Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009 - 2019 RIF StudyPage 1 of 2 Bob Cowell -Re: FW: Rise in fees for development over the past months From: Ben White To: Cowell, Bob; Brown, Glenn; johncrompton@hotmail.com Date: 4/8/2010 6:57 AM Subject: Re: FW: Rise in ·fees for development over the past months All ...... are Bob's comments going to be shared with Tedi? Glenn will you draft a response to Tedi with these comments? J ben Ben White Mayor City of College Station >>> Bob Cowell 04/07/10 5:34 PM >>> All, SAr -tn.~ IA~ f rt.... 7 ~ .t'o t-J t'V' J :I\ '-<-.c... 1" ) } ~ '( (B While I am pleased that we finally received this information so that we can take a closer look at the information, I did want to point out a few things as you consider this information: 1. Not all the items listed are actually fees. Many of the items are the costs associated with development requirements (for example it costs more to build sidewalks now because the City requires 5' sidewalks rather than 4' as in the past) 2. All of the fees identified are to recover the costs associated with project review and inspection to insure that what is built both meets adopted standards and actually gets built to those standards (since the City assumes permanent maintenance responsibilities). It is important to note that we still do not recover all costs (as required by Council policy) and development review and inspection continues to be subsidized by the general fund. 3. Our fees continue to be in line with peer communities. 4. Though it is a small amount, the TIA number in the example is inappropriate as single fam ily residential projects do not require TIA's 5. Some of the items identified in the paragraph after the dollar amounts (such as costs of comprehensive plan amendments or rezoning) should be viewed differently than the other costs in that they are the cost of speculation. This is quite different than the costs associated with projects that are entitled (that is have the zoning in place). 6. It is important to note that there are costs associated with all development. Someone must pay for these costs. For example traffic mitigation (that is upgrading intersections or streets due to the proposed development) either gets paid with the new development or it gets paid by existing residents. The same can be said for new park development. And in nearly every case large percentages of these costs continue to get paid by existing residents anyway (for example new O&M costs or 1/2 the costs of new community parks). 7. College Station continues to have one of the most affordable housing markets in the country. 8. Using the example provided, costs equate to about $1800 per home (assuming 5 homes per acre). When compared with a median list price for existing homes for sale ($168,000) this equates to slightly more than 1 % of the total housing cost and when spread over the typical 30 year mortgage equates to an increase of about $5 per month (principle only) I think it important to be aware of the costs applied to development and use care that we not inappropriately impact market opportunities. However, I also think it important to keep in mind what the fees and development costs are for and achieve. Just my thoughts on the information. fi]p·//r'.·\Doc11ments and Settirnls\bcowell\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4BBD7E45 Cit... 7/20/2010 Transportation Committee Chair D ennis M aloney Members CITY O F Cou.EcE TATION D ave Ruesink J ess Fields Michael Parks Linda LaSut Ca therine Hejl J ean Marie Linhart D ennis Christi ansen D ouglas Slack AGENDA Council Transportation Committee Meeting Regular Meeting College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue Council Chambers College Station, Texas 77840 Tuesday, July 20, 2010 at 4:30 p.m. The Ci£y Council m<1y or nwy nor <1ue11d the Tr;msporwrion Commiuee R eg11/<1r Meeting. l. Call to order. 2. Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding a transportation impact fee to fu nd transportation projects. 3. Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding future agenda items. -J.. 1-\djourn. otice is hereby giv en that a Council Transportation Committee Meeting will be held on the Tuesday, July 20, 2010 at 4:30 PM at the City Hall Administrative Conference Room, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas. The following subjects will be discussed, to wit: See Agenda. Posted this the 16111 day of July, 2010, at 9:30 a.m. C ITY OF COLLEGE STATIO , TEXAS By E-Signed by Connie Hooks (j) VERIFY authent k: it y with Approvelt Connie Hooks, City Secretary I, the undersigned, do hereby ce rtify that the abo ve Notice of Meeting of the Council Transportation Committee City of College Station, Texas, is a true and correct copy of said notice and that I posted a true and correct copy of said notice on the bulletin board at C ity Hall, 11 0 I Texas Avenue, in Coll ege Station, Texas, a nd the City's website, www.cstx. ov. The Agenda and otice are readily accessible to the general public at all times. Said No tice a nd Agenda were posted on July 16, 2010, at 9:30 a.m. Roadway Impact Fee Council Transportation Comm ittee July 20, 2010 v - Crrr OF CouJ.:GE ST1.T10N H...-fT-MINUW-.,' Background -Timeline Mayor's Development Forum -Stakeholders -June 22nd Meeting • Provided $176M Project list and Max Fees • Proposed to Reduce List -July 12" Emailed Reduced Project List July 20'" Council Transportation Committee -Review Reduced Project List -lnputto Council (August 12") -Forward to: • Stakeholders • KHA to recalculate Max Fees (Results before August 12th) August 12'" Council Workshop -Present CTC's Input and Impact Fee List -KHA's Re-Calculated Max Fees -Stakeholder Feedback Background -10 Yr Funding Gap * = ~••mouo,,=~.--------------~ •City will only Build "Reduced" List and Participate • Maximum Bond Funding (could be less) • No TxDot Funding 7/20/2010 Presentation -Overview • Background -Project Timeline -10 Yr Thoroughfare Needs and Cost -10 Yr Est.imated Bonding Capacity -~-... -.::=---() ~.-~""'" . , . ~· . "~ -'fl.1...,,.~~ "',..;;,-.I""' -10 Yr Funding Gap • Roadway Impact Fee Analysis -10 Yr $176M List of Roadway Projects w/ Max Fees -10 Yr Draft $106M Reduced Roadway Impact Fee List • CTC Input to August 12th Council Workshop -General Comments on Impact Fee -10 Yr Draft Roadway Impact Fee List Background -Bonding Capacity • City Estimates $12M per Year • Historically 50% -60% Streets & Transportation -10 Year $60M -$72M -Example Based on Max Bond Funds • Capital $64M • City Participation $BM Estimated Roadway Impact Fees KHA Under Contract and Provided Initial Results Based on the Previous $176M Project List -Attributed to 10 Yr Growth $107M -Not Eligible (by State Law): • Attributed to Existing Traffic $55M • Outside 10 Yr Growth Estimates $14M • Credit for Ad Valorem Taxes-50% Reduction -Max Fees estimated to Generate 10 Yr $53M Proposing to Reduce to $106M Project List -Max Fees approximated to Generate 10 Yr -$34M 1 Estimated Roadway Impact Fees {Based on $176M Project List) ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS FINDINGS SUMMARY Cost Range Varies b.ased on Analysis Area Completed Report Max Estimated Recovereble Fees Sinsle Family SIK-SSK $3' -SllK 5000 SF Office S7K-S38K $17' -$87' 10,000 SF Shopping Center 520' -$101' $45• -$231K S,000 SF Fast Food w/ D thru sso• -S260K SllSK -SS9lK Note: Reducing Project List to $106M will modify these fees "Al<lo.1tlHI lkot'° AOACMAY PMl.ICCTS Mlt.IOlD (C•I ON IMPACT FEE AIUlTSIS A·!,0-l P.odi:Pr..rr1111oH ........ $1.31.1 A.·Z,0.! lb:kPr11r1tJl;i:>..:I lr'pr:HN ..... 5-3,C·l JICdPrwltAotd l!'"j110¥~ SBM ... ~cd~~olld """" S7.lM llc:dl'nlti91ntfrd°llnlt Ill-pr~ SlJ.OM "' 1-dltmMl~&TtUIAl>MUI lr'"prcwed $1.SM ., Slulh-ertP.m.ay "3M ~ OHwn :><t¥t S W~bofn(•l U.tdt) llO'pfcmd $1..0M &' ......,..., 1"·11'·~ $-UM 1..-p1~ """ DMrcn~JU~w~yOrl.,. S!o)J)l.I E>MrcnC:Jt-Olf $1.iM <4 ll'Plpl;JW!°d $7.lM <-> Gfetn~Pnir!ellud lrt>l)<O¥td S.t.2M ir..provtd $3..5Ji.l c.r.tn1Pr.lir•R.....:l loTPfO¥t'1 $VM ,_, llo,derRoid lr.'ptQVtd SUM ,_, """""""' """"' $l.1M --$1 .. <1 M $,l .. 4 M ~' L .. __.,r....... '"" ... PtboilCrHtJl,tk"ny Sl0.5 M ~' Pe!tblt(;·~Pirtw.t'{ ·~ 15.31.1 ~· Srtdih![l.-·~ SJ-' M Subtobh: Ccm~l'C! SO• M "'"" mp!':l .. ed "''" .... SO.OM ~106.l l.t Thoroughfares -10 Yr Reduced List -$106M 7/20/2010 Reduced Impact Fee Project List • Total 10 Yr Cost $176M -City to Build (Capital) $106M Proposed Eligible for Impact Fees ._----~=.._ Includes only "New" and "Widened" Roadways Does not include "Constructed" Roadways $24.4M -Developmentto Build $70M • Includes City Participation $SM -Total City Cost $114M • Anticipates No TxDot Funding Th~roughfares -10 Yr Total List -$176M Example Breakouts of Cost 10 Yr Capital List $106M (Publically Directed) 10 Yr Dev List $70M (Privately Directed) 2 • "Other" Capital Funding • Sti ll a Gap even with Impact Fee • Fun ding $8M "Other" Portion: -Assessments -TIF -TIRZ -PIO - Transportation User Fees (Proposed as Rehab Only) Additional Options -Reduce the Project List (In Impact Fee or Bond) -Shift a portion of the OP funds to Capital Action -Comments I Input? Roadway Impact Fee on August 12•h Council Workshop Options: a) General Comments to Council to Regarding Impact Fee Implementation b) Suggestions to Council on List of Roadway Projects to be considered in Impact Fee Implementation Note Revised List to be forwarded to: Stakeholders Consultant to update Fee Analysis accordin&ly c) Other Input to Council 7/20/2010 3 "Reduced List" ROADWAY PROJECTS INCLUDED (CIP) ON IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS A-1, D-1 A-2, D-2 B-8, C-1 D-4 1-1 1-2 B-2 1-4 C-2 C-3 D-3 C-11 C-4 C-5 C-6 C-7 C-8 C-9 C-15 C-17 D-5 D-6 D-7 D-8 Rock Prairie Road Rock Prairie Road Rock Prairie Road Rock Prairie Road Rock Prairie Interchange Holleman Drive & Texas Avenue Southwest Parkway Deacon Drive & Wellborn (at grade) Barron Road Barron Road Barron Road I Lakeway Drive Barron Cut-Off Greens Prairie Trail Greens Prairie Road Greens Prairie Road Greens Prairie Road Royder Road RoyderRoad Normand Drive Victoria Avenue Lakeway Drive Pebble Creek Parkway Pebble Creek Parkway Bi rkdale Drive Subtotals: Completed Construction Improved New TOTAL Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved New Improved Improved Improved New New Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved New New New New New New 7 /12/2010 $1.8 M $3.9 M $3.5 M $7.4 M $11.0 M $1.5 M $3.3 M $1.0 M $4.1 M $6.0 M $10.0 M $1.1 M $7.1 M $4.2 M $5.5 M $2.7 M $3.3 M $1.2 M $1.4 M $2.4 M $4.0 M $10.S M $5 .8 M $3.S M $0.0 M $0.0 M $64.2 M $42.0 M $106.2 M ROADWAY PROJECTS INCLUDED ON IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS A-1, D-1 Rock Prairie Road Proposed $1.8 M A-2, D-2 Rock Prairie Road Proposed ) $3.9 M B-8, C-1 Rock Prairie Road ~ $3.S M D-4 Rock Prairie Road Proposed $7.4 M 1-1 Rock Prairie Interchange Proposed $11.0 M A-3 Dartmouth Street Completed $3.0 M A-4 Dartmouth Street New $3.5 M A-5, B-1 Texas Avenue Completed $2.3 M B-3 Holleman Drive Construction $1.S M 1-2 Holleman Drive & Texas Avenue Proposed $1.5 M A-6 Appomattox Drive New $2.5 M A-7 Pamela Lane New $2.3 M A-8 Minor Collector A New $2.2 M A-9 Back Street B New $2.3 M B-2 Southwest Parkway New $3.3 M -B-4 Penberthy Road New $2.9 M B-5 Jones Butler Road Completed $1.5 M B-6 Wellborn Road Proposed $4.0 M B-7 Wellborn Road Proposed $0.4 M C-10 Wellborn Road Proposed $0.3 M 1-3 Wellborn Road & George Bush Road Proposed $4.1 M B-9 General Parkway New $6.8 M 1-4 Deacon Drive & Wellborn (at grade) Proposed $1.0 M C-2 Barron Road Proposed $4.1 M C-3 Barron Road Proposed $8.8 M 1-5 Barron Road & SH 6 Interchange (design) Proposed $0.7 M D-3 Barron Road I Lakeway Drive New $11.6 M C-11 Barron Cut-Off New $1.1 M C-12 Barron Cut-Off Extension New $7.3 M C-4 Greens Prairie Trail Proposed $7.1 M C-5 Greens Prairie Road Proposed $4.2 M C-6 Greens Prairie Road Proposed $5.S M C-7 Greens Prairie Road Proposed $2.7 M C-20 Greens Prairie Road/ Arrington Road Completed $1.7 M C-8 Royder Road Proposed $3 .3 M C-9 Royder Road Proposed $1.2 M C-13 Alexandria Avenue New $1.0 M C-14 Arnold Road New $1.4 M C-15 Normand Drive New $1.4 M C-16 Southern Plantation Drive New $0.9 M C-17 Victoria Avenue New $2.4 M C-18 Arrington Road/ Decatur Drive Completed $4.2 M C-19 SH40 Completed $0.4 M D-10 William D. Fitch Completed $7.8 M D-5 Lakeway Drive New $6.2 M D-6 Pebble Creek Parkway New $10.5 M D-7 Pebble Creek Parkway New $5.8 M D-8 Birkdale Drive New $3.5 M D-9 Spearman Drive New $1.8 M Subtotals: Completed $24.4 M Construction $1.5 M Proposed {Improved) $73.0 M New $77 M TOTAL $176 M 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Prepared for: OLLE E STATION rhe Imm oftht Research Valley Prepared by: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc Registered Firm No. F-928 801 Cherry Street, Unit 11, Suite 950 Fort Worth, TX 76102 .... , .... ,,,,·\·· --~oF ri: "~ _.:;,.! .. ········ . ..t1 ·-817.335.6511 May 2010- © Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc., 2010 06127 1400 ;~.··· * ·-.. ~ .. ;-.... ..... ,, , :' ·.•'I '-~: ............................. '/ f JEFFREY A. WHITACRE ~ .,, .................. :.. 'Ii···:······-··· : ~ '11··. 102469 //.f t,o.s·~.m·~' s~_.?.·i)~rJJ&--,,~.s .... ···~~ f>.IAll \\ IQ \. \J/V~ ' ~'""" d-o\0 s~ n - t I Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... iii I. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ I II. Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Inputs ..................................................................................... 2 A. Land Use Assumptions .............................................................................................................................. 2 B. Capital Improvement Plan ......................................................................................................................... 5 III. Methodology for Roadway Impact Fees .................................................................................... 12 A. Service Areas ........................................................................................................................................... 12 B. Service Units ............................................................................................................................................ 12 C. Cost Per Service Unit. .............................................................................................................................. 13 D. Cost of the CIP ........................................................................................................................................ 13 E. Service Unit Calculation .......................................................................................................................... 16 IV. Impact Fee Calculations .............................................................................................................. 20 A. Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit.. .............................................................................. 20 B. Plan For Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit ............................................................................... 22 C. Service Unit Demand Per Unit ofDevelopment... ................................................................................... 24 V. Sample Calculations .................................................................................................................... 26 VI. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 27 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................................... 28 A. Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections B. CIP Service Units of Supply C. Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas May 2010 Kimley-Hom and Associa1es, Inc. List of Exhibits 1 Service Areas .......................................................................................................................................... 4 2 Roadway Impact Fee CIP Service Area A ................................................................................................................................ 8 Service Area B ................................................................................................................................. 9 Service Area C .............................................................................................................................. I 0 Service Area D .............................................................................................................................. I 1 List of Tables 1 Residential and Non-Residential Projections for the City of College Station ..................................... 3 2 Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees Service Area A ............................................................................................................................... 6 Service Area B ................................................................................................................................ 6 Service Area C ............................................................................................................................... 6 Service Area D ............................................................................................................................... 7 3 Level of Use Table Level of Use for Proposed Facilities ............................................................................................. 12 Level of Use for Existing Facilities .............................................................................................. 13 4 Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Cost Projections Service Area A ............................................................................................................................. 15 Service Area B ............................................................................................................................. 15 Service Area C ............................................................................................................................. 16 Service Area D .............................................................................................................................. 16 5 Transportation Demand Factor Calculations ..................................................................................... 18 6 10-Year Growth Projections ............................................................................................................. 19 7 Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee ..................................................................................... 23 8 Land UseNehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET) ................................................................. 25 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas II May 2010 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Impact Fees are a mechanism for funding the public infrastructure necessitated by new development. They originated and evolved in Florida, California and other fast-growing municipalities and counties, primarily in the Southern and Western United States. Across the country, they are used to fund police and fire facilities, parks, schools, roads and utilities. In Texas, the legislature has allowed their use for water, wastewater, roadway and drainage facilities. Impact Fees are currently being used to fund public water and wastewater improvements in the City of College Station, and are now being considered for use in funding roadway infrastructure. In the most basic terms, impact fees are meant to recover the incremental cost of each new unit of development in terms of new infra ure needs. In the case of roadway impact fees, the infrastructure need i increased capacify on arterial roadways. The purpose of this Impact Fee Study is to identify the fee per urnt o new eve opmen necessary to fund these improvements in accordance with the enabling legislation, Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. Impact Fees are a one-time fee, and are charged only against new development. They are based on the cost of the capacity improvements necessar to accommodate new growth. For roadway impact fee purposes the City is broken into our { ) service ar s. A service area is a geographic area within which a unique maximum impact fee is determine . 1 fees collected within the service area must be spent on eligible improvements within the same service area. Impact fees are assessed when a final plat is recorded. The assessment defines the impact of each unit at the time of platting, according to land use, and may not exceed the maximum impact fee allowed by law. Impact fees are collected when a building permit is issued. Therefore, funds are not collected until development-impacts are introduced to the transportation system. Funds collected within a service area can be used only within the same service area. Finally, fees must be utilized within I 0 years of collection, or must be refunded with interest. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code stipulates a specific process for the adoption oflmpact Fees. An Advisory Committee is required to review the Land Use Assumptions and CIP used in calculating the maximum fee, and to provide its finding for consideration by the City Council. The City Council must then conduct a public hearing on the Land Use Assumptions and CIP before considering an Impact Fee ordinance. The Impact Fee ordinance is considered separately from the Land Use Assumptions and CIP. The Advisory Committee must review the Impact Fee ordinance and provide its findings to the City Council. Following receipt of the report by the Advisory Committee, the City Council is required to conduct at least one public hearing on the Impact Fee ordinance prior to adoption. This report includes details of the impact fee calculation methodology in accordance with Chapter 395, the applicable Land Use Assumptions, development of the CIP, and the Land Use Equivalency Table. The resulting maximum fees per vehicle mile and examples of typical developments are : SERVICE AREA: A B MAX ASSESSABLE FlEPIR SIRVIC'E I.NIT (S PER VEl~Ml) s 368 s 249 EXAMPLE DEVELOPMENTS -MAXIMLM ASSESSABLE ROADWAY IMP ACT FlE SINCl..EFAMILYDWEllJNG 10,<XXJSQ. Ff. SHOPPING CENTER l,<XXJ SQ. Ff. OFFICE l,<XXJ SQ Ff. FAST FOOD REST AURA NT WITH DRIVE-THRU WINDOW 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas $ $ s s 111 1,487 s 1,006 29,109 s 19,696 10,966 s 7,420 74,557 s 50,447 c s 919 s 3,713 s 72,693 $ 27,386 s 186,189 D s 1,282 s 5,179 s 101,406 s 38,204 s 259,733 May 2010 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. I. INTRODUCTION Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code describes the procedure Texas cities must follow in order to create and implement impact fees. Senate Bill 243 (SB 243) amended Chapter 395 in September 2001 to define an Impact Fee as "a charge or assessment imposed by a political subdivision against new development in order to generate revenue for funding or recouping the costs of Roadway improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to the new development." Accordingly, the City of College Station has developed its Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) with which to implement Roadway Impact Fees. The City has retained Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. to provide professional transportation engineering services for the development of the roadway impact fee policy. This report includes details of the impact fee calculation methodology in accordance with Chapter 395, the applicable Land Use Assumptions, development of the CIP, and the Land Use Equivalency Table. This report introduces and references two of the basic inputs to the Roadway Impact Fee: the Land Use Assumptio ns and the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Information from these two components is used extensively in the remainder of the report. This report consists of a detailed discussion of the methodology for the computation of impact fees. This discussion - Methodology for Roadway Impact Fees and Impact Fee Calculations addresses each of the components of the computation and modifications requi red for the study. The components include the fo llowing: • Service Areas • Service Units • Cost Per Service Unit • Cost of the CIP • Service Unit Calculation • Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit • Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development This report also includes a section concerning the Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee C redit. This plan details the maximum assessable impact fee per service unit the City of College Station may apply under Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. The final section of the report is the Conclusion, which presents the findings of the study's analysis and summarizes the report. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas May 2010 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. II. ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CALCULATION INPUTS A. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS In order to assess an impact fee, Land Use Assumptions must be developed to provide the basis for population and employment growth projections within a political subdivision. As defined by Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code, these assumptions include a description of changes in land uses, densities, and population in the service area. In addition, these assumptions are useful in assisting the City of College Station in determining the need and timing of capital improvements to serve future development. The residential and non-residential estimates and projections were all compiled in accordance with the following categories: Units: Number of dwelling units, both single and multi-family. Population: Number of people, based on person per dwelling unit factors. Employment: Square feet of building area based on retail, service, and basic land uses. Each classification has unique trip making characteristics. Retail: Land use activities which provide for the retail sale of goods that primarily serve households and whose location choice is oriented toward the household sector, such as grocery stores and restaurants. Service: Land use activities which provide personal and professional services such as government and other professional administrative offices. Basic: Land use activities that produce goods and services such as those that are exported outside of the local economy, such as manufacturing, construction, transportation, wholesale, trade, warehousing, and other industrial uses. The geographic boundaries of the impact fee service areas for roadway facilities are shown in Exhibit 1. The City of College Station is divided into four (4) service areas. The service areas were based upon input from the City of College Station staff, and City Council. The service areas east/west boundary is Texas Avenue while a combination of Rock Prairie Road, Graham Road and Bird Pond Road compose the north/south boundaries. For roadway facilities, the service areas are limited to those areas within the current corporate limits. Therefore, areas within the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) are excluded from this study. It should be noted that at locations where service area boundaries follow a thoroughfare facility, the proposed boundary is intended to follow the centerline of the roadway. In cases where a service area boundary follows the City Limits, only those portions of the faci lity within the City Limits are included in the service area. Table 1 summarizes the residential and non-residential projections by service area within the City of College Station for 2009, as well as the residential and non-residential projections by service area within the City of College Station for 2019. Note that employment figures for Texas A&M University were not included because they wi ll not pay an impact fee. These values were derived based on the City's Comprehensive Plan and input from City of College Station staff. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 2 May 2010 Kimley-Hom ~ Crrv OF Col.LEGE STATION and Associates, Inc. tlx h<an •f iht Rttta"h Valky Table 1. Residential and Non-Residential Projections for the C ity of College Station Service Dwelling Units Year Area Single Family Multi Family 2009 A 2019 Average Annual Growth 2009 B 2019 Average Annual Growth 2009 c 2019 Average Annual Growth 2009 D 2019 Average Annual Growth Total 2009 Total 2019 Average Annual Growth 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 3,768 7,285 4,213 8,748 1.18% 2.01% 4,826 12,017 5,914 15,091 2.25% 2.56% 4,564 594 6,179 1,019 3.54% 7.16% 1,651 2 4,226 2 15.60% 0.00% 14,809 19,898 20,532 24,860 3.86% 2.49% 3 Total 11,053 12,960 1.73% 16,843 21,005 2.47% 5,158 7,198 3.95% 1,653 4,228 15.58% 34,707 45,392 3.08% Employment (Square Feet) Population Basic Retail Service Total 24,762 547,061 4,896,286 2,276,070 7,719,417 28,956 681,046 6,488,073 2,400,156 9,569,275 1.69% 2.45% 3.25% 0.55% 2.40% 48,715 546,183 2,412,980 2,918,138 5,877,301 57,869 1,006,787 3,402,497 3,141,023 7,550,307 1.88% 8.43% 4.10% 0.76% 2.85% 11,665 278,840 296,501 913,341 1,488,682 16,152 435,452 1,290,925 1,381,566 3,107,943 3.85% 5.62% 33.54% 5.13% 10.88% 3,636 189,696 84,377 507,681 781,754 9,299 464,918 809,969 1,046,119 2,321,005 15.58% 14.51% 85.99% 10.61% 19.69% 88,777 1,561,780 7,690,144 6,615,230 15,867,154 112,276 2,588,203 11,991,464 7,968,863 22,548,530 2.65% 6.57% 5.59% 2.05% 4.21% May 2010 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. B. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN The City has identified the City-funded transportation projects needed to accommodate the projected growth within the City. The Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for Roadway Impact Fees is made up of: • Recently completed projects with excess capacity available to serve new growth; • Projects currently under construction; and • Selection of growth necessitated projects needed to complete the City's Master Thoroughfare Plan. The CIP includes thoroughfare roadway facilities as well as intersection improvements. All of the thoroughfare facilities are part of the currently adopted Master Thoroughfare Plan. The CIP for Roadway Impact Fees for the 2009 -2019 Impact Fee Study is listed in Table 2 and mapped in Exhibit 2A through Exhibit 2D. The table shows the length of each project as well as the facility's Master Thoroughfare Plan classification. The CIP was developed in conjunction with input from City of College Station staff and represents those projects that will be needed to accommodate the growth projected in Table 1. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 5 May 2010 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. 'd ~ an OF CoLLEGE STATION • t!x """' •f tlJ< llaw<h V•ikJ Table 2.A. Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees -Service Area A Service o/o In Proj. # Class Roadway Limits Status Length Service Area (mi) Area A-I D-1 MN4-0 Rock Prairie Rd. (I) SH 6 NBFR to Stooebrook Dr. To be widened 0.41 50% A-2 D-2 MN4 Rock Prairie Rd. 12) Stonebrook Dr. to 64' E. of Ritchev Rd. fFuture Bird Pond Alionmenfl To be widened 0.58 50% A-3 MIN4 Dartmouth St (!\ Krenek Tan Rd. to Harvev MitcheU rFM 2818) Comnleted 0.40 100% A-4 MIN4 Dartmouth St (2) Harvev Mitchell £FM 2818) to Texas Ave. New Roadwav 0.49 100% A-5 B-1 MN6 Texas Ave. (I) Georne Bush Dr. to Harvev Mitchell Ph.v Comnleted 1.81 50% A A-6 MIN2 Annomanox Dr. 45CY S. of Raintree Dr. to 325' N. of North Forest Ph.v. New Roadwav 0.52 100% A-7 MIN2 Pamela Ln. SH 30 to FM 158 New Roadwav 0.49 100% A-8 MIN2 Minor Collector A Pamela Ln. to FM 60 New Roadwav 0.47 100% A-9 MN2 Back Street B SH 6 to Sebesta NPw Roo.dwav 0.48 100% 1-1 Rock Prairie Interchanoe Urnrrade 25% 1-2 Holleman Rd. & Texas Ave. Jmnrovement 50% Table 2.B. Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees - Service Area B Service °lo In Proj. # Class Roadway Limits Slat us Length Serv ice Area (mi) Area A-5 B-1 MN6 Texas Ave.(!\ Geon'e Bush Dr. to Harvev Mitchell pi,,.,., Comn\eted 1.81 50% B-2 MIN4 Southwest Ph.v. (I) Jones Butler Rd. to Wellborn Rd. New Roadwav 0.23 100% B-3 COL4 Holleman Dr. (I) Harvev Mitchell P"""'. to Dowlin• Rd. Construction 0.47 100% B-4 MIN4 Penberthv Rd. Georoe Bush Dr. to Luther St. New Roadwav 0.40 100'/o B-5 MIN4 J ooes Butler Rd. (I) Holleman Dr. to Harvev Mitchell Phvv Comnleted 0.53 100'/o B-6 MN6 Wellborn Rd. (FM 2154) (I) Universitv Dr. to Harvev Mitchell Pln.vv To be widened 2.40 100'/o B B-7 MN6 Wellborn Rd. rFM 2154\ 12\ Harvev Mitchell Ph.v. to Rock Prairie Rd. Construction 1.44 100'/o B-8C-I MIN4 Rock Prairie Rd. (J) Normand Dr. to Texas Ave. Comnleted 0.41 50% B-9 MIN2 General Ph.vv Rock Prairie Rd. to Jones Butler Rd. New Rrndwav 1.45 100'/o 1-1 Rock Prairie Intercham!e Uoorade 25% 1-2 Holleman Rd. & Texas Ave. Jmnrovement 50% 1-3 Wellborn Rd. fJ'M 2154) & Georne Bush Rd. 100'/o 1-4 Deacon & Wellborn Rd. rn.A 2154\ at cmide crossino 100'/o Table 2.C. Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees - Service Area C Senrice % In Proj. # Class Roadway Limits Status Length Service Area (mi) Area B-8C-l MIN4 Rock Prairie Rd. (3) Normand Dr. to Texas Ave. Comnleted 0.41 50% C-2 MIN4 Barroo Rd. (I) Wellborn Rd. to William D. Fitch pin~_ To be widened 0.61 100'/o C-3 MIN4 Barroo Rd. (2) SH 40toSH 6 To be widened 1.65 100'/o C-4 MIN4 Greens Prairie Trl (I) 238CY W. of Rovder Rd. to 1 025' E. of Woodlake Dr. To be widened 1.06 100'/o C-5 MIN4 Greens Prairie Rd. (2) I 025' E. ofWcxxllake Dr. to480' E. of Sweetwater Dr. To be widened 0.63 50% C-6 MIN4 Greens Prairie Rd. l3l 480' E. of Sweetwater Dr. to Castleo::ite Dr. To be widened 0.81 100'/o C-7 MIN4 Greens Prairie Rd. 14\ Castleo::ite D.r to Whites Creek Ln. Tobe widened 0.40 100'/o C-8 MIN4 Rovder Rd. (I) 2615' N. of Greens Prairie Rd. to Greens Prairie Rd. To be widened 0.50 50% C-9 MIN4 Rovder Rd (2) Greens Prairie Rd. to9SO' S. of Greens Prairie Rd To be widened 0.18 100'/o C-10 MN6 Wellborn Rd (3) Rock Prairie Rd. to SH 40 Construction 0.95 100'/o c C-11 COL4 Barron Cut-Off Barron Rd. to Barron Cut-Off To be widened 0.18 100'/o C-12 COL4 Barroo Cut-Off Ext Barron Cut-Off to Greens Prairie Rd. New Roadwav 1.14 100'/o C-13 MJN2 Alexandria Ave. Emerald Dove to ChesaOP.ake Ln. New Roadwav 0.21 100'/o C-14 MIN2 Arnold Rd. Farah Dr. to Normand Dr. NewRoadwav 0.29 100'/. C-15 MIN2 Normand Dr. Rock Prairie Rd. to Birmim!ham Rd. New Roadwav 0.29 100'/. C-16 MIN2 Southern Plantation Dr. San Mar Dr. to Victoria Ave. NewRoadwav 0.20 100'/, C-17 MN2 Victoria Ave. Southern Plantation Dr. to SH 40 DesiQJl 0.41 100'/o C-18 MN2 Arrimrtoo Rd. I Decatur Dr. Decatur Dr. to SH 40 Comnleted 0.65 100'/o C-19 FR SH 40 Wellbom Rd. to SH 6 Comnleted 2.94 100'/o C-20 MIN4 Greens Prairie Rd. I Arrinmon Rd. Whites rr••k to SH 40 romn\eted 0.34 100'/o 1-1 Rock Prairie Interchange Uograde 25% 1-5 Barron & SH 6 Interchange Desiim 5<1'/o 2009-2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 6 May 2010 Kimley-Hom Crrv OF Cow.EGE STATION and Associates, Inc. tlx Imm of tlx R~a"'h Valk] Table 2.D. Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees -Service Area D Service Pro~# Class Roadway Area A-I D-1 MAJ4-0 Rock Prairie Rd. (I l A-2 D-2 MAJ4 Rock Prairie Rd. 12) D-3 MIN4 /COL4 Barroo Rd. I Lakewav Dr. D-4 MIN4 Rock Prairie Rd. (4) D-5 COL4 Lakeway Dr. (I) D-6 COL4 Pebble Creek Pkwv. (I) D D-7 MAJ2 Pebble Creek P"'"". 12) D-8 MIN2 Birkdale Dr. D-9 MIN2 Soearman Dr. D-IO MAJ4 William D. Fitch 1-1 l-5 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas %In Limits Status Length Service (mi) Area SH 6 NBFR lo Stooebrook Dr. To be wldened 0.41 50% Stooebrook Dr. to 64' E. of Ritchev Rd. !Future Bird Pond Alionment\ To be widened 0.58 50% SH 6 to I 850' N. of SH 40 New Roadwav 1.31 100% 480' E. of Bradlev Rd. to William D. Fitch To be widened I.II 100'/o SH 6 INBFR) to Future Barron Rd. New Roadwav 0.83 100'/o SH 6 rNRFR) to William D. Fitch New Roadwav 1.49 100'/o Roval Adelaide to Thousand Oaks Dr. New Roadwav 1.04 100'/o Lakewav to St. Andrews Dr. New Roadwav 0.56 100'/o St. Andrews Dr. to William D. Fitch NewRoadwav 0.39 100'/o SH 6 to Rock Prairie Rd. Com I ted 1.77 100'/o Rock Prairie Interchange Unornde 25% Barron & SH 6 Interchane.e Desi211 50"/o 7 May 2010 * Other Thoroughfare Facilities Impact Fee Eligible Project Intersection Improvements Project Limit CITY OF Coll.EGE STATION l!H !:tan oftlH Rm11rcb Vallry Exhibit 2A 2,000 4,000 8,000 . - ---- CIP -Service Area A6 Feet . N 1111"'1-n Kinley-Horn 11!11....1-r ., and Assoc~tes, Inc --Other Thoroughfare Facilities -Impact Fee Eligible Project * Intersection Improvements --Project Limit CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Exhibit 28 0 2,000 4,000 8,000 ---- Cl P -Service Area B~ Feet May 2010 N .....-i-n KlfTlley-Hom 111.....J-LJ and Associates, Inc. - C rrv. 0 Co ·GE STA~~Otl.N Rntttrtb V..Uty • • • r/N kan o; " Exhibit 2C --Cl p -Service Area C6 8 000 2 000 4,000 , Feet N " Kimley-Hom r=i=LJ and Associates, Inc. Legend Other Thoroughfare Facilities Impact Fee Eligible Project * Intersection Improvements COLI.EGE STATION sf>< /)(.llJ'T. ofrht R&imh V,,Jky Exhibit 20 ------- Cl P -Service Area 0:6 2,000 4,000 8,000 Feet 0 N May 2010 Kirnley-Hom and Assoc~tes, Inc Kimley-Hom CITY OF CoLI.EGE STATION and Associates, Inc. tb< "'"" •f th< Ra.arth V"°'J III. METHODOLOGY FOR ROADWAY IMPACT FEES A. SERVICE AREAS The four ( 4) service areas used in the 2009 - 201 9 Roadway Impact Fee Study are shown in the previously referenced Exhibit 1. These service ai:eas cover the entire corporate boundary of the City of Coll ege Station. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code specifies that "the service area is limited to an area within the corporate boundaries of the political subdivision and shall not exceed six (6) miles." In the City of College Station service area boundaries were set using approximately a fo ur (4) mil e limit. B. SERVICE UNITS The "service unit" is a measure of consumption or use of the roadway facilities by new development. In other words, it is the measure of supply and demand for roads in the City. For transportation purposes, the service un it is defined as a vehicle-mile. On the supply side, this is a lane-mile of an arterial street. On the demand side, this is a vehicle-trip of one-mile in length. The application of this unit as an estimate of either supply or demand is based on travel during the afternoon peak hour of traffic. This time period is commonl y used as the basis for transportation planning and the estimati on of trips created by new developm ent. Another aspect of the service unit is the service volume that is provided (supplied) by a lane-mile ofroadway facility. This number, also referred to as capacity, is a function of the facil ity type, facility config urati on, number of lanes, and level of service. The hourly service volumes used in the Roadway Impact Fee Study are based upon are based upon enerally accepted thoroughfare capacity criteria. Table 3A and 3B shows the service -· ·--v·olu;;es as a nct10n of the facility typ . Table 3A. Level of Use for Proposed Facilities (used in Appendix B -CIP Units of Supply) Roadway Type (M TP Classifications) MAJ6 -Major Arterial 6-Lane MAJ4 -Major Arterial 4-Lane MIN4 -Minor Arterial 4-Lane COL4 -Major Collector 4-Lane MAJ2 -Major Collector 2-Lane MIN2 -Minor Collector 2-Lane 2009-2019 Roadway lmpact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Hourly Vehicle-Mile Median Configuration Capacity per Lane-Mile of Roadway Facility Divided 750 Divided 650 Divided 625 Undivided 525 Und ivided 425 Und iv ided 425 12 May 2010 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. Table 3B. Level of Use for Existing Facilities (used in Appendix C -Existing Facilities Inventory) Roadway Hourly Vehicle-Mile Type Description Capacity per Lane-Mile of Roadway Facility 2U-R Rural Cross-Section 150 (i.e. gravel, dirt, etc.) 2U Two lane undivided 425 2U-H High Speed, Limited Access Two lane 700 3U Three lane undivided (TWLTL) 525 4U Four lane undivided 525 4D Four lane divided 650 SU Five lane undivided (TWLTL) 600 6D Six lane divided 750 7U Seven lane undivided (TWL TL) 650 C. COST PER SERVICE UNIT A fundamental step in the impact fee process is to establish the cost for each service unit. In the case of the roadway impact fee, this is the cost for each vehicle-mile of travel. This cost per service unit is the cost to construct a roadway (lane-mile) needed to accommodate a vehicle-mile of travel at capacity. The cost per service unit is calculated for each service area based on a specific list of projects within that service area. The second component of the cost per service unit is the number of service units in each service area. This number is the measure of the growth in transportation demand that is projected to occur in the ten-year period. Chapter 395 requires that Impact Fees be assessed only to pay for growth projected to occur in the city limits within the next ten-years, a concept that will be covered in a later section of this report (see Section III.E). As noted earlier, the units of demand are vehicle-miles of travel. D. COST OF THE CIP The costs that may be included in the cost per service unit are all of the implementation costs for the Impact Fee Study, as well as project costs for arterial system elements within the Capital Improvement Plan. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code specifies that the allowable costs are " ... including and limited to the: 1. Construction contract price; 2. Surveying and engineering fees; 3. Land acquisition costs, including land purchases, court awards and costs, attorney's fees, and expert witness fees; and 4. Fees actually paid or contracted to be paid to an independent qualified engineer or financial consultant preparing or updating the Capital Improvement Plan who is not an employee of the political subdivision." 2009-2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 13 May 2010 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. ~ .. A O~FCol.l..EGE STJ\TION \,j_ .;/ 1/xbtart•fth<Rn<ar<h V.U., The engineer's opinion of the probable costs of the projects in the CIP is based, in part, on the calculation of a unit cost of construction. This means that a cost per linear foot of roadway is calculated based on an average price for the various components of roadway construction. This allows the probable cost to be determined by the type of facility being constructed, the number of lanes, and the length of the project. The costs for location-specific items such as bridges, highway ramps, drainage structures, railroad crossings, and any other special components are added to each project as appropriate. In addition, based upon discussions with City of College Station staff, State, County, and developer driven projects have been included in the CIP as lump sum costs where the City has contributed a portion of the total project cost. A typical roadway project consists of a number of costs, including the following: construction, design engineering, survey, and right-of way acquisition. While the construction cost component of a project may actually consist of approximately 100 various pay items, a simplified approach ~ was used for developing the conceptual level project costs. Each new project's construction cost ,,,('{Ir{· was divided into two cost components: roadway construction cost and major construction . ~'' '1 \ component allowances. The roadway construction components consist of the following pay 1~ ~ .JIAA /items: (1) unclassified street excavation, (2) lime stabilization, (3) concrete pavement, (4) topsoil, · . .;v-1 "' (5) sidewalks, and (6) tum lanes and median openings. Note, for the projects identified with a ~ ~ 1. . "rural" context a different set of pay items was used to include an asphalt type of cross sections. CJ!~ "~~ ,y}1 The unit prices for these pay items are based on recently completed construction projects. j.} ,µs v-' \ft>) I 11'. ,~ \....v\vL-' ,' ~·· \I (_.ff'~ \i-' ... u- Based on the above paving construction cost subtotal, a percentage of this total is calculated to allot for major construction component allowances. These allowances include preparation of mobilization, prep of ROW, traffic control, roadway drainage, special drainage structures, incidental water and sewer relocations, water quality ponds, and traffic signals. These allowance percentages are also based on historical data. The paving and allowance subtotal is given a twenty percent (20%) contingency to determine the construction cost total. While the percentage is fixed for a majority of these allowances, the percentage of right-of-way acquisition costs varies between 10% for existing roadway alignments and 20% for new roadway alignments. Based on a compilation of recently completed projects, 20% is a reasonable value for new roadway alignments, while 10% is appropriate for roadway widening where a portion of the ROW is already in place. Table 4 is the CIP project list for each service area with conceptual level project cost projections. Detailed cost projections and methodology used for each individual project can be seen in Appendix A, Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections. It should be noted that these tables reflect only conceptual-level opinions or assumptions regarding the portions of future project costs that are potentially recoverable through impact fees. Actual costs of construction are likely to change with time and are dependent on market and economic conditions that cannot be precisely predicted at this time. This CIP establishes the list of projects for which Impact Fees may be utilized. Essentially, it establishes a list of projects for which an impact fee funding program can be established. This is different from a City's construction CIP, which provides a broad list of capital projects for which the City is committed to building. The cost projections utilized in this study should not be utilized for the City's building program or construction CIP. 2009 • 2019 Roadway lmpact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 14 ~ay 2010 . .) Service Proj. # Areo A-1,D-l A-2,D-2 A-3 A-4 A-5,B-l A--0 A A-7 A-8 A-9 1-1 1-2 Scn·icc Proj. # A,., A-5,B-l 8-2 8-3 8-4 8-S 8--0 8-7 B 8·8,C-1 8-9 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 Kimley-Hom CITY OF CoLJ.ECE STATION and Associa1es, Inc. tlx h<m •[th< Ra<a«h V../Jq Table 4.A -10-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections -Service Area A Length 'lo ln Total Project Class Roadway Limits Status Sc=n•ice Cost in Service Area (mi) Are• Cost MAJ4-0 Rock Prari: Rd. (I) SH 6 NBFR to Storcbrook Dr. Tobe wrlcn:d 0.41 SO% 1814.000 <m.ro:J MAJ4 Rock Prairie Rd (2) Storw::brook Dr. to &r E. of Ritchev Rd (Faure Bird Pord A Mnn-rt) To be wrlered O.S8 SO% 3,925.000 1.962.SOO MIN4 Darurouth St (I) Kmv:kTao Rd to Han<ev Michel(FM 2818) ColTllieted 0.40 HX1'.t. 3.0032n 3.ooun MIN4 DartrrouthSL (2) Han-cv Michel (FM 2818) to Texas Ave. New Roadwa 0.49 I())'/& 3482ro:J 3.482.ro:J MAJ6 Texas Ave. (I) Cieo~ Bush Dr. to Hal".'CV Mictrl Plm'V. Cn<mPJed 1.81 S0% 2.34321S 1.171.<>a! MIN2 Aonoirono.x Dr. 4.50' S. of Rairtree Dr. to 325' N. ofNonh Forest Pkwy. New Roodwav 0.52 100% 2.453,CXX> 2.4SJ.ro:J MIN2 Parreb Ln SH 30 to FM 158 New Roadwav 0.49 100°/o 2..292.ro:J 2292.ro:J MIN2 MirorCollectorA Parn::b Ln. to™ 60 New Roadway 0.47 100"/o 2.191.ro:J 2.191.ro:J MAJ2 Back Street B SH 6 to Sebesta NcwRoadwav 0.48 100°/o 2.262.ro:J 2262.ro:J Rock Prairi: l.n.ercrn~ unerac1e 25% 11.0CIO.OCIO 2.7l0.ro:J Holk:m:m Rd. & Texas Ave. l.............._'Crrcrt l0% I,S<X>OCIO 7l0,ro:J Service Arca Projctt Cost Subtohd 23,224,385 2009 -2019 Roadway lnmact Fee Studv Cost Per Service Arca 21,750 Total Cost in SERVICE AREA A 23,246,135 Table 4.B -10-Yea r Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections -Service Area B Lt:ng1b ~o ln Class Roadway Limits Status Service (ml) Area MAJ6 Texas Ave. (I) Geom: Bush Dr. to Harvev MicheU Pkwy_ Co~ted 1.81 l0% 2.343.215 1.171.608 MIN4 Southwest Pkwy. (I) Jares B~r Rd to Welborn Rd New Roadway 0.23 100% 3,346.ro:J 3,346,ro:J C'OlA HollcmmDr.(1) Harvcv Michel Pkwv. to Dowtim?. Rd Constn.ctim 0.47 100% l,l07,901 l,l07,901 MIN4 Penberthy Rd. Geo~ Bush Dr. to Luther St New Roadway 0.4 100% 2,851,069 2,851,069 MlN4 Jones ButkrRd (I) Holk man Dr. to Harvcv Mif.ct.:n Pkwv. Corrmlcted O.S3 IOCl'Vo 1,467,0"2 1,467,042 MAJ6 Welllom Rd. (FM 2154) (I) Um'Crsif.y Dr. to Harvey Michell Pkwy. Tobe wi:lcocd 2.4 100'/o 4,036,400 4,036,400 MAJ6 Welllom Rd. (FM 2154) (2) Harvey MicheD Pkwv. to Rock Pratt Rd Constn.ctim 1.44 HXl°/. 