea~ent of
wastewater and biosolids.
Peak Flow Management - A new facility component that functions to convey, treat, and
discharge wet season peak flow (based on the 5-year, 24-hour rainfall event). Facilities must
be provided so that the peak flow can reach and pass through the WPCF without "
overtopping structures so that untreated/.partially treated sewage does not spill onto the
groundandl or into waterways. .
Support Facilities (Indirects) - These facilities serve MWMC's overall mission as opposed
to one specific facility component. Examples include control systems, civil infrastructure
such as roads within the WPCF site, and equipment storage facilities.
A-21
.
. APPENDIX B
Capacity Parameter Allocation Basis
System Capacity. Parameters ,are based on permitting requirements. Facility process
components (defined in Appendix A) are allocated to' each of the system capacity
parameters, as described below.
CollecUon System Pipelines
This category consists of major gravity sewer pipelines and force mains (pressure ~es) that
convey flow for the regional wastewater collection systeIlL Since the primary function af the
pipelines is to convey flow, the allocation is assigned to either average ~r peak flow and
none to wastewater strengt!l parameters (i.e., BOD and TSS). The majority of the time the
conveyance system is carrying average flows. However, the limiting design criteria when
sizing pipelines is based on peak flows.
An assessment of the wet season III, which is the key driver in determining the peak flows,
can be 'used as a guide in determining the averagefpeak allocation bre*down.Table B-1 ,
presents the wet season III as a percentage of total peak flow for existing capacity, cUrrent
loading, and future required capacity.
TABLE B-1
Design Criteria Basis For Unit Pr~sses Driven By Peak Flow
Existing capacity
Current loading (current
capacity required)
Projected 2025 loading
(future capacity required)
Notes:
a) Net reduction in. total III occurs between now and 2025 as.a result of III reduction efforts by th.e cities.
Average Wet Weather 111 as a
Flow Wet Weather III Total Peak Flow Percentage of Total Peak
(mgd) (mgd) (mgd) PI'ow, .%
49 126 175 720/0
43.8 220.2 264 83%
59.3 218.78 277 79%
The range of wet weather If I as a percentage of total pe.ak flow for these three scenarios
ranges from 72 to 84 percent. The arithmetic average of these three values is 78 percent.
Therefore, a reasonable approach is to allocate a quarter to functional use basis, or average
flow; and three quarters to the design criteria sizing basis, or peak flow.
. Average Flow - 1/4
. Peak Flow - 3/,4
C:ollection System Pump Stations
The category collection system pump stations co~ist ofpUII'lp stations that impart
additional head or pressure t~ the wastewater so that the flow is conveyed to the WPCF. An
example of such a facility is the Wilakenzie Pump Station. These regional pump stations '
have the same functionalcind.design criteria basis as the regional collection system
pipelines, and, therefore, the allocations are: '
. ~ verage Flow --1/4
. Peak Flow - 3/4
Preliminary Treatment
Preliminary treatment facilities are located between the pump stations and primary
treatment, consisting of ~reenings and-grit removal facilities. Minimal organic matter
(BOD) is removed during preliminary treatment. Also, solid materials removed during
preliminary treatment tend to be larg~ and heavy in nature; these materials are not typically
considered a "suspended" material (or TSS). Consequently, the loading parameters of BOO
and TSS generally do not apply to preliminary treatment, and the unit process category is
entirely fl~w based. The functional and design criteria basis for preliminary treatment are
very similar to that of the collection system facilities, and, therefore, the allocation is
identiccU to the preceding categories. The split between average and peak flow is as follows:
. Average Flow -.1/4
. Pe~k Flow: 3/4
Primary Treatment
Primary treatment consists of the four, large, circular concrete basins (primary clarifiers) and
the associated equipment used to remove solids that settle to the bottom of the basins. The
purpose of primary treatmenl from a functional basis is to remove TSS and to a lesser
degree BOD. Typical percent removal across primary treatment for TSS and BOD are 60 and
30 percent, respectively. In other words, ~ice as much TSS is removed relative to BOD.
For the design criteria basis, typical primary clarifiers sizing is governed by both average
and peak flow, but for MWMC, where the parallel primary / secondary approach is
proposed for peak flow management, the peak flow will be split between primary trea~ent
and secondary tre~tment. Likewise, if the, high-rate clarification peak flow management is
ultimately implemented (because regulatory approval is not obtained for the parallel
, primary I secondary approach), the peak flow- will 'be split between the primary treatment
and the high-rate clarification. Therefore, only average flow is considered in the cost
allocation.
Combining the functional basis with the design criteria basis, the following allocation is for
primary treatment: .
. Average~low-1/4
. BOD - 1/4
. "TSS-1/2
A-23
. Secondary Treatment
Secondary treatment consists of two trains of aeration basins, eight secondary cl~ers, and
the associated blowers and pumps that function to treat and remove organic loading (BOD)
and to a lesser extent 1SS from the wastewater. OIl a functional basis, secondary treatment
is regarded as removing roughly twice as much BOD .r,elative to 1SS.
For the design criteria basis, typical secondary treatment sizing is governed by both average
and peak' flow,.butfor MWMC,where the parallel primary/secondary approach (or high-
rate clarification approach as a second choice) is proposed for peak flow management, the
peak flows will be split between primary -treatment and secondary treatment. Therefore,
o~y average flow. is considered in the cost allocation.
Combining the functional basis with the design criteria basis, the following allocation is for
secon~ary treatment:
. Average Flow - 1/4
. BOD - 1/2
. 1SS-1/4
, Disinfection/Outfall
Fonowing secondary treatment, the wastewater is disinfected (chlorinated and
dechlorinated) and discharged to the Willamette River through an outfall pipe. Both the
function and sizing of these facilities are entirely based on flow. The relationship between
the functional basis and design criteria is identical to that for.the collection system facilities
and, therefore, the following allocation is for disinfection/outfall:
. Average Flow-1/4
. Peak flow - 3/4
Biosolids
Biosolids are a byproduct of wastewater treatment and are produced during the primary
treatment, secondary treatment, and to a lesser degree tertiarytre~tment processes. The
three subcomp~nents used to allocate biosolids treatment, handling, C!J1d disposall reuse
costs for purposes of SDC calculations are:
. General
. Dewatering
,. BiOCYcle Farm
The definitions of these subcomponents are presented in Appendix C, Growth Capacity
Allocation Documentation.. The three subcomponents were developed for the st>c ~pdate
because. of the differing available capacities and growth percentages associat~d with
facilities in the subcomponents. However, in terms of allocating the facility co'mponents to
the wastewater parameters, .the methodology is identical- independent of which
subcomponent is being considered.
A-24
Biosolids facilities at the WPCF and the BMF are both sized and function to treat the BOD
and TSS removed during the treatment process; therefore, their allocation is split equally'
between BOD and TSS.
. BOO'- 1/2
. 'TSS - 1/2
Tertiary Filters
The existing WPCF does not have tertiary filters. The'20-year project list recommends that
te~ary filters be installed to enable the wP~F to consistently meet the NPDES permit
discharge requirements. The permit includ~s mass limits for BOD and TSS. As influent
flows to the .WPCF increase in the future, the effluent concentration required to mee~ the
mass limits decreases. Addi~on of the filters will assist with meeting these more stringent
effluent concentrations. From a fn!lctional basis, the main purpose of the filters is to remove
TSS, and-toa lesser degree BOD. From a design criteria siZing basis, average flow is used to
determine the size of the facilities. In the wet weather season, a portion of the peak flow .
may be routed to the filters for ~dditianal treatment. HoweveJ;, the .ass~ted peak flow
, loadirig rate onto the filters will not be the lliriiting factor interms of design criteria sizing~
Following is the .allocation for the tertiary filter treatment category: '
. Average Flow -1/4
.' BOD -1/4
. ,TSS-1/2'
Reuse Facilities
'Reuse facilities maybe constrUcted to comply with more stringent regulatory requirements
related to temperature andlor thermal load restrictions of Willalnette ,River discharges.
. Reuse facilities would allow flow to be diverted from the river by reusing plant effluent for
irrigation. The basic design criterion used ~o size reuse facilities is average flow; so this
parameter receives 100 percent of the all~ation. '
. Average Flow -100percent
QdQr Control
Odor control facilities function by collecting odorous air from preliminary I primary liquids
treatment processes and biosolids treatment/'handlingprocesses and treating the air to
remove the ,odors. Odor generation is dependent on the influent loading levels and,
therefore; the allocatio~ is split equally between BOD and TSS because both parameters
contribute ~o the slzingand function of the odor control systems.
. BOD - 1/2
. TSS-1/2
Peak Flow Management
There are a number of future capital improvement projects that specifically function to
convey, treat, and.discharge the wet season peak flow. For example, the parallel
primary I secondary peak flow management approach is proposed solely to address peak
A-25
flows. Also, the~e are facilities such as the dry weather headworks where a portion of their
function or design criteria sizing is based on peak . flow.
The peak flow management category is allocated; entirely to peak flow, as both the ongoing
function and the sizing design criteria sizing are based solely on peak flow.
. Peak Flow - 100 percent
SuPP.ort Facilities (Indirects)
The support facilities ~r in<lli~ category captures certain types of treatment plant facilities
that serve multiple functions~ such as the labora~ory, land acquisiijon, and instrumentation
and control systems. CostS of 9tese types.ofJacilitiesare allocated across the other
11.components in proportion to the weighted average allocation percentages.~or the
reimbursement fee, the weighted average reflects th~ direct allocation of existing asset costs
to the 11 facility components. For the improvement fee, the weighted average reflects the
allo.cation of the 20-year proJect list to the 11 facility components.
. Support facilities. allocated proportionally to the other 11 facility components.
("
(
A-26 . '
APPENDIX C
Growth Capacity Allocation Documentation
Liquids Treatment
A summary of the MWMC liquids treatment capacity is presented in Table'C-l.
TABLE C-1
Capacity Summary of MWMC Liquids Facititi~s
Average
Populati . Flow Peak Flow BOD TSS
on (mgd) (mgd) (Ibs/day) (Ibs/day).
Existing capacity 49 175 66.,000 71,600
Current loading 217,737 43.8 264 54,800 64,700
(current capacity
required)
Available capacity 5.2 None 11 ,200 6,~00
(value)
~Available capacity (%) 1'0.5% 0% 17.0% 9.6%
Projected 2025.19ading 297,585 59 277 74,000 87,600
(future capacity
required)
Growth loading 79,848 '15.5 308 19,20.0 22,900
Required Capacity. 10 102 8,000 16,000
Expansion
Growth s,hare of 2025 26.8 26.1 % 10.8% 25.9% 26.1%
load
Growth share of 100% 100% .29.4% 100% 100%
capacity expansion
Notes:
A The 30~mgd peak flow attributed to growth consists of 15.5 mgd of average flow~;nd
14~5 mgd of wet season III flow. Seethe following discussion for'a detailed derivation of
these values. '
The rationale for these values ispreserited in the following paragraphs.
A-27
Average Flow
The existing capacity .is stated in the current NPDES peniut as 49 mgd that represents the
dry season design -rating for the WPCF. The current loading or current required capacity is
43.8 mgd (presented in DSMM terms). The DSMM value is used to compare to the dry
season design rating of the WPCF because the NPDES discharge permit stipulates that the
WPCF meet monthly average perniit requirements. Therefore, discharge perniit
requirements must be met on a dry season, maximum-month influent condition. This
43.8-mgd value is determined as follows: '
. Current average flow (presented as DSMM) = {(129 x 217,737 x 1.5)/1,000,000) + 1. 7i = 43.8
Where:
129 is the average gallons per capita "per day (gpcd). of the dry season values from
1990 to 2002
217,737 is the population serv~d in 2002
1.5 is the selected peaking factor to convert average dry season flow to maximum
month dry season flow (based on 1990 to 2002 data)
1.7i is the current industrial flow in mgd
The available capacity in terms of average flow is 5.2 mgd (49 - 43.8).
The projected 2025 average flow is determined as follows:
Projected 2025 average flow (presented DSMM) = ((129 x 297,585 x 1.5)/1,000,000) + 1. 7 =
59.3 mgd
Where:
129 is the average gpcd of the dry season values from 1990 to 2002
297,585 is the projected population to be served in 2025
1.5 is the selected peaking factor to .convert average dry season flow to maximum
month dry season flow (based on 1990 to 2~02 da~a)
1.7 is the projected ,industrial flow in mgd (it has been assumed that the
industrial flow will remain constant over the study period)
The total required capacity to meet the ne~ds of growth in terms of average flow is 15.5 mgd
(59.3 - 43.8).
Peak Flow
A summary o~ the peak flowbreakdown~is presented in Table C-2. The existing capacity in
terms of peak flow is not defined in the NPDES permit, but the plant was originally
designed for a peak flow of 175 mgd, ~d therefore that is defined as the existing capacity.
MWMC does not currently have the collection and treatment capabilities to accommodate
the existing peak flow (which is greater than 175 mgd), and therefore the current peak flow
, loading (required capacity) cannot be explicitly measured at the WPCF. Using a computer
A-28
model of the,collection system MWMC is able to estimate the current peak flow. DEQ
defines the peak flow as the peak hour or peak instantaneous flow that occurs during the
5-year, 24-hour storm (3.9 inches of rainfall). Under these rainfall conditions, the model
. predicts a curreI)t flow of 264 mgd. Therefore, there is no available capacity in terms of peak
flow. Since the 'current average fl9W is 43.8 mgd, the current wet season III is 220.2 mgd
. (264 less 43.8).
Using the projected future 2025 population and land, use, the model predicts peak .flows of
294' mgd without III reduction efforts outlined in the 2000 WWFMP and 277 m:gd with III
reduction effortsou~ed in the 2000 WWFMp. Therefore, it is estimated that'the III
reduction efforts will reduce III by approximately 17 mgd.
Wet season III in 2025 attributed to existing users is determined by ~ubtracting the
anticipated reduction in wet season III (17 mgd) from the current wet season III
(220.2 mgd) yielding 203.2 mgd.
Finally, wet season III attributed to growth in 2025 is 14.5 mgd and is determined by taking.
'the 2025 total peak flew projection of 277lllgd and subtracting both the 2025 average flow
(59.3mgd) and the 2025 wet season III attributed to existing users (203.2 mgd). Therefore,
the peak flow in 2025 attributed to growth is 30 mgd (15.5.mgd of average flow plu~ 14.5 of
wet season III flow).
TABLE C.2
Projecled'2025 Peak Flow Breakdown
Average flow attributed to . existing, users (includes dry
season III)
Average flow attributed to future,users (includes'dry
season III)
Wet season III attributed to existing users
Wet season tll attributed to future users
. Total pe~k flow
Total peak flow attributed to growth
43,,5 mgd
15.5 mgd (59.3 - 43.8)
203.2 mgd (220.2 - 17)
14.5 mg~ (277 - 59.3 - 203.2
277 mgd
30 mgd (15.5 +"14.5)
BOD
The methodology for BOD is similar to that of average flow. The existing capacity, although
not explicitly stated in the current NPDES ,permit, is 66,000 lbsl day, whiCh was the value
used for th~original WPCF deSign. The current loading or current required capacity in
presented in DSMM terms is 54,800 lbs/day and is determined as follows:
Current BOD = (0.185 x 217,737 x 1.3)' + 2,402 = 54,800 lbsl day (~c~al calculated value of
54,75611:>sl day rounded to the nearest hundred pounds).
Where:
A-29
0.185 is the selected pounds per capita per day (ppcd) based on dry season
values from 1990 to 2002
217,737 is the population served in 2002
1.3 is the selected peaking to convert average dry season load to DSMM load
(based on 1990 to 2002 data)
2,402 is the current indusbial BOD load in lbsj day
The available capacity in terms of BOD is 11,200 lbsl day,{6.6,OOO - 54,800).
The projected 2025 average load is determined .as follows:
Projected 2025 BOD = (0.185 x 297,585 x 1.3) + 2,402 = 74,OOOmgd (actual calculated value of
73,971lbsl day rounded to the nearest hundred pounds)
Where:
0.185 is the sel~ted pounds. per capita per day (ppcd) based on dry season
values from'1.99O to 2002
... 297,585 is the ,projected population to be served in 2025
1.3 is the selected peaking to convert average dry season load to DSMM load
(based on 1990 to 2002 data)
2,402 is the projected industrial flow in Ibsl day (it has been assumed that the
industrial load will remain constant over the ~tudy period)
The required capacity to meet the needs of growth in terms of BOD is 19,200 lbsl day
(74,OOO - 54,800).
