The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11/04/2021 - Agenda Packet - Impact Fee Advisory Committee (2)College Station, TX Meeting AgendaImpact Fee Advisory Committee 1101 Texas Ave, College Station, TX 77840Internet: https://zoom.us/j/81669307095*Phone: 888 475 4499 and Meeting ID: 816 6930 7095 The City Council may or may not attend the Planning & Zoning Commission Regular Meeting. November 4, 2021 6:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers College Station, TX Page 1 This meeting will offer both in-person and remote participation following both the City’s Guidelines for in-person, virtual attendance, and the speaker protocol in the agenda. The city uses a third-party vendor to help host the meeting and if the call-in number is not functioning access will be through the internet link only. 1.Call to Order and Consider Absence Request. 2.Hear Visitors. At this time, the Chairperson will open the floor to visitors wishing to address the Committee on issues not already scheduled on tonight's agenda. An individual who wishes to address the Committee regarding any item on the agenda shall register with the Committee Secretary prior to 4 p.m. on the day of the meeting. To register, the individual must provide a name and phone number by calling 979.764.3751 or emailing khejny@cstx.gov prior to 4 p.m. To submit written comments to the Committee, email khejny@cstx.gov and they will be distributed to the Committee. The visitor presentations will be limited to three minutes in order to accommodate everyone who wishes to address the Committee and to allow adequate time for completion of the agenda items. The Committee will receive the information, ask city staff to look into the matter, or will place the matter on a future agenda for discussion. (A recording is made of the meeting; please give your name and address for the record.) 3.Consent Agenda All matters listed under the Consent Agenda, are considered routine by the Committee and will be enacted by one motion. These items include preliminary plans and final plats, where staff has found compliance with all minimum subdivision regulations. All items approved by Consent are approved with any and all staff recommendations. Since there will not be separate discussion of these items, citizens wishing to address the Committee regarding one or more items on the Consent Agenda may address the Committee at this time as well. If any Committee Member desires to discuss an item on the Consent Agenda it may be moved to the Regular Agenda for further consideration. 3.1.Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes. Attachments:1.September 2 2021 IFAC 4.Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent Agenda by Committee action. 5.Regular Agenda Page 1 of 231 Impact Fee Advisory Committee Page 2 November 4, 2021 5.1.Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a Semi-Annual Report on System-Wide Impact Fees for Water, Wastewater, and Roadway. (Note: Final action on this item is scheduled for the November 22, 2021 City Council meeting - subject to change.) Sponsors:Carol Cotter Attachments:1.Impact Fee Semi-Annual Report 2.Future Land Use Map 3.Service Area Maps - Water, Wastewater and Roadway 4.Impact Fee CIP - Water, Wastewater and Roadway 5.2.Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an amendment to land use assumptions, capital improvement plans, and max impact fees for system-wide water, wastewater, and roadway and impact fee study updates. Case #ORDA2021-000006 (Note: Final action on this item is scheduled for the November 22, 2021 City Council meeting - subject to change.) Sponsors: Jason Schubert Attachments: 1. Memo - Impact Fee Study Updates 2.Roadway Impact Fee Study Update 3.Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update 5.3.Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding impact fee collection rates for system-wide water, wastewater and roadway impact fees. (Note: Final action on this item will be considered at the November 22, 2021 City Council meeting - subject to change.) Sponsors:Jason Schubert Attachments:1.Cover Sheet - Impact Fee Collection Rate 2.Roadway Service Areas Map3.2016 Collection Rates 6.Discussion and possible action on future agenda items. An Impact Fee Advisory Committee Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. 7.Adjourn. The Impact Fee Advisory Committee may adjourn into Executive Session to consider any item listed on the agenda if a matter is raised that is appropriate for Executive Session discussion. I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted on the website and at College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas, on November 1, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. City Secretary This building is wheelchair accessible. Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who may need accommodations, auxiliary aids, or services such as interpreters, readers, or large print are asked to contact the City Secretary’s Office at (979) 764-3541, TDD at 1-800-735-2989, or email adaassistance@cstx.gov at least two business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. If the City does not receive notification Page 2 of 231 Impact Fee Advisory Committee Page 3 November 4, 2021 at least two business days prior to the meeting, the City will make a reasonable attempt to provide the necessary accommodations. Penal Code § 30.07. Trespass by License Holder with an Openly Carried Handgun."Pursuant to Section 30.07, Penal Code (Trespass by License Holder with an Openly Carried Handgun) A Person Licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (Handgun Licensing Law), may not enter this Property with a Handgun that is Carried Openly." Codigo Penal § 30.07. Traspasar Portando Armas de Mano al Aire Libre con Licencia.“Conforme a la Seccion 30.07 del codigo penal (traspasar portando armas de mano al aire libre con licencia), personas con licencia bajo del Sub-Capitulo H, Capitulo 411, Codigo de Gobierno (Ley de licencias de arma de mano), no deben entrar a esta propiedad portando arma de mano al aire libre.” Page 3 of 231 September 2, 2021 IFAC Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 5 MINUTES IMPACT FEE ADVISORY COMMITTEE September 2, 2021 6:00 p.m. Phone: *888 475 4499 and Webinar ID: 893 4114 7689 Internet: https://zoom.us/s/89341147689 IFAC MEMBERS PRESENT: Dennis Christiansen, Jeremy Osborne, Joe Guerra, Bobby Mirza, William Wright, Richard Woodward, and Jim Jones COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Bill Mather, Jason Cornelius, and James Murr COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Elizabeth Cunha, Bob Brick, and Dennis Maloney CITY STAFF PRESENT: Michael Ostrowski, Molly Hitchcock, Carol Cotter, Erika Bridges, Jason Schubert, Anthony Armstrong, Parker Mathews, Alyssa Halle-Schramm, Amy Milanes, Amy Albright, Carla Robinson, Stephen Maldonado Jr., and Kristen Hejny 1. Call Meeting to Order, Consider Absence Request. Chairman Christiansen called the meeting to order at 6:10 p.m. 2.Hear Visitors No visitors spoke. 3.Consent Agenda 3.1 Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes. •August 5, 2021 IFAC Commissioner Guerra motioned to approve the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Osborne seconded the motion, motion passed (7-0). 4. Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent Agendaby Commission Action. No items were removed from the Consent Agenda. 5.Regular Agenda 5.1 Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding draft land use assumptions, capital improvement plans, and roadway costing template for the upcoming 5-year study updates of roadway, water, and wastewater impact fees. Transportation Planning Coordinator Schubert presented the items to the Commission. Jeff Whitacre, Kimley Horn, presented the Draft Impact Fee 5-year updates and process to the Committee. Page 4 of 231 September 2, 2021 IFAC Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 5 Chairman Christiansen stated that charts look as though impact fees are entirely revenue to the City of College Station. Mr. Christiansen suggested impact fee revenue should be compared to City cost. Mr. Whitacre clarified that what the Commission sees is a total Capital Improvement Project (CIP) number. Mr. Whitacre also stated that there is a total CIP cost and then a portion of the CIP cost is allocated to existing needs which would be paid for by 100% City dollars. The meeting recessed at 6:25 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 6:33 p.m. Committee Member Guerra referenced discussion on Thoroughfare Plan, stating that General Suburban land use that is a combination of two zoning districts, Restricted Suburban and General Suburban. Mr. Guerra asked if staff is using the highest and best use or average use for land use and water and wastewater. Mr. Whitacre stated that staff used an average between the two land uses for this projection. Mr. Whitacre also stated that a high/low was used for water and wastewater. Committee Member Guerra asked why staff is not using the highest and best use. Mr. Whitacre stated that this would over-project the demand. Highest and best use intensity is not seen when developing and staff felt it was more appropriate to use the average. Committee Member Guerra asked about the highest and best use versus average for Urban Mixed Use land use. Mr. Whitacre stated that staff analyzes the assumption for density of residential and what portion of that development would be nonresidential and assumed a split between office and retail for roadway. Chairman Christiansen asked for the major factors for predicting a lower level of growth over the next ten years. Mr. Whitacre stated that there are two reasons, there has been a lot of multi-family development over the last ten years, and there is less land available for development then there was ten years ago. Richard Weatherly, Freese Nichols, presented the Impact Fee CIP for water and wastewater. Committee Member Guerra asked about recovering all cost, but by state law we can only recover 50%. Is this accurate? Mr. Weatherly stated there are two options on setting the maximum allowable impact fee that you can charge, the city can do a flat 50% credit, or the city can look at how much of the capital improvements are covered by water and sewer rates. Mr. Weatherly also stated that we can capture all costs over ten years minus what is already paid for via rates. Page 5 of 231 September 2, 2021 IFAC Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 5 Mr. Whitacre further explained that we can recover 100% of the cost of roadway that is eligible for growth minus the taxes paid. Committee Member Guerra referenced staff’s level of service map stating that Longmire Drive and Rock Prairie Road went from green to red as an unacceptable level of service. Mr. Guerra asked in those conditions how staff moves forward. Mr. Whitacre stated that the city is not allowed to remedy any existing deficiencies with impact fees. Mr. Whitacre further explained that the city would have to count existing traffic and can only recover a small portion of the overall project. Committee Member Woodward asked regarding the Harvey Road piece still in the plan, to explain why that is necessitated by and attributable to new development. Mr. Whitacre stated that it is a roadway that does bring people to developments along the corridor. Mr. Whitacre further stated that the road was widened because of growth to take place and growth that has already occurred. Committee Member Guerra asked about the removal of TXDOT road University Drive west of Wellborn Road, and why it was removed. Mr. Whitacre confirmed that the roadway was removed because there is not a project programmed for that area or projected in the next ten years. Committee Member Guerra asked about fee recovery and where funds come from since development has not happened and will not happen in the future. Mr. Whitacre stated that it would go into a mix of that bucket and will go toward total CIP and calculate out how much is today and portions of growth as growth happens the portion of payable growth will get smaller. Chairman Christiansen asked regarding University Drive between Wellborn Road and Texas Avenue and the funds spent on medians, sidewalks, and traffic signals, are any of these impact fee eligible. Mr. Whitacre stated if it increases capacity and the city is still paying money on the project, it is a potential project that can be considered. Chairman Christiansen stated that TXDOT currently has a contract for University Drive between Wellborn Road and Texas Avenue for bicycle pedestrian movement, will this be added to the process. Mr. Whitacre stated that state law looks at vehicle capacity, it could be an eligible project, but the way the law is written it is focused on vehicle capacity. Mr. Whitacre further stated that standalone sidewalk would not be recoverable. Committee Member Guerra stated that William D. Fitch Parkway has been labeled as an unacceptable level of service and asked how to recoup cost of city’s percentage. Page 6 of 231 September 2, 2021 IFAC Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 5 Mr. Whitacre stated that to recover money roadways must be identified in the Thoroughfare Plan. Committee Member Woodward stated that projects had been removed because a developer had already put them in and stated that these should be creditable and asked why these projects were removed and no longer creditable. Mr. Whitacre stated that they are receiving credit for the roads they have built, the project was removed because the City was not physically paying dollars on it. Chairman Christiansen presented comments from Committee Member Murr. Mr. Whitacre stated that College Station’s methodology is not an experiment, the methodology is transparent. Mr. Whitacre stated that they are open to looking into scenarios and their production, a simple formula and addressed additional comments from Committee Member Murr. Chairman Christiansen asked at what point and format does the Committee see what came of comments heard. Mr. Whitacre stated that the current recommendation is looking at removing two projects from water and wastewater only and only including Oversize Participation (OP), other than that the maps will remain the same, costing and calculation would change, minor changes to maps, information will still be presented to the Committee at the October meeting. Committee Member Woodward asked why developers would take projects in which they have invested out of CIP list, they would not get credits. Mr. Whitacre stated that they must have adequate facilities in the current credit policy that if it is deemed to be necessary for the site, they may not receive credit for the initial roads built any way. Mr. Whitacre further clarified that since they are not receiving credit for those adequate facilities they must have, they want taken off the larger number. Committee Member Woodward asked that Mr. Whitacre address denominator question proposed by Committee Member Murr in terms of growth projections. Mr. Whitacre stated that they have highlighted where growth is expected but are open to suggestions from the Committee. Chairman Christiansen stated that it would be helpful to have a better understanding. Committee Member Osborne requested clarification that costing methodology used for College Station that has been used in 40 additional cities. Mr. Whitacre clarified that the study methodology has been used in other cities but the costing methodology is very specific to College Station. Page 7 of 231 September 2, 2021 IFAC Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 5 Committee Member Guerra shared comments regarding cost estimate, stating that they are comparable to city of Houston. Committee Member Guerra asked if the cost estimate of a four-lane roadway is so much, a two-land roadway should be the cost cut in half. Mr. Whitacre stated that the cost estimate would not simply be cut in half because of the width of the roads, thickness of pavement and other factors. Committee Member Guerra commented on inflation stating that it has almost doubled in eight years. Chairman Christiansen opened the public hearing. Hunter Goodwin, 1011 Lyceum Court, College Station, spoke with concerns with the process. Mr. Goodwin would like to exclude certain roads in their entirety from inclusion in the CIP, exclude certain impact fee eligible road costs from inclusion CIP asking specifically for the actual cost of any impact fee eligible roads, and would like to remove certain impact fee eligible road projects that do not occur within areas of the city where insufficient required infrastructure exists. Veronica Morgan, Mitchell & Morgan Engineers, College Station, addressed points stating that staff needs to look at capital improvements and temper them with where we will put wastewater facilities, and will the facilities be built in time such that the roadway facility would be needed in a ten-year window. Ms. Morgan also stated that with developer constructed roadways they do not want facilities on the map that are larger than required. Ms. Morgan further stated that the growth rate and land use assumption being used for this work are based on the Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Christiansen closed the public hearing. Committee Member Guerra stated that the Committee has heard questions from developers and questions from the Committee and agrees with developers stating that if water and wastewater are not being extended development is not going to happen, so there is no reason for roadways. Mr. Guerra also stated that if the Throughfare Plan is not in the CIP and the developer builds it, they don’t get credit, but if they want credit the thoroughfare needs to be on the CIP list. 6.Adjourn The IFAC meeting adjourned at 7:58 p.m. Approved: Attest: ______________________________ ________________________________ Dennis Christiansen, Chairman Kristen Hejny, Admin Support Specialist Planning & Zoning Commission Planning & Development Services Page 8 of 231 MEMORANDUM DATE: November 4, 2021 TO: Impact Fee Advisory Committee FROM: Carol Cotter, P.E., City Engineer SUBJECT: Semi-Annual Report - System-Wide Impact Fees for Water, Wastewater, and Roadway The City of College Station adopted “System-Wide” Impact Fees for water, wastewater, and roadways in the latter part of 2016. Fee implementation occurred in phases, with full fees having occurred in December of 2018. The service area for roadway impact fees is bounded by the city limits; however, service areas for system-wide water and wastewater impact fees do not strictly follow city limit lines and include some areas of the City’s extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETJ). In accordance with Texas Local Government Code, the 5-year update is in progress and expected to be completed at the end of this month. Staff recommends that the Advisory Committee accept this report and forward to City Council for their update. The City of College Station Code of Ordinances Chapter 107, Impact Fees, designates the Planning and Zoning Commission as the Impact Fee Advisory Committee (IFAC) with the inclusion of an ETJ representative for service areas extending into the ETJ. Additional ad hoc members were recently appointed for the update process. The IFAC is established to: 1.Advise and assist the City in adopting Land Use Assumptions. 2.Review the Capital Improvements Plan and file written comments. 3.Monitor and evaluate implementation of the Capital Improvements Plan. 4.File semi-annual reports with respect to the progress of the Capital Improvements Plan. 5.Advise the City Council of the need to update or revise the Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, and Impact Fees. System-Wide Impact Fees System-wide impact fees for water and wastewater were adopted September 22, 2016, with roadway impact fees following on November 10, 2016. The adopted collection rates are lower than the maximum allowable fees calculated as presented in the table below. Water and wastewater fees were phased in, starting at 50% of the collection rate the first year, but are now being charged at the full collection rate. Roadway impact fees were phased in, beginning with zero fee collection in year one and 50% in year two. Full implementation of the fees occurred in December 2018. Page 9 of 231 Page 2 of 3 Land Use Assumptions and the related Capital Improvements Plans are currently under review with the 5-Year Updates. Resultant amendments will be incorporated in future semi-annual reports. Status of the various programs are presented in the following tables: Impact Fee Collection Rates and Implementation Progress System-Wide Impact Fee 2016 Adopted Max Rate 2016 Collection Rate Total Capital Costs 10-Year Max Recoverable Costs Total Fees Collected Developer Constructed (Estimated) City Constructed Total Constructed Water $2,917 $500 $48,956,302 $34,140,850 $1,516,030 $120,000 $29,647,839 $29,767,839 Wastewater $5,519 $3,000 $153,668,395 $72,285,486 $7,228,100 $690,000 $71,404,880 $72,094,880 Roadway A $1,061 $375/$80 $16,718,225 $15,101,941 $351,250 $510,000 $145,950 $655,950 Roadway B $1,072 $375/$80 $34,640,692 $15,667,860 $1,079,402 $0 $14,428,911 $14,428,911 Roadway C $2,556 $375/$80 $71,201,297 $48,665,106 $929,397 $77,667 $24,979,462 $25,057,129 Roadway D $4,004 $375/$80 $166,367,625 $54,579,323 $348,091 $6,330,000 $10,910,760 $17,240,760 Roadway Totals $288,927,839 $134,014,230 $2,708,140 $6,917,667 $50,465,083 $57,382,750 Impact fee revenues collected since the 2016 adoption of system-wide impact fees are provided below including the amounts collected for the six (6) month reporting period from April 1, 2021, through September 30, 2021. Impact Fees Collected System-Wide Impact Fee FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 Total Collected 6 Month Reporting Period Water $45,075 $339,325 $335,400 $381,880 $414,350 $1,516,030 $272,450 Wastewater $155,475 $1,606,025 $1,575,150 $1,666,800 $2,224,650 $7,228,100 $1,368,150 Roadway A $0 $40,893 $81,193 $123,327 $105,837 $351,250 $42,715 Roadway B $0 $32,671 $80,625 $427,118 $538,988 $1,079,402 $426,231 Roadway C $0 $156,540 $391,243 $186,979 $194,634 $929,396 $116,362 Roadway D $0 $33,000 $150,526 $79,161 $85,404 $348,091 $43,995 Roadway Totals $0 $263,104 $703,587 $816,585 $924,863 $2,708,139 $629,303 The impact fee revenues were utilized to aid in funding a number of the impact fee capital improvement projects. Impact fees may only be spent on eligible projects identified in the respective impact fee capital improvement plans and are then further restricted to the specific zones for roadway impact fees. The projects that received impact fee funding are listed as follows. Page 10 of 231 Page 3 of 3 Impact Fee Utilization Water Impact Fee Projects: • Well #9 • Well #9 Collection Loop • SH6 Water Line Projects (Phases I, II, III, and IIIA) Wastewater Impact Fee Projects: • Lick Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion • Lick Creek Parallel Trunk Line • Carter’s Creek Diversion Lift Station and Force Main • Northeast Sewer Trunk Line (Phases I and II) Roadway Impact Fee Projects: • Zone A - Rock Prairie Road from Medical Avenue to Bird Pond (Project A-5/D-1) • Zone B - Rock Prairie Road from Holleman Drive to Wellborn Road (Project B-3/C-2) • Zone C - Capstone/Barron Realignment (Project C-6) • Zone D - Rock Prairie Road from Medical Avenue to Bird Pond (Project A-5/D-1) • Impact Fee Study (all Zones) Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Impact Fee Advisory Committee accept this report and forward to City Council for their update. Attachments: 1. Future Land Use Map 2. Service Area Maps - Water, Wastewater, and Roadway 3. Capital Improvements Plans excerpted from 2016 Studies – Water, Wastewater, and Roadway Page 11 of 231 Texas A & M UniversityTexas A & M UniversityEAST BYPFM 2154 RDFM 50 RDE 29TH S T ROCK PRAIRIE RDCOUNTY RD-190 JONES RDRIVER RDWILLIAM D FITCH PKWYI AND GN R DCOUNTY RD-175FM-60BIRD POND RDWELS H AV EUNIVERSITY DR ECOLE LNH O P E S C R E E K R DBOONEVILLERDKOPPE BRIDGE RDPEACHCREEKRDHARVEY RDCAVITT A VE BARRON RDROYDER RDKEMP R D W VILLA MARIA RDARRINGTON RDTONKAWAY LAKE RDN DOWLING RDROESE RDTEXAS AVE SDEACON DRE A R L R U D D E R F W Y S BARAK LNHARDY WEEDON RDGRAHAM RDF AND B RDN GRAHAM RDBECK STCOUNTY RD-269B ROADMOORDRS D O W LINGRDN EA R L R U D D E R F W YNUNN JONES RDW 28TH STDOMINIK DRWEEDON LOOPJOHN RICE DRCARTER CREEK PKWY FM159RDFRANCIS DRGREENS PRAIRIE RD WN HARVEY MITCHELL PKWYLONGMIREDRNAVASOTARDGFINFEATHE R R D QUAIL RUNHOLLEMAN DRSTRAUBRDCHICK LNPIPELINE RDOAK DRBRIARCRESTDRGLADE STVICTORIA AVEE 25TH STLEONARD RDE WM J BRYAN PKWYSEBESTA RDELMO WEEDON RDE 23RD STGANDY RDHICKS LNBRADLEY RDLINDA LNANDERSONSTCAIN RDDUSTYRDS MAIN ST FISHTANKRDCOUNTY RD 174 LOST TRLSOUTHWEST PKWYWOODLAKEDRFROSTDR PALASOTADRWELL B ORN R DNAGLE STBAWMKERRDOLDEN LNE VILLA MARIA RDE 27TH STGROESBECK STW 24TH STLEANINGOAKSLNCAPSTONE DRLINCOLN AVEDEER RUNIN DIANLAKESDRLUTHER ST WARHOPULOSR D WHITE CREEK RDLAK E W AYDR W 26TH STE 30TH STHOLLEMANDREPARK PLW BY P A S SPATE RDSULPHURSPRINGSRDTIMBERLINEDRE 26TH STWAYSIDEDRDEWRDOLSEN BLVD GEORGEBUSHDRMUNSON AVEALACIA C T GEORGE BUSH DR WHARVEYMITCHELLPKWYSTODDTRLSCOLLEG EAVEFM 158 RDPEACH CREEK CUT OFFBATTSFERRYRDOLDJONESRDBO XL E Y B N D LACY WELL RDCOUNTY R D 172 4T H S T S T O U S L A N D R D OLD TI RDDEBBIE LN OLD WELLBORN RDFRIERSONRDRIO GRANDE BLVDUNIVERSITY DRFOUNTA IN A V E TU R K E Y C R EEK R D DEER PARK DRG O LDENTR L N O R W O O DLNBITTLE LNFMRO AD2818RDENCHANTEDOAKSDR S ENNIS STPAINTTRLGREENSPRAIRIETRLCOUNTY RD-173 HARPERSFERRYRDT ARROW STROSES RDKRENEK TAP RDFOSTER RDCHEROKEE DR STRADITIONSD RTEE DRD O G W O ODTRLFAVORRDBENTWOODDRFM-2818SUZANNE PL N AN T UCKET DR AUSTINAVENAVARRODRVISTA LNWALTONDRBAKER AVEFM 2818 R D W CHARLOTTE LNSOUTHWEST PKWY ERAYMONDSTOTZERPKWYLANGFORDSTALEXANDRIA AVECOKE ST D A R T M O U T H S T SMITHLNN FOREST PKWYFM-1179CAMELOT DRSOUTHWOOD DRPRIVATE ROAD 4007LIGHTSEY LNPLEA SANTHILLRDPRATT RDWILDHORSERUNW 23RD STBOYETT STABBATERDLONG DRE 31ST STBROTH E RS B L V D ROYALADELADEDRNROSEMARYDRWOODCREEKDRLUZA ST6THH U N T E R S C R E EK R D AGRON O M Y RDWAYFARERLNUNIVERSITY OAKS BLVDLEE AVEDECATUR DRKATHYFLEMINGRDW CARSON ST1ST ST OLDBARKERRANCHRDFOSTERAVEPURYE A R D RPRAIRIE DR S OAKS DRFAIRVIEW AVE WALNUT RDHICKORY RDHAINES DRGOLDEN MISTHARRIS DRSPEARMANDRPIPER LNEAGLE AVEMANUEL DRS U N CRESTSTG R E ENVALLEYDRW E S TW OODMAINDRASHBURN AVESWEE T W ATERDRGREATO A KS D R HENSELDRE22NDSTCLLRANCHERO RDFAIRWAYDRKENT STS SIMS AVEOAKHILLDRURSULINE AVESA IN T A ND R EWSDRLAZY LNLEHRLNWMILNERDRCASTLEGATEDRCANTERBURYDRDYESS RDAPPOM A TTOX DR CAJUN RIDGE RDCHRISTINE LNPEBBLEC R EEK PKW Y EDELWEISSAVERAINTREE DRBALL CIRTANGL EWOODD RWOODCRESTDR HIGGS DRWADE RDS BRYAN AVELUTHER STLYNN DRPIERRE P L W 27TH STCHURCHAVELABRISADRTATUM STOLDCOLLEGERDSPRINGLOOPARBOR DRBLUE RIDGE DRCALUMET TRLB IZZELLSTHOLLEMANDRWSHILOHDRTURK RANCH RDMIRAMONTCIRFAULKNERDRGUSR OYRDELM AVEWINDING CRKBRIAR OAKS DRRODEMEL RANCH RDCENTRALPARKLNF RE M A NSCHOOLRDRICHARDS STBARRONCUTOFFRDINWOODDRASPEN STNUECE S DR DYMPLE LNTREEBROOK LNLAVADALNSOUTHF ORK R D MORTIERDRCREAGOR LNOWLTREELNBEE CRKNORTH AVE EALICESTWHITE R O C K R D GLEN HAVE N DRGOLD NUGGETTENFIELD STCLAYPITRDTIMM DRROBIN D R RIVER PLACE CTPENDLETONDRASHLEYLNS GORDON STW B R IA R G A T E D R FOXFIREDRRIV E R R ID G E D RNIMITZ STHOLLY DR ROANSCHAPELRDHILLRDVALLEYCIRMILE DRCOLGATE DRCAMBRIDGEDRJOE ROUTT BLVDHALEYPLHARTFORD DRBUGGY LNHOLICK LNW O O DLAN D DRCONNIE LNMISTY LNFOWLERDRAUTUMNCIRMESAVERDEDRNORMAND D RSANDSTONEDRPAMELA LNDAIRY CENTER RDCAROL STPENBE RT H Y RD BURT STREDMONDDRAVONST GILCHRISTAVEPOLORDS FORK LNORR STCOMMER C E S T ADA OAKS WILLIAMSON DRLAKE STHOUS T O N ST JOHNKIMBROUGHBLVDLAKEFRONTD R DEERFIELDDRBRIGHTON DRWILL IA M SCREE K DRSILVERHILLRDJAGUAR DR RUNAWAYRDDEXTER DRPECANRIDGEDRSTEWARTS MD WS BUR G E S S R D HOLIK STROCKPRAIRIERDWNEW MAIN DRFREDHALLRDREDM A N LN EMILY D R M IDSUMMERLNTRANT STNEWPORT LNCLAY STCARTERLAKEDROAKLEAFCOPPERFIELDPKWYOLD OAKS DRONYX DRFRENEAU DRCOLLEGE AVELAWYERST5TH ST BALCONES DRRITCHEY RDCROSSPARKDRHUNTERSRUNINDEPENDENCEAVEE28THSTAVONDALE AVEPOTTER LNFLYWAYRDPARKVIEW DRMCCULLOUGH RDBUSHLNVINCENT R D CHACO CANYON DRPINTO RUNGAILPLGRAZDR LISTERLNSOPHIA LNNEWTON STTHOUSAND OAKS RDEMERALDPKWYSILKWOOD DRPA R K W AYTERMILAM STBURTONDRM O R R IS LN RUGEN LNBARNWOOD DRRIVARIDGERDHENSELSHELLBOURNESHLBAHI A DR MINTERSPRINGRDMILLS STAGATE DRVINESTFORESTDRHORTICULTURERDAVENUE BMEMORIALDRMICKTHEAL NSPRINGLN OAK STSTUART STCROSSSTTODD STRIPPLEWOODCTROSERDPARK STBIRMINGHAM DRPINEWOODDRM CALLESTERLNWINDFREE DRGARDEN LNMAYST STONE CITY DRLYNNELLIOTTLNASTER DRNAVIDADSTAUGUSTACIRNORTON LNSCONSET D R HIGHLONESOMETHOMAS STLATHAMHUNTINGTON DR JUNE ST TALL TIMBER DRREGALOAKSDRWATSON STWESTW O O D M AI N LUBBOCK STWELLBOR N R D N EDEN LNHENRY STAXIS CTSTALLI N G S D R FORESTW O O D D R DR A K E D R CHEYENNE DR HOWARDSTBRAZOS DRSARA L N WHITNEYLNCARVERSTVALL E Y VI E W D R W ILDFLOWERDRSUNNYBROOK LNJONESSTCE DARB E N D R DVALVERDEDR SPENCE ST DALLIS D R SESAMESTLAMARSTTIME DRELBRICH LNCARDINALLNWINDHAMRANCHRDALLENRIDGEDRQUALITYCIRKINGSGATE DRMIDWESTDRWINGED FOOT DRLEDGESTONETRLSCANLIN S T L O UISSTKENN EDY PLMISSION HILLS DRGROVESTW BRONZE LNBAMBOO STMARTA STORCHIDSTHILLSIDE DRRIDGEWAYD R BADD A N R DGOESSLER RDA YRSHIRESTDEER CREEK D R BURNETT STWKINGCOLEDRWESTCHESTERDRNORHAM DRARNOLD RDDOVER DRSLEEPY R-R RDROSECIRASBUR Y STGEORGE BUSH DR ETROTTER LNWHISPERING RDGFOSTER LNDOE CIRHONDODRHARVEY STPARKMEADOWLNIRELAND ST MARION P U G H D R JUSTIN LNHERON L A K E S D R N TRADITIONS DRCARMEL PLTW ELVE OAKSSHIREDRREDBUD S T LESLIE DRLIS LNFOUNDERS DRREGALRO W PARK LNW DODGE STSADDLE LNMORGANS LNBELLAIREBLVDWHITES C REE K LN S DEXTER D RLYCEUM CTWOO DSIDE LN NARROW WAY STARLINGDRKIMMY DRBARRO W CT APRICOT G L N OAKSIDEDRSANDPIPER CVTUCKER NUCKSAN FELIP E D R HILLTOP DRJANE STHORN RDSQUIRE RDEPLACIDD R WILLO W BROO K D R LUEDECKE LNLODGE P OL E D R STOKES CIRE BRIA R G A T E D R E OAK HILL DRWALNUT CREEK CTWINDWOODDRCEDAR RIDGE DRSHADY DRKOENIG STHIDDEN ACRES DRRED RIVER DRWILLOWICK DRKOCH STTOLTEC TRLRAVENSTONELO OP SPRINGMIST DRHALL STROLLING R D G OAK HILLS CIRKORSHE A WAY HARDY STLIVE OAK ST GREEN TREE CIRTRIPLE BEND CIRB EE L ERLN S TEXAS AVEPUMA DREMORYOAKDRPLEASANT STDRAYCOTT CTHICKORYRIDGECIRSETTLERS WAYPOST OAK BNDCRENSHAW CIRHORSEBACK CTWELLBORN HTSCOURTLANDTPLSHELLY LNMOSS STRIDGEDALE STSCOTNEY CTWILDERNESS DRMEADOW OAKVICTORIA STFRIARRENWICK DRSTRAN D LN DAKOTA RIDGE DRPARK RDGOAK LN SALLIE LNCRYSTAL LNHONEYSUCKLE LNMARKHAM CTEDGEMORE DRGLENNA CTTRANQ UI L LI T Y CI R TURNBE R RY CIRLOBO DRHILL CIRPUEBLO CT SBRIDL E T RAIL S CT MILLERS LN TARROW ST E BRONC O CI R STOCKTON DRBRITON DRBONNIE LN BLANCO LNPICKERING PLBERWICK PLKUBIN ST SANDIA PLZCOMAL CIRCOLD SPRING DRCADDO CV STEFANIE DRPERRY LNCAJUN CUTOFF LNFIELDSARCTICBAY OAKS CT TWIN BLVDARRINGT O N R D FM 2818 RD WTEXAS AVE SAPPOMATTOX DRFM 2818 RD WLEONARD RDE27THSTLINDA LNARHOPULOSRDEAGLEAVEW 28TH STRAYMONDSTOTZERPKWYLEONARD RDW BRONZE LNPOLO RDMEMORIAL DR OLSENBLVDFOREST DRS TEXAS AVEVINCENT RDEAST BYPVALLEYVIEWDRUNIVERSITY DRE 30TH STKA T HY F L E M IN G R D BLUERIDGEDRTURK RANCH RDPOTTER LNPeachCreekAlumCreekLickCreekCartersCreekSpringCreekStillCreekOldRiverTurkeyCreekBrazos Rive rBurtonCreekHudsonCreekBrushyCreek W h iteCreekCottonwoodBranchH o p e s C r e e kPantherCreekBeeCreekNavasotaRiverWicksonCreek GibbonsCreekMillicanCreekThompsonsCreekSandyBranchRockyCreekBoggy Cr e e k Cedar CreekWicksonCreekCarters CreekCartersCreekW icksonCreekOl d R i v e r BrushyCreekBrazos RiverPeachCreekBrazosRiverBeeCreekNavasota RiverWhite CreekNavasota RiverBeeCreekNavasotaRiverPeachCreekOldRiverStill CreekBrushyCreekBrushyCreekBrushyCreekNavasotaRiverPantherCreekBrazos RiverCartersCreekNavasotaRiverNavasotaRiver PeachCreekNavaso taR iverPeachCreekPeachCreekCottonwoodBranchStillCreekRockyCreekBrazosRiverLickCreekWhiteCreekPeachCreekBrazos RiverNavasotaRiverWhite CreekCartersCreekNavasotaRiverBee CreekNavasotaRiverPeachC r e ekNavasotaRiver Old RiverBrazos RiverOldR iverBrazosRiverC artersCreek BrushyCreekPeachCreekBrazos RiverCartersCreekHopesCreekNavasotaRiverPantherCreekNavasotaRiverC artersCreekB ra zosRiverHopesCreekLickCreekBrazos RiverCartersCreekUV21UV30UV6UV47UV308UV6RUV47City of Bryan03,2006,400SCALE IN FEETLEGENDRoadRailroadStreamCity LimitETJ BoundaryOther City LimitTAMU BoundaryFIGURE 2-1CITY OF COLLEGE STATIONFUTURE LAND USE!ICreated By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: CCL14321Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\Deliverables\04_Final_LUA_Report\(Figure_2-1)-Future_LandUse.mxdUpdated: Wednesday, July 13, 2016FUTURE LAND USE111 - Neighborhood Conservation910 - Rural130 - Estate140 - Village Center109 - Restricted Suburban110 - General Suburban120 - 250 - Urban275 - Urban Mixed Use210 - General Commercial200 - Suburban Commercial310 - Business Park410 - Institutional/Public800 - Natural Areas - Reserved430 - Medical Use450 - Texas A&M University710 - 720 - Natural Areas - Protected850 - Utilities!!!!!!!456 - Redevelopment Areas999 - Water¬¬¬¬¬¬816 - Wellborn Preserve - Open¬¬¬¬¬¬136 - Wellborn Estate - Open¬¬¬¬¬¬315 - Wellborn Business Park¬¬¬215 - Wellborn Commercial¬¬¬815 - Wellborn Preserve¬¬¬¬¬¬135 - Wellborn Estate¬¬¬¬¬¬108 - Wellborn Restricted Suburban¬¬¬115 - Wellborn SuburbanLand UseExpected(LUE per Acre)Worst Case(LUE per Acre)2010 Census Density(People per LUE)Institutional/Public---Natural Areas - Protected ---Natural Areas - Reserved ---Neighborhood Conservation ---Rural ---Texas A&M University---Business Park222.38Estate0.812.38General Commercial462.38General Suburban462.38Medical662.38Restricted Suburban342.38Suburban Commercial462.38Urban15302.38Urban Mixed Use20352.38Village Center20352.38FUTURE POPULATION DENSITYPage 12 of 231 (#UT(#UTUTUT[Ú!(!(!(!(!(!(!(2.0 MG Greens PrairieElevated Storage TankOverflow Elev. = 522'Dowling RoadPump Station(3) - 8,000 gpm Pumps(2) - 6,175 gpm Pumps(1) - 6,000 gpm Pump(1) - 5.0 MG Ground Storage Tank(1) - 3.0 MG Ground Storage TankOverflow Elev. = 370'3.0 MG Park PlaceElevated Storage TankOverflow Elev. = 522'City of Bryan29th StreetTexas A&MUniversityVilla MariaTexas A&M UniversityMaple StreetTexas A&M UniversityOlsen FieldWellbornHollemanWellbornRock PrairieWellbornFoxfire?c?c?c?¡?¡?À?¡?¡B U R L E S O N C O .B R A Z O S C O .18''12''24''30''42''16''20''10''16''12''16''18''12''12''18''18''12''12''18''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''30''12''16''18''18''18''12''12''12''12''18''12''12''18''12''18''16''16''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''24''12''18''12''18''12''18''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''18''24''12''18''24''12''18''12''12''12''12''12''12''18''12''18''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''16''12''12''18''24''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''18''12''18''12''12''24''30''16''16''24''18''18''24''18''12''12''18''24''30''12''24''12''24''24''18 ''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''18''12 ''12''12''18''12''12''12''12''12''12''16''12''18''18''12''12''12''18''18''12''12''12''18''12''12''18''12''24''12''12''12''18''12''12''18''18 ''16''18''12''12''12''18''12''12''12''18''18''18''18''12''24'' 18''12''12''12''12''18''12''12''24''12''18''18''12''12''12''12''12''12''12''24''18''12''12''12''12''12''24''18''12''18''12''12''12''12''12''EAST BYPFM 2154 RDFM 50 RDCOUNTY RD-190 E 29TH ST ROCK PRAIRIE RDJONES RDRIVER RDWILLIAM D FITCH PKWYI AND GN RDCOUNTY RD-175LEONARD RDBIRD POND RDW E L S H A VEFM-244UNIVERSITYDRECOLE LNH O PE S C RE E K R DBOONEVILLE RDKOPPE BRIDGE RDPEACHCREEKRDCA VITT AVE BARRON RDROYDER RDKEMP RDW VILLA MARIA RDARRINGTON RDTONKAWAY LAKE RDN DOWLING RDROESE RDDEACONDRBARAK LNFM-60E VILLA MARIA RDHARDY WEEDON RDF AND B RDN GRAHAM RDBECK STLEANINGOAKSLNB ROADMOORDRS D O WLINGRDNUNN JONES RDW 28TH STDOMINIK DRN E A RLRUDD E R FW YCOUNTY RD 174 CARTER CREEK PKWY FM 159 RDFRANCIS DRGREENS PRAIRIE RD WWEEDON LOOPNAVASOTARDGFINFEA THER RD HOLLEMAN DRSTRAUB RDCHICK LNP IPE LINE RD BRIARCREST DRG LADESTVICTORIA AVEE 25TH STE WM J BRYAN PKWYSEBESTA RDGANDY RDCOUNTY RD 172JOHN RICE DRHICKS LNBRADLEY RDCOUNTY RD-173LINDA LNANDERSONSTCAIN RDN HARVEY MITCHELL PKWYDUSTY RDS MAIN ST FISHTANKRDLOST TRLW OODLAKEDRFROST DRPALASOTADRO AKDRWEL LBOR N RDELMO WEEDON RDNAGLE STBAWMKERRDOLDEN LNE 27TH STGROESBECK STCAPSTONE DRDEER RUNIN D IA NLAKESDRLUTHERSTWARHOPULOSRDWHITE CREEK RDW 26TH STE 30TH STHOLLEMANDREPARKPLW B YP AS SPATE RDSULPHURSPRINGSRDTIMBERLINEDRE 26TH STWAYSIDEDRDEWRDOLSENBLVDGEORGEBUSHDRAL A CI A CT TODDTRLST O U S LA N D R D S COLLEGE AVEFM 158 RDPEACH CREEK CUT OFFBATTSFERRYRDOLDJONESRDBO X L E Y B N D LACY W ELL RD4T H S TOLD TI RDDEBBIE LN FRIERSONRDUNIVERSITY DRFOUNTAIN AVETURKEYCREEK RDDEER PARK DREC HOLS ST G OLDENTR L NO RW O O D L N BITTLE LNFM ROAD 28 1 8 R DENCHANTEDOAKSDRS ENNIS STPAINTTRLGREENS PRAIRIE TRLHARPERSFERRYRDT AR ROWSTROSES RDKRENEK TAP RDCOUNTY RD-192FOSTER RDCHEROKEE DR STRADITION S DRTEE DRCLAY PIT RDDOGWO OD TR LFAVORRD BENTWOODDRFM-2818SUZANNE PL NANTUCKET DR AUSTINAVENAVARRODRVISTA LNWALTONDRBAKER AVEF M 281 8 R D W CHARLOTTE LNSOUTHWEST PKWY ERAYMONDSTOTZERPKWYLAN G FO R D S T COKE ST DAR TMOUTH S T ESTHER BLVDSMITH LNN FOREST PKWYCAMELOT DRSOUTHWOO D DRPRIVATE ROAD 4007LIGHTSEY LNE 24TH STPRATT RDWILDHORSERUNABBATERDE 31ST STROYALADELADEDRNROSEMARYDRLUZA STH U N T E R S C R EEK R D AGR ONOMY R D WAYFARERLNUNIVERSITY OAKS BLVDLEE AVEKATHYFLEMINGRDCOUNTYRD-269W CARSON ST1ST S T OLDBARKERRANCHRDPUR Y EA R D R S OAKS DRWALNUTRDHICKORY RDE 32ND STHAINES DRCOUNTY RD-401GOLDEN MIST HARRIS DRSPEARMANDRPIPER LNEAGLE AVEMANUEL DRS U NCRESTSTCOUNTY RD-170G R E E NVALLEYDRWESTWOODMAINDRASHBURN AVESW E E T W ATERDRGRE A TOAKSDR HENSEL DRCLLRANCHERO RDFAIRWAY DRKENT STS SIMS AVEOAKHILLDRS AINT AN DREW S DRLAZY LNLEHRLNWMILNERDRCANTERBURYDRAPPO M A TTOX DRCAJUN RI DGE R D E D ELWEISSAVERAINTREE DRBALL CIRTANG LE W OODDRWOODCRESTDR HIGGS DRWADE RDW 29TH STS BRYAN AVELUTHER STLOSROBLESDRLYNN DRPIE RR E P L W 27TH STLABRISADRBIZZELL STTATUM STS HASWELL DROLDCOLLEGERDBENNETT STSPRINGLOOPARBOR DRBLUE RIDGE DRTIMBER STCALUMET TRLBRISTOL STSHILOHDRTURK RANCH RDE 23RD STFAULKNERDRHENSELAVEGUSROYRDHOLIKDRELM AVEWINDING CRKBRIAR OAKS DRRODEMEL RANCH RDFREMA N SCHOOL RD BARRONCUTOFFRDINWOODDRASPEN STNUECE S D RDYMPLE LNLAVADA LNRAINBOW TRLNCOULTERDRSOUTHF ORK RD GRAHAM DRCREAGOR LNS HUTCHINS STOWL TREE LNPECAN STNORTH AVE ERE SE A RC H PKWYALICESTWHI TE ROCK RD SROSEMARYDRGLENHA VEN DRGOLD NUGGETTENFIELD STTIMMDRRO B IN DR WINDSOR DRRIVER PLACE CTPENDLETONDROLIVESTS GORDON STW B R IA R G A T E D R SHARON DRFOXFIREDRTROPHYDRRIVE R R ID G E D RFM-1179NIMITZSTHO LLY DR ROANSCHAPELRDHILLRDVALLEYCIRCAMBRIDGEDRJOE ROUTT BLVDRENEE LNHALEYPLHARTFORD DRBUGGY LNHOL ICK LNW OODLAND D RCONNIE LNMISTYLNFOWLERDRAUTUMNCIRMESAVERDEDRN ORMAND DRSANDSTONEDRPAMELA LNDAIRY CENTER RDCAROL STPENB ERTHY R DLEWIS STMEIR LNBURT STAVONST GILCHRISTAVEPOLO RDS FORK LNCLUB DRCOMMERC E ST COPPERFIELDDRSPRINGCRKADA OAKS W INDR ID G E DR WILLIAMSON DRNASHSTJENNIFER DR LAKE STHOUS T O N ST ANITA STDEERFIELDDRBRIGHTON DRW IL L IA M SCREEK D RKYLE AVEJAGUAR DR RUNAWAYR DA DRIENN E DR WINDYRYONRDOAK R ID G E D R DEXTER DRRUSTLING OAKS DRSAN SABA DRSTEWARTS MDWSHAZEL STB UR G ES S R D HOLIK STROCKPRAIRIERDWRED M A NLNLONG DRE MILY DREHLINGERDRGABBARD RDSTAGECOACHRDRIDGECIRMIDSUMMERLNTRANT STNEWPORT LNFONTAIN ED R MIRAMONTCIRCAUDILLSTCARTERLAKEDRDELMA DROAKLEAFOLD OAKS DRFRENEAUDRCOLLEGEAVEW DUNCAN STBURGESSLNJARVISLN5TH ST RITCHEY RDCROSSPARKDRHUNTERSRUNINDEPENDENCEAVEE 28TH STRICHARD STAVONDALEAVEPOTTER LNFLYWAYRDDISCOVER Y DRMCCULLOUGH RDVI NC ENT R D CHACO CANYON DRCHERRY STSHIREWOODDRTRAVIS STM E A D O WBROOKDRPINTO RUNOAKLAWN STATKINS STGAIL PLVILLAGE DRT RUMAN S T COLLEGE MAIN STLYNETTE CIRLISTERLNWESTOVER STLORI LNSOPHIA LNTHOUSAND OAKS RDDYESS RDEMERALDPKWYSILKWOO D DRPA R K WAYTERMILAM STBURTONDRMOR RIS LN UNION STPRAIRIED R D UR R A N D S TBRENTWOODDREFORESTDRRUGEN LNBARNWOOD DRMEADOWLNQUAIL HOLLOW DRR IVARIDGERDHENSELSHELLBOURNESHLHILLSTDELLWOODSTMINTERSPRINGRDVINESTBOM BE R DR AVENUE BDAY AVEIN A M AE A LL E N RDHEADWATER LN MEMORIAL DR STALLIONRDGEPEASESTMICKTHEAL NSPRING LNPECANRIDGEDROAK STSTUART STTODD STOLD MAIN DRRIPPLEWOODCTROSERDCLEARLEAF DRPARK STPINEWOODDRMCALLESTERLNW INDFREE DRGARDEN LNMAY STSTONE CITY DRFREEDOM BLVDYEGUA STLYNNELLIOTTLNNAVIDADSTAUGUSTACIRNORTONLNROSS STW ESTFIELD DRFIRESTONE DRMERLIN DRS C O NSET DR OXFORDST TEXASWORLDSPEEDWAYINDUSTRIAL BLVDPLEASANTHILLRDHIGHLONESOMEDANSBYLNLATHAMHICKORY STBROOK HOLLOW DRJUNE ST TALLT IM B ERDRWILLIAMS STHAUPTRDREGALOAKSDRWATSON STWE S TW OOD MA INS PARKER AVEDUNN STEDEN LNHENRY STPAR DRDETROIT STE 33RD STSHERWOOD DRHOLT ST LAKESIDEDRPERSHING AVEFORESTW O O DD R OL D ENBURGLNDRA K E D R TIFFANY TRLCHEYENNE DRPHOEN IX STCOTTONTAILLNS TABOR AVEHOWARD STHOGANALYS TILLMEADOWDRCARVER STTREEBROOK LNMARYLAKEDRVA LLEY VIE W D R CYPRESS RDW IL D FLOW ERDRJONESSTC E D ARBEN D R DVAL VERDE DRCLOISTERSDRANTONE STCONGRESSIONALDRTI ME D RELBRICH LNT H OR O UG H BREDRDGWINDHAMRANCHRDQUALITYCIRKINGSGATE DRMIDWESTDRWINGEDFOOTDRKRISTI LNLEDGESTONETRLSCANLIN ST WILLOWOAKSTLOU IS STKEN NE DY PLPASLER STEDGE STCEDARWOODDRW BRONZE LNCOUNTY RD-166PATTON AVEBAMBOO STR IDGEWAY D RSIERRA DRGOESSLER RDCLAYTONLNDEER CREEK D R BURNETTSTWEL COME LN SUNNYDALES BRAZOS AVEE CARSON STWESTCHESTERDRNORHAMDRDOTTHOLLOWHILL DRJO E VARISCODRSLEEPY R-R RDETHELBLVDASBU R YS T TROTTERLNW HISPERING RDGCORPORATE LIMIT V IN E W OODD R FORESTBNDDEBBIE DRKIRKWOOD DRFOSTER LNDOE CIRHARVEY STPARKMEADOWLNIRELAND STJUSTIN LNHOPPESS STTIMB ER WOOD D R MA LO NE Y A V E CRESTRIDGEN TRADITIONS DRKARTENLNVALLEY OAKS DRTW ELVE OAKSSUFFOLKAVESAPPHIRE DRARTHURLNSAN MARIO CTREDBUDSTLESLIE DRLIS LNFOUNDERSDRREGAL ROW W DODGE STMUIRFIELD VLGBELLAIREBLVDW H IT E S C R EEKLNBARNSTABLEHBRCR AN E AVEJOSEPH DRWOODSIDE LN AANDRDRNARROW WAY HUMMINGB I RD CIRS HOUSTON AVEU-VROWGARDENACRESBLVDSILVERHILLRDKIMMY DRB AR RO W C THICKORY NUT LNAPRIC OT GLN ENTERPRISEAVEHANUS STGAINERSTWINDOWMERESTBARBARABUSHDROAKSIDEDRSANDPIPERCV DILLONAV E HELENASTMANCHESTERDRTUCKER NUCKM EGLNHILLTOP DRROCHESTERST HORN RDSHILOHAVESQUIRERDEPLACIDDR PROVIDENCEAVEW ILLO W B ROOK DRSUNSETSTLUEDECKE LNPINERIDGEDRPEPPERTREE DRMARKSUL ROSS DRA LDINEDRROYALSTCATERINALNSTOKES CIROAKCIRHUNTWOODDREAGLE PASS STMAYWOOD DRAMBERRIDGEDRWALNUT CREEK CTWINDWOODDRCAEOUSEL LNCHURCH STKOENIG STHIDDEN ACRES DRHARRINGTONAVEKOCH STTOLTEC TRLFINNE Y RO LLING R D G OAK HILLS CIRCLAN VL G K O RSHEA WAYENCINAS PLHARDY STW PEASE STLIVE OAK ST GREEN TREE CIRTRIPLE BEND CIRDONA DRWHISPERING OAKS DRJAMES PKWYBROOKWOODLNS TEXAS AVECOTTONWOOD STPA RK LA ND DR TECHNOLOGYLOOPPUMA DREMORYOAKDRVINCENTSTSUNDANCED R NORFOLK CTDARWI N AVE PLEASANTSTFKENNICOLASAVEF AWN LN HICKORYRIDGECIRPOST OAK BNDDODGE STCRENSHAW CIRHORSEBACK CTWELLBORN HTSRED HILL DRS CAMPUS AVENOTTINGHAMDRSHOSHONI CTSHORTRDBERNBURG LN REMINGTON CTNORTHAVEWDALTONRIDGEDALE STDAVIDS LN CREST STCECILIA CTCRENSHAW LNCALUSA SPRINGS DR HOPESCREEKMEADO W CIRCITATION CIROAK FORRESTMANO R W O O D D R IRISLNWA LL ACE STRENWICK DRSTR AN D LNDAKOTA RIDGE DRMYRTLE DRHIGHLAND DRPECAN PECACOUNTRY MEADOWS LNREBECCA STJORDANLOOPOAK TER THOMAS BLVDWHITE STONE DRWILLOWRIDGEDRANTLER CIRROBERTS STCRYSTAL LNMESA DRMCKENZIETERMINALBLVDOAKWOOD STSHAWNEE CIRBRYANT STT R AN QUI L L IT Y C IR COPPER RIVER DRTUR NBE R R Y C IRPUTTER CTPANTERA DRLOBO DRTIFFANY PARK DRPRESTWICK CTHILL CIRSTONEPARC DRS COULTER DRSAINT L O U IS ST FOX CIRBR ON C O C IR WILLIAMS RD YOUNG PLSTOCKTON DRBRITON DRBO NN IE LN KAZMEIER PLZBLANCO LNPINE STPICKERING PLWESTMINSTER DRTORO LN H EN RY C T CLARE CTGREEN RIDGE CIRKNIGHT DRFLAGSTONE CTCOMAL CIRCOLD SPRING DRRICHMOND AVEARROYO CT SWOODHAVEN CIRBEATRIZ LNPERRY LNCAJUN CUTOFF LNBRIARWOOD CIRSTAUFFER CIRLYNX CVBITTLE STHERITAGE LNFAWN CTY-Z STPINEHURST CIRMIANA CTSEMINOLE CTELKTON CTOAK BLUFF CIRCAMARGO CTTRENT CIRROOSEVELT ST RAYMONDSTOTZERPKWYPARK PLS COULTER DRLINDA LNUNION STHOUS TON STN EARL R UD DER FWY S TEXAS AVEAPPOMATTOX DRTURK RANCH RDBLUERIDGEDRE 26TH STE28THSTE 28TH STPOLO RDWELLB ORN RDLEONARD RDARHOPULOSRDEAST BYPFOUNDERSDRLANG FORD STVINCENT RDSGORDONSTJ A M E S P K WYK A T H Y F L E MING RD S TABOR AVEW 28TH STOAK STKENT STE VILLA MARIA RDLOUISSTBURT STLUTHERSTWPOTTER LNW BRONZE LNNavasotaRiver LickCreekPeachCreekBrazos RiverPantherCreekOldRiverBeeCreekBrushyCreekWhiteCreekHopesCreekAlumCreekWicksonCreekGibbonsCreekSpringCreekTurkeyCreekBurtonCreekStillCreekHudsonCreekCottonwoodBranchRockyCreekMillicanCreekDryCreekRockLakeCreekSandyBranch CedarCreekBoggyCreekThompsonsCreekB r u shyC ree kCartersCreekCartersCreekCartersCreekCartersCreekCartersCreek C artersCreekCartersCreekC artersCree k C artersCreek City of Bryan03,0006,000SCALE IN FEETFIGURE 2-2CITY OF COLLEGE STATIONIMPACT FEEWATER SERVICE AREA!ICreated By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: CCL16175Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\Deliverables\04_Final_LUA_Report\(Figure_2-2)-Existing_W_Service_Area.mxdUpdated: Friday, October 07, 2016LEGEND!(Interconnection(#UTElevated Storage TankUTGround Storage Tank[ÚPump Station8" and Smaller Water Line10" and Larger Water LineRoadRailroadStreamLake/PondParcelImpact FeeWater Service AreaCity LimitETJ BoundaryOther City LimitCounty LinePage 13 of 231 !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(VäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäTXWWTPTXWWTPLS 3LS 2LS 4Aggie Acres LSFox Fire LSWestminster LSValley Park LSHensel Park LSIndian Lakes LSCreek Meadow LSLuther Street LSRock Prairie LSLick Creek WWTPCapacity: 2.0 MGDCarters Creek WWTPCapacity: 9.5 MGDBRAZOSCO.GRIMESCO.B R A Z O S C O . B U R L E S O N C O .?À?c?c?c?c?¡?¡?¡?¡12" F.M.1 0" F.M .15"36"18"24"21"10"30"27"12"16"42"10"12"12"10"15"10"15"12"12"15"12"42"10"12"12"12"15"18"18"10"12"30"18"18"18"10"30"30"16"18"15"18"24"30"12"12"12"18"12"10"18"12"10"15"27"12"10"10"18"12"16"21"18"30"12"15"30"12"10"24"12"12"10"12"2 1"18"12"10"10"18"15"15"1 6"10"12"18"12"15"10"10 "15"12"15"10"10"30"12"18"12"10"18"12"12"12"12"12"12"21"12"18"12"10"12"36"18"12"12"10"15"24"10"12"18"10"10"15"27"12 " 10"12"12"18"12"21"12"27"18"18"30"12"15"15"12"10"12"12"15"18"12"15"18"10"12"12"12"12"12"21"12"18"21"27"10"12"10"18"12"10"10"30"12"10"10"12"12"18"1 2 "10 "16"21"12"12"12"12"12"18"27"36"21"21"18"10"18"21"10"12"18"18"27"12"10"10"18"2 1 "10"18 "18"10"18"12"18"15"12"15"15"16"24"15"12"18"10"15"12"12"18"18"1 2"21"12"18"15"15"12"12"18"18"12"8" F.M.EAST BYPFM 2154 RDFM 50 RDCOUNTY RD-190 E 2 9TH ST ROCK PRAIRIE RDJONES RDRIVER RDWILLIAM D FITCH PKWYI AND GN RDCOUNTY RD-175LEONARD RDBIRD POND RDWE L SH AVEFM-244UNIVERSITY DR ECOLE LNHO P E S C R E EK RD B O ONEVILLERDKOPPE BRIDGE RDPEACHCREEKRDHARVEY RDCA VITT AVE BARRON RDROYDER RDKEMP RDW VILLA MARIA RDARRINGTON RDTONKAWAY LAKE RDN DOWL ING RDROESE RDTEXAS AVE SDEACON DRE A R L R U D DERFW Y S BARAK LNFM-60E VILLA MARIA RDHARDY WE EDON RDF AND B RDNGRAHAMRDBECK STLEANINGOAKSLNB ROADMOORDRSDOWLINGRDNUNN JONES RDW 28TH STDOMINIK DRN EA R LRU DD ER FWYCOUNTY RD 174 CARTER CREEK PKWYFM 159 RDFRANCIS DRGREENS PRAIRIE RD WLON G M IREDRWEEDON LOOPNAVASOTARDGFINFEATHER RD QUAIL RUNHOLLEMAN DRSTRAUB RDCHICK LNPIPELINE RD BRIARCREST DRGLADESTVICTORIA AVEE 25TH STE WM J BRYAN PKWYSEBESTA RDGANDY RDCOUNTY RD 172JOHN RICE DRHICKS LNBRADLEY RDCOUNTY RD-173LINDA LNANDERSONSTN HARVEY MITCHELL PKWYDUSTYRDS MAIN ST FISHTANKRDLOS T TRLSOUTHWEST PKWYWOODLAKEDRFROSTDRPALASOTADROAK DRWELL BO R N RDELMO WEEDON RDNAGLE STBAWMKERRDOLDEN LNE 27TH STGROESBECK STCAPSTONE DRLINCOLN AVEDEER RUNIN DIANLAKES DRLUTHER ST WARHOPULOS R D WHITE CREEK RDLAKE WAYDR W 26TH STE 30TH STHOLLEMAN DR EPARK PLW BY P A S SPATE RDSULPHURSPRINGSRDTIMBERLINEDRE 26TH STWAYSIDEDRDEWRDOLSEN BLV DGEORGEBUSHDRA LA C IA C T GEORGE BUSH DR WHARVEYMITCHELLPKWYSST O U S L A N D R D S C O LLE GE A VEFM 158 RDPEACH CREEK CUT OFFBATTSFERRYRDOLDJONESRDBO X LE YB N D LACY WELL RDDEBBIE LN OLD WELLBORN RDFRIERSONRDRIO GRANDE BLVDUNIVERSITY DRFOUNTAIN AVETURKEYCREEKRDDEER PARK DRE CH OLS ST G OLDENTR L N O R W O O D LNBITTLELNF M RO A D 2 8 1 8 R DENCHANTEDOAKSDRS ENNIS STPAINTTRLGREENS PRAIRIE TRLHARPERSFERRYRDTARROWSTROSES RDCOUNTY RD-192FOSTER RDCHEROKEE DR STRADITIONS DRTEE DRCLAY PIT RDDOGWOOD TRLFAVORRD BENTWOODDRFM-2818SUZANNE PL N A NTUCKET DR NAVARRODRVISTA LNWALTONDRBAKER AVEFM 2818 RD W CHARLOTTE LNSOUTHWEST PKWY ERAYMONDSTOTZERPKWYLANGFORDSTALEXANDRIA AVECOKE STDA R T M O U T H S T ESTHER BLVDSMITHLNBROTHE R S B L V DN FOREST PKWYCAMELOT DRPRIVATE ROAD 4007LIGHTSEY LNPRATT RDWILDHORSERUNBOYETT STABBATERDE 31ST STROYALADELADEDRNROSEMARYDRWOODCREEKDRLUZA ST6TH H U N T E R S C R E E K R D AGRO NOMY R D WAYFARERLNUNIVERSITY OAKS BLVDLEE AVEDECATUR DRKATHYFLEMINGRDAIRLINEDRCOUNTYRD-269W CARSON ST1S T ST OLDBARKERRANCHRDPUR YE A R D RS OAKS DRFAIRVIEW AVEWALNUT RDHICKORY RDHAINES DRCOUNTY RD-401GOLDEN MISTHARRIS DRSPEARMANDRPIPER LNEAGLE AVEMANUEL DRS U NCRESTSTCOUNTY RD-170G R E ENVALLEYDRW E S T W O ODMAINDRASHBURN AVESWE E T W ATERDRGRE A T OAKSDR HENSELDRCLLRANCHERO RDFAIRWAYDRKENT STS SIMS AVEOAKHILLDRSAINT ANDR E W SDRLAZY LNLEHRLNWCASTLEGATEDRCANTERBURYDRA P P O M ATTOXDRCAJUN RIDGE RD CHRISTINELNEDELWEISSAVERAINTREE DRBALL CIRTANG LEW OODDRWOODCRESTDR HIGGS DRWADE RDS BRYAN AVELUTHER STLOSROBLESDRLYNN DRP IERRE P L W 27TH STCHURCHAVELABRISADRBIZZELL S TTATUM STOLDCOLLEGERDSPRINGLOOPARBOR DRBLUE RIDGE DRHOLLEMANDRWSHILOHDRTURK RANCH RDE 23RD STFAULKNERDRGUSROYRDELM AVEWINDING CRKBRIAR OAKS DRRODEMEL RANCH RDFRE MAN SC H O O LRDBARRONCUTOFFRDINWOODDRASPEN STDYMPLE LNLAVADA LNSOUTHF ORK RD MORTIERDRCREAGOR LNOWL TREE LNR E SEARCH P K W YALICESTWHI TE ROCK RDGLENHAVEN D RGOLD NUGGETTENFIELD STROBINDRRIVER PLACE CTPENDLETONDROLIVESTASHLEYLNS GORDON STW B R IA R G A T E D R SHARONDRRIV E R R ID G E D RFM-1179NIMITZ STHOLLY DR ROANSCHAPELRDHILLRDVALLEYCIRMILE DRCAMBRIDGEDRJOE ROUTT BLVDR ENEELNBUGGY LNLAURA LNHOLICK LNW O ODLAN D D RCO NNIE LNMISTYLNFOWLERDRAUTUMNCIRMESAVERDEDRNORMAND DRPAMELA LNDAIRY CENTER RDCAROL STPE NBERTHY R DBURT STAVONST GILCHRISTAVEPOLO RDS FORK LNCLUB DRCOMMERCE ST COPPERFIELDDRADA OAKS WILLIAMSON DRHOU STO N ST ANITA STDEERFIELDDRBRIGHTON DRW IL L IA M SCREE K DRKYLE AVEJAGUAR DR RUNAWAY RDWINDYRYONRDDEXTER DRSTEW ARTS MDWSBUR G E S S R D HOLIK STROCKPRAIRIERDWNEW MAIN DRHEREFORDSTRED M A NLN LONG DREMILY DRTRANT STCLAY STMIRAMONTCIRDELMA DROAKLEAFOLD OAKS DRONYX DRCOLLEGEAVELAWYERSTJARVISLNRITCHEY RDCROSSPARKDRHUNTERSRUNINDEPENDENCEAVEE 28TH STAVONDALE AVEFIDELITY STPOTTER LNFLYWAYRDDISCOVERY DRPARKVIEW DRV IN C ENT R D CHACO CANYON DRTRAVIS STPINTO RUN ATKINS STGAIL PLVILLAGE DRLYNETTECIRLORI LNSOPHIA LNTHOUSAND OAKS RDDYESS RDEMERALDPKWYSILKWOOD DRP A R K W AYTERMILAM STBURTONDRMORRI S LN UNION STDU R R A N D S TBRENTWOODDREFORESTDRBARNWOOD DRMEADOWLNQUAIL HOLLOW DRRIVARIDGERDSHELLBOURNESHLBAHIAD R MINTERSPRINGRDMILLS STAGATE DRVINESTAVENUE BINA MAE AL L EN RD MEMORIALDR STALLIONRDGMICKTHEA L NSPRING LNPECANRIDGEDROAK STSTUART STCROSS STTODD STOLD MAIN DRKERNSTOWN LNRIPPLEWOODCTROSERDPARK STPINEWOODDRMCALLESTERLNGARDEN LNMAY STSTONE CITY DRYEGUASTLYNNELLIOTTLNNAVIDADSTAUGUSTACIRNORTON LNROSS STFIRESTONE DRSCO NS ET DRTEXASWORLDSPEEDWAY PLEASANTHILLRDHIGHLONESOMELATHAMJUNEST TALL TIMBER DRHAUPTRDWATSON STW ES TWOO D MAIN LUBBOCK STW ELLB OR N R D NEDEN LNHENRY STWINDINGRDPARDRFORESTW OOD DR DR A K E DR HOWEDRS TABOR AVEBRAZOS DRS TIL LMEADOWDRWHITNEYLNCARVER STVALLE Y VI E W D R CYPRESSRDW ILDFLOWERDRC E DARBE N D R DCLOISTERSDR SESAMESTT IME DR WINDHAMRANCHRDQUALITYCIRKINGSGATE DRMIDWESTDRWINGED FOOT DRS CAN L IN S T L O UISSTKEN NEDY PLMISSION HILLS DRPONDEROSA DRPASLER STCEDARWOODDRSANPEDRODRW BRONZE LNCOUNTYRD-166BAMBOO STR ID GEWAYD R LEONADRGOESSLERRDA YR SHIRESTCLAYTON LNDEER CREEK D R BURNETT STWEL COME LNWESTCHESTERDRNORHAMDRARNOLD RDDOVER DRSLEEPY R-R RDROSECIRETHELBLVDASBU RY STTROTTER LNWHISPERING RDGC ORPORATE LIMITDEBBIEDRKIRKWOODDR FOSTER LNDOE CIRHARVEY STPARKMEADOWLNIRELANDSTMARI ON PU GH DR JUSTIN LNN TRADITIONS DRKARTENLNCARMEL PLTW ELVE OAKS R ED B U D ST LESLIE DRLIS LNFOUNDERSDRPARK LNW DODGE STMUIRFIELD VLGMORGANS LNBELLAIREBLVDW H IT E S C R EEKLNS DEXT ER DR LAPIS CT LYCEUM CTWOO DSIDE LN S LOGAN AVENARROW WAY MEDI NA DRSILVERHILLRDKIMMY DRBA RR OW C THICKORY NUT LNAPRIC OT GLN OAKSIDEDRSANDPIPERCV SPRINGFIELDDRLAW YERPLHORN RDSHILOHAVESQUIRE RDEPLACIDDR PROVIDENCEAVEWI LLO W BR OOK DR LUEDECKE LNEASTMARK DRSTOKES CIRCAMELLIA CTOAK CIRHALEY DRE OAK HILL DRWALNUT CREEK CTWINDWOODDRSHADY DRKOENIG STHIDDEN ACRES DRTOLTEC TRLRAVENSTONELOOP SPRINGMIST DRSTIL LW ATER R DROLLIN G RDG OAK HILLS CIRCLAN VL G K OR SH E A WA Y HARDY STGREEN TREE CIRTRIPLE BEND CIRS TEXAS AVEPUMA DRSUNDANCED R FKENNICOLASAVEHICKORYRIDGECIRPOST OAK BNDCRENSHAW CIRMILLIFF RDSHORTRDSAND R A D R MARIN E R D R SHELLY LNGLE NN O AKS D R CREST STCRENSHAW LNCALUSA SPRINGS DR CITATION CIRFRIARMANOR W O O D DR EISENH O WE R AVERENWICK DRSTRA ND LN DAN WILLIAMS LNADRIANCE LAB RDREBECCA STCRYSTAL LNBOSQ UE DR BRY AN T STT RAN QU IL LI TY CI R COPPER RIVER DRTURNBE RR Y C IRPUTTER CTLOBO DRTIFFANY PARK DRBAYWOOD LNBYWOOD STPUEBLO CT SW OODLANDS DRPICADILLY CIRSTOCKTON DRBRITON DRBON NIE L NKAZMEIER PLZPICKERING PLKUBIN ST AUGUSTINE CTSTEFANIE DRPERRY LNCAJUN CUTOFF LNFIELDSCOVENTRY PLHOLMES STSIOUX CIRFRIO CIRMIANA CTW 28TH STUNIVERSITY DRPOLO RDLONGMIRE DRMARION P U G H D R POTTER LNARHOPULOSRDLUTHERSTWK A TH Y F L E M IN G RD LINDA LNS TEXAS AVEAVENUE BVINCENT RDEAST BYPFM 2818 RD WL O NGM IR E DR BLUERIDGEDRRAYMONDSTOTZERPKWYTEXAS AVE SW BRONZE LNN E A R L R U D D E R F W Y LEONARD RDTURK RANCH RDFM2818RDW8"8"8"8"8 "8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8 "8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8 "8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8 "8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8" 8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8 "8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"NavasotaRiver LickCreekPeachCreekBrazos RiverPantherCreekOldRiverBeeCreekBrushyCreekWhiteCreekHopesCreekAlumCreekWicksonCreekGibbonsCreekTurkeyCreekBurtonCreekStillCreekHudsonCreekCottonwoodBranchRockyCreekMillicanCreekDryCreekRockLakeCreekSandyBranch CedarCreekBoggyCreekThompsonsCreekB r u shyC ree kCartersCreekCartersCreekCartersCreekCartersCreekCartersCreek C a rtersCreekCartersCreekCity of Bryan8" F.M.8" F.M.03,2006,400SCALE IN FEETLEGEND!(ManholeVäLift StationTXWWTPWastewater Treatment Plant8" and Smaller Wastewater Line10" and Larger Wastewater Line8" and Smaller Force Main10" and Larger Force MainRoadRailroadStreamLake/PondParcelImpact FeeWastewater Service AreaCity LimitETJ BoundaryOther City LimitCounty LineFIGURE 2-3CITY OF COLLEGE STATIONIMPACT FEEWASTEWATER SERVICE AREA!ICreated By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: CCL16175Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\Deliverables\04_Final_LUA_Report\(Figure_2-3)-Existing_WW_Service_Area.mxdUpdated: Wednesday, October 12, 2016User: 02499Page 14 of 231 ROCK PRAI R I E R O A D WILLIAM D FITCH PARKWAY SH 6 HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY WELLBORN ROADSO U T H T E X A S A V E N U E SH 6 ROCK PRAIRIE ROADBIRD POND ROADHARVEY ROADUNIVERSITY DRIVEB D A C Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend City Limits Service Areas A B C D Streets Exhibit 1 Service Areas November 2016 N010.5 Miles Page 15 of 231 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study City of College Station 3-2 3.2 WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Proposed water and wastewater system projects were developed as part of the CIPs presented in the 2016 Water and Wastewater Master Plan Updates. A summary of the costs for each of the projects required for the 10-year growth period used in the impact fee analysis for both the water and wastewater systems are shown in Table 3-3 and Table 3-4, respectively. Detailed project costs for the water and wastewater system are included in Appendix B and C, respectively. Costs listed for the existing projects are based on actual design and construction costs provided by the City. The proposed 10-year water system projects are shown on Figure 3-1. The proposed 10-year wastewater system projects are shown on Figure 3-2. Table 3-3: Proposed Water System Impact Fee Eligible Capital Projects No. Description of Project Capital Cost EXISTING A High Service Pumping Improvements $3,647,228 B Bio-Corridor Waterline $998,884 C Area 2 Waterline Extension $1,224,780 D Cooling Tower Expansion $3,840,099 E Well #9 $5,228,000 F Well #9 Collection Line - budget $3,337,000 G Land- Rowe & Allen $1,082,378 H Land- Hanson South $1,048,633 I 2016 Impact Fee Study $50,000 Existing Project Sub-total $20,457,002 PROPOSED 1 SH 6 Water Line Connection Phase 1 - 24" SE of Creagor Lane $960,300 2 SH 6 Water Line Connection Phase 2 $2,326,700 3 18-inch and 16-inch PRVs for Lower Pressure Plane $546,000 4 New 3 MG Elevated Storage Tank $7,761,000 5 SH 40 Water Line Extension - Graham Road to Barron Road $2,732,600 6 SH 40 Water Line Extension - Sonoma Subdivision to Victoria Avenue $599,100 7 SH 6 Water Line Connection Phase 3 - 24" SE of Greens Prairie Road $823,700 8 Dowling Road Pump Station North Water Line Replacement $1,151,300 9 Harvey Mitchell Parkway Water Line Replacement $3,580,200 10 Water Supply Well 10 $8,018,400 Proposed Project Sub-total $28,499,300 Total Capital Improvements Cost $48,956,302 Page 16 of 231 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study City of College Station 3-3 Table 3-4: Proposed Wastewater System Impact Fee Eligible Capital Projects No. Description of Project Capital Cost EXISTING A Bee Creek Interceptor Phase 1 $3,600,939 B Royder/Live Oak Sewer Service $1,691,256 C 2016 Impact Fee Study $50,000 Existing Project Sub-total $5,342,195 PROPOSED 1 54/60-inch Bee Creek Interceptor Phase 2 $7,060,400 2 42/48-inch Bee Creek Interceptor Phase 3 $5,511,400 3 54-inch Lick Creek Interceptor Phase 1 $2,756,600 4 54-inch Lick Creek Interceptor Phase 2 $8,739,500 5 Expand Lick Creek WWTP Capacity to 5 MGD $29,949,000 6 42/48-inch Medical District Interceptor Phase 1 $9,319,500 7 4 MGD Diversion Lift Station and 24-inch Force Main $12,024,500 8 42-inch Northeast Interceptor Phase 1 $3,501,600 9 48-inch Northeast Interceptor Phase 2 $2,577,900 10 36-inch Northeast Interceptor Phase 3 $5,587,400 11 24/30-inch Northeast Interceptor Phase 4 $3,427,700 12 30/36-inch Southwood Valley Interceptor Phase 1 $3,286,400 13 15/18/24-inch Southwood Valley Interceptor Phase 2 $1,961,400 14 Hensel Park Lift Station Expansion to 6 MGD $4,682,500 15 Expand Lick Creek WWTP Capacity to 8 MGD $24,717,000 16 Diversion Lift Station Expansion to 10 MGD $2,496,000 17 24/27-inch Alum Creek Interceptor $9,018,800 18 3 MGD Peach Creek Lift Station and 16-inch Force Main $4,165,200 19 12/21/24-inch Royder Road Interceptor $4,086,500 20 18/21/24-inch Medical District Interceptor Phase 2 $3,456,900 Proposed Project Sub-total $148,326,200 Total Capital Improvements Cost $153,668,395 Page 17 of 231 !A!A(#UT!(!(!(!(!(!(!((#UT(#UTUTUT[ÚUV302.0 MG Greens PrairieElevated Storage TankOverflow Elev. = 522'?c?c?c3.0 MG Scott and WhiteElevated Storage TankOverflow Elev. = 472'Dowling RoadPump Station(3) - 8,000 gpm Pumps(2) - 6,175 gpm Pumps(1) - 6,000 gpm Pump(1) - 5.0 MG Ground Storage Tank(1) - 3.0 MG Ground Storage TankOverflow Elev. = 370'HSPS Improvements3.0 MG Park PlaceElevated Storage TankOverflow Elev. = 522'City of Bryan29th StreetTexas A&MUniversityVilla MariaTexas A&M UniversityMaple StreetTexas A&M UniversityOlsen FieldWellbornHollemanWellbornRock PrairieWellbornFoxfireTexas A & M UniversityTexas A & M University(7(1(2(2(3(2(3(4(2(5(6(8(9(A(B(C12"30"24"18" 12"18"12''20''18'' 24''30''24''24''30''24''24''City of Bryan18''24''30''16''20''18''18''18''18''16''18''18''18''24''18''16''18''18''24''18''18''18''18''18''18''30''30''18''24''18''16''18''16''16''18''18''18''16''18''18''18''18''18''18''18''18''24''18''18''18''16''18''18''16''18''18''18''30''24''24''16''18''18''18''18''24''18''18''16''16''18''18''18''18''18''18''18''18''18''16''24''18''18''18''18''24''16''16''18''18''18''24''8''12''10'' 8''12''12''12''12''8''12''8''12''8''8''12''8''8''12''12''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''12''12''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''12''8''12''12''12''8''8''8''12''8''12''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''12''8''8''12''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''12''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''12''12''12''8''12''8''12''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''12''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''8'' 8''8''8''8''12''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''12''8''8''12''8''8''12''8''8''12''12''12''8'' 12''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''12''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''8''8'' 8''8''8''12''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''8''12''12''8''8''8''12''12''8''8''8''12''8''8''12''8''8''8''24''EAST BYP FM 2154 R D FM 50 R D COUNTY RD-190 E 29TH ST ROCKPRAIRIERD JONES RDRIVER RDWILLIAM D FITCH PKWYI AND GN RDCOUNTY RD-175LEONARD RDBIRD POND RDWELSH AVEFM-244UNIVERSITYDRECOLE LNHOPESCREEKRD BOONEV ILLERDKOPPE BRIDGE RDPEACHCREEKRDCAVITT A V E ROYD ER RDKEMP RD W VILLA MARIA RDARRINGTON RD TONK A WAY L A KE RD N DOW LI N G RD UNIVERSITY DRROESE RDTEXAS A VE SBARAK LNFM-60E VILLA MARIA RDHARDY WEE D O N RD FANDBRDN GRAHAM RDBECK STLEANINGOAKSLNBROAD MOORDR SDOWL INGRDNUNN JONES RDW 28TH STDOMINIK DRN EARLRUDDER FWY COUNTY RD 174 CART ERCREEKPK WYFM159RDFRANCISDRGREENS PRAIRIE RD WWEEDON LOOPNAVASOTARDGFINFEAT H ER R D STRAUBRDCHICK LNPIPELINE R D BRIARCRESTDRGL ADESTE 25TH ST E WM J BRYAN PKWYGANDYRDCOUNTY RD 172JOHN RICE DRHICKS LNBRADLEY RDCOUNTY RD-173LINDA L N N HAR VEY MITC HEL L PKWY DUSTYRDS MAIN ST FISHTANKRDLOST TR L WO ODLAKEDRFROSTDRPAL ASOT ADROAK DRWELLB O RN R DELMO WEEDON RDNAGLE STBAWMKERRDOLDEN LNE 27TH ST GROESBECK STCAPSTONE DRLINCOLN AVEDEER R UN IND IANLAKE SDRLUTHERSTWAR HOPUL OS RD WHITE CR E EK RDW 26TH STE 30TH S T PARK PLWBYPASSPATE RDSULPHURSPRINGSRDTIMBERLINEDRE 26TH S T WAYSIDEDR DEWRDOL SENBLVD GEORGEBUSHDRALACIA CT TODDTRLSTOUSLANDRD S COLL EG EAVEFM 158 RDPEACH CREEK CUT OFFBATTSFERRYRDOLDJONESRDBOXLEY BND LACY WE LL RD4THSTOLD TI RDDEBBIE LN FRIERSONRDFOUNTAINAVE TURKEYCREEKRDDEER PARK DRGOLDEN TRL NORWOODLN BITTLE LNFMROAD2818RDENCHANTEDOAKSDRS ENNIS STPAINTTRLGREENSPRAIRIETRLHARPERSFERRYRDROSES RDCOUNTY RD-192FOSTER RDCHEROKEE DR STRADITIONSDRTEE DRCLAY PIT RDDOGWO ODTRLBENTWOODDRFM-2818 SUZANNE PL NANTUCKETDRVISTA LNBAKER AVECHARLO TTE L N RAYMONDSTOTZERPKWYLANGFORDST COKE STESTHER BLVDSMI THLN BROTHERSBLVD CAMELO T D R PRIVATE ROAD 4007LIGHTSEY L N PRATT RDWILDHORSERUNABBATERDE 31ST ST NROSEMARYDRLUZA STHUNTERSCREEKRD AGRONO M Y R D WAYFARERLNUNIVERSITY OAKS BLVDLEE AVE KATHYFLEMINGRDAIRLINEDRCOUNTYRD-269W CARSON ST1ST ST OLDBARKERRANCHRDS OAKS DRCOUNTY RD-401GOLDE N MI S T PIPER LNSUNCREST STGREEN VALL EY DRWESTWOO DMAINDR SWEETWAT ERDRHENSELDRCLLRANCHERO RDFAIRWAYDRKENT ST S SIMS AVEOAKHILLDRLAZY LNLEHRLNWCANTERBURYDRAPPOMA T T O X D R CAJUN R ID G E RD RAINTREEDR BALL CIRTANGLEWOODDRWOODCRESTDR HIGGS D R WADE RDS BRYAN AVELYNN DRPIERREPL W 27TH STLABRISADRBIZZELL STTATUM STOLDCOLLEGERDARBOR DRBLUE RIDGE DRCALUM ET T R L SHILOHDRTURK RANCH RDFAULKNERDRGUSROYRD ELM AVEWINDING CRKBRIAR OAKS DRRODEMEL RANCH RDBARRONCUTOFFRDINWOODDRASPEN S T DYMPLE LNLAVADALNSOUTHFORKRDCREAGOR LNOWLTREELNBEE CRKNORTH AVE EALICE STWHITEROCKRD SROSEMARYDRGOLD NUGG E TT ENFIELD STTIMM DRROBIN D R RIVER PLACE CTPENDLETONDRWBRIARGATEDR FOXFIREDRRIVER RIDGE DRFM-1179HOLLY DR ROANSCHAPELRDHILLRDVALLEYCIRCAMBRIDGEDRJOE ROUTT BLVDRENEE LNBUGGY LNHOLICK LN WOOD LAND DR CONNIE LNMISTY LNFO WLERDRAUTUMNCIRMESAVERDEDRNORMANDDRSANDSTONEDRPAMELA LNCAROL STBURT S T AVON ST POLORDS FORK LNCOMMERCE S T COPPERFIELDDRADA OAKS WILLIAMSON DRJENNIFER DR LAKE STHOUSTON S TDEERFIELDDRBRIGHTON DRWILLIAMS CREEKDR JAGUAR DR RUNAWAYRDSAN SABA DRSTEWART S M D W SHOLIK ST ROCKPRAIRIERDWREDMANLN LONG DREMILY D R MID SUMMERLNTRANT S T CLAY STMIRAMONT CIRCARTERLAKEDROAKLEAF OLD OAKS DRCOL LEGE AV EJARVISLN 5TH STCROSSPARKDRHUNTERSRUN INDEPENDENCEAVEE28THSTPOTTER LNFLYWAYRD MCCULLOUGH RDVINCEN T R D CHACO CANYON DRPINTO RUNGAIL PLLISTERLNTHOUSAND OAKS RDSILKWOOD DR PARKWA YTERMORRIS L NFORESTDR BARNWOOD DRRIVARIDGERDSHELLBOURNESHLMINTERSPRINGRDMILLS STVINESTAVENUEBMEMORIALDRMICKTHEALNSPRINGLN PEC ANRIDGEDROAK STSTUART STTODD ST RIPPLEWOODCTROSERDPARK ST PINEWOODDRMCAL LES TERLNGARDENLNMAYST STONE CI T Y DR LYNNELLIOTTLNNAVIDADSTAUGUSTACIRPLE ASAN THILLRDHIGHLONESOMELATHAMBROOK HO LLO W D R JUNEST TALL TI M B ER DRHAUPT RDWATSON STWESTWOO D M A I NEDEN LNHENRY STHOLTSTNEVADA STFORESTWOODDR DRAKE DR CHEYENNE DR HOWARDSTBRAZOS DRCARVE RSTVALLEY VI E W DR WIL DFL OWER DR SUNNYB R O OK LNJONESSTLAMARSTTIME DRCARDINALLN WINDHAMRANCHRDKINGS GA T E D RMIDWESTDR LEDGESTONETRLSCANLIN ST LO UISST ASHSTW BRONZE LNCOUNTYRD-166BAMBOO STMARTASTBADDA N R D DEER C R EE K DRBURNETT STWESTCHESTERDRSLEEPY R- R R D ETHELBLVDTROTTER LNWHISPE RING RDG FOSTE R L NHARVEY STPARKMEADOWLNJUSTIN LNN TRADITIONS DRTWELVEOAKS REDBUD ST LESLIE DRLIS LNFOUNDERS DRW DODGE STBEL LAIREBL VDSDEXTERDRWOODSIDELN NARROW WAY KIMMY D R BARRO W C T APRICOT GLN ENTERPRISEAVEOAKSIDEDR TUCKER NUCKHILLTOP DRHORN RDANDOVER CTSQUIRE RDEPLACIDDR WILLOW BR O O K DRLUEDECKE L NE OAK HILL DRWALNUT CREEK CTHIDDEN ACRES DRRED RIVER DRTOLTEC TRLROLLING R D G OAK HILLS CIR KORSHE A W AY NEW STHARDY STLIVE OAK ST GREEN TREE CIRTRIPLE BEND CIRDONA DRS TEXAS A V E PUMA DREMORYOAKDRPLEASANT STHICKORYRIDGECIRPOST OAK BNDCRENSHAW CIRWELLBORN HTSNOTTI N G HAM DR BUTLE R RI D G E D R SHELLY LNRIDGEDAL E ST WILDERN ESS DR CRENS H A W LN FRIARSTRAN D L N DAKOTA RIDGE DRPARK RDGCRYSTAL LNEDGEMORE DRTRANQUI L LI T Y C I R COPPER RIVER DR TURNB ERR Y CI R WILD PLUM STLOBO DRHILL CIRFOX CIRBRONCO CI R BOLTON AVESTOCKTON D RBRITON DRBONNIE LNBLANCO LNKUBIN ST COMAL CIRCADDO C V STEFA NI E D R PERRY LNCAJUN CUTOFF LNRAYMONDSTOTZERPKWYMEMORIALDR BURTSTBLUERIDGEDRE27THSTVINCENT RDARHOPULOSRDPOTTER LNW BRONZE LNW 28TH STEAST B Y P LEONARD RDTURK RANCH RDE 30TH STPOLO RDKATHYFLEMINGRDNavasotaRiverLickCreekPeachCreek Brazos RiverPantherCreek OldRiverBeeCreekBrushyCreekWhiteCreek HopesCreekAlumCreekWicksonCreek GibbonsCreekSpringCreekTurkeyCreekBurtonCreekStillCreekHudsonCreekCottonwoodBranchRockyCreekMillicanCreek Dr yCreek Roc kLa ke Cre ekSandyBranchCedarCreekBoggyCreekThompsonsCreekOldRiverBru shy CreekCarters Creek03,0006,000SCALE IN FEETLEGEND!AProposed Impact Fee EligibleTransfer Valve(#UTProposed Impact Fee EligibleElevated Storage TankProposed Impact Fee EligibleWater LineExisting Impact Fee EligibleWater Line!(Interconnection(#UTElevated Storage TankUTGround Storage Tank[ÚPump Station6" and Smaller Water Line8" and Larger Water LineRoadRailroadStreamImpact FeeWater Service AreaCity LimitETJ BoundaryCounty LineOther City LimitTAMU BoundaryFIGURE 3-1CITY OF COLLEGE STATIONWATER SYSTEMIMPACT FEE CIP PROJECTS!ICreated By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: CCL16175Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\Deliverables\04_Final_LUA_Report\(Figure_3-1)-IF_W_CIP.mxdUpdated: Friday, October 07, 2016User Name: 02499The utility alignment shown on this figure are for illustration purposesonly and do not set the alignment. The alignment will be determinedat the time of engineering design of the utility.Land Acquisition for Well #10Land Acquisition for Well #9Well #9 Collection LineWell #9Cooling Tower Expansion(H(G(F(E(10Water Supply Well #10(DPage 18 of 231 !