Ord 2250 - Parks Sys Develop Ch
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A METHODOLOGY FOR PARKS AND
RECREATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, future growth should contribute its fair share to the cost of improvements and
additions to city Parks and Recreation facilities that are required to accommodate the needs of such
growth; and
WHEREAS, the imposition of system development charges will provide a source of
revenue to fund the construction or improvement of the city's Parks and Recreations facilities
necessitated by growth; and
WHEREAS, ORS 223.297 - 223.314, adopted in 1989, authorizes local governments to
impose system development charges; and
WHEREAS, system development charges are charges incurred upon the election to develop
property at a specific use, density and/or intensity, and the incurred charge equals, or is less than the
actual cost of providing public facilities commensurate with the needs of the chosen use, density,
and/or intensity; election of other uses, densities, and/or intensities causes direct and proportional
changes in the amount of the incurred charge; and system development charges are separate from
and in addition to any applicable tax, assessment, charge, fee in lieu of assessment, or other fee
provided by law or imposed as a condition of development; and
WHEREAS, system development charges are fees for services because they are based upon
a development's receipt of services considering the specific nature of the development; and
WHEREAS, system development charges are imposed on the activity of development, not
on the land, owner, or property, and therefore, are not taxes on property or on a property owner as a
direct consequence of ownership of property within the meaning of Section lIb, Article XI of the
Oregon Constitution or the legislation implementing that section; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance is intended only to be a financing mechanism for needed extra
capacity capital facilities associated with new development and does not represent the consideration
of land use planning issues or elimination of any possible existing capacity deficiencies; NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Page 1 -
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
-.-'-"--~._- ,."" -'''--'-'' -,-~,---~-
-
.."'-~
Section 1. Definitions. The following definitions apply:
(A) "Applicant" shall mean the owner or other person who applies for a building permit or
development permit.
(B) "Bancroft Bond" shall mean a bond issued by the city to finance a capital improvement in
accordance with ORS 223.205 - 223.295.
(C) "Building" shall mean any structure, either temporary or permanent, built for the support,
shelter or enclosure of persons, chattels or property of any kind. This term shall include
tents, trailers, mobile homes or any vehicles serving in any way the function of a building.
This term shall not include temporary construction sheds or trailers erected to assist in
construction and maintained during the term of a building permit.
(D) "Building Permit" shall mean an official document or certificate authorizing the construction
or siting of any building. For purposes of this ordinance, the term "Building Permit" shall
also include any construction or installation permits which may be required for those
structures or buildings, such as a mobile home, that do not require a building permit in order
to be occupied.
(E) "Capital Improvements" shall mean public facilities or assets used for Parks and Recreation.
(F) "Citizen or Other Interested Person" shall mean any person who is a legal resident of the City
of Woodburn as evidenced by registration as a voter in the city, or by other proof of
residency; or a person who owns, occupies, or otherwise has an interest in real property
which is located within the city limits or is otherwise subject to the imposition of system
development charges, as outlined in Section 3 of this ordinance.
(G) "City" shall mean the City of Woodburn, Oregon.
(H) "Credit" shall mean the amount of money by which the SDC for a specific development may
be reduced because of construction of eligible capital facilities as outlined in this ordinance.
(I) "Development" shall mean a building or other land construction, or making a change in the
use of a structure or land, in a manner which increases the usage of any capital improvements
or which will contribute to the need for additional or enlarged capital improvements.
(J) "Development Permit" shall mean an official document or certificate, other than a building
permit, authorizing development.
(K) "Dwelling Unit" shall mean a building or a portion of a building designed for residential
occupancy, consisting of one or more rooms which are arranged, designed or used as living
Page 2 -
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2909
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
'-----y-..._.__...__._'_...._.._...._......~,...-
..
^".-,."
quarters for one family only.
(L) "Encumbered" shall mean monies committed by contract or purchase order in a manner that
obligates the city to expend the encumbered amount upon delivery of goods, the rendering of
services, or the conveyance of real property provided by a vendor, supplier, contractor or
Owner.
(M) "Improvement Fee" shall mean a fee for costs associated with capital improvements to be
constructed after the effective date of this ordinance. Notwithstanding anything in this
ordinance to the contrary, it is an incurred charge or cost based upon the use of or the
availability for use of the systems and capital improvements required to provide services and
facilities necessary to meet the routine obligations of the use and ownership of property, and
to provide for the public health and safety upon development.
(N) "Off-site" shall mean not located on or contiguous to property that is the subject of
development approval.
(0) "On-site" shall mean located on or contiguous to property that is the subject of
developmental approval.
(P) "Owner" shall mean the person holding legal title to the real property upon which
development is to occur.
(Q) "Person" shall mean an individual, a corporation, a partnership, an incorporated association,
or any other similar entity.
(R) "Prime Rate oflnterest" shall mean the base rate on corporate loans posted by at least 75%
of the nation's 30 largest banks as posted in the Wall Street Journal.
(S) "Qualified Public Improvement" shall mean a capital improvement that is:
1) Required as a condition of development approval;
2) Identified in the adopted capital improvement plan (CIP);and either
3) a) Not located on or contiguous to property that is the subject of development
approval; or
b) Located in whole or in part on or contiguous to property that is the subject of
development approval and required to be built larger or with greater capacity than is
necessary for the particular development project to which the improvement fee is
related
(T) "Right-of-Way" shall mean that portion ofland that is dedicated for public use.
(U) "System Development Charge" shall mean an improvement fee assessed or collected at the
Page 3 -
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
",T - ".,._,-".,.........._~-_.._*-_'--... '-"_"~~'__
-
time of increased usage of a capital improvement or issuance of a development permit or
building permit. System development charges are separate from and in addition to any
applicable tax, assessment, fee in lieu of assessment, or other fee or charge provided by law
or imposed as a condition of development.
(V) "Parks and Recreation System Development Charges Executive Summary, Methodology,
and Rate Study Update" shall mean the report adopted pursuant to Section (3)(B), as
amended and supplemented pursuant to Section (3)(H).
Section 2. Rules of Construction. For the purposes of administration and enforcement of
this ordinance, unless otherwise stated in this ordinance, the following rules of construction shall
apply:
(A) In case of any difference of meaning or implication between the text of this ordinance and any
caption, illustration, summary table, or illustrative table, the text shall control.
(B) The word "shall" is always mandatory and not discretionary~ the word "may" is permissive.
( C) Words used in the present tense shall include the future~ words used in the singular shall
include the plural and the plural the singular, unless the context clearly indicates the contrary;
and use of the masculine gender shall include the feminine gender.
(D) The phrase "used for" includes "arranged for", "designed for", "maintained for", or "occupied
for".
(E) Unless the context clearly indicates the contrary, where a regulation involves two or more
items, conditions, provisions, or events connected by the conjunction "and", "or" or
"either...or", the conjunction shall be interpreted as follows:
1) "And" indicates that all the connected terms, conditions, provisions or events shall
apply.
2) "Or" indicates that the connected items, conditions, provisions or events may apply
singly or in any combination.
3) "Either" ... or" indicates that the connected items, conditions, provisions or events shall
apply singly but not in combination.
(F) The word "includes" shall not limit a term to the specific example, but is intended to extend
its meaning to all other instances or circumstances of like kind or character.
Section 3. Imposition of System Development Charges. System development charges are
hereby imposed, subject to the following conditions:
Page 4 -
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
~--_...--_._---
(A) Development Subiect to Charges. System development charges are imposed on all new
development within the city for capital improvements for transportation. The system
development charges shall be paid in addition to all other fees, charges and assessments due
for development, and are intended to provide funds only for capital improvements
necessitated by new development.
(B) Rates of Charges.
1) The city hereby adopts and incorporates by reference the report entitled "Parks and
Recreation Systems Development Charges Executive Summary, Methodology, and
Rate Study Update" dated September 30, 1999, particularly the assumptions,
conclusions and findings in such study as to the determination of anticipated costs of
capital improvements required to accommodate growth and the rates for system
development charges to reimburse the city for such capital improvements.
Page 5 -
2)
System development charges shall be imposed and calculated for the change in use,
alternation, expansion or replacement of a building or dwelling unit if such change in
use, alternation, expansion or replacement results in an increase in the use of capital
improvements compared to the present use of the development. The amount of the
system development charges to be paid shall be the difference between the rate for the
proposed development and the rate that would be imposed for the development prior
to the change in use, alternation, expansion or replacement.
3)
The city shall, based upon the report referred to in subsection (1) above, adopt by
resolution the amounts of system development charges.
4)
An additional systems development charge may be assessed by the city if the demand
placed on the city's capital facilities exceeds the amount initially estimated at the time
systems development charges are paid. The additional charge shall be for the
increased demand or for the demand above the underestimate, and it shall be based
upon the fee that is in effect at the time the additional demand impact is determined,
and not upon the fee structure that may have been in effect at the time the initial
systems development charge was paid. This provision does not apply to single family
or other residential units unless additional rental units are created.
5)
Notwithstanding any other provision, the SDC rates adopted pursuant to this
ordinance may on January 1 at of each year, after the first year that the ordinance is
effective, be adjusted by the City Administrator to account for changes in the costs of
acquiring and constructing facilities. The adjustment factor shall be based on the
change in average market value of all land in the city, according to the records of the
County Tax Assessor, and the change in construction costs according to the
engineering News Record (ENR) Northwest (Seattle, Washington) Construction Cost
Index~ and shall be determined as follows:
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
'-"-...'''-y--...---
-
Change in Average Market Value X 0.50
+ Change in Construction Cost Index X 0.50
System Development Charge Adjustment Factor
The System Development Charge Adjustment Factor shall be used to adjust the
System Development Charge rates, unless they are otherwise adjusted by action of
the City Council based on adoption of an updated methodology or capital
improvements plan (master plan).
(C) Pavment of Charges. Applicants for building permits or development permits shall pay the
applicable system development charges prior to the issuance of the permits by the city.
(D) Alternative Rate Calculation. Applicants may submit alternative rates for system
development charges, subject to the following conditions:
Page 6 -
1)
In the event an applicant believes that the impact on city capital improvements
resulting from a development is less than the fee established in Section (3) (B), the
applicant may submit alternative system development charge rate calculations,
accompanied by the alternative rate review fee established by resolution for this
purpose, to the City Administrator. The city may hire a consultant to review the
alternative system development charge rate calculations, and may pay the consulting
fees from system development charges revenues.
2)
The alternative system development charge rate calculations shall be based on data,
information and assumptions contained in this ordinance and the adopted system
development charges study or an independent source, provided that the independent
source is a local study supported by a data base adequate for the conclusions
contained in such study performed pursuant to a generally accepted methodology and
based upon generally accepted standard sources of information relating to facilities
planning, cost analysis and demographics.
