Minutes - 2020 - City Council - 11/19/2020 - SpecialEAGLE CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
NOVEMBER 19, 2020
1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Pierce calls the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL: Present: BAUN, GOLD, PITTMAN, PIKE. All present. A quorum is
present.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
4. REPORTS:
A. Mayor and Council Reports: Status of new hires for city hall. Country Christmas
discussion.
B. City Hall Department Supervisor Reports: None.
C. City Attorney Report: None.
5. PUBLIC COMMENT 1: The Eagle City Council is taking remote public comment via
Webex. Meeting login instructions are posted on httos://www.cityofeagle.org/l698/Virtual-
Meetings. If you just want to watch the meeting, without giving comment, please watch our
livestream at https://www.citvofeaale.ora/305/Citv-Agendas-Videos.
This time is reserved for the public to address their elected officials regarding concerns or comments they would
like to provide to the City Council regarding subjects not on the agenda. At times, the City Council may seek
comments/opinions regarding specific City matters during this allotted time. This is not the time slot to give formal
testimony on a public hearing matter, land use application, or comment on a pending application or proposal. Out
of courtesy for all who wish to speak, the City Council requests each speaker limit their comments to three (3)
minutes.
No public comment at this time.
6. ADDITIONS. DELETIONS OR MODIFICATIONS TO THE AGENDA:
A. City Staff requests. No changes requested.
7. ALL CONSENT ITEMS ARE CONSIDERED ACTION ITEMS: 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 Councihnember, 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. Reappointment to the Eagle Library Board: In accordance with Resolution 14-19,
Mayor Pierce is requesting Council confirmation of the reappointment of Nanci
Thaemert to the Eagle Library Board. Ms. Thaemert will serve a term that will end in
November 2023. (SB)
C. Resolution 20-27: A resolution of the City Council of the City of Eagle, Idaho
establishing a Mayor's Youth Advisory Council; intent of the council; offices of the
council; number of persons and membership to serve on the council; selection and
qualifications for persons to serve on the council; establishing the term of the
committee; establishing meetings of the council; and providing an effective date. (BJ)
D. Sanitary Supplies Service Agreement: An agreement between Waxie Sanitary
Supply and the City of Eagle to provide sanitary supplies. (EZ)
Page 1
C:\Users\ematilla\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\E1KOF4Z5\CC-11-19-20spmin_ (002).docx
Gold asks to remove items A, B and D. Gold moves to approve item C. Seconded by
Baun. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES. Gold moves to table items A & B.
Seconded by Baun. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES.
Discussion with public works director regarding item D.
Pike moves to approve item D. Seconded by Pittman. ALL AYE...MOTION
CARRIES.
8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
A. Comprehensive Plan Review Framework Workshop: Eagle City Council will provide
direction on items for research, discussion or review as staff develops a scope of work for a
re -write of the City's comprehensive plan. (NBS)
Nichoel Baird -Spencer addresses the council. Council does an exercise to give direction to
staff to begin the re -write of the comprehensive plan. Discussion.
9. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Idaho Transportation Department Development Proportionate Share Contribution:
City Staff will provide the Council an update on this process and a memo outlining the
request from ITD. (NBS)
Nichoel Baird -Spencer addresses the council. Discussion.
B. Agreement for Development of Doe Park: An agreement between the City of Eagle and
PetIQ, LLC for development of a dog park at the Ada/Eagle Sports Complex located at
3151 East Greenbrook Street, Eagle, Idaho. This agreement does not commit municipal
funds. (EZ)
Public Works Director Ziegenfuss reviews the agreement with the council.
Baun moves to approve 9B Agreement for Development of Dog Park with PetIQ.
Seconded by Pittman. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES.
10. ADJOURNMENT:
Pittman moves to adjourn at 4:27 pm. Seconded by Baun. ALL AYE...MOTION
CARRIES.
Hearing no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned.
Res ectfully submitd:
S HORTON, CMC
SR DEPUTY CLERK/TREASURER
APPROVED:
1`r tT
1'JASON PIERCE
MAYOR
AN AUDIO RECORDING OF THIS MEETING IS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD AT
W W W. CITYOFEAGLE.ORG.
