Loading...
(1) No fee payor shall be required to construct, fund or contribute any capital improvement to meet the same need for police, fire, and parks and recreation capital improvements for which an impact fee is imposed. All system improvements constructed, funded or contributed for police, fire, and parks and recreation capital improvements for which an impact fee is imposed, over and above those required by the city in connection with new development, shall result in either a credit on future impact fees or reimbursement (at the fee payor's option) for such excess to be paid by future development that benefits from such system improvements. However, no credit or reimbursement shall be provided for: a) project improvements; b) any construction, funding or contribution not agreed to in writing by the city prior to commencement of such construction, funding or contribution; and c) any construction, funding or contribution of a type of capital improvements not included in the calculation of the applicable impact fee.
(2) In the calculation of impact fees for a project pursuant to subsections 10-09-05(4) through (6) of this article, credit shall be given for the present value of all tax and user fee revenue generated by the fee payor within the service area and used by the city for system improvements of the category for which the impact fee is being collected. If the amount of such credit exceeds the impact fee for a project, the fee payor shall receive a credit on future impact fees.
(3) In the calculation of impact fees for a project, credit or reimbursement (at the fee payor's option) shall be given for the present value of any construction of system improvements or contribution of land or money required by the city from the fee payor for system improvements of the category for which the impact fee is being collected, including system improvements paid for through local improvement district assessments.
(4) If credit or reimbursement is due to the fee payor, the city and fee payor shall enter into a written agreement, negotiated in good faith, prior to the construction, funding or contribution. The written agreement shall include, without limitation: a description of the construction, funding or contribution of system improvements including, in the case of real property, a legal description of the real property; description as to how the system improvements are to be valued; the amount of the credit or the amount, time and form of reimbursement; instructions as to how the capital improvements should be provided to the city to ensure full transfer of ownership; and the circumstances under which the credit or reimbursement is deemed effective. To assist in such reimbursement, the city shall continue to collect impact fees from other developers whose proposed developments will benefit from such construction, funding or contribution, and will promptly transfer such funds to the fee payor. If a successor in interest claims a reimbursement or credit, the fee administrator may require written documentation that such rights have been conveyed to the claimant prior to issuing the requested reimbursement or credit.
(5) Approved credits may be used to reduce the amount of impact fees of the category for which the impact fee is being collected in connection with any new growth and development until the amount of the credit is exhausted. Each time a request to use approved credits is presented to the city, the city shall reduce the amount of the applicable impact fee otherwise due from the fee payor and shall note in the city records the amount of credit remaining, if any. Upon request of the fee payor, the city shall issue a letter stating the amount of credit available. If the credit has not been exhausted within eight (8) years of the date of issuance of the first building permit for which an impact fee was due and payable, or within such other time period as may be designated in writing by the city, such credit shall lapse, unless a refund of the remaining credit is applied for as set forth in subsection 10-09-07(10) of this article.
(6) Approved credits or reimbursement shall only be used to reduce the amount of the impact fee of the category for which the impact fee is otherwise due, and shall not be paid to the fee payor in cash or in credits against any other monies due from the fee payor to the city.
(7) Credit for land dedications shall, at the fee payor's option, be valued at: a) one hundred percent (100%) of the most recent assessed value for such land as shown in the records of the Canyon County assessor; or b) that fair market value established by an MAI appraiser reasonably acceptable to the city in an appraisal paid for by the fee payor. Credit for contribution or construction of system improvements shall be valued by the city based on complete engineering drawings, specifications, and construction cost estimates submitted by the fee payor to the city, which estimates shall be revised as actual costs become available. The city shall determine the amount of credit due based on the information submitted, or, if the city determines that such information is inaccurate or unreliable, then on alternative engineering or construction costs reasonably acceptable to the city as a more accurate measure of the value of the offered system improvements to the city.
(8) Approved credits for land dedications shall become effective when the land has been conveyed to the city in a form reasonably acceptable to the city at no cost to the city, and has been accepted by the city. Approved credits for contribution or construction of system improvements shall generally become effective when: a) all required construction has been completed and has been accepted by the city; and b) all design, construction, inspection, testing, bonding, and acceptance procedures have been completed in compliance with all applicable requirements of the city. Approved credits for the construction of system improvements may become effective at an earlier date if the fee payor posts security in the form of a performance bond, irrevocable letter of credit or escrow agreement in the amount and under terms reasonably acceptable to the city.
