[0:10] online is right now we

[0:14] have

[0:19] Okay

[0:21] okay

[0:23] weers right now we have that's five of

[0:26] nine so we do have a forum that's what I

[0:29] was

[0:31] [Music]

[0:37] count someone just came in I can't

[0:40] tell no

[0:42] no don't have any EMA again

[0:51] [Music]

[1:00] well it's 2011 so yeah let's get

[1:04] started thanks everyone for being here

[1:08] and I appreciate the air

[1:11] conditioning um just for the folks

[1:13] online uh I'm Trisha Nelson representing

[1:16] city of Boise and then why don't we go

[1:17] around Mike wle Brighton

[1:22] Corporation go ahead yeah Mark heisinger

[1:25] with kson Associates Sonia deidon with

[1:28] kson and Associates

[1:30] Walter state city of Meridian John

[1:33] turnup SE city of

[1:34] star uh Peter Oliver with Tok

[1:38] commercial okay and I see Edinson do you

[1:41] guys want to just maybe for when people

[1:44] watch the video

[1:45] [Laughter]

[1:47] later

[1:49] okay okay um well thanks for being here

[1:53] and I just want to thank um Stacy you

[1:56] know as a newer member I kept thinking

[1:59] I'm trying to catch up with what the the

[2:01] committee's history and what you've all

[2:03] done and being quite familiar with the

[2:06] open meeting law for the last uh almost

[2:10] 30 years is that we are required to have

[2:12] minutes we are a creature of state law

[2:15] and so I wanted to uh talk to my

[2:19] commissioner and talk to the director

[2:21] and you so we're going to have minutes

[2:22] as a committee from our meetings and we

[2:24] will you will see them like most every

[2:28] other committee I think that you've ever

[2:30] sat on and so um so we do have minutes

[2:35] and I want to thank you Stacy for doing

[2:36] that let's start with the uh November 13

[2:39] 23 we've

[2:42] got several of you were attended that

[2:44] meeting this there you a second to

[2:47] review it then I I read them uh

[2:52] previously Madam chair and would move

[2:55] for approval of the November 13th 2023

[2:58] minutes

[3:00] there a second second okay thank you

[3:05] um I have to get you guys straight

[3:07] you're John John John star star the

[3:12] other benefit of minutes is that you

[3:14] constantly get reinforced with

[3:15] everybody's name don't I already know

[3:18] Peter okay it's been moved uh by Mike

[3:21] wle seconded by John turnup see that we

[3:25] accept the minutes of the November 13th

[3:27] meeting all in favor say I I any oppose

[3:33] okay thank

[3:35] you um now we'll move to the minutes of

[3:39] the let me get to the right April 22nd

[3:42] uh meeting of the um

[3:45] CAC is there a motion to accept the

[3:48] minutes that meeting so move okay Peter

[3:53] and second it's been moved by Peter

[3:55] Oliver second by Mike wle that we accept

[3:57] the minutes of the April 22nd meeting

[4:00] all those in favor say I I I motion

[4:04] passes there get that out of the way so

[4:07] thank you for doing that I seems like a

[4:09] little thing but it's it's you'll

[4:12] appreciate them in about two years from

[4:15] now um so with that I will um I guess

[4:19] Edinson did you wna kick this party off

[4:22] thank you thank you m chair um so thank

[4:26] you for having us again on today C

[4:30] uh we're here uh so back in may we

[4:34] presented to the commission on this

[4:36] effort that is an ongoing effort on the

[4:39] review of the preliminary analysis for

[4:41] the uh impact fee and CIP uh update uh

[4:45] which we are aiming for 2025 uh this is

[4:48] a this this today's presentation will

[4:50] focus in service areas this is an Ono

[4:53] ongoing topic that uh the commission

[4:55] requested staff to review more in detail

[4:58] uh look at uh different uh to look at

[5:01] different scenarios but at the same time

[5:03] kind of explore more of what the best

[5:06] practices are regarding service areas

[5:08] and how they're defined so uh this is a

[5:10] task that uh myself Batista Co manager

[5:14] and Megan Anderson see stand today uh as

[5:18] C manager we are working in coordination

[5:20] with Kon Sony mark thank you for all the

[5:24] work you guys do uh in this review uh of

[5:27] the service area to this presentation is

[5:30] a two-part series of uh is the first of

[5:33] a two-part series uh and here we're

[5:36] going to go over uh what is uh defining

[5:39] sort of what is a service area defining

[5:42] parameters behind it how are what are

[5:44] the focus that we're taking are

[5:46] reviewing the service areas and defining

[5:47] what scenarios to look at but uh and

[5:50] that's something that uh Sony and Mark

[5:51] will dive in here in a minute so uh

[5:55] we're expecting to come back again uh in

[5:57] the future after we have presented

[5:59] commission with the results of the

[6:01] analysis so the cic will be involved on

[6:04] the review of that uh of the data that

[6:07] we come up with

[6:08] so with this I will kick it up with

[6:10] Sonia Mark uh for today's presentation

[6:13] great thank you so much Adon um so what

[6:17] we'll be walking through today is very

[6:20] similar to the work session that we we

[6:24] presented at and got feedback from the

[6:26] commission um back in May the end of May

[6:30] um but we wanted an opportunity to do it

[6:32] with this committee as well so that each

[6:34] of you had a chance to ask questions uh

[6:38] make sure we all understand the data and

[6:40] also provide your uh input and thoughts

[6:43] so that the commission can take that

[6:45] under consideration as well

[6:48] um so just as a reminder we've been

[6:52] working um with this group as well as

[6:54] the commission since last summer on

[6:57] evaluating best practices as it relates

[7:00] to the development of capital

[7:02] Improvement plans and traffic impact

[7:04] fees um when we presented to the

[7:08] commission back in December um as

[7:12] Edinson said there was this desire to do

[7:15] a more refined Deep dive into certain

[7:17] topics with service area being one of

[7:19] them and so that's sort of where we are

[7:21] today in the late spring summer of

[7:25] 2024 um and we wanted to report back on

[7:29] what we found so far related to this

[7:31] concept of service

[7:34] area um as a reminder overall um what is

[7:40] ACD CIP and what are traffic impact fees

[7:44] um so traffic impact fees are a tool

[7:47] that um acchd has that allows developers

[7:51] to pay their uh proportional fair share

[7:55] of more systemwide improvements um those

[7:58] of you who are very familiar with the

[8:00] development Pro process know that um

[8:04] developers often um conduct a traffic

[8:07] impact study for proposed new

[8:09] developments that really isolates

[8:12] Project Specific improvements that are

[8:14] needed um to accommodate that

[8:16] development within the development area

[8:19] but traffic commonly doesn't just stay

[8:22] within that area it often goes

[8:23] throughout the system and so traffic

[8:26] impact fees are a tool that allows

[8:28] development to pay their quer share of

[8:30] systemwide improvements without having

[8:32] to study the whole County every time a

[8:35] new development is proposed um in order

[8:38] for ACD to have impact fees they are

[8:41] required to also have a corresponding

[8:44] Capital Improvement plan that lists out

[8:47] what are those systemwide improvements

[8:51] um that are going to be needed and

[8:53] triggered from growth and development um

[8:55] over a horizon year which is usually

[8:58] about a 20year horizon in year um for

[9:01] context impact fees make up about

[9:04] 18% of hd's total revenue about $24

[9:09] million a year um on average over the

[9:12] past five years um but the capital

[9:15] Improvement plan as you can see at the

[9:17] bottom here is just one of several plans

[9:20] that the district has that help guide

[9:23] and direct what goes into their

[9:25] integrated five-year work plan which is

[9:28] what specifically the district will

[9:30] build and construct over the next five

[9:33] years so it's an informative uh document

[9:36] but it's also balanced with a number of

[9:38] other plans like their Ada plans their

[9:40] bike PL plans um and other plans that

[9:43] are needed um to inform that

[9:48] process all right um as a reminder again

[9:52] we actually looked at four key topic

[9:55] areas um that this group as well as the

[9:58] commission confirmed Med um were of

[10:01] particular interest to study as part of

[10:03] this update um so it service area was

[10:07] one of those but we also um went through

[10:09] a best practice review for the other

[10:11] three we reported that back to you at

[10:14] that November 13th meeting so thank you

[10:17] for having the minutes to remind me what

[10:19] date it was that's great um but uh as

[10:23] part of this effort um we did want to

[10:25] dive into service area in more detail

[10:28] that was the request of the commission

[10:30] um so when we talk about service area

[10:33] it's really important to understand what

[10:36] are the legal requirements in the Idaho

[10:39] development impact Fe act that uh speak

[10:42] to service area and inform um what

[10:45] requirements we need to meet as it

[10:47] relates to service area um so on the

[10:50] screen here are the key bullets um that

[10:53] we pulled out of the development impact

[10:55] V act um that speak to service area so

[10:59] so um the ACT defines service area as a

[11:02] geographic boundary where the public

[11:05] facilities within that boundary um and

[11:08] in this case we're talking primarily

[11:10] about those Transportation facilities um

[11:13] where the transportation facilities in

[11:15] that boundary serve the growth within

[11:17] that boundary so they Define service

[11:20] area as um an a a sub region where the

[11:25] growth and the projects are tied um they

[11:28] don't want a service area to have growth

[11:31] that then drives projects in other

[11:35] locations um the service area boundaries

[11:38] need to be determined based on Sound

[11:41] Engineering and planning principles um

[11:44] and we'll get into our evaluation of

[11:47] that here um any impact fees in a

[11:51] service area need to stay and fund

