Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
REXBURG TRANSPORTATION 011320
City of Rexburg DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis 2 January 2020 2 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Contents Contents ............................................................................................................................................2 Background .......................................................................................................................................3 Need for the Study .........................................................................................................................3 Capital Improvements Plan ................................................................................................................3 Existing Facilities ............................................................................................................................3 Existing Deficiencies .......................................................................................................................4 Funding Commitments ...................................................................................................................5 Analysis of Current Capacity and Usage...........................................................................................5 Land Use Assumptions ....................................................................................................................7 Level of Service Analysis .................................................................................................................7 Improvements and Costs Required by New Development ............................................................. 12 Service Units Required by New Development ................................................................................ 18 20-Year Projection of Service Units Required by New Development ............................................... 19 Funding Sources for System Improvements ................................................................................... 19 Joint Development of Public Facilities ........................................................................................... 20 Schedule ...................................................................................................................................... 21 Impact Fee Proportionate Share Analysis .......................................................................................... 21 Cost of Existing System Improvements .......................................................................................... 21 Financing of Existing System Improvements .................................................................................. 21 New Development Contributions to System Improvements Other than Impact Fees ...................... 21 Financing of Existing System Improvements in the Past ................................................................. 21 Credits for System Improvements ................................................................................................. 22 Extraordinary Costs ...................................................................................................................... 22 Time and Price Differential in Fees Charged .................................................................................. 22 Other Funding Sources ................................................................................................................. 22 Proportionate Share Calculation ................................................................................................... 23 Appendix A – Existing System Improvements .................................................................................... 27 Appendix B – No-Build Scenario ....................................................................................................... 28 3 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Background Need for the Study The City of Rexburg (“City”), working with Horrocks Engineers, completed a Transportation Study in Summer 2019 to analyze its current roadway facilities and the demands that will be created by new development. The City is experiencing strong growth, which puts pressure on the City’s existing transportation facilities. It is, therefore, prudent to consider the updating of impact fees, which are one- time fees charged to new development to offset the capital costs associated with new development. The implementation of impact fees will allow the City to maintain its existing service levels for roadway facilities. Any increase in service levels will need to be funded through sources other than impact fees. The Transportation Study, along with updated input from the City, forms the basis for this Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis. The City has determined that there is one service area citywide. Both residential and non-residential development is considered to increase road trips, and therefore impact fees have been calculated for both residential and non-residential development. Capital Improvements Plan Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(a) – A general description of all existing public facilities and their existing deficiencies within the service area or areas of the governmental entity and a reasonable estimate of all costs and a plan to develop the funding resources related to curing the existing deficiencies including, but not limited to, the upgrading, updating, improving, expanding or replacing of such facilities to meet existing needs and usage; Existing Facilities Project improvements are not included in the analysis; only system improvements are included.1 Therefore, all neighborhood streets have been excluded from the calculations; only collector and arterial streets are included. The following roads have been included in the analysis. TABLE 1: EXISTING SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Project Number Description Existing Traffic Volume 1 7th South and Pioneer Yellowstone (Juniper Sands Roundabout) N/A 2 2000 North (Moody) / Yellowstone Highway N/A 3 2nd East/Moody Road Intersection 1,200 4 State Highway 33 Realignment on North end 0 1 Project improvements are defined by Idaho Statute as “site improvements and facilities that are planned and designed to provide service for a particular development project and that are necessary for the use and convenience of the occupants or users of the project.” System improvements are defined as follows: “System improvements, in contrast to project improvements, means capital improvements to public facilities which are designed to provide service to a service area including, without limitation, the ty pe of improvements described in section 50-1703, Idaho Code.” Idaho Code 67-8203 (22) and (28). Section 67-8204 (1) further states that development fees “shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements.” 