HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution - 2020-R0211 - Adoption Of Land Use Assumptions And Capital Improvement Plans - 06/23/2020Resolution No. 2020-R0211
Item No. 8.2
June 23. 2020
RESOLU'llON
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
THAT in accordance with the Texas Local Government Code Sec. 395.045, the City
Council does hereby approve and adopt the land use as.sumptions and capital
improvements plan relating to the possible adoption ol" impact fees as recommended by
the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee (ClAC). Said land use assumptions and
capital improvements plans are attached hereto and incorporated in this resolution as if
fully set forth herein and shall be included in the minule.s of the City Council.
Passed by the City Council on
ATTEST:
June 23,2020
DANIEL M. POPE, MAYOR
Rebecca Garxa, City Sc' y
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
Michael G, Kcenum. IML.
Division Director of l-jiginccring/City Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kelli Leisure, Assistant City Attorney
i;cc!ucs/KLS Adopiiun - Lund Assumpuum & Ciipiliil !mpruvcmi-nu Plan
05.1 i.20
LUBBOCK, TEXAS
2020 LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND
CAPACITY PLANS FOR IMPACT FEES
i I 1�!t or
Lu
City bbock
TEXAS
Prepared by:
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
801 Cherry Street, Unit 11, Suite 1300
Fort Worth, TX 76102
Phone 817 335 6511
TBPE Firm Registration Number: F-928
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
4055 International Plaza, Suite 200
Fort Worth, TX 76109
Phone 817 735 7300
TBPE Firm Registration Number: F-2144
Project Number: 063126029
0 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. j Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Kimley»)Horn
0FREESE
:NICHOLS
Table of Contents
���' � c•,u of
Lubbock
rE%AS
LISTOF EXHIBITS............................................................................................................................
LISTOF FIGURES.............................................................................................................................
EXECUTIVESUMMARY...................................................................................................................1
I. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................6
A. What are Impact Fees?....................................................................................................................6
B. Why do Cities Use Impact Fees?.....................................................................................................6
C. Why is Lubbock Pursuing Impact Fees?..........................................................................................7
D. Impact Fee Components....................................................................................................................7
II. SERVICE AREAS...................................................................................................................8
A. Overview............................................................................................................................................. 8
B. Roadway Service Areas...................................................................................................................8
C. Wastewater and Water Service Areas........................................................................................8
III. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS.................................................................................................12
A.
Overview..........................................................................................................................................
12
B.
Methodology...................................................................................................................................
13
C.
Base Year Data...............................................................................................................................
14
1. Historical Growth..............................................................................................................
14
2. 2020 Population and Employment................................................................................
16
D.
Ten -Year Growth Assumptions......................................................................................................
17
1. 2030 Population and Employment................................................................................
17
2. 2030 Employment............................................................................................................
20
E.
Land Use Assumptions Summary...................................................................................................
21
IV. SERVICE UNITS..................................................................................................................22
A.
Overview..........................................................................................................................................
22
B.
Roadway Service Units..................................................................................................................
22
C.
Wastewater and Water Service Units.......................................................................................
22
V. CAPACITY PLANS..............................................................................................................23
A. Overview.......................................................................................................................................... 23
B. Roadway Capacity Plan............................................................................................................... 23
1. Roadway Projects............................................................................................................. 23
2. Intersection Projects.......................................................................................................... 24
C. Wastewater Capacity Plan.......................................................................................................... 36
D. Water Capacity Plan..................................................................................................................... 39
VI. TOTAL PROJECT COSTS....................................................................................................42
A. Overview.......................................................................................................................................... 42
B. Roadway Capacity Plan Project Costs.......................................................................................42
C. Wastewater Capacity Plan Total Project Costs........................................................................ 52
D. Water Capacity Plan Total Project Costs.................................................................................. 54
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees
City of Lubbock, Texas
March 2020
Kimley»)Horn
r72NICHOLS
(5h (it
Lubbock
toes
LIST OF EXHIBITS
1 Roadway Service Areas........................................................................................................................9
2 Wastewater Service Area.................................................................................................................
10
3 Water Service Area............................................................................................................................
11
4 Population Growth by Water Planning Area.................................................................................
19
5 10-Year Roadway Capacity Plan
ServiceArea A.............................................................................................................................
25
ServiceArea B..............................................................................................................................
26
ServiceArea C.............................................................................................................................
27
ServiceArea D.............................................................................................................................
28
ServiceArea E..............................................................................................................................
29
ServiceArea F..............................................................................................................................
30
ServiceArea G.............................................................................................................................
31
ServiceArea H.............................................................................................................................
32
6 Wastewater Capacity Plan...............................................................................................................
38
7 Water Capacity Plan..........................................................................................................................41
LIST OF FIGURES
LubbockHistorical Population Growth............................................................................................. 15
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees i i March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley»)Horn
r72NICHOLS
LIST OF TABLES
LLubbock
TI)'S
1
Summary of Base Year (2020) Population and Employment......................................................
17
2
City of Lubbock Projected Population and Dwelling Unit Estimations ........................................
18
3
City of Lubbock Projected Population and Dwelling Units Added .............................................
18
4
City of Lubbock Projected Employment Estimations.......................................................................
20
5
City of Lubbock Projected Employment Added.............................................................................
20
6
Residential and Non -Residential Projections for the City of Lubbock ........................................
21
7
Service Volumes for Proposed Facilities..........................................................................................
33
8
Service Volumes for Existing Facilities..............................................................................................
34
9
Vehicle -Mile Net Capacity Calculations..........................................................................................
35
10
Wastewater Flow Projections for Impact Fees...............................................................................
36
11
Wastewater Capacity Plan Projects................................................................................................
37
12
Water Demand Projections for Impact Fees...................................................................................
39
13
Water Capacity Plan Projects...........................................................................................................40
14
10-Year Roadway Capacity Plan
ServiceArea A.............................................................................................................................
45
ServiceArea B..............................................................................................................................
46
ServiceArea C.............................................................................................................................
47
ServiceArea D.............................................................................................................................48
ServiceArea E..............................................................................................................................49
ServiceArea F..............................................................................................................................
50
ServiceArea G.............................................................................................................................
51
ServiceArea H.............................................................................................................................
51
15
Wastewater Capacity Plan Project Total Costs.............................................................................
53
16
Water Capacity Plan Project Total Costs........................................................................................
55
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees III March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
KimlepMorn
�72MCHOLS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
®I� it, E�f
ltubbock
r E A A S
Impact Fees are a mechanism for funding the public infrastructure necessitated by new development.
Across the country, they are used to fund police and fire facilities, parks, schools, roads, and utilities.
In Texas, the legislature has allowed their use for water, wastewater, roadway, and drainage
facilities. In 2019, the City of Lubbock began exploring Roadway, Wastewater, and Water Impact
Fees as a recommendation from the City's PlanLubbock204O Comprehensive Plan to be used as a
funding tool for infrastructure needs as a result of significant growth in the City.
In the most basic terms, impact fees are meant to recover the incremental cost of the impact of each
new unit of development towards new infrastructure needs. Impact Fees are a mathematical
calculation that determine a maximum fee that would be equivalent to growth paying for growth.
This study's purpose is to calculate the maximum impact fee per service unit of new growth.
The Maximum Impact Fee is considered an appropriate measure of the impacts generated by a new
unit of development on a City's infrastructure systems. An impact fee program is anticipated to be
designed so that it is predictable for both the development community and City. An impact fee
program is transparent. This report describes in detail how the fee is calculated and how the
Capital Improvements Advisory Committee (CIAC) monitors the Impact Fee program. An impact fee
program is flexible in that funds can be used on priority projects and not just on projects adjacent to
a specific development. An impact fee program is consistent with other City goals and objectives
for growth. Finally, an impact fee program is both equitable and proportional in that every new
development pays an equal fee that is directly related to its systemwide impact.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees j
City of Lubbock, Texas
March 2020
Kimley»)Horn
I■"7 MCHOLS
Impact Fee Basics
Service Areas
4 &A, F& it% of
Lubbock
TEkdS
A Service Area is a geographic area within which a unique maximum impact fee is determined. All
fees collected within the Service Area must be spent on eligible improvements within the same
Service Area. For Roadway Impact Fees, the Service Area may not exceed a 6-mile diameter trip
length. In Lubbock, this results in the creation of eight (8) separate Roadway Service Areas. For
Wastewater and Water, a Service Area can consider anywhere the City is providing or will be
providing service. Therefore, this study utilizes a singular Service Area for the Water and
Wastewater components. This area is comprised of the existing city limits as well as some areas
adjacent to the city limits where the City anticipates providing water or wastewater service within the
next 10 years. Service Area maps can be found on Pages 9-1 1.
Land Use Assumptions
The Impact Fee determination is required to be based on the projected growth and corresponding
capacity needs in a 10-year window. This study considers the years 2020-2030. Acknowledging
that the parameters of the study (City Limits, Master Thoroughfare Plan, City's PlanLubbock204O
Comprehensive Plan, zoning maps, existing development, etc.) are changing constantly, this study is
based on conditions as they were in Fall 2019.
The base year population (2020) for Lubbock is 274,357. With a 2.50% annual growth rate, the
10-year increase in population is projected to be 74,843 persons to a total population of 351,200.
The 2.50% annual growth rate was recommended from the City's PlanLubbock204O Comprehensive
Plan. The base year employment in terms of square footage is 190,836,000 square feet. The
2030 projections show an increase of 26,871,000 square feet to a total of 217,707,000 square
feet. The square footage represents the amount of developed non-residential land uses over the 10-
year window. These projections set the basis for determining loadings and demands to serve new
growth. The distribution of residential and non-residential growth utilized information from US
Census data, historical building permit data, input from City Staff, and the CIAC.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 2 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley>>> Horn
r7 NICHOLS
Service Units
cit} of
VLubbock
The "service unit" is a measure of consumption or use of the capital facilities by new development. In
other words, it is the unit of measure used to quantify the supply and demand for roads and utilities
in the City. Service units are attributable to an individual unit of development and utilized to
calculate the maximum impact fee of a development.
For roadway purposes, the service unit is defined as a vehicle -mile. A "vehicle -mile" refers to the
capacity consumed in a single lane by a vehicle making a trip one mile in length during the PM peak
hour. The PM peak hour is the one -hour period during the afternoon/evening when the highest
vehicular volumes are observed. In accordance with the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
Trip Generation Manual, loth Edition, the PM Peak is used as the basis for transportation planning
and the estimation of trips caused by new development.
Service units for the water and wastewater components are based on the size of individual water
meters used to serve growth related development. The base wastewater service unit is defined as
the wastewater service provided to a customer with a water connection for a single-family residence.
The base water service unit is defined as a service equivalent to a water connection for a single-
family residence.
Capacity Plans
The City and project staff have identified the Roadway, Wastewater, and Water projects needed
to accommodate the projected growth over the next ten (10) years within the City of Lubbock. These
projects include existing, proposed, and recently completed projects that were determined based on
their current or anticipated impact on each defined Service Area and the City as a whole.
Roadway Capacity Plan
The City of Lubbock's Master Thoroughfare Plan is the ultimate plan for the roadway infrastructure
within the City Limits. To determine the specific roadway projects that would ultimately form the
Roadway Capacity Plan (RCP), City and project staff used the MTP to find all existing or proposed
roadway projects, as well as projects that have been completed within the last ten (10) years. This
initial project list, known as the "Universe of Projects", was then reevaluated by the City and project
staff, as well as the CIAC, to determine which projects would have the greatest impact towards
projected growth patterns over the next ten (10) years, thus removing several projects that were
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 3 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimlep) Horn
rNFREESE
NICHOLS
`Lubbock
rtsr,s
considered less impactful on the thoroughfare network. The projects within the Roadway Capacity
Plan were then evaluated to determine the total amount of vehicle -miles of capacity added to each
Roadway Service Area with the addition of the projects from the RCP. Capacity improvements may
include the addition of lanes, intersection improvements, the extension of a new road, or upgrading
traffic signals. Resurfacing or other maintenance activities do not qualify as capacity improvements
under impact fee law in Texas and cannot be funded with Roadway Impact Fees.