[11:54] projects within that area so you are not

[11:57] able to collect impact fees in one area

[12:00] and apply that to projects within a

[12:03] different service

[12:04] area and that impact fees must be spent

[12:08] within eight years or refunded um so

[12:11] that's another key consideration when

[12:13] we're talking about project flexibility

[12:15] and

[12:17] implementation um we don't necessarily

[12:19] want to constrain ourselves into a

[12:21] scenario where we're not able to use

[12:23] those impact fees within that time

[12:25] period

[12:30] um some historical context and I believe

[12:32] we presented a little bit about this

[12:35] before um when Jeff wle was here with us

[12:38] um he was really helpful in informing um

[12:42] some of the historical context that

[12:43] acchd has gone through as it relates to

[12:46] service

[12:46] area uh when uh we started uh when ACD

[12:51] started to implement this idea back in

[12:53] the early

[12:54] 90s um they started with a single

[12:58] service area concept but one that had

[13:01] identified specific benefit zones within

[13:04] that service area um and it the benefit

[13:08] zones did function somewhat similar to

[13:11] service areas where the fees within

[13:13] those benefit areas were retained within

[13:15] those benefit areas to fund

[13:18] projects um in 2022 there were some

[13:22] changes implemented into the Idaho

[13:24] development impact fee act and so ACD

[13:27] went through an update in 2023 to

[13:30] address those

[13:31] changes um and at that time a multiple

[13:35] service area scenario was implemented uh

[13:38] within the CIP and traffic impact fees

[13:41] um and four service areas were developed

[13:44] at that time that really balanced the

[13:47] cost of projects across the service

[13:51] areas um so that uh major CIP projects

[13:55] weren't um

[13:57] disproportionately imp acting one

[13:59] service area versus the other the aim at

[14:02] that point was to sort of balance fees

[14:04] across the different

[14:06] areas and then um in 2012 another impact

[14:11] fee update went into place and at that

[14:14] time um the district was um had

[14:18] identified several large scale projects

[14:21] that um really were of regional benefit

[14:24] in nature they they served travel uh

[14:27] across the county and so at that point

[14:30] they went back to a single service area

[14:33] so that those Regional projects could be

[14:35] funded by growth throughout the county

[14:38] um and that um those projects could also

[14:41] be funded in a manner that W wasn't

[14:43] constrained to one sub region of the

[14:46] county and so um since 2013 that's been

[14:50] this the service area model that ACD has

[14:52] had um and of course we're going through

[14:55] a process of evaluating whether or not

[14:57] that's still the right uh model to

[15:00] function

[15:02] in um I did want to remind this group as

[15:05] well regardless of which service area

[15:09] model we move forward with hd's current

[15:12] impact fee policy does provide um some

[15:17] latitude and flexibility within it um

[15:20] they do provide credits for

[15:23] redevelopment so if a developer comes to

[15:26] a property that's already developed and

[15:29] changes the use or enhances the use um

[15:32] they get credits for any Redevelopment

[15:35] that takes place so they're only paying

[15:37] sort of the net differential in Impact

[15:40] fees on that

[15:42] Redevelopment um they also work with

[15:44] developers to provide refinements to

[15:47] their impact fees based on land use

[15:49] context um as an example I know kson has

[15:53] worked with several of the developers of

[15:56] some of the downtown Boise Housing

[15:58] that's going up

[15:59] to get credits for impact fees

[16:02] understanding the land use context in

[16:04] downtown Boise where more of those trips

[16:06] would likely be walking biking or

[16:08] Transit

[16:09] trips and then there is an individual

[16:12] assessment process which is a process

[16:14] sort of after the fact where development

[16:17] can pay their impact fees but then once

[16:19] they're built can go back and do a study

[16:22] to document if their fees should be

[16:25] different based on unique trip

[16:27] generation or mode Choice uh conditions

[16:31] so there's quite a bit of flexibility in

[16:33] latitude and I know um probably several

[16:36] people in this room have worked with ACD

[16:38] to take a closer look at their impact

[16:40] fees where

[16:43] appropriate so um based on that we went

[16:47] about creating some scenarios to

[16:51] evaluate service area different service

[16:53] area scenarios to evaluate which one

[16:56] would be the most appropriate to move

[16:58] forward with with at this time um as we

[17:01] know any scenario that we developed has

[17:04] to be consistent with the requirements

[17:07] in the development impact V

[17:09] Act and the key um element of that act

[17:13] that drives the scenario development is

[17:16] the fact that any any service area

[17:18] scenario needs to be based on sound

[17:21] planning and engineering

[17:23] principles and so um in order to

[17:26] evaluate that we really identify provide

[17:29] three sources of data that help guide

[17:33] and direct how travel patterns occur in

[17:36] the county um and we evaluated those um

[17:40] with the um overarching view of how

[17:43] would these um inform different service

[17:46] area

[17:47] scenarios so the first one was trip

[17:50] length which is how far on average do

[17:53] trips go within Ada County and are there

[17:57] differences across the County in terms

[18:00] of how how far trips travel do trips in

[18:03] one part of the county travel a

[18:05] different length compared to those in

[18:07] other

[18:08] areas uh mode share was the second piece

[18:12] of data that we looked at so how do

[18:16] trips occur within Ada County and are

[18:18] there differences with how those trips

[18:20] occur um across the county whether

[18:22] there's certain areas that have more

[18:24] driving trips compared to Transit trips

[18:27] or walking trips and vice versa

[18:30] and then the third piece that we looked

[18:32] at the third data source that we looked

[18:34] at was trip

[18:36] capture and trip capture um documents

[18:40] whether trips originating in certain

[18:43] portions of the county stay within those

[18:45] areas of the County or do trips

[18:48] originating in certain portions of the

[18:50] county go to different areas of the

[18:52] county and again this data piece is

[18:55] really trying to get at that um

[18:58] requirement in the impact fee act as to

[19:01] are there sub regions within Ada County

[19:04] that function as their own

[19:06] transportation systems where growth in

[19:08] that area really drives projects only in

[19:12] that

[19:13] area so maybe I'll pause here because I

[19:16] want this to be a dialogue um are there

[19:18] any thoughts or questions at this point

[19:21] so far I'm curious Sonia on how did you

[19:26] uh I know as you get through uh the

[19:28] information information of the data a

[19:29] little bit further you get into

[19:31] specifically how but how do you

[19:33] determine that mode share is that by uh

[19:38] yeah I that that's a great question so

[19:41] um the data source we used for all of

[19:43] this analysis um is called replica and

[19:48] replica is a product on the market um

[19:50] there's many different Big Data sources

[19:53] but they're a big data source where they

[19:56] um compile

[19:59] travel characteristics and information

[20:02] basically from anyone who's walking

[20:04] around or driving around with a cell

[20:06] phone with GPS in their vehicle um with

[20:10] some other connected

[20:12] technology and replica buys all that

[20:15] information from the these cell phone

[20:18] providers or GPS providers and compiles

[20:22] it all so um you know your question

[20:25] about how does replica know if someone

[20:28] is driving versus walking um that's a

[20:32] little bit part of replica's black box

[20:34] but they do look at how fast is the trip

[20:38] occurring and on what path is the trip

[20:41] occurring so um if you know a trips um

[20:45] occurring at 10 miles per hour or 20

[20:48] miles per hour or more they probably

[20:50] know that person isn't walking that

[20:52] person is either in a bike or a vehicle

[20:55] um depending on the straightness of the

[20:57] path does it follow roadways or does it

[20:59] like Meander through areas that also

[21:03] informs what type of mode um the replica

[21:06] assigns that trip to well Madam chair

[21:09] that would explain why a few years ago

[21:11] when I we changed a location of a

[21:14] standing meeting that occurred twice a

[21:17] month after we changed that location the

[21:20] next time I got in my car my phone

[21:23] actually told me that it's only 19

[21:25] minutes to that new location and I never

[21:27] put it in my

[21:29] that's F fascinating and scary actually

[21:32] they know yeah the advantage is you get

[21:35] better data than a travel

[21:37] diary true down so amazing thank you and

[21:42] and Son Mark can you can just confirm

[21:45] when we talk we're speaking of trips

[21:47] we're talking about all

[21:48] trips throughout the entire County not

[21:51] just on arterials or anything it's the

[21:53] whole volume of of trips that is correct

[21:58] so the um and markk can chime in here

[22:01] too we did screen out only weekday trips

[22:07] so we didn't include weekend type trips

[22:10] but I think that's the only screening or

[22:13] midday weekday wasn't really a screening

[22:16] like when you look at this data you can

[22:17] either choose like a a weekday or a

[22:19] weekend and this is a spring 2023

[22:23] average Thursday essentially is what

[22:25] this reprs um which was the most recent

[22:27] that was available when we started this

[22:28] and then we screened out trips that were

[22:30] 30 plus miles right essentially to take

[22:32] out like those kind of like Long Haul

[22:34] trips because they were you know messing

[22:36] with some of those averages just when

