Minutes - 2006 - City Council - 03/14/2006 - Regular
.;
EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
Minutes
March 14, 2006
PRE-COUNCIL AGENDA: 6:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
Council Member Guerber is present by conference call.
]. Presentation by WRG Design. Jerome Mapp provides Council an overview of the proposal
for the Parks and Pathway Plan. Jerome introduces Brian DeHass, Dave Phillips, and Ashley
Ford from WRG Design who will be working on the Eagle project.
Brian DeHaas, WRG Design, provides the Council a history of the company.
Jerome Mapp: we have spent a lot of time going through the comp plan and Capital Improvement
Plan. Discussion on the recreation component to the Park and Pathway Plan. Genera]
discussion.
2. Mayor and Council's Report:
Bastian: Reports on the Library. The Library continues to have high usage. Discussion on the
Library collection including videos and DVDs. Eag]e has one of the most active Libraries in the
State of Idaho. Genera] discussion.
Design Review Report: The new people on DR are doing very well and we are lucky to have
them.
Nordstrom: Reports on the Sewer Board meeting. Board is going to get education on portable
sewer systems. Discussion regional development of these types of systems. We should put
something in our City Code in regards to these portable sewer systems. Discussion on how the
plants work and the purification of the water which could be used for irrigation.
Vern Brewer, Holladay Engineering: These package plants are very good plants. I would suggest
that we work with Board and have them select the standards they want to operate under and then
we can write it into a City Ordinance.
Further discussion on the sewer plants.
General discussion on water in the foothills.
Guerber: The Fire Department is going to have a bond in May to build the new fire station on
Linder Road.
Parks and Pathway Committee recommended WRG Design for the plan.
Discussion on the underpass under State Street and the pathway connection.
Mayor: The annexation bill before the House today failed, so that is good. General discussion.
Discussion Blue Print for Good Growth. I had them do a correction in the paper. One of my
concerns is that there is two committees that meet, the Steering Committee and the Consortium
which is the elected officials. These meetings are held right on top of each other and we don't
really get the information that is coming out of the Steering Committee meetings. Discussion on
the activity center policy. Discussion on the Strategies. I had the City Attorney's Office draft a
letter I have tonight to be sent to the Blue Print for Good Growth. Discussion adoption of the
plan which would require higher density in the City of Eagle. General discussion. We need to
look at our Intergovernmenta] Agreement. General discussion. Council concurs to have a
Council Meeting of the whole Council and publish notice to the public.
Discussion on the Boise Co-op. They will be located in Eagle River and they would also like to
have the access to the by-pass. Genera] discussion.
Discussion on the access to the by-pass.
The County did not adopt the Committee of Nine Recommendations at their meeting last
Thursday night. I told Meridian's Mayor that the City of Eagle would not be talking to the City
of Meridian until after the Committee of Nine Recommendations is resolved. General
discussion.
Page 1
K-\CDUNCIL\MINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-03-14-06mindoc
Discussion on the restroom at OK Park. The Park and Pathway Committee have recommended
that only the restrooms in the regional parks like Merrill Park should be heated. I need to know
if the Council wants to spend $5,000 - $7,000 to place a transformer in the park in order to heat
the restroom. Genera] discussion. Council concurs that the restroom should be heated. We need
to find the money in the budget.
3. City Engineer Report: Moved to the end ofthe Agenda
4. City Clerk/Treasurer Report: Moved to the end of the Agenda
5. Zoning Administrator's Report: Moved to the end of the Agenda
6. City Attorney Report: Moved to the end of the Agenda
REGULAR COUNCIL AGENDA: 7:40 p.m.
]. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor calls the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL: BASTIAN, GUERBER, NORDSTROM, BANDY. Guerber is present by
telephone conference call. Bandy is absent. A quorum is present.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
5. CONSENT AGENDA:
· Consent Agenda items are considered to be routine and are acted on with one
motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless the Mayor, a
Councilmember, member of City Staff, or a citizen requests an item to be removed
from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Items removed from the Consent Agenda
will be placed on the Regular Agenda in a sequence determined by the City Council.
. Any item on the Consent Agenda which contains written Conditions of Approval
from the City of Eagle City Staff, Planning & Zoning Commission, or Design
Review Board shall be adopted as part of the City Council's Consent Agenda
approval motion unless specifically stated otherwise.
A. Claims Against the City.
B. Minutes of February 2],2006.
C. Minutes of February 28,2006 (special meeting).
D. Minutes of February 28,2006 (regular meeting).
E. DR-llO-05 - Multi-tenant Office Buildinl! - Wayne Park: Wayne Park,
represented by Mike Fairchild Architect, is requesting design review approval to
construct a 3,0] 7-square foot multi-tenant office building. The site is located on
the southwest corner of South W ooddale A venue and Hill Road at 195 South
Wooddale Avenue (Lot 22, Block]] Great Sky Estates Subdivision No.7).
(WEV)
F. DR-02-06 - Entry Structure and Monument Sil!n for Corrente Bello
Planned Unit Development - Todd HiII- Rinconada Development. LLC:
Todd HilI- Riconada Development, LLC, represented by Matt Adams with The
Land Group, Inc., is requesting design review approval to construct an entry
structure and monument sign for Corrente Bello Planned Unit Development.
The 94.89-acre site is located on the north side ofF]oating Feather Road
approximately Y2-mile west of Eagle Road. (WEV)
G. DR-03-06 - Multi-tenant Office Buildinl! within Windinl! Creek Subdivision
Phase 1 - Maver Construction: Mayer Construction, represented by Jason
Mayer, is requesting design review approval to construct a ] ,952-square foot
multi-tenant office building. The site is located on the south side of East
Winding Creek Drive approximately 300-feet northwest of East State Street at
Page 2
K:\COUNClL\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\CC-03-14-06min,doc
9]] East Winding Creek Drive within Winding Creek Subdivision Phase].
(WEV)
H. DR-04-06 - Master Sil!n Plan for a Multi-Tenant Office Buildinl!. Includinl!
One Buildinl! Wall Sil!n for Maver Homes - Maver Homes: Mayer Homes,
represented by Jason Mayer, is requesting design review approval of a master
sign plan for a multi-tenant office building, including one building wall sign for
Mayer Homes. The site is located on the south side of East Winding Creek Drive
approximately 300-feet northwest of East State Street at 9]] East Winding Creek
Drive within Winding Creek Subdivision Phase ]. (WEV)
I. Findinl!s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Park Place Gardens A-08-
05/RZ-12-05/PP-ll-05 Park Place Gardens Subdivision - Park Place
Partners LLC: Park Place Partners, LLC, represented by Bill Clark with Clark
Development, is requesting an annexation and rezone from RUT (Rural Urban
Transition) to R-2-DA (Residential 2-units per acre with a development
agreement), and preliminary plat approval for Park Place Gardens a I26-lot (112-
buildable, I4-common) subdivision. The 95.32-acre site is located between
Meridian Road and Park Lane approximately] ,300 feet north of Floating
Feather Road. (WEV)
J. Findinl!s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for A-3-05 & RZ-5-05-
Annexation and Rezone from RUT to R-2 - Chad Moffat: Chad Moffat,
represented by The Land Group. LLC., is requesting an annexation and rezone
from RUT (Rura] Urban Transition) to R-2 (Residential- up to 2 units per acre),
after participating in mediation, pursuant to Idaho Code 67-65] 0, after the Eagle
City Council's denial ofthe application on September ]3,2005. The ]4.6-acre
site is located on the west side of Park Lane approximately one-half mile north
of Floating Feather Road. (WEV)
K. Findinl!s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for PP-6-05 - Moffat Subdivision-
Post Mediation - Chad Moffat: Chad Moffat, represented by The Land Group.
LLC., is requesting a preliminary plat approval for Moffat Subdivision after
participating in mediation pursuant to Idaho Code 67-65] 0, following the Eagle
City Council's denial of the application on September 13,2005. The l4.6-acre,
30-lot subdivision (24-buildable, 6-common) is located on the west side of Park
Lane approximately one-half mile north of Floating Feather Road. (WEV)
Bastian moves to remove Items #1, J and K from the Consent Agenda. Seconded by
Nordstrom. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES....................
Bastian moves to approve the amended Consent Agenda. Seconded by Nordstrom.
Bastian: AYE; Guerber: AYE; Nordstrom: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION
CARRIES........... .n
51. Findinl!s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Park Place Gardens A-08-05/RZ-12-
05/PP-II-05 Park Place Gardens Subdivision - Park Place Partners LLC: Park Place
Partners, LLC, represented by Bill Clark with Clark Development, is requesting an annexation
and rezone from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R-2-DA (Residentia] 2-units per acre with a
development agreement), and preliminary plat approval for Park Place Gardens a ]26-lot (] ]2-
buildable, ]4-common) subdivision. The 95.32-acre site is located between Meridian Road and
Park Lane approximately ],300 feet north of Floating Feather Road.
5J. Findinl!s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for A-3-05 & RZ-5-05 - Annexation and
Rezone from RUT to R-2 - Chad Moffat: Chad Moffat, represented by The Land Group.
LLC., is requesting an annexation and rezone from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R-2
(Residential - up to 2 units per acre), after participating in mediation, pursuant to Idaho Code 67-
Page 3
K:\COUNCIL\MINVTES\Temporary Minutes Work AreaICC-OJ-14-06mindoc
65]0, after the Eagle City Council's denial of the application on September 13,2005. The ]4.6-
acre site is located on the west side of Park Lane approximately one-half mile north of Floating
Feather Road. (WEV)
5K. Findinl!s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for PP-6-05 - Moffat Subdivision _ Post
Mediation - Chad Moffat: Chad Moffat, represented by The Land Group. LLC., is requesting a
preliminary plat approval for Moffat Subdivision after participating in mediation pursuant to
Idaho Code 67-6510, following the Eagle City Council's denial ofthe application on September
]3,2005. The I4.6-acre, 30-lot subdivision (24-buildable, 6-common) is located on the west side
of Park Lane approximately one-half mile north of Floating Feather Road. (WEV)
Mayor introduces the issue.
Bastian moves to continue these items since we have received a request for mediation on
the items and since we do not have a full Council present tonight and Susan Buxton our
regular attorney is not present tonight. I would like to continue these items to the March
21,2006 City Council meeting from 6:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Seconded by Nordstrom.
Discussion. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES..............
6. PROCLAMATIONS & RESOLUTIONS:
A. Arbor Dav Proclamation: A proclamation for the City of Eagle declaring April 29,2006 as
Arbor Day in the City of Eagle.
Mayor introduces the issue.
Bastian moves to approve the Arbor Day Proclamation and reads the Proclamation into the
record. Seconded by Nordstrom. Discussion. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES............
B. Resolution 06-07: A resolution of the City of Eagle, Ada County, Idaho approving a license
agreement made and entered into by and with Drainage District No.2 authorizing the Mayor and
City Clerk to execute the same and providing an effective date. (SEB)
Mayor introduces the issue.