The RCP also includes major intersection improvement projects. Based on the City's direction, the only
major improvement included in the RCP is the installation of a new traffic signal at currently
unsignalized intersections between two arterial streets and a selection of arterial -to -collector
intersections.
The projects on the RCP were selected from the City's MTP and the "Universe of Projects" and cover
existing, proposed, and completed roadway improvements, as well as intersection improvements with
10-year growth potential. The project team and City staff identified 102 projects with a projected
total project cost (not impact fee eligible cost) of $596,101,104 over eight (8) Roadway Service
Areas. The next steps in the evaluation include the determination of the impact fee recoverable
project cost and the calculation of the Maximum Allowable Fee.
Wastewater Capacity Plan
The Wastewater Capacity Plan was developed for the City of Lubbock based on the growth
patterns and trends from the Land Use Assumptions. The recommended improvements will provide the
required capacity and reliability to meet projected wastewater flows through 2030. The types of
projects that were evaluated include Water Reclamation Plant expansions, regional and localized
system interceptors, lift stations, and studies which evaluate system growth opportunities.
The project team worked with City staff and the CIAC to identify the projects from the City's
Wastewater Master Plan to be impact fee eligible and cover infrastructure identified in the areas
with 10-year growth potential. A total of 22 proposed projects from the Master Plan were
identified to develop the Wastewater Impact Fee Capacity Plan. The total project cost (not impact
fee eligible cost) to be evaluated is $127,910,740. The next steps in the evaluation include the
determination of the 10-year utilization of each project and the calculation of the Maximum
Allowable Fee.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 4
City of Lubbock, Texas
March 2020
Kimley*Horn
ri7.FREESE
NICHOLS
Water Capacity Plan
f
lIr� ('ih of
Lubbock
rues
Similar to the Wastewater Capacity Plan, the Water Capacity Plan was developed to address
system improvements driven by growth. Projects evaluated for the Water Capacity Plan include the
following: Water Treatment Plant expansions, pump stations, ground and elevated storage tanks,
and distribution system mains.
The project team worked with City staff and the CIAC to identify proposed projects eligible from the
City's Water Distribution System Master Plan and cover infrastructure identified in the areas with 10-
year growth potential. A total of 22 proposed projects were selected for the analysis. These
projects have a total project cost (not impact fee eligible cost) of $95,220,200. The next steps in the
evaluation include the determination of the 10-year utilization of each project and the calculation of
the Maximum Allowable Fee.
Next Steps
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code requires a total of two (2) public hearings before
Council to approve an impact fee program. This document has been drafted to be presented at the
first of these public hearings, with the intent of presenting Council with a proposal for Land Use
Assumptions and Capacity Plans. During the first public hearing, Council is only approving the
assumptions and not an impact fee.
The second public hearing will be presented at a later date, with the intent of presenting a proposal
for impact fee calculations and the adoption of an impact fee ordinance.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 5
City of Lubbock, Texas
March 2020
Kimley*Horn
I/r� NICHOLS
1. INTRODUCTION
VL"".Obbock
IERGS
A. What are Impact Fees?
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code (TLGC) describes the procedure that
political subdivisions must follow 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 roadway
improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to the new development."
In other words, Impact Fees are designed to collect revenue from new developments that is
intended to be put towards new infrastructure and improvements necessitated by the new
development. In the most basic terms, Impact Fees are a one-time fee meant to recover the
incremental cost of the impact of each new unit of development creating new infrastructure
needs. Statutory requirements mandate that impact fees be updated at a minimum of every
five (5) years.
B. Why do Cities Use Impact Fees?
Impact Fees are based on mathematical calculations that determine a maximum fee that
would be equivalent to growth paying for growth. The Maximum Impact Fee is considered
an appropriate measure of the impacts generated by a new unit of development on a City's
infrastructure systems. An impact fee program is anticipated to be designed so that it is
predictable for both the development community and City. An impact fee program is
transparent. This report describes in detail how the fee is calculated and how the Capital
Improvements Advisory Committee (CIAC) monitors the Impact Fee program. An impact fee
program is flexible in that funds can be used on priority projects and not just on projects
adjacent to a specific development. An impact fee program is consistent with other City
goals and objectives for growth. Finally, an impact fee program is both equitable and
proportional in that every new development pays an equal fee that is directly related to its
systemwide impact.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 6 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley»)Horn
FREESE
4NICHOLS
4 "'�I c its of
Lubbock
TEXAS
C. Why is Lubbock Pursuing Impact Fees?
The City of Lubbock is pursuing an impact fee program to fund roadway infrastructure and
water and wastewater utilities. Roadway facilities are currently funded through the General
Fund (i.e. property tax and sales tax revenues). Water and wastewater utilities, however,
are currently funded through user fees, in which current users pay for existing services and
growth components. Based on the City's current growth projections, it is not anticipated that
either of these methods will be a sustainable resource of revenue in the future. Fundina
options were evaluated through a sub -committee of the City's PlanLubbock 2040
Comprehensive Plan, and based on the evaluation, it was determined that an impact fee
program would serve as the best option in regards to sustainability and accountability.
D. Impact Fee Components
There are multiple components that comprise an Impact Fee Study. The full methodology and
results of the City's proposed impact fee program is outlined as follows:
• Service Areas (Pg. 8)
• Land Use Assumptions (Pg. 12)
• Service Units (Pg. 22)
• Capacity Plans (Pg. 23)
• Total Project Costs (Pg. 42)
• Recoverable Project Costs
• Impact Fee Calculation
• Sample Calculations
• Adoption Process
• Collection Rate
• Ordinance
The first five of these components are defined and explained in this report. All components
of the impact fee process will be discussed in a report to be released later this year.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 7
City of Lubbock, Texas
March 2020
Kimlep Horn
S17gNICHOLS
II. SERVICE AREAS
A. Overview
�r � at (if
Lubbock
A Service Area is a geographic area within which a unique maximum impact fee is
determined. All fees collected within the Service Area must be spent on eligible
improvements within the same Service Area within ten (10) years.
B. Roadway Service Areas
Chapter 395 requires that Roadway Service Areas shall be limited to the current corporate
boundary. Therefore, areas within the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) are excluded from this
study. Based on guidelines established by Chapter 395, a Roadway Service Area may not
exceed a 6-mile diameter trip length. In defining the Service Area boundaries, the City of
Lubbock and project staff considered the corporate boundary, required size limit, adjacent
land uses, highway facilities, and topography. The City staff worked with the CIAC to
develop a total of eight (8) distinct Service Areas within the City Limits. A map of the
Roadway Service Areas can be found on Page 9.
C. Wastewater and Water Service Areas
Chapter 395 places less restrictions on Wastewater or Water Service Areas in comparison to
Roadway Service Areas. The water and wastewater impact fee service areas include the
current City limits and areas in the ETJ where the City is providing or will be providing service
in the 10-year Impact Fee window. This study considers only one Service Area each for
Wastewater and Water. The project team worked with City Staff and the CIAC to establish
the Wastewater and Water Service Area boundaries. Under this guidance, the Water and
Wastewater Service Areas were developed to have the same boundary. Maps of the
Wastewater and Water Service Areas can be found on Pages 10 and 1 1, respectively.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees
City of Lubbock, Texas
March 2020
DRAFT EXHIBIT 1
CITY OF LUBBOCK
ROADWAY SERVICE AREA
RopOtM R4�i q�4Nr•�' 9ream
st .O Paml
W ]ea0 j .. J Orylum
lii .41 Kimley*Horn
Lubbock r4,NFRE SE
SERVICE AREA 1
O Pepala IC1] "U'l,,,i
m30 I03. (m]0 B.NaI
0 SerNc(1030 BeMu)
m]0 Refall l]Ol0 feN.iR
SERVICE AREAS
�A E
B F
C G
D H
1 i I
TOTAL PROJEOTED POPOL ANDEMPLOYEES
mio POP 1i0]POP),). 5a,]]7 (351,i
:o:o BASIC (2030 B BASIC): 75 5f0,000116.14.1a].000i
KE imle SERNGEI: a6.60a,0001S1,tf].000)
miD RETAR Im]e REfAR,]: p,7]I,poO (11r.107,0al.o lre.11
}010 TOTal EMP (10]O TOTAL EVI], f90,1]6.000 00)
wlnnaC
A
Pop- 5,288 (6.753)
,Basic:S34,90 .000(09,819,000)
Service-17,095.000(19.845,000)
IyROIsii g6100011,516,000)
PAP 18.589( 2950)
Basic. 9,6Js 000 (10,995,000) �' i' j y !
S• ce 5.720.000 (6 526.000)
+ -^•• 1 I ,1 6011,000(6860,000) •-• `.� •.-._✓ I - ' y
Servlce Arta 1 .. _ __, I t _., ( J . l ✓ _ ! _ 7 Try _. I ; J I 1
vov 21 460,33 655, �� --0 �� '7 _�_�•_ 1 . i i` 1 ili. 1 i
5•rvIN /�19,000 (1,61s 0001 _- I .. I' j �-•` j Service AreaH "y 1 •�•:• �•
R•Ia11 1/ 995,000117,684,000) Pop s5.29s 191,269) E �., _• __• F 1
Basic.0 (0) _
• • " I Y' ., . SoNke 11,033.000 (12.565 000) _ ••` ••••• f2 i i -Ile
ROAR 8.958.000 (10 220,000)
_� f 1 j j 1 r -• i •�� I+ i.�, I .1 I 1 Y, � i`, I I^ ...fPOP` 12.9<6116,627) ��
JU ic.�]0, 105.000 (]0.]N.000)
„� .�. ... i --. 1 .� t : • ,,, I ' ail-SeNics 5.915,000 (6,7c6;0"_
t .•, . t •.• - ••, _ •Y S Ret4R:kl72.000j9J22.0001 i
• t / _' i '� I Servlce AreaG fir::,
} t "• »., 1 ! _ -• , Pep 669"(72578(
f - . _ • 1 ,,,• f ti 8•rvlce 2,470.092. .000) ^• r .-.. r'
R•1all 8.81]000 11,528,9,s16,0001 (••
Service Area F .` •� ._ 1 t t f (-..
POp: 23,412 (52 4001 } r 2
Basic
.$32.000(950,0001 i -• -'+I _, �Y _..Y - -- ) ^_
S•M,e 1,3e5,000 (1,5e0,000) 1` -- •• - I _ R•Iall.8,7.1,000fe.919.0p0) -
�•.-`--./. _T •'• •. _•,. •.
f �~ Sarviu AreaE _
I _ Pop 201664319401
Beslc:0 (0'
SeMu-1,266,000(1,BaA,000) _
���-_a• I R•lail:9,s09,000(11,190000)
EN
DRAFT EXHIBIT 2
CITY OF LUBBOCK
WASTEWATER SERVICE AREA
LLGLN
AYAVZi Kimley)>>Horn
!*Lubbock jr, _ 1 F R EMEOS& 1,.,C
W,st—tor S*Mco A-
00)
U1.114 f-ACM)
} t L
7,
f
v
Ile
7:
Wastewater Service Area
267.731 (190,836.000)
344,574(217,708,000)
r
7,-
It
DRAFT EXHIBIT 3
CITY OF LUBBOCK
WATER SERVICE AREA
Cby—
Kimley)))Hoirn
Lubbock rmsmocuom
w -
7--
L:
ru
EEJ
.. ... .. . ......
tL—
. .... .. E.7,
-�,,,ic&�Area
2 4 7 357 (190.836,000),
.,-,.36 200 (217,705,000)
Alt t
Kimley>>)Horn
cu, of
�WFREESE Lubbock
NICHOLS T E : E S
III. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
A. Overview
An initial step in the impact fee process, as established by Chapter 395, is the establishment
of land use assumptions, which address residential and non-residential growth and
development for a ten-year planning period for the years 2020-2030. These land use
assumptions, which also include population and employment projections, will become the basis
for the preparation of impact fee capital improvement plans for roadway, wastewater, and
water facilities.
