Resolution - 2017 - 17-12 - Revised Development Impact Fee Study & Capital Improvement - 03/01/2017.RESOLUTION No. 17-12
A RESOLUTION OF iflE CITY COUNCIL OF '1 FIF CITY OF EAGLE, IDAHO, ADOP 11NG A
REVISED DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE S 1 1JDY & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN DA t ED
MARCH 2017 ADOPIING A PATHWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE, CORRECitD PATHWAY PLAN
MAP AND PA HIWAY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, AN UPDA t ED PARKS CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PLAN, ADOPiiNG A REVISED PARK IMPACT FEE AND ADOPIING A
PAl HWAY IMPACT FEE; AND PROVLL)ING AN EFFECTIVE DA i h.
WHEREAS, the City of Eagle is a municipal corporation operating under the laws of the
state of Idaho; and
WHEREAS, Idaho Code §67-8208 requires a governmental entity imposing a development
impact fee to update its capital improvements plan at least once every five years in accordance
with the procedures set forth in Idaho Code §67-8206; and
WHEREAS, the City of Eagle previously adopted a capital improvements plan (the "Plan")
pursuant to Idaho Code Title 67, Chapter 82, which identifies capital improvements for which
development impact fees maybe used as a funding source; and
WFIEREAS, the City of Eagle has determined that the Plan should be reviewed, revised, and
updated in conjunction with proposed amendments to the City's impact fee ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City of Eagle, and its consultants, have analyzed growth and development
projections and the City's levels of service in order to update the Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Eagle Development Impact Fee Advisory Committee has assisted
the City in analyzing, monitoring, and revising land use assumptions and the implementation of
the capital improvements, advised the City Council as to necessary revisions to the City's capital
improvements plan and impact fee study, and has reviewed the draft revisions as set forth in Exhibit
A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the City of Eagle held a public hearing, which was duly noticed pursuant to
Idaho Code §67-8206, for the purpose of taking public comment on the proposed amendment to the
"City of Eagle Development Impact Fee Study" entitled "Amendment and Updates to:
Development Impact Fee Study & Capital Improvements Plan" dated March 2017, hereinafter
referred to as the "Study;" and
WHEREAS, the Study and its updates/amendments contain the following information:
(a) A general description of all existing public parks and pathways facilities
acknowledging the City's cure of previously existing deficiencies within the service area of the
City;
(b) A commitment by the City to use other available sources of revenue to cure existing
system deficiencies where practical;
(c) An analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage
of capacity of existing capital improvements, which was prepared by a qualified professional
planner or by a qualified engineer licensed to perform engineering services in this state;
(d) A description of the land use assumptions by the City;
(e) A definitive table establishing the specific level or quantity of use, consumption,
generation or discharge of a service unit for each category of system improvements and an
equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land
uses;
(0 A description of all system improvements and their costs necessitated by and
attributable to new development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions,
to provide a level of service not to exceed the level of service adopted in the development impact
fee ordinance;
(g) The total number of additional park acreage necessitated by and attributable to new
development within the service area based on the approved land use assumptions and calculated
in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning criteria;
(h) The projected demand for system improvements required by projected population
growth over a reasonable period of time not to exceed twenty (20) years;
(i) Identification of all sources and levels of funding available to the City for the financing
of the system improvements; and
(j) A schedule setting forth a priority schedule for completion of improvements identified
in the capital improvements plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, after careful consideration, hereby finds and declares that
an impact fee imposed upon residential development to finance parks and pathways, the demand
for which is created by such development, continues to be in the best interest of the general welfare
of the City and its residents, is equitable, does not impose an unfair burden on such development
by forcing developers and builders to pay more than their fair share or proportionate share of the
cost, and therefore deems it advisable to adopt the updated and revised impact fee study and capital
improvements plan.
NOW, 1HEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY '1 HE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF !HE
CITY OF EAGLE, IDAHO that the "Amendment and Updates to: Development Impact Fee Study
& Capital Improvements Plan" dated March 2017, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated
herein by this reference, is hereby adopted by the City.
This Resolution will be in full force and effect upon its adoption and approval this day
p �P
,2017.
ATTEST:
4„.
Sharon 1 Bergmann,
City Clerk/Treasurer
CITY OF EAGLE, IDAHO
Stan Ridgeway,
Mayor
7
HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO.
ENGINEERS • CONSULTANTS
32 N Main Street • PO Box 235 • Payette, ID 83661
208 642 3304 • 208 642 2159 Fax
Reference No. EG15-0341A
L
UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS TO:
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDY &
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
March 2017
Prepared for:
City of Eagle
Eagle, Idaho
Prepared By:
HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO.
m M.I IAMu d IIllaa JAM AIimeM IAW IaM III MI MIMMM IALI aJAM I1, INIumihA NAdlm'IIi,mI.JIIIIAIIAIAI. WIIIIIWI,IUIIA OII III 10.eI.IpUIII4A1WII6JJ,IpIIIIIIV ILIIW.IIWIl i, I WldlNpll IIIIIII IIYo.IIWtlYWM a ILLAMIIIIId,IV,IVVOIWMM
ENGINEERS • CONSULTANTS
32 N Main Street • PO Box 235 • Payette, ID 83661
208 642 3304 • 208 642 2159 Fax
EG 15-0341A
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CITY COUNCIL
Stan Ridgeway, Mayor
Jeff Kunz, Council President
Stan Bastian, Council Member
Naomi Preston, Council Member
Craig Solberg, Council Member
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Robert Grubb
Jane Kramer
Michael Huffaker
Zach Pence
Sierra Morris
HOLLADAY ENGINEERING CO.
Otll,�ll„�l,11,1 1111 I liI 11111, IiV Viii II,I
ENGINEERS • CONSULTANTS
32 N Main Street • PO Box 235 • Payette, ID 83661
208 642 3304 • 208 642 2159 Fax
EG 15-0341A
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary and Recommendations 1
Section 1: Introduction 3
Limited Scope of the Development Impact Fee 2017 Update 4
Residential Units and Allocation of Impact Fees 4
Level of Service 6
Parks Level of Service 6
Pathways Level of Service 7
Section 2: Parks 9
Park Development to Maintain Level of Service 10
Value of Developed Parks 10
2017 — 2026 Capital Improvement Plan 12
Park Impact Fee 15
Section 3: Pathways 16
Developed Pathways 19
Value of Developed Pathways 19
Pathway System Growth to Maintain Level of Service 20
Section 4: Funding and Implementation 23
Funding Sources 23
Implementation 24
2017 Update Impact Fee Summary 25
Holladay Engineering Company
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
Executive Summary and Recommendations
.50i/.ar iDW//�OYta
The Idaho Development Impact Fee Act in Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 82, requires capital
improvement plans upon which impact fee systems are based be "updated" every five years. This
report represents the third amendment of the City of Eagle's Development Impact Fee
Study/Capital Improvements Plan dated May 11, 1999 (Hofman Study). The Hofman Study
recommended a schedule of impact fees for parks and a schedule of impact fees for pathways.