(9) Credit may only be transferred by a fee payor that has received credit to such fee payor's successor in interest. The credit may be used only to offset impact fees for the same category for which the credit was issued. Credits shall be transferred by any written instrument clearly identifying which credits are being transferred, the dollar amount of the credit being transferred, and the system improvements for which the credit was issued. The instrument of transfer shall be signed by both the transferor and transferee, and a copy of the document shall be delivered to the fee administrator for documentation of the transfer before the transfer shall be deemed effective. (Ord. 2671, 4-3-2007)
The decisions of the fee administrator may be appealed as provided below:
(1) Any fee payor who is or may be obligated to pay an impact fee, may appeal a decision made by the fee administrator in applying this article to the city council's designee. Such decisions that may be appealed include:
A. The applicability of an impact fee to the development.
B. The amount of an impact fee to be paid for the development.
C. The availability, amount or application of any credit.
D. The amount of any refund, reimbursement or credit.
A fee payor may pay an impact fee under protest in order to obtain a development approval or building permit(s) and, by paying such impact fee, shall not be estopped from exercising the right of appeal provided herein, nor shall the fee payor be estopped from receiving a refund of any amount deemed to have been illegally collected. Upon final disposition of an appeal, the impact fee shall be adjusted in accordance with the decision rendered and, if necessary, a refund paid.
(2) In order to pursue an appeal, the fee payor shall file a written notice of appeal with the city council's designee within fifteen (15) days after the date of the decision being appealed, or the date on which the fee payor submitted a payment of impact fees under protest, whichever is later. Such written application shall include a statement describing why the appellant believes that the decision was in error, together with copies of any documents that the appellant believes supports the claim.
(3) The city council's designee shall notify the fee payor of the hearing date on the appeal, which notice shall be given no less than fifteen (15) days prior to the date of the hearing, and shall hear the appeal within thirty (30) days after receipt of a written notice of appeal. The appellant shall have a right to be present and to present evidence in support of the appeal. The fee administrator who made the decision under appeal shall likewise have the right to be present and to present evidence in support of the decision. The burden of proof in any such hearing shall be on the fee payor to demonstrate that the amount of the impact fee, credit, reimbursement or refund was not properly calculated by the city.
(4) The criteria to be used by the city council's designee shall be whether: a) the decision or interpretation made by the fee administrator; or b) the alternative decision or interpretation offered by the appellant, more accurately reflects the intent of this article that new growth and development in the city pay its proportionate share of the costs of system improvements for public facilities necessary to serve new development. The city council's designee may affirm, reject or revise the decision of the fee administrator, providing written findings of fact and conclusions, within fifteen (15) days after hearing the appeal. The city council's designee shall modify the amount of the impact fee, credit, refund or reimbursement only if there is substantial evidence in the record that the fee administrator erred, based upon the methodologies contained in the impact fee study, this article and/or the capital improvements plans. The decision of the city council's designee shall be final.
(5) A fee payor may request that the city enter into mediation by a qualified independent party to address a disagreement related to the impact fee for new growth and development. If both parties agree to mediation, costs for the independent mediation service shall be shared equally by the fee payor and the city. Mediation may take place at any time during an appeals process and any time limitation relevant to an appeal shall be tolled. (Ord. 2671, 4-3-2007)
(1) The city has established a development impact fee advisory committee pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-8205. The advisory committee shall continue to be composed of not fewer than five (5) members appointed by the city council. Two (2) or more members of the advisory committee shall be active in the business of development, building or real estate. Two (2) or more members shall not be in the business of development, building, or real estate. The advisory committee shall serve in an advisory capacity to the city council and is established to:
A. Assist the city in adopting land use assumptions;
B. Review the capital improvements plans, and proposed amendments, and file written comments;
C. Monitor and evaluate implementation of the capital improvements plans;
D. File periodic reports, at least annually, with respect to the capital improvements plans and report to the city any perceived inequities in implementing the capital improvements plans or imposing the impact fees; and
E. Advise the city of the need to update or revise land use assumptions, the capital improvements plans, and development impact fees.