Guerber moves to approve Resolution No. 06-07. Seconded by Nordstrom. Bastian: AYE;
Guerber: AYE; Nordstrom: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES..........................
C. Resolution 06-09: A resolution ofthe City of Eagle, Ada County, Idaho, approving an
easement agreement with Eagle Water Company, Inc., for the new City Hall property, a
management letter and estoppel certificate for the new City Hall, authorizing the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute same; and providing an effective date. (SEB)
Mayor introduces the issue.
Nordstrom Moves to approve Resolution No. 06-09. Seconded by Bastian. Bastian: AYE;
Guerber: AYE; Nordstrom: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES..........................
7. FINAL PLATS:
A. FPUD-6-05 & FP-I0-05 - Final Development Plan and Final Plat for Corrente Bello
Subdivision No.1 - Gemstar Development: Gemstar Development, Inc., represented by Bailey
Engineering, is requesting final development plan and final plat approval for Corrente Bello
Subdivision No.1, a 5]-lot (38-buildable, l3-common, I-existing home) planned residential
development. The 41.I6-acre site is located on the north side of Floating Feather Road
approximately Y2-mile west of Eagle Road. (WEV)
B. FPUD-7-05 & FP-ll-05 - Final Development Plan and Final Plat for Corrente Bello
Subdivision No. 2 - Corrente Bello. LLC: Corrente Bello, LLC, represented by Bailey
Engineering, is requesting final development plan and final plat approval for Corrente Bello
Page 4
K\COUNCILIMlNUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\CC.03-14-06min,doc
Subdivision No.2, an 89-lot (71-buildab]e and l8-common) planned residential development.
The 43.44-acre site is located on the north side of Floating Feather Road approximately Y2-mile
west of Eagle Road. (WEV)
Mayor introduces the two issues which will be heard together and separate motions will be made.
Mike Checkard, Bailey Engineering, representing the applicant, this is the final plat and we are in
compliance with all of the specified conditions.
Zoning Administrator Vaughan: The Planning Staff and City Engineer have reviewed both the
final plat for Phase 1 and Phase 2 for Corrente Bello Subdivision and have recommended
approval of both Subdivisions and have recommended the finding that the final plat is in
substantia] compliance with the preliminary plat with conditions noted within the Commissions'
Findings. The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval with the Site
Specific Conditions and Standard Conditions of Approval within their Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law. General discussion.
Bastian moves to approve FPUD-6-05 & FP-I0-05 - Final Development Plan and Final Plat
for Corrente Bello Subdivision No.1. Seconded by Nordstrom. ALL A YES: MOTION
CARRIES.............. ...
Jerry Cockran would like to speak to Council on this matter.
Jerry Cockran, 1087 W. Floating Feather, distributes pictures of a road that goes directly into his
driveway. My concern is the road end adjacent to my drive way. I can not find another like
situation in the City of Eagle. I was not notified and didn't know about this until right before the
final Planning and Zoning meeting. I am opposed to this.
Zoning Administrator Vaughan: On a final plat there is not a public hearing notification
procedure. I believe Mr. Cockran testified at the preliminary plat hearing for the City Council on
this item and the Council acknowledged the testimony and encouraged the applicant to work with
the property owner to the south to look at some mitigating measures to the traffic impacts to the
property to the south. So the notification was provided as part of the preliminary plat. I spoke to
the applicant in terms of if some agreement with regards to the property owner to the south when
they submitted the final plat application and the applicant stated that they had not reached an
agreement in terms of doing something specifically. Beyond that additional action had not been
taken in terms of City Staff requiring the applicant to do something on their property because it
was an encouragement type of a motion to see what could be done to work with the property
owner. It was not a site specific condition of approval.
Mike Checkard, Bailey Engineering, the reason that this access road was placed where its at is
because of this is the only frontage that Corrente Bello No.2 has to Floating Feather Road.
There is no other access to the property except this specific spot.
General discussion on when the signs were posted on the property.
Zoning Administrator Vaughan: Provides a review of the City Code and the Land Use Planning
Act for the Council.
General discussion.
Mike Checkard, Bailey Engineering, I was not personally involved with the discussions between
the applicant and Mr. Cockran.
Jerry Cockran, I met with the developer in my front yard and looked at the stakes where the road
was going to be and I stated that I didn't want the road there.
Further Council discussion.
Page 5
K:\COUNCIL\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work AreaICC.03-14.06min.doc
Nordstrom moves to continue FPUD-7-05 & FP-ll-05 - Final Development Plan and Final
Plat for Corrente Bello Subdivision No.2 to the March 21, 2006 City Council meeting with
the understanding that the Developer come before us and state some mitigation ideas that
he has come up with and presented to the homeowner as a gesture to try and mitigate some
of the traffic evasion to the homeowners property. Mr. Vaughan is to make a telephone
call to the homeowner and let him know the decision of the Council to continue this matter
and to have the developer contact him. Seconded by Bastian. ALL A YES: MOTION
CARRIES...............
C. FP-I-06 - Final Plat for CastIeburv West Subdivision No.1 - Capital Development:
Capital Development, represented by David Y orgason, is requesting final plat approval for
Castlebury West Subdivision No. I, a 28 lot (23 buildable and 5 common) residential
development. The entire Castlebury West Subdivision, located on the northeast corner of
Meridian Road and Chinden Boulevard, consists of a 70.56-acre site, including 80 lots (70
buildable, 10 common). Phase No. I, accessed off of Meridian Road, consists of23.7 acres.
(WEV)
Dave Yorgason, Capital Development, I am requesting approval of the final plat of Castle bury
West Subdivision. Discussion on the Conditions of Approval. Condition No.4 we have
requested that it be deleted and staff has concurred. We need clarification on Condition No.7
that this be a future phase; Condition No.9, we are not aware of Dig Line providing
documentation so we need clarification on this. General discussion.
Zoning Administrator Vaughan: This being only a final plat and not the final development plan
this has not gone to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Planning Staff and the City
Engineer have reviewed the application and have recommended approval and it is in substantial
compliance with the preliminary plat. Our recommendation in regards to the request to strike site
specific condition no. 4 would be appropriate and deferring to you to change no. 7 as you see fit.
Bastian moves to approve FP-I-06 - Final Plat for Castlebury West Subdivision No.1 and
that Site Specific Condition No.4 be stricken and modify Site Specific Condition No.7 to
read at the end ofthe sentence, strike "site" and insert "final phase". Seconded by
Nordstrom. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.............
General discussion on the sale of2 acre lots in the City of Eagle.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None
] O. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Review of park and pathway master plan proposal submitted bv WRG. The Park and
Pathway Development Committee is requesting Council accept the proposal submitted by WRG
Design and enter into contract negotiations for their services. (SKB)
Mayor introduces the issue.
General discussion on the RFP and the proposal from WRG. What Council is approving
tonight is to proceed to negotiate a final contract that will need to come back to the
Council for final approval. There is $50,000.00 set aside to do this Master Plan.
Guerber moves to approve proceeding to bring back a final contract proposal per
the material provided in response to our RFP. Discussion. Seconded by Bastian.
Bastian: AYE; Guerber: AYE; Nordstrom: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION
CARRIES..........
Page 6
K:\COUNCIL\MINL'TES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\CC.03-14-06min.doc
PRE-COUNCIL REPORTS con't:
City Engineering Report: Vern Brewer. Holladay Engineering: Reports on the well being
drilled at Eaglefield. We will be meeting with the developer on Monday at 3:00 p.m.
Bruce has rescheduled the hearing with the Department of Water Resources because of
the wet conditions.
Reports on the meeting with Mike Hormaechea. We have a general agreement to move
forward. Mike wants to have updated costs. We are in the same ballpark as far as costs
are concerned. General discussion.
Zoning Administrators Report: Bill Vaughan: I attended a Land Use Implementation
Blue Print for Good Growth meeting at the County to look at the Counties Cornp Plan
update. The County feels they are in line with Blue Print. Discussed urban development
and planned development. The committee is going to meet three times and the next
meeting will be discussion on ordinances in the area of impact. Genera] discussion.
City Attorney's Report: No report
City Clerk's Report: Reports on the furniture that has been delivered to the new city hall
from Correctional Industries. General discussion.
Reports on the Eagle Community Fund. We have the disbursement amount for 2006 in
the amount of$2,084.00. Staffwill go ahead with grant requests. General discussion.
The United Water Service Contract 2004, under the renewal terms, it automatic renews
for another year on September 15, 2006. General discussion.
I I. ADJOURNMENT:
Bastian moves to adjourn. Seconded by Nordstrom. ALL AYE: MOTION
CARRIES...
Hearing no further business, the Council meeting adjourned at 9: I 0 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
lQw>--u X ~~
--SHARON K. BERGMANN
CITY CLERK/TREASURER
..,.......",
Ii" I.
"," \l BAQ{ .....
.... .t 0 ......... ~ '.
~-,.. . ~
If::.. ~O\\A:r~". ~
~(.): ~ \iI ~
::0 ,:
: : CJ ,.' ~I :
\.~~p..\~/Oi
,...07 ...~.:t'1
\ ro..o~~,:>
~,. .. ""'-v......
Jt 7'E o~ .',....
...""
Page 7
K\COUNCILIJ..fiNUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\CC-03-14-06mindoc
3-7y-06
WATER SERVICE CONTRACT — 2004
ORIGINAL
This Water Service Contract — 2004 (this "Contract") is made effective September 15, 2004, as
provided by that certain resolution of the City of Eagle City authorizing the execution of this Contract,
which resolution is substantially similar to the resolution attached hereto as Exhibit A (the
"Commencement Date"), by and between The City of Eagle ("City'), an Idaho municipal corporation, and
United Water Operations Idaho Inc. ("Contractor"), an Idaho corporation, successor in interest to
Engineering, Management and Maintenance, Inc. ("EM2"), in order to provide operations, maintenance,
and management services for the municipal water system currently owned by City.
RECITALS
A. City, as authorized by Idaho Code, Section 50-323, is the owner of a municipal, domestic
water production, transmission and distribution system in the City of Eagle (hereinafter called the "Water
System"). The geographical boundaries of the Water System are shown on Exhibit B attached hereto
and made a part hereof, which geographical boundaries of the Water System may be amended at City's
sole direction from time to time.
B. City has adopted those certain "Rates, Rules and Regulations for the operation of the
Water System of the City of Eagle, Ada County, Idaho", which are codified in Title 6, Chapter 5 of City's
Code, attached hereto as Exhibit C (the "Regulations"). The Regulations, pursuant to Idaho Code,
Section 50-301, et seq., may be amended from time to time at the sole discretion of the Eagle City
Council. The Regulations, and Idaho Code, Sections 50-301 and 50-323, provide that City may contract
for the operation and maintenance of the Water System.