4 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Project Number Description Existing Traffic Volume 5 2nd South/2nd East Signal N/A 6 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th N) 0 7 East Parkway Corridor (2nd W to 2nd E) 0 8 Yellowstone Highway / Trejo Street N/A 9 North Interchange Signal N/A 10 Traffic Signal Synchronization-City Wide (Rexburg) N/A 11 2nd East (Main Street to 3rd South) 10,200 12 Main Street (US 20 to 12th West) 10,700 13 University Boulevard (Yellowstone to 5th West) 5,700 14 2nd East (4th North to 7th North) 20,700 15 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th S) 0 16 5th West Extension 0 17 Barney Dairy Road to 2nd North 0 33 Corridor Preservation (East Parkway Corridor 7th S to 2nd E ROW Purchase) 0 Source: Horrocks Engineers A map of the existing improvements is shown in Appendix A. Existing Deficiencies As noted by Horrocks Engineers, there are no current deficiencies in the existing system. The table below shows the existing traffic volumes compared to the existing capacity. TABLE 2: EXISTING DEFICIENCIES Project Location Existing Capacity Existing Traffic Volume Existing Volume Over Capacity Reduction for Existing Deficiencies 1 7th South and Pioneer Yellowstone (Juniper Sands Roundabout) N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 2000 North (Moody) / Yellowstone Highway N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 2nd East/Moody Road Intersection 11,500 1,200 0 0% 4 State Highway 33 Realignment on North end 0 0 0 0% 5 2nd South/2nd East Signal N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Project Location Existing Capacity Existing Traffic Volume Existing Volume Over Capacity Reduction for Existing Deficiencies 6 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th N) 0 0 0 0% 7 East Parkway Corridor (2nd W to 2nd E) 0 0 0 0% 8 Yellowstone Highway / Trejo Street N/A N/A N/A N/A 9 North Interchange Signal N/A N/A N/A N/A 10 Traffic Signals (Rexburg) N/A N/A N/A N/A 11 2nd West (Main Street to 3rd South) 11,500 10,200 0 0% 12 Main Street (US 20 to 12th West) 11,500 10,700 0 0% 13 University Boulevard (Yellowstone to 5th West) 9,700 5,700 0 0% 14 2nd East (4th North to 7th North) 26,500 20,700 0 0% 15 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th S) 0 0 0 0% 16 5th West Extension 0 0 0 0% 17 Barney Dairy Road to 2nd North 0 0 0 0% 33 Corridor Preservation (East Parkway Corridor 7th S to 2nd E ROW Purchase) 0 0 0 0% Source: Horrocks Engineers Funding Commitments Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(b) - A commitment by the governmental entity to use other available resources of revenue to cure existing system deficiencies where practical; The City currently has no existing system deficiencies. Analysis of Current Capacity and Usage Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(c) – An analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of capacity of existing capital improvements, which shall be prepared by a qualified professional planner or by a qualified engineer licensed to perform engineering services in this state; Horrocks Engineers has prepared the following table of existing traffic volumes and capacity of system improvements. Table 3 also shows the percent usage of the expected 2028 capacity being used today and the percent usage of the 2028 capacity expected by 2028. 6 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis TABLE 3: CURRENT CAPACITY AND USAGE Existing Traffic Volume Existing Capacity 2028 Volume 2028 Capacity Current Usage of 2028 Capacity Projected Usage of 2028 Capacity 7th South and Pioneer Yellowstone (Juniper Sands Roundabout) N/A NA NA NA NA NA 2000 North (Moody) / Yellowstone Highway N/A NA NA NA NA NA 2nd East/Moody Road Intersection 1,200 11,500 19,500 26,500 5% 74% State Highway 33 Realignment on North end 0 0 7,500 9,700 0% 77% 2nd South/2nd East Signal N/A NA NA NA NA NA East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th N) 0 0 5,400 11,500 0% 47% East Parkway Corridor (2nd W to 2nd E) 0 0 5,500 30,500 0% 18% Yellowstone Highway / Trejo Street N/A NA NA NA NA NA North Interchange Signal N/A NA NA NA NA NA Traffic Signal Synchronization-City Wide (Rexburg) N/A NA NA NA NA NA 2nd East (Main Street to 3rd South) 10,200 11,500 12,700 26,500 38% 48% Main Street (US 20 to 12th West) 10,700 11,500 20,900 26,500 40% 79% University Boulevard (Yellowstone to 5th West) 5,700 9,700 11,400 26,500 22% 43% 2nd East (4th North to 7th North) 20,700 26,500 25,200 40,000 52% 63% East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th S) 0 0 900 11,500 0% 8% 5th West Extension 0 0 600 11,500 0% 5% Barney Dairy Road to 2nd North 0 0 1,700 26,500 0% 6% Corridor Preservation (East Parkway Corridor 7th S to 2nd E ROW Purchase) 0 0 0 0 0% 0% Source: Horrocks Engineers 7 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Land Use Assumptions Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(d) – A description of the land use assumptions by the government entity; Growth in road trips forms the basis for increased demand for transportation facilities. Growth in road trips will come both from residential and nonresidential development. Projected growth in residential units, as well as non-residential development, is shown in the table below. TABLE 4: PROJECTED GROWTH IN REXBURG (UPDATE ALL OF FUTURE AND EXISTING + GROWTH AS WELL) Existing Development Future Development Added Existing + Growth at 2037 Residential Units Population Units Population Units Population Units Single Family 10,646 2,645 4,349 1,204 13,113 3,631 Multi-Family Community Housing 10,723 4,487 8,211 2,274 24,757 6,856 Multi-Family Dormitory Housing 13,724 2,612 4,854 1,344 14,637 4,053 Total 35,093 9,744 17,414 4,822 52,507 14,540 Private Non-Residential Units SF per Capita Estimated kSF SF per Capita Estimated kSF SF per Capita Estimated kSF Commercial 124 4,369 124 2,168 124 6,536 Government 11 373 11 185 11 558 Institutional 107 3,745 107 1,858 107 5,603 Total 242 8,487 242 4,211 242 12,698 Source: Zions Public Finance Land Use Analysis, City of Rexburg Using this growth as the basis for their model, the transportation engineers calculated the growth in PM peak hour trips. TABLE 5: PROJECTED GROWTH IN PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS Description PM Peak Hour Trips 2018 PM Peak Hour Trips 19,200 2028 PM Peak Hour Trips 24,500 Growth in PM Peak Hour Trips, 2018-2028 5,300 Source: Horrocks Engineers Level of Service Analysis Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(e) – A definitive table establishing the specific level or quantity of use, consumption, generation or discharge of a service unit for each category of system improvements and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, including residential, commercial, agricultural and industrial; 8 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Roadway LOS is determined based on the number of lanes and functional