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(VäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäVäTXWWTPTXWWTPVäVäVäPeach Creek Lift StationNew 3 MGD Lift Station(14(10(9(2(3?c?c?c(1]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]LS 3LS 2LS 4AA LSFox Fire LSWestminster LSValley Park LSHensel Park LSNew Wet WellExpand to 6 MGD CapacityIndian Lakes LSCreek Meadow LSLuther Street LSDiversion Lift StationNew 4 MGD Lift StationExpand to 10 MGD CapacityCastlegate LSCrooked CreekPath LSRock Prairie LSLick Creek WWTPCapacity: 2.0 MGDExpand to 5 MGDExpand to 8 MGDCarters Creek WWTPRated Capacity: 9.5 MGDFunctional Capacity: 7.7 MGD(18(19(17(17(4(5(15(6(6(7(16(12(20(8(11(13(B(A12" 8"6"4"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"8"6"8"6"6"6"8" 8"6"8" 6"6"6"6"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"8"6"8"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"8"6"8"8"8"6"6"8"8"8"8" 6"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"8"8"8"6"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"8"8"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"6" 6"6"8" 6"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"8"6"8"6" 8"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"6"8"8"6"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"8"8"6"6"6"8"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"6"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"8"8"6"6"6"6"8"8"6"8"6"8"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"8"6"6"8"6" 6"8"8"6"6"8"8" 6"8"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"8"6"8"8"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"6"8"8"6"8"8"6"6"6" 6" 8"8"6"8"6"8"6"4"8" 8"6"8"6"8"8"8"6"6"6"8"8"8"6"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"8"8"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"8"6"6"8"6"6"8"6"8"8"8"8"6"6"8"6"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"6" 8"8"8"8"6"8" 6"6"6"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"6" 6"6"6"8"6"6"8"8"8"6" 8"6"6"6"6"8"8"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"8" 6"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"8"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"8"6"8"6"6"6"8"8"8"6"6"8"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"8" 8" 4"6"8"6"6"8"6"8"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"6" 6"8"8"8"8"8" 8"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"8"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"8"8"6"6"6"8"8"8"6"8"6"6"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"8"8"6" 8"8"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"6"6"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"6"8"8"6"6"8"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"8" 8"6"6"6"8"6"8" 6"8"8"8"8"6"8"6"8"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"8"6"8"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"6"8"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"8"8"6" 6"8"6"6"8"6"8"6"6"8" 8"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"8"6"8"6" 6"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"6"8"6"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"6" 8"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"6"6"8"6" 8"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"8"6"8"8"6"4"6"8" 8"6"8"6"6"8"6"8"6"6"8"8"8"6"8"8"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"8"6"8" 8" 6" 8"8"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"8"6"8"6"4"8"6"6"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"8"6"6"6"6"8"8"6"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"8"8"6"8"8"8"8"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"8"8"8"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"6"8"8"8"8"8"6"6"15"36"18"24"21"10"30"27"12"16"42"15"12"21"30"12"10"10"12"18"24"18"10"12"10"10"30"18"10"10"21"30"15"12"18"12"12"10"15"12"12"15"15"12"18"21"12"12"18"27"15"10"18"10"18"10"10"12"15"10"10"10"18"10"12"12"12"18"10"12"12"15"15"15"18"10"12"18"12"12"12"24"16"16"10"12"18"15"15"12"12"18"10"12"12"18"18"12"12"18"10"21"12"10"15"24"12"10"21"12"12"10"12"15"27"15"18"24"12"12"27"18"12"15"12"12"18"10"21"18"12"12"12"12"15"30"30"18"12"24'' F.M. 16'' F.M.16'' F.M.48''42''54''21''24''18''12''18''48''12''42''21''48''42''21''12''12" F.M.Texas A & M UniversityTexas A & M UniversityEAST BYP FM 2154 RDFM 50 R D COUNTY RD-190 E 29TH ST ROCK PRAIRIE RDJONES RDRIVER RDWILLIAM D FITCH PKWYI AND GN RDCOUNTY RD-175LEONARD RDBIRD POND RDFM-244UNIVERSITYDRECOLE LNHOPESCREEKRD BOONEV ILLERDKOPPE BRIDGE RDPEACHCREEKRDCAVITT A V E BARRON RDKEMP RD W VILLA MARIA RDARRINGTON RD TONK A WAY L A KE RD N DOW LI NG RDROESE RDEARLRUDDERFWYS BARAK LNFM-60E VILLA MARIA RDHARDY WEE D O N RD F AND B RDNGRAHAMRDBECK STLEANINGOAKSLNBROAD MOORDR SDOWLINGRDNUNN JONES RDW 28TH STN EARLRUDDER FWY COUNTY RD 174 CARTER CR EEK PK W Y FM159RDWEEDON LOOPNAVASOTARDGFINFEAT H ER R D QUAIL RUNSTRAUBRDCHICK LNPIPELINE R D BRIARCRESTDRE 25TH ST E WM J BRYAN PKWYGANDYRDCOUNTY RD 172JOHN RICE DRHICKS LNBRADLEY RDCOUNTY RD-173LINDA L N N HAR VEY MITC HEL L PKWY DUSTYRDS MAIN ST FISHTANKRDLOST TR L WO ODLAKEDRPA LASO TADROAK DRWELLBO R N R DELMO WEEDON RDNAGLE S TBAWMKERRD OLDEN LNE 27TH ST GROESBECK STCAPSTONE DRDEER R UN IND IANLAKE SDRLUTHER ST WAR HOPUL OS RD WHITE CR E EK RDW 26TH STE 30TH S T WBYPASSPATE RDSULPHURSPRINGSRDTIMBERLINEDRE 26TH ST WA YSIDEDRDEWRDOLSEN B L V DGEORGEBUSHDR ALACIA CT GEORGE BUSH DR WSTOUSLANDRDFM 158 RDPEACH CREEK CUT OFFBATTSFERRYRDOLDJONESRDBOXLEY BND LACY WE LL RD DEBBIE LN FRIERSONRDUNIVERSITY DRFOUNTAINAVE TURKEYCREEKRD DEER PARK DRECHOL S ST GOLDEN TRL NOR WOO DLN BITTLE LNFMROAD2818RDENCHANTEDOAKSDRS ENNIS STPAINTTRLHARPERSFERRYRDROSES RDCOUNTY RD-192FOSTER RDCHEROKEE DR STRADITIONSDRTEE DRCLAY PIT RDDOGWO ODTRLFAVORRDBENTWOODDRFM-2818 SUZANNE PL NANTUCKETDR BAKER AVEFM 2818 R D W CHARLO TTE L N RAYMONDSTOTZERPKWYCOKE S T ESTHER BLVDSMI THLNCAMELO T D R PRIVATE ROAD 4007LIGHTSEY L N PRATT RDWILDHORSERUNABBATERDE 31ST ST NROSEMARYDRLUZA STHUNTERSCREEKRD AGRON O M Y R D WAYFARERLNLEE AVEKATHYFLEMINGRDCOUNTYRD-269W CARSON ST1ST ST OLDBARKERRANCHRDS OAKS DRWALNUT RD HICKORY R D COUNTY RD-401GOLDE N MI S T HARRIS DRPIPER LNSUNCREST STGREEN VALL EY DRWESTWOO DMAINDR SWE ETWA TER DRGR EATOAKSDR CLLKENT S T S SIMS AVEOAKHILLDRLAZY LNLEHRLNWCANTERBURYDRCAJUN RI D G E R D BALL CIRTA NGLEWOODDRWOODCRESTDR HIGGS D R WADE RDS BRYAN AVEW 27TH STLABRISADRBIZZELL ST TATUM STARBOR DRBLUE RIDGE DRCALUM ET T R L SHILOHDRTURK RANCH RDELM AVEWINDING CRKBRIAR OAKS DRRODEMEL RANCH RDFREMAN SCHOOLRDBARRONCUTOFFRDINWOODDRASPEN S T DYMPLE LNLAVADA LNRAINBOWTRLSO UTHFORKRD CREAGOR LNS HUTCHINS STOWLTREELNALICE STGOLD NU G G ET T ENFIELD STROBIN DRWINDSOR DRRIVER PLACE CTPENDLETONDRASHL EYL NSGORDONSTWBRIARGATEDR SH ARO NDRRIVER RIDGE DRFM-1179HOLLY DR ROANSCHAPELRDHILLRDVALLEYCIRCAMBRIDGEDRJOE ROUTT BLVDBUGGY LNHOLICK LN WOOD LAND DR CONNI E L NMISTY LNFO WLERDRMESAVERDEDRDAIRY CENTER RDPENBER T HY R DLEWIS STBURT ST AVON ST POLORDS FORK LNCLUB DRCOPPERFIELDDRADA OAKS WILLIAMSON DRNASHSTLAKE STHOUST O N ST JOHNKIMBROUGHBLVDDEERFIELDDRBRIGHTON DRJAGUAR DR RUNAWAYRDSTEWART S M D W S BURGESS RD ROCKPRAIRIERDWNEW MAIN DRREDMANLN LONG DREMILY D RTRANT S T CLAY STMIRAMONT CIRDELMA DROAKLEAF WDUNCANSTJARVISLN CROSSPARKDRHUNTERSRUNINDEPENDENCEAVEE 28TH S T RICHAR D ST AVONDALE AVEPOTTER LNFLYWAYRDDISCOVER Y D R VINCEN T R DTRAVIS ST PINTO RUN LYNETTE CIRLISTERLNTHOUSAND OAKS RDSILKWOOD DR PARKWA YTERBURTONDRMORRIS L N UNION STDURRAND STFORESTDR BARNWOOD DRMEADOWLNQUAIL HOLLOW DRRIVA RID GERDSHELLBOURNESHLMINTERSPRINGRDVINESTAVENUE BINA MA E A LL E N RD MEMORIAL DRSTALLIONRDGMICKTHEALNSPRING LNPEC ANRIDGEDROAK STSTUARTSTTODD ST OLD MAIN DRRIPPLEWOODCTROSERDPARK ST PINEWOODDRMCAL LES TERLNGARDEN LNMAY STSTONE CI T Y DR YEGUA STLYNNELLIOTTLNNAVIDADSTROSS STTEXASWORLDSPEEDWAYINDUST RI AL BL V D PLE ASAN THILLRDHIGHLONESOMELATHAMJUNE STTALL TI M B ER DR EMMETT STWESTWOO D M A I NEDEN LNHENRY STPAR DRFORESTWOODDR DRAKE DR S TABOR AVEHOWARD STBRAZOS DRCARVE RSTVALLEY VI E W DRCYPRESSRDWIL DFL OWER DR SUNNYB R O OK LNJONESSTCEDARBENDRD SPENCEST CLOISTERSDR ANTO N E ST SESAMESTLAMAR STTIME DRWINTER STWINDHAMRANCHRDKINGS GA T E D RMIDWESTDRKRISTILNSCANLIN ST LO UISST KENNE D Y P L W BRONZE LNCOUNTYRD-166BAMBOOSTBADDA N R DGOESSLER RDCLAYTONLNDEER C R EE K DR SUNNYDALE DOT THOLLOWHILL DRSLEEPY R- R R D STATE RD ETHELBLVDTROTTER LNWHISPE RIN G R D GDEBBIEDRKIRKWOODDR FOSTE R L NDOE CIRHARVEY STPARKMEADOWLNIRELANDST JUSTIN LN HOPPE SS STN TRADITIONS DRTWELVEOAKS REDBUD ST LESLIE DRLIS LNFOUNDERS DRW DODGE STBEL LAIREBL VDCRANE A V EWOODSIDELN S LOGAN AVENARROW WAY SHOUSTONAVEKIMMY D R BARRO W C T HICKORYNUTLNHANUS STSANDPIPER CVDILLONAVE HORN RDSHILOHAVEEPLACIDDR WILLOW BR O O K DRLUEDECKE L N DAFLYN LNSUL ROSS DRVERDEDROAK CIRE OAK HILL DRHUNTWOOD DR WALNUT CREEK CTRAVINE AVECAEO U SEL L N KOENIG STKOCH STTOLTEC TRLSTILLWAT E R R DFINNEY ROLLING R D G OAK HILLS CIR CLAN VLG KORSHE A W AY HARDY STGREEN TREE CIRS TEXAS A V E COTTONWOOD STBINA ST PUMA DREMORYOAKDRDARWIN AV EFKENNICOLASAVE HICKORYRIDGECIRPOST OAK BNDCRENSHAW CIRSHORTRDHEATHER GL N DALTON RIDGEDAL E ST CRICKET PASS CRENS H A W LN IRISLNRENWICK DRSTRAN D L N JOHNSONCREEKLOOP DAN WILLIA MS LN ADRIANC E LAB RDANTLER CIRSMUGGLERSRDCRYSTAL LNBRYANT S T SPRUCEWOOD STTRANQUI L LI T Y C I R HOGG STLOBO DRTIFFANY PARK DRHILL CIRS COULTER DRBOB WHITE STSOUTH DR STOCKTON D RBONNIE LNKAZMEIER PLZKNIGHT DRSANDIA PLZFLAG STON E C T RICHMO N D AVE CADDO C V PERRY LNCAJUN CUTOFF LNFIELDSVIRGINIA S TE 28TH STEAST B Y P E 26TH ST POLO RDLEONARD RDPOTTER LNARHOPULOSRDW BRONZE LNTURK RANCH RDLIND ALNW 28TH STKENT STROSS STBLUERIDGEDRRAYMONDSTOTZERPKWYS TEXA S A VE KATHYFLEMINGRD VINCENT RDNavasotaRiverLi ck Cree kPeachCreekBrazos RiverPantherCreek OldRiverBeeCreekBrushyCreekWhiteCreek HopesCreekAlumCreekWicksonCreek GibbonsCreekTurkeyCreekBu rtonCreekStillCreekHudsonCreek CottonwoodBranchRockyCreekMillicanCreek Dr yCreek Roc kLa ke Cre ekSandyBranchCedarCreekBoggyCreekThompsonsCreekBru shy Creek OldRiverCarters CreekCity of Bryan03,0006,000SCALE IN FEETFIGURE 3-2CITY OF COLLEGE STATIONWASTEWATER SYSTEMIMPACT FEE CIP PROJECTS!ICreated By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: CCL16175Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\Deliverables\04_Final_LUA_Report\(Figure_3-2)-IF_WW_CIP_No_Inset.mxdUpdated: Wednesday, October 12, 2016User Name: 02499LEGEND!(ManholeVäProposed Impact Fee EligibleLift StationProposed Impact Fee EligibleGravity LineExisting Impact Fee EligibleGravity LineProposed Impact Fee EligibleForce MainVäLift StationTXWWTPWastewater Treatment Plant8" and Smaller Wastewater Line10" and Larger Wastewater Line8" and Smaller Force Main10" and Larger Force MainRoadRailroadStreamImpact FeeWastewater Service AreaCity LimitETJ BoundaryCounty LineOther City LimitTAMU BoundaryThe utility alignment shown on this figure arefor illustration purposes only and do not setthe alignment. The alignment will be determinedat the time of engineering design of the utility.Lift stations and interceptors are sized for peakwet weather flows and wastewater treatmentplants are sized for average day flows.Page 19 of 231 2016 Roadway Impact Fee Study November 2016 City of College Station, Texas 22 Table 5.A – 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP with Conceptual Level Cost Projections – Service Area A Service Area Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Cost in Service Area A-1 MAJ2 Pavilion Ave. Extension Sebesta Rd. to SH 6 NBFR 2,434,000$ A-2 MAJ2 Dartmouth St. Extension Emerald Pkwy. to S Texas Ave.1,224,000$ A-3 MAJ2 Lassie Ln. Extension Sterling St. to Manuel Dr.302,000$ A-4, B-1 MAJ6 (1/3)S Texas Ave.Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. to Deacon Dr.166,000$ A-5, D-1 MAJ4 Rock Prairie Rd. (1) Medical Ave. to Bird Pond Rd.1,666,500$ A-6 MAJ4 Harvey Rd. Appomattox Dr. to Boonville Rd. (CL)3,249,600$ A-7, D-2 MIN4 Bird Pond Rd. Rock Prairie Rd. to 4,830' NE of Bird Pond Estates (CL)5,594,000$ A-8 MIN4 Linda Lane Harvey Rd. to 560' SE of Harvey Rd. (CL)785,000$ I-1 75,000$ I-2 750,000$ I-3 150,000$ I-4 300,000$ 16,696,100$ 22,125$ 16,718,225$Total Cost in SERVICE AREA A2016 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service AreaSA A Service Area Project Cost Subtotal University Dr. and University Towne Center Signal S Texas Ave. and Walton Dr. Signal Holleman Rd. and S. Texas Ave. Improvement S Texas Ave. and Deacon Dr. Signal a.These planning level cost projections have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Projects within the City of College Station. b.These planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. Page 20 of 231 PLACIDBIRD POND DRIVEFR O S T D R I V E FAULKNER DRIVEFOXFIRE DRIVESTON EBROOK DR IV ESEBESTA ROADEMERALD PARKWAY APPOMATTOX DRIVEKRENEK TAP ROADR A I N T R E E D R I V E COLGATE DRIVEMANUEL DRIVES T E X A S A V E N U E GE O R G E B U S H D R I V E E STAL L INGS DR IVE HOLLEMAN DRIVE EA P P O M A T T O X D R I V E HARVEY ROADDOMINIK DRIVEG L E N H A V E N D R I V E FRANCIS DRIVELINCOLN AVENUESPRING LOOP UNIVERSITY DRIVE E C O P P E R F I E L D P A R K W A Y BOONV I L L E R O A D C O L L E G E A V E N U E N A G L E S T R E E T W E L B O R N R O A D N UNIVERSITY DRIVEHA R V E Y M I T C H E L L P A R K W A YGEORGE BUSH DRIVELUTHER STREET WJ O N E S B U T L E R R O A DMARION PUGH DR IVE FA I R V I E W A V E N U E WEL LBORN RD SOUT H W E ST P A R K W AY S D E X T E R D R I V E G L A D E S T R E E T AN D E R S O N S T R E E T S O U T H W O O D D R I V E N U E C E S D R I V E WE L SH A V E NU E RI O G R A N D E B O U L E V A R D POND E R O S A R O A D MEDICAL AVENUEROCK PRAI R I E R O A D D-4B- 7 A-6B-8D-3 A-7, D- 2A-2A-1A- 4 , B - 1 B- 9 B-2, C-1 A-5, D-1 A- 8 A- 3 5 4 3 1 2 Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend è Intersections Other Thoroughfare Facilities New Project 2008 Bond 2015 Bond Reconstruction Exhibit 2A CIP - Service Area A N010.5 Miles November 2016 Page 21 of 231 2016 Roadway Impact Fee Study November 2016 City of College Station, Texas 23 Table 5.B – 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP with Conceptual Level Cost Projections – Service Area B ServiceArea Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Cost in Service Area A-4, B-1 MAJ6 (1/3)S Texas Ave. Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. to Deacon Dr.166,000$ B-2, C-1 MAJ6 Rock Prairie Rd. (1) Normand Dr. to SH 6 1,967,862$ B-3, C-2 MAJ2 Rock Prairie Rd. (2) 1,500' E. of Holleman Dr. (CL) to Wellborn Rd.2,492,500$ B-4 MAJ2 Rock Prairie Rd. (3)360' W. of Great Oaks Dr. (CL) to Holleman Dr.3,714,000$ B-5 MIN4 Holleman Dr. (1) Rock Prairie Rd. to N Graham Rd.2,317,000$ B-6 MIN4 Holleman Dr. (2) N Dowling Rd. to Rock Prairie Rd.10,305,000$ B-7 MAJ6 (1/3)Wellborn Rd. University Dr. to Harvey Mitchell Pkwy.1,165,400$ B-8 MAJ2 Luther St. Penberthy Rd. to Marion Pugh Dr.1,346,000$ B-9 MIN4 Penberthy Rd. Goerge Bush Dr. to Luther St.3,006,373$ B-10 MAJ2 Turkey Creek Rd. S Traditions Dr. to Raymond Stotzer Pkwy.3,141,000$ B-11 MAJ2 F and B Rd. Turkey Creek Rd. to Harvey Mitchell Pkwy.2,298,000$ B-12 MAJ6 (1/3)University Dr. Harvey Mitchell Pkwy. to Wellborn Rd.534,200$ I-1 75,000$ I-2 750,000$ I-3 150,000$ I-5 1,190,232$ 34,618,567$22,125$ 34,640,692$ S Texas Ave. and Deacon Dr. Signal Service Area Project Cost Subtotal2016 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service AreaTotal Cost in SERVICE AREA BSA B Wellborn Rd. and George Bush Dr. S Texas Ave. and Walton Dr. Signal Holleman Rd. and S. Texas Ave. Improvement a.These planning level cost projections have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Projects within the City of College Station. b.These planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. Page 22 of 231 FR O S T D R I V E FAULKNER DRIVEFOXFIRE DRIVES TON EBROOK DR I VESEBESTA ROADEMERALD PARKWAY APPOMATTOX DRIVEKRENEK TAP ROADRA I N T R E E D R I V E COLGATE DRIVEMANUEL DRIVES T E X A S A V E N U E G E O R G E B U S H D R I V E E S TA LL INGS DR IV E HOLLEMAN DRIVE EAPPOMATTOX D R I V EHARVEY ROADCOLLEG E A V E N U E N A G L E S T R E E TWE L B O R N R O A D NF AND B ROADUNIVERSITY DRIVEH A R V E Y M I T C H E L L P A R K W A Y T U R K E Y C R E E K R O A D HA R V E Y M I T C H E L L P A R K W A YGEORGE BUSH DRIVELUTHER STREET WJ O N E S B U T L E R R O A DMARION PUGH DR IVE FA I R V I E W A V E N U E WELLBORN RD SOUT H W E ST P A R K W AY S D E X T E R D R I V E G L A D E S T R E E T AN D E R S O N S T R E E T S O U T H W O O D D R I V E N U E C E S D R I V E WE L S H A V EN U E RI O G R A N D E B O U L E V A R D DEACON DRIVEPOND E R O S A R O A D LONGM IR E DR IV EARNOLD R OAD GRAHAM ROADMONTIER DRIVEN GRAHAM ROADDEACON W DRIVECAIN ROADN DOWLING ROADHOLLEMAN DR IVE SARBOLEDA DRIVEN GRAHAM ROADEAGLE AVENUEBARRON ROADSOUTHERN PLANTATION DRIVEWILLIAM D FITCH PARKWAY BARRON CUT OFF ROADMEDICAL AVENUEROCK PRAIRIE ROADB- 7 B-6B-12C-9D- 5B-8D-9B-4 A-7, D-2D-8B - 1 0 C-13A-2C- 1 0 A-1C-3A- 4 , B - 1B-11C- 1 1B-3, C-2C- 2 5 B- 9 B-5 B-2, C- 1 C-6 A-5, D-1 C-8A- 3 C-76 5 3 1 2 Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend è Intersections Other Thoroughfare Facilities New Project 2008 Bond 2015 Bond Reconstruction Exhibit 2B CIP - Service Area B N010.5 Miles November 2016 Page 23 of 231 2016 Roadway Impact Fee Study November 2016 City of College Station, Texas 24 Table 5.C – 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP with Conceptual Level Cost Projections – Service Area C ServiceArea Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Cost in Service Area B-2, C-1 MAJ6 Rock Prairie Rd. (1) Normand Dr. to SH 6 1,967,862$ B-3, C-2 MAJ2 Rock Prairie Rd. (2) 1,500' E. of Holleman Dr. (CL) to Wellborn Rd.2,492,500$ C-3 MAJ2 N Graham Rd. Old Wellborn Rd. to 2,075' W of Old Wellborn Rd. (CL)1,967,000$ C-4 MAJ4 Wellborn Rd. (1)Capstone Dr. to Greens Prairie Rd.1,281,800$ C-5 MAJ4 Wellborn Rd. (2) Greens Prairie Rd. to 540' S of Greens Prairie Trl.1,172,000$ C-6 MIN4 Capstone/Barron Realignment Wellborn Rd. to 210' W of Piccadilly Cir.2,289,000$ C-7 MIN4 Barron Rd. (1) 210' W of Piccadilly Cir. to Barron Cut Off Rd.939,000$ C-8 MIN4 (1/2)Barron Rd. (2) Barron Cut Off Rd. to William D Fitch Pkwy.494,000$ C-9 MIN4 Barron Rd. (3) William D Fitch Pkwy. to Decatur Dr.7,801,145$ C-10 MIN4 (1/2)WS Phillips Pkwy. (1) Barron Rd. to 1740' S of Barron Cut Off Rd.1,939,000$ C-11 MIN4 (1/2)WS Phillips Pkwy. (2) 1740' S of Barron Cut Off Rd. to Odell Ln.1,634,000$ C-12 MAJ2 Etonburg Barron Cut Off Rd. to McCullough Rd. Extension 1,665,000$ C-13 MAJ2 McCullough Rd. Extension 2530' E of Wellborn Rd. to WS Phillips Pkwy.3,037,000$ C-14 MAJ2 S. Dowling/McCullough I & G Rd. to 2485' E of I & G Rd.2,350,000$ C-15 MAJ2 Future 2 Lane Major Collector S. Dowling/McCullough to Greens Prairie Rd. Extension 1,372,000$ C-16 MAJ2 Greens Prairie Rd. Extension (1) I & G Rd. to 565' E of I & G Rd. (CL)541,000$ C-17 MAJ2 Greens Prairie Rd. Extension (2) 995' W of Welborn Rd. (CL) to Wellborn Rd.1,346,000$ C-18 MIN4 Greens Prairie Rd. (1) Wellborn Rd. to Royder Rd.561,000$ C-19 MAJ2 Greens Prairie Rd. (2) Royder Rd. to 750' E of Turnberry Cir.3,213,000$ C-20 MAJ2 Greens Prairie Rd. (3) 750' E of Turnberry Cir. to Greens Prairie Trl.2,592,000$ C-21 MIN4 Royder Rd. Greens Prairie Rd. to 885' S of Greens Prairie Trl.4,930,000$ C-22 MIN4 Greens Prairie Trl. (1) Wellborn Rd. to 1000' W of Woodlake Dr.6,960,000$ C-23 MIN4 Greens Prairie Rd. (4) 465' E of Future Etonburg to Arrington Rd.4,230,000$ C-24 MIN4 WS Phillips Pkwy. Extension Greens Prairie Rd. to Arrington Rd.11,500,000$ C-25 MAJ2 Victoria Ave. Southern Plantation Dr. to William D Fitch Pkwy.1,828,530$ I-6 776,335$ I-7 300,000$ 71,179,172$22,125$ 71,201,297$ Wellborn Rd. and S Dowling Rd. Signal William D Fitch Pkwy. and Victoria Ave. SignalSA C Service Area Project Cost Subtotal2016 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service AreaTotal Cost in SERVICE AREA C a.These planning level cost projections have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Projects within the City of College Station. b.These planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. Page 24 of 231 STONEBROOK D R IVE HARVEY M I T C H E L L P A R K W A YLUTHER STREET WJONES B U T L E R R O A DWEL LBORN RDWE L SH AV E NU E RI O G R A N D E B O U L E V A R D DEACON DRIVEPOND E R O S A R O A D LONGM I R E DR I V EARNOLD R OAD GRAHAM ROADMONTIER DRIVEN GRAHAM ROADDEACON W DRIVECAIN ROADN DOWLING ROADHOLLEMAN DR IVE SARBOLEDA DRIVEN GRAHAM ROADCAPSTON E D R I V E EAGLE AVENUEBARRON ROADSOUTHERN PLANTATION DRIVEWILLIAM D FITCH PARKWAY BARRON CUT OFF ROADMCCULLOUGH ROADI & G ROADVICTORIA AVENUEWELLBORN ROADGREENS PRAIRIE TRAILR O Y D E R R O A D ARRINGTON ROADNANT U C KET D RIVEVENTURE DRIVELA K E W A Y D R I V EMEDICAL AVENUEROCK PRA I R I E R O A D ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WILLIAM D FITCH PARKWAYP E B B L E C R E E K P A R KW A Y BIRKDALED-18D - 1 2 D-4 D-15D-15B-6 C- 2 4 D-13C-4C-23C-5D-10 C-9D- 5 C-22D-16 C- 2 1 D-9D-3 B-4 D-8D- 1 1 D - 7 C-19C-13D- 6 C- 2 0 C- 1 0C-3C-14 C- 1 1B-3, C-2C- 2 5B-5 B-2, C- 1 C-6 A-5, D-1 C-15C-17 C-8C- 1 2C-7C-16 C-18 7 6 Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend è Intersections Other Thoroughfare Facilities New Project 2008 Bond 2015 Bond Reconstruction Exhibit 2C CIP - Service Area C N010.5 Miles November 2016 Page 25 of 231 2016 Roadway Impact Fee Study November 2016 City of College Station, Texas 25 Table 5.D – 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP with Conceptual Level Cost Projections – Service Area D Service Area Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Cost in Service Area A-5, D-1 MAJ4 Rock Prairie Rd. (1) Medical Ave. to Bird Pond Rd.1,666,500$ A-7, D-2 MIN4 Bird Pond Rd. Rock Prairie Rd. to 4,830' NE of Bird Pond Estates (CL)5,594,000$ D-3 MAJ4 Rock Prairie Rd. (2) Bird Pond Rd. to Bradley Rd.5,046,000$ D-4 MIN4 Rock Prairie Rd. (3) Bradley Rd. to 2,610' E of Campbell Ct. (CL)23,733,000$ D-5 MAJ2 Lakeway Dr. (1) Medical Ave. to Pebble Creek Pkwy.8,703,000$ D-6 MAJ2 Lakeway Dr. (2)Pebble Creek Pkwy. to 1,910' N of William D. Fitch Pkwy.2,946,000$ D-7 MAJ2 Lakeway Dr. (3) 940' S of Technology Way to Future Nantucket Dr.4,022,000$ D-8 MAJ2 Ritchey Rd. SH 6 NBFR to Rock Prairie Rd.3,964,000$ D-9 MIN4 Bird Pond Rd. Extension SH 6 to Rock Prairie Rd.8,894,000$ D-10 MAJ2 Pebble Creek Pkwy. (1) SH 6 NBFR to William D. Fitch Pkwy.9,100,000$ D-11 MAJ2 Pebble Creek Pkwy. (2) Royal Adelade Dr. to St. Andrews Dr.896,000$ D-12 MAJ2 Pebble Creek Pkwy. (3) St. Andrews Dr. to Future Nantucket Dr.4,886,000$ D-13 MAJ6 (1/3)William D. Fitch Pkwy. (1) Lakeway Dr. to Rock Prairie Rd.4,392,000$ D-14 MAJ6 William D. Fitch Pkwy. (2) Rock Prairie Rd. to 9,700' E of Tonkaway Lake Rd. (CL)40,890,000$ D-15 MIN4 Future Nantucket Dr. SH 6 to East City Limits 19,735,000$ D-16 MAJ2 Future East-West Major Collector Pebble Creek Pkwy. to East City Limits 5,772,000$ D-17 MAJ2 Future North-South Major Collector Future East-West Major Collector to Future Nantucket Dr.3,176,000$ D-18 MIN4 Barron Rd. Extension Lakeway Dr. to Rock Prairie Rd.12,930,000$ 166,345,500$ 22,125$ 166,367,625$SA D Service Area Project Cost Subtotal 2016 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service AreaTotal Cost in SERVICE AREA D a.These planning level cost projections have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Projects within the City of College Station. b.These planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. Page 26 of 231 PLACIDBIRD POND DRIVEFR O S T D R I V E FAULKNER DRIVEFOXFIRE DRIVES TONEBROOK DR IV ESEBESTA ROADEMERALD PARKWAY APPOMATTOX DRIVEKRENEK TAP ROADRI O G R A N D E B O U L E V A R D POND E R O S A R O A D LO NGM I RE DR I V E ARNOL D ROAD GRAHAM ROADMONTIER DRIVEEAGLE AVENUEBARRON ROADSOUTHERN PLANTATION DRIVEWILLIAM D FITCH PARKWAY BARRON CUT OFF ROADMCCULLOUGH ROADVICTORIA AVENUEARRINGTON ROADNANT UCKET D RIVEVENTURE DRIVEL A K E W A Y D R I V EMEDICAL AVENUEROCK PRA I R I E R O A D ROCK PRAIRIE ROADWILLIAM D FITCH PARKWAYP E B B L E C R E E K P A R KW A Y BIRKDALEPIPELINE ROADD-18D- 1 2 D-4 D-14D-15D-13C-4C-23D-10 C-9D- 5 D-16D-9D-3 A-7, D- 2 D-8D- 1 1 D- 7 C-19D-17C-13D- 6A-2C- 2 0 C- 1 0 A-1A- 4 , B - 1 C- 1 1 C- 2 5 B-2, C- 1 C-6 A-5, D-1 C-8C- 1 2C-76 1 Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend è Intersections Other Thoroughfare Facilities New Project 2008 Bond 2015 Bond Reconstruction Exhibit 2D CIP - Service Area D November 2016 N010.5 Miles Page 27 of 231 November 4, 2021 Regular Agenda System-Wide Impact Fee Study Updates for Water, Wastewater, and Roadway To: Impact Fee Advisory Committee From: Carol Cotter, Planning & Development Services Jason Schubert, Planning & Development Services Stephen Maldonado, Jr., Water Services Agenda Caption: Public hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an amendment to land use assumptions, capital improvement plans, and max impact fees for system-wide water, wastewater, and roadway impact fee study updates. Relationship to Strategic Goals: Core Services and Infrastructure, and a Diverse Growing Economy Recommendation: Staff requests the Impact Fee Advisory Committee (IFAC) provide written comments (collectively or individually) regarding the proposed amended land use assumptions, capital improvement plans, and resulting max impact fee calculations. To comply with timing requirements of state law, written comments are due to staff by Thursday, November 11, 2021. Summary: System-wide impact fees were adopted in fall 2016 for water, wastewater, and roadways. As per state law, impact fee studies are to be updated at least every five years. The Impact Fee Advisory Committee (IFAC) reviews the land use assumptions (10-year growth projections), capital improvement plans, and impact fees of the study updates and provides written comments to City Council. Written comments can be as general or as specific as desired but should pertain to whether the study’s methodology and assumptions are reasonable. In addition, IFAC helps monitor implementation of the impact fees between study updates through review of semi-annual reports. Discussion and consideration of any changes to the existing impact fee collection rates will be considered as part of a subsequent item. The City has contracted with Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. (KHA) to perform the roadway impact fee study update and Freese and Nichols, Inc. (FNI) for the water and wastewater impact fee study updates. IFAC was presented an overview of impact fees on August 5, 2021. The draft land use assumptions and draft capital improvement plans were presented to IFAC for discussion on September 2, 2021 and to City Council on September 23, 2021. During the update process, staff hosted a Builder and Developer Breakfast forum on July 29, 2021 to provide an overview of impact fees and receive initial feedback. A development stakeholder meeting was also held on August 23, 2021 along with other stakeholder contacts and discussions that occurred during the process. Page 28 of 231 The discussions held with IFAC, City Council and stakeholders resulted in revisions to the draft study updates. Most feedback involved the roadway impact fee study. The proposed roadway capital improvement plan was revised to remove potential roadway projects where wastewater capacity improvements were not likely to occur within the 10- year horizon of the study. These projects included removal of widening projects for portion of Rock Prairie Road West and Holleman Drive South in Roadway Service Area B. Stakeholders requested that roadways that were likely to be constructed by development during the platting process be removed for the impact fee capital improvements project lists. The basis for the request was that development would be required to build roadways as per City ordinances but would not receive impact fee credit for those improvements if they were roughly proportionate to their development so not eligible for credit. The project costs for several roadways have been reduced in the proposed study to assume that development will construct at least a Minor Collector portion (2 lanes) of a Major Collector and two of the four lanes of a Minor Arterial for the future thoroughfares that are located across tracts of land. The Major Collectors were reduced to 42% of their total cost which reflects the percentage increase from a 38-foot wide Minor Collector to a 54-foot wide Major Collector. The Minor Arterial projects were reduced to 50% of total cost to reflect removal of two of the four lanes. Projects that are expected to be constructed in whole or majority by the City were not reduced. The Major Collector projects reduced are: • D-7 (Durham Drive) • D-14 (Lakeway Drive) • D-15 (Mather Parkway) • D-17 (Nantucket Drive) The Minor Arterial projects reduced are: • C-11 (WS Phillips Parkway) • D-9 (Town Lake Drive) • D-13 (Pebble Creek Parkway) • D-16 (Nantucket Drive) • D-18 (Southern Pointe Parkway) These adjustments reduced the total cost of impact fee capital improvement projects in Service Area C by $7,311,480 and in Service Area D by $31,183,060 ($10,470,060 from Major Collector reductions and $20,713,000 from Minor Arterial reductions). Another main item requested by stakeholders has been to remove projects that have already been completed by the City, have had funds allocated toward them, or were included in prior bond elections. Staff recommends not to make these revisions as the projects are eligible impact fee projects since they have excess capacity available that future development will utilize, and the City is paying debt service toward them. For wastewater, the City has used impact fees as a funding source to pay debt service of projects that have been completed. Removal of completed projects will remove the opportunity to continue to use impact fee funds toward debt service of those projects. When the debt service of a project has been paid off, it is no longer an eligible impact fee project and would be removed as part of future impact study updates. Page 29 of 231 The complete descriptions of proposed land use assumptions, capital improvement plans, and resulting max impact fee calculations are found in the attached impact fee studies. The draft land use assumptions and capital improvement plans seen previously have been finalized. Some of the study information is summarized here for your convenience: Demand Generated by Land Use Assumptions (Projected 10-Year Growth) Impact Fee Type Demand Generated Water 14,044 living unit equivalents (LUEs) Wastewater 12,905 living unit equivalents (LUEs) Roadway Service Area A 18,125 vehicle miles Roadway Service Area B 15,945 vehicle miles Roadway Service Area C 12,076 vehicle miles Roadway Service Area D 16,625 vehicle miles Impact Fee Capital Improvement Costs Attributable to Growth Impact Fee Type Total Capital Costs Capital Cost Attributable to Growth Water $67,722,554 $43,760,813 Wastewater $189,748,166 $65,290,309 Roadway Service Area A $13,915,012 $9,388,254 Roadway Service Area B $48,390,353 $20,859,844 Roadway Service Area C $78,250,564 $26,639,782 Roadway Service Area D $74,492,580 $59,527,697 Maximum Assessable Impact Fees Impact Fee Type 2021 Max Fee Per Service Unit 2016 Max Fee Per Service Unit Water $3,877 $2,917 Wastewater $5,572 $5,519 Roadway Service Area A $499 $1,061 Roadway Service Area B $1,261 $1,072 Roadway Service Area C $2,127 $2,556 Roadway Service Area D $3,452 $4,004 Attachments: 1. 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study 2. College Station, Texas Roadway Impact Fee Update Page 30 of 231 COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS ROADWAY IMPACT FEE UPDATE October 2021 Prepared for the City of College Station Prepared by: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 801 Cherry Street, Suite 1300 Fort Worth, TX 76102 Phone 817 335 6511 TBPE Firm Registration Number: F-928 Project Number: 061271428 © Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.DRAFTPage 31 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update i October 2021 City of College Station, Texas TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary...........................................................................................................................1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................4 Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Inputs ...........................................................................................6 Land Use Assumptions ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Capital Improvement Plan ............................................................................................................................ 12 Methodology for Roadway Impact Fees ........................................................................................ 19 Service Areas................................................................................................................................................... 19 Service Units ..................................................................................................................................................... 19 Cost of the CIP ................................................................................................................................................. 22 Service Unit Calculation ................................................................................................................................. 32 Cost Per Service Unit ...................................................................................................................................... 37 Roadway Impact Fee Calculation .................................................................................................. 38 A.Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit .................................................................................. 38 B.Plan For Financing and the Ad Valorem Tax Credit ............................................................................... 40 C.Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development ........................................................................................ 43 Sample Calculations ....................................................................................................................... 47 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 48 Appendices Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections CIP Service Units of Supply Existing Facilities Inventory Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee CreditDRAFT Page 32 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update ii October 2021 City of College Station, Texas LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Residential and Employment Land Use Assumptions Growth Projections (2021-2031) ......................... 11 Table 2. Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees - Service Area A ................................................... 13 Table 3. Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees - Service Area B.................................................... 13 Table 4. Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees - Service Area C ................................................... 14 Table 5. Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees - Service Area D ................................................... 14 Table 6. Level of Use for Proposed Facilities (used in Appendix B – CIP Service Units of Supply).................... 20 Table 7. Level of Use for Existing Facilities (used in Appendix C – Existing Facilities Inventory) ........................ 21 Table 8. Construction Cost Pay Items ................................................................................................................................. 24 Table 9. 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections – Service Area A ..................................................................................................................................... 28 Table 10. 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections – Service Area B ..................................................................................................................................... 29 Table 11. 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections – Service Area C ..................................................................................................................................... 30 Table 12. 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections – Service Area D ..................................................................................................................................... 31 Table 13. Transportation Demand Factor Calculations ................................................................................................. 35 Table 14. 10-year Growth Projections ............................................................................................................................. 36 Table 15. Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee Computation ......................................................................... 38 Table 16. Maximum Assessable Impact Fee .................................................................................................................... 42 Table 17. Land-Use Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET) .................................................................................. 45DRAFT Page 33 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update iii October 2021 City of College Station, Texas LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1. Roadway Service Areas........................................................................................................................................ 8 Exhibit 2. CIP - Service Area A ........................................................................................................................................... 15 Exhibit 3. CIP - Service Area B ........................................................................................................................................... 16 Exhibit 4. CIP - Service Area C ........................................................................................................................................... 17 Exhibit 5. CIP - Service Area D ........................................................................................................................................... 18 DRAFTPage 34 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 1 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study was performed to update the City of College Station’s Roadway Impact Fees. Roadway Impact Fees were last performed in 2016. The state’s impact fee law (CH 395) requires that municipalities with Impact Fee Programs update their impact fee studies every five years. The implementation of impact fees allows the City to shift a portion of the burden of paying for new facilities onto new development. System improvements necessary to serve 10-year (2031) and ultimate system needs were evaluated. Typically, infrastructure improvements are sized beyond the 10-year requirements; however, Chapter 395 only allows recovery of costs to serve the 10-year planning period. The remainder can be assessed as the planning window extends beyond 2031 and as the impact fees are updated in the future. Elements of the Roadway system, including new roads, widening projects, and intersections were evaluated based on the City’s Thoroughfare Plan, as explained in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) section of this report. Based on the City’s 10-year growth projections and the associated demand (consumption) values, the table below shows the additional vehicle-miles that will be generated by new development by the year 2031: Service Area A B C D 2021-2031 Growth (Veh-Miles)18,125 15,945 12,076 16,625 In order to provide the capacity needed to accommodate the projected increase in vehicle- miles, the Roadway Impact Fee CIP was developed. A credit for the portion of ad valorem taxes projected to be generated by the new service units is deducted from the CIP cost according to Chapter 395 requirements. The cost of the Roadway Impact Fee CIP in each service area (attributable to growth) is shown in the table below: Service Area A B C D Cost of the CIP Attributable to Growth $9,388,254 $20,859,844 $26,639,782 $59,527,697DRAFT Page 35 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 2 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas The maximum assessable fee is then calculated by dividing the recoverable cost of the CIP by the growth in vehicle-miles in each service area. Based on the additional service units and the recoverable cost of the CIP, (with credit for ad valorem taxes), the Maximum Fees the City may assess per service unit and per single-family home are shown below: Service Area A B C D 2021 Maximum Assessable Fee PerService Unit($/Veh-Mi) $499 $1,261 $2,127 $3,452 2021 Maximum Assessable Fee Per Single-Family Home(1 Single-FamilyHome = 3.76 Veh-Mi) $1,876 $4,741 $7,997 $12,979 The 2021 maximum assessable fees are less than those in the former 2016 Roadway Impact Fee Study for Service Areas A, C, and D, and the maximum assessable fee for Service Area B has increased. The 2016 Roadway Impact Fee Study results are shown below: Service Area A B C D 2016 Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit($/Veh-Mi) $1,061 $1,072 $2,556 $4,004 2016 Maximum Assessable Fee Per Single-Family Home(1 Single-FamilyHome = 4.00 Veh-Mi) $4,244 $4,288 $10,224 $16,016 The maximum impact fee per vehicle mile and maximum impact fee per single-family home in each service area are shown in Exhibit A.DRAFTPage 36 of 231 B D A C SH 6 N GRAHAM ROADROCK PRAIRIE R OAD TE X A S A V E N U E S BIRD POND ROADEsri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend City Limits Service Areas A B C D Exhibit A NService Areas October 2021 0 10.5 Miles DRAFTPage 37 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 4 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas INTRODUCTION Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code describes the procedure Texas cities must follow in order to create and implement impact fees. Chapter 395 defines 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 capital improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to the new development.” The City has retained Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide professional transportation engineering services for the 2021 update of their Roadway Impact Fees. This report includes details of the Roadway Impact Fee calculation methodology in accordance with Chapter 395, the applicable Land Use Assumptions, development of the Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan, and the Land Use/Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table. This report introduces and references two of the basic inputs to the Roadway Impact Fee: 1.Land Use Assumptions (Pg. 6) 2.Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)(Pg. 12) Information from the Land Use Assumptions and CIP is used extensively throughout the remainder of the report. This report consists of a detailed discussion of the methodology for the computation of impact fees and is broken into three components: 1.Methodology for Roadway Impact Fees (Pg. 19) 2.Roadway Impact Fee Calculation (Pg. 38) 3.Plan for Financing and the Ad Valorem Tax Credit (Pg. 40)DRAFTPage 38 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 5 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas The components of the Methodology for Roadway Impact Fees include development of: ·Service Areas ·Service Units ·Cost Per Service Unit ·Cost of the CIP ·Service Unit Calculation The components of the Roadway Impact Fee Calculation include: ·Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit ·Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development This report also includes a section concerning the Plan for Financing and the Ad Valorem Tax Credit. This involves the calculation of the applicable credit required by law to offset the City’s use of ad valorem taxes to help fund the CIP. This plan, prepared by Eddie Peacock, CPA, and upon which we relied, 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 update analysis and summarizes the report.DRAFTPage 39 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 6 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CALCULATION INPUTS LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS Purpose Impact Fees are a mechanism for funding the public infrastructure necessitated by growth. In the most basic terms, impact fees are meant to recover the incremental cost of the impact of each new unit of development growth creating new infrastructure needs. In order to assess an impact fee, Land Use Assumptions must be developed to provide the basis for residential and employment growth projections within a municipality. As defined by Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code, these assumptions include a description of changes in land uses, densities, and development in the service area. The land use assumptions are then used in determining the need and timing of transportation improvements to serve future development. The section documents the process used to develop the Land Use Assumptions for the City of College Station Impact Fee study. In accordance with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code, street impact fees must be calculated based on reasonable expectations of residential and employment growth within the next ten years (2021 – 2031). The following resources provided the information required to complete the Land Use Assumptions: ·Detailed historical building permit data ·Projected new developments and focus areas data ·Currently platted developments ·College Station Future Land Use Plan / Comprehensive Plan ·City of College Station Staff Components of the Land Use Assumptions Chapter The Land Use Assumptions include the following components: 1.Impact Fee Study Service Areas - Explanation of the divisions of College Station into service areas for roadway service areas.DRAFTPage 40 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 7 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas 2.Land Use Assumptions Methodology - An overview of the general methodology used to generate the land use assumptions. 3.Ten-Year Growth Assumptions - Walk-through of the growth projections for 2021- 2031. Impact Fee Study Service Areas Service Area Definition According to Chapter 395 of the Local Government Code, a Service Area refers to the area within the corporate boundaries or extraterritorial jurisdiction of the political subdivision to be served by the capital improvement or facilities specified in the Capital Improvement Plan. Funds collected in the specific service areas must be spent in the service area collected. Chapter 395 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.” This resulted in the creation of four (4) service areas in the City of College Station. There is no change from the initial establishment of the service areas in the 2016 study except for minor changes due to City Limit modifications. Roadway Impact Fee Service Areas The geographic boundaries of the four (4) impact fee service areas for roadway facilities are shown in Exhibit 1. 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. The service areas east/west boundary is Texas Avenue, while a combination of Rock Prairie Road, North Graham Road, and Bird Pond Road compose the north/south boundaries. 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 facility within the City Limits area are included in the service area.DRAFTPage 41 of 231 B D A C SH 6 N GRAHAM ROADROCK PRAIRIE R OAD TE X A S A V E N U E S BIRD POND ROADEsri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend City Limits Service Areas A B C D NExhibit 1Service Areas October 2021 0 10.5 Miles DRAFTPage 42 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 9 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Land Use Assumptions Methodology The following factors were considered in developing the residential and employment projections: ·Character, type, density, location and quantity of existing development; ·Growth trends; ·Location of vacant land; ·Future Land Use Map and Growth Areas; ·Physical restrictions (i.e. flood plains); and ·Planned development data. The residential and employment estimates were all compiled in accordance with the following categories: Residential Units - Number of residential dwelling units, including single-family and multi-family Employment - Square feet of building area based on three (3) different classifications. Each classification has unique trip making characteristics. Basic - Land use activities that produce goods and services, including those that are exported outside the local economy (i.e. manufacturing, construction, transportation, wholesale, trade, warehousing, and other industrial uses) Service - Land use activities which provide personal and professional services such as government and other professional offices 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 (i.e. grocery stores and restaurants)DRAFTPage 43 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 10 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas The above categories in the Land Use Assumptions match those used to develop the City’s travel demand modeling and are the broader land use categories that are used in the development of the assumptions for impact fees. In the calculation of the specific Roadway Impact Fee, a more specific and expanded classification based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual will be utilized. Growth projections for the next 10 years (2021 – 2031) for the City of College Station were established using three data sources: known residential developments, specific focus areas, and other City-identified infill growth areas. Known Residential Developments The City provided existing data for known residential developments that was used to project for residential needs. Specific Focus Areas Four (4) focus areas of growth are projected to experience growth from 2021 – 2031 and based on information from the City detailed growth projects were developed. These four areas included University Drive East in Service Area A, Northgate and BioCorridor in Service Area B, and Midtown in Service Area D. City-Identified Infill Growth Areas The City-identified infill growth areas consist of many locations, varying in size and land use of vacant land that would be infilled. Different land use densities or floor area ratios were applied based on the land use classification of each development identified in the Future Land Use Plan.DRAFTPage 44 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 11 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas 10-Year Growth Assumptions Table 1 summarizes the growth projections by service area. Table 1. Residential and Employment Land Use Assumptions Growth Projections (2021-2031) Service Area Single-Family (Units) Multi-Family (Units) Basic (Sq. Ft.) Service (Sq. Ft.) Retail (Sq. Ft.) SA A 410 2,038 -1,174,000 1,480,000 SA B 429 1,937 350,000 1,063,000 953,000 SA C 1,824 127 -506,000 469,000 SA D 693 751 984,000 1,089,000 895,000 Total 3,356 4,853 1,334,000 3,832,000 3,797,000 For comparison purposes, College Station had 12,774 units of residential growth (single- family and multi-family) and approximately 8,000,000 square feet of employment growth (basic, service, and retail) from 2011 – 2020. College Station experienced record growth during this time period. Based on the next ten-year growth projections within College Station City Limits, residential growth is projected to slow but employment is consistent.DRAFTPage 45 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 12 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN The City has identified the transportation projects needed to accommodate the projected growth within the City. The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Roadway Impact Fees is made up of: ·Recently completed projects with excess capacity available to serve new growth (previous bond projects); ·Projects currently under construction; and ·Selection of growth necessitated projects part of the City’s Thoroughfare Plan. The CIP includes thoroughfare roadway facilities as well as intersection improvements. All thoroughfare facilities are part of the Thoroughfare Plan per the 2021 Comprehensive Plan. Minor collectors are not identified as impact fee eligible projects because these facilities are intended to primarily serve specific developments and not serve regional transportation purposes. The CIP for the 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update is listed in Tables 2-5 and mapped in Exhibits 2-5. The table shows the length of each project as well as the facility’s 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 offset the transportation demands generated by the growth projected in Table 1.DRAFTPage 46 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 13 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Table 2. Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees - Service Area A Table 3. Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees - Service Area B Service Area Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Length (mi) % In Service Area A-1 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E DOMINIK DRIVE TO HARVEY ROAD 0.29 100% A-2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR LASSIE LANE STERLING STREET TO MANUEL DRIVE 0.06 100% A-3 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR DARTMOUTH STREET 720' S OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S TO TEXAS AVENUE S 0.42 100% A-4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT HARVEY ROAD SH 6 NBFR TO BOONVILLE ROAD 2.29 100% A-5, D-1 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 NBFR TO STONEBROOK DRIVE 0.41 50%A-6, D-2 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD STONEBROOK DRIVE TO TOWN LAKE DRIVE 0.59 50%A-7, D-8 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL BIRD POND ROAD ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TO 1055' E OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 0.20 50%1 100%2 100%3 50% A UNIVERSITY DRIVE E AND UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER SIGNALHARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S AND DARTMOUTH STREET TEXAS AVENUE S AND BROTHERS BOULEVARD ServiceArea Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Length(mi) % InService Area B-1 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL F & B ROAD 160' E OF TURKEY CREEK ROAD TO HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 0.49 100% B-2 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)LUTHER STREET W HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY TO JONES BUTLER ROAD 0.68 100%B-3, C-1 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WEST 715' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY TO WELLBORN ROAD 0.63 50%B-4, C-2 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD NORMAND DRIVE TO SH 6 0.48 50%B-5 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR TURKEY CREEK ROAD 2775' N OF RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WBFR TO RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WBFR 0.53 100%B-6 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY TO WELLBORN ROAD 2.62 100%B-7 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL PENBERTHY ROAD GEORGE BUSH DRIVE TO LUTHER STREET W 0.40 100% B-8 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT WELLBORN ROAD GEORGE BUSH DRIVE TO 940' N OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 1.23 100% B-9 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR JONES BUTLER ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S TO HOLLEMAN DRIVE S 0.22 100% B-10 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL HOLLEMAN DRIVE S N DOWLING ROAD TO 290' S OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W 1.62 100%3 50%4 100%5 100%6 100%7 100%8 100% B WELLBORN ROAD AND HOLLEMAN DRIVEWELLBORN ROAD AND DEACON DRIVEHOLLEMAN DRIVE W AND JONES BUTLER ROADLONGMIRE DRIVE AND PONDEROSA DRIVE TEXAS AVENUE S AND BROTHERS BOULEVARDWELLBORN ROAD AND GEORGE BUSH DRIVEDRAFT Page 47 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 14 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Table 4. Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees - Service Area C Table 5. Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees - Service Area D Service Area Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Length (mi) % In Service Area B-3, C-1 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WEST 715' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY TO WELLBORN ROAD 0.63 50%B-4, C-2 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD NORMAND DRIVE TO SH 6 0.48 50%C-3 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL BARRON ROAD WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY TO DECATUR DRIVE 1.39 100%C-4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL CAPSTONE DRIVE 1265' W OF WELLBORN ROAD TO WELLBORN ROAD 0.24 100% C-5 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL BARRON ROAD WELLBORN ROAD TO WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY 0.49 100%C-6 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 820' W OF WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY TO ARRINGTON ROAD 1.43 100% C-7 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD WELLBORN ROAD TO 1290' E OF CREEK MEADOW BOULEVARD N 1.27 100% C-8 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL TOWERS PARKWAY ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W TO WELLBORN ROAD 1.00 100%C-9 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT WELLBORN ROAD CAPSTONE DRIVE TO 540' S OF GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 2.36 100%C-10 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY BARRON ROAD TO GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 1.31 100%C-11 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD TO ARRINGTON ROAD 1.55 100%C-12 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)ROYDER ROAD EXTENSION I-GN ROAD TO WELLBORN ROAD 0.22 100% C-13 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL ROYDER ROAD WELLBORN ROAD TO 885' S OF GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 1.03 100% C-14 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR VICTORIA AVENUE SOUTHERN PLANTATION DRIVE TO WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 0.48 100% 9 100% 10 100%11 100%12 100%13 100%14 100% C BARRON ROAD AND LONGMIRE DRIVELONGMIRE DRIVE AND EAGLE AVENUEWILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY AND VICTORIA AVENUE SIGNAL GRAHAM ROAD AND VICTORIA AVENUE BARRON ROAD AND ALEXANDRIA AVENUEBARRON ROAD AND DECATUR DRIVE ServiceArea Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Length(mi) % InService Area A-5, D-1 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL (1/2)ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 NBFR TO STONEBROOK DRIVE 0.41 50% A-6, D-2 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD STONEBROOK DRIVE TO TOWN LAKE DRIVE 0.59 50% D-3 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TOWN LAKE DRIVE TO WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 1.89 100% D-4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL MIDTOWN DRIVE MEDICAL AVENUE TO 990' E OF MEDICAL AVENUE 0.19 100%D-5 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)MIDTOWN DRIVE 990' E OF MEDICAL AVENUE TO 800' S OF TOWN LAKE DRIVE 0.43 100% D-6 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR MIDTOWN DRIVE 800' S OF TOWN LAKE DRIVE TO 2605' S OF CORPORATE PARKWAY 0.98 100%D-7 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR DURHAM DRIVE MIDTOWN DRIVE TO ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 0.40 100% A-7, D-8 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL BIRD POND ROAD ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TO 1055' E OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 0.20 50%D-9 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)TOWN LAKE DRIVE SH 6 NBFR TO MIDTOWN DRIVE 0.37 100% D-10 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR CORPORATE PARKWAY SH 6 NBFR TO MIDTOWN DRIVE 0.26 100%D-11 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR CORPORATE PARKWAY MIDTOWN DRIVE TO WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 1.21 100% D-12 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY ROYAL ADELADE DRIVE TO ST ANDREWS DRIVE 0.38 100%D-13 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY ST ANDREWS DRIVE TO 275' S OF LONE STAR LANE 1.96 100% D-14 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR LAKEWAY DRIVE 1645' S OF GATEWAY BOULEVARD TO SH 6 NBFR 1.02 100%D-15 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR MATHER PARKWAY NANTUCKET DRIVE TO 1920' S OF NANTUCKET DRIVE 0.36 100% D-16 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)NANTUCKET DRIVE SH 6 NBFR TO PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY 1.22 100%D-17 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR NANTUCKET DRIVE PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY TO SOUTHERN POINTE PARKWAY 1.20 100% D-18 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)SOUTHERN POINTE PARKWAY 205' W OF PIPELINE ROAD TO 280' E OF NANTUCKET DRIVE 0.87 100% DDRAFT Page 48 of 231 A-4A-6, D-2A-3A-7, D-8A- 1 A-5, D-1 A- 2 SH 6 TE X A S UNIVERSIT Y HARVEYBIRD PONDDA RTMOUTH SOUTHWESTCO P P E R F I E L D TARROWLASSIEGEORGEBUSHE 3 2 1 Legend FUTURE THOROUGHFARE WIDENING PARTIAL WIDENING CONSTRUCTED - EXCESS CAPACITY OTHER THOROUGHFARES !INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT - FUTURE !INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT - CONSTRUCTED NExhibit 2CIP - Service Area A October 2021 0 10.5 MilesDRAFT Page 49 of 231 TE X A S W E L L B O R N HARVE Y MI T C H E L LF & B ROADHOLLEMANH O P E C R E E K GEORGE BUSHN DOWLINGSOUTH WEST ROCK PR AIRIERAYMOND STOTZERS H 6 ROCK P R AIRIEWUNIVERSITYC O L L E G E LUTHERT U R KE Y C R E E K P E N B E R T H Y B-6 B- 10 B - 8 B-2B- 5B-1B- 7 B-3, C-1B-4, C-2 B-9 8 3 7 6 5 4 Legend FUTURE THOROUGHFARE WIDENING PARTIAL WIDENING CONSTRUCTED - EXCESS CAPACITY OTHER THOROUGHFARES !INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT - FUTURE !INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT - CONSTRUCTED NExhibit 3CIP - Service Area B October 2021 0 10.5 MilesDRAFT Page 50 of 231 SH 6 I-GNWELLBORNBARRONW S P H I L L I P S ARRINGTONGREENS PRAIRIEROCK P RAI RIE WILLIAM D FITCH R O Y D ER TOWE R S CAPSTON E C-9C-6C-3C- 1 1 C-7C-1 0 C-8 C- 1 3 C-14C-5C-12B-3, C-1B-4, C-2 C-4 9 13 14 12 11 10 Legend FUTURE THOROUGHFARE WIDENING PARTIAL WIDENING CONSTRUCTED - EXCESS CAPACITY OTHER THOROUGHFARES !INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT - FUTURE !INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT - CONSTRUCTED NExhibit 4CIP - Service Area C October 2021 0 10.5 MilesDRAFT Page 51 of 231 SH 6 ROCK PRA I R I E WILLIAM D FITCHP E B B L E C R E E KBIRD PONDN A N T U CK ETC O RPORATE LAKEWAYTOWNLAKEMI D T OW N D-3 D- 1 3D-16D- 6 D-11 D-17 D-1 4 D-18D-7D- 5 D-9A-6, D-2 A-7, D-8D- 1 2 D-4 D-15A-5, D-1 D-108 3 6 Legend FUTURE THOROUGHFARE WIDENING PARTIAL WIDENING CONSTRUCTED - EXCESS CAPACITY OTHER THOROUGHFARES !INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT - FUTURE !INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT - CONSTRUCTED NExhibit 5CIP - Service Area D October 2021 0 10.5 MilesDRAFT Page 52 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 19 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas METHODOLOGY FOR ROADWAY IMPACT FEES SERVICE AREAS The four (4) service areas used in the 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update are shown in the previously referenced Exhibit 1. These service areas cover the entire corporate boundary of the City of College 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 four (4) mile limit. 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 unit is defined as a vehicle-mile. On the supply side, this is a lane-mile of a thoroughfare 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 commonly used as the basis for transportation planning and the estimation of trips created by new development. Another aspect of the service unit is the service volume that is provided (supplied) by a lane- mile of roadway facility. This number, also referred to as capacity, is a function of the facility type, facility configuration, number of lanes, and level of service. Below is the definition for vehicle-mile. Vehicle-Mile: The capacity consumed in a single lane in the PM peak hour by a vehicle making a trip one mile in length. Total Vehicle-Miles of Supply: Based on the total length (miles), number of lanes, and capacity (vehicles per hour) provided. Total Vehicle-Miles of Demand: Based on the 10-year growth projections. The demand is equal to PM Trip Rate (trips) * Trip Length (miles).DRAFTPage 53 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 20 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas The hourly service volumes used in the 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update are based upon generally accepted thoroughfare capacity criteria.Table 6 shows the service volumes as a function of the proposed facility type and Table 7 shows the service volumes as a function of the existing facility type. Table 6. Level of Use for Proposed Facilities (used in Appendix B – CIP Service Units of Supply) Roadway Type (Thoroughfare Plan Classification) Median Configuration Hourly Vehicle-Mile Capacity per Lane-Mile of Roadway Facility 6-Lane Major Arterial (TxDOT) Divided 950 4-Lane Major Arterial (TxDOT) 6-Lane Major Arterial Divided 750 4-Lane Major Arterial Divided 650 4-Lane Minor Arterial 2-Lane Major Collector Undivided 550DRAFT Page 54 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 21 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Table 7. Level of Use for Existing Facilities (used in Appendix C – Existing Facilities Inventory) Roadway Type Description Hourly Vehicle-Mile Capacity per Lane-Mile of Roadway Facility 2U-R Rural Cross Section (i.e., gravel, dirt, etc.)150 2U Two-Lane Undivided 425 2D Two-Lane Divided 500 3UO Three-Lane Undivided One-Way 5503UThree-Lane Undivided (TWLTL) 3D Three-Lane Divided 4U Four-Lane Undivided 525 4D Four-Lane Divided 650 5U Five-Lane Undivided (TWLTL)600 6D Six-Lane Divided 750 *High speed, limited access TxDOT roadways have an assumed capacity of 950 vpmpl.DRAFTPage 55 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 22 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas COST OF THE CIP All of the project costs for an arterial or major collector facility which serves the overall transportation system are eligible to be included in 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.” 