The City adopted only the impact fees for parks.
This Update and Amendment to the Development Impact Fee and Capital Improvement Plan
(2017 Update) identifies changes to parks planning with the establishment of a Parks and
Recreation Department (the Department).
The City Parks and Pathway Committee conducted a Parks and Path Survey of 2010. The
overwhelming majority of survey respondents requested more trails for biking, walking, dog
friendly parks, and wildlife observation paths. The Department responded to these requests by
developing Targe portions of the Eagle Sports Complex for bike uses and planning for additional
nature park areas along the Boise River. Portions of the Eagle Sports Complex leased from the
County were returned to Ada County control in exchange for the purchase of 48.83 acres. In
addition, the City purchased another 11.93 acres from Ada County in 2016. New park areas have
been constructed for bike activities with new restrooms being added. The previous 2011 Update
followed a master plan that included the construction of a Velodrome that was not funded. The
result of these actions is a change in the value of the overall park system. At the "3.3 acres per
1,000 population" standard adopted in 1999, the City is in a 1.47 acre surplus in developed park
acreage for the current population. Adjusting for the changes and credit for surplus acreage yields
a recommended decrease of the park impact fee from $466.06 per capita to $395.65 per capita,
or from $1,314.29 to $1,115.72 per single family dwelling unit.
The 2017 Update readdresses the issue of development impact fees for pathways. The Hofman
Study Pathway Facilities section was guided by an October 14, 1997, Pathway Plan map that
contained information that misguided the calculation of pathway impact fees, to wit: it identified
substantial pathway corridors that lay within the jurisdiction of the Idaho Transportation
Department, Ada County Highway District, Garden City, Idaho Department of Lands, and the
Farmer's Union Canal Company. Pathway impact fee projections resulted in stirring significant
public controversy. After several attempted revisions to the Hofman Study, Pathway Facilities
section, the City chose not to adopt an impact fee for pathways.
Holladay Engineering Company
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
*/ 40/1/1/r,�r/JiCy/ /007 i.001.Go.
Each time the pathway system issue is addressed by public surveys, by Comprehensive Plan
amendments, or in any other forum on the City's quality of life, continued pathway development
is foremost among the goals of the residents of Eagle. With the adoption of the Corrected
Pathway Map, a revised level of service that reflects historic and current conditions is possible.
Using the corrected map and population data, the current and recommended level of service is
2,700 linear feet of pathways per 1,000 population1. Based upon this level of service and the
value of the existing greenbelt and pathway system owned by the City, an impact fee of $117.20
per capita, or $330.50 per residential unit is recommended to preserve the existing level of service
over the next ten year growth increment. At this level of service, pathway funding from the City's
general fund is not required for new pathways.
1 The Hofman Study used the term "population" in reference to specific numeric values and the term "residents" in non-
numeric references to citizens of Eagle. This reference convention is continued in this 2017 Update.
Holladay Engineering Company
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
Section 1: Introduction
The 1992 Idaho Legislature passed House
Bill No. 804, Title 67, Chapter 82, Idaho
Code, known as the Impact Fee Act that set
forth the requirements for the calculation
and accounting of impact fees. To require
impact fees, a local governmental entity
must adopt a Comprehensive Plan, an
Impact Fee Ordinance, and a Capital
Improvement Plan to comply with Idaho
law.2 These plans must be reviewed
annually with respect to capital
improvements with a full update at least
every five years.3
yiri07Xy///H/9/H,C4�//pis'i9HpcW,bN/L�Y/Hii/tay/iaSfW/us'an�//nH;
The purpose of impact fees is to provide for an "equitable program for planning and financing
public facilities to serve new growth"4 Stated another way, new growth will "pay its own way" for
development of new public parks and pathways. Prominent features of the Iaw include restrictions
disallowing the use of impact fees for any other purpose than to fund system capital improvement
costs for new public facilities identified in the Capital Improvement Plan and that impact fees must
not exceed the proportionate share of the cost of improvements needed to serve new growth and
development. Proportionate share is that portion of cost of system improvements incurred to
serve new development after any credits, contributions, land dedications, or constructed
improvements and other funding sources are considered.
The 1992 Impact Fee Act, as amended, is essentially the same as when Eagle first passed the
park impact fee on May 11, 1999. Impact fees for parks and pathways are calculated from new
population data since increased demand for parks and pathways is, by Eagle's definition of level
of service, correlated to City residents and housing units. The Impact Fee Ordinance is codified
as Eagle City Code, Title 7, Chapter 6.
The Hofman Study contained two principal sections, Park Facilities and Pathway Facilities. In
1999, the City adopted only the Park Facilities portion and impact fee recommendation
component of the Study. In 2004, the first amendment to the initial study was prepared to update
park inventory, cost, and to recalculate the park deficiency condition. A second update was
prepared in 2011 to address changes in population data, park land acquisition, an updated Capital
Improvement Plan, and updated values including costs of construction. The Pathway Facility
component of the Hofman Study has not been updated since the initial report and
recommendation in 1999.
2 Idaho Code § 67-8208(k)
3 Idaho Code § 67-8205(d)
4 Idaho Code § 67-8202
Holladay Engineering Company
.......J..A.l....,.i..i....<<u,i":�WwWvU1WWd4lUW1.IlWlUWIIIIkUlYlk4LdLUU!�iMU .. -. Co ",:..,
3
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
/4194,/1/U//10,9b,14,100///rY///// /.14,,,//�i�/4,
Under the leadership of the Parks and Recreation Department, the City has prepared a corrected
version of the original Pathway Plan map. The result is a Corrected Pathway Plan map with an
emphasis on greenbelt pathways under City ownership and control.
In its Comprehensive Plan the City adopted as one of its primary objectives for a pathway system
the establishment of greenbelts5 along the Boise River and Dry Creek. Most recently five of the
19 objectives within the Pathway and Greenbelt section of the updated 2015 Comprehensive Plan
are specifically directed toward the continued development of the greenbelt system.
Implementation bullet points from the Comprehensive Plan include:
• Construct bridges to provide access to existing and future greenbelt pathway system
easements.
• Prioritize greenbelt and pathway development: 1) greenbelt pathway system along the
Boise River, 2) greenbelt/pathway system along Dry Creek.
Reconsideration of impact fees for pathways based upon corrected and updated information is
consistent with the goals and objectives of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan.
Limited Scope of the Development Impact Fee 2017 Update
This 2017 Update is focused on specific, eligible capital projects that are anticipated to be
completed within a ten year capital planning horizon to maintain service levels currently enjoyed
by residents of the City. The City has developed a Citywide Parks Master Plan and is planning
for a complementary Citywide Pathway Master Plan. Typically master plans will consider all
aspects of the park and pathway system including, in the instance of pathways, bike lanes and
routes under the jurisdiction of transportation agencies, pathways on state owned property, and
agency or privately maintained pathways available for public use. Impact fees, by contrast, are
limited to specific capital projects consistent with Idaho Code6 and adopted by the City.