3)
If the city council determines that the data, information and assumptions utilized by
the applicant to calculate the alternative system development charges rates comply
with the requirements of this section by using a generally accepted methodology, the
alternative system development charges rates shall be paid in lieu of the rates set forth
in Section (3)(B).
4)
If the city council determines that the data, information and assumptions utilized by
the applicant to calculate the alternative system development charges rates do not
comply with the requirements of this section or were not calculated by a generally
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
-r" .u~_~'.'~_ ".,,"-",.-....-..- -..,..--
"T'
accepted methodology, then the city council shall provide to the applicant (by
certified mail, return receipt requested) written notification of the rejection of the
alternative system development charges rates and the reason therefor.
5) Any applicant who has submitted a proposed alternative system development charges
rate pursuant to this section and desires the immediate issuance of a building permit
or development permit shall pay the applicable system development charges rates
pursuant to Section (3)(B). Said payment shall be deemed paid under "protest" and
shall not be construed as a waiver of any right of review. Any difference between the
amount paid and the amount due, as determined by the city council, shall be refunded
to the applicant.
(E) Exemptions. The following development shall be exempt from payment of the system
development charges:
1) Alternations, expansion or replacement of an existing dwelling unit where no
additional dwelling units are created.
2) The construction of accessory buildings or structures which will not create additional
dwelling units and which do not create additional demands on the city's capital
improvements.
3) The issuance ofa permit for a mobile home on which applicable system development
charges have previously been made as documented by receipts issued by the city for
such prior payment.
(F) Credits for Developer Contributions of Oualified Public Improvements. The city shall grant a
credit, not to exceed 100% of the applicable Parks and Recreation SDC, against the system
development charges imposed pursuant to Section (3)(A) and (B) for the donation ofland as
permitted by Ordinance 1807, or for the construction of any qualified public improvements.
Such land donation and construction shall be subject to the approval of the city.
1) The amount of developer contribution credit to be applied shall be determined
according to the following standards of valuation:
a) The value of donated lands shall be based upon a written appraisal of fair
market value by a qualified and professional appraiser based upon comparable
sales of similar property between unrelated parties in a bargaining transaction;
and
b) The cost of anticipated construction of qualified public improvements shall be
based upon cost estimates certified by a professional architect or engineer.
Page 7 -
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
"-""~---<<.,_._---"--"-<-'--
..
2) Prior to issuance of a building permit or development permit, the applicant shall
submit to the City Administrator a proposed plan and estimate of cost for
contributions of qualified public improvements. The proposed plan and estimate shall
include:
a) a designation ofthe development for which the proposed plan is being
submitted.
b) a legal description of any land proposed to be donated pursuant to Chapter 39
of the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance 1807, and a written appraisal
prepared in conformity with subsection (1)(a) of this section;
c) a list of the contemplated capital improvements contained within the plan;
d) an estimate of proposed construction costs certified by a professional architect
or engineer; and
e) a proposed time schedule for completion of the proposed plan.
3) The City Administrator shall determine if the proposed qualified public improvement
IS:
a) Required as a condition of development approval;
b) Identified in the adopted capital improvement plan (CIP);and either
c) i) Not located on or contiguous to property that is the subject of
development approval; or
ii) Located in whole or in part on or contiguous to property that is the
subject of development approval and required to be built larger or with
greater capacity than is necessary for the particular development project to
which the improvement fee is related
4)
The decision of the City Administrator as to whether to accept the proposed plan of
contribution and the value of such contribution shall be in writing and issued within
fifteen (15) working days ofthe review. A copy shall be provided to the applicant.
5)
A proposed improvement which does not meet all three (3) of the criteria included in
Section 3(F)(3) above shall not be considered a qualified public improvement and the
city is not required ORS 223.297 - 223.314 to provide a credit for such an
improvement. However, the city shall grant a credit, in an amount not to exceed fifty
percent (50%) of the total amount of the applicable Parks and Recreation SDC, for
Page 8 -
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
---r-'.'-~'---"
-
certain other contributions of capital facilities under the following conditions:
a) The capital facilities being contributed must exceed the city standard required
for the specific type of development (i.e., residential, industrial, etc.); and
b) Only the value of the contribution which exceeds the city standard required
for the specific type of development (i.e., residential, industrial, etc.) shall be
considered when calculating the credit; and
6) Any applicant who submits a proposed plan pursuant to this section and desires the
immediate issuance of a building permit or development permit, shall pay the
applicable system development charges. Said payment shall be deemed paid under
"protest" and shall not be construed as a waiver of any review rights. Any difference
between the amount paid and the amount due, as determined by the City
Administrator, shall be refunded to the applicant. In no event shall a refund by city
under this subsection exceed the amount originally paid by the applicant.
(G) Appeals and Review Hearings.
1) An applicant who is required to pay system development charges shall have the right
to request a hearing to review the denial by the City Administrator of a proposed
credit for contribution of qualified public improvements pursuant to Section (3)(F).
2) Such hearing shall be requested by the applicant within fifteen (15) days of the date of
first receipt of the denial by the City Administrator. Failure to request a hearing
within the time provided shall be deemed a waiver of such right.
3) The request for hearing shall be filed with the City Administrator and shall contain the
following:
a) The name and address of the applicant;
b) The legal description of the property in question;
c) If issued, the date the building permit or development permit was issued;
d) A brief description of the nature of the development being undertaken
pursuant to the building permit or development permit;
e) If paid, the date the system development charges were paid; and
f) A statement of the reasons why the applicant is requesting the hearing.
Page 9 -
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
"_.'- --y-'~-~-"""'-"---<'-"'"-"<'
"
4) Upon receipt of such request, the City Administrator shall schedule a hearing before
the city council at a regularly scheduled meeting or a special meeting called for the
purpose of conducting the hearing and shall provide the applicant written notice of
the time and place of the hearing. Such hearing shall be held within forty-five (45)
days of the date the request for hearing was filed.
5) Such hearing shall be before the city council and shall be conducted in a manner
designed to obtain all information and evidence relevant to the requested hearing.
Formal rules of civil procedures and evidence shall not be applicable; however, the
hearing shall be conducted in a fair and impartial manner with each party having an
opportunity to be heard and to present information and evidence.
6) Any applicant who requests a hearing pursuant to this section and desires the
immediate issuance of a building permit or development permit shall pay prior to or at
the time the request for hearing is filed the applicable system development charges
pursuant to Section (3)(B). Said payment shall be deemed paid under "protest" and
shall not construed as a waiver of any review rights.
7) An applicant may request a hearing under this section without paying the applicable
system development charges, but no building permit or development permit shall be
issued until such system development charges are paid in the amount initially
calculated or the amount approved upon completion of the review provided in this
section.
(H) Review of Study and Rates. This ordinance and the Parks and Recreation System
Development Charges Executive Summary, Methodology, and Rate Study shall be reviewed
at least once every five (5) years. The review shall consider new estimates of population and
other socioeconomic data, changes in the cost of construction and land acquisition, and
adjustments to the assumptions, conclusions or findings set forth in the report adopted by
Section (3)(B). The purpose of this review is to evaluate and revise, ifnecessary, the rates of
the system development charges to assure that they do not exceed the reasonably anticipated
costs of the city's capital improvements. In the event the review of the ordinance or the
report alters or changes the assumptions, conclusions and findings of the report, or alters or
changes the amount of system development charges, the report adopted by reference in
Section (3)(B) shall be amended and updated to reflect the assumptions, conclusions and
findings of such reviews and Section (3)(B) shall be amended to adopt by reference such
updated reports.
Section 4. Receipt and Expenditure of System Development Charges.
(A) Trust Accounts. The City hereby establishes a separate trust account for each type of system
development charge to be designated as the "Parks and Recreation SDC" which shall be
Page 10-
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
.
~,
,...---....
maintained separate and apart from all other accounts of the city. All system development
charge payments shall be deposited into the appropriate trust account immediately upon
receipt.
(B) Use of System Development Charges. The monies deposited into the trust accounts shall be
used solely for the purpose of providing capital improvements necessitated by development,
including, but not limited to:
1) design and construction plan preparation;
2) permitting and fees;
3) land and materials acquisition, including any costs of acquisition or condemnation;
4) construction of improvements and structures;
5) design and construction of new drainage facilities required by the construction of
capital improvements and structures;
6) relocating utilities required by the construction of improvements and structures;
7) landscaping;
8) construction management and inspection;
9) surveying, soils and material testing;
10) acquisition of capital equipment;
11) repayment of monies transferred or borrowed from any budgetary fund of the city which
were used to fund any of the capital improvements as herein provided;
12) payment of principal and interest, necessary reserves and costs of issuance under any
bonds or other indebtedness issued by the city to fund capital improvements;
13) direct costs of complying with the provisions ofORS 223.297 to 223.314, including the
costs of developing system development charges methodologies and providing an annual
accounting of system development charges expenditures.
14) consulting costs for the review of alternative rates as provided for in Section (3)(0) of
this ordinance.
Page 11 -
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
y "-------"._.."-~.._-
"
(C) Prohibited Uses of Svstem Development Charges. Funds on deposit in system development
charge trust accounts shall not be used for:
1) any expenditure that would be classified as a routine maintenance or repair expense; or
2) costs associated with the construction of administrative office facilities that are more
than an incidental part of other capital improvements.
(0) Capital Improvements Authorized to be Financed by System Development Charges.
Any capital improvement being funded wholly or in part with system development charges
revenue shall be included in the city's capital improvement program. The capital
improvement program shall:
1) list the specific capital improvement projects that may be funded with system
development charges revenues;
2) provide the cost of each capital improvement project, and an estimate of the amounts of
each revenue source, including system development charges, that will be used to fund
each project;
3) provide the estimated timing of each capital improvement project; and
4) be updated at least once every five (5) years.
(E) Investment of Trust Account Revenue. Any funds on deposit in system development
charges trust accounts which are not immediately necessary for expenditure shall be invested
by the city. All income derived from such investments shall be deposited in the system
development charges trust accounts and used as provided herein.
(F) Refunds of System Development Charges. System development charges shall be refunded in
accordance with the following requirements:
1) An applicant or owner shall be eligible to apply for a full or partial refund if:
a) The building permit or development permit has expired and the development
authorized by such permit is not complete;
b) An error was made in calculating the amount of the system development charges
resulting in overpayment, and the error is discovered within three months of the date
the SDC was paid. The amount of the refund will be limited to the amount collected
in excess of the appropriate SDC.