As defined by Chapter 395, land use assumptions include a description of changes in land
uses, densities, and population in the Service Area. Land use assumptions, in conjunction with
the roadway, wastewater, and water capacity plans, form the initial key components for
implementing an impact fee program.
To assist the City of Lubbock in determining the need and timing of capital improvements to
serve future development, a reasonable estimation of future growth is required. The purpose
of this chapter is to formulate growth and development projections based upon assumptions
pertaining to the type, location, quantity, and timing of various future land uses within the
community, and to establish and document the methodology used for preparing the growth
and land use assumptions.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 12 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley*Horn
_1KNICHOLS
B. Methodology
f
1V ' l ih of
Lubbock
itkhl
Based upon the growth assumptions and the capital improvements needed to support growth,
it is possible to develop an impact fee structure which fairly allocates improvement costs to
growth areas in relationship to their impact upon the entire infrastructure system. These
growth and land use assumptions take into consideration several factors influencing
development patterns, including the following:
• The character, type, density, and quantity of existing development;
• Anticipated future land use (City's Future Development Areas Map and text in the
City's PlanLubbock2040 Comprehensive Plan);
• Availability of land for future expansion;
• Current and historical growth trends of population and development within the City;
• Location and configuration of vacant land;
• Known or anticipated development projects as defined by City Staff; and
• Data established from the City's Master Plans.
A series of tasks were undertaken in the development of this chapter and are described
below:
1. A kick-off meeting was held to describe the general methodological approach in the
study. Preliminary service areas were defined for roadway, wastewater, and water
impact fee systems.
2. Current and historic data of population, housing, and employment was collected from
the City and census data to serve as a basis for future growth.
3. A base year (2020) estimate was developed using City building permit data, U.S.
Census and periodic population data, household occupancy and household size data,
and employment data.
4. A growth rate was determined based upon an analysis of data from recent building
permit data, the City of Lubbock's PlanLubbock204O Comprehensive Plan, and
economic data which was compiled by the City, past growth trends and anticipated
development to occur over the next ten-year planning period. A compound annual
growth rate of 2.50% was recommended and approved by the Capital
Improvements Advisory Committee (CIAC) as part of these land use assumptions. This
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 13 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley»)Horn
t`REESE
<NICHOLS
J o`c Lubb'k
�E[�5
rate is consistent with the growth rate shown in the City's PlanLubbock204O
Comprehensive Plan.
5. Demographics were obtained to serve as a basis for correlating and allocating
projected ten-year growth estimates. Adjustments were also made to conform to the
City's PlanLubbock204O Comprehensive Plan.
6. A ten-year projection (2030) was prepared using the approved growth rate. The
growth was then allocated based on historic population and employment data.
Demographic growth was compared to the land use growth projections from the City's
PlanLubbock204O Comprehensive Plan, the Water Distribution System Master Plan,
and the Wastewater Master Plan. Adjustments were then made to consider known or
anticipated development activity within the ten-year planning period.
7. Base and ten-year demographics were prepared for the respective service areas for
water, wastewater, and roadways.
C. Base Year Data
This section documents the City's historical growth trends and data used to derive the 2020
base year population estimate. This information provides a starting basis of data for the
ten-year growth assumptions that will be presented within the following section.
1. Historical Growth
Over the past several years, Lubbock has experienced steady population and employment
growth. Figure 1 depicts the historic population growth for the City of Lubbock since 1990.
The historical growth averaged 1.26% since 1990, 1.55% since 2000, and 2.06% since
2010. This indicates an upward trend as the City continues to grow and expand residentially
and commercially.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 14 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley»> Horn
r7 NICHOLS
300,000
275,000
250,000
z
O
g 225,000
a
O
a
200,000
LL6,-206
175,000
150,000
1990
2010
29.573
2000
199,564
r
Lubbo��ck
TEX. S
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
YEAR
FIGURE 1. LUBBOCK HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH
2019
267.66
2020
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 15 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley>» Horn
r7 NICHOLS
'Lubbock
S[t,;5
2. 2020 Population and Employment
Based on an analysis of growth rates, average rates of growth for the 10-year forecast
varied between 2.00% and 3.00% in the City's PlanLubbock204O Comprehensive Plan. A
2.50% compound annual growth rate was determined to be an appropriate assumption for
the 10-year study period with an estimated 2020 population of 274,357. This growth rate
is believed to account for periods of stable growth expected to occur in the future. This rate
was presented to and recommended for usage by the CIAC in Fall 2019.
The residential and non-residential estimates and projections were compiled in accordance
with the following categories:
Units: Number of dwelling units, both single and multi -family.
Employment: Square feet of non-residential building area based on three (3) different
classifications. Each classification has unique trip -making characteristics.
Basic: Land use activities that produce goods and services such as those which
are exported outside of the local economy, such as 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 which
primarily serve households and whose location choice is oriented toward the
household sector, such as grocery stores and restaurants.
These categories are split due to unique trip characteristics necessary to calculate the
roadway demands, and per -capita loadings to determine water and wastewater needs.
Building square footage was used in place of employees as it provided a more accurate
spatial distribution of non-residential demand than other available data sources. Table 1
shows the summary of the 2020 population and employment totals.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 16 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley»)Horn
_7 NICHOLS
Cit% ut
`Lubbock
, C % [ S
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF BASE YEAR (2020) POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT
2020 Summary
Population & Employment
Single Family Housing Units
77,367
Multi -Family Housing Units
28,613
Population
274,357
Total Employment
190,836,000 sq. ft.
Basic Employment
75,510,000 sq. ft.
Service Employment
68,722,000 sq. ft.
Retail Employment
46,604,000 sq. ft.
D. Ten -Year Growth Assumptions
Projected growth has been characterized in two forms: population and non-residential
square footage. A series of assumptions were made to arrive at reasonable growth rates
for population and employment. The following assumptions have been made as a basis from
which ten-year projections could be initiated.
• Future land uses will occur based on similar trends of the past and remain consistent
with the Future Development Areas Map and text in the City's PlanLubbock204O
Comprehensive Plan;
• The City will be able to finance the necessary improvements to accommodate
continued growth; and
• Densities will be as projected in the Future Development Areas Map and details
included in the City's PlanLubbock204O Comprehensive Plan.
The ten-year projections are based upon the growth rate which was discussed earlier
(2.50%) and considers past trends of the City.
1. 2030 Population and Employment
The City has experienced steady growth over the past decade. The City's 2010 population
stood at 229,573 residents. By the end of the decade, the City of Lubbock rose to a current
2020 estimate of 274,357. With a compound annual growth rate of 2.50%, Lubbock is
anticipated to grow by 76,843 persons during the 10-year planning period and increase
total population to 351,200 by the year 2030. The number of dwelling units associated with
this increase corresponds to 29,684 units (21,670 single-family, 8,014 multi -family).
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 17 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kidep Horn
r74NICHOLS
Lubbock
TEXAS
An additional factor affecting the overall distribution of population growth within Lubbock is
the growth potential in south and west Lubbock. The master plans for these areas shows a mix
of uses including single-family residential, multi -family residential, and townhomes. Those two
regions are the largest near -term development areas for the City of Lubbock. Table 2 shows
the increase in population and dwelling units by roadway service area.
TABLE 2. CITY OF LUBBOCK PROJECTED POPULATION AND DWELLING UNIT ESTIMATIONS
Roadway
2020
2030
Service
Area
Single -Family
Housing Units
Multi -Family
Housing Units
Population
Single -Family
Housing Units
Multi -Family
Housing Units
population
A
5,862
2,442
21,460
9,847
3,126
33,655
B
7,091
4,028
28,589
11,484
5,156
42,950
C
1,784
236
5,288
21289
302
6,783
D
3,925
1,055
12,946
5,043
1,351
16,623
E
6,914
862
20,366
11,074
1,103
31,940
F
10,883
1,910
33,412
17,579
2,445
52,400
G
19,208
6,648
66,998
19,594
8,510
72,578
21,700
11,432
85,298
22,127
14,634
94,269
TOTAL
JEH
77,367
28,613
274,357
99,038
36,628
351,200
Table 3 shows the demographic increases for each roadway service area in terms of units
added (single-family and multi -family) and overall population added. Exhibit 4 was utilized
from the City's Wastewater Master Plan data to help determine the areas of proposed
growth across the City of Lubbock. The planning areas were developed using US Census
Tract information as well as building permit data dating back to 2010.
TABLE 3. CITY OF LUBBOCK PROJECTED POPULATION AND DWELLING UNITS ADDED
Roadway
Service Area
Single -Family
Units Added
Multi -Family
Units Added
Population Added
A
3,985
684
12,196
B
4,393
1,128
14,361
C
505
66
1,496
D
1,118
296
3,677
E
4,160
241
11,57
F
6,696
535
18,988
G
386
1,862
5,580
H
427
3,202
8,971
TOTAL
21,670
8,014
76,843
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 18 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
DRAFT EXHIBIT 4
CITY OF LUBBOCK /
POPULATION GROWTH
BY PLANNING AREA r
LEGEND _l
Population Growth (Number of Persons) Highway
Under 1,000 Road
1,200 to 2,000 Railroad ;� .• — t
2,000 to 4,000 Stream1 '
4,000 to 6,000 r------ l City Limit
_ Greater than 6,000 ETJ Boundary f !
------�
1��� Myof Kimley»)Horn 'I
Lubbock r,11"MCHOLS l'J
M.,1r
t
L
a i
Ti c•E"LoYks1 !
tl ! e
IN
xer rn"� s xi� s i !
�u a r lJx. .,< ..,, I. .,frx•r ,A(6z1-
V r�>L „rx vxnsr.• - z' - -- --=:`3z:�!'•I.�:,rri7:,: ..
bfi�sr uY,r N.
�i �fx>. i :sra i st rxsr . v*°• _ . ,•se.. i - �> - '_ . Y .r: `
soy!
y'.
srHar 3
[.Mill\/
R° Y ff k;-i Via`_ nr•:_:
�,a�
t.3 —urdsr >q. ss4rer.o y /��5_ _ .:`
x jnx sr snxsL. �. s,r s i
"3i rrx,i xstK.fftW-
_—
S� _ , Fri'ndir
1 i
I_—____
F
----------
f �
t /
7
0 6,000 1
\-\�-� rY. .>'�n •0•0" � � SCALE IN FEET
Kimlep Horn
_7 NICHOLS
w..?��"/I cin of
G� Lubbock
rues
2. 2030 Employment
Employment data for the year 2030 was based upon data from the Future Land Use Plan in
the City's PlanLubbock204O Comprehensive Plan. For assumption purposes, an interpolation
of these numbers was calculated to derive the 2030 employment estimates for each service
area. Table 4 shows the base year 2020 and projected 2030 employment for each service
area, broken down into basic, service, and retail employment types. Table 5 shows the net
growth in each service area by employment type and the percent change over the ten-year
planning period.
TABLE 4. CITY OF LUBBOCK PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATIONS
Service
Basic Employment*
Service Employment*
Retail Employment*
Area
2020
2030
2020
2030
2020
2030
A
31,000
35,000
1,419,000
1,618,000
11,995,000
13,684,000
B
9,638,000
10,995,000
5,720,000
6,526,000
6,014,000
6,860,000
C
34,904,000
39,819,000
17,396,000
19,845,000
6,614,000
7,546,000
D
30,105,000
34,344,000
5,915,000
1 6,748,000
8,172,000
1 9,322,000
E
0
0
1,266,000
1,444,000
9,809,000
11,190,000
F
832,000
950,000
1,385,000
1,580,000
8,747,000
9,979,000
G
0
0
2,470,000
2,818,000
8,413,000
9,598,000
H
0
1 0 11
11,033,000
12,586,000
8,958,000
10,220,000
TOTAL
75,510,000
1 86,143,000
46,604,000
53,165,000
68,722,000
78,399,000
*Employment numbers are in square footage.