[22:37] when you're look at Stu like that but it

[22:41] includes all trips work trips education

[22:44] trips Recreation trips um and it doesn't

[22:47] restrict trips to just the arterial

[22:49] system it's everybody's trip yeah thank

[22:52] you if I

[22:53] might last time there was something

[22:55] about excluding interstate and State

[22:58] Highway

[23:01] use are they excluded or are they

[23:04] included great question so for this

[23:07] analysis we haven't excluded any trips

[23:12] yet um of course trip length you

[23:17] did uh no now let I'll I'll complete the

[23:22] the answer so once we get down to the

[23:26] activity of creating the actual impact

[23:29] fees at that point we will need to take

[23:33] out any distance that's not on an ACD

[23:37] roadway as part of that trip so at that

[23:40] point it gets screened out for this this

[23:44] um exercise of creating potential

[23:47] service area scenarios we did not screen

[23:50] out those trips

[23:53] yet there was one more question what

[23:56] about when you've got bikes getting on

[23:58] bus buses and people getting on buses

[24:00] and how does it figure all you know I'm

[24:04] just thinking about downtown in

[24:05] particular

[24:06] right I think so if you ask me I would

[24:10] say I probably need a replica rep to

[24:12] answer that but Mark maybe you have a

[24:14] better question fa answer to that yeah I

[24:16] I think it calculates them all separate

[24:17] trips so someone bikes to a bus stop

[24:20] gets on the bus takes the bus somewhere

[24:21] those are G to be separate trips

[24:24] yeah good question

[24:27] yeah all all right so let's get into

[24:30] showing you what this data tells us

[24:32] about travel characteristics within Ada

[24:35] County um so this map shows um average

[24:39] trip length and we broke it down by

[24:43] census track

[24:45] area um and essentially the lightest

[24:49] areas on this map represent the shortest

[24:53] trips um shortest average trip with

[24:56] which is about four miles on average

[24:58] average those areas had the shortest

[25:00] trips and then as you get darker the

[25:04] average trips within those census track

[25:07] starts to get longer and longer with the

[25:10] darkest areas which you can see probably

[25:12] on the south end of the county and at

[25:14] the very North End of the county those

[25:16] census tracks had the longest average

[25:19] trips um at about 11 miles on

[25:23] average and so as we were looking for um

[25:27] sort of trends in this data um what we

[25:31] found is that there is this area and I'm

[25:34] not sure can I use a pointer

[25:36] here once I go to the screen it goes

[25:39] away yeah sorry it's all right um so

[25:43] there is this area sort of surrounding

[25:46] downtown Boise um you can look at the

[25:49] North End you see um the close East End

[25:53] um and then south of downtown as you

[25:55] look into the sort of Southeast

[25:57] neighborhood area um including the area

[26:00] around Boise State um those areas are

[26:04] definitely showing up as the lightest on

[26:07] this map meaning those areas definitely

[26:10] have the shortest average trips

[26:13] overall um you can see downtown itself

[26:16] which is sort of that slightly darker

[26:18] area in the middle of that outset there

[26:21] um has longer trips than the areas

[26:24] around it it's probably not surprising

[26:26] people drive into downtown from further

[26:29] away to go to work probably visit

[26:32] businesses in downtown uh probably go to

[26:35] the St Luke's Medical complex and things

[26:37] like that um and you can also see that

[26:40] mirrored actually if you go to the other

[26:42] graphic and you look uh right about

[26:45] where St alphonsa's Medical Campus is

[26:48] it's sort of right south of where the

[26:50] i84 icon is yeah thank you so much Stacy

[26:53] oh thank you yes um is that also the

[26:55] mall area or I can't believe the mall

[26:58] South the mall yeah it's a little south

[27:00] of the mall but you can see there's some

[27:02] of these um you can even look at sort of

[27:04] downtown Meridian there um that's

[27:07] another attractor it looks like where

[27:09] you've got slightly longer trips coming

[27:11] there um so that in general makes sense

[27:15] you can see where some of these more

[27:17] Regional attractors are but definitely

[27:20] those areas surrounding downtown boy um

[27:23] stood out as the shortest on

[27:26] average um and then not surprising those

[27:28] areas on the outskirts of the county had

[27:31] the longest trips um likely needing to

[27:33] travel further for jobs and education

[27:37] shopping all of those kind of

[27:40] uses and feel free to ask questions as

[27:43] we go yeah I don't have a legend so I'm

[27:46] star like dark brown is the dark dark

[27:49] red of I can't differentiate some of the

[27:52] darker yeah so if you look at the sort

[27:54] of the South the North West corner of

[27:58] the county up there um the very

[28:01] northwest corner would be the darkest at

[28:03] about 11 miles on average but then as

[28:06] you get into star itself um it's

[28:10] slightly less um from the colors I would

[28:13] say it's probably around eight to nine

[28:15] miles on average yeah as you look at

[28:19] star and then equals a little less than

[28:21] that just had one one of those question

[28:24] yes trips originating in Canyon County

[28:29] yes do do they count once they cross

[28:32] into Ada or does it have to originate

[28:34] from Ada great great question so these

[28:37] are trips originating in these census

[28:40] trucks so it's only including trips

[28:43] originating within Ada County great

[28:50] question

[28:51] okay so then next is originating and

[28:56] ending uh yes yeah I think we we

[29:00] included all trips so I believe I

[29:02] believe the only filter we put on it was

[29:04] um than frequ what if it was 30 plus

[29:07] miles so we took out kind of those

[29:09] extremes and then so just in terms of

[29:11] what this G is representing if there was

[29:13] a trip ending in Ada County it would be

[29:16] included here or if it was starting in

[29:18] Ada County and then went to Canyon

[29:21] County it would be in if you look at it

[29:23] as origin trips originating or trips

[29:25] destined to a the county it'll kind of

[29:27] work out this same either way yeah um

[29:30] but yeah this was originating and it

[29:31] could have gone to Canyon County the

[29:33] only filter we have on here is that

[29:34] overall trip length so trips like Twin

[29:36] Falls would not be included okay if if I

[29:38] might follow up on that I don't getting

[29:41] too far down to the weeds you're okay

[29:43] you're if you're starting trips 30 miles

[29:45] out and coming

[29:49] in that's really going to skew it or you

[29:52] just counting the distance once it inter

[29:53] a county even though it started 30 miles

[29:55] out

[29:58] so we didn't include trips that long

[30:01] yeah but say for example there was a

[30:03] trip that started in downtown Napa or in

[30:09] Napa and went it went to downtown

[30:12] Meridian it would be included it would

[30:15] show up as a trip to that census track

[30:19] in Meridian with the full mileage with

[30:22] the full mileage as long as it was less

[30:24] than 30 miles yes

[30:29] good

[30:30] clarifications that's good okay so next

[30:34] we have uh mode

[30:37] share so um on this map the lightest

[30:41] areas on this map show the

[30:44] locations that had the lowest per

[30:49] percent of car

[30:51] travel so and then the darker areas have

[30:55] had the highest percent of car travel so

[31:00] again um you can see some areas just

[31:03] north of downtown and south of downtown

[31:07] particularly around the Boise Camp Boise

[31:10] State campus area those were the areas

[31:13] that showed up as having the lowest

[31:16] amount of car travel at about only

[31:20] 78% of car

[31:22] travel and then the darkest areas which

[31:25] you can see some in southwest West uh

[31:29] Boise um in Meridian up in Eagle those

[31:33] were the areas that had the highest per

[31:37] of vehicle travel up at about 90% of

[31:40] trips occurred by personal

[31:43] vehicle

[31:45] um these percentages are as a percent of

[31:50] all trips coming um to or from those

[31:53] census tracks so I know a question we

[31:56] had at the commission was you've got

[31:59] this very light area down in the

[32:01] southern portion of Ada County what you

[32:04] know why is everybody walking and biking

[32:06] there and um that may be an issue or

[32:11] that may be showing up that way because

[32:13] there's just not a lot of trips coming

[32:15] from that census track in the first

[32:17] place so even if there were some trips

[32:21] by another mode besides vehicle it's

[32:23] showing up as a little

[32:25] lighter Sonia this is one where I

[32:29] I it would benefit the interpretation of

[32:32] of this metric to understand by census

[32:36] track the volume of trips just for that

[32:39] percentage kind of evens everybody out

[32:41] but the volume might be wildly different

[32:45] track to track and so that's why I I

[32:48] can't

[32:50] really just depend on this map without

[32:53] having that that Foundation the volume

[32:55] of trips that I'm talking about is the

[32:58] you know 78% in one area what is that

[33:02] volume compared to another tract yeah

[33:06] does that make sense y that's a great

[33:09] point that

[33:11] makes absolutely sense you can see in

[33:14] the map that area sou of the county has

[33:21] yeah and that totally makes sense

[33:23] because this area south of the county

[33:24] the reason is showing lighter colors

[33:27] even though you would expect longer uh

[33:29] commutes uh or the focus would be

[33:31] vehicles in that area based on the land

[33:33] use and attractions there is showing

[33:36] lighter there and that's the reason

[33:37] behind because it doesn't a average

[33:41] based on the volum total volume trips

[33:43] that so abut we'll take a that's a great

[33:47] great Point yeah I know you have the

[33:48] data it's just how you want to show it