TSS
The methodology for TSS is identical to that of BOD. The existing.capacity, although not
explicitly stated in the current NPDES permit, is 71,600 Ibsl day, which was the value used
for. the original WPCF design. The current loading or current required, presented in DSMM
terms, is' 64,700 lbsl day and is determined as follows:
Current TSS = (0.205 x 217,737 x 1.4) + 2,224 = 64,700 lbsl day (actual calculat~d value of
64,7151bsl day rounded to the nearest hundred pounds)
Where:
0.205 is the selected pounds per capita per day (ppcd) based on dry season
values from 1990 to 2002
217,737 is the population served in 2002
1.4 is the selected peaking,to convert average dry season flow to maximum
month dry season flow (based on 1990 to 2002 data)
2,224 is the. current industri~l TSS load inlbsl day
The available capacity in terms of TSS is 6,900 lbs/ day (71,600 - 64,700).
A-30
Tl1.e projected 2025 average TSS is determined as follows:
Projected 2025 TSS = (0.205 *'297,585 * 1.4) + 2,224 = 87,600 mgd (actual calculated value of
87,~311bsj day) rounded to the nearest hundred pounds)
Where:
0.205 is the selected pounds per capita per day (Ppcd) based on dry season
values from 1990 to 2002
'297,585 is the projected population to be served in 2025
1.4 is the selected peaking to co~vert ~verage dry season load to DSMM load.
(based on 1990 to 2002 data)
2,224 is the projected industrial T$S load in lbs.j day (it has beenassume'd that the
industrial load will remain constant over the study period)
The required capacity to meet the needs of growth in terms of TSS is 22,900 lbsjday
(87,600 - 64,7(0). .
Blosolids Trea:tment
The three subcategories used to alloc~te.biosolids treatment, handling, and disposal/reuse
costs for purposes of SOC calculations. are:
. "General
. Dewatering
. Biocycle farm
Table C-3 presents a capacity summary of the MWMC biosolids facilities.
TABLE C-3
Capacity Summary of MWMC Biosolids Facilities (annual average dry tons per year)
Subcomponents
General Dewatering Blocycle Farm
Existing capacity 5,869 7,000 2,811
Current loading (current capaci.ty required) 5,869 5,869 2,81 f
Available capacity None 1,131 None
Available capacity (Ok) 0% 16.2% 0%
Projected 2025 loading '(future capacity. required) 8,600 7,000 3,612
Growth loading . 2,73-,1 1,131 801
Required Capacity. Expansion 2,731 None 801
Growth share of 2025 load 31.8% 16.2% 22.2%
Growth share of capacity expansion 100% 0% 100%
A-31
.
The definition and capacity assessment development for these three subcomponents are ·
presented in the following paragraphs..
General
The general subcomponent consists of biosolids thickening and anaerobic digestion at the
WPCF;' the biosoli~ .P~p station/ force main system that conveys digested biosolids from
the WPCF to the BMF; and'facultative sludge storage lagoons and drying beds at the remote
BMF. The majority of the infrastructure associated with this'iGeneral" component was
constructed in the 19805 and early,1990s.
The cunent loading or current required capacity is presented .as' annual average dry tons of
digested biosplids.
Current biosolids loading:;: 4,962 x 1.183 = 5,869 tons per year
Where:
'4,962.dry tons per year (actual 2002 value)
1.183 factor to convert actual value to a value that can be directly compared to
. the projected 2025 capacity value when a greater biosolids load will be generated
by changes in the treatment process, and is calculated as follows:
= {{60 x 1.23) + (40 x 1.11)} 1100= 1.183
Where:
60is the weighting given to BOD for biosolids production
1.23 is the BOD ppcd ratio (selectedl actual) calculated as follows:
= 0.185/0.15 = 1.23
Where:
0.185 is the selected annual average BOD ppcd'for proJected
influent BOD values
0.15 is the actual BOD ppcd (annual average over 12-year
period)
40 is the weighting given to TSS for biosolids production
1.11 is the TSS ppcd ratio (selected/actual) calculated as follows:
= 0.233/0.21 = 1.11
Where:
0.233 is the select~d annual average TSS ppcd for projected
influent TSS values (average of dry (0.205) and wet (0.26)
seasonal values)
0.21 is the actual TSS ppcd (annual average over 12-year
period)
A-32
Some existing biosolids facilities .in the. II general" subcomponent have more than 5,869 dry
tons per year of processing capacity while other existing facilities, have less. However, in
aggregate there is no av~able capacity and the existing capacity is assumed to ,be 5,869 dry
tons. per year as well.
The projecte,d 2025 biosolids is 8,600 dry tons per year on an average annual basis'~ This,
value is estimated based 'on a computer model of the WPCF that predicts biosolids
production among many other parameters. The projected biosolids production in 2025 is
anticipated to increase at a slightly greater rate than the rate of population growth because
of the addition of tertiary filters that will remove additional solids from the wastewater. The
additional capacity needed to accommodate growth is 2,731 dry tons per year (8,600 -5,869).
Dewatering
MWMC recently installed mechanical biosolids dewatering at the BMF-for the purpose of
removing water from the biosolids so. that the remaining biosolidsvolume is reduced. This
d~wateringfacility was designed to accommodate 7,000 dry tons ofbiosolidsonan annual
av~rage basis. Therefore, the available capacityis 1,131 (7,000 less 5,869). The additional
capacity needed to accommodate gro~th is 1,131 dry tons per year (7,OPO - 5,869).
Biocycle Farm
MWMC is in the process of expanding the capability of the biosolids management program
by constructing a poplar plantation or biogcle farm (BF) that can accept non-dewatered
biosolids, therefore limiting dependence on the cooperative" farms land application program.
Phase 1 is currently under construction and is slated to be online spring 2004, and it is
assumed that the added flexibility that the Phase 1 BF provides will benefit existing Users
only. Phase 1 has a capacity to accept ~,811dry tons per year. For the purpose of
determining" available capacity" for the purpose of SDC development, it is assumed that
there is no existing available capacity associated with the'Phase 1 Biogcle Farm. Phase 2
and 3 will expand the capacity to 3,612 dry tons per year .
The additional capacitY to meet the needs of growth is 801 dry tonS per year (3,612 -2,811)
A-33
, Appendix D
User Capacity Requirements
Table D~1
Capacitl Requirements by User Class
Eugene Flow Base flow Dry Season Dry Season Wet Season ,Boorrss
Wastewater Type of Establishment Estimation Impact Average Flow Max Month Peak Flow Strength Strength BOD TSS
Use Code Unit (FEU) (gaUFEU/day) Impact Impact Impact (rngII) (lbslFEU/day) · (lbslFEU/day) *
(gaIlFEU/day) (gallFEU/day ) (gaIlFEU/day)
1F SFD I DUPLEX DU 175 239 359 696 156 Low 0.299 0.299
1X OTHER RESIDENTIAL (SFD W/OTHER USES) DU 175 239 359 696 150 ' Low 0.299 0.299
11 OTHER RESIDENTIAL.. MULTI FAMILY DU 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256
12A ELDERLY HOUSING - ATTACHED TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171
12B ELDERLY HOUSING - DETACHED TGSF 100 . 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171
12C CONGREGATE ELDERLY CARE' FACiLITY TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171
13, OTHER RESIDENTIAL - RESIDENTIAL HOTEUMOTE TGSF 200 273 410 796 150 Low 0.342 0.342
14 OTHER RESIDENTIAL.. MOBILE HOME PARK DU 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256
15 MOTEL I HOTEL TGSF 200 273 410 796 300 Medium 0.684 0.684
21 HEAVY I NOUSTRYIINDUSTRIAL ** TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085
24 HEAVY INDUSTRYIINDUSTRlAl ** . TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085
2X HEAVY INDUSTRYIINDUSTRlAl ** TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 low 0.085 0.085
3X HEAVYINOUSTRYIINDUSTRIAL** TGSF 50 68 102 . 199 150 low 0.085 0.085
3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS lOW STRENGTH TGALEF 1000 1366 2049 '3978 150 Low 1.710 1.710
3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS MEDIUM StRENGTH TGALEF 1000 1,366 2049 3978 300 Medium 3.419 3.419
3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS. HIGH STRENGTH TGAlEF 1000 1,366 2049 3978 500 Hiah 5.699 5.699
3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS VERY HIGH STRENGTH TGALEF 1000 1366 2049 3978 700 Very Hiah 7.979 7.979
3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS SUPER HIGH STRENGTH TGAlEF 1000 1366 2049 3978 900 Suoer Hiah 1'0.258 10.258
4X TRUCK TERMINAL TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 low 0.171 0.171
4X UTILITIES TGSF too 137 205 398 150 low O~ 171 0.1-71
51 WHOLESALE TRADE TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 low 0~085 0.085
54 SERVICE STATION I MARKEl TGSF 180 246 369 716 150 low 0.308 0.308
54 SUPERMARKET TGSF 180 246 369 716 300 Medium 0.615 0.615
54 CONVENIENCE MARKET TGSF 180 246 369 716 150 Low .0.308 0.308
55 TIRE STORE TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085
55 NEW CAR SALES TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085
59 RETAIL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 low 0'.085 0.085
SA FAST FOOD RESTAURANT TGSF 500 683 1,024 1,989 500 Very High 3.989 3.989
5B QUALITY RESTAURANT TGSF 500 683 . . 1024 1,989 500 Very High 3.989 3.989
5C HIGH TURNOVER RESTAURANT TGSF 500 683 1,024 1989 500 Very High 3.989 I 3.989-
50 DRINKING PLACE TGSF 340 464 697 1353 150 Low 0.581 0.581
50 DRINKING PLACE WIMINIMAL FOOD PREP ~ TGSF 340 464 697 1353 150 Low 0.581 0.581
50 DRINKING PLACE WIRESTAURANT LIKE FOOD PREP - TGSF 500 ! 683 I 1,024 1,989 150 Very Hiah 3.989 ! 3.989
5A,B,C EATING PLACE WIMINIMAL FOOD PREP TGSF 300 410 615 1193 150 low 0.513 I 0.513
5X DISCOUNT MARKET TGSF 30 41 . 61 119 150 Low 0.051 I 0.051
5X FURNITURE STORE TGSF 30 41 61 119 150 low 0.051 0.051
5X . CLOTHING I DRYGOODS I HOUSEWARES TGSF 30 I 41 61 119 150 low 0.051 0.051
61 FINANCIAL INSTITUTION TGSF 110 150 225 438 150 Low .0.188 ! 0.188
62 OTHER SERVICES TGSF 100 137 205 398 tOO Low 0.171 ! 0.171
63 MINI WAREHOUSE TGSF 30 I. 41 61 119 150 low 0.051 I 0.051
64 AUTO CARE TGSF 40 55 82 159 150 low 0.068 0.068
65 HOSPITAL TGSF 150 205 307 597 150 low 0.256 0-.256
65 NURSING HOME TGSF 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256
65 CLINIC, MEDICAl OFFICE TGSF 150 205 ,307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256
66 CONSTRUCTION TRADE TGSF 100 137 ' 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171
67 OFFICE PARK TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171
67 : BUSINESS PARK TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171
67 GOVERNMENT BUILDING TGSF 100 137 205 398 ,150 Low 0.171 0.171
67 US POST OFFICE TGSF 100 137 . 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171
68 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ' TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085
68 MIDDLE SCHOOL . TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085
68 HIGH SCHOOL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 low 0.085 0.085
68 ' COMMUNITY COLLEGE TGSF 50 68 102 199 150. Low 0.085 0.085
68 UNIVERSITY TGSF 50 ! 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085
69 CHURCH TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 . Low 0.085 0.085
68 DAY CARE CENTER TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 low 0.085 i 0.085
68 LIBRARY TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085
68 OTHER EOUCA TIONAUCUL rURAL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085
69 FRATERNAL ORGANIZATION TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085
6A LAUNDRY TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171
6B CAR WASH TGSF 500 683 1.024 1989 '150 low 0.855 0.855
6X GENERAL OFFICE BLOG TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171
7X PUBLIC PARK TGSF 160 .219 328 .636 150 Low 0.274 0.274
7X MULTIPURPOSE RECREATION FACILITY (Indoor) TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274
7X THEATER TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 .Low. 0.274 .0.274
7X OUTDOOR ATHLETIC COMPLEX TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274
7X TENNIS COURT TGSF ,160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274
7X RACQUET CLUB TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low ,0.274 0.274
7X HEALTH CLUB TGSF 160 219 328 636 ' 150 Low 0.274 0.274
7X BOWLING ALLEY TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274
7X RECREATIONAL CENTER TGSF 160 ,219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.214
7X VIDEO ARCADE TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274
7X . OTHER ENTERTAINMENT TGSF ,160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274
82 MEDICAL OFFICE TGSF 200 273 410 796 150 LoW 0.342 0.342
Varies SHOPPING CENTER TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 low 0.171 0.171
ABBREVIATIONS
TGSF - THOUSAND GROSS SQUARE FEET . Calcu~ted as average flow X 8.345 X strength
TSFGLA - THOUSAND SQUARE FEET GROSS LEASABLE AREA . ** Process flow is in addition to other flow
DU - DWELLING UNIT *** Minimal food preparation - food is assembled frOm prepackaged food products
TGALEF - THOUSAND GALLONS ESTIMATED FLOW and cooking, other than wanning, is not required.
VFP .- VEHICLE FUELING POSITIONS **** Includes coffee houses and juice bars where appropriate.
0-1
APPENDIX E'
GO Bond Credit Calculation
TABLE E-1 , '
GO Bond Credit per $1~OOO Assessed Va,lue By Ann.exation Year
Year of Annexation
1979
1980
1981,
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987' .
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004 .'
by Year
$0.09
$0.07
$0.14
$0.18
$0.17
$0.22
$0.33
$0.40
, $0.45
$0.49
$0.48
$0.45
$0.21
$0.15
$0.19
$0.17
',$0.16
$0,.20
$0.24
$0.20
$0.19
$0.05
$0.05
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
'Cumulative Credit (per $1,000 AV)
$5.29
$5.19
$5.12
$4.98
$4.80
$4.63
$4.40
$4.07
$3.67
$3.22
$2.73
$2.25
$1.80
$1.59
$1.45
$1.25
$1.09
$0.92
$0.72
$0.48
$0.28
$0.09
$0.05
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
* Properties annexed- subsequent to debt retirement (2001) not eligible for credit
Metropolitan Wastewate'r M.anagement Commissi,on
Wastewater see Ana,lys,ls
:Table S-1
Fee Sched:ule
Eugene Flow Ba.se Flow Dry Season Dry Season Wet Season BODITSS Reimburse- Improve- Improve-
Wastewater Type of Establishment Estimation Imp,ct Average Flow Max Month Peak Flow Strength Strength BOD TSS ment Cost ment Cost ment Credit Total Cost
Impact Impact Impact (lbslFEU/day) * (lbslFEU/day) * for Rate per ~EU
Use Code Unit (FEU) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) , (mgll) per FEU per FEU Support
1F SFD / DUPLEX DU 175 239 359 696 150 Low 0.299 0.299 $91.61 $1 314.56 $353.05 $1 053.13
1X OTHER RESIDENTIAL (SFD W/OTHER USES) DU 175 239 359 696 150 Low 0.299 0.299 $91.61 $1 314.56 $353.05 $1,053.13
11 OTHER RESIDENTIAL - MUL TI F AMIL Y DU 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256 $'78.52 $1126.77 $302.61 $902.68
12A ELDE'RLY HOUS'ING . ATTACHED TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.111 0~171 ' $52.35 $751.18 $201.14 $601.79
12 B ELDERLY HOU'SING - DETACHED TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $52.35 $751.18 $201.74 $601.79
12 C CONGREGATE ELDERlY CARE FACILITY TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $52.35 $751.18 $201.74 $601.79
13 OTHER RESIDENTIAL - RESIDENTIAL HOTEUMOTEL TGSF 200 273 410 796 150 Low 0.342 0.342 $104.70 $1 502.36 $403.48 $1 203.58
14 OTHER RESIDENTIAL - MOBILE HOME PARK DU 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256 $78.52 $1126.77 $302.61 $902.68
15 MOTEL / HOTEL TGSF 200 273 410 796 300 Medium 0.684 0.684 $173.74 $2125.88 $509.40 $1 790.22
21 HEAVY INDUSTRY/INDUSTRIAL ** TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $1'00.87 $300.89
24 HEAVY INDUSTRY/INOUSTRIAL ** TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
2X HEAVY INDUSTRYIINDUSTRIAL** TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
3X HEAVY INDUSTRYIINDUSTR'IAL ** TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 . $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS LOW STRENGTH TGALEF 1000 1 366 2049 3978 150 Low 1.71 0 1.710 $523.49 $7511.80 $2017.40 $6017.88
3X ' INDUSTRIAL PROCESS MEDIUM STRENGTH TGALEF 1000 1 366 2049 3978 300 Medium 3.419 3.419 $868.71 $10629.42 .$2 547.02 $8951.11
3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS HIGH STRENGTH TGAlEF 1000 1 366 2049 3978 500 HkJh 5.699 5.699 $1 329.00 $14786.26 $3253.18 $12,862.08
3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS VERY HIGH STRENGTH TGALEF 1000 1366 2049 3978 700 Very Hlah 7.979 7.979 $1 789.29 $18 943.09 $3959.34 $16 773.05
3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS SUPER HIGH STRENGTH TGALEF 1000 1366 2049 3978 900 SUDer Hiah 10.258 10.258 $2249.58 $23 099.93 $4 665.,50 $20 684.02
4X TRUCK TERMINAL TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $52.35 $751.18 $201.74 $601.79
4X UTILITIES TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 '$52.35 $751.18 $201.74 $601.79
51 WHOLESALE TRADE TGSF 50 68 102 199 -' 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
54 SERVICE STATION I MARKET TGSF 180 246 369 716 150 Low 0.308 0.308 $94.23 $1 352.12 $363.13 $1,083.22
54 SUPERMARKET TGSF 180 246 369 716 300 Medium 0.615 0.615 $156.37 $1 913.30 $458.46 $1 611.2'0
54 CONVENIENCE MARKET TGSF 180 246 369 --- 716 150 Low 0.308 0.308 $94.23 $1 352.,12 $363.13 $1 083.22
55 TIRE STORE TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0;085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