TABLE 5. CITY OF LUBBOCK PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT ADDED
Service Area
Basic Employment
Added*
Service Employment
Added*
Retail Employment
Added*
A
4,000
199,000
1,689,000
B
1,357,000
806,000
846,000
C
4,915,000
2,449,000
932,000
D
4,239,000
833,000
1,150,000
E
0
178,000
1,381,000
F
118,000
195,000
1,232,000
G
0
348,000
1,185,000
H
0
1,553,000
1,262,000
TOTAL
10,6331000
1 6,561,000
9,677,000
*Employment numbers are in square footage.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 20 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley*Horn
IFWFREESE
NWHOLS
E. Land Use Assumptions Summary
ram;.;::: r City cil
r Lubbock
Table 6 summarizes the residential and non-residential 10-year growth projections within the
City of Lubbock for 2020 and 2030.
TABLE 6. RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL PROJECTIONS FOR THE CITY OF LUBBOCK
Residential Dwelling Units
Non -Residential Square Feet
Service Area
Year
Single -Family
Multi -Family
Basic
Service
Retail
2020
5,862
2,442
31,000
1,419,000
11,995,000
A
-
2030
9,847
3,126
35,000
1,618,000
13,684,000
2020
7,091
4,028
9,638,000
5,720,000
6,014,000
B
2030
11,484
5,156
10,995,000
6,526,000
6,860,000
2020
1,784
236
K34,904,000
17,396,000
6,614,000
C
2030
2,289
302
39,819,000
19,845,000
7,546,000
2020
3,925
1,055
30,105,000
5,915,000
8,172,000
D
-
2030
5,043
1,351
34,344,000
6,748,000
9,322,000
2020
6,914
862
0
1,266,000
9,809,000
E
2030
11,074
1,103
0
1,444,000
11,190,000
2020
10,883
1,910
832,000
1,385,000
8,747,000
F
2030
17,579
19,208
2,445
950,000
1,580,000
9,979,000
2020
6,648
0
2,470,000
8,413,000
G
2030
19,594
8,510
0
2,818,000
9,598,000
2020
21,700
11,432
0
11,033,000
8,958,000
H
2030
22,127
14,634
0
12,586,000
10,220,000
Sub -Total (2020 - 2030)
21,670
8,014
10,633,000
6,561,000
9,677,000
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 21 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley*Horn
ICHOLS 917N
IV. SERVICE UNITS
A. Overview
YLubbock
f F3.55
The "service unit" is a measure of consumption or use of the capital facilities by new
development. In other words, it is the unit of measure used to quantify the supply and
demand for roads and utilities in the City. Service units are attributable to an individual unit
of development and utilized to calculate the maximum impact fee of a development.
B. Roadway Service Units
For transportation purposes, the service unit is defined as a vehicle -mile. A "vehicle -mile"
refers to the capacity consumed in a single lane by a vehicle making a trip one mile in length
during the PM peak hour. The PM peak hour is the one -hour period during the
afternoon/evening when the highest vehicular volumes are observed. In accordance with the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, I Ofh Edition, the PM Peak is
used as the basis for transportation planning and the estimation of trips caused by new
development.
C. Wastewater and Water Service Units
A wastewater service unit is defined as the wastewater service provided to a customer with a
water connection for a single-family residence. A water service unit is defined as a service
equivalent to a water connection for a single-family residence.
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 maximum rated capacity
of the meters as shown from the American Water Works Association (AWWA) Manual M6
Water Meters — Selection, Installation, Testing, and Maintenance, 51h Edition Standards C700,
C701, C702 and C703. Larger meters have a ratio to the base (single-family) meter size
based on the values from AWWA Manual M6 and the maximum impact fee for each meter
size is calculated from the ratio.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees
City of Lubbock, Texas
22
March 2020
Kimley*Horn
FREESE
iNICHOLS
V. CAPACITY PLANS
A. Overview
c_ c•,L� �r
Lubbock
The City and project staff have identified the transportation and utility projects needed to
accommodate the projected growth over the next ten (10) years within the City of Lubbock.
These projects include existing, proposed, and recently completed projects that were
determined based on their current or anticipated impact on each defined Service Area and
the City as a whole. The methodology behind each individual Capacity Plan is outlined
further in the succeeding report sections.
Based on standard impact fee practices as outlined in Chapter 395 of the Texas Local
Government Code, a defined project list of this type would typically be defined as a
"capital improvements plan." As explained by state law, a CIP refers to a plan that
"identifies capital improvements or facility expansions for which impact fees may be assessed."
However, to avoid confusion with pre-existing plans already established by the City of
Lubbock, City and project staff, as well as the CIAC, have agreed to refer to these project
lists as "Capacity Plans", rather than "Capital Improvements Plans."
B. Roadway Capacity Plan
1. Roadway Projects
The City of Lubbock's Master Thoroughfare Plan is the ultimate plan for the roadway
infrastructure within the City Limits. To determine the specific roadway projects that would
ultimately form the Roadway Capacity Plan (RCP), City and project staff used the MTP to
find all existing (Widening) or proposed (New) roadway projects, as well as projects that
have been completed within the last ten (10) years (Completed). This initial project list,
known as the "Universe of Projects", was then reevaluated by the City and project staff, as
well as the CIAC, to determine which projects would have the greatest impact towards
projected growth patterns over the next ten (10) years, thus removing several projects that
were considered less impactful on the thoroughfare network. The proposed RCP is mapped
in Exhibits 5.A — 5.H for each individual service area.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 23 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kidep Horn
I7 MCHOL ■"S
`#Lubbock
TI:L.S
2. Intersection Projects
The RCP also includes major intersection improvement projects. All major intersection
improvements were based on direction from City of Lubbock staff. Based on the City's
direction, the only major improvement included in the RCP is the Installation of a New Traffic
Signal at currently unsignalized intersections between two arterial streets and a selection of
arterial -to -collector intersections.
All intersection improvement recommendations are recommended to undergo a design level
evaluation before implementation to ensure the most appropriate improvements are made.
In the case where a design level evaluation determines improvements at a particular
intersection that are contrary to those outlined in the RCP, such as turn lane improvements in
place of a signal, the RCP cost allocated to the intersection may still be applied to the
alternate improvements for that intersection.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees
City of Lubbock, Texas
24
March 2020
Legend
Project Type
••... New
Widening
Completed
Other Thoroughfare Facilities
Intersections
• Arterial -Arterial
Arterial -Collector
Landmarks
Streams
�— Railroads
L JI Outer Cities ETJ
�.J Outer Cities
Miscellaneous
4W Roadway Project Number
Project Delineator
Legend
Project Type
••• New
Widening
— Median
— Completed
— Other Thoroughfare Facilities
Intersections
• Arterial -Arterial
Arterial -Collector
Landmarks
Streams
-� Railroads
r.0 Outer Cities ETJ
t@ Outer Cities
Miscellaneous
� Roadway Project Number
w
a
LU
w
z
D
B
w
Q 0
Fn
ERSKINy ST ,<V=�
> Q
j 0,
N
City of
WE
91,Lubbock+.
Etzar S
Exhibit S.0
Service Area C prepared by:
Roadway Capacity Plan Kidep Horn
0 0.25 o.s > >.s z
�71NICHOLS
Miles March 2020
® STONE HILL ST
w
FM-2641
C. ;i
w
,. 0
J I i�
t5t5
SKINE ST
z
Y
0:
W
2
D
f z i
7
�a D FM 4
Legend
Project Type
Landmarks
••••• New
—•— Streams
Widening
- Railroads
Completed
L J1 Outer Cities ETJ
— Other Thoroughfare
Facilities 0 Outer Cities
Intersections
Miscellaneous
Arterial -Arterial
Roadway Project Number
Arterial -Collector
Project Delineator
Legend
Project Type
••••• New
Widening
Completed
— Other Thoroughfare Facilities
Intersections
Arterial -Arterial
Arterial -Collector
Landmarks
— Streams
Railroads
L J I Outer Cities ETJ
Outer Cities
Miscellaneous
Roadway Project Number
Project Delineator
X1rzrr N
,' City of
�' LubbockW E
E as S
Exhibit 51 Prepared by:
Service Area E KimleyoHorn
Roadway Capacity Plan FREESE
01111KNICHOLS
0 0.125 025 0.5 0.75 1 March 2020
M 105
114TH ST w
L cr
1 w o
Y Z
� — I
cf
I�
E
130TH ST 130TH.ST
w
-41 � Q
/n
W
w
L
�z
H)1=
�0..... t146T'ST
Legend
Project Type
Landmarks
••••• New
Streams
Widening
—+— Railroads
Completed
& JI Outer Cities ETJ
— Other Thoroughfare
Facilities 0 Outer Cities
Intersections
Miscellaneous
• Arterial -Arterial
Roadway Project Number
Arterial -Collector
— Project Delineator
C
_
-1
Legend
Project Type
New
Widening
Completed
Other Thoroughfare Facilities
Intersections
Arterial -Arterial
Arteria l-Col lector
Landmarks
Streams
t Railroads
Outer Cities ETJ
0 Outer Cities
Miscellaneous
® Roadway Project Number
�s N
It
34TH ST City of
ubbock W E
iExaS
- +_i Exhibit 5.G _� _ Prepared by:
Service Area G
Kimley>Morn
Roadway Capacity Plan
emu, aw.j�._FREESE
A
0 025 0.5 > >s 2 ff-INNICHOLS
March 2020
50TH ST
EL
T- w w
T ._ ___._._� .._.. } o �1 >
_ 9 V
TA I 82ND ST
`-_`CY
�
i.
w 98TH ST
Q
Q
Z
STD 1 1
Legend
Project Type
Landmarks
••••• New
Streams
Widening
Railroads
Completed
L J I Outer Cities ETJ
Other Thoroughfare
Facilities 0 Outer Cities
Intersections
Miscellaneous
Arterial -Arterial
® Roadway Project Number
Arterial -Collector
f
Exhibit 5.H
Service Area H
Roadway Capacity Plan
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2
M les
Legend
Project Type
New
Widening
Completed
— Other Thoroughfare Facilities
Intersections
Arterial -Arterial
() Arterial -Collector
Landmarks
— Streams
-+— Railroads
L J I Outer Cities ED
Outer Cities
Miscellaneous
® Roadway Project Number
Kimlepffiorn
r�FREESE
NICHOLS
J cIt% of
Lubbock
resas
The projects within the Roadway Capacity Plan were evaluated to determine the total
amount of vehicle -miles of capacity added to each Roadway Service Area with the addition
of the projects from the RCP. To calculate this net vehicle -mile capacity, the following items
were determined for each Service Area:
Total Vehicle -Miles of Supply: The total supply is based on the total project length (miles),
number of lanes, and capacity (vehicles per hour), which are provided by the Master
Thoroughfare Plan. In other words, total vehicle -miles of supply refer to the total amount of
lane capacity currently available within a mile -long stretch of roadway for a particular
roadway project. The capacities per roadway type used to calculate supply are provided in
Table 7.