Development of parks and pathways outside City jurisdiction or on property not controlled by the
City have not historically been funded through City impact fees. As such, they have not been
included in this 2017 Update.
The City contains numerous pathways available for public use, but remaining under the
jurisdiction and maintenance provisions of Home Owner's Associations. Capital improvements
on these pathways are ineligible for impact fee funding.
Residential Units and Allocation of Impact Fees
Since the Hofman Study, the City has experienced unprecedented growth resulting in substantive
modifications to its land use map and to the City's Comprehensive Plan reflecting rapid expansion
5 "Greenbelts are typically land areas that border scenic features or hazard areas (i.e. the Boise River and Dry Creek)
and are designed to prevent undesirable encroachment." 2015 Eagle Comprehensive Plan, p. 115.
6 Idaho Code § 50-1703
4
Holladay Engineering Company
J.....i...I....JJ..U.....J...0
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
and urbanization of the area. After the 2011 Update, the City's population grew by 5,331 residents
to a total of 25,510 in 2016.7 Under the land use assumptions currently adopted by the City, the
projected growth rate is 4.5% per year.8 At this rate the population will grow from 25,510 to 39,616
by 2026 and to 58,874 by 2035. The 2010 U.S. Census identified the average number of persons
per residential unit in the City at 2.82 persons and was used for this update.
Figure 1
Units & Populations
Projected Residential Units
Year
Residential Units
Population
2016
9,046
25,510
2020
10,788
30,421
2025
13,443
37,910
2026
14,048
39,616
The Hofman Study and subsequent impact fee updates utilized information from the City of Boise
Parks and Recreation Department as guidance to allocate fees among dwelling types including
multi -family housing, apartments and hotel rooms. A review of census data from the 2011-2015
American Community Survey (ACS) 5 -Year Estimates for Eagle does not support continuation of
this practice. The ratio of single-family to multi -family units are significantly distinct from those of
the larger metropolitan areas in the Treasure Valley. Eagle has fewer than six hundred multiple -
family units and a single hotel which means a person -per -housing -unit -type number was not
sufficiently defined to support a park or pathway fee portioned by housing unit type.
Figure 2
Single vs. Multi -
Family Units
Notes:
(1) Residential Units 2015
estimate from COMPASS
Communities in Motion 2040.
(2) Percentage of single and
multi -family units from ACS,
2011 to 2015 estimate.
Percentage of Single vs. Multi -Family Units:
COMPASS and ACS Comparison
Residential Units,
2015 (1)
Ada
County
157,657
Residential Units, ACS 164,992
Single Family Units (2) 83.0%
17.0%
Multi -Family Units
City of
Boise
99,630
92,167
74.7%
25.3%
City of
Eagle
8,510
8,454
93.2%
6.8%
7 Community Planning Association (COMPASS) and the City of Eagle Planning Department.
8 "Staff is requesting City Council approval of a 4.5% annual average growth rate for planning purposes within the
City's Comprehensive Plan Update." April 18, 2016, Memorandum from Nichoel Baird Spencer to Mayor and City
Council; subsequently adopted at the April 26, 2016, City Council meeting.
Holladay Engineering Company
- J l J J I, IJJ L lumuI WJugu ...
5
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
4/!H/!H/H/r!Hi/////m//l00,iy!00./uOIODlINHI!/Nio
The comparison of Boise single-family residential units to Eagle's single-family residential units
as proportions of the total population does not provide a basis for mirroring the historic City of
Boise impact fee proportions for multi -family units.' Similarly, the City of Meridian 2013 Impact
Fee Study cited a lack of empirical evidence to support fee differentials.10 As a result, it is
recommended single and multi -family residential units have equivalent impact fees.
Level of Service
Level of service is "a measure of the relationship between the service capacity and the service
demand for public facilities."1, Level of service is the basis for evaluating additional capacity
needed for new facilities serving new development. Service levels must be quantifiable and
specific as they set the amount of benefits for payment of impact fees. The quantifiable
development unit recommended for parks and pathways is the "Residential [Dwelling] Unit"
consistent with Title 7, Chapter 6, Eagle City Code.
The relative value of investment relating to the level of service also has a role in the evaluation
process. To provide an accurate impact fee calculation, the value of the various parks and
pathway types or features are estimated and factored into the overall system value. This value
is used to forecast the cost of establishing new facilities utilizing the same approximate mix of
uses and features that exist for current residents. A project that would substantially increase total
park value by the addition of, for example, a regional water park would be considered an increase
in the current level of service which may be ineligible for funding through park impact fees.
A level of service acceptable to the City must be adopted by ordinance. Once adopted, this
standard becomes the basis for new development to construct comparable facilities or to pay
impact fees for the specific capital improvements necessary to allow the City to continue to offer
the quality and quantity of public facilities enjoyed by current residents.
Parks Level of Service
The Hofman Study, following the recommendation of the Development Impact Fee Advisory
Committee, recommended a level of service standard of 3.3 acres of developed park land per
1,000 population. This standard, adopted by the City Council in 1999, is the basis for analyzing
park land surplus or deficiency as the city develops its park system. The Hofman Study did not
distinguish between park types, uses or amenities to meet various needs of the community. It did
recognize that functional distinctions in park size and amenities may result in a range of
development costs.
To address the broad range of activities offered by current park facilities, two new park categories
have been used in the valuation process to denote non -irrigated, natural parks in Eagle: Foothill
9 The City of Boise recently discussed a lack of demographic data to support a given number of persons living in any
certain type of residential unit. Development Impact Fee Advisory Committee Minutes, June 10, 2015.
10 Impact Fee Study and Capital Improvement Plans, prepared for the City of Meridian, BBC Research and
Consulting, 2013.
11 Idaho Code § 67-8203(17)
Holladay Engineering Company
T
I.VIw..I.U.WIJJIIUAWIIr1104Y1YJ%V!✓>..1)�� � ..-. ,:; v:. 1.. ... ...• ./. .J.J •. � ..JJ :.S%!�/yl.(�'//�iiJ%/�/�/�.yH��
6
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
II _
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
it... :. ,.,,....,, ,. , ••., ••...., . //ta'//0,70/�'�///!i707/U/04',WSW/N/NL�/NZWIi//..N/iOi..
Parks and River Wildlife Parks. The park categories were developed in response to consistent
feedback from park users and non-users as most recently exemplified by public input to Eagle's
Citywide Park Master Plan (CPMP).12 They serve to broaden the park experience options
requested by City residents. The additional park categories provided the basis for a refined
estimate of park values which are incorporated into the impact fee calculation.
A ten year horizon for park development is not an unrealistic development horizon. Continued
park facility growth is in demand as evidenced by public input from the 2010 Parks and Pathways
Survey and from the 2015 Citywide Park Master Plan ranking of needed facilities. Park acquisition
and infrastructure development historically involves several City budget funding cycles to
complete.