C. City first contracted for the operation and maintenance of the Water System with that
certain Water Service Contract by and between City and EM2, dated May 26, 1992, as amended by the
First Amendment to Water Service Contract, dated December 2, 1997 (collectively, the "EM2 Contract").
D. Contractor, which is engaged in the business of operating and managing domestic water
systems such as the Water System, has succeeded to the interests of EM2, including the interests of EM2
contained in the EM2 Contract.
E. To more specifically define the duties and obligations of City and Contractor in connection
with the Water System, the parties hereto desire to amend and restate the EM2 Contract by entering into
this Contract which terminates and replaces the previously referenced EM2 Contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is
hereby acknowledged and agreed, the recitals above which are incorporated below, and the mutual terms,
conditions, covenants and agreements contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM OF CONTRACT.
The term of the Contract shall commence on the Commencement Date, and shall expire one (1)
year following the Commencement Date (the "Term"); provided, however, this Contract shall be renewed
automatically, on the same terms as contained herein, in one (1) year increments through September 30,
2012, except as provided in ¶ 9.c. herein.
2. OBLIGATIONS OF CONTRACTOR.
Contractor shall undertake and perform all services and pay all usual and customary expenses
required in connection with the normal operation and maintenance of the Water System, including periodic
inspections and preventive maintenance, meter reading, billing, collections, record keeping, reporting and
compliance with applicable federal, state or local government requirements in connection with the
operation and maintenance of the Water System including the following:
A. Staffing. Contractor shall provide a professional staff of qualified employees for
operations, maintenance and management procedures in connection with the Water System, and shall
REQUEST FOR MEDIATION
er. 3 --/4--a6
RECEIVED & FILED
CITY OF EAGLE
2006
rale:
,Routa to -
Comes now the affected parties in opposition to the Updated 2000 Comprehensive PIadl it.l.the-SeaFing
2025 Comprehensive Plan and hereby request mediation pursuant to I.C. §67-6510 on the issues of
whether notice was properly served and the plan properly adapted.
In addition, the affected parties hereby request mediation pursuant to I.C. §67-6510 on the issue of
whether the existing comprehensive plan was properly interpreted when approving the Park Place
Gardens Subdivision rezone from RUT to R-2 and preliminary plat approval on February 21, 2006.
In addition, the affected parties hereby request mediation pursuant to I.C. §67-6510 on the issue of
whether the existing comprehensive plan was properly interpreted when approving the Moffat Subdivision
re -zone from RUT to R-2 and preliminary plat approval on February 28, 2006.
In addition, the affected parties hereby request mediation pursuant to I.C. §67-6510 on the issue of
whether the existing comprehensive plan was properly interpreted by Planning and Zoning when
approving the Bella Terra Subdivision re -zone from RUT to R -2-P and preliminary plat approval on
February 27, 2006.
fikr,o4 �/ f3g1ffto
6;602-VO 79
Grk(fiI9:13� y
Signature Printed Name Residence City of Post Date
/ Street and Office
. Number
/1166d /7c3 ,V Chacccer
riaet .vALec x,.14/54 a 6/0-ffil- Ci- Mai
DD
Wie 73 'Cove etfulydiaq; e; 3/7/0&
4) L.-.� j� ; �' _ JJ s o S1 acui,. Mck t1/41. ( t7 v_11-
5) M/?
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
888 West Fort Street
Boise ID 83702
T 208.472.4500
jnfotboisecoop.corn
www.boisecoop.com
Fade eo4ame C°°ft
Addressee Name
Title
Company Name
4321 First Street
Anytown
ABC123
Date 3/12/06
Dear Sir or Madam,
-- L �� `✓ / Wil
.2347 boy
This letter constitutes a request for a signalized intersection on the Eagle River
Subdivision in the place shown on the attached drawing.
The intersection.
-The intersection is 1/2 mile East of the intersection of Eagle Road and Highway 44. it is
very similar to the signaled intersection granted for the benefit of Wal -Mar 1/2 mile East
of the intersection of Glenwood Street and Highway 44.
Background:
The Co-op has been searching for a site to construct a second store for more than 3
years. Although we will keep our present site in downtown Boise, we are so busy there
we cannot grow and cannot serve our customers and potential customers the way we
wish and the way they deserve. We have finally found a suitable second store site in the
Eagle River Subdivision as shown on the attached plan. But the access to that sight is
tortuous and would make it difficult or impossible to compete with the nearby markets of
Albertson's and Wal-Mart. Therefore, we are requesting a signal similar to the one
granted Wal-Mart to improve access.
A comparison:
Both intersections are the same distance from the major interchanges whose traffic
would be affected.
The signal on Highway 44 West of Glenwood Street benefits primanly Wal-Mart, as the
other, mainly national, tenants of this center are accessed from Glenwood Street.
In contrast, the intersection we request would benefit not only the Co-op, but also the
proposed future retail shops shown on the attached plan for which the Co-op will serve
as an anchor. It will also improve access to other businesses in Eagle River, such as the
multi -story St. Alphonsas Regional Medical Center, now under construction in Eagle
River.
888 west Fat Street
Boise ID 83702
T 208.472.4500
info@boisecoop.corn
www.boiseconn,,conl
ote eoptdamer ea -obi
Now, let us compare the two companies: Wal-Mart is a huge national chain owned
primarily by the Walton Family in Arkansas. The Co-op is a local company owned by
25,000 Idahoan, 95% of whom reside in Ada County. (We do not know who owns
Albertson's today, the other competitor in the area, but we know it is no longer an Idaho
company,) If the new store is built we hope to expand that ownership to 40,000 or
perhaps even 60,000 local owners.
Wal-Mart has a very bad reputation for the way it treats its employees, whereas the Co-
op has one the best. We have many employees who have worked for us for 20 years or
more, and we offer generous health plans, employee retirement plans and profit sharing.
Building a new store in Eagle will permit us to give our assistant managers the chance to
advance in their positions and it will add at least 100 new employees to the Ada County
workforce.
The need for the store: Allbertson's and Wal-Mart are in fact complementary in many
respects to the Co-op. We do not carry many of the staples they carry such as paper
goods, washing supplies, sugar bomb cereals, cigarettes and lottery tickets. On the
other hand they cannot or do not offer the wide range of organic and health foods and
products we do - nor do they have the best wine department in the State of Idaho, as do
we. We also support many medium sized and small local companies such as Purple
Sage Farms, Zapole Bakery, and many local farmers who provide us with farm fresh
eggs that really are fresh, and not just an advertising gimmick. Albertson's and Wal-Mart
not only cannot support these business, they and their suppliers do their best to destroy
local competition such as is offered by the Co-op and its local suppliers.
So, we believe we offer a product line which the people of Western Ada County want
and need and we not only are a local business, we support other local businesses in a
way neither Albertson's and Wal-Mart can.
Conclusion: We are asking for equality of treatment with Wal-Mart, and we have offered
the reasons why we are entitled to at least that, if not more because of:
1. The intersection will benefit many other businesses while Wal -Mart's benefits
primarily theirs;
2. Our local ownership;
3. Our status as an excellent employer,
4. The unique product and services we will offer the residents of Western Ada County;
For these reasons we respectfully request that you favorably consider the signalized
intersection hereby requested.
Sincerely yours,
eoide eoA(meft ea -oft
Boise Consumer Cooperative
Ken Kavanagh
888 west Fort street President
Boise ID 83702
T 208.472.4500
jnfo'boisecoop_cont
www.boisecoop.com
Cc. 3— i 49
Prepared ht:
Planning Works, LLC
8014 State Line Road
Suite 208
Leawood, KS 66208
913-381-7852
www.ourplanningworks.com
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky &
Walker
515 South Flower Street
Twenty-fifth Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
213-683-6000
www.paulhastings.com
BGG Steering Committee
Preliminary Discussion Draft
February 11, 2006
Blueprint for Good Growth
TABLE OF CONTENTS
L Overview 1
A. Issues 1
B. Guiding Principles 2
C. Definitions 5
II. Blueprint Objectives & Policies 8
A. Growth Management 8
B. Natural Resources 18
C. Transportation Goal, Objectives and Policies 20
D. Utilities Goal, Objectives and Policies 22
E. Public Schools Goal, Objective and Policies 24
III. Strategies 25
A. Plan Amendments 25
B. Intergovernmental Coordination 26
C. Regulatory Changes 29
D. Legislative Initiatives 30
E. Educational Initiatives 30
W. Appendices 31
Appendix A: Growth Projections 31
Appendix B: Scenarios Analysis 31
Appendix C: Plan Policy Amendments 31
Appendix D: Regulatory Models 31
Draft February 11, 2006 i
Blueprint for Good Growth
I. Overview
Ada County is a desirable place — the -climate, natural resources, and economic
opportunities available here continue to draw new people and new development to this
area. The Blueprint for Good Growth is a collaborative multi jurisdictional effort
intended to coordinate land use and public facility decisions so that growth in Ada
County will be an asset to existing residents and future generations. The plan establishes
an overall framework for growth management in Ada County that includes policies and
strategies that ultimately will be incorporated into the plans, regulations and practices of
Ada County, Boise, Eagle, Garden City, Kuna, Meridian, Star, Ada County Highway
District (ACHD) and Idaho Transportation Department (ITD).
This document identifies the main issues to be addressed by the Blueprint for Good
Growth, establishes goals, objectives and policies for the plan, and identifies strategies
that should be pursued by each of the participants in this process to achieve the mutually
beneficial goals established in this plan. While this plan does not prescribe specific land
use amendments, it establishes a growth tier map that establishes distinct growth policy
areas and the applicable policies. It also establishes an on-going process to sustain
effective interagency coordination required to effectively address the growth challenges
faced by Ada County residents, businesses and service providers.
This plan was developed in coordination the Community Planning Association's program
to update the region's Long Range Transportation Plan. This "Communities in Motion"
program established and evaluated numerous growth scenarios that are described in the
appendix of this Plan. The policy areas and policies established in the Blueprint for Good
Growth are consistent with those included in the Long Range Transportation Plan.
A. Issues
Ada County jurisdictions face a variety of growth issues which were identified in the
Needs, Issues and Opportunities Report. This section refines and prioritizes these issues
to help establish a schedule for implementation and to guide decisions involving
competing objectives.
Key issues that need to be resolved over the course of
Blueprint Plan development include:
• Land Use and Development. Coordinating land
use and infrastructure decisions, maintaining strong
and vibrant downtown areas and healthy
neighborhoods, developing better systems for
managing regionally significant development
projects, and promoting sustainable infill
development are just a few of the land use issues
facing each jurisdiction.
