The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 8 - Action MWMC SDCEUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Action: Proposed 34odifications to 34etropolitan Wastewater 34anagement Commission Regional Wastewater System Development Charge 34ethodology and Rates Resolution No. 4?94 Adopting an Amended System Development Charge Methodology £or Regional Wastewater System, Amending Resolution No. 4?40, and Repealing Resolution No. 4??6; and Resolution No. 4?95 Adopting Amended System Development Charge Rates £or Regional Wastewater System, and Amending Resolution No. 4?40 Meeting Date: June 28, 2004 Agenda Item Number: 8 Department: Public Works Staff Contact: Fred McVey www. cl. eugene, or. us Contact Telephone Number: 682-5216 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY This is an agenda item for City Council action on resolutions adopting the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission's (MWMC) requested modifications to the regional wastewater system development charge (SDC) methodology and rates. The proposed resolutions implement modifications to the regional wastewater SDC methodology and rates by incorporating changes in Eugene's SDC Methodologies document. BACKGROUND Council Action History In September 2002, the MWMC requested that the cities of Eugene and Springfield adopt a modified regional wastewater SDC methodology and rates. On January 27, 2003, the council adopted the requested regional wastewater methodology by Resolution No. 4748. Prior to Resolution No. 4748, the last adjustment of the regional wastewater SDC was an update to a credit table which was adopted by Administrative Order 58-02-18- F, effective July 1, 2002. The council was notified by memorandum (February 13, 2003) that implementation of the SDC rates resulting from Resolution No. 4748 had been delayed pending the City of Springfield's adoption of the modified regional wastewater methodology and rates as requested by the MWMC. On July 14, 2003, staff presented the council with a proposed resolution formally extending the effective date Resolution 4748 until the City of Springfield adopted the same methodology and rates. The council declined to approve the resolution extending the effective date, but acknowledged that in recognition of provisions of the MWMC intergovernmental agreement (IGA) requiring the uniform implementation of regional wastewater connection charges (SDCs) the implementation of new rates would not be effective until both cities approved such charges. In a City Council work session on September 22, 2003, staff L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040628\S0406288.doc presented a proposed Resolution 4776 adopting adjusted regional wastewater SDC rates based on a settlement agreement between Home Builders Association of Lane County (HBA) and MWMC calling for the use of a Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) and consultant to review the SDC methodology; the council adopted Resolution 4776 on September 24, 2003. After completion of the CAC review process and revisions to the SDC methodology and rates by the MWMC, the council held a work session on the currently proposed modifications to the regional wastewater SDC methodology and rates on May 19, 2004. The council conducted a public hearing on the proposed modifications on June 14, 2004. Policy Issues The policy issue before the council is whether to adopt by resolutions a modified regional wastewater SDC which updates the regional wastewater SDC methodology and rates as requested by the MWMC. Attachment A is a proposed resolution that adopts revisions to the City's SDC Methodologies document to reflect adjustments to the regional wastewater SDC methodology as revised and recommended by the MWMC. Attachment B is a proposed resolution that adopts a revised schedule of regional wastewater SDC rates as calculated based on application of the proposed methodology to the 20-year project list proposed for adoption in conjunction with the MWMC Facilities Plan. The currently proposed changes to the regional wastewater SDC as requested by the MWMC are a result of a comprehensive review of the methodology which involved staff from the cities of Eugene and Springfield, MWMC staff, consultants and attorneys, attorneys from Eugene and Springfield, and a Citizen Advisory Committee. The proposed SDC rates are reflective of the proposed MWMC Facilities Plan which is the subject of a City Council action item immediately preceding this item. The proposed SDC methodology modifications are intended to ensure the equitable recovery of costs of system capacity related to the demands of growth, while ensuring consistency with statutory requirements related to SDCs. The proposed methodology change in-and-of-itself does not cause a significant increase in SDC rates. However, the costs and timing of capacity-related projects in the proposed MWMC Facilities Plan, upon which the improvement fee portion of the SDC is based, result in an approximate 79 percent increase in the regional wastewater SDC rates. The essential issue before the council is whether it concurs with the MWMC that the proposed methodology and rates appropriately recover infrastructure costs related to new development in a fair and equitable manner. Council Goals This agenda item relates to a Council Goal from the 2003-2004 Vision and Goals Statements. Goal: FAIR, STABLE AND ADEQUATE FINANCIAL RESOURCES - A local government whose ongoing financial resources are based on a fair and equitable system of taxation and other revenue sources and are adequate to maintain and deliver municipal services. The proposed SDC rate adjustment provides needed additional financial resources for improvements to the regional wastewater system while incorporating adjustments to provide fairness and equity in the rate. Financial and/or Resource Considerations The proposed regional SDC rates reflect future capacity-related capital improvement needs of the regional wastewater treatment system. The proposed resolution adopts a modified regional wastewater SDC rate which increases from a current rate of $528.86 per typical single family dwelling unit (SFD) to $947.34 per SFD, or an approximate 79% increase. The adjustment would bring Eugene's total L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040628\S0406288.doc wastewater SDC (local and regional combined) to $1,389.66 per typical SFD from the current combined wastewater SDC of $971.18. This adjustment would not substantially change Eugene's ranking of total SDC charges in relation to other Oregon communities for comparable development types. A comparison of the proposed wastewater SDC rates to those of other Oregon communities, for five example development types, was previously provided to the council. The comparison indicates that the proposed combined wastewater SDC rate for residential development would be among the lowest in the state for comparable communities while SDCs for other development types rank variably in comparison to other communities, from mid-range to among the highest in the state. Other Background Information The City of Eugene entered into an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with the City of Springfield and Lane County in 1978 which established the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission. The commission subsequently adopted the MWMC wastewater SDC methodology and rates. In the IGA, the cities of Eugene and Springfield agreed to charge SDCs uniformly throughout the regional wastewater service area. By agreement, City of Springfield staff provide administrative, financial and rate-setting support to the MWMC. In order for these adjustments to be effective within the cities of Eugene and Springfield, both cities must incorporate the modifications into locally adopted SDC methodologies and rates. The City of Springfield adopted the MWMC regional wastewater SDC methodology and rate schedule after a public hearing on June 21, 2004. Following the council's June 14, 2004, public hearing on the proposed resolutions, given time constraints, it was agreed that councilors could pose questions to staff via email. Two councilors responded with email to staff. Councilor Kelly informed staff that the memorandum providing the requested supplementation information included in council packet for the public hearing (as Attachment D to the June 14, 2004, AlS) provided sufficient information to clarify the proposed calculation of the SDC to his satisfaction. Councilor Bettman provided an inquiry on several related topics; these questions and a staff response are provided as Attachment C to this AlS. As partially reflected in the Council Action History on this item, a lengthy and extensive public process has ensued to arrive at this point of action. Throughout the deliberations of the MWMC, CAC and governing bodies, myriad questions and issues from citizens, elected officials and interested parties have been raised and addressed. A large volume of testimony and written information has been entered into the record. As part of the recent responses, MWMC attorney Dave Jewett responded via email to Roxie Cuellar and Councilor Kelley to issues raised by Ms. Cuellar in an email of May 25, 2004. Attachment D to this AlS is a correction to one of the responses provided in Mr. Jewett's email. Additional responses to written testimony by the Home Builders Association of Lane County and its attorney have been provided as an attachment to the AlS for action on the proposed MWMC Facilities Plan and 20- year project list included in the council packet for this June 28, 2004 meeting. In the end, some differences of opinion and interpretation continue to exist; however, the record clearly shows that ample opportunity was provided for the consideration of all issues and viewpoints on this matter. If the council should choose not to adopt the proposed revisions to the regional wastewater SDC rates, the MWMC intergovernmental agreement specifies that the City request in writing that the commission reconsider the proposed revisions. The commission would then put action for reconsideration on its L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040628\S0406288.doc agenda within 45 days of receipt of request. If the council objects to the commission's action after reconsideration, then it may refer the issue to the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) for mediation. The MPC would then provide an advisory and non-binding written recommendation for resolution of the matter within 45 days of referral. The MWMC's ultimate action shall only take effect after the governing bodies are in agreement. Timing Staff provided notification of intent to modify the SDC methodology by resolution on March 15, 2004, and made proposed changes available for public review on April 15, 2004, to enable sufficient time to conduct a public hearing on June 14, 2004, with action to adopt scheduled for June 28, 2004. The timing of these actions was driven by a commitment to complete modifications to the MWMC SDC by July 1, 2004, as stipulated in the Settlement Agreement between MWMC and the Home Builders Association of Lane County (included as Attachment D to the AlS for the May 19, 2004, City Council work session on the proposed MWMC SDCs). Any revisions to the proposed regional wastewater SDC rates or the methodology will require review by the MWMC and may require re-notification of interested persons, extending the period of public review by a minimum of 60 days from the time of notice. If the council adopts the resolutions as proposed, the modified SDC rates will be effective as early as July 1, 2004. Should the council decline to adopt the proposed revisions to the regional wastewater SDC rates, reconsideration by the MWMC and potential review by MPC could extend timing of rate revisions significantly, or indefinitely. Delays in modifying the SDC may result in delay of needed improvements to the regional wastewater facilities. OPTIONS The options available to the council include the following: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4794 and No. 4795, adopting modified MWMC regional wastewater SDC methodology and rates; or, 2. Direct the City Manager to prepare a written request to the MWMC for reconsideration and return to the council at a future date. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Option #1: Adopt Resolutions No. 4794 and No. 4795, adopting modified MWMC regional wastewater SDC methodology and rates. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to adopt Resolution No. 4794 adopting an amended System Development Charge methodology for regional wastewater system, amending Resolution No. 4740, and repealing Resolution No. 4776. Move to adopt Resolution No. 4795 adopting amended System Development Charge rates for regional wastewater system, and amending Resolution No. 4740. L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040628\S0406288.doc ATTACHMENTS A. Proposed Resolution No. 4794 Adopting SDC Methodology Modifications B. Proposed Resolution No. 4795 Adopting SDC Schedule of Rates C. Response to City Council Questions from Public Hearing on MWMC SDC Methodology and Rates D. Memorandum from CH2MHill correcting June 10, 2004, email from Dave Jewett FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Fred McVey Telephone: 682-5216 Staff E-Mail: fred.mcvey~ci.eugene.or.us L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040628\S0406288.doc ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION NO. 4794 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AMENDED SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY FOR REGIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEM; AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 4740; AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 4776. 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 by Resolution Nos. 4748, 4767, 4768, 4770 and 4776. In addition, inflationary adjustments of Systems Development Charges for Local Wastewater System, Stormwater System, and Transportation System were adopted by Administrative Order No. 58-04-04-F, effective April 5, 2004. C. Amendments to the SDC Methodology for Regional Wastewater are needed to reflect the adjustments to the Regional Wastewater SDC Methodology as revised and recommended by the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission. 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 Systems Development Charge Methodology for Regional Wastewater is amended as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. Section 2. Resolution No. 4740 is amended as described in Section 1, and Resolution No. 4776 is repealed, as of the effective date of this Resolution. Section 3. The City Recorder is requested to append a copy of this Resolution to Resolution No. 4740. Section 4. This Resolution shall become effective on July 1, 2004. The foregoing Resolution adopted the __day of ,2004. City Recorder Exhibit A to Resolution No. 4794 CITY OF EUGENE ENGINEERING DIVISION o£ the PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Systems Development Charge Methodologies July 12, 2004 Adopted by Resolution No. 4740 except as amended by Resolution Nos. 4748, 4767, 4768, 4770, 4776, Administrative Order No. 58-04-04-F, and Resolution No. 4794. 