Page 12 -
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
---w--...-. -'-'''-''"-'-<'-'''--~
"
c) The system development charges have not been expended or encumbered prior to the
end of the fiscal year immediately following the ninth anniversary of the date upon
which such charges were paid. For the purposes of this section, system development
charges collected shall be deemed to be expended or encumbered on the basis of the
first system development charges in shall be the first system development charges
out.
2) The application for refund shall be filed with the City Administrator and contain the
following:
a) The name and address of the applicant;
b) The location of the property which was the subject of the system development
charges;
c) A notarized sworn statement that the petitioner is the then current owner of the
property on behalf of which the system development charges were paid, including
proof of ownership, such as a certified copy of the latest recorded deed;
d) The date the system development charges were paid;
e) A copy of the receipt of payment for the system development charges; and, if
appropriate,
f) The date the building permit or development permit was issued and the date of
expiration.
3) The application shall be filed within ninety (90) days of the expiration of the building
permit or development permit or within ninety (90) days of the end of the fiscal year
following the ninth anniversary of the date upon which the system development charges
were paid. Failure to timely apply for a refund of the system development charges shall
waive any right to a refund.
4) Within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt ofa petition for refund, the City
Administrator will advise the petitioner of the status of the request for refund, and if such
request is valid, the system development charges shall be returned to the petitioner.
5) Refunds will not be granted based on a change in use of the property which results in a
reduced impact on the city's capital facilities.
6) A building permit or development permit which is subsequently issued for a development
on the same property which was the subject of a refund shall pay the systems
development charges as required by Section (3).
Page 13 -
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
----r-"'''---' ""-"'-'--.'-' -",--
"
(G) Annual Accounting Reports. The city shall prepare an annual report accounting for system
development charges, including the total amount of system development charges revenue
collected in each trust account, and the capital improvement projects that were funded.
(H) Challenge of Expenditures. Any citizen or other interested person may challenge an
expenditure of system development charges revenues.
1) Such challenge shall be submitted, in writing, to the City Administrator for review within
two years following the subject expenditure, and shall include the following information:
a) The name and address of the citizen or other interested person challenging the
expenditure;
b) The amount of the expenditure, the project, payee or purpose, and the approximate
date on which it was made; and
c) The reason why the expenditure is being challenged.
2) If the City Administrator determines that the expenditure was not made in accordance
with the provisions of this ordinance and other relevant laws, a reimbursement of system
development charges trust account revenues from other revenue sources shall be made
within one year following the determination that the expenditures were not appropriate.
3) The City Administrator shall make written notification of the results of the expenditure
review to the citizen or other interested person who requested the review with ten (10)
days of completion of the review.
Section 5. Severability. If any clause, section, or provision of this ordinance shall be
declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason or cause, the remaining portion of said ordinance
shall be in full force and effect and be valid as if such invalid portion thereof had not been
incorporate herein.
Section 6. EtTective Date. This ordinance shall be legally effective on January 1,2000.
Approved as to form~'~ ~
City Attorney
11-- IZ- q~
Date
APPROVED:
(~
RI HARD JE G, YOR
Page 14 -
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
v"'.
.
"
Passed by the Council
November 22, 1999
Submitted to the Mayor
November 23. 1999
Approved by the Mayor
November 23, 1999
Filed in the Office of the Recorder
November ~3, 1999
ATTEST: _ ~
M T ant, CIty Recorder
City of Woodburn, Oregon
Page 15 -
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2009
ORDINANCE NO. 2250
-- .,~-- <~.._~--~----' _._-,~-------
~
CITY OF WOODBURN
Parks and Recreation
System Development Charges
Methodology and Rate Study Update
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Parks and Recreation Methodology Update
In 1989, the State of Oregon adopted the Oregon Systems Development
Act (ORS 223.297 - 223.314) to "provide a uniform framework for the
imposition of system development charges by local governments." The
Act requires local governments to enact System Development Charges
(SDC's) by resolution or ordinance, and to develop methodologies to
establish the principles used in arriving at the SDC rates.
The City of W oodbum adopted an ordinance and resolution establishing
SDC's for parks and recreation, water, and sewer facilities in 1991.
Included in the ordinance was a requirement for the ordinance and
methodology to be reviewed periodically to consider new estimates of
population and other socioeconomic data, changes in the cost of
construction and land acquisition, and other adjustments. A review of the
ordinance and the parks and recreation SDC methodology has been
completed, resulting m an updated methodology and some
recommended modifications to the ordinance/ resolution.
The City's SDC for parks and recreation facilities remains an
"improvement fee" designed to generate revenue for construction of
future facilities; it does not include a "reimbursement fee" for facilities
which are already in place.
The 1991 parks and recreation SDC methodology was developed prior to
completion of the City's Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan
Update. Because specific project costs were not then available, SDC rates
included in the 1991 methodology report were based on the "typical"
costs of constructing capacity-increasing improvements needed to
maintain the then existing levels of service for parks and recreation
facilities in the City.
Don Ganer & Associates
as of 10/25/99
"--T~ .
l1II'JIII"
The SDC rates included in the updated methodology are based on the
growth-related costs of specific capacity-increasing projects identified in
the City's 1999 Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan Update.
Population and employment estimates and projections from Marion
County, the U.S. Bureau of Census, and a report prepared for the City by
E.D. Hovee were used to determine growth needs required for the Level
of Service (LOS) Standards (units of facility per 1,000 persons) included in
the Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan update for neighborhood
parks, community parks, and municipal parks, and for the core parks
system
Except for the non-residential SDC (which was not included in the 1991
methodology), the maximum SDC rates in the updated methodology
($762 per single family dwelling unit) are less than the maximum rates in
the original 1991 methodology ($837 per single family dwelling unit)
because a "credit" has been calculated to offset potential property taxes
paid by new development for a planned $2.5 million bond issue; no credit
was included in the original methodology. The City Council in 1991
adopted initial SDC rates at 32% of the maximum rates identified in the
original methodology report, with rates increasing by 8.6% of the
maximums annually to a total of 57.75% of the maximum rate ($483.20
per single family dwelling unit). The maximum SDC rates included in the
updated methodology report are as follows:
RESIDENTIAL SDC PER DWELLING UNIT
Residential Compliance/ Residential
Facilities Cost Per + Administration - Credit Per SDC Per
Type of Dwellin& Unit Dwellin& Unit Cost/Unit Dwellin& Unit Dwelling Unit
Single-Family: $ 1,084 $ 108 $430 $ 762
Multi-Family: $ 1,180 $ 118 $189 $ 1,109
Manufactured Housing: $ 712 $ 78 $ 215 $ 635
NON-RESIDENTIAL SDC PER EMPLOYEE
Non-Residential
Facilities Cost Per
Employee
Compliance/
+ Administration -
Employee
Credit Per
Employee
Non-Residential
SDC Per
Employee
$ 20
$2
$17
$5
Don Ganer & Associates
i i
as of 10/'15/99
...Y-
B. Ordinance Modifications
Credits
The 1993 Oregon Legislature modified legislative requirements
concerning the provision of "credits" against SDC's for certain
improvements required as a condition of development approval. In
order to comply with these changes, replacement language for the SDC
ordinance has been drafted, as follows:
"Qualified Public Improvement" means a capital improvement that is required:
(1) Required as a condition of development approval;
(2) Identified in the adopted capital improvement plan (OP); and
(3)
(a)
Not located on or contiguous to property that is the subject
of development approval, or
Located in whole or in part on or contiguous to property
that is the subject of development approval and required to
be built larger or with greater capacity than is necessary for
the particular development project to which the
improvement fee is related.
(b)
Annual Rate Adjustments
The current ordinance does not provide for annual adjustments in rates to
account for changes in costs of acquisition and development. The
following new language has been recommended to provide for annual
rate adjustments to account for changes in costs, as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision, the SDC rates adopted pursuant to
Ordinance No. shall on January 1st of each year be adjusted to
account for changes in the costs of acquiring and constructing facilities.
The adjustment factor shall be based on the change in average market
value of all land in the City, according to the records of the County Tax
Assessor, and the change in construction costs according to the
Engineering News Record (ENR) Northwest (Seattle, Washington)
Construction Cost Index; and shall be determined as follows:
Don Ganer & Associates
iii
as of 10/25/99
'-"1" ...._-_.~-t-..~..,,,.,,--''''-. - ",",.~-_."",,. ~,,--~_..,~........--,
~
Change in Average Market Value X 0.50
+ Change in Construction Cost Index X 0.50
System Development Charge Adjustment
Factor
The System Development Charge Adjustment Factor shall be used to
adjust the System Development Charge rates, unless they are otherwise
adjusted by action of the City Council based on adoption of an updated
methodology or capital improvements plan (master plan).
Don Ganer & Associates
iv
as of 10/25/99
"-'"''y--"._''''-.,....'_.''''''-''-~''''.,-'''''~-'''.,--'''',...._--''''',,-..-,-, .
-
--v
PARKS AND RECREATION
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
METHODOLOGY AND RATE STUDY
UPDA TE
City of Woodburn, Ore~
as of
September 30, 1999
15418 NW White Fox Dr. . Beaverton, Oregon 97006 · (503) 690-8981
Don
Ganer &
Associates
~--......~,.. '-"'- ....".-....... t.."...", ,-.....-..... ..,----..""..-.;.." -.- "~.,_._.- .......... _..._--...;' _...._.._,...~.~....,."~~-,-;~-"~.,'_..."._.-,,.",.".........,...--.,~,""....",... .
.." . 1'.........*_"'"'
CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 AUTHORITY AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. Legislative Authority
B. "Improvement fee" and "Reimbursement fee" SDC's
C. Requirements and Options for Credits, Exemptions,
and Discounts
D. Guiding Concepts
E. Alternative Methodology Approaches
3.0 PARKS AND RECREATION SDC METHODOLOGY
A. Population and Employment Growth
B. Benefit of Facilities
C. Facility Needs
D. Facility Costs
4.0 RESIDENTIAL PARKS AND RECREATION SDC RATES
A. Formula 4a: Residential Facilities Cost Per Capita
B. Formula 4b: Residential Facilities Cost
Per Dwelling Unit
C. Formula 4c: Compliance/Administration Cost
Per Dwelling Unit
D. Formula 4d: Residential SDC Credit Per Dwelling Unit
E. Formula 4e: Residential SDC Per Dwelling Unit
5.0 NON-RESIDENTIAL SDC RATES
A. Formula Sa: Non-Residential Facilities Cost Per Employee
B. Formula 5b: Compliance/ Administration Cost
Per Employee
C. Formula 5c: Non-Residential SDC Credit Per Employee
D. Formula 5d: Non-Residential SDC Per Employee
6.0 CONCLUSION
APPENDIX: SDC Capital Improvements Plan
Don Ganer &: Associates
..