• Transportation. While there is an overall belief
that ACHD has greatly improved its transportation
Key Issues:
Land Use &
Development
Transportation
Agriculture
Environment &
Recreation
Business & Economic
Development
Intergovernmental
Coordination
Draft February 11, 2006 1
Blueprint for Good Growth
planning and development practices, there also are numerous ways to improve
the transportation planning process. Ultimately, roadways must serve
residents, not just vehicles. Land use and transportation planning and actions
need to be coordinated to provide greater transportation choices and create
healthier neighborhoods, to continue remedying existing deficiencies, to
balance investment in new projects with operation, maintenance and repair
needs, and to explore innovative ways to provide transit and non -automotive
travel modes such as sidewalks, paths, bicycles, buses, and trains.
• Agriculture. The retention of agribusiness and agricultural land uses is a
cultural, economic and fiscal issue. It is possible to reach consensus on the
importance of the future of agriculture in Ada County through consultation
with agricultural land owners. Major issues are how much and what types of
agriculture can be sustained and how to provide economic support to farmers
to help them realize as much gain from retaining agricultural lands as the
would from land sales.
• Environment and Recreation. The natural environment is the key factor in
the local quality of life. The emergence of Ada County as a recreation
destination is directly related to successful efforts to clean up the Boise River.
Current decisions about development and transportation will affect
environmental quality and recreation opportunities for years to come. Current
decisions about development and transportation need to be made
simultaneously with preservation of natural areas and the environment and the
creation of park, recreation and open -space areas.
• Business and Economic Development. Ada County is in the enviable
position of having an attractive environment for economic growth. This
growth should provide diverse employment opportunities for residents while
remaining sensitive to quality of life issues.
• Intergovernmental Cooperation. Ada County, ACHD, the cities, the state
and Canyon County all need to use the plan through mutually reinforcing
intergovernmental agreements that address: expansion of annexation areas
and areas of impact; location and percentages of residential and economic
growth; preservation of agricultural and environmentally sensitive lands,
water distribution and rights; and allocation of federal, state and regional
funding.
B. Guiding Principles
Prior to selecting a preferred growth management strategy, the Steering Committee
developed a set of guiding principles pn which this plan is based.
Draft February 11, 2006 2
Blueprint for Good Growth
General Principles
• We love our home in the Treasure Valley. The valley has grown and we
expect it to grow more. It will be a better place if we plan growth to meet our
most important priorities, which follow.
• We will ensure growth is a benefit to all citizens and the economy. Our plans
will support good jobs and a strong, sustainable economy.
• We will support growth in all communities to allow choices in where to live
and work.
• We will manage growth with fiscal responsibility, discipline and creativity.
• Our plans will limit sprawl and promote other kinds of more responsible
development.
• We will invest in our neighborhoods to create and maintain attractive and
livable places that nurture community and reflect our pride in the Treasure
Valley.
• We will offer a quality transportation system for private vehicles with
increasing choices for pedestrians, bicycles, and transit.
• We will maintain a vibrant central city in Boise and strong downtowns in all
cities.
• We will protect the natural resources that we value.
We will manage growth with fiscal responsibility, discipline, and creativity.
• Growth must pay for itself.
• We will reduce infrastructure costs by
o building higher densities in appropriate locations;
o better managing growth in impact areas;
o Aligning capital improvement plans with areas targeted for new growth;
and
o Considering new and innovative ways to accomplish these things.
• We will reduce transportation costs and pollution if we can create complete
communities where jobs, shopping and housing are near each other.
Our land use plans will complement a strong economy.
• Our land use plans must allow developers to offer products that the public will
buy.
• Our land use plans will complement our strategies to produce well -paying
jobs and broad prosperity.
• We must have a strong education system to have a quality community and a
strong economy. When we plan, school representatives will be included on the
team.
We will limit sprawl and promote other kinds of more responsible development.
• We will emphasize infill development and increasing the density of residential
development.
• We will require master planning of larger, undeveloped areas to ensure an
appropriate mix of commercial, residential, and open space uses.
Draft February 11, 2006
Blueprint for Good Growth
o We will focus most commercial and residential development within
cities and in contiguous portions of defined areas of impact.
o We will consider master -planned communities outside of developed
areas if they demonstrate they will pay for their impact on the area and
will not burden other communities by shifting capital, operations and
maintenance costs.
• Residential development will include a range of densities, housing types, and
price levels.
• We will create a transportation system that will support the land use patterns
we want and will be the least harmful to the environment.
• We will work creatively using our group strength to implement the land use
patterns we want.
We will enhance our neighborhoods and sense of community.
• We will educate and work with neighborhoods and communities so they know
who they are and what they want to be.
• Development must respect, and creatively enhance, community identities.
• We will distribute growth to all communities so that citizens have choices of
where to live and work.
We will create attractive places to live, work, shop and play.
• Neighborhood and community design will support community identity and
discourage sprawl.
• We will design attractive streets that are as safe as possible for pedestrians and
bicyclists.
• We will develop community centers that promote activities day and night.
• We will develop safe, attractive communities.
• We will emphasize the planting of trees and flowers.
We will offer a quality transportation system for private vehicles with increasing
choices for pedestrians, bicycles, and transit.
• We will construct mixed-use patterns along main streets and in downtowns.
• We will connect neighborhoods, parks, schools and open space to shopping
areas and other area assets with complete sidewalks, transit stops and bike
paths.
• We are firmly committed to identifying, preserving and using key highway
and rail corridors.
• We are firmly committed to expanding and strengthening highway and transit
connections between communities.
• We will coordinate investments to create efficient transportation corridors.
• We will ensure our transportation systems support our land use decisions and
provide alternatives to vehicular travel.
• We will create stable and equitable funding sources for transportation.
Draft February 11, 2006 4
Blueprint for Good Growth
We will maintain a vibrant central city in Boise and strong downtowns in all
cities.
• We will maintain a vibrant downtown Boise as the region's center for
government, commerce and entertainment.
• We will accommodate growth through infill, redevelopment and expansion.
• We will build stronger neighborhoods through mixed-use development.
• We will promote an effective regional transportation system by building
developments that support transit.
• We will create a city where car ownership is not required to travel freely.
• We will encourage expansion and reinvestment in all downtowns.
We will protect the natural resources we value.
• The natural resources we value most are our clean air and water, our trees, the
Boise Foothills, the Boise River and floodplains, Lake Lowell and agricultural
lands.
• We will protect these assets by
o building higher densities in appropriate locations,
o better concentrating and coordinating growth in impact areas,
o providing incentives to property owners, [Comment: new idea for
discussion]
o adopting development regulations that encourage protection of natural
resource areas, and [Comment: new idea for discussion]
o Participating in the planting of trees and flowers, and
o Supporting programs that result in tree and flower proliferation.
• We will better protect these assets if we are able to locate jobs, shopping and
housing near each other.
C. Definitions
One key to achieving a coordinated growth management strategy is agreement on a
common language. The following terms, used through the Blueprint for Good Growth,
shall have the following meanings:
Adequate public facilities — requirement that essential public facilities will be
provided at adopted levels of service prior to or concurrent with the creation of
new demands for those facilities.
Compatibility — the ability of uses to coexist adjacent to one another without
reducing the value or viability of either use due to noise, light, shadows, traffic,
odors and other potential nuisances. Scale, height, density, building design, site
design, setbacks, buffers, use and materials are some of the factors affecting
compatibility. Each of these factors may be modified to enhance the
compatibility between adjacent uses that may differ in use, intensity or design.
Conservation subdivision — a development technique in which the size of lots
may be reduced in order to provide for a greater amount of undeveloped open
space, which may be permanently preserved through a variety of methods.
Draft February 11, 2006 5
Blueprint for Good Growth
Density, Gross — the total number of dwelling units divided by the total number
of acres in the tract on which those units are located.
Density, Net — the total number of dwelling units divided by the total number of
acres in the tract on which those units are located minus land located within
floodways, steep slopes, rights-of-way, and public lands.
Development of Regional Impact — define this
Downtown development — development within Boise's defined downtown area
and other future areas characterized by high intensity development. See Main
Street development.
Economic impact — changes in employment, considering targeted salaries or
wage rates; changes to property values; and changes in retail sales.
Environmental protection — implementation of programs to retain specific
environmental resources in their natural state, enhance the quality of degraded
environmental resources or to protect environmental resources from degradation.
Environmental resources — specific water, land, or air resources that are
designated for protection due to some fiscal, cultural, biological, recreational,
aesthetic or public safety value. For purposes of this plan, the specific
environmental resources targeted for protection include: floodways, locally
defined water quality protection zones, slopes in excess of 30%, identified habitat
areas, wildlife corridors and scenic vistas.
Essential public facilities — facilities for which the capacities may be specifically
linked to the approvals of developments that create demands for those facilities.
For purposes of this plan, essential public facilities include water, wastewater,
stormwater, transportation system, fire protection and schools.
Fiscal impact — the net monetary affect of a development on all public service
providers after considering all costs and revenues resulting from the development.
Growth Tier — a defined area that is subject to a set of policies that are distinct
from the policies of other growth tiers.
Infill — development that occurs on small or remnant parcels within otherwise
developed neighborhoods.
Level of Service — an adopted, quantifiable measure of the capacity of a facility
to meet anticipated demands.
Main Street development — development occurring within the established
downtowns or city centers of cities other than Boise. See downtown
development.
Mixed-use development — development that includes integrated residential and
non-residential uses within a single project area. Uses may be mixed horizontally
or vertically, but each mixed use project contains both residential and non-
residential uses. (insert local examples)
Draft February 11, 2006
Blueprint for Good Growth
Multiple use development — development that may include two or more different
types of uses that are not developed as a single, integrated project.
Open Space — any parcel of land maintained in an essentially unbuilt state and
reserved for public or private uses, including, but not limited to habitat protection,
water quality protection, passive recreational uses, livestock grazing or field crop
production (see open space policies).
Planned community — a new mixed-use community developed from vacant land
that includes all the services and uses needed by residents to live work and play
(see planned community policies).
Planned development — a flexible zoning tool that allows for deviation from
minimum lot sizes and other standard code requirements in return for provision of
amenities such as common open space and other design features. Also known as
planned unit development.
Transit -oriented development — development designed to reduce the use of
private automobiles by increasing the number of trips by walking, bicycle,
carpool, bus, streetcar, rail, or other transit mode. TODs generally feature higher
densities, a mix of uses, and greater emphasis of a pedestrian scale. (see appendix
for TOD model)
Transit -supportive development — development featuring a balanced
transportation network where walking, bicycling, and transit work in harmony
with the private automobile.
Urban Development — areas characterized by a variety of housing types and
densities as well as the availability of goods, services, employment and provision
of essential public services.
Draft February 11, 2006 7
Blueprint for Good Growth
11. Blueprint Objectives & Policies
A. Growth Management
This section establishes the framework for management of growth through coorclinsted
decisions that are consistent with the guiding principles established above. Objectives
and policies in this section identify growth tiers, the targeted proportion of growth to
occur in each tier and conditions applicable to development in each tier. Additionally,
this section outlines areas to improve coordination between participating agencies and
addresses the timing/phasing of development in relation to the availability of adequate
public facilities and services.