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 Appendix F ..... Local System Formulas and General Fee Schedule .................................... F-1 Transportation Appendix B ..... Trans 3ortation System Charge Detail ......................................................... B-1 Figure 2 .......... Trans 3ortation System, Streets ................................................................. B-9 Figure 3 .......... Trans 3ortation System, Off-Street Bicycle Paths ...................................... B-10 Table 3 ........... Trans 3ortation Trip Rates ..................................................................... B-11, 12 Table 4 ........... Trans 3ortation System Valuation Assumptions .......................................... B-13 Table 5 ........... Trans 3ortation 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 ......................................... C1-5 Figure 4.. Local Wastewater System .......................................................................... C1-6 Table 8 ... SDC / HUD BPR Use Codes .............................................................. C1-14-24 Regional 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 9 ........... Stormwater System Development Charge Analysis ..................................... D-5 Table 10 ......... Stormwater SDC-Eligible Project List .......................................................... D-6 Parks Appendix E ..... Parks System Charge Detail ....................................................................... E-1 Table 11 .......... Parks System Development Charge Analysis .............................................. E-2 Figure 6 .......... Parks System ............................................................................................. E-3 City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Table of C6ntents 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 appendices are adopted and made a part hereof: A: Definitions of General Terms and 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 (i.e., 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 Policy #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 increase 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 district 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 50% 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 Iow-income persons is subsequently used for other than housing for Iow 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 bond 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 shall be established or modified considering "the cost of the existing facility or facilities, prior contributions by existing uses, gift or grants from federal or state government or private persons, the value of unused capacity available to future system users, rate-making principles employed to finance publicly owned capital improvements and other relevant factors identified by the local government imposing the fee." City of Eugene SDC Methodologies '~' . · Improvement fees shall be established considering "the cost of projected capital improvements needed to increase the capacity of the systems to which the fee is related." · 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: 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. City of Eugene SDC Methodologies TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF LOCAL SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES (See Appendix C-2 for information regarding the Regional Wastewater SDC) Transportation Wastewater Local (City) Stormwater Parks Cost per trip = $1,363.66 Cost per new residential units Total stormwater unit cost per Cost per Dwelling Unit = (e.g., single-family, mobile home sq.ft, of impervious surface Area = $1,344.65 parks, duplexes, apartments) = a $0.148. Charges are based on base rate of $297.92 plus $0.0722 use. 1-2 Family development per square foot of living area. under 3,000 sq.ft have tiered rates Residential additions will be based on est. imp. surfaco areas. ~ charged $0.0722 per square foot 1-2 Family over 3,000 sq.ft, and ~ of increased living area. Multi-Family & Nonresidential are n, Nonresidential uses = $2.2572 per! based on actual imp. surface area. gallon of daily flow/discharge. Charges for Mfg. Home Parks are based on est. imp. surfaco area per spaco plus actual impervious surfaco area of additional common area. Estimated costs of arterial/collector Estimated non-assessable cost of Estimated non-assessable cost of Unit costs for vadous components. Street system (non assessable cost existing system using costs from system-wide capacity from future ~er lane-mile, costs of intersections, "Gravity Sewer Lines System Valuation capacity-enhancing projects as e~ traffic signals, street lights, structures) Model" developed by CH2M Hill. contained in the Stormwater SDC I~ and off street bicycle paths. Charges are net of all federal grants Project List and available existing ,,~ and outstanding debt. stormwater system capacity. O ~ Existing levels of service for Design flow standards currently Design standards currently used Existing levels of service for ~ various components as used by the city for various land by the City to handle a Five-year various components, as · o established by current City use types. PFUs equivalents are storm, established in Eugene Parks & ~ transportation design standards, determined per Oregon adopted Recreation Plan. u) Plumbing Code. c Street Component: Reimbursement fef~ Reimbursement fee Improvement fee o =~ ~ · 40%lmpr. Fee · 84% · 47% · 60% Reim. Fee Bike ~ Component: Improvement fee Improvement fee ~ "6 · 100%lmpr. Fee · 16% · 53% Charges for new or expanding New or expanding residential uses Charges for new (all) or expanding Charges are based on a fiat rate development are based on the are charged based on a per (Multi-family, Nonresidential) per dwelling unit for all types of cost per trip times the trip rate dwelling unit cost plus a rate per development are based on residential development. There is assigned for a specific square foot of living area. Non- estimated or actual impervious no charge for commercial ,- development type times the residential uses are charged surfaco areas and the total development. o number of units of measurement based on the number of PFUs at a stormwater unit cost per square ~ proposed, rate for the spedfic development foot. Stormwater impact not ~ type. Credit for past trunk sewer attributable to impervious surface eE levy payments will be applied to area will be charged based on ~- the local charge, equivalent surfaco area and the E total stormwater unit cost per square foot. Note: Administration costs are not included in the figures 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 Eliqible Costs -- SDC Impact Measurement (PER UNIT OF SERVICE) Apply SDC to specific types of development City of Eugene SDC Methodologies ' ' 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 as a 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. 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 foe changes in rate factors incorporated in the established SDC methodologies. Changes in rate factors may occur to account for changes in the systems' characteristics City of Eugene SDC Methodologies ' ' 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 The 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, pumhasing, 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 Street light costs Bridge and other structure construction costs · Off-street bicycle paths Bicycle path construction costs Bicycle path light costs City of Eugene SDC Methodologies 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) RegionaIWastewater 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). 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. City of Eugene SDC Methodologies : - - 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 system components that are identified in the adopted 1989 Parks and Recreation Plan and the parks system components identified in Table 11, which are used to calculate the parks SDC, are generally described as parks (neighborhood and community) and facilities which are more particularly described in Appendix E. The current community standard or level of service, for parks infrastructure is the determining factor in calculating the impact of new development on the system. New development can be charged the costs of providing parks infrastructure for the development at the same level of service as the existing community as a whole. The detailed calculation for each component of the parks SDC and the Cost of Service formula are set forth in Appendix E. The parks SDC rate can be found in the current adopted fee schedule in Appendix F. The rate per dwelling unit is determined based on equivalent dwelling units (EDU). The parks SDC for a proposed development is determined by multiplying the rate per dwelling unit (EDU) by the number of dwelling units in the proposed development. The cost per EDU is the sum of all parks system components identified in Appendix E. There is currently no parks SDC for nonresidential development. 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.) City of Eugene SDC Methodologies 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 impact reductions: · 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 pertinent items to document proper functioning as determined by the City Engineer. City of Eugene SDC Methodologies '- 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 physical improvements which are privately constructed as part of the development. The applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the improvements will materially reduce the demand the development will place upon the public stormwater drainage system and the improvements will remain in use and functional for at least twenty years after the development is occupied. (Note: Qualification for SDC stormwater reduction does not necessarily qualify customers for a reduction of the monthly stormwater user service charges which are governed by the Stormwater Service Charge Methodology.) 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 follows: SFD and Duplex Residential development: 100% 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 50% 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. 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. City of Eugene SDC Methodologies 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 Council has formed a Local Improvement District in accordance with provisions in Eugene Code, 1971 section 6.610 (6) or 7.407 (3). 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 as a 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 / 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 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. City of Eugene SDC Methodologies -- 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. 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 from cancellation of an active permit, expiration of a permit without being used, or an approved change of design of an active permit. City of Eugene SDC Methodologies -- 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 such as calculations as outlined in Appendix F. 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. 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 City of Eugene SDC Methodologies -- 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 at the City Manager's office. 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 calculation 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 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. 1. Transportation SYstem 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. Wastewater System 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 3. Stormwater System REDUCTIONS: Retention system (e.g. drywell, infiltration trench) 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 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) City of Eugene SDC Methodologies 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 · 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 52% 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, Improvement 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 m 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 cost 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 (52%) 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 m 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 measures 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 1. Analysis of System Value Total Replacement Cost - Pipe $415,212,3361 Total Replacement Cost - Pumping Stations $15,850,693 City Cost of future Projects within UGB $9,925,332 Other Wastewater Components $3,253,455 2. Analysis of Assessable Amount .Size Total Cost 5-inch $9,434,085 E~ to 48-inch $313,928,688 Capacity ,~formation ~ ~II 4. Calculation of Wastewater SDC Total System Valuation, existing and planned $444,241,8161 :est per unit of capacity per gallon $2.2572 II . Calculation of Reimbursement Percentage I ICity System Capacity (EDUs)in mgd 49.01 100.00% IExisting Use in mgd 21.41 43.7% IPercent Available for New Development in mgd 27.61 56.3% ITotal va~ue of Reserve Capacity (val~e of system) ~ .~/ $62,122,2541 100'00% City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater~' ' TABLE 7 Local Wastewater Plumbing Fixture Unit Rates 1F Single-Famil7 / Duplex Housing $297.92 + (Sq Ft Living Area x $0.0722) 1× Mixed Use with Residential $297.92 + (Sq Ft Living Area x $0.0722) 11 Multi-Family Housing $297.§2 + (Sq Ft Living Area x $0.0722) 12 A, B, & C EIded¥ Housing Attach, Detach, & Group/Retirement Home $297.92 + (Sq Ft Living Area x $0.0722) 13 Residential Hotel $297.92 + (Sq Ft Living Area x $0.0722) 14 Mobile Home Park $297.92 + (Sq Ft Living Area x $0.0722) 15 Hotels, Motels, Lodging 19.0! $43.00 21 Beverage/Food Mfg 39.87 $89.99 24 Wood Products 47.93 $108.19 2X Light Mfg./Pdnting 56.62 $127.80 3X Manufacturing 58.65 $132.38 4X Transportation & Utilities 18.22 $41.13 41 Fire Station 7.75 $17.49 51 Wholesale Trade 21.37 $48.24 54 Retail Trade / Grocery 55.46 $125.18 55 Retail Trade Automotive 7.83 $17.67 59 Retail Trade Other 39.91 $90.08 5A Restaurant - Fast Food 25.44 $57.42 5B Restaurant- Low to Med Turnover 62.47 $141.01 5C Restaurant - Higher Turnover 22.45 $50.67 5D Drinking Establishments 54.98 $124.10 5E ,Take/Bake & Pick Up/Delivery Establishments 26.49 $59.79 5X Retail Trade / Clothing & Dry Goods 12.35 $27.88 61 Financial Offices / Banks 16.99 $38.35 62 Other Services 28.51 $64.35 63 Rental/Storage Services 6.49 $14.65 64 Automotive & Other Repair Services 16.17 $36.50 65 Medical Services 28.75 $64.89 66 Construction Trade Services 13.69 $30.90 67 Government Services, Office/Business Parks Based on specific use of development 68 Education / Cultural 15.66 $35.35 69 ;humhes/Clubs/Organizations 15.70 $35.44 6A1 Laundry Services (Linen, Uniform) 538.96 $1,216.54 6A2 Laundry, Self-Service 299.64 $676.35 6A3 Dry Cleaning Service (with or w/out laundry services) 36.30 $81.94 6B Car Wash 264.54 $597.12 6X Professional/Real Estate/Insurance 67.76 $152.95 7X Entertainment, Recreation & Sports 88.42 $199.58 82 Veterinarian Service 24.79 $55.96 *The unit cost of capacity for the local wastewater system is $2.2572 per gallon per day. The flow per Plumbing Fixture Unit (PFU) is stated as gallons per day based on the size of development and type of land use. Land use types 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 gal/day x $2.2572 -- a cost per PFU of $108.19. 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 Daily flow, wastewater discharge = SCD eligible cost Formula Cost of Service (Per unit of capacity) System valuation (Value of existing + Value of planned) = Unit of capacity Build-out capacity (mgd) Non-Residential Formula: Residential Formula: Cost of Service Cost of Service (per flow estimation units [FEU] (per residential dwelling unit [DU]) (Cost per Gallon per Day / PFU (varies by (Cost per Gallon per Day x base flow for RDU) development type)) x number of PFUs + (Cost per square foot x square feet of living area) = charge for non-residential development = charge for residential development City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater.' ' TABLE 8 Wastewater SDC / HUD BPR* Use Codes * Bureau of Public Records, Housing and Urban Development HUD BPR Eugene Wastewater SDC Land Use Land Use Description Use Code Codes 1F 1111 Single Family Housing 1F. 1119 Common or Open Area - T~3ically In Single Family Area 1F 1120 Two Family Housing Unit-Duplex 1F 1129 Common or Open Area - Typically In Duplex Structure Area 11 1130 Apartment Under Construction 11 1131 Quad 11 1132 Apartment With 1 To 4 Units 11 1133 Apartment With 5To 19 Units 11 1134 Apartment With 20 Units or More 11 1139 Common or Open Area - Typically In Multi-Unit Structure Area 1F 1150 Mobile Home - Not In Mobile Home Park 1F 1151 Mobile Home - Temporary 1F 1159 Common or Open Area - Typically In Mobile Home Area 1F 1160 Houseboat-Separate 12C 1210 Boarding & Rooming Houses 12C 1221 Fraternity & Sorority Houses 12C 1231 Nurses Home 12C 1232 College Dormitory 12C 1239 Other Residence Halls or Dormitories 12A, B, or C 1241 Retirement Home 12C 1251 Convents 12C 1252 Monasteries 12C 1253 Rectories 12C 1259 Religious Quarters 12C 1290 Group Quarters (Military, Forest Service) 13 1300 Residential Hotel or Motel With 75% or More Permanently Occupied 14 1400 Mobile Home Park or Court 15 1510 Hotels, Motels, Lodges, Cabins, Resorts 15 1520 Mobile Home, Temporary Weekly Lodging 15 1590 Other Transient Lodgings (YMCA or YWCA) 15 1900 , Moorages, Houseboat, Commercial 15 1910 Seasonally Occupied Family Quarters 21 2111 Meat Packing Establishments or Slaughtering Plants 21 2113 Poultry & Small Game Dressing & Packing 21 2120 Creamery Multi-Dairy Products 21 2121 Butter, Creamery & Whey / Mfg 21 2122 Cheese Natural & Processed 21 2123 Condensed & Evaporated Milk / Mfg 21 2124 Ice Cream & Frozen Desserts / Mfg 21 2125 Milk Processing & Distribution 21 2131 Canning & Preserving Of Sea foods / Mfg 21 2132 Canning Specialty Foods City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater,. ' ' _ 21 2133 Canning Fruits, Vegetables, Preserves / Mfg 21 2134 Drying & Dehydrating Fruits & Vegetables / Mfg 21 2135 Pickling Of Fruits & Vegetables 21 2137 Frozen Food Processing (Fruits, Vegetables, Specialties) / Mfg 21 2140 Grain Mill Products (Prepared, Concentrated, Supplemented Feeds) 21 2150 Baker~ Products / Mfg 21 2171 Candy & Other Confectioner)/Products / Mfg 21 2185 Beverages, Nonalcoholic, Bottled or Canned / Mfg 21 2195 Roasting Coffee & Coffee Products / Mfg 21 2190 Other Food Preparations & Kindred Products / Mfg 2X 2220 Knit Goods / Mfg 2X 2330 Women's, Misses, Girl's, Children's, Infant's Outerwear / Mfg 2X 2361 Leather Tanning & Finishing / Mfg 2X 2369 Other Leather Products / Mfg 2X 2392 House Furnishings (Except Curtains & Draperies) / Mfg 2X 2393 Textile Bags / Mfg 2X 2394 Canvas Products / Mfg 2X 2395 Pleating, Tucking, Decorative & Novelty Stitching For Trade 24 2400 Lumber & Paper Co.