55 NEW CAR SALES TGSF 50 ._---~ --~ -" 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
59 RETAIL .. TGSF 50 68 102 -~. 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89 .
5A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT ------- __TGS,=-_ ____ 500_= =.~,~___ 68~ ,__.,__ 1,02~ -_._~- 500 Very Hlah 3.989 3.989 $894.65 .$9471.55 $1 979.67 $8'386.52
58 QUALITY RESTAURANT ------ _~ TGSL._ ___ 500___ ---_.~ f-u______1,024 ______ 1,989 ___ 500 Very High 3.989 3.989 $894.65 $9471.55 $1 979.67 $8 386.52
5C HIGH TURNOVER RESTAURANT TGSF 500 683 1 024 _. 1989 500 Very Hlah 3.989 3.989 $894.65 $9 471.55 $1 979.67 $8 386.52
50 DRINKING PLACE TGSF 340 464 697 1,353 150 Low 0.581 0.581- $177~99 $2 554.01 $685.92 $2 046.08
50 DRINKING PLACE W/ MINIMAL FOOD PREPARATION TGSF 340 464 697 1353 150 Low 0.581 0.581 $177.99 $2 554.01 $685.92 $2 046.08
50 DRINKING PLACE W/ RESTAURANT-LIKE FOOD PRE TGSF 500 683 1024 1989 150 Very Hiah 3.989 3.989 $894.65 $9 471.55 $1 979.67 $8 386.52
5A 5B 5C EATING PLACE W/MINIMAL FOOD PREPARATION TGSF 300 410 615 1193 150 Low 0.513 0.513 $157.05 $2 253.54 $605.22 $1,805.37
5X DISCOUNT MARKET TGSF 30 41 61 119 150 Low 0.051 ' 0.051 $15.70 $225.35 $60.52 $180.54
5X FURNITURE STORE TGSF 30 41 61 119 150 Low 0.051 0.051 $15.70 $225;.35 $60.52 $180.54
5X CLOTHING I DRYGOODSI HOUSEWARES TGSF 30 41 61 119 150 Low 0.051 0.051 $15.70 $225.35 S60.52 $180.54
ABBREVIATIONS
TGSF ~ THQUSAND GROSS SQUARE'FEET * Calculated as average flow X'8.345 X strength
TSFGLA -. THOUSAND SQUARE FEET GROSS LEASABLE AREA ** Process flow is in addition to other flow
OU - DWELLING UNIT *** . Minimal food preparation. food is assembled from prepackaged food products and cooking, other than wannlng, Is not required.
TGALEF - THOUSAND GALLONS ESTIMATED FLOW **** Includes coffee houses and juice bars where appropriate.
VFP - VEHICLE FUELING POSiTIONS
S-1,. page 1 of 2
.
Metropolitan Wastew'ater Ma:na.gem.ent Co:mJTl'ission
Wastew.ater S'DC:. Analysis '
Table 8-1
Fee Schedu.le
Eugene Flow Base Flow Dry Season Dry Season Wet Season BODrrSS Reimburse- Improve- Improve-
Wastewater Type of Establishment Estimation Impact Average Flow Max Month Peak Flow Strength Strength BqD TSS ment Cost ment Cost ment Credit Total Cost
Impact ImpaCt Impact (lbslFEU/day) · (lbslFEU/day) · for Rate per FEU
Use Code Unit (FEU) (gaVFEU/day) (gaVFEU/day) (gaVFEU/day) (gaVFEU/day) (mg/I) . P8f\FEU per .FEU Support
61 FINANCIAL INSTITUTION TGSF 110 150 225 438 150 Low 0.188 0.188 $57.58 $826.30 $221.91 $661.97
62 OTHER SERVICES TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 -Low 0.171 0.171 $52.35 $751.18 $201.74 $601.79
63 MINI WAREHOUSE TG.SF 30 41 61 119 150 Low .0.051 0.051 $15.70 $225.35 $60.52 $180.54
64 AUTO CARE TGSF 40 55 82-- 159 150 Low 0.068 0.068 $20.94 $300.47 $80.70 $240.72
65 HOSPITAL TGS'F 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256 . $78.52, $1 126.77 $302.61 $902.68
6.5 NURSING HOME TGSF 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256 $78.52 $1126.77 $302.61 $902.68
65 CLINIC MEDICAL OFFICE TGSF 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256 $78.52 $1 126.77 $302.61 $902.68
66 CONSTRUCTION TRADE TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $52.35 . $751.18 $201.74 $601.79
67 OFFICE PARK TGSF 100 137 205 -~- 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $52.35 $751.18 $201.74 $60t~
67 BUSINESS PARK TGSF 100 --- 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $52.35 $751.18 $201.74 $601.79
67 GOVERNMENT BUILDING .,TGSF 100 137 205 -~ 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $52.35 $751.18 $201.74' $601.79
_. 67 US POST OFFICE TGSF _'_ 100 __ 137 --~ ___"_""_' 39,8 _. 150 Low 0.171 0.171 -. $52.35 $751.18 $201.74 $601.79
-----
68 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL --.--.-..-...-..-- TGSF 50__ ----~ -_._~- _._--,-~ .-.- . 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
68 MIDDLE SCHOOL TGSF _.__.~--- -_._------~ 102 199 __ 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
68 ~~:~~~iOLLEG~-."'-~~'~=====~~~~=~=~=~=- TGSF __ ,____.__. 50___ 68 ~~==10_~- .~=...=~:~m 150 < Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
~'--ea-- TGSF __ 50 .._----~ . -~ ;--.__-.WL =.-"-"150 -, Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
68 UNIVERSITY TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
69 CHURCH TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 . 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
68 DAY.CARE CENTER TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
68 LIBRARY TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
68 OTHEREDUCA TIONAUCUL TURAL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
69 FRATERNAL ORGAN1ZATION TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $26.17 $375.59 $100.87 $300.89
6A LAUNDRY TGS'F 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $52.35 $751.18 $201.74 $601.79
6B CAR WASH TGSF 500 .683 1024 1 989 150 Low 0.855 0.855 ' $261.75 $3 755.90 $1 008.70 $3 008.94
6X GENERAL OFFICEBLDG TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 . 0.171 $52.35 $751.18 $201.74 $601.79
7X PUBLIC PARK TGSF 1.60 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $83.76 $1 201.89 $322.78 $962.86
7X MULTIPURPOSE RECREATION FACILJTY (Indoor) TGSF 16.0 219 32.8 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $83.78 $1' 201.89 $322.78 $962.86
7X THEATER TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 . $83.76 $1 201.89 $322.78 $962.86
7X OUTDOOR ATHLETIC COMPLEX TG.SF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $83.76 $1 201.89 $322.78 $962.86
7X TENNIS.COURT TGSF 180 219 328 636 150 LOw 0.274 0.274 $83.76 $1 201.89 $322.78 $962.86
7X RACQUeT CLUB rGSF 160 219 .328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $83.76 $1 201.89 $322.78 $962.86
7X HEAL'THCLUB TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $83.76 $1 201.89 $322.78 $962.86
7X BOWLING ALLEY TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $83.76 $1 201.89 $322.18 $962.86
7X RECREATIONAL CENTER TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $83.76 $1 201.89 $322.78 $962.86
7X VIDEO ARCADE TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $83.76 $1 201.89 $.322.78 $962.86
7X OTHER ENTERTAINMENT TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $83.76 $1 201.89. $322.78 $962.86
82 VETERINARIAN SERVICES TGSF 200 273 410 796 150 Low 0.342 0.342 $104.70 $1 502.36 $403.48 $1 203.58
Varies SHOPPING CENTER TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $52.46 $752.37 $201.99 $602.84
ABBREVIATIONS
TGSF - THOUSAND GROSS SQUARE FEET * Calculated as average flow X 8.345 X strQAgth
TSFGLA - THOUSAND SQUARE FEET GROSS LEASABLE AREA .. Process flow is in addition to other flow
DU - DWELLING UNIT ... Minimal food preparation - food is assembled from prepackaged food produqts and cooking, other than wal"l'riing, is not required.
TGALEF - THOUSAND GALLONS ESTIMATED FLOW ...* Includes coffee houses and juice bars where appropriate.
VFP -VEHICLE FUELlNG.PCSITIONS
S-1, page 2 of,2
Appendix D
Stormwater System Charge Detail
1.0 Formula
.
The impact analysis for the stormwater system is based on square footage of impervious
surface, which creates an impact on the stormwater system by land use type. Impervious
surface is defined in section 6.406 Eugene code, 1971 as "any hard surface area which causes
water to run off the surface in greater quantities or at an increased rate of flow from conditions
pre-existing to development. Common impervious surfaces include, but are not limited to,
rooftops, walkways, driveways, parking lots, or concrete or asphalt surfaces. JJ The estimated
non-assessable ~ost of the system-wide capacity from future capacity-enhancing projects, as
contained in the Stormwater SOC-Eligible Project List, and the estimated available capacity in
the existing stormwater system projected to be used by new development is used as the basis
for determining the stormwater SOC.
The stormwater SOC is comprised of an improvement. fee and a reimbursement fee, as new
development will require the construction of additional system capacity as well as the use of
available capacity in the existing system. The per unit cost of additional capacity for the
improvement fee is based on the value of the system-wide capacity of future capacity-
enhancing projects (current planned projects are listed in the Stormwater SOC-Eligible Project
List, Table 10) divided by the total projected impervious surface area that will be added by new
development at build-out within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The per unit cost of
existing capacity for the reimbursement fee is based on the value of available system-wide
capacity within the existing system projected to be used by new development divided QY the
total projected' impervious surface area that will be added by new development at build-out
within the UGB.
The value of the future stormwater system is based on the estimated costs of planned future
capacity-enhancing stormwater projects contained within stormwater plans and the Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP). Of that total value, the SDC-eligible component is attributable to those
portions of future projects that are non-assessable and capacity-enhancing and related to the
demands of future development; i.e. add new capacity for new users.
The total value of the existing system is estimated based on the replacement cost of the
stormwater system components, which include both piped system and open channel system
components. Assessable costs are excluded from the SDC-eligible existing system costs.
Assessable costs are determined using the approach specified in the City Code. The city
assesses up to and including the first 24 inches of pipe diameter or equivalent capacity. The
non-assessable portion of stormwater system costs (SDC eligible costs). is based on
replacement costs minus assessable costs. The portion of non-assessable existing system
value allocated to new development (SDC-eligible value) is established by determining the
percent of piped system and open channel system capacity project~d to be used by new
development. The use of capacity of the existing system is estimated with use of hydraulic
modeling to identify existing available capacity (based on existing land use and flow data) and
expected future conditions (based on Metro Plan designations).
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
- Stormwater~
The total unit cost per square foot of impervious surface area is the sum of the per unit costs of
additional capacity of the improvement fee and reimbursement fees. Table 9 provides a
detailed breakdown of the calculation and numerical supporting data of the stormwaterSDC.
Figure 6 illustrates the calculation formula of the stormwater SDC. The stormwater SDC rates
per unit of capacity can be found in Appendix F in the current adopted SDC fee schedule.
.2.0 Single Family Dwelling and Duplex Rates
The stormwater SDC for single family residential development is comprised of three rate
categories: Small residential with a building footprint of 1,000 square feet or less; Medium
residential with a building footprint of greater than 1,000 but less that 3,000 square feet; and
Large residential with a building footprint of 3,000 square feet or more. Building footprint is
defined as the first floor area plus attached or detached garage or carport. For the Small and
Medium residential rate categories, an estimated average impervious surface area (square feet)
specifi~ to each category is multiplied by the current total stormwater SDC rate per square foot
to determine the appropriate single-family residential stormwater SDC flat rate per dwelling unit.
For the Large residential category, the stormwater SDC is determined by multiplying the actual
impervious surface of the total proposed building site by the current total stormwater SDC unit
cost per square foot. The stormwater SDC' for a duplex is cal~ulated as two times the
appropriate stormwater SDC flat rate of either a Small or Medium residential category. Duplex
units equal to or over 3,000 square feet each are treated as Large residential. Details of the
stormwater SDC analysis are provided in Table 9. Rate formulas, calculations, and fee
schedule are provided in Appendix F.
3.0 Manufactured Home Park Rates
Manufactured home developments are charged a flat rate per individual space based' on the
estimated average impervious area for a doublewide manufactured home, plus any additional
common area impervious surface (e.g., clubhouse, private streets). To determine the amount of
stormwater SDC attributable to the proposed spaces in the park, the total number of proposed
spaces is first multiplied by the estimated average impervious surface area (square feet) per
space, the results of which are then multiplied by the current total stormwater SDC unit cost per
square foot. To determine the amount of stormwater SDC attributable to all additional common
area impervious surfaces within the park, these areas will be measured separately and the sum
of this additional actual impervious surface area (square feet) will be multiplied by the current
total stormwater SDC rate per square foot. Details of the stormwater SDC an'alysis are provided
in Table 9. Rate formulas, calculations, and fee schedules are provided in Appendix F.
4.0 Multi-Family and Non-Residential Rate
For all uses not listed in sections 2.0 and 3.0 above (e.g. multi-family, commercial, industrial) or
whenever this Appendix D makes reference to a rate per square foot of impervious surface area,
the stormwater SDC collected is determined to be the current stormwater SDC rate per square
foot of impervious surface. area as adopte~ in the SDC fee schedule located in Appendix F.
5.0 Stormwater Impacts Not Attributable to Impervious Surface Area
For all uses not listed in sections 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 above, where any development type creates
an impact through discharges to the public stormwater system (as allowed by Eugene Code
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Stormwater
1971 section 6.610) which are not attributable to creation or modification of impervious surface
area, will have stormwater SDCs calculated by evaluating the equivalent impervious surface
area which 'would generate a similar impact.
6.0 Stormwater System SDC Impact Reduction Criteria
Two forms of, separate and potentially additive impact reduction credits may be provided:
reduced impact due to reduced quantity of stormwater runoff discharg~d to the City stormwater
system and reduced impact due to pollution reduction water quality treatment which exceeds
minimum standards.
6.1 Stormwater Destination and Quantity Reduction
Reduction or elimination of stormwater which otherwise would' be discharged. into the public
stormwater system may result in a corresponding reduction of stormwater SDC collected at the
time of building and development permit issuance. Reduction of the stormwater SDC will be
proportional to the reduction of runoff entering the public system from the fully developed site.