Growth Tiers Defined
Map 1 establishes a variety of growth tiers covering Ada County. The growth tiers
described below define areas with different development opportunities and policies which
are defined in this plan.
Activity Centers
This tier includes commercial and mixed use development at various scales and
intensities of development that serve neighborhoods, communities and the region.
Most neighborhood activity centers, and all community and regional activity
centers should be designed to support access by transit services as well as other
modes of transportation. Standards for each of these centers shall be established
within each community's land development regulations.
• Neighborhood activity centers, which are not shown in Map 1, serve one
or more neighborhoods and are characterized by relatively small scale
retail and service uses that may include mixed use or attached housing
opportunities. These centers are characterized by designs and scales that
support pedestrian access from adjacent neighborhoods. [e.g., 16th and
State Street, and 8th and Fort in Boise]
• Community activity centers meet the needs of a group of neighborhoods
or the entire community. These are characterized by shopping centers that
include grocery stores as anchors, moderate to high density housing
housing, office and service uses and mixed-use or multiple -use
development. [insert local examples]
• Regional activity centers meet the needs of one or more community and
include large scale employment and retail uses, high density residential
development and mixed use projects that draw business from throughout
the Treasure Valley. [insert local examples]
Areas of Impact
These areas are adjacent to incorporated cities and reflect an area that could
reasonably be expected to be annexed and to be served by centralized sewer
service within the next twenty years. Some rural residential development that
does not receive centralized sewer service may be included within areas of impact
Draft February 11, 2006 8
Blueprint for Good Growth
in accordance with the applicable municipality's comprehensive plan. The
primary purposes of areas of impact are to:
• Protect future city growth areas from inappropriate development that would_
constrain future growth;
• Facilitate coordinated land use and facility planning so service providers can
better anticipate and plan to meet future demands;
• Provide a predictable framework for private development decisions;
• Provide for orderly and sequenced annexations and to reduce pressure for
rapid area of impact boundary adjustments to encompass short-term
annexation plans; and
• Ensure financial and physical capability to provide needed public facilities
and services.
Cities
This tier includes currently incorporated municipalities and will be modified to
reflect future annexations and incorporations.
Rural Tier
This tier includes all unincorporated land that is not located within an area of
impact or approved planned community.
Planned Communities
This tier includes planned communities that are located outside an area of impact.
The planned community tier should change to reflect the boundaries of planned
communities approved through the County's comprehensive plan and planned
community zoning processes. Note that this plan encourages development of
planned communities and developments that include the characteristics of planned
communities within areas of impact and cities.
Public Lands
This tier includes lands owned by a federal, state or local governmental agency.
Transit Corridors
This tier includes lands along existing or planned high volume transit routes that
may be served by buses, bus rapid transit (BRT) or a fixed guideway system (e.g.,
commuter rail or light rail).
Growth Management Goal, Objective and Policies:
Goal: To establish and maintain sustainable development patterns that foster a high
quality of life in Ada County.
Comment: Quality of life is defined by the guiding principles and subsequent
policies. While these policies also more fully define what is meant by sustainable
development patterns, generally sustainability means that development will result
in:
Draft February 11, 2006 9
Blueprint for Good Growth
• A Healthy Economy, with sustainable job's and businesses that develop
and nurture the local work force, where decision-making takes into
account the interdependence of economic, environmental and social well
being;
• A Healthy Environment, where decision-making takes into account long
term consequences of development on natural and built up areas, and
efforts are made to prevent problems before they occur;
• Social Equity, which is the promotion of fair and equal treatment across
generations and among different groups in society, as well as the
reduction in disparities in risks and access to benefits. Evidence of social
equity includes housing and employment opportunities for all residents,
regardless of age, education, cultural background or income, as well as
inclusive and participatory decision-making processes. Social equity also
means that the benefits derived from growth do not shift burdens to
existing residents; and
• Efficiency, which includes the efficient use of energy and resources with
little or no waste. This includes the efficient use of natural and fiscal
resources (e.g., taxes and fees).1
Objective: Within two years of adoption of the BGG, local governments will update
their comprehensive plans to be consistent with the BGG, and within three years
of adoption of the BGG, local governments will update their land development
regulations to be consistent with the policies established in BGG.
General Growth Management Policies
GM -1: MAP 1 establishes the growth tiers covering Ada County. To
implement this plan in a consistent and coordinated manner, local
governments shall use the growth tier map in conjunction with the
applicable policies established in this section of the BGG to guide growth
management decisions, including capital improvements planning,
comprehensive plan amendments, annexations, area of impact extensions
and development decisions.
GM -2: Ensure that development decisions are coordinated with the
availability of essential public facilities so that adequate public facilities
will be provided before or concurrent with the generation of demands for
those facilities. [Comment: this will require ongoing coordination
between local governments and independent public service providers.]
GM -3: Coordinate land use and capital facility planning by requiring capital
improvement programs by service providers to be consistent with adopted
comprehensive plans and the Blueprint for Good Growth.
Text modified from Exploring Sustainable Communities, a teachers guide by World Resources Institute
for secondary education.
Draft February 11, 2006 10
Blueprint for Good Growth
GM -4: Establish and use the BGG revision process to ensure that local
growth management decisions are consistent with the County -wide growth
management strategy established in the BGG. [Comment: see the
implementation section for a description of the BGG revision process.]
GM -5: Develop and update local transportation elements of the
comprehensive plans in conjunction with ACHD, Valley Regional Transit,
ITD and COMPASS to ensure that policies reflect the ability to provide
and maintain adequate transportation system capacity. Local plans and
development decisions shall be consistent with the ACHD Capital
Improvements Program, the Long -Range Transportation Plan, and the
Valley Regional Transit Regional Operations and Capital Improvement
Plan, as amended from time to time.
GM -6: Coordinate development decisions with local and regional plans for
the full range of public facilities, as well as open space and environmental
protection.
GM -7: Encourage cities and the county, as applicable, to establish long-term
annexation agreements pursuant to policy GM -18 to minimize
intergovernmental conflicts and provide greater predictability for property
owners
GM -8: Establish a development of regional impact review process to ensure
that large scale developments (see Strategy section of this plan for
thresholds), including major future land use map amendments, are
consistent with the Long Range Transportation Plan and the 20 -year
ACHD Capital Improvements Plan. All developments of regional impact
shall be subject to the following criteria:
1. Require the submittal of a concept plan for all contiguous land
holdings prior to the first preliminary plat approval.
2. Ensure that the development is reflected in the applicable
cuuiptc;hensive plan, the BGG tier map, and the Long -Range
Transportation Plan and the ACHD 20 -Year CIP.
3. Establish the base residential and non-residential intensity at the time
of concept plan approval, considering:
a. the adequacy of essential public facilities;
b. applicable comprehensive plan policies;
c. consistency of the project with the Long Range Transportation
Plan and the ACHD 20 -Year CIP;
d. the proximity of the project to existing employment centers;
and
e. physical limitations of the site.
Draft February 11, 2006 11
Blueprint for Good Growth
Activity Center Policies
GM -9: Identify activity centers within individual comprehensive plans that
are consistent with the BGG Tier map and assign appropriate land use
categories and densities within each activity center to promote a
sustainable mix of land uses that reduces automobile dependency and
supports pedestrian trips.
Establish standards for community and regional activity centers that
ire minimum densities of at least 8 dwelling units per acre, minimum
levels of pedestrian connectivity and transit facilities that are sufficient to
support viable transit service. The following intensities are provided to
guide local jurisdictions in defining centers:
Activity Center Type
Density Ranges Non -Residential Project
i.
Pm 'l
than 150,00 sq.ft.
ss) easable area
0 to 150,000 sq.ft. of
,,grosj)leasable area
thaq25,000 sq.ft. of
gross easab e area
Regional
tiN
Community
Neighborhood
Greater than 20 dwellings Gr
per acre
12 to 20 dwellings per acre
8 to 16 dwellings per acre
GM -11: Establish mixe
scales of mixed use
center.
Areas of Impact Policies
Draft
evelopment standards that allow appropriate
velopment by right within each type of activity
GM -12: Establish and adjust Area of Impact boundaries based upon:
1. coordinated 20 -year capital facility plans that reflect historical or
reasonably anticipated funding levels to facilitate the efficient
provision of adequate water, wastewater, stormwater and
transportation facilities;
2. recent growth trends and projected growth of the applicable city;
3. the availability of adequate land supplies within the city and its area of
impact to meet the amount and diversity of growth that may be
reasonably anticipated by the city [Comment: the evaluation of land
supplies should consider the availability of a mix of infill and green-
field development opportunities required to meet projected growth
demands.];
4. the existence of short-term (e.g., 5 -year) capital improvements
programs that are adequately funded to accommodate growth
anticipated within at least 20 percent of the area of impact; and
5. inter -governmental agreements with the County and applicable service
providers to coordinate land use and infrastructure decisions in
accordance with the policies established in this plan.
February 11, 2006 12
Blueprint for Good Growth
GM -13: Within Areas of Impact, identify areas where essential public
facilities are available and areas where essential public facilities are
scheduled to be available based on 5 -year CIP to coordinate development
patterns with efficient infrastructure system development.
GM -14: Where essential public facilities are available, the County may
approve development applications that are consistent with local plans,
regulations and adopted facility extension/connection policies.
GM -15: Where essential public facilities are scheduled to be available in
accordance with and adopted 5 -Year CIP, the County may approve
development that is consistent with local plans, regulations and facility
connection policies, subject to the extension of public facilities and the
applicable service providers' reimbursement policies for capacity that
ceeds demands generated by the development.
: Where ess 'ali
thin adopted -Year an C
take one of the of u ng • c
Actions'
COILn'N
b"
hOU CAZ) iYe)
alga FUtioA
�ncoxut?
\V,l0.laP-avi mu.IC.¢. -ln;w u•Do r►c, hovac d.cuelopmud' not run oil
'lb The &Nib cldu3.neg. 4eiwleA.+
Itxd
I'Ybtlin5 Au,
- Not I
Itk
With writte
facilities are not scheduled to be provided
the applicable c • : da Co may
o ffer coni ering the factor ' : ed below:
Secr n r� soon 4
ct*-cv_A'AvtzkoxicwarYtaj
city, approval of the - . ; , e tau lot.
Anna -
Ls) -
consen
development application su jecrte,the provision o
of adequate public facilities for the en re d elopment
compliance with adopted city plans, regulations . d
infrastructure policies; or
With written consent from the city, approval of developmen ' of
up to 20 percent of the land area2 in the development that is:
g°Det
aciArtopmegi
earviAk
0,NA Dweloper
• consistent with the applicable city's comprehensive
plan, development regulations and infrastructure
policies, and
• subject to a concept plan for the entire development and
a development agreement that provides for future
annexation and full funding of facilities, including
funding for future connection of the portion of the site
that is initially developed to centralized water and
wastewater systems; or
• Disapproval of the development application.