408,816 408.816 MIN4 Rock PraiR:: Rd (3) Normand Dr. to Te.'IW'.IS A\"e. COtT1>leted 0.41 lO'/o 3,SOO,ro:J l.7l0,ro:J MIN2 Geocral Pkwy. Rock Pr;i.iR: Rd. to Jares Butkr Rd New Roadway 1.45 100'/o 6,793,CXXl 6,793,CXXl Rock Prairi: lrterclnne:: U""""de 25% 11,000,000 2,750,0CIO Hotkmm Rd & Texas Ave. hrnrm:crrcrl SO'/, I ,S00,000 7l0,ro:J Welborn Rd (FM 215-i) & Geoll!e Bush Rd 100°/o 4,100,000 4,100,CXXl Deacon& Welborn Rd (FM 2154) at Pr.vlP crossQ. 100'/o l,CXXl,000 l,CXXl,CXXl Sen·ice Area Project Cost Subtotal t---3_1~,9_31~,83__,6 2009 -2019 Roadway Imoact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area 21,750 Total Cost in SERVICE AREA B 31,953,586 2009 -2019 Roadway impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 15 May 2010 Service Art a c D Notes: Kimley-Hom and Associa1es, Inc. Table 4.C -10-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections - Service Area C Proj. # Clau Roadway B-8,C-l MJN4 Rock PraSic Rd (3) C-2 MJN4 Barron Rd {I) C-3 MlN4 Barron Rd (2) C-4 Greens PrairC Trl (I) C-5 MJN4 Greens Prairi: Rd. (2) C.Q MlN4 Greens Prairi: Rd (3) C-7 MIN4 Q-ecns Prairl! Rd (4) C-8 RoydcrRd (I) C-9 MIN-I RO"t'der Rd (2) C-10 MAJ6 we-.Rd(3) C-11 COU Barron Cut-Off C-12 COU Barron Cut-Off fat C-13 MIN2 Akxan:iria Ave. C-14 MIN2 Arroki Rd C-15 MIN2 Nomnnd Dr. C-16 MIN2 Southern Plantation Dr. C-17 MAJ2 Vi:toria Ave. C-18 MAJ2 Amnmon Rd I Decatur Dr. C-19 FR SH 40 C-20 MIN4 ~ens Prairi: Rd I Arrington R 1-1 1-5 Limits Nonnard Dr. to Texas Ave. Wellborn Rd to William D. Filch Pkwv. SH-K>toSH6 2,380' W. ofRoyder Rd to 1,025' E. of Woodlake Dr. 1,025' E. of Woodlake Dr. to 480' E. of Sweetwater Dr. 4&)' E. of Sweetwater Dr. to Castk:l!;ltc Dr. Castk!j!;lte D.r to Whies Creek Ltl 2,615' N. of Greens Praric Rd to Greei:t> Prai:rr Rd G-cens Prairi: Rd to 950' S. of Greens Prairi: Rd Rock Prairie Rd to SH 40 Barron Rd to Barron Cut-Off Barron Cl.t-Off to Greens Prairie Rd En-.:raki Dove to Chcsaoeake Ln. Farah Dr. to Nonnarxl Dr. Rock Prarie Rd to B~m Rd San Mar Dr. to Vi:toria Ave. Southern Pla1tatim Dr. to SH 40 Decatur Dr. to SH 40 Welborn Rd to SH 6 Whiles Creek to SH 40 Rock Pratt lllerchan2C U~ Slatus U ngth ( .. ) Coimleted 0.41 To be wi:lcrcd 0.61 To be widcred 1.65 To be widercd 1.06 To be widered 0.63 Tobe widcrcd 0.81 To be widcred 0.40 To be widered 0.50 To be widened 0.18 Constructi>n 0. 95 To be widered 0.18 New Roadwav 1.14 New Roadway 0.21 New Roadway 0.29 New Roadway 0.29 New Roadway 0.20 Design 0.41 Cormkted 0.65 Conri.'.ted 2.9-1 Conftted O.lt 0.00 9/o In Service Area 50% HX1'/o 100°/o IOCYVo 1()(1'/o 100% 100% 100°/o 100°/o 100% 100°/o 100°/o 100°/o 100°/o 100°/o IOOYo IOO'Vo 25% Total Project Cost 3,500,000 4,081,000 8,811,479 7,120,CXXI 4.202,CXX> s..in.ooo 2.662.000 3,331,000 12 10,000 272.54-i 1,078,CXX> 7,J0-1,000 1.378,CXX> 1,356,000 929,000 2,455.<XX> "-'9.562 1.736,498 11,000,000 Cost in Sen'icc Area 1,7.SO,OO'.> 4,081,(XX) 8,811,479 7.120.00J 2,IOl,CXXJ 5,477,00'.) 2,662,000 1,665.500 1210,000 l,078J:XXJ 7,J0-1,000 1.00-l.CXX> 1.378.CXX> 1,356,000 929.000 2.-155.0CO 42-19.358 "-'9.562 1.736,498 2,750.000 Barron& SH 6 lnterchangc Design 0.00 SO°/o 737,716 368..858 Sen'ice Arca Project Co!ll Subtotal l-'--~6~02~08~·~80~0'i 2009 • 2019 RoadmtY lmpac1 Fee Study Cost Per Service Arca 21,750 Total Cost in SERVICE AREA C 60,230,550 Table 4.D -10-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees Proj. # Class A-1. D-1 MAJ4-0 A-2. D-2 MAJ4 D-3 MIN4 /COL D-4 MJN-1 D-5 COL4 D.Q COL4 D-7 MAJ2 D-8 MIN2 D-9 MJN2 D·IO MAJ4 1-1 1-5 with Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections - Service Area D Roadway Rock Prairie Rd. (J) Rock Prairie Rd t2\ Barron Rd I Lakeway Dr. Rock PraiOC Rd (4) Lakewav Dr. < n Pebbk: Creek Pkwv. ()) Pebbo Creek Pl-,,~. 12) Birkdalc Dr. SocamnnDr. WilliamD. Filch Limits Status SH 6 NBFR to Storebrook Dr. To be wict:rcd Storebrook:Dr. to 64' E. ofRilchev Rd tFuture Bird Porrl A,;,,.,"lCrt) To be widcrcd SH 6to I.850' N. of SH 40 New Roadway 480' E. d Bradk:v Rd to William D. Filch To be widercd SH 6 CNBFR) to Fucurc Barron Rd New Roadway SH 6 <NBFRl to William D. Fi:ch New Roadway Roval Ade lade to lrousarxl Oaks Dr. New Roadway Lakeway to St A~ws Dr. New Roadway St. Ardrews Dr. to William D. Filch New Roadway SH 6 to Rock Prairi: Rd Co~ted Rock PrairC JrtcrchanPr: UnPradc Barron & SH 6 lnterch:ulQe Desif!Jl Length (mi) 0.41 0.58 1.31 I.II 0.83 1.49 1.04 0.56 0.39 1.77 ~o lll Scivke Ao-.a 50% 1,814.IXX> 'm.000 3.925.000 1.962.500 10C)% 11,550.000 11.550.000 100% 7.436.CXX> 7..t36.0Xl 100% 6214.CXX> 6.214.0Xl 10.-18300) 10,483.00l 100°/o 5.776.000 5,776.000 100% 3.503.000 3,503,000 100°/o 1.822.000 1.822.000 100°/o 7.796,500 7.796.500 25% 11.CXX>.OO:> 2,750.000 5()0/o 737.716 368.858 Sen•ice Are:. Project Cost Subtotal ,_ __ 6_0~,56_8~,8_5__,8 2009-2019 Ro:Hhnn· Jmnsacl Fee Study Casi Per Service Area 21,750 Total Cost in SERVICE AREA D 60,590,608 a. The planning level cost projections have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. b. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. c. The project cost total within each service area may di ffer fro m the total shown in the Summary sheets contained within Appendix A due to some projects that are split between multiple service areas. E. SERVICE UNIT CALCULATION The basic service unit for the computation of College Station's roadway impact fees is the vehicle-mile of travel during the afternoon peak-hour. To determine the cost per service unit, it is necessary to project the growth in vehicle-miles of travel fo r the service area for the ten-year period. The growth in vehicle-miles from 2009 to 20 I 9 is based upon projected changes in residential an d non-residenti al growth for the period. In order to determine this growth, baseline estimates of population, basic square fee t, service square feet, and retail square fee t for 2009 were made by 2009-2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 16 May 2010 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. the City, along with projections for each of these demographic statistics through 2019. Table 1 details the growth estimates used for impact fee determination. The residential and non-residential statistics in the Land Use Assumptions provide the "independent variables" that are used to calculate the existing (2009) and projected (2019) transportation service units used to establish the roadway impact fee maximum rates within each service area. The roadway demand service units (vehicle-miles) for each service area are the sum of the vehicle-miles "generated" by each category of land use in the service area. For the purpose of impact fees , all developed and developable land is categorized as either residential or non-residential. For residential land uses, the existing and projected population is converted to dwelling units. The number of dwelling units in each service area is multiplied by a transportation demand factor to compute the vehicle-miles of travel that occur during the afternoon peak hour. This factor computes the average amount of demand caused by the residential land uses in the service area. The transportation demand factor is discussed in more detail below. For non-residential land uses, the process is similar. The Land Use Assumptions provide existing and projected number of building square footages for three (3) categories of non-residential land uses-basic, service, and retail. These categories correspond to an aggregation of other specific land use categories based on the NAICS (North American Industrial Classification System). Building square footage is the most common independent variable for the estimation of non- residential trips in the Institute of Transportation Engineers ' (!TE) Trip Generation, 8'h Edition. This statistic is more appropriate than the number of employees because building square footage is tied more closely to trip generation and is known at the time of application for any development or development modification that would require the assessment of an impact fee. The existing and projected Land Use Assumptions for the dwelling units and the square footage of basic, service, and retail land uses provide the basis for the projected increase in vehicle-miles of travel. As noted earlier, a transportation demand factor is applied to these values and then summed to calculate the total peak hour vehicle-miles of demand for each service area. The transportation demand factors are aggregate rates derived from two sources -the !TE Trip Generation Manual, 8'h Edition and the latest on regional origin-destination travel surveys performed by Texas Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and the NHTS. ITE's Trip Generation, 81h Edition provides the number of trips that are produced or attracted to the land use for each dwelling unit, square foot of building, or other corresponding unit. For the retail category ofland uses, the rate is adjusted to account for the fact that a percentage ofretail trips are made by people who would otherwise be traveling past that particular establishment anyway, such as a trip between work and home. These trips are called pass-by trips, and since the travel demand is accounted for in the land use calculations relative to the primary trip, it is necessary to discount the retail rate to avoid double counting trips. The next component of the transportation demand factor accounts for the length of each trip. The average trip length for each category is based on the region-wide travel characteristics survey conducted by Texas Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and the National Household Travel Survey (NHTS). 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 17 May201 0 Kimley-Hom CrJ"Y OF CoLUGE STATION and Associates, Inc. tlx '"'"' •f tiK R<1mrl1 Valky The computation of the transportation demand factor is detailed in the following equation: TDF = T * (1-P, ) * L b max where ... Lmax = min(L *OD or SAL) Variables: TDF =Transportation Demand Factor, T =Trip Rate (peak hour trips I unit), Pb =Pass-By Discount(% of trips), Lmax =Maximum Trip Length (miles), L =Average Trip Length (miles), and OD =Origin-Destination Reduction (50%) SAL =Max Service Area Trip Length (see Table 5) The maximum trip length was limited to four (4) miles based on the maximum trip length within each service area. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code allows for a service area diameter of six (6) miles, however the service areas within College Station are approximately four (4) miles in diameter. The adjustment made to the average trip length statistic in the computation of the maximum trip length is the origin-destination reduction. This adjustment is made because the roadway impact fee is charged to both the origin and destination end of the trip. For example, impact fee methodology will account for a trip from home to work within College Station to both residential and non-residential land uses. To avoid counting these trips as both residential and non- residential trips, a 50% origin-destination (OD) reduction factor is applied. Therefore, only half of the trip length is assessed to each land use. Table 5 shows the derivation of the Transportation Demand Factor for the residential land uses and the three (3) non-residential land use categories. The values utilized for all variables shown in the transportation demand factor equation are also shown in the table. Table 5. Transportation Demand Factor Calculations Variable Residential Basic Service Ret~·· Single Family M ulti Family T 1.01 0.62 0.97 1.49 3.73 Pb 0% 0% 0% 0% 34% L 9.20 9.20 10.02 10.92 6.43 Lmax * 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.215 TDF 4.04 2.48 3.88 5.96 7.91 The application of the demographic projections and the transportation demand factors are presented in the 10-Year Growth Projections in Table 6. This table shows the total vehicle-miles by service area for the years 2009 and 2019. These estimates and projections lead to the vehicle- miles of travel for both 2009 and 2019. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 18 May 2010 § "' 0 0 Year 2009 DWELLING UNITS SERVICE AREA SINGLE MULTI TDF2 FAMILY' FAMILY' 1.01 A 3,768 7,285 4.04 B 4,826 12,017 4.04 c 4,564 594 4.04 D 1,651 2 4.04 Totals 14,809 19,898 Year 2019 DWELLING UNITS SERVICE TDF2 AREA SINGLE MULTI FAMILY' FAMILY' 1.01 A 4,213 8,748 4.04 B 5,914 15,091 4.04 c 6,179 1,019 4.04 D 4,226 2 4.04 Totals 20,532 24,860 VEHICLE-MILES OF INCREASE12 (2009. 2019) SERVICE VEH-MILES AREA A 16,411 B 21,469 c 17,819 D 20,057 Total 75,756 TDF3 0.62 2.48 2.48 2.48 2.48 TDf' 0.62 2.48 2.48 2.48 2.48 Table 6. 10-Year Growth Projections RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILES SQUARE FEET5 TRANS. DEMAND FACTOR' NON-RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILES'0 TOTAL SINGLE MULTI BASIC7 SERVICE' RETAIL' VEHICLE FAMILY FAMILY TOTAL BASIC SERVICE RETAIL BASIC SERVICE RETAIL TOTAL MILES" 0.97 1.49 3.73 15,223 18,067 33,290 547,061 4,896,286 2,276,070 3.88 5.96 7.91 2,123 29,182 18,014 49,319 82,609 19,497 29,802 49,299 546,183 2,412,980 2,918,138 3.88 5.96 7.91 2,119 14,381 23,096 39,596 88,895 18,439 1,473 19,912 278,840 296,501 913,341 3.88 5.96 7.91 1,082 1,767 7,229 10,078 29,990 6,670 5 6,675 189,696 84,377 507,681 3.88 5.96 7.91 736 503 4,018 5,257 11,932 109,176 1,561,780 7,690,144 6,615,230 6,060 45,833 52,357 104,250 213,426 RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILES SQUARE FEET5 TRANS. DEMAND FACTOR' NON-RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILES'0 TOTAL SINGLE MULTI FAMILY FAMILY 17,019 21,694 23,893 37,426 24,963 2,527 17,073 5 TOTAL BASIC SERVICE RETAIL BASIC7 SERVICE' RETAIL9 BASIC SERVICE RETAIL TOTAL VEHICLE MILES" 0.97 1.49 3.73 38,713 681,046 6,488,073 2,400,156 3.88 5.96 7.91 2,642 38,669 18,996 60,307 99,020 61,319 1,006,787 3,402,497 3,141,023 3.88 5.96 7.91 3,906 20,279 24,860 49,045 110,364 27,490 435,452 1,290,925 1,381 ,566 3.88 5.96 7.91 1,690 7,694 10,935 20,319 47,809 17,078 464,918 809,969 1,046,119 3.88 5.96 7.91 1,804 4,827 8,280 14,911 31,989 144,600 2,588,203 11,991,464 7,968,863 10,042 71,469 63,071 144,582 289,182 Notes: ' From Land Use Assumptions included in 2009 Roadwiy Impact Fee Update Report 2 Transportalion Demand Factor for each Service Area (from LLNMET) using Single Family Detached Housing land use and trip generation rate 3 Transportation Demand Factor for each Service Area (from LLNMET) using Apartment/M.Jltu-Family land use and trip genera/ion rate 4 Calculated by multiplying TDF by the number of dwelling units 5 From Land Use Assumptions included in 2009 Roadway Impact Fee Update Report ' Trip generation rate and Transportation Demand Factors from LLNMET for each land use 7 'Basic' corresponds to General Light Industrial land use and trip generation rate ' 'Service' corresponds to General Office land use and trip generation rate ' 'Retail' corresponds to Free-Standing Retail land use and trip generation rate '° Calculated by multiplying Transportation Demand Factor by the number of thousand square feet for each land use '' Residential plus non-residential vehicle-mile totals for each Service Area 12 Total Vehicle-Mies (2009) subtracted from Total Vehicle-Mies (2019) ~ II ~ Kimley-Hom Crrv OF CoLI.ECE STATION and Associates, Inc. tlK hmt •f U,, Rei<a'<h V.Jky IV. IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS A. MAXIMUM ASSESSABLE IMPACT FEE PER SERVICE UNIT This section presents the maximum assessable impact fee rate calculated for each service area. The maximum assessable impact fee is the sum of the eligible Impact Fee CIP costs for the service area divided by the growth in travel attributable to new development projected to occur within the 10-year period. A majority of the components of this calculation have been described and presented in previous sections of this report. The purpose of this section is to document the computation for each service area and to demonstrate that the guidelines provided by Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code have been addressed. Table 7 illustrates the computation of the maximum assessable impact fee computed for each service area. Each row in the table is numbered to simplify explanation of the calculation. Line Title Description Total Vehicle-Miles of The total number of vehicle-miles added to the service area based on 1 Capacity Added by the the capacity, length, and number oflanes in each project (from CIP Annendix B -CIP Service Units of Suooly) Each project identified in the Impact Fee CIP will add a certain amount of capacity to the City's roadway network based on its length and classification. This line displays the total amount added within each service area. Total Vehicle-Miles of A measure of the amount of traffic currently using the roadway 2 facilities upon which capacity is being added. (from Appendix B -Existing Demand CIP Service Units of Supply) A number of facilities identified in the Impact Fee CJP have traffic currently utilizing a portion of their existing capacity. This line displays the total amount of capacity along these facilities currently being used by existing traffic. Total Vehicle-Miles of Number of vehicle-miles of travel that are not accommodated by the 3 existing roadway system (from Appendix C -Ex isting Roadway Existing Deficiencies Facilities Inventory) In order to ensure that existing deficiencies on the City's roadway network are not recoverable through impact fees, this line is based on the entire roadway network within the service area. Any roadway within the service area that is deficient -even those not identified on the Impact Fee CIP -will have these additional trips removed from the calculation. Net Amount of Vehicle-A measurement of the amount of vehicle-miles added by the CIP that 4 Miles of Capacity will not be utilized by existing demand (Line 1 -Line 2 -Line 3) Added This calculation identifies the portion of the Impact Fee CIP (in vehicle-miles) that may be recoverable through the collection of impact fees. 2009-2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 20 May2010 Kimley-Hom Crrv OF Cou.£CE STATION and Associates, Inc. th< ltra<t •ftk Ret<a,,.h Vallq Total Cost of the CIP The total cost of the projects within each service area (from Table 4: 5 within the Service Area 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan with Conceptual Level Cost Opinions) This line simply identifies the total cost of all of the projects identified in each service area. Cost of Net Capacity The total CIP cost (Line 5) prorated by the ratio of Net Capacity 6 Supplied Added (Line 4) to Total Capacity Added (Line 1). [(Line 4 I Line 1) *(Line 5)1 Using the ratio of vehicle-miles added by the Impact Fee CIP available to serve future growth to the total vehicle-miles added, the total cost of the Impact Fee CIP is reduced to the amount available for future growth (i.e. excluding existing usage and deficiencies). 7 Cost to Meet Existing Needs and Usa e The difference between the Total Cost of the CIP (Line 5) and the Cost of the Net Ca aci lied Line 6 . Line 5-Line 6 This line is provided for informational purposes only -it is to present the portion of the total cost of the Impact Fee CIP that is required to meet existing demand. Total Vehicle-Miles of Based upon the growth projection provided. in the Land Use 8 New Demand over Ten Assumptions, an estimate of the number of new vehicle-miles within Years the service area over the next ten years. (from Table 6) This line presents the amount of growth (in vehicle-miles) projected to occur within each service area over the next ten years. Percent of Capacity The result of dividing Total Vehicle-Miles of New Demand (Line 8) 9 Added Attributable to by the Net Amount of Capacity Added (Line 4), limited to 100% New Growth (Line 10). This calculation is required by Chapter 395 to ensure 10 Chaoter 395 Check capacity added is attributable to new growth. In order to ensure that the vehicle-miles added by the Impact Fee CIP do not exceed the amount needed to accommodate growth beyond the ten-year window, a comparison of the two values is performed. If the amount of vehicle-miles added by the Impact Fee CIP exceeds the growth projected to occur in the next ten years, the Impact Fee CIP cost is reduced accordingly. Cost of Capacity Added The result of multiplying the Cost of Net Capacity Added (Line 6) by 11 Attributable to New the Percent of Capacity Added Attributable to New Growth, limited to Growth 100% (Line 9). This value is the total Impact Fee CIP project costs (excluding financial costs) that may be recovered through impact fees. This line is determined considering the limitations to impact fees required by the Texas legislature. Pre-Credit CJP Cost Found by dividing the Cost of the CIP attributed to growth by the 12 Per Service Unit Total Vehicle-Miles of New Demand Over Ten Years (Line 8). (Line 11 I Line 8). This value is the total pre-credit CIP Cost per service unit prior to a credit calculation. Note the CIP Cost is for only the cost of capacity attributable to growth. 2009 -2019 Roadway lmpact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 21 May 2010 Kimley-Hom CITY OF Cowc E STATION and Associates, Inc. tbt """ •f tbt R'1wrh ValkJ B. PLAN FOR A WARDING THE ROADWAY IMP ACT FEE CREDIT Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code requires the Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees contains specific enumeration of a plan for awarding the impact fee credit. Section 395.014 of the Code states: "(7) A plan for awarding: (A) a credit for the portion of ad valorem tax and utility service revenues generated by new service units during the program period that is used for the payment of improvements, including the payment of debt, that are included in the capital improvements plan; or (B) In the alternative, a credit equal to 50 percent of the total projected cost of implementing the capital improvements plan ... " -The City of College Station has determined the maximum assessable impact fee per service unit shall be 50% of the total projected cost of implementing the capital improvements plan. Therefore, the Pre-Credit CIP Cost Per Service Unit (Line 12) is multiplied by 50% to obtain the Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit (Line 13). 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 22 May 20 10 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. Table 7. Maximum Assessable Fee Table SERVJCE AREA: l TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY ADDED BYTHECIP (FROM CIP UNITS OF SUPPLY, APPENDIX B) 2 TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND (FROM CIP UNITS OF SUPPLY, APPENDIX B) 3 TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEFICIENCIES (FROM EXISTING FACILITIES INVENTORY, APPENDIX C) 4 NEf AMOUNT OF VEH-MI OF CAPACITY ADDED (LINE 1-LINE2-UNE3) 5 TOTAL COST OF THE RIP WITHIN SERVICE AREA (FROM TABLE4) 6 COST OF NEf CA PA CITY SUPPLIED (LINE 4 / LINE I) • (LINE 5) 7 COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE (LINE 5 -LINE 6) 8 TOTAL VEH-MIOFNEW DFMANDOVERTENYEARS (FROM TAB LE 6 and Land Use Assumptions) 9 PERCENT OF CAPACITY ADDED ATTRIBUTAB!ETO GROWTH (UNES/ LINE4) JO IF LINE 8> LINE4, REDUCELINE9TO IOO%, OTHERWISE NO CHANGE ]] COST OF CAPACITY ADDED A TTRIBUTAB!E TO GROWTH (UNE6 •LINE 10) 12 PRE-CREDIT MAX FEE PER SERVICE UNIT($ PER VEH-MI) (UNE I I/ LINES) 13 MAX ASSESSAB!EFEE PER SERVICE UNIT (S PER VEH-MI) (LINE I2. 