TABLE 7. SERVICE VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED FACILITIES
Hourly Vehicle -Mile
Proposed
Cross Section
Facility Classification
Median Configuration
Capacity per Lane -Mile of
Roadway Facility
PA
Principal Arterial
Undivided
840
PA-M
Principal Arterial (Modified)
Undivided
750
MA
Minor Arterial
Undivided
750
Total Vehicle -Miles of Existing Demand: The total existing demand is based on trip length
(miles) and existing peak hour volume. In other words, total vehicle -miles of existing demand
refer to the current demand of lane capacity required for an individual land use
development unit. The capacities per roadway type used to calculate existing demand are
provided in Table 9. The roadway type in Table 9 represents what is actually built, not
necessarily what is identified on the Master Thoroughfare Plan.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 33 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimlep)) Horn
ffi7 NICHOLS
ct� of
��Lubbock
TABLE 8. SERVICE VOLUMES FOR EXISTING FACILITIES
Roadway
Type
Description
I I
Hourly Vehicle -Mile
Capacity per Lane -Mile of
Roadway Facility
2U
Two-lane undivided
510
3U
Three -lane undivided (TWLTL)
650
4D
Four -lane divided
750
4U
Four -lane undivided
570
5D
Five -lane divided
750
5U
Five -lane undivided (TWLTL)
650
6D
Six -lane divided
840
6U
Six -lane undivided
750
7D
Seven -lane divided
840
7U
Seven -lane undivided (TWLTL)
750
8D
Eight -lane divided
840
8U
Eight -lane undivided
750
Total Vehicle -Miles of Existing Deficiencies: The existing deficiencies are based on existing
vehicle -mile supply and demand. A roadway is considered to have a vehicle -mile deficiency
if its current demand exceeds its current supply.
The purpose of an impact fee is to fund infrastructure that is affected by new development
(i.e. growth projections). Because impact fees cannot be used towards existing demand or
deficiencies, the net vehicle -mile capacity is calculated by subtracting both existing demand
and existing deficiency vehicle -miles from the current supply. Table 9 outlines the net
capacity for each Roadway Service Area.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 34 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimlep Horn
r•�4NICHOLS
TABLE 9. VEHICLE -MILE NET CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
r�it� of
��
Lubbock
TEYf S
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Total Vehicle Miles of
Supply
104,360
56,741
56,250
53,815
78,230
58,693
3,954
1,176
Total Vehicle Miles of
Existing Demand
12,209
5,122
923
6,072
9,772
7,080
522
0
Total Vehicle Miles of
Existing Deficiencies
714
824
0
0
1,096
894
3,052
0
Net Amount of
Vehicle -Miles Added
91,437
50,795
55,327
47,743
67,362
50,719
380
1,176
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 35 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley) Horn
Y Lubbtock
r72NICHOLS P
rD,:5
C. Wastewater Capacity Plan
Within the 10-year growth window, the City expects to make facility and infrastructure
upgrades to the wastewater collection system. The response to growth is the need for the
Capacity Plan to support the development trends and growth rate projections from the Land
Use Assumptions. The project team worked with City Staff and the CIAC to identify projects
eligible for Impact Fee cost recovery. The projects include proposed projects from the City's
Wastewater Master Plan. These identified projects have capacity to serve the projected
growth over the next 10 years. The following list shows the types of projects included in the
analysis:
• Treatment plant expansions
• Collection system interceptors (regional and localized)
• Lift Stations and force mains
The projects identified in the capacity plan are to address system growth. Using the
population and non-residential growth projections from the Land Use Assumptions and
planning per-capitas/pea king factors from the Wastewater Master Plan, the project team
was able to calculate the increase in flows during the 10-year window. Table 10 summarizes
the increase in wastewater flows due to growth.
TABLE 10. WASTEWATER FLOW PROJECTIONS FOR IMPACT FEES
2020 PEAK FLOW 12030 PEAK FLOW 11 INCREASE IN PEAK FLOW
SERVICE AREA (MGD)
Citywide 59.57
67.19
7.62
Table 11 shows the eligible projects for the Wastewater Capacity Plan. Exhibit 6 shows the
identified eligible impact fee projects. Locations shown for interceptors and other
recommended improvements were generalized for hydraulic analyses. Specific alignments
and sites will be determined as part of the design process. The next steps in the analysis are
to determine the 10-year utilization of the projects to calculate the eligible cost for the
Wastewater Impact Fee calculation.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees
City of Lubbock, Texas
36
March 2020
Kimley*Horn
ICHOL r-�NS
TABLE 11. WASTEWATER CAPACITY PLAN PROJECTS
AA f S V, it� of
Lubbock
TfifA$
Project ID
Description
Total Project Cost
1
36-inch 138th Street Sewer Line Extension
$8,182,500
2 121-inch
Downtown Sewer Improvements Phase 1
$2,364,640
3
24-/30-inch Downtown Sewer Improvements Phase 2
$5,764,050
4
21-/24-/30-inch West Loop Improvements Phase 1
$9,497,400
5
21-inch West Loop Improvements Phase 2
$4,751,290
6
Permanent Flow Metering Program
$277,200
7
21-/24-inch Auburn Street Improvements
$6,027,210
8
11 5-inch 1 14th Street Sewer Line Extension Phase 1
$1,660,950
9
arlisle LS Expansion and Force Main Improvements
$2,333,200
10
16-inch Indiana LS Force Main
$3,767,700
11
15-inch 1 14th Street Sewer Line Extension Phase 2
F $1,752,300
12
12-inch Upland Avenue Sewer Line Extension
$1,429,600
13
1 2-inch Alcove Avenue Sewer Line Extension
$1,387,600
14
12-inch Inler Avenue Sewer Line Extension
$2,576,700
15
15-inch Stonewood LS Sewer Line Extension
$4,325,600
16
21-inch 130th Street Sewer Line Extension
$3,401,700
17
Northwest Water Reclamation Plant Expansion
$46,1 25,000
18
30-inch Ursuline Street Sewer Line Extension
$8,608,000
19
1 2-inch Kent Street Sewer Line Extension
$1,163,500
20
1 2-inch E Kent Street Sewer Line Extension
$2,291,900
21
18-/21-inch 1-27 Interceptor Improvements Phase 1
$6,558,100
22
15-/18-inch 1-27 Interceptor Improvements Phase 2
$3,664,600
GRAND TOTAL COST
$127,910,740
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 37 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
DRAFT EXHIBIT 6
CITY OF LUBBOCK
IMPACT FEE ELIGIBLE
WASTEWATER CAPACITY PLAN
LEGEND
m L!I S.—
Prtw iMag—
® \'lalar R.chmalion PYnl
�� R91wal
— 10'anO Small
qpy
\YashwaW LNa
_ Ir.ra wxr
IYasU+nhr LiM
wtrwa
�a Fort'a .'an
-�>r -Strewn
Parul
1Yaslewler
S.rviu Ma
[�GY LmI
ArA
KimleyoHorn
h.,,
Lubbock
4
r�r\
rii£NICHOLS
•. 6 1 P..man.m Fw+. m.Ler.
IMP,ACf FEE ELIGIBU
IMPROVEMENTS
Q" vamh,MlFw m.<r
Ip \,nsu\w
® Wa�ar Rechna',m Pw
0
KimlepMorn
FREESE
1 MICHOLS
D. Water Capacity Plan
Lubbock
,04S
Within the 10-year growth window, the City expects to make facility and infrastructure
upgrades to the water distribution system. The response to growth is the need for the
Capacity Plan to support the development trends and growth rate projections from the Land
Use Assumptions. The project team worked with City Staff and the CIAC to identify projects
eligible for Impact Fee cost recovery. The proposed projects come from the City's Water
Distribution System Master Plan. These identified projects have capacity to serve the
projected growth over the next 10 years. The following list shows the types of projects
included in the analysis:
• Treatment Plant Expansions
• Storage Tanks
• Pump Stations
• Distribution System Mains
• Transmission Mains
The projects identified in the capacity plan are to address system growth. Using the
population and non-residential growth projections from the Land Use Assumptions and
planning per-capitas/pea king factors from the Water Distribution System Master Plan, the
project team was able to calculate the increase in demands during the 10-year window.
Table 12 summarizes the increase in water demands due to growth.
TABLE 12. WATER DEMAND PROJECTIONS FOR IMPACT FEES
SERVICE AREA
2020 MAX DAY
DEMAND (MGD)
2030 MAX DAY
DEMAND (MGD)
INCREASE IN MAX DAY
DEMAND (MGD)
Citywide
71.97
1 89.52
1 17.56
Table 13 shows the eligible projects for the Water Capacity Plan. Exhibit 7 shows the
identified impact fee eligible projects. The next steps in the analysis are to determine the
10-year utilization of the projects to calculate the eligible cost for the Water Impact Fee
calculation.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees
City of Lubbock, Texas
39
March 2020
KidepMorn
r79-NICHOLS
TABLE 13. WATER CAPACITY PLAN PROJECTS
of
Lubbock
T f Y 4 S
Project ID
F Description
Total Project Cost
102.0
MG 50th Street Elevated Storage Tank
$4,833,200
2
2.0 MG Milwaukee Elevated Storage Tank
$4,799,800
3
115 MGD Low Head "C" Pump Station and 36-inch Line
$33,513,100
4 12.0
MG 82nd Street Elevated Storage Tank
$4,829,000
5
2.0 MG 3rd Street Elevated Storage Tank
$4,766,400
b 112.0
MG Clovis Highway Elevated Storage Tank
$4,900,000
7 Ill2-inch
Alcove Avenue/1 141h Street Water Line
$2,954,900
8 Ill2-inch
98th Street Alcove Avenue Water Line
$2,038,000
9 112-inch
Milwaukee Avenue/Erskine Street Water Line
$1,894,100
10
112-inch Kent Street Water Line
$2,960,100
11
12-inch Kent Street Water Line
$2,550,700
12 Ill2-inch
Ursuline Street/N. Frankford Avenue Water Line
$2,790,800
13
12-inch N. Avenue Q Water Line
$1,389,000
14
Lake Alan Henry WTP Expansion to 20 MGD
$2,893,400
15
12-inch Ursuline Street Water Line
$404,200
16
12-inch Interstate 27 Water Line
$4,623,000
17
Pump Station #15 Expansion
$3,218,200
18
12-inch 1301h Street Water Line Phase 1
$1,490,100,
19
12-inch 1301h Street Water Line Phase II
$1,439,600
20
12-inch 130th Street Water Line Phase III
$1,250,200
21 112-inch
130th Street Water Line Phase V
$2,752,800
22
112-inch 130th Street Water Line Phase IV
$2,929,600
GRAND TOTAL COSTJ
$95,220,200
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 40 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
No Text
Kimlep Horn
EREESE �
Lubbock
�NNICHOLS „ (, s
VI. TOTAL PROJECT COSTS
A. Overview
With the overall Capacity Plans established, the next step in the impact fee process is to
determine the total project costs for each roadway, wastewater, and water project. 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 Roadway Capacity Plan who is not an
employee of the political subdivision."
Only the City's project cost is included. If outside funding sources were utilized, they are not
included.
The maximum assessable impact fee does not specifically cover the entire cost of a roadway,
wastewater or water project. The percentage of a project's cost that is impact fee eligible
will be outlined in a future chapter, Recoverable Project Costs.
B. Roadway Capacity Plan Project Costs
The engineer's opinion of the probable costs of the projects in the RCP 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 cost for location specific
items such as bridges, drainage structures, railroad crossings, or any other special
components are added to each project, as appropriate. In addition, projects in which the
City has contributed a portion, or all, of the project costs have been included in the RCP as
lump sum projects. Based upon discussions with City of Lubbock staff, TxDOT-driven projects
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 42
City of Lubbock, Texas
March 2020
Kimley>>> Horn
r7 NICHOLS
MY, Ity of
Lubbock
i[k1$
have been included in the RCP as a 20% portion of the total cost where the City anticipates
contributing a portion of the total project costs.
Tables 14.A — 14.H present the 10-Year Roadway Capacity Plan project lists for each
service area with planning level project costs. It should be noted that these tables reflect
only conceptual -level opinions or assumptions regarding the portions of future project costs
that are potentially recoverable through impact fees. Actual project costs are likely to
change with time and are dependent on market and economic conditions that cannot be
predicted.
The RCP establishes the list of projects for which Impact Fees may be utilized. Projects not
included in the RCP are not eligible to receive impact fee funding. The cost projections
utilized in this study should not be utilized for the City's construction CIP.