Park investment is directly related to the quality of City parks as measured by costs of amenities
and features. Once the acreage element is identified, the system improvements and costs are
estimated to quantify a value per acre. This provides a basis for the cost of system improvements
to be paid for by new development through various funding options or through contributions. This
aspect of impact fees allows the City to maintain its unit value of park acreage as the park system
develops to meet demands of growth. This is addressed in the Capital Improvement Plan for
parks.
Pathways Level of Service
The Hofman Study established a pathway level of service by "totaling the lengths of all [existing
and planned] Multiple -Use Paths and Multiple -Use Trails and dividing that amount by the build
out population." It set an initial target level of service at "4,670 linear feet [of pathway] per 1,000
population." This level of service and the resulting cost of implementation was revised numerous
times by alternative projections ranging from 3,058 to 9,205 linear feet per 1,000 population. As
stated above, the level of service controversy resulted in the Council voting not to adopt a pathway
impact fee.
Utilizing the actual population and developed pathway inventory data that existed at the time of
the Hofman Study, the level of service available to City residents may be measured by the
calculation:
Linear Feet Pathway / (Population / 1,000) = Level of Service (1999).
Calculating the level of service by this method yields a value that reflects an actual 1999 facility -
to -population ratio indicative of the public's pathway experience. This level of service value was
2,442 linear feet per 1,000 population.
In the ten year impact fee planning period from 2017 to 2026, the population is expected to grow
from 25,510 to 39,616. By expanding development of the pathway system on pace with
residential growth, the Greenbelt users will not see a reduction in capacity or overall variety of
experience. Applying the 2026 population projection to the corrected Pathway Plan map of
12 City of Eagle - Citywide Park Master Plan, 2015, Prepared by The Land Group (Draft Copy)
Holladay Engineering Company
CITY OF EAGLE -- IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
.,...:..aWarAm,.,iu1u+wtlwwwlwu,uuuuwwwwi ` :.>•`..••.., . r •/nh/N////HN///HH�/H////NNH//y////iH////N / /!i/H//iONi/Hiinr//
current and future pathways demonstrates the need for an additional 38,086 linear feet of pathway
to maintain the current level of service for City residents.
Figure 3
Pathway Level of
Service
Notes:
(1) Pathway footage derived
from map scale using Google
Earth.
Pathway Level of Service
Population
Pathways,
Linear Feet
Level of
Service
1999 Hofman Study 10,625 25,950 2,442
2017 Update 25,510 68,540 (1) 2,687
2026 Population 39,616 102,040 (1) 2,576
From a historical and current planning perspective, 2,700 linear feet or 0.51 miles per 1,000
population compares well with past levels of service. It is recommended the City use this value
when considering adoption of a level of service to establish an impact fee for pathways.
For comparative purposes, pathways were evaluated using current investment value and the
estimated value of future capital projects. A ten year horizon for continued greenbelt development
is not unreasonable based on current use and public input from the 2010 Parks and Pathways
Survey and from the 2015 Citywide Park Master Plan ranking of needed facilities. The discussion
of pathway value per residential unit is included below in the Capital Improvement Plan section
for pathways.
..............
Holladay Engineering Company
........................' ,..,..1,.a,.aw/a!:,!NNpc/iiwiw..ni:,„ri//.., iiriw
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
Section 2: Parks
!a�ii�Z�nvui�iHuiiiyinui�//�iiiHirarm/,v.✓iiNi�eiiirNii/�:/�'�i;�rii.
The City currently has eight developed parks totaling 85.65 acres. These consist of four
neighborhood parks, Heritage Park, and three Targe park areas. Each park offers unique
amenities offering a wide range of recreational experiences.
Figure 4 Existing Parks
Park Nam Acreage
Arboretum Park
The total acreage owned by the City is 1.29 acres. For the Impact Fee Study, only a
portion of the property was included as developed park since the Senior Center building
and the majority of the parking lots are not being utilized as developed park. Using the
actual park area and two parking stalls, the developed acreage was estimated to be
0.40 acres.
Ada Eagle Sports Park
The total acreage of the City owned portion of the Ada Eagle Sports Park is 63.792
acres (with the 11.93 acres purchased from Ada County). The City's water system
reservoir is located on a parcel with approximately 0.39 acres located within the fence
around the reservoir and excluded from the calculation. In addition, 6.2 acres of the
undeveloped/unusable velodrome area was excluded from the calculation. With these
exclusions, the developed acreage was estimated to be 57.20 acres as summarized
below:
• Skate Board Park (5.05 acres)
• BMX Track (6.00 acres)
• Bike Downhill Skills Course (10.10 acres)
• Reservoir Site -outside fence (2.64 acres)
• Hell Mary Trail Parcel (4.51 acres) — purchased from Ada County in 2016
• Low Rider Trail Parcel (7.42 acres) — purchased from Ada County in 2016
• Trails and previous seasonal snow park (21.48 acres)
Friendship Park
Heritage Park
Orval Krasen Park
The total acreage owned by the City of Eagle within this park is 2.42 acres. However, a
portion of this area is excluded from use as a park due to the New Dry Creek Canal 1.65
running along the south boundary. A fence lies along the canal protecting park users
from the canal. With this area excluded, the developed acreage was estimated to be
1.65 acres.
Reid Merrill Park 8.92
Guerber Park
The total acreage owned by the City of Eagle within this park is 14.80 acres. However,
the City of Eagle has a lease agreement on the 0.399 acre parcel owned by the 15.20
Chaumont HOA located at the corner of Hill Road and N. Dicky Drive. With this parcel
included, the developed acreage of 15.20 acres was used.
Plaza Drive Park
The total acreage owned by the City of Eagle between S. 2nd Street and S. Eagle Road
is 0.52 acres. However, approximately half of the acreage is located within the canal 0.50
and behind a fence. With the canal area excluded, the developed acreage was
estimated to be 0.25 acres. Also, there is an additional 0.25 acres at the corner of Plaza
and Eagle Road fronting McDonalds.
0.40
57.20
1.30
0.48
Total Acreage 85.65
Holladay Engineering Company
1WuhWUAWIIiI, _.
9
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
11.11010011.01000011.1
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
At the adopted level of service of 3.3 acres per 1,000 population, the required developed park
area adjusted to Eagle's December, 2016, population of 25,510 is 84.18 acres. This places the
City in a surplus position with respect to the adopted level of service by 1.47 acres.
Figure 5
Park Inventory
History
History of Park Inventory
Report
Hofman Study
First Amendment
Second Amendment
Third Amendment
Developed
Year Park
(acres)
1999
2004
2011
2017
4.08
17.08
77.33
85.65
Park Need
(acres)
35.06
50.42
66.59
84.18
Surplus or
(Deficiency)
(acres)
(30.98)
(33.34)
10.74
1.47
The City owns 6.2 acres of undeveloped land (previous Velodrome site) within the Eagle Sports
Park Complex, 3.2 acres of undeveloped land in the Mace Ranch Subdivision on Eagle Road,
and 9.6 acres in the floodway along the river west of Merrill park.