Page 2
C:\Users\ematilla\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INateache\Content.Outlook\E1KOF425\CC-11-19-20spmin_ (002).docx
u
City of Eagle Capital Plan
Prioritization Summary
Introduction
The Capital Plan is a road map to help the City look beyond year-to-year budgeting to determine what,
when, where and how future public improvements will take place over the next five years. The Capital
Improvement Budget is made up of capital projects contained in the City's Capital Improvement Plan as
well as capital maintenance needs, funding the depreciation and replacement costs of existing city
infrastructure.
Definitions
Capital Project: New project, facility, or investment that costs more than $20,000 and has a life span of
5 years or more. Customarily these projects are associated with maintaining minimal levels of service
associated with growth or the annexation of new lands. These projects often have a dedicated funding
source (i.e. development impact fees) or are eligible for outside funding and/or money (i.e. state and
federal transportation grants, etc.) i.e.: new parks, trails, expansion of facilities, partnerships with ACHD
& ITD, new water mains or storage.
Capital Maintenance: The replacement, upgrade, or renovation of an existing capital project, facility, or
investment that has a cost of $10,000 or more and has a lifespan of 5-years or more. This does not
include ordinary maintenance necessary to ensure continued day-to-day/annual use of the facility. i.e.
replacement of fleet vehicles, renovations to parks, replacement of flood damaged trails.
Goal
The goal of a 5-year Capital Plan is to establish a plan that outlines the projected infrastructure and
maintenance improvement needs of the City to assist in the planning and budgeting process. This plan
will include a summary of the improvements, an estimated cost, a schedule for the improvements, and
the source of funding for the project. The capital plan will prioritize the identified projects into yearly
plans based on community input, project rankings and available funding. Because the City's goals and
resources are constantly changing, this plan is designed to be re-evaluated each year to reaffirm or
reprioritize the capital improvement projects. Some projects may remain relatively fixed in their
prioritization if substantial outside funding commitments have been made to the projects and accepted
by the City.
Funding Limits
On an annual basis, funds for Capital Plan will be limited based on the City's fund balances. For guidance
purposes the City will use $2M as a goal for capital projects and $1.26M for maintenance projects. The
level of funding needed for each project will be developed/scoped as part of the initial inclusion in the
plans in order to determine the annual set -aside (savings) needed to execute the project over time.
Projects identified in the capital plan may be funded by different sources internal to the City (impact
fees, general funds, user fees, etc.) as well as external to the City (grants, developer contributions,
donations, etc.). It is anticipated that as the City matures in the Capital Planning process more
sophisticated and complex funding options could be considered (i.e. general obligation (GO) bonds,
revenue bonds, etc.). Each project within the Capital Plan will have a unique funding combination.
During the City's annual budget process, the projects will be fully analyzed for the source or sources of
funding available.
Schedule of Proiects
Project schedules will be based upon the project readiness (is the project conceptual needing significant
scoping and definition or is the project ready for construction), available funding (internal and external
to the City), and project ranking (how it correlates with other projects included in and out of the Capital
Plan).
Preliminary Prioritization Process
Projects will be prioritized by staff based on the capital plan scoring system below. While scoring is used
for initial prioritization recommendations to the City Council, the City Council may reorganize the
prioritization based on City needs, public comment and budget/funding thresholds.
Categories
Long Term Planning
(0-5)
Health/Public Safety
(0-5)
Infrastructure
(0-5)
Leveraged Funding
(0-5)
Operational Budget
(0-5)
Quality of Life
(0-5)
Location & Timing
(0-5)
Category Category Weighted Total
Score Weight Score Score
2
0
2
0
1
2
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
75 pt Max
Sustainability/Innovation 1 0
(0-5)
*Preliminary weighting is a guide. The Council may re-evaluate at the time of final prioritization.
k:\capital facilities planning\2021\prioritization draft.docx
2 of 6
Ranking Criteria
Long Term Planning: Master Plans are prepared to provide the City with a valuable aid for continuing
efforts to meet and exceed goals set forth by City departments, committees, and the citizens at -large.
Master Plans include those documents that have been prepared internally to assure consistent
adherence to industry best practices, as well as those documents that have been created with the
assistance of outside consultants. A component of master planning includes public discussion and/or
citizen engagement. The score could be based on answers to the following questions:
1) Is the project identified within an adopted plan of the City of Eagle? Plan can include the City's
comprehensive land use plan, trails master plan, or impact fee plan?
2) Is the project prioritized in the plan or just referenced?
3) Has the project been fully developed and defined in enough detail so that the specifics (cost,
location, timeline) are known?