-Multi-Products 66 2410 Logging Camps & Logging Contractors 24 2421 Sawmills & Plannin~ Mills, General / Mfcj 24 2422 Hardwood Dimension & Flooring / Mfg 24 2429 Special Sawmill Products (Shingles, Hoops, Staves) / Mfg 24 2431 Millwork / Mfg 24 2432 Veneer & Plywood / Mf~ 24 2433 Prefabricated Wooden Buildings & Structural Members / Mfg 24 2440 Wooden Containers / Mfg 24 2491 Wood Preserving 24 2499 Other Lumber & Wood Products (Except Furniture) / Mfg 2X 2510 Household Furniture / Mfg 2X 2520 Office Furniture / Mfg 2X 2540 Partitions, Shelving, Lockers & Store Fixtures / Mfg 2X 2599 Other Furniture & Fixtures (Cabinets, Carts, Stools) / Mfg 2X 2620 Paper / Mfg 2X 2642 Envelopes, Printed or Unprinted, Paper, Glassine, Cello / Mfg 2X 2646 Pressed & Molded Pulp Goods / Mf~ 2X 2647 iSanitar7 Paper Products/Mfg 2X 2649 Other Converted Paper & Paper Products (Except Containers)/Mf~ 2X 2650 Paperboard Containers & Boxes / Mf~l 2X 2660 Building Paper & Buildincj Board (Fiber, Siding, Felt) / Mf~ 2X 2710 Newspapers, Publishincj & Printin~ or Publishincj Only / Mfg 2X 2720 Periodicals, Publishing & Printin~ or Publishin~ Only / Mf~ 2X 2730 Books, Publishing & Printing, or Publishin~ Only / Mfg 2X 2740 Commercial Printing / Mf~ 2X 2750 Business Forms, Manifold / Mfg 2X 2760 Cards, Greeting, Except Hand Painted / Mfg 2X 2781 Typesetting For The Printin~ Trade 2X 2789 Other Printing Trade Service Industries (Decals) 2X 2790 Other Printing & Publishing (Maps, Directories) / Mfg 3X 2810 Industrial Inorganic & Organic Chemicals / Mf~ 3X 2820 Plastics, Synthetic Resins, Rubbers & Other Manmade Fibers / Mfg 3X 2860 Gum & Wood Chemicals / Mfg City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater. ' - _ 3X 2850 Paints, Varnishes, Lacquers, Enamels & Allied Products / Mfg 3X 2870 Agricultural Chemicals (Fertilizers, Herbicides) / Mfg 3X 2899 Other Chemicals & Allied Products / Mfg 3X 3140 Miscellaneous Plastic Products / Mfg 3X 3190 Other Fabricated Rubber Products / Mfg 3X 3200 Stone, Clay & Glass Products / Mf~l 3X 3229 Other Glass & Glassware Products (Pressed or Blown) / Mfg 3X 3230 Cement, Hydraulic, Portland, Natural, Masonry, Puzzolan / Mfg 3X 3249 Structural Clay Products / Mfg 3X 3259 Pottery & Related Products / Mfg 3X 3261 Blocks, Concrete & Cinder / Mfg 3X 3262 Concrete Products (Excluding Brick & Block) / Mfg 3X 3263 Concrete (Ready Mixed) / Mfg 3X 3270 Cut Stone Products For Building, Ornamental, Paving, / Mfg 3X 3280 Abrasive, Asbestos & Misc. Nonmetallic Mineral Products / Mfg 3X 3311 Blast Furnace, Steel Works & Rolling / Mfg 3X 3320 Iron & Steel Foundries / Mfg 3X 3360 Nonferrous Foundries (Aluminum, Bronze, Copper, Brass) / Mf~l 3X 3390 Other Primary Metal Industries / Mfs! 3X 3421 Engines & Turbines / Mfg 3X 3423 Construction, Mining & Materials Handling Machinery & Equipment / Mfg 3X 3424 Metalworking Machinery & Equipment / Mfg 3X 3425 Special Industry Machinery (Sawmill Machinery) / Mfg 3X 3426 General Industrial Machinery & Equipment / Mfg 3X 3429 Other Machinery Manufacturing (Pistons, Valves) 3X 3433 Household Electrical Appliances / Mfg 3X 3435 Radio & Television Receiving Sets / Mfg 3X 3437 Electronic Components & Accessories / Mfg 3X 3439 Other Electrical Machinery, Equip. & Supplies Manufacturing 3X 3441 Motor Vehicles & Equipment / Mfg 3X 3443 Ship & Boat Building 3X 3449 Other Transportation Equip. (Campers, Trailers) / Mfg 3X 3491 Metal Cans / Mfg 3X 3492 Cutlery, H& Tools & Hardware / Mfg 3X 3493 Heating Apparatus & Plumbing Fixtures / Mfg 3X 3494 Fabricated Structural Metal Products (Awnings, Boilers) / Mfg 3X 3496 Metal Stamping / Mf~l 3X 3497 Coating, Engraving & Allied Services 3X 3498 Fabricated Wire Products (Misc.) / Mfg 3X 3499 Other Fabricated Metal Products (Irrigation Equipment, Industrial Patterns). 3X 3521 Mechanical Measuring & Controlling Instruments / Mfg 3X 3542 Orthopedic, Prosthetic & Surgical Appliances & Supplies / Mfg 3X 3913 Lapidary Work, Contract & Other Stone Polishing 3X 3930 'Toys, Amusement, Sporting & Athletic Goods / Mfg 3X 3950 Costume Jewelry, Novelties, Buttons & Misc. Notions / Mfg 3X 3997 Signs & Advertising Displays / Mfg 3X 3999 Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing 4X 4111 Railroad Right-of-Way 4X 4112 Railroad Switching & Marshaling Yard 4X 4113 Railroad Terminals, Passenger 4X 4114 Railroad Terminals, Freight 4X 4115 Railroad Terminals, Passenger & Freight City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater. ' ' 4X 4116 Railroad Equipment & Maintenance 4X 4119 Other Railroad Transportation 4X 4211 Terminal, Bus Passenger, Intercity 4X 4214 Maintenance Facilities For Passenger Bus Vehicles 4X 4219 Bus Stops 4X 4221 Freight Trucking Terminals, With or Without Maintenance Facility 4X 4222 Motor Freight Garaging & Maintenance Facility 4X 4223 Moving & Storage, Household 4X 4229 Other Motor Freight Transportation 4X 4291 Taxicab Transportation 4X 4311 Airport & Flying Field Landing/Takeoff Fields 4X 4312 Airport & Flying Field Terminals (Passenger) 4X 4313 Airport & Flying Field Terminals (Freight) 4X 4314 Airport & Flying Field Terminals (Passenger & Freight) 4X 4315 Aircraft Storage & Equipment Maintenance 4X 4319 Other Airports & Flying Fields Necessary 4X 4391 Heliport Landing/Takeoff Pads 4X 4399 Other Aircraft Transportation 4X 4500 Highway & Street Rights-of-Way 4X 4508 Bridges - Railroad, Vehicular or Pedestrian 4X 4510 Freeways, (i.e., Routes With No At-Grade Intersections) 4X 4520 Expressways, (i.e. Routes With Grade Intersect Only At Maior Streets) 4X 4550 Collector/Distributor Streets 4X 4570 Alleys, Public 4X 4571 Bicycle Path 4X 4575 Pedestrian Walkway, Stairway, Etc. 4X 4580 Rights-Of-Way, Roads-Proposed Roadway 4X 4590 Private Roads 4X 4599 Other Rights-of-Way Related 4X 4600 Automobile Parking (Non-Structure/Retail) 4X 4601 Automobile Parking (Non-Structure/Service) 4X 4602 Automobile Parking (Non-Structure/Government) 4X 4603 Automobile Parking (Non-Structure/Education) 4X 4604 Automobile Parking (Non-Structure/Transportation) 4X 4605 Automobile Parking (Non-Structure/Recreation) 4X 4606 Automobile Parking (Non-Structure/Industrial) 4X 4607 Automobile Parking (Non-Structure/Utility) 4X 4608 Automobile Parking (Non-Structure/Religious) 4X 4610 Automobile Parking (Structure/Retail) 4X 4611 Automobile Parking (Structure/Service) 4X 4612 Automobile Parking (Structure/Government) 4X 4613 Automobile Parking (Structure/Education) 4X 4614 Automobile Parking (Structure/Transportation) 4X 4615 Automobile Parking (Structure/Recreation) 4X 4616 Automobile Parking (Structure/Industrial) 4X 4711 Telephone Exchange Stations 4X 4719 Telephone Equipment Repair & Servicing] 4X 4721 Radio Telegraph Message Center 4X 4731 Radio Broadcasting Studios, Commercial & Public Educational 4X 4732 Radio Broadcasting Transmitters & Towers, Commercial & Public Education 4X 4739 Other Radio Communication 4X 4741 Television Broadcasting Studio, Commercial & Public Educational City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater 4X 4742 Television Transmitters & Towers, Commercial & Public Educational 4X 4749 Other Television Communication 4X 4759 Radio & Television Transmitter, Combined, Commercial or Public Education 4X 4810 Electric & Power Companies 4X 4811 Electric Transmission Right-of-Way 4X 4812 Electric Generation Plant 4X 4813 Electricity Regulating Substations 4X 4819 Other Electric Utility 4X 4823 Gas Storage Tanks & Distribution Facilities, Mfg or Natural 4X 4824 Gas Pressure Control Stations 4X 4831 Water Pipeline Right-of-Way (EWEB Canal) 4X 4832 Water, Domestic Supply, Treatment Plant 4X 4833 Water Storage (Flood Control Dam, Water Tower) 4X 4835 Pumping Station, Domestic Water 4X 4839 Water, Domestic Supply, Aqueduct 4X 4841 Sewage Treatment Plant 4X 4842 Sewage Sludge Drying Beds 4X 4843 Sewage Pressure Control Station 4X 4852 Garbage Grinding Station, Central 4X 4853 Composting Plants 4X 4854 Sanitar7 Land Fill 4X 4855 Refuse Disposal, Except Industrial Wastes 4X 4856 Industrial Waste Disposal 4X 4859 Other Solid Waste Disposal 4X 4911 Petroleum Pipeline Right Of Way 4X 4921 Freight Forwarding Service 4X 4922 Crating & Packing Service 4X 4923 Travel Arranging Services (Information, Freight Agencies) 4X 4924 Transportation Ticket Services (Travel Agency, Ticket Office) 4X 4990 Other Transportation, Communication & Utilities 51 5111 Automobiles & Other Motor Vehicles / Whsle 51 5112 Automotive Equipment / Whsle 51 5113 Tires & Tubes / Whsle 51 5121 Drugs, Drug Proprietaries & Druggist's Sundries / Whsle 51 5122 Paints & Varnishes (Shellac, Lacquers, Enamels) / Whsle 51 5129 Other Drugs, Chemicals & Allied Products / Whsle 51 5131 Dr~ Goods, Piece Goods & Notions / Whsle 51 5132 Apparel & Accessories, Hosier7 & Lingerie / Whsle 51 5133 Footwear / Whsle 51 5141 Groceries, General Line / Whsle 51 5142 Dairy Products / Whsle 51 5143 ,Poultr~ Products / Whsle 51 5144 Confectioner7 / Whsle 51 5145 Fish, Fresh / Whsle 51 5146 Meat & Meat Products / Whsle 51 5147 Fruits & Vegetables /Whsle 51 5149 Other Groceries & Related Products / Whsle 51 5151 Cotton, Raw / Whsle 51 5152 Grain / Whsle 51 5153 Hides, Skins & Pelts /Whsle 51 5154 Exporters Of Leaf Tobacco 51 5155 Wool, Raw / Whsle City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater. ' ' 51 5156 Livestock / Whsle 51 5157 Horses / Whsle 51 5159 Farm Products, Raw (Except Cotton, Grain or Livestock) / Whsle 51 5161 Electrical Apparatus & Equipment; Wiring Supplies & Construction Equipment 51 5162 Electrical Appliances, TV & Radio Sets / Whsle 51 5163 Electronic Parts & Equipment / Whsle 51 5171 Hardware / Whsle 51 5172 Plumbing & Heating Equipment & Supplies / Whsle 51 5173 Air Conditioning, Refrigerated Equipment & Supplies / Whsle 51 5181 Commercial & Industrial Machinery, Equipment & Supplies/Whsle 51 5182 Farm Machinery & Equipment / Whsle 51 5183 Professional Equipment & Supplies/Whsle 51 5184 Equipment & Supplies For Service Establishments / Whsle 51 5185 Transportation Equipment & Supplies (Except Motor Vehicles)/Whsle 51 5189 Other Machinery, Equipment & Supplies / Whsle 51 5191 Metals & Minerals (Except Petroleum Products & Scrap) / Whsle 51 5192 Petroleum Bulk Stations & Terminals / Whsle 51 5193 Scrap & Waste Materials / Whsle 51 5194 Tobacco & Tobacco Products / Whsle 51 5195 Beer, Wine & Distilled Alcoholic Beverages / Whsle 51 5196 Paper & Paper Products ! Whsle 51 5197 Furniture & Home Furnishings/Whsle 51 5198 Lumber & Construction Materials / Whsle 51 5199 Other Wholesale Trade 5X 5211 Lumber Yards / Ret 5X 5212 Building Materials / Ret 5X 5220 Plumbing & Heating Equipment / Ret 5X 5230 Paint, Glass & Wallpaper / Ret 5X 5240 Electrical Supplies / Ret 5X 5251 Hardware Stores / Ret 5X 5252 Farm Equipment / Ret 5X 5310 Department Stores / Ret 5X 5320 Mail Order Houses / Ret 5X 5330 Limited Price Variety Stores / Ret 5X 5340 Merchandise Vending Machine Operators / Ret 5X 5350 Selling Organizations, Direct, Headquarters of Door-To-Door 5X 5391 Dry Goods & General Merchandise / Ret 5X 5392 General Stores / Ret 54 5410 Grocery Stores, With or Without Fresh Meat / Ret 54 5421 Meat Markets / Ret 54 5422 Sea Food Markets / Ret 54 5430 Fruit & Vegetable Stands / Ret 54 5440 Candy, Nut & Confectionery / Ret 54 5450 Dairy Products Stores / Ret 54 5461 ~Retail Bakeries / Mfg 54 5462 Bakeries, Nonmfg, Retail 54 5491 Egg & Poultry Dealers / Ret 54 5499 Other Retail Trade - Food 55 5511 New & Used Cars & Trucks / Ret 55 5512 Automobiles, Used Cars & Trucks Only / Ret 55 5520 Tires, Batteries & Accessories / Ret 55 5530 Automobile Service Stations, With or Without Minor Repair Service City of Eugene SDC Methodologi s Wastewater, ' - _ 55 5591 Marine Craft & Accessories / Ret 55 5592 Aircraft Dealers / Ret 55 5599 Other Retail Trade - Auto trailers, Mobile Homes, Motorcycles 5X 5610 Clothing Stores, Men's & Boy's / Ret 5X 5620 Clothing Stores, Women's Read)/To Wear / Ret 5X 5630 Women's Accessories & Specialties / Ret 5X 5640 Children's & Infant's Wear / Ret 5X 5650 Famil)/Clothing Stores / Ret 5X 5660 Shoe Stores, Famil)/, Men's, Women's or Children's / Ret 5X 5670 Custom Tailors / Ret 5X 5680 Furriers / Retail 5X 5690 Other Retail Trade-Apparel & Accessories 5X 5711 Furniture / Ret 5X 5712 Floor Covering Stores / Ret 5X 5713 Draperies, Curtains & Upholste~/Ret 5X 5714 China, Glassware & Metalware Stores / Ret 5X 5719 Other Furniture, Home Furnishings & Equipment / Ret 5X 5720 Household Appliances / Ret 5X 5731 Radios, TV's, Stereos / Ret 5X 5732 Music Supplies / Ret 5X 5733 Calculators, Computers & Other Office Machines / Ret 5A/B/C 5810 Eating Places (Food & Both Food & Alcoholic Beverages) 5D 5820 Bars, Drinking Establishments 59 5910 Drug & Proprietar~/Ret 59 5920 Liquor, Wine & Beer (Packaged) / Ret 59 5931 Antique Stores / Ret 59 5932 Secondhand Merchandise / Ret 59 5941 Book Stores, New / Ret 59 5942 Stationer7 Stores / Ret 59 5951 Sporting Goods / Ret 59 5952 Bicycle & Bic)/cle Parts Dealers ! Ret 59 5961 Feed Grain & Hay Stores / Ret 59 5969 Other Farm & Garden Supplies (Nurseries) / Ret 59 5970 Jewelr7, Precious & Precious Metals, Including Custom Made/Ret 59 5981 Fuel Dealers, Coal, Wood, Ice / Ret 59 5982 Fuel Oil Dealers / Ret 59 5983 Bottled Gas / Ret 59 5991 Florists / Retail 59 5992 Cigars & Cigarettes / Ret 59 5993 Magazines & Newspapers / Ret 59 5994 Camera Shops & Photographic SuppI)/Stores / Ret 59 5995 Gift, Novelt)/& Souvenir Shops (Ceramic Shop) / Ret 59 5996 Optical Goods Stores / Ret 59 5999 Other Retail Trade-Artist Supply, Luggage Shop, Pet Shop 61 6111 Banking Services 61 6112 Bank-Related Functions 61 6121 Savings & Loan Associations 61 6122 Agriculture, Business & Personal Credit Services (Credit Union) 61 6129 Other Credit Services (Loan Co.) 61 6131 Securit)/Brokers, Dealer & Flotation Services 61 6132 Commodit)/Contracts Brokers & Dealers Services 61 6133 Securit)/& Commodity Exchange City of Eugene SDC Methodologi s Wastewater ' - 6X 6141 Insurance Carriers 6X 6142 Insurance Agents, Brokers & Services 6X 6151 Real Estate Operators (Except Developers) & Lessors 6X 6152 Real Estate Agents, Brokers & Management Services 6X 6153 Title & Trust Companies 6X 6154 Real Estate Subdividing & Developing Services 6X 6155 Real Estate Operative Builders 6X 6159 Other Real Estate & Related Services 6X 6160 Holding & Investment Services 6X 6190 Other Finance, Insurance & Real Estate Services 6A3 6211 Laundering, Dry Cleaning & Dyeing Services (Except Rug Cleaning) 6A1 6212 Linen Supply & Industrial Laundry Services 6A1 6213 Diaper Service 6A2 6214 Laundries, Self-Service 6A3 6215 Rug Cleaning & Repairing Plants 62 6220 Photographic Services (Including Commercial) 62 6231 Beauty Services 62 6232 Barber Services 62 6241 Funeral & Crematory Services 62 6242 Cemeteries 62 6251 Pressing & Alteration, & Clothing Repair Shops 62 6252 Fur Garments, Cleaning, Repairing, & Storage 62 6253 Shoe Repair Shops 62 6290 Other Personal Services 62 6311 Advertising Agencies 62 6312 Outdoor Advertising Services 62 6319 Other Advertising Services, NEC 62 6320 Collection Agencies, Accounts (Except Real Estate) 62 6332 Blueprinting & Photocopying Services 62 6339 :Stenographic Services & Other Duplicating & Mailing Services 62 6341 Window Cleaning Services 62 6342 Disinfecting & Exterminating Service 62 6349 Building Maintenance, Janitorial, & Similar Services 62 6350 News Syndicate Services 62 6360 Commercial Employment Agencies 63 6371 Farm Product Warehousing & Storage (Barns, Livestock Shelters) 63 6372 Stockyards (Not Exclusively For Fattening Livestock) 63 6373 Refrigerated Warehousing, Except Food Lockers 63 6374 Rental Of Cold Storage Lockers 63 6375 Commercial Warehousing & Storage 63 6379 Industrial Warehousing & Storage 62 6391 Research Development & Testing Services 62 6392 Business & Management Consulting Services 62 6393 Detective & Protective Services 62 6394 Equipment Rental & Leasing Services 62 6395 Photographic Laboratories, Not Manufacturing 62 6396 Trading Stamp Redemption Store 62 6397 Automobile & Truck Rental Services 62 6398 Motion Picture Distribution & Services 62 6399 Other Business Svc (Garbage Collctn; Sewer or Answering Svc) 6B 6412 Car Wash 64 6411 Automobile Repair Shops, General City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater 64 6419 Other Automobile Services 64 6491 Electric Appliance Repair (Except Radio, TV, or Refrigeration) 64 6492 Television & Radio Repair Services 64 6493 Watch, Clock & Jewelry Repair Services 64 6494 Re-upholstery & Furniture Repair Services 64 6499 Other Repair Services (Tool, Locksmith, Musical Instrument, Hydraulic) 6X 6500 Professional Office Building 65 6511 Physicians Services 65 6512 Dental Services 65 6513 Hospital Services 65 6514 Medical Laboratory Services 65 6515 Dental Laboratories 65 6516 Convalescent Homes, Sanitariums, Nursing Homes 65 6517 Medical Clinic, Out- Patient Service 65 6519 Other Medical & Health Services 6X 6520 Legal Services 6X 6591 Architectural & Engineering Services 6X 6592 Scientific & Educational Research Services 6X 6593 Accounting, Auditing & Bookkeeping Services 6X 6599 Other Professional Services 66 6611 Building Construction-General Contractor Services 66 6619 Other General Construction Contractor Services 66 6621 Plumbing, Heating & Air Conditioning Services 66 6622 Painting, Paper Hanging & Decorating Services 66 6623 Electrical Work / Contractors 66 6624 Masonry, Stonework, Tile Setting & Plastering Services 66 6625 Carpentry Work / Contractors 66 6626 Roofin~ & Sheet Metal Services 66 6627 Concrete Construction, Other Than Paving, Foundation & Excavation 66 6628 Water Well Drilling / Contractors 66 6629 Other Special Construction Trade Services 67 6710 Executive, Legislative & Judicial Functions (Offices, Courts) 67 6719 Other Publicly Owned Property 67 6721 Police Protection & Related Activities 67 6722 Fire Stations, Community Fire Protection 67 6729 Other Protective Functions & Their Related