50%) 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas A B 9,251 26,985 3,808 12,784 639 5,158 4,804 9,043 $ 23,246, 135 $ 31 ,953,586 $ 12,071,607 $ 10,708,033 $ 1 l,174,528 $ 21 ,245,553 16,41 l 21,469 341.6% 237.4% 100.0% I 00 00/o $ 12,071 ,607 $ 10,708,033 $ 736 $ 499 $ 368 $ 249 23 ~ CITY OF Col.I.EGE STATION tb< btan •fth< i?a«'<h l'.tO., c D 32,748 17,979 6,510 2,725 733 0 25,505 15,254 $ 60,230,550 $ 60,590,608 $ 46,909,130 $ 51 ,407,149 $ 13,321,420 $ 9,183,459 17,819 20,057 69.8% 131.4% 69.8% 100.0% $ 32,742,573 $ 51 ,407,149 $ l,838 $ 2,564 $ 919 $ l,282 May20l0 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. C. SERVICE U NIT D EMAND P ER UNIT OF D EVELOPMENT The roadway impact fee is determined by multiplying the impact fee rate by the number of service units projected for the proposed development. For this purpose, the City utilizes the Land UseNehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET), presented in Table 8. This table lists the predominant land uses that may occur within the City of College Station. For each land use, the development unit that defines the development's magnitude with respect to transportation demand is shown. Although every possible use cannot be anticipated, the majority of uses are found in this table. If the exact use is not listed, one similar in trip-making characteristics can serve as a reasonable proxy. The individual land uses are grouped into categories, such as residential, office, commercial, industrial, and institutional. The trip rates presented for each land use is a fundamental component of the LUVMET. The trip rate is the average number of trips generated during the afternoon peak hour by each land use per development unjt. The next column, if applicable to the land use, presents the number of trips to and from certain land uses reduced by pass-by trips, as previously discussed. The source of the trip generation and pass-by statistics is ITE's Trip Generation, 81h Edition, the latest edition of the definitive source for trip generation data. This report utilizes trip generation studies for a variety of land uses throughout the United States, and is the standard used by traffic engineers and transportation planners for traffic impact analysis, site design, and transportation planning. To convert vehicle trips to vehicle-miles, it is necessary to multiply trips by trip length. The adj usted trip length values are based on regional origin-destination travel surveys performed by Texas Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and the NHTS. The other adjustment to trip length is the 50% origin-destination reduction to avoid double counting of trips. At this stage, another important aspect of the state law is applied -the limit on transportation service unit demand. If the adjusted trip length is above the maximum trip length within the service area, the maximum trip length used for calculation is reduced to the corresponding value. This reduction, as discussed previously, limits the maximum trip length to the approximate size of the service areas. The remaining column in the LUVMET shows the vehicle-miles per development unit. This number is the product of the trip rate and the maximum trip length. This number, previously referred to as the Transportation Demand Factor, is used in the impact fee estimate to compute the number of service units consumed by each land use application. The number of service units is multiplied by the impact fee rate (established by City ordinance) in order to determine the impact fee for a development. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 24 May 2010 Kimley-Hom CITY OF Coll.EGE ST,\TION and Associates, Inc. t!x lxm •f tht flat•r<h Y"°'1 Table 8. Land Use I Vehicle-Mile Equivalencv Table Land Use Category PORT AND TERMINAL TruckTcminal INDL5TRIAL General Li,l:ht Industrial General Heavy Industrial Industrial Park Warehousing Mini-Warehouse RESIDENTIAL Singlc·Famly Detached Housina: AoartmenllMuhi-familv Residential CondorriniumTownhome Mobile Hom: Park/ Manufactured Housina Senior Adult Housini;i:-Detachcd Senior Adult Housin ·Allached Assisted Llviniz LODGlNG Hotel Motel/ Other Lodiziniz Facilities RF.cRfATIONAL GolfDriviniz Ranize Golf Course Recreational Comm.mitv Center Ice Skatiniz Rink Miniature GolfCourse Muhiolex Movie Theater Racauet /Tennis Oub lNSTIIUflONAL Churoh Dav Care Center Primarv/Middle School(l-8) HU!:h School Junior I ColTITlllnil Colleize Universitv I Colleize MIDICAL Oinic Hosoit.al Nursin Horn: Anirrel HosoitaVVeterinarv Clinic omcE Comorate Headauarters Buildiniz Geneml Office Buildiniz Medical-Dental OffJCe Buildirui: Sina.le Tenant OffJCe Buildi:niz Office Park COMMffiCIAL Automobile Related Autorrnbile Care Center Autorrohile Parts Sales Gasoline/Scivice Station Gasoline/Service Stal ion w/ Conv Markel Gasoline/Service Station w/ Conv Market and New Car Sales Quick Lubrication Vehicle Shop Self-Service Car Wash Autorrated Car Wash Tire Store ITEL.and Use Code 030 110 120 IJO 150 151 Oe~lopmenl Unit Am 6.55 l,OOOSFGFA 0.97 l,OOOSFGFA 0.68 l,OOOSFGFA 0.86 l,OOOSFGFA 0.32 l,OOOSFGFA 0.26 210 Dwcllirur. Unit I.OJ 220 Dwellinu Unit 0.62 230 Dwcllinu Unit 0.52 240 Occupied Dwcllin11. Unit 0.59 251 Dwclliniz. Unit 0.27 252 Occuoied Dwelliniz Unit 0.16 254 Beds 0.22 310 Room 0.59 320 Room 0.47 432 Too 1.25 430 0.30 495 l,CXX>SFGFA 1.45 465 l,CXX>SFGFA 2.36 431 Hok 0.JJ 445 Screens 13.64 491 Court 3.35 560 l,CXX>SFGFA 0.55 565 l,CXX>SFGFA 12.46 30% 522 Students 0.16 530 Students 0.13 540 Studeals 0.12 550 Students 0.21 630 l,CXX>SFGFA 5.18 610 Bod• 1.31 620 0.22 640 l,CXX>SFGFA 4.n 30"/, 714 l,CXX>SFGFA 1.40 710 l,CXXlSFGFA 1.49 720 l,CXXlSFGFA 3.46 715 1,CXX>SFGFA 1.73 750 l,CXXlSFGFA 1.48 B B 942 1.CXX> SF Occ. GlA 3.38 ~;. B 343 l,CXX>SFGFA 5.98 43% A 944 Vehicle Fueliniz Position 13.87 42% A 945 Vehicle Fueliniz Position 13.38 56% B 946 Vehicle Fuelin11. Position 13.94 56% A 341 l,CXX>SFGFA 2.59 20'1. B 941 Scrvicin Positions 5.19 40% B 947 Stall 5.54 40% B 948 Stall 77.50 40% B 848 J,CXX>SFGFA 4.15 28% A Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Thru Windo\ 934 l,CXX>SFGFA 33.34 50"/, A Fast Food Restaumnt without Drive-Thru Win 933 l,CXX>SFGFA 26.15 50"!, B High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 932 l,CXX>SFGFA 11.15 43% A Quality Restaumnt 931 l,CXX>SFGFA 7.49 44o/, A Coffee/Donut Shoo with Drive-Thru Window 937 l,CXX>SFGFA 42.93 70"/1 A OthcrRdail Free-StandinJt Imcounl Store 815 l,CXX>SFGFA 5.00 JO'/, c Nursery (Garden Center) l,OOOSFGFA 3.80 30'!. Hoirc hnprovement Supentore 862 l,OOOSFGFA 2.37 48o/e A Phamncy/Drugstore w/o Drive-Thru Window 880 l,CXX>SFGFA 8.42 53% A Phanmcv/DruJtstore w/ Drive-Thru Window 881 l,OOOSFGFA I0.35 49'/e A Shopping Center 820 l,CXX>SFGFA 3.73 34o/, A Supennarla:t 850 l,OOOSFGFA 10.50 36'11 A Toy/O:iildren's Superstore 864 l,CXX>SFGFA 4.99 30% B Department Store 875 l,CXX>SFGFA 1.78 30'1. B Video Rental Store 8% l,CXX>SFGFA 13.00 5091. B SERVICES Walk-In Bank 911 1,CXX>SFGFA 1213 40% B Drive-In Bank 912 Drive-in Lanes 27.41 47% A HairSakin 918 J,OOOSFGLA 1.45 30'1. B Trip Ra .. 6.55 0.97 0.68 0.86 0.32 0.26 LOI 0.62 0.52 0.59 0.27 0.16 0.22 0.59 0.47 1.25 0.30 1.45 2.36 0.33 13.64 3.35 0.55 8.72 0.16 0.13 0.12 0.21 5.18 1.31 0.22 3.30 1.40 1.49 3.46 1.73 1.48 2.03 3.41 8.04 5.89 6.13 2.07 3.11 3.32 46.50 2.99 16.92 13.08 6.36 4.19 12.88 3.50 2.66 113 3.% 528 2.46 6.72 3.49 1.25 6.80 7.28 14.53 1.02 Trip Lengtt. (mi) 10.02 50% 5.01 10.02 50% 5.01 10.02 50% 5.01 10.02 50% 5.01 10.83 50"/e 5.42 10.83 50% 5.42 9.20 SO-/o 4.ro 9.20 50% 4.(£1 9.20 50% 4.60 9.20 50"1. 4.60 9.20 50"1. 4.60 9.20 50% 4.60 9.20 50% 4.60 6.43 50'/1 3.22 6.43 50'/o 3.22 6.43 so-1. 3.22 6.43 50o/, 3.22 6.43 50o/, 3.22 6.43 50% 3.22 6.43 SO-lo 3.22 6.43 50'/, 3.22 6.43 50'/, 3.22 4.20 50% 2.10 4.20 50% 2.10 4.20 50% 2.10 4.20 50% 2.10 4.20 50o/o 2.10 4.20 50'/o 2.10 7.55 50% 3.78 7.55 50% 3.78 7.55 50% 3.78 7.55 50o/1 3.78 10.92 50% 5.46 10.92 50o/o 5.46 10.92 50% 5.46 10.92 50% 5.46 I0.92 50% 5.46 6.43 50'/, 3.22 6.43 SO-lo 3.22 1.20 50'/, 0.60 1.20 50'1. o.ro L20 so-1. 0.60 6.43 so-;., 3.22 6.43 50'/, 3.22 1.20 50'/, 0.60 1.20 50'/, 0.60 6.43 50'°/o 3.22 4.79 50'/o 2.40 4.79 50'/o 2.40 4.79 50'°/o 2.40 4.79 50% 2.40 4.79 50% 2.40 6.43 50'°/o 3.22 6.43 50% 3.22 6.43 50'°/o 3.22 6.43 50'°/o 3.22 6.43 50'°/o 3.22 6.43 50'°/o 3.22 6.43 50% 3.22 6.43 50% 3.22 6.43 509/o 3.22 6.43 so-1. 3.22 3.39 50o/, 1.70 3.39 50o/, 1.70 3.39 so-1. 1.10 ~7toSouru1ofP111-ll7R1tu: A: ITE Trip Oen.u11ion. Hanil!ook ln.d Editkin. (Jun.e 2004) 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 3.78 3.78 3.78 3.78 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.22 3.22 0.60 0.60 0.60 3.22 3.22 0.60 0.60 3.22 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 1.70 1.70 1.70 B: Estimated by Kimky-Hom b-.sed on ITE rain for 1imilar catcprics l6.20 3.88 2.72 3.44 1.28 1.04 4.04 2.48 2.08 2.36 1.08 0.64 0.88 1.90 1.51 4.02 0.% 4.(,6 7.59 1.06 43.85 10.77 1.16 18.31 0.34 0.27 0.25 0.44 19.55 4.95 0.83 12.46 5.60 5.% 1384 6.92 5.92 6.52 10.96 4.83 3.53 3.68 6.(,6 10.01 1.99 27.90 9.61 40.52 JI.JI 15.22 10.05 30.85 11.25 8.55 3.% 12.72 16.97 7.91 21.60 11.23 4.01 21.86 12.34 24.62 l.72 C: ITE ulc adjusted upward by KHA hued on logical relationship to other categories 2009-2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 25 May2010 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. V. SAMPLE CALCULATIO NS The following section details two (2) examples of maximum assessable roadway impact fee calculations. Example 1: • Development Type -One (1) Unit of Single-Family Housing in Service Area A Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Steps -Example 1 Determine Development Unit and Vehicle-Miles Per Development Unit Step From Table 8 [Land Use -Vehicle-mile Equivalency Table] 1 Development Type: I Dwell ing Unit of Single-Family Detached Housing Number of Development Units: 1 Dwelling Unit Yeh-Mi Per Development Unit: 4.04 Step Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit 2 From Table 7, Line 13 [Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit) Service Area A: $368 Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Impact Fee =# of Development Units * Yeh-Mi Per Dev Unit * Max. Fee Per Service Unit Step 3 Impact Fee = 1 * 4.04* $368 Maximum Assessable Impact Fee = $1 ,486. 72 Example 2: • Development Type -125,000 square foot Home Improvement Superstore in Service Area C Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Steps -Example 2 Determine Development Unit and Vehicle-Miles Per Development Unit Step From Table 8 [Land Use -Vehicle-mile Equivalency Table] 1 Development Type: 125 ,000 square feet of Home Improvement Superstore Development Unit: 1,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area Yeh-Mi Per Development Unit: 3.96 Step Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit 2 From Table 7, Line 13 [Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit) Service Area C: $919 Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Impact Fee =# of Development Units* Yeh-Mi Per Dev Unit* Max. Fee Per Service Unit Step 3 Impact Fee = 125 * 3.96 * $919 Maximum Assessable Impact Fee = $454,905 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 26 May 2010 Kimley-Hom Crrv OP CoLI..EGE STATION and Associates, Inc. t/x "'"" •ftlx Ra<.,<h v..u., VI. CONCLUSION The City of College Station can establish a process to implement the assessment and collection of roadway impact fees through the adoption of an impact fee ordinance that is consistent with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. This report establishes the maximum allowable roadway impact fee that could be assessed by the City of College Station within each of the four (4) service areas. The maximum assessable roadway impact fees calculated in this report are presented in Table 7. This document serves as a guide to the assessment ofroadway impact fees pertaining to future development and the City's need for roadway improvements to accommodate that growth. Following the public hearing process, the City Council may establish an amount to be assessed (if any) up to the maximum established within this report and update the Roadway Impact Fee Ordinance accordingly. In conclusion, it is our opinion that the data and methodology used in this study are appropriate and consistent with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. Furthermore, the Land Use Assumptions and the proposed Capital Improvements Plan are appropriately incorporated into the process. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 27 May2010 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. APPENDICES A. CONCEPTUAL LEVEL PROJECT COST PROJECTIONS SERVICE AREA A SERVICE AREA B SERVICE AREA C SERVICE AREA D B. CIP SERVICE UNITS OF SUPPLY C. EXISTING ROADWAY FACILITIES INVENTORY 2009 -20 19 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 28 CITY OF CoLLECE STATION tht lmut of tht Rtt<an'h V.lky May2010 ~ Kimley-Hom CITY OF COLl.ECE STATION and Associates, Inc. ''" """'•!th< &s<•m1 v.11q Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas May 2010 City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees Appendix A -Summary of Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections Roadway Improvements -Service Area A # Class Proiect A-1 D-1 MAJ4-0 Rock Prairie Rd. (1) A-2, D-2 MAJ4 Rock Prairie Rd. (2) A-3 MIN4 Dartmouth St. 11 l A-4 MIN4 Dartmouth St. (2) A-5, B-1 MAJ6 Texas Ave. (1) A-6 MIN2 Appomattox Dr. A-7 MIN2 Pamela Ln. A-8 MIN2 Minor Collector A A-9 MAJ2 Back Street B Intersection Improvements 1-1 1-2 Limits Status Proiect Cost SH 6 NBFR to Stonebrook Dr. To be widened $ 1814000 Stonebrook Dr. to 64' E. of Ritchey Rd. (Future Bird Pond Alionment) To be widened $ 3,925 000 Krenek Tao Rd. to Harvev Mitchell <FM 2818\ Comoleted $ 3,003,277 Harvey Mitchell (FM 2818) to Texas Ave. New Roadway $ 3 482,000 Georoe Bush Dr. to Harvey Mitchell Pkwv. Comoleted $ 2,343,215 450' S. of Raintree Dr. to 325' N. of North Forest Pkwy. New Roadway $ 2,453,000 SH 30 to FM 158 New Roadwav $ 2,292,000 Pamela Ln. to FM 60 New Roadway $ 2,191,000 SH 6 to Sebesta New Roadway $ 2,262,000 Rock Prairie Interchange Upgrade $ 11,000,000 Holleman Rd. & Texas Ave. Improvement $ 1,500,000 TOTAL $ 36,265,492 "Total may be higher than presented in Table 4 (10-Year Roadway Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Cost Opinions) because the cost of some projects are shared between service areas. NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Un~ied Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. A-1, D-1 Name: Rock Prairie Rd. (1) Limits: Impact Fee Class: SH 6 NBFR to Stonebrook Dr. MAJ4-0 This project consists of the widening of a two-lane divided facility into a four lane divided major arterial (Context: Suburban) Ultimate Class: 4 Lane Major Arterial 2,140 Length (If): Service Area(s): A, D 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 507 5' Concrete Sidewalk 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 Item Description Prep ROW -/ Traffic Control -/ Pavement Markings/Markers -/ Roadway Drainage Special Drainage Structures -/ Water -/ Sewer -/ Establish Turf I Erosion Control -/ Illumination Other: Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Notes n 5% $ Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% $ 2% $ Standard Internal System 15% $ None Anticipated $0 $ Minor Adjustments 3% $ Minor Adjustments 5% $ 7% $ Standard llumination System 7% $ $0 $ .. Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ Paving and Allowan $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction Cost TOTAL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acquisition: Existing Alignment 10% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 755,911 Item Cost 37,796 22,677 15, 118 11 3,387 22,677 37,796 52,914 52,914 355,279 1,111,190 222,238 1,334,000 Item Cost 1,334,000 266,800 80,040 133,400 1,814,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. A-2, D-2 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): Rock Prairie Rd. (2) Stonebrook Dr. to 64' E. of Ritchey Rd. (Future Bird Pond Alignment) MAJ4 4 Lane Major Arterial 3,075 A, D Roadway Construction Cost Projection This project consists of the reconstruction of a two-lane divided facility into a four lane divided major arterial (Context: Suburban) · -. •· i ti Quanti Unit Price Item Cost I I I I I 102 Unclassified Street Excavation 12,984 c $ 10.00 $ 129,840 202 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 25,284 s $ 4.50 $ 113,778 mt 302 8" Concrete Pavement 25,284 $ 44.00 $ 1,112,496 402 4" To soil 12,984 $ 3.25 $ 42, 198 502 5' Concrete Sidewalk 30,750 $ 4.75 $ 146,063 I 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s 2,223 s $ 41 .00 $ 91 ,143 Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ 1,635,518 •• I Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Prep ROW 5% $ 81 ,776 ~ Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% $ 49,066 ~ Pavement Markings/Marke rs 2% $ 32,710 ~ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% $ 245,328 Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 $ ~ Water Minor Adjustments 3% $ 49,066 ~ Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% $ 81,776 ~ Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% $ 114,486 ~ Illumination Standard llumination System 7% $ 114,486 Other: $0 $ **Allowances based on% of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 768,694 Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 2,404,212 Construction Contingency: 20% $ 480,842 Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 2,886,000 Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Item Cost Construction: -$ 2,886,000 Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 577,200 Mobilization 6% $ 173, 160 ROW/Easement Acauisition: Existing Alignment 10% $ 288,600 Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 3,925,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of th e City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. A-3 Name: Dartmouth St. (1) Limits: Impact Fee Class: Krenek Tap Rd. to Harvey Mitchell (FM 2818) MIN4 Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 4 Lane Minor Arterial 2,120 A Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Actual Construction Cost: Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Acquisition: This project consisted of the construction a four-lane divided minor arterial. The City contributed $3,003,277 towards the construction of this facility. (Context: Suburban) Allowance Item Cost -$ 3,003,277 Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 3,003,277 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. A-4 Name: Dartmouth St. (2) Limits: Impact Fee Class: Harvey Mitchell (FM 2818) to Texas Ave. MIN4 This project consists of the construction of a new four-lane divided minor arterial (Context: Suburban) Ultimate Class: 4 Lane Minor Arterial 2,600 Length (If): Service Area(s): A 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 5' Concrete Sidewalk Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Item Description Prep ROW Traffic Control ~ Pavement Markings/Markers ~ Roadway Drainage Special Drainage Structures ~ Water ~ Sewer ~ Establish Turf I Erosion Control ~ Illumination Other: Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Notes Allowance 5% None Anticipated 0% 2% Standard Internal System 15% None Anticipated $0 Minor Adjustments 3% Minor Adjustments 5% 7% Standard llumination System 7% $0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowance Subtotal: Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOTAL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement Acquisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: 96 ,201 940,632 32 ,864 123,500 77 ,080 1,380,057 Item Cost $ 69,003 $ $ 27 ,601 $ 207,009 $ $ 41,402 $ 69,003 $ 96,604 $ 96,604 $ $ 607,226 $ 1,987,283 $ 397,457 $ 2,385,000 Item Cost $ 2,385,000 $ 477,000 $ 143, 100 $ 477,000 $ 3,482,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. A-5, B-1 Name: Texas Ave. (1) Limits: Impact Fee Class: George Bush Dr. to Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. MAJ6 Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 6 Lane Major Arterial 9,555 A, B Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Actual Construction Cost: Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Acquisition: This project consisted of the construction of a six-lane divided major Arterial. The City of College Station paid for the utility relocations totaling $1,747,254 and $595,961.01 for ROW acauistion <Context: Suburban) Allowance Item Cost -$ 2,343,215 Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 2,343,215 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. A-6 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Appomattox Dr. 450' S. of Raintree Dr. to 325' N. of North Forest Pkwy. MIN2 2 Lane Minor Collector 2,760 This project consists of the construction of a new two-lane minor collector facility. (Context: Restricted) Length (If): Service Area(s): A Quanti 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 5' Concrete Sidewalk Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: e 5% $ None Anticipated 0% $ '1 Pavement Markings/Markers 2% $ '1 Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% $ Special Drainage Structu res None Anticipated $0 $ '1 Water Minor Adjustments 3% $ '1 Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% $ '1 Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% $ '1 Illumination Standard llumination System 7% $ Other: $0 $ ''Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ Paving and Allowance t I: $ Construction Contingency: . 20% $ Construction Cost TOTAL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: -20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acauisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 971 ,937 Item Cost 48,597 19,439 145,791 29,158 48,597 68,036 68,036 427,654 1,399,591 279,918 1,680,000 Item Cost 1,680,000 336,000 100,800 336,000 2,453,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. A-7 Name: Limits: Pamela Ln. SH 30 to FM 158 MIN2 This project consists of the construction of a new two-lane minor collector facility. (Context: Urban) Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 106 2 Lane Minor Collector 2,580 A 206 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 306 8" Concrete Pavement 406 4" To soil 506 5' Concrete Sidewalk 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: •• Item Description Notes Allowance Prep ROW 5% Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% '1 Pavement Markings/Markers 2% '1 Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 '1 Water Minor Adjustments 3% '1 Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% '1 Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% '1 Illumination Standard llumination System 7% Other: $0 •*Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction Cost TOTAL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acquisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ 73, 100 64,503 630,696 17,703 122,550 908,552 Item Cost 45,428 18, 171 136,283 27 ,257 45,428 63,599 63,599 399,765 1,308,317 261 ,663 1,570,000 Item Cost 1,570,000 314,000 94,200 31 4,000 2,292,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. A-8 Name: Limits: Minor Collector A Pamela Ln. to FM 60 MIN2 This project consists of the construction of a new two-lane minor collector facility. (Context: Urban) Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): 2 Lane Minor Collector 2,465 Service Area(s): A Roadway Construction Cost Projection -Item Description Quanti Unit Price IIml .. I • • I 6,985 c $ 10.00 206 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime .. 13,695 s $ 4.50 306 8" Concrete Pavement 13,695 s $ 44.00 406 4" To soil 5,204 $ 3.25 506 5' Concrete Sidewalk 24,650 $ 4.75 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s 0 s $ 41 .00 Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: •• Item Description Notes Allowance Prep ROW 5% Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% " Pavement Markings/Markers 2% " Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 " Water Minor Adjustments 3% " Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% " Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% " Illumination Standard llumination System 7% Other: $0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowance Subtotal: Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOTAL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement Acauisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: Item Cost $ 69,850 $ 61 ,628 $ 602,580 $ 16,91 3 $ 117,088 $ $ 868,058 Item Cost $ 43,403 $ $ 17,361 $ 130,209 $ $ 26,042 $ 43,403 $ 60,764 $ 60,764 $ $ 381,946 $ 1,250,004 $ 250,001 $ 1,501,000 Item Cost - $ 1,501,000 $ 300,200 $ 90,060 $ 300,200 $ 2,191,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. A-9 Name: Limits: Back Street B SH 6 to Sebesta MAJ2 This project consists of the construction of a new two-lane major collector facility. (Context: Impact Fee Class: Restricted) Ultimate Class: Length (If): 2 Lane Major Collector 2,545 Service Area(s): A 105 205 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 305 8" Concrete Pavement 405 4" To soil 505 5' Concrete Sidewalk 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Item Description Notes Allowance Prep ROW 5% Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% -.J Pavement Markings/Markers 2% -.J Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 -.J Water Minor Adjustments 3% -.J Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% -.J Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% -.J Illumination Standard llumination System 7% Other: $0 .. Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowa c Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOT AL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement Acauisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: 63,626 622, 116 17,462 120,888 896,201 Item Cost $ 44,810 $ $ 17,924 $ 134,430 $ $ 26,886 $ 44,810 $ 62,734 $ 62,734 $ $ 394,328 $ 1,290,529 $ 258,106 $ 1,549,000 Item Cost $ 1,549,000 $ 309,800 $ 92,940 $ 309,800 $ 2,262,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees Appendix A -Summary of Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections R d oa wa y mprovemen s -s erv1ce A # Class Project A-5, B-1 MAJ6 Texas Ave. (1) B-2 MIN4 Southwest Pkwv. (1) B-3 COL4 Holleman Dr. (1) B-4 MIN4 Penberthy Rd. B-5 MIN4 Jones Butler Rd. (1 l B-6 MAJ6 Wellborn Rd. (FM 2154) (1) B-7 MAJ6 Wellborn Rd. <FM 21541 (21 B-8,C-1 MIN4 Rock Prairie Rd. (3) B-9 MIN2 General Pkwy. Intersection Im lrovements 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 rea B Limits Status Project Cost Georqe Bush Dr. to Harvey Mitchell Pkwv. Completed $ 2,343,215 Jones Butler Rd. to Wellborn Rd. New Roadwav $ 3,346,000 Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. to Dowling Rd. Construction $ 1,507,901 Georqe Bush Dr. to Luther St. New Roadwav $ 2,851,069 Holleman Dr. to Harvev Mitchell Pkwv. Completed $ 1,467,042 University Dr. to Harvey Mitchell Pkwv. To be widened $ 4,036,400 Harvev Mitchell Pkwv. to Rock Prairie Rd. Construction $ 408,816 Normand Dr. to Texas Ave. Completed $ 3,500,000 Rock Prairie Rd. to Jones Butler Rd. New Roadway $ 6,793,000 Rock Prairie lnterchanqe Upqrade $ 11,000,000 Holleman Rd. & Texas Ave. Improvement $ 1,500,000 Wellborn Rd. (FM 2154) & George Bush Rd. $ 4,100,000 Deacon & Wellborn Rd. (FM 2154) at qrade crossina $ 1,000,000 TOTAL $ 43,853,443 "Total may be higher than presented in Table 4 (10-Year Roadway Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Cost Opinions) because the cost of some projects are shared between service areas. NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appenidix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. A-5, B-1 Name: Texas Ave. (1) Limits: Impact Fee Class: George Bush Dr. to Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. MAJ6 Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 6 Lane Major Arterial 9,555 A, B Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Actual Construction Cost: Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Acquisition: This project consisted of the construction of a six-lane divided major Arterial. The City of College Station paid for the utility relocations totaling $1,747,254 and $595,961.01 for ROW acauistion (Context: Suburban) Allowance Item Cost -$ 2,343 ,215 Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 2,343,215 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. B-2 Name: Limits: Southwest Pkwy. (1) Jones Butler Rd. to Wellborn Rd. MIN4 This project consists of the construction of a new four-lane divided minor arterial (Context: Urban) Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: 4 Lane Minor Arterial 1, 190 Length (If): Service Area(s): B 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 5' Concrete Sidewalk Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Item Description Prep ROW Traffic Control ,j Pavement Markings/Markers ,j Roadway Drainage Special Drainage Structures ,j Water ,j Sewer ,j Establish Turf I Erosion Control ,j Illumination ,j Other: Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Notes Allowance 5% None Anticipated 0% 2% Standard Internal System 15% None Anticipated $0 Minor Adjustments 3% Minor Adjustments 5% 7% Standard llumination System 7% RR crossing $1 ,000,000 ••Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowance Subtotal: Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOT AL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement Acquisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: 44,033 430,540 15,041 56,525 35,301 631 ,690 Item Cost $ 31,584 $ $ 12,634 $ 94,753 $ $ 18,951 $ 31 ,584 $ 44,218 $ 44,218 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,277,942 $ 1,909,632 $ 381,926 $ 2,292,000 Item Cost $ 2,292,000 $ 458,400 $ 137,520 $ 458,400 $ 3,346,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. B-3 Name: Holleman Dr. (1) Limits: Impact Fee Class: Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. to Dowling Rd. COL4 Ultimate Class: Length (If): 4 Lane Major Collector 2,495 Service Area(s): B Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Actual Construction Cost: Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Acauisition: This project consists of the construction of a new four-lane major collector. The City contributed $1,507,901 towards the construction of this facility. (Context: Suburban) Allowance Item Cost -$ 1,507,901 Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 1,507,901 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. B-4 Name: Penberthy Rd. Limits: Impact Fee Class: George Bush Dr. to Luther St. MIN4 Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 4 Lane Minor Arterial 2,105 B Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Construction: Engineering/Survey/Testing: Mobilization ROW/Easement Acquisition: This project consists of the construction of a new four-lane minor arterial. (Context: Urban) This project is part of the 2008 Bond Election and is estimated at $2,851 ,069 Allowance Item Cost -$ 2,851,069 $ - $ - $ - Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ 2,851 ,069 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standard s contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. B-5 Name: Jones Butler Rd. (1) This project consisted of the construction a four- Limits: Holleman Dr. to Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. lane undivided minor arterial. (Context: Urban) The Impact Fee Class: MIN4 City contributed $1,467,042 to this project. Ultimate Class: 4 Lane Minor Arterial Length (If): 2,775 Service Area(s): B Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Item Cost Actual Construction Cost: -$ 1,467,042 Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Acquisition: Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ 1,467,042 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. B-6 Name: Wellborn Rd. (FM 2154) (1) This project consists of the City's contribution to Limits: University Dr. to Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. the TxDOT reconstruction of a five-lane undivided Impact Fee Class: MAJ6 Ultimate Class: 6 Lane Major Arterial 12,695 Length (If): Service Area(s): B 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 1 O" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 5' Concrete Sidewalk Turn Lanes and Median 0 Item Description Prep ROW -I Traffic Contro l -I Pavement Markings/Markers -I Roadway Drainage Special Drainage Structures -I Water -I Sewer -I Establish Turf I Erosion Control -I Illumination Other: facility into a six-lane divided major arterial (Context: Urban) 609,363 5,958,219 174,207 603,01 3 376,298 Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: 8,412,276 Notes Allowance Item Cost 5% $ 420,61 4 Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% $ 252,368 2% $ 168,246 Standard Internal System 15% $ 1,261,841 None Anticipated $0 $ Minor Adjustments 3% $ 252,368 Minor Adjustments 5% $ 420,614 7% $ 588,859 Standard llumination System 7% $ 588,859 $0 $ .. Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 3,953,769 Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 12,366,045 Construction Contingency: 20% $ 2,473,209 Construction Cost TOT AL: $ 14,840,000 Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Item Cost Construction: -$ 14,840,000 Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 2,968 ,000 Mobilization 6% $ 890,400 ROW/Easement Acauisition: Existing Alignment 10% $ 1,484,000 Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% City Contribution) $ 4,036,400 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. B-7 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): Wellborn Rd. (FM 2154) (2) Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. to Rock Prairie Rd. MAJ6 6 Lane Major Arterial 7,605 B Actual City Contribution: Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Ac uisition: This project consists of the reconstruction of a three-lane undivided facility into a six-lane divided major arterial (Context: Suburban). This section of Wellborn Rd. is under construction. The City's contribution to this TxDOT project was $453,679.84 for ROW and $227,679.50 for utility relocations. 60% ($408,816) of this project is located in Service Area B. Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: 408,816 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009-2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. B-8,C-1 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Rock Prairie Rd. (3) Normand Dr. to Texas Ave. MIN4 Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 4 Lane Minor Arterial 2,190 B,C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Actual Construction Cost: Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Acquisition: This project consists of the construction a five-lane undivided minor arterial. (Context: Suburban) This projct costs only includes the porton identified in the 2008 Bond Election (Rock Prairie Rd West Widening Right of Way Purchase -$3,500,000). Allowance Item Cost - $ 3,500,000 Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 3,500,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/201 0 Project Information: Description: Project No. B-9 Name: Limits: General Pkwy. Rock Prairie Rd. to Jones Butler Rd . MIN2 This project consists of the construction of a new two-lane minor collector facility. (Context: Urban) Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 2 Lane Minor Collector 7,645 B 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 406 4" To soil 506 5' Concrete Sidewalk 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Item Description Notes Allowance Prep ROW 5% Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% ,./ Pavement Markings/Markers 2% ,./ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 ,./ Water Minor Adjustments 3% ,J Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% ,J Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% ,./ Illumination Standard llumination System 7% Other: $0 .. Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction Cost TOT AL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acquisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ 191 ,129 1,868,812 52,455 363,138 2,692,143 0 134,607 53,843 403,821 80,764 134,607 188,450 188,450 1,184,542 3,876,685 775,337 4,653,000 Item Cost 4,653,000 930,600 279,180 930,600 6,793,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees Appendix A -Summary of Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections R d oa way mprovements -s erv1ce A rea # Class Project B-8,C-1 MIN4 Rock Prairie Rd. 13l C-2 MIN4 Barron Rd. (1) C-3 MIN4 Barron Rd. (2) C-4 MIN4 Greens Prairie Tri. 11 l C-5 MIN4 Greens Prairie Rd. (2) C-6 MIN4 Greens Prairie Rd. f3l C-7 MIN4 Greens Prairie Rd. (4) C-8 MIN4 Rovder Rd. 11 l C-9 MIN4 Royder Rd. (2) C-10 MAJ6 Wellborn Rd 131 C-11 COL4 Barron Cut-Off C-12 COL4 Barron Cut-Off Ext. C-13 MIN2 Alexandria Ave. C-14 MIN2 Arnold Rd. C-15 MIN2 Normand Dr. C-16 MIN2 Southern Plantation Dr. C-17 MAJ2 Victoria Ave. C-18 MAJ2 Arrinaton Rd. I Decatur Dr. C-19 FR SH 40 C-20 MIN4 Greens Prairie Rd. I Arrinaton Rd. 1mersect1on 1m Jrovements t-1 1-5 c Limits Status Proiect Cost Normand Dr. to Texas Ave. Comoleted $ 3 500 000 Wellborn Rd. to VV111iam D. Fitch Pkwy. To be widened $ 4,081,000 SH 40 to SH 6 To be widened $ 8,811,479 2,380' W. of Rovder Rd. to 1 025' E. of Woodlake Dr. To be widened $ 7 120 000 1,025' E. of Woodlake Dr. to 480' E. of Sweetwater Dr. To be widened $ 4,202,000 480' E. of Sweetwater Dr. to Castleoate Dr. To be widened $ 5,477,000 Castleoate D.r to Whites Creek Ln. To be widened $ 2,662,000 2,615' N. of Greens Prairie Rd. to Greens Prairie Rd. To be widened $ 3,331,000 Greens Prairie Rd. to 950' S. of Greens Prairie Rd. To be widened $· 1,210,000 Rock Prairie Rd. to SH 40 Construction $ 272 544 Barron Rd. to Barron Cut-Off To be widened $ 1,078,000 Barron Cut-Off to Greens Prairie Rd. New Roadway $ 7,304,000 Emerald Dove to Chesapeake Ln. New Roadway $ 1,004,000 Farah Dr. to Normand Dr. New Roadwav $ 1,378,000 Rock Prairie Rd. to Birminqham Rd. New Roadway $ 1,356,000 San Mar Dr. to Victoria Ave. New Roadway $ 929,000 Southern Plantation Dr. to SH 40 Desi on $ 2,455,000 Decatur Dr. to SH 40 Comoleted $ 4,249,358 Wellborn Rd. to SH 6 Completed $ 449,562 Whites Creek to SH 40 Completed $ 1 736,498 Rock Prairie lnterchanqe Upqrade $ 11,000,000 Barron & SH 6 lnterchanqe Desion $ 737,716 TOTAL $ 7 4,344, 158 *Total may be higher than presented in Table 4 (10-Year Roadway Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Cost Opinions) because the cost of some projects are shared between service areas. NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. B-8,C-1 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Rock Prairie Rd. (3) Normand Dr. to Texas Ave. MIN4 Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 4 Lane Minor Arterial 2,190 B,C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Actual Construction Cost: Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Acauisition: This project consists of the construction a five-lane undivided minor arterial. (Context: Suburban) This projct costs only includes the porton identified in the 2008 Bond Election (Rock Prairie Rd West Widening Right of Way Purchase -$3,500,000). Allowance Item Cost - $ 3,500,000 Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ 3,500,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-2 Name: Limits: Barron Rd. (1) This project consists of the reconstruction of a two- Wellborn Rd. to William D. Fitch Pkwy. lane· undivided facility into a four-lane divided minor Impact Fee Class: MIN4 arterial (Context: Suburban) Ultimate Class: 4 Lane Minor Arterial Length (If): 3,205 Service Area(s): c Item Description Unclassified Street Excavation 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 5' Concrete Sidewalk Turn Lanes and Median 0 Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: •• Item Description Allowance Prep ROW 5% $ >/ Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% $ >/ Pavement Markings/Markers 2% $ >/ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% $ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 $ >/ Water Minor Adjustments 3% $ >/ Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% $ >/ Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% $ >/ Illumination Standard llumination System 7% $ Other: $0 $ *'Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction Cost TOTAL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acauisition: Existing Alignment 10% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 118,589 1, 159,532 40,508 152,238 94,997 1,701 ,193 Item Cost 85,060 51 ,036 34,024 255,179 51 ,036 85,060 119,084 119,084 799,563 2,500,756 500, 151 3,001,000 Item Cost 3,001,000 600,200 180,060 300,100 4,081,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-3 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): Barron Rd. (2) SH 40 to SH 6 MIN4 4 Lane Minor Arterial 8,700 c Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Construction: Engineering/Survey/Testing: Mobilization ROW/Easement Acquisition: This project consists of the reconstruction of a two-lane undivided facility into a four-lane divided minor arterial (Context: Suburban) 2008 Bond Election Project: Barron Road Widening Phase 2. City's actual contribution from Decatur to SH 6 - $2,845,907 and City Engineer Estimate was $5,965,572 from SH 40 to Decatur. Allowance Item Cost -$ 8,811,479 $ - $ - $ - Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ 8,811,479 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-4 Name: Greens Prairie Tri. (1) Limits: Impact Fee Class: 2,380' W. of Royder Rd. to 1,025' E. of Woodlake Dr. MIN4 This project consists of the reconstruction of a two-lane undivided facility into a four-lane divided minor arterial (Context: Suburban) Ultimate Class: 4 Lane Minor Arterial 5,590 Length (If): Service Area(s): c 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 5' Concrete Sidewalk Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s •• Item Description Prep ROW ,./ Traffic Control ,./ Pavement Markings/Markers ,./ Roadway Drainage Special Drainage Structures ,./ Water ,./ Sewer ,./ Establish Turf I Erosion Control ,./ Illumination Other: Quanti Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Notes Allowance 5% $ Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% $ 2% $ Standard Internal System 15% $ None Anticipated $0 $ Minor Adjustments 3% $ Minor Adjustments 5% $ 7% $ Standard llumination System 7% $ $0 $ .. Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ Paving and Allowan u 1· $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction Cost TOT AL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acauisition: Existing Alignment 10% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ 206,834 2,022,372 70,652 265,525 165,722 2,967,134 Item Cost 148,357 89,014 59,343 445,070 89,014 148,357 207,699 207,699 1,394,553 4,361,687 872,337 5,235,000 Item Cost 5,235,000 1,047,000 314,100 523,500 7,120,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-5 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): Greens Prairie Rd . (2) 1,025' E. of Woodlake Dr. to 480' E. of Sweetwater Dr. MIN4 4 Lane Minor Arterial 3,300 C, ETJ Roadway Construction Cost Projection This project consists of the reconstruction of a two-lane undivided facility into a four- lane divided minor arterial (Context: Suburban) -mill Item Description Unclassified Street Excavation Quanti 13,934 c Unit Price Item Cost $ 10.00 $ 139,340 , •• I 203 303 I I 403 503 601 - -J -J -J -J -J -J -J 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 5' Concrete Sidewalk Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Pavement Markings/Markers Roadway Drainage Special Drainage Structures Water Sewer Establish Turf I Erosion Control Illumination Other: 27,134 s $ 4.50 27,134 s $ 44.00 12,834 $ 3.25 33,000 $ 4.75 2,386 s $ 41.00 Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Notes Allowance 5% Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% 2% Standard Internal System 15% None Anticipated $0 Minor Adjustments 3% Minor Adjustments 5% 7% Standard llumination System 7% $0 .. Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowance Subtotal: Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOT AL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement AcQuisition: Existing Alignment 10% Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 122,103 1, 193,896 41 ,711 I I I 156,750 97,826 1,751,626 Item Cost 87,581 52,549 35,033 262,744 52,549 87,581 122,614 122,614 823,265 2,574,891 514,978 3,090,000 Item Cost 3,090,000 618,000 185.400 . 309,000 4,202,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-6 Name: Greens Prairie Rd . (3) Limits: Impact Fee Class: 480' E. of Sweetwater Dr. to Castlegate Dr. MIN4 This project consists of the reconstruction of a two-lane undivided facility into a four-lane divided minor arterial (Context: Suburban) Ultimate Class: 4 Lane Minor Arterial 4,300 Length (If): Service Area(s): c 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 5' Concrete Sidewalk Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Item Description Prep ROW ~ Traffic Control ~ Pavement Markings/Markers ~ Roadway Drainage Special Drainage Structures ~ Water ~ Sewer ~ Establish Turf I Erosion Control ~ Illumination Other: Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Notes Allowance 5% Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% 2% Standard Internal System 15% None Anticipated $0 Minor Adjustments 3% Minor Adjustments 5% 7% Standard llumination System 7% $0 .. Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowa Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOT AL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement Acquisition: Existing Alignment 10% Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: 159,102 1,555,664 54,350 204,250 127,469 2,282,395 Item Cost $ 114,120 $ 68,472 $ 45,648 $ 342,359 $ $ 68,472 $ 11 4,120 $ 159,768 $ 159,768 $ $ 1,072,727 $ 3,355,122 $ 671,024 $ 4,027,000 Item Cost $ 4,027,000 $ 805,400 $ 241,620 $ 402,700 $ 5,477,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-7 Name: Greens Prairie Rd. (4) Limits: Impact Fee Class: Castlegate D.r to Whites Creek Ln. MIN4 This project consists of the reconstruction of a three-lane undivided facility into a four-lane divided minor arterial (Context: Urban) Ultimate Class: 4 Lane Minor Arterial 2,090 Length (If): Service Area(s): c 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 403 4" To soil 503 5' Concrete Sidewalk 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Item Description Prep ROW .J Traffic Control .J Pavement Markings/Markers .J Roadway Drainage Special Drainage Structures .J Water .J Sewer .J Establish Turf I Erosion Control .J Illumination Other: Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Notes Allowance 5% Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% 2% Standard Internal System 15% None Anticipated $0 Minor Adjustments 3% Minor Adjustments 5% 7% Standard llumination System 7% $0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowa tal· Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOT AL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement Acquisition: Existing Alignment 10% Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: 77,333 756,140 26,416 99,275 61 ,951 1,109,365 Item Cost $ 55,468 $ 33,281 $ 22, 187 $ 166,405 $ $ 33,281 $ 55,468 $ 77,656 $ 77,656 $ $ 521,402 $ 1,630,767 $ 326,153 $ 1,957,000 Item Cost $ 1,957,000 $ 391 ,400 $ 117,420 $ 195,700 $ 2,662,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-8 Name: Royder Rd. (1) Limits: 2,615' N. of Greens Prairie Rd . to Greens Prairie Rd. Impact Fee Class: MIN4 This project consists of the reconstruction of a two- Ultimate Class: 4 Lane Minor Arterial lane undivided facility into a four-lane divided minor Length (If): 2,615 arterial (Context: Suburban) Service Area(s): C, ETJ st 110,420 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 96,759 8" Concrete Pavement 946,088 4" To soil 33,053 5' Concrete Sidewalk 124,213 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s 77,531 Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: 1,3~8,063 Notes Allowance Item Cost 5% $ 69,403 v Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% $ 41 ,642 v Pavement Markings/Markers 2% $ 27,761 v Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% $ 208,209 Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 $ v Water Minor Adjustments 3% $ 41 ,642 v Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% $ 69,403 v Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% $ 97,164 v Illumination Standard llumination System 7% $ 97,164 Other: $0 $ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 652,388 Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 2,040,451 Construction Contingency: 20% $ 408,090 Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 2,449,000 Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Item Cost Construction: -$ 2,449,000 Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 489,800 Mobilization 6% $ 146,940 ROW/Easement AcQuisition: Existing Alignment 10% $ 244,900 Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 3,331,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-9 Name: Royder Rd. (2) Limits: Impact Fee Class: Greens Prairie Rd . to 950' S. of Greens Prairie Rd . MIN4 This project consists of the reconstruction of a two-lane undivided facility into a four-lane divided minor arterial (Context: Suburban) Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 4 Lane Minor Arterial 950 c 203 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 303 8" Concrete Pavement 403 4" To soil 503 5' Concrete Sidewalk 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 ~ ~ Pavement Markings/Markers ~ Roadway Drainage Special Drainage Stru ctures ~ Water ~ Sewer ~ Establish Turf I Erosion Control ~ Illumination Other: Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Allowance 5% $ Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% $ 2% $ Standard Internal System 15% $ None Anticipated $0 $ Minor Adjustments 3% $ Minor Adjustments 5% $ 7% $ Standard llumination System 7% $ $0 $ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction C $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acquisition: Existing Alignment 10% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ 35, 154 343,728 12,009 45,125 28, 167 504,303 Item Cost 25,215 15, 129 10,086 75,645 15, 129 25,215 35,301 35,301 237,021 741 ,324 148,265 890,000 Item Cost 890,000 178,000 . 