4) Has adequate public discussion and citizen engagement around the project transpired? Does it
appear to have broad community support, beyond specific board or user groups?
Scoring Scale
0
1
2-3
4
5
The project is not part of
any master plan
The project is included in a
Master Plan, but is not
prioritized or is not a high
priority or the appropriate
level of citizen engagement
on the specific project has
not yet taken place or the
project has had significant
public engagement but is
not in a plan.
4
The project is in a City
adopted plan, is a high
priority and has had
significant public
engagement.
Public Health & Safety: Health/public safety includes police service, safe roads, safe drinking water, and
flood control. A police station would directly impact the citizens, scoring high in this category. New
softball fields may not directly affect the health/public safety of the citizens, therefore scoring low. The
score could be based on answers to the following example questions:
1) How does the proposed project directly impact the health/public safety of the citizens of Eagle?
2) On what scale does this project indirectly affect the health/public safety of the community?
3) Does this project satisfy a Federal Mandate?
4) Does this project satisfy a State Mandate?
Scoring Scale
0
1
2-3
4
5
The Project does not impact
the health/publicsaftey of
the citizens.
The project is divided
between the impacts it has
on the Citzens regarding
health/public saftey.
The project directly impacts
the health/publicsaftey of
the citizens.
k:\capital facilities planning\2021\prioritization draft.docx
3 of 6
Infrastructure: This item relates to infrastructure needs for the City of Eagle, including sidewalks,
lighting, parking facilities, municipal buildings, and recreational facilities, to name a few. This item also
includes partnerships or projects related to streets and highways in which the City is partnering with
ACHD or ITD. The score could be based on answers to the following example questions:
1) Is the infrastructure project needed?
2) If the proposed project is improving existing infrastructure, are there significant consequences if
the existing infrastructure fails or is there a high likelihood of failure?
3) Will the proposed project address an existing facility that is outdated or has exceeded its useful
life?
4) Is the proposed project supported by a life cycle analysis of repair versus replacement? e. Does
the proposed project extend service to support/promote new growth?
5) Does the proposed project foster safe and accessible modes of travel?
Scoring Scale
0
1
2-3
4
5
The level of need for the
The level of need for the
The level of need for the
project is low and it
project is moderate and it
project is high; it addresses
addresses either new or
addresses either new or
existing infrastructure; and
existing infrastructure
existing infrastructure
the ancillary benefits are
(maximum score fora
facility less than 5-years
old)
well defined
Leveraged Funding: Capital improvement projects may be funded through sources other than City
funds. Grants through various agencies, public private partnerships, and donations can all be sources of
external funding for a project. The use of City dedicated funding non -general fund sources may be
considered but shall not receive above a 3 (impact fees, water fund, etc.). The percentage of total cost
funded by an outside source will determine the score in this category.
Scoring Scale:
0 I 1
2 I 3 I 4 1 5
0-16% 17-33%
External Funding External Funding
34-50% 51-67%
External Funding I External Funding
68-84%
External Funding
85-100%
External Funding
Operational Budget: Some projects may impact the operating budget for the next few years or for the
life of the facility. A new facility will need to be staffed and supplied, therefore having an impact on the
operational budget for the life of the facility. Replacing a streetlight with a more energy efficient model
may decrease operational costs. The score could be based on answers to the following questions:
1) Will the proposed project require additional personnel to operate?
2) Will the proposed project require additional annual maintenance?
3) Will the proposed project require additional equipment not included in the project budget?
4) Will the proposed project reduce staff time and City resources currently being devoted, and thus
have a positive impact on the operational budget?
5) Will the efficiency of the proposed project save money?
6) Will the proposed project present a revenue generating opportunity?
k:\capital facilities planning\2021\prioritization draft.docx
4of6
7) Will the proposed project help grow a strong, diversified economic base to help offset any
additional costs?
Scoring Scale
0
1
2-3
4
5
The project will have a
The project will not impact
The project will have a
negative impact on the
the Capital Maintenance &
positive impact on the
Capital Maintenance &
Operational Maintenance
Capital Maintenance &
Operational Maintenance
budgets it is
Operational Maintenance
budgets. It will require
cost/revenue neutral
budgets. It will have
additional money to
significant savings in
operate
time, materials and/or
maintenance or be revenue
generating to more than
offset costs
Quality of Life: Quality of life is a characteristic that makes the City a favorable place to live and work. A
large park with amenities to satisfy all community members would greatly impact the quality of life.