Park Development to Maintain Level of Service
By 2026, the City will need a minimum of 130.73 acres of developed parks to serve a population
of 39,616 at the level of service of 3.3 acres per 1,000 population. The expected growth of 14,106
new residents over the next 10 years will require 46.55 additional park acres to maintain the level
of service. However, with the City currently having 1.47 acres of surplus, the total required amount
to maintain the level of service in 2026 will be 45.08 acres.
Value of Developed Parks
The costs per acre for development of parks presented in the 2011 update were used in the 2017
update adjusted to 2016 values. The previous park definitions in the 2011 update were
maintained, but supplemented with the addition of two new park definitions to include non -irrigated
foothill park development and nature park areas. The improvement costs per acre for each park
definition is presented in Table 6.
Holladay Engineering Company
i ......... L...M411J,4 Th•47411114 44,1114414,064161001.0.........0
10
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
Figure 6
Park Development
Costs
Notes:
(1) Includes costs for
potential restroom and
parking area
improvement per each
10 acre increment at
river access points.
W141,11,14WJ4WW41 W4W1 W.1HIJN
Park Description by Cost
Foothills Park Development
Nature Park Development (1)
Lower Cost Development
Moderate Cost Development
Higher Cost Development
Special Use Amenities
Development Cost/Acre
$10,000
$16,000
$115,000
$126,250
$173,750
$312,500
To arrive at an average cost per acre of developed parks, land values were divided into three
categories. Existing park land was valued at $125,000 per acre, irrigated land for future parks was
valued at $50,000 per acre (consistent with the 2011 Update) and non -irrigated or floodway land
was valued at $7,500 per acre. Land values of existing parks also vary according to the predicted
likelihood of flooding based on maps produced by FEMA. Estimated costs for various park
facilities are applied to land values across the spectrum of locations to arrive at a weighted
average cost value. Combining land and amenities, the average cost per acre for developed
parks is $123,801.52.
Using this average cost, the value of the current 85.65 acre developed park system is
$10,603,600. The value per acre is less than the value of $179,580 per acre established in the
2011 Update due in part to the development of Targe non -irrigated foothill bike parks and facilities
which are less expensive to construct than a comparable acreage of irrigated parks with
playground equipment and other amenities. This resulted in a decrease in the overall value per
acre of developed parks.
As new developed acres are added to the inventory at the rate necessary to maintain the level of
service, it is recommended the impact fee analysis be reviewed annually. This will permit the
impact fee to reflect any significant swings in park land value and development cost.
Figure 7
Park Summary
4.
.v. \�.\ \ �. �`\\ tib\ .\. I \
\\��� �� �\,\'\� c....� �. �.���\ . \0\ .Q�\\��.�... \cw � ° �\. � :\:�Zi:. ? . \,\. �. ;\e\�\;h�.�"�;�\\. \\. �c\����a.�. \��'.�� "� x`. vo\\�,a \ \. \.w���a�aa�•:.. ^`a:.
�a.
Summary of Park Values for Current Level of Service
Park Level of Service
Current Value of Parks
Value per Capita
Value per Residential Unit
11
3.3 Acres per 1,000
Population
$10,603,600
$415.66
$1,172.17
Holladay Engineering Companyoilry
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
2017 — 2026 Capital Improvement Plan
1....,.7•.ull.i.nllirl ill: fyGu:Pii.G1"iPiZ.Ziana$iwiXgexrii+4i
In keeping with the goals and objectives of the 2011 Comprehensive Plan and the Development
Impact Fee Ordinance, the City is working with land owners to acquire additional park land.
Planned but as yet undeveloped park acreages have been identified in several areas of the City.
For river access parks, planned improvements consist of a restroom facility and paved parking
with some minor trail work in keeping with the natural setting. These will eventually be located at
all river access points. Identified on the attached map.
A river wildlife area identified below is that portion of the floodway Tying east of Eagle Road
adjacent to Merrill Park on the North Channel of the Boise River. The proposed Lakemoor and
Gateway South parks are identified park acreages within larger development tracts that have
received preliminary plat approval. At the present time this land remains in private ownership and
actual developed acreage remains undetermined. Sites for the Western Park and the
Sport/Ballfield Complex have yet to be determined. At least one larger park will be located west
of Linder to better serve residents in the western area. Guerber Park will be expanded to the east
to include a grass seating area for sports events and to provide better drainage and
accommodation of runoff water.
1.11w.....:...ITTRE
12
Holladay Engineering Company
:.::: «.n.: 'i. ' • r� / .r. r �•���u�u/i//u�u�//yl%y/�/%iH//u.4.
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
Figure 8 Capital Improvement Plan
Park Area Description
Riverside Wildlife Park
Lakemoor Park (TBD)
Gateway South Park (TBD) (1)
Western Community Park
(TBD)
Mace Park
East Plaza Drive (Extension)
Park
Sport/Ballfield Complex (TBD)
Eagle Sports Park
(undeveloped)
River Access Park (Linder Rd.)
River Access Park (Edgewood)
Guerber Park Expansion
Park -Pathway Maintenance
Facility
Impact Fee Study Update
2017 -2026 Capita
///�Y///N/H/Hf/////.V///n!'/1/�YH/•Y/HH/ur/�i%�N'r/i �.
Acres Land Value Improvement
Value
9.6 City Owned
6.0 $45,000
12.0 $90,000
15.0 $750,000
3.2 City Owned
0.5 $25,000
30.0 $1,500,000
6.2 City Owned
1.0 $7,500
1.0 $7,500
2.5 City Owned
2.0 City Owned
$153,600
$690,000
$1,380,000
$2,606,300
$51,200
$48,000
$3,450,000
$62,000
$16,000
$16,000
$287,500
$400,000
Total CIP
Value
$153,600
$735,000
$1,470,000
Growth
Related
Portion
100%
100%
100%
$3,356,300 100%
$48,000 100%
$73,000 100%
$4,950,000 100%
$62,000 100%
$23, 500
$23, 500
$287,500
100%
100%
100%
$400,000 35.6%
$15,000 100%
Total Amount of CIP Improvements
$11,600,600
(1) Water surface area of aesthetic amenity ponds has not been included in development cost.
Holladay Engineering Company
13
I S:
L alp
(/ L
il.„
kuagh..."5 611111Te(
,--ii
. ,
MND ..
r�rTi��::R:
�iy�•�+ jI►4
City Of Eagle
Parks Plan Yap
Draft
1500
SECTION CORNERS
RIVER ACCESS PARK
CONCEPT LEVEL - VICINITY OF PLANNED PARK
EA1' CITY OWNED PROPERTY
SPO
PARR
COMPLEX
Wan
MAIM _
nom
11.2 r r
1
rv
. 6 ,
Std
VER
,rx CITY OE MERff
Tan
ilLHOLLADAY
ENGINEERING CO.
o«su
r o.vwi. 0 sa..:
un
r which
nation
Hoiladoy Enq�neerinq tcmpany
Gu4fin.tr TEE the ob.ence of � ocs
information furnished to them
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
. .a nl i uiati AMli,..,iul(g44.6,44444R`N.w,...v.
