Minutes - 2010 - Planning & Zoning - 08/02/2010 - Regular
THE CITY OF EAGLE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 2, 2010
I. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Roehling calls the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL: Present: ROEHLING, SMITH, VILLEGAS, TANNER
Absent: AIZPITARTE
3. 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 Chairman, a Commissioner, 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 Rules of Order.
. Any item on the Consent Agenda that conlains written recommendations from the City of
Eagle shall be adopted as part of the Planning & Zoning Commission's Consent Agenda
approval motion unless specifically stated otherwise.
A. Minutes of June 7, 2010. Continuedfrom the June 21,2010, meeting.
B. Minutes of June 21. 2010.
Roehling moves to approve items 3A and 3B on the consent agenda. Seconded by Smith. ALL
AYE...MOTION CARRIES.
General discussion regarding modifYing the agenda and the commissioners schedules.
Planner Nichoel Baird Spencer provides clarification regarding the special meeting scheduled for Tuesday,
September 7, 20 10, due to the Labor Day holiday on Monday, September 6, 20 I O.
Roehling asks to proceed with pulling item 6A from the agenda and for staff to work on finding a date that
works for both staff and commissioners.
4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. CU-03-10 - Private School Facility - La Mia Terra, LLC: La Mia Terra, LLC, represented
by Shawn Nickel with SLN Planning, is requesting conditional use approval for La Mia Terra
School, a new private school facility. The 4. 86-acre site is generally located on the west side of
North Horseshoe Bend Road approximately 1,150-feet south of East Floating Feather Road at
10895 North Horseshoe Bend Road.
Shawn Nickel, 148 N. 2nd Street Ste. 101, is representing La Mia Terra, LLC. He provides a brief
summary of the application and history of the previously approved Brutsman Subdivision. He discusses
the maximum student capacity expected at the pre-K through 5th grade private school along with the
current issue being resolved with Eagle Fire regarding the sprinkler system. He discusses the hours to be
open, parking areas, and landscaping. He then discusses the modifications he would make to staffs
conditions of approval, showing a diagram of the fencing.
Page I of 5
K:\P&Z\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-08-02-10min,doc
THE CITY OF EAGLE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 2, 2010
General discussion regarding location and plans for the existing "barn" on the property, the proposed
design of additional fencing, and access points.
Nickel shows the approved preliminary plat for Brutsman Subdivision and describes the stub streets for
access. He then discusses the modifications he is requesting concerning the access.
Commissioner Tanner states that the access language that Mr. Nickel is requesting is a different approach
than what is in the Staff Report. He then discusses the jurisdiction Ada County Highway District (ACHD)
would have on the issue with access.
Nickel states he has no issue with marrying the information as it is shown in ACHD's description as long
as it gives him the freedom to modify the Preliminary Plat in the future.
General discussion regarding the language the applicant is requesting changed in the staff report's
conditions.
Chairman Roehling asks Commissioner Villegas if he has any further comment.
Villegas states nothing further at this time.
General discussion regarding how much additional traffic would be created with the private school at this
location.
Nickel refers to a report done by ACHD and a letter by ACHD dated July 21 st, 20 10. He reads that there is
an estimated 114 vehicle trips per day.
Roehling asks Nickel if he is in agreement with the conclusions of ACHD's estimates.
Nickel states he is.
General discussion regarding the attendance and input from the neighborhood meeting held prior to
submittal of the application to the City.
Roehling asks Mr. Nickel to review the current fencing on the property in the diagram.
Nickel provides the diagram, discusses the existing fencing, and shows where the proposed wrought iron
fencing will be located.
Chairman Roehling asks fellow Commissioners ifthere are any further questions for the applicant.
Commission states there is nothing at this time.
Mike Williams, Planning Staff, provides a summary of the application and the modifications requested by
the representative to the Staff Report. He reviews both condition # 13 and # 15. He reviews the use of
"mays" and "shalls" in the language for condition number 13. He refers to page 16 of 19 of the staff report
and the jurisdiction of ACHD. He recommends to the Commission that Condition 13 just be stricken from
the report. He then discusses Condition #15 and reviews Eagle City Code in regard to landscaping
requirements. He states that the Code lists requirements regarding the landscaping and that the Design
Review Board will also be doing a thorough review of the landscaping. Lastly, he discusses the access
issues and the existing "barn". He states that Horseshoe Bend Road is not the only access to the site. He
discusses the access sites proposed by the applicant. He states the barn is currently located on the property
line. He recommends the barn either be removed or be moved to become compliant with Eagle City Code
Page 2 of 5
K:\P&Z\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-08-02-10min.doc
THE CITY OF EAGLE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 2, 2010
for the setback requirements. He then stands for questions.
General discussion regarding sewer and water hook up.
Roehling asks fellow Commissioners for questions for Staff.
Villegas states none at this time.
Tanner asks to be skipped at this time.
Smith asks Williams to clarify the access points and the stub streets on the diagram.
Planner Williams provides clarification on access and explains the diagram.
General discussion regarding road paving and occupancy.
Planner Williams provides clarification regarding Eagle Fire's comments regarding phasing of the building
and the sprinkler system.
Roehling asks for clarification concerning Condition #15. He asks Staff to explain what is required by
code concerning the landscaping.
Planner Williams reviews the Code concerning landscaping for the development and states that the rest
would be decided upon by the Design Review Board.
General discussion regarding access requirements and the pathway along the parking area.
General discussion regarding modifications to the conditions as provided by Staff.
Planner Williams discusses the process that would take place if a parcel division was proposed.
City Attorney Fitzer states he concurs with Staff's comments.
Roehling recommends considering the striking of Condition # 13, with no supplemental language.
General discussion regarding the landscaping, the review by the Design Review Board, and buffering
options.
Planner Williams provides clarification concerning the use of buffering for the sake of buffering, differing
uses, or dust mitigation.
Chairman Roehling asks, although the public hearing sign in sheet is blank, if anyone from the public
wishes to speak.
Eric Rolfsen, 3188 E. Shadow View, states his back yard will abut the parking area for the school. He
states he came to the meeting out of curiosity and is not opposed the proposed use of the building. He
shares his concerns about his back yard as it is small and the only privacy buffer is shrubbery, which does
no good in the fall and winter. He asks if there is going to be any additional buffering between the school
and his back yard.
General discussion regarding the buffering requirements and the proposed paved pathway.
Representative Nickel provides a rebuttal. He states his clients will be happy to work with the neighbors
regarding buffering and he reviews his concerns with the landscaping requirements again.
Page 3 of 5
K:\P&Z\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-08-02-1 Omin,doc
THE CITY OF EAGLE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 2, 2010
General discussion regarding landscaping, access, and the existing barn.
Chairman Roehling closes the public hearing.
General discussion regarding the proper order of deliberation and discussion.
Villegas moves to approve CU-03-10 - Private School ]?acility - La Mia Terra, LLC with the
following modifications: that condition number 13 be stricken however condition 15 remain as
proposed by staff. Seconded by Roehling. Discussion: Commissioner Smith states that this has been an
interesting discussion and presentation. This piece of property has a lot of history. I think the proposal and
use of the building is a reasonable one and I think it won't be very intrusive. One thing I want to be certain
of is that the neighbor, Mr. Rolfsen, is openly satisfied with the proposal to give him both privacy and
preservation of his plants and shrubs. If we are assured that this will be taken care of in Design Review
then I'm easy with it. But the various changes that are being proposed in terms of getting the sprinklers in
eliminate one of the concerns of one condition and also the fact that it would be City sewer and water that
takes care of restroom facilities and the kitchen that is going to be used there. It seems a good use for a real
odd shaped piece of land. It is such a narrow strip. I would like to see it in the future when it develops.
Commissioner Villegas states since he was the one that made the motion, he certainly agrees that they
don't need condition # 13 on there. As far as # 15, based on what was discussed with Mike and the prior
precedent here, I think I have faith in my fellow members on Design Review to realize that jfthis is going
to be used for grazing purposes they are not going to require small caliper trees and vegetation that cattle
would love to eat or whatever will be grazing. 1 do want to keep uniform with our city code. That is why I
made the motion to keep that second condition on there. Commissioner Tanner states he agrees with that.
He does have a concern with that particular requirement but, like Villegas mentioned, hopefully we can
rely on them to be reasonable and not to go over board with something like that. Also, I am not familiar
with that code section. Is there an exception or anything beyond what that says or is it just left up to the
Design Review Board for what they are going to require in that 25 feet. Planner Williams provides
clarification stating that whatever is proposed they will look at it at that time but ifthey want additional
plantings or have additional concerns, staff will address those, present it to the Design Review Board, and
they will make their decision from there based on whatever uses are going to occur on that site. It goes
from Design Review Board to Council for final check off. Chairman Roehling states that our intent is very
clear, so 13 is stricken and in fact the applicant gets exactly what the applicant wants for 15 and we are
trusting the Design Review board to deliver that. There is precedent for checks and balances to make sure
the right thing is done here. Rather than trying to circumvent any city ordinances here I think what we have
chosen here is good. Chairman Roehling asks the clerk to read back motion and she does. Chairman
Roehling states that there is one item I wanted to make sure we got in there and we didn't. It was the
Standard Conditions of Approval. Planner Williams adds he would like to go back to condition number 8
in regard to the barn. As the condition is worded it states the applicant shall remove the existing barn
located adjacent to the southern boundary prior to the issuance of the zoning certificate prior to
construction of improvements. I will ask that we could leave "applicant shall remove" and add "or move
the barn outside the required setbacks". As stated it says remove only. If they are looking to move it we
should give them the allowance to move it outside the required setbacks. General discussion regarding the
location of the barn. Attorney Fitzer provides clarification regarding moving the barn outside of the
setbacks. Chairman Roehling states the applicant shall remove the existing barn located adjacent to the
southern boundary or move the structure outside the setbacks prior to the issuance of the zoning certificate
for construction of improvements. Roehling propose an amendment or modification of the motion
that will be as follows: the applicant shall remove the (~xisting barn located adjacent to the southern
boundary or move the structure outside the setbacks prior to the issuance of the zoning certificate
for construction of improvements. Second modification is that the standard conditions of approval
are to apply. Villegas states he agrees to amend to what Chairman Roehling has included. Second
concurs. ALL AYE.. .MOTION CARRIES.