[33:50] yeah yeah great point I think you know

[33:53] an interesting thing that came from this

[33:55] is no matter where you are in County you

[33:59] know at least 75% of the trips are

[34:01] occurring by vehicle um there are some

[34:04] that are on that lower end but then some

[34:07] obviously that are quite a bit higher

[34:09] than that um so that's kind of

[34:12] interesting the other interesting

[34:14] pattern you can sort of see here if you

[34:16] look broadly at this figure is that the

[34:20] Eastern portion of the county definitely

[34:24] looks lighter overall as you compare to

[34:27] the Western Port portion of the county

[34:29] and so we did take a look at that um and

[34:33] sort of if you use Coal Road as a

[34:35] dividing line just because there's some

[34:37] dark dark census tracks that go up to PO

[34:40] Road there um about it's about in the

[34:43] low 80% sort of around

[34:46] 82% of the trips in the Eastern portion

[34:50] of the county occurring by Vehicles

[34:52] compared to sort of about

[34:55] 87% in the western portion of the county

[34:59] so you can kind of see that pattern as

[35:01] you look at this map as

[35:04] well yeah what other observation it

[35:07] always depends on your perspective but I

[35:09] think when I look we've always had in

[35:12] the regional plan kind of a goal for for

[35:15] mod share is to get maybe 25% of the

[35:18] trips you know we've always seems like

[35:20] we've always been at 10 so I'm looking

[35:22] at 78 going that's awesome you know or

[35:25] he I like at least a 78 or our cars I'm

[35:28] like well only 78 yeah I mean there some

[35:31] areas that are reaching that that goal

[35:34] right now yeah and then you know a

[35:37] question um from the commission came up

[35:41] as you know sort of what what are those

[35:45] areas telling us that maybe we could do

[35:47] in other locations of the county to

[35:49] improve that in improve that modare and

[35:52] other locations as

[35:54] well

[35:56] good um so then finally internal capture

[36:00] so you know as a reminder the data that

[36:03] we evaluate related to internal capture

[36:06] informs us if there are ways to portion

[36:09] out the county into sort of

[36:12] independently functioning regions sub

[36:15] regions within the county are there

[36:18] areas where the growth in that area is

[36:21] going to drive projects kind of

[36:25] contained within that area versus

[36:26] driving the need for projects

[36:28] elsewhere and so we started at the very

[36:31] high level you can see here in the upper

[36:34] left at the countywide what does that

[36:36] look like for Ada County as a whole um

[36:40] and what we found is that 91% of the

[36:44] trips either originating or destined

[36:46] within adaa County actually start stay

[36:49] you know come from uh adaa County as

[36:52] well um so that was informative an

[36:56] informative base point for us to look at

[36:59] um then we portioned out the county into

[37:02] sort of an east side and a west side of

[37:05] the county what does that look like and

[37:09] um our dividing line here is somewhat

[37:13] arbitrary but it's around Coal Road we

[37:16] kind of use that mod chair as a guide um

[37:19] to separate things out and if you do

[37:22] that um in the Eastern portion shown up

[37:25] there this isn't going to work but shown

[37:27] up in the top right in the blue um about

[37:32] 65% of the trips originating in that

[37:35] area stay within that area um and then

[37:39] in the purple uh the Western portion of

[37:41] the county about 74% of the trips in

[37:45] that area stay within the that

[37:48] area um if you look at the county in two

[37:52] regions but this time dividing it North

[37:54] and South uh along the interstate

[37:58] um if you look north of the interstate

[38:00] 80% of the trips are originating there

[38:04] uh north of the interstate there stay

[38:05] within that that area north of the

[38:08] interstate um but when you look south of

[38:11] the interstate only 52% of the trips

[38:14] generating from in that southern Blue

[38:16] Area stay within that

[38:19] area um and finally um if we broke it

[38:23] down into four regions um sort of

[38:26] Northeast northw West Southeast

[38:28] Southwest you can see the numbers here

[38:32] um the northwest region would be the

[38:34] highest um capturing the trips within

[38:37] that sub region um at about

[38:40] 64% but then um the the the other

[38:44] regions go down further from there and

[38:47] you know to meet the requirements in the

[38:49] impact fee act what we're looking for uh

[38:52] in these scenarios is balance we're

[38:55] looking at any scenarios that balance um

[38:59] internal trips in whatever sub regions

[39:02] we we U we create so we're looking for

[39:06] the scenario that has High

[39:09] internalization um in every region that

[39:12] we're creating um so you know as we look

[39:16] at this we've got we've got really good

[39:19] internalization if we look County rot

[39:21] wide um if we split the the county into

[39:25] two sub regions east and west West we

[39:28] still have a a pretty high percentage of

[39:31] internalization in both those regions

[39:34] but then when we broke it down either

[39:36] North South or into four regions we

[39:39] really start to lose at least in some of

[39:41] the regions a high internal

[39:45] percentage again we don't know the

[39:47] volumes again we don't know the volumes

[39:49] or we haven't presented the volume

[39:52] here and I'm not sure for this one if

[39:56] that really

[39:58] matters the volumes in this one because

[40:02] again um if we were to move forward with

[40:05] a service area scenario that broke the

[40:09] county down into multiple sub regions or

[40:12] multiple service

[40:13] areas um we we we wouldn't have

[40:18] engineering and planning data to support

[40:22] either the either of the bottom two

[40:24] scenarios that planning data just

[40:26] doesn't support it because if we were to

[40:29] play this out and pretend these are the

[40:31] service areas you know you would have

[40:34] projects say in this in the in the north

[40:38] south two region scenario you would have

[40:42] development occurring within the

[40:44] southern region that was only paying

[40:47] traffic impact fees within the southern

[40:50] region yet its traffic is you know 48%

[40:55] of its traffic is going to the Norther

[40:57] region and it wouldn't be paying for

[41:00] projects in there so that's why we're

[41:02] really looking for

[41:10] balance I just I just struggle with I

[41:13] mean there's the lines we look we're

[41:15] looking at comparable size of

[41:19] areas but are we then not showing the

[41:24] volume differences around the county

[41:30] volume of trips you

[41:32] know that's the I think like one of the

[41:35] reasons why we didn't look at volume was

[41:38] because we were trying to find

[41:39] Geographic areas with distinct

[41:41] differences yeah so we were focused a

[41:43] little bit more on like the actual

[41:45] Geographic areas and seeing if there's

[41:47] distinct differences in the travel

[41:49] patterns like I think that's partially

[41:50] why we framed it kind of in this way

[41:52] yeah yeah if that's helpful I mean we

[41:55] can pull that data and show you know

[41:58] send that out as well um there's nothing

[42:02] stopping us from doing that I just don't

[42:04] know if the volumes on this particular

[42:07] for this particular topic really inform

[42:11] anything that these perentes don't and

[42:13] we're trying to get at this idea of you

[42:15] know where is development occurring and

[42:18] where are the projects going to be that

[42:20] that development drives the need

[42:22] for chair one of the things that we have

[42:27] to look at from the perspective of the

[42:29] trip capture is that how well each of

[42:32] the boundaries work by itself has been

[42:35] independent uh independent service areas

[42:38] in its own way uh so comparing them

[42:41] terally we can compare them and do a uh

[42:45] data analysis from of those sorts Bas in

[42:47] the traffic

[42:48] volumes but the the the goal through the

[42:53] looking at from the trip capture is

[42:54] making sure that the boundaries that we

[42:55] have developed can work

[42:57] by themselves it can be yeah depending

[43:00] of each other uh the percentage that you

[43:03] see here just demonstrate from itself

[43:07] how how high that internal trips are are

[43:11] are working so for example in the county

[43:13] countywide basically that's the highest

[43:16] we can get at at this point uh and then

[43:19] breaking it apart even more that's where

[43:22] you would have areas higher volume

[43:25] higher internal capture than other areas

[43:29] and our goal is to and there's no

[43:32] science behind or best practice of which

[43:34] is that percentage you want to hit

[43:36] overall we want to keep them uh as

[43:38] independ independent as we can

[43:40] percentage wise uh greater than and we

[43:44] cannot say it percentage but we can say

[43:46] like we could we think like for example

[43:49] the two region it's a good goal to have

[43:51] above 60 uh just to reflect that

[43:55] internal independence of each

[43:57] yeah yeah great thanks

[44:01] said it just shows our really lack of

[44:03] north south routes

[44:06] right all right

[44:09] so we took all this data and to develop

[44:14] scenarios service area scenarios for

[44:17] evaluation we really as Edon said we

[44:20] really need to look at all three pieces

[44:22] of information we can't base it just on

[44:26] internal capture or just on mod share we

[44:29] really need to Overlay the trip length

[44:31] the mod share and those that internal

[44:34] capture data to craft scenarios that are

[44:38] sort of defensible and supported by

[44:40] those engineering and planning

[44:42] principles um so that's what we did and

[44:46] we felt there were three possible

[44:49] scenarios that are supported Enough by

[44:53] the data um that we recommended to move

[44:56] forward for f further

[44:58] evaluation um so and I'll go into each

[45:00] of these in more detail but the three