Attributes listed in Tables 14.A — 14.H are defined as follows:
• Project Number — Identifies which Service Area the project is in with a corresponding
number. The corresponding number does not represent any prioritizations and is used
only to identify projects. For example, Project E-7 is in Service Area E and is the 71h
project on the list.
• Class — The costing class to be used in the analysis, based on the ultimate classification
according to the Master Thoroughfare Plan. The impact fee class provides the width and
depth for the various elements in the facility cross section. All classifications are defined
in Table 7.
• Roadway — A unique identifier for each project.
o Certain roadways have been divided into multiple projects based on factors such as
service area location and proposed costing class. For these road segments, a suffix
has been added to the name to indicate that the project is a part of a series. For
example, Milwaukee Avenue has been separated into five (5) segments. Therefore,
each Milwaukee Avenue project has an appended suffix associated with it (see
Tables 14.A and 14.F).
• Limits — Represents the beginning and ending location for each project.
• Length ft — The distance measured in feet that is used to cost out the project.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 43 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
KimlepO Horn
•111FREE5E
MCHOLS
It) of
Lubbock
[s.r.s
• Percentage in Service Area — Indicates if a roadway exists fully within a Service Area or
shares a border with additional service areas and/or the ETJ.
• Total Project Cost — Represents the total cost of the entire project.
• Cost in Service Area — Represents the amount of the project cost for which the Service
Area in question is responsible. For example, a segment of 98th Street is a border street
for Service Areas E and G. Each of these Service Areas would be responsible for 50%
of the total project cost.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 44
City of Lubbock, Texas
March 2020
Kimley>>)Horn ��►�i of
IrO NWHOLS Lubbock
TABLE 14.A. 10-YEAR ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN
WITH CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS - SERVICE AREA A
Prof. #
Class
Roadway
Limits
Length
(�)
,1 In
Service
Area
Total Project
Cos[
Cost In Ser%I
Area
A-1
MA
50th St (1)
300' W of Railroad Tracks to Milwaukee Ave
0.07
100%
$ 1,153,000
S 1,153
A-2
PA-M
Alcove Ave (1)
34th St to 50th St
1.00
50%
S 6,403,000
S 3,201
Ursuline St (1)
1.00
100%
A-3
MA
Milwaukee Ave to Frankford Ave
$ 6,403,000
S 6,403
50th St (2)
1.01
$ 8,707,000
A-4
PA
City Limits to Upland Ave
100%
S 8,707
A-5
MA
50th St (3)
Upland Ave to 300' W of Railroad Tracks
0.93
100%
S 6,723,000
S 6,723
A-6
PAN
66th St
Alcove Ave to US 6182 SBFR
1.19
100%
S 10,007,000
S 10,007
A-7
PAN
Alcove Ave (2)
City Limits to 34th St
2.12
100%
S 16,073,000
S 16,073
A-8
PA-M
Alcove Ave (3)
50th St to US 62 82 SBFR
S 7,135
1.88
50%
S 14,271.000
A-9
PA
Erskine St (1)
City Limits to Frankford Ave
1.23
S 10,588
100%
S 10,588,000
FM 179
2.25
A-10
PA
660' N of FM 2255 to 630' S of 34th St
100%
$ 4,314,600
S 4,314
A-11
PAN
FM 2255 (1)
FM 309 to 2,705' E of FM 309
0.51
50%
S 828,200
S 414
A-12
PA-M
FM 2255 (2)
CR 1340 to Venita Ave
2.33
100%
S 3,925,000
S 3,925
PA-M
PAN
FM 309 (1)
0.49
S 949.000
A-13
FM 2255 to 12th St
12th St to City Limits
50%
100%
S 474
S 2,802
A-14
FM 309 (2)
1.64
S 2,802,800
PA-M
2.00
50%
S 14,458,000
A-15, B4
Frankford Ave (1)
Kent St to Erskine St
S 7,229
A-16
PA
Milwaukee Ave (1)
Kent St to CR 6430
S 6,068
1.41
50%
S 12,136,000
A-17
PA Q 7)
Milwaukee Ave (2)
CR 6430 to Hanover Street
0.35
100%
$ 961.000
S 961
A-18
PA
Milwaukee Ave (3)
Hanover St to FM 2255
1.22
100%
S 11,210,000
S 11,210
A-19
PA
SH 114
City Limits to Milwaukee Ave
4.12
100%
S 8,075
$ 8.075.000
Upland Ave (1)
City Limits to US 62182 SBFR
100%
A-20
PA-M
4.28
S 32,399,000
S 32,399
Location
Improvement(s)
In
Service
Area
Total Project
Cost
Cost in Servl
Area
S 350
Alcove Ave & 34th St
Install Traffic Signal
100%
S 350,000
1-2
1-3
E
Upland Ave & 34th St
Alcove Ave & 50th St
Install Traffic Signal
Install Traffic Signal
$ 350,000
S 350,000
S 350
S 175
100%
50%
1-0
E
Upland Ave & 50th St
Install Traffic Signal
100%
$ 350,000
S 350
1-5
1-6
a
Milwaukee Ave & 50th St
Alcove Ave & 661h Ave
Install Traffic Signal
Install Traffic Signal
100%
50%
S 350
S 175
S 350,000
S 350,000
1-7
d
Upland Ave & 66th Ave
Install Traffic Signal
100%
S 350,000
S 350
1-8
2
Milwaukee Ave & Erskine St
Install Traffic Signal
S 350.000
S 350
100%
1-9
Milwaukee Ave & Ursuline St
Install Traffic Signal
S 350,000
S 175
50%
1-10
CR 1540 & 50th St
Install Traffic Signal
S 300,000
S 300
100%
1-11
Iola Ave & 34th St
Install Traffic Signal
I
I 100%
S 300.0001
S 300
Service Area Roadway Project Cost Subtotal
S 147,864,
Service Area Intersection Project Cost Subtotal
S 3,225,
2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area
$ 20,
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 Lubbock.
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.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 45
City of Lubbock, Texas
March 2020
KimlepMorn 101ice Cit, of
1 FREESE LL1Ubock
�"7<NICHOLS rtx is
TABLE 14.B. 10-YEAR ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN
WITH CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS - SERVICE AREA B
Sentce Area
Prof. #
Class
Roadway
Limits
Length
% In
Service
Total Project
Cost In Sery
(nil)
Area
Cost
Area
B-I
MA
Ursuline St (2)
Frankford Ave to Quaker Ave
2.00
100%
S 12,828.000
S 12,828
B-2
MA
Erskine St (2)
University Ave to Ave K
1.30
100%
S 10,147,000
S 10,147
B-3, C-12
PA
FM 2641 (1)
1,18
50%
$ 2,430,200
Ave Q to US 87
S 1,215
A-15, RA
PA-M
Frankford Ave (1)
2.00 _
_50%
S 11,295,000
S 5,647
Kent St to Erskine St
B-5
Kent St
S 4,790,000
S 2,395
PA-M
Frankford Ave to US Hwy 84
0.66
50%
B-6
PA
University Ave (1)
Kent St to Drake St
1.49
100%
S 12,852,000
S 12,852
B-7
MA
Ursuline St (3)
Quaker Ave to US Hwy 84
0.23
100%
S 1,652,000
S 1.652
B-8
PA (113)
Slide Rd (1)
US Hwy 84 to Marshall St
1.47
100%
S 642,000
S 642
B-9
PA (113)
US Hwy 84 (1)
Kent St to City Limits
0.41
_
S 178.800
S 178
_
100%
8-10
PA (1(3)
City Limits to Loop 289
1.21
100%
$ 529,600
S 529
US Hwy 84 (2)
B-I I
PA
Erskine St (3)
Frankford Ave to Loop 289
1.78
100%
S 5,051,000
S 5,051
0e
B-12
MA
Erskine St(4)
Texas Tech Pkwy to Indiana Ave
0.97
100%
$ 1,445,000
S 1,445
B-13
PA
Slide Rd (2)
100%
S 1,004,600
S 1,004
Erskine St to Loop 289
0.82
LocationImproveotent(s)
%In
Sentce
Total Project
Cost In San
c E
Area
Cost
Area
1-12
Knoxville Ave & 4th St
Install Traffic Signal
50%
S 300,000
S 15C
1-13
e
Slide Rd & Ursuline St
Install Traffic Signal
100%
S 350,000
S 35C
= 8
_
Quaker Ave &Ursuline St
1-14
Install Traffic Signal
100%
S 350.000
_
S 35C
1-15
University Ave & Drake St
Install Traffic Signal
100%
S 300.000
S 30C
1-16
Elkhart Ave & 4th St
Install Traffic Signal
100%
S 300,000
S 30C
Service Area Roadway Project Cost Subtotal
S 55,587,
Service Area Intersection Project Cost Subtotal
S 1,450
I
2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area
S 20
Total Cost In SERVICE AREA B
$ 57,058
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 Lubbock.
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.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees
City of Lubbock, Texas
46
March 2020
Kimley»)Horn
�'� • cti, ,r
Ir-M NWHOLS Lubbock
TETS
TABLE 14.C. 10-YEAR ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN
WITH CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS — SERVICE AREA C
Service Area
Proj. p
Class
Roadway
Limits
Length
% In
Service
Total Project
Cost In Sery
(ntl)
Area
Cost
Area
C-1
PA-M
Avenue P (1)
Utah St to FM 1294
1.00
50%
S 6,396,000
S 3,198
C-2
MA
_ Avenue P (2)
FM 1294 to Keuka St
1.00
50%
S 7,118.000
S 3,559
C-3
PA-M
CR 6440 to Erskine SI
Boles Rd
0.52
100%
S 3.350.000
S 3,350
C-4
PA-M
Fiddlewood Ave
City Limits to Erskine St
0.63
50%
S 4,036,000
S 2,018
C-5
PA-M
Keuka St (1)
City Limits to Railroad Tracks
0.88
30%
S 6,693.000
S 3,346
C-6
PA-M
Keuka St (2)
Railroad Tracks to US 87
0.61
100%
$ 4,V9,000
S 4,279
C-7
MA
Municipal Or (1)
Guava Ave to Olive Ave
1.14
100%
S 7,282,000
S 7,282
C-8
MA
Olive Ave (1)
City Limits to FM 2641
0.12
50%
S 741,000
S 37C
C-9, D-7
PA-M
_
US 62182 NBFR to 1040' E of US 62/82 NBFR
0.20
50%
$ 1,426,000
S 713
Erskine St (5)
C-10
PA-M
1.81
50%
S 13,094,000
S 6,547
_
Erskine St (6)
1040' E of US 62182 NBFR to Fiddlewood Ave
C-1 I
PA
FM 1294
2.00
100%
S 4,008,000
S 4,008
Avenue P to Martin Luther King Jr Blvd
B-3, C-12
PA
FM 2641 (1)
M Q to US 87
1.18
50%
S 2,272,800
S 1,136
C-13
PA
FM 2641 (2)
US 87 to Martin Luther King Jr Blvd
0.98
100%
S 1.890,800
$ 1,890
C-14
PA
FM 2641 (3)
Martin Luther King Jr Blvd to City Limits
2.14
S 4,103
100%
S 4,103.600
C-15
MA
Martin Luther King Jr Blvd (1)
City Limits to 2,590' S of FM 1294
1.19
S 9,283,000
S 4,641
50%
V
Martin Luther King Jr Blvd (2)
50%
C-16
MA
_
2,590' S of FM 1294 to Keuka St
0.50
S 3,645.000
S 1.822
e
C-17
MA
Martin Luther King Jr Blvd (3)
Keuka St to Stone Hill St
1.01
50%
S 7,995.000
S 3,997
_ C-18 _
_ MA
Municipal Dr (2)
Loop 289 WBFR to Guava Ave
0.84
100%
S 6,106,000
S 6,106
C-19
MA
_ _
Stone Hill St (1)
_ _
City Limits to Avenue P
0.54
50%
S 3,933,000
_
S 1,966
C-20
MA
Stone Hill Si (2)
1.01
50%
S 8,015,000
S 4,007
_ _
Martin Luther King Jr Blvd to Guava Ave
Guava Ave to 2600' E of Guava Ave
S 3,564.000
C-21
MA
Stone Hill St (3)
0.49
100%
S 3.564
C-22
MA
Stone Hill St (4)
2600' E of Guava Ave to City Limits
0.50
50%
S 3,584,000
S 1,792-
C-23
—
PA-M
--
Wood Ave (1)
._........... .............................