6. NEW BUSINESS:
Page 4 of 5
K:\P&Z\MINUTES\Tcmporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-08-02-10I11indoc
THE CITY OF EAGLE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 2, 2010
A. Workshop/Discussion on the Draft Downtown Eae:le Plan (NBS):
The Commission chose to pull this item from the agenda in order for staff to find a date that will work for
both staff and Commissioners. It is continued to a date undetermined.
7. REPORTS:
A. Commission: NONE
B. City Attorney: NONE
C. Staff:
Planner Nichoel Baird Spencer presents a draft letter composed as a response to Idaho Transportation
Department (ITD).
General discussion regarding STIP and the determination by the State to remove anything from the request
lists that aren't concerning maintenance of the road system.
Planner Baird Spencer states that comments are being accepted until August 4; 2010, so the City of Eagle
will be submitting comments. The State Board of Transportation is the determining board.
Planner Baird Spencer also provides talking points concerning items the Planning and Zoning department
is working on. She discusses the HUD, U.S. Department of Transportation, State Hwy 44 Corridor Study,
and TIGER grants. Lastly, she provides the Commissioners with the Planning Department's Fiscal Year
I 0/11 Work Schedule.
Commissioner Smith asks for an update concerning the absence of a mayor, and the draft budget.
Planner Baird Spencer provides a brief update.
General discussion regarding the Walgreen's site at Hwy 44 and Eagle Road.
8. ADJOURNMENT:
Roehling moves to adjourn. Seconded by Villegas. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES.
Hearing no further business the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission meeting adjourned at 7:33 p.m.
,......"",
"" '"
" I\" G LE "
..' G r" ..,
..' 6 V....... "
.,. 0.... #
.... 0 ... '" T E ...,.. ~
~ ::....- 0'9:-- ..":.
: ..q" ....... ':.
: f-,: Q;' ~ ~. 0 :
: ~: 0 · V -: :r: :
- U . u ~~~ Q. _ :
-. ~' ~. , -
- · Co. "'.1"\"
~ e. '? ~:,.. -....; .:
## Jf ..0 INCOllYo.. ~..... ....
", ........ 0 ,..'
"~I, ST A '\~, """
"""11111' "~,I'
A TRANSCRIBABLE RECORD OF THIS MEETING IS AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL.
Page 5 of 5
K:\P&Z\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-08-02-10mil1.doc
EAGLE PLANNING & ZONIN
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET
CU -03-10 - Private School Facility — La Mi
August 2, 2010
NAME
ADDRESS/
TELEPHONE/E-MAIL
/ t/ (?i r"i . 47"--/
� J
CT, D ED
AUG :+ 2 2010
Terra, LLC ti
File:
Route t
TESTIFY
YES/NO? PRO/CON
/es,/ riu
EAGLE PLANNING & ZONING
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET
CU -03-10 - Private School Facility — La Mia Terra, LLC
NAME
August 2, 2010
ADDRESS/ TESTIFY
TELEPHONE/E-MAIL YES/NO? PRO/CON
9Ab Z °F2
City of Eagle
P.O. Box 1520
Eagle, Idaho 83616
208-939-6813
July 29, 2010
Idaho Transportation Department
Attn: Dave Jones
PO Box 8028
Boise, ID 83707-2028
CITY OF EAGLE
ja 0 7 2010
Fite:
Route to:_ciattne4444ers
John Grasser
Michael Huffaker
Norm Semanko
Al Shoushtarian
Re: Draft FY2011-2015 STIP — US 20/26 Corridor Preservation Study (Caldwell to Boise) — Key# 07826 and SH 44
Corridor Preservation Study (I-84 Junction in Canyon County to Eagle Road) — Key# 07827
Dear Mr. Jones,
It is safe to say that State Highway 44 and US 20/26 are, and will continue to be, major regional thoroughfares providing
needed travel options in a limited transportation system. The corridor studies presently underway are an acknowledgement of
this circumstance and are a means to identify practices and policies in an effort to mitigate issues associated with growth in
the Treasure Valley. In this vein, the Idaho Transportation Department and local governments have expended substantial
time, effort, and money on these two corridor preservation projects during the past few years.
It was a surprise to find that the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) is considering removal of right-of-way funds for the
US 20/26 and State Highway 44 corridor preservation projects (Key Nos. 7826 and 7827) from the draft FY2011-2015 State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). To be candid, for ITD to forgo the funding of these projects is a squandering
of taxpayer dollars, not only for the monies spent but those to be spent on the inevitable planning and necessary right-of-way
purchases.
To maintain state highways capable of carrying higher volumes of east -west traffic in 20 years, ITD needs to take action not
only to implement a plan but also to acquire vacant and under-utilized parcels before the areas within the anticipated right-of-
way necessary for preservation is developed.
While we recognize the fiscal constraints facing ITD, given the importance of these two corridors to the region's
transportation system, and the funding thus far expended, the City of Eagle requests that funding be reprogrammed into the
STIP to preserve right-of-way and continue corridor planning.
Sincerely,
Michael Huffaker
Acting Mayor/ Council President
cc: COMPASS
Mark McNeese
Page 1 of 1
C:\Documents and Setttngs\nbaird\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook1EDEr42BJ\SH44 Comdor Preservation Ltr.doc
July 27, 2010
IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
P.O. Box 8028
Boise, ID 83707-2028
Matt Stoll, Executive Director
Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho
800 S. Industry Way, Suite 100
Meridian, ID 83642
(208) 334-8300
itd.idaho.gov
J1J
JUL 2 S 2010
J
By
RE: Draft FY 2011 — FY 2015 STIP, Removal of US 20/26 and SH 44 Right of Way Funds
Dear Matt,
Director Ness has asked me to answer your letter dated July 14 regarding the removal of funding
for corridor preservation projects on US Hwy 20/26 and to SH 44. I would like to respond to the
points that you brought to our attention.
The removal of the funding was a difficult decision for our Engineer and Planners, and we would
agree that there has been a great deal of work that has gone into each of these projects. With the
funding issues that are plaguing transportation across the county, the Department's Engineers and
Planners must closely scrutinize each project we have in the STIP. The Department is moving to
a position of maintaining and rehabilitating the infrastructure we have in place, and the Department
is moving away from projects that expand our system.
The "proposed" STIP is currently presented to the public for comment, and in September the
Transportation Board will consider all comments from the public prior to finalizing the STIP. The
Idaho Transportation Department welcomes your comments and ideas on how the transportation
funding is being used in the Treasure Valley.
When the public comment period closes, the ITD board will access all comments received on the
Draft STIP, and then the STIP will be finalized. If you should have any questions, please contact
me at 334 8300.
Sincerely,
ibtotivatyk• ave Jones, P.E.
District Three Engineer
4.'
tr9
COMPASS
COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION
of 5ouchwost Idaho
July 14, 2010
Brian Ness, Director
Idaho Transportation Department
P 0 Box 7129
Boise, Idaho 83701
Re: Draft FY2011-2015 STIP -Removal of U.S. 20/26 and State
Hiahwav 44 Riaht-of-Wav Funds
Dear Director Ness:
The COMPASS Board of Directors is very concerned that the Idaho
Transportation Department (ITD) has removed right-of-way funds for U.S.
20/26 and State Highway 44 corridor preservation projects (Key Nos. 7826
and 7827) from the draft FY2011-2015 State Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP).
Given the importance of these two corridors to the region's transportation
system, and the funding already expended, the COMPASS Board of
Directors requests that funding be reprogrammed into the STIP to preserve
right-of-way. The Board also requests clarification of the rationale for
removing the projects from the draft STIP.
The Idaho Transportation Department and local governments have
expended substantial time, effort, and money on the two corridor
preservation projects in recent years. More than $7.3 million has been
obligated on these corridors since 1999, not to mention the time devoted by
the affected cities, counties, highway districts, federal agencies, and various
state offices.
The environmental studies on both corridors have identified route options
that will have the least effect on various resources, including businesses
and residences. It can be reasonably assumed that development will
continue to occur adjacent to the existing right-of-way for both corridors
and south of Middleton. Without any funds presently committed to corridor
preservation, there will undoubtedly be new homes and businesses to add
to the list of affected properties in the environmental documents, thus
increasing overall project costs in the future that could have been easily
mitigated in the present.
COMPASS members are well aware of the fiscal challenges facing ITD and
have gladly partnered in advocating for revenue enhancements. Therefore,
it is particularly dismaying for COMPASS members to see the removal of
right-of-way preservation funds for these critical corridors while hearing of
the possible addition of development and construction funds for new
projects within the state.
Director Ness
July 14, 2010
Page 2
The COMPASS Board of Directors looks forward to your response, and requests that the
decision be reconsidered and funding be programmed for corridor preservation in the final
STIP.