classification of the roadway. In the City of Rexburg, a standard of LOS A – LOS C is acceptable for roadway segments. This allows for speeds at or near free-flow speeds, but with some congestion during the peak times of the day. Any roadway which currently performs at LOS C or better but which will perform at LOS D or worse in the future due to new development in Rexburg will be mitigated and is impact fee eligible. Appendix B shows service levels that would occur by 2028 if no road improvements are made – the “no-build” scenario. The following table summarizes the maximum capacities (LOS D) for roadway segments used by the City of Rexburg. TABLE 6: ROADWAY SEGMENT MAXIMUM CAPACITY (LOS D) Lanes Arterial Collector 2 10,000 9,000 3 11,500 10,000 5 26,500 N/A 7 40,000 N/A Source: Horrocks Engineers Table 7 summarizes the ratio of PM peak hour trips (service units) to various land use types, based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip General Manual, 10th ed. There is a minor discrepancy in the way ITE calculates trips and the way trips or roadway volumes are calculated in the travel demand model used in the Rexburg Study. This discrepancy is explained by the model roadway volumes and capacities being calculated using daily traffic volumes rather than trips on the roadway. Essentially, this means that a travel demand model “trip” or unit of volume is counted once as a vehicle leaves home, travels on the road network, and then arrives at work. This vehicle will only be counted as it travels on the roadway network. The ITE Trip Generation method uses driveway counts as its measure of a trip. Therefore, a vehicle making the same journey will be counted once as it leaves home and once again as it arrives at work for a total of two trips. This can be rectified simply by adjusting the ITE Trip Generation rates by one half as shown in the table below. An additional consideration is that certain developments do not generate primary trips or trips that originated for the sole purpose of visiting that development. An example of a primary trip is a home- based work trip where someone leaves their house with the express purpose of going to work. This primary trip has been generated by a combination of the home where the trip originated and the place of occupation where the trip is terminated. Thus, it is easily understood that the impact of this trip should be attributed to the housing development and workplace development since without either of these locations, the trip doesn’t happen. Some trips are not primary trips, they are defined as pass-by trips. This means that the trip (crossing the driveway of a development) was generated by a driver deciding to make a stop on their way to their primary destination. Good examples of pass-by trips are someone that stops at the gas station on their way to work (a gas station is a pass-by trip) or a driver that is enticed to stop at a fast food restaurant as they drive by because the “HOT DONUTS” sign is illuminated (the fast food restaurant is a pass-by trip). Pass-by trips do not add traffic to the roadway and, therefore, do not create additional impact. Each land use type in the ITE Trip Generation Manual has a suggested reduction for pass-by trips where applicable. In each case, the trip reduction rate will be applied to the trip generation rate used in the IFA. 9 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis TABLE 7: QUANTITY OF USE BY DEVELOPMENT TYPE ITE Code ITE Land Use Unit ITE Trip Rate Pass-Thru Adjusted Trip Rate 21 Commercial Airport Employees 10.28 5.14 130 Industrial Park 130 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.4 0.20 140 General Manufacturing 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.67 0.34 151 Mini- Warehouse 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.17 0.09 210 Single-Family Detached Housing Dwelling Unit 0.99 0.50 220 Multi-Family / (Low-Rise 1-2 Levels) – Community Housing Dwelling Unit 0.56 0.28 221 Multi-Family (Mid-Rise 3-10 Levels) – Community Housing Dwelling Unit 0.44 0.22 222 Multi-Family (High-Rise >10 Levels) – Community Housing Dwelling Unit 0.36 0.18 225 Off-Campus Apartment (Adjacent to Campus)* Resident 0.28 0.14 225 Off-Campus Apartment (Over 1/2 mile from Campus)* Resident 0.31 0.16 240 Mobile Home / RV Park Occupied Dwelling Unit 0.59 0.30 254 Assisted Living Center Bed 0.26 0.13 310 Hotel Room 0.6 0.30 416 Campground/Re creational Vehicle Park Acres 0.98 0.49 444 Movie Theater < 10 Screens 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 6.17 3.09 10 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ITE Code ITE Land Use Unit ITE Trip Rate Pass-Thru Adjusted Trip Rate 445 Movie Theater > 10 Screens 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 4.91 2.46 492 Health/Fitness Club 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 3.45 1.73 520 Elementary School 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 1.37 0.69 522 Middle School / Junior High School 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 1.19 0.60 530 High School 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.97 0.49 534 Private School (K-8) Students 0.26 0.13 550 University/Colle ge 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 1.17 0.59 560 Church 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.49 0.25 565 Day Care Center 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 11.12 5.56 590 Library 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 8.16 4.08 610 Hospital 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.97 0.49 710 General Office Building 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 1.15 0.58 720 Medical-Dental Office Building 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 3.46 1.73 730 Government Office Building 1000 Sq. Ft. Gross Floor Area 1.71 0.86 770 Business Park 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.42 0.21 812 Building Material and Lumber Store 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 2.06 1.03 816 Hardware/Paint Store 1000 Sq. Ft. Gross Floor Area 2.68 26% 0.99 11 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ITE Code ITE Land Use Unit ITE Trip Rate Pass-Thru Adjusted Trip Rate 817 Nursery (Garden Center) 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 6.94 3.47 820 Shopping Center / Strip Mall 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area 3.81 34% 1.26 841 Automobile Sales 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 3.75 1.88 848 Tire Store 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 3.98 28% 1.43 850 Supermarket 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 9.24 36% 2.96 851 Convenience Market 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 49.11 61% 9.58 880 Pharmacy/Drug store without Drive-Thru Window 1000 Sq. Ft. Gross Floor Area 8.51 53% 2.00 881 Pharmacy/Drug store with Drive-Thru Window 1000 Sq. Ft. Gross Floor Area 10.29 49% 2.62 890 Furniture Store 1000 Sq. Ft. Gross Floor