'-T"" ,
...
t----."...,.,. ."_.__~___d__'_",,,,_ ~'"-~. -'-'___'k,~'_'"'_
4
~
1
2
2
2
3
4
5
7
7
8
11
12
14
14
15
16
16
17
19
19
20
20
21
23
as of 9/30/99
TABLES
~
TABLE 3.1: Estimated City of Woodburn 8
Population and Employment Increases (1999 - 2020)
TABLE 3.2: Estimates of Average Weekly Availability 9
of Parks and Recreation Facilities
TABLE 3.3: Total Annual Availability of Parks 10
and Recreation Facilities
TABLE 3.4: Total Residence and Employment Related 10
A vailability of Parks and Recreation Facilities
TABLE 3.5: Employee-To-Resident Parks Demand Ratio 10
TABLE 3.6: Current Average Levels of Service (LOS) 11
and Applied LOS Standards
TABLE 3.7: Additional Facility Needs For Population and 12
Employment Growth Based on LOS Standards
TABLE 3.8 Residential and Non-Residential Growth 13
Required Facilities Costs
TABLE 4.1: Facilities Cost Per Capita 14
TABLE 4.2: Average Persons Per Dwelling Unit 15
TABLE 4.3: Residential Facilities Cost Per Dwelling Unit 15
TABLE 4.4: Compliance/Administration Cost Per Dwelling Unit 16
TABLE 4.5: Credit Per Dwelling Unit 17
TABLE 4.6: Residential SDC Per Dwelling Unit 18
TABLE 5.1: Non-Residential Facilities Cost Per Employee 19
TABLE 5.2: Compliance/ Administration Cost Per Employee 20
TABLE 5.3: Credit Per Enployee 21
TABLE 5.4: Non-Residential SDC Per Employee 22
TABLE 5.5: Square Feet Per Employee 23
Don Ganer &; Associates
i i
as of 9/30/99
-'T'"'
"'
CITY OF WOODBURN
Parks and Recreation System Development Charges
Methodology Report and Rate Study
1.0 INTRODUCTION
System Development Charges (SDC's) are one-time fees charged to new development
to help pay a portion of the costs associated with building capital facilities to meet
needs created by growth. Oregon local governments are authorized to enact SDC's for
capital facilities for transportation, water, wastewater (sewer), stormwater drainage,
and parks and recreation facilities, and the City of Woodburn has implemented SDC's
for all authorized facilities.
In January 1997, the City of Woodburn engaged Don Caner & Associates, working in
association with David Reed, Ph.D to update the City's Parks and Recreation
Comprehensive Plan (Plan). Following completion of the draft Plan, the City requested
a review and update of the City's Parks and Recreation SDC methodology and rates to
reflect growth-required facility needs identified in the Plan. This report presents an
updated SDC methodology, documents the calculation of Parks and Recreation SDC
rates, and identifies projects to be funded from SDC revenues.
Section 2.0 of this report presents authority and background information including (1)
legislative authority for SDC's; (2) an explanation of "improvement fee" and
"reimbursement fee" SDC's; (3) requirements and options for credits, exemptions and
discounts; (4) guiding concepts for SDC's and (5) alternative methodology approaches.
Section 3.0 presents the methodology used to develop the updated Parks and
Recreation SDC's, section 4.0 presents the calculation of Residential Parks and
Recreation SDC Rates, and section 5.0 presents the calculation of Non-residential Parks
and Recreation SDC Rates. The Parks and Recreation SDC Capital Improvement
Program (CIP), which lists projects which may be funded with SDC revenues, is
included as an Appendix to this report.
Don Ganer & Associates
1
as of 9/30/99
"-"''T'' " " ,,- '''''' "," ""'_h .,,,". -..""~."",.,,-"-<~,,-_.,,,--............
.....
2.0 AUTHORITY AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. Legislative Authority
While SDC's have been in use in Oregon since the mid-1970's, State legislation
regarding SDC's was not adopted until 1989, when the Oregon Systems Development
Act (ORS 223.297 - 223.314) was passed. The purpose of this Act was to "...provide a
uniform framework for the imposition of system development charges...". SB 122 and
HB 3172, passed in 1993 and 1999, respectively, include additional statutory provisions
regarding SOC's. Together, these pieces of legislation require local governments who
enact SDC's to:
· Enact SDC's by ordinance or resolution;
· develop a methodology outlining how the SDC's were developed;
. adopt a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to designate capital
improvements that can be funded with "improvement fee" SDC revenues;
. provide credit against the amount of the SDC for the construction of
certain "qualified public improvements";
· separately account for and report receipt and expenditure of SDC
revenues; and develop procedures for challenging expenditures; and
. use SDC revenues only for capital expenditures (operations and
maintenance uses are prohibited).
B. "Improvement fee" and "Reimbursement fee" SDC's
The Oregon Systems Development Act provides for the imposition of two types of
SDC's: (1) "improvement fee" SDC's, and (2) "reimbursement fee" SDC's.
"Improvement fee" SDC's may be charged for new capital improvements that will
increase capacity. Revenues from "improvement fee" SDC's may be spent only on
capacity-increasing capital improvements identified in the required Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) that lists each project, and the expected timing and cost of
each project. "Reimbursement fee" SDC's may be charged for the costs of existing
capital facilities if "excess capacity" is available to accommodate growth. Revenues
from "reimbursement fees" may be used on any capital improvement project, including
major repairs, upgrades, or renovations. Capital improvements funded with
"reimbursement fee" SDC's do not need to increase capacity, but they must be listed in
the CIP.
Don Ganer & Associates
2
as of 9/30/99
"--y-
. ;",~",.....,,,...~b"""""H,~_._A_',,_,..',,, .__'h..'",~,>t'_~~,_,..~,,,.,.,.~,,......,__,,~..__,",._',,,_~~_.
-.
C. Requirements and Options for Credits, Exemptions, and Discounts
(1) Credits
A credit is a reduction in the amount of the SDC for a specific
development. The Oregon SDC Act requires that credit be allowed for the
construction of a "qualified public improvement" which (1) is required as
a condition of development approval, (2) is identified in the Capital
Improvement Plan, and (3) either is not located on or contiguous to
property that is the subject of development approval, or is located on or
contiguous to such property and is required to be built larger or with
greater capacity than is necessary for the particular development project.
The credit for a qualified public improvement may only be applied
against an SDC for the same type of improvement (e.g., a parks and
recreation improvement can only be used for a credit for a parks and
recreation SDC), and may be granted only for the cost of that portion of an
improvement which exceeds the minimum standard facility size or
capacity needed to serve the particular project. For multi-phase projects,
any excess credit may be applied against SDC's that accrue in subsequent
phases of the original development project.
In addition to these required credits, the City may, if it so chooses,
provide a greater credit, establish a system providing for the
transferability of credits, provide a credit for a capital improvement not
identified in the Capital Improvement Plan, or provide a share of the cost
of an improvement by other means.
(2) Exemptions
The City may "exempt" certain types of development, such as "non-
residential development" from the requirement to pay parks SDC's.
Exemptions reduce SDC revenues and, therefore, increase the amounts
that must come from other sources, such as bonds and property taxes.
Don Ganer &. Associates
3
as of 9/ 3IJ / 99
-'--Y---''''-'~''_.' i-''''d"._._'''''-'"''-''~---'''-''-''
'"
(3) Discounts
The City may "discount" the amount of the SDC by reducing the portion
of growth-required improvements to be funded with SDC's. A discount
in the SDC may also be applied on a pro-rata basis to any identified
deficiencies to be funded from non-SDC sources. For example, the City
may charge new development an SDC rate sufficient to recover only 25%
of identified growth-required costs. The portion of growth-required costs
to be funded with SDC's must be identified in the SDC-CIP.
Because discounts reduce SDC revenues, they increase the amounts that
must come from other sources, such as bonds or general fund
contributions, required to meet Level of Service Standards.
D. Guiding Concepts
In addition to the requirements of the Oregon SDC Act and SB 122, court cases from
Oregon and other states provide additional guidance for the methodology to be used in
developing SDC's.
(1) "Essential Nexus" Requirement
In a 1987 case, Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, the u.s. Supreme
Court established that government agencies must show that an "essential
nexus" (e.g. reasonable connection) exists between a project's impacts and
any dedication requirements. For SDC's the "essential nexus"
requirement means there must be a reasonable connection between the
nature of the development and the facilities being funded with the SDC
revenues. For example, new parks are needed to serve the recreation
needs of new development in order to prevent overcrowding of existing
facilities and to meet the Level of Service Standards included in the City's
Parks and Recreation Master Plan; therefore an "essential nexus" exists
between new development and the SDC's charged to to build parks
needed to serve new development.
Don Ganer & Associates
4
as of 9/30/99
"-"""Y- '''".._--',....,,''',
1111'.
(2) "Rough Proportionality" Requirement
In its landmark 1994 decision in Dolan v. City of Tigard, the U.S. Supreme
Court cited the requirement for "rough proportionality" between the
requirements placed on a developer by government and the impacts of
the development. Case law is conflicting on the question of whether
Dolan applies to SDC's. However, to avoid controversy, the Parks and
Recreation SDC is structured so that the Dolan test is satisfied. This
concept of rough proportionality is applied in "improvement fee" SDC's
by insuring that new growth is not required to pay (either through fees or
exactions) to upgrade existing deficiencies or provide new facilities
beyond a level "rougWy proportionate" with the extent of new
development's impact; "improvement fee" SDC's can be charged only for
the portion of capital facilities costs that are attributable to growth. As an
example, if an SDC is designed to provide funding for Community Parks
at a Level of Service (LOS) of 2.0 acres per 1,000 persons, new
development can only be charged a fee sufficient to provide facilities for
new residents at 2.0 acres per 1,000 persons, and cannot be required to
pay additional costs that may be needed to eliminate deficiencies.
E. Alternative Methodology Approaches
There are three basic approaches used to develop improvement fee SDC's; "standards-
driven", "improvements-driven", and "combination/ hybrid".
(1) Standards-Driven Approach
The "standards-driven" approach is based on the application of Level of
Service (LOS) Standards for facilities such as neighborhood parks,
community parks, etc. Facility needs are determined by applying the LOS
Standards to the projected future population. SDC-eligible amounts are
calculated based on the costs of additional facilities needed to serve
growth. This approach works best where LOS Standards have been
adopted as part of a comprehensive plan or facilities master planning
process and the Levels of Service provided to current residents are at or
near those required by the LOS Standards.
Don Caner & Associates
5
as of 9/30/99
'"
(2) Improvements-Driven Approach
The "improvements-driven" approach is based on a specific list of
planned capacity-increasing capital improvements. The portion of each
project that is attributable to growth is determined, and the SDC-eligibIe
costs are calculated by dividing the total costs of growth-required projects
by the projected increase in population. This approach works best where
a detailed master plan or project list is available and the benefits of
projects can be apportioned between growth and current residents.