(Note: detention facilities are not eligible for stormwater SDC impact reduction.) A 100%
reduction in the stormwater SDC will be granted only for the complete containment and
management of all runoff from the site that would otherwise directly or indirectly enter into the
City's public stormwater system. Runoff discharged into an area that does not ultimately enter
the City's public stormwater system constitutes acceptance of responsibility for compliance with
any state or federal regulations that appl'y to the area or body of water receiving the runoff. To
be eligible for the impact reduction, the development must meet standards for stormwater
destination specified in Eugene Code 1971 section 9.6791 (3) in a manner which demonstrates
ongoing reduction in impact to the public system.
6.1.1 Single-Family Development (SFD) and Duplex Development
Because stormwater SDCs for. small- and medium-residential SFDs and duplexes are
based on estimated average amounts of impervious surface areas, these buildings can
qualify only for one of two impact reduction rates:
a) 100% SDC reduction for complete elimination and management of runoff from
the site entering the public system or discharging into an area which ultimately
enters into the public system; or
b) 500/0 reduction for partial reduction and management of runoff from the site
entering the public system regardless of the amount of reduction.
The SDC reduction will be granted after review and approval by the City Engineer of the
stormwater destination design and documentation submitted in accordance with
standards specified in Eugene Code 1971 section 9.6791 (3).
6.1.2 Manufactured Home Park, Multi-family, and Nonresidential Development
Stormwater SDCs for these uses will be reduced proportional to the reduction in total
stormwater runoff entering the public stormwater system from the fully developed site.
(Total stormwater runoff includes both runoff from the site in its natural condition and any
increase due to construction of impervio~s surfaces). The SDC reduction will be granted
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
~tormwater.
, '
after review and approval by the City Engineer of the stormwater destination design and
documentation submitted in accordance with standards specified in Eugene Code 1971
section 9.6790 (3).
6.2 Stormwater Pollution Reduction
Reduction of stormwater pollution through water quality treatment techniques may result in a
corresponding requction of stormwater SDC collected at. the time of building and development
permit issuance. A single-level water quality SDC credit of 10% of the total stormwater SDC is
applied to three categories of development:
1 ) Development sites not subject to the standards for stormwater pollution
reduction of Eugene Code 1971 section 9.6792, but which treat a minimum of 20% of the total
impervious area of the development site through privately maintained techniques and facilities in
a manner which meets said standards;
2) Development- sites where a portion of the site impervious area is subject to the
standards for stormwater pollution reduction of Eugene Code 1971 section 9.6792 and for which
approved privately maintained stormwater management facilities are constructed which treat
runoff from 20% or more impervious area than the minimum required, or which reduce a
minimum of 200/0 of the total impervious area of the development site through use of impervious
area reduction techniques specified in Eugene's adopted Stormwater Management Manual;
3) Development sites where all of the site impervious area is subject to the
standards for stormwater pollution reduction of Eugene Code 1971 section 9.6792 which reduce
a minimum of 20% of the total impervious area of the development site through use of
impervious area reduction techniques specified in Eugene's adopted Stormwater Management
Manual.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Stormwater)
FIGURE 5
Stormwater System
Capital Project -
Based Methodology
System Value
(SDC-Eligible Costs)
~ Impact Measurement
Impervious Service
~ Improvement Fee
Future capacity-enhancing project costs - non SDC
eligible project cost
~ Reimbursement Fee
Replacement cost - non SDC-eligible cost
Formula:
Cost of Service
(Unit cost per square foot)
SDC - Eligible Cost
Additional impervious
surface area within UGB
=
Cost per square
foot of impervious
surface area
Formula:
Total Cost of Service
(Unit cost per square foot)
Improvement Unit Cost + Reimbursement Unit Cost
NOTE: The costs per unit of measure, can be found in Table 12 and the SDC fee schedule in Appendix F.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Stormwater.
TABLE 8
Stormwater Drainage Systems Development Charge Analysis
11. Existing Stormwater Drainage System Value & SDC-Eligible Costs
4.270/0
2.340/0
13. Stormwater System Calculation Details
Medium Residential
(building footprint ~ 1,000 sq. ft.)
(building footprint >1,000 sq. ft. and < 3,000 sq.ft.)
14. Calculation of SDC*
Unit Cost per Square Foot, 1m rovement Fee
[$13,494,414 /155,770,560
(building footprint < 1,000 sq. ft.)
Medium Residential SDC (building footprint >1,000 sq. ft. and < 3,000 sq.ft.)
Small Duplex SDC (unit building footprints < 1,000 sq. ft.)
Medium Duplex SDC (unit building footprints >1,000 sq. ft. and < 3,000 sq.ft.)
M~ . Home Park SDC er S ace portion of total char e
*See Appendix F for complete rate schedule.
[1,800 sq. ft. x $0.165
[2,900 sq.ft x $0.165
[$297.00 x 2]
[$478.50 x 2]
[1,684 sq. ft. x $0.165
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Stormwater~
TABLE 9
City of Eugene
2003 Stormwater SDC-Eligible Project List
Martin Drive Pipe Improvements (0.2-0.7 CIP)
Mt. Cavalry Pipe Improvements
Frederick Court Pipe Daylight
43rd Avenue Pipe Improvements
Morse Park Ranch Park Pipe Improvements
Laurelwood Flood Control Fac/Pipe Imps
Jackson Street Pipe Improvements
Windsor Circle Pipe Improvements
West Hawkins Lane Water Quality Facility
Bell Avenue (Increase Pipe Sizes Along)
Empire Park Pond Retrofit
Royal Node Stormwater Infrastructure
Greenhill Tributary Storm Improvements Ph 2
Greenhill Tributary Water Quality Facility
Roosevelt Channel- Culvert Improvement
-1 Main Channel Culvert & Open Waterway Improvements
Lynnbrook Drive Open Waterway & Culvery Improvements
Spring Creek Bridge Construction & Waterway Improvements
Sanders Street Water Quality Facility
Spring Creek Drive Water Quality Facility
Kirsten Street Pipe Improvements
Hunsacker - Open Channel Improvements (0.2-0.7 CIP)
Lenox/Salty - Culvert Replacement (0.2-0.7 CIP)
Hunsacker Culvert Replacement (0.2-0.7 CIP)
Division Avenue Tip-Up Pipe Replacement
Irvington Drive Water Quality Facility
St. Peter School Culvert Replacement
River Point Pond Outlet Channel
Gilham Road System Culvert Replacement
Gilham Road System Water Quality Facility
Ascot Park Open Waterway Modification
3rd-4th Connector Stormwater Improvements (0.2-0.7 CIP)
Beaver St & Hunsaker Ln Stormwater Improvements
Greenhill Rd Stormwater Improvements
Irvington Drive - Stormwater (0.2-0.7 CIP)
Kinney Park Flow Diversion & Restoration
River Road - Stormwater(0.2-0.7 CIP)
Royal Ave. , Terry to Greenhill
Services for New Development ($10.0.,0.0.0./year)
Streambank Stabilization ($ varies/year)
;i:::ill:.....
$10.8,0.56
$886,756
$137,452
$2,50.4,458
$1,225,215
$2,333,542
$89,930.
$1,0.67,779
$726,531
$923,239
$447,328
$1,626,648
$434,547
$870.,0.24
$157,90.1
$598,142
$560.,496
$161,852
$868,281
$274,90.3
$445,0.0.4
$462,432
$199,846
$30.,210.
$12,665
$759,644
$63,440.
$433,734
$31,371
$759,761
$83,889
$139,427
$58,0.95
$116,190.
$116, 190.
$720.,373
$58,0.95
$116, 190.
$3,950.,431
$5,693,269
$10.8,0.56
$215,697
$63,228
$80.1,426
$134,774
$350.,0.31
$22,482
$686,429
$588,144
$424,690.
$89,466
$1,626,648
$148, 141
$261,0.0.7
$49,863
$95,70.3
$168,149
$37,226
$43,414
$54,981
$129,0.51
$277,692
$119,675
$18,590.
$2,913
$10.6,350.
$19,0.32
$177,831
$31,371
$75,976
$55,367
$139,427
$58,0.95
$116, 190.
$116,190.
$533,0.76
$58,0.95
$116, 190.
$3,950.,431
$1,423,317
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Stormwater~
Appendix E
Parks System Charge Detail
1.0 Parks SDC Methodology
The parks system development charge (SDC) consists of an improvement and reimbursement
. fee, and is charged to residential and nonresidential development. The estimated cost of
capacity from future capacity-enhancing projects to serve new development, as contained in the
Parks Recreation and Open Space Project and Priority Plan, and the estimated capacity in the
existing parks system to be used by new development form the basis for determining the parks
SDC. All park and facility types in the parks system are considered in the basis for the charge.
The parks SDC methodology includes the following steps, discussed below.
· petermine growth capacity needs
· Determine the SDC cost basis
· Determine s,ystem-wide unit costs
· Develop the SDC rate schedule
1.1 Determine Growth Capacity Needs
Capacity in the parks system is typically expressed in terms of acres of parks and number of
facilities per population. The number of acres and facilities per capita is also used to
express the level of service (LOS) provided in the parks system. Capacity. demand is
created by new development, in the form of additional park users, by attracting additional
po:pulation or equivalent population to the City parks system. Population growth, LOS and
related capacity needs are projected over a planning horizon as reflected in the Parks,
Recreation and Open Space Project and Priority Plan (Project List).
Capacity needs for all park and facility types, except for neighborhood parks are based on a
system-wide analysis. The capacity analysis for neighborhood parks is done on a service
area basis, reflecting more localized planning for these park types.
1.1'.1 Park Types Other than Neighborhood
Capacity requirements, for existing an'd future park users.(growth), are based on the
planned LOS for .each type of park (except neighborhood parks, as discussed
below) as defined by the Project List. The planned ~OS for a particular park or
facility is defined as the quantity of future City-funded and owned park acreage per
1,000 population served. A large portion of land acquisition costs for some park
types (Le., linear and natural area parks) is assumed to be funded through non-City
agencies. This is in part due to the fact that the service areas for these parks are
regional in nature - drawing from beyond the city limits. Therefore, the LOS is
adjusted for this partner funded acreage; specifically, the total future planned
acreage is reduced by acreage assumed to be funded by partner agencies. In this
way, the future. LOS is "discounted", to recognize the fact that these improvements
may be funded and owned by other agencies and will serve a broader popuration.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Parks)
The following equation shows the calculation of the planned LOS:
(Existing Inventory Q + Planned Q - Other Funded Q) / Future Population Served = Planned LOS
Where:
Q = quantity (acres of park, miles of trails, number of facilities), and
Future Population Served = projected 2025 population for. all park types, except for
Natural Area parks which are based on 2050 population.
The capacity requirements - the number of park acres - needed for existing
development and growth are estimated by multiplying the planned LOS for each
park type by the population of each group.
Table 10 shows the determination of growth capacity needs for land acquisition and
d,evelopment for all parks except for neighborhood parks.
1.1.2 Recreation Facilities
A capacity analysis was also conducted for those facility types for which project
costs are itemized in the Project List. Table 11 shows the capacity analysis for
Outdoor Recreation Amenities, Natural Area Amenities, and Recreation Facilities.
Similar to the park acreage analysis, the capacity analysis for facilities is based on
the planned LOS. The need for existing park users is equal to the planned LOS
multiplied by the existing population. Existing users' needs are assumed to be met
first by the existing inventory of facilities; any shortfall is assumed to come from the
Project List. The facilities required by growth are equal to the product of the
planned LOS and the projected increase in population through 2025. Growth's
need is assumed to be met by new facilities from the Project List, and any "surplus"
facilities in the existing inventory.
1.1.3 Neighborhood Parks
Capacity analysis for neighborhood parks is treated differently from other park types
due to the nature of planning and development of neighborhood parks. .
Neighborhood parks are planned and developed to serve a localized area whereas
other park types tend to provide broader system-wide capacity. Growth capacity
needs for existin,g and future neighborhood parks are a function of 1 )- the growth
population served, relative to the total population served within neighborhood park
service areas, and. 2) the number of acres of neighborhood parks, both existing and
planned to be acquired and developed. The capacity analysis is comprised of the
following steps:
1) -- Establish future neighborhood park service areas resulting from
implementation of the PROS Project and Priorities Plan projects
related to neighborhood parks.
Generally, the assumption of a neighborhood park service area boundary is
that it includes areas within a %-mile safe walking distance of a
neighborhood park. Three types of neighborhood park service areas were
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
" Parks:
FI$URE 6
Parks System
Capital Project -
Based Methodology
System Value
(SDC-Eligible Costs)
~ Impact Measurement
Population or Equivalent Population
~ Improvement Fee
Future capacity-enhancing project costs - non SDC
eligible project cost
~ Reimbursement Fee
Replacement cost - non SDC-eligible cost
i
!
F~rmula:
Costlof Service
(Unit costl per Population)
SDC - Eligible+Cost
[Projected Population (Residenti$l) + = Cost per Person
Equivalent Population (Nonresidential))
:
:
Fc>rmula:
Unit CO$t of Service =
(Improvement Unit Cost + Reimbursement Unit Cost
- Adjustments or Credits per Unit)
NOTE: The costs per unit of measure, can be founq in Table 17 and in Appendix F.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
;
Table 10
Land Acquisition and Development Capacity Analysis by Park Type
(a) (b) (e) (d) (e) = (e+d) (f) = (b X pop) (g) = (f-e) (h)=(b X pop) (i)=surplus (g) (j) = (h-i)
Existing Population (167,081) Growth Population (43,819)
Existing LOS Planned LOS Existing Added by Existing From Existing
Park Type (acres/1,000 (acres/1,000 Inventory Project List Total Future Total Need (Surplus) / Total Need Inventory From Project
(see Table 12 for Neighborhood) population) population) (acres) ( acres) (acres) (acres) Deficit (acres) (acres) (acres) List (acres)
Land Acqulsitl.on
Urban Parks 0.0066 0.0126 1.1 1.6 2.7 2.1 1.0 0.6 0.0 0.6
Community Parks 1 .3118 1 .8050 219.2 161.5 380.7 301 .6 82.4 79.1 0.0 79.1
Metropolitan Parks 3.9170 3.1094 654.5 1.3 655.8 519.5 (134.9) 136.3 134.9 1.3
Natural Area Parks 8.8985 11.3765 1 ,486.8 . 1,388.0 2,874.7 1,900.8 414.0 498.5 0.0 498.5
Linear Parks 1.2038 1 .0153 201 .1 13.0 214.1 169.6 (31.5 ) 44.5 31.5 13.0
Special Facilities 0.7823 0.6212 130.7 0.3 131.0 103.8 (26.9) 27.2 na 0.3
Total Acquisition 17.3806 19.1853 2,904.0 1,617.6 4,521.6 3,205.5 301 .5 840.7 206.4 618.3
Development
Urban Parks 0.0066 0.0052 1.1 0.0 1.1 0.9 (0.2) 0.2 0.2 0.0
Community Parks .0.8604 1 .1388 143.8 96.4 240.2 190.3 46.5 49.9 0.0 49.9
Metropolitan Parks 1 .1456 1.0285 191.4 25.5 216.9 171.9 (19.5) 45.1 19.5 25.5
Natural Area Parks 0.1006 0.0797 16.8 0.0 16.8 13.3 (3.5) 3.5 3.5 0.0
Linear Parks 0.0443 0.0729 7.4 8.0 15.4 12.2 4.8 3.2 0.0 3.2
Special Facilities 0.4820 0.3913 80.5 2.0 82.5 65.4 (15.1 ) 17.1 na 2.0
Total Development 3.2128 3.5274 536.8 207.1 743.9 589.4 52.6 154.6 41.5 117.5
Table 11
Capacity Analysis & Project List Allocations for Facilities
Existing Existing LOS Project List Planned LOS Existing Growth Existing
Need Project Need Project List
Facility Type Inventory Each Per Pop. F aci I ities (1) Each Per Pop. (Each) List % (Each) 0/0 Inventory for
Growth
Outdoor Recreation Amenities unit per unit per
Basketball - Full Court
Basketball 38 1 4,397 24.0 1 3,402 11.12 460/0 12.9 540/0
Botanical Gardens 5 1 33,416 1.0 1 35, 150 (0.25) 00/0 1.0 1 000/0 0.2
Children's Play Areas 42 1 3,978 26.0 1 3,101 11 .87 460/0 14.1 540/0
--
Community Gardens 6 1 27,847 5.0 1 19,173 2.71 540/0 2.3 460/0
Disc Golf Courses 2 1 83,541 1.0 1 70,300 0.38 380/0 0.6 620/0
Dog Parks 3 1 55,694 1.0 1 52,725 0.17 170/0 0.8 830/0
Golf Courses 1 1 167,081 1.0 1 105,450 0.58 58% 0.4 420/0
Performance Space 17 1 9,828 1.0 1 11,717 (2.74) 00/0 1.0 1 000/0 2.7
Picnic Areas (Reservable) 7 1 23,869 3.0 1 21 ,090 0.92 310/0 2.1 690/0
Sand Volleyball 6 1 27,847 2.0 1 26,363 0.34 170/0 1.7 830/0
Skate Parks 5 1 33,416 2.0 1 30,129 0.55 27010 1.5 730/0
Soccer 15 1 11 , 139 15.0 1 7,030 8.77 58010 6.2 420/0
Softball/Baseball 28 1 5,967 8.0 1 5,858 0.52 70/0 7.5 930/0
Tennis Courts 23 1 7,264 8.0 1 6,803 1.56 19010 6.4 810/0
Wading Pools/Spray Parks 8 1 20,885 5.0 1 16,223 2.30 460/0 2.7 540/0
Natural Area Amenities 2.99
Interpretive Facilities 3 1 55,694 8.5 1 18,339 6.11 720/0 2.4 280/0
Trails, Multi-Use 20.30 0.12 1 ,000 1.0 0.10 1 ,000 (3.43 ) 00/0 1.0 1 000/0 3.4
Trails, Mountain Bike 3.80 0.02 1 ,000 - 0.02 1,000 (0.79) 00/0 - ... 100% 0.8
Trails, Pedestrian 10.96 0.07 1 ,000 30.8 0.20 1 ,000 22.08 720/0 8.7 280/0
Trails, Running 11.82 0.07 1 ,000 1.5 0.06 1 ,000 (1 .27) 00/0 1.5 1 000/0 1.3
Trailheads 8 1 20,885 11.5 1 10,815 7.45 650/0 4.1 350/0
Recreation Facilities 4.7
Gymnasiums (courts) 0 N/A 0 N/A
Swimming Pools 3 1 55,694 2 1 42, 180 0.96 480/0 1.0 520/0
Community Centers/Sr Centers 10 1 16,708 3 1 16,223 0.30 1 00/0 2.7 900/0
delineated: existing park service areas; expanded park service areas due to
access improvements; and, future park project service areas.