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, and any other special components are added to each project as appropriate. In addition, based upon discussions with City of College Station staff, TxDOT driven projects have been included in the CIP as a 20% portion to the total cost where the City anticipates contributing a portion of the total project costs. The following is a detailed description of the costing worksheet/methodology for the Roadway Impact Fee CIP. Where actual project costs are known or the project has been designed, those specific cost amounts are utilized in lieu of the conceptual level project cost projections.DRAFTPage 56 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 23 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas 1)Overview of Roadway Impact Fee CIP Costing Worksheets A costing worksheet was developed for each project (see Appendix A). Each worksheet contains project information, construction pay items, construction component allowances, and a summary of costs and allowances. An example costing sheet is provided below. Project Information Construction Pay Items Construction Component Allowances Summary of Costsand AllowancesDRAFT Page 57 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 24 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas 2)Project Information In order to correctly estimate the cost of a roadway project, several attributes are first identified: ·Project Number – Identifies each project with a corresponding number. The corresponding number does not represent any prioritizations and is used only to identify projects. ·Name – A unique identifier for each project. ·Limits – Represents the beginning and ending location for each project. ·Impact Fee Class – The costing class to be used in the analysis. The impact fee class provides the width for the various elements in the roadway. The construction costs are variable, based on the proposed Thoroughfare Plan classification of the roadway. ·Length (ft) – The distance measured in feet that is used to cost out the project. ·Service Area(s) – Represents the service area(s) where the project is located. ·Description – Used to describe the project type assumed in the costing such as a widening or new construction. 3)Construction Pay items A typical roadway project consists of several costs, including the following: planning, survey, design engineering, permitting, right-of way acquisition, construction, and inspection. While the construction cost component of a project may contain approximately 100 various pay items, a simplified approach was used for developing the conceptual level project costs. The pay items for both concrete and asphalt roads are shown in Table 8. Table 8. Construction Cost Pay Items Concrete Pay Items Asphalt Pay Items ·Unclassified street excavation ·Lime Stabilization ·Concrete pavement and curb ·Topsoil ·Sidewalk ·Turn lanes and median openings ·Unclassified street excavation ·Lime Stabilization ·Type C asphalt top layer ·Type B asphalt base layers ·Sidewalk ·Curb and gutter ·Turn lanes and median openingsDRAFT Page 58 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 25 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas 4)Construction Component Allowances A percentage of the paving construction cost is allotted for various major construction component allowances, as appropriate. These allowances include traffic control, pavement markings and signage, roadway drainage, illumination, minor water and sewer adjustments, landscaping, and irrigation. These allowance percentages are based on historical data. In addition, lump sum dollar allowances are provided for special drainage structures, railroad crossings, and intersection improvements where needs are anticipated. The paving and allowance subtotal is given a fifteen percent (15%) contingency, five percent (5%) mobilizations, and three percent (3%) preparation of right-of-way to determine the construction cost total. 5)Summary of Cost and Allowances To determine the total Impact Fee Project Cost, 12% of the construction cost total is added for engineering, surveying, and testing. Another 20% of the construction cost total is added for ROW/easement acquisition for new projects. This percentage is reduced to 10% where the roadway already exists. TxDOT facilities assume no ROW/easement acquisition allotted. The construction costs are variable based on the proposed classification of the roadway. Additional classifications are utilized in cases where a portion of the facility currently exists. The classification followed by (1/2) is used for facilities where half the facility still needs to be constructed. The Impact Fee Project Cost Total is then the Construction Cost Total plus engineering, surveying, testing, and inspection; plus, ROW/easement acquisition. Based upon discussions with City of College Station staff, state highway projects were included with a projected contribution of twenty percent (20%) of the total project. In addition, some projects already have been identified for contributions other than the City. These project’s costs are reduced to account for other contribution sources. Tables 9-12 comprise the CIP project list for the City of College Station with conceptual level project cost projections. Individual project cost worksheets 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 thatDRAFT Page 59 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 26 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas 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 created for the City of College Station introduces 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. 6)Major Collector Adjustment Based on initial calculations of Project Costs for Major Collector facilities, it was determined that an adjustment factor needed to be applied to ensure a more appropriate and suitable cost for this specific project type. To determine the total Impact Fee Project Cost of a newly constructed Major Collector facility, a delta value was calculated based on the cross- sectional width of Collectors and Local Roads for the City of College Station, shown below: College Station Roadway Impact Fee Major Collector Adjustment Calculation Step 1 Calculate Delta. Major Collector Pavement: 54 Feet Minor Collector Pavement: 38 Feet “Delta”: (54 – 38) / 38 = 0.42 = 42% This 42% adjustment factor was applied to all project costs for new major collectors in the City of College Station that are anticipated to be constructed by development. The adjustment represents the oversized participation that the City would potentially credit/offset a development for building a major collector based on the City’s rough proportionality policy. Major collectors that need widening remained at the full cost of the roadway facility because this facility is anticipated to be widened by the City.DRAFTPage 60 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 27 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas 7)50% Arterial Adjustment Additional classifications are utilized in cases where only a portion of the roadway is impact fee eligible due to anticipated developer contributions. For future arterials projected to be constructed through development properties, two lanes are anticipated to be constructed by the future developers. For these projects, only 50% of the project cost is impact fee eligible, indicated with classifications being followed by “50%”.DRAFTPage 61 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 28 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Table 9. 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections – Service Area A Notes: 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 Subdivision Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for aspecific project.c.The project cost total within Service Area may differ from the total shown in the Summary sheets contained within Appendix A due to some projects that are split between City limits and ETJ. Service Area Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Length (mi) % In Service Area Total Project Cost Cost in Service Area A-1 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E DOMINIK DRIVE TO HARVEY ROAD 0.29 100%2,409,500$2,409,500$ A-2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR LASSIE LANE STERLING STREET TO MANUEL DRIVE 0.06 100%860,066$860,066$ A-3 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR DARTMOUTH STREET 720' S OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S TO TEXAS AVENUE S 0.42 100%2,423,520$2,423,520$ A-4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT HARVEY ROAD SH 6 NBFR TO BOONVILLE ROAD 2.29 100%2,509,696$2,509,696$ A-5, D-1 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 NBFR TO STONEBROOK DRIVE 0.41 50%2,164,000$1,082,000$ A-6, D-2 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD STONEBROOK DRIVE TO TOWN LAKE DRIVE 0.59 50%5,136,000$2,568,000$ A-7, D-8 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL BIRD POND ROAD ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TO 1055' E OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 0.20 50%1,758,000$879,000$ 1 UNIVERSITY DRIVE E AND UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER SIGNAL 100%400,000$400,000$ 2 HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S AND DARTMOUTH STREET 100%566,992$566,992$ 3 TEXAS AVENUE S AND BROTHERS BOULEVARD 50%397,476$198,738$ 12,731,782$ 1,165,730$ 17,500$ 13,915,012$ A Service Area Project Roadway Cost Subtotal 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area Service Area Project Intersection Cost Subtotal Total Cost in SERVICE AREA ADRAFT Page 62 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 29 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Table 10. 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections – Service Area B Notes: 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 Subdivision Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for aspecific project.c.The project cost total within Service Area may differ from the total shown in the Summary sheets contained within Appendix A due to some projects that are split between City limits and ETJ. Service Area Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Length (mi) % In Service Area Total Project Cost Cost in Service Area B-1 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL F & B ROAD 160' E OF TURKEY CREEK ROAD TO HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 0.49 100% 4,106,520$4,106,520$ B-2 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)LUTHER STREET W HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY TO JONES BUTLER ROAD 0.68 100% 2,903,600$2,903,600$ B-3, C-1 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WEST 715' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY TO WELLBORN ROAD 0.63 50% 4,659,868$2,329,934$ B-4, C-2 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD NORMAND DRIVE TO SH 6 0.48 50% 4,017,530$2,008,765$ B-5 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR TURKEY CREEK ROAD 2775' N OF RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WBFR TO RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WBFR 0.53 100% 3,278,140$3,278,140$ B-6 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY TO WELLBORN ROAD 2.62 100% 1,407,527$1,407,527$ B-7 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL PENBERTHY ROAD GEORGE BUSH DRIVE TO LUTHER STREET W 0.4 100% 3,080,683$3,080,683$ B-8 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT WELLBORN ROAD GEORGE BUSH DRIVE TO 940' N OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 1.23 100% 1,486,464$1,486,464$ B-9 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR JONES BUTLER ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S TO HOLLEMAN DRIVE S 0.22 100% 9,652,780$9,652,780$ B-10 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL HOLLEMAN DRIVE S N DOWLING ROAD TO 290' S OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W 1.62 100% 10,631,012$10,631,012$ 3 TEXAS AVENUE S AND BROTHERS BOULEVARD 50% 397,476$198,738$ 4 WELLBORN ROAD AND GEORGE BUSH DRIVE 100% 1,190,232$1,190,232$ 5 WELLBORN ROAD AND HOLLEMAN DRIVE 100% 644,445$644,445$ 6 WELLBORN ROAD AND DEACON DRIVE 100% 4,532,013$4,532,013$ 7 HOLLEMAN DRIVE W AND JONES BUTLER ROAD 100% 572,000$572,000$ 8 LONGMIRE DRIVE AND PONDEROSA DRIVE 100% 350,000$350,000$ 40,885,425$ 7,487,428$ 17,500$ 48,390,353$Total Cost in SERVICE AREA B B Service Area Project Roadway Cost Subtotal 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area Service Area Project Intersection Cost SubtotalDRAFT Page 63 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 30 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Table 11. 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections – Service Area C Notes: 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 Subdivision Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. c.The project cost total within Service Area may differ from the total shown in the Summary sheets contained within Appendix A due to some projects that are split between Citylimits and ETJ. Service Area Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Length (mi) % In Service Area Total Project Cost Cost in Service Area B-3, C-1 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WEST 715' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY TO WELLBORN ROAD 0.63 50% 4,659,868$2,329,934$ B-4, C-2 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD NORMAND DRIVE TO SH 6 0.48 50% 4,017,530$2,008,765$ C-3 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL BARRON ROAD WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY TO DECATUR DRIVE 1.39 100% 5,795,317$5,795,317$ C-4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL CAPSTONE DRIVE 1265' W OF WELLBORN ROAD TO WELLBORN ROAD 0.24 100% 2,765,575$2,765,575$ C-5 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL BARRON ROAD WELLBORN ROAD TO WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY 0.49 100% 4,712,977$4,712,977$ C-6 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 820' W OF WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY TO ARRINGTON ROAD 1.43 100% 10,550,324$10,550,324$ C-7 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD WELLBORN ROAD TO 1290' E OF CREEK MEADOW BOULEVARD N 1.27 100% 8,918,740$8,918,740$ C-8 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL TOWERS PARKWAY ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W TO WELLBORN ROAD 1.00 100% 10,030,680$10,030,680$ C-9 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT WELLBORN ROAD CAPSTONE DRIVE TO 540' S OF GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 2.36 100% 2,407,328$2,407,328$ C-10 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY BARRON ROAD TO GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 1.31 100% 5,844,160$5,844,160$ C-11 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD TO ARRINGTON ROAD 1.55 100% 7,311,480$7,311,480$ C-12 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)ROYDER ROAD EXTENSION I-GN ROAD TO WELLBORN ROAD 0.22 100% 3,360,000$3,360,000$ C-13 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL ROYDER ROAD WELLBORN ROAD TO 885' S OF GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 1.03 100% 7,686,614$7,686,614$ C-14 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR VICTORIA AVENUE SOUTHERN PLANTATION DRIVE TO WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 0.48 100% 1,973,927$1,973,927$ 9 GRAHAM ROAD AND VICTORIA AVENUE 0.00 100% 350,000$350,000$ 10 BARRON ROAD AND ALEXANDRIA AVENUE 0.00 100% 320,994$320,994$ 11 BARRON ROAD AND DECATUR DRIVE 0.00 100% 350,000$350,000$ 12 BARRON ROAD AND LONGMIRE DRIVE 0.00 100% 350,000$350,000$ 13 LONGMIRE DRIVE AND EAGLE AVENUE 0.00 100% 350,000$350,000$ 14 WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY AND VICTORIA AVENUE SIGNAL 0.00 100% 816,249$816,249$ 75,695,821$ 2,537,243$ 17,500$ 78,250,564$ Service Area Project Roadway Cost Subtotal 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area C Total Cost in SERVICE AREA C Service Area Project Intersection Cost SubtotalDRAFT Page 64 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 31 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Table 12. 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees with Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections – Service Area D Notes: 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 ofCollege Station.b.The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.c.The project cost total within Service Area may differ from the total shown in the Summary sheets contained within Appendix A due to some projects that are split between Citylimits and ETJ. Service Area Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Length (mi) % In Service Area Total Project Cost Cost in Service Area A-5, D-1 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL (1/2)ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 NBFR TO STONEBROOK DRIVE 0.41 50% 2,164,000$1,082,000$ A-6, D-2 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD STONEBROOK DRIVE TO TOWN LAKE DRIVE 0.59 50% 5,136,000$2,568,000$ D-3 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TOWN LAKE DRIVE TO WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 1.89 100% 17,245,000$17,245,000$ D-4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL MIDTOWN DRIVE MEDICAL AVENUE TO 990' E OF MEDICAL AVENUE 0.19 100% 1,028,820$1,028,820$ D-5 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)MIDTOWN DRIVE 990' E OF MEDICAL AVENUE TO 800' S OF TOWN LAKE DRIVE 0.43 100% 4,535,000$4,535,000$ D-6 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR MIDTOWN DRIVE 800' S OF TOWN LAKE DRIVE TO 2605' S OF CORPORATE PARKWAY 0.98 100% 5,374,808$5,374,808$ D-7 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR DURHAM DRIVE MIDTOWN DRIVE TO ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 0.4 100% 981,960$981,960$ A-7, D-8 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL BIRD POND ROAD ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TO 1055' E OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 0.2 50% 1,758,000$879,000$ D-9 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)TOWN LAKE DRIVE SH 6 NBFR TO MIDTOWN DRIVE 0.37 100% 1,753,000$1,753,000$ D-10 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR CORPORATE PARKWAY SH 6 NBFR TO MIDTOWN DRIVE 0.26 100% 1,436,192$1,436,192$ D-11 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR CORPORATE PARKWAY MIDTOWN DRIVE TO WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 1.21 100% 9,894,000$9,894,000$ D-12 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY ROYAL ADELADE DRIVE TO ST ANDREWS DRIVE 0.38 100% 2,137,000$2,137,000$ D-13 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY ST ANDREWS DRIVE TO 275' S OF LONE STAR LANE 1.96 100% 9,181,000$9,181,000$ D-14 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR LAKEWAY DRIVE 1645' S OF GATEWAY BOULEVARD TO SH 6 NBFR 1.02 100% 2,635,080$2,635,080$ D-15 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR MATHER PARKWAY NANTUCKET DRIVE TO 1920' S OF NANTUCKET DRIVE 0.36 100% 882,000$882,000$ D-16 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)NANTUCKET DRIVE SH 6 NBFR TO PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY 1.22 100% 5,877,000$5,877,000$ D-17 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR NANTUCKET DRIVE PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY TO SOUTHERN POINTE PARKWAY 1.2 100% 3,083,220$3,083,220$ D-18 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)SOUTHERN POINTE PARKWAY 205' W OF PIPELINE ROAD TO 280' E OF NANTUCKET DRIVE 0.87 100% 3,902,000$3,902,000$ 74,475,080$ -$ 17,500$ 74,492,580$Total Cost in SERVICE AREA D D Service Area Project Roadway Cost Subtotal 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area Service Area Project Intersection Cost SubtotalDRAFT Page 65 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 32 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas 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 for the service area for the ten- year period. The growth in vehicle-miles from 2021 to 2031 is based upon projected changes in residential units and employment for the period. In order to determine this growth, estimates of residential units, basic employment, service employment, and retail employment for 2021 were made, along with growth projections for each of these demographic statistics through 2031. The Land Use Assumptions section of this report details the growth estimates used for the impact fee determination. The residential and employment statistics in the Land Use Assumptions provide the “independent variables” that are used to calculate the existing (2021) and projected (2031) 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 number of dwelling units are estimated. 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 employment – basic, service, and retail. Building square footage is the most common independent variable for the estimation of non-residential trips in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. This characteristic isDRAFT Page 66 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 33 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas 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 ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition and the National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) performed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). ITE’s Trip Generation Manual, 11th 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 of land uses, the rate is adjusted to account for the fact that a percentage of retail 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 MPOs, requirements in Chapter 395, and other generally accepted planning principles.DRAFTPage 67 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 34 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas The computation of the transportation demand factor is detailed in the following equation: Variables: TDF = Transportation Demand Factor T = Trip Rate (peak hour trips / unit) Pb =Pass-By Discount (% of trips) L = Average Trip Length (miles) An origin-destination reduction of 50% had already been applied when determining the trip length to avoid double counting of trips. From here, adjustments were made to the transportation demand factor based upon planning principles and engineering judgement for each land use. 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 of six (6) miles, and the service areas within College Station are approximated with a four (4) mile distance. For residential, basic, and service land uses, trip lengths go beyond the service area boundary and were capped at four miles based on the max trip length. For retail land use, this max trip length was cut in half and assumed to be the radius of a service area. Specific land uses were adjusted if the trip lengths were anticipated to be shorter than the four or two based on specific land use travel characteristics. Table 13 shows the derivation of the Transportation Demand Factor for the residential and employment land use categories for each service area. The values utilized for all variables shown in the transportation demand factor equation are also shown in the table. LPTTDFb*)1(*-=DRAFTPage 68 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 35 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Table 13. Transportation Demand Factor Calculations Variable Residential Basic Service RetailSingle-Family Multi-Family T 0.94 0.39 0.65 1.44 3.40 Pb 0%0%0%0%34% Lmax *4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 TDF 3.76 1.56 2.60 5.76 4.49 * Lmax is less than 4 miles for retail land use; therefore, this lower trip length is used for calculating the TDF for these land uses. The application of the demographic projections and the transportation demand factors are presented in the 10-Year Growth Projections in Table 1. This table shows the total growth in vehicle-miles by service area between the years 2021 and 2031. These estimates and projections lead to the Vehicle-Miles of Travel for the 10-year period.DRAFTPage 69 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 36 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Table 14. 10-year Growth Projections 2021- 2031 Growth Projections1 TOTAL Single Family Units Trip Rate TDF2 Multi-Family Units Trip Rate TDF3 VEHICLE MILES4 BASIC SERVICE RETAIL BASIC7 SERVICE8 RETAIL9 BASIC SERVICE RETAIL TOTAL VEHICLE MILES11 0.94 0.39 0.65 1.44 3.40 A 410 2,038 4,721 0 1,174,000 1,480,000 0 6,762 6,642 13,404 18,125 B 429 1,937 4,635 350,000 1,063,000 953,000 910 6,123 4,277 11,310 15,945 C 1,824 127 7,056 0 506,000 469,000 0 2,915 2,105 5,020 12,076 D 693 751 3,777 984,000 1,089,000 895,000 2,558 6,273 4,017 12,848 16,625 Totals 3,356 4,853 20,189 1,334,000 3,832,000 3,797,000 3,468 22,073 17,041 42,582 62,771 VEHICLE-MILES OF INCREASE (2021 - 2031) Notes: A 18,125 1 From Secton 3.A. Land Use Assumptions B 15,945 2 Transportation Demand Factor for each Service Area (from LUVMET) using Single Family Detached Housing land use and trip generation rate C 12,076 3 Transportation Demand Factor for each Service Area (from LUVMET) using Multi-Family Housing (Mid-Rise) land use and trip generation rate D 16,625 4 Calculated by multiplying TDF by the number of dwelling units 5 From Secton 3.A. Land Use Assumptions6Trip generation rate and Transportation Demand Factors from LUVMET for each land use 7 'Basic' corresponds to General Light Industrial land use and trip generation rate 8 'Service' corresponds to General Office land use and trip generation rate 9 'Retail' corresponds to Shopping Center land use and trip generation rate 10 Calculated by multiplying Transportation Demand Factor by the number of thousand square feet for each land use 11 Residential plus non-residential vehicle-mile totals for each Service Area SERVICEAREA VEH-MILES 3.76 SERVICE AREA RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILES NON-RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FEET5 TRANS. DEMAND FACTOR6 NON-RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE-MILES10 4.495.762.601.56 DRAFTPage 70 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 37 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas 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 a level of service corresponding to the City’s standards. 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 (see Section 4.D). As noted earlier, the units of demand are vehicle-miles of travel.DRAFTPage 71 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 38 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CALCULATION 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 Roadway Impact Fee CIP costs for the service area divided by the growth in travel attributable to new development projected to occur within the ten-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 15 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. Table 15. Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee Computation Line Title Description 1 Total Vehicle-Miles of Capacity Added by theRoadway Impact Fee CIP The total number of vehicle-miles added to the service area based on the capacity, length, and number of lanes in each project (fromAppendix B – CIP Service Units of Supply) Each project identified in the RIF 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. 2 Total Vehicle-Miles ofExisting Demand A measure of the amount of traffic currently using the roadway facilities upon which capacity is being added. (from Appendix B – CIP Service Units of Supply) A number of facilities identified in the RIF CIP 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. 3 Net Amount of Vehicle- Miles of Capacity Added A measurement of the amount of vehicle-miles added by the RIF CIP that will not be utilized by existing demand (Line 1 – Line 2) This calculation identifies the portion of the RIF CIP (in vehicle-miles) that may be recoverable through the collection of impact fees.DRAFTPage 72 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 39 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas 4 Total Cost of the Roadway Impact Fee CIP and RIF Study within the Service Area The sum of the total cost of the roadway projects within each service area (from Tables 9-12) and the Roadway Impact Fee study cost per service area. This line simply identifies the sum of the total cost of all the roadway projects identified in each service area and the cost of the roadway impact fee study per service area. 5 Cost of Net Capacity Supplied The total Roadway Impact Fee CIP cost (Line 4) prorated by the ratioof Net Capacity Added (Line 3) to Total Capacity Added (Line 1). [(Line 3 / Line 1) * (Line 4)] Using the ratio of vehicle-miles added by the Roadway Impact Fee CIP available to serve future growth to the total vehicle-miles added, the total cost of the RIF CIP is reduced to the amount available for future growth (i.e. excluding existing usage and deficiencies). 6 Cost to Meet Existing Needs and Usage The difference between the Total Cost of the Roadway Impact FeeCIP (Line 4) and the Cost of the Net Capacity supplied (Line 5). (Line 4 – Line 5) This line is provided for information purposes only – it is to present the portion of the total cost of theRoadway Impact Fee CIP that is required to meet existing demand. 7 Total Vehicle-Miles ofNew Demand over TenYears Based upon the growth projection provided in the Land UseAssumptions, an estimate of the number of new vehicle-miles withinthe service area over the next ten years. (from Table 14) This line presents the amount of growth (in vehicle-miles) projected to occur within each service area overthe next ten years. 8 Percent of Capacity Added Attributable to New Growth The result of dividing Total Vehicle-Miles of New Demand (Line 7) by the Net Amount of Capacity Added (Line 3), limited to 100% (Line 9). This calculation is required by Chapter 395 to ensure capacityadded is attributable to new growth.9 Chapter 395 Check In order to ensure that the vehicle-miles added by the Roadway 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 Roadway Impact Fee CIP exceeds the growth projected to occur in the next ten years, the Roadway Impact Fee CIP cost is reduced accordingly. 10 Cost of Roadway Impact Fee CIP Attributable to New Growth The result of multiplying the Cost of Net Capacity Added (Line 5) by the Percent of Capacity Added Attributable to New Growth, limited to 100% (Line 9). (Line 5 * Line 9) This value is the total Roadway Impact Fee CIP project costs (excluding financial costs) that may berecovered through impact fees. This line is determined considering the limitations to impact fees required by the Texas legislature. 11 Total Cost of the IntersectionImpact Fee CIP within the ServiceArea The total cost of the intersection projects within each service area(from Tables 9-12) This line simply identifies the total cost of all the intersection projects identified in each service area.DRAFTPage 73 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 40 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas 12 Percent of Intersection Capacity Added Attributable to New Growth The result of dividing Total Vehicle-Miles of New Demand (Line 7) by the vehicle-mile carrying capacity in each service area (Table 14). In order to ensure that the capacity added by the Intersection Impact Fee CIP does not exceed the amount needed to accommodate growth beyond the ten-year window, the anticipated vehicle mile growth in each service area is calculated as a percentage of the vehicle-mile carrying capacity. 13 Cost of Intersection Impact FeeCIP Attributable to New Growth The result of multiplying the Cost of Net Capacity Added (Line 11) by the Percent of Capacity Added Attributable to New Growth (Line 12). (Line 11 * Line 12) This value is the total Intersection Impact Fee CIP project cost (excluding financial costs) that may berecovered through impact fees. This line is determined considering the limitations to impact fees required by the Texas legislature. 14 Cost of Total Roadway Impact Fee CIP Attributable to New Growth The result of adding the Cost of the Roadway Impact Fee CIPAttributable to new growth (Line 10) to the Cost of the Intersection Impact Fee CIP Attributable to new growth (Line 13)(Line 10 + Line 13). This value is the Total Roadway Impact Fee CIP project cost (excluding financial costs) that may berecovered through impact fees. This line is determined considering the limitations to impact fees requiredby the Texas legislature. B. PLAN FOR FINANCING AND THE AD VALOREM TAX CREDIT Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code requires the Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees to contain specific enumeration of a plan for awarding the impact fee credit. Section 395.014 of the Code requires: (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 plan is summarized, as prepared by Eddie Peacock, CPA, in Appendix D, Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit. The following table summarizes the portions of Table 16 that utilize this credit calculation.DRAFTPage 74 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 41 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Line Title Description 15 Financing Costs (from Appendix D –Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact FeeCredit) – 80% of eligible projects 16 Interest Earnings (from Appendix D –Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit) 17 Cost of the Roadway Impact Fee CIP and Financing Attributable to New Growth The sum of the Cost of Capacity Added Attributable to New Growth, Financing Costs, and Interest Earnings. (Line 14 + Line 15 + Line 16) 18 Pre-Credit Maximum FeePer Service Unit Found by dividing the Cost of the CIP and Financing Attributable to New Growth (Line 17) by the Total Vehicle-Miles of New Demand Over Ten Years (Line 7). (Line 17 / Line 7) 19 Credit for Ad ValoremTaxes A credit for the portion of ad valorem taxes projected to be generated by the new service units, as per Section 395.014 of the Local Government Code. (from Appendix D – Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit) 20 Recoverable Cost of theRoadway Impact Fee CIP and Financing The difference between the Cost of the CIP and Financing Attributableto New Growth (Line 17) and the Credit for Ad Valorem Taxes (Line 19). (Line 17 + Line 19) 21 Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit Found by dividing the Recoverable Cost of the CIP and Financing (Line20) by the Total Vehicle-Miles of New Demand Over Ten Years (Line 7).(Line 20 / Line 7)DRAFTPage 75 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 42 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Table 16. Maximum Assessable Impact Fee A B C D 1 TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY ADDED BY THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CIP(FROM CIP SERVICE UNITS OF SUPPLY,APPENDIX B)11,544 32,963 34,912 20,793 2 TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND (FROM CIP SERVICE UNITS OF SUPPLY,APPENDIX B)3,304 13,135 7,551 2,018 3 NET AMOUNT OF VEH-MI OF CAPACITY ADDED (LINE 1 - LINE 2)8,240 19,828 27,361 18,775 4 TOTAL COST OF THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CIP AND RIF STUDYWITHIN SERVICE AREA (FROM TABLES 9-12) $ 12,749,282 $ 40,902,925 $ 75,713,321 $ 74,492,580 5 COST OF NET CAPACITY SUPPLIED(LINE 3 / LINE 1) * (LINE 4) $ 9,100,319 $ 24,604,047 $ 59,337,539 $ 67,262,934 6 COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE(LINE 4 - LINE 5) $ 3,648,963 $ 16,298,878 $ 16,375,782 $ 7,229,646 7 TOTAL VEH-MI OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS(FROM TABLE 14 AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS)18,125 15,945 12,076 16,625 8 PERCENT OF CAPACITY ADDEDATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH(LINE 7 / LINE 3)219.9%80.4%44.1%88.5% 9 IF LINE 8 > LINE 4, REDUCE LINE 9 TO 100%,OTHERWISE NO CHANGE 100.0%80.4%44.1%88.5% 10 COST OF ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH (LINE 5 * LINE 9) $ 9,100,319 $ 19,781,654 $ 26,167,855 $ 59,527,697 11 TOTAL COST OF THE INTERSECTION IMPACT FEE CIPWITHIN SERVICE AREA (FROM TABLES 9-12)1,165,730$7,487,428$2,537,243$-$ 12 PERCENT OF INTERSECTION CAPACITY ADDEDATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH (FROM TABLE 14 ANDLAND USE ASSUMPTIONS)24.7%14.4%18.6%48.5% 13 COST OF INTERSECTION IMPACT FEE CIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH(LINE 11 * LINE 12)287,935$1,078,190$471,927$-$ 14 COST OF TOTAL ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CIPATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH(LINE 10 + LINE 13)9,388,254$20,859,844$26,639,782$59,527,697$ 15 FINANCING COSTS(FROM PLAN FOR AWARDING THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT, APPENDIX D) $ 1,456,897 $ 3,237,092 $ 4,134,040 $ 9,237,681 16 INTEREST EARNINGS(FROM PLAN FOR AWARDING THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT, APPENDIX D) $ 131,440 $ 292,040 $ 372,960 $ 833,390 17 COST OF THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CIP AND FINANCING ATTRIBUTABLETO NEW GROWTH (LINE 14 + LINE 15 + LINE 16) $ 10,713,711 $ 23,804,896 $ 30,400,862 $ 67,931,987 18 PRE-CREDIT MAXIMUM FEE PER SERVICE UNIT(LINE 17 / LINE 7) $ 591 $ 1,492 $ 2,517 $ 4,086 19 CREDIT FOR AD VALOREM TAXES(FROM PLAN FOR AWARDING THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT, APPENDIX D) $ 1,661,061 $ 3,690,731 $ 4,713,374 $ 10,532,225 20 RECOVERABLE COST OF ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CIP(LINE 17 + LINE 19) $ 9,052,650 $ 20,114,165 $ 25,687,488 $ 57,399,762 21 MAXIMUM ASSESSABLE FEE PER SERVICE UNIT(LINE 20 / LINE 7) $ 499 $ 1,261 $ 2,127 $ 3,452 SERVICE AREA:DRAFTPage 76 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 43 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas C. SERVICE UNIT DEMAND PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT 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 Use/Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET), presented in Table 17. 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 are 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 unit. 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 Manual, 11th Edition, the latest edition of the definitive source for trip generation data. This manual 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. An origin-destination reduction of 50% had already been applied when determining the trip length to avoid double counting of trips. Adjustments were made to the transportation demand factor based upon planning principles and engineering judgement for each land use. The adjusted trip length values are based on the Regional Origin-Destination Travel Survey performed by the NHTS. 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 service area trip length, the maximum trip length used for calculation is reduced. This reduction, as discussed previously, limits the maximum trip length to the approximate sizeDRAFT Page 77 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 44 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas of the service areas. 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 of six (6) miles, and the service areas within College Station are approximated with a four (4) mile distance. 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 attributed to each land use category. 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.DRAFTPage 78 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 45 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Table 17. Land-Use Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET) ITE LandUse Code Development Unit TripGen Rate (PM) Pass-by Rate Pass-by Source Trip Rate Max TripLength (mi) Veh-MiPer Dev- Unit PORT AND TERMINAL Truck Terminal 030 1,000 SF GFA 1.97 1.97 4.00 7.88 INDUSTRIAL General Light Industrial 110 1,000 SF GFA 0.65 0.65 4.00 2.60 Industrial Park 130 1,000 SF GFA 0.34 0.34 4.00 1.36 Warehousing 150 1,000 SF GFA 0.32 0.32 4.00 1.28 Mini-Warehouse 151 1,000 SF GFA 0.15 0.15 4.00 0.60 RESIDENTIAL Single-Family Detached Housing 210 Dwelling Unit 0.94 0.94 4.00 3.76 Single-Family Attached Housing 215 Dwelling Unit 0.57 0.57 4.00 2.28 Multi-family Housing (Low-Rise)220 Dwelling Unit 0.51 0.51 4.00 2.04 Multi-family Housing (Mid-Rise)221 Dwelling Unit 0.39 0.39 4.00 1.56 Multi-family Housing (High-Rise)222 Dwelling Unit 0.32 0.32 4.00 1.28 Off-Campus Student Apartment (Mid-Rise)226 Bedrooms 0.21 0.21 4.00 0.84 Mid-Rise Residential with 1st Floor Commercial 231 Dwelling Unit 0.17 0.17 4.00 0.68 Mobile Home Park / Manufactured Housing 240 Dwelling Unit 0.58 0.58 4.00 2.32 Senior Adult Housing - Single-Family 251 Dwelling Unit 0.30 0.30 4.00 1.20 Senior Adult Housing - Multi-Family 252 Dwelling Unit 0.25 0.25 4.00 1.00 Assisted Living 254 Beds 0.24 0.24 4.00 0.96 LODGING Hotel 310 Room 0.59 0.59 2.00 1.18 Motel / Other Lodging Facilities 320 Room 0.36 0.36 2.00 0.72 RECREATIONAL Miniature Golf Course 431 Holes 0.33 0.33 2.00 0.66 Golf Driving Range 432 Tees 1.25 1.25 2.00 2.50 Multipurpose Recreational Facility 435 1,000 SF GFA 3.58 3.58 2.00 7.16 Multiplex Movie Theater 445 Screens 13.96 13.96 2.00 27.92 Ice Skating Rink 465 1,000 SF GFA 1.33 1.33 2.00 2.66 Health/Fitness Club 492 1,000 SF GFA 3.45 3.45 2.00 6.90 Recreational Community Center 495 1,000 SF GFA 2.50 2.50 2.00 5.00 INSTITUTIONAL Private School (K-8)530 Students 0.26 0.26 2.00 0.52 Private High School 534 Students 0.19 0.19 2.00 0.38 Charter Elementary School 536 Students 0.16 0.16 2.00 0.32 Junior / Community College 540 Students 0.11 0.11 2.00 0.22 Church 560 1,000 SF GFA 0.49 0.49 2.00 0.98 Day Care Center 565 1,000 SF GFA 11.12 44% B 6.23 1.75 10.87 MEDICAL Hospital 610 1,000 SF GFA 0.86 0.86 4.00 3.44 Nursing Home 620 Beds 0.14 0.14 4.00 0.56 Clinic 630 1,000 SF GFA 3.69 3.69 4.00 14.76 Animal Hospital/Veterinary Clinic 640 1,000 SF GFA 3.53 30% B 2.47 4.00 9.88 OFFICE General Office Building 710 1,000 SF GFA 1.44 1.44 4.00 5.76 Single Tenant Office Building 715 1,000 SF GFA 1.76 1.76 4.00 7.04 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 1,000 SF GFA 3.93 3.93 4.00 15.72 Office Park 750 1,000 SF GFA 1.30 1.30 4.00 5.20 Key to Sources of Pass-by Rates: A: ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Edition (September 2017) B: Estimated by Kimley-Horn based on ITE rates for similar categories C: ITE rate adjusted upward by KHA based on logical relationship to other categories Land Use Category DRAFTPage 79 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 46 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas Table 17 Continued. Land-Use Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET) ITE LandUse Code Development Unit Trip Gen Rate (PM) Pass-by Rate Pass-by Source Trip Rate Max TripLength (mi) Veh-Mi Per Dev- Unit COMMERCIAL Automobile Related Automobile Sales (New)840 1,000 SF GFA 2.42 20% B 1.94 2.00 3.87 Automobile Sales (Used)841 1,000 SF GFA 3.75 20% B 3.00 2.00 6.00 Automobile Parts Sales 843 1,000 SF GFA 4.90 43% A 2.79 2.00 5.59 Tire Store 848 1,000 SF GFA 3.75 28% A 2.70 2.00 5.40 Quick Lubrication Vehicle Shop 941 Servicing Positions 4.85 40% B 2.91 2.00 5.82 Automobile Care Center 942 1,000 SF GFA 3.11 40% B 1.87 2.00 3.73 Gasoline/Service Station w/ Conv Market 945 Vehicle Fueling Position 18.42 56% B 8.10 0.60 4.86 Self-Service Car Wash 947 Stalls 5.54 40% B 3.32 0.60 1.99 Car Wash and Detail Center 949 Stalls 13.60 40% B 8.16 0.60 4.90 Dining Fast Casual Restaurant 930 1,000 SF GFA 12.55 43% A 7.15 2.00 14.31 Fine Dining Restaurant 931 1,000 SF GFA 7.80 44% A 4.37 2.00 8.74 High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 932 1,000 SF GFA 9.05 43% A 5.16 2.00 10.32 Fast Food Restaurant without Drive-Thru Window 933 1,000 SF GFA 33.21 50% B 16.61 2.00 33.21 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Thru Window 934 1,000 SF GFA 33.03 50% A 16.52 2.00 33.03 Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Thru Window 937 1,000 SF GFA 38.39 70% A 11.52 2.00 23.03 Other Retail Free-Standing Discount Store 815 1,000 SF GFA 4.86 30% C 3.40 2.00 6.80 Nursery (Garden Center)817 1,000 SF GFA 6.94 30% B 4.86 2.00 9.72 Shopping Center (>150k SF)820 1,000 SF GFA 3.40 34% A 2.24 2.00 4.49 Shopping Plaza (40-150k SF)821 1,000 SF GFA 5.19 34% B 3.43 2.00 6.85 Strip Retail Plaza (<40k SF)822 1,000 SF GFA 6.59 34% B 4.35 2.00 8.70 Supermarket 850 1,000 SF GFA 8.95 36% A 5.73 2.00 11.46 Home Improvement Superstore 862 1,000 SF GFA 2.29 42% A 1.33 2.00 2.66 Toy/Children's Superstore 864 1,000 SF GFA 5.00 30% B 3.50 2.00 7.00 Department Store 875 1,000 SF GFA 1.95 30% B 1.37 2.00 2.73 Pharmacy/Drugstore w/o Drive-Thru Window 880 1,000 SF GFA 8.51 53% A 4.00 2.00 8.00 Pharmacy/Drugstore with Drive-Thru Window 881 1,000 SF GFA 10.25 49% A 5.23 2.00 10.46 Drive-In Bank 912 Drive-in Lanes 27.07 35% A 17.60 2.00 35.19 Key to Sources of Pass-by Rates: A: ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Edition (September 2017) B: Estimated by Kimley-Horn based on ITE rates for similar categories C: ITE rate adjusted upward by KHA based on logical relationship to other categories Land Use Category DRAFTPage 80 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 47 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas SAMPLE CALCULATIONS The following section details two examples of maximum assessable Roadway Impact Fee calculations. Example 1: Development Type - One Unit of Single-Family Housing in Service Area A Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Steps –Example 1 Step 1 Determine Development Unit and Vehicle-Miles Per Development Unit From Table 17 [Land Use –Vehicle-mile Equivalency Table] Development Type: 1 Dwelling Unit of Single-Family Detached Housing Number of Development Units: 1 Dwelling Unit Veh-Mi Per Development Unit: 3.76 Step 2 Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit From Table 16, Line 21 [Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit] Service Area A: $499 Step 3 Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Impact Fee = # of Development Units * Veh-Mi Per Dev Unit * Max. Fee Per Service Unit Impact Fee = 1 * 3.76 * $499 Maximum Assessable Impact Fee = $1,876 Example 2: Development Type – 125,000 square foot Shopping Center in Service Area C Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Steps –Example 2 Step 1 Determine Development Unit and Vehicle-Miles Per Development Unit From Table 17 [Land Use –Vehicle-mile Equivalency Table] Development Type: 125,000 square feet of Shopping Center Development Unit: 1,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area Veh-Mi Per Development Unit: 4.49 Step 2 Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit From Table 16, Line 21 [Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit] Service Area C: $2,127 Step 3 Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Impact Fee = #of Development Units * Veh-Mi Per Dev Unit * Max. Fee Per Service Unit Impact Fee = 125 * 4.49 * $2,127 Maximum Assessable Impact Fee = $1,193,778DRAFT Page 81 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update 48 October 2021 City of College Station, Texas CONCLUSION The City of College Station has established a process to implement the assessment and collection of Roadway Impact Fees through the adoption of an impact fee ordinance that is consistent with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. This report establishes the maximum allowable Roadway Impact Fee that could be assessed by the City of College Station within each service area. The maximum assessable Roadway Impact Fees calculated in this report are as shown below: Service Area A B C D 2021 MaximumAssessible Fee PerService Unit ($/Veh-mi) $499 $1,261 $2,127 $3,452 This document serves as a guide to the assessment of Roadway 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 update are appropriate and consistent with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. Furthermore, the Land Use Assumptions and the proposed Capital Improvement Plan are appropriately incorporated into the process.DRAFTPage 82 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update October 2021City of College Station, Texas APPENDICES CONCEPTUAL LEVEL PROJECT COST PROJECTIONS CIP SERVICE UNITS OF SUPPLY EXISTING FACILITIES INVENTORY PLAN FOR AWARDING THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT DRAFTPage 83 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update October 2021City of College Station, Texas CONCEPTUAL LEVEL PROJECT COST PROJECTIONS DRAFTPage 84 of 231 Roadway Improvements - College Station Service Area A From To A-1 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E DOMINIK DRIVE HARVEY ROAD WIDENING 100% $ 2,409,500 $ 2,409,500 A-2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR LASSIE LANE STERLING STREET MANUEL DRIVE FUTURE 100% $ 860,066 $ 860,066 A-3 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR DARTMOUTH STREET 720' S OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S TEXAS AVENUE S FUTURE 100% $ 2,423,520 $ 2,423,520 A-4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT HARVEY ROAD SH 6 NBFR BOONVILLE ROAD WIDENING 100% $ 2,509,696 $ 2,509,696 A-5, D-1 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 NBFR STONEBROOK DRIVE PARTIAL WIDENING 50% $ 2,164,000 $ 1,082,000 A-6, D-2 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD STONEBROOK DRIVE TOWN LAKE DRIVE WIDENING 50% $ 5,136,000 $ 2,568,000 A-7, D-8 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL BIRD POND ROAD ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 1055' E OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD FUTURE 50% $ 1,758,000 $ 879,000 1 100%400,000$400,000$ 2 100%566,992$566,992$ 3 50%397,476$198,738$ UNIVERSITY DRIVE E AND UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER SIGNAL HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S AND DARTMOUTH STREET NOTE: These planning level cost projections listed in Appendix A 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. These planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. The project cost total within Service Area may differ from the total shown in the Summary sheets contained within Appendix Adue to some projects thatare split between City limits and ETJ. Intersections Total Cost in Service AreaFunctional Class Project Limits Project Type Percent in Service Area Project Cost TEXAS AVENUE S AND BROTHERS BOULEVARD Project ID City of College Station - 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees Summary of Conceptual Level Projects 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 85 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.A-1 Name:GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E Limits:DOMINIK DRIVE to HARVEY ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):1,508Service Area(s):A Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 109 Unclassified Street Excavation 6,032 cy 9.00$54,288$209 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)11,729 sy 7.00$82,102$309 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 11,059 sy 65.00$718,813$ 409 4" Topsoil 4,524 sy 4.00$18,096$ 509 6' Concrete Sidewalk 18,096 sf 6.00$108,576$ 609 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 1,424 sy 72.00$102,544$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,084,420$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%54,221$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%32,533$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%271,105$ √Illumination 6%65,065$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%32,533$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%21,688$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%43,377$Miscellaneous:$0 -$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:520,521$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,604,941$Construction Contingency:15%240,741$ Mobilization 5%80,247$ Prep ROW 3%48,148$ Construction Cost TOTAL:1,975,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-1,975,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%237,000$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 10%197,500$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,409,500$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane minor arterial. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 86 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.A-2 Name:LASSIE LANE Limits:STERLING STREET to MANUEL DRIVE Impact Fee Class:2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTORLength (lf):313Service Area(s):A Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 112 Unclassified Street Excavation 991 cy 9.00$8,921$212 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)1,948 sy 5.50$10,712$312 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (8") with Integral Curb 1,878 sy 55.00$103,290$ 412 4" Topsoil 487 sy 4.00$1,948$ 512 6' Concrete Sidewalk 3,756 sf 6.00$22,536$ 611 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 0 sy 60.50$-$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:147,406$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%4,422$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%36,851$ √Illumination 6%8,844$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%4,422$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%2,948$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%5,896$Miscellaneous:$0 -$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:63,384$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:210,790$Construction Contingency:15%31,619$ Mobilization 5%10,540$ Prep ROW 3%6,324$ Construction Cost TOTAL:260,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-260,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%31,200$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:Two Properties to Connect Lassie and Cornell 568,866$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:860,066$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the construction of a new two 2 lane major collector to connect Lassie Lane and Cornell Drive. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 87 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.A-3 Name:DARTMOUTH STREET Limits:720' S OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S to TEXAS AVENUE S Impact Fee Class:2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTORLength (lf):2,216Service Area(s):A Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 112 Unclassified Street Excavation 7,017 cy 9.00$63,156$212 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)13,788 sy 5.50$75,836$312 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (8") with Integral Curb 13,296 sy 55.00$731,280$ 412 4" Topsoil 3,447 sy 4.00$13,788$ 512 6' Concrete Sidewalk 26,592 sf 6.00$159,552$ 611 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 0 sy 60.50$-$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,043,613$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%31,308$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%260,903$ √Illumination 6%62,617$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%31,308$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%20,872$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%41,745$Miscellaneous:$0 -$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:448,754$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,492,366$Construction Contingency:15%223,855$ Mobilization 5%74,618$ Prep ROW 3%44,771$ Construction Cost TOTAL:1,836,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-1,836,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%220,320$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 20%367,200$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,423,520$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the construction of a new two 2 lane major collector. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 88 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.A-4 Name:HARVEY ROAD Limits:SH 6 NBFR to BOONVILLE ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOTLength (lf):12,074Service Area(s):A Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 103 Unclassified Street Excavation 48,296 cy 9.00$434,664$203 2" Asphalt (Type C)85,860 sy 7.75$665,412$303 4" Asphalt Base (Type B)85,860 sy 11.50$987,385$ 403 6" Asphalt Base (Type B)91,226 sy 21.00$1,915,741$ 503 12" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 50#/sy)93,909 sy 8.00$751,271$ 603 6' Concrete Sidewalk 27 sf 6.00$165$ 703 Machine Laid Curb & Gutter 24,148 lf 10.00$241,480$803 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 11,403 sy 48.25$550,205$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:5,546,323$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%277,316$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%166,390$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%1,386,581$ √Illumination 6%332,779$ Special Drainage Structures Carters Creek Crossing 0%500,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%166,390$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%110,926$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%221,853$√Miscellaneous:Associates Intersection $0 400,000$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:3,562,235$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:9,108,558$Construction Contingency:15%1,366,284$ Mobilization 5%455,428$ Prep ROW 3%273,257$ Construction Cost TOTAL:11,204,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-11,204,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%1,344,480$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:TxDOT Roadway 0%-$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% City Contribution)2,509,696$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane major arterial. This project includes an anticipated contribution from the City of College Station to TxDOT. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 89 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.A-5, D-1 Name:ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD Limits:SH 6 NBFR to STONEBROOK DRIVE Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL (1/2)Length (lf):2,168Service Area(s):A/D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 104 Unclassified Street Excavation 4,336 cy 9.00$39,024$204 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)8,431 sy 7.00$59,018$304 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 7,949 sy 65.00$516,707$ 404 4" Topsoil 5,300 sy 4.00$21,198$ 504 6' Concrete Sidewalk 13,008 sf 6.00$78,048$ 604 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 1,055 sy 72.00$75,946$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:789,940$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%39,497$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%23,698$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%197,485$ √Illumination 6%47,396$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%23,698$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%15,799$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%31,598$√Miscellaneous:Signal at Stonebrook $0 350,000$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:729,171$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,519,112$Construction Contingency:15%227,867$ Mobilization 5%75,956$ Prep ROW 3%45,573$ Construction Cost TOTAL:1,869,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-1,869,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:2020-2021 CIP 108,453$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 10%186,900$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,164,000$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane major arterial. This consists of the two additional lanes. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 90 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.A-6, D-2 Name:ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD Limits:STONEBROOK DRIVE to TOWN LAKE DRIVE Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIALLength (lf):3,129Service Area(s):A/D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 103 Unclassified Street Excavation 12,516 cy 9.00$112,644$203 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)24,337 sy 7.00$170,357$303 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 22,946 sy 65.00$1,491,490$ 403 4" Topsoil 9,387 sy 4.00$37,548$ 503 6' Concrete Sidewalk 37,548 sf 6.00$225,288$ 603 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 2,955 sy 72.00$212,772$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,250,099$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%112,505$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%67,503$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%562,525$ √Illumination 6%135,006$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%67,503$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%45,002$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%90,004$√Miscellaneous:Signal at Stonebrook $0 350,000$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,430,047$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,680,146$Construction Contingency:15%552,022$ Mobilization 5%184,007$ Prep ROW 3%110,404$ Construction Cost TOTAL:4,527,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-4,527,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:2020-2021 CIP 156,527$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 10%452,700$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,136,000$ This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane major arterial. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 91 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.A-7, D-8 Name:BIRD POND ROAD Limits:ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD to 1055' E OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIALLength (lf):1,053Service Area(s):A/D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 103 Unclassified Street Excavation 4,212 cy 9.00$37,908$203 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)8,190 sy 7.00$57,330$303 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 7,722 sy 65.00$501,930$ 403 4" Topsoil 3,159 sy 4.00$12,636$ 503 6' Concrete Sidewalk 12,636 sf 6.00$75,816$ 603 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 995 sy 72.00$71,604$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:757,224$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%22,717$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%189,306$ √Illumination 6%45,433$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%22,717$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%15,144$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%30,289$Miscellaneous:$0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:325,606$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,082,830$Construction Contingency:15%162,425$ Mobilization 5%54,142$ Prep ROW 3%32,485$ Construction Cost TOTAL:1,332,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-1,332,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%159,840$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 20%266,400$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,758,000$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the realignment and construction of a new 4 lane major arterial. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 92 of 231 Roadway Improvements - College Station Service Area B From To B-1 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL F & B ROAD 160' E OF TURKEY CREEK ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S WIDENING 100% $ 4,106,520 $ 4,106,520 B-2 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL(1/2)LUTHER STREET W HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY JONES BUTLER ROAD PARTIAL WIDENING 100% $ 2,903,600 $ 2,903,600 B-3, C-1 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WEST 715' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY WELLBORN ROAD WIDENING 50% $ 4,659,868 $ 2,329,934 B-4, C-2 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD NORMAND DRIVE SH 6 CONSTRUCTED 50% $ 4,017,530 $ 2,008,765 B-5 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR TURKEY CREEK ROAD 2775' N OF RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAYWBFR RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WBFR WIDENING 100% $ 3,278,140 $ 3,278,140 B-6 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL -TxDOT HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WELLBORN ROAD WIDENING 100% $ 1,407,527 $ 1,407,527 B-7 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL PENBERTHY ROAD GEORGE BUSH DRIVE LUTHER STREET W CONSTRUCTED 100% $ 3,080,683 $ 3,080,683 B-8 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL -TxDOT WELLBORN ROAD GEORGE BUSH DRIVE 940' N OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S PARTIAL WIDENING 100% $ 1,486,464 $ 1,486,464 B-9 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR JONES BUTLER ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S HOLLEMAN DRIVE S FUTURE 100% $ 9,652,780 $ 9,652,780 B-10 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL HOLLEMAN DRIVE S N DOWLING ROAD 290' S OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W CONSTRUCTED 100% $ 10,631,012 $ 10,631,012 3 50%397,476$198,738$ 4 100%1,190,232$1,190,232$ 5 100%644,445$644,445$ 6 100%4,532,013$4,532,013$ 7 100%572,000$572,000$ 8 100%350,000$350,000$ City of College Station - 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees Summary of Conceptual Level Projects Functional Class Project Limits Project TypeProject ID Intersections Percent in Service Area Project Cost Total Cost in Service Area TEXAS AVENUE S AND BROTHERS BOULEVARD WELLBORN ROAD AND GEORGE BUSH DRIVE LONGMIRE DRIVE AND PONDEROSA DRIVE WELLBORN ROAD AND HOLLEMAN DRIVE WELLBORN ROAD AND DEACON DRIVE HOLLEMAN DRIVE W AND JONES BUTLER ROAD NOTE: These planning level cost projections listed in Appendix A 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. These planning level cost projections shall not supersede theCity’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. The project cost total within Service Area may differ from the total shown in the Summary sheets contained within Appendix Adue to some projects that are split between City limits and ETJ. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 93 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.B-1 Name:F & B ROAD Limits: Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):2,571Service Area(s):B Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 109 Unclassified Street Excavation 10,284 cy 9.00$92,556$209 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)19,997 sy 7.00$139,977$309 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 18,854 sy 65.00$1,225,510$409 4" Topsoil 7,713 sy 4.00$30,852$ 509 6' Concrete Sidewalk 30,852 sf 6.00$185,112$ 609 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 2,428 sy 72.00$174,828$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,848,835$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%92,442$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%55,465$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%462,209$ √Illumination 6%110,930$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%55,465$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%36,977$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%73,953$Miscellaneous:$0 -$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:887,441$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:2,736,275$Construction Contingency:15%410,441$Mobilization 5%136,814$ Prep ROW 3%82,088$ Construction Cost TOTAL:3,366,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-3,366,000$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%403,920$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 10%336,600$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:4,106,520$ This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane minor arterial. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 160' E OF TURKEY CREEK ROAD to HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 94 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.B-2 Name:LUTHER STREET W Limits:HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY to JONES BUTLER ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)Length (lf):3,587Service Area(s):B Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 110 Unclassified Street Excavation 7,174 cy 9.00$64,566$210 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)13,949 sy 7.00$97,646$310 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 13,152 sy 65.00$854,902$ 410 4" Topsoil 8,768 sy 4.00$35,073$ 510 6' Concrete Sidewalk 21,522 sf 6.00$129,132$ 610 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 1,745 sy 72.00$125,654$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,306,972$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%65,349$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%39,209$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%326,743$ √Illumination 6%78,418$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%39,209$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%26,139$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%52,279$Miscellaneous:$0 -$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:627,347$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,934,319$Construction Contingency:15%290,148$ Mobilization 5%96,716$ Prep ROW 3%58,030$ Construction Cost TOTAL:2,380,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-2,380,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%285,600$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 10%238,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,903,600$ This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane minor arterial. This consists of the two additional lanes. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 95 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.B-3, C-1 Name:ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WEST Limits:715' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY to WELLBORN ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):3,335Service Area(s):B/C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:Bid Tabulation on July 23rd, 2021 -4,992,868$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:2020-2021 CIP 867,000$Previous City contribution County Contribution (1,200,000)$Other ROW/Easement Acquisition:-$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:4,659,868$ This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane minor arterial. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 96 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.B-4, C-2 Name:ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD Limits:NORMAND DRIVE to SH 6 Impact Fee Class:6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIALLength (lf):2,556Service Area(s):B/C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Actual Cost Expenditures 4,017,530$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:Previous City contributionOtherROW/Easement Acquisition: Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:4,017,530$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the previously completed widening to a 6 lane major arterial and includes engineering costs for the Rock Prairie Bridge. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 97 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.B-5 Name:TURKEY CREEK ROAD Limits: Impact Fee Class:2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTORLength (lf):2,775Service Area(s):B Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 112 Unclassified Street Excavation 8,788 cy 9.00$79,088$212 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)17,267 sy 5.50$94,967$312 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (8") with Integral Curb 16,650 sy 55.00$915,750$412 4" Topsoil 4,317 sy 4.00$17,267$ 512 6' Concrete Sidewalk 33,300 sf 6.00$199,800$ 611 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 0 sy 60.50$-$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,306,871$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%65,344$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%39,206$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%326,718$ √Illumination 6%78,412$ Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%39,206$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%26,137$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%52,275$Miscellaneous:$0 -$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:877,298$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:2,184,169$Construction Contingency:15%327,625$Mobilization 5%109,208$ Prep ROW 3%65,525$ Construction Cost TOTAL:2,687,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-2,687,000$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%322,440$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 10%268,700$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:3,278,140$ This project consists of the widening to a 2 lane major collector. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2775' N OF RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WBFR to RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WBFR 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 98 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.B-6 Name:HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S Limits:RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY to WELLBORN ROAD Impact Fee Class:6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOTLength (lf):13,848 Service Area(s):B Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Actual Cost Expenditures -1,407,527$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:Previous City contributionOtherROW/Easement Acquisition: Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,407,527$ 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 futureCapital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the widening to a 6 lane major arterial. This consists of the two additional lanes. The traffic signals located at George Bush Dr, Luther St, & Holleman Dr will be designed to accommodate this expansion. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 99 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.B-7 Name:PENBERTHY ROAD Limits:GEORGE BUSH DRIVE to LUTHER STREET W Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):2,127Service Area(s):B Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Actual Cost Expenditures 3,080,683$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:Previous City contributionOtherROW/Easement Acquisition: Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:3,080,683$ This project consists of the previously completed construction of a 4 lane minor arterial. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 100 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.B-8 Name:WELLBORN ROAD Limits: Impact Fee Class:6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOTLength (lf):6,481Service Area(s):B Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 101 Unclassified Street Excavation 28,804 cy 9.00$259,240$201 2" Asphalt (Type C)51,848 sy 7.75$401,822$301 4" Asphalt Base (Type B)51,848 sy 11.50$596,252$401 6" Asphalt Base (Type B)54,728 sy 21.00$1,149,297$ 501 12" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 50#/sy)56,169 sy 8.00$449,349$ 601 6' Concrete Sidewalk and 12' Concrete Shared-Use Path 22 sf 6.00$133$ 701 Machine Laid Curb & Gutter 25,924 lf 10.00$259,240$801 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 7,479 sy 48.25$360,878$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:3,476,211$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%173,811$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%104,286$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%869,053$ √Illumination 6%208,573$ Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%104,286$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%69,524$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%139,048$Miscellaneous:$0 -$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,918,581$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:5,394,793$Construction Contingency:15%809,219$Mobilization 5%269,740$ Prep ROW 3%161,844$ Construction Cost TOTAL:6,636,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-6,636,000$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%796,320$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:TxDOT Roadway 0%-$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% City Contribution)1,486,464$ This project consists of the widening to a 6 lane major arterial. This project includes an anticipated contribution from the City of College Station to TxDOT. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. GEORGE BUSH DRIVE to 940' N OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 101 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.B-9 Name:JONES BUTLER ROAD Limits:HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S to HOLLEMAN DRIVE S Impact Fee Class:2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTORLength (lf):1,146 Service Area(s):B Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:2020-2021 CIP 8,242,780$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:2020-2021 CIP 1,360,000$ Previous City contributionOtherROW/Easement Acquisition:2020-2021 CIP 50,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:9,652,780$ This project consists of the construction of a new two 2 lane major collector. A five leg roundabout will be constructed to connect Jones Butler Rd to Holleman Dr and North Dowling Road. 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 futureCapital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 102 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.B-10 Name:HOLLEMAN DRIVE S Limits:N DOWLING ROAD to 290' S OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):8,542 Service Area(s):B Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Actual Cost Expenditures 10,631,012$Engineering/Survey/Testing:Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition: Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:10,631,012$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the previously completed widening to a 4 lane minor arterial. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 103 of 231 Roadway Improvements - College Station Service Area C From To B-3, C-1 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WEST 715' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY WELLBORN ROAD WIDENING 50% $ 4,659,868 $ 2,329,934 B-4, C-2 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD NORMAND DRIVE SH 6 CONSTRUCTED 50% $ 4,017,530 $ 2,008,765 C-3 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL BARRON ROAD WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY DECATUR DRIVE CONSTRUCTED 100% $ 5,795,317 $ 5,795,317 C-4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL CAPSTONE DRIVE 1265' W OF WELLBORN ROAD WELLBORN ROAD FUTURE 100% $ 2,765,575 $ 2,765,575 C-5 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL BARRON ROAD WELLBORN ROAD WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY WIDENING 100% $ 4,712,977 $ 4,712,977 C-6 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 820' W OF WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY ARRINGTON ROAD WIDENING 100% $ 10,550,324 $ 10,550,324 C-7 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD WELLBORN ROAD 1290' E OF CREEK MEADOW BOULEVARD N CONSTRUCTED 100% $ 8,918,740 $ 8,918,740 C-8 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL TOWERS PARKWAY ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W WELLBORN ROAD CONSTRUCTED 100% $ 10,030,680 $ 10,030,680 C-9 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT WELLBORN ROAD CAPSTONE DRIVE 540' S OF GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD WIDENING 100% $ 2,407,328 $ 2,407,328 C-10 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL(1/2)WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY BARRON ROAD GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD PARTIAL WIDENING 100% $ 5,844,160 $ 5,844,160 C-11 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD ARRINGTON ROAD FUTURE 100% $ 7,311,480 $ 7,311,480 C-12 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL(50%)ROYDER ROAD EXTENSION I-GN ROAD WELLBORN ROAD FUTURE 100% $ 3,360,000 $ 3,360,000 C-13 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL ROYDER ROAD WELLBORN ROAD 885' S OF GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD CONSTRUCTED 100% $ 7,686,614 $ 7,686,614 C-14 2 LANE MAJORCOLLECTOR VICTORIA AVENUE SOUTHERN PLANTATION DRIVE WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY CONSTRUCTED 100% $ 1,973,927 $ 1,973,927 9 100%350,000$ $ 350,000 10 100%320,994$320,994$ 11 100%350,000$350,000$ 12 100%350,000$350,000$ 13 100%350,000$350,000$ 14 100%816,249$816,249$ City of College Station - 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees Summary of Conceptual Level Projects Total Cost in Service AreaFunctional Class Project Limits Project TypeProject ID LONGMIRE DRIVE AND EAGLE AVENUE Percent in Service Area WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY AND VICTORIA AVENUE SIGNAL BARRON ROAD AND ALEXANDRIA AVENUE BARRON ROAD AND DECATUR DRIVE BARRON ROAD AND LONGMIRE DRIVE NOTE: These planning level cost projections listed in Appendix A 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. These planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. The project cost total within Service Area may differ from the total shown in the Summary sheets contained within Appendix A due tosome projects that are split between City limits and ETJ. Project Cost Intersections GRAHAM ROAD AND VICTORIA AVENUE 2021 Roadway Impact Fee UpdateCity of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 104 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.B-3, C-1 Name:ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WEST Limits:715' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY to WELLBORN ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):3,335Service Area(s):B/C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:Bid Tabulation on July 23rd, 2021 -4,992,868$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:2020-2021 CIP 867,000$Previous City contribution County Contribution (1,200,000)$Other ROW/Easement Acquisition:-$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:4,659,868$ This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane minor arterial. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 105 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.B-4, C-2 Name:ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD Limits:NORMAND DRIVE to SH 6 Impact Fee Class:6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIALLength (lf):2,556Service Area(s):B/C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Actual Cost Expenditures 4,017,530$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:Previous City contributionOtherROW/Easement Acquisition: Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:4,017,530$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the previously completed widening to a 6 lane major arterial and includes engineering costs for the Rock Prairie Bridge. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 106 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.C-3 Name:BARRON ROAD Limits:WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY to DECATUR DRIVE Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):7,353Service Area(s):C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:2011-2012 CIP -5,241,340$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:2011-2012 CIP 115,085$Previous City contributionOtherROW/Easement Acquisition:2010 - 2011 CIP 438,892$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,795,317$ This project consists of the previously completed widening to a 4 lane minor arterial. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 107 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.C-4 Name:CAPSTONE DRIVE Limits:1265' W OF WELLBORN ROAD to WELLBORN ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):1,265 Service Area(s):C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:2020-2021 CIP -2,112,900$Engineering/Survey/Testing:2020-2021 CIP 209,623$Previous City contribution Other ROW/Easement Acquisition:2020-2021 CIP 443,052$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,765,575$ This project is the realignment of Capstone Drive. The estimate in the 2020 - 2021 published CIP is 6,400,500 for contruction of Capstone and Barron Alignment and $635,000 for design. This project is prorated between Project C-4 and C-5. NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 108 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.C-5 Name:BARRON ROAD Limits:WELLBORN ROAD to WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):2,567 Service Area(s):C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:2020-2021 CIP -4,287,600$Engineering/Survey/Testing:2020-2021 CIP 425,377$ Previous City contribution Other ROW/Easement Acquisition: Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:4,712,977$ This project is the widening for Barron Road to a 4 lane minor arterial. The estimate in the 2020 - 2021 published CIP is 6,400,500 for contruction of Capstone and Barron Alignment and $635,000 for design. This project is prorated between Project C-4 and C-5. NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 109 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.C-6 Name:GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD Limits:820' W OF WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY to ARRINGTON ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):7,561 Service Area(s):C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-8,779,524$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:2020-2021 CIP 1,650,800$ Previous City contributionOtherROW/Easement Acquisition:2020-2021 CIP 120,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:10,550,324$ 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 futureCapital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane minor arterial. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 110 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.C-7 Name:GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD Limits:WELLBORN ROAD to 1290' E OF CREEK MEADOW BOULEVARD N Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):6,691 Service Area(s):C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Actual Cost Expenditures -8,918,740$Engineering/Survey/Testing:Previous City contribution Other ROW/Easement Acquisition: Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:8,918,740$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the previously completed widening to a 4 lane minor arterial. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 111 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.C-8 Name:TOWERS PARKWAY Limits:ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W to WELLBORN ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIALLength (lf):5,278 Service Area(s):C Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 103 Unclassified Street Excavation 21,112 cy 9.00$190,008$ 203 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)41,051 sy 7.00$287,358$ 303 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 38,705 sy 65.00$2,515,847$403 4" Topsoil 15,834 sy 4.00$63,336$503 6' Concrete Sidewalk 63,336 sf 6.00$380,016$ 603 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 4,985 sy 72.00$358,904$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:3,795,468$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%113,864$√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%948,867$√Illumination 6%227,728$ Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%113,864$√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%75,909$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%151,819$ √Miscellaneous:Railroad Accomodations $0 500,000$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:2,382,051$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:6,177,520$Construction Contingency:15%926,628$Mobilization 5%308,876$Prep ROW 3%185,326$Construction Cost TOTAL:7,599,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-7,599,000$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%911,880$ Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 20%1,519,800$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:10,030,680$ 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 futureCapital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the construction of a new 4 lane major arterial. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 112 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.C-9 Name:WELLBORN ROAD Limits:CAPSTONE DRIVE to 540' S OF GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOTLength (lf):12,484 Service Area(s):C Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 103 Unclassified Street Excavation 49,936 cy 9.00$449,424$ 203 2" Asphalt (Type C)88,775 sy 7.75$688,007$ 303 4" Asphalt Base (Type B)88,775 sy 11.50$1,020,914$403 6" Asphalt Base (Type B)94,324 sy 21.00$1,980,795$503 12" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 50#/sy)97,098 sy 8.00$776,782$ 603 6' Concrete Sidewalk 28 sf 6.00$170$ 703 Machine Laid Curb & Gutter 24,968 lf 10.00$249,680$ 803 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 11,790 sy 48.25$568,889$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:5,734,661$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%286,733$√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%172,040$√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%1,433,665$√Illumination 6%344,080$ Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%172,040$√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%114,693$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%229,386$ Miscellaneous:$0 -$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:3,002,637$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:8,737,298$Construction Contingency:15%1,310,595$Mobilization 5%436,865$Prep ROW 3%262,119$Construction Cost TOTAL:10,747,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-10,747,000$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%1,289,640$ Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:TxDOT Roadway 0%-$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (20% City Contribution)2,407,328$ This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane major arterial. This project includes an anticipated contribution from the City of College Station to TxDOT. 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 futureCapital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 113 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.C-10 Name:WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY Limits:BARRON ROAD to GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)Length (lf):6,939 Service Area(s):C Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 110 Unclassified Street Excavation 13,878 cy 9.00$124,902$ 210 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)26,985 sy 7.00$188,895$ 310 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 25,443 sy 65.00$1,653,795$410 4" Topsoil 16,962 sy 4.00$67,848$510 6' Concrete Sidewalk 41,634 sf 6.00$249,804$ 610 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 3,376 sy 72.00$243,075$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,528,319$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%126,416$√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%75,850$√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%632,080$√Illumination 6%151,699$ Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossings (2)0%500,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%75,850$√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%50,566$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%101,133$ Miscellaneous:$0 -$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,713,593$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:4,241,913$Construction Contingency:15%636,287$Mobilization 5%212,096$Prep ROW 3%127,257$Construction Cost TOTAL:5,218,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-5,218,000$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%626,160$ Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:No ROW included 0%-$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,844,160$ 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 futureCapital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane minor arterial. This consists of the two additional lanes. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 114 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.C-11 Name:WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY Limits:GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD to ARRINGTON ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)Length (lf):8,163 Service Area(s):C Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 111 Unclassified Street Excavation 16,326 cy 9.00$146,934$ 211 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)31,745 sy 7.00$222,215$ 311 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 29,931 sy 65.00$1,945,515$411 4" Topsoil 19,954 sy 4.00$79,816$511 6' Concrete Sidewalk 48,978 sf 6.00$293,868$ 610 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 3,972 sy 72.00$285,952$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,974,300$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%89,229$√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%743,575$√Illumination 6%178,458$ Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%89,229$√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%59,486$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%118,972$ Miscellaneous:$0 -$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,528,949$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:4,503,250$Construction Contingency:15%675,487$Mobilization 5%225,162$Prep ROW 3%135,097$Construction Cost TOTAL:5,539,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-5,539,000$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%664,680$ Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 20%1,107,800$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:7,311,480$ This project is the construction of two lanes of a new 4 lane minor arterial. 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 futureCapital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 115 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.C-12 Name:ROYDER ROAD EXTENSION Limits:I-GN ROAD to WELLBORN ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)Length (lf):1,164 Service Area(s):C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:2020-2021 CIP -2,490,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:2020-2021 CIP 370,000$Previous City contribution Other ROW/Easement Acquisition:500,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:3,360,000$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the construction two lanes of a new 4 lane minor arterial. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 116 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.C-13 Name:ROYDER ROAD Limits:WELLBORN ROAD to 885' S OF GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):5,444 Service Area(s):C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Actual Cost Expenditures -7,686,614$Engineering/Survey/Testing:Previous City contribution Other ROW/Easement Acquisition: Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:7,686,614$ This project consists of the previously completed widening to a 4 lane minor arterial. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 117 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.C-14 Name:VICTORIA AVENUE Limits:SOUTHERN PLANTATION DRIVE to WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY Impact Fee Class:2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTORLength (lf):2,534 Service Area(s):C Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Actual Cost Expenditures -1,973,927$Engineering/Survey/Testing:Previous City contribution Other ROW/Easement Acquisition: Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,973,927$ This project consists of the previously completed widening to a 2 lane major collector. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 118 of 231 Roadway Improvements - College Station Service Area D Project ID From To A-5, D-1 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL (1/2) ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 NBFR STONEBROOK DRIVE PARTIAL WIDENING 50% $ 2,164,000 $ 1,082,000 A-6, D-2 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD STONEBROOK DRIVE TOWN LAKE DRIVE WIDENING 50% $ 5,136,000 $ 2,568,000 D-3 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TOWN LAKE DRIVE WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY WIDENING 100% $ 17,245,000 $ 17,245,000 D-4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL MIDTOWN DRIVE MEDICAL AVENUE 990' E OF MEDICAL AVENUE CONSTRUCTED 100% $ 1,028,820 $ 1,028,820 D-5 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2) MIDTOWN DRIVE 990' E OF MEDICAL AVENUE 800' S OF TOWN LAKE DRIVE PARTIAL WIDENING 100% $ 4,535,000 $ 4,535,000 D-6 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR MIDTOWN DRIVE 800' S OF TOWN LAKE DRIVE 2605' S OF CORPORATE PARKWAY CONSTRUCTED 100% $ 5,374,808 $ 5,374,808 D-7 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR DURHAM DRIVE MIDTOWN DRIVE ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD FUTURE 100% $ 981,960 $ 981,960 A-7, D-8 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL BIRD POND ROAD ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 1055' E OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD FUTURE 50% $ 1,758,000 $ 879,000 D-9 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%) TOWN LAKE DRIVE SH 6 NBFR MIDTOWN DRIVE FUTURE 100% $ 1,753,000 $ 1,753,000 D-10 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR CORPORATE PARKWAY SH 6 NBFR MIDTOWN DRIVE CONSTRUCTED 100% $ 1,436,192 $ 1,436,192 D-11 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR CORPORATE PARKWAY MIDTOWN DRIVE WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY FUTURE 100% $ 9,894,000 $ 9,894,000 D-12 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2) PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY ROYAL ADELADE DRIVE ST ANDREWS DRIVE PARTIAL WIDENING 100% $ 2,137,000 $ 2,137,000 D-13 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%) PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY ST ANDREWS DRIVE 275' S OF LONE STAR LANE FUTURE 100% $ 9,181,000 $ 9,181,000 D-14 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR LAKEWAY DRIVE 1645' S OF GATEWAY BOULEVARD SH 6 NBFR FUTURE 100% $ 2,635,080 $ 2,635,080 D-15 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR MATHER PARKWAY NANTUCKET DRIVE 1920' S OF NANTUCKET DRIVE FUTURE 100% $ 882,000 $ 882,000 D-16 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%) NANTUCKET DRIVE SH 6 NBFR PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY FUTURE 100% $ 5,877,000 $ 5,877,000 D-17 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR NANTUCKET DRIVE PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY SOUTHERN POINTE PARKWAY FUTURE 100% $ 3,083,220 $ 3,083,220 D-18 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%) SOUTHERN POINTE PARKWAY 205' W OF PIPELINE ROAD 280' E OF NANTUCKET DRIVE FUTURE 100% $ 3,902,000 $ 3,902,000 Percent in Service Area Project Cost Total Cost in Service AreaFunctional Class Project Limits Project Type NOTE: These planning level cost projections listed in Appendix A 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. These planning level cost projections shall not supersedethe City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. The project cost total within Service Area may differ from the total shown in the Summary sheets contained within Appendix A due to some projects that are split between City limits and ETJ. City of College Station - 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees Summary of Conceptual Level Projects 2021 Roadway Impact Fee UpdateCity of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 119 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.A-5, D-1 Name:ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD Limits:SH 6 NBFR to STONEBROOK DRIVE Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL (1/2)Length (lf):2,168Service Area(s):A/D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 104 Unclassified Street Excavation 4,336 cy 9.00$39,024$204 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)8,431 sy 7.00$59,018$304 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 7,949 sy 65.00$516,707$ 404 4" Topsoil 5,300 sy 4.00$21,198$ 504 6' Concrete Sidewalk 13,008 sf 6.00$78,048$ 604 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 1,055 sy 72.00$75,946$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:789,940$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%39,497$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%23,698$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%197,485$ √Illumination 6%47,396$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%23,698$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%15,799$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%31,598$√Miscellaneous:Signal at Stonebrook $0 350,000$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:729,171$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,519,112$Construction Contingency:15%227,867$ Mobilization 5%75,956$ Prep ROW 3%45,573$ Construction Cost TOTAL:1,869,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-1,869,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:2020-2021 CIP 108,453$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 10%186,900$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,164,000$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane major arterial. This consists of the two additional lanes. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 120 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.A-6, D-2 Name:ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD Limits:STONEBROOK DRIVE to TOWN LAKE DRIVE Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIALLength (lf):3,129Service Area(s):A/D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 103 Unclassified Street Excavation 12,516 cy 9.00$112,644$203 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)24,337 sy 7.00$170,357$303 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 22,946 sy 65.00$1,491,490$ 403 4" Topsoil 9,387 sy 4.00$37,548$ 503 6' Concrete Sidewalk 37,548 sf 6.00$225,288$ 603 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 2,955 sy 72.00$212,772$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,250,099$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%112,505$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%67,503$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%562,525$ √Illumination 6%135,006$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%67,503$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%45,002$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%90,004$√Miscellaneous:Signal at Stonebrook $0 350,000$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,430,047$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,680,146$Construction Contingency:15%552,022$ Mobilization 5%184,007$ Prep ROW 3%110,404$ Construction Cost TOTAL:4,527,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-4,527,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:2020-2021 CIP 156,527$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 10%452,700$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,136,000$ This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane major arterial. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 121 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-3 Name:ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD Limits:TOWN LAKE DRIVE to WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIALLength (lf):9,999Service Area(s):D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 103 Unclassified Street Excavation 39,996 cy 9.00$359,964$203 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)77,770 sy 7.00$544,390$303 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 73,326 sy 65.00$4,766,190$ 403 4" Topsoil 29,997 sy 4.00$119,988$ 503 6' Concrete Sidewalk 119,988 sf 6.00$719,928$ 603 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 9,444 sy 72.00$679,932$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:7,190,392$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%359,520$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%215,712$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%1,797,598$ √Illumination 6%431,424$ Special Drainage Structures Mutliple Stream Crossings 0%500,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%215,712$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%143,808$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%287,616$√Miscellaneous:Signal at Stonebrook $0 350,000$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:4,301,388$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:11,491,780$Construction Contingency:15%1,723,767$ Mobilization 5%574,589$ Prep ROW 3%344,753$ Construction Cost TOTAL:14,135,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-14,135,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%1,696,200$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 10%1,413,500$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:17,245,000$ This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane major arterial. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 122 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-4 Name:MIDTOWN DRIVE Limits:MEDICAL AVENUE to 990' E OF MEDICAL AVENUE Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIALLength (lf):990 Service Area(s):D Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Actual Cost Expenditures -1,028,820$Engineering/Survey/Testing:Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:-$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,028,820$ This project consists of the previously completed Midtown Drive and Corporate Parkway project that was $10,202,990 in actual cost expenditures and is spread across four projects in Service Area D. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 123 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-5 Name:MIDTOWN DRIVE Limits: Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)Length (lf):2,274 Service Area(s):D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 110 Unclassified Street Excavation 4,548 cy 9.00$40,932$ 210 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)8,843 sy 7.00$61,903$310 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 8,338 sy 65.00$541,970$410 4" Topsoil 5,559 sy 4.00$22,235$510 6' Concrete Sidewalk 13,644 sf 6.00$81,864$ 610 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 1,106 sy 72.00$79,659$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:828,563$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%41,428$√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%24,857$√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%207,141$√Illumination 6%49,714$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%24,857$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%16,571$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%33,143$ √Miscellaneous:Signal at Stonebrook $0 350,000$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:747,710$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,576,273$Construction Contingency:15%236,441$Mobilization 5%78,814$Prep ROW 3%47,288$Construction Cost TOTAL:1,939,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-1,939,000$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%232,680$ Previous City contribution 2,363,170$OtherROW/Easement Acquisition:-$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:4,535,000$ This project consists of the widening of Midtown Drive and the project also consists of the previously completed Midtown Drive and Corporate Parkway project that was $10,202,990 in actual cost expenditures and is spread across four projects in Service Area D. NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any futureCapital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 990' E OF MEDICAL AVENUE to 800' S OF TOWN LAKE DRIVE 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 124 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-6 Name:MIDTOWN DRIVE Limits: Impact Fee Class:2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTORLength (lf):5,172 Service Area(s):D Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Actual Cost Expenditures -5,374,808$ Engineering/Survey/Testing:Previous City contributionOtherROW/Easement Acquisition:-$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,374,808$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 800' S OF TOWN LAKE DRIVE to 2605' S OF CORPORATE PARKWAY This project consists of the previously completed Midtown Drive and Corporate Parkway project that was $10,202,990 in actual cost expenditures and is spread across four projects in Service Area D. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 125 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-7 Name:DURHAM DRIVE Limits:MIDTOWN DRIVE to ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD Impact Fee Class:2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTORLength (lf):2,138Service Area(s):D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 112 Unclassified Street Excavation 6,770 cy 9.00$60,933$212 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)13,303 sy 5.50$73,167$312 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (8") with Integral Curb 12,828 sy 55.00$705,540$ 412 4" Topsoil 3,326 sy 4.00$13,303$ 512 6' Concrete Sidewalk 25,656 sf 6.00$153,936$ 611 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 0 sy 60.50$-$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,006,879$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%30,206$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%251,720$ √Illumination 6%60,413$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%30,206$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%20,138$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%40,275$Miscellaneous:$0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:432,958$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,439,837$Construction Contingency:15%215,976$ Mobilization 5%71,992$ Prep ROW 3%43,195$ Construction Cost TOTAL:1,771,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-1,771,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%212,520$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 20%354,200$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (42% Major Collector Adjustment)981,960$ This project consists of the construction of a new 2 lane major collector. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 126 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.A-7, D-8 Name:BIRD POND ROAD Limits:ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD to 1055' E OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIALLength (lf):1,053Service Area(s):A/D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 103 Unclassified Street Excavation 4,212 cy 9.00$37,908$203 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)8,190 sy 7.00$57,330$303 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 7,722 sy 65.00$501,930$ 403 4" Topsoil 3,159 sy 4.00$12,636$ 503 6' Concrete Sidewalk 12,636 sf 6.00$75,816$ 603 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 995 sy 72.00$71,604$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:757,224$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%22,717$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%189,306$ √Illumination 6%45,433$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%22,717$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%15,144$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%30,289$Miscellaneous:$0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:325,606$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,082,830$Construction Contingency:15%162,425$ Mobilization 5%54,142$ Prep ROW 3%32,485$ Construction Cost TOTAL:1,332,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-1,332,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%159,840$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 20%266,400$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,758,000$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the realignment and construction of a new 4 lane major arterial. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 127 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-9 Name:TOWN LAKE DRIVE Limits:SH 6 NBFR to MIDTOWN DRIVE Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)Length (lf):1,962Service Area(s):D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 111 Unclassified Street Excavation 3,924 cy 9.00$35,316$211 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)7,630 sy 7.00$53,410$311 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 7,194 sy 65.00$467,610$ 411 4" Topsoil 4,796 sy 4.00$19,184$ 511 6' Concrete Sidewalk 11,772 sf 6.00$70,632$ 610 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 955 sy 72.00$68,729$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:714,881$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%21,446$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%178,720$ √Illumination 6%42,893$ Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%21,446$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%14,298$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%28,595$Miscellaneous:$0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:557,399$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,272,280$Construction Contingency:15%190,842$ Mobilization 5%63,614$ Prep ROW 3%38,168$ Construction Cost TOTAL:1,565,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-1,565,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%187,800$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:No ROW included -$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,753,000$ This project consists of the construction of two lanes of a new 4 lane minor arterial. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 128 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-10 Name:CORPORATE PARKWAY Limits:SH 6 NBFR to MIDTOWN DRIVE Impact Fee Class:2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTORLength (lf):1,382 Service Area(s):D Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Actual Cost Expenditures -1,436,192$ Engineering/Survey/Testing: Previous City contributionOtherROW/Easement Acquisition:-$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,436,192$ 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 futureCapital Improvement Planning within the City of College Station. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the previously completed Midtown Drive and Corporate Parkway project that was $10,202,990 in actual cost expenditures and is spread across four projects in Service Area D. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 129 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-11 Name:CORPORATE PARKWAY Limits:MIDTOWN DRIVE to WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY Impact Fee Class:2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTORLength (lf):6,386Service Area(s):D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 112 Unclassified Street Excavation 20,222 cy 9.00$182,001$212 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)39,735 sy 5.50$218,543$312 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (8") with Integral Curb 38,316 sy 55.00$2,107,380$ 412 4" Topsoil 9,934 sy 4.00$39,735$ 512 6' Concrete Sidewalk 76,632 sf 6.00$459,792$ 611 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 0 sy 60.50$-$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:3,007,451$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%90,224$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%751,863$ √Illumination 6%180,447$ Special Drainage Structures Bridge Crossing 0%2,850,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%90,224$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%60,149$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%120,298$√Miscellaneous:Traffic Signal $0 350,000$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:4,493,204$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:7,500,655$Construction Contingency:15%1,125,098$ Mobilization 5%375,033$ Prep ROW 3%225,020$ Construction Cost TOTAL:9,226,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-9,226,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:2020 - 2021 CIP 668,000$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:No ROW Included 0%-$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:9,894,000$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the construction of a new 2 lane major collector. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 130 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-12 Name:PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY Limits:ROYAL ADELADE DRIVE to ST ANDREWS DRIVE Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)Length (lf):1,991Service Area(s):D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 110 Unclassified Street Excavation 3,982 cy 9.00$35,838$210 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)7,743 sy 7.00$54,199$310 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 7,300 sy 65.00$474,522$ 410 4" Topsoil 4,867 sy 4.00$19,468$ 510 6' Concrete Sidewalk 11,946 sf 6.00$71,676$ 610 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 969 sy 72.00$69,745$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:725,448$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost √Traffic Control Construction Phase Traffic Control 5%36,272$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%21,763$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%181,362$ √Illumination 6%43,527$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%21,763$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%14,509$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%29,018$√Miscellaneous:Signal at Stonebrook $0 350,000$ **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:698,215$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,423,663$Construction Contingency:15%213,549$ Mobilization 5%71,183$ Prep ROW 3%42,710$ Construction Cost TOTAL:1,752,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-1,752,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%210,240$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:Existing Alignment 10%175,200$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,137,000$ This project consists of the widening to a 4 lane minor arterial. This consists of the two additional lanes. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 131 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-13 Name:PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY Limits:ST ANDREWS DRIVE to 275' S OF LONE STAR LANE Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)Length (lf):10,372Service Area(s):D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 111 Unclassified Street Excavation 20,744 cy 9.00$186,696$211 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)40,336 sy 7.00$282,349$311 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 38,031 sy 65.00$2,471,993$ 411 4" Topsoil 25,354 sy 4.00$101,415$ 511 6' Concrete Sidewalk 62,232 sf 6.00$373,392$ 610 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 5,046 sy 72.00$363,334$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:3,779,180$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%113,375$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%944,795$ √Illumination 6%226,751$ Special Drainage Structures Alum Creek Crossing 0%250,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%113,375$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%75,584$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%151,167$Miscellaneous:$0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,875,047$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:5,654,227$Construction Contingency:15%848,134$ Mobilization 5%282,711$ Prep ROW 3%169,627$ Construction Cost TOTAL:6,955,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-6,955,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%834,600$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 20%1,391,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:9,181,000$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the construction of two lanes of a new 4 lane minor arterial. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 132 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-14 Name:LAKEWAY DRIVE Limits:1645' S OF GATEWAY BOULEVARD to SH 6 NBFR Impact Fee Class:2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTORLength (lf):5,366Service Area(s):D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 112 Unclassified Street Excavation 16,992 cy 9.00$152,931$212 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)33,388 sy 5.50$183,636$312 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (8") with Integral Curb 32,196 sy 55.00$1,770,780$ 412 4" Topsoil 8,347 sy 4.00$33,388$ 512 6' Concrete Sidewalk 64,392 sf 6.00$386,352$ 611 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 0 sy 60.50$-$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,527,088$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%75,813$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%631,772$ √Illumination 6%151,625$ Special Drainage Structures Alum Creek Crossing 0%250,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%75,813$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%50,542$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%101,084$Miscellaneous:$0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,336,648$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,863,736$Construction Contingency:15%579,560$ Mobilization 5%193,187$ Prep ROW 3%115,912$ Construction Cost TOTAL:4,753,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-4,753,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%570,360$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 20%950,600$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (42% Major Collector Adjustment)2,635,080$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the construction of a new 2 lane major collector. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 133 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-15 Name:MATHER PARKWAY Limits:NANTUCKET DRIVE to 1920' S OF NANTUCKET DRIVE Impact Fee Class:2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTORLength (lf):1,920Service Area(s):D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 112 Unclassified Street Excavation 6,080 cy 9.00$54,720$212 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)11,947 sy 5.50$65,707$312 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (8") with Integral Curb 11,520 sy 55.00$633,600$ 412 4" Topsoil 2,987 sy 4.00$11,947$ 512 6' Concrete Sidewalk 23,040 sf 6.00$138,240$ 611 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 0 sy 60.50$-$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:904,213$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%27,126$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%226,053$ √Illumination 6%54,253$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%27,126$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%18,084$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%36,169$Miscellaneous:$0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:388,812$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,293,025$Construction Contingency:15%193,954$ Mobilization 5%64,651$ Prep ROW 3%38,791$ Construction Cost TOTAL:1,591,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-1,591,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%190,920$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 20%318,200$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (42% Major Collector Adjustment)882,000$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the construction of a new 2 lane major collector. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 134 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-16 Name:NANTUCKET DRIVE Limits:SH 6 NBFR to PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)Length (lf):6,466Service Area(s):D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 111 Unclassified Street Excavation 12,932 cy 9.00$116,388$211 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)25,146 sy 7.00$176,019$311 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 23,709 sy 65.00$1,541,063$ 411 4" Topsoil 15,806 sy 4.00$63,223$ 511 6' Concrete Sidewalk 38,796 sf 6.00$232,776$ 610 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 3,146 sy 72.00$226,506$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,355,975$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%70,679$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%588,994$ √Illumination 6%141,359$ Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%70,679$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%47,120$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%94,239$Miscellaneous:$0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,263,069$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:3,619,045$Construction Contingency:15%542,857$ Mobilization 5%180,952$ Prep ROW 3%108,571$ Construction Cost TOTAL:4,452,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-4,452,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%534,240$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 20%890,400$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,877,000$ This project consists of the construction of two lanes of a new 4 lane minor arterial. 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 135 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-17 Name:NANTUCKET DRIVE Limits:PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY to SOUTHERN POINTE PARKWAY Impact Fee Class:2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTORLength (lf):6,341Service Area(s):D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 112 Unclassified Street Excavation 20,080 cy 9.00$180,719$212 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)39,455 sy 5.50$217,003$312 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (8") with Integral Curb 38,046 sy 55.00$2,092,530$ 412 4" Topsoil 9,864 sy 4.00$39,455$ 512 6' Concrete Sidewalk 76,092 sf 6.00$456,552$ 611 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 0 sy 60.50$-$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:2,986,259$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%89,588$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%746,565$ √Illumination 6%179,176$ Special Drainage Structures Minor Stream Crossing 0%250,000$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%89,588$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%59,725$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%119,450$Miscellaneous:$0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:1,534,091$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:4,520,350$Construction Contingency:15%678,052$ Mobilization 5%226,017$ Prep ROW 3%135,610$ Construction Cost TOTAL:5,561,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-5,561,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%667,320$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 20%1,112,200$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL (42% Major Collector Adjustment)3,083,220$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the construction of a new 2 lane major collector. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 136 of 231 City of College Station Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update updated:10/12/2021 Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection Project Information:Description:Project No.D-18 Name:SOUTHERN POINTE PARKWAY Limits:205' W OF PIPELINE ROAD to 280' E OF NANTUCKET DRIVE Impact Fee Class:4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)Length (lf):4,611Service Area(s):D Roadway Construction Cost Projection No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 111 Unclassified Street Excavation 9,222 cy 9.00$82,998$211 8" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 36#/sy)17,932 sy 7.00$125,522$311 Reinforced Concrete Pavement (10") with Integral Curb 16,907 sy 65.00$1,098,955$ 411 4" Topsoil 11,271 sy 4.00$45,085$ 511 6' Concrete Sidewalk 27,666 sf 6.00$165,996$ 610 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 2,243 sy 72.00$161,525$ Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,680,081$ Major Construction Component Allowances**:Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$ √Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%50,402$ √Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 25%420,020$ √Illumination 6%100,805$ Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%-$ √Water Minor Adjustments 3%50,402$ √Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%33,602$ √Landscaping and Irrigation 4%67,203$Miscellaneous:$0 **Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:722,435$ Paving and Allowance Subtotal:2,402,515$Construction Contingency:15%360,377$ Mobilization 5%120,126$ Prep ROW 3%72,075$ Construction Cost TOTAL:2,956,000$ Impact Fee Project Cost Summary Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost Construction:-2,956,000$Engineering/Survey/Testing:12%354,720$Previous City contributionOther ROW/Easement Acquisition:New Roadway Alignment 20%591,200$ Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:3,902,000$ 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 or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project. This project consists of the construction of two lanes of a new 4 lane minor arterial. 