[45:02] scenarios were um keeping a single

[45:05] service area for the entire County but

[45:08] then adding an overlay Zone to that and

[45:11] I'll go into detail by what I into what

[45:14] I actually mean by that um scenario two

[45:18] would be uh looking at an option that

[45:20] has two separate service areas within

[45:23] the

[45:23] county and then scenario three would be

[45:27] maintaining the current conditions what

[45:29] is um what what ACD has today with just

[45:33] a single service area for the entire

[45:36] County so I'll go into a little bit more

[45:39] detail about what actually each of these

[45:41] scenarios would look

[45:43] like so the first is um a single service

[45:47] area but with an overlay

[45:50] Zone and so in this scenario there would

[45:53] be one service area for the whole County

[45:56] so a single set of projects that every

[46:00] um every development in the county would

[46:03] pay

[46:04] into however within the overlay Zone and

[46:09] you could see that overlay Zone defined

[46:11] in Orange there which sort of

[46:13] encompasses downtown Boise uh the North

[46:17] End the East End outside of downtown

[46:20] Boise and then goes south um into the

[46:23] southeast neighborhood association as

[46:26] well as cap captures uh the Boise State

[46:28] University

[46:29] campus within that overlay Zone the

[46:33] impact fees in that area would for

[46:36] development would be reduced because the

[46:39] data showed that development within that

[46:43] area has a fewer number of vehicle trips

[46:48] and also the vehicle trips it does have

[46:51] our shorter

[46:52] trips um so that's what this scenario

[46:55] would be

[46:59] I'll pause for questions on that or if

[47:02] that makes sense I can move

[47:05] on I had thoughts again to

[47:09] having I don't know I I helped me

[47:12] complete the thought if you would

[47:13] because we I'm trying to um I don't know

[47:18] if it's analogous to like a park impact

[47:21] fee where and I know most of the cities

[47:24] have those where it's kind of um divided

[47:28] into Regional Parks everybody goes to

[47:31] Regional Parks so part of your fee is

[47:33] for the is for the regional

[47:35] park community and neighborhood so the

[47:39] total sum is um and I kind of see this

[47:44] as where everybody pays and this isn't

[47:48] really accurate but like an arterial fee

[47:51] and then some areas their their their

[47:54] the nature of their local traffic is

[47:56] different that they would pay something

[47:58] different for that overlay because

[48:01] it's travel characteristics are are more

[48:04] localized or impacts are more localized

[48:07] does that make sense I don't know it's

[48:09] an interesting

[48:11] analogy um and I think I mean I think

[48:14] there are some some analogies that can

[48:16] be drawn there so but it it is slightly

[48:20] different because so they if you look at

[48:23] what is the equation that makes up a

[48:25] city's Park fee

[48:27] like you said it's going to have maybe a

[48:29] regional park component it's going to

[48:32] have a neighborhood park component and

[48:33] maybe it has something else um when you

[48:36] look at traffic impact fees the equation

[48:39] that goes into impact fees has number of

[48:44] trips no well maybe I'll clarify number

[48:47] of vehicle trips it's got trip length so

[48:51] how long are those trips and then it's

[48:53] got a few other factors such as that you

[48:56] know how much on Ada County Roads versus

[48:58] itd roads so it is what we're doing is

[49:02] saying there's two components of that

[49:06] equation that data shows within this

[49:10] area their components of that equation

[49:13] are much lower than elsewhere in the

[49:15] county and in fact if you add the number

[49:18] of vehicle trips and the trip length

[49:20] together it's sort of a 26% reduction

[49:24] that you get compared to what we found

[49:26] from the travel data elsewhere in the

[49:29] county can you go back a slide I just

[49:32] want absolutely was gonna

[49:34] ask is there like a scenario 2A that

[49:38] would have service areas and maybe one

[49:40] or some of them would have an overlay

[49:42] within that service area or do we just

[49:44] the data just doesn't support

[49:46] that uh you could do that I

[49:51] guess you could do the two service area

[49:54] model and in the

[49:57] I guess the East service area which

[50:00] includes downtown Boise you could also

[50:02] you could add a an over South the North

[50:06] include downtown I couldn't quite the

[50:09] north the north does include downtown

[50:11] the north south one that 0 yeah yeah

[50:16] yeah so yeah there's I guess there's

[50:18] nothing preventing you from doing that

[50:21] it just you know the more you do the

[50:23] more complexity you introduce but that

[50:26] they they they could be combined they

[50:27] absolutely could be combined if that was

[50:30] I just didn't know what desired

[50:34] yeah okay any other questions from the

[50:37] committee on this concept of an overlay

[50:42] zone no all right so moving on so the

[50:48] next scenario would be a two surface

[50:51] area

[50:53] scenario excuse me my voice is going to

[50:56] start to give out here um and in this

[50:59] scenario there would be two distinct

[51:01] service areas within the county um they

[51:05] each would have their own set of

[51:07] projects different projects um only

[51:11] development within the given service

[51:14] area so you know within the West service

[51:17] area only development within the West

[51:19] would pay into those West projects and

[51:22] same for the

[51:23] East um and the but the reason we felt

[51:28] this was a feasible scenario to carry

[51:30] forward for

[51:32] evaluation is because it was supported

[51:35] by that internal capture data where this

[51:38] was really the only breakdown within the

[51:42] county besides including the county as a

[51:45] whole that had balance in that internal

[51:48] capture between the two sub regions

[51:51] thank you so much

[51:53] Stacey um and then in addition to that

[51:56] when we go when we went back all the way

[51:58] to that trip length data you might

[52:01] remember there was definite differences

[52:03] between the East portion of the county

[52:06] and then the West portion of the county

[52:08] in terms of how long the average trip

[52:11] length was and maybe I'll just flash

[52:13] back there quickly so you can see it so

[52:17] you might rem or sorry there's trip

[52:19] length and then there was also mod share

[52:22] sorry that's what I meant to say in mod

[52:24] share there is definitely a difference

[52:27] where you could see the Eastern portion

[52:30] of the county um showed up lighter on

[52:33] this map meaning it had uh a lower

[52:36] percentage of vehicle mode share versus

[52:38] the Western portion of the

[52:41] county so that would be this um this

[52:45] scenario for

[52:47] evaluation

[52:49] yes and I'm not suggesting doing it why

[52:52] not a North Sou

[52:57] great question yeah because I was

[52:59] thinking the same thing is remind me why

[53:02] we should balance trip capture okay yeah

[53:05] same thing yeah y yeah so let's go back

[53:08] to these so because North and South if

[53:10] you look at number two are are different

[53:14] which kind of leans

[53:17] toward a north south break for two

[53:19] service yes

[53:22] so

[53:24] um and maybe

[53:27] maybe we shouldn't be looking at areas

[53:30] that are different within the county we

[53:32] want to look at areas that are

[53:34] consistent within the county um that's

[53:38] really what we want to be looking fors

[53:40] me around to want split it that's a

[53:43] great question that is absolutely a

[53:45] great question so maybe I'll just I'll

[53:47] reiterate this again hopefully this

[53:50] helps so if we were to split it and this

[53:53] is again just looking at internal

[53:55] capture data um which is just one but if

[53:58] we were to split it north south and have

[54:01] that purple and blue be the service

[54:04] areas north and south what you would do

[54:07] is establish what Transportation

[54:10] projects are needed in that North Region

[54:13] and what Transportation projects are

[54:15] needed in that South

[54:17] Region but when you do that only the

[54:21] projects only the development in the

[54:24] North Region would pay for projects in

[54:26] the North Region and only development in

[54:29] the South Region would pay for projects

[54:32] in the South Region and when you look at

[54:36] that from is development paying for its

[54:40] proportional fair share what these

[54:43] numbers tell me is there is almost

[54:47] 48% almost half of the trips within that

[54:50] South Region drive to and from the North

[54:54] Region and so they are you know driving

[54:57] the need for projects in that region as

[55:00] well because that's where they're going

[55:02] to and from every day but they wouldn't

[55:05] be paying for those Regional projects

[55:07] because they they'd only be paying for

[55:09] localized projects in the South and the

[55:11] converse to that which is and people see

[55:15] the same thing two different

[55:17] ways is that the

[55:21] north even though

[55:23] 20% go outside

[55:26] if it was a single District they're

[55:29] paying 100% I mean they're paying for

[55:32] everything even so that's the other way

[55:35] the other side of the coin so if I'm

[55:37] looking at this North Region I would

[55:39] love it to be its own service area that

[55:42] looks great it's a very high internal

[55:44] percentage that looks great right except

[55:46] then when you look at the South and it's

[55:48] only 52 if the north was 80 in this

[55:52] scenario and the South was say 70%

[55:57] then that becomes the M much more

[55:59] realistic scenario as opposed to

[56:01] dividing it e east west but that's just

[56:04] not what the data is showing um the

[56:07] development in that southern portion is

[56:10] going to destinations outside of it all

[56:14] the time so that's the concern we

[56:18] had okay got it if I yeah there's

[56:23] micron's 155 billion