CaaritAxi
' Through any development approval, the City and County may require the reservation of sufficient right-
of-way and easements to serve planned development in the vicinity of the project. Dry sewers may be
required if elevations can be determined at the time of development. eon
2 The remaining 80 percent may be developed when the C. 'determines that the full range of facilities and top 4l
services are adequate to serve the entire site.
Draft
February 11, 2006 13
Factors
Blueprint for Good Growth
• Consistency of the concept plan for the portion to be developed
and the entire property with the applicable city's
comprehensive plan;
• System -wide benefits provided by proposed public facilities;
• Local and regional fiscal and economic benefits;
• Capital obligations generated by the development;
• Operations and maintenance obligations generated by the
development; and
• Other benefits consistent with the city's adopted
comprehensive plan goals (e.g., housing, environmental,
recreational, economic, transportation, etc).
GM -17: When an applicant seeks an exception to adopted public
improvement standards within an area of impact, the exception shall
require approval by both the applicable city and Ada County to avoid
future infrastructure deficiencies that impede future growth and service
delivery.
GM -18: Adjustments to area of impact boundaries to reflect 20 -year growth
plans shall include an agreement not to annex beyond the area of impact
unless approved by the county or the other affected city. Pursuant to
Policy GM -7, local governments are encouraged to enter into annexation
boundary agreements that establish ultimate boundary lines between
individual cities and are based upon the following factors:
• Anticipated growth and the need for additional land to serve the cities'
residential and non-residential land use needs;
• Sewer service basins and the capacity to serve development in those
basins;
• Other service area boundaries (e.g., school districts, fire districts)
• Geographic features (e.g., ridges, waterways, arterial streets, railroads,
greenways) that form arrlr,rliate breaks between communities; and
• Public input from affected property owners.
City Policies
GM -19: Ensure that development decisions are consistent with the adopted
comprehensive plans, regulations and the BGG.
GM -20: Establish a mix of uses that maintains or improves the balance of
jobs, housing and services in each city to improve local fiscal health and
reduce long-term transportation demands.
GM -21: Base annexation decisions on the availability of essential public
facilities, the schedule for provision of those facilities in applicable capital
improvements plans, area of impact boundaries, fiscal benefits, economic
Draft February 11, 2006 14
Blueprint for Good Growth
benefits, the ne for addition • s evelopment areas, and the local
comprehensivcipit,
d
emit development in the rural tier to an average s f five percent
cted county -wide population growth within any three-year perio
we of deve oment approved witlun a planned commune Thi
limitation should be based on _ ..•:. : ano a e exte
that demand exceeds the five percent pe t allocation, permits shall
allocated on a first come, first granted basis.
W12- u?6
Orta#un6 0.2 ,
IVO maw'""
"Ont Nitta- +ivy
rcdtux►g Int
S'ie „,6
.iyP A
419741)*\
)9'4;0/%0
It, Li
60 :4
,tt
Alt - . ; - age suggested by Co
GM -22: - ::: • e : - elopm the rural tier te-an u ould average of five
percent of proected county -wide population growth within the previous? k
any three-year period, exclusive of development approved within aA\11*0‘``
planned community. This limi -. - . - . - ... . _ ... _ . . - :. ' .:. _ : _X ,,,* tal.\.e.
to - - ,: . _ - ... _ - . pereent-peFmit
r shall a 5.rct sunt gianted� c $
Who is the monitoring body and would we realistically expect any 0‘
jurisdiction to do this?
dro-1,
GM
-23: : • blish an equity -based program to secure permanent open space
n the rural tier through the use of techniques such as: conservation
subdivisions, transfers of development rights, or purchases of land,
conservation easements or development rights.
[Comment: policies GM -24 through GM -25 reserved in this draft]
Planned Communities Policies -- Nem it. a., c.. p tly►"%ItiA,
Allow pl ed c mm ities to be established within cities, areas o:
pact or ruraloounty subject to the policies of this sectio
comprehensive plan consistency and compliance with applicabl
development regulations.
'I V-AhoAd cuu,rot. as'u Amu
GM -27: Adjust development standards to encourage pl . endcommunities o
developments providing the benefits of planned communities within cities
and their areas of impact. These standards, described more fully in the
implementation section of this plan, may inclugeenurn density
thresholds, by -right development patterns that .-a of uses and
dwelling types subject to administrative review, trip -generation credits for
mixed use and transit -oriented development patterns and other incentives
to create more sustainable development patterns.
may
GioidoPt
Centel
1405
RAiwad Oka
Gtex 0,..Chuaeb rcArZ t S °pon e:pike,
c.b-17) rWitAitIen ItpaJ mask.
DrafPnr9 February 11, 2006 we. ct0(\ 15
OA
C0( t t o �ax au 3o �r,o --t u�
` (� LSU " qo -� d •
.�
Seek
Ada .Lk,
Blueprint for Good Growth
No an4-wrzt,v..e.
C1P- a
Vu410111t)
r6P6)
aenslaoken
(Amrnurutive
or all planned communities:
equire the submittal of a concept plan for all contiguous land
holdings to be included within the planned community. Prior to
approving any extensions to a concept plan require the cumulative
analysis of facility, service and fiscal impacts for all lands to be
included within the planned community, including the creation of
facility and service demands in portions of the development located
_outside of Ada County.
W
ecailofiatA Irxctpm, toa. Cons.akc.+rti- " k t -,Ad
2. Prior to approval of a planned community, ensure that the
development is the County's comprehensive plan, the
BGG tier map, the Long -Range Transportation Plan and the ACRD
20 -Year CIP.
3. Assign the base residential and non-residential intensity at the time of
concept plan approval, considering:
a. the adequacy of essential public facilities;
b. consistency of the project with the Long Range Transportation
Plan, the ACRD 20 -Year CIP and the Valley Regional Transit
Plan;
c. the proximity of the project to existing employment centers;
and
d. physical limitations of the site.
Itteck,-'!p dekiudopenti
Scuee..4.1
fit^eictoklwt. Coma►.
jk,rlQ COIAirvhA 1nDo
1)
A;1" (°— Z
upoY1 incmrpt.ra10w.
a, 'planned,-k\kikin OiranOpt 461A? �m
0.G tegtrb
vitton kexki.10b,u, 5-flttr
Refine existing County development regulations addressing planned
unities outside areas of impact to implement policy GM -28 and the
owing policies:
1. Ensure that planned communities fund 100 percent of on and off-site
capital improvement costs for essential public facilities and emergency
service facilities required to serve the proposed development.
2. Ensure that development will fully fund operations and maintenance
costs for water, wastewater, transportation, public safety and
emergency services at adopted levels of service. (see Strategies
section for discussion of alternative funding tools)
3. Require the preservation of at least 50% of the gross acreage of the
property for open space. Allow the applicant to meet the need for up
to half the required open space through the conservation of off-site
high priority open space areas.
P"(- 1 Draft
ttb
t►�
t\a-te tee$
February 11, 2006
Ezra han
$1, os‘rwst
16
Blueprint for Good Growth
Public Lands Policy
GM -30: Coordinate with state, federal and local agencies to:
1. develop and maintain an inventory of public lands for use by all
service providers in identifying opportunities for collocation of
compatible public uses;
2. identify potential land swaps that result in more efficient protection of
resources within Ada County;
3. maintain or enhance access to public lands for public access and
emergency service provision;
4. maintain or enhance connectivity between public lands for recreational
or wildlife purposes;
5. review the impacts of proposed development of lands on
a. the preceding polices;
b. land use compatibility; and
c. transportation system function.
Transit Corridor Policies
Note: While the emphasis of this section is on the preservation of transit
corridors that are anticipated to provide some level of service within the next 20
years, this plan anticipates that long term need for more extensive transit
services to efficiently move people throughout Ada County and other portions of
the Treasure Valley. The preservation of future transit opportunities is critical
to ensure tiat needed services needed beyond the planning period can be
establ' / ' erve future residents.
GM -31:
as
ap # shows the key arterial routes that have the greatest potential
ary bus transit corridors. Local governments should require
evelopment within these bus transit corridors to safely and efficiently
accommodate necessary transit facilities. These facilities may include on -
street bus stops with convenient pedestrian and bicycle access, pullout
lanes at community activity centers or on-site transit stations at regional
activity centers. (insert reference to Valley Regional Transit design
*dards)
To support the provision of efficient and convenient transit service,
should encourage or require minimum gross densities of at least 8
dwelling units per acre within identified bus transit corridors. Where
stable neighborhoods or natural resources inhibit the compatible
establishment of higher densities, seek to obtain transit supportive
densities and designs in mixed use activity centers in other areas along the
corridors.
GM -33: Map # illustrates the corridors most likely to support high capacity
transit services (e.g., bus rapid transit, light rail or commuter rail). Light
or commuter rail is planned for the existing rail corridor. Bus rapid transit
(BRT) service has been studied and is proposed for the State Street
Draft February 11 , 2006 17
Blueprint for Good Growth
corridor. Chinden Boulevard could provide another opportunity for BRT
if the right-of-way and abutting development support the service. To
enable the provision of high capacity transit services, local governments
should require minimum densities of at least 16 dwelling units per acre
within one-quarter mile of potential transit stops. Potential stops are
illustrated on Map #, for the light rail and State Street corridors. Potential
sites along the Chinden corridor will require more study.
GM -35: Adopt and apply transit -oriented development design standards that
address connectivity, pedestrian access, parking and transit facility design
within all bus transit corridors and within one-half mile of all high
capacity transit facilities. [Comment: TOD design standards to be
included in implementation section appendix]
GM -35: Ensure that local development decisions are consistent with adopted
transportation and transit plans to promote effective movement of people
and goods.
B. Open Space and Natural Resources
This plan supports the retention of open space for a wide variety of uses and the
responsible use of natural resources that results in the protection of the environmental and
aesthetic value of our land, air and water. While efforts to protect air quality will require
regional solutions, local land use and transportation decisions could significantly reduce
air pollutant generation from automobiles.
Open Space and Natural Resource Goal: To develop an interconnected
system of open spaces and natural resource areas that:
• Protect water quality;
• Protect development from flood hazards;
• Provide an accessible, system of greenways and trails;
• Protect wildlife habitat by avoiding fragmentation of habitat
areas and corridors;
• Minimize development on steep hillsides; and
• Provide appropriate recreational opportunities.
Open Space
OS -1: Develop a countywide open space and greenway plan to facilitate the
establishment of a coordinated system that helps achieve the open
space and natural resource goal.
OS -2: Establish context -sensitive minimum open space requirements for all
non -industrial development projects based on the following general
guidelines:
• Activity centers and transit corridors — no minimum percentage, but
establish plazas and other public spaces.
Draft February 11, 2006 18
Blueprint for Good Growth
• Cities and Areas of Impact:
o Residential projects: 20 percent open space, including land
dedicated for public uses, but excluding street rights-of-way.
o Non-residential and mixed-use projects: 15 percent open space,
including plazas and other public gathering spaces.