Activities 67 6730 Post Offices & Related Facilities 67 6741 Prisons, State, Federal or Other Civil Government 67 6749 Other Correctional Institutions 67 6755 Recruitin~l Station, U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, etc. 67 6759 Other Military Bases & Reservation 6X 6810 School District Administration Office 68 6811 Nursery Schools 68 6812 Elementary Schools 68 6813 Junior High Schools 68 6814 Senior High Schools 68 6815 Private Handicap Schools 68 6816 Parochial Schools 68 6821 Universities & Colleges 68 6822 Junior Colleges 68 6823 Theological Seminaries 68 6831 Vocational or Trade Schools City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater ' ' _ 68 6832 Business & Stenographic Schools 68 6833 Barber & Beauty Schools 68 6834 Art & Music Schools 68 6835 Dance Studios & Schools 68 6836 Driving Schools 68 6839 'Other Special Training & Schooling (Language, Modeling) 69 6911 Churches, Temples, Sunday School Facilities 69 6919 Other Religious Activities (Retreats, Camps, Diocesan Offices) 69 6920 Welfare & Charitable Services (Red Cross, Salvation Army) 69 6991 Business Associations, (Grange Halls, Trade or Farm Assn.) 69 6992 Professional Membership Organizations 69 6993 Labor Unions & Similar Labor Organizations 69 6994 Civic, Social & Fraternal Associations 69 6999 Misc. Services (Historical Clubs, City Clubs, Youth Projects) 68 7111 Libraries 68 7112 Museum, Historical Exhibit 68 7113 Art Galleries 68 7119 Other Cultural Activities 68 7123 Arboreta & Botanical Gardens 7X 7212 Theater, Motion Picture, Indoor 7X 7213 Drive-In Motion Picture Theater 7X 7214 Theater, Legitimate Stage 7X 7219 Other Entertainment Assembly 7X 7221 Stadium, Football, Baseball, Track & Field or Other 7X 7223 Race Track Operation, Horse, Dog, Automobile 7X 7231 Auditorium 7X 7232 Exhibition Hall 7X 7239 Other Miscellaneous Assembly 7X 7290 Other Public Assembly 7X 7311 Fairground 7X 7312 Amusement Park 7X 7391 Penny Arcades 7X 7393 Golf Driving Ranges 7X 7399 Other Amusements (Pool Hall, Shooting Range) 7X 7411 Golf Course, Without Country Club 7X 7412 Golf Course, With Country Club 7X 7413 Tennis Courts 7X 7414 Ice Skating Rinks 7X 7415 Roller Skating Rinks 7X 7416 Riding Stable 7X 7417 Bowling Alleys 7X 7419 Other Sports Activities 7X 7421 Pla)/Lot or Tot Lot (Preschool or Elementary School-Aged Children) 7X 7422 Playground, Equipped (Not Part of Another Facility) 7X 7423 Pla)/Fields or Athletic Fields 7X 7424 Recreation Center, General 7X 7425 Gymnasiums & Athletic Clubs 7X 7429 Other Playground & Athletic Areas 7X 7431 Swimming Beach, Designated 7X 7432 Swimming Pool, Indoor or Covered (Not Part of Residential Use) 7X 7442 Boat Rentals & Boat Access Sites 7X 7449 Other Marinas City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater '- _ 7X 7491 Camping & Picnickin9 Areas 7X 7499 Other Recreation Not Elsewhere Classified 7X 7520 Group or Organized Camps (Girl Scout & Boy Scout, etc.) 7X 7620 Park, Ornamental (Plaza or Monument or Traffic Circle, etc.) 7X 7625 Park, Private Leisure 7X 7630 Open Space, Natural Area, Wetland 7X 7690 Other Parks 7X 7900 Other Cultural, Entertainment & Recreational Activities No SDC Use Code Assigned 8010 Orchards, Tree Fruit or Nut No SDC Use Code Assigned 8020 Intensive Grain or Field Crop No SDC Use Code Assigned 8030 Bush, Fruit, Berries No SDC Use Code Assigned 8040 Pasture, Cows, Sheep, Cattle No SDC Use Code Assigned 8120 Farm, Predominant Crop - Cash Grain (Wheat, Corn, etc.) No SDC Use Code Assigned 8130 Farm, Predominant Crop - Field Crop Except Cash Grain or Fiber No SDC Use Code Assigned 8141 Farm, Predominant Crop - Tree Fruits (Pear, Date, Lemon, etc.) No SDC Use Code Assigned 8142 Farm, Predominant Crop - Tree Nuts No SDC Use Code Assigned 8143 Farm, Predominant Crop - Vegetables, Ground Fruits No SDC Use Code Assigned 8150 Farm, Predominant Product - Dai~ Goods (Milk, Cheese, etc.) No SDC Use Code Assigned 8161 Farm, Predominant Activity - Cattle Raising No SDC Use Code Assigned 8170 Farm, Predominant Activity - Poultry Raising (Incl. Egg Products) No SDC Use Code Assigned 8180 Farm, General, No Predominant Crop or Activity No SDC Use Code Assigned 8192 Farm, Predominant Activity - Nurser)/or Flower Stock No SDC Use Code Assigned 8194 Farm, Predominant Activity - Horse Raising No SDC Use Code Assigned 8199 Other Agricultural & Related Activities No SDC Use Code Assigned 8213 Grist Milling Services No SDC Use Code Assigned 8219 Other Agricultural Processing Services 82 8221 Veterinarian Service 82 8222 Animal Hospitals & Other Veterinar~ Service No SDC Use Code Assigned 8223 Poult~ Hatcheries No SDC Use Code Assigned 8229 Animal Breeding & Other Husbandry Services (Worm Hatche~) No SDC Use Code Assigned 8310 Timberlands No SDC Use Code Assigned 8321 Forest Nurseries No SDC Use Code Assigned 8390 Guard Station, Game Management Area & Other Forestr~ Activities No SDC Use Code Assigned 8542 Quarrying - Crushed & Broken Stone Including Riprap No SDC Use Code Assigned 8543 Quar~ing - Sand & Gravel No SDC Use Code Assigned 8553 Crude Petroleum & Gas Field Services No SDC Use Code Assigned 8900 Other Resource Production & Extraction No SDC Use Code Assigned 9100 Vacant, Unused, Undeveloped Land No SDC Use Code Assigned 9101 Broadleaf Brush No SDC Use Code Assigned 9102 Stump Land, Cutover Land No SDC Use Code Assigned 9103 Sand Dunes No SDC Use Code Assigned 9220 Non-reserve Forests No SDC Use Code Assigned 9310 Rivers, Creeks, Streams No SDC Use Code Assigned 9320 Lakes, Ponds, Reservoirs No SDC Use Code Assigned 9390 Other Water Areas (Swamps) No SDC Use Code Assigned 9395 Sand Bars No SDC Use Code Assigned 9400 Unused Building or Structure No SDC Use Code Assigned 9410 Vacant Shop or Office City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater Appendix C2 Regional Wastewater System Charge Detail City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Wastewater~ . _ System Development Charge Methodology Prepared for Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission partners in wastewater management March 26, 2004* *As updated with minor technical corrections and nonsubstantive revisions through April 15, 2004 Contents System Development Charge Methodology ........................................................................... 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 System Development Charge Methodology ................................................................ 2 Overview .............................................................................................................. 2 Methodology Element One: Determine Growth Capacity Needs ............... 4 Step One - Capacity Parameters ................................................................. 4 Step Two - Growth Capacity Requirements ............................................. 6 Methodology Element Two: Develop Cost Basis ........................................... 6 Step One - System Valuation ...................................................................... 7 Step Two - Existing System Allocation ..................................................... 7 Step Three - Project Cost Allocation .......................................................... 8 Step Four - Adjustments ............................................................................ 11 Methodology Element Three: Develop SDC Schedule ................................ 12 Methodology Element Four: Calculate Revenue Offsets and Credits ....... 12 Past Payments ............................................................................................. 13 Future Payments ........................................................................................ 13 Appendixes A System 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 .................................................................... 1 2 Example Calculation for Single (Average Flow) Capacity Parameter .................................3 3 Summary of Facility Process Component Allocation to System Capacity Parameters ..... 6 4 Existing System Available Capacity by Parameter ................................................................. 8 5 Summary of Project Type Allocation Criteria ........................................................................ 10 6 Growth Allocation Percentages by Project Type ................................................................... 11 B-1 Design Criteria Basis For Unit Processes Driven By Peak Flow ....................................... B-1 C-1 Capacity Summary of MWMC Liquids Facilities .............................................................. C-1 C-2 Projected 2025 Peak Flow Breakdown ................................................................................. C-3 C-3 Capacity Summary of MWMC Biosolids Facilities (annual average dry tons per year) .......................................................................................................................................... C-5 E-1 GO Bond Credit per $1,000 Assessed Value By Annexation Year .................................... E-1 SEA31003271388(d g).doc SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY Figures I Overview of MWMC SDC Methodology ............................................................................ 2 2 Existing System Allocation ................................................................................................... 3 3 Project Cost Allocation .......................................................................................................... 9 4 SDC Schedule Development ............................................................................................... 12 SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 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, when the change 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 223.297-223.314), and with the guidance of a Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) appointed by MWMC. Table I 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 MWMC Methodology Reimbursement Fee Determine that existing capacity exists Explicitly calculates the portion of existing capacity available to new users based on rated design capacities. Methodology based on, when applicable: Methodology includes: (a) Rate-making principles employed to finance (a) Consideration of capital financing costs publicly-owned capital improvements (b) Adjustment for grant-funded facilities (b) Prior contributions by existing users (c) Valuation based on appreciated cost (i.e., adjusted for (c) Gift or grants inflation) (d) Value of unused capacity or cost of existing (d) Determination of unused capacity facilities (e) Other relevant factors Promote objective of future system users (1) Includes a credit against SDCs for properties subject to contributing no more than an equitable share of past general obligation bond debt service charges through existing system costs property tax payments. (2) Provides guidance to calculate a credit against SDCs for future estimated user charge payments used to fund capital included on the SDC project list. Improvement Fee Methodology demonstrates consideration of Provides a structured process for allocation of capital project projected costs of capital improvements identified costs that is to be applied to an adopted project list in an adopted plan or list SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY TABLE 1 Summary of Key Methodological Requirements Oregon Law Requirement MWMC Methodology Methodology demonstrates consideration of the Allocates future improvement costs to growth in proportion to need for increased capacity in the system to meetcapacity requirements future users' demands Combined Fee Demonstrate that charge is not based on Determines total growth capacity requirements and the portion providing the same capacity of capacity to be met through existing system available capacity and future capacity expansion. Calculates a weighted average cost of capacity. System Development Charge Methodology Overview The SDC methodology for MWMC is based on a combined reimbursement and improvement structure, as shown in Figure 1. The methodology consists of the following elements: · Determine capacity needs · Develop cost basis · Develop SDC schedule · Calculate revenue offsets and credits FIGt IRE 1--OVERVIEW OF MWMC SDC METHODOLOGY Existing Demand I Growth Demand : Existing Facilities I New facilities : I ' · Existing ~' ~ Capacity ($) New Capacity ($) ] · : Growth units (Avg. Flow, Peak Flow, BCD, TSS) : Average Flow (gal.) Peak Flow (gal.) BCD (lbs) Past payments Future Payments SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY The reimbursement fee is based on the value of available capacity in the system that will serve growth. The improvement fee is based on future facility costs associated with providing growth's additional 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 units projected for the period 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 parameter) 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 total SDC 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* Existing Future Element Total System Expansion Determine Capacity Needs Systemwide Capacity (mgd) 60 50 10 Existing Users (mgd) 45 45 0 Growth (mgd) 15 5 10 Determine Cost Basis Needs 10% 100% Systemwide Cost $50,000,000 $12,000,000 Growth Cost $17,000,000 $5,000,000 $12,000,000 Determine SDC Schedule Weighted Average Unit Cost ($/mgd) $1,133,333 $333,333 $800,000 User Capacity Requirement (mgd) 0.00035 0.00035 0.00035 Total SDC $396.67 $116.67 $280.00 *Example only; not MWMC specific SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 3 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY The example reimbursement 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 mgd existing +10 mgd expansion) = 15 mgd total. At this point the SDC schedule can be developed. First, the weighted average unit costs are developed. This is accomplished by dividing the reimbursement fee and improvement fee cost bases by the total growth capacity units (15 mgd in this case). By dividing the individual fee elements by the total growth units, the 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/15 mgd) and $800,000 per mgd ($12 million/15 mgd), respectively, for reimbursement and improvement elements; and $1.1 million per mgd ($17 million/15 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 cost per unit ($1.13 per gallon per day) multiplied by the 350-gallon-per-day user requirements. As the example demonstrates, 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 improvement fees. Recovers cost associated with existing 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 capacity. 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- Capacity Parameters The appropriate capacity measure relates to the sizing criteria of the wastewater system, and may, to improve equity, require consideration of multiple parameters 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 measures or parameters used in the methodology are: SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY · 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 (NPDES) permit. Because the NPDES 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 "capacity." The dry season maximum month flow includes base flow (customer flow) and the baseline or dry season infiltration and inflow (I/I). · Peak Flow-The peak hour flow in the wet season associated with the 5-year, 24-hour storm event. Peak flow includes average flow and the additional increment of wet weather I/I. · 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 a measurement of wastewater strength. · Total Suspended Solids-Solids in the wastewater that are 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 projected 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 facihty 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 and/or peak) and remove some other parameter not represented by BOD or TSS such as screenings, grit, or pathogens? These questions are answered by the functional performance component. The design basis considers 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 projec, ts that provide overall support for the wastewater system, a separate category of "indirect" support facilities is used to provide for reallocation of these support-type costs across all of the system capacity parameters. SEA31003271388(DG).OOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY 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 ¼ % ...... 1 Collection system pump stations ¼ ~ ...... 1 Preliminary treatment ¼ 3/. ...... 1 Primary treatment ¼ -- ¼ Y2 -- 1 Secondary treatment ¼ .. y2 1/. .. 1 Disinfection/outfall ¼ % ...... 1 Biosolids (same for all three subcomponents) .... Y~ Y~ -- 1 Tertiary filters ¼ -- ¼ Y~ -- 1 Reuse facilities 1 ........ 1 Odor control .... Y~ ¼ -- 1 '1 Peak flow management -- I ..... Support facilities (Indirects) ........ 