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost ProjectionsDRAFT Page 137 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update October 2021City of College Station, Texas CIP SERVICE UNITS OF SUPPLY DRAFTPage 138 of 231 Service Area A 10/12/2021 VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS LENGTH CAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY(MI)PK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HRPER LN TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MI A-1 GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E DOMINIK DRIVE TO HARVEY ROAD 0.29 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 637 100% 650 754 185 569 2,409,500.00$2,409,500.00$A-2 LASSIE LANE STERLING STREET TO MANUEL DRIVE 0.06 2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR NEW 100% 550 66 0 66 860,066.00$860,066.00$A-3 DARTMOUTH STREET 720' S OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S TO TEXAS AVENUE S 0.42 2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR NEW 100% 550 462 0 462 2,423,520.00$2,423,520.00$A-4 HARVEY ROAD SH 6 NBFR TO BOONVILLE ROAD 2.29 4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT 1154 100% 950 8702 2643 6059 2,509,696.00$2,509,696.00$ A-5, D-1 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 NBFR TO STONEBROOK DRIVE 0.41 4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL 964 50% 650 533 198 335 2,164,000.00$1,082,000.00$A-6, D-2 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD STONEBROOK DRIVE TO TOWN LAKE DRIVE 0.59 4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL 870 50% 650 767 257 510 5,136,000.00$2,568,000.00$A-7, D-8 BIRD POND ROAD ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TO 1055' E OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 0.20 4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL 214 50% 650 260 21 239 1,758,000.00$879,000.00$ 1 UNIVERSITY DRIVE E AND UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER SIGNAL 100%400,000.00$400,000.00$2 HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S AND DARTMOUTH STREET 100%566,992.00$566,992.00$3 TEXAS AVENUE S AND BROTHERS BOULEVARD 50%397,476.00$198,738.00$11,544 3,304 8,240 18,625,250$13,897,512$ 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area 17,500$TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA A 13,915,012$ SUBTOTAL City of College Station - 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study CIP Service Units of Supply Project ID#ROADWAY LIMITS LANES CLASSIFICATION PEAKHOURVOLUME % INSERVICEAREA TOTAL PROJECTCOST TOTAL PROJECTCOST IN SERVICEAREA 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix B - CIP Service Units of SupplyDRAFT Page 139 of 231 Service Area B 10/12/2021 VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESSLENGTHCAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY(MI)PK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HRPER LN TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MIB-1 F & B ROAD 160' E OF TURKEY CREEK ROAD TO HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 0.49 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 606 100% 650 1274 297 977 4,106,520.00$4,106,520.00$B-2 LUTHER STREET W HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY TO JONES BUTLER ROAD 0.68 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)461 100% 650 1768 313 1455 2,903,600.00$2,903,600.00$B-3, C-1 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WEST 715' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY TO WELLBORN ROAD 0.63 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 1091 50% 650 819 344 475 4,659,868.00$2,329,934.00$B-4, C-2 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD NORMAND DRIVE TO SH 6 0.48 6 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL 1892 50% 750 1080 454 626 4,017,530.00$2,008,765.00$B-5 TURKEY CREEK ROAD 2775' N OF RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WBFR TO RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WBFR 0.53 2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR 155 100% 550 583 82 501 3,278,140.00$3,278,140.00$B-6 HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY TO WELLBORN ROAD 2.62 6 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT 2582 100% 950 14934 6765 8169 1,407,527.00$1,407,527.00$B-7 PENBERTHY ROAD GEORGE BUSH DRIVE TO LUTHER STREET W 0.40 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 1212 100% 650 1040 485 555 3,080,683.00$3,080,683.00$B-8 WELLBORN ROAD GEORGE BUSH DRIVE TO 940' N OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 1.23 6 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT 2451 100% 950 7011 3015 3996 1,486,464.00$1,486,464.00$B-9 JONES BUTLER ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S TO HOLLEMAN DRIVE S 0.22 2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR NEW 100% 550 242 0 242 9,652,780.00$9,652,780.00$B-10 HOLLEMAN DRIVE S N DOWLING ROAD TO 290' S OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W 1.62 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 852 100% 650 4212 1380 2832 10,631,012.00$10,631,012.00$3 TEXAS AVENUE S AND BROTHERS BOULEVARD 50%397,476.00$198,738.00$4 WELLBORN ROAD AND GEORGE BUSH DRIVE 100%1,190,231.66$1,190,231.66$WELLBORN ROAD AND HOLLEMAN DRIVE 100%644,445.00$644,445.00$WELLBORN ROAD AND DEACON DRIVE 100%4,532,013.03$4,532,013.03$HOLLEMAN DRIVE W AND JONES BUTLER ROAD 100%572,000.00$572,000.00$LONGMIRE DRIVE AND PONDEROSA DRIVE 100%350,000.00$350,000.00$ 32,963 13,135 19,828 52,910,290$48,372,853$ 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area 17,500$TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA B 48,390,353$ TOTAL PROJECTCOST IN SERVICEAREA SUBTOTAL City of College Station - 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study CIP Service Units of Supply Project ID#ROADWAY LIMITS LANES CLASSIFICATION PEAKHOURVOLUME % INSERVICEAREA TOTAL PROJECTCOST 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix B - CIP Service Units of SupplyDRAFT Page 140 of 231 Service Area C 10/12/2021 VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESSLENGTHCAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY(MI)PK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HRPER LN TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MIB-3, C-1 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WEST 715' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY TO WELLBORN ROAD 0.63 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 1090 50% 650 819 343 476 4,659,868.00$2,329,934.00$B-4, C-2 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD NORMAND DRIVE TO SH 6 0.48 6 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL 1892 50% 750 1080 454 626 4,017,530.00$2,008,765.00$C-3 BARRON ROAD WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY TO DECATUR DRIVE 1.39 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 1341 100% 650 3614 1864 1750 5,795,317.00$5,795,317.00$C-4 CAPSTONE DRIVE 1265' W OF WELLBORN ROAD TO WELLBORN ROAD 0.24 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 238 100% 650 624 57 567 2,765,575.00$2,765,575.00$C-5 BARRON ROAD WELLBORN ROAD TO WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY 0.49 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 461 100% 650 1274 226 1048 4,712,977.00$4,712,977.00$C-6 GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 820' W OF WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY TO ARRINGTON ROAD 1.43 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 976 100% 650 3718 1396 2322 10,550,324.00$10,550,324.00$C-7 GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD WELLBORN ROAD TO 1290' E OF CREEK MEADOW BOULEVARD N 1.27 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 469 100% 650 3302 596 2706 8,918,740.00$8,918,740.00$C-8 TOWERS PARKWAY ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W TO WELLBORN ROAD 1.00 4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL NEW 100% 650 2600 0 2600 10,030,680.00$10,030,680.00$C-9 WELLBORN ROAD CAPSTONE DRIVE TO 540' S OF GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 2.36 4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL - TxDOT 882 100% 950 8968 2082 6886 2,407,328.00$2,407,328.00$C-10 WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY BARRON ROAD TO GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 1.31 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)124 100% 650 3406 162 3244 5,844,160.00$5,844,160.00$C-11 WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD TO ARRINGTON ROAD 1.55 2 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)NEW 100% 650 2015 0 2015 7,311,480.00$7,311,480.00$C-12 ROYDER ROAD EXTENSION I-GN ROAD TO WELLBORN ROAD 0.22 2 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)NEW 100% 650 286 0 286 3,360,000.00$3,360,000.00$C-13 ROYDER ROAD WELLBORN ROAD TO 885' S OF GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 1.03 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 65 100% 650 2678 67 2611 7,686,614.00$7,686,614.00$C-14 VICTORIA AVENUE SOUTHERN PLANTATION DRIVE TO WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 0.48 2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR 634 100% 550 528 304 224 1,973,927.00$1,973,927.00$GRAHAM ROAD AND VICTORIA AVENUE 100%350,000.00$350,000.00$BARRON ROAD AND ALEXANDRIA AVENUE 100%320,994.00$320,994.00$BARRON ROAD AND DECATUR DRIVE 100%350,000.00$350,000.00$BARRON ROAD AND LONGMIRE DRIVE 100%350,000.00$350,000.00$LONGMIRE DRIVE AND EAGLE AVENUE 100%350,000.00$350,000.00$WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY AND VICTORIA AVENUE SIGNAL 100%816,249.00$816,249.00$ 34,912 7,551 27,361 82,571,763$78,233,064$ 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area 17,500$TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA C 78,250,564$ TOTAL PROJECTCOST IN SERVICEAREA SUBTOTAL City of College Station - 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study CIP Service Units of Supply Project ID#ROADWAY LIMITS LANES CLASSIFICATION PEAKHOURVOLUME % INSERVICEAREA TOTAL PROJECTCOST 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix B - CIP Service Units of SupplyDRAFT Page 141 of 231 Service Area D 10/19/2021 VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS LENGTH CAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY (MI)PK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HR PER LN TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MI A-5, D-1 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 NBFR TO STONEBROOK DRIVE 0.41 4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL (1/2)964 50% 650 533 198 335 2,164,000.00$1,082,000.00$ A-6, D-2 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD STONEBROOK DRIVE TO TOWN LAKE DRIVE 0.59 4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL 870 50% 650 767 257 510 5,136,000.00$2,568,000.00$ D-3 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TOWN LAKE DRIVE TO WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 1.89 4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL 603 100% 650 4914 1140 3774 17,245,000.00$17,245,000.00$ D-4 MIDTOWN DRIVE MEDICAL AVENUE TO 990' E OF MEDICAL AVENUE 0.19 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL 123 100% 650 494 23 471 1,028,820.00$1,028,820.00$ D-5 MIDTOWN DRIVE 990' E OF MEDICAL AVENUE TO 800' S OF TOWN LAKE DRIVE 0.43 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)123 100% 650 1118 53 1065 4,535,000.00$4,535,000.00$ D-6 MIDTOWN DRIVE 800' S OF TOWN LAKE DRIVE TO 2605' S OF CORPORATE PARKWAY 0.98 2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR 123 100% 550 1078 121 957 5,374,808.00$5,374,808.00$ D-7 DURHAM DRIVE MIDTOWN DRIVE TO ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 0.40 2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR NEW 100% 550 440 0 440 981,960.00$981,960.00$ A-7, D-8 BIRD POND ROAD ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TO 1055' E OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 0.20 4 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL NEW 50% 650 260 0 260 1,758,000.00$879,000.00$ D-9 TOWN LAKE DRIVE SH 6 NBFR TO MIDTOWN DRIVE 0.37 2 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)NEW 100% 650 481 0 481 1,753,000.00$1,753,000.00$ D-10 CORPORATE PARKWAY SH 6 NBFR TO MIDTOWN DRIVE 0.26 2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR 50 100% 550 286 13 273 1,436,191.91$1,436,191.91$ D-11 CORPORATE PARKWAY MIDTOWN DRIVE TO WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 1.21 2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR NEW 100% 550 1331 0 1331 9,894,000.00$9,894,000.00$ D-12 PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY ROYAL ADELADE DRIVE TO ST ANDREWS DRIVE 0.38 4 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (1/2)560 100% 650 988 213 775 2,137,000.00$2,137,000.00$ D-13 PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY ST ANDREWS DRIVE TO 275' S OF LONE STAR LANE 1.96 2 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)NEW 100% 650 2548 0 2548 9,181,000.00$9,181,000.00$ D-14 LAKEWAY DRIVE 1645' S OF GATEWAY BOULEVARD TO SH 6 NBFR 1.02 2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR NEW 100% 550 1122 0 1122 2,635,080.00$2,635,080.00$ D-15 MATHER PARKWAY NANTUCKET DRIVE TO 1920' S OF NANTUCKET DRIVE 0.36 2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR NEW 100% 550 396 0 396 882,000.00$882,000.00$ D-16 NANTUCKET DRIVE SH 6 NBFR TO PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY 1.22 2 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)NEW 100% 650 1586 0 1586 5,877,000.00$5,877,000.00$ D-17 NANTUCKET DRIVE PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY TO SOUTHERN POINTE PARKWAY 1.20 2 2 LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR NEW 100% 550 1320 0 1320 3,083,220.00$3,083,220.00$ D-18 SOUTHERN POINTE PARKWAY 205' W OF PIPELINE ROAD TO 280' E OF NANTUCKET DRIVE 0.87 2 4 LANE MINOR ARTERIAL (50%)NEW 100% 650 1131 0 1131 3,902,000.00$3,902,000.00$ 20,793 2,018 18,775 79,004,080$74,475,080$ 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area 17,500$TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA D 74,492,580$ TOTAL PROJECTCOST IN SERVICEAREA SUBTOTAL City of College Station - 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study CIP Service Units of Supply Project ID#ROADWAY LIMITS LANES CLASSIFICATION PEAKHOURVOLUME % INSERVICEAREA TOTAL PROJECTCOST 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update City of College Station, Texas Appendix B - CIP Service Units of SupplyDRAFT Page 142 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update October 2021City of College Station, Texas EXISTING FACILITIES INVENTORY DRAFTPage 143 of 231 Service Area A % INROADWAYFROMTOLENGTH LENGTH TYPE SERVICE(ft)(mi)AREA NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WBBIRD POND ROAD 1055' E OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TRUMPETER SWAN DRIVE 1120 0.21 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 107 107 100 425 425 9,015 9,015 2,270 2,270 6,745 6,745BIRD POND ROAD TRUMPETER SWAN DRIVE FROST DRIVE 765 0.14 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 107 107 100 425 425 6,158 6,158 1,550 1,550 4,607 4,607BIRD POND ROAD FROST DRIVE RUDDY DUCK DRIVE 2965 0.56 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 107 107 100 425 425 23,866 23,866 6,009 6,009 17,857 17,857BIRD POND ROAD RUDDY DUCK DRIVE 1115' E OF RUDDY DUCK DRIVE 1115 0.21 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 107 107 100 425 425 8,975 8,975 2,260 2,260 6,715 6,715BOONVILLE ROAD 275' N OF UNIVERSITY DRIVE E UNIVERSITY DRIVE E 275 0.05 2 2 4D 6 Lane Major Arterial 641 641 50 650 650 3,385 3,385 1,668 1,668 1,717 1,717BOONVILLE ROAD UNIVERSITY DRIVE E HICKS LANE 1535 0.29 2 2 4D 6 Lane Major Arterial 702 702 50 650 650 18,897 18,897 10,197 10,197 8,700 8,700BOONVILLE ROAD HICKS LANE HARVEY ROAD 2150 0.41 2 2 4D 6 Lane Major Arterial 702 702 50 650 650 26,468 26,468 14,282 14,282 12,185 12,185BOONVILLE ROAD HARVEY ROAD 430' S OF HARVEY ROAD 430 0.08 2 2 4D 6 Lane Major Arterial 710 710 50 650 650 5,294 5,294 2,891 2,891 2,402 2,402COPPERFIELD PARKWAY UNIVERSITY DRIVE E HARVEY ROAD 3180 0.60 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 248 248 100 650 650 78,295 78,295 14,936 14,936 63,359 63,359DARTMOUTH STREET HARVEY ROAD HOLLEMAN DRIVE E 1805 0.34 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 370 370 100 550 550 18,802 18,802 12,649 12,649 6,153 6,153DARTMOUTH STREET HOLLEMAN DRIVE E MANUEL DRIVE 570 0.11 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 370 370 100 550 550 5,938 5,938 3,994 3,994 1,943 1,943DARTMOUTH STREET MANUEL DRIVE COLGATE DRIVE 935 0.18 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 370 370 100 550 550 9,740 9,740 6,552 6,552 3,188 3,188DARTMOUTH STREET COLGATE DRIVE BRENTWOOD DRIVE E 675 0.13 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 370 370 100 550 550 7,031 7,031 4,730 4,730 2,301 2,301DARTMOUTH STREET BRENTWOOD DRIVE E SOUTHWEST PARKWAY E 450 0.09 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 370 370 100 550 550 4,688 4,688 3,153 3,153 1,534 1,534DARTMOUTH STREET SOUTHWEST PARKWAY E KRENEK TAP ROAD 1565 0.30 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 232 232 100 600 600 35,568 35,568 6,862 6,862 28,706 28,706DARTMOUTH STREET KRENEK TAP ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 2160 0.41 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 232 232 100 650 650 53,182 53,182 9,470 9,470 43,711 43,711DARTMOUTH STREET HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 720' S OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 720 0.14 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 0 0 100 550 550 7,500 7,500 0 0 7,500 7,500DOMINIK DRIVE GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E STALLINGS DRIVE 1875 0.36 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 347 347 100 425 425 15,092 15,092 12,322 12,322 2,770 2,770DOMINIK DRIVE STALLINGS DRIVE MUNSON AVENUE 1115 0.21 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 125 125 100 425 425 8,975 8,975 2,629 2,629 6,346 6,346E TARROW DRIVE COUPLET SPLIT UNIVERSITY DRIVE E 965 0.18 3 0 3UO 4 Lane Minor Arterial 214 0 100 550 550 30,156 0 3,902 0 26,254 0EISENHOWER STREET UNIVERSITY DRIVE E ASH STREET 1100 0.21 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 0 0 100 425 425 8,854 8,854 0 0 8,854 8,854EISENHOWER STREET ASH STREET LINCOLN AVENUE 655 0.12 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 0 0 100 425 425 5,272 5,272 0 0 5,272 5,272EMERALD PARKWAY SH 6 SH 6 NBFR 170 0.03 3 3 6D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 213 213 100 750 750 7,244 7,244 686 686 6,559 6,559EMERALD PARKWAY SH 6 NBFR CORSAIR CIRCLE 865 0.16 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 213 213 100 650 650 21,297 21,297 3,489 3,489 17,808 17,808EMERALD PARKWAY CORSAIR CIRCLE SANDSTONE DRIVE 1805 0.34 1 1 2D 2 Lane Major Collector 213 213 100 500 500 17,093 17,093 7,282 7,282 9,811 9,811EMERALD PARKWAY SANDSTONE DRIVE APPOMATTOX DRIVE 325 0.06 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 213 213 100 550 550 3,385 3,385 1,311 1,311 2,074 2,074EMERALD PARKWAY APPOMATTOX DRIVE BENT OAK STREET 1280 0.24 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 213 213 100 550 550 13,333 13,333 5,164 5,164 8,170 8,170GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E S TEXAS AVENUE FOSTER AVENUE 860 0.16 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 633 633 100 650 650 21,174 21,174 10,302 10,302 10,872 10,872GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E FOSTER AVENUE DOMINIK DRIVE 645 0.12 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 633 633 100 650 650 15,881 15,881 7,727 7,727 8,154 8,154GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E DOMINIK DRIVE UNIVERSITY OAKS BOULEVARD 605 0.11 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 319 319 100 550 550 6,302 6,302 3,649 3,649 2,653 2,653GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E UNIVERSITY OAKS BOULEVARD HARVEY ROAD 905 0.17 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 319 319 100 550 550 9,427 9,427 5,459 5,459 3,968 3,968GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E HARVEY ROAD HOLLEMAN DRIVE E 1270 0.24 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 317 317 100 550 550 13,229 13,229 7,613 7,613 5,616 5,616GLENHAVEN DRIVE UNIVERSITY DRIVE E FRANCIS DRIVE 1125 0.21 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 188 188 100 425 425 9,055 9,055 4,006 4,006 5,050 5,050GLENHAVEN DRIVE FRANCIS DRIVE BRAZOSWOOD DRIVE 535 0.10 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 188 188 100 425 425 4,306 4,306 1,905 1,905 2,401 2,401HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S S TEXAS AVENUE DARTMOUTH STREET 1945 0.37 2 2 5U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 922 922 100 950 950 69,991 69,991 33,945 33,945 36,045 36,045HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S DARTMOUTH STREET SH 6 SBFR 1865 0.35 2 2 5U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 922 922 100 950 950 67,112 67,112 32,549 32,549 34,563 34,563HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S SH 6 SBFR SH 6 240 0.05 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 922 922 100 950 950 12,955 12,955 4,189 4,189 8,766 8,766HARVEY ROAD S TEXAS AVENUE GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E 1135 0.21 2 2 5U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 1003 1003 100 950 950 40,843 40,843 21,550 21,550 19,293 19,293HARVEY ROAD GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E STALLINGS DRIVE 1260 0.24 2 2 5U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 1003 1003 100 950 950 45,341 45,341 23,923 23,923 21,418 21,418HARVEY ROAD STALLINGS DRIVE DARTMOUTH STREET 1265 0.24 2 2 5U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 1003 1003 100 950 950 45,521 45,521 24,018 24,018 21,503 21,503HARVEY ROAD DARTMOUTH STREET MUNSON AVENUE 365 0.07 2 2 4D-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 1068 1068 100 950 950 13,134 13,134 7,383 7,383 5,752 5,752HARVEY ROAD MUNSON AVENUE SCARLETT O'HARA DRIVE 1900 0.36 2 2 5U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 1068 1068 100 950 950 68,371 68,371 38,432 38,432 29,939 29,939HARVEY ROAD SCARLETT O'HARA DRIVE SH 6 SBFR 1135 0.21 2 2 5U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 1068 1068 100 950 950 40,843 40,843 22,958 22,958 17,885 17,885HARVEY ROAD SH 6 SBFR SH 6 NBFR 805 0.15 3 3 6U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 577 577 100 750 750 34,304 34,304 8,797 8,797 25,507 25,507HARVEY ROAD SH 6 NBFR APPOMATTOX DRIVE 590 0.11 1 2 5U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 577 577 100 950 950 10,616 21,231 6,448 6,448 4,168 14,784HARVEY ROAD APPOMATTOX DRIVE HARVEY TO LINDA CONNECTOR 2615 0.50 1 1 2U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 577 577 100 950 950 47,050 47,050 28,577 28,577 18,473 18,473HARVEY ROAD HARVEY TO LINDA CONNECTOR 570' E OF HARVEY TO LINDA CONNECTOR 570 0.11 1 1 2U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 568 568 100 950 950 10,256 10,256 6,132 6,132 4,124 4,124HARVEY ROAD 570' E OF HARVEY TO LINDA CONNECTOR COPPERFIELD PARKWAY 3180 0.60 1 1 3U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 568 568 100 950 950 57,216 57,216 34,209 34,209 23,007 23,007HARVEY ROAD COPPERFIELD PARKWAY SUMMIT CROSSING LANE 2560 0.48 1 1 3U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 463 463 100 950 950 46,061 46,061 22,448 22,448 23,612 23,612HARVEY ROAD SUMMIT CROSSING LANE BOONVILLE ROAD 2565 0.49 1 1 3U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 422 422 100 950 950 46,151 46,151 20,476 20,476 25,674 25,674HOLLEMAN DRIVE E S TEXAS AVENUE GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E 1055 0.20 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 164 164 100 550 550 10,990 10,990 3,267 3,267 7,723 7,723HOLLEMAN DRIVE E GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E LASSIE LANE 410 0.08 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 164 164 100 550 550 4,271 4,271 1,270 1,270 3,001 3,001HOLLEMAN DRIVE E LASSIE LANE DARTMOUTH STREET 2130 0.40 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 164 164 100 550 550 22,188 22,188 6,596 6,596 15,592 15,592HOLLEMAN DRIVE E DARTMOUTH STREET SH 6 SBFR 3275 0.62 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 164 164 100 550 550 34,115 34,115 10,141 10,141 23,973 23,973LINCOLN AVENUE S TEXAS AVENUE FOSTER AVENUE 485 0.09 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 311 311 100 425 425 3,904 3,904 2,852 2,852 1,052 1,052LINCOLN AVENUE FOSTER AVENUE EISENHOWER STREET 415 0.08 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 311 311 100 425 425 3,340 3,340 2,440 2,440 900 900LINCOLN AVENUE EISENHOWER STREET NUNN STREET 865 0.16 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 311 311 100 425 425 6,963 6,963 5,087 5,087 1,876 1,876LINCOLN AVENUE NUNN STREET TARROW STREET 895 0.17 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 311 311 100 425 425 7,204 7,204 5,263 5,263 1,941 1,941LINCOLN AVENUE TARROW STREET MUNSON AVENUE 1570 0.30 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 258 258 100 425 425 12,637 12,637 7,672 7,672 4,966 4,966LINCOLN AVENUE MUNSON AVENUE UNIVERSITY DRIVE E 1740 0.33 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 258 258 100 425 425 14,006 14,006 8,502 8,502 5,503 5,503LINDA LANE HARVEY ROAD 585' S OF HARVEY ROAD 585 0.11 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 38 38 100 425 425 4,709 4,709 415 415 4,293 4,293ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 SH 6 NBFR 235 0.04 3 3 6D 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 750 750 10,014 10,014 4,210 4,210 5,804 5,804 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 NBFR 415' E OF SH 6 NBFR 415 0.08 1 1 4D 4 Lane Major Arterial 482 482 100 650 650 5,109 5,109 3,788 3,788 1,320 1,320ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 415' E OF SH 6 NBFR SCOTT AND WHITE DRIVE 855 0.16 1 1 2D 4 Lane Major Arterial 435 435 100 500 500 8,097 8,097 7,044 7,044 1,053 1,053ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SCOTT AND WHITE DRIVE STONEBROOK DRIVE 885 0.17 1 1 2D 4 Lane Major Arterial 435 435 100 500 500 8,381 8,381 7,291 7,291 1,089 1,089 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD STONEBROOK DRIVE MEDICAL AVENUE 695 0.13 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 435 435 100 425 425 5,594 5,594 5,726 5,726 -132 -132 132 132 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD MEDICAL AVENUE DURHAM DRIVE 1140 0.22 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 302 302 100 425 425 9,176 9,176 6,510 6,510 2,666 2,666ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD DURHAM DRIVE TOWN LAKE DRIVE 1305 0.25 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 302 302 100 425 425 10,504 10,504 7,452 7,452 3,052 3,052S TEXAS AVENUE 955' N OF UNIVERSITY DRIVE E 590' N OF UNIVERSITY DRIVE E 365 0.07 2 2 5U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 1736 1736 100 950 950 13,134 13,134 12,001 12,001 1,134 1,134 S TEXAS AVENUE 590' N OF UNIVERSITY DRIVE E UNIVERSITY DRIVE E 590 0.11 2 2 4D-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 1736 1736 100 950 950 21,231 21,231 19,398 19,398 1,833 1,833S TEXAS AVENUE UNIVERSITY DRIVE E LINCOLN AVENUE 1700 0.32 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1716 1716 100 950 950 91,761 91,761 55,234 55,234 36,527 36,527S TEXAS AVENUE LINCOLN AVENUE WALTON DRIVE 570 0.11 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1716 1716 100 950 950 30,767 30,767 18,520 18,520 12,247 12,247 S TEXAS AVENUE WALTON DRIVE FRANCIS DRIVE 1120 0.21 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1716 1716 100 950 950 60,455 60,455 36,389 36,389 24,065 24,065 S TEXAS AVENUE FRANCIS DRIVE GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E 1490 0.28 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1716 1716 100 950 950 80,426 80,426 48,411 48,411 32,015 32,015S TEXAS AVENUE GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E HARVEY ROAD 1885 0.36 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 2016 2016 100 950 950 101,747 101,747 71,955 71,955 29,792 29,792S TEXAS AVENUE HARVEY ROAD HOLLEMAN DRIVE E 1270 0.24 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1881 1881 100 950 950 68,551 68,551 45,244 45,244 23,307 23,307 S TEXAS AVENUE HOLLEMAN DRIVE E MANUEL DRIVE 1040 0.20 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1881 1881 100 950 950 56,136 56,136 37,050 37,050 19,086 19,086S TEXAS AVENUE MANUEL DRIVE BRENTWOOD DRIVE E 865 0.16 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1881 1881 100 950 950 46,690 46,690 30,816 30,816 15,875 15,875S TEXAS AVENUE BRENTWOOD DRIVE E SOUTHWEST PARKWAY E 1010 0.19 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1881 1881 100 950 950 54,517 54,517 35,981 35,981 18,536 18,536 S TEXAS AVENUE SOUTHWEST PARKWAY E KRENEK TAP ROAD 1535 0.29 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1152 1152 100 950 950 82,855 82,855 33,476 33,476 49,379 49,379 S TEXAS AVENUE KRENEK TAP ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 1945 0.37 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1152 1152 100 950 950 104,986 104,986 42,418 42,418 62,568 62,568S TEXAS AVENUE HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S DARTMOUTH STREET 1675 0.32 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1152 1152 100 950 950 60,275 60,275 36,530 36,530 23,745 23,745S TEXAS AVENUE DARTMOUTH STREET DEACON DRIVE 1940 0.37 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1152 1152 100 950 950 69,811 69,811 42,309 42,309 27,502 27,502 S TEXAS AVENUE DEACON DRIVE SH 6 1450 0.27 1 1 2D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 338 338 100 950 950 26,089 26,089 9,282 9,282 16,807 16,807SOUTHWEST PARKWAY E S TEXAS AVENUE CORNELL DRIVE 1205 0.23 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 726 726 100 650 650 29,669 29,669 16,569 16,569 13,100 13,100SOUTHWEST PARKWAY E CORNELL DRIVE DARTMOUTH STREET 1125 0.21 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 726 726 100 600 600 25,568 25,568 15,469 15,469 10,099 10,099SOUTHWEST PARKWAY E DARTMOUTH STREET CENTRAL PARK LANE 1915 0.36 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 726 726 100 600 600 43,523 43,523 26,331 26,331 17,191 17,191 SOUTHWEST PARKWAY E CENTRAL PARK LANE SH 6 SBFR 1580 0.30 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 726 726 100 600 600 35,909 35,909 21,725 21,725 14,184 14,184SOUTHWEST PARKWAY E SH 6 SBFR SH 6 230 0.04 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 636 636 100 600 600 5,227 5,227 2,770 2,770 2,457 2,457SPRING LOOP TARROW STREET UNIVERSITY DRIVE E 3135 0.59 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 419 419 100 425 425 25,234 25,234 24,848 24,848 386 386 TARROW STREET 855' N OF SPRING LOOP SPRING LOOP 855 0.16 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 171 171 100 550 550 8,906 8,906 2,769 2,769 6,137 6,137 TARROW STREET SPRING LOOP COUPLET SPLIT 400 0.08 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 171 171 100 550 550 4,167 4,167 1,295 1,295 2,871 2,871TARROW STREET COUPLET SPLIT UNIVERSITY DRIVE E 1465 0.28 0 3 3UO 4 Lane Minor Arterial 171 100 550 550 0 45,781 0 4,745 0 41,037TARROW STREET UNIVERSITY DRIVE E LINCOLN AVENUE 1760 0.33 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 220 220 100 550 550 18,333 18,333 7,317 7,317 11,017 11,017 UNIVERSITY DRIVE E S TEXAS AVENUE EISENHOWER STREET 845 0.16 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1368 1368 100 950 950 45,611 45,611 21,885 21,885 23,726 23,726UNIVERSITY DRIVE E EISENHOWER STREET TARROW STREET 1795 0.34 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1368 1368 100 950 950 96,889 96,889 46,490 46,490 50,399 50,399UNIVERSITY DRIVE E TARROW STREET E TARROW DRIVE 855 0.16 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1260 1260 100 950 950 46,151 46,151 20,403 20,403 25,747 25,747 UNIVERSITY DRIVE E E TARROW DRIVE SPRING LOOP 2550 0.48 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1260 1260 100 950 950 137,642 137,642 60,852 60,852 76,790 76,790 UNIVERSITY DRIVE E SPRING LOOP GLENHAVEN DRIVE 2075 0.39 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1600 1600 100 950 950 112,003 112,003 62,879 62,879 49,124 49,124UNIVERSITY DRIVE E GLENHAVEN DRIVE SH 6 SBFR 630 0.12 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1600 1600 100 950 950 34,006 34,006 19,091 19,091 14,915 14,915UNIVERSITY DRIVE E SH 6 SBFR SH 6 575 0.11 4 2 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1600 1600 100 950 950 41,383 20,691 17,424 17,424 23,958 3,267 UNIVERSITY DRIVE E SH 6 SH 6 NBFR 525 0.10 2 4 6D-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 966 966 100 950 950 18,892 37,784 9,605 9,605 9,287 28,179UNIVERSITY DRIVE E SH 6 NBFR COPPERFIELD PARKWAY 5350 1.01 2 2 4D-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 966 966 100 950 950 192,519 192,519 97,881 97,881 94,638 94,638UNIVERSITY DRIVE E COPPERFIELD PARKWAY SUMMIT CROSSING LANE 2380 0.45 2 2 4D-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 363 363 100 950 950 85,644 85,644 16,363 16,363 69,281 69,281 UNIVERSITY DRIVE E SUMMIT CROSSING LANE BOONVILLE ROAD 1530 0.29 2 2 4D-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 292 292 100 950 950 55,057 55,057 8,461 8,461 46,595 46,595 UNIVERSITY OAKS BOULEVARD GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E STALLINGS DRIVE 1520 0.29 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 488 488 100 425 425 12,235 12,235 14,034 14,034 -1,799 -1,799 1,799 1,799UNIVERSITY OAKS BOULEVARD STALLINGS DRIVE MUNSON AVENUE 1410 0.27 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 488 488 100 425 425 11,349 11,349 13,018 13,018 -1,669 -1,669 1,669 1,669UNIVERSITY OAKS BOULEVARD MUNSON AVENUE SCARLETT O'HARA DRIVE 1985 0.38 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 128 128 100 425 425 15,978 15,978 4,812 4,812 11,166 11,166 UNIVERSITY OAKS BOULEVARD SCARLETT O'HARA DRIVE MERRY OAKS DRIVE 780 0.15 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 128 128 100 425 425 6,278 6,278 1,891 1,891 4,388 4,388UNIVERSITY OAKS BOULEVARD MERRY OAKS DRIVE SH 6 SBFR 620 0.12 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 128 128 100 425 425 4,991 4,991 1,503 1,503 3,488 3,488 233,485 44.22 4,206,281 4,230,722 1,748,852 1,749,694 2,457,429 2,481,028 3,600 3,6008,437,003 3,498,546 4,938,457 7,200 College Station - 2021 Roadway Impact Fee StudyExisting Roadway Facilities Inventory 9/30/2021 PM VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING Classification DEFICIENCIESLANESHOURPK-HR PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR PK-HREXISTINGPEAKCAPACITYSUPPLYDEMANDCAPACITY VEH-MI SUBTOTAL VOL PER LN TOTAL TOTAL VEH-MI 2021 Roadway Impact Fee UpdateCity of College Station, Texas Appendix C - Existing Facilities InventoryDRAFT Page 144 of 231 Service Area B % INROADWAYFROMTOLENGTH LENGTH TYPE SERVICE(ft)(mi)AREA NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WBAGRONOMY ROAD F AND B ROAD RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY 3975 0.75 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 413 413 100 550 550 41,406 41,406 31,055 31,055 10,352 10,352ANDERSON STREET GEORGE BUSH DRIVE PARK PLACE 1430 0.27 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 337 337 100 550 550 14,896 14,896 9,127 9,127 5,769 5,769ANDERSON STREET PARK PLACE HOLLEMAN DRIVE 1975 0.37 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 337 337 100 550 550 20,573 20,573 12,606 12,606 7,967 7,967ANDERSON STREET HOLLEMAN DRIVE BRENTWOOD DRIVE 2125 0.40 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 337 337 100 550 550 22,135 22,135 13,563 13,563 8,572 8,572ANDERSON STREET BRENTWOOD DRIVE SOUTHWEST PARKWAY 895 0.17 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 337 337 100 550 550 9,323 9,323 5,712 5,712 3,611 3,611BRENTWOOD DRIVE ANDERSON STREET S TEXAS AVENUE 1330 0.25 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 216 216 100 550 550 13,854 13,854 5,428 5,428 8,426 8,426COLLEGE AVENUE E BROOKSIDE DRIVE INLOW BOULEVARD 2150 0.41 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 506 506 50 650 650 26,468 26,468 10,292 10,292 16,176 16,176COLLEGE AVENUE INLOW BOULEVARD CROSS STREET 940 0.18 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 506 506 100 650 650 23,144 23,144 8,999 8,999 14,145 14,145COLLEGE AVENUE CROSS STREET UNIVERSITY DRIVE 1250 0.24 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 506 506 100 650 650 30,777 30,777 11,967 11,967 18,809 18,809DEACON DRIVE W HOLLEMAN DRIVE S TOWERS PARKWAY 1060 0.20 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 132 132 100 550 550 11,042 11,042 2,650 2,650 8,392 8,392DEACON DRIVE W TOWERS PARKWAY GENERAL PARKWAY 1895 0.36 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 132 132 100 550 550 19,740 19,740 4,738 4,738 15,002 15,002DEACON DRIVE W GENERAL PARKWAY OLD WELLBORN ROAD 715 0.14 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 112 112 100 550 550 7,448 7,448 1,510 1,510 5,938 5,938DEACON DRIVE WELLBORN ROAD WELSH AVENUE 2885 0.55 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 204 204 100 550 550 30,052 30,052 11,147 11,147 18,905 18,905DEACON DRIVE WELSH AVENUE RIO GRANDE BOULEVARD 2310 0.44 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 204 204 100 550 550 24,063 24,063 8,925 8,925 15,138 15,138DEACON DRIVE RIO GRANDE BOULEVARD BROTHERS BOULEVARD 1545 0.29 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 204 204 100 550 550 16,094 16,094 5,969 5,969 10,124 10,124DEACON DRIVE BROTHERS BOULEVARD LONGMIRE DRIVE 2540 0.48 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 204 204 100 550 550 26,458 26,458 9,814 9,814 16,645 16,645DEACON DRIVE LONGMIRE DRIVE S TEXAS AVENUE 675 0.13 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 204 204 100 550 550 7,031 7,031 2,608 2,608 4,423 4,423F AND B ROAD 160' E OF TURKEY CREEK ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 2570 0.49 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 303 303 100 425 425 20,687 20,687 14,748 14,748 5,938 5,938F AND B ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S FINFEATHER ROAD 5985 1.13 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 303 303 100 550 550 62,344 62,344 34,346 34,346 27,998 27,998F AND B ROAD FINFEATHER ROAD 865' E OF FINFEATHER ROAD 865 0.16 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 303 303 100 550 550 9,010 9,010 4,964 4,964 4,046 4,046FINFEATHER ROAD 3665' N OF F AND B ROAD F AND B ROAD 3665 0.69 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 282 282 100 550 550 38,177 38,177 19,574 19,574 18,603 18,603GEORGE BUSH DRIVE W HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S PENBERTHY BOULEVARD 4035 0.76 2 2 4D 4 Lane Major Arterial 701 701 100 650 650 99,347 99,347 53,571 53,571 45,776 45,776GEORGE BUSH DRIVE W PENBERTHY ROAD MARION PUGH DRIVE 2160 0.41 2 2 4D 4 Lane Major Arterial 701 701 100 650 650 53,182 53,182 28,677 28,677 24,505 24,505GEORGE BUSH DRIVE W MARION PUGH DRIVE WELLBORN ROAD 415 0.08 2 2 4D 4 Lane Major Arterial 701 701 100 650 650 10,218 10,218 5,510 5,510 4,708 4,708GEORGE BUSH DRIVE WELLBORN ROAD MONTCLAIR AVENUE 750 0.14 2 2 4D 4 Lane Major Arterial 1129 1129 100 650 650 18,466 18,466 16,037 16,037 2,429 2,429GEORGE BUSH DRIVE MONTCLAIR AVENUE FAIRVIEW AVENUE 325 0.06 2 2 5U 4 Lane Major Arterial 1129 1129 100 600 600 7,386 7,386 6,949 6,949 437 437GEORGE BUSH DRIVE FAIRVIEW AVENUE DEXTER DRIVE 1125 0.21 2 2 5U 4 Lane Major Arterial 1129 1129 100 600 600 25,568 25,568 24,055 24,055 1,513 1,513GEORGE BUSH DRIVE DEXTER DRIVE TIMBER STREET 1440 0.27 2 2 4D 4 Lane Major Arterial 1129 1129 100 650 650 35,455 35,455 30,791 30,791 4,664 4,664GEORGE BUSH DRIVE TIMBER STREET ANDERSON STREET 1445 0.27 2 2 5U 4 Lane Major Arterial 1144 1144 100 600 600 32,841 32,841 31,295 31,295 1,546 1,546GEORGE BUSH DRIVE ANDERSON STREET S TEXAS AVENUE 1970 0.37 2 2 5U 4 Lane Major Arterial 1144 1144 100 600 600 44,773 44,773 42,665 42,665 2,108 2,108GRAHAM ROAD N N DOWLING ROAD S DOWLING ROAD 590 0.11 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 54 54 50 425 425 2,375 2,375 299 299 2,076 2,076GRAHAM ROAD N S DOWLING ROAD HOLLEMAN DRIVE S 3705 0.70 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 54 54 50 425 425 14,911 14,911 1,877 1,877 13,034 13,034HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S WELLBORN ROAD WELSH AVENUE 3930 0.74 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1181 1181 100 950 950 141,420 141,420 87,867 87,867 53,554 53,554HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S WELSH AVENUE NUECES DRIVE 880 0.17 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1181 1181 100 950 950 31,667 31,667 19,675 19,675 11,992 11,992HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S NUECES DRIVE RIO GRANDE BOULEVARD 1420 0.27 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1181 1181 100 950 950 51,098 51,098 31,748 31,748 19,350 19,350HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S RIO GRANDE BOULEVARD SOUTHWOOD DRIVE 1290 0.24 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1291 1291 100 950 950 46,420 46,420 31,541 31,541 14,879 14,879HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S SOUTHWOOD DRIVE LONGMIRE DRIVE 1495 0.28 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1291 1291 100 950 950 53,797 53,797 36,554 36,554 17,243 17,243HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S LONGMIRE DRIVE S TEXAS AVENUE 1215 0.23 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1291 1291 100 950 950 65,582 65,582 29,708 29,708 35,875 35,875HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER PARKWAY 1970' W OF S TRADITIONS DRIVE S TRADITIONS DRIVE 1970 0.37 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 116 116 100 650 650 48,504 48,504 4,309 4,309 44,194 44,194HOLLEMAN DRIVE W JONES BUTLER ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 2370 0.45 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 408 408 100 425 425 19,077 19,077 18,291 18,291 786 786HOLLEMAN DRIVE S HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S N DOWLING ROAD 2455 0.46 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 279 279 100 650 650 60,445 60,445 12,949 12,949 47,496 47,496HOLLEMAN DRIVE S N DOWLING ROAD GENERAL PARKWAY 1270 0.24 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 426 426 100 650 650 31,269 31,269 10,247 10,247 21,022 21,022HOLLEMAN DRIVE S GENERAL PARKWAY FEATHER TO GENERAL CONNECTOR 1400 0.27 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 426 426 100 600 600 31,818 31,818 11,295 11,295 20,523 20,523HOLLEMAN DRIVE S FEATHER TO GENERAL CONNECTOR TOWERS PARKWAY 1205 0.23 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 175 175 100 600 600 27,386 27,386 3,982 3,982 23,404 23,404HOLLEMAN DRIVE S TOWERS PARKWAY CAIN ROAD 725 0.14 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 175 175 100 600 600 16,477 16,477 2,396 2,396 14,081 14,081HOLLEMAN DRIVE S CAIN ROAD DEACON DRIVE W 1420 0.27 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 175 175 100 600 600 32,273 32,273 4,693 4,693 27,580 27,580HOLLEMAN DRIVE S DEACON DRIVE W ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W 2225 0.42 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 175 175 100 650 650 54,782 54,782 7,353 7,353 47,429 47,429HOLLEMAN DRIVE S ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W 290' S OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W 290 0.05 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 175 175 100 650 650 7,140 7,140 958 958 6,182 6,182HOLLEMAN DRIVE S 290' S OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W GRAHAM ROAD N 1365 0.26 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 175 175 100 425 425 10,987 10,987 4,511 4,511 6,476 6,476HOLLEMAN DRIVE W JONES BUTLER ROAD MARION PUGH DRIVE 885 0.17 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 408 408 100 425 425 7,124 7,124 6,830 6,830 293 293HOLLEMAN DRIVE W MARION PUGH DRIVE WELLBORN ROAD 830 0.16 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 408 408 100 550 550 8,646 8,646 6,406 6,406 2,240 2,240HOLLEMAN DRIVE WELLBORN ROAD FAIRVIEW AVENUE 2235 0.42 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 589 589 100 550 550 23,281 23,281 24,911 24,911 -1,630 -1,630 1,630 1,630HOLLEMAN DRIVE FAIRVIEW AVENUE WELSH AVENUE 310 0.06 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 589 589 100 550 550 3,229 3,229 3,455 3,455 -226 -226 226 226HOLLEMAN DRIVE WELSH AVENUE S DEXTER DRIVE 635 0.12 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 589 589 100 550 550 6,615 6,615 7,078 7,078 -463 -463 463 463HOLLEMAN DRIVE S DEXTER DRIVE GLADE STREET 2095 0.40 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 589 589 100 550 550 21,823 21,823 23,351 23,351 -1,528 -1,528 1,528 1,528HOLLEMAN DRIVE GLADE STREET ANDERSON STREET 1125 0.21 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 589 589 100 550 550 11,719 11,719 12,539 12,539 -820 -820 820 820HOLLEMAN DRIVE ANDERSON STREET S TEXAS AVENUE 2300 0.44 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 589 589 100 550 550 23,958 23,958 25,635 25,635 -1,677 -1,677 1,677 1,677JONES BUTLER ROAD LUTHER STREET W HOLLEMAN DRIVE W 1185 0.22 2 2 4U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 443 443 100 525 525 23,565 23,565 9,931 9,931 13,634 13,634JONES BUTLER ROAD HOLLEMAN DRIVE W HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S NBFR 2670 0.51 2 2 4U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 89 89 100 525 525 53,097 53,097 4,475 4,475 48,621 48,621JUNCTION BOYS ROAD N DOWNLING ROAD MARKET STREET 845 0.16 1 1 2D 2 Lane Major Collector 0 0 100 500 500 8,002 8,002 0 0 8,002 8,002LONGMIRE DRIVE HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S BROTHERS BOULEVARD 1545 0.29 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 581 581 100 550 550 16,094 16,094 16,986 16,986 -892 -892 892 892LONGMIRE DRIVE BROTHERS BOULEVARD DEACON DRIVE 2165 0.41 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 581 581 100 550 550 22,552 22,552 23,803 23,803 -1,251 -1,251 1,251 1,251LONGMIRE DRIVE DEACON DRIVE PONDEROSA DRIVE 2205 0.42 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 581 581 100 550 550 22,969 22,969 24,242 24,242 -1,274 -1,274 1,274 1,274LONGMIRE DRIVE PONDEROSA DRIVE PINON DRIVE 495 0.09 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 581 581 100 550 550 5,156 5,156 5,442 5,442 -286 -286 286 286LONGMIRE DRIVE PINON DRIVE 270' N OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 1045 0.20 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 581 581 100 425 425 8,411 8,411 11,489 11,489 -3,078 -3,078 3,078 3,078 LONGMIRE DRIVE 270' N OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 270 0.05 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 500 500 100 425 425 2,173 2,173 2,554 2,554 -381 -381 381 381LOUISE AVENUE WELLBORN ROAD BOYETT STREET 610 0.12 1 1 2U 2 Lane Minor Collector 0 0 100 425 425 4,910 4,910 0 0 4,910 4,910LUTHER STREET W 300' W OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 300 0.06 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 155 155 100 425 425 2,415 2,415 881 881 1,534 1,534LUTHER STREET W HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S PENBERTHY ROAD 3585 0.68 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 231 231 100 425 425 28,857 28,857 15,650 15,650 13,206 13,206LUTHER STREET W PENBERTHY ROAD MARION PUGH DRIVE 1445 0.27 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 105 105 100 425 425 11,631 11,631 2,874 2,874 8,758 8,758MARION PUGH DRIVE GEORGE BUSH DRIVE W LUTHER STREET W 2290 0.43 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 279 279 100 425 425 18,433 18,433 12,101 12,101 6,332 6,332MARION PUGH DRIVE LUTHER STREET W 295' S OF LUTHER STREET W 295 0.06 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 211 211 100 425 425 2,375 2,375 1,179 1,179 1,196 1,196MARION PUGH DRIVE 295' S OF LUTHER STREET W HOLLEMAN DRIVE W 1040 0.20 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 211 211 100 550 550 10,833 10,833 4,156 4,156 6,677 6,677MARKET STREET JUNCTION BOYS ROAD HOLLEMAN DRIVE S 505 0.10 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 0 0 100 425 425 4,065 4,065 0 0 4,065 4,065MISSION RANCH DRIVE GREAT OAKS DRIVE FEATHER RUN 1210 0.23 1 1 2U 2 Lane Minor Collector 0 0 100 425 425 9,740 9,740 0 0 9,740 9,740 MONTCLAIR AVENUE GEORGE BUSH DRIVE LUTHER STREET 2035 0.39 1 1 2U 2 Lane Minor Collector 87 87 100 425 425 16,380 16,380 3,334 3,334 13,046 13,046 N DOWLING ROAD BEELER LANE 800' E OF BEELER LANE 800 0.15 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 176 176 50 425 425 3,220 3,220 1,330 1,330 1,890 1,890 N DOWLING ROAD 800'E OF BEELER LANE 1110' E OF BEELER LANE 310 0.06 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 176 176 50 425 425 1,248 1,248 515 515 732 732 N DOWLING ROAD 1305' N OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W 630' N OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W 680 0.13 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 27 27 50 425 425 2,737 2,737 174 174 2,563 2,563N DOWLING ROAD 1120' N OF GRAHAM ROAD N GRAHAM ROAD N 1120 0.21 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 27 27 50 425 425 4,508 4,508 286 286 4,221 4,221PENBERTHY ROAD GEORGE BUSH DRIVE W LUTHER STREET W 2125 0.40 2 2 4U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 606 606 100 525 525 42,259 42,259 24,389 24,389 17,869 17,869RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY 1370' W OF SH 47 SBFR SH 47 EBFR 1370 0.26 2 2 5U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 726 726 100 950 950 49,299 49,299 18,825 18,825 30,475 30,475RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY SH 47 EBFR SH 47 790 0.15 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 726 726 100 950 950 28,428 28,428 10,855 10,855 17,573 17,573RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY SH 47 TURKEY CREEK ROAD 3280 0.62 1 1 2U-TX Freeway/Expressway 1123 1123 100 950 950 59,015 59,015 69,762 69,762 -10,747 -10,747 10,747 10,747RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY TURKEY CREEK ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 2850 0.54 2 2 5U-TX Freeway/Expressway 1123 1123 100 950 950 102,557 102,557 60,616 60,616 41,940 41,940RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S NBFR 435 0.08 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 770 770 100 950 950 23,480 23,480 6,344 6,344 17,136 17,136RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S NBFR ADRIANCE LAB ROAD 3930 0.74 2 2 5U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 770 770 100 950 950 141,420 141,420 57,313 57,313 84,108 84,108 RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY ADRIANCE LAB ROAD AGRONOMY ROAD 1515 0.29 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 981 981 100 950 950 54,517 54,517 28,148 28,148 26,369 26,369 RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY AGRONOMY ROAD WELLBORN ROAD 1030 0.20 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 981 981 100 950 950 37,064 37,064 19,137 19,137 17,927 17,927 RIO GRANDE BOULEVARD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S BALCONES DRIVE 930 0.18 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 228 228 100 550 550 9,688 9,688 4,007 4,007 5,680 5,680 RIO GRANDE BOULEVARD BALCONES DRIVE DEACON DRIVE 2115 0.40 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 228 228 100 550 550 22,031 22,031 9,113 9,113 12,918 12,918RIO GRANDE BOULEVARD DEACON DRIVE PONDEROSA DRIVE 2020 0.38 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 212 212 100 550 550 21,042 21,042 8,111 8,111 12,931 12,931RIO GRANDE BOULEVARD PONDEROSA DRIVE ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 1335 0.25 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 212 212 100 550 550 13,906 13,906 5,360 5,360 8,546 8,546ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W 375' W OF GREAT OAKS DRIVE GREAT OAKS DRIVE 375 0.07 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 169 169 100 425 425 3,018 3,018 1,200 1,200 1,818 1,818ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W GREAT OAKS DRIVE FEATHER RUN 2375 0.45 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 169 169 100 425 425 19,117 19,117 7,602 7,602 11,515 11,515ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W FEATHER RUN 280' W OF HOLLEMAN DRIVE S 905 0.17 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 169 169 100 425 425 7,285 7,285 2,897 2,897 4,388 4,388ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W 280' W OF HOLLEMAN DRIVE S HOLLEMAN DRIVE S 280 0.05 2 2 4D 4 Lane Major Arterial 169 169 100 650 650 6,894 6,894 896 896 5,998 5,998ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W 715' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY TOWERS PARKWAY 715 0.14 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 546 546 100 425 425 5,755 5,755 7,387 7,387 -1,632 -1,632 1,632 1,632ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W TOWERS PARKWAY GENERAL PARKWAY 1775 0.34 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 546 546 100 425 425 14,287 14,287 18,338 18,338 -4,051 -4,051 4,051 4,051ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W GENERAL PARKWAY WELLBORN ROAD 845 0.16 1 1 2D 4 Lane Major Arterial 546 546 100 500 500 8,002 8,002 8,730 8,730 -728 -728 728 728 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WELLBORN ROAD EDELWEISS AVENUE 1160 0.22 2 2 4D 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 650 650 28,561 28,561 20,783 20,783 7,777 7,777 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD EDELWEISS AVENUE VICTORIA AVENUE 1220 0.23 2 2 4D 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 650 650 30,038 30,038 21,858 21,858 8,180 8,180 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD VICTORIA AVENUE WELSH AVENUE 365 0.07 2 2 5U 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 600 600 8,295 8,295 6,540 6,540 1,756 1,756 ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WELSH AVENUE RIO GRANDE BOULEVARD 2615 0.50 2 2 5U 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 600 600 59,432 59,432 46,852 46,852 12,580 12,580ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD RIO GRANDE BOULEVARD NORMAND DRIVE 1740 0.33 2 2 5U 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 600 600 39,545 39,545 31,175 31,175 8,370 8,370ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD NORMAND DRIVE LONGMIRE DRIVE 1685 0.32 2 2 5U 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 600 600 38,295 38,295 30,190 30,190 8,106 8,106ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD LONGMIRE DRIVE SH 6 SBFR 545 0.10 3 3 6D 6 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 750 750 23,224 23,224 9,765 9,765 13,460 13,460ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 SBFR SH 6 330 0.06 3 3 6D 6 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 750 750 14,063 14,063 5,913 5,913 8,150 8,150S DOWLING ROAD I AND GN ROAD N DOWLING ROAD 935 0.18 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 0 0 50 425 425 3,763 3,763 0 0 3,763 3,763S TEXAS AVENUE 955' N OF UNIVERSITY DRIVE E 590' N OF UNIVERSITY DRIVE E 365 0.07 2 2 5U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 1736 1736 100 950 950 13,134 13,134 12,001 12,001 1,134 1,134S TEXAS AVENUE 590' N OF UNIVERSITY DRIVE E UNIVERSITY DRIVE E 590 0.11 2 2 4D-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 1736 1736 100 950 950 21,231 21,231 19,398 19,398 1,833 1,833S TEXAS AVENUE UNIVERSITY DRIVE E LINCOLN AVENUE 1700 0.32 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1716 1716 100 950 950 91,761 91,761 55,234 55,234 36,527 36,527 S TEXAS AVENUE LINCOLN AVENUE WALTON DRIVE 570 0.11 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1716 1716 100 950 950 30,767 30,767 18,520 18,520 12,247 12,247 S TEXAS AVENUE WALTON DRIVE FRANCIS DRIVE 1120 0.21 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1716 1716 100 950 950 60,455 60,455 36,389 36,389 24,065 24,065 S TEXAS AVENUE FRANCIS DRIVE GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E 1490 0.28 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1716 1716 100 950 950 80,426 80,426 48,411 48,411 32,015 32,015 S TEXAS AVENUE GEORGE BUSH DRIVE E HARVEY ROAD 1885 0.36 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 2016 2016 100 950 950 101,747 101,747 71,955 71,955 29,792 29,792S TEXAS AVENUE HARVEY ROAD HOLLEMAN DRIVE E 1270 0.24 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1881 1881 100 950 950 68,551 68,551 45,244 45,244 23,307 23,307S TEXAS AVENUE HOLLEMAN DRIVE E MANUEL DRIVE 1040 0.20 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1881 1881 100 950 950 56,136 56,136 37,050 37,050 19,086 19,086S TEXAS AVENUE MANUEL DRIVE BRENTWOOD DRIVE E 865 0.16 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1881 1881 100 950 950 46,690 46,690 30,816 30,816 15,875 15,875S TEXAS AVENUE BRENTWOOD DRIVE E SOUTHWEST PARKWAY E 1010 0.19 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1881 1881 100 950 950 54,517 54,517 35,981 35,981 18,536 18,536S TEXAS AVENUE SOUTHWEST PARKWAY E KRENEK TAP ROAD 1535 0.29 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1152 1152 100 950 950 82,855 82,855 33,476 33,476 49,379 49,379S TEXAS AVENUE KRENEK TAP ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 1945 0.37 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1152 1152 100 950 950 104,986 104,986 42,418 42,418 62,568 62,568S TEXAS AVENUE HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S DARTMOUTH STREET 1675 0.32 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1152 1152 100 950 950 60,275 60,275 36,530 36,530 23,745 23,745S TEXAS AVENUE DARTMOUTH STREET DEACON DRIVE 1940 0.37 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1152 1152 100 950 950 69,811 69,811 42,309 42,309 27,502 27,502S TEXAS AVENUE DEACON DRIVE SH 6 1450 0.27 1 1 2D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 338 338 100 950 950 26,089 26,089 9,282 9,282 16,807 16,807 SOUTHWEST PARKWAY WELLBORN ROAD WELSH AVENUE 2900 0.55 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 526 526 100 600 600 65,909 65,909 28,890 28,890 37,019 37,019 SOUTHWEST PARKWAY WELSH AVENUE SOUTHWOOD DRIVE 3610 0.68 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 526 526 100 600 600 82,045 82,045 35,963 35,963 46,082 46,082 SOUTHWEST PARKWAY SOUTHWOOD DRIVE GLADE STREET 255 0.05 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 526 526 100 600 600 5,795 5,795 2,540 2,540 3,255 3,255 SOUTHWEST PARKWAY GLADE STREET ANDERSON STREET 1395 0.26 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 526 526 100 600 600 31,705 31,705 13,897 13,897 17,807 17,807SOUTHWEST PARKWAY ANDERSON STREET S TEXAS AVENUE 1125 0.21 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 526 526 100 600 600 25,568 25,568 11,207 11,207 14,361 14,361SOUTHWOOD DRIVE SOUTHWEST PARKWAY HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 2945 0.56 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 199 199 100 550 550 30,677 30,677 11,072 11,072 19,605 19,605TURKEY CREEK ROAD 2775' N OF RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WBFR RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WBFR 2775 0.53 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 78 78 100 425 425 22,337 22,337 4,073 4,073 18,263 18,263 TURKEY CREEK ROAD RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY WBFR RAYMOND STOTZER PARKWAY 240 0.05 2 2 5U 2 Lane Major Collector 78 78 100 600 600 5,455 5,455 352 352 5,102 5,102 UNIVERSITY DRIVE WELLBORN ROAD BOYETT STREET 730 0.14 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1865 1865 100 950 950 39,403 39,403 25,785 25,785 13,618 13,618 UNIVERSITY DRIVE BOYETT STREET NAGLE STREET 1535 0.29 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1865 1865 100 950 950 82,855 82,855 54,219 54,219 28,636 28,636UNIVERSITY DRIVE NAGLE STREET COLLEGE AVENUE 1250 0.24 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1865 1865 100 950 950 67,472 67,472 44,152 44,152 23,319 23,319UNIVERSITY DRIVE COLLEGE AVENUE S TEXAS AVENUE 2625 0.50 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1364 1364 100 950 950 141,690 141,690 67,788 67,788 73,903 73,903WELLBORN ROAD 955' N OF LOUISE AVENUE LOUISE AVENUE 955 0.18 2 2 4U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 697 697 100 750 750 27,131 27,131 12,598 12,598 14,533 14,533WELLBORN ROAD LOUISE AVENUE CHURCH AVENUE 590 0.11 1 1 4U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 697 697 100 750 750 8,381 8,381 7,783 7,783 598 598WELLBORN DRIVE CHURCH AVENUE UNIVERSITY DRIVE 395 0.07 2 2 5U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 697 697 100 950 950 14,214 14,214 5,211 5,211 9,003 9,003WELLBORN ROAD UNIVERSITY DRIVE GEORGE BUSH DRIVE W 5015 0.95 2 2 5U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 1121 1121 100 950 950 180,464 180,464 106,474 106,474 73,990 73,990WELLBORN ROAD GEORGE BUSH DRIVE W LUTHER STREET 2165 0.41 2 2 5U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1170 1170 100 950 950 77,907 77,907 47,974 47,974 29,933 29,933WELLBORN ROAD LUTHER STREET HOLLEMAN DRIVE W 1500 0.28 2 2 5U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1170 1170 100 950 950 53,977 53,977 33,239 33,239 20,739 20,739WELLBORN ROAD HOLLEMAN DRIVE W SOUTHWEST PARKWAY 1940 0.37 2 2 5U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1226 1226 100 950 950 69,811 69,811 45,028 45,028 24,783 24,783 WELLBORN ROAD SOUTHWEST PARKWAY 940' N OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 880 0.17 2 2 5U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1226 1226 100 950 950 31,667 31,667 20,425 20,425 11,242 11,242 WELLBORN ROAD 940' N OF HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 940 0.18 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1226 1226 100 950 950 50,739 50,739 21,818 21,818 28,921 28,921 WELLBORN ROAD HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S BALCONES DRIVE 2705 0.51 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1801 1801 100 950 950 146,009 146,009 92,242 92,242 53,767 53,767 WELLBORN ROAD BALCONES DRIVE NAVARRO DRIVE 1270 0.24 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1801 1801 100 950 950 68,551 68,551 43,307 43,307 25,244 25,244WELLBORN ROAD NAVARRO DRIVE DEACON DRIVE 1290 0.24 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1247 1247 100 950 950 69,631 69,631 30,466 30,466 39,164 39,164WELLBORN ROAD DEACON DRIVE ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 2555 0.48 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1247 1247 100 950 950 137,912 137,912 60,343 60,343 77,569 77,569WELSH AVENUE HOLLEMAN DRIVE SOUTHWEST PARKWAY 2415 0.46 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 297 297 100 550 550 25,156 25,156 13,562 13,562 11,595 11,595WELSH AVENUE SOUTHWEST PARKWAY NUECES DRIVE 1120 0.21 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 317 317 100 550 550 11,667 11,667 6,714 6,714 4,953 4,953WELSH AVENUE NUECES DRIVE HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S 1895 0.36 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 369 369 100 550 550 19,740 19,740 13,226 13,226 6,514 6,514WELSH AVENUE HARVEY MITCHELL PARKWAY S BALCONES DRIVE 1075 0.20 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 459 459 100 550 550 11,198 11,198 9,345 9,345 1,853 1,853WELSH AVENUE BALCONES DRIVE NAVARRO DRIVE 905 0.17 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 459 459 100 550 550 9,427 9,427 7,867 7,867 1,560 1,560WELSH AVENUE NAVARRO DRIVE DEACON DRIVE 1655 0.31 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 459 459 100 550 550 17,240 17,240 14,387 14,387 2,852 2,852 WELSH AVENUE DEACON DRIVE EDELWEISS AVENUE 1915 0.36 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 252 252 100 550 550 19,948 19,948 9,122 9,122 10,826 10,826 WELSH AVENUE EDELWEISS AVENUE ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 980 0.19 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 252 252 100 550 550 10,208 10,208 4,668 4,668 5,540 5,540 342,170 64.80 6,862,343 6,862,343 3,602,447 3,602,447 3,259,895 3,259,895 30,666 30,66613,724,685 7,204,894 6,519,791 61,331 College Station - 2021 Roadway Impact Fee StudyExisting Roadway Facilities Inventory 9/30/2021 PM VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING Classification DEFICIENCIESLANESHOURPK-HR PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR PK-HREXISTINGPEAKCAPACITYSUPPLYDEMANDCAPACITY VEH-MI SUBTOTAL VOL PER LN TOTAL TOTAL VEH-MI 2021 Roadway Impact Fee UpdateCity of College Station, Texas Appendix C - Existing Facilities InventoryDRAFT Page 145 of 231 Service Area C % INROADWAYFROMTOLENGTH LENGTH TYPE SERVICE(ft)(mi)AREA NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WBARRINGTON ROAD SH 6 SBFR DECATUR DRIVE 1320 0.25 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 164 164 100 550 550 13,750 13,750 4,100 4,100 9,650 9,650ARRINGTON ROAD DECATUR DRIVE WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY WB 3315 0.63 1 1 2D 2 Lane Major Collector 396 396 100 500 500 31,392 31,392 24,863 24,863 6,530 6,530ARRINGTON ROAD WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY WB WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 155 0.03 2 2 4U 2 Lane Major Collector 573 573 100 525 525 3,082 3,082 1,681 1,681 1,402 1,402ARRINGTON ROAD WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY EB 70 0.01 2 2 4U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 573 573 100 525 525 1,392 1,392 759 759 633 633ARRINGTON ROAD WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY EB GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 555 0.11 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 94 94 100 650 650 13,665 13,665 988 988 12,677 12,677ARRINGTON ROAD GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD S OAKS DRIVE 2270 0.43 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 94 94 100 550 550 23,646 23,646 4,041 4,041 19,605 19,605ARRINGTON ROAD S OAKS DRIVE DIAMONDBACK DRIVE 2880 0.55 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 94 94 50 425 425 11,591 11,591 2,564 2,564 9,027 9,027ARRINGTON ROAD DIAMONDBACK DRIVE WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY 4810 0.91 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 94 94 50 425 425 19,358 19,358 4,282 4,282 15,077 15,077BARRON ROAD WELLBORN ROAD 1765' E OF WELLBORN ROAD 1765 0.33 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 190 190 100 425 425 14,207 14,207 6,351 6,351 7,856 7,856BARRON ROAD 1765' E OF WELLBORN ROAD WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY 820 0.16 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 231 231 100 425 425 6,600 6,600 3,580 3,580 3,021 3,021BARRON ROAD WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY SB 370 0.07 2 1 3D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 231 231 100 550 550 7,708 3,854 1,615 1,615 6,093 2,239BARRON ROAD WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY SB WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 275 0.05 2 2 4U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 231 231 100 525 525 5,469 5,469 1,201 1,201 4,268 4,268BARRON ROAD WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY NB 105 0.02 2 2 4U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 231 231 100 525 525 2,088 2,088 458 458 1,630 1,630BARRON ROAD WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY NB VICTORIA AVENUE 2655 0.50 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 671 671 100 650 650 65,369 65,369 33,715 33,715 31,654 31,654BARRON ROAD VICTORIA AVENUE NEWPORT LANE 1360 0.26 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 671 671 100 650 650 33,485 33,485 17,270 17,270 16,214 16,214BARRON ROAD NEWPORT LANE ALEXANDRIA AVENUE 1265 0.24 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 671 671 100 650 650 31,146 31,146 16,064 16,064 15,082 15,082BARRON ROAD ALEXANDRIA AVENUE DECATUR DRIVE 1325 0.25 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 671 671 100 650 650 32,623 32,623 16,826 16,826 15,797 15,797BARRON ROAD DECATUR DRIVE LONGMIRE DRIVE 840 0.16 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 671 671 100 650 650 20,682 20,682 10,667 10,667 10,015 10,015BARRON ROAD LONGMIRE DRIVE SH 6 1125 0.21 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 671 671 100 650 650 27,699 27,699 14,286 14,286 13,413 13,413CAPSTONE DRIVE I-GN ROAD 1265' W OF WELLBORN ROAD 3545 0.67 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 119 119 50 425 425 14,267 14,267 3,995 3,995 10,272 10,272DECATUR DRIVE BARRON ROAD SOUTHERN PLANTATION DRIVE 1660 0.31 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 200 200 100 425 425 13,362 13,362 6,288 6,288 7,074 7,074DECATUR DRIVE SOUTHERN PLANTATION DRIVE ALEXANDRIA AVENUE 1610 0.30 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 200 200 100 425 425 12,959 12,959 6,098 6,098 6,861 6,861DECATUR DRIVE ALEXANDRIA DRIVE ARRINGTON ROAD 1490 0.28 1 1 2D 2 Lane Major Collector 200 200 100 500 500 14,110 14,110 5,644 5,644 8,466 8,466GRAHAM ROAD N 845' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY TOWERS PARKWAY 845 0.16 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 0 0 100 425 425 6,802 6,802 0 0 6,802 6,802GRAHAM ROAD N TOWERS PARKWAY GENERAL PARKWAY 1465 0.28 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 0 0 100 425 425 11,792 11,792 0 0 11,792 11,792GRAHAM ROAD WELLBORN ROAD BRANDENBURG LANE 935 0.18 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 269 269 100 550 550 9,740 9,740 4,764 4,764 4,976 4,976GRAHAM ROAD BRANDENBURG LANE VICTORIA AVENUE 1460 0.28 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 294 294 100 550 550 15,208 15,208 8,116 8,116 7,093 7,093GRAHAM ROAD VICTORIA AVENUE SCHAFFER ROAD 2460 0.47 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 367 367 100 550 550 25,625 25,625 17,076 17,076 8,549 8,549GRAHAM ROAD SCHAFFER ROAD BIRMINGHAM ROAD 1670 0.32 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 390 390 100 550 550 17,396 17,396 12,335 12,335 5,061 5,061GRAHAM ROAD BIRMINGHAM ROAD LONGMIRE DRIVE 1250 0.24 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 390 390 100 550 550 13,021 13,021 9,233 9,233 3,788 3,788GRAHAM ROAD LONGMIRE DRIVE SH 6 SBFR 1015 0.19 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 216 216 100 550 550 10,573 10,573 4,152 4,152 6,421 6,421GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 140' W OF WELLBORN ROAD WELLBORN ROAD 140 0.03 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 235 235 100 550 550 1,458 1,458 622 622 837 837GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD WELLBORN ROAD 975' E OF WELLBORN ROAD 975 0.18 2 2 5U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 235 235 100 600 600 22,159 22,159 4,330 4,330 17,829 17,829GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 975' E OF WELLBORN ROYDER ROAD 2470 0.47 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 235 235 100 650 650 60,814 60,814 10,970 10,970 49,844 49,844GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD ROYDER ROAD CREEK MEADOW BOULEVARD N 1985 0.38 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 