2) -- Estimate existing population within existing and future
neighborhood park service areas.
Parks service for the existing population is estimated using address data
from the Regional Geographic Information System (GIS). Existing dwelling
unit types were identified by land use code and were multiplied by an
average household size factor for that dwelling type. Average household
size factors used in the analysis were consistent with the City's parks SDC
methodology.
3) -- Estimate future 'population within existing and future
neighborhood park service areas.
Future population growth within park service areas is estimated by applying
dwelling-unit-density and household size assumptions to potentially
buildable residential lands inside the Eugene Urban Growth Boundary.
4) -- Determine percentage of total population served within
neighborhood park service areas attributable to existing population
versus future growth population.
This is a simple calculation using the results of steps 2 and 3.
5) -- Multiply growth population share by the number of acres of
neighborhood park land to determine growth capacity needs.
Growth's share of the total population of existing service areas is used to
determine growth capacity needs of existing park land and development.
Growth's share of the total population of expanded service areas is used to
determine growth capacity needs of future land acquisition and
development.
Table 12 shows the results of the neighborhood parks capacity analysis.
City of Eugene sec Methodologies
: Parks~
Table 12
Determination of Growth Capacity Needs for Neighborhood Parks
Existing Growth (thru Total
(2005) 2025)
Existing Park Service Areas
Population 86,415 19,764 106,179
Percentage of total population served 81% 19% 100%
Existing Acreage Allocation - Acquisition 170..6 40.0 210.6
Existing Acreage Allocation - Development 77.6 18.2 95.8
Expanded & Future Service Areas
Population 23,669 22,528 46, 197
Percentage of total population served 51% 49% 100%
Future Acreage Allocation - Acquisition 26.5 25.5 52.0
Future Acreage Allocation - Development 38.352 36.848 75.2
1.2 Determine the SDC Cost Basis
Development of the SDC cost basis involves allocation of planned park and facility
acquisition and improvements (and associated costs) and the portions of existing park
system capacity serving growth to future park users in proportion to their relative need, as
determined by the capacity analysis. The cost basis includes all park types: neighborhood
parks, community parks, natural areas, urban plazas, metropolitan parks, linear parks, and
special use facilities, within the City's park system1.
1.2.1 Reimbursement Fee
For the reimbursement fee, the cost basis is the sum of the value of the existing
system inventory that will serve growth. The land and facilities are valued based on
current replacement costs. The cost basis is adjusted for historical funding from
external sources (Le., grants and contributions). Only the portions of existing parks
funded through city funding sources are included in the cost basis. Tables 10
through 13 show the quantity of existing land and facilities by type that are assumed
to be required for growth's capacity needs. The reimbursement fee cost basis is
shown in Table 13.
1.2.2 Improvement Fee
For the improvement fee, the cost basis is the sum of growth's share of individual
projects from the Project List (with the exception of priority 5 projects). The project
list represents the community's desired level of service over the planning period, as
articulated through the PROS Comprehensive Plan development process. Projects
or portions of projects that are (a) identified as "renovation" in the Project Plan,
and/or (b). estimated to be funded through other City or non-City funds, are excluded
from the cost basis.
Table 14, derived from the Project List, shows the improvement fee cost basis.
1 The parks system indudes some existing and planned park acres outside the urban growth boundary (UGB). These are induded
in the SDC cost basis, consistent with applicable law and in order to fully recover growth's costs of capacity; parks outside of the
UGB were induded in the planned LOS established by the community through the PROS planning process.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Parks~
Table 13
Reimbursement Fee Cost Basis
Existing Inventory Units Needed For Growth Unit Costs ($/Unit) Facilities
~ Ci) Ci) >- :c
c: R ~ Q) c:
Q) (1J g e. (1J
"E Q. g d.
(1J CI) "0 "i
Developed Development Acquisition Facilities Trails Growth Cost C) ~ "l! "l! Q)
Total Acres Development Acquisition Facility Trails "0 "0
Acres (Acres) (Acres) (Number) (miles) (Cost Basis) ~ c: .- .- c: c:
(1J Q) :::J :::J
"c e CI) 0) LL LL
~ =? c: ~ ~
-g "c
~ c: (3 (3
Park Type m Q) "3 :::J
(l. a::: ~ ~
~ 0 0
Neighborhood Parks
na 210.63 95.82 18.21 40.02 $63,170 $91 ,800 $4,823,867 480/0 48%
Urban Plazas
Subtotal 1.10 1.10 0.23 0.00 0.34 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 1 0.00 0.00 00/0 0%
Community Parks
na 219.17 0.00 0.00 $0
Metropolitan Parks
Subtotal 654.45 191.40 19.55 134.93 1.41 .1.78 $69,790 $57,375 $697,900 $68,173 $10,208,500 3 4 5.00 5.36 420/0 30%
Natural Area Parks
Subtotal 1 ,487 17 3.49 0.00 0.61 $2,084 $5,814 $104,187 $71 ,004 - - 3 - 38% 38%
Linear Parks I Greenways
Subtotal 201.13 7.40 0.00 31.49 2.30 $47,430 $52,203 $1,613,830 0 0 8.80 3.60 25%
Special Use Facilities
Bloomberg 20.80 4.32 $2,242 $9,689 8%
Campbell Center 1.43 1.43 0.16 $4,387 $707 1 80/0
Cuthl>ert Amphitheater 0.16 $87,736 $14,140 1 8%
Hilyard Community Center 0.16 $4,387 $707 1 80/0
Lamb Cottage 0.21 $26,321 $5,469 80/0
Mor~e Ranch House 0.21 $43,868 $9,115 80/0
Owetl Rose Garden 8.30 5.20 0.41 0.26 0.05 $439 $28,024 $131,604 $13,859 1 80/0 80/0
Pref4' ~ntaine Memorial 1.28 . 0.27 0.21 $28,024 $8,774 $9,276 80/0 80/0
Shel on McMurphey Johnson 1.12 1.12 0.23 0.23 $439 $28,024 $6,623 80/0 8%
Sou1 h Eugene High School $0
Subtotal 130.71 80.53 0.64 5.08 1.16 $69,585 1 3 0.00 0.00
I TOTAL 2,903.96 393.05 42.12 211.52 2.90 4.69 $16,786,787 4 8 16.80 8.96
--
Table 14
I
t~
c tS
mprovemen ee os aSls
i
f Acquisition Other Other Other
Park Units Quantity Acquisition Development Development Renovation Funding - Funding - Funding - Net Project- Growth Share Growth Cost
Type 'C Cost Cost Partner Costs (Cost Basis)
A. Totals City Partner
(Ownership)
/flew Parks and Open Space
Acquire a neighborhood park site to serve this area (83) NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,000 49% $374,850
Acquire a neighborhood park site to serve this area (84) NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,000 49% $374,850
Acquire a neighborhood park site to serve this area (85) NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,000 49% $374,850
Acquire neighborhood park to serve this area (56) NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,000 49% $374,850
Acquire a neighborhood park site (R1) NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,000 49% $374,850
Acquire neighborhood park site (R2) NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,000 49% $374,850
Acquire a neighborhood park site (R3 and R4) NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,000 49% $374,850
Develop Femdale Park Site NP 1 4. $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0 $0 $0 $0 $526,416 19% $100,019
Develop Rosetta Place as neighborhood park NP 1 acres 1 $ 131,604 $ 131,604 $0 $0 $0 $0 $131,604 19% $25,005
Acquire land for combined neighborhood park and Ridgeline NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,OOO! 49% $374,850
"Gateway" (WC1)
Acquire land for cqmbined neighborhood park and Ridgeline NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,000 49% $374,850
"Gateway" (WC3)
Acquire land for neighborhood park (WC5) NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 ~ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,000 49% $374,850
Develop Hawkins Heights as a neighborhood park (WC4) NP 3 acres 3 $ 394,812 $ 394,812 $0 $0 $0 $0, $394.8121_ 19% $75,014
Develop neighborhood park (WC5) NP 2 acres 2 $ 263,208 $ 263,208 $0 $0 $0 $01 $263,208 49% $128,972
$0 -
Develop Videra Park to serve WC-6 NP 1 acres 2 $ 263,208 $ 263,208 $0 $0 $0 $263,208 49% $128,97,,-
Acquire land ~r neighborhood park (W11) NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,0001 49% $374,850
Develop Willakenzie school site as neighborhood park, with play area NP 1 acres 5 $ 658,020 $ 658,020 $0 $0 $0 $0 $658,020 19% $125,024
and ballfields I I ----
Acquire a neighborhood park site to north, adjacent to Golden NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 ! '$ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,000 49% $374,850
Gardens (81) - - - 200.000 I $
Develop RoyallDanebo NP 1 acres 2 1$ 219,340 $0 $0 $0 $0 $219,340 49% $107,477
Develop neighborhood park site (83) NP 4 acres 4 $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0 $0 $0 $0 $526,416 49% $257,944
Develop neighborhood park site (84) NP 1 acres 4 $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0 $0 $0 $0 $526,416 49% $257,944
Develop neighborhood park site (85) NP 3 acres 4 $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0 $0 $0 $0 $526,416 49% $257,944
Develop neighborhood park site (81) NP 4 acres 2.3 $ 302,689 $ 302,689 $0 $0 $0 $0 $302,689 49% $148,318
Develop neighborhood park site (56) NP 4 acres 4 $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0 $0 $0 $0 $526,416 49% $257,944
Develop Terra Unda Park as neighborhood park NP 2 acres 4.3 $ 565,897 $ 565,897 $0 $0 $0 $0 $565,897 19% $107,520
Develop Lone Oak park site as neighborhood park with athletic field NP 3 acres 3.9 $ 513,256 $ 513,256 $0 $0 $0 $0 $513,256 19% $97,519
Develop Wendover Park site as neighborhood park NP 4 acres 1 $ 131,604 $ 131,604 $0 $0 $0 $0 $131,604 19% $25,005
Develop recreational amenities along Amazon Greenway to serve NP 3 acres 4 $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0 $0 $0 $0 $526,416 49% $257,944
neighborhood park needs (WC2)
Develop Creekside Park as neighborhood park NP 1 acres 3.17 $ 417,185 $ 417,185 $0 $0 $0 $0 $417,185 19% $79,265
Acquire a neighborhood park (W4) NP 1 acres 4 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $765,000 49% $374,850
Develop Chase Commons as neighborhood park NP 3 acres 4 $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0 $0 $0 $0 $526,416 19% $100,019
Develop neighborhood park site (R1) NP 4 acres 4 $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0 $0 $0 $0 $526,416 49% $257,944
Develop neighborhood park site (R2) NP 3 acres 4 $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0 $0 $0 $0 $526,416 49% $257,944
Develop neighborhood park site (R3 and R4) NP 4 acres 4 $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0 $0 $0 $0 $526,416 49% $257,944
improvement Fee Cost Basis
Acquisition Other Other Other
Park b Acquisition Development Funding - Net Project Growth Cost
'S Units Quantity Development Renovation Funding - Fundin9 - Growth Share
Type 'C Cost Cost Partner Costs (Cost Basis)
A. Totals City Partner
(Ownership)
Develop Ridgeline "Gateway" park (WC1) as both trailhead and NP 5
~tdoor recreation area with picnic. play area, basketball, etc.
qevelop Ridgeline "Gateway" park (WC3) as both trailhead and NP 4 acres 5 $ 658,020 $ 658,020 $0 $0 $0 $0 $658,020 49% $322,430
outdoor recreation area with picnic, play area, basketball, etc.