1 I 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 defined as a 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 planning horizon when developing facility plans (see DEQ Guidance for Development of Wastewater Facilities Plans, 2000). To determine the capacity required by growth, the capacity required by existing users is subtracted from the capacity 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 I/I 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: · 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. SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY · Project Cost Allocation (Improvement Fee)-The method for allocating 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 - 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 national 20-city average Construction Cost Index from the time of construction to estimate current values. The inflation adjusted cost approach recognizes 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 reimbursement fee cost basis, is a three-step allocation process1 comprised of the following steps, as illustrated in Figure 2: R-1. 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 available 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 component (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 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. If the current capacity requirement is equal to or greater than the existing capacity, then there is no available capacity, and none of the costs related to that parameter 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 these figures is provided in Appendix C. 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 "r' in the number sequence. SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY FIGURE 2--EXISTING SYSTEM ALLOCATION Reimbursement Fee Cost Basis TABLE 4 Existing System Available Capacity by Parameter Average Flow Peak Flow BOD TSS Variable (mgd) (mgd) (lbs/day) (lbs/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 (%) 10.5% 0% 17% 9.6% Source: 2004 Facilities Plan Step Three- Project Cost Allocation The project cost allocation methodology, for use in determining the improvement fee cost basis, is a four-step allocation process consisting of the following steps: I-1. Allocate project costs to facility process components (e.g., primary treatment, secondary treatment). I-2. Allocate costs by components to system capacity parameters (e.g., average flow, peak flow). I-3. Allocate project costs to type (capacity improvement, performance upgrade, or rehabilitation). 1-4. Allocate costs to user type (existing customers or projected growth). SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY The project cost allocation methodology provides an equitable basis for determining the projects or portions of projects that are related to growth capacity needs and are, thereby, included in the improvement fee portion of the SDC calculation. The methodology is not tied to a specific list of projects intended to be funded by SDCs (20-year project list), but is intended to provide a consistent framework for allocation of future projects to growth. Each step of the methodology is described below. The general allocation process is also presented graphically in Figure 3. FIGURE 3--PROJECT COST ALLCOATION STEP M · · ~ STEP I-2 · · ~ STEP I-4 · · ~, $ ! $ % of Total Future ~ % of Capacity Allocation Basis Load 0% Expansion The allocation of future projects to facility process components is generally fairly straightforward, as most projects relate directly to an individual component or support the entire treatment system. The refinement of the facility component allocation process for MWMC 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 treatment) will also play a role in future peak flow management. 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 relative to the expansion or improvement of each applicable component. SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY The allocation fractions from Table 3 are used to distribute costs by facility component to capacity parameter, as was done for the existing system cost allocations. The basis for these allocations is described in Appendix B. Step I-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 and/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 Improvements- Projects that increase system capacity by increasing the level of performance provided by facilities. Unlike '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 enhance system capacity. Capacity and performance upgrade projects can be new facilities, or upgrade/expansion of existing facilities. Rehabilitation projects are the replacement of outdated or worn out equipment or facilities. 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 shown in Table 5. These criteria should be applied in the development of specific projects for inclusion in the appropriate planning . document or 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 Project Type Potential Criteria Capacity Adds new facilities/expands existing facilities Provides new liquids treatment or biosolids capacity beyond existing system design standard or beyond the current permitted capacity Performance Improvements Adds new facilities/improves existing facilities Provides capacity/enhanced capability sized for total future capacity needs Driven by new regulatory requirement Driven by increase in community performance standard Technological efficiencies Rehabilitation Replaces existing facility or portion of facility Does not serve growth either through existing available or new capacity Preserves existing facility performance/capacity SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY Once project costs have been allocated to system component and project type categories, and the costs 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 of 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 expansion = 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 requirement. Table 6 summarizes the growth allocation percentages by project type. The documentation for these figures is provided in Appendix C. TABLE 6 Growth Allocation Percentages by Project Type Project Type Average Flow Peak Flow BOD TSS Capacity (growth's sharo of capacity 100% 29.4% 100% 100% expansion) Performance (growths sharo of total 26.1% 10.8% 25.9% 26.1% future system capacity) Rehabilitation 0% 0% 0% 0% Source: 2004 Facilities Plan 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 private persons. Existing (and if applicable in the future, plarmed) asset costs are reduced by the percent of the asset that is funded by grants. SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY · Ratemaking principles employed to finance the capital improvements. Projected capital financing cost (i.e., interest expense) is added to the cost basis, based on the recommended project phasing and 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 Capacity Unit Costs Requirement / SDC / Unit X = X = X = Using industry reference data for charging 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. For example, 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 Appendix 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 "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. After 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 SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY 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 real property at the time of application 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 present-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 for 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 and the projected length of future payments. At the time of adoption of the project list upon which SDCs are 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 user 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 generated by the methodology. SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 Appendixes APPENDIX A System Component Definitions 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 next step of allocating costs to capacity parameters, and ultimately to user type. As regulatory requirements change in the future, 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 Eugene/Springfield Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) are included in this component. 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 sedimentation 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/Outfall- Process elements at the downstream end of the treatment process. Disinfection kills or inactivates remaining pathogens contained in the treated wastewater, and the ouffall conveys the treated wastewater to the Willamette River where it can be distributed through 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 system that conveys SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY digested biosolids from the WPCF to the Biosolids Management Facility (BMF); and facultative sludge storage lagoons and drying beds at the remote BMF. The majority of the infrastructure associated with this "General" subcomponent were constructed in the 1980s and early 1990s. · 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 reduced. This dewatering facility was designed to accommodate 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-dewatered biosolids, therefore limiting dependence on the cooperative farms land application program that typically uses dewatered biosolids. Tertiary Filters -- Filters to remove TSS and to a lesser degree BOD/ammonia from the secondary effluent. Reuse Facilities- These facilities enable reuse of effluent and include UV disinfection; pumping of filtered, disinfected effluent; pipelines to convey the water to the end use site; and irrigation distribution/application systems. Odor Control- Facilities that collect and treat odorous air generated by the treatment 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 ground and/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. SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 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. Collection System Pipelines This category consists of major gravity sewer pipelines and force mains (pressure lines) that convey flow for the regional wastewater collection system. Since the primary function of the pipelines is to convey flow, the allocation is assigned to either average or peak flow and none to wastewater strength 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 I/I, which is the key driver in determining the peak flows, can be used as a guide in determining the average/peak allocation breakdown. Table B-1 presents the wet season I/I as a percentage of total peak flow for existing capacity, current loading, and future required capacity. TABLE B-I Design Criteria Basis For Unit Processes Driven By Peak Flow Average Wet Weather III as a Flow Wet Weather I/I Total Peak Flow Percentage of Total Peak (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) Flow, % Existing capacity 49 126 175 72% Current loading (current 43.8 220.2 264 83% capacity required) Projected 2025 loading 59.3 218.7a 277 79% (future capacity required) Notes: a) Net reduction in total I/I occurs between now and 2025 as a result of I/I reduction efforts by the cities. The range of wet weather I/I as a percentage of total peak 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 SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY Collection System Pump Stations The category collection system pump stations consist of pump stations that impart additional head or pressure to 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 functional and design criteria basis as the regional collection system pipelines, and, therefore, the allocations are: · Average Flow - 1/4 · Peak Flow - 3/4 Preliminary Treatment Preliminary treatment facilities are located between the pump stations and primary treatment, consisting of screenings and grit removal facilities. Minimal organic matter (BOD) is removed during preliminary treatment. Also, solid materials removed during preliminary treatment tend to be large and heavy in nature; these materials are not typically considered a "suspended" material (or TSS). Consequently, the loading parameters of BOD and TSS generally do not apply to preliminary treatment, and the unit process category is entirely flow 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 identical to the preceding categories. The split between average and peak flow is as follows: · Average Flow-l/4 · Peak 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 treatment 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, twice 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 treatment and secondary treatment. Likewise, if the high-rate clarification peak flow management is ultimately implemented (because regulatory approval is not obtained for the parallel primary/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 Flow - 1/4 · BOD-1/4 · TSS- 1/2 SEA31003271388(DG).DOOd041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY Secondary Treatment Secondary treahnent consists of two trains of aeration basins, eight secondary clarifiers, and the associated blowers and pumps that function to treat and remove organic loading (BOD) and to a lesser extent TSS from the wastewater. On a functional basis, secondary treatment is regarded as removing roughly twice as much BOD relative to TSS. For the design criteria basis, typical secondary treatment sizing is governed by both average and peak flow, but for 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, only average flow is considered in the cost allocation. Combining the functional basis with the design criteria basis, the following allocation is for secondary treatment: · Average Flow - 1/4 · BOD-1/2 · TSS - 1/4 Disinfection/Outfall Following 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 tertiary treatment processes. The three subcomponents used to allocate biosolids treatment, handling, and disposal/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 SDC update because of the differing available capacities and growth percentages associated with facilities in the subcomponents. However, in terms of allocating the facility components to the wastewater parameters, the methodology is identical- independent of which subcomponent is being considered. SEA31003271388(DG).OOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY 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. · BOD-1/2 · TSS-1/2 Tertiary Filters The existing WPCF does not have tertiary filters. The 20-year project list recommends that tertiary filters be installed to enable the WPCF to consistently meet the NPDES permit discharge requirements. The permit includes mass limits for BOD and TSS. As influent flows to the WPCF increase in the future, the effluent concentration required to meet the mass limits decreases. Addition of the filters will assist with meeting these more stringent effluent concentrations. From a functional basis, the main purpose of the filters is to remove TSS, and to a 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 additional treatment. However, the associated peak flow loading rate onto the filters will not be the limiting factor in terms 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 may be constructed to comply with more stringent regulatory requirements related to temperature and/or thermal load restrictions of Willamette River discharges. Reuse facilities would allow flow to be diverted from the river by reusing plant effluent for irrigation. The basic design criterion used to size reuse facilities is average flow; so this parameter receives 100 percent of the allocation. · Average Flow - 100 percent Odor Control Odor control facilities function by collecting odorous air from preliminary/primary liquids treatment processes and biosolids treatment/handling processes and treating the air to remove the odors. Odor generation is dependent on the influent loading levels and, therefore, the allocation is split equally between BOD and TSS because both parameters contribute to the sizing and 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/secondary peak flow management approach is proposed solely to address peak SEA31003271388{DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY flows. Also, there 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 Support Facilities (Indirects) The support facilities or indirect category captures certain types of treatment plant facilities that serve multiple functions, such as the laboratory, land acquisition, and instrumentation and control systems. Costs of these types of facilities are allocated across the other 11 components in'proportion to the weighted average allocation percentages. For the reimbursement fee, the weighted average reflects the direct allocation of existing asset costs to the 11 facility components. For the improvement fee, the weighted average reflects the allocation of the 20-year project list to the 11 facility components. · Support facilities allocated proportionally to the other 11 facility components. SEA3t003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 B-5 APPENDIX C Growth Capacity Allocation Documentation Liquids Treatment A summary of the MWMC liquids treatment capacity is presented in Table C-1. TABLE C-1 Capacity Summary of MWMC Liquids Facilities Average Flow Peak Flow BOD TSS Population (mgd) (mgd) (lbs/day) (lbs/day) Existing capacity -- 49 175 66,000 71,600 Current loading (current 217,737 43.8 264 54,800 64,700 capacity required) Available capacity (value) -- 5.2 None 11,200 6,900 Available capacity (%) 10.5% 0% 17.0% 9.6% Projected 2025 loading 297,585 59 277 74,000 87,600 (future capacity required) Growth loading 79,848 1515 30a 19,200 22,900 Required Capacity 10 102 8,000 16,000 Expansion Growth share of 2025 load 26.8 26.1% 10.8% 25.9% 26.1% Growth share of capacity '100% 