(3) Combination/ Hybrid Approach
The combination/ hybrid-approach includes elements of both the
"improvements-driven" and "standards-driven" approaches. If not
already adopted, LOS Standards may be developed and used to develop a
list of planned capacity-increasing projects. The growth-required portions
of projects can then be used as the basis for determining the SDC-eligible
costs. This approach works best where a detailed master plan or project
list of capacity needs has not recently been developed and where
sufficient data is available to identify the existing Levels of Service.
Don Ganer &. Associates
6
as of 91 '!IJ199
-.
-----.-'-_."~---._.~'"-,._..,,.~."
-
3.0 PARKS AND RECREATION SDC METHODOLOGY
The Combination/ Hybrid approach has been used to develop the updated Parks and
Recreation SDC methodology. The City of Woodburn Parks and Recreation Comprehensive
Plan Updllte identifies facility needs through 2020, based on the application of Level of
Service Standards for the City's projected population and employment. The Level of
Service (LOS) standards included in the Plan are currently met or exceeded for current
residents. The Capital Improvement Plan included as Appendix A includes the same
projects as are identified in the Comprehensive Plan Update, but they have been
modified to identify the growth-required portion (if any), the estimated timing, and the
estimated cost of each project.
Parks and recreation facilities benefit City residents, businesses, non-resident
employees, and visitors. The methodology used in developing the City's Parks and
Recreation SDC's establishes the required "essential nexus" between a project's impacts
and the SDC's by identifying specific types of parks and recreation facilities and
analyzing the proportionate need of each type of facility for use by residents and
employees. The SDC's to be paid by a development meet the "rough proportionality"
requirement because they are based on the nature of the development and the extent of
the impact of the development on the types of parks and recreation facilities for which
the SDC's are charged. The Parks and Recreation SDC's are based on population and
employment, and the SDC rates are calculated based on the specific impact a
development is expected to have on the City's population and employment.
For facilities that are not generally used by employees (i.e., mini-parks and
neighborhood parks), only a residential parks and recreation SDC may be charged. For
facilities that benefit both residents and employees (i.e., community parks and centers,
municipal parks, greenways, open space, and trails), parks and recreation SDC's may
be charged to both residential and non-residential development.
A. Population and Employment Growth
The Parks and Recreation SDC's is based on a portion of the growth-required capital
costs per "capita" (person). Projections of population and employment growth were
calculated using data provided by Marion County and the U.S. Bureau of Census; and
from a report prepared for the City in 1999 by E.D. Hovee. The estimated population
and employment increases are shown in Table 3.1.
Don Ganer & Associates
7
as of 9/30/99
.'"
TABLE 3.1
ESTIMATED CITY OF WOODBURN
POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT INCREASES (1999 - 2020)
2020 (Projected)
Estimated Current
Estimated Increase
Population:
Employment:
26,290
9,058
16,937
7,051
9,353
2,007
B. Benefit of Facilities
The LOS Standards used to determine facility needs consider the proportionate benefit
each type of facility has for residents and employees. For purposes of this report, mini
parks and neighborhood parks are considered to be used primarily by residents, rather
than by employees and other non-residents. Therefore, the LOS Standards and
identified needs for these types of facilities are based only on population and do not
consider employment. For all other facilities including community parks and centers,
municipal parks, greenways, open space, and trails, both population and employment
were considered in development of the LOS Standards and facility needs.
While parks and recreation facilities benefit both residents and employees, the amount
of time these facilities are available for use by employees is not the same as for
residents; an employee does not create demands for facilities equal to those created by a
resident. In order to equitably apportion the need for facilities between employees and
residents, an employee-to-resident demand ratio was developed based on the potential
time these facilities are available for use. First, estimates for the average number of
hours per week these facilities are available for use were identified. Children's ages,
adult employment status, work location (inside or outside the City), and seasonal
variances were taken into account and are displayed in Table 3.2 (page 9).
Don Ganer & Associates
8
as of 9/30/99
'-"'T'''"''''-''
"
T ABLE 3.2
ESTIMATES OF AVERAGE WEEKL Y
A V AILABILITY OF PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
Non-Employed Live In/ Live In/ Live Out/
Adult (18+ ) 5-17 Kids Work In Work Out Work In Total
Summer Oune-Sept)
Weekday
Before Work 1 1 2
Meals/ Breaks 1 1 2
After Work 2 2 4
Other Leisure 12 12 2 2 28
Sub-Total 12 12 6 2 4 36
Weekend
Leisure 12 12 12 12 0 48
Sub-Total 12 12 12 12 0 48
Summer Hrs/ Day 12 12 7.71 4.86 2.86 39.43
Spring/Fall (April-May, Oct-Nov)
Weekday
Before Work 05 05 1
Meals/ Breaks 1 1 2
After Work 1 1 2
Other Leisure 10 4 2 2 18
Sub-Total 10 4 4.5 2 25 23
Weekend
Other Leisure 10 10 10 10 0 40
Sub-Total 10 10 10 10 0 40
Spring/Fall Hours/Day 10 5.71 6,07 4.29 1.79 27.86
Winter (December-March)
Weekday
Before Work 05 0.5 1
Meals/ Breaks 1 1 2
After Work 0.5 05 1
Other Leisure 8 2 1 1 12
Sub-Total 8 2 3 1 2 16
Weekend
Other Leisure 8 8 8 8 0 32
Sub-Total 8 8 8 8 0 32
Winter Hours/ Day 8 3,71 4,43 3 1,43 2057
Annual Wtd. Avg Hours 10 7.14 6.07 4.05 2.02 29.29
Next, the Annual Weighted Average Hours calculated for each categol)' (from Table
3.2) were applied to population and employment data (1990 Census) to determine the
Total Annual Weighted Average Hours for each categol)' of Resident and Employee.
The results of these calculations are displayed in Table 3.3 (page 10).
Don Ganer &. Associates
9
as of 9/30/99
'.--'Y"."".
;-....,..-.,.," ......,...--_.._.".~---~."'._.~.._'""_.._-~,>.. ,.... ,., .....,+.', '-.'~'-'- ""-"<'~~;-~._""'"-""---"'"~
"
TABLE 3.3
TOTAL ANNUAL AVAILABILITY
OF PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
Non-Employed Live In/ Live In/ Live Out/
Adult (18+ ) 5-17 Kids Work In Work Out Work In Total
Population & Emp, Data 3,680 3,581 2,046 2,652 1,289 13,248
(1990 Census)
Annual Wtd. A vg Hours 10 7.14 6.07 4.05 2.02 29,29
Tol Annual Wtd. Avg. Hrs. 36,800 25,579 12,422 10,734 2,609 88,144
Next, the available hours (from Table 3.3) were allocated between employment-related
hours and residence-related hours, as displayed in Table 3.4.
TABLE 3.4
TOTAL RESIDENCE AND EMPLOYMENT RELATED
AVAILABILITY OF PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
Residence Related
Hours
% of Total
Resident Non-Employee
Resident Employee
sub-total
73,113
8.281
81,394
8259%
9.40%
92.34%
Employment Related
Resident Employee
Non-Resident Employee
sub-total:
4,141
2.609
6,749
4.70%
2,96%
7,66%
Finally, the Employee-to-Resident Parks Demand Ratio was calculated by dividing the
total of employment-related hours by the total for residence-related hours (from Table
3.4), with results summarized in Table 3.5.
TABLE 3.5
EMPLOYEE-TO-RESIDENT PARKS DEMAND RATIO
Weighted Avg. Hrs.
Residence-Related
Weighted Avg. Hrs.
Employment-Related
Employee %
of Resident
81,394 (92.34%)
6,749 (7.66%)
8.3%
Don Ganer & Associates
10
as of 9/30/99
----r--' .._-" j-'<'- H ''''---~--'' -''',.,-~-- ..".-..--, ---..".
...
C. Facility Needs
The Level of Service Standard included in the City of Woodburn's Parks and Recreation
Comprehensive Plan Update provided the framework for identifying facility needs.
Specific needs were determined based on the development and application of Level of
Service (LOS) Standards based on "Units of Facility Per 1,000 Persons". LOS standards
were developed for Neighborhood, Community, and Municipal Parks; and for the Core
Parks System. LOS standards were not developed for Mini-Parks, Cultural Resource,
or Special Use Park/Facilities, or for Greenways/Open Space, Trails/Pathways
because these are site-specific facilities for which population standards are difficult to
apply. For those facilities for which LOS Standards were not developed, population
proportions were used to determine the growth-required portion of a project.
The LOS standards identified in Table 3.6 provide objective criteria by which facility
needs can be determined. Using these LOS standards, excess capacity facilities and
growth-required needs were identified.
TABLE 3.6
CURRENT AVERAGE
LEVELS OF SERVICE (LOS)
AND LOS STANDARDS
Facility Type
Service
Area
Current Average LOS
(Units per 1.000 persons)
LOS Standard
Neighborhood/School Park*
Community /Municipal Park
Core Park System**
1/2 mile radius
City
City
7.69 acres
2.74 acres
11.78 acres
5.50 acres
2.00 acres
8.25 acres
Public school playground and recreation facilities were included in the current inventory.
** Includes neighborhood/ school parks, community parks, municipal parks, and all other types of
facilities, such as special use, greenways, open space, trails, etc.
*
To determine facility needs, the LOS standards are applied to the 2020 population and
employment projections. Table 3.7 presents a summary of facilities needed to serve
growth based on application of the LOS standards.
Don Ganer &; Associates
11
as of 9/30/99
-"'T- -,...-..
.,.t,,",_"'k"'~ ......,...c~,_.....'- "",-"_""""_".,.,,.,-.,,, -
"
TABLE 3.7
ADDITIONAL FACILITY NEEDS FOR POPULATION AND
EMPLOYMENT GROWTH BASED ON LOS STANDARDS
Facility Type
Neighborhood/School Park (acres)
Municipal/Community Park (acres)
Total Core Park System (acres)
Current Surplus
or (Deficiency)
36.90
13.05
57.25
Pop. Growth
Required Units
1455
6.00
21.28
Empl. Growth
Required Units
0.00
0.10
0.37
The LOS analysis results in the identification of excess capacity that is available to serve
new development, and for which a "reimbursement fee" SDC may be charged;
however no "reimbursement fee" SDC is include in this methodology because:
. excess capacity neighborhood/ school park facilities include recently completed
Woodburn School District facilities which also serve as parks and recreation
facilities, and which have outstanding bonded debt that is being repaid through
property taxes; and
. excess capacity municipal! community park acreage includes Centennial Park,
which is under construction, and Legion and Settlemier parks, both of which need
extensive renovation.