Develop neighborhood park site (W11) NP 5
Nelgborhood Park Total 126.67 $ 9,945,OO( $ 9, t63,66~ $ 19, 728,00~ $0 $0 $0 $ $19,728,003 43% $8,507,158
Acquire 100+ acres surrounding Golden Gardens ponds for CP 2 acres 100 $ 3,060,000 $ 3,060,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,060,000 49% $1,498,59~
c>>mmunity park
~quire Amazon Park inholdings along Hilyard for community park CP 1 acres 1.5 $ 1,530,000 $ 1,530,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,530,000 49% $749,29E
use
Acquire community park site to serve Santa Clara CP 1 acres 40 $ 7,650,000 $ 7,650,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,650,000 49% $3,746,48C
Develop Santa Clara Community Park, including lighted ballfields CP 2 acres 40 $ 3,948,120 $ 3,948,120 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,948,120 52% $2,043,15-:1
Develop Golden. Gardens and acquired property as community park 3 acres 40 $ 3,948,120 $ 3,948,120 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,948,120 52% $2,043,15-:1
wtth significant natural area component and trails
ACquire portion of Union Pacific area fQr neighborhood and I
community park, including improved connections, recreation and CP 4 acres 20 $ 3,825,000 $ 3,825,000 $0 $0 $0 $01 $3,825,000 49% $1,873,24C
open space I
Community Park Total 241.5 $ 16,065,00~ $ 7 ,896,24~ $ 23,961,24Cl $0 $0 $0 $ $23,961,240 50% $11,953,914
Acquire land to provide urban open space within Courthouse UP 4 acres 0.75 $ 860,625 $ 860,625 $0 $0 $215,156 $0 $645,469 35% $228,52':l
neighborhood
Acquire land for urban plaza to be developed in partnership with UP 4 acres 0.5 $ 650,250 $ 650,250 $0 $162,563 $325,125 $0 $162,563 35% $57,554
tIlInsit
Acquire land to expand park blocks UP 4 acres 0.5 $ 650,250 $ 650,250 $0 $0 $162,563 $0 $487,688 35% $172,66"
Acquire land for an urban plaza in Santa Clara UP 4 acres 0.5 $ 650,250 $ 650,250 $0 $0 $162,563 $0 $487,688 35% $172,66~
Urban Plaza Total 2.25 $ 2,811,37~ $ . $ 2,811 ,37~ $0 $162,563 $865,406 $ $1,783,406 35% $631,402
Acquire land for Amazon Creek Greenway (WC2) LP 2 acres 4 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $191,250 $191,250 $0 $382,500 100% $382,50C
Implement plan for Jefferson Area Greenway and linear park LP 3 acres 4 $ 526,416 $ 526,416 $0 $131,604 $263,208 $0 $131,604 40% $52, 73~
Develop millrace linear park LP 5 acres $0 $0 . $0 $0 $0 40% $0
l~p'lement greenwayllinear park plan for Amazon Creek from LP 4 acres 3.97 $ 1,096,700 $ 1,096;700 $0 $548,350 $548,350 $0 $0 40% $0
~adwaters to Fairgrounds in partnership with ACOE
Implement Rasor Park Master Plan LP 2 acres 2 $ 263,208 $ 263,208. $0 $0 $0 $0 $263,208 40% $105,46':l
Apquire linear park along Roosevelt drainage channel LP 4 acres 10 $ 306,000 $ 306~000 $0 $153,000 $0 $0 $153,000 100% $153,00C
Unear Park Total 23.97 $ 1,071,00C $ 1 ,886,32~ _-$ 2,957 ,32~ $0 $1,024,204 $1,002,808 $ $930,312 75% $693,695
Apquire land on priority stormwater corridors 1hat link with develope<< NA 1 acres 30 $ 918,000 $ 918,000 $0 $459,000 $459,000 $0 $0 36% $0
parks, include trails
ACquire additional river frontage, including property to the north NA 1 acres 60 $ 4,131,000 $ 4,131,000 $0 $2,065,500 $1,032,750 $0 $1,032,750 36% $370,931
Apquire land for natural areas within Willamette/McKenzie River .-
NA 4 acres 100 $ 1,530,000 $ 1,530,000 $0 $765,000 $765,000 $0 $0 36% $0
cQnfluence
~quire land for natural areas and access to Gillespie Butte NA 1 acres 1.7 $ 325,125 $ 325,125 $0 $0 $0 $0 $325,125 36% $116,77J:
~uire natural areas to connect Ridgeline system east to Pisgah and NA 3 acres 55 $ 841,500 $ 841,500 $0 $0 $210,375 $420,750 $210,375 36% $75,56C
V'(.lIamette River system
~uire natural areas to complete Moon Mountain to Spencer Butte NA 1/2 acres 325 $ 4,972,500 $ 4,972,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,972,500 36% $1,785,9641
s~ment
~quire additional ridgeline to complete Fern Ridge to West Eugene NA 213 acres 500 $ 7,650,000 $ 7,650,000 $0 $0 $3,825,000 $1,912,500 $1,912,500 36% $686,909
Wetlands
~uire additional ridgeline to complete Willow Creek to Bailey Hill ROl NA 1/2 acres 300 $ 4,590,000 $ 4,590,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,590,000 36% $1,648,582
I
t~
C tB
mprovemen ee os aSls
Other Other Other
Park ~ Acquisition Development Acquisition Funding - Net Project Growth Cost
i Units Quantity Development Renovation Funding - Funding - Growth Share
Type "C Cost Cost Partner Costs (Cost Basis)
~ Totals City Partner
(Ownership)
Acquire additional ridgeline to complete Bailey Hill Road to Blanton NA 1/2 acres 300 $ 4,590,000 $ 4,590,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,590,000 36% $1,648,58.,:
Heights
Acquire natural area within Royal Mix~d Use area NA 3 acres 50 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $382,500 $0 $0 $382,500 36% $137,38~
Acquire land for natural areas along McKenzie River (Rivers to NA 3 acres 80 $ 1,224,000 $ 1,224,000 $0 $612,000 $612,000 $612,000 $0 36% $0
Ridges)
Acquire additional Amazon Headwaters property NA 1 acres 50 $ 765,000 $ 765,000 $0 $191,250 $191,250 $0 $382,500 36% $137,38~
Expand Ridgeline Trail natural area park to include Spencer Creek NA 3/4 acres 500 $ 7,650,000 $ 7,650,000 $0 $0 $3,825,000 $1,912,500 $1,912,500 36% $686,90~
area
Acquire land for natural areas to complete Rivers to Ridges farmlanl NA 5 -+ $ - $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
connections
Develop and implement restoration plan for Green Island with partnt r NA 5 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $01 $0
~g.ncies I
Natural Area Total 2351.7 $ 39,952,12d $ $ 39,952,12~ $0 $4,475,250 $10,920,375 $ 4,857,7s( $20,310,750 36% $7,294,975
Acquire land to provide significant riverfront open space within MP 1 acres 1.76 $ 2,295,000 I $ 2,295,000 $0 $344,250 $573,750 $0 $1,377,000 100% $1,377,OOC
courthouse/cannery neighborhood --f-------
Develop Prefontaine Memorial Park as a metropolitan park UP 5 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Metropolitan Park Total 1.76 $ 2,295,00~ $ $ 2,295,00~ $0 $344,250 $573,750 $ . $1,377,000 100% $1,377,000
Acquire land in front of SMJ House SF 1 acres 0.3 $ 261,630 $ 261,630 $0 $0 $0 $0 $261,630 21% $54,359
Acquire land at 4J Admin site to expand River House and Rose SF 5 $0 $0 .$0 $0 $0 0% $0
Garden for special event site
Acquire land for park with agricultural character, possible living history SF -5 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
farm
Special F acUity Total 0.3 $ 261,63~ $ $ 261,63Cl $0 $0 $0 $261,630 21% $54,359
New Parks and Open Space Total 2748.2 $ 72,401,13~ $ 19,546,22, $91,966,69E $0 $6,006,267 $13,362,339 $4,857,75Cl $68,352,341 45% $30,512,504
New Recreation Facilities
Develop spray parks at Washington and or Monroe Parks NP 1 ea 2 $ 164,505 $ 164,505 $0 $0 $0 $164,505 54% $88,867
Develop soccer fields at Bethel Community Park CP 3 ea 2 $ 482,548 $ 482,548 $0 $0 $0 $482,548 42% $200,51 S
Develop a running trail to serve the Bethel area CP 2 If 2600 $ 48,474 $ 48,474 $0 $0 $0 $48,474 100% $48,474
Develop soccer field at N. Westmoreland CP 4 ea 1 $ 241,274 $ 241,274 $0 $0 $0 $241,274 42% $100,26C
Develop Striker Fields as community park with significant athletic CP 3 acres 40 $ 5,483,500 $ 5,483,500 $0 $0 $0 $5,483,500 42% $2,278,63C
fields, lighting, within sports complex model
Provide major community center on west side of Beltline to serve SF 5 $0
Bethel
Provide synthetic surface field to serve BethellDanebo in partnershil 1 ea 4 $ 4,386,800 $ 4,386,800 $0 $0 $0 $4,386,800 42% $1,822,904
with school district
Provide additional dog off-leash facilities north of beltline (WK) CP 4 ea 1 $ 164,505 $ 164,505 $0 $0 $0 $164,505 83% $136,718
Develop an off leash dog area in BethellDanebo CP 5 $0
Develop pedestrian trails within Golden Gardens CP 3 $ 87,736 $ 87,736 $0 $0 $0 $87,736 28% $24, 72 Ei
Develop tennis Courts at Bethel Community Park (4) CP 5 $0
Develop an off leash dog area in City Central CP 5 $0
--- -, $0
Develop an off leash dog area in River Road/Santa Clara CP 5
Develop a disc golf facility to serve Santa Clara and River Road CP 5 $0
-------
Develop off-leash dog area to serve Willow Creek CP 5 $0
-- ----- -- ---- $0
Develop spray park at Ascot CP 5 I
Develop multi-use path to Fern Ridge LP 5 $0
I
t~
C tB
mprovemen ee os aSls
l:' Acquisition Other Other Other
Park Acquisition Development Funding - Net Project Growth Cost
"S Units Quantity Development Renovation Funding - Funding- Growth Share
Type 1: Cost Cost Partner Costs (Cost Basis)
G- Totals City Partner
(Ownership)
Develop pedestrian trails along Greenhill Tributary LP 5 $0
Develop trails within West Eugene Wetland sites NA 3 If 10000 $ 175,472 $ 175,472 $0 $0 $87,736 $81',736 28% $24,726
Develop primary Ridgeline trails NA 3/4 miles 15 $ 1,480,545 $ 1,480,545 $0 $0 $370,136 $1,110,409 28% $312,942
Provide trailheads and interpretive facilities within existing WEW sitE ~ NA 4 ea 3 $ 197,406 $ 197,406 $0 $0 $98,703 $98,703 35% $34,774
"()8;81op trails, trailheads, and interpretive facilities throughout NA 3 mile 8 $ 789,624 i $ 789,624 $0 $0 $197,406 $592,218 28% $166,90~
Ridgeline 1
Develop mountain biking trails and freeriding designated areas NA 5 $0
Develop trails, trailheads, and interpretive facilities in WEW NA 4 ea 1 $ 65,802 $ 65,802 $0 $0 $32,901 $32,901 28% $9,272
Develop trail facilities throughout the Ridgeline system NA 4 miles 5 $ 493,515 $ 493,515 $0 $0 $0 $493,515 28% $139,08E
Provide covered centrally located skate park with bicycle facilities MP 1 ea 1 $ 219,340 $ 219,340 $0 $0 $0 $219,340 73% $159,50-4
Provide interpretive facilities and trails at Skinner Butte Park, enhance I
accessibility MP 3 ea 1 ,$ 603,1851 $ 603,185 $0 $0 $0 $603,185 28% $169,557
I
Provide children's play area in downtown area MP 2 ea 1 $ 142,571 $ 142,571 $0 $0 $0 $142,571 54% $77,473
Develop regional play area in Alton Baker Park MP 3 ea 1 $ 1,096,700 $ 1,096,700 $0 $0 $0 $1,096,700 54% $595,94S
Develop multi-cultural community center/aquatic center in SF 4 ea 1 $ 10,967,000 $ 10,967,000 $0 $0 $0 $10,967,000 52% $5,696,57.4
VYhiteakerlSkinner Butte area
Develop major indoor/outdoor aquatic facility and community center SF 2 ea 1 $ 15,353,800 $ 15,353,800 $0 $0 $0 $15,353,800 52% $7,975,20~
Develop Environmental Education Center SF 1 ea 1 $ 1,919,2251 $ 1,919,225 $0' $0 $0 $1,919,225 21% $398,76C
Develop environmental education site behind River House SF 4 ea 1 $ 219,340 $ 219,340 $0 $0 $0 $219,340 21% $45,57':l
Acquire Civic Stadium for renovation and expanded community use SF 5 $0
Develop a major community/aquatic center to serve Santa Clara SF 5 $0
Develop visual arts center SF 5 $0 '
Provide full service South Eugene community center by upgrading SF 5 $0
Amazon Community Center
Develop a Vellodrome SF 5 $0
Develop a second Willamette River boat launch X 4 ea 1 $ 427,713 $ 427,713 $0 $0 $0 $427,713 21% $88,867
New Recreation Facilities Total S 45,210,580 S 45,210,580 $0 $0 $786,882 $44,423,698 46% $20,596,259
Improving Existing Facilities
Upgrade State Street Park NP 1 ea 1 $ 219,340 $ 219,340 $219,340 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Upgrade Monroe Park NP 5 $0
Upgrade Charnel Mulligan NP 1 acres 1.2 $ 164,505 $ 164,505 $164,505 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Upgrade Tugman Park NP 4 ea 1 $ '301,593 $ 301,593 $301.593 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Enhance Crest Heights prairie habitat NP 4 acres 3 1$ 82,253 $ 82,253 $82,253 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Upgrade Acorn Park NP 5 ~= 219.340 $0 $0 $0 $0
Upgrade Bond Lane park NP 1 ea 1 $ 219,340 $194,340 $0 $0 $25,000 54% $13,419
Upgrade Brewer Park NP 5 ~-- $0
Upgrade Sladden Park NP 4 acres 1.2 1$ 164,505 $ 164,505 $164,505 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Upgrade Lafferty Park NP 2 ea 1 1$ -~ $ 109,670 $84,670 $0 $0 $25,000 54% $13,419
Implement Frank Kinney Park plan NP 5 I $0
Upgrade Fairmount Park NP 5 i $0
I --- $0
Upgrade Washburne Park NP 5
Implement Friendly Park plan NP 1 ea 1 $ 109,670 $ 109,670 $109,670 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
I
tM
C tB
mprovemen ee os aSls
b Acquisition Other Other Other
Park Acquisition Development Funding - Net Project Growth Cost
i Units Quantity Development Renovation Funding - Funding - Growth Share
Type "C Cost Cost Partner Costs (Cost Basis)
D. Totals City Partner
(Ownership)
Upgrade Kincaid Park NP 4 ea 1 $ 109,670 $ 109.670 $59.670 $0 $0 $50.000 54% $27.170
Upgrade University . Park NP 4 ea 1 $ 164.505 $ 164.505 $164.505 $0 ~ $0 0% $0
Enhance natural area at Bramblewood NP 4 acres 4 $ 109.670 $ 109.670 $109.670 $0 $0 0% $0
Complete Arrowhead Park NP 5 $0
Complete Awbrey Park NP 5 ! $0
Upgrade Berkeley Park NP 4 ea 0.53 $ 109,670. $ 109.670 $82.253 $0 $0 $27,418 49% $13.435
Complete Skyview Park NP 5 $0
Complete Irwin Park NP 5 $0
Complete development of Candlelight Park NP 5 $0
Upgrade Scobert Gardens NP 5 I $0
Complete Milton Park NP 5 i $0
Provide play area at Shadow Wood park NP 5 $0
Complete Oakmont Park NP 5 $0
Complete Gilham Park NP 5 $0
Complete Petersen Barn Park. including parking revisions $ $329,010 -
CP 2 ea 2 438.680 $ 438.680 $0 $0 $109.670 520/0 $56.754
Develop play area at Ascot CP 2 ea 1 $ 82.253 $ 82.253 $32.253 $0 $0 $50.000 54% $27.170
Renovate Sheldon Community Center and pool SF 3 ea 1 $ 6,360,860 $ 6,360.860 $6,360,860 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Improve Echo Hollow Pool SF 4 ea 1 1$ 4.935.150 $ 4,935,150 $4.935,150 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Implement Amazon Park master plan CP 3 ea 1.5 1$ 3,014,828 $ 3,014,828 $2,614,828 $0 $0 $400,000 66% $264,52':1
Implement Westmoreland Park master plan CP 4 ea 14.43 $ 548,350 $ 548,350 $411,263 $0 $0 $137.088 52% $70,94~
Enhance Spencer Butte Trail system NA 1 ea 1 $ 548,350 $ 548,350 $411,263 $0 $137.088 $0 0% $0
Implement Wild Iris Ridge Habitat Enhancement Plan NA 3 acres 123 I 1$ 674.471 $ 674,471 $263.043 $0 $337.235 $74,192 36% $26,647
Restore Willow Creek between 11 th & 18th NA 4 acres 60 $ 329.010 $ 329.010 $0 $164,505 . $164',505 $0 0% $0
Implement Ridgeline master Plan NA 4 ea 1 $ 548.350 $ 548.350 $548,350 $0 $137,088 $0 0% $0
Enhance and develop Sorrel Ponds site NA 5 I $0
Implement Skinner Butte Park Master Plan MP 3/4 acres 22.52 $ 6.275,317 $ 6.275,317 $2.823,893 $0 $0 $3.451,425 100% $3,451,42E
Provide accessible trails within Hendricks Park Forest MP 4 If. 3500 $ 166,973 $ 166.973 $166.973 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Implement Hendricks Park Forest Management Plan MP 3 acres 2 $ 767,690 $ 767.690 $567,690 $0 $191.923 $8.078 64% $5,174
Replace aging infrastructure at Alton Baker Park MP 2 acres 2 $ 219,340 $ 219.340 $219.340 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Renovate Alton Baker Calloe Canal for kayaking, recreation. and MP 2 ,$ 5.483.500 $ 5.483.500 $2,741.750 $0 $2.741.750 $0 0% $0
natural resource benefits I I