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
Park Impact Fee
Park impact fee calculation is summarized in Figure 9.
Figure 9
Park Impact Fee
Population (2026)
Population (2016)
Population Increase (2017-2026)
New Acres Needed to Maintain Level of Service
Park Cost per Acre
Value of future Parks to Maintain Level of Service
Credit for 1.47 Acre Surplus
New Park Costs, Net of Credit
Impact Fee per Capita
Impact Fee per Residential Unit
15
39,616
25,510
14,106
46.55
$123,801.52
$5,762,961
-$181,988
$5,580,973
$395.65
$1,115.72
Holladay Engineering Company
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
Section 3: Pathways
4HON,14,0r/H/OUr/l.r�rH///NUr//Hi07,0//H/iONy///rNra/rH//iar74
The foundation study for establishing pathway impact fees, the Hofman Study, evolved from
community discussions calling for a citywide pathway system along the Boise River greenbelt that
would complement a regional greenbelt pathway system. Numerous updates to the
Comprehensive Plan, the 2011 Eagle Parks and Pathways Survey, and focus groups with a
citizen survey developed for the draft 2015 CPMP have consistently ranked pathways and access
to the greenbelt at the top of a list of desired City amenities.13 More than 90% of respondents
reported some pathway use and use of the Boise River greenbelt ranked number one in terms of
park and path visitation.
The Pathway Facilities portion of the Hofman Study was guided by an October 14, 1997, Pathway
Plan map containing information that misguided the calculation of pathway impact fees. It
identified portions of pathway corridors that lay within the jurisdiction of the Idaho Transportation
Department, Ada County Highway District, Garden City, the Idaho Department of Lands, and the
Farmer's Union Canal Company. Pathway impact fee projections were presented that included
proposed improvements outside the jurisdiction of the City. The proposed level of service at 4,670
linear feet per 1,000 population would have resulted in the City beginning its impact fee process
with a million dollar pathway deficit. These report conclusions produced significant public
controversy and testimony before the City Council. After several revisions to the study report
were advanced and rejected, the City elected not to adopt an impact fee for pathways.
A corrected map was prepared in 2016 based on recognized easements and rights of way
controlled and maintained by the City. Trail segments in corridors within the state or county
jurisdictions have been removed. Trails along canal banks owned by Farmer's Union Canal
Company were withdrawn due to Farmer's Union policies based on functional and liability
concerns for the public. Trails currently owned and maintained by the City were highlighted to
create an accurate basis for reassessing a pathway level of service. Finally, certain areas of the
October, 1997 map that projected greenbelt trails through state lands or in areas that cannot be
realistically improved due to current subdivision encroachment or environmental concerns have
been modified to reflect those realities. The result is a revised Corrected Pathway Plan map of
City owned and maintained paths demonstrating the historic emphasis on greenbelt pathways.
An inventory of all identifiable sections of pathways was conducted incorporating plat information
and photographic evidence from Google Earth.14 Pathway construction and materials were
verified with City staff. Proposed pathway connections and bridges linking existing paths were
added to the inventory to provide a basis for a Pathway Capital Improvement Plan. Existing and
proposed rights-of-way were estimated to develop a basis for property acquisition costs. Concept
level bridge estimates were prepared from approximate distances utilizing Google Earth and Ada
County map data.15 This information is identified on the pathway map as existing and planned
improvements.
13 lipid, Draft CPMP, 2015
14 Inventory of Existing and Proposed Pathways, Appendix
15 Source: Google Earth Pro, 2016
Holladay Engineering Company
�L" .:'.K; .fErAa, `r.; a is ia:...fr./A.` a a....gNtata sY
16
r
+
�f-
60_,.:. 6611_08.12:116 r ii
Or
I Yaw
111 114.. INN 110
alit
Ua. ri IllIl .
��,�"fir F %• A�t
Klight
isb
arlii,
�� is II
, Fit ��it �1►ir � 414�.'tRin�'`z
�%Z�C:y 0'•4
2
} L
t
, i 11111111640,41tit ,... L -IN
_ ..„, ._, . lia. a
H.:: iimaiii mow
iii,_ raqiffi.
Oa N Ht.°dt'
City Of Eagle
Corrected Pathway
P!an vtap
Draft
10 FOOT ASPHALT PATH, EXISTING
10 FOOT ASPHALT PATH, PLANNED • •
10 FOOT CONCRETE PATH, EXISTING
10 FOOT CONCRETE PATH, PLANNED • •
8 FOOT COMPACT GRAVEL PATH, EXISTING
II FOOT COMPACT GRAVEL PATH, PLANNED • •
It FOOT IMPROVED TRAIL EXISTING
II FOOT IMPROVED TRAIL, PLANNED
NATIVE MATERIAL NATURE TRAIL, EXISTING
NATIVE MATERIAL NATURE TRAIL, PLANNED•
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, EXISTING t•
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, PLANNED MEI
RIVER ACCESS PARKING J�
J
SECTION CORNERS qT
.te ..e.e.♦ . \�., f f1 II•' f;a
� � W
J ry
,�• �+�`.`_�... �'�'� m" 11��.Ny�!+ �' may��; •.�
:,4 �11111-91.11.1:::;:::7:*s"
t
4.
�.. ■N _ r vimir/r //♦i fry :�••�:i r°jt11a i1�a.�••
r Hann +:�r r►' �, � r ��M���
US HAY ?40-26
CITY OF MERIDIAN
HOLLADAY
ENGINEERING CO.
x e.r GK • rl�r.„rr � •)Mr
,]W; •u lr4.°( Ma,]MY•YI•�NI•rw�nr� ♦sn
Th. Pathway Flan Map corre:ts lunsd�ct
found In the Fothrey Plon Map adapted
mNuded m the iity of Eoqle. Developmei
Study / Cst:ir Improvements Plon by H
4ssucwtes apGroved by the City m 1999
roues
1997
Th+s map represents a compilation of public intarmatun
Iron diverse records gathered by the City o4 Eagle
and Holladay Engneorinq Company The purpose for which
th+s map ,s pr♦pared is on overail yen.ral represM,talron
of positional relationsh.ps- and not a defnihve descnptron
Woun ieEaor.nlad sorosf coabnjeDe oar rG'a up7esd.
He
nce,
CeNNeCsOtT aDOeNH4atANy E meeoo• anmore
or the corrections ci dl �ntrxmatwn furnished to them
fur the preparotwr. at this map
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
1•�.i�..................i,,.im.���u,�:�n.i.wu iu - .::.......•:., ..,.:... ...:,,,.�• ..:�..... �..•., -,..,..dadd/hl//�9X'///,,4H/Hd'i/d/dh%di/ddiNiiyiidididii/iriiui/,i.
This pathway system is generally distributed along designated Greenbelts along the Boise River
and Dry Creek. Greenbelt pathways have been identified by location and type to facilitate
evaluation of function, capacity, and condition. Several non -greenbelt pathway segments have
been accepted by the City. These segments are also identified on the referenced map.