Area 0.52 53% 0.12 911 Walk-In Bank 1000 Sq. Ft. Gross Floor Area 12.13 6.07 912 Drive-in Bank 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 20.45 47% 5.42 918 Hair Salon 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 1.45 0.73 932 Restaurant, Sit- Down (High Turnover) 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 9.77 44% 2.74 933 Fast Food without Drive- Through Window 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 28.34 43% 8.08 934 Restaurant with Drive Through Window 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 32.67 50% 8.17 12 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ITE Code ITE Land Use Unit ITE Trip Rate Pass-Thru Adjusted Trip Rate 942 Auto Care Center 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area 3.11 1.56 944 Gasoline/ Service Station Fueling Position 14.03 42% 4.07 945 Gasoline/Servic e Station with Convenience Store 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area 88.35 56% 19.44 947 Self Service Car Wash Wash Stall 5.54 2.77 948 Automated Car Wash 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 14.2 7.10 *Dormitory housing would be included in this category and fees would be calculated on a per-bed basis. ITE does not have a separate category for dormitory housing. Improvements and Costs Required by New Development Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(f) – A description of all system improvements and their costs necessitated by and attributable to new development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions, to provide a level of service not to exceed the level of service adopted in the development impact fee ordinance; The following table shows the total projects necessitated by new development, as well as the funding source and the resulting amount remaining to be paid for by Rexburg City. TABLE 8: IMPROVEMENTS AND COSTS REQUIRED BY NEW DEVELOPMENT AND FUNDING SOURCE Project Location Total Price Funding Source Rexburg City % Rexburg City Total 1 7th South and Pioneer Yellowstone (Juniper Sands Roundabout) $1,500,000 Urban Renewal/Developers 0% $0 2 2000 North (Moody) /Yellowstone Highway $1,200,000 Rexburg/ITD/Urban Renewal 17% $200,000 3 2nd East/Moody Road Intersection $200,000 Rexburg/Urban Renewal 40% $80,000 4 State Highway 33 Realignment on North end $4,000,000 Rexburg/Urban Renewal/IDOC (State) 75% $3,000,000 5 2nd South/2nd East Signal $375,000 Rexburg 100% $375,000 6 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th N) $6,000,000 Rexburg/Urban Renewal 67% $4,000,000 13 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Project Location Total Price Funding Source Rexburg City % Rexburg City Total 7 East Parkway Corridor (2nd W to 2nd E) $2,350,000 Rexburg/Urban Renewal 15% $350,000 8 Yellowstone Highway / Trejo Street $500,000 Rexburg 100% $500,000 9 North Interchange Signal $700,000 Rexburg/ITD 50% $350,000 10 Traffic Signal Synchronization- City Wide (Rexburg) $500,000 Rexburg/ITD 50% $250,000 11 2nd East (Main Street to 3rd South) $1,125,000 Rexburg 100% $1,125,000 12 Main Street (US 20 to 12th West) $750,000 Rexburg/ITD/Developers 50% $375,000 13 University Boulevard (Yellowstone to 5th West) $1,200,000 Rexburg/Urban Renewal/Developers 25% $300,000 14 2nd East (4th North to 7th North) $1,000,000 Rexburg/ITD 50% $500,000 15 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th S) $2,500,000 Rexburg 100% $2,500,000 16 5th West Extension $8,000,000 Rexburg 100% $8,000,000 17 Barney Dairy Road to 2nd North $3,000,000 Rexburg/Urban Renewal 83% $2,500,000 Total $34,900,000 $24,405,000 Source: Horrocks Engineers However, new development is not responsible to pay for the entire $24,405,000 attributable to the City. This amount must be reduced by the following factors: Reductions for existing deficiencies Pass-through volume Existing excess capacity Existing user share Reduction for Existing Deficiencies Horrocks Engineers has calculated that there does not need to be any reduction for existing deficiencies. TABLE 9: EXISTING DEFICIENCY COST REDUCTION CALCULATION 14 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Project Location 2028 Added Capacity Existing Volume Over Capacity Reduction for Existing Deficiencies 1 7th South and Pioneer Yellowstone (Juniper Sands Roundabout) N/A N/A N/A 2 2000 North (Moody) / Yellowstone Highway N/A N/A N/A 3 2nd East/Moody Road Intersection 15,000 0 0% 4 State Highway 33 Realignment on North end 9,700 0 0% 5 2nd South/2nd East Signal N/A N/A N/A 6 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th N) 11,500 0 0% 7 East Parkway Corridor (2nd W to 2nd E) 30,500 0 0% 8 Yellowstone Highway / Trejo Street N/A N/A N/A 9 North Interchange Signal N/A N/A N/A 10 Traffic Signal Synchronization-City Wide (Rexburg) N/A N/A N/A 11 2nd East (Main Street to 3rd South) 15,000 0 0% 12 Main Street (US 20 to 12th West) 15,000 0 0% 13 University Boulevard (Yellowstone to 5th West) 16,800 0 0% 14 2nd East (4th North to 7th North) 13,500 0 0% 15 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th S) 11,500 0 0% 16 5th West Extension 11,500 0 0% 17 Barney Dairy Road to 2nd North 26,500 0 0% Source: Horrocks Engineers Pass-Through Traffic An adjustment must also be made for pass-through traffic. Pass-through traffic does not have its origination or destination in Rexburg. New development cannot be charged for the increase in traffic due to development outside of the City. Rather, these additional costs must be shared by the entire community. Pass-through percentage is determined based on roadway functional classification with arterial roads being assigned a pass-through of 3% and collector roads assigned a pass-through of 1%. The 2028 added capacity is multiplied by the assigned pass-through percent resulting in a pass-through volume which new development in Rexburg is not responsible for. Pass-Through for intersections are based on the functional classification of the major roadway. TABLE 10: PASS-THROUGH TRAFFIC COST REDUCTION CALCULATION Project Location 2028 Added Capacity Pass-Through Volume Pass-Through Percent Reduction for Pass- Through 1* 7th South and Pioneer Yellowstone (Juniper Sands Roundabout) N/A N/A N/A N/A 15 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Project Location 2028 Added Capacity Pass-Through Volume Pass-Through Percent Reduction for Pass- Through 2* 2000 North (Moody) / Yellowstone Highway N/A 71 1% 1% 3 2nd East/Moody Road Intersection 15,000 585 3% 4% 4 State Highway 33 Realignment on North end 9,700 225 3% 3% 5* 2nd South/2nd East Signal N/A 381 3% 3% 6 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th N) 11,500 162 3% 2% 7 East Parkway Corridor (2nd W to 2nd E) 30,500 165 3% 1% 8* Yellowstone Highway / Trejo Street N/A 393 3% 3% 9* North Interchange Signal N/A 567 3% 3% 10 Traffic Signal Synchronization-City Wide (Rexburg) N/A N/A N/A N/A 11 2nd East (Main Street to 3rd South) 15,000 381 3% 3% 12 Main Street (US 20 to 12th West) 15,000 627 3% 5% 13 University