Sincerely,
Matthew J. Stoll
Executive Director
pc: COMPASS Board
IT Board
DM:nb T:\FY10\600 Projects\685 TIP\1115 TIP\Public comment\NessROWItr0710.docx
Talking Points
" `'RECEIVED & FILED
CITY OF EAGLE
AUG 0 2 2010
• The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) IiaFsilp
Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for Sustainable Communitialfiaminu
Grants and a joint NOFA with U.S. Department of Transportation for Community
Challenge Planning Grants and Tiger II Planning Grants.
• COMPASS is developing applications for all three to address regional needs:
o Sustainable Communities Planning Grant, to fund metropolitan and
multijurisdictional planning to address housing, economic development,
transportation, energy, water, and environmental quality in an integrated
fashion;
o Community Challenge Planning Grant for housing, economic development and
land use planning along State Street/SH 44; and
o Tiger II Planning Grant to conduct the High Capacity Corridor Alternatives
Analysis.
• Sustainable Communities Planning Grant application will be for Category 1
(Regional Plan for Sustainable Development (RPSD):
o Funds a regional "consortium" with the capacity and experience to carry out
proposed activities; COMPASS as a lead applicant that submits the application.
• COMPASS Board /member agencies plus other partners (especially
housing and economic development agencies, etc.) as the consortium;
• Would allow members/partners to pursue housing, economic
development, transportation, energy, water, and environmental
planning in a regional context and with additional resources;
o Minimum grant amount is $500,000, maximum grant is $5 million;
o Requires a minimum 20% of the grant amount as leveraged resources (in-kind
and/or local, state, federal)
• COMPASS could leverage CIM resources to meet the minimum 20% -
more is better;
• If members/partners have resources they would use to develop
housing, economic development etc. plans, they could leverage those
toward to grant.
o Requires agreement of partnership at the time of application, and a formal
consortium agreement within 120 days of the grant agreement start date.
o Application is due August 23, 2010
Ouestions:
1. Are you on board with the Sustainable Communities Planning Grant application?
2. If yes, who should we work with to draft (for the application) your agency's role
(what you'd want to accomplish) and
3. Identify any resources that can be leveraged?
What Would a Regional Plan for Sustainable Development Look Like?
The grant funding supports development and implementation of RPSD that:
a. Identify priorities for the region:
1) affordable housing,
2) transportation investment,
3) water infrastructure,
4) economic development,
5) land use planning,
6) environmental conservation,
7) energy system,
8) open space, and
9) other infrastructure;
b. Define a single, integrated plan for regional development that:
1) addresses population growth or decline over a minimum 20 -year time frame,
2) sets 3 to 5 year benchmark performance targets, and
3) delineates strategies to meet established performance goals;
c. Establish performance goals and measures that are, at a minimum, consistent with the
Sustainability Partnership's Livability Principles;
d. Utilize geo-coded data sets and other metrics in developing, implementing, monitoring, and
assessing the performance goals of various reinvestment scenarios;
e. Provide detailed plans, policies, and implementation strategies to be implemented by all
participating jurisdictions over time to meet planning goals;
f. Prioritize projects that facilitate the implementation of the regional plan and identify
responsible implementing entities (public, nonprofit, or private) and funding sources;
g. Show how the proposed plan will establish consistency with HUD, DOT, and
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) programs, and policies, such as Consolidated
Plans, Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, Long Range Transportation Plans, and
Asset Management Plans, including strategies to modify existing plans, where appropriate; and
h. Engage residents and stakeholders substantively and meaningfully in the development of
the shared vision and its implementation early and throughout the process, including
communities traditionally marginalized from such processes, while accommodating limited
English speakers, persons with disabilities, and the elderly.
Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant
Application Schedule
July 27, 2010 Meeting 10-11:30am at COMPASS
• Identify partners
• Determine tasks and timeline
August 3 - Meeting 3:00-4:30pm at COMPASS
• Synthesize work plans and budgets
• Review a general description of proposed Regional Plan for Sustainable
Development (RPSD)
• Outline a process to develop a RPSD
August 10 - Meeting 10:00-11:30am at COMPASS
• Review draft application
• Letters of Commitment Due
August 17 - Meeting 10:30am-12:OOpm at COMPASS
• Finalize application
August 23—Application Deadline
October—Grants Awarded
120 Days from Grants Awarded—Memorandum of Understanding signed by
Consortium
36 month performance Period
Draft — 7-22-10
July 27, 2010
Michael Linde
Leader, Partnership Programs
National Park Service
5th Floor
909 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98104
RECEIVED & FILED
CITY OF EAGLE
AUG 0 2 2010
File:
Route to:
Regarding: Technical Assistance to Ada County, Idaho and its Recreation & Trail
Partners
Dear Mr. Linde:
Attached is Ada County's request for NPS planning assistance in FY2011-2012.
A collaborative effort of agencies, non-profit organizations and landowners have come
together to plan a trail system in the northwest foothills of the Treasure Valley. Given
the scope, significant opportunities, and diversity of partners, the project would greatly
benefit from the assistance of the NPS Rivers & Trails Program.
This large project area has high recreation potential and diverse natural resource values.
It is just west of the land dealt with in the NPS facilitated Shafer Butte Trail Plan. This
project involves both public and private lands that could result in an integrated trail
system in the northwest foothills Over 80 miles of additional public recreational trails
are possible, providing a close -to -home recreation area in Southwest Idaho, home to 1/3
of Idaho's population
We have greatly benefited from past partnerships with the Rivers and Trails Conservation
Assistance program and hope to continue this relationship.
Please call John Caywood ph. 208-577-4580 if we can provide any information or
assistance.
Sincerely, Chairman
Ada County Board of County Commissioners
Enclosure
0
Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program
Pacific West Region
National Park Service
U.S. Department of the Interior
Applicant Information
Project Name:
Cities:
Counties:
Congressional Districts:
Application for Assistance
Northwest Foothills Open Space, & Trail Plan
Boise and Eagle, Idaho
Ada County, Idaho
Idaho - 151 Congressional District:
Applicant Name: Ada County, Idaho
Primary contact_:
John Caywood
Ada County Recreation & Event Services Department
4049 Eckert Road.
Boise ID 83716
icavwood@adaweb.net
Ph. 208-577-4580
Project Description
1. Describe the project goals, including any tangible conservation or outdoor recreation
results expected (e.g.: miles of river protected, restored or enhanced; miles of publicly
accessible trail created or enhanced; acres of parkland created.)
Create over 80 miles of non -motorized trail in a system covering 50± square miles of
land in the urban interface in the North Boise Foothills. This trail plan will
incorporate extensive public input into development of a trail system on private, state,
and BLM land in southwestern Idaho east of State Highway 55 and west of Shaefer
Butte. The end result will be open space and trail connectivity laid out to protect key
natural resource and wildlife areas on private and federal land in a foothills area
that is targeted for large scale urbanization.
2. Identify the important natural resources to be improved or protected, and/or the
outdoor recreation opportunities to be enhanced.
The project area offers a wonderful opportunity to enhance local and regional
recreation opportunities by formulating an extensive, non -motorized, public trail
system. The resultant trails will offer exemplary recreation opportunities near the
communities of Boise and Eagle, Idaho. Users will be able to access the system from
present and future urban neighborhoods, ride tens of miles of trails, and connecting
to the Shafer Butte Trail System on Forest Service land. The Boise Valley is Idaho's
largest urban population center. Heavy use is anticipated of this trail system which is
located less than an hours drive of about one-third of the state's 1.3 million people.
The project area includes populations of rare plants — Aasae's onion (Allium
aasaee), Mulford's milkvetch (Astragalus mulfordiae) and Slickspot peppergrass
(Lepidium pappeliferum — ESA threatened) which would be impacted by wrongfully
sited trails. The project area also supports large seasonal populations of Long -billed
curlew (Numenius americanus -- BLM Sensitive), Rocky mountain elk (Cervus
canadensis ), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and declining populations of
pronghorn (Antilocapra americana), which could be impacted by unregulated
recreation use, particularly in the winter.
3. List the partners involved and describe how they are actively and substantively
involved in the project. Identify those partners that embrace any of the current
strategic themes for RTCA. Briefly summarize the existing or anticipated role and
contribution of each. (Three support letters from partners required)
Ada County Recreation and Event Services Department (Project Lead), Cities of
Boise and Eagle; Ridge -to -Rivers Foothills Trails Partnership, U.S. Bureau of Land
Management, Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG), M3 Development
Corporation, Avimor Planned Community, , Ada Soil and Water Conservation
District (ASWCD), , Land Trust of Treasure Valley, North Ada County Foothills
Association (NACFA), Southwest Idaho Mountain Biking Association
(SWIMBA)make up the Core Planning Team. Other agencies and interest groups will
be consulted as needed.
The Land Trust of the Treasure Valley works to create opportunities to conserve
natural, scenic, recreation and farmlands of Southwest Idaho. The Land Trust owns
a trail easement in the planning area and will provide staff assistance on the Core
Planning Team, may hold trail easements if necessary and provide expertise on
easements and acquisition strategies. The Director of the Land Trust has extensive
trail planning experience.