[56:26] development pay impact

[56:29] Fe I'll let Megan answer that

[56:35] question yes we do calculate inps for

[56:39] all the development that's happening at

[56:40] Micron they did have a credit that they

[56:44] recently used the remainder of the

[56:46] credit so everything moving forward we

[56:49] are assessing and they are paying their

[56:52] fair share according to our current

[56:54] impact ordinance big book

[56:57] yeah they're big projects so yes but

[57:00] they are they are paying for their

[57:01] development okay yeah that's a good

[57:04] example of a large

[57:07] attractor where if they felt it was in

[57:09] their best interest they would do a

[57:11] study to see how many trips are on the

[57:14] interstate versus ACD roads right I just

[57:18] to show the there's a lot of math yeah

[57:22] that make it FKS have to deal with

[57:25] conest the freeway is going to get and

[57:27] what the results going to be pushing

[57:28] everybody out on Mike do you have a

[57:31] formula for that

[57:36] Al that's what we call the Doomsday

[57:38] scenario

[57:39] Peter Interstate goes okay belly

[57:43] up so um yeah so again wanted to

[57:48] highlight the two piece uh portions of

[57:51] data that were driving the support of

[57:54] this as a scenario are that that

[57:57] internal capture that we just talked

[57:58] about but also the mode share where we

[58:00] did see a difference between you know

[58:04] probably about an 8% difference on

[58:06] average between the Moocher and the

[58:08] Eastern portion of the county and then

[58:10] the Western portion of the

[58:12] county and then so finally the third

[58:15] scenario that we recommended moving

[58:17] forward for

[58:19] evaluation was you know what H

[58:22] maintaining that single service area you

[58:24] know we we just talked about an example

[58:26] of you have a large employer that is

[58:29] probably driving trips from uh or

[58:32] generating trips from all across the

[58:34] county um this is important to have not

[58:37] only as a baseline comparison um when

[58:40] we're comparing these other scenarios

[58:42] but it is also supported by the data

[58:44] when you look at that what is

[58:46] functioning as a system you can say with

[58:49] confidence that the county as a whole is

[58:51] functioning as a system where 90% of the

[58:55] trips are contained within the

[58:57] county um so this was the third scenario

[59:01] we recommended to move forward for

[59:04] evaluation um and so that's we we

[59:07] presented this to the commission um like

[59:10] I said at the end of May um they

[59:14] supported moving these three potential

[59:16] scenarios forward for

[59:18] evaluation we were we have been um

[59:24] evaluating them based on sort of these

[59:27] four top bullets here how well are they

[59:30] supported by this engineering and

[59:32] planning data what happens in the three

[59:36] scenarios in terms of the resultant

[59:38] projects and fees that materialize under

[59:42] each um how may each of these scenarios

[59:46] impact the implementation and timing of

[59:49] of actually implementing projects from

[59:52] the capital Improvement plan and then

[59:56] what are the differences in terms of

[59:58] administration cost and complexities to

[1:00:01] ACD for each of these

[1:00:03] scenarios um you know I'm sure you all

[1:00:06] are aware that no matter what ACD does

[1:00:10] the local agencies and developers have

[1:00:12] questions about the fees why are my fees

[1:00:15] this way why are different City's fees a

[1:00:17] different way potentially and so how do

[1:00:20] we evaluate each of these three

[1:00:22] scenarios based on these and so I don't

[1:00:25] how a lot of answers for you on the

[1:00:28] results of this evaluation yet that's

[1:00:30] what we're currently doing um and the

[1:00:32] goal is to present that evaluation back

[1:00:35] to the commission uh in mid

[1:00:38] July but um we would love any of your

[1:00:42] input or questions as we go through this

[1:00:44] evaluation to make sure that feeds into

[1:00:47] what we present back to the

[1:00:50] commission so Sonia one

[1:00:54] question because we're countywi we we we

[1:00:56] think

[1:00:58] big but a lot of those other

[1:01:00] jurisdictions initial research or cities

[1:01:04] you know they're

[1:01:06] smaller and I'm thinking of obviously

[1:01:08] I'm representing

[1:01:10] Boise totally out of scale to Meridian

[1:01:13] Star and

[1:01:14] Cuna but as those cities downtowns grow

[1:01:18] just the fact that they're not their own

[1:01:20] census tract is that kind

[1:01:23] of diluting their their special

[1:01:28] characteristics to a larger census tract

[1:01:30] whereas if they were their own downtown

[1:01:33] overlay that they may you may

[1:01:36] find um data comparable to just a a

[1:01:40] common common

[1:01:44] characteristics to other downtowns small

[1:01:47] or big does that make sense it does make

[1:01:49] sense it's a great question um because I

[1:01:54] like to see like a small business in

[1:01:58] Cuna just be treated like anything you

[1:02:01] know um whereas it might just draw from

[1:02:05] a that service area I mean it might have

[1:02:08] short trip lengths and any anyway but

[1:02:11] we'd never see it because we're our

[1:02:16] minimum analytical unit is census trct

[1:02:20] is that is that an accurate I I don't

[1:02:22] know if our minimum data source is

[1:02:26] census truck maybe Mark you could we

[1:02:29] could we pull data more refined than

[1:02:31] census truck block grou or we can I

[1:02:34] think our only hesitation is just like

[1:02:36] the certainty of the data sure isn't as

[1:02:39] good platform

[1:02:42] right I think though the to answer or to

[1:02:45] maybe provide some thought on your

[1:02:48] question Trisha yeah one what we do now

[1:02:53] doesn't prevent future

[1:02:56] overlay zones happening in the future um

[1:03:00] those could be created I think though as

[1:03:03] you look at what is the criteria for an

[1:03:06] overlay Zone one would need to be a

[1:03:09] clear demonstration that it is it's

[1:03:11] travel characteristics are unique yeah

[1:03:14] but two I think you also need to look at

[1:03:18] uh there needs to be some sort of

[1:03:19] critical mass right I don't know if we

[1:03:22] would recommend one single census track

[1:03:25] as an overlay zone right there needs to

[1:03:27] be sort of a critical mass of land use

[1:03:30] pattern that defines it um and then the

[1:03:33] final thing I'll add and maybe Megan

[1:03:35] this is what you're chiming me to say so

[1:03:37] I apologize is there is nothing that

[1:03:40] prevents that small business in downtown

[1:03:42] Cuna from taking advantage even if they

[1:03:45] weren't considered an overlay Zone from

[1:03:48] taking advantage of some of that other

[1:03:49] flexibility that's already within the

[1:03:52] impact fee policy to work with ACD as

[1:03:55] they too so well I was thinking more of

[1:03:58] the smaller towns could do their own

[1:03:59] individual assessment because a little

[1:04:02] business isn't going to be able to do

[1:04:04] that yeah and that is that's where we

[1:04:08] would really um have the best

[1:04:10] opportunity to meet their needs is as

[1:04:13] every impact the assessment comes into

[1:04:15] to my team even without them asking for

[1:04:18] an individual assessment we'll catch

[1:04:20] things like that and just depending on

[1:04:23] where it's developed what kind of a

[1:04:25] business is what's the draw going to be

[1:04:28] is it going to be a

[1:04:30] small uh you know little Main Street

[1:04:34] kind of a business that no one from

[1:04:36] Southeast boisee is gonna drive to this

[1:04:38] business I'm not going to guyo and

[1:04:40] anymore

[1:04:42] sadly yeah so that that's really the

[1:04:44] best way to meet those individual needs

[1:04:47] because as we're developing the CIP we

[1:04:49] do have to look at it on a larger scale

[1:04:52] either countywide or with these

[1:04:55] different service areas and the the

[1:04:57] overlays that are currently um an option

[1:05:00] for US based on the data that we're

[1:05:02] seeing but we my team that is definitely

[1:05:05] our job to to meet with those people

[1:05:09] individually as they bring questions to

[1:05:11] us or even to just catch it and reach

[1:05:13] out to them and say this is the category

[1:05:17] that we have on the sheet but let's talk

[1:05:19] more about your business I'm not sure if

[1:05:21] that's a good fit so so we do have the

[1:05:24] flexibility to already

[1:05:26] um meet those needs even with our

[1:05:28] current impa coordinates Madam chair

[1:05:30] down down that line I think you would

[1:05:32] find I don't think that it would be

[1:05:34] supported by census

[1:05:37] data but the western side of the county

[1:05:40] in that two uh East West

[1:05:44] scenario it wouldn't be a downtown it

[1:05:47] would be the St

[1:05:50] Luke's uh and Village complex I mean

[1:05:55] that would be

[1:05:56] about as close as you could get to

[1:05:58] something that would equate to a

[1:05:59] downtown boisey in terms of but I don't

[1:06:02] know that that would be supported by

[1:06:03] Census Data because the population

[1:06:05] within some of those areas it's all it's

[1:06:08] all employment uh so it gets no gets a

[1:06:13] little

[1:06:14] messy well it doesn't get messy it's

[1:06:17] just how refined you want to be you know

[1:06:20] that's all I'm just kind

[1:06:22] of because everybody's growing really

[1:06:26] little towns anymore you know what I

[1:06:27] mean and at some point if there's a a

[1:06:30] way

[1:06:30] to define the criteria for the

[1:06:34] overlay when you mentioned I actually

[1:06:36] wrote it down but I don't know exactly

[1:06:38] what they are and I don't need to know

[1:06:39] right now but I think that will be

[1:06:41] important to know why other areas don't

[1:06:45] qualify yeah but they may in the futy

[1:06:48] yet but they may in the fut

[1:06:51] exactly mam chair sure follow to Mike's

[1:06:56] statement I mean that's those centers

[1:06:58] the

[1:06:59] village and these employment centers