Complete Alton Baker Park. update WABP Development Plan and MP 3/4 acres 30 1$ 4,018,309 $ 4,018,309 $3,868.309 $0 $1.004,577 $0 28% $0
EABP Master Plan
Implement Morse Ranch master plan MP 4 acres 3 --~ 658,020 $ 658,020 $526,416 $0 $0 $131.604 100% $131,604
EKpand Petersen Barn Community Center SF 5 $0
Upgrade Campbell Center with fitness center SF 3 ea 1 $ 2,851,420 $ 2,851,420 $342.170 $0 $0 $2,509.250 0% $0
Develop parking and access to Laurelwood "Back 9" and Ribbon Trail SF 2 acres 2 $ 438.680 $ 438,680 $219.340 $0 $0 $219,340 21% $45,57~
south end ..- f----
Enclose portion of Amazon Pool for year round use SF 5 $0
Replace Maintenance Buildings at Laurelwood SF 2 ea 1 ~. 1,035.285 $ 1,035.285 $1,035,285 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
,-
Improve Tennis Courts at WHS in partnership with Bethel School SF 4 ea 1 $ 109.670 $ 109,670 $109,670 $0 $54.835 $0 0% $0
District 52
J
th
C tB
mprovemen ee os aSls
b Acquisition Other Other Other
Park Acquisition Development Funding - Net Project Growth Cost
'S Units Quantity Development Renovation Funding - Funding - Growth Share
Type 'C Cost Cost Partner Costs (Cost Basis)
0- Totals City Partner
(Ownership)
Complete second phase of River House Master Plan SF 4 ea 1 $ 1,316,040 $ 1,316,040 $658,020 $0 $0 $658,020 21% $136,71S
Implement SMJ House plan, including parking and access across I I
railroad tracks SF 5 I I .$0
Improve Cuthbert Amphitheater SF 5 $0
Provide for replacement of synthetic surface fields in partnership with SF 1,3,4 ea 10 $ 2,741,750 $ 2,741,750 $2,741,750 $0 $1,370,875 I $0 $0
Implement Rose Garden master plan SF 5 $0
Replace irrigation at Laurelwood SF 5 $0
Restore Bloomberg NA 5 $0
Renovate park restrooms X 1 ea 7 $ 921,228 $ 921,228 $921,228 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Develop children's play area renovation program X 1 ea 1 $ 219,340 $ 219,340 $219,340 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Decommission wading pools X 2 ea 1 $ 548,350 I $ 548,350 $548,350 $0 $0 I $0 0% $0
Renovate park irrigation systems X 2 ea 1 $ 1,096,700 I $ 1,096,700 $1,096.700 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Renovate park lighting systems X 1 ea 1 $ 548.350 i $ 548.350 $548,350 $0 $0 $0 0% $0
Renovate tennis courts, including resurfacing X 1 ea 1 $ 1,096.700 $ 1,096,700 $822.525 $0 $0 $274,175 81 % $220.74~
Redevelop W. University 1 $ 65.802 $ 65.802 $65,802 $0 0% $0
Implement habitat management plans X 2 ea 1 $ 1.096,700 $ 1,096,700 $1.096.700 $0 $274,175 $0 0% $0
Improving Existing Facilities Total $ 51,019,855 $ 51,019,855 $38,982,592 $164,505 $6,414,050 $8,150,257 55% $4,504,714
Access Improvements
Improve access to Friendly & Lafferty Parks (See S2 on Map 3) NP 4 ea 1 $ 164,505 $ 164,505 $0 $41,126 $0 $123,379 49% $60,456
Improve access to Kincaid and Milton (See 54 on Map 3) NP 4 ea 1 $ 164.505 $ 164,505 $0 $41,126 $0 $123,379 49% $60,45E
Develop access improvements to meet neighborhood park needs NP 4 ea 1 $ 109,670 $ 109.670 $0 $27,418 $0 $82,253 49% $40,304
(See 62 on Map 3)
Develop access improvements to serve this neighborhood (See B6 NP 4 ea 1 $ 27,418 $ 27,418 $0 $6,854 $0 $20,563 49% $10,076
01)'1 Map 3)
1'2\ . ... .~ 'V. .. .... z , VI lICIt' NP 4 ea 1 $ 164,505 $ 164.505 $0 $41,126 $0 $123,379 49% $60,456
Improve access to Fairmount and Laurel Hill Park (See S1 on Map ) NP 4 ea 1 ,$ 164,505 $ 164,505 $0 $41,126 $0 $123,379 49% $60.45E
Improve access to Amazon Park (See S3 on Map 3) NP 4 ea 1 $ 164,505 $ 164,505 $0 $41,126 $0 $123,379 49% $60,45E
Improve access to Tugman Park (See S5 on Map 3) NP 4 ea 1 $ 164,505 $ 164.505 $0 $41.126 $0 $123,379 49% $60.45E
Improve access to existing parks (See R5 on Map 3) NP 4 ea 1 $ 109,670 $ 109,670 $0 $27,418 $0 $82,253 49% $40,304
Improve access to existing parks (See R6 on Map 3) NP 4 ea 1 $ 109,670 $ 109,670 $0 $27,418 $0 $82,253 49% $40,304
Enhance access to Striker Fields (See W3 on Map 3) NP 4 ea 1 $ 109,670 $ 109,670 $0 $27,418 $0 $82,253 49% $40.304
Enhance access to Brewer & Bond Lane parks (See W5 on Map 3) NP 4 ea 1 $ 109,670 $ 109,670 $0 $27,418 $0 $82,253 49% $40,304
Improve connectivity to Sheldon (See W6 on Map 3) NP 4 ea ~-I $ 109,670 $ 109,670 $0 $27,418 $0 $82,253 49% $40,304
Enhance access to Crescent Park (See W7 on Map 3) NP 4 +-~ ~ 54,835 $ 54,835 $0 $13.709 $0 $41,126 49% $20,152
ea 1
Improve access and parking at Cal Young Sports Park (See W2 on $ 109,670 $82,253 $27,418 $0 $0 49% $0
Map 3) NP 4 ea 1 $ 109,670 I
Enhance access to Willakenzie school and Ascot Park (See W9 and NP 4 ea 2 $ 109,670 $ 109.670 $0 $27,418 $0 $82,253 49% $40,304
W10 on Map 3)
Enhance access to Churchill Sports Park (See WC2 on Map 3) NP 5 $0
Enhance access to Oakmont Park (See W8 on Map 3) NP 5 I;- $0
Replace pedestrian bridges at Amazon Park, add new bridges wher t CP 2 ea 1 548,350 $ 548,350 $411,263 $137,088 $0 $0 0% $0
needed
~
t~
c
B
,mprovemen ee ost aSls
Acquisition Other Other Other
Park b Acquisition Development Funding - Net Project Growth Cost
i Units Quantity Development Renovation Funding - Funding - Growth Share
Type 'C Cost Cost Partner Costs (Cost Basis)
A. Totals City Partner
(Ownership)
Enhance access to Amazon Creek Greenway and Fern Ridge LP 5 I i $0
Bikepath in the Willow Creek area :
Develop access improvements between parks, schools and X 3 If 2000 i$ 35,094 $ 35,094 $0 $8,774 $0 $26,321 21% $5,468
neighborhoods to WEW system and bike system
Qevelop connections from bikepath to ridgeline and pacifiC crest trai X 5 I $0
system and proposed Willamalane riverfront system !
Develop pedestrian improvements to link downtown with Skinner 1$
Butte Park, SMJ house, and riverfront system (excluding pedestrian X 2/3 ea 1 1,535,380 $ 1,535,380 $0 $767,690 $01 $767,690 21% $159,504
bridge at train station) I
Improve access north/south of Beltline X 2 ea 1 1$ 329,010 $ 329,010 $b $329,010 $0 $0 0% $0
Provide underpass via Delta Ponds to riverfront bike system X ornplet ea I $0
Complete comprehensive POS Signage System X 1 ea 1 $ 329,010 $ 329,010 $0 $0 $0 $329,010 21% $68,358
Complete ADA improvements X 1 ea 1 1$ 219,340 $ 219,340 $0 $0 $0 $219,340 21% $45,573
Improve Royal Avenue to enhance park/school connectivity X 4 ea 1 $ 109,670 $ 109,670 $0 $54,835 $0 $54,835 21% $11,39':l
Improve access to existing natural resource areas X 5 $0
Develop pedestrian and bike access improvements between River X 5 $0
RoadlSanta Clara and Bethel Danebo and Fern Ridge Reservoir
Provide access to Golden Gardens X 1 ea 1 $ 164,505 $ 164,505 '$0 $0 $0 $164,505 21% $34,178
Acquire land to provide connectivity north and east to Santa Clara X 5 $0
area
Access Improvements Total $ 5,217,002 $ 5,217,002 $493,515 $1,784,057 $0 $2,939,430 34% $999,564
GRAND TOTAL 654 $72,401,130 $120,993,664 $193,414,133 $39,476,107 $7,954,828 $20,563,271 $4,857,750 $123,865,726 46% $56,613,042
1.2.3 Park Acreage Allocation
Table 15 shows the percentages used to allocate Project List acreage and
development costs to existing development and growth. Separate allocation
percentages are provided for land acquisition and development, and for each park
type based on the capacity analysis. Land development and acqui~ition costs for
special use facilities are allocated based on growth's share of total future
population, which differs from the LOS approach used for most other park types. As
these are "special" facilities not associated with a standard park type, allocation is to
both existing and new development in proportion to future total population.
1.2.4 Facilities Cost Allocation
Outdoor recreation facilities standard to selected park types are included in the SDC
cost basis unless funded primarily through user fees (e.g., golf courses). Standard
natural area amenities are also included, unless funded through other sources (e.g.,
off-street.bike paths). The allocation percentages for each facility type are shown in
Table 11.
1.3 Determine System-Wide Unit Costs
Development of system-wide unit costs involves the following steps:
1) -- Allocate cost basis between residential and nonresidential development.
The City conducted a Parks and Recreation Facilities' User Survey in 2004. The
objectives of the survey were to provide a more ~horough understanding of park
usage and data to evaluate a nexus between residential/nonresidential
development and the use of parks, open space and recreation facilities in the City.
Based on the survey results 16.4 percent of park usage is attributable to
nonresidential development; the remaining 83.6 percent of the cost basis is
allocated to residential development.
2) -- Divide cost basis by total growth units to determine cost per unit.
System-wide unit costs are calculated separately for residential and nonresidential.
The residential unit cost is determined by dividing the residential portion of the cost
basis by the growth in resident population to determine a cost per person. For
nonresidential, the system-wide unit cost is equal to the nonresidential cost basis
divided by the groWth in equivalent population2 to determine a cost per equivalent
population.
2 As residential use is 83.6 percent of total park users, then the total population of park users added by growth is calculated by dividing the growth in resident
population by .836. The difference between this total park user population and the resident population is the 'equivalent population' attributable to nonresidential
development.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Parks)
Ta.ble 15
A/~ t. f R · t UtA
{C t
Dca Ion 0 rOJec s creage . OS
Project list
Acreage (1 ) Existing Deficiency .Growth (thru 2025) (3rowtb (beVond 2025)
PCl.rk Typ~ Acre$Qe (1) Acreage % Acreage % Aaeage I %
J,.and Acquisition
Neighborhood 52.0' . 26.5 51% 25.5 49% - 0%
.UrbSn 1.6 1.0 65% 0.6 35% - 0%
;Com.munity 16'1.5 ~2.4 51% 79.1 49% - Q%
Metropolitan 1.3 - 0% 1.3 100% - 0%
:Natural Area 1.388~O 414.0 '30% 498.5 36% .475.4 34%
linear . 13.0 - 0% 13.0 100% - 0%,
:Special Facilities 0.3 ' 0.2 79% 0.1 21% - 0%
Total Acres 1.617.6, 524.2 32% 618.0 38% 475.4 ' 29%
:Qevelopment
Nelghborh9Od 75.2 ' 38~4 . 51% 36.8 49% - 0%
;~an '0.0 - 0% 0.0 0% - 0%.
Community 96.4 46.5 48% 49~9 52% - 0%
:Metropolitan 25.5 - 0% 25.5 100% - .0%
Natural Area 0.0 - 0% 0.0 0% - 0%
-Linear 8.0 4.8 600/0 3.2 400k - 0%
.~pecial Facilities 2~O 1~6 79% 0'.4 21% - 0%
.T olal Acres , 207.1 91.2 . '44% 115.9 56% ..; 0%
(1) Net of partner funded/owned' acreage
Table 16
System-Wide Unit Costs; Residential & Nonresidential Development per Compon$nt
, '
83.~' 43;119 16.4'K1 B,6H
Residential Unit ~OI1I'8S~IUnlt
Residentiat .Cost Nonresidential Cost
Cost Basis Share ($lNewPerson) Share ' ($/New equiY. Pop.)
New Parks 'and Ope'" Space Improvement Fee
Neighborhood Parks $8,507,158 ' $7,11"1;984, $162 $1,395,174 $162
Community P"rks $11,953,914 . $9,993,472 $228 $1,960,442 $228.
Urban Plaza' . $631,402 $527,852 $12 $103,550 $1.2
UnearParks $693,695 $579,929 $1.3 $113,766 $13
Natural Area Parks $7,294,975 $6,098,599 $13$ $1,196,376 $139
Metrooolitan. Parks .$1;377,000 $1,151,1'72 $26 $225,828 $26
Special Use Facilities $54,359' $46.444 $1 $8 915 $1
Sub-total $30.612~504 $25.508,453 $582 $5,004 061 ,$582 ;
New Recreation Facilities . .. $20,596,259 $1.7,218,473 $393 $3,377,787 $393
Improving Existing. Facilities $4.504.714, $3,765,94'1 $86 $738,773 $86
Access Improvements $999 564 $.835,636 $19 $163.929 $19
Subtotel.tMPROveMENT $56,61:3,042 $47,328,503 $1,080 $9,284,53,9 $1,080
existing Parks and Facllftle! ) , Relmburs.ment ,Fee
Nekihborhood Parks ' $4,823,867 $4,032,753 $92 , $791,114 $92
Communitv Parks' $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Urban Plaza . $0 $0 $0 $0' $0
:Unear Parks $1,613.830 $1.349,162 $31 $264,668 $31
Natural Area PalXs $71",004 $59,360 $1 $11,645 ro. . $1
Metrooolltan Parks $10,208,500 $8,534,306 $1,95, $1,674,194 . $195
, Soecial Use Facilities_ $69' 58$. . $6811173 $1- . $11,412 $1
SublotelREIMBURSEMENT $~6, 186,787 $14,033.754 $320 ' $2,753,033 $320
Total SYSTEM $73,399,829 . $61,362.257 $1,400. . $12,037,572 $1,400
Less Credit $293 $836
Net Co.at per Unit '- $1,107 -
,
3) -- Determine credit for existing deficiency costs.
The SDC is designed to fully recover from new development the parks system
capacity demand created by growth. The Project List includes costs that are
associated with correcting deficiencies of existing parks and facilities, and with
increasing the level of service for existing park users. Assuming that the deficiency
costs are recovered through taxes -. used to retire general obligation (GO) bonds or
in the form of general fund support of the projects - new development will contribute
to these costs. New development is also contributing to the retirement of existing
GO bonds issued in 1998 to fund recent park acquisition and development. To
recognize this future. contribution, a credit is calculated based on a projected stream
of GO bond debt service requirements, assuming one GO bond per Project List
pdority phase to. fund the deficiency costs. The credit is equal to the present value
of the future debt payments per person (for residential) or per equivalent population
(for nonresidential).
Table .16 shows the system-wide unit costs for residential and nonresidential
development for each SDC component.
1.4 Develop the SDC Rate Schedule
The system-wide cost and credit per unit is multiplied by the number of persons served to
determine the fee and credit for a particular type of development. The SDC schedule is
presented in Table 17.
Table 17
SDC Schedule
Category Persons or EP Gross SDC per Credit per Unit Net SDC per
per Unit Unit Unit
Residential per PU
Sinale-familv 2.64 $3,697 $773 $2,924
Duplexrrown Hm/Mobile Hm 2.14 $2,997 $627 $2,370
Multifamilv 1.67 $2.339 $489 $1 ,850
Nonresidential per Room
A 1.93 $2,703 $1,613 $1,090
per TGSF
B, 1.29 $1 ,806 $1,078 $728
C 0.79 $1 ,106 $660 $446
D 0.47 $658 $393 $265
E 0.19 $266 $159' $107
See Table 19 for nonresidential class definitions and Appendix A for cross-reference to HUD/BPR codes.
1.4.1 Residential SDC Assessment
US Census data form the basis for determining the average number of persons per
type of residential development, for purposes of SDC assessment. The US Census
classifies living quarters as either housing units or group quarters, as follows:
. Housing units - include a house, an apartment, a mobile home or trailer, a group
of rooms or a single room occupied as a separate living quarters or, if vacant,
intended for occupancy as separate living quarters. If the living quarters contain
eight. or fewer persons unrelated to the householder or person in charge, it is
classified as a housing unit.
City of Eugene SDC Methodol()9_ies
Par~~~
· Group quarters - include the "institutionalized" population (prisons, nursing
homes, other), as well as the "non-institutionalized" population (college dorms,
military housing, other). If the living quarters contain nine or more persons
unrelated to the householder or person in charge (a total of at least 10 unrelated
persons), it is classified as group quarters.