2
Summary of Partner Contributions
Partner Core As -needed Staff GIS Public Technical Trail
member member meeting s expertise easements
Ada County X X X X X
Boise City X X X
Eagle X X X X X
M3 PC X X X X X X
Avimor PC X X X X X X
BLM X X X X
USFS X X X
IDFG X X X X
SWIMBA X X
IVCP X X X
LTTV X X X X
NACFA X X X
Ridge to X X
Rivers
FACTS X X
RMEF X X
Dry Crk PC X X X
Hidden X X X X
Springs PC
4. Provide other examples of support for the project including: supporting language in
local, regional and state plans, endorsements from elected officials and boards,
supportive votes or public survey results, other grants or awards received, or
examples of media coverage. Letters of support are welcome. Describe public
participation, if any, in the project so far, and any future public participation plans.
Ada County's 2008 Ada County Comprehensive Plan policies include:
Policy 9.2-4: Coordinate park and recreation planning with Boise, Canyon and
Elmore Counties, cities in Ada County, state and federal agencies such as the
BLM, US Forest Service and the Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation
(IDPR) and other non-governmental organizations.
Goal 9.4: Ada County supports coordination among the County, cities, state and
federal agencies and private entities to provide a full range of recreational
opportunities to County residents.
Foothills Recommendations:
• Develop and apply a consistent plan and set of open space preservation
and recreation standards governing the lands in the foothills countywide;
• Develop and apply a consistent plan and set of open space preservation
and recreation standards governing the lands in the foothills countywide; achieve
a high percentage of open space preservation in the Overlay area.
3
City ordinances in both Boise and Eagle parallel Ada County goals.
Development agreements for the Avimor and M3 Planned Communities require
appropriate public trail planning, construction, and management and open space
habitat protections.
5. Describe the kind of assistance you are seeking from RTCA staff. (For examples of
the kinds of technical assistance RTCA staff can provide, click on "What we do" on
our website, www.nps.eov/rtca).
The applicants request NPS help in building a strong regional coalition for a north
Boise foothills trail system, guiding the group through the planning process, assisting
with public outreach strategies, and developing a synergistic final action plan.
Current strategic themes: (check boxes that apply)
_x_ Project provides physical connection among resources;
x Project includes both outdoor recreation and natural resource conservation goals;
_x_ Project partners with an NPS area and/or connects communities to NPS areas
parks; NPS areas include: National Parks and Monuments, National Heritage Areas,
National Trails and Wild & Scenic Rivers. [adjacent to Shaefer Butte trail system, an
RTCA project.]
Project partners with a health organization (active and substantial);
Project engages youth partners.
4
1 Map:
-Garden Ci
?ise
Northwest Foothills Planning Area
Proiect Background and Context
Public Participation — existing and planned: Community input into Eagle and Ada
County Comprehensive Plans have been significant. The Avimor development team
conducted informal scoping during the past several years. An initial meeting was held
June 16, 2010 to determine the interest of the key partners in conducting a planning
process. The listed participants and several citizens attended and agreed to pursue a
plan for a Northwest Foothills Trail Plan using NPS facilitation. Public involvement for
the detailed trail plan will be conducted in a manner that complies with NEPA since a
large portion of the planning area includes federal BLM land.
History and prior activity on the project, current status and completion date: North Ada
County public trails have been discussed by groups, individuals, officials, and in the
press for several years. Comprehensive Plans of Eagle and Ada County have embraced
5
the concept of additional trails in the planning area. The formal trail planning process is
in its initial stages. Anticipated completion date will be early 2012.
What aspects are going well? Where does this project need the most help? This project
will coordinate efforts of and communication between Ada County, Boise County, 2
cities, 3 developers, federal and state agencies, landowners, NGOs and interested and
affected citizens. A developer has been leading the effort the past couple of years and
has made great progress in scoping key issues. It is now time for this developer driven
trail planning to become a broader, open, and transparent public process to fully realize
the recreational and ecologic potential of the northwest foothills area.
6
RECEIVED & F1LE `
CITY OF EAGLE
AUG 0 2 2010
File:
Route to:
City of Eagle
Planning & Zoning Department
Fiscal Year 2010-11 Work Program
-1-
k \plamung dept\pork pr)gram \10-11\t}211I11-11 final aurk prgram 6-15-11.).docx
City of Eagle
Planning & Zoning Department
Fiscal Year 2010-11 Work Program
Table of Contents
Work Plan Purpose Page 3
Mission, Vision and Values Page 3
Department Organization Page 4
2010-11 Work Program -Overview Page 5
Council, Commissions, & Committees Page 6
Statutory Requirements Page 9
Code & Procedural Updates Page 13
Community Outreach Page 18
Non -City Committees Page 21
Eagle Applications to Others Page 27
Interagency Coordination Page 29
Administration Page 31
2-
k:\planning dept\work program \ fy 10-1 1 \ fy2010- 1 1 final work prgram 6-15-1O.docx
ORK PLAN PURPOSE
The Eagle Planning and Zoning Department work program was drafted to prioritize policies,
programs, and services for the coming year as well as provide broad guidance as to departmental
goals, programs, and staffing needs in the future.
The Zoning Administrator and the Planning and Zoning Staff participated in the goal and objective -
setting process with review and endorsement by the Mayor.
MISSION STATEMENT
As the Eagle Planning and Zoning Department, we take pride in our organization, the community,
and ourselves. We are charged with shaping the built environment to preserve the public good,
minimize taxpayer exposure, maximize positive land use interactions, distribute the benefits and
burdens of change equitably, and elevate the quality of life within the City of Eagle.
VISION STA"I'EMEN'1'
The City of Eagle will be a well-planned community that encourages diversified living and housing
opportunities, fosters economic vitality that offers jobs for residents, and provides places for people
to recreate and enjoy Eagle's natural beauty.
--- The Eagle Comprehensive Plan
CORE VALUES
The Eagle Planning and
Zoning Department values...
Respect
Dedication
Service
Participation
Teamwork
Innovation
Integrity
-3-
k \planning dept \wirk program \fc1U.l I\fc31110-I1 final cork prgram 6-15-IO.docx
DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
Overall Structure
The Planning and Zoning Department is managed by the City's Zoning Administrator and provides
staff and support for Current Planning (annexation, zoning, subdivision, conditional use permit,
variance applications and appeals), Long Range Planning (comprehensive plan, sub -area plans,
demographic and regional planning activities), Special Topics (design review, transportation and
code compliance) and administrative support. To ensure that a complete review of all applications
and plans is completed, the Planning and Zoning Department works closely with the City Attorney
and City Engineer. (See Department Organitiateon Chan)
Staff Composition
The Eagle Planning and Zoning Department employs six (6) full time staff members. Combined, the
current staff represents over 81.5 years of public service experience and over 60 years of planning
experience. The City currently employs three (3) Planners certified by the American Institute of
Certified Planners and one (1) Planner certified through the Community Development Council.
William I. Vaughan, AICP — Zoning Administrator
Nichoel R. Baird Spencer, MCRP, AICP — Planner III
Micheal Williams, CCD — Current Planning Supervisor
Barbara Cerda — Planner II
Jeff Lowe, AICP — Planner II
Crystal Skinner — Administrative Assistant II
Staff Training and Certifications
One Degree in Geography & Regional Planning
One Degree in City & Regional Planning
Two Degrees in Political Science (emphasis in Governmental Systems)
Three Certifications from the American Institute of Certified Planners
Two Certifications in Effective Zoning Administration Techniques
One Certification from the Community Development Council
One Certification from FEMA - Community Rating System
One Certification from FEMA - National Flood Insurance Program
One Certification from FEMA - Advance Floodplain Management Concepts (July 2010)
k.\planning der \work program\tvlU-11\fy'2U10-11 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
PLANNING & ZONING FY 2011 WORK PROGRAM
OVERVIEW:
FY 2011 P&Z Tasks Hours
Council, Commission & committees 1812
Statutory Requirements 622-4
Code & Procedural Updates 1776
Public Outreach 301
Non -City Committees 597
Interagency Coordination 120
Eagle Applications to others 230
Administration 736
11,796
Interagency
Cordination
1% Eagle Applications to
FY 2011 P&Z Work Program
others Council, Commission
Non -City 2% Administration
& committees
Committees 6% 15%
5%
Public Outreach
3%
Code & procedural
Updates
15%
Statuto
Requirements
53%
k \planning &pt\ork pr, gram\fv111-11\ff2011)-11 final work prgram 6-13-10.docx
CIT\ COUNCIL, COMMISSIONS & COMMITTEES: 1,812 HOURS
OVERVI1 w:
The Planning and Zoning Department provides staff and support for the City Council, Planning and
Zoning Commission and numerous other City Committees associated with zoning and subdivision
applications, the Comprehensive Plan, Sub -area Plans, demographic and regional planning activities,
and Special Topics (Design Review, Transportation and Code Compliance).
Citi Council, Commission & Committees Hours
City Council 360
Planning & Zoning Commission 500
Design Review Board 500
Joint Meetings 80
Transportation Committee 300
Parks & Pathways Development Commission 72
1,812
City Council, Commissions & Committtees
Parks& pathways
4%
1
Transportatio
-6-
k \planning (kilt \work program \fy1 /-11\fy211111-I I final wcirk prgram 6-15-10.docx
City Council — 360 hours
The City Council meets on the 2"`' and 4'" 'Tuesday of each month to conduct City business.