Boulevard (Yellowstone to 5th West) 16,800 342 3% 3% 14 2nd East (4th North to 7th North) 13,500 756 3% 6% 15 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th S) 11,500 27 3% 1% 16 5th West Extension 11,500 18 3% 1% 17 Barney Dairy Road to 2nd North 26,500 51 3% 1% *Intersection improvement project pass-through reductions are based on major roadway pass-through percentages Source: Horrocks Engineers Excess Capacity Cost Reduction Calculation The projects built will have capacity to serve new development beyond the next 8 -10 years. This excess capacity cannot be included in the impact fees charged to new development. This cost reduction is made in the table below. TABLE 11: EXCESS CAPACITY COST REDUCTION CALCULATION Project Location Future Capacity Added Capacity 2028 Traffic Volume 2028 Excess Capacity Cost Reduction % 1 7th South and Pioneer Yellowstone (Juniper Sands Roundabout) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 2000 North (Moody) / Yellowstone Highway N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 2nd East/Moody Road Intersection 26,500 15,000 19,500 7,000 27% 4 State Highway 33 Realignment on North end 9,700 9,700 7,500 2,200 23% 5 2nd South/2nd East Signal N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th N) 11,500 11,500 5,400 6,100 54% 16 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Project Location Future Capacity Added Capacity 2028 Traffic Volume 2028 Excess Capacity Cost Reduction % 7 East Parkway Corridor (2nd W to 2nd E) 30,500 30,500 5,500 25,000 82% 8 Yellowstone Highway / Trejo Street N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9 North Interchange Signal N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10 Traffic Signal Synchronization-City Wide (Rexburg) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11 2nd East (Main Street to 3rd South) 26,500 15,000 12,700 13,800 53% 12 Main Street (US 20 to 12th West) 26,500 15,000 20,900 5,600 22% 13 University Boulevard (Yellowstone to 5th West) 26,500 16,800 11,400 15,100 57% 14 2nd East (4th North to 7th North) 40,000 13,500 25,200 14,800 37% 15 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th S) 11,500 11,500 900 10,600 93% 16 5th West Extension 11,500 11,500 600 10,900 95% 17 Barney Dairy Road to 2nd North 26,500 26,500 1,700 24,800 94% Source: Horrocks Engineers Existing User Share Cost Reduction Calculation There will also be some use of these new facilities by existing development. Again, new development is not responsible for the existing user share of costs. The existing user percentages assigned were dependent on project location and predicted trip distributions. The existing user volumes are calculated by multiplying the assigned existing user percent by the added capacity. These reductions are summarized in the table below. TABLE 12: EXISTING USER SHARE COST REDUCTION CALCULATION Project Description Added Capacity Existing User Volume Existing User % 1 7th South and Pioneer Yellowstone (Juniper Sands Roundabout) N/A N/A N/A 2 2000 North (Moody) / Yellowstone Highway N/A N/A N/A 3 2nd East/Moody Road Intersection 15,000 300 2% 4 State Highway 33 Realignment on North end 9,700 97 1% 5 2nd South/2nd East Signal N/A N/A N/A 6 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th N) 11,500 115 1% 7 East Parkway Corridor (2nd W to 2nd E) 30,500 305 1% 8 Yellowstone Highway / Trejo Street N/A N/A N/A 9 North Interchange Signal N/A N/A N/A 10 Traffic Signal Synchronization-City Wide (Rexburg) N/A N/A N/A 11 2nd East (Main Street to 3rd South) 15,000 300 2% 12 Main Street (US 20 to 12th West) 15,000 300 2% 13 University Boulevard (Yellowstone to 5th West) 16,800 336 2% 17 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Project Description Added Capacity Existing User Volume Existing User % 14 2nd East (4th North to 7th North) 13,500 270 2% 15 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th S) 11,500 115 1% 16 5th West Extension 11,500 115 1% 17 Barney Dairy Road to 2nd North 26,500 265 1% Source: Horrocks Engineers Summary of Cost Reduction Calculations The following table summarizes the cost reductions for existing user share,2 reduction for pass-through traffic, and reduction for excess capacity. TABLE 13: SUMMARY OF COST REDUCTION CALCULATIONS Description Reduction for Existing User Share Reduction for Pass-Through Reduction for Excess Capacity Impact Fee Eligible Proportion 1* 7th South and Pioneer Yellowstone (Juniper Sands Roundabout) N/A 0% N/A N/A 2* 2000 North (Moody) / Yellowstone Highway N/A 1% N/A 99% 3 2nd East/Moody Road Intersection 2% 4% 27% 67% 4 State Highway 33 Realignment on North end 1% 3% 23% 73% 5* 2nd South/2nd East Signal N/A 3% N/A 97% 6 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th N) 1% 2% 54% 43% 7 East Parkway Corridor (2nd W to 2nd E) 1% 1% 82% 16% 8* Yellowstone Highway / Trejo Street N/A 3% N/A 97% 9* North Interchange Signal N/A 3% N/A 97% 10 Traffic Signal Synchronization-City Wide (Rexburg) N/A 3% N/A 100% 11 2nd East (Main Street to 3rd South) 2% 3% 53% 42% 12 Main Street (US 20 to 12th West) 2% 5% 22% 71% 13 University Boulevard (Yellowstone to 5th West) 2% 3% 57% 38% 14 2nd East (4th North to 7th North) 2% 6% 37% 55% 15 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th S) 1% 1% 93% 5% 16 5th West Extension 1% 1% 95% 3% 17 Barney Dairy Road to 2nd North 1% 1% 94% 4% *Intersection improvement project reductions are based solely on pass-through. Source: Horrocks Engineers 2 The existing user share reduction has been combined with the existing deficiency reduction in this table. 18 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Using the above cost reduction percentages, the total cost attributable to growth is $7,250,000. TABLE 14: COST ATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH Description Total Price Rexburg City Total Impact Fee Eligible Proportion Cost Attributable to Growth 1 7th South and Pioneer Yellowstone (Juniper Sands Roundabout) $1,500,000 $0 0% $0 2 2000 North (Moody) / Yellowstone Highway $1,200,000 $200,000 99% $198,000 3 2nd East/Moody Road Intersection $200,000 $80,000 67% $54,000 4 State Highway 33 Realignment on North end $4,000,000 $3,000,000 73% $2,190,000 5 2nd South/2nd East Signal $375,000 $375,000 97% $364,000 6 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th N) $6,000,000 $4,000,000 43% $1,720,000 7 East Parkway Corridor (2nd W to 2nd E) $2,350,000 $350,000 16% $56,000 8 Yellowstone Highway / Trejo Street $500,000 $500,000 97% $485,000 9 North Interchange Signal $700,000 $350,000 97% $340,000 10 Traffic Signal Synchronization-City Wide (Rexburg) $500,000 $250,000 100% $250,000 11 2nd East (Main Street to 3rd South) $1,125,000 $1,125,000 42% $473,000 12 Main Street (US 20 to 12th West) $750,000 $375,000 71% $266,000 13 University Boulevard (Yellowstone to 5th West) $1,200,000 $300,000 38% $114,000 14 2nd East (4th North to 7th North) $1,000,000 $500,000 55% $275,000 15 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th