53,400 89,000 1,210,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-10 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): Wellborn Rd (3) Rock Prairie Rd. to SH 40 MAJ6 6 Lane Major Arterial 4,990 c Actual City Contribution: Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Ac uisition: This project consists of the reconstruction of a three-lane undivided facility into a six-lane divided major arterial (Context: Suburban). The City's contribution to this TxDOT project was $453,679.84 for ROW and $227,679.50 for utilitiy relocations. 40% ($272,544) of this project is located in Service Area C. Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: 272,544 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station . 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-11 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Barron Cut-Off Barron Rd . to Barron Cut-Off COL4 This project consists of the reconstruction of a two- lane undivided facility into a four-lane major collector (Context: Suburban) Ultimate Class: Length (If): 4 Lane Major Collector 930 Service Area(s): c Unit Price $ 10.00 $ 204 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime $ 4.50 $ 304 8" Concrete Pavement $ 44.00 $ 404 4" To soil $ 3.25 $ 504 5' Concrete Sidewalk $ 4.75 $ 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s s $ 41.00 $ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ Allowance 5% $ " Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% $ " Pavement Markings/Markers 2% $ " Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% $ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 $ " Water Minor Adjustments 3% $ " Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% $ " Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% $ " Illum ination Standard llumination System 7% $ Other: $0 $ .. Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction Cost TOT AL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acquisition: Existing Alignment 10% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ Item Cost 37,720 33 ,480 327,360 6,383 44,175 449,118 Item Cost 22,456 13,474 8,982 67,368 13,474 22,456 31 ,438 31 ,438 211,086 660,204 132,041 793,000 Item Cost 793,000 158,600 47,580 79,300 1,078,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Concepfual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-12 Name: Limits: Barron Cut-Off Ext. Barron Cut-Off to Greens Prairie Rd. COL4 This project consists of the construction of a new four-lane major collector (Context: Suburban) Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 4 Lane Major Collector 5,995 c 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 504 5' Concrete Sidewalk 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Allowance 5% None Anticipated 0% v Pavement Ma rki ngs/Markers 2% v Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 v Water Minor Adjustments 3% v Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% v Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% v Illumination Standard llumination System 7% Other: $0 .. Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction Cost TOTAL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement AcQuisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ 2,895,098 Item Cost 144,755 57,902 434,265 86,853 144,755 202,657 202,657 1,273,844 4,168,942 833,788 5,003,000 Item Cost 5,003,000 1,000,600 300, 180 1,000,600 7,304,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within )he Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-13 Name: Limits: Alexandria Ave. Emerald Dove to Chesapeake Ln . MIN2 This project consists of the construction of a new two-lane minor collector facility. (Context: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 2 Lane Minor Collector 1, 130 c 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 5' Concrete Sidewalk Turn Lanes and Median 0 Suburban) Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: • Item Description Notes Allowance Prep ROW 5% Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% ,,/ Pavement Markings/Markers 2% ,,/ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 ,,/ Water Minor Adjustments 3% ,,/ Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% ,,/ Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% ,,/ Illumination Standard llumination System 7% Other: $0 ••Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction Cost TOT AL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acquisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ 32 ,020 28,251 276,232 7,755 53,675 397,933 Item Cost 19,897 7,959 59,690 11 ,938 19,897 27,855 27,855 175,091 573,024 114,605 688,000 Item Cost 688,000 137,600 41 ,280 137,600 1,004,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-14 Name: Limits: Arnold Rd . Farah Dr. to Normand Dr. MIN2 This project consists of the construction of a new two-lane minor collector facility. (Context: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: 2 Lane Minor Collector 1,550 Length (If): Service Area(s): c 106 Unclassified Street Excavation 206 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 306 8" Concrete Pavement 406 4" To soil 506 5' Concrete Sidewalk 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Suburban) Quanti Unit Price 4,392 $ 10.00 8,612 s $ 4.50 8,612 s $ 44.00 3,273 $ 3.25 15,500 $ 4.75 0 s $ 41 .00 Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Allowance Pre p ROW 5% Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% -/ Pavement Markings/Markers 2% -/ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 -/ Water Minor Adjustments 3% -/ Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% -/ Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% -/ Illumination Standard llumination System 7% Other: $0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowance Subtotal: Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOTAL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement Acquisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: Item Cost $ 43,920 $ 38,754 $ 378,928 $ 10,637 $ 73,625 $ $ 545,864 Item Cost $ 27,293 $ $ 10,917 $ 81,880 $ $ 16,376 $ 27,293 $ 38,210 $ 38,210 $ $ 240,179 $ 786,043 $ 157,209 $ 944,000 Item Cost $ 944,000 $ 188,800 $ 56,640 $ 188,800 $ 1,378,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-15 Name: Limits: Normand Dr. Rock Prairie Rd. to Birmingham Rd . MIN2 This project consists of the construction of a new two-lane minor collector facility. (Context: Impact Fee Class: Suburban) Ultimate Class: Length (If): 2 Lane Minor Collector 1,525 Service Area(s): c 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 5' Concrete Sidewalk Turn Lanes and Median 0 Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Item Description Notes Allowance Prep ROW 5% Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% ..J Pavement Markings/Markers 2% ..J Roadway Dra inage Standard Internal System 15% Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 ..J Water Minor Adjustments 3% ..J Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% ..J Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% ..J Illumination Standard llumination System 7% Other: $0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowance Subtotal: Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOT AL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement Acauisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: 537,053 Item Cost $ 26,853 $ $ 10,741 $ 80,558 $ $ 16, 112 $ 26,853 $ 37,594 $ 37,594 $ $ 236,305 $ 773,358 $ 154,672 $ 929,000 Item Cost $ 929,000 $ 185,800 $ 55,740 $ 185,800 $ 1,356,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-16 Name: Limits: Southern Plantation Dr. San Mar Dr. to Victoria Ave. MIN2 This project consists of the construction of a new two-lane minor collector facility. (Context: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 2 Lane Minor Collector 1,045 c 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 4" To soil 5' Concrete Sidewalk Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Suburban) Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: • Item Description Notes Allowance Prep ROW 5% Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% ..J Pavement Markings/Markers 2% ..J Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 ..J Water Minor Adjustments 3% ..J Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% ..J Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% ..J Illumination Standard llumination System 7% Other: $0 .. Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction Cost TOT AL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acquisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 368,011 Item Cost 18,401 7,360 55,202 11 ,040 18,401 25,761 25,761 161,926 529,937 105,987 636,000 Item Cost 636,000 127,200 38,160 127,200 929,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-17 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): Victoria Ave. Southern Plantation Dr. to SH 40 MAJ2 2 Lane Major Collector 2,165 c Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Construction: Engineering/Survey/Testing: Mobilization ROW/Easement Acquisition: This project consists of the construction of a new two-lane major collector facility. The City Engineer's Estimate for this project is $2,455,000. Allowance Item Cost -$ 2,455,000 $ - $ - $ - Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 2,455,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-18 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): Arrington Rd. I Decatur Dr. Decatur Dr. to SH 40 MAJ2 2 Lane Major Collector 3,430 c Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Ac uisition: This project consists of the construction of a two- lane major collector facility. The City's actual contribution for this project was $4,249,358. Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: 4,249,358 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City"s design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-19 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): SH 40 Wellborn Rd. to SH 6 FR FRWY 15,540 c Actual City Contribution: Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Ac uisition: This project consists of the construction of SH 40. The City's actual contribution for this TxDOT project was $449,562.25 for ROW. Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: 449,562 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. C-20 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): Greens Prairie Rd. I Arrington Rd. Whites Creek to SH 40 MIN4 4 Lane Minor Arterial 1,820 c Item Description Actual City Contribution: Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Ac uisition: This project consists of the construction of a four- lane minor arterial facility (Greens Prairie Rd.) and a three lane major collector (Arrington Rd.). This project was a realignment and widening project as a result of the SH 40 construction. The City's actual contribution for this project was $1,736,498.36. Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: 1,736,498 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees Appendix A -Summary of Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections Roadway Improvements -s erv1ce A rea # Class Project A-1, D-1 MAJ4-0 Rock Prairie Rd. 11 l A-2, D-2 MAJ4 Rock Prairie Rd. (2) D-3 ~IN4 /COL Barron Rd. I Lakeway Dr. D-4 MIN4 Rock Prairie Rd. (4) D-5 COL4 Lakeway Dr. 11 l D-6 COL4 Pebble Creek Pkwy. (1) D-7 MAJ2 Pebble Creek Pkwy. (2) D-8 MIN2 Birkdale Dr. D-9 MIN2 Spearman Dr. D-10 MAJ4 William D. Fitch Intersection Im Jrovements 1-1 1-5 D Limits Status Proiect Cost SH 6 NBFR to Stonebrook Dr. To be widened $ 1814000 Stonebrook Dr. to 64' E. of Ritchey Rd. (Future Bird Pond AliQnment) To be widened $ 3,925,000 SH 6 to 1,850' N. of SH 40 New Roadwav $ 11 ,550,000 480' E. of Bradley Rd. to William D. Fitch To be widened $ 7,436 000 SH 6 (NBFRl to Future Barron Rd. New Roadwav $ 6,214,000 SH 6 INBFRl to William D. Fitch New Roadway $ 10,483,000 Royal Adelaide to Thousand Oaks Dr. New Roadway $ 5,776,000 Lakeway to St. Andrews Dr. New Roadwav $ 3,503,000 St. Andrews Dr. to William D. Fitch New Roadway $ 1,822,000 SH 6 to Rock Prairie Rd. Completed $ 7,796,500 Rock Prairie lnterchanae Uoarade $ 11 ,000 000 Barron & SH 6 lnterchanae Desian $ 737,716 TOTAL $ 72,057,216 "Total may be higher than presented in Table 4 (10-Year Roadway Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Cost Opinions) because the cost of some projects are shared between service areas. NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. A-1, D-1 Name: Rock Prairie Rd. (1) Limits: Impact Fee Class: SH 6 NBFR to Stonebrook Dr. MAJ4-0 This project consists of the widening of a two-lane divided facility into a four lane divided major arterial (Context: Suburban) Ultimate Class: 4 Lane Major Arterial 2,140 Length (If): Service Area(s): A,D 207 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 307 8" Concrete Pavement 407 4" To soil 507 5' Concrete Sidewalk 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Item Description Prep ROW ~ Traffic Control ~ Pavement Markings/Markers ~ Roadway Drainage Special Drainage Structures ~ Water ~ Sewer ~ Establish Turf I Erosion Control ~ Illumination Other: Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Notes Allowance 5% Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% 2% Standard Internal System 15% None Anticipated $0 Minor Adjustments 3% Minor Adjustments 5% 7% Standard llumination System 7% $0 .. Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowance Subtotal: Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOTAL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement Acquisition: Existing Alignment 10% Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: 60,640 53,501 523,116 17,004 101,650 755,911 Item Cost $ 37,796 $ 22,677 $ 15, 118 $ 113,387 $ $ 22,677 $ 37,796 $ 52,914 $ 52 ,914 $ $ 355,279 $ 1, 111, 190 $ 222,238 $ 1,334,000 Item Cost $ 1,334,000 $ 266,800 $ 80,040 $ 133,400 $ 1,814,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. A-2, D-2 Name: Rock Prairie Rd. (2) Limits: Impact Fee Class: Stonebrook Dr. to 64' E. of Ritchey Rd. (Future Bird Pond Alignment) MAJ4 This project consists of the reconstruction of a two-lane divided facility into a four lane divided major arterial (Context: Ultimate Class: 4 Lane Major Arterial 3,075 Length (If): Service Area(s): A,D 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 402 4" To soil 502 5' Concrete Sidewalk 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 '1 '1 Pavement Markings/Markers '1 Roadway Drainage Special Drainage Structures '1 Water '1 Sewer '1 Establish Turf I Erosion Control '1 Illumination Other: Suburban) Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Allowance 5% $ Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% $ 2% $ Standard Internal System 15% $ None Anticipated $0 $ Minor Adjustments 3% $ Minor Adjustments 5% $ 7% $ Standard llumination System 7% $ $0 $ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction Cost TOT AL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acquisition: Existing Alignment 10% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 113,778 1,11 2,496 42,198 146,063 91,143 1,635,518 Item Cost 81,776 49,066 32,710 245,328 49,066 81 ,776 114,486 114,486 768,694 2,404,212 480,842 2,886,000 Item Cost 2,886,000 577,200 173, 160 288,600 3,925,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. D-3 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): Barron Rd. I Lakeway Dr. SH 6 to 1,850' N. of SH 40 MIN4 / COL4 4 Lane Minor Arterial 6,900 D Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Construction: Engineering/Survey/Testing: Mobilization ROW/Easement Acauisition: This project consists of the construction of a new four-lane minor arterial for Barron Rd. and a new four-lane collector for Lakeway Dr. This is a 2008 Bond Election Project: Barron Road East I Lakeway Drive -$11,550,000 Allowance Item Cost -$ 11,550,000 Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 11,550,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. D-4 Name: Rock Prairie Rd. (4) Limits: Impact Fee Class: 480' E. of Bradley Rd. to William D. Fitch MIN4 This project consists of the reconstruction of a two-lane undivided facility into a four lane divided minor arterial (Context: Restricted) Ultimate Class: 4 Lane Minor Arterial 5,840 Length (If): Service Area(s): D 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 403 4" To soil 503 5' Concrete Sidewalk 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 Item Description Prep ROW -I Traffic Control -I Pavement Markings/Markers -I Roadway Drainage Special Drainage Structures -I Water -I Sewer -I Establish Turf I Erosion Control -I Illumination Other: Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Notes Allowance 5% Construction Phase Traffic Control 3% 2% Standard Internal System 15% None Anticipated $0 Minor Adjustments 3% Minor Adjustments 5% 7% Standard llumination System 7% $0 "Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowance Subtotal: Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOT AL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement AcQuisition : Existing Alignment 10% Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: 216,081 2,112,792 73,814 277,400 173,102 3,099,769 Item Cost $ 154,988 $ 92 ,993 $ 61 ,995 $ 464,965 $ $ 92 ,993 $ 154,988 $ 216,984 $ 21 6,984 $ $ 1,456,891 $ 4,556,660 $ 911 ,332 $ 5,468,000 Item Cost $ 5,468,000 $ 1,093,600 $ 328,080 $ 546,800 $ 7,436,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. 0-5 Name: Limits: Lakeway Dr. (1) SH 6 (NBFR) to Future Barron Rd . COL4 This project consists of the construction of a new four-lane divided major collector. Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): 4 Lane Major Collector 4,380 Service Area(s): D 6" Lime Stabi lization with Lime 8" Concrete Pavement 404 4" To soil 504 5' Concrete Sidewalk 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: Item Description Notes Allowance Prep ROW 5% Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% ..J Pavement Markings/Markers 2% ..J Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% ..J Special Drainage Structures Crosses Flood Plain $500,000 ..J Water Minor Adjustments 3% ..J Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% ..J Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% ..J Illumination Standard llumination System 7% Other: $0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowance Subtotal: Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOT AL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement Acquisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: 2,115,183 Item Cost $ 105,759 $ $ 42,304 $ 317,277 $ 500,000 $ 63,455 $ 105,759 $ 148,063 $ 148,063 $ $ 1,430,680 $ 3,545,863 $ 709,173 $ 4,256,000 Item Cost $ 4,256,000 $ 851,200 $ 255,360 $ 851 ,200 $ 6,214,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station . The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. D-6 Name: Limits: Impact Fee Class: Pebble Creek Pkwy. (1) SH 6 (NBFR) to William D. Fitch COL4 This project consists of the construction of a new major collector (Context: Subu~ban) Ultimate Class: Length (If): 4 Lane Major Collector 7,885 Service Area(s): D Item Description Unit Price Unclassified Street Excavation 31 ,979 $ 10.00 204 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 63,080 $ 4.50 304 8" Concrete Pavement 63,080 $ 44.00 404 4" To soil 16,647 $ 3.25 504 5' Concrete Sidewalk 78,850 $ 4.75 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s 0 s $ 41 .00 Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: rp s Allowance Prep ROW 5% Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% ..J Pavement Markings/Markers 2% ..J Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% ..J Special Drainage Structures Crosses Flood Plain $500,000 ..J Water Minor Adjustments 3% ..J Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% ..J Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% ..J Illumination Standard llumination System 7% Other: $0 .. Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: Paving and Allowance Subtotal: Construction Contingency: 20% Construction Cost TOTAL: Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: - Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% Mobilization 6% ROW/Easement Acauisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: Item Cost $ 319,790 $ 283,860 $ 2,775,520 $ 54, 103 $ 374,538 $ $ 3,807,810 Item Cost $ 190,391 $ $ 76,156 $ 571 , 172 $ 500,000 $ 114,234 $ 190,391 $ 266,547 $ 266,547 $ $ 2,175,438 $ 5,983,248 $ 1, 196,650 $ 7,180,000 Item Cost $ 7,180,000 $ 1,436,000 $ 430,800 $ 1,436,000 $ 10,483,000 NOTE: Th e planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. D-7 Name: Pebble Creek Pkwy. (2) This project consists of the construction of a new Limits: Royal Adelaide to Thousand Oaks Dr. two-lane major collector facility. (Context: Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: MAJ2 Restricted) 2 Lane Major Collector Length (If): 5,515 Service Area(s): D st 156,260 205 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 137,876 305 8" Concrete Pavement 1,348,116 405 4" To soil 37,840 505 5' Concrete Sidewalk 261 ,963 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 enin s Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: 1,942,054 Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Prep ROW 5% $ 97 ,103 Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% $ ..J Pavement Markings/Markers 2% $ 38,841 ..J Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% $ 291,308 ..J Special Drainage Structures Crosses Flood Plain $500,000 $ 500,000 ..J Water Minor Adjustments 3% $ 58,262 ..J Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% $ 97 ,103 ..J Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% $ 135,944 ..J Illumination Standard llumination System 7% $ 135,944 Other: $0 $ ••Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ 1,354,505 Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ 3,296,559 Construction Contingency: 20% $ 659,312 Construction Cost TOTAL: $ 3,956,000 Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Item Cost Construction: -$ 3,956,000 Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ 791 ,200 Mobilization 6% $ 237,360 ROW/Easement Acquisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% $ 791 ,200 Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ 5,776,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning ~evel cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. D-8 Name: Limits: Birkdale Dr. Lakeway to St. Andrews Dr. MIN2 This project consists of the construction of a new two-lane minor collector (Context: Restricted) Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): 2 Lane Minor Collector 2,955 Service Area(s): D $ 6" Lime Stabilization with Lime 4.50 $ 8" Concrete Pavement 44.00 $ 4" To soil 3.25 $ 5' Concrete Sidewalk 4.75 $ Turn Lanes and Median 0 Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ Item Description Notes Allowance Prep ROW 5% $ Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% $ -/ Pavement Markings/Markers 2% $ -/ Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% $ -/ Special Drainage Structures Crosses Flood Plain $500,000 $ -/ Water Minor Adjustments 3% $ -/ Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% $ -/ Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% $ -/ Illumination Standard llumination System 7% $ Other: $0 $ *'Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction Cost TOT AL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acquisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL: $ Item Cost 83,730 73,877 722,348 20,277 140,363 1,040,594 Item Cost 52,030 20,812 156,089 500,000 31,218 52,030 72,842 72,842 957,863 1,998,457 399,691 2,399,000 Item Cost 2,399,000 479,800 143,940 479,800 3,503,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Project No. D-9 Name: Limits: Spearman Dr. St. Andrews Dr. to William D. Fitch MIN2 This project consists of the construction of a new two-lane minor collector (Context: Restricted) Impact Fee Class: Ultimate Class: Length (If): 2 Lane Minor Collector 2,050 Service Area(s): D $ 4.50 $ 8" Concrete Pavement 44.00 $ 406 4" To soil 3.25 $ 506 5' Concrete Sidewalk 4.75 $ 601 Turn Lanes and Median 0 Paving Construction Cost Subtotal: $ Item Description Notes Allowance Prep ROW 5% $ Traffic Control None Anticipated 0% $ " Pavement Markings/Markers 2% $ " Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 15% $ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated $0 $ " Water Minor Adjustments 3% $ " Sewer Minor Adjustments 5% $ " Establish Turf I Erosion Control 7% $ " Illumination Standard llumination System 7% $ Other: $0 $ ''Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal: $ Paving and Allowance Subtotal: $ Construction Contingency: 20% $ Construction Cost TOT AL: $ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Allowance Construction: -$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: 20% $ Mobilization 6% $ ROW/Easement Acauisition: New Roadway Alignment 20% $ Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ Item Cost 58,090 51 ,251 501 ,116 14,066 97,375 721,898 Item Cost 36,095 14,438 108,285 21 ,657 36,095 50,533 50,533 317,636 1,039,534 207,907 1,248,000 Item Cost 1,248,000 249,600 74,880 249,600 1,822,000 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections City of College Station 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. updated: 5/13/2010 Project Information: Description: Pro1ect No. D-10 Name: William D. Fitch Limits: Impact Fee Class: SH 6 to Rock Prairie Rd. MAJ4 Ultimate Class: Length (If): Service Area(s): 6 Lane Major Arterial 9,350 D Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes: Actual Construction Cost: Construction Cost Estimate From City Engineering/Survey/Testing: ROW/Easement Acauisition: This project consists of the construction of a four- lane divided major arterial. The City's actual contribution to this project was $3,421,011 from SH 6 to Pebble Creek Pkwy. and $4,375,489 from Pebble Creek Pkwy. to Rock Prairie Rd. (Context: Suburban) Allowance Item Cost -$ 7,796,500 $ - $ - $ - Impact Fee Project Cost TOT AL: $ 7,796,500 NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City's design standards contained within the Unified Development Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas Appendix A -Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. Appendix B -CIP Service Units of Supply 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas May 2010 Service Area A Project ID ROADWAY # A-1, D-1 Rock Prairie Rd. (1) A-2, D-2 Rock Prairie Rd. (2) A-3 Dartmouth St. fH A-4 Dartmouth St. (2) A-5, B-1 Texas Ave. f1) A-6 Appomattox Dr. A-7 Pamela Ln. A-8 Minor Collector A A-9 Back Street B 1-1 1-2 SUBTOTAL 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study CIP Service Units of Supply PEAK % IN LIMITS LENGTH LANES IMPACT FEE HOUR SERVICE (Ml) CLASSIFICATION VOLUME AREA SH 6 NBFR to Stonebrook Or. 0.41 4 MAJ4-0 383 50% Stonebrook Or. to 64' E. of Ritchev Rd. <Future Bird Pond Alianment) 0.58 4 MAJ4 383 50% Krenek Tap Rd. lo Harvey Mitchell (FM 2818) 0.40 4 MIN4 223 100% Harvev Mitchell <FM 2818) to Texas Ave. 0.49 4 MIN4 0 100% Geome Bush Dr. to Harvev Mitchell Pkwv. 1.61 8 MAJ8 3,900 50% 450' S. of Raintree Dr. to 325' N. of North Forest Pkwv. 0.52 2 MIN2 0 100% SH 30 to FM 158 0.49 2 MIN2 0 100% Pamela Ln. to FM 60 0.47 2 MIN2 0 100% SH 6 to Sebesta 0.46 2 MAJ2 0 100°/a Rock Prairie Interchange Upgrade 25% Holleman Rd. & Texas Ave. lmorovement 50% 511&'2010 VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS TOTAL PROJECT CAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY TOTAL PROJECT COST IN SERVICE PK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HR COST AREA PER LN TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MI 650 533 79 454 $ 1,814,000 $ 907,000 650 754 111 643 $ 3,925,000 $ 1,962,500 625 1,000 89 911 $ 3,003,277 $ 3,003,277 625 1,225 0 1,225 $ 3,482,000 $ 3.462,000 750 4,073 3,530 543 $ 2,343,215 $ 1,171.608 425 442 0 442 $ 2,453,000 $ 2,453,000 425 417 0 417 $ 2,292,000 $ 2,292,000 425 400 0 400 $ 2,191,000 $ 2,191,000 425 406 0 408 $ 2.262,000 $ 2,262,000 $ 11,000,000 $ 2,750,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 750,000 9 251 3808 6 442 $ 36 265 492 $ 23 224 385 2009 a 2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area $ TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA A $ 21,750 23,246,135 Appendix B -CIP Units Of Supply Service Area B Project ID ROADWAY # A-5, B-1 Texas Ave. (1) B-2 Southwest Pkwy. (1) B-3 Holleman Dr. (1) B-4 Penberthy Rd. B-5 Jones Butler Rd. <H B-8 Wellborn Rd. (FM 2154) (1) B-7 Wellborn Rd. IFM 2154l 12l B-6,C-1 Rock Prairie Rd. (3) B-9 General Pkwv. 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 SUBTOTAL 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study CIP Service Units of Supply PEAK % IN LIMITS LENGTH LANES IMPACT FEE HOUR SERVICE (Ml) CLASSIFICATION VOLUME AREA Georae Bush Or. to Harvev Mitchell Pkwv. 1.61 6 MAJ6 3,900 50% Jones Buller Rd. to Wellborn Rd. 0.23 4 MIN4 0 100% Harvev Mitchell Pkwv. to Dowllno Rd. 0.47 4 COL4 0 100% Georoe Bush Or. to Luther St. 0.40 4 MIN4 0 100% Holleman Or. to Harvev Mitchell Pkwv. 0.53 4 MIN4 0 100°~ University Dr. to Harvey Mitchell Pkwv. 2.40 6 MAJ6 2,300 100% Harvev Mitchell Pkwv. to Rock Prairie Rd. 1.44 6 MAJB 2,400 100% Nonnand Or. to Texas Ave. 0.41 4 MIN4 1,359 50% Rock Prairie Rd. to Jones Butler Rd. 1.45 2 MtN2 0 100% Rock Prairie Interchange UPOrade 25% Holleman Rd. & Texas Ave. lmorovement 50% Wellborn Rd. !FM 2154l & Geo111e Bush Rd. 100% Deacon & Wellborn Rd. fFM 2154) at arade crossino 100°A:o 51'18/2010 YEH-Ml VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS TOTAL PROJECT CAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY TOTAL PROJECT COST IN SERVICE PK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HR COST AREA PER LN TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MI 750 4,073 3,530 543 s 2,343,215 $ 1,171,606 625 575 0 575 $ 3,346,000 $ 3,346,000 525 967 0 967 $ 1,507,901 $ 1,507,901 625 1,000 0 1,000 $ 2,651,069 $ 2851,069 625 1,325 0 1,325 $ 1,467,042 $ 1 467,042 750 10,600 5.520 5,260 $ 4,036,400 $ 4,036,400 750 6.460 3,456 3,024 $ 406,616 $ 406,616 625 513 279 234 $ 3,500,000 s 1,750,000 425 1,233 0 1,233 $ 6,793,000 $ 6,793,000 $ 11,000,000 $ 2.750,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 750,000 $ 4,100,000 $ 4,100,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1 000 000 26 985 12 784 14 200 s 43 853 443 $ 31 931 836 2009 - 2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area S TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA A $ 21 ,750 31 ,953,586 Appendix 8 -CIP Units of Supply Service Area C Project JD ROADWAY # B-8,C-1 Rock Prairie Rd. l3l C-2 Barron Rd. (1) C-3 Barron Rd. l2l C-4 Greens Prairie Tr1. {1} C-5 Greens Prairie Rd. (2) c.a Greens Prairie Rd. (3l C-7 Greens Prairie Rd. (4) C-6 Royder Rd. (1) C-9 Rovder Rd. CZl C-10 Wellborn Rd l3) C-11 Barron Cut-Off C-12 Barron Cut-Off Ex!. C-13 Alexandrta Ave. C-14 Arnold Rd. C-15 Normand Dr. C-18 Southern Plantation Or. C-17 Victoria Ave. C-16 Arrinolon Rd./ Decatur Or. C-19 SH 40 C-20 Greens Prairie Rd./ Arrinaton Rd. l-1 1-5 SUBTOTAL 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study GIP Service Units of Supply PEAK % IN LIMITS LENGTH LANES IMPACT FEE HOUR SERVICE (MQ CLASSIFICATION VOLUME AREA Normand Dr. to Texas Ave. 0.41 4 MIN4 1,359 50% Wellborn Rd. to William 0. Fitch Pkwv. 0.81 4 MIN4 458 100% SH40toSH6 1.65 4 MIN4 471 100% 2,380' W. of Royder Rd. to 1,025' E. of Woodlake Dr. 1.06 4 MIN4 160 100% 1,025' E. of Woodlake Dr. to 480' E. of Sweetwater Or. 0.63 4 MIN4 373 ·50% 480' E. of Sweetwater Or. to CasUeaate Dr. 0.81 4 MIN4 373 100% Castleaate O.r to Whites Creek Ln. 0.40 4 MIN4 608 100% 2,615' N. of Greens Prairie Rd. to Greens Prairie Rd. 0.50 4 MIN4 23 50% Greens Prairie Rd. to 950' S. of Greens Prairie Rd. 0.16 4 MIN4 23 100~4 Rock Prairie Rd. to SH 40 0.95 6 MAJ6 1,920 100% Barron Rd. lo Barron Cul-Off 0.18 4 COL4 40 100% Barron Cut-Off to Greens Prairie Rd. 1.14 4 COL4 0 100% Emerakf Dove lo Chesapeake Ln. 0.21 2 MIN2 0 100% Farah Dr. to Normand Dr. 0.29 2 MIN2 0 100% Rock Prairie Rd. lo Birminaham Rd. 0.29 2 MIN2 0 100% San Mar Dr. lo Victoria Ave. 0.20 2 MIN2 0 100% Southern Plantation Or. lo SH 40 0.41 2 MAJ2 0 100% Decatur Dr. to SH 40 0.65 2 MAJ2 113 100% Wellborn Rd. to SH 6 2.94 4 FR 789 100% Whiles Creek to SH 40 0.34 4 MIN4 322 100% Rock Prairie Interchange Upgrade 25% Barron & SH 6 lnterchanae Deslan 50% 5118/2010 VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS TOTAL PROJECT CAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY TOTAL PROJECT COST IN SERVICE PK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HR COST AREA PER LN TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MI 825 513 279 234 $ 3,500,000 $ 1,750,000 825 1,525 278 1,247 $ 4,081,000 $ 4,081,000 825 4,125 777 3,348 $ 8,811 ,479 $ 8,811,479 825 2,850 170 2,480 $ 7,120,000 $ 7,120,000 625 788 117 670 $ 4,202,000 $ 2,101,000 625 2,025 302 1,723 $ 5,477,000 $ 5,477,000 625 1,000 243 757 s 2,662,000 $ 2,662,000 625 625 6 619 $ 3,331,000 $ 1,665,500 825 450 4 446 $ 1,210,000 $ 1,210,000 750 4,275 1,824 2,451 $ 272,544 $ 272,544 525 378 7 371 $ 1,078,000 $ 1,078,000 525 2,394 0 2,394 $ 7,304,000 $ 7,304,000 425 179 0 179 $ 1,004,000 $ 1,004 000 425 247 0 247 $ 1,378,000 $ 1,378,000 425 247 0 247 $ 1,356,000 $ 1,356,000 425 170 0 170 $ 929,000 $ 929,000 425 349 0 349 $ 2,455,000 $ 2,455,000 425 553 73 479 $ 4,249,356 $ 4,249,358 600 9.408 2,320 7,088 $ 449,562 $ 449,562 625 650 109 741 $ 1,736,498 $ 1,736,498 $ 11,000,000 $ 2,750,000 $ 737,716 $ 368,858 32 748 6 510 26 237 $ 74 344 158 $ 60 208 800 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area $ TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA A S 21,750 60,230,550 Appendix B -CIP Units of Supply Service Area D Project ID ROADWAY # A-1, D-1 Rock Prairie Rd. (1) A-2, D-2 Rock Prairie Rd. (2) D-3 Barron Rd./ Lakewav Or. 0-4 Rock Prairie Rd. {4) 0-5 Lakewav Dr. (1) D-6 Pebble Creek Pkwv. (1) 0-7 Pebble Creek Pkwv. l2\ D-8 Birk.dale Dr. D-9 Soeerman Or. D-10 William 0. Fitch 1-1 1-5 SUBTOTAL 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study CIP Service Units of Supply PEAK %IN LIMITS LENGTH LANES IMPACT FEE HOUR SERVICE (Ml) CLASSIFICATION VOLUME AREA SH 6 NBFR to Stonebrook Dr. 0.41 4 MAJ4-0 363 50% Stonebrook Dr. to 64' E. of Rilchey Rd. (Future Bird Pond Alignment) 0.58 4 MAJ4 383 50% SH 6 to 1,850' N. of SH 40 1.31 4 MIN4 /COL4 0 100% 460' E. of Bradley Rd. to Willlam O. Fitch 1.11 4 MIN4 125 100% SH 6 lNBFR\ to Future Barron Rd. 0.83 4 COL4 0 100% SH 6 CNBFR) to William 0. Fitch 1.49 4 COL4 0 100% Raval Adelaide to Thousand Oaks Dr. 1.04 2 MAJ2 0 100% Lakeway to St. Andrews Dr. 0.56 2 MIN2 0 100% St. Andrews Dr. to William D. Fitch 0.39 2 MIN2 0 100% SH 6 to Rock Prairie Rd. 1.77 4 MAJ4 1,354 100% Rock Prairie lnterchanoe Uoorade 25% Barron & SH 6 lnterchanae Desian 50% SIHIJ2010 VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS TOTAL PROJECT CAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY TOTAL PROJECT COST IN SERVICE PK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HR COST AREA PER LN TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MI 650 533 79 454 $ 1,614,000 $ 907,000 650 754 111 643 $ 3,925,000 $ 1,962,500 525 2,751 0 2,751 $ 11,550,000 $ 11,550,000 625 2,775 139 2,636 $ 7,436,000 $ 7,436,000 525 1,743 0 1,743 $ 6,214,000 $ 6,214,000 525 3,129 0 3,129 $ 10,483,000 $ 10,483,000 425 684 0 864 $ 5,776,000 $ 5,776,000 425 476 0 476 $ 3,503,000 $ 3,503,000 425 332 0 332 $ 1,622,000 $ 1,822,000 650 4,602 2,397 2,205 $ 7,796,500 $ 7,796,500 $ 11,000,000 $ 2,750,000 $ 737,716 $ 366,858 17 979 2,725 15 254 $ 72057216 $ 60 568 858 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area $ TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA D S 21,750 60,590,608 Appendix B -CIP Units of Supply Kimley-Hom and Associa1es, Inc. Appendix C -Existing Facilities Inventory 2009-2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of Coll ege Station, Texas 0TY OF Cou.EGE STATION tlJ< Imm •fth< Rn<a.dJ v.~ May 2010 Service Area A ROADWAY FROM University Or. (FM 60) Texas Ave. (Bus 6) University Dr. (FM 60) Lincoln Ave. University Dr. (FM 60) SH 6 (SBFR) University Dr. (FM 60) 4SO ft East of SH 6 (NBFR) University Dr. (FM 60) Copperfield Dr. Harvey Rd. (SH30) Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Harvey Rd. (SH30) Dartmoulll St. Harvey Rd. (SH30) 390 ft East of Appomattox Dr. Harvey Rd. (SH30) Copperfield Dr. Harvey Mitchell (FM 2818) Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Harvey Mitchell (FM 2818) 2, 170 ft East ofTexas Ave. Rock Prairie Rd. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Rock Prairie Rd. Foxfire Dr. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) 200 ft North of Cooner St. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) University Dr. (FM 60) Texas Ave. (Bus 6) George Bush Dr. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Harvey Rd. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. Boonville Rd. University Dr. (FM 60) Lincoln Ave. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Lincoln Ave. University Dr. (FM 80) Tarrow St. University Dr. (FM 60) Walton Dr. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Dominik Dr. George Bush Dr. Dominik Dr. Munson Ave. Glenhaven Dr. Dominik Dr. Brazos wood Dr. Glenhaven Dr. University Oaks Blvd. George Bush Or. Switch Station Rd. SH 6 (NBFR) Brentwood Or. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Lassie Ln. Holleman Dr. Cornell Dr. Manuel Dr. North Forest Pkwy. SH 6 (NBFR) Emerald Pkwy. SH 6 (SBFR) Sebesla Rd. SH 6 (NBFR) TarrowSt. University Dr. (FM 60) TarrowSt. University Dr. (FM 60) TarrowSt. 140 ft South of Spring Loop George Bush Dr. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) George Bush Dr. Dominik Or. Dartmouth SI. Harvey Rd. Dartmouth SI. Holleman Dr. Dartmouth St. Southwest Pkwy. Dartmouth St. Krenek Tap Rd. Holleman Or. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Holleman Dr. George Bush Dr. Holleman Or. S20 ft South of Unnamed St. (A 4) Southwest Pkwy. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Copperfield Dr. University Dr. (FM 60) Copperfield Dr. Harvey Rd. IBird Pond Rd. I Unnamed St. (D 1) SUBTOTAL City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory PM %IN VEH-MI TO LENGTH LENGTH EXIST TYPE PEAK SERVICE CAPACITY (ft) (mi) LANES HOUR AREA PK-HR VOL PER LN NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB Lincoln Ave. 6020 1.14 3 3 6D 18SO 18SO 100% 7SO 7SO SH 6 (SBFR) 274S O.S2 3 3 6D 18SO 18SO 100% 7SO 7SO 4SO ft East of SH 6 (NBFR) 1,S7S 0.30 2 2 4D 740 740 100% 6SO 6SO Copperfield Dr. 4,860 0.92 1 1 2UH 740 740 100% 700 700 Boonville Rd. 3,890 0.74 1 1 2UH 660 660 100% 700 700 Dartmouth St. 3,690 0.70 2 2 SU 890 890 100% 600 600 390 ft East of Appomaltox Dr. S,17S 0.98 2 2 SU 920 920 100% 600 600 Copperfield Dr. 4,130 0.78 1 1 2UH 44S 44S 100% 700 700 Boonville Rd. 6,97S 1.32 1 1 2UH 37S 37S 100% 700 700 2, 170 ft Easl of Texas Ave. 1,9SS 0.37 2 2 SU 78S 78S 100% 600 600 SH 6 (SBFRl 1,890 0.36 2 2 SU 78S 78S 100% 600 600 Foxfire Dr. 2,390 0.4S 1 1 3D 27S 108 50% S2S S2S SOO ft West of Unnamed St. (D 3) 1,70S 0.32 1 1 2U 27S 108 SO% 42S 42S University Dr. (FM 60) 96S 0.18 2 2 SU 12SO 12SO SO% 600 600 George Bush Dr. 4,88S 0.93 3 3 6D 2100 2100 SO% 7SO 7SO Harvey Rd. 1,88S 0.36 3 3 6D 2400 2400 SO% 7SO 7SO Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. 7,67S 1.4S 3 3 6D 19SO 19SO SO% 7SO 7SO SH 6 S,070 0.96 2 2 SU 1200 1200 50% 600 600 Harvey Rd. 3,690 0.70 2 2 4D 660 660 SO% 6SO 6SO University Dr. (FM 60) S,980 1.13 1 1 2U 476 2S3 100% 42S 42S Tarrow St. 3,13S O.S9 1 1 3U 476 2S3 100% S2S S2S Lincoln Ave. 1,760 0.33 1 1 3U 263 263 100% S2S S2S Tarrow St. S20 0.10 1 1 2U 128 128 100% 42S 42S Munson Ave. 2,990 O.S7 1 1 2U 214 369 100% 42S 42S Glenhaven Or. 3,080 O.S8 1 1 2U 214 369 100% 42S 425 University Dr. (FM 60) 3,010 O.S7 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 42S SH 6 (SBFR) 90S 0.17 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 42S SH 6 (SBFR) 6,32S 1.20 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 42S 4SO ft West of Appomattox Dr. 69S 0.13 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 42S Dartmouth SI. 2,SSS 0.48 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 42S Sterling St. 710 0.13 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 42S Soulllwest Pkwy. 1,91 S 0.36 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 42S Unnamed St. (A 2) 3,S3S 0.67 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 42S 17S ft East of Emerald Plz. 1,34S 0.2S 2 2 4D 302 302 100% 6SO 6SO 620 ft East of Unnamed SI. (A 3) 1,240 0.23 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 42S 140 ft Soulh of Spring Loop 1,720 0.33 1 1 3U 603 803 100% S2S S2S 140 ft South of Spring Loop 1,21S 0.23 1 1 3U 803 803 100% S2S S2S 100 ft North of Autumn Cir. 88S 0.17 1 1 3U 803 803 100% S2S S2S Dominik Dr. 1,49S 0.28 2 2 4D 676 362 100% 6SO 6SO Harvey Rd. 1,48S 0.28 1 1 3U 676 362 100% S2S S2S Holleman Dr. 1,80S 0.34 2 2 SU 242 242 100% 600 600 Soulllwest Pkwy. 2,630 O.SO 2 2 4U 242 242 100% S2S S2S Krenek Tap Rd. 1,S70 0.30 2 2 SU 242 242 100% 600 600 Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. 2,11S 0.40 1 1 4D 34 189 100% 650 6SO George Bush Dr. 1,070 0.20 1 1 3U na na 100% S2S S2S S20 ft South of Unnamed St. (A 4) 3,720 0.70 1 1 3U na na 100% S2S S2S SH 6 (SBFR) 2,070 0.39 1 1 3U na na 100% S2S S2S SH 6 (SBFR) S,830 1.10 2 2 SU 910 910 100% 600 600 Harvey Rd. 3,210 0.61 2 2 4D 34 189 100% 6SO 6SO 560 ft South of Harvey Rd. SSS 0.11 1 1 2U 34 189 100% 42S 42S 11,,,u ft East of Unnamed SI. (A 1) 5,uou 0.96 1 1 2U 7S ,, OU 0 "<O "<O 142,560 28.66 VEH-MI SUPPLY PK-HR TOTAL NB/EB SB/WB 2,S6S 2,S6S 1,170 1,170 388 388 644 644 S16 S16 839 839 1,176 1,176 S48 '548 92S 92S 444 444 430 430 119 119 69 69 110 110 1,041 1,041 402 402 1,63S 1,63S S76 S76 454 4S4 481 481 312 312 17S 17S 42 42 241 241 248 248 242 242 73 73 S09 S09 S6 S6 206 206 S7 S7 154 1S4 28S 28S 331 331 100 100 171 171 121 121 88 88 368 368 148 148 410 410 S23 S23 3S7 3S7 260 260 106 106 370 370 206 206 1,32S 1,32S 790 790 4S 4S <VO <VO 46,749 na =Traffic counts not available; fac111ty not identified on Roadway Impact Fee CIP and not operating at or near capacity; therefore, the lack of traffic volumes on this fac1l1ty does not impact the calculations. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 5113J2010 VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING DEMAND CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR TOTAL VEH-MI VEH-MI NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB 2,109 2,109 4S6 456 962 962 208 208 221 221 167 167 681 681 -37 -37 37 37 486 486 29 29 622 622 217 217 902 902 274 274 --348 348 199 199 49S 49S 429 429 291 291 1S4 154 281 281 149 149 62 24 S7 94 44 17 24 S1 114 114 -S -S s s 971 971 69 69 428 428 -27 -27 27 27 1,417 1,417 218 218 S76 S76 o o 231 231 224 224 S39 287 -S8 19S S8 283 1SO 29 162 88 88 87 87 13 13 29 29 121 209 119 32 12S 21S 123 33 na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na 77 77 254 254 na na na na 262 262 -90 -90 90 90 18S 18S -64 -64 64 64 13S 13S -47 -47 47 47 191 102 177 266 190 102 -42 46 42 83 83 328 328 120 120 403 403 72 72 28S 28S 14 76 247 18S na na na na na na na na na na na na 1,00S 1,00S 320 320 21 11S 770 67S 4 20 41 2S 35 "" 000 15" 29 332 12,690 639 Appendix C -Existing Facilities Inventory Service Area B ROADWAY FROM IHaymona t:itotzer t-'kv.y Harvey M1tcne11 Pkwy Raymond Statzer Pky,y Discovery Or Raymond Stelzer Pkwy Wellborn Rd Raymond Statzer Pkwy College Ave Texas Ave. (Bus 6) 200 fl North of Cooner SI. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Universitv Dr. CFM 60) Texas Ave. (Bus 6\ Georoe Bush Dr. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Harvey Rd. Texas Ave. (Bus 6) Harvey Mitchell Pkwv. Georae Bush Dr Harvey Mitchell Pkwy George Bush Dr Penberthy George Bush Dr Wellborn Rd George Bush Or Fairview Ave George Bush Dr Rosemary Ln Harvey Mitchell Pkwv Wellborn Rd Harvev Mitchell Pkwv Welsh Ave Harvey Mitchell Pkwy Rio Grande Blvd Harvey Mitchell Pkwv Longmire Dr Rock Prairie Rd Wellborn Rd Rock Prairie Rd Victoria Dr Rock Prairie Rd Rio Grande Blvd Rock Prairie Rd Longmire Dr Wellborn Rd 160 ft South of Natalie St Wellborn Rd University Dr Wellborn Rd George Bush Dr Wellborn Rd Harvey Mitchell Pkwy Turkey Creek Rd Raymond Slolzer Pkwy Turkey Creek Rd 715 ft North of Unnamed St (B 3) F & B Rd Turkey Creek Rd F & B Rd Harvey Mitchell Pkwy College Main SI 90 ft North of Spruce SI Luther SI Harvey Mitchell Pkwy Dov.ling Rd 385 ft West of Beeler Ln Holleman Dr Harvey Mitchell Pkwy Holleman Dr Jones-Buller Rd Jones Butler Rd Graham Rd Jones Butler Rd 1,185 fl North of Gandy Rd Jones Butler Rd 2,050 ft North of Cain Rd Jones Butler Rd Saddle Ln Marion Pugh Dr Holleman Dr Marion Puah Dr Luther SI Fairview Ave George Bush Dr Welsh Ave Holleman Dr Welsh Ave Southwest Pkwy Welsh Ave Harvey Mitchell Pkwy Welsh Ave Deacon Dr Timber St George Bush Dr Park Pl Timber St Glade St Park Pl Southwood Dr Southwest Pkwy Rio Grande Blvd Harvey Mitchell Pkwy Brothers Blvd Texas Ave Lonomire Dr Harvey Mitchell Pkwy Longmire Dr Alr1ine Dr Lonamire Dr Ponderosa Dr Lonamire Dr Pinon Dr 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory PM %IN VEH-MI TO LENGTH LENGTH EXIST TYPE PEAK SERVICE CAPACITY (ft) (mi) LANES HOUR AREA PK-HR VOL PER LN NB/EB SBIWB NB/EB SBIWB NB/EB SBIWB I u1scovery ur 2, u U.02 2 2 OU lUUU ouuu 1uu o ouu DUU Wellborn Rd 4,140 0.7B 2 2 4D 1250 1250 100% 650 650 College Ave 3,520 0.67 3 3 6D 2100 2100 100% 750 750 Texas Ave (Bus 6) 2,625 0.50 3 3 6D 1950 1950 100% 750 750 University Dr. (FM 60) 965 0.1B 2 2 5U 1250 1250 50% 600 600 Georae Bush Dr. 4,BB5 0.93 3 3 6D 2100 2100 50% 750 750 Harvev Rd. 1,BB5 0.36 3 3 6D 2400 2400 50% 750 750 Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. 