The Planning and Zoning Department provides support to the City Council in the following
ways:
Eagle City Code:
Title 6 - Public Ways & Property
Title 8 - Zoning
Title 9 - Land Subdivisions
Title 10 - Flood Control
Idaho State Statutes:
50-2 Annexation
50-17 Local Improvement Districts
50-13 Plats & Vacations
67-65 Local Land Use Planning Act
67-82 Development Impact Fees
Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission- 500 hours
Planning and Zoning meetings are scheduled on the 1" and 3r`' Mondays of the month. The
Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission is charged to conduct a planning process designed
to prepare, implement, review and update a comprehensive plan that includes all lands
within the City's jurisdiction. They hold public hearings and make recommendations to the
City Council on changes to the plan and ordinances, conditional use permits, rezone
applications, subdivisions, variances, and zoning ordinance amendments.
The Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission is charged to provide a ways and means to
obtain citizen participation in the planning process regarding land use within the City.
According to the Planning and Zoning Commission By -Laws, the Zoning Administrator (or
individual assigned by the Zoning Administrator) is required to give notice of all meetings
and public hearings and to provide the Commission with all essential documentation
regarding items under their review.
Design Review Board — 500 hours
Design Review Board meetings are scheduled on the 2"`1 and 4th Thursdays of every month.
The Design Review Board reviews all design review applications to assure compliance with
Eagle's architecture standards in accordance with Eagle City Code 8-2A. This section of the
City Code addresses building architecture, signage, landscaping, streetscape, and pedestrian
elements. It is the implementation of Eagle City Code Section 8-2A and the Eagle
Architecture and Site Design (EASD) Book that have guided the look of the City and have
created a unique sense of place that sets it aside from other jurisdictions in the valley.
Other communities have strived to become like Eagle by creating codes and DR Boards to
help enhance the general appearance of their cities and to protect property rights and values.
Eagle has been a model for these communities.
-7-
k \plannig dept\work program \fy111-1 l\f}•21110-11 final cork prgram 6-15-10.docx
Eagle Walgreens
Kuna Walgreens value = S1,053,140.00
Eagle Walgreens value = S1,754,843.00 (S701,703.00 more)
Waymeega
7 7 ,..I
Kuna Walgreens
The value lost without the Design Review Board implementing design standards would be
approximately a 40% (701,703.00/1,754,843.00) decrease in property value if design
standards were the same as other jurisdictions in the area.
Estimated Value Added: $3,291,187.00
Joint meetings 80 hours
Joint meetings have historically been schedule for months with a 5th Monday, resulting in 3
meetings a year. 'l'he intent of the meetings is to provide the City Council and the appointed
boards, committees, and commissions a chance to dialogue about issues, polices, and future
planning activities outside of the public hearing process.
Joint meetings are one of the few mechanisms for the Council and appointed boards to
discuss common goals and visions and established shared priorities. The continuation of
these meetings help the City Council and the appointed boards, committees, and
commissions remain informed and united on important policy issues.
Eagle Transportation Committee — 300 hours
The Eagle Transportation Committee reviews transportation -related activities and plans
within the City and its Area of Impact and provides input to the Eagle City Council
regarding surface and public transportation needs and projects. Eagle City Staff prepares
agendas and topics for meeting discussions as well as coordinates special speakers and
presentations for the Committee's benefit.
Parks and Pathways Development Commission — 72 hours
The Parks and Pathways Development Commission is a seven member commission that
meets once a month and is appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council. The
Commission provide recommendations to the City Council concerning park and pathway
development, including the review of subdivision applications for the establishment of
regional pathway connections.
-8-
k \planning Jept\work pnxrram\fylll-11\11.2010-11 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
STA 'I't'TORN RI:QL IREMENTS: 6.224 Hol RS
OVI:RVII:\\ :
The Planning and Zoning Department is tasked with implementing and enforcing Local and State
Statutes and is a primary contact between the City and It's residents, land owners, buyers, and
businesses with regard to the items and issues described herein.
Statutory Requirements flours
Customer Service 4765
Planning application 400
DR applications 350
Building permit coordination 175
Floodplain management 100
Code Compliance 104
M3 Project Management 330
6,224
Code
Compliance
2%
Building permit
cordin ation
DR applications
Planning
application
6%
3%
Statutory Requirements
M3 Project
oodplain Management
rnan. ement 5%
Customer Sevice
76%
-9-
k \Planning dept \work program \f) -I11-1 I\Iy2111t1-I1 final uork prgram 6-15-10.docx
Customer Service — 4,765 hours
Customer service functions arc the largest single function of the Planning and Zoning office.
City Staff completes the following tasks on a daily basis:
• Answering Calls - questions about process and specific allowances for property.
• Front desk Planning - walk-in questions about process and specific allowances for
property.
• Pre -application meetings with land owners and developers in the City.
• Working with developers after approval of entitlements
• Public records requests
• Notary Services
• Mapping Requests
• Mail Distribution
Customer service has been an important Planning and Zoning Department function for
service to the City's residents, visitors, and businesses regarding inquires about the services
and regulations of the City. The Planning and Zoning Department is the primary contact
between the public and the City for matters relating to zoning, subdivisions, property
records, code compliance, and the like.
Planning Applications — 400 1 -lours
It is forecasted that the number of planning and zoning applications will generally remain
consistent with the number received in FY 2010.
Design Review Applications — 350 Hours
It is forecasted that the number of design review applications will generally remain consistent
with the numbers received in FY 2010.
Building Permit Coordination 175 Hours
Building permit coordination is the planning department's review of all building permit
applications to ensure that they meet the required site specific setback and have received the
appropriate design review approvals. Further, this function includes permit tracking and the
issuance of certificate of occupancy permits. This function increases the likelihood of
identifying discrepancies in the plans and decreases contractor oversights and errors un the
field.
Floodplain Management — 100 hours
Floodplain management is the practice of controlling development which occurs within an
Arca of Special Flood Hazard (ASFH) as idenuficd in the Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM). The city participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and controls
development occurring within the ASFH through Eagle City Code, Title 10, Flood Control.
Floodplain management is important for the protecuon of public health, safety, and general
welfare as well as assuring that there are no excessive public expenditures for replacement of
infrastructure and/or structures.
10 -
L \planning dept \work program\ly10-I 1\fy21110-11 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
Currently the City of Eagle has a Community Rating System (CRS) rating of 6 which allows a
20% discount on flood insurance rates. There are only a few communities within Idaho that
have a comparable rating.
Floodplain management requires specialized staff with a higher level of training specific to
floodplain management to coincide with planning. The specialized staff provides
information and assistance to the general public, lending institutions, insurance companies,
and other governmental agencies. One of the other value added attributes is the reduction in
costs of flood insurance to residents located within the areas of special flood hazard. Our
CRS flood rating is established contingent upon our flood control regulations and service
provided to the citizens of the community.
Code Compliance — 40 Hours
The Planning and Zoning Department in conjunction with Public Works, provides code
enforcement for citizen complaints and for violations related to Titles 6, 8, 9, and 10.
M3 Project Management — 330 hours
The City of Eagle in 2007 approved the M3 Development application. The approval and
signing of the development agreement contractually obligated the City to a 30 -year project
management process including the review and approval of hillside and grading standards,
Planned Unit Development Standards, habitat mitigation review, and design standards in
addition to the customary platting and subdivision processes.
In FY 2011 the planning and zoning staff will be responsible for the following:
• Project management - meet monthly with M3 representatives, fulfill public records
requests, and coordinate interagency meetings
• Review and analyze PUD Standards
• Schedule public hearing process for City review and consideration of the PUD
Standards
• Review and analyze Design Standards
• Schedule public hearing process for City review and consideration of the Design
Standards
• CID review
The City currently works under a reimbursement agreement with M3 for all staff costs not
covered under the exiting fee schedule. To date, for FY2010, the City has billed M3 for
$14,000 in staff reimbursement costs. This is intended to continue in FY2011 for the items
listed above.
FY 2011 Estimated Cost Recovery: $ 19,000
Through the City's approval of M3 the City has contractually obligated M3 to the provision
of the following City facilities during the development of the project:
• Police - up to a 1 acre shared site, up to SI,000,000.00 to fund their proportionate
share of building, facility equipment, personnel, and operation operations costs
• Fire - up to a 1 acre shared site, up to S 1,000,000.00 to fund their proportionate
share of building, facility equipment, personnel, and operation costs
- 11 -
k \planning dept\work program \fy10-11\fv211111-11 final wcork rrgram 6-15-10_docx
• Library - up to a 4 acre site library site.
Estimated Future Value: $500,000.00
12
k:\planning dept\work program\fy10-11\fy2010-11 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
CODE & PROCEDURAL UPDATES: 1.776 1lO1'RS
OVERVIEW:
Codes and procedural updates are the necessary reviews and updates to codes, fee schedules, and
application submittal materials to ensure the Cite receives appropriate information and funding for
the City to function as required. The category also includes updates to City code to ensure that the
comprehensive plan is being implemented.
Code & Procedural Updates Hours
Park Impact Fee Review 20
Planning & Zoning Land Use Fee Schedule 50
Application updates/modifications 80
Home Occupation Permits 36
Wine District Overlay 150
Update to Title 8 & 9 960
State Highway Access Management 80
Downtown Plan 400
1776
Code & Procedural Updates
Park Impact Fee
Review P&Z Fee Schudule
1% 3%
State Highway Access
Management
5%
Application
updates/modifications
4%
Home occupation
permits
2%
Wine District Overlay
8%
Downtown Plan
23%
-13-
hl.unung dLpt\work program \fill!-11\i\211I1i-11 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
Park Impact Fce Review — 20 hours
Park impacts fees are fees assessed to developers to offset the cost of providing community
and regional parks within the City; neighborhood parks are normally designed and
constructed as part of residential development. Park impact fees are a mechanism to ensure
that development pays a proportionate share of the impacts of growth.