S) $2,500,000 $2,500,000 5% $125,000 16 5th West Extension $8,000,000 $8,000,000 3% $240,000 17 Barney Dairy Road to 2nd North $3,000,000 $2,500,000 4% $100,000 TOTAL $34,900,000 $24,405,000 $7,250,000 Source: Horrocks Engineers Service Units Required by New Development Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(g) – The total number of 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; The total cost required by new development is $7,250,000. The total number of PM peak hour trips forecast is as follows: TABLE 15: PM PEAK HOUR TRIP GROWTH Description PM Peak Hour Trips 2018 PM Peak Hour Trips 19,200 2028 PM Peak Hour Trips 24,500 19 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Description PM Peak Hour Trips Growth in PM Peak Hour Trips, 2018-2028 5,300 Source: Horrocks Engineers 20-Year Projection of Service Units Required by New Development Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(h) – The projected demand for system improvements required by new service units projected over a reasonable period of time not to exceed twenty (20) years; The following table shows how capacity will be consumed by new development over the next 20 years. TABLE 16: FUTURE CAPACITY Project Location 2028 Traffic Volume 2038 Traffic Volume Current Usage of 2028 Capacity Projected Usage of 2028 Capacity Projected Usage of 2038 Capacity 1* 7th South and Pioneer Yellowstone (Juniper Sands Roundabout) 10,000 10,700 0% 38% 40% 2* 2000 North (Moody) / Yellowstone Highway 7,100 7,800 17% 27% 29% 3 2nd East/Moody Road Intersection 19,500 22,900 5% 74% 86% 4 State Highway 33 Realignment on North end 7,500 8,500 0% 77% 88% 5* 2nd South/2nd East Signal 12,700 13,900 38% 48% 52% 6 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th N) 5,400 9,200 0% 47% 80% 7 East Parkway Corridor (2nd W to 2nd E) 5,500 9,300 0% 18% 30% 8* Yellowstone Highway / Trejo Street 13,100 14,500 30% 43% 48% 9* North Interchange Signal 18,900 21,800 0% 62% 71% 10 Traffic Signal Synchronization-City Wide (Rexburg) NA NA NA NA NA 11 2nd East (Main Street to 3rd South) 12,700 13,200 38% 48% 50% 12 Main Street (US 20 to 12th West) 20,900 25,800 40% 79% 97% 13 University Boulevard (Yellowstone to 5th West) 11,400 12,000 22% 43% 45% 14 2nd East (4th North to 7th North) 25,200 33,100 52% 63% 83% 15 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th S) 900 5,000 0% 8% 43% 16 5th West Extension 600 2,000 0% 5% 17% 17 Barney Dairy Road to 2nd North 1,700 3,000 0% 6% 26% *Intersection improvement project capacities and volumes reflect major roadway values. Source: Horrocks Engineers Funding Sources for System Improvements Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(i) – Identification of all sources and levels of funding available to the governmental entity for the financing of the system improvements. 20 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Potential funding sources include grants, donations, general fund, impact fees and revenue allocation funds. Joint Development of Public Facilities Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(j) – If the proposed system improvements include the improvement of public facilities under the jurisdiction of the state of Idaho or another governmental entity, then an agreement between governmental entities shall specify the reasonable share of funding by each unit, provided the governmental entity authorized to impose development impact fees shall not assume more than its reasonable share of funding joint improvements, nor shall the agreement permit expenditure of development impact fees by a governmental entity which is not authorized to impose development impact fees unless such expenditure is pursuant to a developer agreement under section 67-8214, Idaho Code; Total anticipated funding by other governmental sources is shown in the following table: TABLE 17: TRANSPORTATION FUNDING SOURCES BY PROJECT Project Location Total Price Funding Source Rexburg City % Rexburg City Total 1 7th South and Pioneer Yellowstone (Juniper Sands Roundabout) $1,500,000 Urban Renewal 0% $0 2 2000 North (Moody) / Yellowstone Highway $1,200,000 Rexburg/ITD 17% $200,000 3 2nd East/Moody Road Intersection $200,000 Rexburg/Urban Renewal 40% $80,000 4 State Highway 33 Realignment on North end $4,000,000 Rexburg/County 75% $3,000,000 5 2nd South/2nd East Signal $375,000 Rexburg 100% $375,000 6 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th N) $6,000,000 Rexburg/Urban Renewal 67% $4,000,000 7 East Parkway Corridor (2nd W to 2nd E) $2,350,000 Rexburg/Urban Renewal 15% $350,000 8 Yellowstone Highway / Trejo Street $500,000 Rexburg 100% $500,000 9 North Interchange Signal $700,000 Rexburg/ITD 50% $350,000 10 Traffic Signal Synchronization-City Wide (Rexburg) $500,000 Rexburg/ITD 50% $250,000 11 2nd East (Main Street to 3rd South) $1,125,000 Rexburg 100% $1,125,000 12 Main Street (US 20 to 12th West) $750,000 Rexburg/ITD 50% $375,000 13 University Boulevard (Yellowstone to 5th West) $1,200,000 Rexburg/Urban Renewal 25% $300,000 14 2nd East (4th North to 7th North) $1,000,000 Rexburg/ITD 50% $500,000 15 East Parkway Corridor (Barney Dairy to 7th S) $2,500,000 Rexburg 100% $2,500,000 16 5th West Extension $8,000,000 Rexburg 100% $8,000,000 21 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Project Location Total Price Funding Source Rexburg City % Rexburg City Total 17 Barney Dairy Road to 2nd North $3,000,000 Rexburg/Urban Renewal 83% $2,500,000 Total $34,900,000 $24,405,000 Source: Horrocks Engineers Schedule Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(k) – A schedule setting forth estimated dates for commencing and completing construction of all improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. The City will spend all impact fees collected within the 8-year timeframe required by Idaho law. These funds will be spent for transportation facilities described in this report. Impact Fee Proportionate Share Analysis The Proportionate Share Analysis follows the outline provided in Idaho Statute 67-8207 (2). Cost of Existing System Improvements Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(a) – The cost of existing system improvements within the service area or areas; The City has not identified any excess capacity that new development needs to buy into in its existing roadway facilities. Financing of Existing System Improvements Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(b) – The means by which existing system improvements have been financed; There is no debt outstanding on any transportation system improvements. Therefore, no credits need to be made for outstanding debt. New Development Contributions to System Improvements Other than Impact Fees Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(c) – The extent to which the new development will contribute to the cost of system improvements through taxation, assessment, or developer or landowner contributions, or has previously contributed to the cost of system improvements through developer or landowner contributions. The City does not intend to bond for future transportation improvements; therefore, no double payments will occur by new development. The City may choose, at its discretion, to accept donations of roadway improvements from developers. In this case, the impact fee should be offset by the donations. Financing of Existing System Improvements in the Past Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(d) – The extent to which the new development is required to contribute to the cost of existing system improvements in the future. 