Regional projects that require local funding for a larger regional user group shall not receive above a 3 in
this category. The score could be based on answers to the following example questions:
1) Does the proposed project enhance the quality of life for a wide range of community members?
2) Will the proposed project attract new residents, businesses, or visitors to the City?
3) Does the proposed project serve to preserve the integrity of the City's residential
neighborhoods?
4) Does the proposed project help create a beautiful and clean community?
5) Does the proposed project specifically promote the responsible use of resources?
6) Does the proposed project encourage widespread participation in a variety of recreational and
cultural activities accessible to all community members?
Scoring Scale
0
1
2-3
4
5
The project does not impact
the quality of life for Eagle
community members
The project has a moderate
impact on the quality of life
for Eagle community
members
The project greatly impacts
the quality of life fora wide
range of Eagle community
members
Location & Timing: The timing and location of the project is an important attribute of the project. If the
project is not needed for many years, it would score low in this category. If the project is close in
proximity to many other projects and/or if a project is urgent or may need to be completed before
another one can be started, it would score high in this category. The score could be based on the
answers to the following example questions:
1) When is the proposed project needed?
2) Do other projects require this one to be completed first?
3) Does the proposed project require other projects to be completed first?
k:\capital facilities planning\2021\prioritization draft.docx
5 of 6
4) Can the proposed project be done in conjunction with other projects? (example: installation of
sidewalks and street lighting within the same block)
5) Is this project contingent on the investment and timing of an outside agency or partner?
6) Will it be more economical to build multiple projects together, thus reducing construction costs?
7) Will it help reduce the overall number of neighborhood disruptions from year to year?
8) Is this an existing facility at or near the end of its functional life?
9) Is the project located in a priority area for the City (downtown, reinvestment area, employment
area)?
Scoring Scale
0 1 1 2-3 4 5
The project does not have
acritical timing or location
component
The project has either
critical timing or location
components
Both timing and location are
critical
Sustainability/Innovation: Projects that move the City towards more sustainable and energy saving,
produce solutions to solve new problems, and meet new challenges that come from being a rapidly
growing City (i.e. demographic, social, technological, and economic changes) that helps the departments
to adapt quickly and embrace change. The score could be based on the answers to the following
example questions:
1) Does the proposed project help meet the sustainability goals of the city (i.e. improve energy
efficiency, reduce facility/operation costs)?
2) Is the project a creative and dynamic solution to opportunities and issues within the City of
Eagle?
3) Does the project meet emerging challenges, reduce costs, and better serve the public?
4) Does the project achieve higher levels of service for the City of Eagle?
Scoring Scale
0
1
2-3
1 4
5
The project will not impact
the City's sustainability
and/or meet general
industry standards
The project will have a
modest positive impact on
sustainability and/or will
be innovative to Eagle but
there are similar examples
across the state/country
The project will have a
significant positive impact
on the City's sustainability
and/or will be the first of its
kinds in the state/country
k:\capital facilities planning\2021\prioritization draft.docx
6 of 6
Your Safety • Your Mobility • Your Economic Opportunity
MEMO NO. 39
Page 1 of S
DISTRICT 3 OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES
DATE: November 13, 2020
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT PROPORTIONATE SHARE CONTRIBUTION
FOR SPECIAL ATTENTION OF: DISTRICT 3 EMPLOYEES
DATE OF REVIEW:
The Idaho Transportation Department's (ITD) responsibility is to ensure each State highway properly
addresses safety and mobility. New development growth, both on and off the State highway system,
contributes to increased congestion. District 3 has defined an equitable program for improving public
facilities needed to serve new growth and development and to protect the public safety of the citizens
of the state of Idaho.
Area of Interest
Application of the program will be generally applied to any development within a five (5) mile connection
to the State highway system. Depending on the size of the development and available connectivity to the
State highway system, District 3 may request information regarding developments beyond the prescribed
five mile connection distance.
Analysis Requirements
A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) is required by Idaho Administrative Code (IDAPA) 39.03.42 for any new or
expanded development that at full buildout meets or exceeds any of the below described thresholds and is
requesting a direct connection to the State highway system. District 3 will apply these same TIS requirement
thresholds to any development within the above described area of interest.