"1'hc City is required to update the park impact fee every 5 years; the last update was
completed in 2005. As part of establishing the impact fee the City must establish a level of
service (acres per 1000 in population) with which the City wishes to develop parks. Any
deficiency in the level of service below the adopted standard is reduced proportionally from
the impact fee that the City collects; the deficiency is the City responsibility to fund. In
2005, the city had a deficiency of 1.6 trillion dollars that had to be removed from the
estimated park impact fees and had to be funded through the general fund.
In 2010 and 2011 the City will be addressing park impact fees and working to determine
whether the City has satisfied the deficiency with the construction of Guerber Park and the
investments in the velodrome. If the City has satisfied the deficiency then the City should be
able to increase the park impact fee charged per unit. The construction of the Downtown
Plan (1,800 units at $151.8/unit) and Foothills (24,000 units at $240.71/unit) could result m
an increase to the Parks Capital Fund of nearly 5.7 million dollars at build -out of the two
areas.
If the City does not update the park impact fees the City cannot legally assess this fee to
development and would lose this capital revenue.
Future Estimated Value Added for Parks: $5,777,040.00
Planning and Zoning Land Use Fee Schedule Update — 50 Hours
The City periodically- reviews the Land Use Fee Schedule for planning and zoning
applications to ensure that staff time and the costs related to the entitlement process
(notices, newspaper pubhcations, and public hearings) are being paid equitably by the
applicant.
The City's last fee schedule review was conducted in 2006. At that time the City staff
analyzed the total staff time consumed for the processing of land use applications,
researched other local jurisdictions fees, documented copying and clerking costs, and
reviewed the length of the public hearing process to establish an updated fee schedule that
was commensurate with the costs of processing the different land use applications within the
City.
After a preliminary review, it is anticipated that the existing fee schedule is off by
approximately 40%. If the fee schedule adjustment is not completed it is anticipated that the
City will forgo over $5,000 in FY 2011 and that will be compounded annually until the fee
schedule is adjusted.
FY 2011 Estimated Value Added: $5,000.00
- 14 -
k \planning dept\work progra n\ ty 11/-1 I \fy 201 (1- I I final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
Application Updates and Modifications — 80 hours
This is the process of converting all documents and forms to a pdf format that can be
completed on-line. This process is also a review of all submittal requirements to ensure that
the requested materials are adequate for the processing of the applications.
Hoene Occupation Permits — 36 hours
Establish a more formal application and permitting process for home occupation permits
within the City of Eagle. Year to date the City has issued 23 home occupation permits.
Wine District Overlay District — 150 hours
In 2007, in association with the North Foothills subarea and the Snake River Appellation
designation by the US Department of Agriculture, the City established a Wine District within
the City's Comprehensive Plan for the Foothills arca north of Beacon Light Road.
The intent of the designation was to establish a Wine District overlay that established
standards for vineyards, wineries, crushing facilities and ancillary commercial and tourism
uses (bed and breakfasts, on-site sales, tasting facilities, special events, and tours).
Currently, the City and local land owners have received 5300,000 in grant money from the
Idaho Department of Commerce to construct the infrastructure for the construction of a
Viticulture Center. Further, according to Idaho Department of Commerce in 2008, 23°%o of
trips to Idaho were for outdoor uses and tourism. A similarly positioned community, Walla
Walla, Washington estimated that wine related tourism accounts for $91 million annually.
With the development of an active wine district the City could anticipate an increase in
tourism dollars (estimated at 1°/0 of Walla Walla's) in addition to grants, income taxes, sales
tax, or revenue sharing.
Without proactive planning and the provision of clearly identifiable standards for viticulture
and ancillary uses, it is unlikely these benefits will be realized.
Future Estimated Value Added: $1.2 Million
Eagle City Code Title 8 & 9 Updates — 960 hours
The Eagle Integrated Development Code is designed to be the implementing tool of the
public vision identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Combining or integrating the codes
together in one document allows the ordinance to be more thoroughly explained relative to
the intent of the comprehensive plan; an integrated code can "borrow" the strengths of the
physical and blend it with intensity (use) to obtain a clearer picture of what is proposed and
desired to be developed. Also, an integrated code can remove most of the subjectivity and
uncertainty from the vision being sought.
'1'he code needs to be more than lust "fixed". Of course it is not fair to say the code is
broken, but it is appropriate to make sure the code stays up to date with current expectations
and trends. There is a need to incorporate new tools such as form based codes, sustainability
policies, and smart growth principles, to name a few. Consolidating various development
regulations into a single document helps provide a more concise ordinance and a "one stop"
- 15 -
k \planning dept\work program\fvi11-11\fv21/10-11 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
reference point for the multitude of regulations that can affect a proposed development.
The integrated code will eliminate duplication, contradictions, and confusion resulting from
the frequency of similar or identical development regulations in different sections of the
code
The rewriting of the code is an implementation of the City's vision as stated in the
Comprehensive Plan. If the codes are not updated the necessary regulations may not be
effective enough to guide development and achieve the results envisioned in the
Comprehensive Plan.
State Highway Access Management Plan — 80 hours
The City of Eagle has four (4) state highways to contend with: SH 44, SH2O/26, SH 55 and
SH 16. The City has worked in concert with the local transportation agencies (ACHD and
ITD) to establish access allowance during the review of platting and development projects.
As the City has expanded its comprehensive planning arca the City and ACHD have
expressed a desire (Eagle in their comprehensive plan and ACHD in their Northwest
Foothills Transportation Plan) to have access along the State Highway system stringently
controlled. The intent of this project is to begin the dialogue and negotiations to have ITD
formally recognize the City's Comprehensive Plan and the NW Foothills Transportation
Plan so the state highway system and local transportation systems are developed and
improved in concert with the City's Comprehensive Plan during land use and entitlement
process.
If the City does not make the effort to coordinate land use and transportation planning, the
City will not be able to ensure that the development that occurs along the State
transportation system is consistent with the system modeling and design standards adopted
by both Eagle and ACHD.
Downtown Plan Implementation — 400 hours
Begin the implementation phase for the Downtown Comprehensive Plan. The following
activities give the City the opportunity to implement the Downtown Comprehensive Plan
and begin refining the land use approval process to better create the downtown vision of the
Citizens.
• Begin drafting text for new zones — cottage retail, neighborhood mixed use,
Live/Work, and Vertical Mixed use
• Begin a comprehensive parking master plan - calculate parking generation based on
existing & other parking codes, discuss districts and structured parking (joint effort
with the URA), establish new standards
• Begin edits/updates to the Eagle Architecture and Site Design Book
• Outline options for streamlining the development application process within
downtown
• Outline options for increasing housing within the downtown
If the implementation phase of the plan is not executed the City may again be confronted by
citizens and business owners that feel the city is an obstacle to development rather than a
guiding hand.
16
k'\planning dept\cork program \fy 11l- I 1 \fy2O 10-11 tin.il work prgram 6-15-10. docx
The implementation and eventual development of the Eagle Comprehensive Plan is
estimated to result in an increase of $360 million in residential assessed value (1,800 units at
$200,000 each) and $1.8 billion in non-residential assessed value (1.5 million square feet at
$1,100 per sq foot) in 2010 dollars, a combined value of $2.19 billion. These are future
revenues may not be realized if the downtown plan is not supported, implemented, and
prioritized. Further, this number does not reflect corporate income taxes, sales tax, or
revenue sharing that may be increased from establishing a more viable downtown.
Future Estimated Value Added: $2,190,000,000.00
- 17 -
k: \planning dept \work program \fy'1u-11 \fy201U-11 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
Pl I31_IC UI TREACI I: 301 HOl RS
OVERVIEW:
Public outreach gives the staff and citizens a chance to dialogue about the city and the department's
functions on a more informal basis. This outreach effort may help showcase the efforts the City
makes toward creating a quality, livable, and vibrant place for citizens to live, work, and play.
Public Outreach Ilours
Citizen Planner 40
Citizens Guide to Eagle 80
FEMA Guide 80
Outreach to Schools 16
Design Review for Businesses 40
Arbor Day/Tree City USA 30
Mayors Cup 15
301
Mayors Public Outreach
Cup
Arbor 5%
Day/Tree City
DR for Businesses
13%
Outreach to
schools
5%
10%
Citizen Planner
13%
Citizensguicle
Eagle
2 7"
.1
FCNlt1 Guider
27%
- 18 -
k \planning dept \work program \fy111-11\f 2010-11 final work prs ram 6-15-10.docx
Citizen Planner Workshop — 40 hours
Citizen Planner Workshop is a public workshop that helps citizens understand the
development process, the public hearing process, and to better understand the City and State
codes pertaining to land use and planning.
The Citizen Planner Workshops provides the city an opportunity to offer better guidance
with regard to the public participation process. Citizens learn where to get information, how
to provide written and verbal testimony and where to access public meeting notices and the
City's plantung documents. By implementation of these workshops, the City is able to
facilitate better public meetings and communication.
Value added is that the better informed citizens are the more likely they are to be involved in
the community and planning process in a positive way and the Council and appointed
commissions, boards, and committees will be more likely to receive positive public input and
participation at public hearings.
Citizens Guide to Eagle — 80 hours
Outreach to the general public that provides an overview and contact information of the
services provided by the City and other public agencies in the City, including but not limited
to ACHD, Ada County Sherriff, water and sewer providers and public schools.