D. Facility Costs
The Woodburn Parks and Recreation SDC Capital Improvement Plan (eIP), which is
included as Appendix A, identifies facilities needed to serve both residential and non-
residential growth needs through the year 2020. Table 3.8, page 13, shows the breakout
between residential and non-residential costs. Because each employee needs only 8.3%
of the equivalent facilities needed for a resident, the residential share of growth costs is
98.2% of the total for those facilities which benefit both residential and non-residential
development (i.e., municipal parks, etc.), and 100% for those facilities which benefit
residential development only (i.e., neighborhood parks, etc.).
Don Ganer & Associates
12
as of 9/30/99
'"'~"'.--' ...',
t".--'_.<,.~ .,.. .... >
..
TABLE 3.8
RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL
GROWTH REQUIRED FACILITIES COSTS
Facility
Neighborhood/School Parks.
Sports/ Recreation Facilities
Municipal/Community Parks
Greenways, Open Space, Trails
Maintenance Facilities
Totals
Total Facilities
Growth Costs
$1,713,800
1,564,200
446,500
189,000
12.600
$3,926,100
Residential
Growth Costs
$1,713,800
1,536,044
438,463
185,598
1bm
$3,886,278
· these facilities are considered to benefit residential population only.
Don Ganer & Associates
""
13
"M'Jf
Non-Residential
Growth Costs
$ 0
28,156
8,037
3,402
227
$39,822
as of 9/30/99
.......,', ....._...-.,"'""''''>...,''''''............--_-"_'''.._".~...,___.,,_._.-+. _....._,~_".v,;.._.~
4.0 RESIDENfIAL PARKS AND RECREATION SDC RATES
The City's Residential Parks and Recreation SDC rates are calculated using a series of
sequential formulas which, when completed, yield the total SDC rates for each new
dwelling unit in the City. The formulas identify:
· the residential facilities cost per capita (Formula 4a, below),
· the residential facilities cost per dwelling unit (Formula 4b, page 15),
· the compliance/ administrative cost per dwelling unit (Formula 4c, page 16)
· the credit per dwelling unit (Formula 4d, page 17), and
· the residential SDC per dwelling unit (Formula 4e, page 17).
The Residential SDC is an "improvement fee" only and does not include a
"reimbursement fee" component.
A. Fonnula 4a: Residential Facilities Cost Per Capita
The residential facilities cost per capita is calculated by dividing the residential portion
of growth-required facilities costs (identified in Table 3.8, page 13) by the expected
increase in the City's population during the next twenty years (from Table 3.1, page 8).
4a.
Residential
Facilities
Costs
Population
Increase
Residential
Facilities Cost
Per Capita
Table 4.1 presents the calculation of the facilities cost per capita.
TABLE 4.1
FACILITIES COST PER CAPITA
Residential
Facilities Costs
Population
Increase
Residential
Facilities Cost
Per Capita
$3,886,278
9,705
$400
Don Ganer &. Associates
14
as of 9/30/99
Y'
,..,.,"".._---..,_..._"~_.._,.,---~-~~..,~._-'~'-".'" .....
B. Fonnula 4b: Residential Facilities Cost Per Dwelling Unit
The Residential Parks and Recreation SDC's is based on facilities costs per capita and is
calculated based on the number of persons per dwelling unit. Dwelling units typically
house different numbers of persons depending on the type of unit (i.e., single family,
multi-family, etc.). To determine the appropriate number of persons per dwelling unit,
census data gathered in 1990 was analyzed, and the resulting calculations are displayed
in Table 4.2.
TABLE 4.2
AVERAGE PERSONS PER DWELLING UNIT
Type of Unit
Single-Family
1990 Census
Avg. Persons
Per Dwelling Unit
2.71
Multi-Family
2.95
Manufactured Housing
1.93
The residential facilities cost per dwelling unit is calculated by multiplying the average
number of persons per dwelling unit (from Table 4.2) by the residential facilities cost
per capita (from Table 4.1, page 14).
4b.
Persons Per x
Dwelling Unit
Residential
Facilities Cost
Per Capita
Residential
Facilities Cost Per
Dwelling Unit
The results of these calculations are displayed in Table 4.3:
TABLE 4.3
RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES COST PER DWELLING UNIT
Multi-Family:
Average Residential Residential
Persons Per X Facilities Cost Facilities Cost Per
Dwelling Unit Per Capita Dwelling Unit
2.71 $400 $ 1,084
2.95 $400 $ 1,180
1.93 $400 $ m
Type of Dwelling Unit
Single-Family:
Manufactured Housing:
Don Ganer<< Associates
15
as of 9/30/99
--T~
.. ",',d'."'._~~_ .. dO "" '" .........."...."..""..__,~..,,-...__
C. Fonnula 4c: Compliallce/Administration Cost Per Dwelling Unit
The City will incur compliance and administrative costs associated with the Residential
Parks and Recreation SDC's. ORS 223.307(5) allows the City to recoup the direct costs
of complying with Oregon law regarding SDC's. Recoupable costs include consulting,
engineering, and legal fees as well as the cost of accounting for revenues and
expenditures. The total compliance/ administrative cost is estimated to be 10% of the
residential facilities costs per dwelling unit. The compliance/ administrative cost per
dwelling unit is determined by multiplying the residential facilities cost per dwelling
unit (from Table 4.3) by 10%
4c.
Compliance /
Administration
Rate
Residential
x Facilities Cost
Per Dwelling Unit
Compliance/
Admin. Cost Per
Dwelling Unit
Table 4.4 presents the compliance/ administration cost per dwelling unit.
TABLE 4.4
COMPLIANCE/ADMINISTRATION COST PER DWELLING UNIT
Residential Compliance/ Compliance/
Facilities Cost Per X Administration = Admin Cost Per
Type of Dwelling Unit Dwelling Unit Rate Dwelling Unit
Single-Family: $ 1,084 10% $ 108
Multi-Family: $ 1,180 10% $ 118
Manufactured Housing: $ 772 10% $ 78
D. Formula 4d: Residential SDC Credit Per Dwelling Unit
The Master Plan identifies capacity improvements for both growth and non-growth
needs. Bonds and property taxes will likely be used as a source for funding a portion of
these improvements, and a portion of bond repayments and property taxes will be paid
by growth. Therefore, a credit must be calculated to provide for these payments in
order to avoid charging growth twice for the same facilities
Don Ganer &. Associates
16
as of 9/30/99
-"T'.
to." .
-
A credit has been calculated for each type of dwelling unit usmg the following
assumptions:
· $2.5 million in G.O. bonds for parks improvements issued in 2001,
· 20 year bond term, 6% interest,
· 5.5% annual increase in total property tax assessments,
· 3% annual increase in assessed property valuations,
· 4% annual inflation (decrease in value of money),
· Average 1999 property valuations for new dwelling units at $125,000 for single
family, $55,000 for multi-family, and $85,000 for manufactured housing units
($75,000 for unit, $15,000 for lot).
Present Value
4d. of Future Property
Tax Payments
SDC
Credit Per
Dwelling Unit
The amounts of these credits are shown in Table 4.5.
TABLE 4.5
CREDIT PER DWELLING UNIT
Type of Dwelling Unit
Credit Per
Dwelling Unit
Single-Family:
$430
Multi-Family:
$189
Manufactured Housing:
$215
E. Fonnula 4e: Residential SDC Per Dwelling Unit
The residential SDC rate per dwelling unit is calculated by adding the
compliance! administration cost per dwelling unit (fable 4.4, page 16) to the residential
facilities cost per dwelling unit (from Table 4.3, page 15), and subtracting the credit per
dwelling unit (from Table 4.5).
4e.
Residential
Facilities Cost +
Per Dwelling Unit
Compliance!
Admin. Cost
Per Dwelling Unit
Credit Per
Dwelling Unit
Residential
SDC Per
Dwelling Unit
Don Ganer & Associates
17
as of 9/'!IJ/99
....'
"j..._--.,..._............~""'.".^.....<..~.w,,_,."......................"'._""_,.,_~'___.__ ,........~...,,_,_..,.,...-.....~.......~_~,._,..
The results of these calculations are shown in Table 4.6.
TABLE 4.6
RESIDENTIAL SDC PER DWELLING UNIT
Residential Compliance/ Residential
Facilities Cost Per + Administration - Credit Per SDC Per
Type of Dwelling Unit Dwelling Unit Cost/Unit Dwelling Unit Dwelling Unit
Single-Family: $ 1,084 $ 108 $430 $ 762
Multi-Family: $ 1,180 $ 118 $189 $ 1,109
Manufactured Housing: $ 772 $ 78 $ 215 $ 635
Don Ganer<< Associates
18
as of 9/30/99
T'
""'-'-"""'-"--+---~~'."--'---"""""""'~'-
5.0 NON-RESIDENTIAL SDC RATES
The City's Non-Residential Parks and Recreation SDC rates are calculated using a series
of sequential formulas which, when completed, yield the total SDC rates for each new
employee added by new development in the City. The formulas identify:
a) the Non-Residential Facilities Cost Per Employee (Formula 5a, below),
b) the "Compliance/ Administration" Cost Per Employee (Formula 5b, page 20),
c) the Credit Per Employee (Formula 5c, page 20); and
d) the Non-Residential SDC Per Employee (Formula 5d, page 21).
The Non-Residential SDC is an "improvement fee" only and does not include a
"reimbursement fee" component.
A. Formula Sa: Non-Residential Facilities Cost Per Employee
The Non-Residential Facilities Cost Per Employee is calculated by dividing the non-
residential growth-related facilities costs (from Table 3.9, page 13) by the expected
increase in the City's employment through 2020 (from Table 3.1, page 8).
Non-Residential
5a. Growth-Related
Facilities Costs
Employment
Increase
Non-Residential
Facilities Cost
Per Employee
Table 5.1 presents the calculation of the Non-Residential Facilities Cost Per Employee.
TABLE 5.1
NON-RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES COST PER EMPLOYEE
Non-Residential
Growth-Related
Facilities Cost
Non-Residential Facilities
Cost Per Employee
Employment
Increase
$ 39,822
2,007
$20
Don Ganer & Associates
19
as of 9/30/99
.
y"
""'~""'" .....
B. Fonnula 5b: Compliance/Administration Cost Per Employee
ORS 223.307(5) allows the City to recoup the direct costs of complying with Oregon law
regarding SDC's. Recoupable costs include consulting, engineering, and legal fees as
well as the cost of collecting and accounting for revenues and expenditures. The total
compliance/ administration cost is estimated to be 10% of collected SDC revenues. The
Compliance/ Administration Cost Per Employee is calculated by multiplying the Non-
Residential Facilities Cost Per Employee (from Table 5.1, page 19) by 10%:
5b. Non-Residential Facilities X
Cost Per Employee
10%
Compliance/ Admin.
