4.7.600 Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.7.600 Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures.

A. Applicability. When significant impacts are identified as part of the Transportation Impact Analysis, mitigation measures must be included to address those impacts.

B. Preparation. Prior to proposing mitigation, the applicant’s engineer must consult with the City Engineer regarding mitigation options. The proposed mitigation and a concept-level drawing of the final intersection form must be prepared and submitted prior to a development application being deemed complete. Mitigation measures may be proposed by the applicant or recommended by ODOT or Deschutes County in circumstances where a state or county facility will be impacted by a proposed development. Deschutes County and/or ODOT must be consulted to determine if improvements proposed for their facilities comply with their standards and are supported by the respective agencies.

C. Intersection Operation Standards. If the Transportation Impact Analysis shows that the operation standards at the intersection are or will be exceeded, the applicant is required to provide mitigation measures in compliance with subsection (F) of this section.

1. Development proposals within Master Planned Developments or Special Planned Areas, as described in BDC Chapter 4.5, Master Plans, where a Transportation Mitigation Plan has been approved, may exceed the operation standards at affected intersections as long as the proposed development is consistent with the approved Transportation Mitigation Plan.

2. Widening to accommodate additional travel lanes will not be permitted in the following situations:

a. Clear and Objective Track and Discretionary Track. Intersections and streets that are already constructed consistent with the City of Bend Transportation System Plan (TSP) including streets and intersections in BDC 3.4.200(F)(3)(b) as “not being identified for lane expansion”;

b. Clear and Objective Track and Discretionary Track. Intersections and streets located within or directly adjoining the City’s Central Business District or historic district;

c. Discretionary Track. Where no physical mitigation is available to improve intersection operations to the performance standard; or

d. Discretionary Track. Where improvements may result in unacceptable tradeoffs to other modes of travel.

1. Unless a unique situation is identified in subsection (D) of this section, Unique Situations, mitigation must be in place, or secured in conformance with BDC 4.3.400(J), at the time of final platting of a land division or at the time of final occupancy, whichever occurs first. Mitigation for phased developments must be in place at the time specified in the approved decision. Construction of emergency services access requirements may be needed earlier.

2. Development proposals within Master Planned Developments or Special Planned Areas, as described in BDC Chapter 4.5, Master Plans, where a Transportation Mitigation Plan has been approved, must refer to the Plan for the extent and timing of improvements.

F. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures must consider all users and mitigate the impacts of the proposed development.

1. The following mitigation measures may be proposed by the applicant for the Clear and Objective Track and Discretionary Track:

i. The intersection form will be determined through the City’s Intersection Form Evaluation Framework located in the City’s Roundabout Evaluation and Design Guidelines document.

ii. Mitigation must include the construction of the full intersection infrastructure and control required to bring the intersection into compliance with this code, the City of Bend Transportation System Plan, and the City of Bend Standards and Specifications.

iii. Intersection improvements must improve corridor operations in terms of progression and reduced corridor delay, and must be shown to cause no significant adverse impact to the corridor during integrated corridor operations.

iv. Mitigation in the form of street widening must be constructed in conformance with the street classification of the City of Bend Transportation System Plan and the cross-sections contained in this code or the City of Bend Standards and Specifications. At the written request of an applicant and as part of the discretionary track development review process, the City Engineer may approve an alternate cross section if it meets operations standards.

v. Walking and biking accommodations must be considered as part of any improvement.

i. Construct Interim Mitigations. Interim mitigation measures may include but are not limited to upgraded operations controls, interconnected signals, signage, striping, pedestrian refuge, etc.

ii. Improved signal timing and phasing may be achieved by installing the necessary communications and field equipment that would provide the increased capacity necessary to achieve the operation standards. For this to be acceptable as an interim measure, the applicant must demonstrate through a field calibrated corridor operations model that the proposed signal timing and phasing will provide the additional capacity necessary to meet the concurrency standards. Timing and phasing communications and field equipment are subject to approval of the City Engineer and/or ODOT.

2. The following mitigation measures may be proposed by the applicant for the Discretionary Track:

a. Transportation and Parking Demand Management (TPDM) Plan. Implement an approved TPDM plan in compliance with BDC 4.7.400(B)(3), Transportation and Parking Demand Management (TPDM) Plan, and BDC Chapter 4.8, Transportation and Parking Demand Management (TPDM) Plan.

b. Walking, Biking and Transit. In addition to accommodating walking and biking as part of the intersection and street improvement mitigation, walking, biking and transit improvements may be considered as potential mitigation measures, particularly when they reduce the number of study area generated vehicle trips or reduce the Level of Traffic Stress to achieve LTS 1 or LTS 2. Mitigation improvements may include accessible sidewalks, pedestrian refuges, bike lanes, curb extensions, traffic control devices, curb ramps, striping, signage and other elements. Negative impacts of intersection and street mitigation measures on walking and biking infrastructure, such as on crosswalks and roadway shoulders, must be avoided, minimized, and/or mitigated themselves. The City may require accessibility improvements, including compliant curb ramps along the proposed development and including safe and accessible paths of travel to and from the proposed development, depending on the type and impacts of the proposed development.

c. Payment in Lieu of Construction. If infrastructure construction is required above, the City may elect to accept a payment in an amount equal to the cost estimated by the City for the design, right-of-way acquisition, utility relocation and construction cost of the improvements in lieu of actual construction. The City will use these funds on the impacted corridor to improve multi-modal safety, operations and to relieve congestion. Once the City accepts a payment in lieu of construction, the proposed development may proceed even if the impact of the proposed development causes the operation standards to be exceeded.

d. Alternate Location Mitigation. Mitigation strategies at alternative locations or affecting alternative modes of travel may be proposed by the applicant and may be accepted by the City Engineer. At a minimum, the proposed improvements must meet the following criteria:

i. The overall improvements proposed should be proportional to the impacts created by the application;

ii. The proposed improvement strategies must address a critical need or issue within the study area such as safety, connectivity, system capacity, and parallel routes;

iii. The locations proposed for improvement must be within the study area;

iv. The proposed improvements must not already be, or be in the process of being, a condition of approval of another development; and

v. All applicable analysis requirements for the primary locations(s) apply to the analysis of the alternative location(s).

e. Suspend the Mobility Standard. The City Manager may suspend the mobility standard for a particular intersection or series of intersections under the City’s jurisdiction when the intersection(s) may be in a condition that interim mitigation is not practical due to the large scale of the improvements or the City desires to maintain the current intersection’s form. In such cases, developments impacting the intersection(s) do not have to analyze or mitigate impacts on the intersection(s). The City Manager will issue a written statement providing the duration and reason for the suspension of the mobility standard, and will maintain a list of all intersections where the mobility standard has been suspended. Suspending the mobility standard is not a limited land use decision or a land use decision. [Ord. NS-2463, 2023; Ord. NS-2434, 2022; Ord. NS-2423, 2021; Ord. NS-2398, 2021; Ord. NS-2362, 2020; Ord. NS-2289, 2017; Ord. NS-2263, 2016]