FEMA Guide for Citizens — 80 hours
As part of the City's Community Rating System (CRS) flood rating requirements for the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) the City is required to provide community
outreach. As part of the community outreach staff will also be preparing a guide for
distribution which will provide information on how to prepare for a flood, safety steps to be
taken during a flood event, and agency contact information. Staff is also available for
speaking engagements at local service clubs, organizations, or home owner association
meetings where the guide will also be distributed.
Schools — 16 hours
Outreach to schools is the planning staff working with and presenting community -building
ideas to students that may be studying and modeling (planning) a city for a class project.
This outreach builds awareness and understanding in the community of City planning and its
importance to the health of the community.
These presentations give staff a chance to receive feedback (positive or negative) from those
Nye have served and hear ideas from the next generation of residents.
Design Review for Small Businesses — 40 hours
Design Review workshops for small businesses are to help businesses better understand the
design review process, the City Code, and the Eagle Architecture Site and Design Book
pertaining to design requirements and standards for buildings, signage, and landscaping.
- 19 -
k \planning dept\work program\II)-1I\fv2u10-11 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
These workshops provide the City with the opportunity to better guide the public through
the review process and provide them with the criteria that will aide them in submitting a
complete and well-designed project.
Arbor Day/Tree City USA — 30 Hours
Tree City USA Certification is provided by the Arbor Day Foundation in cooperation with
the National Association of State Foresters and the USDA Forest Service. The goal is to
recognize environmental improvement and encourage higher levels of tree care throughout
America while also providing new ideas to improve community tree care.
Trees help clean the air, conserve soil and water, moderate temperature and bring nature into
our daily lives. It is important for citizens and our youth to learn the importance of a
sustainable urban forest and the many benefits trees provide. Trees also increase property
values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and beautify our community.
Eagle Kiwanis Mayor's Cup Golf Tournament — 15 hours
The Eagle Kiwanis Mayors Cup Golf tournament is a joint fundraiser for the City of Eagle
Community Fund and the Eagle Kiwanis.
Revenue from the tournament and its sponsors are allocated to Eagle Kiwanis and the City of
Eagle Commzinily Fund. The Eagle Kzwamr is a local organization of business people
committed to helping the children of the community through fund raisers and support of
youth organizations in the schools.
The City o/ Eagle Community Fund is a permanent endowment in the Idaho Community-
Foundation that benefits non-profit organizations in the local community. A portion of the
earnings from the Fund are distributed annually to charitable groups based on applications
and needs identified by a review committee appointed by the City.
FY 2010 Value to Community: $6000.00
- 20 -
k \planning dept\ccork program \iy111-11\fy20111-I1 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
NON -CIT\ COMMITTEES: 607 1101 RS
O\'ER\'I I:\\ :
Non -City Committees are committees that are staffed by the Planning & Zoning Department on
behalf of the City at the direction of the Mayor and/or Council. Many of these committees make
recommendations to elected and/or appointed officials within the county or have direct impact on
the day to day interaction of the City of Eagle with outside agencies as it relates to the department's
duties and functions established in Eagle City Code or Idaho Code.
Non -Cit. Crrmmttrees flours
Regional Technical Advisory Committee (RTAC) 80
Blueprint for Good Growth (BPGG) 10
Demographic Advisory Committee (DAC) -I()
Regional Geographic Advisory Committee (RGAC) 25
Capital Investment Citizens Advisory Committee (CICAC) 55
Communities in Motion (CIM) 41)
Transportation Land Use Integration Plan (TLIP) 20
Urban Renewal Agency (URA) 3(1
AIC -legislative committee 2()
BLM 4 Rivers Management Plan 10
Assistance to the Eagle Chamber of Commerce 32
State Street/Hwy 44 Transit Corridor Implementation
Coordination 12()
Ada County Street Naming 25
Project Coordination 111()
607
Project Non -City Committees
Cordination
1G" BPGG
Ada County 2% DAC Fegional
Street Naming 7") Geograah c
4%
Advisory
Committee
4%
State Street
Corridor
20%
Eagle Chamber
5% BLM 4 Rivers
Mznzgement Plan
2%
-legislative
committee
3%
C�pl:al Investrrert
Citizers Advisory
Committee
Communities in 9%
TLIP Motion
3iG 7%
-21-
k.\planning ikpt\workprng m\li1t)-11\ft21111)-11 final workprgrun 6-15-1().docx
Regional Technical Adx isory Committee (RTAC) — R0 hours
RTAC advises the COMPASS Board on regional transportation and related planning issues
and recommends priorities for federal funding requests as well as the technical review of
core agency documents such as the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and
Unified Planting Work Program (UPWP). Members constitute a primary communications
link between COMPASS and its members.
As a member of RTAC (our staff member is the current Chairman), we represent the City at
the meetings and provide input regarding COMPASS plans, studies, and other activities as
they relate to the City.
If the City does not participate it will not be represented on important
planning/construction projects. We will also lose the "presence" that we have established in
the agency community, thus diminishing the level of respect we have built and the
opportunity to be invited to cooperatively participate in planning with other communities.
This Committee provides a face to other agencies and elected officials that let them know we
are serious about being involved and is willing to participate in regional matters.
Blueprint for Good Growth — 10 Hours
Blueprint for Good Growth: The Ada County Consortium is a partnership of governments
in charge of local land use and roadway planning: Ada County, its cities, the Ada County
Highway District, and the Idaho 'Transportation Department. The partners want to better
coordinate land use and transportation planning to ensure that growth is orderly and
beneficial for the community's continued prosperity and quality of life.
BPGG give the City a voice in the development of accumulative impact analysis of
transportation, which requires developers to detail on-site and off-site impacts of
development. Further this group is working to develop a Transportation Impact Study
consistency document so all jurisdictions informational needs are met when a TIS is
completed for a project.
If Eagle does not participate the City's concerns or requests will not be reflected in the
analysis.
Demographic Advisory Committee — 40 hours
The Demographic Advisory Committee (DAC) is a technical committee responsible for
reviewing demographic and growth monitoring activities conducted at COMPASS. The chief
function of the committee is to recommend improvements to the growth monitoring
process and to review demographic materials before they are presented to the COMPASS
Board. For example, members examine building permit and employment information,
subdivision platting activity, population forecasts, and other kinds of data which offer insight
into the location, hype, and pace of regional growth.
If the City docs not participate the city will not have a voice in the allocation of population
to the City on a yearly permit tracking basis or for forecasting purposes. By not having
adequate/appropriate population forecasts the City's need for transportation improvements
_??_
k \plannviq dept\pork program \I} I0-11\fv21/111-11 final work prgr m 6-15-10.docx
may not be met in the Long Range Transportation Plan (federal transportation plan), the
State Transportation Improvement Plan, or in the ACHD Five Year Work Program. A
similar situation occurred in 2004 when the City was not allocated appropriate growth and
the transportation investment funds were shifted to north Meridian oppose to Eagle.
Regional Geographic Advisory Committee — 25 hours
The Regional Geographic Advisory Committee is the only committee addressing issues
regarding regional geographic information.
Geographic information is fundamental to good planning, allowing local jurisdictions to
analyze and display development patterns for decision making purposes. Currently much of
the geographic information is designed and built for individual jurisdictions or a singular
purpose. The goal of RGAC is to mold these individual jurisdictional data sets into regional
data sets that allow for good, consistent, regional planning across jurisdictional boundaries.
For Example, preliminary plat information is collected by every jurisdiction in the region,
but done so in different formats. How can we determine the number of potential residential
units m the region, if only half the jurisdictions collect this piece of the information. The
RGAC brings attention to this need so that every local jurisdiction will collect similar
information that allows for regional analysis.
It's important for every jurisdiction involved in land use/transportation planning to be at the
table, where land use/transportation planning issues are being discussed. If a member is not
at the table, they cannot advance change to support their objectives, nor will they be aware
of change affecting their objectives.
Success will be measured by the number of data sets we convert or create to work across
jurisdictional boundaries resulting in increased quality and quantity of geographic analysis
across the region. The measure of success depends on how you measure the value of good
decision making.
The idea is that every RGAC member represents the interests of their jurisdiction at the
table while also serving as a champion for regional GIS at their work place. So the value is
not only what the member brings to the meeting, but what they also take back to their office.
Ada County Highway District Capital Investment Citizens Advisory Committee — 55 hours
The CICAC provides the ACHD Commissioners with a multi-year capital investment
recommendation that is used to develop annual capital improvement programs and budgets,
serve as, and perform the duties of the development impact fees advisory committee as
provided by 67-8205, Idaho Code.
The CICAC is composed of fourteen (14) members, nominated by the cities and county, and
appointed by the Commission. Two (2) members are appointed from each city and the
county - one (1) land use planning director (or designee) and one (1) resident citizen.
Communities in Motion — 40 hours
Communities in Motion (CIM) is the Treasure Valley's federally mandated long range
transportation plan. The plan looks at demographic forecasts and funding options for
infrastructure within the valley over a 20 -year planning window. The plan helps establish
-23-
k\planning dept.\ wi rk program \f1111 -11\f121110 -I1 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
priorities for federal, state, and ACHD funding for roadway construction. Staff participation
includes forecasting growth within the City, establishing compliance with the City's adopted
comprehensive plan and establishing areas of concern for future projects. Since Eagle has 4
major State highways bisecting the City that received a large amount of funding through
federal match the Staff's participation in the process is vital to ensuring improvements that
benefit Eagle.
Transportation and Land Use Integration Plan — 20 hours
TLIP is a project started by ACHD to establish unique roadway standards for each City to
ensure that the planned roadway network is not in conflict with the planned land uses. TLIP
establishes minimum lane/streets widths, as well as, where planters, street trees, and
separated sidewalks should be located. The City- has participated in the TLIP development
and the City will be asked for adoption of the finished plan.