• Rural Areas: a minimum of 50 percent open space for conservation
subdivisions.
• Planned Communities: 50 percent open space (see policy GM -29).
OS -3: In reviewing development proposals, evaluate opportunities to retain
meaningful open spaces consistent with the preceding policies. Adopt
standards addressing the amount, configuration, dimensions, usability
and uses allowed within open spaces (see implementation section for
more details).
Natural Resources
Ada County encompasses many distinct environments offering a wealth of natural
resources that merit special protection efforts, including:
• Scenic hillsides and ridgelines;
• Floodplains along streams and rivers;
• Wildlife habitat areas; and
• Agricultural lands.
OS -4: Coordinate natural resource conservation efforts with federal, state and
other local agencies responsible for the maintenance and protection of
those resources.
OS -5: Enable development to satisfy a portion of its open space requirements
through the preservation of valued natural resource areas shown in
Map #.
OS -6: Limit development encroachment into areas identified in Map #.
Where land or development rights cannot be secured, use conservation
subdivision design to maximize preservation of the resources.
OS -7: Ensure that new development neither impedes the function of
floodplains or floodways, nor places development or its occupants at
risk from floodwaters. Coordinate stormwater management efforts
with affected agencies, which may include the ACHD, Boise River
Flood Control District 10 and/or irrigation entities, encouraging the
use of low impact stormwater management design wherever feasible.
OS -8: Coordinate with irrigation entities to minimize the risks and costs to
operators for the use of irrigation ditch rights-of-way and easements
for bicycle and pedestrian trails as part of the larger greenway system.
Draft February 11, 2006 19
Blueprint for Good Growth
OS -9: Preserve and protect gravel resources needed to support growth and
maintenance of facilities within Ada County. Minimize encroachment
of new development into relatively open areas that may be quarried for
gravel without interfering with existing development.
OS -10: To ensure limit potential safety hazards that may be generated by
gravel operations, establish review standards that require site
reclamation and the protection of floodplain areas during and
subsequent to the quarry operations. (see appendix for model
language)
C. Transportation Goal, Objectives and Policies
This section establishes policies to coordinate transportation facilities with future
development. In addition to establishing policies for road corridor preservation, it
addresses transit corridor preservation and the incorporation of non -motorized (e.g.,
bike/pedestrian) transportation facilities and services into the overall transportation
system. Other key transportation policies address connectivity, streetscape, traffic
calming techniques, interconnectivity and other issues identified in this Plan.
[CominenJ, ___Manv of1e policies are contingent upon the adoption_of different level of
service (LOS) standards for different areas/road segments (e.g., lower congestion
thresholds in rural areas, such as LOS B or C and the identification of constrained
facilities in high priority areas such as downtowns and activity centers that may continue
to operate at LOS E without impeding future development).]
Transportation Goal: To coordinate land use and transportation decisions
so that the full range of mobility needs may be met with the least fiscal
burden.
Objectives:
• Establish a formal plan amendment review process to ensure that local
comprehensive plans, the Long Range Transportation Plan, the ACHD 20 -
year CP and the Valley Regional Transit Regional Operations and Capital
Improvement Plan are consistent to ensure that planned land uses and
transportation facilities are mutually supportive.3
3 ACHD will continue to plan for street capacity to serve development approved by local governments.
While near term projects shown in the 20 -year CIP will reflect approvals that more closely reflect trend
development patterns, longer term projects should reflect planned land uses that are consistent with
"Community Choices", the preferred growth scenario adopted through the Long Range Transportation Plan
and locally adopted land use plans.
Draft February 11, 2006 20
Blueprint for Good Growth
• Within four years of adoption of the Blueprint for Good Growth,
implement a transportation management program that is consistent with
the following transportation policies.
Transportation Policies
T-1: Establish appropriate level of service standards that:
• Allow greater levels of congestion in cities and activity centers
than in outlying areas;
• Recognize the capacity constraints of some key corridors by
allowing for greater levels of congestion in constrained corridors;
• Allow for greater levels of congestion along identified transit
corridors.
T-2: Establish context sensitive street cross-sections that safely convey
existing and projected traffic in accordance with established level of
service standards, while addressing the following factors:
1. Compatibility with planned land uses along the corridor;
2. Safe access to abutting properties (note: this may be provided through
parallel roads, alleys or private drives along arterial streets);
3. Anticipated bicycle and pedestrian traffic;
4. Access to transit; and
5. Stormwater management needs.
T-3: Map # is the functional classification map that indicates the planned
function of future roadways. This map shall be used in conjunction with
cross-sections developed pursuant with policy T-2 to identify right-of-way
needs and to prevent encroachment of development into rights-of-way
needed to serve existing and planned development
T-4: Along corridors where additional right-of-way is needed, require
development to provide its pro -rata share of the right-of-way and
improvements. If additional right-of-way is needed, buildings and critical
parking shall be located outside of the planned right-of-way. Unless
sufficient funds are available to secure needed right-of-way prior to
development, maximum development intensities shall be based on the
acreage of the site prior to acquisition of the right-of-way.
T-5: Establish minimum connectivity requirements to improve traffic flow,
pedestrian connectivity, bicycle access, transit access and minimize
projected vehicle miles traveled from new development. Require new
development along arterial streets to provide access parallel to the arterial
street via an appropriate combination of frontage roads, private drives and
parallel collector streets.
T-6: Establish and maintain a more detailed traffic model that will track
existing, committed (e.g., approved), and planned traffic demands, as well
Draft February 11, 2006 21
Blueprint for Good Growth
as their impacts on arterial and collector intersections. Continually refine
the model to provide more effective guidance in the review of traffic
mitigation proposals:
T-7: Adopt and implement the ACHD Pedestrian -Bicycle Transportation
Plan to establish routes that make bicycles a viable transportation
alternative for some individuals.
T-8: In conjunction with the development of context -sensitive street cross-
sections, develop and adopt a menu of traffic calming provisions in the
design manual that:
1. Identifies alternative traffic calming designs (e.g., bulb -outs,
boulevards, roundabouts and medians);
2. Effectively slow traffic;
3. Allow streets to function at planned capacities; and
4. Do not obstruct emergency access to and through neighborhoods.
T-9: To facilitate transit services that provide effective alternatives to
automotive travel, ensure that development and street designs are
consistent with the Transit Corridor development policies established in
GM -34 through GM -37. Along arterial roads that serve as bus routes,
require adequately designed bus pull-outs at appropriate locations
identified by Valley Regional Transit to facilitate transit provision without
obstructing non -bus traffic.
T-10: Refine street system capital funding sources so that adequate funds are
available for capacity expansion in addition to the maintenance and
operations of existing facilities. Evaluate the following strategies to
enhance capital funding:
1. Ongoing adjustment of local street impact fees to ensure that they keep
up with rising construction and right-of-way costs;
2. Expansion of impact fees to include state routes and the collector street
system;
3. The use of special districts to fund extraordinary capital and
operations/maintenance costs associated with developments of
regional impact;
4. Dedication and improvement requirements for bicycle and pedestrian
facilities.
D. Utilities Goal, Objectives and Policies
Coordination of utilities with growth and development decisions is an objective that will
be difficult to achieve due to the large number of service providers. Utilities are provided
within Ada County through a collection of municipal, public and private service
providers. Electrical service is provided by Idaho Power. Water and sewer service is
provided by municipal and other public and private service providers. Stormwater
Draft February 11, 2006 22
Blueprint for Good Growth
management responsibilities are shared between local governments, irrigation entities,
ACRD and various flood control agencies. Despite the challenges created by the
fragmented service provision, this plan strongly supports continued efforts to share
information and coordinate capital and service provision plans.
Utility Goals:
1. To compatibly and safely integrate necessary utility facilities with future growth
and development;
2. To ensure that utility systems are adequate to meet the needs of residents and
businesses;
3. To minimize energy consumption and water demands through aggressive
conservation measures (e.g., green buildings, xeriscaping, grey -water usage); and
4. To minimize the negative impacts of utility provision on the natural and built
environments.
Utility Objectives:
1. Within two years of adoption of the BGG, local governments will update local
plans to identify public utility needs and to make accommodations for the
facilities required to deliver projected services.
2. Within three years of adoption of the BGG, local governments will update their
land development regulations to be consistent with the policies established in this
section.
Utility Policies
U-1: Adopt and enforce minimum fire flow requirements or alternative fire
suppression options for all development located within cities and all
development within areas of impact that is served by centralized water and
sewer service.
U-2: Plan for the extension of municipally approved sewer service throughout
cities and their areas of impact, except in areas specifically planned for
large lot residential development. Ensure that development in planned
sewer service areas is designed to be connected to the municipal sewer
system. Where development of interim facilities is authorized pursuant to
policy GM -16, ensure that provisions are made for the future connection
of the development to the applicable municipal system.
U-3 Map # illustrates the general locations of electrical system substations
required to serve planned development within each community. Local
governments shall coordinate with Idaho Power to ensure that adequate
land is planned for siting these facilities and associated power lines.
[What are the rules regarding advance site acquisition by Idaho Power?]
U-4: Annually review of applicable short and long-range utility capital plans
with all utility providers4 to discuss projected short and long-term
4 This should include all water, wastewater, electric, telecommunications and natural gas service providers.
Draft February 11, 2006 23
Blueprint for Good Growth
demands from development, facility siting and construction needs, and
right-of-way and easement acquisition needs.
U-5: Coordinate development reviews with applicable service providers to
ensure that new development can be served safely and adequately.
U-6: Evaluate alternatives to coordinate and provide a stable funding source
for stormwater management services that address the needs of ACHD,
irrigation entities, flood control districts and local municipalities,
including compliance with NPDES stormwater quality requirements.
Alternatives may include the expansion of an existing agency's mandate
or the creation of a new stormwater management utility.
E. Public Schools Goal, Objective and Policies
Three school districts provide public school facilities and services in Ada County. Each
of these districts faces unique growth related challenges, the outcome of which will have
a dramatic impact on the quality of life in Ada County. The most significant challenge
faced by local school districts is the funding of the capital facilities needed to serve
anticipated growth.
Public School Goal: To coordinate development decisions with the capacity of local
school districts to provide high quality educational facilities and services.
Public School Objective: To establish adequate public school facility requirements
within two years after the adoption of the Blueprint for Good Growth.
Public School Policies
PS -1: Coordinate with local school districts to secure sufficient funding to
meet anticipated demands from the state or other local sources.
PS -2: Coordinate with local school districts to ensure that public facilities are
adequate to meet projected demands from new development.
PS -3: Coordinate with school districts to establish appropriate school siting
criteria that address:
• Appropriate access for elementary, middle and high schools;
• Opportunities for collocation of recreation and other appropriate
facilities; and
• The extension and funding of support infrastructure, including, but
not limited to water, sewer and streets.