(2) The city shall make available to the advisory committee, upon request, all financial and accounting information, professional reports in relation to other development and implementation of land use assumptions, the capital improvements plans, and periodic updates of the capital improvements plans. (Ord. 2671, 4-3-2007; Ord. 3374, 12-6-2021)
(1) As used in this article, masculine, feminine or neuter gender and the singular or plural number shall each be deemed to include the others wherever and whenever the context so dictates; the word shall, will or must is always mandatory; the word may is permissive; and the word should indicates that which is recommended, but not required.
(2) Nothing in this article shall limit or modify the rights of any person to complete any development for which a lawful building permit was issued prior to the effective date hereof.
(3) Nothing in this article shall prevent the city from requiring a developer to construct reasonable project improvements in conjunction with a project.
(4) Nothing in this article shall limit the ability of the city to enter into intergovernmental agreements as provided in section 67-8204A, Idaho Code.
(5) The impact fees described in this article, and the administrative procedures of this article shall be reviewed at least once every five (5) years to ensure that: a) the demand and cost assumptions and other assumptions underlying such impact fees are still valid; b) the resulting impact fees do not exceed the actual costs of providing police, fire, and/or parks and recreation system improvements required to serve new growth and development; c) the monies collected in any impact fee fund have been and are expected to be spent for system improvements of the type for which such impact fees were paid; and d) such system improvements will benefit those developments for which the impact fees were paid.
(6) Violation of this article shall be subject to those remedies provided in this code. Knowingly furnishing false information to any official of the city charged with the administration of this article on any matter relating to the administration of this article including, without limitation, the furnishing of false information regarding the expected size or use of a proposed development, shall be a violation of this article.
(7) The captions used in this article are for convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation of any portion of the text of this article.
(8) If any paragraph, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this article is, for any reason, held to be invalid, inconsistent with the provisions of the Idaho impact fee act, section 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, unconstitutional and/or unenforceable, such provisions shall be deemed to be separate, distinct and independent and the remaining provisions of this article shall continue in full force and effect. (Ord. 2671, 4-3-2007)
Traffic impact study, intersection study, master plan policies, and related transportation matters.
(1) Traffic Studies:
A. Requirements And General Information: Traffic studies will be required in conjunction with private development when the traffic generated exceeds certain development thresholds.
B. Development Studies: Traffic studies will be required for city roadway or intersection improvement projects. These may vary from a simple one page study evaluating existing traffic volumes, accidents and physical conditions. They can also be a complex analysis of existing and future levels of service at several locations, on and off the project site, as well as various possible development and public improvement project scenarios. They may need to consider various roadway concept alternatives, alignments, modes of travel and project enhancements.
C. Design And Project Studies: Traffic studies may be required for a variety of issues. The city should be an active participant in the review of those involving city roads to include those within the city's impact area.
D. Scoping Of The Project: Where many unknown and alternate designs exist for a project, a scoping study should precede the project design to clearly define the project scope.
E. Traffic Impact Studies Criteria: The City of Caldwell must consider the impacts of a proposed development on property and transportation facilities. Therefore, a traffic impact study will be required if the proposed development generates one hundred (100) or more peak hour vehicle trips; more than thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of commercial use; or more than fifty thousand (50,000) square feet of industrial use. Institutional reviews will be required based upon the city's experience with other like operations or from information provided by other jurisdictions in this region. The city may require an impact study, even if the aforementioned criteria are not exceeded to resolve unique circumstances. The city may also waive the requirement if, in the city's opinion, there are no traffic issues to resolve. (Ord. 3346, 5-17-2021)
The type of land use and the trips generated will be determined using the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) publication: "Trip Generation – An Information Report".
Typical uses within the commercial, industrial and institutional categories include (but are not limited to):
Commercial:
Business park.
Indoor theater.
Office building.
Restaurant.
Retail store.
Shopping center.
Supermarket.
Industrial:
Heavy industry.
Industrial park.
Light industrial.
Manufacturing.
Truck/bus terminal.
Utility plant.
Warehousing.
Institutional:
College/university.
Hospital/nursing home.
Library.
Military base.
Place of worship.
Prison.
School.