Eagle Urban Renewal Agency — 30 hours
Attend Agency meetings and provide staff support for mapping, data collection, and joint
planning efforts for redevelopment activities within the URA Districts.
Association of Idaho Cities Legislative Advisory Committee: Planner Technical Advisory
Team — 20 hours
AIC staff routes legislative bills that impact cities to the appropriate Technical Analysis
Team for comments and feedback. The quick analysis provided by the Team is an
invaluable means by which AIC responds to the fast -paced legislative session. The City's
participation helps guide the AIC in their support and testimony on pending legislation and
provides the City the opportunity to be aware of the potential impacts from legislation.
BLM 4 Rivers Management Plan — 10 hours
The Four Rivers Management plan is the guidance document for all BLM owned land within
the region. This management plan will have direct impact on the way the City regulates
development and uses within the City and adjacent to the City. Staff time is to review the
draft plan and prepare comments to the BLM on how the management plan impacts the
City of Eagle and the City's Recreation and Public Purposes Act Application.
Eagle Chamber Committees — 32 hours
Work with the Eagle Chatnber of Commerce on various committees and community -
outreach projects. These include:
Downtown Feasibility- Interaction with local business as the City begins to
implement the Downtown Plan.
Economic Development Committee- Attend to listen to community and business
concerns about the City and how to promote economic growth and development it
the City.
Monthly Chamber Meetings- Staff attends and presents various planning reports
and studies to the Chamber members at the Chamber's regular monthly meetings.
Question and answer sessions often follow these meeting providing staff additional
opportunities to interact with the business community.
24
k.\planning dept \ work program \ fyll)-11 \ I1 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
State Street Corridor Transit Oriented Development — 120 hours
The State Street Corridor Plan is used to prepare for development of new (and
redevelopment), active places for people and to support efficient transit with high ridership
along the State street Corridor. Concentrated site-specific plans and implementation of
transit supportive development will improve roadway function and introduce a new form
and design to the corridor.
Transit oriented development creates sufficient density in specific locations/nodes with the
potential to support high capacity transit as well as employment and retail centers.
Pedestrian movement in accessing transit, local services, retail, jobs, plazas, playgrounds, etc.
characterizes and helps establish a successful node. Overlay zones provide developers and
investors the assurance they require for investment while integrating appropriate design
compatibly with adjacent neighborhoods. Political will, community enthusiasm and a true
understanding of the various types and functions of transit oriented developments will be
necessary to meet the numerous upcoming challenges to create the future State Street
"Transit Corridor vision.
Successful transit oriented development requires a region -wide concerted and cooperative
effort, often over a ten to twenty year period. Without our involvement, we will not have a
voice in TOD projects that will have an impact on jurisdictions and stakeholders affected by
State Street developments both upstream and downstream.
This plan will help ensure that development complies with the "vision" and is successful and
benefits other aspects of the community.
Every local jurisdiction will make independent ordinance decisions in accordance with their
community character and vision. With our participation, we can aid in the continuity of the
regional transit vision as well as take advantage of the benefits that will occur from TOD
developments m nearby areas
Ada County Street Naming — 25 hours
The Ada County Street Naming Committee reviews development proposals to ensure
uniformity in street naming and proper addressing. The committee reviews plats, addressing,
address changes and the renatrung of streets. This committee conducts the final review of
plats regarding the naming of streets prior to approval of a final plat. Through these reviews
the committee reduces confusion in regard to the naming of streets and proper addressing
which helps aid local emergency management agencies within the countywide emergency 9-
1-1 program so affected agencies may protect public health and safety. The Cit' needs to
have representation on the committee so we can ensure that all proposals comply with Eagle
City Code and that the City has a voice at the table regarding any concerns that may arise.
Currently the committee is working on a Uniform Street Naming and Address Numbering
Ordinance and a Street Naming and Address Numbering Policy Manual.
Project Coordination — 100 hours
Staff collaboration with ACHD on City -specific construction projects (or studies) such as
State Street and Floating feather sidewalks/pathways, Hill Road/State/Plaza and
Ballantyne/SH44 intersections or minor projects such as Eagle Road crosswalk.
25 -
k \planning dept\work program\ft 10-1 I \ry211111-I 1 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
Project coordination is important in order for the City to snake informed decisions on a
project in accordance with the City's objectives as well as to ensure that the city's vision is
carried through on each project. And, helping to scope a project helps to make sure a
project is completed in accordance with the City's intent.
The City needs to maintain communication and collaboration in order to anticipate and
respond to unexpected delays or situations or the City may not get what was wanted.
By the City's participation we contribute problem solving skills, experience, and knowledge
to not only think of solutions (projects) to get rid of deficiencies but also to request,
collaborate on, and implement these projects.
26
k:\planning dept\work program \fy1(1-11\fy201O-11 final work prgram 6-15-1O.docx
EAGLE APPLICATIONS 1'0 O'1'IIER AGENCIES: 230 HOU RS
OVE RV1EW':
The following are applications and requests that the City Council has made or directed staff to
pursue with other jurisdictions that require regular contact and staff involvements.
Eagle Applications to Other Agencies I lours
Ada County /AOI processes and applications 50
R&PP Application 80
Downtown Revitalization Block Grant 60
SH44 Access Permit 40
230
Applications to Other Agencies
5H44 Access
Permit
17%
Ada County /AOI
processes and
applications
22%
Downtown
Revitalization
Block Grant
26%
RS:PP Application
- 27 -
k \planning dept \work program \r'1U-1 I \fv211I11-I I final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
Ada Count/AOI — 50 Hours
Review of applications to Ada County but within the Eagle AOI; work with Ada County
Staff on AOI request, Comprehensive plan review and Ada County Ordinance changes. The
main function of staff is to provide an "Eagle" perspective to development applications in
the AOI. If the City did not participate the County would approve development without the
City's input.
R&PP Application — 80 Hours
In 2009, the City submitted a Recreation and Public Purposes Act Application (R&PP) to
the BLAI for the acquisition of 2,000 acres south of M3 and just north of the Farmers Union
Canal. In recent discussions with the BLV, there is significant field and survey work that
will be required for the application to move forward. Staff will serve as the project manager
and work with various volunteers and neighboring property owners to finish the field work.
If the City does not participate in this process the BLM will deem the application incomplete
and deny the City's request. Further, the City's ability to leverage, collect and use park
impact fees in the future will be impacted and it is likely that Ada County will choose not to
implement the City's park impact fee in the AOI.
Downtown Revitalization Block Grant — 60 hours
Work with Sage to complete the Urban Block Grant application to the Idaho Department of
Commerce.
Access Permit to ITD for SH 44 Bypass — 40 hours
Work with stakeholders and ITD to develop access to SH 44 in general alignment with the
southerly extension of Plaza Drive (generally located at the midpoint between Eagle Road
and Edgewood Lane).
- 28 -
k.\planning dept \work program \fy10-11\fy201u-11 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
INTERAGENC\ COORDINA'T'ION: 120 Hou RS
OVI:RVIE\\:
Meetings with other agencies to coordinate planning and policy issues. 'These functions provide the
staff information and insight on larger regional issues and allow the City to participate m discussions
of regional importance.
lntcraLlcnr\ Cn1act in,(I6,n 1Iut(rs
ACHD 20
ITD 5
Eagle Sewer District 20
Ada County 20
Gem County 5
Cities 10
Idaho Power Franchise Fee Planning 40
120
Interagency Coordination
Idaho Power
Franchise Fee
Planning
33%
ACIID
17%
Eagle Sewer
District
17%
ITD
Gem County
4%
-29-
k:\rlanningdip! \wflrkprugr m\t\111-I1\h2(11(1-I1 final work prgram 6 -I5 -10 -docs
Ada County Highway District (ACHD) — 20 hours
joint Agency Meetings, work on specific area plans, TIS reviews, applications and general
application processes.
Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) — 5 hours
Corridor planning coordination, TIS reviews, applications and general application processes.
Eagle Soyer District (ESD) — 20 hours
Staff coordination on projects, decision points, generalized information sharing.
Ada County — 20 hours
Generalized information sharing, project and application review, data sharing (zoning and
building permits).
Gem County — 5 hours
Generalized information sharing on the Foothills planning area and M3, Discussion of AOI
and infrastructure planning.
Other Cities — 10 hours
Generalized information sharing, project and application review, data sharing (zoning and
building permits).
Idaho Power Franchise Fee Planning- — 40 hours
Work with Idaho Power to identify and prioritize key distribution line corridors and plan for,
facilitate, and fund the burial of identified distribution lines within the City.
- 30 -
k \planning dept\work program \fylll-I I\fy20I0-11 Final work prgram 6-15-10.docx
AD IINIsTRA MON: 736 Hot. Its
OVERVII-\\:
It is the responsibility of the Zoning administrator to oversee the implementation of the Strategic
Plan and to coordinate the planning of the Citv with the City -'s elected and appointed officials,
Committees and Staff.
Aelnlink1ratinn
Hours
Budget 240
Billings 104
Project Tracking 52
Development Sureties 16
Personnel 312
Interdepartmental Coordination 12
736
Interdepartmental
Corrdination
2%
Adrninistration
Development
Sureties
2%
Project Tracking
7%
- 31 -
1,Aplanning dept \cork program\fc1O-I1\fy2U111-11 final work prgram 6-15-10.docx