1.4.1.1 Hous'ing Units
The residential rate schedule differentiates between residential dwelling types
based on available Census data on number of persons per dwelling unit.
Dwelling unit types are aggregated into three groups, as reflected in Table 18.
Accessory dwelling units are included in the same category as attached one-unit
dwellings and two-unit dwellings; this recognizes the most current (2000) Census
statistics for Eugene that imply that this type of dwelling unit has fewer persons
residing per dwelling unit than a detached one unit dwelling.
TABLE 18
Average Number of Persons per Structure Type (Grouped), 2000 US Census
1, detached unit structure
31 ,759
83,719
2.64
Persons
per Unit
(Grouped)
2.64
Type of Structure
Number of
Occupied Units
Persons per
Type of
Structure
Persons
per Unit
------........--......----............--.........-... ......-...........--....-...--..-...-..-.-.-..... .--...--...-......-......-..---.-....-- -..---......-..-...-..-.........- ...--.-...............................-.................-...................
1, attached unit structure
3,870
8,489
2.19
2 'unit structure
2,315
4,782
2.07
2.14
Mobile home
3,038
6,437
2.12
..--...-.--...--.--.-.........-.-...------...-.......-.-............-... ................................-..-.........-.-.-....- .-.......-..-...-....-.-........-.....--.-- .-.....-.-................-....--........ -........................-..-...................-.-........-.......-.
3 or 4 unit structure
3,309
5,840
1.76
5 to 9 unit structure
3,639
6,280
1.73
10 to 19 unit structure
3, 179
5,455
1.72
1.67
.--.......--.....-...---.........-..........-..........-....-..............-.......................... -................................--..--..-.-.-- --...--....-...................--..-.....-..-- .-----...-..............................
20 to 49 unit structure
2,361
3,576
1.51
50 or more unit structure
4,476
7, 134
1.59
Total
57,946
131,712
2.27
2.27
1.4.1.2 Group Housing
The nature of the group housing will establish whether, for purposes o.f assessing
a park SOC, they are classified as residential or nonresidential development.
Group housing developed for those that reside independently and freely will be
assessed as residential development, whereas gro~p housing developed to
incarcerate individuals or to provide housing for those wholly dependent upon
care by others, such as nursing homes or residential care facilities, will be .
assessed as nonresidential development.
. Group Housing - Residential Park SDC Assessment. The parks SDC for
residential land uses is based . on persons per unit; at the time of
development, the proposed number of residents for which the group
housing is designed will form the basis of the fee.
City of Eugene'SDC Methodologies
Parks
· Group Housing - Nonresidential Park SDC Assessment. The parks SDC
for nonresidential land uses is based on categories defined by similar
employee densities (noted below). Since institutional group housing is
developed for individuals who are unable to use the City park system, but
supports employees and visitors who do use parks, the parks SDC for
such development is assessed using the category C nonresidential rate
schedule (discussed below), which contains comparable institutions.
1.4.2 Nonresidential SDC Assessment
The City's park SDC, like that for other systems (wastewater, transportation,
stormwater) is assessed on all nonresidential development types (industrial,
commercial, office use, institutional, etc.).
The nonresidential fee for specific nonresidential land uses is assessed as follows:
1. Determine nonresidential classes for purposes of parks. SDC assessment.
2. Allocate equivalent population growth among nonresidential classes. .
3. Determine the equivalent population density (e.g., equivalent population per
Thousand Gross Square Feet [TGSF] of building) by class.
4. Determine the SDC per TGSF by multi~ying the unit cost by the, equivalent
population density.
1) -- Determine Nonresidential Classes
Nonresidential developments are classified into five categories (A to El, based on
(A) number of guests and.(B to E) employee density, as summarized in Table 19.
Table 19
Svmmary of Nonresidential SDC Classes
Class Development Types*
--..-..-----.--.....--.--..--......-.---.--...----.-..-.-....-..-----......-..---.----..---.-.---......------.-..----.-..........---...--...--.......-...-...-.....-.-..........-..------.--
A Hotels, motels, B&Bs, & other tourist accommodations
...-.---.-..-.......-----..--..-.-....-..--..-...........--...--.-........-....----.-........------.-...--------.-.-.-.-.~--_._..._........_......_.._......_.:-.........._.._......._.......------...----...-.-......
B
Office (financial, investment, real estate, government, medical, legal & other
business/professional services), institutional, grocery, eating & drinking establishments
.---...-..--.--..-.---------....-........-.........-..--......-............------.-..---.--.--....-...--.-...----...--....-.......--.----......-.....-........--.-.-......--...---..,.----.....-..-----
C Industrial, wholesale, manufacturing, transportation, agriculture
o General retail & services, recreation
.-------.--..--.-..-...---.-......--..............-....-..-.----..--..--.-....-......-..-....-.---..-.---..-....---.----..--......--..--....-.........----.........-..-.--...-..-...-..--...------.--.-.-
E Commercial warehousing & storage
Note that, on the basis of the park user survey results, K-12 schools cue not included in nonresidential classes
as users associated with such schools are generally attributable to local residential land uses and related
demand is accounted for in residential development categories. * See Appendix A for detailed cross-
reference to HUD/BPR codes .
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
, Parks
2) -- Allocate Equivalent Population to Nonresidential Classes
The impact of tourist accommodation rooms is based on the average number of
guests per unit. As there is not local data on the total. number of visitors to the
City (or visitors by land use, apart from tourist accommodation) - and there is
local data on the number of employees and TGSF per land use - employee
density per land use is used to allocate equivalent population across the other
nonresidential classes.
The equivalent population, net of tourist accommodation guests, is allocated to
the other classes of nonresidential development based on building size (i.e.,
TGSF) and employment density (i.e., number of employees per TGSF). Current
employment data by standard industrial classification were analyzed along with
data qn existing building square footage to determine estimated employment
density by nonresidential class. Based on the total employees attributable .to
each nonresidential class, percentages are derived and used to distribute the
growth in equivalent population across the classes.
3) - Determine Equivalent Population Density by Class
The equivalent population density (i.e., equivalent population per TGSF) by class
is determined by dividing the total growth in equivalent population attributable to
each class by the projected growth in TGSF for that class. .
4) -- Determine SDC per TGSF by Class
The SDC is the product of the equivalent population density and the system-wide
unit cost per person. Table 17 presents the SDC schedule for residential and
nonresidential developments based on the approach described above.
2.0 SDC Updating
Parks SDC updates will entail the following elements:
2.1 Annual Inflationary Cost Adjustments
On an annual basis, the City will:
. Apply the Engineering News-Record (ENR) 20-City national average construction cost
index (CCI) to the development and renovation cost components of proposed park
improvements; and
. Use the Lane County Assessment & Taxation office's published Sales Ratio Report as
the cost index to measure changes to the acquisition cost component of proposed park
land acquisitions. This cost index shall be determined using the vacant residential and
recreation lands categories of the areas best representing.the Eugene urban area.
2.2 Biennial Evaluation of Existing and Planned Expenditures
Following adoption every two years of the city-wide Capital Improvement Program (CIP), a
review of actual parks project expenditures over the preceding two fiscal years and
projected near-term CI"P expenditures over the next three fiscal years will be completed to
evaluate consistency with the average annual expenditure for the same period anticipated
by the adopted Project List. In the event that this analysis shows that average expenditures
of the review period vary more than 10 percent than expenditures anticipated in the Project
List, the issue will be referred to the City Council for consideration of updating the SOC.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Parks,
2.3 Periodic Project List Modifications
The parks SDC methodology assumptions and rate factors will be .reviewed and updated
whenever the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Project and Priorities Plan (Project List)
is modified.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Parks~
Appendix F
Local System Formulas & General Fee Schedule
1.0 Formula and Calculation Details
1.1 General Rate Setting, Cost of Service Formula
SDC eligible costs
= SDC per unit of service
Impact measurement
1.2 Transportation System Cost of Service consists of non-assessable arterial
and collector street system cost of service plus off-street bicycle cost of service.
1.2.1 Non-Assessable Arterial & Collector Street System Cost of Service
General Formula
Non-Assessable Cost per Lane Mile X Lane Miles per trip = Cost per trip
Calculation
Street System Cost per Trip
Reimbursement: $948,401 X (0.8888/675) = $1,248.80 = Cost per Trip
Improvement: $1,128,902 X (0.8888/675) = $1,486.47 = Cost per Trip
Total Allocated Cost per Trip = $1 ,248.80 (0.4) + $1 ,486.47 (0.6) = $1 ,519.10
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Fee Schedule & Formulas
1.2.2 Off-Street Bicycle path Cost of Service
General Formulas
Miles of bicycle paths
per person
X Cost per miles = Cost per person
Cost per person, Bicycle Paths
= Cost per trip
# of Trips per person
Calculations
Path Lighting + Path Section
($14.83)
+
($99.46)
=
$114.29 (per person)
$114.29
= $127.70 (per trip)
0.895
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Fee Schedule & Formulas~
1.3 Wastewater System Cost of Service:
1.3.1 Local Wastewater System Cost of Service
Determination of Flow Estimation Formula for Residential Development
Graphical comparison of water consumption per month to square foot of living area results in a
slope of 0.951 gallons per month per square foot and a base flow per dwelling unit of 3,946
gallons per month.
Gallons per Month
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000 ~~
3000
2000
1000
o
Base Flow
Intercept, 3 , 9 46
Gal. I Month
Gal. I Day (GPD) 1 3 2
-30 day month-..
Cost per GallDay $ 2 5 1 4 5
Base Charge -
$ 3 3 1 9 1
GPO x Cost per Gal.
370
o 816
2780 4000
3280
Total Area Living Space
Projected
* Sampled Actual Data
Slope 0 9 5 1 g a 11m o/sq ft
Days per Month 3 0
Slope I 30 Days 0 0 32
Cost per Gal/Day $ 2 5 1 45
Cost per sqlt -
Daily usage factor x Cost per $ 0 0 8 0 5
Gal.
The implementation of this rate structure results in each new single family dwelling being
charged a local wastewater SDC that is comprised of a base rate of $331.91 plus an additional
charge of $0.0805 applied to the total proposed living space area of the dwelling.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Fee Schedule & Formulas:
Formulas for Non-Residential DeveloDment
Non-Assessable System Valuation
(Value of existina + Value of olanned)
Build-out capacity (mgd)
=
Cost per unit of capacity
Per unit of capacity X flow per PFU for development type X number of PFUs
for development = SDC for development
Calculations for Non-Residential DeveloDment
$112.152M + $11.056M
= $2.5145 per gallon per day
49.0 mgd
$2.5145 X Gallon per PFU (varies by development type) X
Number of PFUs = SDC for development
1.4 Stormwater System Cost of Service:
General Formulas
SDC eligible costs
=
Unit cost per square foot of
impervious surface area
Total additional impervious
surface area within UGB (sq. ft)
Reimbursement:
$12,255,293
=
$0.0787 per sq. ft.
impervious surface area
155,770,560 sq. ft.
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Fee Schedule & Formulas:
Improvement:
$13,494,414
=
$0.0866 per sq. ft.
impervious surface area
155,770,560 sq. ft.
Total Unit Cost per Sq. Ft. Impervious Surface Area =
(Reimbursement + Improvement) = $0.0866 + $0.0787 =
$0.165
1.5 Parks System Cost of Service:
General Formulas:
Residential - costs and equivalent population densities per dwelling unit
type vary
Cost per person
X Persons per Dwelling Unit Type =
Cost per DU
Nonresidential - costs and equivalent population densities per
development category type vary
Cost per Person
X Persons per TGSF
=
Cost per TGSF
OR
Cost per Person
X Persons per Room
=
Cost per Room
TGSF = Thousand Gross Square Feet of floor area
Calculations: Vary; see Table 17
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Fee Schedule & Formulas
2.0 Adopted SDC Fee Schedule: Current Rates
2.1 Transportation System:
Cost per trip
2.2 Local Wastewater System:
Residential dwelling unit base fee
Residential dwelling unit total living area multiplication factor
Non-Residential rate per gal/day per land use type per PFU
2.3 Regional (MWMC) Wastewater System:
Residential dwelling unit
Non-Residential rate per gal/day per land use type per FEU
2.4
Stormwater System:
Small Residential
Medium Residential
Small Duplex
Medium Duplex
(building footprint ~.1 ,000 sq. ft.)
(building footprint> 1,000 sq.ft. and < 3,000 sq. ft.)
(unit building footprints ~ 1,000 sq. ft.)
(unit building footprints >1,000 sq. ft. and < 3,000 sq. ft.)
Manufactured Home Park
Per space (assumes 1,684 sq. ft. per space)
Dlus
Per sq. ft. actual impervious surface area, addt'1 common areas
All Other Development
Per sq.ft. actual impervious surface area and/or equivalent
2.4 Parks System:
Charge per unit varies depending upon population density; see Table 17
Residential (per Dwelling Unit)
Single Family
DuplexITown Home/Mobile Home/Accessory DU.
Multifamily
Nonresidential (unit varies - see Table 19 for Class description)
Class A (per Room)
Class B (per thousand gross square feet or TGSF)
Class C (per TGSF)
Class D (per TGSF)
Class E (per TGSF)
2.6 Administration Fees:
City of Eugene if based on percentage
City of Eugene if based on flat rate
MWMC per permit application
2.7 Appeal Fee: City of Eugene per SDC appeal
$1,519.10
$331.91
$0.0805
Varies
$1,053.15
Varies
$297.00
$478.50
$594.00
$957.00
$277.86
$0.165
$0.165
$2,924.00
$2,370.00
$1,850.00
$1,090.00
$728.00
$446.00
$265.00
$107.00
5.0%
$60.00
$10.00
$100.00
City of Eugene SDC Methodologies
Fee Schedule -& Formulas
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 4900
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AMENDED SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT
CHARGE METHODOLOGY FOR PARKS SYSTEM; AFFIRMING
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGIES ADOPTED
BY RESOLUTION NOS. 4740, 4748, 4767, 4768, 4770, 4794, 4795, 4827,
4875, 4876 AND 4883; AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NOS. 4740, 4748,
4767, 4768, 4770, 4794, 4795, 4827, 4875, 4876 AND 4883.
The City Council of the City of Eugene finds as follows:
A.
On September 23, 2002, the System Development Charges (SDC) Methodologies
were adopted by Resolution No. 4740.
B.
Resolution No. 4740 has subsequently been amended, most recently by
Resolution No. 4876, which adopted amended Local Stormwater SDC Methodology concerning
Credits, effective July 12, 2006. In addition, SDCs for Local Wastewater System, Stormwater
System, and Transportation System were adjusted for inflation by Administrative Order No. 58-
06-02-F, effective April 3, 2006, and an inflationary adjustment of SDC rates for Regional
Wastewater System was adopted by Resolution No. 4883, effective August 1, 2006.
C.
After comprehensive review of the SDC Methodology for Parks System, a
recommendation was made to amend that Methodology based on inclusion of a charge for all
nonresidential development and a service area-based growth allocation method for neighborhood
parks.
D.
In addition, a recommendation was made that the current SDC Methodology,
which consists of provisions and amendments contained in Resolution Nos. 4740, 4748, 4767,
4768, 4770, 4794, 4795, 4827, 4875, 4876, and 4883, should be affirmed and incorporated into
the SDC Methodology, and those Resolutions be repealed as redundant as of the effective date of
this Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE,
based upon the above findings,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a
Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows:
Section 1.
The amendments to the SDC Methodology for Parks System attached as
Exhibit A are adopted.
Section 2
. The SDC Methodologies are attached as Exhibit B and contain the complete
SDC Methodologies as of the effective date of this Resolution. Exhibit B includes the
Resolution - Page
1 of 2
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070409\S0704095-attA.doc
ATTACHMENT A
amendments referenced in Section 1 of this Resolution, and incorporates the unamended
provisions of Resolution Nos. 4740, 4748, 4767, 4768, 4770, 4794, 4795, 4827, 4875, 4876, and
4883 which are hereby affirmed, re-adopted and incorporated in Exhibit B.
Section 3
. Resolution Nos. 4740, 4748, 4767, 4768, 4770, 4794, 4795, 4827, 4875,
4876, and 4883 are repealed as of the effective date of this Resolution.
Section 4
. This Resolution shall become effective May 7, 2007.
The foregoing Resolution adopted the______ day of April, 2007.
___________________________________
City Recorder
Resolution - Page
2 of 2
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070409\S0704095-attA.doc