The term "dwelling units" used in this policy includes units associated with hotels, motels and private homes or apartments. The City will consider proposed developments of other types not listed above and decide the need for a traffic impact study on a case-by-case basis. (Ord. 3346, 5-17-2021)
The developer of a proposed large-scale development should review the project with the City Engineering staff before submitting a preliminary plat application. (Ord. 2506, 7-6-2004; Ord. 3346, 5-17-2021)
The City will decide at that time whether a traffic impact study will be required and set the study parameters. With the developer’s approval, and at the developer’s expense, the City will then initiate the traffic impact study with a traffic consultant off the City’s Approved Consultant list. The impact study area shall include all roadways and intersections directly joining the proposed development. It shall include other roadways and intersections that the City believes are affected by traffic generated by the proposed development. (Ord. 2506, 7-6-2004; Ord. 2805, 11-2-2009; Ord. 3346, 5-17-2021)
(2) Traffic Impact Considerations:
A. The traffic impact study shall identify and consider:
1. The continuation of local residential streets, collector streets and arterial streets. The study shall cover streets from the development boundaries, to an intersection with existing or proposed residential, collector or arterial streets as shown on the latest edition of the "Canyon County Functionally Classified Road Map".
2. Existing land use, roadways, traffic patterns and roadway volume, and turning movement volume within the study area. The study must consider average daily traffic and traffic during at least two (2) representative peak hours.
3. Existing levels of service within the study area. This will be determined using the latest edition of the "Highway Capacity Manual" (HCM) and existing traffic control devices.
4. Planned road improvements and major land developments within the study area.
5. Forecasts of future traffic patterns, roadway capacity and turning movements in the study area before the proposed development is built. This establishes "background traffic". Traffic patterns and roadway capacity shall be forecast for the built out year and for a twenty (20) year planning period. Turning movements shall be forecast for the built out year. Traffic forecasts by COMPASS should be used, when available. Those forecasts shall be checked for credibility and reconciled with independent forecasts. The study should include a reasonable rate of regional traffic growth. It should estimate additional traffic likely to be generated by vacant land development in and surrounding the area. The basis of development projections will be current zoning, prepared with advice from staff.
6. Trip generation and distribution expected from the proposed development; this is "site traffic".
7. Forecast of future traffic patterns, roadway capacity volumes, and turning movements in the study area after the proposed development is fully built and occupied. These numbers are "site traffic" plus "background traffic".
8. Future levels of service in the study area, with "site traffic" plus "background traffic". Forecast levels of service for roadway links and impacted intersections at the development build out year and twenty (20) years from the present. Identify all roadway/intersections configurations and traffic control devices.
9. Recommended roadway/pathway improvements and mitigation measures. This includes location and design of driveways, intersections and traffic control devices. Include potentially viable nonroadway measures, such as ridesharing, transit, bicycling incentives and staggered or flexible work hours.
10. School crossings, safe routes to school and bikeways.
11. Roadway access control that differs from the city's general requirements. Show exceptions where there are special conditions such as unusually heavy turn storage requirements, high speeds and high traffic volumes.
12. The effects of the traffic from the proposed development on existing local streets and the effects of traffic from existing local streets on the proposed development.
(3) Average Daily Traffic (ADT): The evaluator needs to estimate ADT for all street segments in the proposed development likely to have volumes exceeding one thousand (1,000) vehicles per day. These estimates will help select the proper street cross section for each segment. Each proposed collector street should be broken into several segments. The evaluator will base this on key intersections in the proposed street network. That will reduce the length of collector width streets required and define the extent of collector traffic levels in the development. The evaluator will compare project volumes on streets that provide access to the development with the applicable threshold volumes. The evaluator should use the Caldwell subdivision ordinance and adopted planning thresholds for reference purposes.
(4) Trip Generation Rates: Trip generation rates used in the impact study shall be supported by appropriate data presented in the latest edition of the publication, "Trip Generation Manual". Other studies recognized by the traffic engineering profession may be used for analysis purposes. Those conducting impact studies should consult ITE's "Traffic Access And Impact Studies For Site Development" (a recommended practice 1991), and the federal highway administration's, "Site Impact Traffic Evaluation (SITE) Handbook" report number FHWA/PL/85/004, January 1985, or the most recent publication update.
