[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