Figure 10
Current Greenbelt
Notes:
(1) See Figure 11 for
Pathway Type
description. Boise River
Location
Pathway Type'1)
Linear Feet
South Channel, South Side 10 3,700
South Channel, South Side 2 5,200
South Channel, South Side 4 1,600
South Channel, North Side 3 350
South Channel, North Side 4 6,300
North Channel, South Side 1 8,450
North Channel, South Side 2 5,850
North Channel, North Side 1 16,500
North Channel, North Side 10 2,000
North Channel, North Side 3 7,150
Dry Creek
South Side 1 2,300
South Side 2 6,000
Sub -Total Greenbelt Pathways 65,400
Other, Non -Greenbelt Pathways 1 3,140
Total Pathways 68,540
The current pathway system includes seven pedestrian bridges to Zink pathway segments. As
bridges are integral to a riparian pathway system, they are identified by separate segment
numbers and are included in the valuation of the overall greenbelt pathway system.
Holladay Engineering Company
18
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
Developed Pathways
II.., � �., I. i71iWI41�I:�bntld�1941WIMX�44
The City's pathway system is made up of five types of pathways constructed primarily along
greenbelt routes bordering the Boise River and Dry Creek. The five types are defined by surfacing
materials, pathway width, and designated uses. Highly utilized sections are surfaced with asphalt
pavement or concrete befitting their traffic volumes and urban environment. Greenbelt sections
in the areas of low use reflect low impact materials or the simple clearing of the greenbelt pathway
or trail varying between 4 and 8 feet in width to conform to permit requirements of the US Army
Corps of Engineers. Frequently these low volume pathways meander with undulating slopes
conforming to natural riverbank contours. The current variety and relative scale of components
of the pathway system is illustrated in the inventory summary below.
Figure 11
Pathway Inventory
Summary by Type
Width, Linear Percent
FT Feet of Total
Type 1 Paved, Asphalt 10 28,990 42%
Type 10 Paved, Concrete 10 7,100 10%
Type 2 Gravel or Aggregate Surface 8 17,050 25%
Type 3 Soil — Aggregate Mix 8 7,500 11%
Type 4 Native Riparian Soils 4 7,900 12%
.01401011040*
Total Pathways
r..x?
68,540 fif
Construction standards have been applied by the City for Type 1, Type 10, and Type 2 improved
pathways. Type 3 and Type 4 unsurfaced pathways utilize native materials including gravel, chips,
or bark and minimal constructed improvements to retain the natural feel of the riparian ecosystem.
Negotiated easements, neighborhood agreements, agency permits, soil types, intended uses,
and user volume define the placement and types of pathways utilized by the City.
Value of Developed Pathways
Total pathway value is derived from an assessment of land value and from estimates based on
construction methods and materials. Land was valued in broad terms based on its location with
respect to flood designation maps by FEMA. Land within the floodway was valued at a lessor
amount per acre than land in the 100 -year flood plain, 500 -year flood plain, or land outside a
designated flood boundary, respectively. Construction values reflecting 2016 costs as Public
Works projects are applied to the various pathway material types and quantities.16 Pathway
bridge costs gathered from the City's seven existing pathway bridges are used to arrive at a unit
16 Recent pathway capital costs were favorably comparable to values from RS Means Construction Cost Index, 2016.
Holladay Engineering Company
1;iy;: ,.qui
19
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
i...i....,,,,111.11a...4110141,104,...,”' NNN/,6Y///,917HH!/HNW/!9Y//dH///hY//NH///////liNiNiN/WOO.
.
price per square foot for new bridges planned for four new crossings. The overall value of the
current pathway system complete with bridges is $4,109,114, or $59.95 per linear foot. Applying
another unit of measure, the pathway system is valued at $454.24 per residential unit.
Figure 12
Pathway Summary
Summary of Pathway Values for Current Level of Service
Pathway Level of Service
Current Value of Pathways
Value per Capita
Value per Residential Unit
Pathway System Growth to Maintain Level of Service
2,700 LF per 1,000 Population
$4,109,114
$161.08
$454.24
To maintain the pathway system level of service for the next ten year increment of growth, the
City will want to develop an additional 38,086 linear feet of greenbelt pathways. This will allow
the City to fill in gaps in the greenbelt system, add additional bridges for interconnectivity, and
add new pathways of all types in keeping with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and desires
of residents as evidenced by community surveys conducted by the Parks and Pathway Committee
and by consultants.
Expansion of the pathway system is guided by the adoption of the Corrected Pathway Plan map
featuring greenbelt improvements along the Boise River and Dry Creek. Funding sources were
considered in the cost and local match components of the estimate. Maintenance and
improvement to the existing pathway system are ineligible for funding from impact fees. Pathways
not identified on the Corrected Pathway Plan map and identified in the Capital Improvement Plan
are also ineligible for development through impact fees. Developer contributions, including right-
of-way and construction cost, to the pathway system are only eligible for reimbursements or
credits if the pathway is one identified on the Corrected Pathway Plan map or Capital
Improvement Plan.
Holladay Engineering Company
i.i.a...,, isa:.yi.:,,�i..:.uJAIALL.wthJaii.i,r;..;u11.,i1tiAWU:IJllIb,AYJ1J!Jli;
20
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
............ .
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
Figure 13
Capital
Improvement
0//.N/yh5.2'iWlul1/.H//////taYy,YbDYr/NH/H/,%/////h/H.„��
2017 — 2026 Capital Improvement an
Pathway and Bridge Description
Eagle Island State Park to Water's
Edge Boundary
Pathway Growth
CIP Value Related
Type Portion
4 $38,600 100%
Eagle Road to New South Channel
10 $4,400 100%
Bridge
New South Channel Bridge to Banbury
10 $290,400 100%
No. 1
W. Moon Valley Road to HCR 1 $100,700 100%
Subdivision
Bel Aire Subdivision 1 $50,100 100%
Fischer Park to Ballantyne Road 1 $240,300 100%
Linder Road to Eagle Island 1 $132,300 100%
Eagle Island to Mace Pathway 1 $118,100 100%
Island Woods Sub. to east Eagle 2 $75,600 100%
Island
State Street to Dry Creek Canal 1 $146,400 100%
Dry Creek — Highway 44 to State 1 $25,800 100%
Street
Edgewood Road to Farmer's Union 3 $24,400 100%
Canal
Farmer's Union Canal to Beacon Light 3 $20,700 100%
Road
Eagle Road Pedestrian Bridge, North 200 FT $1,020,600 100%
Channel
Dry Creek Pedestrian Bridge, North 200 FT $1,020,600 100%
Channel
Dry Creek Pedestrian Bridge to Clear 40 FT $100,000 100%
Creek Sub.
Eagle Road Pedestrian Bridge, South 140 FT $714,400 100%
Channel
Impact Fee Update $10,000 100%
Total Amount of CIP Improvements $4,133,400
Funding from non -City Sources $2,480,000
Amount from Impact Fees $1,653,400
Holladay Engineering Company
21
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
Pyi//iq//i/N//uiH/rc'i�p�gYiiHywiyi�viii�Hii/.uia�H,ii,
The pathway system is accessible to the public: existing and new residents. New construction is
not to increase the level of service to existing residents, but to maintain the level of service
available to current residents as the population increases.