(5) Preparation Of Traffic Impact Study: The applicant shall pay for a traffic impact study commissioned by the city. A qualified professional shall prepare the traffic impact study. The city shall approve the professional who will do the study before the work begins. The city engineer or designated staff member will confirm the qualifications of the proposed professional. The qualified professional will serve as the city's primary contact during the study.
(6) Study Boundaries: The boundary of the study area shall be identified jointly by the professional conducting the study and city staff.
(7) Joint Traffic Study: The city may participate or require the participation of others in a joint traffic study when there is a need to evaluate some traffic component that has wider application than the proposal at hand. The joint traffic study will include the elements of the traffic impact study area required of the development. The developer will pay a negotiated portion of the study.
(8) Master Plans: Developments that are to be platted in multiple phases may require a master plan. The master plan shall address broad community development, street network issues and all the elements required in a traffic impact study. If all of the phases of the proposed development exceed the threshold requirements, the developer may be required to update the traffic study when future phases of the project are submitted or in the city's opinion, conditions in the area have changed significantly, or if the future phases deviate significantly from the approved master plan.
(9) Traffic Signal Warrants: The traffic signal warrants from the MUTCD should be used as guidelines to consider the need for a traffic signal at a location. Other features should be considered such as traffic circulation patterns; spacing with respect to other controls; and the physical characteristics of the intersection (such as the horizontal and vertical curvature). If either the total volume warrant or the volume interruption warrant are satisfied, it will not be necessary to check warrants 8 through 11 which are primarily special volume warrants. The evaluator should give special consideration to locations that satisfy the school crossing warrant or the accident warrant.
(10) Level Of Service: Traffic conditions will be measured according to present and forecasted level of service (LOS) for roadways relative to their functional classification. Level of service is a measure of the congestion level on a street in an urban setting; it is typically measured at intersections. Functional classifications refer to the transportation distribution characteristics of a roadway. Planning volume thresholds are the twenty-four (24) hour equivalents of what the typical intersection levels of services are expected to be along a street based on its number of lanes and functional classification. Planning thresholds are based on typical intersection conflicts and intersection designs.
An arterial street that has the same number of lanes as a collector street carries more traffic than the collector because it is assumed to receive sixty percent (60%) more green time as compared to forty percent (40%) green time for collectors. Planning volume thresholds are used to determine the needed street section based on future traffic forecasts. Traffic forecasts are generated from a computer traffic model, which simulates the trips generated by future land use types, densities and locations routed on an assumed roadway network.
(11) Functional Street Classification: Urban and rural street classification maps are prepared by COMPASS and adopted by its member agencies, including the city of Caldwell. The maps depict the current local, collector and arterial street designations. Several future and arterial streets are shown on the maps. Not all future collector and arterial streets are indicated. The city reserves the right to designate future collector streets or upgrade existing streets as conditions and projections warrant. The functional street classification map will be relied upon to determine a development's level of participation in transportation improvement matters based upon the development's anticipated impact on the road system. (Ord. 2506, 7-6-2004)
(12) Traffic Impact Mitigation: The applicant shall be responsible for assuming a proportionate share of the design, construction, installation and inspections associated with remediating the traffic impacts identified by the study and/or as identified by the city engineer in his/her review and analysis of the proposed development and surrounding traffic patterns. Traffic impact mitigation shall be addressed according to the time frame identified in the traffic study and/or as identified by the city engineer and shall be required for any development that is estimated to exceed five hundred (500) vehicle trips per day, regardless of whether a traffic impact study has been conducted or not. If a traffic impact study has not been conducted, the vehicle trips per day for a development shall be estimated using the most current edition of the ITE “Trip Generation” handbook. The applicant may be allowed, at his/her option, to contribute monies in lieu of construction, but the basis for the obligation is for construction. Monetary contributions must be made at a level commensurate with costs to construct the same by the city and as estimated by the city. The alternate provision for payment of money is not a requirement, is for the benefit and convenience of the applicant only and does not constitute an impact fee. If the traffic mitigation should be deferred the applicant shall deposit funds in the roadway trust fund, sufficient to cover the determined proportional traffic impact cost. (Ord. 2506, 7-6-2004; Ord. 2805, 11-2-2009; Ord. 3346, 5-17-2021)
Loading...