• Generates 100 or more peak hour trips; or
• Meets or exceeds the following land use threshold values; or
LAUD USE TYPE
Th1.ESKOLE' VALUE
Rewteatia,
- D u , A 3 1,, :;
R.era,i
: D= sry,.a e. feet
Otte
5D,D00 square tee
Iru sinal
70.GOO square feet
Loagnt
IOC rooms
_ 1- :,d 4i1-'
AM 1 Sectsens 6 -c 8
. Wan* Code)
&
.: s-
• Connects to a public road / State highway intersection with known safety, capacity and/or
congestion concerns.
Your Safety • Your Mobility • Your Economic Opportunity
MEMO NO. 39
Page 2 of 8
Developments not meeting any of the above thresholds at full buildout will be asked to provide some
or all of the following data and analysis.
• Trip generation numbers
• Trip Distribution Percentage Diagram (request from COMPASS if in Ada or Canyon County)
• Intersection site traffic turning volumes
• Left and right turn lane warrants
• Vehicle turning movement diagrams
State Hiehwav System Mitieation Improvements
Intersection mitigation improvements are required for any individual movement exceeding LOS F or
volume to capacity ratio (v/c) of 0.9 or greater. Roadway mitigation improvements are required for any
roadway segment analysis exceeding LOS E.
Left and right turn lanes will be required at any non -signalized intersection meeting the ITD Traffic
Manual's Left and Right Turn Lane Warrants.
For developments on or near corridors with ITD approved corridor plans:
1.) When a development meets or exceeds the TIS thresholds described under Analysis Requirements
the development is required to provide a TIS.
a. TIS shall identify any mitigation improvements at public road intersections.
Proportionate share contributions shall be calculated at public road intersections requiring
mitigation improvements.
b. TIS shall identify any specific improvements required for direct access approaches (new
or existing) to the State highway system.
2.) For all developments defined within ITD's area of interest, but do not meet or exceed the TIS
thresholds:
a. ITD will identify the development's area of impact on the State highway system.
b. The development will provide at a minimum:
• Trip Generation Sununary Table
• Trip Distribution Patterns
• Total Traffic Volume Diagrams
c. Based on the provided information, ITD will calculate the development's proportionate
share contribution for future identified improvements per the associated corridor plan.
Your Safety • Your Mobility • Your Economic Opportunity
'Ot�TIpM 4Q!
MEMO NO. 39
Page 3 of 8
For developments on or near corridors without ITD approved corridor plans:
1.) When a development meets or exceeds the TIS thresholds described under Analysis Requirements
the development is required to provide a TIS.
a. TIS shall identify any mitigation improvements at public road intersections.
Proportionate share contributions shall be calculated at public road intersections requiring
mitigation improvements.
b. TIS shall identify any specific improvements required for direct access approaches (new
or existing) to the State highway system.
2.) For all developments defined within ITD's area of interest, but do not meet or exceed the TIS
thresholds.
a. ITD will identify the development's area of impact on the State highway system and may
request the development to provide:
• Left and right turn lane warrants
• Vehicle turning movement diagrams
b. Based on the provided information ITD will calculate the development's proportionate
share contribution for identified mitigation improvements.
Projects programmed in accordance with an intergovernmental ITD/Agency agreement may collect
proportionate share to fund the joint project. Otherwise, proportionate share contributions cannot include
any improvements currently funded/programmed by ITD.
1 it itla t ion Improvement Location Development Contribution
Private approaches, private roads and new public
road connections to the State highway system.
Design and construct 100% of the improvements.
Existing public road / State highway intersections;
State highway road segments.
Pay a proportionate share of the mitigation
improvement cost.
If ITD determines the development impact results
in an immediate safety concern, the developer is
responsible to design and construct 100% of the
mitigation improvement. ITD will work with the
development to determine low cost interim
solutions where feasible.
Proportionate shares contributions will either be paid directly to ITD or held in an intergoverrunental
agreement between ITD and the local land use agency for application to a future project. ITD may require
the developer to construct a mitigation improvement(s) in lieu of holding the financial contribution, if the
proportionate share can fully cover the design/construction cost.
Your Safety • Your Mobility • Your Economic Opportunity
n, UN Eck.
MEMO NO. 39
Page 4 of 8
Determination of Proportionate Share Percentage
1.) Intersections/Roadways covered by a District 3 Planning Document
Proportionate share shall be calculated by comparing the number of site trips through an
intersectionlroadway segment at full build out with the total number of trips forecasted when the
improvement is warranted.