[1:07:02] generate an incredible trips oh yeah

[1:07:05] right and that's what we're going to see

[1:07:07] more of I think sen scatter and then the

[1:07:10] second question I had was so is there

[1:07:13] interaction with each

[1:07:15] City on you know where they're seeing

[1:07:18] their growth and even their zoning C boy

[1:07:22] just went through reone right that's all

[1:07:23] going to impact some of the stuff but as

[1:07:25] you are putting together this package is

[1:07:28] there interaction with the the

[1:07:31] cities so I think that Edon you can

[1:07:35] chime in but obviously the the key data

[1:07:39] point that we use as we're drafting

[1:07:42] these projects and then resulting fees

[1:07:45] is the compass travel demand model and

[1:07:48] that model of course gets updated all

[1:07:51] the time with input from each individual

[1:07:54] land use agency

[1:07:56] within the county and you know is

[1:07:58] adapted when rezoning happens when new

[1:08:01] zoning happens that sort of thing so I

[1:08:03] think that's that that's the sort of

[1:08:06] foundational document that where that

[1:08:08] gets

[1:08:09] Incorporated mam chair and yeah right

[1:08:12] now uh so right now we're looking at the

[1:08:15] data as a uh as all the trips and view

[1:08:19] in it because we're trying to provide

[1:08:22] what do scenario analysis is to the

[1:08:23] commission see what path they would like

[1:08:25] to take it if we end up in a single

[1:08:28] service area with the overlay Zone

[1:08:30] absolutely we'll Define those criterias

[1:08:32] and start looking at in more broader

[1:08:34] more more detail scale like the land use

[1:08:37] components certainly the compass data

[1:08:39] takes takes in to takes into account a

[1:08:42] lot of the land use assumptions that

[1:08:44] they have on their comprehensive plans

[1:08:46] the entitlements that they have approved

[1:08:48] so as we start looking and reviewing it

[1:08:51] more in detail we're certainly Define

[1:08:52] those CR and bring it back for GE for

[1:08:55] the C

[1:08:56] as well so um all that information will

[1:08:59] take into consideration or if the if the

[1:09:02] out is the one that we decid to do for

[1:09:04] with yeah I mean our perspective is one

[1:09:07] thing and there's some of us around the

[1:09:10] table that are far

[1:09:11] more educated and informed on the topics

[1:09:16] but I'm just talking about as far as the

[1:09:18] city with economic development people

[1:09:21] and planners you know the city of boisey

[1:09:23] right now all just from my observation

[1:09:26] they're they're not really excited about

[1:09:29] annexation right so that's going to

[1:09:31] change a lot of the perspective for the

[1:09:34] time being and just wondering how that

[1:09:36] might

[1:09:38] influence you know the areas of that

[1:09:41] we're talking about splitting up two or

[1:09:43] four one Etc makes sense if you'll

[1:09:46] indulge me a few minutes because

[1:09:49] I I'm a I guess I'm a geek but I find

[1:09:54] the the demog graphic information at the

[1:09:57] traffic Zone level to be incredibly

[1:10:00] important that it be good and so does

[1:10:02] compass and so do the people who manage

[1:10:04] those models and that's why every year

[1:10:07] they um they reconcile it with the land

[1:10:11] use decision so they make sure land use

[1:10:14] decisions aren't going one way and the

[1:10:16] model data is different than that and

[1:10:18] that gets to um particularly households

[1:10:21] and employment in each traffic Zone I

[1:10:24] have to think with m expansion plans

[1:10:27] that has been plugged in at that those

[1:10:29] traffic zones and then that gets fed

[1:10:32] into the model so those trips get

[1:10:34] accounted for um and because I

[1:10:39] uh you have to I always try to describe

[1:10:42] to people you have to it's like a movie

[1:10:44] it's like 3D but you have to put the

[1:10:45] fourth dimension of Time how is this

[1:10:47] area growing and how is it how are the

[1:10:51] growth centers changing around the

[1:10:53] county I look at the whole two count

[1:10:55] area um that's why I did ask and I us to

[1:10:59] always do it when I had GIS support is I

[1:11:02] like to look at the the traffic Zone

[1:11:05] level not to look at the weeds but to

[1:11:08] look at that overall spatial pattern of

[1:11:11] growth throughout adaa County where are

[1:11:13] the the job centers where are the you

[1:11:16] know you can easily show that on a map

[1:11:18] so I had the that was my cost to the

[1:11:20] city for being on this committee I want

[1:11:22] to see that map because that tells a

[1:11:25] better story of kind of what you're

[1:11:27] getting at is the volume and lo location

[1:11:31] of these hotspots over the next 20 years

[1:11:34] and um anyway so I they humored me and I

[1:11:38] you know it's obviously more to the west

[1:11:41] of the county now but there's still um

[1:11:43] because of just the the density

[1:11:46] differences in Boise from other folks it

[1:11:49] it does still account for a significant

[1:11:53] volume of growth it's just a smaller

[1:11:56] footprint than than other areas and

[1:11:58] that's just because they're just

[1:12:00] different you know Madam chair the fact

[1:12:03] that we're we're dealing with a moment

[1:12:05] in time that will be reviewed a few

[1:12:07] years down the line and this process

[1:12:09] will will take a look all these changes

[1:12:12] right but it's been really enlightening

[1:12:15] for me to have now seen this

[1:12:17] presentation twice because I think a few

[1:12:19] meetings ago we got into this discussion

[1:12:21] of multiple zones without quite

[1:12:24] considering the implications of how

[1:12:26] those dollars can best be

[1:12:29] used and by if we split it down to a

[1:12:32] point where it we trapped money that

[1:12:35] can't physically be used for the broader

[1:12:38] picture I think that would be a mistake

[1:12:41] at least to this point in time so from

[1:12:44] my perspective and I would move that we

[1:12:47] actually endorse the the three concepts

[1:12:50] that have been suggested here today to

[1:12:52] be evaluated as has done the Mission so

[1:12:56] that by the middle of July that we have

[1:12:59] a better picture of how all of these

[1:13:00] factors play into it uh so I would move

[1:13:04] that we endorse these three scenarios

[1:13:07] for further study and

[1:13:11] evaluation okay is there a second we'll

[1:13:13] have

[1:13:14] discussion is this an action item for

[1:13:17] the agenda can we do this um I don't

[1:13:19] think we do have an action item but I

[1:13:21] think we need to at least Express an

[1:13:23] opinion we could provide dire let do

[1:13:27] motions but I think this let's just talk

[1:13:30] about it for now okay is that all right

[1:13:31] well I I for One support the direction

[1:13:34] so I'll ask the other committee members

[1:13:35] how do you um what are your thoughts on

[1:13:38] the can you put the slide back up so

[1:13:42] that'll

[1:13:44] help there you go perfect

[1:13:48] yeah I have no problem

[1:13:51] yeah look John's thinking

[1:13:55] I guess in general I'm supportive I I

[1:13:57] keep

[1:13:58] yeah looking at the stars perspective

[1:14:02] you know like Garden City we just don't

[1:14:04] have the arterials you

[1:14:07] know like like you know other places do

[1:14:10] right and we're growing into Canyon

[1:14:14] County now so our our trips are outside

[1:14:18] of our data and trying to figure out how

[1:14:21] all this is going to impact eventually

[1:14:25] once you get down to the finer points of

[1:14:27] of developing these

[1:14:29] plans

[1:14:31] I yeah I I'll support moving forward

[1:14:34] with these three

[1:14:35] options yeah I support it but I still

[1:14:39] want the criteria for the overlay zones

[1:14:42] if there is something in the scenario to

[1:14:44] that might qualify so I think if we can

[1:14:46] articulate the criteria for overlay Zone

[1:14:50] and Analysis may show it there may be an

[1:14:54] opportunity for for one in the scenario

[1:14:58] two does that make sense so it may but

[1:15:01] of course the overlay Zone theoretically

[1:15:03] is suggesting that that's an area that

[1:15:06] it is deserving of paying less impact

[1:15:09] fees than

[1:15:12] so yeah I meanies it and I get the only

[1:15:16] other history lesson that was admitted

[1:15:18] at the beginning and it just dawned on

[1:15:19] me it's there a lot of work that went

[1:15:22] into blueprint for good growth and that

[1:15:24] was originally to by ACD because of

[1:15:31] the the the let's just say the capital

[1:15:33] budget and the operating budget lines

[1:15:36] are going to cross I think they're

[1:15:37] probably there yet and uh it was if we

[1:15:40] didn't pay attention to how we grew

[1:15:43] there there would only be funds for

[1:15:46] operation and maintenance and not system

[1:15:48] expansion which is this is systemic you

[1:15:52] know where we where are we going to

[1:15:53] invest dollars to add more roads what's

[1:15:55] the impact and so then you know that's

[1:15:58] why that was that interval of time when

[1:16:00] you had multiple service

[1:16:03] areas uh for 10 or so

[1:16:06] years and then it was simplified now

[1:16:10] when listening to the commission

[1:16:11] discussion at the work

[1:16:13] session I don't think because it's

[1:16:16] simpler doesn't sit well with me that if

[1:16:20] there's a technical reason to to have a

[1:16:24] difference based on the engineering and

[1:16:27] planning principles you need to respect

[1:16:29] that um you know I experien with the

[1:16:34] little fire districts in cany County we

[1:16:36] did it because it was the right thing to

[1:16:38] do they needed their impact fee they

[1:16:39] were all different but you had it was a

[1:16:42] lot of a lot of analysis that they paid

[1:16:44] for and rolled up to an impact fee

[1:16:48] ordinance for for I think six of them

[1:16:51] and after the first year we raised over

[1:16:53] a quar million dollars for those fire

[1:16:55] districts now it would have been yeah

[1:16:57] life would have been simpler to just not