Cost Per Employee
Table 5.2 presents the calculation of the Compliance/ Administration Cost Per
Employee.
TABLE 5.2
COMPLIANCE/ADMINISTRATION COST PER EMPLOYEE
Non-Residential Facilities
Cost Per Employee
Cost
Factor
Compliance/ Admin,
Cost Per Employee
$ 20
x
10%
$2
C. Formula 5c: Non-Residential Credit Per Employee
The Master Plan identifies capacity improvements for both growth and non-growth
needs. Bonds and property taxes will likely be used as a source for funding a portion of
these improvements, and a portion of bond repayments and property taxes will be paid
by growth. Therefore, a credit must be calculated to provide for these payments in
order to avoid charging growth twice for the same facilities.
Don Ganer & Associates
20 as of 9/30/99
T~
_ ..w......,.....~...."_...,...,..._".-..........-_........."~.,".._.,.,.....__=".,._""',... J" t ~............_.......~".._."'-..-.....~_,.""""......._~.',.h._>I<=~".__""';'"'-..........,,;.;.._."...
A credit has been calculated for employees using the following assumptions:
· $2.5 million in G.O. bonds for parks improvements issued in 2001,
· 20 year bond term, 6% interest,
· 5.5% annual increase in total property tax assessments,
· 3% annual increase in assessed property valuations,
· 4% annual inflation (decrease in value of money),
· Average 1999 property valuation for non-residential development at $10 per square
foot,
· An average of 500 square feet per employee
5c.
Present Value of
Tax Payments Per
Employee
Credit Per
Employee
The amount of this credit is shown in Table 5.3
TABLE 5.3
CREDIT PER EMPLOYEE
Credit Per
Employee
Present Value of Tax Payments $17
D. Fonnula 5d: Non-Residential SDC Per Employee
The Non-Residential SDC Per Employee IS calculated by adding the
compliance/ administration cost per employee (Table 5.2, page 20) to the non-
residential facilities cost per employee (from Table 5.1 page 19), and subtracting the
credit per employee (from Table 5.3). .
Non-Residential
5d. Facilities Cost +
Per Employee
Compliance/
Admin. Cost
Per Employee
Credit Per
Employee
N on- Residential
SDC Per
Employee
Don Ganer & Associates
21
as of 9/30/99
'-'T
',' .,..,...,.....~"..~~~-"...........-".,~,..~,..,.,_._,-'.~.-.,-"'"._--''>"_._'''''''''''"''''''-~'''''''''''-''---'~-~~-'-'.''--"'-''''''
The results of these calculations are shown in Table 5.4.
TABLE 5.4
NON-RESIDENTIAL SDC PER EMPLOYEE
Non-Residential
Facilities Cost Per
Employee
Compliance/
+ Administration -
Employee
Credit Per
Employee
Non-Residential
SDC Per
Employee
$ 20
$2
$17
$5
The parks and recreation SDC's for a particular non-residential development are
determined by:
1) dividing the total building space (square feet) in the development by the
number of square feet per employee (from the guidelines in Table 5.5, page
23), and
2) multiplying the result (from step 1) by the Non-Residential SDC Per
Employee rate (Table 5.4).
For example, the parks and recreation SDC's for a 100,000 square foot Distribution
Warehouse would be calculated as follows:
1) 100,000 (sq. ft. building size) + 2,500 (sq. ft. per employee) = 40 employees,
2) 40 employees X $5 (SDC rate) = $200.
For non-residential development where more than one SIC may be used, multiple SIC's
may be applied based on their percentage of the total development.
Don Ganer & Associates
22 as of 9/30/99
"Y'
> ,~"""",_",,___,,""""~,"'_~'M""" ~ .. .. '_"__~~-+-~_"'_'_'._'''*'___~'''~,".._____.....",...~_.,".__..,., ."._~-,.-_..-.
TABLE 5.5
SQUARE FEET PER EMPLOYEE
(recommended guidelines from Metro Employment Density Study)
Standard Industry Square Feet Standard Industry Square Feet
Classification (SIC) Per Employee Classification (SIC) Per Employee
Manufacturing: Trucking 1,500
General 700 Communications 250
Food Related 77S Utilities 225
Textile, Apparel 575
Lumber, Wood Products 560 Retail:
Paper and Related 1,400 General 700
Printing and Publishing 600 Hardware 1,000
Chemicals, Petrol, Food Stores 675
Rubber, Plastics 850 Restaurant/Bar 225
Cement, Stone, Clay, Glass 800 Appliance / F umiture 1,000
Furniture and Furnishings 600 Auto Dealership 650
Primary Metals 1,000 Gas Station (gas only) 300
Secondary Metals 800 Gas Station (gas and service) 400
Non-Electrical Machinery 600 Regional Shopping Center 600
Electrical Machinery 375
Electrical Design 325 Services:
Transportation Equipment 500 Hotel/Motel 1,500
Other 400 Health Services (hospital) 500
Health Services (clinic) 350
Wholesale Trade; Educational 1,300
Durable Goods 1,000 Cinema 1,100
Non-Durable Goods 1,150 Personal Services 600
Finance, Insurance,
Warehousing - Real Estate, Business Services 350
Storage 20,000
Distribution 2,500 Government Administration 300
6.0 CONCLUSION
The City's growth will require a combination of techniques, including system
development charges, bond revenues, and other sources of funds to pay for capital
facilities needed to serve the parks and recreation needs of current and future residents.
As growth occurs and the demographics of the community change, the City's parks and
recreation facility needs will also change and should be periodically monitored through
the use of opinion surveys and similar techniques. The ClP should be reviewed and
updated at least once every two years to reflect changes in parks and recreation facility
needs. The System Development Charges methodology should also be periodically
updated when significant changes are made to the ClP, and/ or when cost estimates
become outdated.
Don Ganer &. Associates
23
as of 9/30/99
'''.r- .
-""~+-,~".,-,-"""""",~~,~~~-~",-""""-=-",_.......""-,~,,,,"~,,,,,,",,.._,...~"'"_..----"._,------.......,', ,,~--"',,",-,--,~,.~
o
C
en
Cc
.2 m
--
me.
~CI)
0-
)(G)c
_a:~
c't:JG)
zc>
Wmo
e.CI)Q,
e.~E
<...
m-
e.-
m
c==
...c.
::Sm
.co
't:J
o
o
3:
~ I)
0.0 C
oJ:: 0
~.-
o ....
.... 0
C)o..
~
~w
ctl
c..u
o
I/)
r
J::
;f. ~
o
....
C)
J::
...
~
o
....
C)
I
C
o
z
'J::
C ...
o ~
Z 0
....
;f.C)
I'-
o
o
N
o
o
o
N
"0
I)
III .-
.- III
o E
I- .;;
III
w
8
o
o
N
It)
iIt
o
iIt
~
o
IX)
~
8
o
LI)
LI)
iIt
8
o
o
I'-
~
iIt
<f-
a
N
<f-
8
o
o
o
LI)
I'-
I'-
iIt
o
a
a
a
I'-
~
iIt
8
v
I'-
I'-
iIt
~
It)
M
8
ID
I'-
M
iIt
~
v
ID
8
a
LI)
~
N
iIt
ci~ ~
g 'C C -""
o ~ ,2 I)
.... C).... .,
.... en C"CI s-
III OlU
~ tf"i: ni
C) 5 '=0 0
.~ .... .,
"0 'i:"~ ii
~~~B
~ :;; :J ~
~Q.nlcv
0.. ..; -g 1
E C III 1V
III I)
J::EIIl a.
OlI)"'''O
-= ~ ~ C
:; a. E ~
m ~ ~ I)
o ..... 0 1:
'-co.l)
i [.~ ~
E 'S C)III OS:.:J2. 0
0- ".;:;.....-
~ I),~ 0 ~ ii
O"O~< I/)
o.E~"O_tJ~ ~
,_ ~ ~ 2 Ol III l:'
~ ~'+, t: ~ ~"~
IIII11J:: C... Co
::Eo.~8~ ~::
c
....
I)
J::
...
:l
o
III
I)
J::
...
.~
~,...
III III
0.1)
....
"0 U
o III
,glll
o X
.D 0
J:: ...
Olo.
'Ii fi-
c '-""
1IIl:'
g-u
"ii~
ii ...
~o
,~ 5
fr'+'
u 5
<a.
"0
C
Ii 6....
.... ....:l
,~ Ol ...
E ~cn
~ c..c
:l Ol I)
c .~ E
I) "0 I)
E :l >
I) "0 e
ii ,E; E
a.~
.~ ~
c
o
III
"ii
Z
-""
....
III
a.
Ol
c
'6
:l
"0
C
~ I)
.... 01
III III
0.. C
en .~
~"O
l\I"O
... C
.n III
~
~
o
o
a
o
a
I'-
iIt
~
a
a
a
a
a
a
I'-
iIt
ol
c
'+,
J::
~
v ~
0I:t:
III :l
,E; .Ll
~ V
"00.
III
- u
2~{:l
I) C
1/1 E III
"'v-
CU"O
V III C
Eo.III
V V
> '- ..;-
o c
.... ... I)
E ~ E
"- E v
I) .Q. :il
~s-o.
::Ev~
a
iIt
<f-
a
a
a
a
a
N
~
~
a
a
a
a
a
o
N
iIt
a
iIt
~
a
8
III
N
iIt
~
8
J::
...
l\I
a.
III
III
V
U
U
l\I
Ol
:5 ti
:J 01
"0 ~
,E; 01
~ "in
fa -0 t)
n. fi t;
v _ l\I
0l0l
~ .~
"C 1:
~,g>
2l:'
:l '5
c u
v v
E III
v
>ni
~ ~
0.01
E C
- 'i:
v 'iij
-""...
III V
::E ....
8
LI)
N
~
iIt
8
v
ID
IX)
~
'#
It)
M
8
ID
M
LI)
iIt
~
v
It)
a
a
a
a
v
N
iIt
ni
"0
C
l\I
...
:;
o
U
t
o
a.
I/)
"0
"0
l\I
x
o
....
a.
a.
l\I
'-""
-""
....
l\I ;.,
0.. l\I
C ~
OJ::
1/1 ...
"ii :1
Z ....
"0 V
CJ::
[1;;
Jj ~
8
LI)
N
M
N
~
~
a
M
a
a
LI)
N
v
LI)
iIt
~
a
I'-
a
a
a
LI)
I'-
I'-
iIt
c
,2
...