22 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis The City has no existing, outstanding bonds or leases for transportation facilities. Therefore, new development will not be required to pay for existing facilities. Credits for System Improvements Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(e) – The extent to which the new development should be credited for providing system improvements, without charge to other properties within the service area or areas; If new development is required to provide oversize system improvements that will benefit other properties in the service area, then reimbursement agreements or credits must be made at that time. Extraordinary Costs Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(f) – Extraordinary costs, if any, incurred in serving the new development; Not applicable. Time and Price Differential in Fees Charged Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(g) – The time and price differential inherent in a fair comparison of fees paid at different times; The City anticipates updating its CIP and Impact Fee Proportionate Share Analysis every few years. At these times, the City will update the costs associated with purchasing land and making transportation improvements. Other Funding Sources Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(h) - The availability of other sources of funding system improvements including, but not limited to, user charges, general tax levies, intergovernmental transfers, and special taxation. The governmental entity shall develop a plan for alternative sources of revenue. User Charges. User charges are most often charged in connection with the operation and maintenance of facilities. It is not anticipated that toll roads would be implemented for the construction of roadway capital facilities. General Tax Levies. While general tax levies may be used to fund transportation facilities, impact fees are intended to be used to maintain existing service levels through acquisition of the facilities needed due to new growth and development. General tax levies are anticipated to be used for road maintenance and funding any facilities that would raise service levels. Intergovernmental Transfers. The City can borrow money from other City funds in order to construct transportation facilities and then later repay those funds as impact fee revenues are collected. At this time the City has no plans to use intergovernmental transfers. Special Taxation. The City does not intend to issue debt or impose special taxes to fund transportation improvements. Donations and/or Grants. The City may receive donations or grants from public or private entities to offset some of the costs for constructing roads. 23 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Urban Renewal. The City may choose to use urban renewal funds for transportation infrastructure. Proportionate Share Calculation There are three main cost components in the calculation of impact fees: New construction of transportation facilities; Consultant costs; and Credits Capital Costs of Transportation Improvements Capital costs are calculated by taking the new improvements cost of $7,250,000 and dividing by the projected growth in PM peak hour trips through 2028 as shown previously in Table 15. This results in a cost of $1,367.92 per PM peak hour trip. TABLE 18: CAPITAL COST PROPORTIONATE SHARE ANALYSIS Description Amount Total Eligible Costs for Rexburg $7,250,000 Growth in PM Peak Hour Trips, 2018-2028 5,300 Cost per PM Peak Hour Trip $1,367.92 Consultant Costs The cost of preparing this analysis, as well as the costs incurred by Horrocks Engineers in preparing the Transportation Study, can also be included in the calculation of impact fees. The cost of $35,000 is divided among the projected PM peak hour trip growth of 5,300 trips by 2028. TABLE 19: PROPORTIONATE SHARE CALCULATION – CONSULTANT COSTS Consultant Costs Amount Transportation Consultant Costs $35,000 PM Peak Hour Trip Growth, 2018-2028 5,300 Cost per PM Peak Hour Trip $6.60 Credits Credits are made for the existing fund balance in the transportation impact fee account. The existing funds can be used to offset the capital costs needed for future development and thus reduce the cost to new development. TABLE 20: PROPORTIONATE SHARE CALCULATION – CREDIT FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE FUND BALANCE Credits for Fund Balance Amount Transportation Impact Fee Fund Balance $1,423,579* Growth in PM Peak Hour Trips, 2018-2028 5,300 Credit for Impact Fee Fund Balance ($268.60) *Impact fee fund balance as of 9/30/18 provided by the City of Rexburg 24 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis No other credits are necessary for outstanding bonds, debt obligations, leases or other factors. Summary of Proportionate Share Analysis Total costs per PM peak hour trip are summarized as follows: TABLE 21: TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE SUMMARY – PER PM PEAK HOUR TRIP Capital Costs $1,367.92 Consultant Costs $6.60 Credit for Impact Fee Fund Balance ($268.60) Cost per PM Peak Hour Trip $1,105.92 The cost per PM peak hour trip is multiplied by the ITE trip rate that is adjusted for the following factors: 1) model differences regarding trip ends; and 2) reduction for pass-by trips. The ITE trip rate is reduced by 50 percent to account for trip ends, which is a difference in the model used by the engineers in the IFFP and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). These standards have been further reduced to adjust for pass-by trips. The City may choose to combine many of the categories listed by ITE to avoid large differences in fees charged to developments of different types. The following table shows groupings commonly used by cities and the maximum fee that may be charged for these categories. TABLE 22: MAXIMUM TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES ITE Code ITE Land Use Unit Trip Rate Impact Fee per Unit 21 Commercial Airport Employees 5.14 $5,684.47 130 Industrial Park 130 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.20 $221.19 140 General Manufacturing 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.34 $370.49 151 Mini-Warehouse 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.09 $94.00 210 Single-Family Detached Housing Dwelling Unit 0.50 $547.43 220 Multi-Family / (Low-Rise 1-2 Levels) – Community