L
Example: Development impacts the intersection of Fisher Parkway and SH-44.
ITD has identified that signali:ation of Fisher Parkway is warranted by
2045.
Site TrEffi:
0 -) Z5 s =5 0
U'1 41 n AM
} Site TrEffi=
0 —) 5 12
0 —4
7 2B 4 P►d
2245 Fisher Farkwai (.Z .t}
SF+44 = 3,9:34
Fisher Pa = 2S4
2045 Fisher Park;.tay (Pr.1)
SF....=.c 14
Fisher Park4ay = 97
AM Site = 135
AM Total = 4,218
AM % = 3.20
PM Site = 86
PM Total = 4,911
PM % =1.75
Proportionate Share for
Fisher Parkway Signal
Avg % = 2.48
2.) Intersections/Roadways not covered by a District 3 Planning Document
Proportionate share shall be calculated by comparing the number of site trips through an
intersection at full build out with the forecasted total number of trips at full buildout.
Example: Development impacts the intersection of Amity Road and SH-69.
TIS states widening on SH-69 is needed.
jYour Safety • Your Mobility • Your Economic Opportunity
Brio oE°�4'
Site Traffic Full Build Out Total Traffic
h. Amity Road S SF4 69'
0 14 0
J j L.
0-! k0
0—,- ,0
1 --)� 1 r�1
11 41 7 AM
1 ) Amity Road & SFt 69'
-- 0 47 0
j
0-) k 0
0 --► -.— 0
4 --� I r� 4
7 28 4 PM
Amity Road & SFi 69
18 625 69
L-
190 - - 137
218 --•- -'--- 98
42- (-31
f r-
50 1738 109 AM
Amity Road & SR 69
79 2019 111
66 k--- 102
144 215
47 -' `111
48 887 38 PM
MEMO NO. 39
Page 5 of 8
AM Site = 75 AM Total = 3,325
AM % = 2.26
PM Site = 94 PM Total = 3,867
PM % = 2.43
Proportionate Share for SH-69
Widening thru Amity Rd
Intersection
Avg % = 2.34
Determination of Proportionate Share Contribution Cost Estimate
ITD shall provide a conceptual cost estimate for any proportionate share mitigation improvements. The
conceptual cost estimate will be based on conservative assumptions for roadway base depth. Conceptual
cost estimate will include estimated right-of-way (R/W) costs, if additional R/W is required to construct the
improvement, ITD is willing to adjust cost estimate based on actual surveyed data if provided by the
developer. See Appendix A for conceptual cost estimate unit prices.
The developer's proportionate share percentage shall be multiplied by the conceptual improvement cost to
calculate the development's proportionate share contribution.
Proportionate share contributions shall either be required in full prior to occupancy of any structures or at
a pro -rated amount per each unit if residential, or per square footage of commercial development.
Proportionate shares costs shall be held either within an Intergovernmental ITD/Agency agreement or by
ITD as defined in the section below.
Intergovernmental ITD/Agencv Agreement
Per Idaho Statute 67-8204A, the legislature finds that governmental entities are authorized to enter
into agreements with the ITD for system improvements. ITD shall establish jurisdiction -wide
intergovernmental agreements to hold development proportionate share contributions. ITD and the
partnering agency will jointly identity future projects to be funded from the development
contributions.
0
Your Safety • Your Mobility • Your Economic Opportunity
MEMO NO. 39
Page 6 of 8
For agencies that will not enter into an interagency agreement, ITD will utilize available financial
mechanisms to hold development contributions internal to ITD. Development contribution funds shall be
used within 10 years of receipt; otherwise shall be returned to the developer.
This Memo on Development Proportionate Share Contribution is applicable until amended or superseded
by new ITD policy. Proportionate share contributions are not an impact fee, they are costs associated to
mitigate for development impacts to the State highway system.
O,g 1. I1y sirGned or }. Caleb Lek?Y
D. _-W$.4 .i'.rb laM uv .n,•9abu.pDY.
J. Caleb Lakeyau- ---cN `=°'ed`a'4e'
Lau,•ir n D�si,rl Ad.nerseab• irD ❑3
Rteas:: 1 a- sfP'OV _W tie elk/cement
C.7In. . L'dc _98 1.'-1.eao1
Da'e :•p'; p ' 17 •1 Sa:;:1-07 30.