....
o
a.
c
....
v
...
III
l\I
V
V
J::
...
,~
~
l\I
a.
"0
o
o .
J:: ,...
o rl
.D ....
-5,:;:
"Ii LI)
c x
l\I 0
8-0.
_ a.
v III
>'-""
~l:'
't)u
.: to)
:lJ::
0-...
u_
< 0
8
LI)
I'-
m
It)
iIt
~
a
m
8
III
I'-
I'-
iIt
~
a
a
a
a
LI)
I'-
I'-
iIt
c
~
...
III
V
~
J::
...
:l
o
I/)
v
..c
...
~t
'68-
-iJ III
.f: ~
~ :J
.... ...
l\I 'c
0.. :l
... -
::~
.... III
til a.
.....;
c c
o v
Lt E
J:: ~
t~
o Q.
Z V
....
o ...
... C
1/1 V
~ E ti
v 0.01
E '5 ~
v 0"01
> v
e"O~
Q. c c
"~ 6 III
vat"
~~5
::E a. u
o
~
~
o
o
a
III
I'-
ID
~
~
o
o
o
a
LI)
I'-
ID
iIt
I/)
tl
:a
l\I
...
u
'i:
u
'a.
I/)
Oltl
C "+:i
'6 'c
:l tl
"0 E
.f: ('OJ
I/) ~
OJ::
o ...
..c 0
u
1/)"0
~ fi
.0 -
:l 1/1
o.~
o tl
... E
I/) tl
... U
C C
tl l\I
~~
> I)
e-g
o.:l
E 0
,- ....
tl Ol
-"" ;.,
III l\I
::Eo.
o
iIt
o
a
IX)
M
.E;
~,...
l\I I/)
Q.tl
....
"0 U
o l\I
,glll
(; ><
.D 0
..c ....
Olo.
'Ii fi-
c '-""
l\I ;.,
...
g.o
"ii~
ii ...
~'t
~ c
'5,2
g-~
<&.
I'-
iIt
~
o
o
a
III
I"-
ID
iIt
o
o
I"-
M
l"-
Ll)
iIt
~
o
a
o
a
LI)
I"-
ID
iIt
o
a
LI)
I"-
IX)
N
M
iIt
...J
<
I-
o
I-
m
:::l
II)
"'_~<."_".~_~""""""'-'-'~''''''''~''-'''''''''''__''''''''''"''-''''_~__'''''__''_'___"__.H~_"'_'----""-__'_~""
u
C
CJ)
Cc
.2 ca
--
cao.
~tJ)
0-
)(G)c
_a:e
c"CG)
zc>
Wcao
o.tJ)Q..
o.~E
<(L-
ca-
0.-
ca
C::
L-Q.
::Sca
.au
"C
o
o
~
~ tI
o ..c
C\I 0 '5
<Il ~
0) w 0
ctl ...
Cl.. ~
8
U')
to
oq-
oq-
ifl
'#.
I'-
oq-
o
o
U')
('<)
o
U')
ifl
;f.
I'-
a
a
N
a
a
a
N
-0
tI
l'll ...
... l'll
o E
I- ...
III
W
a
o
a
a
U')
Ol
ifl
C
o 0
..... '';:;
,-.l'll
E g
.:! (j -
"0 L.. :s -0
~-c.....~
III C -0
::l C
;l g>>~nJ~
~'g~~-il
~ ~ a. .~ {i
~t ~.~
c-Oc
-t: tI cii'~
'" E c a.
a... t) ',ij c...
C > -c ::l
,~e,~ e
~. a. - 01
~ .~ ~ (;j
t.) 'c c
1V> ~o ~ :~
ooll>'Ug
~~...-1l+:;
.... tJ c ~
-0 01 E i ,g
fij ~ ~ ~ ,t
c '1r ~ E ,~
01 a.tI~
.-tltI>E
IJ-O...O
-0 .=! -0 5- 2
tI 0 c E ::l
0:: .~ l'll ._ l'll
r
o
ifl
'#.
o
a
a
o
a
o
co
ifl
:f-
a
o
a
a
a
o
a
co
ifl
t
::l
8 - ~
t:~
(;j tI 0
tI-BE-o
-0 tI tI C
~~.Ml'll
.f: ~ ~ ~-
tI
E
tI
>
o
5-
E
0'0
... c tI
~513
'" "'-c
a.. ~ II>
t; -[ .~
'E 0
tI i 'a. ~
+:ic "'('0
..... tJ ...... c:
~ E ~ 'iij
tI~E.u
... 0 t.l -
~ ~i~
~ II> ... ~
'U~~g:J
~ g nJ ~ ~
c~5EE
01 tI .- 0 tI
.- 01'" 0... >0
IJ '" l]
-oCot;c
~ ,~~ ~ E
o
ifl
~
o
o
o
o
a
I'-
I'-
ifl
;f-
a
a
o
o
a
o
I'-
I'-
ifl
II>
...
C
tI
E
tI
tI 15
> ...
o+:; Q.
tI ,~ II>
e...... ~
~ .2 .;:;
.~ ~ E
tI .- tI
-ci:.....
~[(;j
.~ -0 ~
o fij 'c
... tI
~ Ir ~
:;; ~ b:
a.. .c '0
~ .2 fij
.;:;
o
E
o
o
o C
...J 0
CJ "+:;
> E
o '"
... ...
0.0
.E~
a
ifl
a
ifl
~
a
;f.
o
o
a
o
N
ifl
8
U')
N
ifl
'#.
a
a
:f- :f-
a a
o a
'>
a
a
a
N
ifl
a a
a a
U') U')
N ('<)
ifl ifl
.:.t.>.
... ...
(Q oc
o.::l
o
tI
III
tI
...
l'll
:J
(;j
>
tI
II>
o
tl E
'5 0-
l'll
... ...
l'll 01
..!! cii
..c C
'in "Z:;
II> -c
tI 01
g en
l'll E ~ '5.
~::l ::l '"
'5t1...0
lot- ~ 'c (I)
1Il::E .2-g
E... 1!
g~ {:-o
....c :JC
1;) t) "0 RI
tI U ,~_
~ ~ 0 B
.:.t. ... ...
l'll tI tI
Em~:;
""C..fIJ nJ....
fij:g ~ ~
~~ ~~
(;j c :.J.2
... .:.t.
tI ::l tI"""
"C..c > 0
r!'8 e~
OlOo.N
g-~ .E ~
'11'.
a
ifl
a
.,
a
a
to
N
ifl
'#.
o
8
U')
M
o
a
oq-
N
N
.,
ifl
,-.
...:
iii
a
a
C!.
I'-
......
()
o
CJ)
C:c:
.0 cu
.... -
cuo.
fU)
u....
xG)i
_a::E
c'OG)
zc:>
UJcuo
0.u)Q.
o.':'::E
<('-
cu-
0.-
cu
c::!::
'-0.
::Scu
.ao
'0
o
o
3:
-~T-
~ t)
o .a
C"') c.;;
~ W ~
~ ...
ClUCl
o
Ul
8
OJ 0
o tI't
tI't
;f. ;f.
~ 0
~
...
~
o
...
CI
I
c:
o
z
8 8
N 0
0'> 0
~ M
tI't tI't
'~
c: ...
o ~
Z 0
...
;f.CI
;f- ;f.
v 0
<0 0
"-
o
o
N
o
o
o
N
-0
tl
C'lI ....
.... C'lI
o E
I- .;;
'"
uJ
o 0
o 0
o 0
o 0
M M
tI't tI't
~ t;
"'~
~ ....
t) ~
~ ~,~
'iij E
t)=
-0>.
=' .~
oU
,~ t)
o~
... ....
o
- ....
-o~
c: ....
'" ::J
. 0
= '"
Ii
>
~
t)
+J
'"
'"
u
....'E
~~
~ 0
c: ...
t) .
t) ...
"'Ul
CI c:
~o
C'lI 0
~ c:
t)::J
~ E
>'0
3:~
t) >.
-0 '"
C'lI ~
a~
0. I'll t)
::l 0. 0::
- ....
",Ul
~-o
'" c:
~ '"
~ c: 1)
C'lI 0 >
u",t)
o li U
1! E E
-0 ~ e
liI....
t) t) >.
u ~ ~
~ 0-5
o.C'lI
::l 0.
8
o
Ul
M
tI't
;f.
<0
M
8
o
v
c.o
tI't
<f.
::b
o
o
o
o
o
~
tI't
c:
c 0
o '"
'" c
c '"
'" E
E ~
~I
I...
'"
....
"'-0
t: 5
t) 0.
~~
'5 ~
C' ,_
t> .~
-0 c:
c: t)
::J E
o III
L. ......
Olt)
~~
0. 'c
t) L.
~.2
o -><
.Q ~
~ c.
-o'iii
c: ....
'" '"
c:
~:;~
Ci~~
t) '" III
0:: 0. 0.
o
tI't
8
o
c.o
M
tI't
;f.
o
;f.
Ul
M
8
o
U')
M
tI't
o
o
o
v
c.o
tI't
<f.
8
<f. ;f-
v v
Ul c.o
-;.
o
o
o
U')
M
tI't
o 0
o 0
o 0
o 0
o c.o
~ tI't
tI't
E
o
-g~
"'-0
c: li
15
o c
c: 0
::J :!1!
c >
~'O
~ .g ~
tUl~ 15
.0 ->< '" c:
'" :v 0. '"
(Qi a.. .... C'G
~ ~.ii ~
'" 0 E '"
.... "'0 (.l ....
o III +J 0
-ot)....-o
'E ~ Jl 'E
8 ,~ 0 8
.>< .....
~tt1!
u ~ ~ u
.... ...
UlUl
~-o-o
~~~
'5 ~ ~
~OO
8
Ul
~
N
tI't
8
Ul
V
OJ
tI't
;f.
c.o
M
;f-
Ul
M
8
v
OJ
M
tI't
o
o
v
o
U')
tI't
<f.
v
<0
8
o
In
M
N
tI't
o
...
~
III
0.
c:
o
'01
t)
--l
E
o
~
01
c
0'><
~c;j~
t) .'"
c-ou
'" ~ t)
i;' 0:: :g
1~g
...0.....
[0 0
....><
-g~li
t) III .0
~o.~
C> (; +-'
o ::J
.... E ~
:1~t)
c:.....c:
t) t) ....
EUlc:
t) E 0
"'0-0
III L. c:
t) .... '"
~ ti .
t) > 1:;
o .C (.l
o -0 ...
"'.... U
~~ni
'5 t) ~
C'NC:
o C'lI t)
~IUl
~
t)ffi
'S ::l
8"~
~ ....
-_._.~~.~._.~