Ashland System Development Charge Review Committee
June 26, 2018
CALL TO ORDER
Brown meeting began at 3:05 PM
Members Present: Troy Brown Jr., Jac Nickels, Russ Silbiger
Members Abset: Dan Jovick
Staff Present: Paula Brown, Scott Fleury, Brandon Goldman, Mark Welch and Tara Kiewel
Consultant Present: Deb Galardi, Galardi Rothstein Group
Guests: Joe Graf
1. Project List Update – Deb Galardi, Galardi Rothstein Group
a. Updated cost estimates, projects and other funding assumptions (Table 1 attached)
Under Oregon statutes methodology must consider a project list which determines how the improvement SDCs can be spent. The updated project list includes updated costs based on ODOT unit costs and ADA factors. This updated list also considers additional areas of external funding that might be available. Brown explained the Nevada Street Bridge project has be moved to the later project list after a Council decision. Two Ashland Street projects have been added to the list. There is additional State funding available from the Safe Routes to Schools program.
Goldman asked for clarification regarding the list of projects that have been dropped. Brown Jr. requested a comprehensive list of projects including ones that are not going forward including developer driven, etc.
b.Reimbursement projects (Table 2 attached)
2. Growth Share Analysis (Tables 3 and 4 attached)
a.Bike and pedestrian level of service analysis
b.Roadway projects (based on travel demand model volumes)
Brown Jr. asked how often is the model adjusted. Brown explained the Transportation System Plan (TSP) is updated every five to ten years so we can analyze changes. Fleury mentioned that this included changes from the Planning Division to improve the zoning of transportation in the City and it is a more refined model.
3. Updated System-Wide Cost per Trip (Table 5 attached)
Galardi explained after reviewing the data she recommends using the daily trip rate. It better aligns with the community.
4. Preliminary SDC Schedule by Land Use
5. Policy Discussion
- Comparison of updated trip characteristics to current SDC Schedule (Tables 6)
- Comparison of preliminary updated TSDCs to current SDCs – Daily Trip Basis (Table 7a)
- Comparison of updated TSDCs – Daily Trips vs. PM Peak Basis (Table 7b)
Nickels expressed concern regarding affordable housing and raising SDCs for residential use. Goldman explained that low income housing is a separate category that is regulated. Brown mentioned that we may need to review living wage and home affordability and consider discounting those SDCs. Galardi explained the change in fees for single family is based on the updated trip rates, and Ashland’s SDC is rate is low and inconsistent for industry standards.
Nickels asked about phasing in the SDCs. Brown wants to review the impact and consider phasing in SDCs on a three year schedule. Galardi explained this about balancing objectives having the revenue to do projects and having a methodology that is fair and reflects industry standards.
Brown Jr. believes there are land use categories listed that are not relevant to Ashland and wants to know what revenue would be generated. Galardi explained that growth trips are the best estimates based on population and employment estimations. Brown said this is a twenty-year projection that is reviewed every seven years.
The Commission agreed by consensus to use the daily trip rates and data from the Institute of Traffic Engineers ITE 10th Edition.
Land use categories and SDC fee implementation will be discussed at the next meeting.
NEXT MEETING DATE: Tuesday July 19, 2018
ADJOURNMENT: Meeting Adjourned 5:00 p.m.
Public Works Administrative Assistant
- Trip assessment basis – Preliminary recommendation: Daily trip basis with linked trip adjustment only (eliminate trip length)
- Fee level – Implementation strategy for fee increase (overall or specific land uses with significant changes