Draft February 11, 2006 24
Blueprint for Good Growth
111. Strategies
This section of the Blueprint for Good Growth outlines recommendations to implement
the policies established in the previous section. Many of the recommendations will need
to be adjusted to reflect differences in the plans, codes and character of local
governments.
A. Plan Amendments
This section identifies comprehensive plan amendments that each jurisdiction will need
to make to ensure consistency with the objectives and policies of the Blueprint for Good
Growth.
Future Land Use Map Amendments
The Blueprint Growth Tier Map and local governments' future land use plans are largely
consistent with the future land uses proposed by the Communities in Motion Community
Choice Scenario. This scenario established as the basis for future population and
employment growth on which the Long Range Transportation Plan is based. While no
specific future land use amendments are listed in this plan, local governments will need
to adopt the Blueprint for Good Growth Tier map and related policies to implement this
plan. Additionally, local governments should review zoning maps and zoning district
requirements to ensure that they are consistent with and promote the implementation of
the Blueprint policies.
As Ada County and each of the cities update their future land use map and the tier map
within their jurisdictions, they should:
1. Determine whether the amendment is a major or minor amendment. Minor
amendments are those that do not result in a change of the tier map boundaries
and do not exceed the development of regional impact thresholds. Adjustments to
city limits boundaries that are encompassed within the applicable city's area of
impact shall be considered minor amendments.
2. Minor amendments should be handled through the normal process used by the
local agency.
M • ' endments should be forwarded to the Blueprint for Good Growth
Office?, who shal
a. review the propose amendment for consistency with: ✓
i. the goals, objectives and policies of this plan;
ii. the Long Range Transportation Plan; -�
iii. the ACHD 20 -year CIP; and ✓
iv. Valley Regional Transit Operations and Capital Improvement Plan.
Forward draft consistency findings to the BGG Consortium for formal
action in accordance with the intergovernmental agreement implementing
this plan.
5 Note that this text presumes the use of a hearing examiner to review local government actions for
consistency with the BGG. The Consortium will be responsible for retaining the hearing examiner (whose
expenses should be covered by application fees) and making a formal consistency finding.
Draft February 11, 2006 25
Blueprint for Good Growth
c. If the BGG Consortium finds that the proposed plan amendment is
inconsistent with any of the documents in paragraph "a" ... [discussion
item]
Policy Amendments
Each community may incorporate the Blueprint for Good Growth policies by reference or
directly incorporate applicable policies into their comprehensive plans. Subsequent to the
plan amendments that reference or incorporate the plan amendments, each jurisdiction
forward . rp n osed policy amendments to the iG Hearing xamii 7for a
consistency review pursuant to mayor amendment provisions of the previous section[
B. Intergovernmental Coordination
This section identifies changes in intergovernmental policies, practices and agreements
needed to implement the BGG objectives and policies.
Areas of Impact
This section outlines locally adopted standards and procedures related to adjustments to
areas of impact. In addition to establishing local procedures, this section identifies
proposed statutory changes. The local standards and procedures should be implemented
through intergovernmental agreements between each of the cities and Ada County.
Boundary modification standards: In addition to considering the state mandated
factors for modifications to areas of impact, the following factors shall be evaluated prior
to granting an amendment to an area of impact boundary:
[Should these factors be considered by the hearing master prior to County action
established under the statute? This could reduce political pressures on County
Commissioners and result in a clear evidentiary record prior to their review and action.]
1. Consistency of the proposed boundary with applicable long range capital facility
plans that reflect historical or reasonably anticipated funding levels to facilitate
the efficient provision of adequate water, wastewater, stormwater and
transportation facilities;
2. Recent growth trends and COMPASS growth projections for the applicable city;
3. The availability of adequate land supplies within the city and its area of impact to
meet the amount and diversity of growth that be re onably anticipated by
the city. When considering this factor, th Hearing Mast shall examine the
planned land uses in the existing city, existing area of impact and the expansion
area to determine whether they represent a mix of land uses and products that can
reasonably be anticipated to be demanded. Generally residential land supplies
that are more than 1.5 times the anticipated 20 -year demand should be considered
excessive. Commercial and industrial surpluses may be more than twice
projected demands, depending on very long-range needs and opportunities.
4. The existence of short-term (e.g., 5 -year) capital improvements programs that are
adequately funded to accommodate growth anticipated within at least 20 percent
Draft February 11, 2006 26
Blueprint for Good Growth
of the area of impact. Note that these plans should provide capacity, though not
necessarily line extensions that typically are funded by new development; and
5. Whether existing inter -governmental agreements with the County and applicable
service providers to coordinate land use and infrastructure decisions are consistent
with the policies established in this plan.
Area of Impact development standards:
Development within each area of impact shall be subject to the terms of an
intergovernmental agreement implementing the Blueprint for Good Growth policies.
Each local government shall document applicable land use, development and public
improvement standards through a separate intergovernmental agreement. Each
agreement shall establish:
• Applicable future land use categories;
• Zoning districts to authorize planned land uses;
• Site development standards addressing bulk, setback and other applicable
development standards for buildings, parking areas, landscaping, signs, and public
use areas;
• On and off-site public improvement standards addressing water, wastewater,
transportation, stormwater and public utilities; and
• Development approval criteria.
Development review procedures.
Except as otherwise provided by the Area of Impact Policies, applications for
development within areas of impact shall be:
• jointly reviewed by City and County staffs for compliance with the applicable
development standards; and
• acted upon by the applicable County authority.
In those instances when City approval of a development agreement is required, the
County shall not approve the final plat of a project until the City and developer have
executed the development agreement.
In those instances when a variance to a public improvement standard is requested, the
County shall not authorize the variance unless the City has provided written
documentation that the variance has been approved.
ACHD Coordination
This section addresses potential changes in the development review and capital planning
processes to enhance the coordination between transportation system decisions,
comprehensive plans and development decisions. Included in this section are
recommendations to:
[To be finalized after confirmation of policies by Steering Committee and Consortium.]
• implement the BGG objectives and policies;
Draft February 11, 2006 27
Blueprint for Good Growth
• ensure that traffic modeling addresses the cumulative impact of development;
and
• resolve inconsistencies between neighborhood plans and regional
transportation needs.
COMPASS Coordination
This section addresses potential changes in local government planning and development
monitoring procedures to ensure that COMPASS has the most current information
available concerning current and future land uses. Additional coordination will involve
the coordination of traffic modeling between ACRD and COMPASS.
[To be finalized after confirmation ofpolicies by Steering Committee and Consortium.]
Development review procedures:
• In addition to providing development review opportunities in accordance with
existing policies and procedures, local governments will provide to COMPASS
and ACRD quarterly reports that identify:
o Building permit and certificate of occupancy data,
o Zoning and plan map amendments, and
o Concept plan, preliminary plat and final plat approvals.
• See new DRI procedures below.
Traffic modeling procedures:
• COMPASS and ACHD will update travel demand models based on development
activity reports from local governments.
• COMPASS, ACHD and IDT will share traffic count data, transportation network
information, and collaboratively calibrate traffic models on an annual basis.
• COMPASS will continue to monitor current and long range traffic demands at a
regional level.
• ACHD will track existing plus pipeline development (e.g., development projects
approved, but not yet built) and refine travel demand modeling to provide more
detailed assessments of the impacts of development on intersections and non -
arterial streets.
ITD Coordination
This section will address potential changes in local and State policies, standards and
procedures to address existing issues, such as funding, roadway design, access
management, roadway amenities (e.g., sidewalks, landscaping and other streetscape
design issues), and incorporation of impact fees and adequate public facility standards
into state ITD policies and regulations.
[To be finalized after confirmation ofpolicies by Steering Committee and Consortium.]
Draft February 11, 2006 28
Blueprint for Good Growth
Valley Regional Transit Coordination
[To be finalized after confirmation of policies by Steering Committee and Consortium.]
Developments of Regional Impact
This section establishes the thresholds and procedures for review of Developments of
Regional Impact (DRI).
DRI Thresholds
[discussion item]
DRI Procedures
• Upon determining that an application for site development plan, zoning map
amendment, comprehensive plan map amendment, or subdivision approval
exceeds the DRI thresholds, the local government shall notify the applicant of the
need for review of the application by the Hearing Master, who shall hear the
application within days of the submittal of the application to the BGG
Consortium.
• Copies of the application shall be forwarded to all local governments and other
public service providers affected by the application within 5 working days of the
filing of the application with the Consortium.
• Insert notice and hearing requirements.
• Within 45 days of the opening of the public hearing on the DRI application, the
Hearing Master shall provide written findings of fact and conclusions of law
regarding the application's compliance with the DRI review factors.
• Effect of Hearing Master's finding — to be completed
o Site development plan
o Zoning map amendment
o Comprehensive plan map amendment
o Subdivision application
DRI Review Factors
Insert factors for each type of application
C. Regulatory Changes
This section will identify and prioritize regulatory changes needed to implement the
BGG. Model regulations (including policy options) will be prepared to address
numerous regulatory needs, including, but not limited to:
i. Infill standards
1. Administrative design standards for high density projects;
2. Creation of "third" places6 within neighborhoods
3. Form -based zoning standards for transit -oriented development; and
6 Home and work are the first two places; third places are public, quasi -public and private places where
people can meet their neighbors, such as: coffee shops, public plazas, parks, museums and social clubs.
Draft February 11, 2006 29
Blueprint for Good Growth
4. Compatibility criteria for infill development.
ii. Planned Development Regulations
iii. Planned Communities Regulations
iv. Conservation Subdivision Standards
v. Adequate Public Facilities Standards
vi. Mitigation Standards
vii. Benchmarks to measure annual compliance with BGG standards and policies
[Comment: recommended plan edits by jurisdiction will be drafted after discussion of
draft policies and determination of the funding status of phase II of BGG]
D. Legislative Initiatives
This section will identify key regulatory initiatives that would help implement the BGG,
which may include:
i. Proposals for public improvement district (PID) standards that would require
PID consistency with comprehensive plans and would allow the PID to be
used to fund operation and maintenance costs resulting from certain
developments;
ii. Adjustments to the area of impact processes;
iii. Adjustments to impact fee legislation; and
iv. Clarifications of authority for intergovernmental agreements.
E. Educational Initiatives
This section will identify short-term and ongoing educational initiatives that may be
provided through Blueprint efforts or other mechanisms. In addition to addressing
general planning and plan implementation topics such as those listed above, the plan
could outline presentations on specific topics of interest, such as case studies of
successful and unsuccessful planned communities, the use of mitigation fees, and form -
based zoning.
Draft February 11, 2006 30
IV. Appendices
Appendix A: Growth Projections -
Appendix B: Scenarios Analysis
Appendix C: Plan Policy Amendments
Appendix D: Regulatory Models
Blueprint for Good Growth
/
Draft February 11, 2006 31