100% 29.4% 100% 100% expansion Notes: A The 30-mgd peak flow attributed to growth consists of 15.5 mgd of average flow and 14.5 mgd of wet season I/I flow. See the following discussion for a detailed derivation of these values. The rationale for these values is presented in the following paragraphs. Average Flow The existing capacity is stated in the current NPDES permit 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 permit requirements. Therefore, discharge permit requirements must be met on a dry season, maximum-month influent condition. This 43.8-mgd value is determined as follows: SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY 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 served 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 proiected 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 2002 data) 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 needs of growth in terms of average flow is 15.5 mgd (59.3 - 43.8). Peak Flow A summary of the peak flow breakdown 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, and 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 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 current flow of 264 mgd. Therefore, there is no available capacity in terms of peak flow. Since the current average flow is 43.8 mgd, the current wet season I/I 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 I/I reduction efforts outlined in the 2000 WWFMP and 277 mgd with I/I SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY reduction efforts outlined in the 2000 WWFMP. Therefore, it is estimated that the I/I reduction efforts will reduce I/I by approximately 17 mgd. Wet season I/I in 2025 attributed to existing users is determined by subtracting the anticipated reduction in wet season I/I (17 mgd) from the current wet season I/I (220.2 mgd) yielding 203.2 mgd. Finally, wet season I/! attributed to growth in 2025 is 14.5 mgd and is determined by taking the 2025 total peak flow projection of 277 mgd and subtracting both the 2025 average flow (59.3 mgd) and the 2025 wet season I/I 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 plus 14.5 of wet season I/I flow). TABLE C-2 Projected 2025 Peak Flow Breakdown Average flow attributed to existing users (includes dry 43.5 mgd season I/I) Average flow attributed to future users (includes dry 15.5 mgd (59.3 - 43.8) season I/I) Wet season I/I attributed to existing users 203.2 mgd (220.2 - 17) Wet season I/I attributed to future users 14.5 mgd (277 - 59.3 - 203.2 Total peak flow 277 mgd Total peak flow attributed to growth 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 lbs/day, which was the value used for the 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 lbs/day (actual calculated value of 54,756 lbs/day rounded to the nearest hundred pounds). Where: 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 industrial BOD load in lbs/day The available capacity in terms of BOD is 11,200 lbs/day (66,000 - 54,800). SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY The projected 2025 average load is determined as follows: Projected 2025 BOD = (0.185 x 297,585 x 1.3) + 2,402 = 74,000 mgd (actual calculated value of 73,971 lbs/day rounded to the nearest hundred pounds) Where: 0.185 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 - 1.3 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 lbs/day (it has been assumed that the industrial load will remain constant over the study period) The required capacity to meet the needs of growth in terms of BOD is 19,200 lbs/day (74,000 - 54,800). T$$ 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 lbs/day, which was the value used for the original WPCF design. The current loading or current required, presented in DSMM terms, is 64,700 lbs/day and is determined as follows: Current TSS = (0.205 x 217,737 x 1.4) + 2,224 = 64,700 lbs/day (actual calculated value of 64,715 lbs/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 industrial TSS load in lbs/day The available capacity in terms of TSS is 6,900 lbs/day (71,600 - 64,700). The 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 87,631 lbs/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 SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY 1.4 is the selected peaking to convert average dry season load to DSMM load (based on 1990 to 2002 data) - 2,224 is the projected industrial TSS load in lbs/day (it has been assumed 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 lbs/day (87,600 - 64,700). Biosolids Treatment The three subcategories used to allocate biosolids treatment, handling, and disposal/reuse costs for purposes of SDC 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 Biocycle Farm Existing capacity 5,869 7,000 2,811 Current loading (current capacity required) 5,869 5,869 2,811 Available capacity None 1,131 None Available capacity (%) 0% 16.2% 0% Projected 2025 loading (future capacity required) 8,600 7,000 3,612 Growth loading 2,731 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% 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 biosolids pump 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 SEA31003271388(DG),00C/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY BMF. The majority of the infrastructure associated with this "General" component was constructed in the 19808 and early 19908. The current loading or current required capacity is presented as annual average dry tons of digested biosolids. 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)}/100= 1.183 - Where: 60 is the weighting given to BOD for biosolids production 1.23 is the BOD ppcd ratio (selected/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 selected 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) Some existing biosolids facilities in the "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 available capacity and the existing capacity is assumed to be 5,869 dry tons per year as well. The projected 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 SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY 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 biosolids volume is reduced. This dewatering facility was designed to accommodate 7,000 dry tons of biosolids on an annual average basis. Therefore, the available capacity is 1,131 (7,000 less 5,869). The additional capacity needed to accommodate growth is 1,131 dry tons per year (7,000 - 5,869). 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-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 2,811 dry 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 Biocycle 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). SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 APPENDIX D User Capacity Requirements TABLE D-I Capacity Requirements by User Class Springfield Dry Season Dry Season Wet Season Traffic/ Eugene Flow Base Flow Average Max Month Peak Flow BOD/TSS BOD TSS Wastewater BPR/HUD Wastewater Estimation Impact Flow Impact Impact Impact Strength (Ib/FEU/day) (Ib/FEU/day) Code Code Use Code Type of Establishment Unit (FEU) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (mg/I) Strength * * 30 4111-4990 4X TRUCK TERMINAL TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 151 6371-6379 63 MINI WAREHOUSE TGSF 30 41 61 119 150 Low 0.051 0.051 170 4111-4990 4X UTILITIES TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0,171 200 1111-1139 1X OTHER RESIDENTIAL DU 175 239 359 696 150 Low 0.299 0.299 (SFD W/OTHER USES) 220 1130-1139 11 OTHER RESIDENTIAL - DU 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256 MUTI FAMILY 200 1300 13 OTHER RESIDENTIAL - TGSF 200 273 410 796 150 Low 0.342 0.342 RESIDENTIAL HOTEL/MOTEL 240 1400 14 OTHER RESIDENTIAL- DU 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256 MOBILE HOME PARK 210 1111-1129 1F SFD / DUPLEX DU 175 239 359 696 150 Low 0.299 0.299 300 1510-1590 15 MOTEL / HOTEL TGSF 200 273 410 796 300 Medium 0.684 0.684 400 7212-7900 7X PUBLIC PARK TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 435 7X MULTIPURPOSE TGSF 160 219 328 638 150 Low 0.274 0.274 RECREATION FACILITY (Indoor) 443 7212-7900 7X THEATER TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 488 7X OUTDOOR ATHLETIC TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 COMPLEX 491 7212-7900 . 7X TENNIS COURT TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 492 · 7212-7900 7X RACQUET CLUB TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 493 7212-7900 7X HEALTH CLUB TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 494 7212-7900 7X BOWLING ALLEY TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 495 7212-7900 7X RECREATIONAL CENTER TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 TABLE D-1 Capacity Requirements by User Class Springfield DrySeason DryS ason Wet S ason Traffic/ Eugene Flow Base Flow Av rage Max Month Peak Flow BOD/TSS BOD TSS Wastewater BPR/HUD Wastewater Estimation Impact Flow Impact Impact Impact Strength (Ib/FEU/day) (Ib/FEU/day) Code Code Use Code Type of Establishment Unit (FEU) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (mg/I) Strength * * 500 3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS TGALEF 1000 1,366 2,049 3,978 150 Low 1.710 1.710 LOW STRENGTH 500 3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS TGALEF 1000 1,366 2,049 3,978 300 Medium 3.419 3.419 MEDIUM STRENGTH 500 3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS TGALEF 1000 1,366 2,049 3,978 500 High 5.699 5.699 HIGH STRENGTH 500 3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS TGALEF 1000 1,366 2,049 3,978 700 Very 7.979 7.979 VERY HIGH STRENGTH High 500 3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS TGALEF 1000 1,366 2,049 3,978 900 Super 10.258 10.258 SUPER HIGH STRENGTH High 520 6812 68 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 522 522 68 MIDDLE SCHOOL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 530 6813 68 HIGH SCHOOL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 540 6821 68 COMMUNITY COLLEGE TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 550 6821 68 UNIVERSITY TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 560 6911 69 CHURCH TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 565 6811-6839, 68 DAY CARE CENTER TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 7111-7123 590 7111 68 LIBRARY TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 591 6994 69 FRATERNAL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 ORGANIZATION 600 5410-5499 54 SERVICE STATION / TGSF 180 246 369 716 150 Low 0.308 0.308 MARKET 610 6511-6519 65 HOSPITAL TGSF 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256 620 6511-6519 65 NURSING HOME TGSF 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256 630 6511-6519 65 CLINIC, MEDICAL OFFICE TGSF 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.256 700 5810 5A FAST FOOD TGSF 720 983 1,475 2,864 500 High 4.103 4.103 RESTAURANT 720 8221,8222 82 VETERINARIAN TGSF 200 273 410 796 150 Low 0.342 0.342 SERVICES 75(~ 6710-6759 67 OFFICE PARK TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 770 6710-6759 67 BUSINESS PARK TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 730 6710-6759 67 GOVERNMENT BUILDING TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 732 6710-6759 67 US POST OFFICE TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 TABLE D-I Capacity Requirements by User Class Springfi Id DrySeason Dry Season Wet Season Traffic/ Eugen Flow Bas Flow Average Max Month Peak Flow BOD/TSS BOD TSS Wastewater BPPJHUD Wastewater Estimation Impact Flow Impact Impact Impact Strength (Ib/FEU/day) (Ib/FEU/day) Code Code Use Code Type of Establishment Unit (FEU) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (rog/I) Strength * * 800 5910-5999 59 RETAIL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 831 5810 5B QUALITY RESTAURANT TGSF 720 983 1,475 2,864 500 High 4.103 4.103 832 5810 5C HIGH TURNOVER TGSF 720 983 1,475 2,864 500 High 4.103 4.103 RESTAURANT 835 5820 5D DRINKING PLACE TGSF 340 464 697 1,353 150 Low 0.581 0.581 840 6411,6419- 64 AUTO CARE TGSF 40 55 82 159 150 Low 0.068 0.068 6499 841 5511-5599 55 NEW CAR SALES TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 847 6412 6B CAR WASH TGSF 500 683 1,024 1,989 150 Low 0.855 0.855 848 5511-5599 55 TI RE STORE TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 850 5410-5499 54 SUPERMARKET TGSF 180 246 369 716 300 Medium 0.615 0.615 851 5410-5499 54 CONVENIENCE MARKET TGSF 180 246 369 716 150 Low 0.308 0.308 854 5211-5392, 5X DISCOUNT MARKET TGSF 30 41 61 119 150 Low 0.051 0.051 5610-5733 890 5211-5392, 5X FURNITURE STORE TGSF 30 41 61 119 150 Low 0.051 0.051 5610-5733 895 7212-7900 7X VIDEO ARCADE / OTHER TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 ENTERTAINMENT 900 6111-6133 61 FINANCIAL INSTITUTION TGSF 110 150 225 438 150 Low 0.188 0.188 251 1210-1290 12 B ELDERLY HOUSING - TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 DETACHED 252 1210-1290 12A ELDERLY HOUSING - TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 ATTACH E D 253 1210-1290 12C CONGREGATE ELDERLY TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 CARE FACILITY 120 2111-2190 21 HEAVY TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 INDUSTRY/INDUSTRIAL** 120 2220~2395, 2X HEAVY TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 2510-2790 INDUSTRY/INDUSTRIAL** 120 2400,2421- 24 HEAVY TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 ' ' 2499 INDUSTRY/INDUSTRIAL** 120 2810-3999 3X HEAVY TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 INDUSTRY/INDUSTRIAL** 120 2810-3999 3X HEAVY TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 INDUSTRY/iNDUSTRIAL/ TABLE D-1 Capacity Requirements by User Class Springfield Dry Season Dry Season Wet Season Traffic/ Eug ne Flow Base Flow Average Max Month Peak Flow BOD/TSS BOD TSS Wastewater BPPJHUD Wastewater Estimation Impact Flow Impact Impact Impact Strength (Ib/FEU/day) (IblFEU/day) Code Code Use Code Type of Establishment Unit (FEU) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) (mg/I) Strength * * WHOLESALE** 710 6141-6190, 6X GENERAL OFFICE BLDG TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 6500, 6520-6599, 6810 860 5111-5199 51 WHOLESALE TRADE TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 870 5211-5392 5X CLOTHING / DRYGOODS / TGSF 30 41 61 119 150 Low 0.051 0.051 HOUSEWARES 820 6211-6215 6A LAUNDRY TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 900 6212-6290 62 OTHER SERVICES TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 110 6611-6629 66 CONSTRUCTION TRADE TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 440 6811-6839 68 OTHER TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 EDUCATIONAL/CULTURAL 450 7212-7900 7X OTHER ENTERTAINMENT TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.276 0.276 820 SHOPPING CENTER TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 ABBREVIATIONS TGSF - THOUSAND GROSS SQUARE FEET TSFGLA - THOUSAND SQUARE FEET GROSS LEASABLE AREA DU - DWELLING UNIT TGALEF - THOUSAND GALLONS ESTIMATED FLOW VFP - VEHICLE FUELING POSITIONS Notes: *Calcula~te'd as average flow (gal/unit/day)II ,000,000 X 8.345 X strength (mg/I). **Process flow is in addition to other flow. APPENDIX E Bond Credit Calculation Credit per $1,000 Assessed Value By Annexation Year Annexation by Year Cumulative Credit (per $1,000 AV) 1979 $0.09 $5.29 1980 $0.07 $5.19 1981 $0.14 $5.12 1982 $0.18 $4.98 1983 $0.17 $4.80 1984 $0.22 $4.63 1985 $0.33 $4.40 1986 $0.40 $4.07 1987 $0.45 $3.67 1988 $0.49 $3.22 1989 $0.48 $2.73 1990 $0.45 $2.25 1991 $0.21 $1.80 1992 $0.15 $1.59 1993 $0.19 $1.45 1994 $0.17 $1.25 1995 $0.16 $1.09 1996 $0.20 $0.92 1997 $0.24 $0.72 1998 $0.20 $0.48 1999 $0.19 $0.28 200O $0.05 $0.09 2001 $0.05 $0.05 2002 $0.00 $0.00 2003 $0.00 $0.00 2004 $0.00 $0.00 Prope~ies annexed subsequentto debtretirement(2001)noteligibleforcredit. SEA31003271388(DG).DOC/041040034 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." The estimated non-assessable cost of the system-wide capacity from future capacity-enhancing projects, as contained in the Stormwater SDC-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 SDC. The stormwater SDC 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 SDC-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 by 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 projected 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 stormwater SDC. 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) specific 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 calculated 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 analysis 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 adopted 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 EC 6.610) which are not attributable to creation or modification of impervious surface area, will have stormwater City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Stormwater~ . _ FIGURE 5 Stormwater System System Value Capital Project - (SDC-Eligible Costs) Based Methodology · Improvement Fee Impact Measurement Future capacity-enhancing cost- non SDC Impervious Service eligible cost · Reimbursement Fee Replacement cost - non SDC-eligible cost Formula: Cost of Service (Unit cost per square foot) SDC - Eli~lible Cost Cost per square Additional impervious = foot of impervious surface area within UGB 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 9 Stormwater Drainage Systems Development Charge Analysis 1. Existing Stormwater Drainage System Value & SDC-Eligible Costs (Reimbursement Fee) Total Replacement Cost - Existing Pipe System $222,748,229 Total Re lacement Cost - Existing Open Channel Systems Percent of Existing Pipe System to be Used by New Development 4.27% Percent of Existing Open Channel system to Used by New Development 2.34% Total SDC-Eligible Cost - Existing Pipe* $9,511,350 Total SDC-Eli.