City Limits to CR 6440
0.50
50%
S 3,619,000
S 1,805
C-24
PA-M
Wood Ave (2)
—
US 62'82 NBFR to CR 6440
0.10
100%
S 748,000
S 748
°o
% In
e
Location
Improvements)
Sen Ice
Total Project
Cost In Sen
>
h Q
Area
Cost
Area
9 a
6
1-17
Martin Luther King Jr Blvd & Stone Hill St
Install Traffic Signal
50°a
S 350,000
S 175
Service Area Project Cost Subtotal
S 76,256
Service Area Intersection Project Cost Subtotal
S 175
2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area
S 20
Total Cost In SERVICE AREA C
$ 76,452
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 Lubbock.
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.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees
City of Lubbock, Texas
47
March 2020
Kimley>>>Horn
l'ih of
�r FREESE pLLlUbock
"7<NICHOLS T t A A s
TABLE 14.D. 10—YEAR ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN
WITH CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS — SERVICE AREA D
Length
% In
Total Project
Cost In Servi
Service Area
Proj. N
Class
Roadway
Limits
(mi)
Service
Cost
Area
Area
D-1
PA
82nd St (1)
Martin Luther King Jr Blvd to Olivc Ave
2.17
50%
S 17,199.000
S 8,599
D-2
PA-M
Guava Ave
_ US Hwy 84 to 82nd St
0.30
100%
S 1,942,000
S 1,942
D-3
MA
19th St
1.77
100%
S 2,867,400
Ute Ave to City Limits
S 2.867
DA
4th St
0.75
100%
S 5,441,000
MA
US Hwy 82 to Loop 289
S 5,441
D-5
50th St (4)
1.18
100%
S 10,861,000
PA
Southeast Dr to City Limits
S 10,861
D-6
PA
82nd St (2)
IH-27 to Martin Luther King Jr Blvd
1.46
50%
S 12.526,000
S 6,263
C-9, D-7
PA-M
Erskine St (5)
US 62182 NBFR to 1040' E of US 62/82 NBFR
0.20
50%
S 1,426,000
S 713
D-8
PA
FM 40
Loop 289 to City Limits
0.27
100%
S 522.600
S 522
PA-M
Loop 289 EBFR to 82nd St
0.72
100°/n
S 5,188,000
S 5,188
D-9
Martin Luther King Jr Blvd (4)
Southeast Dr to US Hwy 84
0.33
100%
S 2,358,000
S 2,358
D-10
MA
Olive Ave (2)
D-I I
MA
800' E of Martin Luther King Jr Blvd to 1,420' E of Olivc Ave
3.02
100%
S 5,193,800
S 3,193
_
Southeast Dr (1)
t<ir
D.12
MA
Southeast Dr (2)
1,420' E of Olive Ave to 2,060' E of Olive Ave
0.66
50%
S 1,221,600
S 61 C
US H%vy 84 (3)
Martin Luther King Jr Blvd to Southeast Dr
3.06
100%
$ 5,877,800
D-13
PA
S 5,977
Location
Improvement(s)
In
Service
Total Project
Cost In Sery
a e
E
Area
Cost
Area
1-I8
Southeast Dr & 50th St
Install Traffic Signal
10010
S 350,000
S 35C
1-19
E
Marlin Luther King Jr Blvd & 82nd St
Install Traffic Signal
50%
S 350,000
S 175
1-20
Guava Ave & US Hwy 84
Install Traffic Signal
1000/0
S 350,000
S 35C
Service Area Project Cost Subtotal
S 56,437
Service Area Intersection Project Cost Subtotal
$ 875
2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area
$ 20
Total Cost in SERVICE AREA D
$ 57,333
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 Lubbock.
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.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees
City of Lubbock, Texas
in
March 2020
Kimley»)Horn ®���� Cit%of
ri1 NICHOLS Lubbock
TEXAS
TABLE 14.E. 10-YEAR ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN
WITH CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS - SERVICE AREA E
Service Area
Proj. p
Class
RoadNay
Limits
Length
Service
Project
Cost In Servi
(in[)Cost
Area
Cost
Area
E-I
PA -%I
146th St (1)
Frankford Ave to 1.790' F of Slidc Rd
1.34
50".
S 8.605.000
S 4.302
F.-2
PA -AI
146th St (2)
1.790' E of Slide Rd to Memphis Ave
Lit,
l00".
S 7.452.000
S 7,452
E-3
PA -AI
146th St (3)
Memphis Ave to University Ave
1.50
501.
S 9.606.000
S 4,803
E4
PA M
146th St (4)
University Ave to CR 2250
0.50
l00".
S 3.281.000
S 3.281
E-5
PA-M
146th St (5)
CR 2250 to Avenue P
0.49
50%
S 3,784.000
S 1.892
E-6
PA
Quaker Ave (1)
135th St to 1461h St
0.72
[ Wu
S 5,490.000
S 5,496
E-7
PA M
Quaker Avc f2)
146th St to 1650' S of 146th St
0.31
100%
S 2.003.000
S 2,003
E-8
PA-M
Quaker Ave (3)
1650' S of 146th St to Woodrow Rd
0.52
50".
S 3.314.000
S 1,657
E-9
MA
114th St 11)
Frankford Ave to City Limits
4.13
100".
S 30.584.000
S 30.584
F.-10. F-10
MA
Frankford Ave (2)
114th St to 146th St
2.00
50".
S 15,203.000
S 7,601
1 11
MA
Frankford Ave (3)
146th St to City Limits
0.13
50".
S 911.000
S 453
E-12
PA
Indiana Ave (1)
130th St to 1461h St
1.00
MID%
S 8.617.000
S 8.617
E-13
PA
Quaker Ave (4)
130th St to 135th St
0.28
I00".
S 2.412.000
S 2.412
E-14
PA
Slide Rd (3)
130th St to 146th St
1.00
100%
S 1.923.600
S 1.923
E-15
PA 42 7)
University Ave (2)
981h St to Ioodt St
0.14
100%
S 388.000
S 388
E-16
PA
University Ave (3)
100th St to City Limits
0.99
100".
S 8.520.000
S 8.520
E-17
PA
University Ave (4)
130th St to 146th St
1.00
100%
S 8,617.000
S 8.617
E-18
PA-M
University Ave (5)
146th St to City Limits
0.13
50%
S 911.000
S 455
E-19. G-1
PA
98th St (1)
University Ave to City Limits
1.57
501a
S 7.530.000
5 1765
E-20, F-13
PA
Frankford Ave 14)
98th St to 114th St
1.01
50".
S 5.354.000
S 2.677
L•-21
PA
Indiana Ave (2)
103th St to 130th St
1.68
100".
S 7,128.000
S 7.128
E-22
PA
Quaker Ave (51
9Sth St to 130th St
1.96
1 100".
S 9.428.000
S 9.428
In
Location
Improvement(s)
Service
Total Project
Cost In Servi
Area
Cost
Area
1-21
Frankford Ave & 114th St
Install Traffic Signal
50".
S 350.000
S 175
1-22
Frankford Ave & 146th St
Install Traffic Signal
50".
S 350.000
S 175
1-23
Frankford Ave & 122nd St
Install Traffic Sigital
50".
S 300.000
S 150
1-24
Frankford Ave & 106th St
Install Traffic Signal
50".
S 300.000
S 150
I--25
Elgin Ave & 98th St
Install Traffic Signal
50".
S 300.000
S 150
I-2o
Avenue U & 98th St
Install Traffic Signal
50".
S 300.000
S 150
1-27
`
Slide Rd & I I4th St
Install Traffic Signal
100".
S 350.000
S 350
i1-28
University Ave & 114th St
Install Traffic Signal
too".
S 350.000
S 350
1-29
$
Slide Rd & 146th St
Install Traffic Signal
50".
S 350.000
S 175
1-30
y
Quaker Ave & 146th St
Install Traffic Signal
10014
S 350.000
S 350
1-31
=
Indiana Ave & 146th St
Install Traffic Signal
50".
S 350.000
S 175
1-32
University Ave & I -loth St
Install Traffic Sigrid
100".
S 350.000
S 350
1-33
tli
University Ave & I08th Dr 106th St
Install Traffic Signal
too".
S 300.000
S 300
1 _M
c
Quaker Ave & 1091h St
Install Traffic Signal
I(Va
S 300.000
S 300
1-35
Chicago Ave & 114th St
Install Traffic Signal
100".
S 300.000
S 300
1-36
Memphis Ave & 114th St
Install Traffic Sirrml
loon.
S 300.000
S 300
[-37
Slide Rd & 138th St
Install Traffic Signal
100".
S 300.000
S 300
1-38
Memphis Ave & 146th St
Install Tragic Signal
100".
S 300.000
5 300
1-39
CR 1930 & 146th St
Install Traffic Signal
too".
S 300.000
S 300
140
Topeka Ave & 114th St
Install Traffic Signal
too".
S 300.000
S 300
1-41
Flint Avc & 114th St
Install Tragic Signal
100".
S 300.000
S 300
1-42
Chicago Ave & 146th St
Install Tragic Signal
50".
S 300.000
S 150
1-43
Elgin Ave & 146th St
Install Traffic Signal
75..
S 300.000
S 225
1-44
Avenuc U & 140th St
Install Traffic Signal
75".
1 S 300.0001
S 225
Service Area Project Cost Subtotal
S 123,458.
Service Area Intersection Project Cost Subtotal
S 6,000
2019 Roadway Im aet Fee Study Cost Per Service Area
S 20.
0 2 OS 1n
S 129.479
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 Lubbock.
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.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 49 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Service
Kimlep Horn ��t� (i(, of
HIMFREESE %Lubbock
INICHOLS T E x Al
TABLE 14.F. 10-YEAR ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN
WITH CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS - SERVICE AREA F
Prof. #
Class
Roadway
Limits
Length
/ 10
Service
Total Project
Cost In Sery
(mi)
Area
Cost
Area
F-I
MA
114th St (2)
Alcove Ave to Upland Ave
1.00
10016
S 6.385,000
S 6,385
F-2
PA-M
146th St (6)
City Limits to Frankford Ave
0.78
100%
S 5,006,000
S 5,00f
F-3
PA
98th St (2)
Alcove Ave to Upland Ave
1.00
100%
S 7,624,000
S 7,624
F4
PA-M
Alcove Ave (4)
107th St to 130th St
1.52
50%
S 10,4h,000
S 5;21f
F-5 _
MA_
114th St (3)
T98th
Upland Ave to Frankford Ave
2.02
100%
S 14.623.000
S 14.623
PA (4.+7)
F-6
St (3)
Upland Ave to Quincy Ave
0.49
mr.
S 2,426,000
$ 2,424
F-7
PA
98th St (4)
Quincy Ave to Milwaukee Ave
0.51
too-.