Housing Dwelling Unit 0.28 $309.66 221 Multi-Family (Mid-Rise 3-10 Levels) – Community Housing Dwelling Unit 0.22 $243.30 222 Multi-Family (High-Rise >10 Levels) – Community Housing Dwelling Unit 0.18 $199.07 225 Off-Campus Apartment (Adjacent to Campus)* Resident 0.14 $154.83 225 Off-Campus Apartment (Over 1/2 mile from Campus)* Resident 0.16 $171.42 240 Mobile Home / RV Park Occupied Dwelling Unit 0.30 $326.25 254 Assisted Living Center Bed 0.13 $143.77 310 Hotel Room 0.30 $331.78 416 Campground/Recreational Vehicle Park Acres 0.49 $541.90 25 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ITE Code ITE Land Use Unit Trip Rate Impact Fee per Unit 444 Movie Theater < 10 Screens 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 3.09 $3,411.79 445 Movie Theater > 10 Screens 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 2.46 $2,715.05 492 Health/Fitness Club 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 1.73 $1,907.73 520 Elementary School 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.69 $757.56 522 Middle School / Junior High School 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.60 $658.03 530 High School 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.49 $536.38 534 Private School (K-8) Students 0.13 $143.77 550 University/College 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.59 $646.97 560 Church 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.25 $270.95 565 Day Care Center 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 5.56 $6,148.96 590 Library 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 4.08 $4,512.19 610 Hospital 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.49 $536.38 710 General Office Building 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.58 $635.91 720 Medical-Dental Office Building 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 1.73 $1,913.26 730 Government Office Building 1000 Sq. Ft. Gross Floor Area 0.86 $945.57 770 Business Park 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.21 $232.24 812 Building Material and Lumber Store 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 1.03 $1,139.11 816 Hardware/Paint Store 1000 Sq. Ft. Gross Floor Area 0.99 $1,096.64 817 Nursery (Garden Center) 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 3.47 $3,837.57 820 Shopping Center / Strip Mall 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area 1.26 $1,390.48 841 Automobile Sales 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 1.88 $2,073.62 848 Tire Store 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 1.43 $1,584.57 850 Supermarket 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 2.96 $3,270.01 851 Convenience Market 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 9.58 $10,590.87 880 Pharmacy/Drugstore without Drive-Thru Window 1000 Sq. Ft. Gross Floor Area 2.00 $2,211.69 881 Pharmacy/Drugstore with Drive-Thru Window 1000 Sq. Ft. Gross Floor Area 2.62 $2,901.90 890 Furniture Store 1000 Sq. Ft. Gross Floor Area 0.12 $135.14 911 Walk-In Bank 1000 Sq. Ft. Gross Floor Area 6.07 $6,707.46 912 Drive-in Bank 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 5.42 $5,993.30 918 Hair Salon 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 0.73 $801.80 932 Restaurant, Sit-Down (High Turnover) 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 2.74 $3,025.38 933 Fast Food without Drive- Through Window 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 8.08 $8,932.47 934 Restaurant with Drive Through Window 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 8.17 $9,032.67 942 Auto Care Center 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area 1.56 $1,719.72 26 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ITE Code ITE Land Use Unit Trip Rate Impact Fee per Unit 944 Gasoline/Service Station Fueling Position 4.07 $4,499.69 945 Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Store 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area 19.44 $21,495.93 947 Self Service Car Wash Wash Stall 2.77 $3,063.42 948 Automated Car Wash 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area 7.10 $7,852.09 *Dormitory housing would be included in this category and fees would be calculated on a per-bed basis. ITE does not have a separate category for dormitory housing. If additional categories are desired, the City can use the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th ed., and multiply the total PM peak hour trips by 50 percent, by any reduction for pass-by trips, by the total cost per PM peak hour trip as shown in Table 22 above. 27 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Appendix A – Existing System Improvements 89:D 89:D 89:LMNO 89:D 89:LMNO 89:LMNO N 2 n d E S 2 n d E S 1 2 t h W U S H i g h w a y 2 0 W 7th S W Main St University Blvd S 2 n d W E 2nd S W 1000 S W 2000 S W Hwy 33 N H i l l R d S 4 t h E S Y e l l o w s t o n e H w y E Main St S 5 t h W P i o n e e r R d W 1st N N Y e l l o w s t o n e H w y N 2 n d W W 4th S E Moody Rd E 7 th S N 5 t h W B a r n e y D a i r y R dE 4th N Pioneer Rd S 5 t h W O :\!2 0 1 8 \U T -1 3 0 3 -1 8 0 6 R e x b u r g I F F P -I F A \P r o j e c t D a t a \G I S \H o r r o c k s \M x d \I F F P F i g u r e s \1 8 P r o j e c t s M a p N e w 0 8 .1 4 .2 0 1 9 .m x d , 1 0 /1 7 /2 0 1 9 3 :2 9 :0 1 P M , j e f f m Legend Rexburg City Limits 89:D Intersection Improvement 89:LMNO Signal New Roads Road Widening Corridor Preservation (ROW) Existing Roads Capital Facilities Projects Impact Fee FacilitiesPlan 0 0.5 10.25 Miles Service Layer Credits: Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community 9 2 3 5 8 1 7 6 1 1 4 E a s t P a r k w a y C o r r i d o r East ParkwayCorridor 1 6 1 2 1 4 1 5 1 3 1 7 3 3 28 City of Rexburg | DRAFT Transportation CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Appendix B – No-Build Scenario N 2 n d E S 2 n d E S 1 2 t h W U S H i g h w a y 2 0 W 7th S W Main St University Blvd S 2 n d W E 2nd S W 1000 S W 2000 S W Hwy 33 N Hill Rd S 4 t h E S Y e l l o w s t o n e H w y E Main St S 5 t h W P i o n e e r R d W 1st N N Y e l l o w s t o n e H w y N 2 n d W W 4th S E Moody Rd E 7 th S N 5 t h W Barney Dairy RdE 4th N Pioneer Rd S 5 t h W 8 ,2 0 0 4 ,8 0 0 5 ,5 0 0 <3000 9 ,7 0 0 1 6 ,4 0 0 6 ,6 0 0 1 9 ,9 0 0 7 ,1 0 0 5 ,1 0 0 5 ,3 0 0 8 ,0 0 0 3,700 10,800 14,600 25,000 1 0 ,6 0 0 10,100 21,500 1 1 ,1 0 0 2 4 ,7 0 0 9 ,5 0 0 9,600 3,000 2 9 ,7 0 0 6,50019,70020,600 2 9 , 4 0 0 <3 0 0 0 8,200 <3 0 0 0 <3000 O :\!2 0 1 8 \U T -1 3 0 3 -1 8 0 6 R e x b u r g I F F P -I F A \P r o j e c t D a t a \G I S \H o r r o c k s \M x d \I F F P F i g u r e s \1 2 2 0 2 8 N o -B u i l d L O S N e w .m x d , 1 0 /1 7 /2 0 1 9 3 :1 2 :4 5 P M , j e f f m Legend Rexburg City LimitsAcceptable (LOS B or Better)Acceptable (LOS C)Unacceptable (LOS D or Worse)HighwayLocal Road 2028 No BuildLevel of Service Impact Fee FacilitiesPlan 0 0.5 10.25 Miles Service Layer Credits: Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community