(lible Cost- Existin~q Open Channel Systems* $1,489,909 12. Futur Stormwater System SDC-Eligible Project Costs ~ (Improvement Fee)lI :3. Stormwater System Calculation Details Single-Family Dwellin~l (SFD), estimated average impervious surface area Small Residential (building footprint <__1,000 sq. ft.) 1,800 S(~. ft. Medium Residential (building footprint >1,000 sq. ft. and < 3,000 sq.ft.) 2,900 sq. ft. Mfg. Home Park Space, estimated average impervious surface area 1,780 sq. ft. 4. Calculation of SDC* Unit Cost per Square Foot, Improvement Fee [$12,113,585 / 155,770,560] $0.0778 (53%) Unit Cost per Square Foot, Reimbursement Fee [$11,001,258/155,770,560 $0.0706 (47%) Small Residential SDC (building footprint < 1,000 sq. ft.) [1,800 sq. ft. x $0.148 $266.40 Medium Residential SDC (building footprint >1,000 sq. ft. and < 3,000 sq.ft.) [2,900 sq.ft x $0.148] $429.20 Small Duplex SDC (unit building footprints _< 1,000 sq. ft.) [$266.40 x 2] $532.80 Medium Duplex SDC (unit building footprints >1,000 sq. ft. and < 3,000 sq.ft.) [$429.20 x 2] $858.40 Mfg. Home Park SDC per Space (portion of total charge) [1,684 sq. ft. x $0.148] $249.23 *See Appendix F for complete rate schedule. City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Stormwater.' ' TABLE 10 City of Eugene 2003 Stormwater SDC-Eligible Project List Martin Drive Pipe Improvements (02-07 ClP) $96,999 $96,999 Mt. Cavalry Pipe Improvements $796,018 $193,626 Frederick Court Pipe Daylight $123,387 $56,758 ¢3rd Avenue Pipe Improvements $2,248,187 $719,420 Morse Park Ranch Park Pipe Improvements $1,099,844 $120,9831 Laurelwood Flood Control Fac/Pipe Imps $2,094,761 $314,214 Jackson Street Pipe Improvements $80,728 $20,182 Windsor Circle Pipe Improvements $958,517 $616,190 West Hawkins Lane Water Quality Facility $652,188 $527,962 Bell Avenue (Increase Pipe Sizes Along) $828,768 $381,233 Empire Park Pond Retrofit $401,555 $80,311 Royal Node Stormwater Infrastructure $1,460,200 $1,460,200 Greenhill Tributary Storm Improvements Ph 2 $390,082 $132,983 Greenhill Tributary Water Quality Facility $780,998 $234,300 Roosevelt Channel - Culvert Improvement $141,744 $44,761 A-1 Main Channel Culvert & Open Waterway Improvements $536,936 $85,910 Lynnbrook Drive Open Waterway & Culvery Improvements $503,143 $150,943 Spring Creek Bddge Construction & Waterway Improvements $145,290 $33,417 Sanders Street Water Quality Facility $779,434 $38,972 .~pdng Creek Ddve Water Quality Facility $246,774 $49,355 ~irsten Street Pipe Improvements $399,469 $115,846 -lunsacker- Open Channel Improvements (02-07 CIP) $415,114 $249,277 :enox/Salty - Culvert Replacement (02-07 CIP) $179,396 $107,429 Hunsacker Culvert Replacement (02-07 CIP) $27,118 $16,688 ~)ivision Avenue Tip-Up Pipe Replacement $11,369 $2,615 [rvington Drive Water Quality Facility $681,913 $95,468 St. Peter School Culvert Replacement $56,948 $17,084 River Point Pond Outlet Channel $389,352 $159,634 Gilham Road System Culvert Replacement $28,161 $28,161 Gilham Road System Water Quality Facility $682,018 $68,202 Ascot Park Open Waterway Modification $75,305! $49,701 3rd-4th Connector Stormwater Improvements (02-07 CiP) $125,160 $125,160 Beaver St & Hunsaker Ln Stormwater Improvements $52,150 $52,150 Greenhill Rd Stormwater Improvements $104,300 $104,300 Irvington Ddve - Stormwater (02-07 CIP) $104,300 $104,300 Kinney Park Flow Diversion & Restoration $646,660 $478,528 River Road - Stormwater (02-07 ClP) $52,150 $52,150 Royal Ave., Terry to Greenhill $104,300 $104,300 Services for New Development ($100,000/year) $3,546,200 $3,546,200 Streambank Stabilization ($ varies/year) $5,110,700 $1,277,675 I City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Stormwater.' ' Appendix E Parks System Charge Detail 1.0 Formula The parks SDC is determined based on the level of service and the cost for each component listed in Table 11. These components are identified in the 1989 Parks and Recreation Plan. Included are neighborhood and community parks, and special facility areas which encompass facilities such as tennis and basketball courts, softball diamonds and soccer fields. A parks SDC is collected from residential development only. The basis of the charge is equivalent dwelling units (EDUs). Table 11 contains the current Eugene planning area standards for neighborhood and community parks. Standards for special facility areas, also shown in Table 11, were developed by dividing the current planning area facility count by the current population to arrive at the current level of service per thousand population. This standard was then multiplied by the per-acre cost for land acquisition/development or the per unit cost of each component to get the cost per 1,000 population. Then the per capita amounts were derived by dividing by 1,000. The per capita component costs were then summed to arrive at a cost impact per capita. To calculate the cost per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU), the Total Charge per Person is multiplied by the average number of persons per household, for the city. The population records serve as the basis for deriving the average number of persons per dwelling unit, used in the parks SDC analysis. City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Parks _ TABLE 11 Parks System Development Charge Analysis O · Ill ~) ~r~r~o (acres) (acres) ~ $222,037 Per acre $137.72 0 Neighborhood, developed (1) 87.18 0.620 Per 1,000 population 0 Neighborhood, land acquisition only 40.78 0.290 Per 1,000 population $180,000 Per acre $52.22 ~ Neighborhood, natural (2) 61.76 0.439 Per 1,000 population $203,499 Per acre $89.42 ~ Community, developed (1) 158.81 1.130 Per 1,000 population $111,787 Per acre $126.31 o Community, land acquisition only 23.35 0.166 Per 1,000 population $45,000 Peracre $7.48 ~- Community, natural (2) 46.38 0.330 Per 1,000 population $59,478 Per acre $19.63 0 ~' r~,,~, ~,=o (number) (number) ¢3 Softball Diamonds (3) 31.00 0.221 Per 1,000 population $359,156 Per diamond $79.22 Restrooms (4) 11.23 0.080 Per 1,000 population $192,667 Per 2 pair unit $15.40 Tennis Courts (5) 27.00 0.192 Per 1,000 population $96,096 Per court $18.46 Basketball Courts (6) 19.35 0.138 Per 1,000 population $62,898 Per court $8.66 Miscellaneous Courts/Courses (7) 10.23 0.073 Per 1,000 population $28,694 Each $2.09 Soccer Fields (8) 4.08 0.029 Per 1,000 population $197,246 Per field $5.72 Soft Jogging Paths (miles) 10.94 0.078 Per 1,000 population $97,416 Per mile $7.58 Parking spaces, fields and facilities 531.74 3.783 Per 1,000 population $3,598 Per space $13.61 Horseshoe Courts (9) 20.00 0.142 Per 1,000 population $3,414 Per court $0.4~ Volleyball Courts, sand (9) 4.00 0.028 Per 1,000 population $22,140 Per court $0.63 (1) Includes land acquisition and full development, with utility connections, excluding restroom facilities. (2) Includes all land that is not intended to be developed. (3) Note that the unit cost is per softball diamond, when constructed in pairs. May include utility connections, multi-purpose playing fields, lights, special drainage for year-round service use, seating, fences, fountains, and landscaping; excludes restroom and parking facilities. (4) Excludes most metro-scale (regional) facilities. (5) Note that tl~e unit cost is per court when constructed in groups of four courts, and are lighted. No parking included. (6) Full court, high school dimensions. (7) Includes 7 wading pools, I skate board bowls, 1 bocci ball court, 1 amphitheater, and 1 disk golf course. ',8) Excludes lights and parking. ',9) Note that the unit cost is per court, when constructed in groups of two or more. *The inventory is adjusted to reflect the portion of existing bond-funded parks and facilities which have been paid for by the existing community. FIGURE 6 PARKS SYSTEM Level of Service System Value Components unit construction · Parks cost per component · Facilities (As provided by Parks Planning) Impact Measuement Per EDU (Residential) Formula Cost of Service (Per equivalent dwelling unit [EDU]) (Residential) Cost per X Persons per = Cost per person household EDU NOTE: The cost per EDU can be found in the current adopted SDC fee schedule in F. 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 INon-Assessable Cost Lane Mile X Lane Miles trip = Cost per trip per per Calculation Street System Cost per Trip Reimbursement: $851,355 X (0.8888 / 675) = $1,121.01 = Cost per Trip Improvement: $1,013,386 X (0.8888/675) -- $1,334.37 = Cost per Trip Total Allocated Cost per Trip = $1,121.01 (0.4) + $1,334.37 (0.6) = $1,363.66 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 ($13.32) + ($89.28) = $102.60 (per person) $102.60 = $114.63 (per trip) 0.895 City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Fee Schedule & Formulas. 1.3 Wastewat r 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. 8000 ~ Gallons per Month 4000 [~11 II 20001 II ~ 370 ~ ~5 ~ ~77 ~ 27g0 t 4000 0 g~ ~585 2382 3280 To~l Ama Living Space ~ Projected % Sampl~ Actual Data Base Flow Intercept, 3,946 Slope 0.951 gal/mo/sq ft Gal. / Month Gal./Day (GPD) 132 Days per Month 30 -30 day month-- Cost per Gal/Day $2.2572 Slope/30 Days 0.032 Base Charge = $297.92 Cost per Gal~Day $ 2.2572 GPD x Cost per GaL Cost per sq ft = Daily usage factor x Cost per $0.0722 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 $297.92 plus an additional charge of $0.0722 applied to the total proposed living space area of the dwelling. City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Fee Schedule & Formulas, Formulas for Non-Residential Development Non-Assessable System Valuation (Value of existin,q + Value of planned) = Cost per unit of capacity Build-out capacity (mgd) Per unit of capacity X flow per PFU for development type X number of PFUs for development = SDC for development Calculations for Non-Residential Development $100,676M + 9,925M = $2.2572 per gallon per day 49.0 mgd $2.2572 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 Total additional impervious impervious surface area surface area within UGB (sq. ft) Reimbursement: $11,001,258 = $0.0706 per sq. ft. 155,770,560 sq. ft. impervious surface area City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Fee Schedule & Formulas: Improvement: $12,113,585 = $0.0778 per sq. fl. 155,770,560 sq. ft. impervious surface area Total Unit Cost per Sq. Ft. Impervious Surface Area = (Reimbursement + Improvement) -- $0.0778 + $0.0706 = $0.148 1.5 Parks System Cost of Service: General Formula: Cost per person X Persons per household = Cost per EDU Calculation: $584.63 X 2.3 = $1,344.65 (per EDU) City of Eugene SDC Methodologies Fee Schedule & Formulas, 2.0 Adopted SDC Fee Schedule: Current Rates 2.1 Transportation System: Cost per trip $1,363.66 2.2 Local Wastewater System: Residential dwelling unit base fee $297.92 Residential dwelling unit total living area multiplication factor $0.0722 Non-Residential rate per gal/day per land use type per PFU Varies 2.3 Regional (MWMC) Wastewater System: Residential dwelling unit $947.34 Non-Residential rate per gal/day per land use type per FEU Varies Unit Cost by Component Average Daily Flow (per gallon) $0.449 Peak Wet Weather Flow (per gallon) $0.467 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (per pound) $876.610 Suspended Solids (per pound) $665.753 2.4 Stormwater System: Small Residential (building footprint < 1,000 sq. ft.) $266.40 Medium Residential (building footprint > 1,000 sq.ft, and < 3,000 sq. ft.) $429.20 Small Duplex (unit building footprints < 1,000 sq. ft.) $532.80 Medium Duplex (unit building footprints >1,000 sq. ft. and < 3,000 sq. ft.) $858.40 Manufactured Home Park Per space (assumes 1,684 sq. ft. per space) $249.23 plus Per sq. ft. actual impervious surface area, addt'l common areas $0.148 All Other Development Per sq.ft, actual impervious surface area and/or equivalent $0.148 2.5 Parks System: Total charge per person $584.63 Total charge per Dwelling Unit (2.3 persons x $584.63) $1,344.65 2.6 Administration Fees: City of Eugene if based on percentage 5.0% City of Eugene if based on flat rate $60.00 MWMC per permit application $10.00 2.7 Appeal Fee: City of Eugene per SDC appeal $100.00 City of Eugene SDC M thodologies Fee Schedule & Formulas ATTACHMENT B RESOLUTION NO. 4795 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AMENDED SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE RATES FOR REGIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEM AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 4740. 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 by Resolution Nos. 4748, 4767, 4768, 4770, 4776 and, the most recent amendment, Resolution No. __., which adopted an amended SDC Methodology for Regional Wastewater System and repealed Resolution No. 4776. In addition, inflationary adjustments of Systems Development Charges for Local Wastewater System, Stormwater System, and Transportation System were adopted by Administrative Order No. 58-04-04-F, effective April 5, 2004. C. Resolution No. __ dated ., adopted the MWMC Facilities Plan 20-year project list. D. Based on Resolution No. __ and Resolution No. __, it is necessary to adopt amended Regional Wastewater SDC rates calculated based on application of the Methodology to the 20-year project list. 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 Systems Development Charge rates for Regional Wastewater are amended as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. Section 2. Resolution No. 4740 is amended as described in Section 1 as of the effective date of this Resolution. Section 3. The City Recorder is requested to append a copy of this Resolution to Resolution No. 4740. Section 4. This Resolution shall become effective on July 1, 2004. The foregoing Resolution adopted the day of ., 2004. City Recorder rableS't I I ~4etropolitan Wastewater Management Commission ~Proposed Waste#mr SDC Analysis SOC Schedule DJ"/Seas~ Reimbume- Improve- Improvemenl Total Cost Springfield Eugene Row Base Row Average Row D~/Season Max Wet Seasm Peak BOD TSS · Traf~ast~ Wastewater Use Eslimafioa Impact Impact Monlh Impact Flow Impact BODffss Slmnglh ment Cost pe~ ment Cost Credit for ; water Code: Code Type of Establishment Unit(FEU) (galEEUI, t'=y) (galEEUIday) (gal/FEU/day) (gal/FEU/day) Slrenglh (m~) (Ibs/FEU/day)' ~ (~3~=EU/daY)* FEU per FEU Rate Supporl per FEU 30 4x TRUCK TERMINAL TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0,171 0.171 $48.88 $675.32 $180.86 $541,34 151 63 MINI WAREHOUSE TGSF 3O 41 61: 119 150 Low 0.051 0,051 $14.08 $202.60 $54.26 $162.40 170 4X rrlLmEs TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0,171 $46.88 $675.32 $180.86 $541.34 200 lX OTHER RESIDENTIAL (SFD W/OTHER USES) DU 175 239 359 696 150 Low 0.299 0.299 $82,03 $1,181.81 $316.50 $947.34 220 11 OTHER EESIOENTIAL - UL,ql FAMILY BU 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0,256 0.256 $70.31 $1,012.98 $271.29 $812011 200 13 OTHER RESIDENTIAL- RESIDENTIAL HOTEl/MOTEL TGSF 200 273 410 796 150 Low 0.342 0.342 $93.75 $1,350.64 $361.71 $1,082.6~ 240 14 OTHER RESIDENTIAL- MOBILE HOME PARK DU 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0,256 $70.31 $1,012.98 $27129 $812.01 210 1F SFD / DUPLEX DU 175 239 359 698 150 Low 0.299 0.299 $82.03 $1,181,81 $316.50 $947.3~ 300 15 MOTEL/HOTEL TGSF 200 273 410 796 3O0 Medium 0.684 0,684 $155.56 $1,911.18 $456.67 $1,610.07 400 7X PUBUC PARK TG~F 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $75.00 $1,080.51 $289.37 $866.14 435 7X ~IULTIPURPOSE RECREATION FACIUTY (Indo~) TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $75.00 $1,080.51 $289.37 $866.14 443 7X II-IEATER TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $75.00 $1,080.51 $289.37 $866.14 488 7X 3UTDOOR ATHLETIC COMPLEX TGSF 160 219 328 636: 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $75.99 $1,080.51 $289.37 $866.14 491 7X tENNIS COUR? TGSF 160 219' 328 636 150 Low 0,274 0,274 $75.00 $1,080.51 $289.37 $866.14 492 7X ~CQUET CLUB TG~ 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $75,00 $1,080,51 $289.37 $866.14 493 7X ~EALTH CLU9 TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0,274 0,274 $75,00 $1,080.51 $289.37 $866.14 494 7X ~OWLING AI. LEY TGSF 180 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $75.00 $1,080,51 $289.37 $866.14 495 7X =~ECREA'nONAL CENTER TGSF 160 219 328 636 15O Low 0.274 0.274 $75,00 $1,080,51 $289.37 $866.14 500 3X NDUSTR~AL PROCESS LOW STRENGTH TGALEF 1000 1,366 2,049 3,978 150 Low 1.710 1.710 $468.75 $6,753.19~ $1,808.57 $5,413.37 500 3X NDUSTRIAL PROCESS MEDIUM STRENGTH TGALEF 1000 1,366 2,049 3,976 3OO Medium 3.419 3.419 $777.79 $9,555.9C $2,283,33 $8,050.36 500 3X NDUSTRIAL PROCESS HIGH STRENGTH TGALEF 1000 1,366 2,049 3,978 5001 Hig~ 5,699 5,699 $1,189.84 $13,292.83 $2,916,33 $11,566.35 500 3X INDUSTRIAL PROCESS VERY HIGH STEENGTH TGALEF 1000 1,366 2,049 3,978 7OO Very High 7,979 7,979 $1,501.90 $17,029.77 $3,349.34 $15,082.33 500 3X NDUSTEIAL PROCESS SUPER HIGH STRENGTH TGALEF 1000 1,386 2,049 3,978 900 Super High 10,258 10.256 $2,013.95 $20,766.71 $4,182.34 $18,598,32 520 68 :'LEMENTARY