J. CALEB LAKEY, P.E.
District 3 Administrator
Oversight: Engineering
Original Issue Date: November 13, 2019
Revised Date: November 13, 2020
IDA
Your Safety • Your Mobility • Your Economic Opportunity
APPENDIX A — Conceptual Cost Estimate Unit Price Values
Intersection Widening - Conceptual Cost Estimate
MEMO NO. 39
Estimated By: Date:
Checked By: Date:
Locatior:
Scone:
ilecik DesplptiOn
SEC I1ON
Page 7 of 8
Ci a�tity "hiti ?lice- Cos: SEIOM2.
CA C_EARIN6 &GRUBBING ...4.r ACV_
$ lS\;2
`k
2Cs-C13A REM OF BITUMINOUS St.'?.�:
SY$ 9,..6r2I
N 13372
A REMOVAL c Px'v MARKINGS
-T
KN 1B:S:i2
2C5-CC5A EXCAVATION
CC. CY% $ 3S. $ <N GSB;
3C3-C 5A GRANULAR SUBBASE
'0 TON 15,SE1 S - KN 1oSS:°2
303-C k 3. ° AGG Tr B FOP; -.ASE
C.CC TON $ .30 $ M _SS72
401-C2CA CSS-2 DaL EMULAS?' ,FORTAC ( CAT l:.00 GAL
S {': '1SS72
405-435A PAVE HMA 1NCL ASPH&ADD CI_ SP.-3 C.CC TON
MAID $ {1 13372
614-015A SJDEWALK
C 5'y $ !O.00 r - <\ 20294
614-1325A 2 :.:
3 SY
1152L5.111 ;: - {\193:63
615-492A C .33 & G'JTTE TYRE 2
D.00. FT
a� fiYtl S' 04..2C294
621-CC5A SEED B.E-D PREPARATION
a 00 ACRE
67 $ - KN 1.33.72:
62;-C1CA SEEDING
C =. s
615-65/A ThAFF c SEPARATiORTT/.`-'^E _►
,,.CO =T
KN 199E5
KN 2CTSS.
TRANSVERSE.. 'W:.,CYRD, SYMBOL, ARROW ~A'
V<G—WATERBORNE
u.0 S: _.4'b $ KN 13962
63C-C25A O\GIT D+\A_ PAVE CENT MARKING
C., FT S LOS S
KN 158::2
656-CC5A TRA=S4G\A'_,NSTAT}ON
0,00 IS. S229,OOQ04 r; RN 1E.
675-CC.5A
!.2`0 IS 5. - e kN 11872
Trait,c Control
LOO IS S - S - KN +s
Miscellaneous i•:=wr;c r 1:ERIS
kMot:Oiaation lCfik
5
SECTION 1 Sub -Total
SECDIOAI 2
EN C...ar.._;e Order Quantity Variance 5 .
Ct4 Non -Bid Items
S.
SECTION 2 Sub total 5
SUMMARY
S _•Tc:a SEc..TG"._&SECT.\2
Scaa'.i _eve'
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
Your Safety • Your Mobility • Your Economic Opportunity
10
MEMO NO. 39
Page 8 of 8
Summary of Prerie[t Costs
Amount
Co-s:r_:
S -
Constructsori Servstes
-•,
c -
^;.c-,t-of-Wiley
c :C ,C ,=S
e -
Total Cost
$ -
Appendix B
ITD Planning Documents to be used in Proportionate Share Contribution Calculations
• US 20/26 Corridor Study (Eagle Road to Caldwell)
o Strip Maps https://apos.itd.idaho.aov/arms/us2026Corridor5tudv/Strip-Maas.pdf
• SH-44 Traffic and Access Report
o Document https_ /itd.Idaho.17ov`wp-count%uuoloads'2019/024D-
44 Corridor Traffic Access Report.pdf
• SH-55 South Corridor Plan
o Appendices
https://apos.itd.idaho.gov/Apes/d3/55 Corridor/Idaho55SouthCorridorPlanAnoendicies.odf
• SH-55 Pearl Lane to Middleton Road Traffic Report
o Hard copy available upon request
• SH-69 Overland Road to Kuna Traffic Study
o Hard copy available upon request
• US-20/American Legion Blvd Access Technical Memorandum (8/3/2018)
o Hard copy available upon request