[1:16:59] even do it but but you had to want to do

[1:17:02] it I guess you had to want to respect

[1:17:04] that they had a need that there was for

[1:17:07] those

[1:17:08] districts there was a

[1:17:11] significant financial incentive to them

[1:17:14] to have it other other districts didn't

[1:17:16] really qualify but you had to want to

[1:17:20] get complicated because they needed the

[1:17:23] resources or they in this case

[1:17:27] the data supports a different impact

[1:17:29] page so and I think two Services just

[1:17:33] two service areas versus I think there

[1:17:35] were four in the past that's still

[1:17:38] pretty simple you know for remember yeah

[1:17:43] um for a county this this population

[1:17:47] size Road

[1:17:49] networks looking at some of the examples

[1:17:51] and the best

[1:17:53] practices now first one city to have

[1:17:56] multiple then that makes my head explode

[1:17:58] but

[1:17:59] um I think for a size Ada County but I

[1:18:03] would like to see more information on

[1:18:04] the overlay zones I think that would

[1:18:06] benefit the jurisdictions to understand

[1:18:09] that criteria

[1:18:13] because it is or it isn't you know I

[1:18:15] like

[1:18:17] things black and

[1:18:20] white is there any other any other

[1:18:23] Reflections on this yeah

[1:18:28] Walter your downtown overlay Zone the

[1:18:31] one you're use for an

[1:18:34] example is because they do so little

[1:18:38] tripping outside is that

[1:18:41] correct

[1:18:43] um

[1:18:44] no simply sense what's the reason for

[1:18:47] picking downtown because they gen more

[1:18:51] trips happen by walking biking Transit

[1:18:55] in that area and the trips overall are

[1:18:59] significantly shorter than the rest of

[1:19:03] the county skew is it skewed by Boy

[1:19:06] State can I speak that's my neighborhood

[1:19:09] so it's not just downtown but it's a lot

[1:19:11] of Southeast yeah you do have Boise

[1:19:13] State but there's a lot

[1:19:16] of there's a lot of people who live and

[1:19:18] work in Boise State in that area but you

[1:19:21] also have a lot of bus routes that serve

[1:19:23] that area as well

[1:19:25] uh number two um the Harris rant so that

[1:19:28] as you get closer to Boise State I don't

[1:19:31] know if you want to show the map Sonia

[1:19:33] yeah I can you know I can't see a lot of

[1:19:36] detail but I can tell that southern

[1:19:37] boundary has to be Federal Way in the

[1:19:40] bench so you're all kind Boise Avenue is

[1:19:43] it Boise a the curve the curve looks too

[1:19:46] curvy

[1:19:47] for yeah I can't uh you might have

[1:19:51] followed oh yes you're right am I right

[1:19:54] okay

[1:19:55] because that's a j that's a bench too

[1:19:58] but

[1:19:59] um but it's all of that you know you do

[1:20:02] have um Broadway which is a state

[1:20:07] highway so that would be excluded but

[1:20:10] there is there is just a lot of there's

[1:20:12] a lot of bikers there's a lot of Walkers

[1:20:14] there's bus riders it's just a it's just

[1:20:17] kind

[1:20:18] of I think a mature transportation

[1:20:22] system you know if you look at it from a

[1:20:25] Transportation perspective you've got

[1:20:29] land use patterns in that area that

[1:20:32] there's housing there's jobs and there's

[1:20:35] Services all within a close enough area

[1:20:39] where people can either make those trips

[1:20:42] by car but in a very short distance or

[1:20:45] they can make the trips by another mode

[1:20:47] because they're close enough that

[1:20:49] walking or biking Works to make the trip

[1:20:52] as well but they are an a tractor

[1:20:56] the fact you got a six Lane interstate

[1:20:59] highway funneling into it and out of it

[1:21:02] if it wasn't so many people from the

[1:21:04] rest of the county going in and out of

[1:21:06] downtown you wouldn't need the

[1:21:09] connector so so you're bringing up a

[1:21:13] very good point that we have somewhat

[1:21:16] glossed over in this presentation that

[1:21:19] when you look at like these Maps so if

[1:21:24] you followed the data perfectly your

[1:21:27] overlay Zone would kind of be a donut

[1:21:30] that excluded downtown itself because

[1:21:34] you're kind of you're right downtown

[1:21:37] there are people driving to there from a

[1:21:39] you know from a fair distance there are

[1:21:41] a lot of lot a lot of yeah they they may

[1:21:46] not be traveling within it but to it

[1:21:49] flowing AB out of it by the thousands

[1:21:53] every day you're Absol absolutely well

[1:21:55] but the out of it are typically going

[1:21:57] home rather than the trip being

[1:22:00] generated within that area that then

[1:22:02] they had to be they had to have a reason

[1:22:04] to go down there in the first yeah yeah

[1:22:05] no totally correct but trip drive from

[1:22:08] drive from here at at four but they're

[1:22:10] not generated try to get down but

[1:22:13] they're not generated within that area

[1:22:15] that's the point that the number of

[1:22:18] trips generated in that area are not

[1:22:20] people that are scattering to the hinter

[1:22:22] land it's primarily a funnel or a black

[1:22:25] hole in the downtown yeah yeah okay

[1:22:29] anyway yeah no you're right um and this

[1:22:32] gets into that policy decision of what

[1:22:34] makes up an overlay Zone and it kind of

[1:22:37] gets to be that you have to have this

[1:22:39] critical mass of land uses that work

[1:22:42] together so your your point is extremely

[1:22:45] valid and the data supports your point

[1:22:47] 100% yeah also that overlay Walter isn't

[1:22:51] just downtown it's actually a small

[1:22:53] portion it goes Way Beyond yeah madear

[1:22:58] yeah and I think with the city school

[1:23:00] I'm not sure where they're at now but

[1:23:02] the traffic Zone dat say I think the

[1:23:04] goal was 10,000 housing units

[1:23:07] downtown so there's a there's a a lot of

[1:23:11] housing being built that

[1:23:13] um I see I can see it you

[1:23:17] know lot lot of projects

[1:23:23] so one question yeah gave us some data

[1:23:28] at the previous meeting about the

[1:23:30] internal versus external trips yes is

[1:23:32] that going to factor in in any way so

[1:23:35] that was by city right so say that you

[1:23:40] went even I'm gonna go to this graphic

[1:23:44] here so that was taking it was similar

[1:23:48] to this exercise except it was going

[1:23:51] even a Step Beyond four regions and

[1:23:54] breaking it up to seven individual

[1:23:57] cities within the count um and when we

[1:24:00] looked at the data that way we saw um

[1:24:05] you're definitely not having that

[1:24:07] balance that I spoke about before of

[1:24:10] looking for sub regions where all of

[1:24:13] them have a relatively high amount of

[1:24:15] internal trips um and so this exercise

[1:24:19] was to sort of break it down somewhere

[1:24:22] between full County and then all Seven

[1:24:25] Cities and where when we did that

[1:24:28] exercise we found that breaking the

[1:24:31] county out into East West two areas

[1:24:35] provides the highest the best amount of

[1:24:40] balance yeah I was going to share

[1:24:42] observation on the 91% I think that uh

[1:24:47] because I know the compass model

[1:24:48] obviously measures that the screen lines

[1:24:50] at the county has been I think a little

[1:24:52] higher but I'm I'm interested in the Imp

[1:24:56] with the growth in Canyon County and the

[1:24:58] um widening of the interstate if that 95

[1:25:02] is now 91 and then we have the highway

[1:25:05] 16 extension

[1:25:08] um but with our own growth too it's an

[1:25:11] interesting little Balancing Act though

[1:25:13] but I think it used to be a lot higher

[1:25:15] than

[1:25:15] 91 before

[1:25:17] those Intercounty arterials are the were

[1:25:22] were expanded so yeah the the question

[1:25:25] was raised at the commission meeting um

[1:25:29] you know I think the perception for a

[1:25:31] long time has been that everyone lives

[1:25:34] in Canyon County and then drives into

[1:25:37] Ada County for work and the data just

[1:25:40] doesn't really support that because even

[1:25:43] we looked at the Canyon County data and

[1:25:45] if you look at Canyon County as a whole

[1:25:49] it has

[1:25:49] 81% internal trips so you know the vast

[1:25:55] majority of Canyon County trips are

[1:25:56] staying in Canyon County as

[1:26:01] well interesting Dynamics work yes Bun

[1:26:05] It is Well really appreciate the

[1:26:07] discussion today all these thoughts and

[1:26:10] perspectives are super helpful um and

[1:26:14] yeah Edson I don't know if you want to

[1:26:15] go over next steps yeah I was gonna

[1:26:17] Edson so looking at that there's a

[1:26:19] commission work session on the 17th of

[1:26:22] July 17th okay

[1:26:25] so our next steps is we're going to do

[1:26:28] the analysis in the next couple weeks uh

[1:26:32] leading to our meeting where we're going

[1:26:34] to present the result of the three

[1:26:36] scenarios uh our plan is to come back to

[1:26:39] the CAC uh the following month uh to

[1:26:42] present the similar information as well

[1:26:44] as we're going to update couple of the

[1:26:46] information that we presented today

[1:26:49] based on the feedback we receive I

[1:26:51] included that Mo uh the mode share MTH

[1:26:54] that we want to see as slightly

[1:26:56] different so volumes yeah yes and at

[1:26:59] that point we'll continue working

[1:27:01] through the pr analysis to Define what

[1:27:03] those recommendations look like and

[1:27:05] proceed forward on the

[1:27:08] update of the

[1:27:11] in and Walter depending on when it's

[1:27:13] scheduled I'll be gone the first two

[1:27:16] weeks of August so be prepared to run

[1:27:18] the meeting

[1:27:20] maybe Vice chair we can adj

[1:27:24] oh it's fine

[1:27:28] yeah I want make sure I want to thank

[1:27:31] you for all of your work Sonia and Mark

[1:27:35] um uh I just I just eat it up

[1:27:41] but and thank you committee and is there

[1:27:44] a to I I shall move all right all right

[1:27:49] thank you all favor I you're out of here

[1:27:53] thanks

[1:28:23] e for

Capital Investment Citizen Advisory Committee (CICAC) - 24 Jun 2024

Transcript