S 5,087,000
$ 5,081
F-8
PA (40)
98th St (5)
Milwaukee Ave to_Fulton _Ave _
0.84
100%
$ 4,118,000
S 4, 118
F-9
PA-M
Alcove Ave (5)
US 62J82 NBFR to I07th St
1.55
50%
S 11.886,000
S 5,943
E-10, F-10
MA
Frankford Ave (2)
114th St to 146th St
2.00
50'/o
S 15,203,000
S 7,601
F-I I
PA
Milvvaukce Ave (4)
500' S of 112th St to 130th St
1,09
100%
S 9,407,000
S 9.401
F-12
PA-M
Upland Ave (2)
US 62l82 NBFR to 130th St
3.85
100-4
S 28,584,000
S 28,584
E-20, F-13
PA
Frankford Ave (4)
98th St to 114th St
1.01
WA
S 5,354,000
S 2,677
F-14
PA
Milwaukee Ave (5)
94th St to SW N of 114th St
1.14
100'/o
S 5,930.000
1 S 5.93C
Location
Improvement(-)
% In
Service
Total Project
Cost In Sere
Area
Cost
Area
S 171
I-21
Frankford Ave & 114th St
Install Traffic Signal
50*16
$ 350,000
1-22
Frankford Ave & 146th St
Install Traffic Signal
50%
S 350,000
S 175
1-23
Frankford Ave & 122nd St
Install Traffic Signal
50%
S 300,000
S 15(
I-24
Frankford Ave & 106th St
Install Traffic Signal
50%
S 300,000
$ IS(
145
Alcove Ave & I I4th St
Install Traffic Signal
50*16
$ 350.000
S 17'_
146
°
Upland Ave & I I4th St_
Install Traffic Signal
I00%
S 3.50,000
$ 35(
1-47
Milwaukee Ave & 1141h Sl
Install Traffic Signal —
100%
S 350.000
S 35(
148
Alcove Ave & 98th St
Install Traffic Signal
50°b
S 350,000
S 17?
1-49
2
Upland Ave&98 th
--St
Install Traffic Signal
10010
S 350,060
S 35(
1-50
c
Milwaukee Ave & 98th St
Install Traffic Signal
100'.
S 350,000
$ 35(
I-51
Milwaukee Ave & 122nd St
install Traffic Signal
100'.
S 3001000
_
$ 301
1-52
t
Iola Ave & 114th St
Install Traffic Signal
10096
S 300,000
S 30[
1-53
=
Wassau Ave & 98th St
Install Traffic Signal
100%
S 300,0W
S 301
I-54
Quincy Ave & 98th St
Install Traffic Signal
too-.
$ 300,000
S 30(
1-55
Milwaukee Ave & 107th St
Install Traffic Signal
100'.
S 300,000
$ 30(
1-56
Upland Ave & 107th St
Install Traffic Signal
100'.
S 300,000
$ 30(
I-57
Quincy Ave & 82nd St
Install Traffic Signal
100'.
S 300,000
$ 30(
1-58
Frank -ford Ave & 74th St
Install Traffic Signal
too-.
S 300,000
S 30(
I-59
Iola Ave/Juneau Ave& 93th St
Install Traffic Signal
too-.
S N0,000
$ 30(
I-60
Quincy Ave & 1141h St
Install Traffic Signal
100'.
S 300,000
S 30(
1-61
Iola Ave & 146th St
Install Traffic Signal
I
1 100'.
S 300,000
S 301
Service Area Project Cost Subtotal
S 110,627
Service Area Intersection Project Cost Subtotal
S 5,700
2019 Roadwa • Im act Fee Stud Cost Per Service Area
S 20
Ota ost n A A
5 116,348
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 Lubbock.
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.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 50
City of Lubbock, Texas
March 2020
Sen Ice
Kimley>>> Horn
MFREESE
-NICHOLS
`Lubbock
?EYf.1
TABLE 14.G. 10-YEAR ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN
WITH CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS — SERVICE AREA G
Proj. #
Class
Roadway
Limits
Length
% In
Service
Total Project
Cost In Sery
(ml)
Area
Cost
Area
E-19, G-1
PA
98th St (1)
University Ave to City Limits
1.57
Soo,
$ 7,530,000
S 3,76:
Location
Improvement(s)
In
Service
Total Project
Cost In Sen•
_
s
Area
Cost
Area
S IS(
1-25
Elgin Ave & 98th St
Install Traffic Signal
5096
S 300,000
I-26
E
a
Install Traffic Signal
Avenue U & 98th St
50%
$ 300,000
S IS(
1-62
University Ave & 78th St
Install Traffic Signal
100%
S 300.000
S 30(
1-63
Indiana Ave & 90th St
Install Traffic Signal
100%S
300,000
S 30(
1-64
e
_ University Ave & 91 st St _
_ _ Install Traffic Signal
S 30(
100%.
S 300.000
1-65
Quaker Ave & 93rd St
Instal( Traffic Signal
100°%
S 300,000
_
S 30(
Service Area Project Cost Subtotal
S 3,765
Service Area Intersection Project Cost Subtotal
$ 1,500
2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area
S 20
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 Lubbock.
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.
TABLE 14.H. 10-YEAR ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN
WITH CONCEPTUAL LEVEL COST PROJECTIONS — SERVICE AREA H
Pro . p
1
Class
Roadwa y
Llmlts
Length
% In
Service
Total Project
Cost In Sen
(nd)
Area
Cost
Area
tl-I
MA
loth St
Quaker Avc to 795' W of Texas Tech Pkw
0.39
10040
S 2,513,000
S 2.513
% In
cY3 �
E
Location
Improvement(s)
Service
Total Project
Cast In Sen
6
Area
Cost
Area
S 150
1-12
Knoxville Ave & 4th St
Install Traffic Signal
50%
1 S 300,000
S 350
1-66
Quaker Ave & IOth St
Install Traffic Signal
100%
IS 350,000
Service Area Project Cost Subtotal
S 29513,
Service Area Intersection Project Cost Subtotal
S 500,
2019 Roadway Impact Fee Study Cost Per Service Area
$ 20.
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 Lubbock.
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.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 51
City of Lubbock, Texas
March 2020
Kimlep Horn s` f.
cite'
�7 NICHOLS !fLubfiIOc $
C. Wastewater Capacity Plan Total Project Costs
The Wastewater Capacity Plan was developed for the City of Lubbock to deliver a high
level of service that promotes residential and commercial development. The recommended
improvements will provide the required capacity to meet projected wastewater flows through
2030 due to growth. The engineer's opinion of the probable costs of the proposed projects
in the Wastewater Capacity Plan are based on costs developed from the Wastewater
Master Plan. The cost estimates include material costs, engineering design fee, contractor
mark up, and general contingency. Additional fees related to environmental, geotechnical,
land acquisition, change order contingency, and legal fees are not included. These cost also
do not include escalation or inflation cost.
Table 15 presents the 10-Year Wastewater Capacity Plan project list with planning level
project costs. It should be noted that the table reflects only conceptual -level opinions or
assumptions regarding the portions of future project costs that are potentially recoverable
through impact fees. Actual project costs are likely to change with time and are dependent
on market and economic conditions that cannot be predicted.
The Wastewater Capacity Plan establishes the list of projects for which Impact Fees may be
utilized. Projects not included in the Wastewater Capacity Plan are not eligible to receive
impact fee funding. The cost projections utilized in this study should not be utilized for the
City's construction CIP.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 52
City of Lubbock, Texas
March 2020
Kimley*Horn � of
rNFREESE , L.#M0Ck
NICHOLS T I as
TABLE 15. WASTEWATER CAPACITY PLAN PROJECT TOTAL COSTS
PROPOSED PROJECTS
Project ID
Description
Total Project Cost
1
36-inch 138th Street Sewer Line Extension
$8,182,500
2
21-inch Downtown Sewer Improvements Phase 1
$2,364,640
3
24-/30-inch Downtown Sewer Improvements Phase 2
$5,764,050
4
21 -/24-/30 -inch West Loop Improvements Phase 1
$9,497,400
5
21-inch West Loop Improvements Phase 2
$4,751,290
6
Permanent Flow Metering Program
$277,200
7
21-/24-inch Auburn Street Improvements
$6,027,210
8
15-inch 1 14th Street Sewer Line Extension Phase 1
$1,660,950
9
arlisle LS Expansion and Force Main Improvements
$2,333,200
10
16-inch Indiana LS Force Main
$3,767,700
11
15-inch 1 14th Street Sewer Line Extension Phase 2
$1,752,300
12
1 2-inch Upland Avenue Sewer Line Extension
$1,429,600
13
1 2-inch Alcove Avenue Sewer Line Extension
$1,387,600
14
12-inch Inler Avenue Sewer Line Extension
$2,576,700
15
15-inch Stonewood LS Sewer Line Extension
$4,325,600
16
21-inch 130th Street Sewer Line Extension
$3,401,700
17
Northwest Water Reclamation Plant Expansion
$46,1 25,000
18
30-inch Ursuline Street Sewer Line Extension
$8,608,000
19
1 2-inch Kent Street Sewer Line Extension
$1,163,500
20
1 2-inch E Kent Street Sewer Line Extension
$2,291,900
21
118-/21 -inch 1-27 Interceptor Improvements Phase 1
$6,558,100
22
15-/l 8-inch 1-27 Interceptor Improvements Phase 2
$3,664,600
GRAND TOTAL COST
$127,910,740
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 53 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley>» Horn
c it% of
r `#Lubbock
"7 NICHOLS
D. Water Capacity Plan Total Project Costs
The Water Capacity Plan was developed for the City of Lubbock to deliver a high level of
service that promotes residential and commercial development. The recommended
improvements will provide the required capacity to meet projected water demands through
2030 due to growth. The engineer's opinion of the probable costs of the proposed projects
in the Water Capacity Plan are based on costs developed from the Water Distribution
System Master Plan. The cost estimates include material costs, engineering design fee,
contractor mark up, and general contingency. Additional fees related to environmental,
geotechnical, land acquisition, change order contingency, and legal fees are not included.
These cost also do not include escalation or inflation cost.
Table 16 presents the 10-Year Water Capacity Plan project list with planning level project
costs. It should be noted that the table reflects only conceptual -level opinions or assumptions
regarding the portions of future project costs that are potentially recoverable through impact
fees. Actual project costs are likely to change with time and are dependent on market and
economic conditions that cannot be predicted.
The Water Capacity Plan establishes the list of projects for which Impact Fees may be
utilized. Projects not included in the Water Capacity Plan are not eligible to receive impact
fee funding. The cost projections utilized in this study should not be utilized for the City's
construction CIP.
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 54 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas
Kimley»)Horn
c�l� Tyr
�I ` Lubbock
N"1 NICHOLS { T x g 1
TABLE 16. WATER CAPACITY PLAN PROJECT TOTAL COSTS
Project ID
Description
Total Project Cost
1
2.0 MG 50Th Street Elevated Storage Tank
$4,833,200
2
2.0 MG Milwaukee Elevated Storage Tank
$4,799,800
3
15 MGD Low Head "C" Pump Station and 36-inch Line
$33,513,100
4 12.0
MG 82.d Street Elevated Storage Tank
$4,829 000
5
2.0 MG 3rd Street Elevated Storage Tank
$4,766,400
6
2.0 MG Clovis Highway Elevated Storage Tank
$4,900,000
7 11
2-inch Alcove Avenue/1 141h Street Water Line
$2,954,900
8
112-inch 98Th Street Alcove Avenue Water Line
$2,038,000
9
112-inch Milwaukee Avenue Erskine Street Water Line
$1,894,100
10
12-inch Kent Street Water Line
$2,960,100
11
12-inch Kent Street Water Line
$2,550,700
12
112-inch Ursuline Street/N. Frankford Avenue Water Line
$2,790,800
13
12-inch N. Avenue Q Water Line
$1,389,000
14
Lake Alan Henry WTP Expansion to 20 MGD
$2,893,400
15
12-inch Ursuline Street Water Line
$404,200
16
12-inch Interstate 27 Water Line
$4,623.000
17
Pump Station #15 Expansion
$3,218,200
18
12-inch 130Th Street Water Line Phase 1
$1,490,100
19
12-inch 130Th Street Water Line Phase 11
$1,439,600
20 112-inch
130Th Street Water Line Phase III
$1,250,200
21 1
12-inch 130Th Street Water Line Phase V
$2,752,800
22 Ill2-inch
130Th Street Water Line Phase IV
$2,929,600
GRAND TOTAL COST
$95,220,200
2020 Land Use Assumptions and Capacity Plans for Impact Fees 55 March 2020
City of Lubbock, Texas