235 235 100 650 650 48,873 48,873 8,816 8,816 40,057 40,057GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD CREEK MEADOW BOULEVARD N 1290' E OF CREEK MEADOW BOULEVARD N 1295 0.25 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 235 235 100 650 650 31,884 31,884 5,751 5,751 26,133 26,133GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 875' W OF WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY 820 0.16 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 190 190 100 425 425 6,600 6,600 2,943 2,943 3,657 3,657GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY CASTLEGATE DRIVE 3480 0.66 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 190 190 100 425 425 28,011 28,011 12,490 12,490 15,522 15,522GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD CASTLEGATE DRIVE WHITES CREEK LANE 2085 0.39 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 488 488 100 550 550 21,719 21,719 19,270 19,270 2,448 2,448GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD WHITES CREEK LANE ARRINGTON ROAD 1200 0.23 1 1 4U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 488 488 100 525 525 11,932 11,932 11,091 11,091 841 841HARPERS FERRY ROAD 975' N OF NANTUCKET DRIVE NANTUCKET DRIVE 975 0.18 1 1 2U 2 Lane Minor Collector 488 488 50 425 425 3,924 3,924 4,506 4,506 -582 -582 582 582I AND GN ROAD CAPSTONE DRIVE 2225' S OF DOWLING ROAD 1240 0.23 1 1 2U-R 2 Lane Major Collector 488 488 50 150 150 1,761 1,761 5,730 5,730 -3,969 -3,969 3,969 3,969I-GN ROAD CAPSTONE DRIVE S DOWLING ROAD 3555 0.67 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 23 23 50 425 425 14,308 14,308 757 757 13,550 13,550I-GN ROAD S DOWLING ROAD 2225' S OF S DOWLING ROAD 2225 0.42 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 23 23 50 425 425 8,955 8,955 474 474 8,481 8,481I-GN ROAD I-GN TO ROYDER CONNECTOR KOPPE BRIDGE ROAD 675 0.13 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 23 23 50 425 425 2,717 2,717 144 144 2,573 2,573LONGMIRE DRIVE ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD BIRMINGHAM ROAD 1150 0.22 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 194 194 100 550 550 11,979 11,979 4,214 4,214 7,765 7,765LONGMIRE DRIVE BIRMINGHAM ROAD GRAHAM ROAD 780 0.15 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 194 194 100 550 550 8,125 8,125 2,859 2,859 5,266 5,266LONGMIRE DRIVE GRAHAM ROAD BRIDLE GATE DRIVE 1460 0.28 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 194 194 100 550 550 15,208 15,208 5,351 5,351 9,858 9,858LONGMIRE DRIVE BRIDLE GATE DRIVE 1140' S OF BRIDLE GATE DRIVE 1140 0.22 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 194 194 100 550 550 11,875 11,875 4,178 4,178 7,697 7,697LONGMIRE DRIVE 1140' S OF BRIDLE GATE DRIVE EAGLE AVENUE 430 0.08 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 194 194 100 425 425 3,461 3,461 1,576 1,576 1,885 1,885LONGMIRE DRIVE EAGLE DRIVE BARRON ROAD 1295 0.25 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 194 194 100 425 425 10,424 10,424 4,746 4,746 5,678 5,678ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W 715' W OF TOWERS PARKWAY TOWERS PARKWAY 715 0.14 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 546 546 100 425 425 5,755 5,755 7,387 7,387 -1,632 -1,632 1,632 1,632ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W TOWERS PARKWAY GENERAL PARKWAY 1775 0.34 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 546 546 100 425 425 14,287 14,287 18,338 18,338 -4,051 -4,051 4,051 4,051ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD W GENERAL PARKWAY WELLBORN ROAD 845 0.16 1 1 2D 4 Lane Major Arterial 545 545 100 500 500 8,002 8,002 8,722 8,722 -720 -720 720 720ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WELLBORN ROAD EDELWEISS AVENUE 1160 0.22 2 2 4D 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 650 650 28,561 28,561 20,783 20,783 7,777 7,777ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD EDELWEISS AVENUE VICTORIA AVENUE 1220 0.23 2 2 4D 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 650 650 30,038 30,038 21,858 21,858 8,180 8,180ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD VICTORIA AVENUE WELSH AVENUE 365 0.07 2 2 5U 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 600 600 8,295 8,295 6,540 6,540 1,756 1,756ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WELSH AVENUE RIO GRANDE BOULEVARD 2615 0.50 2 2 5U 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 600 600 59,432 59,432 46,852 46,852 12,580 12,580ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD RIO GRANDE BOULEVARD NORMAND DRIVE 1740 0.33 2 2 5U 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 600 600 39,545 39,545 31,175 31,175 8,370 8,370ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD NORMAND DRIVE LONGMIRE DRIVE 1685 0.32 2 2 5U 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 600 600 38,295 38,295 30,190 30,190 8,106 8,106ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD LONGMIRE DRIVE SH 6 SBFR 545 0.10 3 3 6D 6 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 750 750 23,224 23,224 9,765 9,765 13,460 13,460ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 SBFR SH 6 330 0.06 3 3 6D 6 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 750 750 14,063 14,063 5,913 5,913 8,150 8,150ROYDER ROAD I-GN TO ROYDER CONNECTOR 1945' S OF I-GN TO ROYDER CONNECTOR 4 1945 0.37 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 33 33 100 425 425 15,656 15,656 1,197 1,197 14,459 14,459ROYDER ROAD 1945' S OF I-GN TO ROYDER CONNECTOR BACKWATER LANE 245 0.05 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 33 33 100 550 550 2,552 2,552 151 151 2,401 2,401ROYDER ROAD BACKWATER LANE GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 1565 0.30 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 33 33 100 550 550 16,302 16,302 963 963 15,339 15,339ROYDER ROAD GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 885' S OF GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 890 0.17 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 33 33 100 550 550 9,271 9,271 548 548 8,723 8,723VICTORIA AVENUE ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD MORTIER DRIVE 2065 0.39 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 276 276 100 550 550 21,510 21,510 10,775 10,775 10,736 10,736VICTORIA AVENUE MORTIER DRIVE GRAHAM ROAD 1440 0.27 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 276 276 100 550 550 15,000 15,000 7,514 7,514 7,486 7,486VICTORIA AVENUE GRAHAM ROAD EAGLE AVENUE 2050 0.39 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 276 276 100 550 550 21,354 21,354 10,696 10,696 10,658 10,658 VICTORIA AVENUE EAGLE AVENUE BARRON ROAD 2155 0.41 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 276 276 100 550 550 22,448 22,448 11,244 11,244 11,204 11,204 VICTORIA AVENUE BARRON ROAD SOUTHERN PLANTATION DRIVE 1390 0.26 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 317 317 100 550 550 14,479 14,479 8,345 8,345 6,134 6,134 VICTORIA AVENUE SOUTHERN PLANTATION DRIVE CASTLE ROCK PARKWAY 1705 0.32 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 317 317 100 550 550 17,760 17,760 10,236 10,236 7,524 7,524 VICTORIA AVENUE CASTLE ROCK PARKWAY WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY NB 650 0.12 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 317 317 100 550 550 6,771 6,771 3,902 3,902 2,868 2,868VICTORIA AVENUE WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY NB WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 180 0.03 2 2 4D 2 Lane Major Collector 427 427 100 650 650 4,432 4,432 1,456 1,456 2,976 2,976VICTORIA AVENUE WELLBORN ROAD LIVE OAK STREET 385 0.07 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 169 169 100 425 425 3,099 3,099 1,229 1,229 1,870 1,870VICTORIA AVENUE LIVE OAK STREET CREEK MEADOW BOULEVARD N 1830 0.35 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 169 169 100 425 425 14,730 14,730 5,840 5,840 8,890 8,890VICTORIA AVENUE CREEK MEADOW BOULEVARD N WOODLAKE DRIVE 1570 0.30 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 132 132 100 425 425 12,637 12,637 3,925 3,925 8,712 8,712VICTORIA AVENUE WOODLAKE DRIVE ETONBURY AVENUE 1760 0.33 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 132 132 100 425 425 14,167 14,167 4,400 4,400 9,767 9,767VICTORIA AVENUE ETONBURY AVENUE WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY 1365 0.26 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 132 132 100 425 425 10,987 10,987 3,413 3,413 7,575 7,575VICTORIA AVENUE WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY CASTLEGATE DRIVE 920 0.17 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 427 427 100 425 425 7,405 7,405 7,440 7,440 -35 -35 35 35VICTORIA AVENUE CASTLEGATE DRIVE WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY SB 2110 0.40 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 427 427 100 425 425 16,984 16,984 17,064 17,064 -80 -80 80 80VICTORIA AVENUE WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY SB WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 105 0.02 2 2 4D 2 Lane Major Collector 427 427 100 650 650 2,585 2,585 849 849 1,736 1,736 WELLBORN ROAD ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD MORTIER DRIVE 3000 0.57 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1247 1247 100 950 950 161,932 161,932 70,852 70,852 91,080 91,080 WELLBORN ROAD MORTIER DRIVE GRAHAM ROAD 855 0.16 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1265 1265 100 950 950 46,151 46,151 20,484 20,484 25,666 25,666 WELLBORN ROAD GRAHAM ROAD WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 1070 0.20 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 1265 1265 100 950 950 57,756 57,756 25,635 25,635 32,120 32,120 WELLBORN ROAD WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 1750' SW OF WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 1750 0.33 2 2 4D-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 283 283 100 950 950 62,973 62,973 9,363 9,363 53,610 53,610WELLBORN ROAD 1750' SW OF WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 280' N OF BARRON ROAD 1895 0.36 2 2 4D-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 283 283 100 950 950 68,191 68,191 10,139 10,139 58,052 58,052WELLBORN ROAD 280' N OF BARRON ROAD BARRON ROAD 280 0.05 1 1 3U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 283 283 100 950 950 5,038 5,038 1,498 1,498 3,540 3,540WELLBORN ROAD BARRON ROAD BARRON CUT OFF ROAD 2375 0.45 1 1 2U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 441 441 100 950 950 42,732 42,732 19,837 19,837 22,895 22,895WELLBORN ROAD BARRON CUT OFF ROAD MCCULLOUGH ROAD 2180 0.41 1 1 2U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 441 441 100 950 950 39,223 39,223 18,208 18,208 21,016 21,016WELLBORN ROAD MCCULLOUGH ROAD VICTORIA AVENUE 1665 0.32 1 1 3U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 441 441 100 950 950 29,957 29,957 13,907 13,907 16,051 16,051WELLBORN ROAD VICTORIA AVENUE I-GN TO ROYDER CONNECTOR 745 0.14 1 1 2U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 333 333 100 950 950 13,404 13,404 4,692 4,692 8,713 8,713WELLBORN ROAD I-GN TO ROYDER CONNECTOR GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 4705 0.89 1 1 2U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 333 333 100 950 950 84,654 84,654 29,629 29,629 55,025 55,025WELLBORN ROAD GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 540' S OF GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 540 0.10 3 1 4U-TX 4 Lane Major Arterial 333 333 100 750 750 23,011 7,670 3,401 3,401 19,611 4,270 WOODLAKE DRIVE VICTORIA AVENUE GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 2735 0.52 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 68 68 100 425 425 22,015 22,015 3,522 3,522 18,492 18,492 WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY BARRON ROAD BARRON CUT OFF ROAD 995 0.19 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 62 62 100 425 425 8,009 8,009 1,168 1,168 6,841 6,841 WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY BARRON CUT OFF ROAD BREWSTER DRIVE 1720 0.33 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 62 62 100 425 425 13,845 13,845 2,020 2,020 11,825 11,825 WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY BREWSTER DRIVE VICTORIA AVENUE 1660 0.31 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 62 62 100 425 425 13,362 13,362 1,949 1,949 11,413 11,413WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY VICTORIA AVENUE ODELL LANE 600 0.11 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 8 8 100 425 425 4,830 4,830 91 91 4,739 4,739 WS PHILLIPS PARKWAY ODELL LANE GREENS PRAIRIE ROAD 1965 0.37 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 8 8 100 425 425 15,817 15,817 298 298 15,519 15,519 240,330 45.52 3,287,470 3,264,317 1,120,246 1,120,246 2,167,225 2,144,071 11,068 11,068 6,551,787 2,240,492 4,311,296 22,136 College Station - 2021 Roadway Impact Fee StudyExisting Roadway Facilities Inventory 9/30/2021 PM VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING Classification DEFICIENCIESLANESHOURPK-HR PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR PK-HREXISTINGPEAKCAPACITYSUPPLYDEMANDCAPACITY VEH-MI SUBTOTAL VOL PER LN TOTAL TOTAL VEH-MI 2021 Roadway Impact Fee UpdateCity of College Station, Texas Appendix C - Existing Facilities InventoryDRAFT Page 146 of 231 Service Area D % INROADWAYFROMTOLENGTH LENGTH TYPE SERVICE(ft)(mi)AREA NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WBBIRD POND ROAD 1055' E OF ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TRUMPETER SWAN DRIVE 1120 0.21 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 107 107 100 425 425 9,015 9,015 2,270 2,270 6,745 6,745BIRD POND ROAD TRUMPETER SWAN DRIVE FROST DRIVE 765 0.14 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 107 107 100 425 425 6,158 6,158 1,550 1,550 4,607 4,607BIRD POND ROAD FROST DRIVE RUDDY DUCK DRIVE 2965 0.56 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 107 107 100 425 425 23,866 23,866 6,009 6,009 17,857 17,857BIRD POND ROAD RUDDY DUCK DRIVE 1115' E OF RUDDY DUCK DRIVE 1115 0.21 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 107 107 100 425 425 8,975 8,975 2,260 2,260 6,715 6,715CORPORATE PARKWAY SH 6 NBFR MIDTOWN DRIVE 1380 0.26 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 1 1 100 550 550 14,375 14,375 13 13 14,362 14,362GATEWAY BOULEVARD SH 6 NBFR LAKEWAY DRIVE 915 0.17 1 1 2D 2 Lane Major Collector 163 163 100 500 500 8,665 8,665 2,816 2,816 5,849 5,849LAKEWAY DRIVE WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY PARKVIEW DRIVE 1735 0.33 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 310 310 100 550 550 18,073 18,073 10,187 10,187 7,886 7,886LAKEWAY DRIVE PARKVIEW DRIVE VENTURE DRIVE 610 0.12 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 310 310 100 425 425 4,910 4,910 3,581 3,581 1,329 1,329LAKEWAY DRIVE VENTURE DRIVE GATEWAY BOULEVARD 1670 0.32 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 310 310 100 425 425 13,442 13,442 9,805 9,805 3,637 3,637LAKEWAY DRIVE GATEWAY BOULEVARD 1645' S OF GATEWAY BOULEVARD 1645 0.31 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 310 310 100 425 425 13,241 13,241 9,658 9,658 3,583 3,583MIDTOWN DRIVE SH 6 NBFR HEALING WAY 345 0.07 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 88 29 100 550 550 3,594 3,594 575 189 3,019 3,404MIDTOWN DRIVE HEALING WAY MEDICAL AVENUE 910 0.17 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 88 29 100 550 550 9,479 9,479 1,517 500 7,963 8,979MIDTOWN DRIVE MEDICAL AVENUE 990' E OF MEDICAL AVENUE 990 0.19 1 1 3U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 40 83 100 550 550 10,313 10,313 750 1,556 9,563 8,756MIDTOWN DRIVE 990' E OF MEDICAL AVENUE DURHAM DRIVE 465 0.09 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 40 83 100 425 425 3,743 3,743 352 731 3,391 3,012MIDTOWN DRIVE DURHAM DRIVE TOWN LAKE DRIVE 1015 0.19 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 40 83 100 425 425 8,170 8,170 769 1,596 7,401 6,574MIDTOWN DRIVE TOWN LAKE DRIVE 800' S OF TOWN LAKE DRIVE 800 0.15 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 40 83 100 425 425 6,439 6,439 606 1,258 5,833 5,182MIDTOWN DRIVE 800' S OF TOWN LAKE DRIVE CORPORATE PARKWAY 2570 0.49 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 40 83 100 550 550 26,771 26,771 1,947 4,040 24,824 22,731MIDTOWN DRIVE CORPORATE PARKWAY 2605' S OF CORPORATE PARKWAY 2605 0.49 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 40 83 100 550 550 27,135 27,135 1,973 4,095 25,162 23,040MIDTOWN DRIVE 2605' S OF PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 1910 0.36 1 1 3U 2 Lane Major Collector 40 83 100 550 550 19,896 19,896 1,447 3,002 18,449 16,893NANTUCKET DRIVE SH 6 SH 6 NBFR 140 0.03 1 1 2D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 60 60 100 500 500 1,326 1,326 158 158 1,168 1,168PARKVIEW DRIVE LAKEWAY DRIVE SPEARMAN DRIVE 2050 0.39 1 1 2U 2 Lane Minor Collector 219 219 100 425 425 16,501 16,501 8,503 8,503 7,998 7,998PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY SPEARMAN DRIVE 4125 0.78 1 1 2D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 280 280 100 500 500 39,063 39,063 21,875 21,875 17,188 17,188PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY SPEARMAN DRIVE ROYAL ADELADE DRIVE 1030 0.20 1 1 2D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 280 280 100 500 500 9,754 9,754 5,462 5,462 4,292 4,292PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY ROYAL ADELADE DRIVE ST ANDREWS DRIVE 1990 0.38 1 1 2U 4 Lane Minor Arterial 280 280 100 425 425 16,018 16,018 10,553 10,553 5,465 5,465ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 SH 6 NBFR 235 0.04 3 3 6D 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 750 750 10,014 10,014 4,210 4,210 5,804 5,804ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SH 6 NBFR 415' E OF SH 6 NBFR 415 0.08 1 1 4D 4 Lane Major Arterial 946 946 100 650 650 5,109 5,109 7,435 7,435 -2,327 -2,327 2,327 2,327ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 415' E OF SH 6 NBFR SCOTT AND WHITE DRIVE 855 0.16 1 1 2D 4 Lane Major Arterial 482 482 100 500 500 8,097 8,097 7,805 7,805 291 291ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD SCOTT AND WHITE DRIVE STONEBROOK DRIVE 885 0.17 1 1 2D 4 Lane Major Arterial 435 435 100 500 500 8,381 8,381 7,291 7,291 1,089 1,089ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD STONEBROOK DRIVE MEDICAL AVENUE 695 0.13 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 435 435 100 425 425 5,594 5,594 5,726 5,726 -132 -132 132 132ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD MEDICAL AVENUE DURHAM DRIVE 1140 0.22 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 435 435 100 425 425 9,176 9,176 9,392 9,392 -216 -216 216 216ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD DURHAM DRIVE TOWN LAKE DRIVE 1305 0.25 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 302 302 100 425 425 10,504 10,504 7,452 7,452 3,052 3,052ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD TOWN LAKE DRIVE DOUBLE MOUNTAIN ROAD 2700 0.51 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 302 302 100 425 425 21,733 21,733 15,418 15,418 6,315 6,315ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD DOUBLE MOUNTAIN ROAD WILLIAMS CREEK DRIVE 4030 0.76 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 110 110 100 425 425 32,438 32,438 8,396 8,396 24,043 24,043ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WILLIAMS CREEK DRIVE WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 3270 0.62 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 110 110 100 425 425 26,321 26,321 6,813 6,813 19,509 19,509ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY WILLIAM D. FITCH TO ROCK PRAIRIE CONNECTOR 2915 0.55 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 110 110 100 425 425 23,464 23,464 6,073 6,073 17,391 17,391ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WILLIAM D. FITCH TO ROCK PRAIRIE CONNECTOR 7660' S OF WILLIAM D. FITCH TO ROCK PRAIRIE CONNECTOR 7660 1.45 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 110 110 100 425 425 61,657 61,657 15,958 15,958 45,699 45,699ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 7660' S OF WILLIAM D. FITCH TO ROCK PRAIRIE CONNECTOR MESA VERDE DRIVE 935 0.18 1 1 2U 4 Lane Major Arterial 110 110 50 425 425 3,763 3,763 974 974 2,789 2,789TOWN LAKE DRIVE MIDTOWN DRIVE DOUBLE MOUNTAIN ROAD 2120 0.40 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 1 1 100 650 650 52,197 52,197 20 20 52,177 52,177TOWN LAKE DRIVE DOUBLE MOUNTAIN ROAD ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 815 0.15 2 2 4D 4 Lane Minor Arterial 1 1 100 650 650 20,066 20,066 8 8 20,059 20,059VENTURE DRIVE SH 6 NBFR LAKEWAY DRIVE 1005 0.19 1 1 2U 2 Lane Major Collector 100 100 100 425 425 8,089 8,089 1,903 1,903 6,186 6,186WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY SH 6 SH 6 NBFR 300 0.06 4 3 7U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 841 841 100 950 950 21,591 16,193 4,776 4,776 16,815 11,418WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY SH 6 NBFR LAKEWAY DRIVE 975 0.18 3 3 6D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 841 841 100 950 950 52,628 52,628 15,521 15,521 37,107 37,107WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY LAKEWAY DRIVE SPEARMAN DRIVE 3025 0.57 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 841 841 100 950 950 108,854 108,854 48,154 48,154 60,701 60,701WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY SPEARMAN DRIVE PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY 835 0.16 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 841 841 100 950 950 30,047 30,047 13,292 13,292 16,755 16,755WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY PEBBLE CREEK PARKWAY WILLIAM D. FITCH TO ROCK PRAIRIE CONNECTOR 2815 0.53 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 841 841 100 950 950 101,297 101,297 44,811 44,811 56,487 56,487WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY WILLIAM D. FITCH TO ROCK PRAIRIE CONNECTOR ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD 1275 0.24 2 2 4D-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 841 841 100 950 950 45,881 45,881 20,296 20,296 25,585 25,585WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY ROCK PRAIRIE ROAD WILLIAMS CREEK DRIVE 1705 0.32 1 1 2U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 841 841 100 950 950 30,677 30,677 27,141 27,141 3,536 3,536WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY WILLIAMS CREEK DRIVE LINDA LANE 6210 1.18 1 1 2U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 841 841 100 950 950 111,733 111,733 98,854 98,854 12,879 12,879WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY LINDA LANE TONKAWAY LAKE TO TURK RANCH CONNECTOR 3535 0.67 1 1 2U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 841 841 100 950 950 63,603 63,603 56,272 56,272 7,331 7,331WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY EXT SH 30 6005 1.14 1 1 2U-TX 2 Lane Major Collector 279 279 100 950 950 108,045 108,045 31,674 31,674 76,370 76,370WILLIAM D. FITCH PARKWAY 0 0 7740 1.47 1 1 2U-TX 6 Lane Major Arterial 841 841 0% 950 950 0 0 0 0 0 0 122,140 23.13 1,469,397 1,464,000 570,507 577,538 898,890 886,462 2,682 2,682 2,933,397 1,148,045 1,785,352 5,364 College Station - 2021 Roadway Impact Fee StudyExisting Roadway Facilities Inventory 9/30/2021 PM VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING Classification DEFICIENCIESLANESHOURPK-HR PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR PK-HREXISTINGPEAKCAPACITYSUPPLYDEMANDCAPACITY VEH-MI SUBTOTAL VOL PER LN TOTAL TOTAL VEH-MI 2021 Roadway Impact Fee UpdateCity of College Station, Texas Appendix C - Existing Facilities InventoryDRAFT Page 147 of 231 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update October 2021City of College Station, Texas PLAN FOR AWARDING THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT DRAFTPage 148 of 231 City of College Station, Texas 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit Prepared by Eddie Peacock, PLLC Page 1 of 7 Texas Local Government Code Section 395 “Financing Capital Improvements Required by New Development in Municipalities, Counties, and Certain Other Local Governments” requires the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) to contain specific enumeration of a plan for awarding the impact fee credit. Section 395.014, Texas Local Government Code states: “… (a) The political subdivision shall use qualified professionals to prepare the capital improvements plan and to calculate the impact fee. The capital improvements plan must contain specific enumeration of the following items: (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….” City of College Station Street CIP improvements are funded from ad valorem tax-supported debt and roadway impact fees. The portion of ad valorem tax generated by the new service units during the ten- year period is estimated to equal the interest and sinking (I&S) tax levy necessary to fund ten years of debt service payments for new debt issued to fund the growth-related street CIP projects. The maximum impact fee is expressed in dollars per vehicle-mile. The RWIF credit per vehicle -mile is calculated by dividing the annual portion of estimated property tax by the current total vehicle-mile of demand. The cumulative total vehicle-miles by service area are derived from the total projected ten-year demand of vehicle miles by service area applied equally over the ten-year period: Service Area Cost of Growth- Related CIP I&S Tax Levy = Avg Annual Debt Payment [1] Projected 10- Year Demand Veh-Mi RWIF Credit - $ per Veh-Mi A $10,713,711 302,011$ 18,125 16.66$ B 23,804,897 671,042 15,945 42.08 C 30,400,862 856,977 12,076 70.97 D 67,931,987 1,914,950 16,625 115.18 [1] 20-year amortization at 4% interest rate Annual Amount of Ad Valorem Tax Generated by Growth Used for the Payment of Debt DRAFTPage 149 of 231 City of College Station, Texas 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit Prepared by Eddie Peacock, PLLC Page 2 of 7 The credit per vehicle mile is multiplied times the ten-year cumulative total of vehicle miles of demand by service area to equal the CIP credit by service area: Service Area Projected 10yr Demand (Veh- Miles) Annual Demand (Veh-Miles) 10 YR Cumulative Demand Total RWIF Credit - $ per Veh-Mi CIP Credit by Service Area A 18,125 1,813 99,688 16.66$ 1,661,061$ B 15,945 1,595 87,698 42.08 3,690,731 C 12,076 1,208 66,418 70.97 4,713,374 D 16,625 1,663 91,438 115.18 10,532,225 College Station 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update New Roadway Vehicle-Miles and Credit per Service Area - 10 Year Impact Fee Period Financing Costs are added to the cost of RWIF attributable to growth to determine the net cost attributable to new growth: Service Area Cost of RWIF Attributable to Growth Net Financing Costs Net Cost Attributable to New Growth A $9,388,254 1,325,457$ 10,713,711$ B $20,859,844 2,945,052 23,804,896 C $26,639,782 3,761,080 30,400,862 D $59,527,697 8,404,290 67,931,987 College Station 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Study Update Net Cost Attributable to New Growth DRAFTPage 150 of 231 City of College Station, Texas 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit Prepared by Eddie Peacock, PLLC Page 3 of 7 Calculation of the maximum impact fee after the credit by service area (column I) is illustrated in the following table: (A)(B)(C)(D)(E)(F)(G)(H)(I) (C) X (D)(F) - (E) (F) / (A) (G) / (A) Cost Projected 10yr Annual Cumulative $ PER CIP Credit Net Cost Attributable Base Maximum Service Demand Demand Demand VEH-MI by Attributable to Growth Maximum Impact Fee Area (veh-miles) (veh-miles) Total CREDIT Service Area to Growth Less Credit Impact Fee after Credit 1 18,125 1,813 99,688 16.66$ 1,661,061$ 10,713,711$ 9,052,651$ 591.10$ 499.46$ 2 15,945 1,595 87,698 42.08 3,690,731 23,804,897 20,114,166 1,492.94$ 1,261.47$ 3 12,076 1,208 66,418 70.97 4,713,374 30,400,862 25,687,488 2,517.46$ 2,127.15$ 4 16,625 1,663 91,438 115.18 10,532,225 67,931,987 57,399,761 4,086.13$ 3,452.62$ Totals 20,597,389$ 132,851,457$ 112,254,068$ City of College Station 2021 Impact Fee Study Update Calculation of the Maximum Impact Fee After the the Credit by Service Area The CIP credit by service area (column E) is subtracted from the cost attributable to growth by service area (column F) to result in the cost attributable to growth less credit by service area (column G). The maximum impact fee per vehicle-mile after the credit per service area (column I) is calculated by dividing the cost attributable to growth less credit (column G) divided by the projected 10-year demand (Column A). A comparison to the base maximum impact fee and 50% reduction follows: 50% Alternative After the CreditBaseFee per Maximum Fee Maximum % of Base Maximum Fee Service Maximum Service Unit per Single Family Impact Fee after Maximum per Single Family Area Impact Fee @ 50% Discount Dwelling Unit the Credit Impact Fee Dwelling Unit A $591.10 $295.55 $1,170.38 $499.46 84.50%1,977.86$ B 1,492.94 746.47 2,956.02 1,261.47 84.50%4,995.42 C 2,517.46 1,258.73 4,984.57 2,127.15 84.50%8,423.51 D 4,086.13 2,043.07 8,090.56 3,452.62 84.50%13,672.38 City of College Station 2021 Impact Fee Study Update Comparison of the Base Maximum Impact Fee to the 50% Maximum Impact Fee and Maximum Impact fee after the Credit by Service Area DRAFTPage 151 of 231 City of College Station, Texas 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit Prepared by Eddie Peacock, PLLC Page 4 of 7 APPENDIX FINANCING COSTS BY SERVICE AREA GROWTH YEAR YEAR DEBT ISSUE RELATED INTEREST INTEREST TOTAL 100.00% SERIES ALL SERIES 2021 1 2022 751,060 29,794 29,794 29,794 2 2023 751,060 58,573 58,573 58,573 3 2024 751,060 86,296 86,296 86,296 4 2025 751,060 112,921 112,921 112,921 5 2026 751,060 138,403 138,403 138,403 6 2027 751,060 162,696 162,696 162,696 7 2028 751,060 185,752 185,752 185,752 8 2029 751,060 207,521 207,521 207,521 9 2030 751,060 227,952 227,952 227,952 10 2031 751,060 246,989 246,989 246,989 7,510,603 1,456,897 1,456,897 1,456,897 GROWTH AVG BAL RELATED 1 2022 751,060 13,144 13,144 13,144 2 2023 751,060 13,144 13,144 13,144 3 2024 751,060 13,144 13,144 13,144 4 2025 751,060 13,144 13,144 13,144 5 2026 751,060 13,144 13,144 13,144 6 2027 751,060 13,144 13,144 13,144 7 2028 751,060 13,144 13,144 13,144 8 2029 751,060 13,144 13,144 13,144 9 2030 751,060 13,144 13,144 13,144 10 2031 751,060 13,144 13,144 13,144 131,440 131,440 131,440 NET INTEREST EXPENSE 1,325,457 1,325,457 INTEREST REVENUE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2021-2030 [1] Assumptions: 1) Total Area A growth related CIP cost is 80% debt funded and financed by 10 equal bond series, 2) interest rate on bond series is 4%, 3) bond proceeds are fully expended equally over the 10 year period, and 4) the annual investment rate of return is 1.75%. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION SCHEDULE OF PROJECTED DEBT ISSUANCE AND NET INTEREST COST [1] ROADWAY AREA A IMPACT FEE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN FOR THE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2021 TO 2030 TOTAL CIP INTEREST EXPENSE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2021-2030 AREA A DRAFTPage 152 of 231 City of College Station, Texas 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit Prepared by Eddie Peacock, PLLC Page 5 of 7 GROWTH YEAR YEAR DEBT ISSUE RELATED INTEREST INTEREST TOTAL 100.00% SERIES ALL SERIES 2021 1 2022 1,668,788 66,199 66,199 66,199 2 2023 1,668,788 130,143 130,143 130,143 3 2024 1,668,788 191,742 191,742 191,742 4 2025 1,668,788 250,900 250,900 250,900 5 2026 1,668,788 307,519 307,519 307,519 6 2027 1,668,788 361,496 361,496 361,496 7 2028 1,668,788 412,724 412,724 412,724 8 2029 1,668,788 461,094 461,094 461,094 9 2030 1,668,788 506,488 506,488 506,488 10 2031 1,668,788 548,787 548,787 548,787 16,687,875 3,237,092 3,237,092 3,237,092 GROWTH AVG BAL RELATED 1 2022 1,668,788 29,204 29,204 29,204 2 2023 1,668,788 29,204 29,204 29,204 3 2024 1,668,788 29,204 29,204 29,204 4 2025 1,668,788 29,204 29,204 29,204 5 2026 1,668,788 29,204 29,204 29,204 6 2027 1,668,788 29,204 29,204 29,204 7 2028 1,668,788 29,204 29,204 29,204 8 2029 1,668,788 29,204 29,204 29,204 9 2030 1,668,788 29,204 29,204 29,204 10 2031 1,668,788 29,204 29,204 29,204 292,040 292,040 292,040 NET INTEREST EXPENSE 2,945,052 2,945,052 INTEREST REVENUE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2021-2030 [1] Assumptions: 1) Total Area B growth related CIP cost is 80% debt funded and financed by 10 equal bond series, 2) interest rate on bond series is 4%, 3) bond proceeds are fully expended equally over the 10 year period, and 4) the annual investment rate of return is 1.75%. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION SCHEDULE OF PROJECTED DEBT ISSUANCE AND NET INTEREST COST [1] ROADWAY AREA B IMPACT FEE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN FOR THE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2021 TO 2030 TOTAL CIP INTEREST EXPENSE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2021-2030 AREA B DRAFTPage 153 of 231 City of College Station, Texas 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit Prepared by Eddie Peacock, PLLC Page 6 of 7 GROWTH YEAR YEAR DEBT ISSUE RELATED INTEREST INTEREST TOTAL 100.00% SERIES ALL SERIES 2021 1 2021 2,131,183 84,542 84,542 84,542 2 2022 2,131,183 166,204 166,204 166,204 3 2023 2,131,183 244,870 244,870 244,870 4 2024 2,131,183 320,420 320,420 320,420 5 2025 2,131,183 392,727 392,727 392,727 6 2026 2,131,183 461,661 461,661 461,661 7 2027 2,131,183 527,084 527,084 527,084 8 2028 2,131,183 588,856 588,856 588,856 9 2029 2,131,183 646,828 646,828 646,828 10 2030 2,131,183 700,848 700,848 700,848 21,311,826 4,134,040 4,134,040 4,134,040 GROWTH AVG BAL RELATED 1 2021 2,131,183 37,296 37,296 37,296 2 2022 2,131,183 37,296 37,296 37,296 3 2023 2,131,183 37,296 37,296 37,296 4 2024 2,131,183 37,296 37,296 37,296 5 2025 2,131,183 37,296 37,296 37,296 6 2026 2,131,183 37,296 37,296 37,296 7 2027 2,131,183 37,296 37,296 37,296 8 2028 2,131,183 37,296 37,296 37,296 9 2029 2,131,183 37,296 37,296 37,296 10 2030 2,131,183 37,296 37,296 37,296 372,960 372,960 372,960 NET INTEREST EXPENSE 3,761,080 3,761,080 INTEREST REVENUE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2021-2030 [1] Assumptions: 1) Total Area C growth related CIP cost is 80% debt funded and financed by 10 equal bond series, 2) interest rate on bond series is 4%, 3) bond proceeds are fully expended equally over the 10 year period, and 4) the annual investment rate of return is 1.75%. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION SCHEDULE OF PROJECTED DEBT ISSUANCE AND NET INTEREST COST [1] ROADWAY AREA C IMPACT FEE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN FOR THE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2021 TO 2030 TOTAL CIP INTEREST EXPENSE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2021-2030 AREA C DRAFTPage 154 of 231 City of College Station, Texas 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Update Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit Prepared by Eddie Peacock, PLLC Page 7 of 7 GROWTH YEAR YEAR DEBT ISSUE RELATED INTEREST INTEREST TOTAL 100.00% SERIES ALL SERIES 2021 1 2021 4,762,216 188,912 188,912 188,912 2 2022 4,762,216 371,389 371,389 371,389 3 2023 4,762,216 547,173 547,173 547,173 4 2024 4,762,216 715,992 715,992 715,992 5 2025 4,762,216 877,565 877,565 877,565 6 2026 4,762,216 1,031,600 1,031,600 1,031,600 7 2027 4,762,216 1,177,791 1,177,791 1,177,791 8 2028 4,762,216 1,315,822 1,315,822 1,315,822 9 2029 4,762,216 1,445,364 1,445,364 1,445,364 10 2030 4,762,216 1,566,073 1,566,073 1,566,073 47,622,158 9,237,681 9,237,681 9,237,681 GROWTH AVG BAL RELATED 1 2021 4,762,216 83,339 83,339 83,339 2 2022 4,762,216 83,339 83,339 83,339 3 2023 4,762,216 83,339 83,339 83,339 4 2024 4,762,216 83,339 83,339 83,339 5 2025 4,762,216 83,339 83,339 83,339 6 2026 4,762,216 83,339 83,339 83,339 7 2027 4,762,216 83,339 83,339 83,339 8 2028 4,762,216 83,339 83,339 83,339 9 2029 4,762,216 83,339 83,339 83,339 10 2030 4,762,216 83,339 83,339 83,339 833,390 833,390 833,390 NET INTEREST EXPENSE 8,404,290 8,404,290 INTEREST REVENUE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2021-2030 [1] Assumptions: 1) Total Area D growth related CIP cost is 80% debt funded and financed by 10 equal bond series, 2) interest rate on bond series is 4%, 3) bond proceeds are fully expended equally over the 10 year period, and 4) the annual investment rate of return is 1.75%. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION SCHEDULE OF PROJECTED DEBT ISSUANCE AND NET INTEREST COST [1] ROADWAY AREA D IMPACT FEE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN FOR THE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2021 TO 2030 TOTAL CIP INTEREST EXPENSE TEN YEAR PERIOD 2021-2030 AREA D DRAFTPage 155 of 231 PREPARED FOR: City of College Station PREPARED BY: Freese and Nichols, Inc. 11200 Broadway St., Suite 2320 Pearland, Texas 77584 832-456-4700 C ity of College Station DRAFT 2021 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDY Page 156 of 231 DRAFT 2021 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDY Prepared for: City of College Station Prepared by: FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC. 11200 Broadway Street, Suite 2320 Pearland, Texas 77584 832-456-4700 FNI Project Number: CCL20771 DRAFT THIS DOCUMENT IS RELEASED FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTERIM REVIEW UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF RICHARD WEATHERLY, P.E., TEXAS NO. 100211 ON 10/19/2021. IT IS NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION, BIDDING OR PERMIT PURPOSES. FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC. TEXAS REGISTERED ENGINEERING FIRM F-2144 Page 157 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 BACKGROUND AND SCOPE ............................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Texas Local Government Code ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Impact Fee Development ............................................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 List of Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................ 1-3 2.0 LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Projected Future Development .................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Living Unit Equivalent (LUE) ........................................................................................................ 2-4 2.3 Impact Fee Service Areas ............................................................................................................... 2-5 3.0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN ................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Water Demand and Wastewater Flow Projections .............................................................. 3-1 3.2 Water and Wastewater System Improvements .................................................................... 3-2 4.0 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS ........................................................... 4-1 4.1 Water and Wastewater Capacity Analysis ............................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Maximum Impact Fee Calculation .............................................................................................. 4-4 4.2.1 Rate Credit Analysis ................................................................................................................ 4-4 4.2.2 Maximum Allowable Water Impact Fee .......................................................................... 4-5 4.2.3 Maximum Allowable Wastewater Impact Fee .............................................................. 4-5 4.2.4 Schedule of Maximum Allowable Water and Wastewater Impact Fees ............. 4-6 4.3 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE COMPARISON ............................................... 4-7 5.0 IMPACT FEE ADOPTION ..................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Public Hearing .................................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Ordinance ............................................................................................................................................. 5-1 Page 158 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station ii List of Figures Figure 2-1: Future Land Use .................................................................................................... 2-2 Figure 2-2: Anticipated Future Developments ....................................................................... 2-3 Figure 2-3: Water Impact Fee Service Area ............................................................................ 2-6 Figure 2-4: Wastewater Impact Fee Service Area .................................................................. 2-7 Figure 3-1: Water Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan .................................................... 3-5 Figure 3-2: Wastewater Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan ........................................... 3-6 Figure 4-1: Benchmark of Adopted Water and Wastewater Impact Fees ............................. 4-7 List of Tables Table 1-1: List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................ 1-3 Table 2-1: Living Unit Equivalencies.......................................................................................... 2-4 Table 2-2: Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Service Area LUEs ........................................... 2-5 Table 3-1: Projected Water Demands....................................................................................... 3-1 Table 3-2: Projected Wastewater Flows ................................................................................... 3-1 Table 3-3: Impact Fee Eligible Water System Capital Projects ................................................. 3-3 Table 3-4: Impact Fee Eligible Wastewater System Capital Projects ....................................... 3-4 Table 4-1: Cost Allocation for Water Impact Fee Calculation ................................................... 4-2 Table 4-2: Cost Allocation for Wastewater Impact Fee Calculation ......................................... 4-3 Table 4-3: Water Impact Fee Calculation ................................................................................. 4-5 Table 4-4: Wastewater Impact Fee Calculation ........................................................................ 4-5 Table 4-5: Schedule of Maximum Allowable Water and Wastewater Impact Fees ................. 4-6 Appendices Appendix A Chapter 395, Texas Local Government Code Appendix B Water CIP Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (OPCC) Estimates Appendix C Wastewater CIP Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (OPCC) Estimates Appendix D Rate Credit Analysis Appendix E IFAC and Public Hearing Presentations Appendix F Adopted Ordinance Page 159 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 1-1 1.0 BACKGROUND AND SCOPE The City of College Station, Texas (City) authorized Freese and Nichols, Inc. (FNI) to perform an impact fee study for the City’s water and wastewater systems. The purpose of this report is to document the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan which will be used in the development and calculation of water and wastewater impact fees for the City of College Station and also document the calculated maximum allowable impact fees. The methodology used herein satisfies the requirements of the Texas Local Government Code (TLGC) Section 395 (Section 1.1) for the update of impact fees. 1.1 TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code (Appendix A) requires an impact fee analysis before impact fees can be created, updated, and assessed. Chapter 395 defines 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 capital improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to the new development.” In September 2001, Chapter 395 was amended creating the current procedure for implementing impact fees. Chapter 395 identifies the following items as impact fee eligible costs: • Construction contract price • Surveying and engineering fees • Land acquisition costs • Fees paid to the consultant preparing or updating the capital improvements plan (CIP) • Projected interest charges and other finance costs for projects identified in the CIP Chapter 395 also identifies items that impact fees cannot be used to pay for, such as: • Construction, acquisition, or expansion of public facilities or assets other than those identified on the capital improvements plan • Repair, operation, or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements • Upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental, or regulatory standards • Upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements to provide better service to existing development • Administrative and operating costs of the political subdivision as allowed above Page 160 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 1-2 As a funding mechanism for capital improvements, impact fees allow cities to recover the costs associated with new facilities or facility expansions in order to serve future development. Statutory requirements mandate that impact fees be based on a specific list of improvements identified in a capital improvements program and only the cost attributed (and necessitated) by new growth over a 10-year period may be considered. As projects in the program are completed, planned costs are updated with actual costs to reflect the capital expenditure of the program more accurately. Additionally, new capital improvement projects may be added to the system. 1.2 IMPACT FEE DEVELOPMENT The impact fee update process included preparation of land use assumptions and development of impact fee eligible capital improvement plans (CIPs) and associated CIP costs. The impact fee calculation is limited to project recommendations within the next 10 years that will serve projected growth. The maximum allowable impact fee per living unit equivalent (LUE) was calculated using the identified eligible CIP projects. An analysis was performed to determine the credit based on utility service revenue and was included in the calculation to determine the maximum allowable impact fee. As part of the impact fee update, FNI conducted workshops with the City’s appointed Impact Fee Advisory Committee (IFAC) and City Council. The IFAC’s role includes reviewing the land use assumptions and impact fee capital improvement plans (CIPs) and providing written comments on the proposed impact fees to the City Council. The City Councils sets the impact fees to be collected. Page 161 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 1-3 1.3 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS The list of abbreviations used in this report are presented in Table 1-1. Table 1-1: List of Abbreviations Abbreviation Actual CCN Certificate of Convenience and Necessity CIP Capital Improvement Plan EST Elevated Storage Tank ETJ Extraterritorial Jurisdiction FM Farm-to-Market FNI Freese and Nichols, Inc. gpm Gallons per Minute GST Ground Storage Tank IFAC Impact Fee Advisory Committee LUE Living Unit Equivalent MGD Million Gallons per Day OPCC Opinion of Probable Construction Cost SH State Highway TLGC Texas Local Government Code WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant Page 162 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 2-1 2.0 LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS Population and land use are important elements in the analysis of water and wastewater systems. To assist the City of College Station in determining the need and timing of capital improvements to serve future development, a reasonable estimation of future growth is required. Growth and development projections were formulated based on assumptions pertaining to the type, location, quantity, and timing of various future land uses within the community. These land use assumptions, which were utilized to develop living unit equivalent (LUE) projections, will become the basis for the preparation of impact fee capital improvement plans for water and wastewater facilities. A living unit equivalent is defined as the equivalent to a water or wastewater connection for a single-family residence. 2.1 PROJECTED FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Comprehensive Plan The City of College Station is currently undergoing a Comprehensive Plan update. FNI utilized information from the City’s Planning and Development Services department to update the land use and LUE projections within the City’s water and wastewater impact fee service areas. The City provided an expected LUE per acre density for each land use type. The updated future land use and expected LUE per acre density are shown on Figure 2-1. Planned Development and Redevelopment The City’s Planning and Development Services Department identified specific areas where future residential and non-residential developments are expected to occur and an expected timeline of development. These areas are shown on Figure 2-2. The Planning Department also identified areas that are anticipated to be redeveloped at a higher density. These areas consist of existing single-family and multi-family residential and commercial units that would be demolished and replaced with larger complexes or mixed-use housing. The major redevelopment areas include Northgate, Research Valley BioCorridor, Midtown, and the University Drive East Corridor. LUE projections were developed for these identified areas based on the City’s future land use and any available information on anticipated lot counts provided by developers. FNI also identified vacant parcels that could be developed in the future, identified as infill, utilizing the City’s land use and meter billing data. Page 163 of 231 !! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!!!!! ! ! !!!! ! ! !!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!B R A Z O S C O B R A Z O S C O G R I M E S C O G R I M E S C O ?¡ ?cBryan ?c ?¡ ?c BRAZOS COBRAZOS COWASHINGTON COWASHINGTON CO ?À Texas A & M UniversityTexas A & M University T X - 6 S T X - 6 N TX - 6 TX-30 EA S T B Y P FM 2154 RDROCK PRAI R I E R D TX-4 7 RIVER RDWILLIAM D FITCH PKWYI AND GN RDBIRD POND RDWE L S H A V E UNIVE RSITY DR ECOLE LNC A V I T T A V E HOPES CREEK RDHARVEY RDBARRON RDFM 2 8 1 8 R D W TO N K A W A Y L A K E R D ARRINGTON RDN D O W L I N G R DUNIVERSITY DRPEACH CREEK RDW VILLA MARIA RDTE X A S A V E S COUNTY RD-175 DEACON DRRO Y D E R R DEARL RU DDER FWY SBARAK LNE 29TH STF AND B RDGRAHAM RDN GRAHAM RDS DOWLI N G R D NUNN JONES RDDOMINIK DRCA R T E R C R E E K P K W Y FRANCIS DRGREENS PRAIRIE RD WJO N E S R D LO N GM I R E D R FI N F E A T H E R R D HOLLEMAN DRQUAIL RUNPI P E L I N E R D VI C T O R I A A V E CH I C K L N GL A D E S T SEBESTA RDBROADMOOR DRGANDY RDBRADLEY RDKEMP RD AN D E R S O N S T DUSTY RDFISHTANK RDCAIN RDSOUTH W EST P K W Y L O S T T R L E VILLA MARIA RD W O O D L A K E D R ROESE RD KOPPE BRIDGE RDFR O S T D RWE L L B O R N R D BAWMKER RDNA G L E S T OLDEN LNLINCOLN AVECAPSTON E D R IN D I A N L A K E S D R LA K E W A Y D R DE E R R U N LUTHER ST WW H I T E C R E E K R D HOLLEMAN DR EPATE RDW BYPASSPAR K P L WAY S I D E D R SULPHUR SPRINGS RDBRIARCREST DRTIMBERLINE DR O L S E N B L V D M U N S O N A V E GEORGE BUSH DRDEW RD GEORGE BUSH DR WALACIA CT HARV E Y MI T C H E L L P K W Y S S C O L L E G E A V E TODD T R L FM 158 R D PEACH CREEK CUT OFFGROESBECK STBO X L E Y B N DFOUNTAIN AVERI O G R A N D E B L V D O L D W E L L B O R N R D OLD TI RDDEER PARK DR DEBBIE LN 4T H S T TURKEY CREEK RDGOLDEN TRLENCHANTED OAKS DRPAINT T R LFM ROAD 2818 RD BI T T L E L N GREENS PRAIRIE TRLHARPERS FE R R Y R DKRENEK TAP RDTARROW STS T R A D I T I O N S D R FAVOR RDDOGWOOD TRLNAVARRO DRTEE DRAUSTIN AVEW A L T O N D RBECK STNANTUCKET D RSUZANNE PLVISTA LNCHEROKEE DRFM - 2 8 1 8 RAYMOND STOTZER PK WY SOUTHWEST PKWY EAL E X A N D R I A A V E LA N G F O R D S T BROTHERS BLVDDARTMOUTH STN FOREST PKWYC O K E S T S M I T H L N SO U T H W O O D D R LI G H T S E Y L N WILD HORSE RUNABBATE RDROYAL ADELADE DR B O Y E T T S T WAYFARE R L NN ROSEMARY DRWOODCREEK DRHUNTERS CREEK RD LE E A V E A G R O N O M Y R D DE C A T U R D R FA I R V I E W A V E AIRLINE DR FO S T E R A V EW CARSON STOLD BARKER RANCH RD PU R Y E A R D R COPPERFIEL D D R W A L N U T R D N H A R V E Y M I T C H E L L P K W Y 1 S T S T S OAKS DR HI C K O R Y R D G O L D E N M I S T SPEARMAN DR HAINES D R PALASOTA DR HARRIS DREAGLE AVEFAIRW A Y D R S W E E T W A T E R D R A S H B U R N A V E MANUEL DRG R E A T O A K S D RPIPER LNWESTWOOD MAIN DRHARDY WEEDON RDRANCHERO RDSAINT ANDR E W S D ROAK HILL DRKE N T S T CAST L E G A T E D REDELWEISS AVEARBOLEDA DRAPPOMATTOX DRLAZY LNLEHR LN WCHRISTINE LNLI N D A L N CLL T A N G L EW O O D D R RA I N T R E E D R C A J U N R I D G E R D BALL CIRLYNN DRLOS ROBLES DRLUTHER STOLD COLLEGE RDW E E D O N L O O P E 3 1 S T S T BLUE RIDGE DRSPRING LOOP CA L U M E T T R LHOLLEMAN DR W B I Z Z E L L S TELM AV E TURK RANCH RDFAULKNER DRCE N T R A L P A R K L N G U S R O Y R D BRIA R O A K S D R F R EMA N S CHOO L R D WINDING CRKBARRON CUT OFF RDINWOOD DRNUECES DRCARLL LNMORTIER DRCREAGOR LNGLENHAVEN DRRESEARCH PKWYWHITE ROCK RD BEE C R KENFIELD STWINDSOR DR R O B I N D R AS H L E Y L NOLIVE STVA L L E Y C I R ROANS CHAPEL RDFOXFIRE DRCAMBRIDGE DRNI M I T Z S T HARTFORD DRHI LL RDMILE DRBUGGY LNPA M E L A L N MESA VE R D E D RDAIRY CENTER RDCO N N I E L N MISTY LN SANDSTONE DR NORMAND DRP E N B E R T H Y R D CAROL STRUN A W A Y R D POLO RDORR STWILLIAMSON DRJENNIFER DRHOU S TO N S T WI L L I A M S C R E E K D R BRIGHTON DR DEERFIELD DRDE X T E R D R C A M E L O T D R NEW MAIN DR HO L I K S T REDMAN LNGABBARD RDMIDSUMME R L N LA C Y W E L L R D NE W P O R T L N CO L L E G E A V E CARTER L A K E D R CO P P E R F I E L D P K W Y LA W Y E R S T FRENEAU DRLEONARD RDOA K L E A F CROSS PARK DRFLYWAY RD B U R G E S S L N AVONDALE AVERITCHEY RDPOTTER LNMCCULLOUGH RDATKINS S T PINTO RUNEMERALD PKWY SI L K W O O D D R MO R R I S L N TA U B E R S T BRENTWOOD DR ESHELLBOURNES HLHORTICULTURE RDHE N S E LVINE STMIC K T H E A L N CA M I L L E D R SPRING L N STUART STN O T T I N G H A M D R BIRMI N G H A M D R O A K S T PINEWOOD DR NAVIDAD ST WI N D F R E E D R HIG H L O N E S O M E S C O N S E T D R T A L L T I M B E R D R REG A L O A K S D RDUNN STEDEN LN FO R E S T W O O D D R O A K V I E W S T HORSE HAVEN LNFRIERSON RDAXIS C T CHEYENNE DRVALLEY VIEW DRSARA LN VAL VERDE DRC LO I S T E R S DRJONES STS P E N C E S T CARDINAL LN THOROUGHBRED RDGWINDHAM RANCH RDQU A L I T Y C I R KE N N E D Y P L MISSI O N HILLS D R RIDGE WAY D R BERRY CRK W BRONZE LNORCHID STSWITCH STA RDASH STDE E R C R E E K D R GUADALUPE DRST A T E R D NORHAM DRARNOLD R D SL E E P Y R - R R D W H I S P E R I N G R D G ROSE CIRWOODS LNMARION PUGH DRVALLEY OAKS DRN TRADI TI O N S D R BE L L A I R E B L V D SH I R E D R FOUNDER S D R AFTON OAKS DRW RIDGE DR W H I T E S C R E E K L NMORGANS LNSADDL E L N NARROW WAY LA U R E N D R HORSESHOE LNLIS L N M E D I N A D R HICKORY NUT LN U- V R O W KI M M Y D R APRICOT GLNOXBURGH DRSAND PIPE R C V TUCKER N U C K ANDOVE R C T JA N E S T E PLACID DR LU E D E C K E L N IBIS CT EA S T M A R K D R BELMONT CIREAGLE P A S S S T E OAK HILL DR BROOKWATER CIRCEDAR RIDGE DRHIDDEN ACRES DROS A G E T R A I L D R K O R S H E A W A Y FO R E S T D R C L A N V L G TRIPLE BEND CIRWHISPERING OAKS DRC L A R K S T PO S T O A K B N D APPLEBY PL BRIDLE GATE D R RIDGE WALK SCOTNEY CTWI L D E R N E S S D R MEADOW OAKRO C K Y M E A D O W S D R CITATION CIRDAKOTA RIDGE DR PR O C TFRIARSALLIE LNCRYSTAL LN WELLESLEY CTDE A N P U T D R S COULTER DRPRESTWICK CTPU F F I N W A YLAKESI DE ST LEGAC Y LNBRONCO C IR FOX CI RMAGNOLIA DRCOLONIAL C I RW B Y P A S S TURK RANCH RDBIZZELL ST EAGLE AVEUNIVERSITY DRFLYWAY R D BLUE RI D G E D RLEONARD RDKEMP RD FOUN D E R S D R TX-4 7 FM 2818 RD W ARRINGTON RDPOTTER LNE AR L RU DDER FW Y S RAYMOND STOTZER PKWYCLLW BR ONZE L N 0 2,500 5,000 SCALE IN FEET DRAFT FIGURE 2-1CITY OF COLLEGE STATION WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE FUTURE LAND USE !I Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: CCL14324Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\01_DELIVERABLES\00_DRAFT_REPORT\(Figure_2-1)-Future_Land_Use.mxdUpdated: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 LEGEND Road Railroad Stream Lake Texas A&M University City Limit ETJ Boundary Other City Limit County Boundary LAND USE Urban Center Neighborhood Center General Commercial Neighborhood Commercial Business Center Urban Residential Mixed Residential Suburban Residential Estate Residential Rural Neighborhood Conservation Medical Wellborn Institutional/Public Texas A&M University Parks & Greenways Natural Areas ! ! !!! !!Redevelopment Areas Page 164 of 231 B R A Z O S C O B R A Z O S C O G R I M E S C O G R I M E S C O ?¡ ?cBryan ?c ?¡ ?c BRAZOS COBRAZOS COWASHINGTON COWASHINGTON CO ?À SUMMIT CROSSING APARTMENTS CHIMNEY HILL RE-DEVELOPMENT ENCINO TRACE APARTMENTS MISSION RANCH SUBDIVISION BRIDGEWOOD SUBDIVISION GREENS PRAIRIE RESERVE SUBDIVISION WINDHAM SUBDIVISION WELLBORN SETTLEMENT SUBDIVISION ANIMATE HABITAT PEBBLE CREEK SUBDIVISION PEBBLE CREEK SUBDIVISION UNIVERSITY DR. EAST CORRIDOR NORTHGATE RESEARCH VALLEY BIOCORRIDOR MIDTOWN MIDTOWN Texas A & M UniversityTexas A & M University T X - 6 S T X - 6 N TX- 6 EA S T B Y P TX- 3 0 FM 2154 RDTX-4 7 ROCK PR A I R I E R D RIVER RDWILLIAM D FITCH PKWYI AND GN RDBIRD POND RDW E L S H A V E UNIVERSIT Y DR ECOLE LNC A V I T T A V E HARVEY RDHOPES CREEK RDBARRON RDJ O N E S R D FM 2 8 1 8 R D W FI N F E A T H E R R D KEMP R DW VILLA MARIA RDTO N K A W A Y L A K E R D ARRINGTON RDN D O W L I N G R DUNIVERSITY DRTE X A S A V E S PEACH CREEK RDDEACON DREAR L RUDDER FW Y S BARAK LN R O Y D E R R DF AND B RDGRAHAM RDN GRAHAM RDS DOWLI N G R D NUNN JONES RDDOMINIK DRFRANCIS DRGREENS PRAIRIE RD WCA R T E R C R E E K P K W Y LONG M I R E D RHOLLEMAN DRQUAIL RUNPI P E L I N E R D VI C T O R I A A V E CH I C K L N GL A D E S T SEBESTA RDGANDY RDBROADMOOR DRBRADLEY RDE 29TH ST AN D E R S O N S T FISHTANK RDCAIN RDSOUTH W E ST P K WY L O S T T R L W O O D L A K E D R FR O S T D RWE L L B O R N R D E VILLA MARIA RDNA G L E S T OLDEN LNLINCOLN AVEKOPPE BRIDGE RDCAPSTON E D R IN D I A N L A K E S D R DUST Y R D LA K E W A Y D R DE E R R U N LUTHER ST WW H I T E C R E E K R D HOLLEMAN DR EPATE RDW BYPASSPARK PLWAY S I D E D R BRIARCREST DRTIMBERLINE DR O L S E N B L V D M U N S O N A V E GEORGE BUSH DRDEW R D GEORGE BUSH DR WALACIA CT HARVE Y MI T C H E LL P K W Y S S C O L L E G E A V E TODD T R L FM 15 8 R D PEACH CREEK CUT OFF BO X L E Y B N DFOUNTAIN AVERI O G R A N D E B L V D OL D W E L L B O R N R D OLD TI RDDEER PARK DR 4T H S T TURKEY CREEK RDG O L D E N T R L ENCHANTED OAKS DRGROESBECK STPAINT T R LFM ROAD 2818 RD BIT T L E L N GREENS PRAIRIE TRLHARPERS F E R R Y R DKRENEK TAP RDTA R R O W S T S T R A D I T I O N S D R N H A R V E Y M I T C H E L L P K W Y FAV O R R D N E A R L R U D D E R FW Y DOGWOOD TRLNAVARRO DRTEE DRWA L T O N D R NANTUCKET DRSUZANNE PLVISTA LNFM - 2 8 1 8 RAYMOND STOTZER PK WY SOUTHWEST PKWY ELA C Y W E L L R D AL E X A N D R I A A V E LA N G F O R D S T BROTHERS BLVDDARTMOUTH STN FOREST PKWYC O K E S T S M I T H L N S O U T H W O O D D R LI G H T S E Y L N WILD H O RSE RUNABBATE RDROYAL ADELADE DRB O Y E T T S T WAYFARE R L N CHEROKEE DRWOODCREEK DRUNIVERSITY OAKS BLVDHUNTERS CREEK RDBECK STA G R O N O M Y R D DE C A T U R D R FA I R V I E W A V E FO S T E R A V EW CARSON STPU R Y E A R D R W A L N U T R D 1 S T S T S OAKS DR HI C K O R Y R D G O L D E N M I S T SPEARMAN DR COPPERFIEL D D R HAINES D R HARRIS DREAGLE AVEFAIRW A Y D R S W E E T W A T E R D R AS H B U R N A V E MANUEL DRG R E A T O A K S D RPIPER LNWESTWOOD MAIN DRHENSEL DRRANCHERO RDSAINT ANDRE W S D ROAK HILL DRKE N T S T CAS T L E G A T E D R ED E L W E I S S A V E ARBOLEDA DRAPPOMATTOX DRLAZY LNLEHR LN WCHRISTINE LNLI N D A L N CLL TA N G L E W O O D D R RA I N T R E E D R BALL CIRLYNN DRLOS ROBLES DRHARDY WEEDON RDPALASOTA DR LUTHER STBI Z Z E L L S TOLD COLLEGE RDPIERRE PLBLUE RIDGE DRSPRING LOOP CA L U M E T T R L HENSEL AVE HOLLEMAN DR W ELM A V E TURK RANCH RDFAULKNER DRCE N T R A L P A R K L N G U S R O Y R D BRIA R O A K S D R FREMAN SCHOOL RDTREEHOUSE T RL WINDING CRKBARRON CUT OFF RDHOLIK DROLD JONES R D INWOOD DRWE E D O N L O O P NUECES DRAS P E N S T CARLL LNMORTIER DRCREAGOR LNG L E N H A V E N D R R E S E A R C H P KW Y WHITE ROCK RD G O L D N U G G E T T BEE C R KENFIELD STR O B I N D R TIMM DRAS H L E Y L N HOLLY DR VALLEY CIR ROANS CHAPEL RDFOXFIR E D R SULPHUR SPRINGS RDCOLGATE DRJOE ROUTT BLVD CAMBRIDGE DRHARTFORD DRHILL RDRE N E E L NMILE DRWOODLAND DRBUGGY LNPAME L A L N H O L I C K L N MESA VE R D E D RDAIRY CENTER RDC O N N I E L N MISTY L N SANDSTONE DR AUTUMN CIR NO R M A N D D R P E N B E R T H Y R D CAROL STAV O N S T E 3 1 S T S T RUN A W A Y R D POLO RDORR STWILLIAMSON DRCOONER STH O U S T O N S T WI L L I A M S C R E E K D R BRIGHTON DR DEERFIELD DRJAGUAR DRDE X T E R D RNEW MAIN DRREDMAN LNGABBARD RDMIDSUMME R L N SHILOH A V E RI D G E C I R NE W P O R T L N CARTER L A K E D R C O P P E R F I E L D P K W Y LA W Y E R S TOLD OAKS DRFRENEAU DRLEONARD RDFLYWAY RD ONYX DRBU R G E S S L N RITCHEY RDDI S C O V E R Y D R FIDELITY STPOTTER LNMCCULLOUGH RDCROSS PARK DRSHIREWOOD DRATKINS S T PINTO RUNVILLAG E D R SOPHIA LNEMERALD PKWY LISTER LN GR A Z D R SIL K W O O D D R RIVA RIDGE RDUNION STMEAD O W L N SHELLBOURNES HLRUGEN LNHE N S E L AVENUE BVINE STMICK T H E A L N CA M I L L E D R KERNSTOWN LNSPRIN G L N CROSS STN O T T I N G H A M D R BIRMI N G H A M D ROAK STAUGUSTA C I R ST O N E C I T Y D R PINEWOOD DR NAVIDAD ST GARDEN LNHI G H L O N E S O M E S C O N S E T D R T A L L T I M B E R D R H U N T I N G T O N D R THOM A S S T W E L L B O R N R D N STALL INGS DROLDENBURG LNAXI S C T CHEYENNE DRV A L L E Y V I E W D R WHITNEY LNMITCHE L L S TMOCKINGBIRD RDVAL VERDE DRSU N N Y B R O O K L N CLOISTERS DRMEMORIAL DRJONES STS P E N C E S T SESAME STANGELINA CIRCARDINAL LN KI N G S G A T E D R THOROUGHBRED RDGLAMAR STELBRICH LNWINDHAM RANCH RDQUALITY CIRLEDGESTONE TRLPONDEROSA DR KE N N E D Y P L MISSI O N HILLS D R RIDGE WAY D R BERRY CRK W BRONZE L N ORCHID STDE E R C R E E K D R W KING COLE DRBEE CREEK DRST A T E R DSUNCREST STARNOLD RDSL E E P Y R - R R D DOVER DRROSE CIRFOR E S T B N D MARION PUGH DR N TRADI TI O N S D R CARMEL PLBE L L A I R E B L V D FOUNDER S D R REDBUD STAFTON OAKS DRW RIDGE DR W H I T E S C R E E K L NSADDLE LN NARROW WAYS D E X T E R D R HORSESHOE LNTHOMPSON STKI M M Y D R APRICOT GLNOXBURGH DRSAND PIPE R CVOAKSIDE DRHELENA STTUCKER N U C KNEWARK CIRPROVIDENCE AVEANDOVER C T E PLACID DR PINE RI D G E D R LU E D E C K E L N IBIS CTSTOKES CIR WALNUT C R E E K C T E OAK HILL DR BROOKWATER CIRCEDAR RIDGE DRWI N D W O O D D R HIDDEN ACRES DROS A G E T R A I L D R SH A D Y D R BLUE QUA IL LN K O R S H E A W A Y SP R I N G M I S T D R C L A N V L G HARDY STGREEN TREE CIRTRIPLE BEND CIRLIVE OAK STWHISPERING OAKS DRS T E X A S A V E BEEL E R L N EMORY OAK D R PUMA D R R O S E M A R Y L N CRENSHA W C I R PO S T O A K B N D S C A M P U S A V E APRIL B L O O M HORSEBACK C T BRIDL E G AT E DRRIDGE WALKCECILIA CTWI L D E R N E S S D R OAK TRL MEADOW OAKCALUSA SPRINGS DRDAKOTA RIDGE DR PR O C T GR E E N B R I A R C I R MADER A CI R FRIAR AD R I A N C E L A B R D SALLIE L N CREST O N L N GL E N N A C T CO P P E R R I V E R D R T U R N B E R R Y C I R DE A N P U T D R PRESTWICK CTPU F F I N W A Y L EGA C Y LN PU E B L O C T S STO C K T O N D R KA Z M E I E R P L Z COLONIAL C I R SANDIA P L Z DANVILLE CTKNIGHT DRCOLD SPRING DRB O G E Y C T GREER LNFIELDSLUTHE R S T WUNIVERSITY DRRAYMOND STOTZER PKWYFLYWAY R DLEONARD RDARRINGTON RD S T E X A S A V E POTTER LNFM 2 8 1 8 RD W W BRO NZ E L N A P P O M A T T O X D R TE X A S A V E S TX-4 7 CLLBLUE RI D G E D R BIZZELL ST TURK RANCH RDEAGLE AVE 0 2,250 4,500 SCALE IN FEET DRAFT FIGURE 2-2CITY OF COLLEGE STATION WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE ANTICIPATED FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS !I Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: CCL20771Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\01_DELIVERABLES\00_DRAFT_REPORT\(Figure_2-2)-Future_Developments.mxdUpdated: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 LEGEND University Dr East Corridor Midtown Northgate Research Valley Biocorridor Road Railroad Stream Lake Texas A&M University City Limit ETJ Boundary Other City Limit County Boundary Page 165 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 2-4 2.2 LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENT (LUE) According to Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code, the maximum impact fee may not exceed the amount determined by subtracting the rate credit from the cost of the capital improvements required and dividing that amount by the total number of service units attributed to new development during the impact fee eligibility period. Water and wastewater service units are defined as living unit equivalents (LUEs), representing a typical connection for one single-family residence. Rate credit analysis is discussed in detail in Section 4.2.1. The service associated with public, commercial, and industrial connections is converted into service units based upon the capacity of the meter used to provide service. The number of service units required to represent each meter size is based on the safe maximum operating capacity of the appropriate meter type. Water meter specifications including the safe maximum operating capacities for the specific meters utilized by the City were identified for each meter size. The service unit equivalent is the ratio of the safe maximum operating capacity of the meter in question to the safe maximum operating capacity of a 5/8” meter. The service unit equivalent for each meter size used by the City is listed in Table 2-1. Table 2-1: Living Unit Equivalencies Meter Size Meter Type Safe Maximum Operating Capacity(1)(2) (gpm) Living Unit Equivalent(3) 5/8" x 3/4” Displacement 15 1.0 1” Displacement 50 3.3 1-1/2” Compound 160 10.7 2” Compound 160 10.7 3” Compound 400 26.7 4” Compound 800 53.3 6” Compound 1,600 106.7 8” Compound 2,700 180.0 10” Compound 4,000 266.7 (1) City is currently using Badger Recordall Disc Meter (Model 25 for 5/8” x 3/4” and Model 70 for 1”) and Sensus Omni C2 for 1.5” meters and larger. (2) The 1-1/2” and 2” meters have similar operating capacity, however the meter headloss curves are different. Meter selection to be verified during the permit review process. (3) Living unit equivalents shown as rounded to single decimal point. Page 166 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 2-5 2.3 IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREAS The water and wastewater impact fee service areas were updated during this study as described below. Water Service Area The water impact fee service area is defined by the portion of the City’s water Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) that falls within the existing City limits and is shown on Figure 2-3. Wastewater Service Area The wastewater impact fee service area is defined by the City’s wastewater CCN and City limits. The service area excludes a portion of BioCorridor which is within City limits but is currently a part of the City of Bryan’s CCN. The wastewater impact fee service area is shown on Figure 2-4. Table 2-2 shows the existing and projected 10-year LUEs for the water and wastewater impact fee service areas based on the anticipated future developments discussed in Section 2.1. Table 2-2: Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Service Area LUEs Year(1) Water LUEs Wastewater LUEs 2021 55,780 58,423 2031 69,824 71,328 Growth in LUEs 14,044 12,905 (1) 2021 LUEs estimated based on water meter billing data and meters identified as water only or sewer only meters. Page 167 of 231 0 2,500 5,000 SCALE IN FEET DRAFT FIGURE 2-3CITY OF COLLEGE STATION WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE WATER IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREA !I Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: CCL14324Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\01_DELIVERABLES\00_DRAFT_REPORT\(Figure_2-3)-Water_Impact_Fee_Service_Area.mxdUpdated: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 LEGEND !