7,675 1.45 3 3 6D 1950 1950 50% 750 750 SH"6 5 070 0.96 2 2 5U 1200 1200 50% 600 600 Penberthy 3,965 0.75 2 2 4D 960 960 100% 650 650 Wellborn Rd 2,610 0.49 2 2 4D 960 960 100% 650 650 Fairview Ave 1,110 0.21 2 2 4D 1350 1350 100% 650 650 Rosemary Ln 5,330 1.01 2 2 5U 1450 1450 100% 600 600 Texas Ave (Bus 6) 655 0.12 2 2 4D 1450 1450 100% 650 650 Welsh Ave 3,630 0.69 2 2 5U 1100 1100 100% 600 600 Rio Grande Blvd 2,300 0.44 2 2 5U 1100 1100 100% 600 600· Longmire Dr 2,785 0.53 2 2 5U 1100 1100 100% 600 600 Texas Ave (Bus 6) 1,215 0.23 2 2 5U 1100 1100 100% 600 600 Victoria Dr 2,3BO 0.45 2 2 40 712 751 50% 650 650 Rio Grande Blvd 2,9BO 0.56 2 2 5U 717 75B 50% 600 600 Longmire Dr 3,425 0.65 2 2 5U 84B 511 50% 600 600 Texas Ave (Bus 6) 870 0.16 2 2 5U B4B 511 50% 600 600 University Dr 1,925 0.36 2 2 4U 2B05 2B05 100% 525 525 George Bush Dr 5,025 0.95 2 2 5U 1150 1150 100% 600 600 Harvey Mitchell Pkwy 7,675 1.45 2 2 5U 1150 1150 100% 600 600 Rock Prairie Rd 7,605 1.44 1 1 3UH 1200 1200 100% 700 700 715 ft North of Unnamed St (B 3) 5,460 1.03 1 1 2U 34 34 100% 425 425 Harvey Mitchell Pkwy 1,565 0.30 1 1 2U-R 34 34 100% 150 150 Harvey Mitchell Pkwy 2,415 0.46 1 1 2U-R 11 11 100% 150 150 Finfeather Rd 6,B70 1.30 1 1 3U 11 11 100% 525 525 University Dr 1,940 0.37 1 1 2U 64B 64B 100% 425 425 Marion Pugh 5,010 0.95 1 1 2U 514 514 100% 425 425 240 ft Wes! of Quail Run 2,295 0.43 1 1 2U 208 20B 50% 425 425 Jones-Butler Rd 2,340 0.44 1 1 2U 41 3 413 100% 425 425 Wellborn Rd 1,700 0.32 1 1 3U 674 674 100% 525 525 1,1B5 ft North of Gandy Rd 2,B25 0.54 1 1 2U 249 249 50% 425 425 2,050 ft North of Cain Rd 4,535 O.B6 1 1 2U 249 249 100% 425 425 Saddle Ln 1,B60 0.35 1 1 2U 249 249 50% 425 425 Dov.ling Rd 710 0.13 1 1 2U 249 249 100% 425 425 Luther SI 1,365 0.26 1 1 3U 252 252 100% 525 525 George Bush Dr 2,300 0.44 1 1 3U 765 765 100% 525 525 Holleman Dr 3,545 0.67 1 1 2U 120 120 100% 425 425 Southwest Pkwy 2,40B 0.46 1 1 3U 463 463 100% 525 525 Harvey Mitchell Pkwy 3,000 0.57 1 1 3U 463 463 100% 525 525 Deacon Dr 3,655 0.69 1 1 3U 727 727 100% 525 525 Rock Prairie Rd 2,895 0.55 1 1 3U 451 451 100% 525 525 Park Pl 1,595 0.30 1 1 2U 207 207 100% 425 425 Glade SI 350 0.07 1 1 2U na na 100% 425 425 Southwest Pkwy 5,220 0.99 1 1 2U 260 260 100% 425 425 Harvey Mitchell Pkvvy 2,955 0.56 1 1 2U 351 351 100% 425 425 Rock Prairie Rd 6,360 1.20 1 1 3U 409 409 100% 525 525 Ponderosa Dr 5,845 1.11 1 1 2U 118 148 100% 425 425 Ainine Dr 1,020 0.19 1 1 3U 988 9BB 100% 525 525 Ponderosa Dr 4,BBO 0.92 1 1 3U 794 794 100% 525 525 Rinon Dr 465 0.09 1 1 3U 700 700 100% 525 525 260 ft North of Rock Prairie Rd 1,090 0.21 1 1 2U 700 700 100% 425 425 5113/2010 VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING SUPPLY DEMAND CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES PK-l-iR PK-l-iR PK-l-iR PK-l-iR TOTAL TOTAL VEH-MI VEH-MI NB/EB SBIWB NB/EB SBIWB NB/EB SBIWB NB/EB SBIWB DOU DOU 525 525 105 105 1,019 1,019 9BO 9BO 39 39 1,500 1,500 1,400 1,400 100 100 1,119 1,119 969 969 149 149 110 110 114 114 -5 -5 5 5 1,041 1,041 971 971 69 69 402 402 42B 42B -27 -27 27 27 1,635 1,635 1,417 1,417 21B 21B 576 576 576 576 0 0 976 976 721 721 255 255 643 643 475 475 16B 168 273 273 2B4 2B4 -11 -11 11 11 1,211 1,211 1,464 1,464 -252 -252 252 252 161 161 1BO 1BO -19 -19 19 19 B25 B25 756 756 69 69 523 523 479 479 44 44 633 633 5BO 5BO 53 53 276 276 253 253 23 23 293 293 160 169 133 124 339 339 202 214 136 125 3B9 3B9 275 166 114 223 99 99 70 42 29 57 3B3 383 1,023 1,023 -840 -840 640 640 1, 142 1, 142 1,094 1,094 4B 48 1,744 1,744 1,672 1,672 73 73 1,00B 1,00B 1,72B 1,728 -720 -720 720 720 439 439 35 35 404 404 44 44 10 10 34 34 69 69 5 5 63 63 683 6B3 15 15 ----66B 66B 156 156 23B 23B -B2 -82 B2 B2 403 403 4B7 4B7 -B4 -84 B4 B4 92 92 45 45 47 47 1B8 18B 1B3 1B3 5 5 169 169 217 217 -48 -48 4B 4B 114 114 67 67 47 47 365 365 214 214 151 151 75 75 44 44 31 31 57 57 33 33 24 24 136 136 65 65 71 71 229 229 333 333 -105 -105 105 105 285 2B5 B1 B1 205 205 239 239 211 211 2B 2B 29B 298 283 263 35 35 363 363 503 503 -140 -140 140 140 2BB 2BB 247 247 40 40 12B 12B 63 63 66 66 2B 28 na na na na 420 420 257 257 163 163 23B 23B 196 196 41 41 632 632 493 493 139 139 470 470 131 164 340 307 101 101 191 191 -B9 -89 B9 89 4B5 4B5 734 734 -249 -249 249 249 46 46 62 62 -15 -15 15 15 8B BB 145 145 -57 -57 57 57 Appendix C -Existing Facilities Inventory Service Area B ROADWAY FROM Lonamire Dr 260 fl North of Rock Prairie Rd Deacon Or Wellborn Rd Anderson St George Bush Dr Brentvwt>od Anderson St Jones Butler Rd Luther St Holleman Dr Wellborn Rd Holleman Or Oney Hervey Or Holleman Or Unnamed St (8 1) Southwest Pkwv Wellborn Rd Southwest Pkwy 415 ft East of Andersoon St SheflNOod Dr 22S fl East of Robin Dr Gandv Rd 55 n East or unnameo '" 10 <1 SUBTOTAL City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory PM %IN VEH-MI TO LENGTH LENGTH EXIST TYPE PEAK SERVICE CAPACITY (ft) (mi) LANES HOUR AREA PK-HR VOL PER LN Rock Prairie Rd 260 0.05 1 1 3U 700 700 100% 525 525 Texas Ave (Bus 6) 9,985 1.89 1 1 3U 130 130 100% 525 525 Southwest Pk"WY 6,395 1.21 1 1 3U 76 76 100% 525 525 Texas Ave (Bus 6) 1,340 0.25 1 1 2U na na 100% 425 425 1,290 ft North of Harvey Mitchell Pkw 2,665 0.50 2 2 4U 166 166 100% 52S 525 Oney Hervey Dr 1,080 0.20 2 2 4U 484 S68 100% S2S 525 Unnamed St (8 1) 6,92S 1.31 1 1 3U 484 S68 100% S2S 525 Texas Ave {Bus 6) 660 0.13 2 2 SU S38 620 100% 600 600 41S ft East of Andersoon St 8,61S 1.63 2 2 SU 1070 1070 100% 600 600 Texas Ave {Bus 6) 70S 0.13 2 2 40 935 93S 100% 650 6SO Marion Jones Butler Rd 3,96S 0.75 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 425 1vve11oorn t'(C J,JJO U.OJ l l <U na na """ "" .,, 220,653 42.31 -na -Traffic counts not available, fac1hty not 1dent1fied on Roadway Impact Fee CIP and not operating at or near capacity, therefore, the lack of traffic volumes on this fac1hty does not impact the calculallons. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 5113/2010 VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING SUPPLY DEMAND CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR TOTAL TOTAL VEH-MI VEH-MI 26 26 34 34 -9 -9 9 9 993 993 246 246 747 747 636 636 92 92 544 544 108 108 na na na na S30 530 84 84 446 446 21S 21S 99 116 116 99 689 689 63S 74S S4 -S6 56 150 150 67 78 83 73 1,958 1,958 1,746 1,746 211 211 174 174 12S 12S 49 49 319 319 na na na na 1J4 1J4 na na na na 64,426 55,045 8,202 5,158 Appendix C -Existing Facilities Inventory Service Area C ROADWAY FROM Rock Prairie Rd Wellborn Rd Rock Prairie Rd Vienna Dr Rock Prairie Rd Rio Grande Blvd Rock Prairie Rd Longmire Dr Gandv Rd 55 ft East of Unnamed St (B 2l Wellborn Rd Rock Prairie Rd Wellborn Rd 6SO ft North of Norton Wellborn Rd 60 ft South of Capstone Dr Graham Rd City Limits Graham Rd Wellborn Rd Graham Rd Vienna Dr Graham Rd Longmire Dr McCullough Rd Gus Roy Rd Victoria Ave Rock Prairie Rd Victoria Ave Graham Rd Victoria Ave Barron Rd SH40 Wellborn Rd Barron Cut Off Rd Barron Rd Royder Rd 2,090 ft North of Greens Prairie Rd Longmire Dr Rock Prairie Rd Longmire Dr Graham Rd Longmire Dr Eagle Ave Decatur Dr Barron Rd Decatur Or Spring Garden Dr Decatur Dr Greens Prairie Rd Arrington Rd SH 40West Arrington Rd Oaks Dr. Barron Rd Wellborn Rd Barron Rd SH 40West Barron Rd 200 ft West of Decatur Dr Greens Prairie Rd Royder Rd Greens Prairie Rd 1,02S ft East of Woodlake Dr Greens Prairie Rd 4BO ft East of Sweetwater Dr Greens Prairie Rd Castlegate Dr Greens Prairie Rd VVhites Creek Edelweiss Ave Rock Prairie Rd Mortier Or Wellborn Rd Arnold Rd Schaffer Dr Schaffer Dr Arnold Rd Birminaham Rd Birmingham Rd Eaale Ave Wiiiiam D Fitch Pkwv Newoort Ln Eaale Ave Alexandria Chesapeake Ct Southern Plantation Dr 425' South of Newport St Oxburah Dr Decatur Dr Victoria Ave BSO' South of Caslleoate Dr Castlegate Dr Victoria Ave SUBTOTAL City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory PM %IN VEH-MI TO LENGTH LENGTH EXIST TYPE PEAK SERVICE CAPACITY (ft) (mi) LANES HOUR AREA PK-HR VOL PER LN NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB Vienna Dr 2,3BO 0.45 2 2 4D 712 751 50% 650 650 Rio Grande Blvd 2,9BO 0.56 2 2 SU 717 7SB 50% 600 600 Longmire Dr 3,42S 0.65 2 2 SU 84B 511 50% 600 600 Texas Ave lBus 6) B70 0.16 2 2 SU B4B S11 SO% 600 600 Wellborn Rd 3,33S O.B3 1 1 2U na na 50% 425 42S 650 ft North of Norton Ln 6,6BS 1.27 1 1 3UH 960 960 100% 700 700 Capstone Dr 1,B2S 0.35 1 1 2UH 71S 71S 100% 700 700 700 ft South of Barron Rd 99S 0.19 ~ 1 2UH 71S 71S 100% 700 700 Old Wellborn Rd 2,120 0.40 1 1 3U 497 497 100% S2S S2S Vienna Dr 2,420 0.46 1 1 3U 497 497 100% S2S S2S Longmire Dr S,3BO 1.02 1 1 3U 364 440 100% S25 S2S SH 6 (SBFR) 97S 0.1B 1 1 3U B9 341 100% S2S S2S Unnamed St (C 2) 2,100 0.40 1 1 2U na na SO% 42S 42S Graham Rd 3,60S 0.6B 1 1 3U 233 233 100% S2S S2S Barron Rd 4,210 O.BO 1 1 3U 241 241 100% S25 525 765 ft South of Barron Rd 765 0.14 2 2 4U 241 241 100% S2S 52S Greens Prairie Rd 1S,540 2.94 2 2 FR 319 470 100% BOO BOO 930 ft South of Barron Rd 930 0.1B 1 1 2U-R 20 20 100% 1SO 1SO 890 ft South of Greens Prairie Tri 3,S70 0.6B 1 1 2U 11 12 SO% 425 425 Graham Rd 1,960 0.37 1 1 3U 3S6 6B2 100% 525 S25 Eagle Ave 3,000 O.S7 1 1 3U 19S 337 100% S2S S25 Barron Rd 1,315 0.2S 1 1 3U 241 241 100% 52S 52S Spring Garden Dr 3,550 0.67 1 1 2U 163 10B 100% 42S 42S Greens Prairie Rd 4,37S 0.83 1 1 2D 69 6B 100% 52S S2S Arrington Rd 2,750 O.S2 1 1 3U S1 62 100% 525 525 Oaks Dr. 2,730 O.S2 1 1 3U 294 2B 100% S25 525 1,B9S' W. lnidan Lakes Dr. 1,895 0.36 1 1 2U 294 2B 50% 42S 42S SH-40West 3,230 0.61 1 1 2U 197 259 100% 425 425 200 ft West of Decatur Dr 6,SOO 1.23 1 1 2U 207 264 100% 42S 42S SH 6 (SBFR) 2,125 0.40 1 1 2U 207 264 100% 425 425 1,02S ft East of Woodlake Dr 3,220 0.61 1 1 2U 55 105 100% 425 42S 480 ft East of Sweetwater Dr 3,300 0.63 1 1 2U 127 246 SO% 425 42S Castlegate Dr 4,300 0.81 1 1 2U 127 246 100% 425 42S VVhites Creek 2,090 0.40 1 1 3U 194 414 100% S2S S25 Arrinaton Rd 1,260 0.24 1 1 4U 194 414 100% 525 S2S Mortier Or 2,940 0.56 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 42S Victoria Ave 2,555 0.46 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 425 100' North of Farah Dr 765 0.14 1 1 2U na na 100% 425 425 Graham Rd 2,015 0.38 1 1 2U na na 100% 425 42S SH 6 rSBFRl 2,305 0.44 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 425 SH 6 (SBFR) 9,115 1.73 1 1 2U na ~ 100% 425 42S Barron Rd 2,1BS 0.41 1 1 2U na na 100% 425 42S Decatur Dr 5,910 1.12 1 1 2U na na 100% 425 425 SH 6 !SBFRl S,060 0.96 1 1 2U na na 100% 425 425 SH 6 (SBFR) 1,44S 0.27 1 1 2U na na 100% 425 425 William O Fitch Pkwv 3,12S O.S9 1 1 2U na na 100% 42S 42S Greens Prairie Rd 4,515 O.B6 1 1 2U 76 177 100% 425 425 153 645 29.10 VEH-MI SUPPLY PK-HR TOTAL NB/EB SB/WB 293 293 339 339 3B9 3B9 99 99 134 134 BB6 BB6 242 242 132 132 211 211 241 241 S3S 53S 97 97 BS BS 3SB 3SB 419 419 152 152 4,709 4,709 26 26 144 144 195 19S 29B 29B 131 131 28B 286 43S 43S 273 273 271 271 76 76 260 260 S23 S23 171 171 2S9 2S9 133 133 346 346 208 20B 12S 12S 237 237 206 206 62 62 162 162 186 1B6 734 734 17B 176 476 476 407 407 116 116 2S2 2S2 363 363 33,714 •na =Traffic counts not available; facrhty not 1dent1fied on Roadway Impact Fee CIP and not operatmg at or near capacity; therefore, the lack of traffic volumes on this fac1l1ty does not impact the calculations. 2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 511312010 VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING DEMAND CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR TOTAL VEH-MI VEH-MI NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB 160 169 133 124 202 214 136 125 27S 166 114 223 70 42 29 57 na na na na 1,215 1,215 -329 -329 329 329 247 247 -S -S 5 s 13S 135 -3 -3 '~ -3- 200 200 11 11 22B 22B 13 13 371 44B 164 B7 16 63 B1 34 na na na na 159 159 200 200 192 192 226 226 35 35 117 117 939 1,3B3 3,770 3,326 4 4 23 23 4 4 140 140 132 2S3 63 -SB SB 111 191 1BB 107 60 60 71 71 110 73 17B 213 S7 56 378 379 27 32 247 241 152 14 119 257 S3 s 24 71 121 1SB 139 102 2SS 32S 26B 198 83 106 8B 65 34 64 226 195 40 77 93 56 103 200 243 146 77 164 131 44 46 99 79 26 na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na ~ na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na ne na na na 65 151 298 212 12,911 14,341 733 Appendix C -Existing Facilities Inventory Service Area D ROADWAY FROM Rock Prairie Rd Texas Ave (Bus 6) Rock Prairie Rd Foxfire Dr William D. Fitch SH 6 CNBFRl William D. Fitch Unnamed St (D 4) William D. Fitch Pebble Creek Pkwv William D. Fitch 660 ft East of Rock Prairie Rd William D. Fitch Tonkaway Lake SH 30 100 ft North of Unnamed St ID 51 Rock Prairie Rd Bird Pond Rd. Rock Prairie Rd Bradley Rd Rock Prairie Rd NS Major Collector D Lakeway Dr Greens Prairie Rd Venture Or SH 6 (NBFR) Pebble Creek Pkwy Greens Prairie Rd Pebble Creek Pkwv Firestone Bird Pond Rd 1,80 ft North of Rock Prairie Rd Bird Pond Rd Unnamed St ID 1) SUBTOTAL City of College Station -2009 -2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory PM °le IN VEH-MI TO LENGTH LENGTH EXIST TYPE PEAK SERVICE CAPACITY (fl) (mi) LANES HOUR AREA PK-HR VOL PER LN NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB Foxfire Dr 2,390 0.45 1 1 3D 275 108 50% 525 525 Bird Pond Rd. 3,075 0.58 1 1 2U 275 108 50% 425 425 Unnamed St (D 4) 2,670 0.51 2 2 4D 656 698 100% 650 650 Pebble Creek Pkwy 2,425 0.46 2 2 4D 656 698 100% 650 650 680 ft East of Rock Prairie Rd 4,775 0.90 2 2 4D 179 179 100% 650 650 Tonkawav Lake 9,395 1.78 1 1 2U 179 179 100% 425 425 SH 30 9,710 1.84 1 1 2U 179 179 100% 425 425 610 ft South of Greens Prairie Rd 1,615 0.31 1 1 2UH 345 345 50% 700 700 Bradley Rd 3,885 0.74 1 1 2U 44 81 100% 425 425 NS Major Collector D 16,425 3.11 1 1 2U 44 81 100% 425 425 Citv Limits 2,050 0.39 1 1 2U 44 81 100% 425 425 785 ft South of Technoloov Wav 5,675 1.07 1 1 3U na na 100% 525 525 Lakeway Dr 1,020 0.19 1 1 3U na na 100% 525 525 Firestone 2,960 0.56 1 1 3U 146 146 100% 525 525 AdeladeRoval Adelade Dr 2,175 0.41 2 2 4D 146 146 100% 650 . 650 Unnamed St (D 1) 1,040 0.20 1 1 2U 75 75 100% 425 425 1,550 ft East of Unnamed St (A 1) 5,090 0.96 1 1 2U 75 75 50% 425 425 76 375 14.46 VEH-MI SUPPLY PK-HR TOTAL NB/EB SB/WB 119 119 124 124 657 657 597 597 1,176 1,176 756 756 782 782 107 107 313 313 1,322 1,322 165 165 564 564 101 101 294 294 536 536 84 84 205 205 15,803 •na =Traffic counts not available; facility not 1dent1fied on Roadway Impact Fee CIP and not operating at or near capacity, therefore, the lack of traffic volumes on this facility does not impact the calculations. 2009 • 2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study City of College Station, Texas 5113/2010 VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING DEMAND CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR TOTAL VEH-MI VEH-MI NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB 62 24 57 94 80 31 44 92 332 353 326 304 301 321 296 276 162 162 1,014 1,014 319 319 438 436 329 329 452 452 53 53 54 ---s4 --- 32 60 280 253 137 252 1,185 1,070 17 31 148 134 na na na na na na na na 82 82 212 212 60 60 475 475 15 15 69 69 36 36 169 169 4145 10 326 0 Appendix C -Existing Facilities Inventory Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plan 2035 ~A -'e~~~!ent #or°;ransportatlon A Look at Past, Present and Future Trends As the Texas Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plan 2035 begins to take shape, we would like to share some interesting facts, insights, and findings. From activities that have been completed, ongoing analysis, and preliminary public input, some interesting trends and some significant challenges will face the citizens of Texas over the next 25 years. The Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plan 2035 Team has been analyzing trends in population, vehicle miles traveled, trucking, rail, public transportation, bicycle/pedestrian, ports, aviation, and freight. Forecasts were also prepared for these systems through the year 2035. GROWTH Over the past 25 years, Texas has experienced substantial growth in population. Forecasts show that Texas will continue to have similar growth in the future. The increase in vehicles miles travelled (VMT) has and will continue to outpace the growth in population. This can be attributed to a number of factors, such as economic growth, longer commutes and higher volumes of through traffic. Currently planned additions to lane mileage will not keep up with the expected growth in VMT over the next 25 years. VMT, Population, and Lane Miles """' ..... 1609! ..... ·-IOO!I .... -""' '°" ... ... , .... .... 1000 200S lOOI 2010 2015 2020 202S lOJO lOlS •VMT •Popl.btlon lilaMMMs USDOT, Tx001; US Census Bureau & Texas State Doto Center FUNDING Texas faces three transportation financial challenges: • First, the demand for transportation spending continues to expand rapidly as -The economy grows -The population expands -The current transportation infrastructure continues to age and needs replacement or reconstruction. ape the Future of Texas July 2010 • Second, the current level of funds available to TxDOT has dropped significantly over the last three years, in part due to the economic slowdown. • Third, the rate of growth in future resources will be slower than in recent years as -Fuel economy improves and people begin to use electric vehicles which reduces revenue from current taxes on motor fuel, and -The rate of growth in VMT slows (although VMT overall will expand). This means that the financial gap between what is needed to improve current conditions and available funds will grow significantly-billions of dollars-over the next 25 years. TOUGH CHOICES AHEAD What options exist to help meet these demands? Texas can make progress along four fronts-each of which calls for some tough choices by the people of Texas: Come to the next meeting and discuss these tough choices. It's a great chance to comment on the Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plan 2035 and get your ideas heard. • Do more w ith less: Use technology for more efficient use of infrastructure and get greater return on investment by being more selective in which projects go forward. • Change demand: Recognize that the transportation system will be used differently in the future than it has been in the past. People in urban areas are likely to telecommute more, shift the hours of travel away from peak hours, and shift from autos to public transportation, cycling, and walking. Freight movement is likely to shift from truck to rail. • Accept a lower level of performance: Expect more congestion, longer traffic delays, rougher pavements, waiting longer for improvements, etc. • Find additional sources of revenues: Explore a full range of options, including potential increases in current registration fees, taxes on motor fuel, local option taxes, user fees, and other options. An efficient and reliable transportation system has historically produced a strong Texas economy. As the population grows and transportation needs increase, transportation infrastructure will play a vital role in maintaining economic strength. Successfully planning for future growth and addressing these tough choices will position Texas to remain an economic leader well into the 21st century. What we heard from YOU Twenty-seven meetings were held around the state between May 4th and May 24th as part of the first round of public outreach for the Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plan 2035. A questionnaire was administered to help gain insight and information about the transportation system. • How you commute to work/school (mode) • Other means of travel in Texas • Rating of the transportation problems in Texas • Potential solutions for improving Texas roads and improving public transportation • Potential solutions for improving travel between Texas cities The 228 questionnaires received to date from the public meetings were analyzed and graphical summaries are provided on the website at http://www. txdot.gov/public_involvement/transportation_plan/. Not surprisingly, the vast majority of individuals who responded commute to either work or school via personal vehicle at seventy·eight percent (78%) but surprisingly, twelve percent (12%) utilized multiple modes of travel as shown below. How do you commute to work/school? '" •Driven By Another Person In A Personill Vehicle •Publ!cTr1nsit •Multiple Modes, Other •Do not Commute, No Response In response to the question "How do you rate the following as Texas transportation problems?" the questionnaires indicated that more than 50% of the responders rated all of the problems identified below as "Critical" and/or "Very Important .... Texas transportation problems """ ""' ,,,._ "' Howcloyou111tethefollowincur..u1tr1ru.porutionproblem1? Troft;c'-Htion ~ l.-diol~-i;,.. i..did lrwtil .... ~..,. en.mtilinil ,,.......,..,._ ~ • YttV imporUnt •Nol:important ----............. Get involved and stay connected: • Attend an open-house style public meeting • V1Sit our website at http://www.bldot.1ov/ public_in110lvement/trlnsportation_11lan/ • EmaU us at TPP _TxTranPlan@dot.state.tx.us •Write to: Pegy Thurin, P.E., Project Manager Statewide Transportation Plan 2035 4544 Post Oak Place, #224 Houston, Texas, 77027 • call us toll-free at 1-888-S-lX-PlAN (1-888-589-7526) • Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube Attend the location most convenient for you. Come and go anytime between the hours of 4:00 -7:00 pm. August 5 August 12 August 3 Augu~2 August 5 August 11 August 13 ~ust3 August 5 Aug~ Aujust 5 August 3 Augu.!!_5 August 10 August 4 Brownwood Bryan Childress Corpus C~isti Dallas El Paso El Paso Ft Worth Houston Laredo Lubbock Lufkin Odessa Paris Pharr San Angelo San Antonio ~ Waco __Y!._aC'!.__ Wichita Falls Yoakum ... Amari Mo Open-House Style Public Meetin2 Locations • . Childress . LeveUand Open-House Style Public Meeting • • Abilene for the Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plan 2035 El Paso . . W Ode66a • Brownwood Please join us to help shape the future of Texas: • • SanAngelo . • Help 1uide where and how transportation dollars should be spent Marfa Austin • • View exhibits and watch informational videos San An~nio • Ask questions • Provide written comments • Si1n-up for the newsletter mailin1 list •Laredo Mary Bein Kil~e, 325-67§:6806 Paul Braun, 806·356·3256 Deanne Simmons, 903·799-1308 Ed Collins, 512·832·7041 Phillip Lujan, 409·898-5740 Sandra Parker, 325-646·2591 (ex. 413) Bob Ap~on, 979-778·2165 Barbara Seal, 940·937-7288 P~ Sa~ Evans~~1·808~222 Nasser Askari, 214·320·6628 Eduardo Calvo, 915-790--4322 Eduardo Calvo, 915·7904322 Bill Riley, 817-370-6532 Rakesh Tripathi, 713·802·5301 Alberto Ramirez, 956-712-7446 Dianah Ascencio, 806·748-4472 Kathi White, 936·6334395 Matt Carr, 432-498--4761 Rick Macke , 903-737-9300 ex. 375) Amy Rodrig_uez, 956·702-6100 (ex. 102) John DeWitt, 325·947·9265 laura Lopez, 210-615·5839 Glenn Green~220/9135 Ed Kabobel, 254-867-2700 x731) Ed Kabo_bel, 2_!;4:867-2700Jx731) Adele lewis, 940·720-7728 Paul Frerich, 361·2934347 Pharr . TxDOT, Abilene Area Office Con~~ce Room, 1350 N. Arnold Blvd., ~bilene, TX, 79603 TxDOT, Amarillo District Office, HR Conference Center, 5715 Canyon Or, Amarillo, TX, 79110 TxDOT, Atlanta District Office, 701 E. Main St., Atlanta, TX, 75551 TxOOT, Austin District Office, Bldg 7, 7901 North IH 35, Austin, TX, 78753 TxDOT, Beaumont District Office, 8350 Eastex Fwy, Beaumont, TX, 77708 TxDOT, Brownwood District Office, Large Meeting Room, 2495 Highway 183 North, Brownwood, TX, 76802 Brazos Center, 3232 Briarcrest Dr, Bryan, TX, 77802 Tx001_Shildress District Office Training Room, 7599 US 28], Childress, TX, 79201 T~DOT, Coi:e_us Chris.!!_ District Office, Bui~in~ Training_R~m, !?01 South Pa~re Island Dr, Corpus Christi, TX, 78416 DeSoto City Hall, 211 East Pleasant Run Road, DeSoto, TX, 75115 El Paso Times, Community Room, 300 N. Campbell St, El Paso, TX, 79901 Marfa City Hall, Casner Room, 113 S. Highland (corner of US 67/90), Marfa, TX, 79843 TxDOT, Fort Worth District Regional Training Center, 2501 SW Loop 820, Fort Worth, TX, 76133 TxDOT, Houston District, Auditorium, 7600 Washington Ave, Houston, TX, 77007 TxDOT, Laredo District Office, Meeting Room, 1817 Bob Bullock Loop, Laredo, TX, 78043 Levelland High School, Commons Area, 1400 Hickory, Levelland, TX, 79336 TxDOT, Lufkin District Office Regional Conference Room, 1805 N. Timberland Dr, Lufkin, TX, 75901 TxDOT, Odessa District Office, large Conference Room, 3901 E. Hwy 80, Odessa, TX, 79761 Sam Rayburn Student Center, Texas A&M University-Commerce, 2200 West Neal St, Commerce, TX, 75428 TxDOT, Pharr District Conference Center, 600 W. US Expressway 83, Pharr, TX, 78577 TxOOT, San Angelo District Office, Training Room, 4502 Knickerbocker Rd, San Angelo, TX, 76904 VIA Metro Center Board Room, 1021 San Pedro Ave, San Antonio, TX, 78212 Rose Garden Center, 420 Rose Park Or, Tyler, TX, 75702 Central Texas Council of Governments, 2180 North Main Street, Belton, TX, 76513 Waco Transit Administration Building, 301South8th Street, Waco, TX, 76701 -r TxDOT Training Center, 1601 South;;est Parkway, Wicl:;~a Falli Tx, 76302 - TxDOT, Yoakum District Office, Training Room, 403 Huck Street, Yoakum, TX, 77995 Persons who haw speci.I communkation or KCOmmodlltion needs m.., all the District Contact listed above. Requests shoutd be rMde no later than three d.ys prior to the meetfnc. Ewry reuonab• effort wil be mMie to accommoct. .. spKlll needs. Open House-Style Public Meeting#l May 2010 Analyze Future Conditions & Develop Recommendations PUBLIC COMMENTS WELCOME Thoroughfares 10 Yr Reduced List $106M lntersecUon Improvements Project Limit Example Breakouts of Cost 10 Yr Ca ital List $106M (Publically Directed) Totals: Dev $96M City $72M Other $SM 10 Yr Dev List $70M (Privately Directed)