By adopting a pathway level of service of 2,700 linear feet per 1,000 population for greenbelt
development, which reflects the level of service currently enjoyed by residents of the City, there
is no deficit correcting contribution required of the general fund.
Pathway impact fees are shown in Figure 14.
Figure 14
Pathway Impact
Fees
Pathway Impact Fees
2017-2026 Population Increase
2017-2026 Residential Units
Pathway Needed to Maintain Level of
Service(2700 x 14,106/1000)
Value of New Pathway from CIP
Funding from non -City Sources
Impact Fee Portion of Estimated Costs
14,106 Population
5,002
38,086 Linear Feet
$4,133,400
$2,480,000
$1,653,400
Pathway Impact Fee per Capita $117.20
Pathway Impact Fee per Residential Unit $330.50
22
Holladay Engineering Company
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
Section 4: Funding and Implementation
iuz» z xsa zzciva Hoairzyyrv.7oiircniiawuaia orimuoi
There are various sources that may be used to fund parks and pathways in addition to impact
fees. Often the successful financing of a complex project requires combining several sources.
Projects requiring multiple years or phases to complete may draw from grant or partnership
opportunities that have constraints for timing or qualifying criteria. A funding strategy that
emphasizes the diligent pursuit all options is vital for achieving success.
Funding Sources
General Fund: Use of the general fund provides the most flexibility for municipal park and
pathway projects, but this fund is used to operate all other general functions of a city. In the
instance of a level of service deficit, this fund will be used to correct the deficiency.
General Obligation Bonds: This source borrows money for public facilities that is repaid through
funds generated through increased taxes. Bond approval requires a vote from the citizens and
passage by two thirds of the voters. Normally, General Obligation Bonds are used to fund larger
projects due to the effort required to prepare and present a project sufficient to gain voter approval.
Revenue Bonds: These bonds depend upon repayment from cash flow generated by the facility
being constructed. This funding requires voter approval.
Grants: Grants are available from a variety of sources, both public and private. All grants have
qualifying criteria that must be met and most applications are competing with other municipal
applicants. For most grants from public agencies there are calendar cycles for making
applications. When competing for grants, success is determined by the quality of the application
and the project's ability to achieve the purpose and objectives of the granting agency.
Public Private Partnerships: Developing a Public Private Partnership requires an agreement
signed by all parties to address purpose, financial obligations, and other contractual matters
required to fund and operate a facility. Performance under this framework is often guaranteed by
a construction bond to protect the public funding element.
Public or Private Donations: Donations to the City's general fund may be used for any park or
recreation improvement. Donations that are not a requirement to offset a level of service standard
may be earmarked by the City in accordance with the request of the donor. These funds pass
through the general fund to be used in the manner identified by the donor or at the discretion of
the City.
Donations made for improvements necessitated by growth to maintain the level of service go into
the impact fee fund and can be used only for capital projects identified in the Capital Improvement
Plan. The donor is entitled to a dollar for dollar reduction in impact fees. Documentation of the
transaction is identified as a credit or reimbursement to the donor. Donations in excess of the
donor's obligations under the impact fee requirements are credited as general fund donations.
23
Holladay Engineering Company•
u%o;ww�i41.1,47,644"""4;iswiibiririihirib».90.10.,
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
Implementation
/a//�iyNW/!!i!//SO9V17//i/y/�n�iiH/i ii//�i��.
Continued success in funding the development of the parks and pathway system through impact
fees requires a commitment by City leadership to implement those elements of the study required
by the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act. Within that framework, the City may adopt or modify
the recommendations of this Update to reflect its selected capital projects or sequence for
implementation adopted by the City Council.
Corrected Pathway Plan Map:
Since the Hofman Study was predicated on an incorrect map, a first step to open the discussion
of pathways is the adoption of a corrected map with accurate representations of current pathways
and pathway types.
Advisory Committee:
The City shall appoint a development impact fee Advisory Committee to assist in review of land
use assumptions, review the parks and pathway capital improvement plans, and monitor and
evaluate implementation.17 The Committee shall make recommendations for consideration by the
City Council and should periodically report progress on the implementation of the capital
improvement plan.
Impact Fee Ordinance:
Currently Eagle City Code, Title 7, Chapter 6, Development Impact Fee, prohibits the collection
of impact fees for pathways. Acting on the recommendations of the Advisory Committee, the
Council will consider adoption of the initial or amended park and pathway capital improvement
plans. Ordinance 358 may be amended and adopted pursuant to Idaho Code1s, to incorporate
the 2017 Update and Amendments to the Development Impact Fee Study by reference, including:
• a pathway level of service,
• a pathway Capital Improvement Plan,
• an updated parks Capital Improvement Plan, and
• additional language updates as recommended by legal counsel.
Impact Fee Accounting:
Tracking collections, expenditures, and improvements by the City should continue in the manner
prescribed by Idaho Code19 and ECC 7-6-8. This process should be reviewed periodically by the
Advisory Committee and projects may be adjusted according to both impact fees and other funds
made available for parks and pathway projects. Particular attention should be given to the
expenditure of impact fees within eight (8) years on a first -in, first out basis to prevent the refund
of unexpended fees.
17 Idaho Code § 67-8205
18 Idaho Code § 67-8206
19 Idaho Code § 67-8210
24
Holladay Engineering Company 110
:..:..: . �: ; : ..:'.: .:..... .. .. ::.. .r.:• ... 4 :::. ,:::r ... , ... .::. /,�XG�1Lad�H///,�NH///�r/!/itN.f!//H///F✓'///////I//HNi/!//N//G
CITY OF EAGLE — IMPACT FEE
2017 UPDATE AND AMENDMENTS
A Financial Plan for Parks and Recreation:
Parks and pathways are typically not revenue generating sources. Funding for capital
improvements may be used to create infrastructure and amenities, but large amounts of operation
and maintenance costs are incurred to operate these systems. Operation and maintenance costs
are not eligible for funding from impact fees. The City should establish a financial plan that
includes all costs of development and operation.
An element of the financial plan should be setting the policy of developer credits and
reimbursements. Following ECC 7-6-7, General Methodology for Calculation, developers and the
City have the ground rules for assessing the value of donations and in-kind work to determine the
proportional share of fees allocated for a capital project or from a specific development. A written
policy addressing credits, donations, dedication of land and construction of improvements could
assist both parties in planning for costs and budgets.
2017 Update Impact Fee Summary
Impact fees, calculated in the manner prescribed by Title 67, Chapter 82, Idaho Code, and
recommended to the City are summarized in Figure 15.
Figure 15
Summary
Source
Park Impact Fee
Pathway Impact Fee
Park & Pathway Impact Fee Total
25
$ per Residential Unit
$1,115.72
$330.50
$1,446.22
Holladay Engineering Company