(Emergency Interconnect !(Active Interconnect [Ú Pump Station (#UT Elevated Storage Tank UT Ground Storage Tank 8" and Smaller Water Line 10" and Larger Water Line Road Railroad Stream Water Impact FeeService Area Texas A&M University Brazos County MUD 1 City Limit ETJ Boundary Other City Limit County Boundary Page 168 of 231 0 2,500 5,000 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND Vä Lift Station TXWWTP Wastewater TreatmentPlant 8" and SmallerWastewater Line 10" and LargerWastewater Line 8" and Smaller Force Main 10" and LargerForce Main Road Railroad Stream Lake Wastewater ImpactFee Service Area Texas A&M University Brazos County MUD 1 City Limit ETJ Boundary County Boundary DRAFT FIGURE 2-4CITY OF COLLEGE STATION WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREA !I Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: CCL20771Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\01_DELIVERABLES\00_DRAFT_REPORT\(Figure_2-4)-Wastewater_Impact_Fee_Service_Area.mxdUpdated: Tuesday, October 19, 2021User: 03812 Page 169 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 3-1 3.0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN As part of the City’s 2016 Water Master Plan Update and 2016 Wastewater Master Plan Update, the City developed water and wastewater capital improvement plans (CIPs). For this impact update study, the water and wastewater capacity projects were reviewed and updated per the updated land use assumptions. The recommended improvements will provide the required capacity to meet projected water demands and wastewater flows through buildout. The existing and future water and wastewater CIP projects that are required to serve projected growth within the next 10 years were identified for inclusion in the water and wastewater impact fee analysis. 3.1 WATER DEMAND AND WASTEWATER FLOW PROJECTIONS The projected population and land use discussed in Section 2.1 were utilized along with planning criteria to develop future water demand and wastewater flow projections. Historical water demands and wastewater flows were analyzed to develop and update the planning criteria from the 2016 Master Plans. Table 3-1 presents the projected water demands and Table 3-2 presents the projected wastewater flows for the City of College Station. Table 3-1: Projected Water Demands Year Average Day Demand (MGD) Maximum Day Demand (MGD) Peak Hourly Demand (MGD) 2021 12.7 26.4 47.5 2031 16.2 33.1 59.6 Buildout 18.2 37.4 67.3 Table 3-2: Projected Wastewater Flows Basin Year Total Average Daily Flow(1) (MGD) Total Average Daily Flow After Flow Diversion Projects(2) (MGD) Carters Creek WWTP 2021 7.51 7.51 2031 9.16 7.40 Buildout 10.09 7.32 Lick Creek WWTP 2021 1.92 1.92 2031 2.83 4.59 Buildout 3.78 6.55 (1) ADF includes total projected flow within each existing WWTP basin and does not include any proposed flow diversions (2) ADF includes proposed CC WWTP to LC WWTP flow diversion projects identified in the wastewater CIP Page 170 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 3-2 3.2 WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS During this study, FNI updated the City’s existing water and wastewater system hydraulic models. The hydraulic models along with the future demand and flow projections were utilized to update the proposed water and wastewater capital improvement plans and identify impact fee eligible CIP projects. The impact fee eligible water system projects are shown on Figure 3-1 and the impact fee eligible wastewater system projects are shown on Figure 3-2. Planning level capital cost estimates were calculated for all recommended improvements. A summary of the costs for all impact fee eligible water and wastewater CIP projects are shown in Table 3-3 and Table 3-4 respectively. Detailed water and wastewater project costs for all proposed projects are also included in Appendix B and Appendix C, respectively. The planning level capital cost estimates do not include individual service connections or subdivision lines. The costs are provided as estimates based on previous similar engineering experience in 2021 dollars and include an allowance for engineering, surveying, and contingencies. Ongoing and recently completed capital improvement projects that are projected to serve growth within the next 10-years are also considered impact fee eligible. The costs for these projects shown in Table 3-3 and Table 3-4 are based on actual and projected design and construction costs provided by the City. Page 171 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 3-3 Table 3-3: Impact Fee Eligible Water System Capital Projects Project Type Impact Fee Eligible CIP No. Description of Project(1) Total Capital Cost (2021 Dollars) Recently Completed Projects A High Service Pumping Improvements $ 3,597,227 B BioCorridor Water Line $ 998,884 C Area 2 Water Line Extension $ 1,000,000 D Cooling Tower Expansion $ 3,795,667 E Well No. 10 Land Acquisition $ 1,048,633 F Well No. 9 and Collection Line $ 7,623,202 G Midtown Drive 12-inch Water Line $ 920,000 H The Crossing at Lick Creek Phase 1 - 3 Oversize Participation $ 45,233 I Embassy Suites Water Line Oversize Participation $ 15,030 J Brazos Valley Auto Complex Oversize Participation $ 84,791 K Castlegate II Oversize Participation $ 50,871 L Greens Prairie Oversize Participation $ 96,498 M Summit Crossing Phase 3A Oversize Participation $ 32,550 N SH 6 Water Line Phase 1 and 2 $ 1,036,568 Recently Completed Project Subtotal $ 20,345,154 Ongoing Projects O SH 6 Water Line Phase 3 $ 3,050,000 P 3.0 MG Elevated Storage Tank and Pressure Reducing Valves $ 8,690,000 Q SH 40 Water Line Phase 1 and 2 $ 4,200,000 R 2021 Impact Fee Study $ 150,000 Ongoing Project Subtotal $ 16,090,000 Proposed Projects 1 New and Replacement 12-inch Rock Prairie Road Water Line $ 2,289,500 2 New 18-Inch Midtown Business Center Water Line $ 2,796,400 3 BioCorridor Water Line Improvements $ 2,741,200 4 Water Supply Well No. 10 $ 19,223,900 5 Harvey Mitchel Parkway Water Line Replacement $ 4,236,400 Proposed Future Project Subtotal $ 31,287,400 Total Impact Fee Eligible Water Capital Improvements Cost $67,722,554 (1) Oversize participation projects include only the portion of costs paid for by the City. Page 172 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 3-4 Table 3-4: Impact Fee Eligible Wastewater System Capital Projects Project Type Impact Fee Eligible CIP No. Description of Project(1) Total Capital Cost (2021 Dollars) Recently Completed Projects A Royder/Live Oak Sewer Service $ 1,691,256 B Bee Creek Interceptor Phase 1 and 2 $ 8,472,421 C Lick Creek Trunk Line $ 14,020,058 D Medical District Trunk Line Phase 1 (Participation Agreement) $ 1,770,375 E Northeast Trunk Line Phase 1 and 2 $ 6,558,738 F Southwood Valley Trunk Line Phase 1 $ 1,518,488 G 18-Inch Harvey Road Gravity Line $ 188,790 H Creek Meadows Lift Station Upsizing and Force Main $ 212,587 I Nagle Street Student Housing Oversize Participation $ 26,854 Recently Completed Project Subtotal $ 34,459,567 Ongoing Projects J Bee Creek Interceptor Phase 3 $ 3,900,000 K Medical District Trunk Line Phase 2 and 3 $ 3,250,000 L Northeast Trunk Line Phase 3 and 4 $ 13,861,000 M Carters Creek Diversion Lift Station Phase 1 $ 13,900,000 N Lick Creek WWTP Phase 1 Expansion $ 39,014,049 O 2021 Impact Fee Update $ 174,150 Ongoing Project Subtotal $ 74,099,199 Proposed Projects 1 15/18/24/30/36-inch Southwood Valley Interceptor Phase 2 $ 7,314,800 2 18/21/24-Inch Bee Creek Trunk Line Phase 4 $ 5,357,800 3 18/21-Inch Alum Creek Sewer Trunk Line $ 11,136,600 4 8-Inch Creek Meadows Force Main Re-Routed to Alum Creek Trunk Line $ 2,517,900 5 Lick Creek WWTP Phase 2 Expansion (to 8.0 MGD) $ 49,946,000 6 21/24-Inch Harvey Road Replacement Gravity Line $ 4,916,300 Proposed Project Subtotal $ 81,189,400 Total Impact Fee Eligible Wastewater Capital Improvements Cost $ 189,748,166 (1) Oversize participation projects include only the portion of costs paid for by the City. Page 173 of 231 (#UT (#UT UTUT[Ú[Ú !A!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!((#UT Texas A & M UniversityTexas A & M University Brazos CountyMUD 1 City of Bryan 29th Street 3.0 MG Park PlaceElevated Storage Tank Overflow Elev. = 522' 2.0 MG Greens Prairie Elevated Storage TankOverflow Elev. = 522' Dowling Road Pump Station(3) - 8,000 gpm Pumps(2) - 6,175 gpm Pumps(1) - 6,000 gpm Pump(1) - 5.0 MG Ground Storage Tank(1) - 3.0 MG Ground Storage TankOverflow Elev. = 370'High Service Pumping Improvements City of College StationHSC Parkway Texas A&M University Villa Maria Texas AMUniversityMaple Street Texas AMUniversity Olsen Field Wellborn Foxfire Wellborn Holleman Wellborn Rock Prairie Wellborn Waterford Heights Wellborn Caprock 3.0 MG Rock PrairieElevated Storage Tank and PRVs (H 24 " (2 (1 (1 (N (N (G (O (3 (5 (L (A (B 18"18"12" 24"30"30"12" 18" &18"18"18"(I (M & &&&(J (K (C (P (Q (Q (O ?c ?c ?¡ ?¡ ?À (O20"12"1 8 "18"(3 1 2 " 1 6 " 12" 16 " 1 2 " 1 6 "12"30"12 " 12 " 24 "18"12"12"12"12"12 "18"12"24"12"12"12"24"12" 12"12"18" 12" 18 "12"8" 4" 2" 6" 3" 1"1 1/2"6"8"8"8"6"8" 8" 8"8"6"6"6"8"3" 8" 6" 6 "4"4"8" 8"8"8" 8" 8"2"4"4"6" 6"6"6"6"8"6"8"1"8"6"6"6"6"8"8" 8" 8" 4" 8"8"6"8"6"6"6"8"8"6 " 6 "6"8"4" 6"4"6"8"8"6"6"6" 6" 8" 6"8"6"3"8"6"8"8" 6" 6" 2"2"8"8" 8"6"6"6"6" 4"6"6"8"6"8"8"6"8"4" 6" 6" 8"8" 8" 8" 8" 4" 8" 8" 6"6"8"6"6"6" 4"8"8"8" 6" 6" 6" 6" 8"6"6" 4" 6"8"4"6"6"6" 6"8"6"3"6"4"2"6" 6"8"8"6"8"8" 8 "8"6"6"6"8"6" 6"6"6"6"8"8"8"8"8"8" 6" 6" 4"6"6"6" 8"6"4"8"8"8"4" 8" 8"8"8"8"6" 8" 8" 8"8"8"6"8"6" 8"8"6"8"6"6"8"8" 6" 4"8"3"8"8"8"6"6"6"8" 8" 8" 6"8"6"8"6"6"4"8"8"8"8" 8" 3" 6" 6" 8"6"6"8"6" 8"8"6" 8"8"6"8"8"6" 6"8"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"6"6"2" 8" 6" 8"8"8"8"6"8"8"8"8"8"8" 6"4"6"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"8"8"8"6"6"4"3"6"6"6"6"8"8"8"6"8"6"8" 6" 6"8"8" 8" 6" 8"8"6"2"8" 6" 6" 8" 8"6"8"8"6"2"8"6"6"8 " 8" 8"6" 6" 8" 6"8"2"8"6"6"8" 8" 6" 4"6"6"8"8"3" 4"8"6"6"4" 8" 4" 6" 6"6"8" 8" 8"8"8"6"8"8" 8" 8" 6" 8"8"8"6"8"6"8"6"6"4" 8" 6"8"4" 6"4"6"8"8"8 " 6" 8"8"8" 8"8"6" 6" 6" 6"8"6"6"6"8"8" 8"8"6"6"8" 6" 8"8"8"2"8"6"8"6"6"6"8" 6"6"8"4"8"8"8"8" 6" 6" 8"6"8"6"8"6"6"4"6"8 "2"2"6"4" 8"6"6" 6" 6 " 8" 8" 8" 4"8"6"8"8"8"8"6" 8" 6"6"8" 6"8"6" 6 " 8" 6"2"8" 6" 4" 6"6"6"8"8"6"6"8"8"6" 6" 8"8"8"8"8"6"8"8"6"8"8"6"6"6"8"8"6"8"6"4"6"8"6"6"6" 8"6"8"8"6"6"8" 6" 3" 2"8"6" 6 "8"8" 8"8" 6"8"8"6"8"8"6"4" 6" 4"6"6"6"4"6"8"6" 8"8"8"8"6"6"6"6 " 3"6"4"8"6"6"6" 8" 6"6"8" 8" 6"8" 2" 6"8"8"6" 8"8"6" 8" 6" 8" 8" 8" 6" 8"6" 4" 6"6"8"2"8"6"8"6" 6" 6"8"6"6"8"6"4"6" 8 "6"6"6"8"6" 8" 8" 6" 8" 6"8"8"8"6"6" 6" 6"8"4"8"6"8"6"8"6"8"8"6"8" 6"8"6" 6" 8" 8" 6"8"8" 8" 6" 6"8"6"4"6"2"6" 8"6"6" 6" 8" 6"6"6"8"6"8" 6"8"8"6"8"6" 8"6"8"6"8"6"6" 3" 8" 6" 8" 6 " 8"8"6"6" 8"6"6"6" 8"6"8"8 "8"6"6" 2"8"4"6"8"6"8"2"8"8"8" 8" 8" 6" 6" 6"8"8" 8" 8"8"8"3"8"8"8"6"8"6"6"8"8" 6" 8" 8" 8" 6" 8"6"8 " 8" 4" 4"6"2"6"8"6" 6" 8"6"6"8"8"6" 6"6"2"6"8"6" 8"6"8" 3"8"6" 6"6"6" 6" 8" 8" 2"6"6"3"8" 6" 8" 8" 8" 8"6"8"8" 8"8"6" 6" 6" 8" 8"8"6"6"8"8"6" 6"6"8"6"6"8" 6" 6" 8" 6"6"6"6"6"6" 6" 8"8"8"6"8"2"6"8"2"8"4" 4" 8" 8" 6" 6" 6" 8" 6" 6"6"8" 36 " 30"18"12"24 "42" 1 6 "20"10"18"1 2 " 18 "30"12"12"12"12 " 18 " 1 2 "18"12"18"18 " 12 " 12 " 12" 16 " 18 "18"12"12"12"12" 24"18" 18"18"12"24" 24" 12"12"2 4 " 12 " 12 " 12" 12 " 12 " 1 2 " 12" 12" 12 "12"12 "12"12 " 12 " 2 4 "12"18"10"12"18 " 1 2 " 18 "12"12 " 18" 12 " 12 "36"16"18 " 24"12"12" 18" 1 2 "12" 1 2 " 12 "18"18"12"16"18"18"24" 12" 12" 24" 36"16"12" 12"12"18 " 3 0 "12"18 "24"18" 18"12"12"18"30"12"16"12"16"18"24"12"12"12 "12"12"12"12"12"12 " 36 "12"12 " 12 " 12"12"12"18"12"18"30"18"18"24"12"12"12" 12 "12"12"12"12 "12"12 " 12" 18"12"30"36 "12"12" 12 "16"12" 12 "12"12 " 1 2 "12"16"18" 1 2 "12"18"18"12"18"12" 18"36"12 " 12 "30"1 2 " 18" 12" 12 "30"30 " 18 "18"12"12"18"30 " 12 "12"18"30 " 1 2 "12"18 " 12 "18"36"12"12 " 18"12"12 "12"16"18"30"12"18" 12 " 12" 12"12"12"20"24"18"12"18"12"12"12"12"12 " 24 " 30 "18"12 " 12"12"12 "12"18"36 " 1 2 " T X - 6 S T X - 6 N TX - 6 TX-30 EA S T B Y PFM 2154 RDE 29TH STROCK PRAIRIE RDTX-4 7 RIVER RDWILLIAM D FITCH PKWYI AND GN RD COUNTY RD-175 COUNTY RD-190BIRD POND RDHOPES CREEK RDCOLE LNBOONEVILLE RD C A V I T T A V E R O Y D E R R D PEACH CREEK RDW 28TH S T TO N K A W A Y L A K E R D ARRINGTON RDN D O W L I N G R DW VILLA MARIA RDUNIVERSITY DRROESE RD BARAK LNH A R D Y W E E D O N R D F AND B RDN GRAHAM RDBROADMOOR DRS DOWL ING RDBECK STNUNN JONES RDJO N E S R D DOMINIK DRCA R T E R C R E E K P K W Y N E A R L R U D D E R F W Y FRANCIS DRFI N F E A T H E R R D WEEDON LOOPTX-21 PIPELINE RDCH I C K L N BRIARCREST DRK EMP RD G L A D E S T E 2 5 T H S T SE B E S TA RDKOPPE BRIDGE RDGANDY RDBRADLEY RDHICKS LNDUST Y R DFISHTANK RDCAIN RDS MAIN ST PALASOTA DR L O S T T R L W O O D L A K E D R FR O S T D R W E L L B O R N R D BAWMKER RDN A G L E S TE VILLA MARIA RDJOHN RICE DRGROESBECK STOLDEN LNE 2 7 T H S T LINCOLN AVECAPSTONE D R IN D I A N L A K E S D R DE E R R U N W H I T E C R E E K R D ELMO WEEDON RDPATE RDPARK PLE 3 0 T H S T WAY S I D E D R SULPHUR SPRINGS RDTIMBERLINE DR E WM J BRYAN PKWYE 2 6 T H S T DEW RD GEORGE BUSH DR WALACIA CT S C O L L E G E A V E TODD T RL FM 15 8 R D PEACH CREEK CUT OFF B O X L E Y B N DFOUNTAIN AVEOLD TI RDDEER PARK DR DEBBIE LN 4 T H S TTURKEY CREEK RDGOLDEN TRLE C H O L S S T ENCHANTED OAKS DRPAINT T R L BITTLE L N GREENS PRAIRIE TRLS ENNIS STOAK DR ROSES RD CHEROKEE DRS T R A D I T I O N S D R DOG W O O D T R L NAVARRO DRTEE DRWA L T O N D R NANTUCKET DRSUZANNE PLVISTA LNBAKER AVERAYMOND STOTZER PKWYN FOREST PKWYS M I T H L N CA M E L O T D R LI G H T S E Y L N WILD H O RSE RUNABBATE RDCOUNTY RD 172COUNTY RD-173E 3 1 S T S T LUZA STHUNTERS CREEK RD LE E A V EW CARSON STOLD BARKER RANCH RD PU R Y E A R D R WALNUT RD1 S T S T S OAKS DR G O L D E N M I S T SPEARMA N D R EAGLE AVEFAIRW A Y D R G R E E N V A L L E Y D R S W E E T W A T E R D R G R E A T O A K S D R S U N C R E S T S T WESTWOOD MAIN DRRANCHERO RDS SIMS AVEOAK HILL DRKE N T S T LAZY LNS BRYAN AVEC A J U N R I D G E R D LI N D A L N CLL RA I N T R E E D RWOODCREST DR BALL CIRLYNN DRLOS ROBLES DRBIZZELL ST OLD COLLEGE RDBLUE RIDGE DRBEN N E T T S T C A L U M E T T R L AR B O R D R TI M B E R S T ELM A V E TURK RANCH RDRODEMEL RANCH RD G U S R O Y R D COUNTY RD 174BRIA R O A K S D R FREMAN SCHOOL RDWINDING CRKINWOOD DRAS P E N S T SO U T H F O R K R D NORTH AVE ES HUTCHINS STOWL TREE LN FRIERSON RDWHITE ROCK RD G O L D N U G G E T TENFIELD STAL I C E S T W BR IARGATE DR WINDSOR DR PENDLETON DRR O B I N D RS GORDON STLA C Y W E L L R D HOLLY DROLIVE STTROPHY DRVAL L E Y C I R ROANS CHAPEL RDFOXFIRE DRJOE R OUTT BLVDHI L L RDWOODLAND DRBUGGY LNHO L I C K L N MESA V E R D E D RDAIRY CENTER RDC O N N I E L N MISTY LN AUTUMN CIR TATUM S T CAROL STAV O N S TCOMMERCE ST BU R T S T SP R I N G C R K RUN A W A Y R D POLO RDADA OAKSWILLIAMSON DRH O U S T O N S T DEERFIELD DRNASH ST LAKE STARAPAHO RIDGE DRSAN SABA DRBURGESS RDREDMAN L NGABBARD RDMIDSUMME R L N TR A N T S T OLD OAKS DRFRENEAU DRPRIVATE ROAD 4007LEONARD RDFLYWAY RD W DUNCAN STHUN T E R S R U N 5TH ST RI C H A R D S T E 28TH ST POTTER LNMCCULLOUGH RDCHACO CANYON DRATKINS S T PINTO RUN PARK W A Y T E R LISTER LNRAVENWOOD DR SI L K W O O D D R COPPERFIELD DRMARINERS CV LO R I L N MI L A M S TMO R R I S L N RIVA RIDG E R D D U R R A N D S TQUAIL HOLLOW DRMEAD O W L NMOCKINGBIRD RDSHELLBOURNES HLSTALLION R D G MILLS STMEMORIAL DRVINE STMICK T H E A L N E PEASE ST CA M I L L E D R SPRI N G L N STUART STTO D D S T PA R K S T OAK STFR E E D O M B L V D ROSE RD HI G H L O N E S O M E ROSS S T TA L L T I M B E R D RWATSON STDANSBY LNSCRIMSHAW LNHOLT STEDEN LN O A K V I E W S T CHEYENNE DRHOWA R D ST V A L L E Y V I EW D R MARY LAKE DR BRAZOS D R VAL VERDE DRWI L D F L O W E R D R C E D A R B E N D R D CLOISTERS DRJONES STANGELINA CIRKI N G S G A T E D R THOROUGHBRED RDGWINDHAM RANCH RDQU A L I T Y C I R PATTON A V E LEDGESTONE TRLWILLO W O A K S T RI D G E W A Y D R BERRY CRK W BR ONZE LNBAMBOO STGOESSLER RDDE E R C R E E K D R ST A T E R DSUNNYDALE C O R N E L L D RHOLLOWHILL DRSL E E P Y R - R R D A S B U R Y S T W H I S P E R I N G R D G WOODS LN KIRKWOOD D R FO R E S T B N D DOE CIRN TRADI TI O N S D R RIVER O A K S D R BE L L A I R E B L V D FOUNDERS D R AFTON OAKS DRLESLIE DRMCARTHU R A V E NARROW WAYJOSEPH DRHORSESHOE LNBRUSSELS DRLIS L N WOODSIDE LNHUMMINGBIR D C I R M E D I N A D R KINNARD A V E HICKORY NUT LN KI M M Y D R APRICOT GLN B A R R O W C T SANDPIP E R C VOAKSIDE DRB A N K S A V E NEWARK CIRMARSHA L L A V E E PLACID DRPARK HURSTLU E D E C K E L N IBIS CT STOKES CIR BELMONT CIRWALNUT C R E E K C T OAK CIRCA E O U S E L L N WI N D W O O D D R HIDDEN ACRES DRCHURCH ST RED R I V E R D R KOENIG STTOLTEC TRLH U N T E R S W A Y K O R S H E A W A Y KOCH ST OA K H I L L S C I R ROLLING RDG C L A N V L G CHIP P E N D A L E S T FIN N E YHARDY STGREEN TREE CIRTRIPLE BEND CIRWHISPERING OAKS DRS T E X A S A V E LAMAR DRPLEASANT STCOUNTY RD-172CRENSHA W C I R PO S T O A K B N D HORSEBACK C T HE A T H E R G L N MA R I N E R DR WI L D E R N E S S D R CITATION CIRRENWICK DRIRIS LN WHITE S T O NE D R T R O W CRYSTAL LN SYC A M O R E T R L ANTLER CIROPAL ST B R Y A N T S T EDGEMORE DRCREST O N L N SPRU C E W O O D S T POST OFFICE STS COULTER DRPRESTWICK CTHOPE LNSOUTH DR E DODGE STN E A R L R U D D E R F W Y TX-4 7 UNIVERSITY DRE 27TH ST TX-21BURT STCLLTURK RANCH RDK E M P R D E 30TH ST POTTER LNFLYWAY R D KENT ST BLUE RI D G E D R DRAFT FIGURE 3-1CITY OF COLLEGE STATION WATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN !I Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: CCL20771Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\01_DELIVERABLES\00_DRAFT_REPORT\(Figure_3-1)-Water_IF_CIP.mxdUpdated: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 1:44:44 PMUser Name: 03812 0 2,750 5,500 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND Impact Fee Eligible Project Water Line Ongoing/Recently Completed Improvements !APressure Relief Valve (#UT Water Tank Water Line Existing Water System !(Interconnect (#UT Elevated UT Ground [Ú Pump Station 8" and Smaller Water Line 10" and Larger Water Line Road Railroad Stream Lake Water Impact Fee Service Area Brazos County MUD 1 Texas A&M University City Limit ETJ Boundary Other City Limit County Boundary UT UT[Ú[Ú (5 Dowling Road Pump Station(3) - 8,000 gpm Pumps(2) - 6,175 gpm Pumps(1) - 6,000 gpm Pump(1) - 5.0 MG Ground Storage Tank (1) - 3.0 MG Ground Storage Tank Overflow Elev. = 370'High Service Pumping Improvements (A 30"3 0 "30"30"30"8" 6" 3"4"6" 8" 8" 8"6"8"8" 6"6"8"8"8"8"4"8"8"6"6"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"8" 8" 8 "8"8"8"8"8 " 8"8"6"8 "8"8"6"6" 8" 8"6"8" 6"6"8" 8" 8"8"8"6"8"6" 8"8"6"6"6"8"6" 6"6"6" 6" 6"8"6"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"8"8"8"8"8" 3"8"8"8 " 8" 8"8"6"8" 8"8"8" 8"8"8"8"6"8" 6"6"8"8"8"8"8"6"6" 8" 6"8"6" 6" 6"6"8" 6"6" 8" 6"8"8"8"36"30"24"18"42"12"16 "48"10"16"1 2 " 1 2 "16"12 "12"1 2 "12"2 4 " 12"12"12"12"12"18" 36 " 12 " 16" 1 2 " 36 " 12"10"12" 12"12"18" 42 " 12"24" 36 " 18" Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community The timing of projects shown is subject to change based on development patterns.The utility alignments shown in this figure are for illustration purposes onlyand do not set the alignments. The alignment of each utility will be determinedat the time of the engineering design. (4 (D (E (F Cooling Tower Expansion Land Acquisition for Well No. 10 Well No. 9 and Collection Line New Groundwater Well No. 10 Page 174 of 231 Vä Vä Vä VäVä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä Vä VäTXWWTP TXWWTP TXWWTP Texas A & M UniversityTexas A & M University Brazos County MUD 1 Private Lift Station (3 (H (B (L (K 2 0 " F . M . (6 (4 (L (L 8" F . M 8" F . M (K (K (J []][][(M (M (M (D (2 48 "18"21"24"8" F . M 8" F.M18"36"8 " F .M 8" ?c ?c ?c ?c ?c ?¡ ?¡ ?¡?¡ ?À Carters Creek WWTPPermitted Capacity: 9.5 MGDFunctional Capacity: 7.7 MGD Carters Lake WWTP Southern Pointe LS Indian Lakes LS Crooked Creek Path LS Creek Meadow LSExpansion to 0.87 MGD Decommission Existing 6-Inch Force Mains and Re-Route Flows Aggie Acres LS Luther Street LS Fox Fire LS Valley Park LS Hensel Park LS2.59 MGD Existing Firm CapacityDecommission Lift Station and 12" Force Main WASHINGTON COWASHINGTON COBRAZOS COBRAZOS CO BRAZ O S C O BRAZ O S C O GRIM E S C O GRIM E S C O Westminster LS Lift Station 2 Decommission Lift Station and 8" Force Main Lift Station 3Decommission Lift StationDivert Flow to Lick Creek WWTP Lift Station 4 Mission Ranch LS Castlegate LS Rock Prairie LS Decommission Lift Station and 6-Inch Force Main 15" 15"15"15"15"30"10"36"2 4 " 30" 18" 48"24"21"20"18"42"21"15"18" 15"18"18"27"21"15" 8" F . M . 6" F . M . 8" F . M .6" F.M.6" F.M.6" F.M.18"18"15" 4 2 " 12" F . M . 30"18"Bryan (F (1 (B (C Lick Creek WWTP Treatment Capacity: 2.0 MGDExpansion to 5 MGDExpansion to 8 MGD (N (5 (M (A 2 0 " F . M . 30"36"36" (3 12"30"18"15"30"30"42"42"42"42" 48"54"(G (E (E(I Diversion Lift StationNew 6 MGD Lift Station Eastside LS To A&M Wastewater System 27''3 6 ' '18''12 ' ' 54'' 48' ' 4 2 ' ' 24'' 21''18''48''12''12''3 6 ' ' 54''42' ' 48 ' '18''48'' 42'' 48'' 48''36''12 ' ' 54'' 18''21''24''30''18' '18''21''24'' 54" 15" 42 "18"24"10"30"2 1 " 12 " 16"27"60"10"12 " 12 " 12 "12"15"24"16" 10 " 15" 15" 18 " 21 "12"15"10"18"10"12" 12 "12"12"12"24"12 "15"18"12"12"21"12"18"18"12"12"12 "12"18"16"12 "12"12"12 "10"12"10 " 15"12"10"1 0 "10"12"10"12"15"10"10 "18"12"1 5 " 18"10"12" 12 " 15"12"12"18"15"18"12 "15"10 " 15"10"10"12"12 " 12"12"30 "18"10"12"30"12"18"10" 18"12"12"12"10"12"12 "12"12 " 10"15"12"21" 21"12"15"15"10"21" 21"15"1 5 "10"15"12 "12" 12 "12"15"1 0 "18"15" 10 " 10" 1 0 "30"15 "12"30"12"12"10"27"18"12"10"12 " 12 "10"15" 18 "12"18" 12 "12"12" 16"12"12"12"10"12"12" 10"12"12 " 15 " 16"16"10"12"12"15"12"12"1 6 "12"10"18"10"18 "18"12" 18" 12" 24"12"10 "18"18"12 "12"18"12 " 1 5 " 12"18"24"18"12"18"12"12 "10"10"10" 15 " 15 " 15 "12"15"1 5 " T X - 6 S T X - 6 N TX - 6 TX-30 E A S T B Y P FM 2154 RDE 29TH ST ROCK P R A I R I E R D TX-4 7 RIVER RDWILLIAM D FITCH PKWYI AND GN RD COUNTY RD-175 COUNTY RD-190BIRD POND RDWE L S H A V EUNIVERSITY DR EHOPES CREEK RDCOLE LNBOONEVILLE RD C A V I T T A V E BARRON RDFM 2 8 1 8 RD WPEACH CREEK RDW 28TH S T TO N K A W A Y L A K E R D ARRINGTON RDN D O W L I N G R DW VILLA MARIA RDUNIVERSITY DRTE X A S A V E S ROESE RD DEACON DRE A R L R U D D E R FW Y SBARAK LNH A R D Y W E E D O N R D F AND B RDN GRAHAM RDBROADMOOR DRS DOWL ING RDBECK STNUNN JONES RDJO N E S R D DOMINIK DRCA R T E R C R E E K P K W Y N E A R L R U D D E R F W Y FRANCIS DRGREENS PRAIRIE RD WL O N G M I R E D R FI N F E A T H E R R D WEEDON LOOPHOLLEMAN DRQUAIL RUNTX-21 PI P E L I N E R D VI C T O R I A A V E CH I C K L N BRIARCREST DRK EMP RD G L A D E S T E 2 5 T H S T SEBESTA RDKOPPE BRIDGE RDGANDY RDBRADLEY RDAN D E R S O N S T HICKS LNDUST Y R DFISHTANK RDS MAIN ST PALASOTA DR SOUT H W E S T P K W Y L O S T T R L WOODLAKE D R FR O S T D R W E L L B O R N R D BAWMKER RDN A G L E S TE VILLA MARIA RDJOHN RICE DRGROESBECK STOLDEN LNE 2 7 T H S T LINCOLN AVECAPSTONE D R IN D I A N L A K E S D R LA K E W A Y D R DE E R R U N LUTHER ST WW H I T E C R E E K R D ELMO WEEDON RDPATE RDW BYPASSPARK PLE 3 0 T H S T WAY S I D E D R SULPHUR SPRINGS RDTIMBERLINE DR E WM J BRYAN PKWYE 2 6 T H S T GEORGE BUSH DRDEW RD GEORGE BUSH DR WALACIA CT FM 158 R D PEACH CREEK CUT OFF B O X L E Y B N DFOUNTAIN AVEDEER PARK DR DEBBIE LNTURKEY CREEK RDGOLDEN TRLE C H O L S S T ENCHANTED OAKS DRPAINT T R L BITTLE L N S ENNIS STTA R R O W S T OAK DR ROSES RD CHEROKEE DRS T R A D I T I O N S D R FAVOR RDDOGWOOD TRLNAVARRO DRTEE DRWA L T O N D R NANTUCKET DRSUZANNE PLBAKER AVEFM - 2 8 1 8 RAYMOND STOTZER PKWY SOUTHWEST PKWY EAL E X A N D R I A A V EN FOREST PKWYC O K E S T S M I T H L N CA M E L O T D R LI G H T S E Y L N WILD H O RSE RUN N H A R V E Y M I T C H E L L P K W Y ABBATE RDROYAL ADELADE DRCOUNTY RD 172COUNTY RD-173E 3 1 S T S T WOODCREEK DRLUZA STHUNTERS CREEK RD LE E A V E A G R O N O M Y R D DE C A T U R D R FA I R V I E W A V E AIRLI N E D RW CARSON STOLD BARKER RANCH RD PU R Y E A R D R 1S T S T S OAKS DR G O L D E N M I S T SPEARMAN DR HAINES D R EAGLE AVEFAIRWAY DRG R E E N V A L L E Y D R SW E E TW A T E R D R AS H B U R N A V E MANUEL DRGREAT OAKS DR S U N C R E S T S T PIPER LNWESTWOOD MAIN DRHENSEL DRS SIMS AVESAINT ANDR E W S D ROAK HILL DRKE N T S T EDELWEISS AVEA P P OM A T T O X D RLAZY LNLEHR LN WS BRYAN AVEC A J U N R I D G E R D CLL TA N G L E W O O D D R WOODCREST DR BALL CIRLOS ROBLES DRBI Z Z E L L S T PIERRE P L BLUE RIDGE DRBEN N E T T S T SPRING LOOP AR B O R D R TI M B E R S T HOLLEMAN DR W ELM A V E TURK RANCH RDCE N T R A L P A R K L N RODEMEL RANCH RD GU S R O Y R D COUNTY RD 174BRIA R O A K S D R WINDING CRKBARRON CUT OFF RDRICHARDS STLAVAD A L N NUECES DRA S P E N S T CARLL LNSO U T H F O R K R D MORTIER DRS HUTCHINS STOWL TREE LN G L E N H A V E N D R WHITE ROCK RD G O L D N U G G E T TENFIELD STAL I C E S T W BR IARGATE DR WINDSOR DR PENDLETON DRRO B I N D RS GORDON STLA C Y W E L L R D A S H L E Y L N HOLLY DR OL I V E S T TROPHY DRVAL L E Y C I R ROANS CHAPEL RDCOLGATE DRJOE ROUTT BLVD NI M I T Z S T HARTFORD DRHI L L RD LA U R A L N RE N E E L NWOODLAND DR HO L I C K L N MESA V E R D E D RDAIRY CENTER RDC O N N I E L N MISTY LN SANDSTONE DR TATUM S T CAROL STAV O N S TCOMMERCE ST BU R T S T RUN A W A Y R D POLO RDADA OAKSORR STWILLIAMSON DRH O U S T O N S T WI L L I A M S C R E E K D R DEERFIE L D D R NASH ST LAKE STJAGUAR DRDE X T E R D R BURGESS RDNEW MAIN DR H O L I K S T REDMAN L NGABBARD RDTR A N T S T PRIVATE ROAD 4007LEONARD RDO A K L E A F CROSS PARK DRFLYWAY RD W DUNCAN STONYX DRB U R G E S S L N RITCHEY RDHUNTE R S R U N RI C H A R D S T E 28TH ST EDGEWOOD DRPOTTER LNCHACO CANYON DRATKINS S T PINTO RUN PARK W A Y T E R LISTER LNRAVENWOOD DR SI L K W O O D D R COPPERFIELD DRMARINERS CV LO R I L NMO R R I S L N BRENT W O O D D R EQUAIL HOLLOW DRMEAD O W L NMOCKINGBIRD RDSHELLBOURNES HLAVENUE BSTALLION R D G MILLS STMEMORIAL DRMICK T H E A L N E PEASE ST SPRI N G L N STUART STPA R K S T OA K S T FR E E D O M B L V D A U G U S T A C I R ROSE RD PINEWOOD DR NAVIDAD ST YEGUA STNORTON L N HI G H L O N E S O M E S C O N S E T D R ROSS S T TA L L T I M B E R D RLUBBOCK STHAUPT RDSCRIMSHAW LNHOLT STEDEN LN WINDING RD FO R E S T W O O D D R O A K V I E W S T HOWA R D ST V A L L E Y V I EW D R WHITNEY LNMARY LAKE DR CODY DR WI L D F L O W E R D R C E D A R B E N D R D CLOISTERS DRJONES STHARDWOOD LNKI N G S G A T E D R THOROUGHBRED RDGLAMAR ST QU A L I T Y C I R PATTON A V E WILLO W O A K S T KE N N E D Y P L MISSION HI L L S D R RI D G E W A Y D R BERRY CRK W BR ONZE LNGROVE STBAMBOO STAY R S H I R E S TGOESSLER RDDE E R C R E E K D R ST A T E R DSUNNYDALE HOLLOWHILL DRSL E E P Y R - R R DCORPORATE L IMIT DOVER DRW H I S P E R I N G R D G ROSE CIRWOODS LN KIRKWOOD D R MARION PUGH DR KE L L I L N IR E L A N D S T DOE CIRN TRADI TI O N S D R BE L L A I R E B L V D S H I R E D R FOUNDERS D R AFTON OAKS DRW H I T E S C R E E K L NLESLIE DRLYCEUM CTMCARTHU R A V E JOSEPH DRHORSESHOE LNLIS L N WOODSIDE LNKINNARD A V E HICKORY NUT LN KI M M Y D R APRICOT GLN B A R R O W C T SANDPIP E R C VOAKSIDE DRB A N K S A V E MARSHA L L A V E PARK HURSTLU E D E C K E L N IBIS CT LO DG E PO L E DR V O N T R A P P L N WALNUT C R E E K C T OAK CIRCA E O U S E L L N CEDAR RIDGE DROLD MAIN DRHIDDEN ACRES DRSH A D Y D R RED R I V E R D R TOLTEC TRLS T I L LW A T E R R D K O R S H E A W A Y KOCH ST SP R I N G M I S T D R OA K H I L L S C I R ENCINAS PLC L A N V L G FIN N E YHARDY STWHISPERING OAKS DRS T E X A S A V E BEEL E R L NLAMAR DRPUMA D R COUNTY RD-172CRENSHA W C I R HE A T H E R G L N APPLEBY PL CITATION CIRVICTORIA STDAKOTA RIDGE DR P R O C T L AN D R R D EDWARD STRENWICK DRIRIS LN FRIAR WHITE S T O NE D R CRYSTAL LN OAK TER SYC A M O R E T R L OPAL ST B R Y A N T S T CO N W A Y C T CREST O N L N DE A N P U T D R HOGG STS COULTER DRNATALIE STSOUTH DR E DODGE STFLYWAY R D TX-21 TX-4 7 TE X A S A V E S FM 2818 R D WTURKEY CREEK RDE VILLA MARIA RDS T E X A S A V E K E M P R D TURK RANCH RDKENT ST POTTER LNE A R L R U D D E R F W Y S BLUE RI D G E D RHOLT STLEONARD RDE 30TH ST E 27TH ST N E A R L R U D D E R F W Y LUTHE R S T W RAYMOND STOTZER PKWY 8"6"4"8"8"6 " 8"6"6"6" 8" 6" 6" 8"8"6"6"6 " 6"8"8"6" 6" 8" 6 " 6" 8" 6 "8"8"6" 6" 6"6"8"6"8"6" 6"8"6"8"6"6"6"8"8"8"6"6 " 6"8"8"8"6"6"6"8"8"6"8"6" 6"8"6" 8" 8" 6" 8" 8" 6 " 8" 6"6"6"6" 8"8"6" 6"6"8" 6" 6"8"6"6" 8" 8"6"8" 6"6"8"8" 8" 6"8"8"8" 6"8"6" 8" 8" 8" 8"6"8"6"8" 6" 6" 6" 8"6"8" 8"8"8"8"8"8"6"6" 8"8"8"8"6"6"6"8"8"6"8"6"6" 8" 6"6"6"8" 8" 8" 6 " 8" 8" 8"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"8"8"6" 8"8"8"8"6"6"6"6"6" 8"8"6" 6" 6" 6 "6"8" 8"8"8"6"8"8"6"8"6"6" 8"8"6" 8"6"8"6"6"8" 6" 6" 6" 6"6"6"8"6"8"8"8" 8"6"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"6" 6"6" 8"8"6"6" 8"6"8" 8" 6"6"8"8"6"8"8"8" 6" 6" 8"8"8" 6" 6 "6"6"8 "8" 6"6"8"6"8 "8"6"8" 8" 8"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"6" 8"6"6"6"8" 6" 6"6"6"6"8"6"8" 6"6"6"6"8"8"8" 8" 6" 6"6"8"6"6" 8" 6" 8" 8" 6" 8 "8"6"8"6"8"6"6"6"8"8" 6"8"6"6" 6"6"8"8"6"6" 8" 6"8" 6" 8"6"6"6" 8" 6" 6"8"6" 6" 8" 6"6"6" 8" 8" 6" 8" 8" 8" 6" 8" 6"6"6" 6"8"6"8" 6" 8" 6"8"6"6"8"8"8"6"8"8 " 6" 6" 8" 6" 6" 8" 6" 8" 6"8"6" 6"8"6"8"6"6" 6" 6" 8" 6" 8"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"8"6"8" 6" 6"6"8" 6"8"6"8" 6" 6" 6"8"8 " 8" 6" 8" 8"4"8"6" 6" 6" 6" 6" 6" 8"6"6" 8" 8" 6"6"6"8"6" 8" 8"8"6"6"6"8" 8"8"6" 8" 6" 8" 8" 6"6"8" 6"6"6"6"8"6"6"6" 8"6"6" 6"6"6" 6" 8" 8" 8" 8" 6"8"8"6"8"6"8" 8" 8" 8"8"8"6"8"6"6"6" 8" 8" 8"6"6 " 8" 6"8"6 " 8" 6" 6" 8 "6"6"6"6"6"8"8"8" 8"6" 8"6"8"8" 6"8"6"8"8" 6" 8"6"8"8"6"8" 6" 6" 8" 8"6"6"8"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"8"8"8"8"6" 8" 6" 6" 6" 6" 6"8"8"6"8"6"8"8"6" 8" 8 "6"8" 6" 8" 6" 6"8"6" 8" 6" 8" 6" 8" 8"6"6" 6" 8" 8" 8"6"8"6" 6"6"8" 6" 8" 6" 8" 8" 6"8"8" 8" 8" 8" 8" 8"8"8" 8" 6" 6"8"8" 6"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"8"6"6"8"8"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"6" 6"8"6"6" 6" 6"8"6"6" 6" 6"6"8"6" 6"6"6" 6" 8" 6" 8" 6" 6"8"8"6" 6" 8"6"6" 8"6"6"8"8"6"8" 6"8"6"6"6 "8"8"6"8"8" 8 "6"6"8"8"6"6" 8"8"8"8"8"6"6" 8"8"8"8"8"6" 6" 8"6"4"8"8"6"6"8" 6"6"6"8"6"6" 8" 8" 6"8"8"6"6"6" 8"6"6"8"8"6"8"8" 6"6"6"8"6"6"6"6"6"6" 6" 8" 8"6"8"8"6" 6" 8"8"6"6" 8"6"6"6"6"6"6" 6" 8"8"6"8" 6" 6" 6" 6" 6" 6"6"8"6"8"8"8"8"6"6"6"6" 6"6"8"6"8" 6" 6" 6" 6" 8" 8"6"8"8"8"6"6"6"6"8"8" 6" 6" 6"6"6" 8"6"6"8 "8"8"8"6"6"8"8"6" 6" 6" 8" 8"6"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"6"6" 8" 6" 6"8"8"8"6"6"8"6"8" 8"6"8 "6"8"6"6"6"6"8"8"6"8"8"6"8"6"8" 8" 6" 8 "6"6"8"6"6"8"8"6"6" 8" 6"6"8"6"6"8"8"6"6" 8" 6"6"6"8"6"6"6" 6"8"8"6"6"6"6"8"8"6"6" 6"6"6"8"6" 6 "8"6"8"8"6" 6" 6 " 8"6" 6" 8"6"6" 8" 6"8"6"6"8"6"8"6" 8" 8"6"6"6"6" 6" 6"6"8"6"6"8"8"6 " 6"8"8 " 6" 6"6"6" 8" 6" 8" 8" 8"6"8"6" 8"6"6"8"6" 8" 6"8"8" 6" 6 " 6" 6" 6"8"8"6"6"8" 8" 6" 6"6"6" 8"6"6"6"8"6" 6"6"6"6"6"8"8"8"8"6"8"6" 6"8"8"6"8"6"8"8"6"8"8"8"6"6" 8"8"8"8"6"6"8"6 " 6"6"6"6"6" 6"8"8"8"8"6" 6"8"6"8"6"6" 6" 6" 6" 6"6"6"8"6" 6" 6"6"8"6"6"8"6"6" 8" 8" 6" 8"8"6" 8" 6" 6"6"6"6"6"8" 6" 8"6"6"6"8"8"6"8"6" 6" 6"6"6"6"6" 6" 6" 6"6"6"6" 6" 8" 8" 6" 6"6"6" 6" 8"6"8"8"6"8" 8" 6" 6"8"6"6"6"8"6"8" 8"6"8" 6" 8"8"6"6"8"8"8" 8" 6" 8 "8"8" 6" 8" 6"6"6" 6"6"6"6"8" 8"8"6" 6" 6"8"6" 6"6"6"4" 6" 6"6"6"6"8" 6"6"6" 6"8"6"8"6"8"6" 8"6"8" 6"6"6"8"6"6" 6"6"8" 6"6"6"8"6"6"8"6" 6" 6" 8" 8"6"6"6" 6"6"6"6"6"8" 8" 8" 6"8"8" 8"8"6" 6" 6" 8" 8" 8"6"6" 6" 8 " 6"6"6"6"6" 8" 6"8"6"6"6"6"8"8"6"6"8"6"6"8"6"8"6" 8" 6"6"8"8"6"6"6"8"6" 6" 6" 6"6"6" 6"8"8"6"8" 6"8"8"6"6" 8"6"8"6"8"6"8" 6"6"6"6"8" 6" 6"6"8"8"8"8"6"8" 8"8"8"8"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"6"8" 6" 8"8"6"8" 8" 6"6"8"6"8"6"6"8" 6"8"6"6"6"6"8"6"8"6"8"6"6"6"6"6" 6"6"8" 6" 6" 6 "6"8"6"6"8"6" 6"8"6" 6"8"6"8"8"8"8"6" F.M.4" F.M.8" F .M .12" F.M.4" F . M . DRAFT FIGURE 3-2CITY OF COLLEGE STATION WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE UPDATE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN !I Created By Freese and Nichols, Inc.Job No.: CCL20771Location: H:\W_WW_PLANNING\01_DELIVERABLES\00_DRAFT_REPORT\(Figure_3-2)-WW_ImpactFee_CIP.mxdUpdated: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 2:54:12 PMUser Name: 03812 0 2,750 5,500 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND Ongoing/Recently Completed Improvements Vä Lift Station TXWWTP Wastewater TreatmentPlant Gravity Main Force Main Impact Fee Eligible Improvements Gravity Main Force Main Existing Wastewater System Vä Lift Station TXWWTP Wastewater TreatmentPlant 8" and SmallerWastewater Line 10" and Larger Wastewater Line Force Main Road Railroad Stream Lake Wastewater ImpactFee Service Area Brazos County MUD 1 Texas A&M University City Limit ETJ Boundary Other City Limit County Boundary (J ][ (1 (F48" 48"36''42'' 54'' 48'' 42''42''36''42''42''54''54''30''36''30''30''15"36"24"30" 12 " 10" 21" 18 " 16" 12 " 15" 15 " 12" 10"30"12 "10"30"15"12"15"36"12"30 " 12 " 10"10"30"10" 10 " 12 " 12 " 18 " 15"10"12"30"12 " 10 " 12 " 10"12"1 0 " 10 " 10 " 12 "30"10" 18 " 12 "10"12"10"15 " 1 0 " 15" 12 " 15" 15"18"18"24" 30 " 12 " T X - 6 SMILE DRT X - 6 N TE X A S A V E S TODD TRL HILLSIDE DR MORGANS LNAUSTIN A V E HAWK T R E E D R AIRLINE DR SEBESTA RDC E N T R A L P A R K L N AN G E L I N A C I R SA N D Y C I R HI C K O R Y D R SUMMIT STEMERALD PLZ COLGA T E CI R RAY B U R N C T N FOREST PKWYFARM-TO-MARKET ROAD 2818OA K F O R R E S TAUBU RN C T CARNATION CTYALE CIRBRENT W O O D D R E W A L N U T B N DAZALEA CTDA R T M O U T H S T HARVEY MITCHELL PKWY SEAR L R UD D ER FW Y S M O S S Y O A KAMHERST CIRCY P R E S S D R EAST BYPVALLEY VIEW DRBROTHERS BLVDEMERALD PKWY L O N G M I R E D RASHFORD DRCR O S S T I M B E R S D R EAST BYPTX-6 STX-6 STX-6 NCOLGA T E CI R TX-6 STX-6 NLO N G M I R E D RAIRLINE DRTX-6 NEAST BYP HAWK T R E E D R TX-6 STX-6 N DA R T M O U T H S T TE X A S A V E S AIRLINE DRTX-6 SEARL RUDDER FWY SMO S S Y O A K TX-6 NSEBESTA RDAUSTIN AVE8"6"4"8" 8"8"8"8"8"8"6"8"6"6"6" 6"8"8"8"6"8"8"8"6"8"6" 6"6"6"8"6"6"8"6"8"8"8"6"8"6"6"8"8" 6" 8" 6" 8"8"6" 6"8"8" 6" 8"6"8"6" 6 "6"8"8"6"6"6"8" 8" 6"8"8" 8" 8"6"6" 6" 6"8"6"6"8" 6"6"8"6" 6"6"8" 8" 8"8"8" 6" 8" 8" 8"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"8" 8" 6" 8"6"8"8"6"8"6" 6" 8"8"6"8"8"6 "8"6"6"6"6"8"6"6"6"8"8"6"8" 6"6"6"8"8"6"8"6"8"8"8"6"8"8"6"6"6" 8"8"6"6"6"6"8"8"6"8" 8"8"6"8"8" 6" 6" 8"8"6"8"6"6"8"6"6" 8" 8"8"8"6"6"8" 6"8"6" 6" 6" 6" 6"6"6"6"8"6"6" 8"6"6"8"6" 8" 6"8"8" 8" 6" 6"6"6"8"8"8"8"8" 8" 6" 6"6"6"6"6" 6"8"8 " 6"8"6" 8" 8"6"8" 8" 6" 6"8"8"8"6"8"8"6"8" 6" 6" 6" 8" 6"8"6" 6"8"6"6" 6" 8" 8"6"The timing of projects shown is subject to change based on development patterns.The utility alignments shown in this figure are for illustration purposes onlyand do not set the alignments. The alignment of each utility will be determinedat the time of the engineering design. Page 175 of 231 DRAFT 2021 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 4-1 4.0 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS The water and wastewater impact fee analysis involves determining the utilization of existing and proposed projects within the capital improvement plans (Section 3.0) required to serve new development over the next 10-year period. For these projects, the impact fee is calculated as a percentage of the project cost, based upon the percentage of the project’s capacity required to serve development projected to occur between 2021 and 2031. Capacity serving existing development and development projected to occur beyond the 10-year period is not impact fee eligible. 4.1 WATER AND WASTEWATER CAPACITY ANALYSIS The impact fee eligible water and wastewater projects were evaluated to determine the proportion of the project that will be utilized within the next 10 years. The 10-year utilization will define the percentage of the project cost that is impact fee eligible. A summary of the project costs required for the 10-year growth period used in the impact fee analysis for both the water and wastewater systems are shown in Table 4-1 and Table 4-2, respectively. The 2021 percent utilization is the portion of a project’s capacity required to serve existing development and is therefore not included in the impact fee eligible cost. The 2031 percent utilization is the portion of the project’s capacity that will be utilized by 2031. The 2021 - 2031 percent utilization is the portion of the project’s capacity required to serve growth from 2021 to 2031. The portion of a project’s total cost that is used to serve growth projected to occur from 2021 through 2031 is calculated as the total project cost multiplied by the 2021 - 2031 percent utilization. Only this portion of the cost is used in the impact fee analysis. Page 176 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 4-2 Table 4-1: Cost Allocation for Water Impact Fee Calculation No. Description of Project Percent Utilization Costs Based on 2021 Dollars 2021 2031 2021-2031 Capital Cost 10-Year (2021-2031) Recently Completed A High Service Pumping Improvements 20% 60% 40% $ 3,597,227 $ 1,438,891 B BioCorridor Water Line 25% 100% 75% $ 998,884 $ 749,163 C Area 2 Water Line Extension 10% 35% 25% $ 1,000,000 $ 250,000 D Cooling Tower Expansion 25% 100% 75% $ 3,795,667 $ 2,846,750 E Well No. 10 Land Acquisition 0% 95% 95% $ 1,048,633 $ 996,201 F Well No. 9 and Collection Line 25% 100% 75% $ 7,623,202 $ 5,717,402 G Midtown Drive 12-inch Water Line 20% 70% 50% $ 920,000 $ 460,000 H The Crossing at Lick Creek Phase 1 - 3 Oversize Participation 45% 90% 45% $ 45,233 $ 20,355 I Embassy Suites Water Line Oversize Participation 10% 100% 90% $ 15,030 $ 13,527 J Brazos Valley Auto Complex Oversize Participation 40% 70% 30% $ 84,791 $ 25,437 K Castlegate II Oversize Participation 45% 100% 55% $ 50,871 $ 27,979 L Greens Prairie Oversize Participation 10% 35% 25% $ 96,498 $ 24,125 M Summit Crossing Phase 3A Oversize Participation 15% 100% 85% $ 32,550 $ 27,668 N SH 6 Water Line Phase 1 and 2 40% 70% 30% $ 1,036,568 $ 310,970 Recently Completed Project Subtotal $ 20,345,154 $ 12,908,468 Ongoing O SH 6 Water Line Phase 3 40% 70% 30% $ 3,050,000 $ 915,000 P 3.0 MG Elevated Storage Tank and Pressure Reducing Valves 40% 70% 30% $ 8,690,000 $ 2,607,000 Q SH 40 Water Line Phase 1 and 2 35% 100% 65% $ 4,200,000 $ 2,730,000 R 2021 Impact Fee Study 0% 100% 100% $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Ongoing Project Subtotal $ 16,090,000 $ 6,402,000 Proposed 1 New and Replacement 12-inch Rock Prairie Road Water Line 45% 85% 40% $ 2,289,500 $ 915,800 2 New 18-Inch Midtown Business Center Water Line 20% 90% 70% $ 2,796,400 $ 1,957,480 3 BioCorridor Water Line Improvements 10% 100% 90% $ 2,741,200 $ 2,467,080 4 Water Supply Well No. 10 0% 95% 95% $ 19,223,900 $ 18,262,705 5 Harvey Mitchel Parkway Water Line Replacement 70% 90% 20% $ 4,236,400 $ 847,280 Proposed Future Project Subtotal $ 31,287,400 $ 24,450,345 Total Impact Fee Eligible Water Capital Improvements Cost $ 67,722,554 $ 43,760,813 Page 177 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 4-3 Table 4-2: Cost Allocation for Wastewater Impact Fee Calculation No. Description of Project Percent Utilization Costs Based on 2021 Dollars 2021 2031 2021-2031 Capital Cost 10-Year (2021-2031) Recently Completed A Royder/Live Oak Sewer Service 15% 25% 10% $ 1,691,256 $ 169,126 B Bee Creek Interceptor Phase 1 and 2 75% 95% 20% $ 8,472,421 $ 1,694,484 C Lick Creek Trunk Line 40% 75% 35% $ 14,020,058 $ 4,907,020 D Medical District Trunk Line Phase 1 (Participation Agreement) 30% 65% 35% $ 1,770,375 $ 619,631 E Northeast Trunk Line Phase 1 and 2 75% 90% 15% $ 6,558,738 $ 983,811 F Southwood Valley Trunk Line Phase 1 95% 100% 5% $ 1,518,488 $ 75,924 G 18-Inch Harvey Road Gravity Line 5% 30% 25% $ 188,790 $ 47,198 H Creek Meadows Lift Station Upsizing and Force Main 0% 60% 60% $ 212,587 $ 127,552 I Nagle Street Student Housing Oversize Participation 75% 100% 25% $ 26,854 $ 6,714 Recently Completed Project Subtotal $ 34,459,567 $ 8,631,460 Ongoing J Bee Creek Interceptor Phase 3 75% 95% 20% $ 3,900,000 $ 780,000 K Medical District Trunk Line Phase 2 and 3 85% 95% 10% $ 3,250,000 $ 325,000 L Northeast Trunk Line Phase 3 and 4 75% 95% 20% $ 13,861,000 $ 2,772,200 M Carters Creek Diversion Lift Station Phase 1 0% 75% 75% $ 13,900,000 $ 10,425,000 N Lick Creek WWTP Phase 1 Expansion 10% 100% 90% $ 39,014,049 $ 35,112,644 O 2021 Impact Fee Update 0% 100% 100% $ 174,150 $ 174,150 Ongoing Project Subtotal $ 74,099,199 $ 49,588,994 Proposed 1 15/18/24/30/36-inch Southwood Valley Interceptor Phase 1 and 2 95% 100% 5% $ 7,314,800 $ 365,740 2 18/21/24-Inch Bee Creek Trunk Line Phase 4 80% 95% 15% $ 5,357,800 $ 803,670 3 18/21-Inch Alum Creek Sewer Trunk Line 45% 60% 15% $ 11,136,600 $ 1,670,490 4 8-Inch Creek Meadows Force Main Re-Routed to Alum Creek Trunk Line 80% 100% 20% $ 2,517,900 $ 503,580 5 Lick Creek WWTP Phase 2 Expansion (to 8.0 MGD) 0% 5% 5% $ 49,946,000 $ 2,497,300 6 21/24-Inch Harvey Road Replacement Gravity Line 20% 45% 25% $ 4,916,300 $ 1,229,075 Proposed Future Project Subtotal $ 81,189,400 $ 7,069,855 Total Impact Fee Eligible Wastewater Capital Improvements Cost $ 189,748,166 $ 65,290,309 Page 178 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 4-4 4.2 MAXIMUM IMPACT FEE CALCULATION Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code states that the maximum impact fee may not exceed the amount determined by subtracting a credit from the cost of the capital improvements required and dividing that amount by the total number of service units attributed to new development during the impact fee eligibility period. Chapter 395 defines two different methods for determining the credit: 1. A credit for ad valorem tax and utility service revenues generated by new service units that is used for the payment of improvements included in the CIP, or 2. A credit equal to 50% of the total projected cost of implementing the CIP The City of College Station elected to calculate the credit for ad valorem tax and utility service revenues generated by new service units and performed a service revenue rate credit analysis, described in Section 4.2.1. The maximum allowable water and wastewater impact fees are calculated in Section 4.2.2 and Section 4.2.3. 4.2.1 Rate Credit Analysis The purpose of the rate credit is to ensure that new growth is not charged both through the impact fee and then again through future rate increases to pay for the impact fee capital improvement projects. Each utility should calculate the credit in a way that is consistent with the operation of their fund, the way they finance their capital improvements, and the way these capital improvements costs are represented in their utility rates. FNI utilized the projected LUEs, discussed in Section 2.0, to determine the pro rata share of the existing debt (interest and principal) attributable to each LUE on the system for each year of the impact fee period. Eligible debt on existing projects was calculated based on total existing debt provided by the City, the financing method of the impact fee eligible projects already constructed (or partially constructed), and the percent utilization of each project as calculated in the impact fee analysis. Ad valorem taxes weren’t considered since there are no water and wastewater projects funded through ad valorem taxes. The resulting cost per LUE was multiplied by the cumulative growth in LUEs for each year of the impact fee period, resulting in the portion of the existing debt (interest and principal) that future customers will pay for in water/wastewater rates. This represents the credit to the impact fees required to avoid ‘double counting’ and this credit was subtracted from the total impact fee eligible. The calculation of the rate credit is shown in Appendix D. Page 179 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 4-5 4.2.2 Maximum Allowable Water Impact Fee The total maximum allowable water impact fee calculation per LUE is summarized in Table 4-3. The total eligible impact fee costs include the projected capital improvement costs to serve 10-year development and the projected finance cost for the capital improvements. Table 4-3: Water Impact Fee Calculation Water Impact Fee Total Eligible Capital Improvement Costs $43,760,813 Total Eligible Financing Costs $12,663,228 Rate Credit ($1,966,603) Total Impact Fee Eligible Cost(1) $54,457,437 10-Year Growth in Water LUEs 14,044 Maximum Allowable Water Impact Fee per LUE(2) $3,877 (1) Total eligible capital and financing costs minus the rate credit (2) Total eligible costs divided by the growth in LUEs 4.2.3 Maximum Allowable Wastewater Impact Fee The total maximum allowable wastewater impact fee calculation per LUE is summarized in Table 4-4. The total eligible impact fee costs include the projected capital improvement costs to serve 10-year development and the projected finance cost for the capital improvements. Table 4-4: Wastewater Impact Fee Calculation Wastewater Impact Fee Total Eligible Capital Improvement Costs $65,290,309 Total Eligible Financing Costs $9,135,832 Rate Credit ($2,507,952) Total Eligible Impact Fee Cost(1) $71,918,188 10-Year Growth in Wastewater LUEs 12,905 Maximum Allowable Wastewater Impact Fee per LUE(2) $5,572 (1) Total eligible capital and financing costs minus the rate credit (2) Total eligible costs divided by the growth in LUEs Page 180 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 4-6 4.2.4 Schedule of Maximum Allowable Water and Wastewater Impact Fees Table 4-5 shows the schedule of maximum allowable water and wastewater impact fees by water meter size, based on the living unit equivalents discussed in Section 2.2. Table 4-5: Schedule of Maximum Allowable Water and Wastewater Impact Fees Meter Size Living Unit Equivalent(1) Maximum Allowable Impact Fees Water Wastewater Total 5/8" x 3/4" 1.0 $ 3,877 $ 5,572 $ 9,449 1” 3.3 $ 12,923 $ 18,573 $ 31,496 1-1/2” 10.7 $ 41,354 $ 59,434 $ 100,788 2” 10.7 $ 41,354 $ 59,434 $ 100,788 3” 26.7 $ 103,386 $ 148,586 $ 251,972 4” 53.3 $ 206,773 $ 297,173 $ 503,946 6” 106.7 $ 413,546 $ 594,346 $ 1,007,892 8” 180.0 $ 697,860 $ 1,002,960 $ 1,700,820 10” 266.7 $ 1,033,866 $ 1,485,866 $ 2,519,732 (1) Living unit equivalents shown as rounded to single decimal point. Page 181 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 4-7 4.3 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE COMPARISON A comparison graph showing adopted water and wastewater impact fees in benchmark cities is presented on Figure 4-1. The graph also shows where College Station compares using its maximum allowable impact fee as well as the City’s existing impact fee. Figure 4-1: Benchmark of Adopted Water and Wastewater Impact Fees Page 182 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station 5-1 5.0 IMPACT FEE ADOPTION 5.1 PUBLIC HEARING The amended Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code requires one public hearing to be held to update an existing impact fee. The presentations shall include a discussion of the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan and the proposed ordinance, order or resolution imposing an impact fee. The required public hearing is tentatively scheduled to be held on November 22, 2021 at the City of College Station City Hall. Public hearing dates will be set by Council and advertised more than 30 days prior to the public hearing. The presentations by Freese and Nichols, Inc. at the public hearings will be included in Appendix E. 5.2 ORDINANCE Once the public hearing is held, the political subdivision shall approve or disapprove the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan and the proposed ordinance, order or resolution imposing an impact fee within 30 days of the public hearing. Page 183 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station APPENDIX A Chapter 395, Texas Local Government Code Page 184 of 231 1 CHAPTER 395. FINANCING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY NEW DEVELOPMENT IN MUNICIPALITIES, COUNTIES, AND CERTAIN OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS § 395.001. Definitions In this chapter: (1) "Capital improvement" means any of the following facilities that have a life expectancy of three or more years and are owned and operated by or on behalf of a political subdivision: (A) water supply, treatment, and distribution facilities; wastewater collection and treatment facilities; and storm water, drainage, and flood control facilities; whether or not they are located within the service area; and (B) roadway facilities. (2) "Capital improvements plan" means a plan required by this chapter that identifies capital improvements or facility expansions for which impact fees may be assessed. (3) "Facility expansion" means the expansion of the capacity of an existing facility that serves the same function as an otherwise necessary new capital improvement, in order that the existing facility may serve new development. The term does not include the repair, maintenance, modernization, or expansion of an existing facility to better serve existing development. (4) "Impact fee" means a charge or assessment imposed by a political subdivision against new development in order to generate revenue for funding or recouping the costs of capital improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to the new development. The term includes amortized charges, lump-sum charges, capital recovery fees, contributions in aid of construction, and any other fee that functions as described by this definition. The term does not include: (A) dedication of land for public parks or payment in lieu of the dedication to serve park needs; (B) dedication of rights-of-way or easements or construction or dedication of on-site or off-site water distribution, wastewater collection or drainage facilities, or streets, sidewalks, or curbs if the dedication or construction is required by a valid ordinance and is necessitated by and attributable to the new development; (C) lot or acreage fees to be placed in trust funds for the purpose of reimbursing developers for oversizing or constructing water or sewer mains or lines; or (D) other pro rata fees for reimbursement of water or sewer mains or lines extended by the political subdivision. Page 185 of 231 2 However, an item included in the capital improvements plan may not be required to be constructed except in accordance with Section 395.019(2), and an owner may not be required to construct or dedicate facilities and to pay impact fees for those facilities. (5) "Land use assumptions" includes a description of the service area and projections of changes in land uses, densities, intensities, and population in the service area over at least a 10-year period. (6) "New development" means the subdivision of land; the construction, reconstruction, redevelopment, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of any structure; or any use or extension of the use of land; any of which increases the number of service units. (7) "Political subdivision" means a municipality, a district or authority created under Article III, Section 52, or Article XVI, Section 59, of the Texas Constitution, or, for the purposes set forth by Section 395.079, certain counties described by that section. (8) "Roadway facilities" means arterial or collector streets or roads that have been designated on an officially adopted roadway plan of the political subdivision, together with all necessary appurtenances. The term includes the political subdivision's share of costs for roadways and associated improvements designated on the federal or Texas highway system, including local matching funds and costs related to utility line relocation and the establishment of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, drainage appurtenances, and rights-of-way. (9) "Service area" means the area within the corporate boundaries or extraterritorial jurisdiction, as determined under Chapter 42, of the political subdivision to be served by the capital improvements or facilities expansions specified in the capital improvements plan, except roadway facilities and storm water, drainage, and flood control facilities. The service area, for the purposes of this chapter, may include all or part of the land within the political subdivision or its extraterritorial jurisdiction, except for roadway facilities and storm water, drainage, and flood control facilities. For roadway facilities, the service area is limited to an area within the corporate boundaries of the political subdivision and shall not exceed six miles. For storm water, drainage, and flood control facilities, the service area may include all or part of the land within the political subdivision or its extraterritorial jurisdiction, but shall not exceed the area actually served by the storm water, drainage, and flood control facilities designated in the capital improvements plan and shall not extend across watershed boundaries. (10) "Service unit" means a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation, or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards and based on historical data and trends applicable to the political subdivision in which the individual unit of development is located during the previous 10 years. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 566, § 1(e), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. Page 186 of 231 3 SUBCHAPTER B. AUTHORIZATION OF IMPACT FEE § 395.011. Authorization of Fee (a) Unless otherwise specifically authorized by state law or this chapter, a governmental entity or political subdivision may not enact or impose an impact fee. (b) Political subdivisions may enact or impose impact fees on land within their corporate boundaries or extraterritorial jurisdictions only by complying with this chapter, except that impact fees may not be enacted or imposed in the extraterritorial jurisdiction for roadway facilities. (c) A municipality may contract to provide capital improvements, except roadway facilities, to an area outside its corporate boundaries and extraterritorial jurisdiction and may charge an impact fee under the contract, but if an impact fee is charged in that area, the municipality must comply with this chapter. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.012. Items Payable by Fee (a) An impact fee may be imposed only to pay the costs of constructing capital improvements or facility expansions, 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 improvements plan who is not an employee of the political subdivision. (b) Projected interest charges and other finance costs may be included in determining the amount of impact fees only if the impact fees are used for the payment of principal and interest on bonds, notes, or other obligations issued by or on behalf of the political subdivision to finance the capital improvements or facility expansions identified in the capital improvements plan and are not used to reimburse bond funds expended for facilities that are not identified in the capital improvements plan. (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Edwards Underground Water District or a river authority that is authorized elsewhere by state law to charge fees that function as impact fees may use impact fees to pay a staff engineer who prepares or updates a capital improvements plan under this chapter. (d) A municipality may pledge an impact fee as security for the payment of debt service on a bond, note, or other obligation issued to finance a capital improvement or public facility expansion if: (1) the improvement or expansion is identified in a capital improvements plan; and Page 187 of 231 4 (2) at the time of the pledge, the governing body of the municipality certifies in a written order, ordinance, or resolution that none of the impact fee will be used or expended for an improvement or expansion not identified in the plan. (e) A certification under Subsection (d)(2) is sufficient evidence that an impact fee pledged will not be used or expended for an improvement or expansion that is not identified in the capital improvements plan. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 90, § 1, eff. May 16, 1995. § 395.013. Items Not Payable by Fee Impact fees may not be adopted or used to pay for: (1) construction, acquisition, or expansion of public facilities or assets other than capital improvements or facility expansions identified in the capital improvements plan; (2) repair, operation, or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements or facility expansions; (3) upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental, or regulatory standards; (4) upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements to provide better service to existing development; (5) administrative and operating costs of the political subdivision, except the Edwards Underground Water District or a river authority that is authorized elsewhere by state law to charge fees that function as impact fees may use impact fees to pay its administrative and operating costs; (6) principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other indebtedness, except as allowed by Section 395.012. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.014. Capital Improvements Plan (a) The political subdivision shall use qualified professionals to prepare the capital improvements plan and to calculate the impact fee. The capital improvements plan must contain specific enumeration of the following items: (1) a description of the existing capital improvements within the service area and the costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, or replace the improvements to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental, or regulatory standards, which shall be prepared by a qualified professional engineer licensed to perform the professional engineering services in this state; Page 188 of 231 5 (2) an analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of capacity of the existing capital improvements, which shall be prepared by a qualified professional engineer licensed to perform the professional engineering services in this state; (3) a description of all or the parts of the capital improvements or facility expansions and their costs necessitated by and attributable to new development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions, which shall be prepared by a qualified professional engineer licensed to perform the professional engineering services in this state; (4) a definitive table establishing the specific level or quantity of use, consumption, generation, or discharge of a service unit for each category of capital improvements or facility expansions and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, including residential, commercial, and industrial; (5) the total number of projected service units necessitated by and attributable to new development within the service area based on the approved land use assumptions and calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning criteria; (6) the projected demand for capital improvements or facility expansions required by new service units projected over a reasonable period of time, not to exceed 10 years; and (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. (b) The analysis required by Subsection (a)(3) may be prepared on a systemwide basis within the service area for each major category of capital improvement or facility expansion for the designated service area. (c) The governing body of the political subdivision is responsible for supervising the implementation of the capital improvements plan in a timely manner. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 2, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. § 395.015. Maximum Fee Per Service Unit (a) The impact fee per service unit may not exceed the amount determined by subtracting the amount in Section 395.014(a)(7) from the costs of the capital improvements described by Section 395.014(a)(3) and dividing that amount by the total number of projected service units described by Section 395.014(a)(5). Page 189 of 231 6 (b) If the number of new service units projected over a reasonable period of time is less than the total number of new service units shown by the approved land use assumptions at full development of the service area, the maximum impact fee per service unit shall be calculated by dividing the costs of the part of the capital improvements necessitated by and attributable to projected new service units described by Section 395.014(a)(6) by the projected new service units described in that section. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 3, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. § 395.016. Time for Assessment and Collection of Fee (a) This subsection applies only to impact fees adopted and land platted before June 20, 1987. For land that has been platted in accordance with Subchapter A, Chapter 212, or the subdivision or platting procedures of a political subdivision before June 20, 1987, or land on which new development occurs or is proposed without platting, the political subdivision may assess the impact fees at any time during the development approval and building process. Except as provided by Section 395.019, the political subdivision may collect the fees at either the time of recordation of the subdivision plat or connection to the political subdivision's water or sewer system or at the time the political subdivision issues either the building permit or the certificate of occupancy. (b) This subsection applies only to impact fees adopted before June 20, 1987, and land platted after that date. For new development which is platted in accordance with Subchapter A, Chapter 212, or the subdivision or platting procedures of a political subdivision after June 20, 1987, the political subdivision may assess the impact fees before or at the time of recordation. Except as provided by Section 395.019, the political subdivision may collect the fees at either the time of recordation of the subdivision plat or connection to the political subdivision's water or sewer system or at the time the political subdivision issues either the building permit or the certificate of occupancy. (c) This subsection applies only to impact fees adopted after June 20, 1987. For new development which is platted in accordance with Subchapter A, Chapter 212, or the subdivision or platting procedures of a political subdivision before the adoption of an impact fee, an impact fee may not be collected on any service unit for which a valid building permit is issued within one year after the date of adoption of the impact fee. (d) This subsection applies only to land platted in accordance with Subchapter A, Chapter 212, or the subdivision or platting procedures of a political subdivision after adoption of an impact fee adopted after June 20, 1987. The political subdivision shall assess the impact fees before or at the time of recordation of a subdivision plat or other plat under Subchapter A, Chapter 212, or the subdivision or platting ordinance or procedures of any political subdivision in the official records of the county clerk of the county in which the tract is located. Except as provided by Section 395.019, if the political subdivision has water and wastewater capacity available: (1) the political subdivision shall collect the fees at the time the political subdivision issues a building permit; Page 190 of 231 7 (2) for land platted outside the corporate boundaries of a municipality, the municipality shall collect the fees at the time an application for an individual meter connection to the municipality's water or wastewater system is filed; or (3) a political subdivision that lacks authority to issue building permits in the area where the impact fee applies shall collect the fees at the time an application is filed for an individual meter connection to the political subdivision's water or wastewater system. (e) For land on which new development occurs or is proposed to occur without platting, the political subdivision may assess the impact fees at any time during the development and building process and may collect the fees at either the time of recordation of the subdivision plat or connection to the political subdivision's water or sewer system or at the time the political subdivision issues either the building permit or the certificate of occupancy. (f) An "assessment" means a determination of the amount of the impact fee in effect on the date or occurrence provided in this section and is the maximum amount that can be charged per service unit of such development. No specific act by the political subdivision is required. (g) Notwithstanding Subsections (a)-(e) and Section 395.017, the political subdivision may reduce or waive an impact fee for any service unit that would qualify as affordable housing under 42 U.S.C. Section 12745, as amended, once the service unit is constructed. If affordable housing as defined by 42 U.S.C. Section 12745, as amended, is not constructed, the political subdivision may reverse its decision to waive or reduce the impact fee, and the political subdivision may assess an impact fee at any time during the development approval or building process or after the building process if an impact fee was not already assessed. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 980, § 52, eff. Sept. 1, 1997. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 4, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. § 395.017. Additional Fee Prohibited; Exception After assessment of the impact fees attributable to the new development or execution of an agreement for payment of impact fees, additional impact fees or increases in fees may not be assessed against the tract for any reason unless the number of service units to be developed on the tract increases. In the event of the increase in the number of service units, the impact fees to be imposed are limited to the amount attributable to the additional service units. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.018. Agreement With Owner Regarding Payment A political subdivision is authorized to enter into an agreement with the owner of a tract of land for which the plat has been recorded providing for the time and method of payment of the impact fees. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Page 191 of 231 8 § 395.019. Collection of Fees if Services Not Available Except for roadway facilities, impact fees may be assessed but may not be collected in areas where services are not currently available unless: (1) the collection is made to pay for a capital improvement or facility expansion that has been identified in the capital improvements plan and the political subdivision commits to commence construction within two years, under duly awarded and executed contracts or commitments of staff time covering substantially all of the work required to provide service, and to have the service available within a reasonable period of time considering the type of capital improvement or facility expansion to be constructed, but in no event longer than five years; (2) the political subdivision agrees that the owner of a new development may construct or finance the capital improvements or facility expansions and agrees that the costs incurred or funds advanced will be credited against the impact fees otherwise due from the new development or agrees to reimburse the owner for such costs from impact fees paid from other new developments that will use such capital improvements or facility expansions, which fees shall be collected and reimbursed to the owner at the time the other new development records its plat; or (3) an owner voluntarily requests the political subdivision to reserve capacity to serve future development, and the political subdivision and owner enter into a valid written agreement. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.020. Entitlement to Services Any new development for which an impact fee has been paid is entitled to the permanent use and benefit of the services for which the fee was exacted and is entitled to receive immediate service from any existing facilities with actual capacity to serve the new service units, subject to compliance with other valid regulations. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.021. Authority of Political Subdivisions to Spend Funds to Reduce Fees Political subdivisions may spend funds from any lawful source to pay for all or a part of the capital improvements or facility expansions to reduce the amount of impact fees. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.022. Authority of Political Subdivision to Pay Fees Political subdivisions and other governmental entities may pay impact fees imposed under this chapter. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Page 192 of 231 9 § 395.023. Credits Against Roadway Facilities Fees Any construction of, contributions to, or dedications of off-site roadway facilities agreed to or required by a political subdivision as a condition of development approval shall be credited against roadway facilities impact fees otherwise due from the development. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.024. Accounting For Fees and Interest (a) The order, ordinance, or resolution levying an impact fee must provide that all funds collected through the adoption of an impact fee shall be deposited in interest-bearing accounts clearly identifying the category of capital improvements or facility expansions within the service area for which the fee was adopted. (b) Interest earned on impact fees is considered funds of the account on which it is earned and is subject to all restrictions placed on use of impact fees under this chapter. (c) Impact fee funds may be spent only for the purposes for which the impact fee was imposed as shown by the capital improvements plan and as authorized by this chapter. (d) The records of the accounts into which impact fees are deposited shall be open for public inspection and copying during ordinary business hours. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.025. Refunds (a) On the request of an owner of the property on which an impact fee has been paid, the political subdivision shall refund the impact fee if existing facilities are available and service is denied or the political subdivision has, after collecting the fee when service was not available, failed to commence construction within two years or service is not available within a reasonable period considering the type of capital improvement or facility expansion to be constructed, but in no event later than five years from the date of payment under Section 395.019(1). (b) Repealed by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 9, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. (c) The political subdivision shall refund any impact fee or part of it that is not spent as authorized by this chapter within 10 years after the date of payment. (d) Any refund shall bear interest calculated from the date of collection to the date of refund at the statutory rate as set forth in Section 302.002, Finance Code, or its successor statute. (e) All refunds shall be made to the record owner of the property at the time the refund is paid. However, if the impact fees were paid by another political subdivision or governmental entity, payment shall be made to the political subdivision or governmental entity. Page 193 of 231 10 (f) The owner of the property on which an impact fee has been paid or another political subdivision or governmental entity that paid the impact fee has standing to sue for a refund under this section. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1396, § 37, eff. Sept. 1, 1997. Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 62, § 7.82, eff. Sept. 1, 1999; Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 9, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. SUBCHAPTER C. PROCEDURES FOR ADOPTION OF IMPACT FEE § 395.041. Compliance With Procedures Required Except as otherwise provided by this chapter, a political subdivision must comply with this subchapter to levy an impact fee. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.0411. Capital Improvements Plan The political subdivision shall provide for a capital improvements plan to be developed by qualified professionals using generally accepted engineering and planning practices in accordance with Section 395.014. Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 5, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. § 395.042. Hearing on Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan To impose an impact fee, a political subdivision must adopt an order, ordinance, or resolution establishing a public hearing date to consider the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan for the designated service area. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 5, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. § 395.043. Information About Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan Available to Public On or before the date of the first publication of the notice of the hearing on the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan, the political subdivision shall make available to the public its land use assumptions, the time period of the projections, and a description of the capital improvement facilities that may be proposed. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 5, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. Page 194 of 231 11 § 395.044. Notice of Hearing on Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan (a) Before the 30th day before the date of the hearing on the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan, the political subdivision shall send a notice of the hearing by certified mail to any person who has given written notice by certified or registered mail to the municipal secretary or other designated official of the political subdivision requesting notice of the hearing within two years preceding the date of adoption of the order, ordinance, or resolution setting the public hearing. (b) The political subdivision shall publish notice of the hearing before the 30th day before the date set for the hearing, in one or more newspapers of general circulation in each county in which the political subdivision lies. However, a river authority that is authorized elsewhere by state law to charge fees that function as impact fees may publish the required newspaper notice only in each county in which the service area lies. (c) The notice must contain: (1) a headline to read as follows: "NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN RELATING TO POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF IMPACT FEES" (2) the time, date, and location of the hearing; (3) a statement that the purpose of the hearing is to consider the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan under which an impact fee may be imposed; and (4) a statement that any member of the public has the right to appear at the hearing and present evidence for or against the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 5, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. § 395.045. Approval of Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan Required (a) After the public hearing on the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan, the political subdivision shall determine whether to adopt or reject an ordinance, order, or resolution approving the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan. (b) The political subdivision, within 30 days after the date of the public hearing, shall approve or disapprove the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan. (c) An ordinance, order, or resolution approving the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan may not be adopted as an emergency measure. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 5, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. Page 195 of 231 12 § 395.0455. Systemwide Land Use Assumptions (a) In lieu of adopting land use assumptions for each service area, a political subdivision may, except for storm water, drainage, flood control, and roadway facilities, adopt systemwide land use assumptions, which cover all of the area subject to the jurisdiction of the political subdivision for the purpose of imposing impact fees under this chapter. (b) Prior to adopting systemwide land use assumptions, a political subdivision shall follow the public notice, hearing, and other requirements for adopting land use assumptions. (c) After adoption of systemwide land use assumptions, a political subdivision is not required to adopt additional land use assumptions for a service area for water supply, treatment, and distribution facilities or wastewater collection and treatment facilities as a prerequisite to the adoption of a capital improvements plan or impact fee, provided the capital improvements plan and impact fee are consistent with the systemwide land use assumptions. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 566, § 1(b), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.047. Hearing on Impact Fee On adoption of the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan, the governing body shall adopt an order or resolution setting a public hearing to discuss the imposition of the impact fee. The public hearing must be held by the governing body of the political subdivision to discuss the proposed ordinance, order, or resolution imposing an impact fee. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 5, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. § 395.049. Notice of Hearing on Impact Fee (a) Before the 30th day before the date of the hearing on the imposition of an impact fee, the political subdivision shall send a notice of the hearing by certified mail to any person who has given written notice by certified or registered mail to the municipal secretary or other designated official of the political subdivision requesting notice of the hearing within two years preceding the date of adoption of the order or resolution setting the public hearing. (b) The political subdivision shall publish notice of the hearing before the 30th day before the date set for the hearing, in one or more newspapers of general circulation in each county in which the political subdivision lies. However, a river authority that is authorized elsewhere by state law to charge fees that function as impact fees may publish the required newspaper notice only in each county in which the service area lies. (c) The notice must contain the following: (1) a headline to read as follows: "NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON ADOPTION OF IMPACT FEES" Page 196 of 231 13 (2) the time, date, and location of the hearing; (3) a statement that the purpose of the hearing is to consider the adoption of an impact fee; (4) the amount of the proposed impact fee per service unit; and (5) a statement that any member of the public has the right to appear at the hearing and present evidence for or against the plan and proposed fee. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 5, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. § 395.050. Advisory Committee Comments on Impact Fees The advisory committee created under Section 395.058 shall file its written comments on the proposed impact fees before the fifth business day before the date of the public hearing on the imposition of the fees. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 5, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. § 395.051. Approval of Impact Fee Required (a) The political subdivision, within 30 days after the date of the public hearing on the imposition of an impact fee, shall approve or disapprove the imposition of an impact fee. (b) An ordinance, order, or resolution approving the imposition of an impact fee may not be adopted as an emergency measure. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 5, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. § 395.052. Periodic Update of Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan Required (a) A political subdivision imposing an impact fee shall update the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan at least every five years. The initial five-year period begins on the day the capital improvements plan is adopted. (b) The political subdivision shall review and evaluate its current land use assumptions and shall cause an update of the capital improvements plan to be prepared in accordance with Subchapter B. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 6, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. Page 197 of 231 14 § 395.053. Hearing on Updated Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan The governing body of the political subdivision shall, within 60 days after the date it receives the update of the land use assumptions and the capital improvements plan, adopt an order setting a public hearing to discuss and review the update and shall determine whether to amend the plan. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.054. Hearing on Amendments to Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, or Impact Fee A public hearing must be held by the governing body of the political subdivision to discuss the proposed ordinance, order, or resolution amending land use assumptions, the capital improvements plan, or the impact fee. On or before the date of the first publication of the notice of the hearing on the amendments, the land use assumptions and the capital improvements plan, including the amount of any proposed amended impact fee per service unit, shall be made available to the public. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.055. Notice of Hearing on Amendments to Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, or Impact Fee (a) The notice and hearing procedures prescribed by Sections 395.044(a) and (b) apply to a hearing on the amendment of land use assumptions, a capital improvements plan, or an impact fee. (b) The notice of a hearing under this section must contain the following: (1) a headline to read as follows: "NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENT OF IMPACT FEES" (2) the time, date, and location of the hearing; (3) a statement that the purpose of the hearing is to consider the amendment of land use assumptions and a capital improvements plan and the imposition of an impact fee; and (4) a statement that any member of the public has the right to appear at the hearing and present evidence for or against the update. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 7, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. Page 198 of 231 15 § 395.056. Advisory Committee Comments on Amendments The advisory committee created under Section 395.058 shall file its written comments on the proposed amendments to the land use assumptions, capital improvements plan, and impact fee before the fifth business day before the date of the public hearing on the amendments. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.057. Approval of Amendments Required (a) The political subdivision, within 30 days after the date of the public hearing on the amendments, shall approve or disapprove the amendments of the land use assumptions and the capital improvements plan and modification of an impact fee. (b) An ordinance, order, or resolution approving the amendments to the land use assumptions, the capital improvements plan, and imposition of an impact fee may not be adopted as an emergency measure. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.0575. Determination That No Update of Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan or Impact Fees is Needed (a) If, at the time an update under Section 395.052 is required, the governing body determines that no change to the land use assumptions, capital improvements plan, or impact fee is needed, it may, as an alternative to the updating requirements of Sections 395.052-395.057, do the following: (1) The governing body of the political subdivision shall, upon determining that an update is unnecessary and 60 days before publishing the final notice under this section, send notice of its determination not to update the land use assumptions, capital improvements plan, and impact fee by certified mail to any person who has, within two years preceding the date that the final notice of this matter is to be published, give written notice by certified or registered mail to the municipal secretary or other designated official of the political subdivision requesting notice of hearings related to impact fees. The notice must contain the information in Subsections (b)(2)-(5). (2) The political subdivision shall publish notice of its determination once a week for three consecutive weeks in one or more newspapers with general circulation in each county in which the political subdivision lies. However, a river authority that is authorized elsewhere by state law to charge fees that function as impact fees may publish the required newspaper notice only in each county in which the service area lies. The notice of public hearing may not be in the part of the paper in which legal notices and classified ads appear and may not be smaller than one-quarter page of a standard-size or tabloid-size newspaper, and the headline on the notice must be in 18-point or larger type. Page 199 of 231 16 (b) The notice must contain the following: (1) a headline to read as follows: "NOTICE OF DETERMINATION NOT TO UPDATE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN, OR IMPACT FEES"; (2) a statement that the governing body of the political subdivision has determined that no change to the land use assumptions, capital improvements plan, or impact fee is necessary; (3) an easily understandable description and a map of the service area in which the updating has been determined to be unnecessary; (4) a statement that if, within a specified date, which date shall be at least 60 days after publication of the first notice, a person makes a written request to the designated official of the political subdivision requesting that the land use assumptions, capital improvements plan, or impact fee be updated, the governing body must comply with the request by following the requirements of Sections 395.052-395.057; and (5) a statement identifying the name and mailing address of the official of the political subdivision to whom a request for an update should be sent. (c) The advisory committee shall file its written comments on the need for updating the land use assumptions, capital improvements plans, and impact fee before the fifth business day before the earliest notice of the government's decision that no update is necessary is mailed or published. (d) If, by the date specified in Subsection (b)(4), a person requests in writing that the land use assumptions, capital improvements plan, or impact fee be updated, the governing body shall cause an update of the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan to be prepared in accordance with Sections 395.052-395.057. (e) An ordinance, order, or resolution determining the need for updating land use assumptions, a capital improvements plan, or an impact fee may not be adopted as an emergency measure. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 566, § 1(d), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.058. Advisory Committee (a) On or before the date on which the order, ordinance, or resolution is adopted under Section 395.042, the political subdivision shall appoint a capital improvements advisory committee. (b) The advisory committee is composed of not less than five members who shall be appointed by a majority vote of the governing body of the political subdivision. Not less than 40 percent of the membership of the advisory committee must be representatives of the real estate, development, or building industries who are not employees or officials of a political subdivision or governmental entity. Page 200 of 231 17 If the political subdivision has a planning and zoning commission, the commission may act as the advisory committee if the commission includes at least one representative of the real estate, development, or building industry who is not an employee or official of a political subdivision or governmental entity. If no such representative is a member of the planning and zoning commission, the commission may still act as the advisory committee if at least one such representative is appointed by the political subdivision as an ad hoc voting member of the planning and zoning commission when it acts as the advisory committee. If the impact fee is to be applied in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the political subdivision, the membership must include a representative from that area. (c) The advisory committee serves in an advisory capacity and is established to: (1) advise and assist the political subdivision in adopting land use assumptions; (2) review the capital improvements plan and file written comments; (3) monitor and evaluate implementation of the capital improvements plan; (4) file semiannual reports with respect to the progress of the capital improvements plan and report to the political subdivision any perceived inequities in implementing the plan or imposing the impact fee; and (5) advise the political subdivision of the need to update or revise the land use assumptions, capital improvements plan, and impact fee. (d) The political subdivision shall make available to the advisory committee any professional reports with respect to developing and implementing the capital improvements plan. (e) The governing body of the political subdivision shall adopt procedural rules for the advisory committee to follow in carrying out its duties. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. SUBCHAPTER D. OTHER PROVISIONS § 395.071. Duties to be Performed Within Time Limits If the governing body of the political subdivision does not perform a duty imposed under this chapter within the prescribed period, a person who has paid an impact fee or an owner of land on which an impact fee has been paid has the right to present a written request to the governing body of the political subdivision stating the nature of the unperformed duty and requesting that it be performed within 60 days after the date of the request. If the governing body of the political subdivision finds that the duty is required under this chapter and is late in being performed, it shall cause the duty to commence within 60 days after the date of the request and continue until completion. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Page 201 of 231 18 § 395.072. Records of Hearings A record must be made of any public hearing provided for by this chapter. The record shall be maintained and be made available for public inspection by the political subdivision for at least 10 years after the date of the hearing. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.073. Cumulative Effect of State and Local Restrictions Any state or local restrictions that apply to the imposition of an impact fee in a political subdivision where an impact fee is proposed are cumulative with the restrictions in this chapter. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.074. Prior Impact Fees Replaced by Fees Under This Chapter An impact fee that is in place on June 20, 1987, must be replaced by an impact fee made under this chapter on or before June 20, 1990. However, any political subdivision having an impact fee that has not been replaced under this chapter on or before June 20, 1988, is liable to any party who, after June 20, 1988, pays an impact fee that exceeds the maximum permitted under Subchapter B by more than 10 percent for an amount equal to two times the difference between the maximum impact fee allowed and the actual impact fee imposed, plus reasonable attorney's fees and court costs. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.075. No Effect on Taxes or Other Charges This chapter does not prohibit, affect, or regulate any tax, fee, charge, or assessment specifically authorized by state law. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.076. Moratorium on Development Prohibited A moratorium may not be placed on new development for the purpose of awaiting the completion of all or any part of the process necessary to develop, adopt, or update land use assumptions, a capital improvements plan, or an impact fee. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 441, § 2, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. § 395.077. Appeals (a) A person who has exhausted all administrative remedies within the political subdivision and who is aggrieved by a final decision is entitled to trial de novo under this chapter. Page 202 of 231 19 (b) A suit to contest an impact fee must be filed within 90 days after the date of adoption of the ordinance, order, or resolution establishing the impact fee. (c) Except for roadway facilities, a person who has paid an impact fee or an owner of property on which an impact fee has been paid is entitled to specific performance of the services by the political subdivision for which the fee was paid. (d) This section does not require construction of a specific facility to provide the services. (e) Any suit must be filed in the county in which the major part of the land area of the political subdivision is located. A successful litigant shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees and court costs. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.078. Substantial Compliance With Notice Requirements An impact fee may not be held invalid because the public notice requirements were not complied with if compliance was substantial and in good faith. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. § 395.079. Impact Fee for Storm Water, Drainage, and Flood Control in Populous County (a) Any county that has a population of 3.3 million or more or that borders a county with a population of 3.3 million or more, and any district or authority created under Article XVI, Section 59, of the Texas Constitution within any such county that is authorized to provide storm water, drainage, and flood control facilities, is authorized to impose impact fees to provide storm water, drainage, and flood control improvements necessary to accommodate new development. (b) The imposition of impact fees authorized by Subsection (a) is exempt from the requirements of Sections 395.025, 395.052-395.057, and 395.074 unless the political subdivision proposes to increase the impact fee. (c) Any political subdivision described by Subsection (a) is authorized to pledge or otherwise contractually obligate all or part of the impact fees to the payment of principal and interest on bonds, notes, or other obligations issued or incurred by or on behalf of the political subdivision and to the payment of any other contractual obligations. (d) An impact fee adopted by a political subdivision under Subsection (a) may not be reduced if: (1) the political subdivision has pledged or otherwise contractually obligated all or part of the impact fees to the payment of principal and interest on bonds, notes, or other obligations issued by or on behalf of the political subdivision; and (2) the political subdivision agrees in the pledge or contract not to reduce the impact fees during the term of the bonds, notes, or other contractual obligations. Page 203 of 231 20 Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 669, § 107, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. § 395.080. Chapter Not Applicable to Certain Water-Related Special Districts (a) This chapter does not apply to impact fees, charges, fees, assessments, or contributions: (1) paid by or charged to a district created under Article XVI, Section 59, of the Texas Constitution to another district created under that constitutional provision if both districts are required by law to obtain approval of their bonds by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission; or (2) charged by an entity if the impact fees, charges, fees, assessments, or contributions are approved by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission. (b) Any district created under Article XVI, Section 59, or Article III, Section 52, of the Texas Constitution may petition the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission for approval of any proposed impact fees, charges, fees, assessments, or contributions. The commission shall adopt rules for reviewing the petition and may charge the petitioner fees adequate to cover the cost of processing and considering the petition. The rules shall require notice substantially the same as that required by this chapter for the adoption of impact fees and shall afford opportunity for all affected parties to participate. Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, § 82(a), eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 76, § 11.257, eff. Sept. 1, 1995. § 395.081. Fees for Adjoining Landowners in Certain Municipalities (a) This section applies only to a municipality with a population of 105,000 or less that constitutes more than three-fourths of the population of the county in which the majority of the area of the municipality is located. (b) A municipality that has not adopted an impact fee under this chapter that is constructing a capital improvement, including sewer or waterline or drainage or roadway facilities, from the municipality to a development located within or outside the municipality's boundaries, in its discretion, may allow a landowner whose land adjoins the capital improvement or is within a specified distance from the capital improvement, as determined by the governing body of the municipality, to connect to the capital improvement if: (1) the governing body of the municipality has adopted a finding under Subsection (c); and (2) the landowner agrees to pay a proportional share of the cost of the capital improvement as determined by the governing body of the municipality and agreed to by the landowner. (c) Before a municipality may allow a landowner to connect to a capital improvement under Subsection (b), the municipality shall adopt a finding that the municipality will benefit from allowing the landowner to connect to the capital improvement. The finding shall describe the benefit to be received by the municipality. Page 204 of 231 21 (d) A determination of the governing body of a municipality, or its officers or employees, under this section is a discretionary function of the municipality and the municipality and its officers or employees are not liable for a determination made under this section. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1150, § 1, eff. June 19, 1997. § 395.082. Certification of Compliance Required (a) A political subdivision that imposes an impact fee shall submit a written certification verifying compliance with this chapter to the attorney general each year not later than the last day of the political subdivision's fiscal year. (b) The certification must be signed by the presiding officer of the governing body of a political subdivision and include a statement that reads substantially similar to the following: "This statement certifies compliance with Chapter 395, Local Government Code." (c) A political subdivision that fails to submit a certification as required by this section is liable to the state for a civil penalty in an amount equal to 10 percent of the amount of the impact fees erroneously charged. The attorney general shall collect the civil penalty and deposit the amount collected to the credit of the housing trust fund. Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 345, § 8, eff. Sept. 1, 2001. Page 205 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station APPENDIX B Water System CIP Planning Level Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (OPCC) Estimates Page 206 of 231 Draft Water CIP - Opinion of Probable Construction Cost*October 15, 2021 CIP Project Number:1 1 ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 8,900 LF 150$ 1,335,000$ 2 300 LF 90$ 27,000$ 3 200 LF 528$ 105,600$ 1,467,600$ 30%440,300$ 1,907,900$ 20%381,600$ 2,289,500$ 2,289,500$ Project Name:New and Replacement 12-Inch Rock Prairie Road Water Lines City of College Station Project Description: This project includes the construction of a replacement 12-inch water line along Rock Prairie Road and a new 12-inch water line between Spanish Moss Drive and Pebble Creek Parkway. Project Drivers: This project is sized to serve projected buildout demands. The project will help reduce excessive headloss and will provide increased capacity for projected future developments. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost *Planning Level Cost in 2021 Dollars DESCRIPTION 12" WL & Appurtenances Pavement Repair 24" Boring and Casing SUBTOTAL: CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL: ENG/SURVEY SUBTOTAL: Estimated Project Total: Page 207 of 231 Draft Water CIP - Opinion of Probable Construction Cost*October 15, 2021 City of College Station *Planning Level Cost in 2021 Dollars CIP Project Number:2 2 ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 6,500 LF 225$ 1,462,500$ 2 500 LF 660$ 330,000$ 1,792,500$ 30%537,800$ 2,330,300$ 20%466,100$ 2,796,400$ 2,796,400$ Project Name:New 18-Inch Midtown Business Center Water Line Project Description: This project includes the construction of a new 18-inch water line in Midtown Business Center. Project Drivers: This project will extend water service to projected future developments within the Midtown Business Center area. This project will also connect the existing water line along William D. Fitch Parkway to the recently constructed line along Creagor Lane, increasing connectivity and completing the loop. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost DESCRIPTION 18" WL & Appurtenances 30" Boring and Casing SUBTOTAL: CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL: ENG/SURVEY SUBTOTAL: Estimated Project Total: Page 208 of 231 Draft Water CIP - Opinion of Probable Construction Cost*October 15, 2021 City of College Station *Planning Level Cost in 2021 Dollars CIP Project Number:3 3 ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 4,400 LF 150$ 660,000$ 2 3,500 LF 225$ 787,500$ 3 200 LF 528$ 105,600$ 4 200 LF 660$ 132,000$ 5 800 LF 90$ 72,000$ 1,757,100$ 30%527,200$ 2,284,300$ 20%456,900$ 2,741,200$ 2,741,200$ Project Name:BioCorridor Water Line Improvements Project Description: This project includes the construction of new 12/18-inch water lines in the BioCorridor area from Harvey Mitchell Parkway to SH 47. Project Drivers: This project will extend water service to projected future developments within the BioCorridor area and will provide looping for the existing lines to help improve available fire flows. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Pavement Repair DESCRIPTION 12" WL & Appurtenances 18" WL & Appurtenances 24" Boring and Casing 30" Boring and Casing SUBTOTAL: CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL: ENG/SURVEY SUBTOTAL: Estimated Project Total: Page 209 of 231 Draft Water CIP - Opinion of Probable Construction Cost*October 15, 2021 City of College Station *Planning Level Cost in 2021 Dollars CIP Project Number:4 4 ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 1 LS 7,838,000$ 7,838,000$ 2 11,000 LF 375$ 4,125,000$ 3 400 LF 900$ 360,000$ 12,323,000$ 30%3,696,900$ 16,019,900$ 20%3,204,000$ 19,223,900$ 19,223,900$ Project Name:Water Supply Well No. 10 Project Description: This project includes a new 3,300 gpm water supply well in the Simsboro aquifer with collection line. Project Drivers: This project will increase groundwater pumping capacity to serve future developments and meet the City's design criteria and TCEQ alternative capacity requirements. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost DESCRIPTION New 3,300 gpm Well 30" WL & Appurtenances 42" WL & Appurtenances SUBTOTAL: CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL: ENG/SURVEY SUBTOTAL: Estimated Project Total: Page 210 of 231 Draft Water CIP - Opinion of Probable Construction Cost*October 15, 2021 City of College Station *Planning Level Cost in 2021 Dollars CIP Project Number:5 5 ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 4,800 LF 375$ 1,800,000$ 2 850 LF 1,056$ 897,600$ 3 200 LF 90$ 18,000$ 2,715,600$ 30%814,700$ 3,530,300$ 20%706,100$ 4,236,400$ 4,236,400$ Project Name:Harvey Mitchell Parkway Water Line Replacement Project Description: This project includes the construction of a new 30-inch water line along Harvey Mitchell Parkway from Wellborn Road to Welsh Avenue to replace the existing 24-inch water line. Project Drivers: This project will increase capacity and reduce excessive headloss in existing water lines that occur with increased water demand. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost DESCRIPTION 30" WL & Appurtenances 48" Boring and Casing Pavement Repair SUBTOTAL: CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL: ENG/SURVEY SUBTOTAL: Estimated Project Total: Page 211 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station APPENDIX C Wastewater System CIP Planning Level Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (OPCC) Estimates Page 212 of 231 CIP Project Number:1 1 ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 1,300 LF 225$ 292,500$ 2 2,800 LF 270$ 756,000$ 3 700 LF 360$ 252,000$ 4 3,500 LF 450$ 1,575,000$ 5 900 LF 540$ 486,000$ 6 23 EA 22,000$ 506,000$ 7 22 EA 24,000$ 528,000$ 8 1,500 LF 90$ 135,000$ 9 200 LF 792$ 158,400$ 4,688,900$ 30%1,406,700$ 6,095,600$ 20%1,219,200$ 7,314,800$ 7,314,800$ SUBTOTAL: ENG/SURVEY SUBTOTAL: Estimated Project Total: SUBTOTAL: CONTINGENCY 36" Pipe 8- 16 feet deep 60" Diameter Manhole (8-16 feet deep) 72" Diameter Manhole (8 - 16 feet deep) Pavement Repair 36" Boring and Casing DESCRIPTION 15" Pipe 8- 16 feet deep 18" Pipe 8- 16 feet deep 24" Pipe 8- 16 feet deep 30" Pipe 8- 16 feet deep Project Description: This project includes the construction of replacement gravity lines from Arroyo Court North to the Phase 1 Southwood Valley Trunk Line. Project Drivers: The recommended lines are sized to convey projected peak wet weather buildout flows and will also alleviate the existing capacity limitations. The 15-inch line is sized to convey 1.3 MGD, the 18-inch is sized to convey 2.5 MGD, and the 24-inch is sized to convey 3.3 MGD of projected peak wet weather flow. The 30-inch is sized to convey 7.7 MGD and the 36-inch is sized to convey 8.2 MGD of projected buildout peak wet weather flow. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost *Planning Level Cost in 2021 Dollars Project Name:Replacement 15/18/24/30/36-inch Southwood Valley Interceptor Phase 1 and 2 Draft Wastewater CIP - Opinion of Probable Construction Cost*October 15, 2021 City of College Station Page 213 of 231 *Planning Level Cost in 2021 Dollars Draft Wastewater CIP - Opinion of Probable Construction Cost*October 15, 2021 City of College Station CIP Project Number:2 2 ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 3,600 LF 270$ 972,000$ 2 2,200 LF 315$ 693,000$ 3 2,200 LF 360$ 792,000$ 4 24 EA 22,000$ 528,000$ 5 2,500 LF 90$ 225,000$ 6 300 LF 748$ 224,400$ 3,434,400$ 30%1,030,400$ 4,464,800$ 20%893,000$ 5,357,800$ 5,357,800$ SUBTOTAL: ENG/SURVEY SUBTOTAL: Estimated Project Total: SUBTOTAL: CONTINGENCY Pavement Repair 34" Boring and Casing DESCRIPTION 18" Pipe 8- 16 feet deep 21" Pipe 8- 16 feet deep 24" Pipe 8- 16 feet deep 60" Diameter Manhole (8-16 feet deep) Project Description: This project includes the construction of new 18, 21, and 24-inch gravity lines along Cain Road and Navarro Drive from Holleman Drive South to Harvey Mitchell Parkway. Project Drivers: The recommended lines are sized to convey projected peak wet weather buildout flows and will also help alleviate existing capacity limitations. The 18-inch line is sized to convey 1.2 MGD, the 21-inch is sized to convey 3.2 MGD, and the 24-inch is sized to convey 3.75 MGD of projected peak wet weather flow. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Project Name:18/21/24-Inch Bee Creek Trunk Line Phase 4 Page 214 of 231 *Planning Level Cost in 2021 Dollars Draft Wastewater CIP - Opinion of Probable Construction Cost*October 15, 2021 City of College Station CIP Project Number:3 3 Project Description: ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 12,500 LF 270$ 3,375,000$ 2 45 EA 22,000$ 990,000$ 3 6,300 LF 336$ 2,116,800$ 4 6 EA 26,000$ 156,000$ 5 1,900 LF 90$ 171,000$ 7,138,800$ 30%2,141,700$ 9,280,500$ 20%1,856,100$ 11,136,600$ 11,136,600$ ENG/SURVEY SUBTOTAL: Estimated Project Total: SUBTOTAL: CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL: 18" Pipe 8- 16 feet deep 60" Diameter Manhole (8-16 feet deep) 21" Pipe > 16 feet deep 60" Diameter Manhole (16-24 feet deep) Pavement Repair This project includes the construction of an 18-inch gravity line along Alum Creek that will replace the existing 12-inch gravity line. Project Drivers: The recommended line is sized to convey projected peak wet weather buildout flows of 2.3 MGD, including redirected flows from the Creek Meadows Lift Station. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost DESCRIPTION Project Name:18/21-Inch Alum Creek Sewer Trunk Line Page 215 of 231 *Planning Level Cost in 2021 Dollars Draft Wastewater CIP - Opinion of Probable Construction Cost*October 15, 2021 City of College Station CIP Project Number:4 4 Project Description: ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 10,900 LF 120$ 1,308,000$ 2 1,200 LF 90$ 108,000$ 3 500 LF 396$ 198,000$ 1,614,000$ 30%484,200$ 2,098,200$ 20%419,700$ 2,517,900$ 2,517,900$ SUBTOTAL: Estimated Project Total: SUBTOTAL: CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL: ENG/SURVEY 18" Boring and Casing Opinion of Probable Construction Cost DESCRIPTION 8" Force Main < 8 feet deep Pavement Repair Project Name:Re-Route of 8-Inch Creek Meadows Force Main to Alum Creek Trunk Line This project includes the re-route of the Creek Meadows Lift Station force main to the proposed Alum Creek Trunk Line (Projects 7 and 8). Project Drivers: This project includes the construction of a new 8-inch force main from the Creek Meadows Lift Station to re-route the lift station flows to the proposed Alum Creek Trunk Line (Project 7 and 8). This project will decommission the existing 6-inch parallel force main associated with the Creek Meadows lift station and alleviate downstream capacity constraints. Page 216 of 231 *Planning Level Cost in 2021 Dollars Draft Wastewater CIP - Opinion of Probable Construction Cost*October 15, 2021 City of College Station CIP Project Number:5 5 Project Description: ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 1 LS 32,016,600$ 32,016,600$ 32,016,600$ 30%9,605,000$ 41,621,600$ 20%8,324,400$ 49,946,000$ 49,946,000$ Estimated Project Total: CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL: ENG/SURVEY SUBTOTAL: SUBTOTAL: Opinion of Probable Construction Cost DESCRIPTION 3.0 MGD Lick Creek WWTP Expansion Project Name:Expand Lick Creek WWTP Capacity to 8 MGD This project includes a 3.0 MGD expansion of the Lick Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant from 5.0 MGD to 8.0 MGD. Project Drivers: The recommended expansion is sized to treat projected average daily buildout flows in the treatment plant service area, including diverted flows from the Carters Creek Diversion Lift Station and flows from the Lift Station 3 service areas. Page 217 of 231 *Planning Level Cost in 2021 Dollars Draft Wastewater CIP - Opinion of Probable Construction Cost*October 15, 2021 City of College Station CIP Project Number:6 6 Project Description: ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 3,200 LF 315$ 1,008,000$ 2 4,200 LF 360$ 1,512,000$ 3 17 EA 22,000$ 374,000$ 4 1,100 LF 90$ 99,000$ 5 200 LF 792$ 158,400$ 3,151,400$ 30%945,500$ 4,096,900$ 20%819,400$ 4,916,300$ 4,916,300$ ENG/SURVEY SUBTOTAL: Estimated Project Total: SUBTOTAL: CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL: 21" Pipe 8- 16 feet deep 24" Pipe 8- 16 feet deep 60" Diameter Manhole (8-16 feet deep) Pavement Repair 36" Boring and Casing This project includes the construction of a 21/24-inch gravity line along Harvey Road to the 42-Inch Northeast Interceptor to replace the existing 15/18-inch line. Project Drivers: The 21-inch line is sized to convey projected peak wet weather buildout flows of 4.1 MGD and the 24-inch line is sized to convey 5.4 MGD. These flows include projected buildout flows from the Eastside Service Area. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost DESCRIPTION Project Name:Replacement 21/24-Inch Harvey Road Replacement Gravity Line Page 218 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station APPENDIX D Rate Credit Analysis Page 219 of 231 City of College Station Draft Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study Impact Fee Eligible Water Projects Existing Bond Series Project No.Bond Issue and Project(s) Funded Capital Cost Capital Cost Financed Projects % of Overall Bond Issue % of Project that is Impact Fee Eligible % of Bond Issue that is Impact Fee Eligible Series 2008 CO $3,616,000 75.0% F Land- Rowe & Allen $1,082,378 $1,082,378 100%75% Series 2009 CO $7,862,000 95.0% E Land- Hanson South $1,048,633 $1,048,633 100%95% Series 2012 CO $3,000,000 40.0% A High Service Pumping Improvements $3,647,228 $3,000,000 100%40% Series 2014 CO $6,324,000 43.1% C Area 2 Waterline Extension $1,224,780 $1,000,000 16%25% D Cooling Tower Expansion $3,840,099 $3,300,000 52%75% Series 2016 CO $7,900,000 33.4% F Well #9 - PARTIAL $4,866,492 $2,030,000 26%75% F Well #9 Collection Line - budget - PARTIAL $1,674,332 $1,250,000 16%75% P SH 6 Water Line Connection Phase 1 - 24" SE of Creagor Lane - PARTIAL $482,160 $300,000 4%30% P SH 6 Water Line Connection Phase 2 - PARTIAL $554,408 $300,000 4%30% Series 2017 CO $8,420,000 32.6% F Well #9 $4,866,492 $2,836,492 34%75% F Well #9 Collection Line $1,674,332 $424,332 5%75% P SH6 Water Line PH 1 (SH40 to Venture Dr)$482,160 $182,160 2%30% P SH6 Water Line PH 2 (Creagor Ln to SH40)$554,408 $254,408 3%30% Q SH6 Water Line PH 3 (Woodcreek to Sebesta)$3,050,000 $550,000 7%30% Series 2018 CO $3,570,000 28.1% R RPR Elevated Storage Tank (Third Water Tower)$7,636,470 $1,200,000 34%30% G Midtown Water Line Project $995,864 $920,000 26%70% Series 2019 CO $13,006,000 12.8% Q SH6 Water Line PH 3 (Woodcreek to Sebesta)$3,050,000 $790,000 6%30% F SH6 Water Line PH 3A $233,365 $233,365 2%30% $284,000 $4,250,000 Series 2020 CO $2,960,000 6.2% Q SH6 Water Line PH 3 (Woodcreek to Sebesta)$3,050,000 $610,000 21%30% Series 2021 CO $8,840,000 16.7% Q SH6 Water Line PH 3 (Woodcreek to Sebesta)$3,050,000 $800,000 9%30% R RPR Elevated Storage Tank (Third Water Tower)$7,636,470 $2,500,000 28%30% S SH40 Water Line (Graham to Barron)$3,095,650 $500,000 6%65% S SH40 Water Line (Sonoma to Victoria)$1,087,823 $250,000 3%65% R RPR Elevated Storage Tank (Third Water Tower)$7,636,470 35%30% Page 220 of 231 City of College Station Draft Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study Impact Fee Eligible Water Projects Existing Bond Series Project No.Bond Issue and Project(s) Funded Capital Cost Capital Cost Financed Projects % of Overall Bond Issue % of Project that is Impact Fee Eligible % of Bond Issue that is Impact Fee Eligible Series 2011 CO $3,064,000 10.0% A Royder/Live Oak Sewer Service - PARTIAL $1,575,000 $75,000 100.0%10% Series 2012 CO $5,835,000 30.0% A Royder/Live Oak Sewer Service - PARTIAL See Series 2011 CO $500,000 100.0%10% B Bee Creek Interceptor Phase 1 - PARTIAL $3,600,939 $550,000 100.0%20% Series 2013 CO $2,065,000 19.4% B Bee Creek Interceptor Phase 1 - PARTIAL See Series 2012 CO $2,000,000 96.9%20% Series 2014 CO $11,400,000 11.3% B Bee Creek Interceptor Phase 1 - PARTIAL See Series 2012 CO $1,050,939 9.2%20% B 54/60-inch Bee Creek Interceptor Phase 2 - PARTIAL $4,871,482 $4,871,482 42.7%20% A Royder/Live Oak Sewer Service - PARTIAL $1,000,000 $1,000,000 8.8%10% Series 2017 CO $5,000,000 90.0% N Lick Creek WWTP Expansion $39,014,049 $5,000,000 100.0%90% Series 2018 CO $10,000,000 17.1% C Lick Creek Trunkline $14,020,058 $2,647,000 26.5%35% E Northeast Sewer Trunkline PH 2 $2,797,362 $500,000 5.0%15% L Northeast Sewer Trunkline PH 3 $5,900,000 $500,000 5.0%20% D Medical District Trunkline PH 1 $1,770,375 $1,750,000 17.5%35% Series 2019 CO $23,906,000 45.6% N Lick Creek WWTP Expansion $39,014,049 $8,843,000 37.0%90% M Carters Creek Diversion Lift Station $15,900,000 $2,340,000 9.8%75% C Lick Creek Trunkline $14,020,058 $1,303,000 5.5%35% F Southwood Valley Trunkline $1,518,488 $1,479,000 6.2%5% J Bee Creek Parallel Trunkline PH 3 $3,900,000 $800,000 3.3%20% E Northeast Sewer Trunkline PH 2 $2,797,362 $1,370,000 5.7%15% L Northeast Sewer Trunkline PH 3 $5,900,000 $568,000 2.4%20% L Northeast Sewer Trunkline PH 4 $7,961,000 $900,000 3.8%20% Series 2020 CO $18,115,000 49.8% N Lick Creek WWTP Expansion $39,014,049 $6,200,000 34.2%90% C Lick Creek Trunkline $14,020,058 $8,850,000 48.9%35% E Northeast Sewer Trunkline PH 2 $2,797,362 $927,362 5.1%15% L Northeast Sewer Trunkline PH 3 $5,900,000 $1,035,000 5.7%20% F Southwood Valley Trunkline $1,518,488 $39,488 0.2%5% Series 2021 CO $11,650,000 59.7% M Carters Creek Diversion Lift Station $15,900,000 $500,000 4.3%75% N Lick Creek WWTP Expansion $39,014,049 $6,500,000 55.8%90% C Lick Creek Trunkline $14,020,058 $650,000 5.6%35% L Northeast Sewer Trunkline PH 3 $5,900,000 $2,000,000 17.2%20% K Medical District Trunkline PH 2 $2,000,000 $500,000 4.3%10% K Medical District Trunkline PH 3 $1,250,000 $500,000 4.3%10% Page 221 of 231 City of College Station Draft Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study Impact Fee Eligible Water Projects Existing Bond Series Year 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 Water Impact Fee Eligible Interest + Principle for 10-Year Period $2,419,109 $2,436,371 $2,448,920 $2,470,189 $2,467,465 $2,428,298 $1,706,018 $1,249,011 $862,535 $862,383 Total Impact Fee Eligible LUEs Each Year 57,184 58,589 59,993 61,398 62,802 64,206 65,611 67,015 68,420 69,824 Cost per LUE $42 $42 $41 $40 $39 $38 $26 $19 $13 $12 Cumulative LUEs in 10-Year Period 1,404 2,809 4,213 5,618 7,022 8,426 9,831 11,235 12,640 14,044 Portion Paid by Growth in 10-Year Period $59,411 $116,802 $171,983 $226,011 $275,892 $318,688 $255,621 $209,399 $159,342 $173,455 Total Credit Year 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 Wastewater Impact Fee Eligible Interest + Principle for 10-Year Period $2,461,192 $2,464,801 $2,450,934 $2,366,322 $2,365,681 $2,365,725 $2,371,099 $2,369,629 $2,372,931 $2,360,225 Total Impact Fee Eligible LUEs Each Year 59,714 61,004 62,295 63,585 64,876 66,166 67,457 68,747 70,038 71,328 Cost per LUE $41.22 $40.40 $39.34 $37.22 $36.46 $35.75 $35.15 $34.47 $33.88 $33.09 Cumulative LUEs in 10-Year Period 1,291 2,581 3,872 5,162 6,453 7,743 9,034 10,324 11,615 12,905 Portion Paid by Growth in 10-Year Period $53,190 $104,283 $152,321 $192,104 $235,290 $276,846 $317,528 $355,856 $393,509 $427,023 Total Credit $1,966,603 $2,507,952 Page 222 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station APPENDIX E IFAC and Public Hearing Presentations (To be added after public hearing) Page 223 of 231 DRAFT Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Study City of College Station APPENDIX F Adopted Ordinance (To be added after adoption of ordinance) Page 224 of 231 November 4, 2021 Regular Agenda Impact Fee Collection Rate To: Impact Fee Advisory Committee From: Carol Cotter, Planning & Development Services Jason Schubert, Planning & Development Services Stephen Maldonado, Jr., Water Services Agenda Caption: Public hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding impact fee collection rates for system-wide water, wastewater, and roadway impact fees. Relationship to Strategic Goals: Core Services and Infrastructure, and a Diverse Growing Economy Recommendation: Staff requests the Impact Fee Advisory Committee (IFAC) provide written comments (collectively or individually) regarding the impact fee collection rates. Written comments are due to staff by Thursday, November 11, 2021. Summary: System-wide impact fees were adopted in fall 2016 for water, wastewater, and roadways. As per state law, impact fee studies are to be updated at least every five years. With each study, a maximum assessable impact fee is calculated based on the land use assumptions (10-year growth projections) and capital improvement plans included in the study. As part of another agenda item, the Impact Fee Advisory Committee (IFAC) reviewed the land use assumptions (10-year growth projections), capital improvement plans, and max impact fees of the study updates. This item is to provide feedback and written comments to City Council regarding the existing impact fee collection rate and if it should be adjusted. Impact fees are a funding source to help meet infrastructure needs related to future growth. Impact fee rates are a calculation of cost per service unit. Water and wastewater service unit are defined as living unit equivalents (LUEs), representing a typical connection for one single-family residence (based on a 5/8” water meter). There is a conversion factor for larger water meters that determines the number of LUE equivalents. For roadways, the service unit is vehicle-miles which is a measurement of the number of trips a site generates and its trip length. Trip generation and trip length vary for each of the 66 different types of land uses. The maximum assessable impact fees per service unit were calculated as follows: Maximum Assessable Impact Fees Impact Fee Type 2021 Max Fee Per Service Unit 2016 Max Fee Per Service Unit Water $3,877 $2,917 Wastewater $5,572 $5,519 Roadway Service Area A $499 $1,061 Roadway Service Area B $1,261 $1,072 Roadway Service Area C $2,127 $2,556 Roadway Service Area D $3,452 $4,004 Page 225 of 231 When City Council adopted system-wide impact fees in 2016, they adopted the maximum assessable impact fee and imposed reduced collection rates that were phased in. There are four roadway Service Areas (see attached map). The Council adopted a flat collection rate for all four including a collection rate of $375 per vehicle mile for residential and $80 for non-residential. The 2016 collection rates and phase-in timelines are provided for reference as an attachment. Water and Wastewater Collection Rate Options As noted previously, water and wastewater impact fees depend upon the size of the water meter installed. Larger water meters have greater capacity so have a conversion factor to assess the number of LUEs. The tables below compare the calculated max impact fees for water and wastewater from the 2021 study with the various meter sizes in relation to the 2016 Adopted/Existing collection rate. There are 25% and 50% collection rate alternatives provide for a framework of comparing potential alternatives to the max rate and other potential collection rates. Water Impact Fee Collection Rate Comparisons Meter Size Equiv. LUE 2016 Adopted/Existing 2021 25% of Max 2021 50% of Max 2021 100% of Max 5/8" 1 $500 $969 $1,939 $3,877 1" 3.3 $850 $3,231 $6,462 $12,923 1.5" 10.7 $5,350 $10,339 $20,677 $41,354 2" 10.7 $5,350 $10,339 $20,677 $41,354 3" 26.7 $13,350 $25,847 $51,693 $103,386 4" 53.3 $26,650 $51,693 $103,387 $206,773 6" 106.7 $53,350 $103,387 $206,773 $413,546 8" 180 $90,000 $174,465 $348,930 $697,860 10" 266.7 $133,350 $258,467 $516,933 $1,033,866 *Red numbers reduced an additional 50% Wastewater Impact Fee Collection Rate Comparisons Meter Size Equiv. LUE 2016 Adopted/Existing 2021 25% of Max 2021 50% of Max 2021 100% of Max 5/8" 1 $3,000 $1,393 $2,786 $5,572 1" 3.3 $5,100 $4,643 $9,287 $18,573 1.5" 10.7 $16,050 $14,859 $29,717 $59,434 2" 10.7 $16,050 $14,859 $29,717 $59,434 3" 26.7 $40,050 $37,147 $74,293 $148,586 4" 53.3 $79,950 $74,293 $148,587 $297,173 6" 106.7 $160,050 $148,587 $297,173 $594,346 8" 180 $270,000 $250,740 $501,480 $1,002,960 10" 266.7 $400,050 $371,467 $742,933 $1,485,866 *Red numbers reduced an additional 50% Page 226 of 231 The table below provides water impact fee comparisons between the existing adopted collection rate and various percentages of the 2021 max calculated fee for common sample land uses. Sample Potential Water Impact Fees Land Use Example Typical Dom. Meter Size Typical Irr. Meter Size 2016 Adopted 25% of 2021 Max* 50% of 2021 Max* 100% of 2021 Max* Single Family Home 5/8" x 3/4" - $500 $969 $1,939 $3,877 50-unit Apartment Complex 3" 1" $14,200 $29,077 $58,155 $116,309 80,000 sq ft Home Improvement Store 2" 1.5" $10,700 $20,677 $41,354 $82,708 80,000 sq ft Shopping Center 3" 1.5" $18,700 $36,185 $72,370 $144,740 80,000 sq ft Supermarket 3" 1.5" $18,700 $36,185 $72,370 $144,740 5,000 sq ft Office Building 5/8" x 3/4" 5/8" x 3/4" $1,000 $1,939 $3,877 $7,754 3,000 sq ft Fast Food w/Drive-Thru 1" 5/8" x 3/4" $1,350 $4,200 $8,400 $16,800 *Includes both Domestic + Irrigation The table below provides wastewater impact fee comparisons between the existing adopted collection rate and various percentages of the 2021 max calculated fee for common sample land use. Sample Potential Wastewater Impact Fees Land Use Example Typical Dom. Meter Size Typical Irr. Meter Size 2016 Adopted 25% of 2021 Max* 50% of 2021 Max* 100% of 2021 Max* Single Family Home 5/8" x 3/4" - $3,000 $1,393 $2,786 $5,572 50-unit Apartment Complex 3" - $40,050 $37,147 $74,293 $148,586 80,000 sq ft Home Improvement Store 2" - $16,050 $14,859 $29,717 $59,434 80,000 sq ft Shopping Center 3" - $40,050 $37,147 $74,293 $148,586 80,000 sq ft Supermarket 3" - $40,050 $34,147 $74,293 $148,586 5,000 sq ft Office Building 5/8" x 3/4" - $3,000 $1,393 $2,786 $5,572 3,000 sq ft Fast Food w/Drive-Thru 1" - $5,100 $4,643 $9,287 $18,573 *Includes only Domestic Roadway Collection Rate Options The table below shows the current collection rates, which are a flat rate across the four service areas compared with other potential collection rate alternatives. The flat collection rate for residential land uses is $375 per vehicle mile of service unit ($1,500 for a single family home) and further reduced for non-residential land uses is $80 per vehicle mile of service unit. With the 2021 roadway impact fee study, the trip rates for the different uses were updated from the prior 9th edition of the ITE Trip General Manual to the 11th edition. If the existing collection rates are retained, the actual fees to be assessed will still vary slightly from the existing amounts due to the changes in trip rates. Other potential alternatives to the collection rate presented in the tables include to the 2021 maximum assessable rate and 25% and 50% of the maximum rate. There are numerous other scenarios if wanting to pursue other percentages, flat rate alternatives or retaining a differential between residential and non-residential collection rates. Page 227 of 231 Maintaining a flat collection fee across all Service Areas allows a proposed land use to pay the same fee regardless where it is located within the City. The flat rate is also simpler to administer. Revising the collection rate to be based on the max rate in its Service Area, or a percentage of it, provides that a development pays its equitable share toward the infrastructure needs based on the Service Area in which it is located. A percentage method allows developments to pay a lower impact fee if the Service Area in which it is located has a lower max fee resulting from a smaller amount of infrastructure needed to accommodate the forecasted growth in that area. Sample Potential Fees Service Area A Collection Rate $375/$80 $375/$80 $124 $249 $499 Land Use Example Current 11th Edition* 25% of Max 50% of Max 100% of Max Single Family Home $1,500 $1,410 $466 $936 $1,876 50-unit Apartment Complex $46,500 $38,250 $12,648 $25,398 $50,898 80,000 sq ft Home Improvement Store $15,488 $17,024 $26,387 $52,987 $106,187 80,000 sq ft Shopping Center/Plaza $31,360 $39,872 $61,802 $124,102 $248,702 80,000 sq ft Supermarket $77,696 $87,040 $134,912 $270,912 $542,912 5,000 sq ft Office Building $2,384 $2,304 $3,571 $7,171 $14,371 3,000 sq ft Fast Food w/Drive-Thru $7,838 $7,927 $12,287 $24,673 $49,446 *The 2021 study updated the trip rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual 9th edition to the 11th edition. Sample Potential Fees Service Area B Collection Rate $375/$80 $375/$80 $315 $630 $1,261 Land Use Example Current 11th Edition* 25% of Max 50% of Max 100% of Max Single Family Home $1,500 $1,410 $1,184 $2,369 $4,741 50-unit Apartment Complex $46,500 $38,250 $32,130 $64,260 $128,622 80,000 sq ft Home Improvement Store $15,488 $17,024 $67,032 $134,064 $268,341 80,000 sq ft Shopping Center/Plaza $31,360 $39,872 $156,996 $313,992 $628,482 80,000 sq ft Supermarket $77,696 $87,040 $342,720 $685,440 $1,371,968 5,000 sq ft Office Building $2,384 $2,304 $9,072 $18,144 $36,317 3,000 sq ft Fast Food w/Drive-Thru $7,838 $7,927 $31,213 $62,427 $124,952 *The 2021 study updated the trip rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual 9th edition to the 11th edition. Page 228 of 231 Sample Potential Fees Service Area C Collection Rate $375/$80 $375/$80 $531 $1,063 $2,127 Land Use Example Current 11th Edition* 25% of Max 50% of Max 100% of Max Single Family Home $1,500 $1,410 $1,997 $3,997 $7,998 50-unit Apartment Complex $46,500 $38,250 $54,162 $108,426 $216,954 80,000 sq ft Home Improvement Store $15,488 $17,024 $112,997 $226,206 $452,626 80,000 sq ft Shopping Center/Plaza $31,360 $39,872 $264,650 $529,799 $1,060,097 80,000 sq ft Supermarket $77,696 $87,040 $577,728 $1,156,544 $2,314,176 5,000 sq ft Office Building $2,384 $2,304 $15,293 $30,614 $61,258 3,000 sq ft Fast Food w/Drive-Thru $7,838 $7,927 $52,617 $105,333 $210,764 *The 2021 study updated the trip rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual 9th edition to the 11th edition. Sample Potential Fees Service Area D Collection Rate $375/$80 $375/$80 $863 $1,726 $3,452 Land Use Example Current 11th Edition* 25% of Max 50% of Max 100% of Max Single Family Home $1,500 $1,410 $3,245 $6,490 $12,980 50-unit Apartment Complex $46,500 $38,250 $88,026 $176,052 $352,104 80,000 sq ft Home Improvement Store $15,488 $17,024 $183,646 $367,293 $734,586 80,000 sq ft Shopping Center/Plaza $31,360 $39,872 $430,119 $860,238 $1,720,477 80,000 sq ft Supermarket $77,696 $87,040 $938,944 $1,877,888 $3,755,776 5,000 sq ft Office Building $2,384 $2,304 $24,854 $49,709 $99,418 3,000 sq ft Fast Food w/Drive-Thru $7,838 $7,927 $85,515 $171,029 $342,059 *The 2021 study updated the trip rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual 9th edition to the 11th edition. Implementation Alternatives: Timing/Phasing As done with the adoption of system-wide impact fees, there is the potential to phase in adjustments to the collection rate over a period of time. In implementing a change in the collection rate, it is possible to place an implementation waiting period of several months from adoption (i.e. 6 months, 1 year, etc.) or provide a date specific implementation (i.e. July 1, 2022, January 1, 2023, etc.). Note that state law does not require a phased or delayed schedule. Grandfathering With the initial adoption of system-wide impact fees, there was not a grandfathering provision though state law required an initial one-year waiting period on platted property before impact fees could be assessed. There is the potential to grandfather projects such as an approved and active preliminary plan and or final plat filed, though implementation of any grandfathering provisions will affect the amount of impact fees that can be collected. Note that state law does not require grandfathering provisions other than a limit on increasing the maximum assessable rate. Attachments: 1. Roadway Impact Fee Service Area Map 2. 2016 Collection Rates and Phase-In Timelines Page 229 of 231 B D A C SH 6 N GRAHAM ROADROCK PRAIRIE R OAD TE X A S A V E N U E S BIRD POND ROADEsri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend City Limits Service Areas A B C D NExhibit 1Service Areas October 2021 0 10.5 Miles DRAFTPage 230 of 231 2016 Impact Fee Collection Rates and Phase in Timelines On or before 11/30/2017 On or after 12/1/2017 On or after 12/1/2017 On or after 12/1/2017 5/8”$500 $250 $500 1”$850 $425 $850 1-1/2”$5,350 $2,675 $5,350 2”$5,350 $2,675 $5,350 3”$13,350 $6,675 $13,350 4”$26,650 $13,325 $26,650 6”$53,350 $26,675 $53,350 8”$90,000 $45,000 $90,000 10”$133,350 $66,675 $133,350 5/8”$3,000 $1,500 $3,000 1”$5,100 $2,550 $5,100 1-1/2”$16,050 $8,025 $16,050 2”$16,050 $8,025 $16,050 3”$40,050 $20,025 $40,050 4”$79,950 $39,975 $79,950 6”$160,050 $80,025 $160,050 8”$270,000 $13,500 $270,000 10”$400,050 $200,025 $400,050 ROADWAY Impact Fees Date of building permit application Res.Non-Res.Res.Non-Res.Res.Non-Res. A $0.00 $0.00 $187.50 $40.00 $375.00 $80.00 B $0.00 $0.00 $187.50 $40.00 $375.00 $80.00 C $0.00 $0.00 $187.50 $40.00 $375.00 $80.00 D $0.00 $0.00 $187.50 $40.00 $375.00 $80.00 WATER Impact Fee Collection Rate Per Service Unit No Fees Assessment Date Properties platted on or before 11/30/2016; and Water Meter Size No Fees On or after 12/1/2017 Building Permit Application Date Properties platted on or after 12/1/2016; and Water Meter Size Assessment Date Properties platted on or before 11/30/2016; and Building Permit Application Date On or before 11/30/2017 WASTEWATER Impact Fee Collection Rate Per Service Unit Properties platted on or after 12/1/2016; and On or after 12/1/2017 On or after 12/1/2017 On or After 12/1/2018 Service Areas Land Use Type Land Use Type Land Use Type 12/1/2016-11/30/2017 12/1/2017-11/30/2018 Page 231 of 231