SCHOOL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.68 $99.43 $270,67 $22 68 ~IIDDLE SCHOOL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0,085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 530 68 -IIGH SCHOOL TC, SF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.685 0,085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 540 68 ~MMUNITY COU. EGE TC, SF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0,685 0,085 $23.44 $337.68 $90.43 $270.67 550 68 JNIVERSITY TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0,085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 550 69 ~HURCH TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.68 $90.43 $270.67 565 68 :)AY CARE CENTER TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 590 68 .IBRARY TGSF 50 68 102 199 15O Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.68 $90.43 $270.67 591 69 -'RATERNAL ORGANF. ATION TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 600 54 ,SERVICE STATION / MARKET TGSF 180 246 369 716 150 Low 0.308 0.308 $84.38 $1,215.58 $325.54 $974.41 610 65 ~osPrrAL TGSF 150 205 307 597 150 ~ 0.256 0.256 $70.31 $1,012.98 $271.29 $812.01 620 65 qURSING HOME TGSF 150 205 307 597 15O Low 0.256 0.256 $70.31 $1,012.98 $271.29 $812.01 630 65 ~.INIC, MEDICAL OFFICE TGSF 150 205 307 597 150 Low 0.256 0.258 $70.31 $1,012.98 $271.29 $812.01 700 5A -'AST FOOD RESTAURANT TC, SF 720 983 1,475 2,804 5O0 High 4.103 4.103 $656.69 $9,570.84 $2,099.76 $8,327.77 720 82 /ETERINARIAN SERVICES TGSF 200 273 410 796 150 Low 0.342 0.342 $93.75 $1,350.64 $361.71 $1,082.67 750 ~ 67 ~OFFICE PARK TGSF 100 137 205 398 15O Low 0.171 0.171 $46.68 ~75.32 $180.86 $541.34 770, 67 3USlNESS PARK TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $46,88 $675.32 $180.86 $541.34 730 67 ,~OVERNMENT BUILDING TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $46.68 $675.32 $180.86 $541.34 732 67 JS POST OFFICE TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $46.68 $675.32 $180.86 $541.34 Table S-1I I .... Me~politan Wastcwatcr Management Commission __ __ Proposd Wastewater SDC Analysis ..... SDC Schedule D~/Season Reimburse- Improve- Improvement Total Cost 8~ngfield Eugene Row BaseFIow AvecageFinw D~ySeasa~Uax Wet Seaso~ Peak BOD/'rss BOD TSS TralfiOWaste Wastewater Use EslimalJo~ impact impact Mo~lfl impact Flow Impact Slrength water Code Code Type of Establishment Unit (FEU) (galEEU/day) (gal/FEUIday) (gal/FEU/day) (gat/FEU/day) Strenglh (rog/I) (Ibs/FEUIday) * (~'FEL~day)* merit Cost per ment Co~t Credit for FEU per FEU Rate Support per FEU 800 59 RETAIL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66' $90.43 $270.6*/ 831 58 ~')UALiTY RESTAURANT TGsF 720 983 1,475 2.864 500 High 4.103 4.103 $856.69 $9,570.84 $2,099.76 $8,327.7'/ 832 6C ~itGH TURNOVER RESTAURANT TGSF 720 983 1.475 2,864 500 High 4.103 4.103 $856.69 $9,570.84 $2,099.76 $8,327.77 835 50 3RINKING PLACE TG~ 340 464 897 1,353 150 ~ Low 0.581 0.581 $159.38 $2,296.09 $614.92 $1,840.55 840 64 ~,UTO CARE TGSF 40 55 82 159 150 Low 0.068 0.068 $18.75 $270.13 $72.34 $216.53 841 55 qEW CAR SALES TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270,67 847 68 :AR WASH TGSF 500 683 1,024 1,989 150 Low 0.855 0.855 $234.38 $3,376.60 $904.29 $2,706.69 848 55 rlRE STORE TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 850 54 SUPERMARKET TGSF 180 246 369 716 300 Medium 0.615 0.615 $140.00 $1,720.06 $411.00 $1,449.06 851 54 :CONVENIENCE MARKET TGSF 180 246 369 716 150 Low 0.308 0.308 $84.38 $1,215.58 $325.54 $974,41 854 5X DISCOUNT UARKET TGSF 30 41 61 119 150 Low 0.051 0.051 $14.06 $202.60! $54.26 $162.40 890 5X FURNITURE STORE TGSF 30 41 61 119 150 Low 0.051 0.051 $14.06 $202.6(~ $54.2~ $162.40 895 TX VIDEO ARCADE TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $75.00 $1,080.51 $2893? $866.14 900 61 FINANCIAL INSTITUTION TGSF 110 150 225 438 150 Low 0.188 0.188 $51.5~ $742.85 $198.94 $595.47 251 128 ELDERLY HOUSING · DETACHED TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 * $46.8~ $675.32 $180.86 $541.34 252 12A ELDERLY HOUSING. ATI'ACHED TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $46.8~ $675.32 $180.86 $541.34 253 12C CONGREGATE ELDERLY CARE FACILITY TGSF 100 137 205 398 t50 Low 0.171 0.171 $46.88 $675.32 $180.86 $541.34 120 21 HEAVY INDUSTRY/INDUSTRIAL*' TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 120 2X HEAVY INDUSTRY/INDUSTRIAL** TC.~ 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 120 24 HEAVY INDUSTRY/INDUSTRIAL** TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 120 3X HEAVY INDUSTRY/INDUSTRIAL** TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 120 3X HEAVY INDUSTRY/INDUSTRIAL TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 710 6X GENERAL OFFICE BLDG TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $46.88 $675.32 $180.86 $541.34 860 51 WHOLESALE TRADE TGSF 50 68 102 199 150 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 870 5X CLOTHING / DRYGOOOS / HOUSEWARES TC..~ 30 41 61 119 150 Low 0.051 0.051 $14.06 $202.60 $54.26 $162.4C 820 6A LAUNDRY TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 LOW 0.171 0.171 $46.88 $675.32 $180.86 $541,34 900 82 OTHER SERVICES TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 LOW 0.171 0.171 $46.88 $675.32 $180.86 $541.34 110 66 CONSTRUCTION TRADE TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 LOw 0.171 0.171 $46.88 $675.32 $180.86 $541,34 440 68 OTHER EDUCATIONAUCULTURAL TGSF 50 68 102 199 t50 Low 0.085 0.085 $23.44 $337.66 $90.43 $270.67 450 7X OTHER ENTERTAINMENT TGSF 160 219 328 636 150 Low 0.274 0.274 $75.00 $I,080.51 $289.37 $866.14 820 SHOPPING CENTER TGSF 100 137 205 398 150 Low 0.171 0.171 $46.98 $676.39 $181.08 $542.28 ABBREVIATIONS TGSF - THOUSAND GROSS SOUARE FEET TSFGLA - THOUSAND SOUARE FEET GROSS LEASABLE AREA DU - DWELLING UNIT TGALEF - THOUSAND GALLONS ESTIMATED FLOW VFP - VEHICLE FUELING POSITIONS · Calculated as average flow X 8.345 X strength "Process flow is in eddifio~ to ofhe* flow ATTACHMENT C Public Works Engineering MEMORANDUM 858 Pearl Street Eugene, Oregon 97401 (541) 682-5291 (541) 682-5032 FAX Date: June 21, 2004 To: Mayor Torrey and City Council From: Fred McVey, 682-5216 Engineering Data Services Manager Subject: Response to Council Questions Resulting from Public Hearing on Proposed MWMC SDC Methodology and Rates This memorandum provides responses to Council questions as requested by Council following a public hearing June 14, 2004 on the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) proposed regional wastewater system development charge (SDC) methodology and rater~ Due to time constraints for Council discussion and questions following the public comments, Council agreed to allow questions to be forwarded to the City Managers Office via email. Only Councilor Bettman submitted questions. Provided are questions in italics with staff response following each question. Coburg officials urged us to consent to studying adding Coburg to the MWMC so that they can accommodate growth by providing sanitary sewer facilities as opposed to what they have now which are septic systems. First of all, I assume they have negative capacity, or a deficit, existing now due to the intensity of industrial and residential development that has proliferated without adequate facilities to serve it. So any capacity added at this time would be needed existing capacity due to the deficit plus capacity for new development to serve projected growth. They do not currently charge any SDC. 0 How could charges be equitably levied for the above capacity without a subsidy from Eugene/Springfield? It is my understanding from the staff summary that currently ratepayers are paying, and will continue to pay, a significant portion of the cost for new capacity to serve new development because the existing and proposed SDC's are too low to recover the costs of the capacity improvements required for new growth. City of Coburg officials have asked that the potential for meeting Coburg's wastewater treatment needs through the MWMC regional wastewater treatment system be studied. The officials' stated intent was that Coburg would pay for the costs they create in the regional treatment system under such an approach. Staff assume that desired results of a study of the issue would include, among other things, a determination of costs, financial feasibility, and appropriate funding structure and mechanisms of an approach which would not result in a subsidy from Eugene/Springfield. While the current regional wastewater SDC rate is under-collecting costs related to the demands of growth, the staff summary was not intended to convey that existing ratepayers would, in the future, be funding any portion of new capacity to serve new development under the proposed SDC; they would not. The proposed SDC methodology and rates are intended to fully recover growth's equitable share of capacity-related improvements to the regional wastewater treatment system. The staff summary also states that 65% of users are in Eugene. 2) Does that mean 65% of ratepayers are in Eugene? City of Eugene wastewater user fee ratepayers constitute approximately two thirds of the total ratepayer base within the MWMC regional wastewater system; Springfield and Lane County residents and businesses connected to the wastewater system make up the other approximate one third. 3) Where is the additional capacity needed in Eugene or SpringdqeM or Lane Co. inside the UGB, is it proportional? Are Eugene ratepayers subsidizing SpringfieM's need for increased capacity to serve new growth? If Coburg were to be added to the system, under the current and proposed rate and SDC structure, wouM other jurisdictions' ratepayers, specifically Eugene, be subsidizing their new capacity? Growth is anticipated to occur throughout the Eugene/Springfield urban growth boundary with a slightly higher rate of growth attributable to the Springfield portion of the UGB. A consistent SDC rate is applied to all development within the regional wastewater service area so there is no differential for development based on the location it occurs; wherever it occurs it will pay the same regional wastewater SDC. As explained in the response to question # 1, under the proposed SDC ratepayers are not subsidizing the future capacity needs of new development. Assuming that existing and proposed policies and principles would apply to any agreement to include Coburg in the regional wastewater system, Eugene and other jurisdictions' ratepayers would not be subsidizing new capacity costs in Coburg. 4) MWMC is regional and therefore serves Lane County outside the city limits but inside the UGB, how does this arrangement affect Eugene ratepayers? I guess to address the specific questions one would need to know, what percentage of the ratepayers revenue goes to new capacity (i.e. improvement and reimbursementD If65% or the total wastewater revenue is from Eugene ratepayers, does the percentage of rates paid in Eugene match the percentage of capacity required by Eugene's growth? To what extent are Eugene ratepayers subsidizing growth in other jurisdictions? The proposed SDC methodology was found by MWMC and the CAC to provide for an equitable allocation of costs to growth and existing system users. Under the proposed SDC, ratepayers would not be subsidizing costs of capacity needed to serve growth. SDCs by their nature are proportional to growth, so the percentage of SDCs paid in Eugene will match the percentage of capacity required by Eugene's growth. ATTACHMENT D M E M O R A N D U M CI'I2MHILL June 10, 2004 E-mail, Essential Elements of the Methodology TO: Gary Colwell/MWMC Project Manager FROM: Matt Noesen/CH2M HILL Project Manager Debbie Galardi/Galardi Consulting DATE: June 21, 2004 The purpose of this memorandum is to correct some of the information stated in the June 10, 2004, e-mail from Dave Jewett to Roxie Cuellar and David Kelly, Eugene City Councilor. Even though there is no change to the MWMC SDC Methodology or to the resulting SDC rates, we feel that it is important to issue this memorandum to avoid the potential for any future confusion and/or misinterpretation. On May 25, Roxie Cuellar, on behalf of the Lane County Home Builders Association, e- mailed a list of six "items" that they "feel are essential elements that must be included in the SDC methodology." Per Ms. Cuellar's May 25 e-mail, one of these "essential elements" that needed to be part of the SDC Methodology was a calculation that shows how population is converted to dwelling units. An e-mail from Dave Jewett responded to these six items on June 10, 2004. Note that the e-mail response was submitted into the Eugene public record at the June 14, 2004, Public Hearing on MWMC Facilities Plan and SDC Methodology (Item 8). The following is an excerpt from the June 10, 2004, e-mail that addresses the population conversion issue: "B. ISSUES LIST. 1. Population Conversion. The population conversion ratio is part of the computer model that applies the principles set forth in the methodology to determine the residential improvement fee. However, in the spirit of continuing staffs effort's to fulfill information requests submitted by the rate paying public, the conversion from population to single family d~elling units ($FDs) in the SDC model is as follows: 129 gallons per capita per day X $1.7% X 2. 65 = 175 gallon per FEUper day (actual calculated value is 176. 7, but was rounded to the nearest $ gallons) Where: - 129 is the gallons offlow per capita per day derived from 12 years of historical data and used to project wastewater flows in the 2004 Facilities Plan and in the SDC Methodology - $1.7 % is the residential share of the total influent Eugene-Springfield WPCF flow - 2. 65 is the assumed population per household- FEU is flow estimation unit. S0406288-ATTD.DOC 1 JUNE 10, 2004 E-MAIL, ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE METHODOLOGY This 175 value can be found in the SFD/Duplex row (8th row) in Appendix D - User Capacity Requirements of the SDC Methodology..." We need to revise this particular response because some of the information is inaccurate. In an effort to provide Mr. Jewett with information on June 9, 2004, to enable him to finalize his response, CH2M HILL inadvertently provided some incorrect information. The above calculation converting population to single family dwelling units is not the basis for determining the single family base flow impact and ultimately the single family SDC rate. In fact, the values that determine the amount of capacity that is being used by user type ("Base Flow Impact" colunm of Appendix D of the SDC Methodology) were taken from MWMC's existing SDC Methodology and updated to reflect dry season maximum month and peak flow impacts. The 175 gallons per day of base flow impact reflects historical sewer billing records. Specifically, the historical average billed volume (based on winter average water use) per single family residential account is approximately 175 gallons per day. This number is converted to dry season average flow impact by comparing total billed volumes to treatment plant dry season average flows (a factor of 1.37). Finally, dry season average flow impact is converted to dry season maximum month impact based on the system design peaking factor of 1.5. The calculation converting from flow per population to an estimated flow per single family dwelling unit as presented in the June 10, 2004, e-mall was performed by the consultants, completely independent of the SDC model as an initial check for the selected values listed in Appendix D of the MWMC SDC Methodology. This particular check calculation is difficult to derive accurately because of the difficulty in determining the average number of persons per household for the MWMC service area, as well as adjusting for industrial flows. The consultants performed several checks to ensure that the selected values in Appendix D were a reasonable basis for $DC assessment. For example, a dry season maximum month impact per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) was estimated by dividing the existing dry season capacity requirements (43.8 mgd) by the estimated number of EDUs (approximately 125,000 -- calculated by dividing the total billed sewer volumes by the average volume per single-family residential account). This calculation yields a dry season maximum month impact of 350 gallons per day (gpd), compared to the 359 gpd used in the MWMC SDC Methodology. Furthermore, all of the values used to estimate the capacity requirements of a single-family dwelling unit compare favorably to other communities. The City of Albany, for example (whose methodology was submitted in the record by the Home Builders of Lane County) use an average flow requirement of 420 gpd. The biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and total suspended solids (TSS) capacity measures used by MWMC are significantly more conservative or lower than those used in the Albany Methodology. In closing, we regret that this incorrect information was inadvertently put forward, and we hope that the above explanation will help clarify the basis for these particular assumptions in the MWMC SDC Methodology. As stated at the beginning of this memorandum, there is no change to the MWMC SDC Methodology or to the resulting SDC rates. However, we feel that it is important to issue this memorandum to avoid the potential for any future confusion and/or misinterpretation. S0406288-ATTD.DOC 2