Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem #1 Capital Improvement Plans and Impact Fee Analysis440d't\ CHUBBUCK 1 0 0 H 0 Memo To: Impact Fee Advisory Committee Community Services Department 290 E Linden Ave., Chubbuck, ID 83202 208.237.2430 www.CityofChubbuck.us From: Devin Hillam, Community Services Director ID 7 Date: November 7, 2023 Re: Development Impact Fee Meeting information OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND The development impact fee tool was created by the Idaho Legislature through Title 67 Chapter 82, Development Impact Fees (Attachment #1) to serve as an offset to the increase in costs to local communities due to the cost of growth; costs of growth may include increased demands, expanded areas of service, and decreased capacities within the system to provide services. Development Impact Fees are one-time fees that are imposed by a local government or a new or proposed development project to pay for all or a portion of the costs of providing public services to the new development. Although widely adopted in the west and north areas of the state, development impact fees in eastern Idaho have been rare with just a handful using the tool- Jefferson County, Madison County, Rexburg. The role of the Development Impact Fee Advisory Committee is established in 67-8205 which states that the role of the Committee is to: Assist the [City Council] in adopting land use assumptions; Review the capital improvements plan, and proposed amendments, and file written comments; Monitor and evaluate implementation of the capital improvements plan; • File periodic reports, at least annually, with respect to the capital improvements plan and report to the [City Council] any perceived inequities in implementing the plan or imposing the development impact fees; and J:\Planning\Impact Fees\Annual meeting packets\11.14.23\11.14.23 DIF Overview Memo to Committee 11.7.23 final.docx 1 • Advise the [City Council] of the need to update or revise land use assumptions, the capital improvements plan, and development impact fees. In turn, the City Council must make available upon your request: All applicable financial and accounting information; Professional reports in relation to other development and implementation of land use assumptions; • The capital improvements plan; • And periodic updates of the capital improvements plan. The City of Chubbuck collects impact fees at the building permit stage for Police, Emergency Services, and Parks. Police and Emergency Services were established by Ordinance No. 783 (Attachment #2) and Parks via Ordinance No. 791 (later corrected by Ord. No. 804) (Attachments #3 & 4). As required by the statute, each fee is associated with a capital improvements plan and as also required by the statute, impact fees collected are to be spent in-line with the needs of the current capital improvements plan (Police Attachment #5, Emergency Services (Attachment #6, Parks Attachment #7). On January 1 of every year, the ordinances adopting the impact fees call for an automatic inflationary adjustment to the impact fees collected but the last (and only) inflationary adjustment was on January 1, 2020 (Attachment #8). DRAFT UPDATED PLANS AND ANALYSES As requested by the Committee and the City Council, the City has been working with Zions Public Finance to update the Parks and Recreation, Police, and Emergency Services capital improvement plans and impact fee analyses. While the various attached draft analyses (Attachments 9, 10, 11) include information about how the proposed maximum fees were calculated, I suspect that the Committee will be most interested in understanding how the proposed maximum fees compare with current development impact fees; the following chart summarizes the differences: 2 Parks & Recreation Police Emergency Services Current Fees (11/1/2023) Residential Only (Per Unit): Single Family Residential: $2,366.78 Multi -Family Residential: $2,205.98 Residential: Single Family Residential: $232.72 Multi -Family Residential: $155.63 Non -Residential (per 1,000 sq ft): General Commercial: $373.47 Office: $47.96 Institutional: $68.26 Residential: Single Family Residential: $275.38 Multi -Family Residential: $244.67 Non -Residential (per 1,000 sq ft): General Commercial: $309.67 Office: $146.14 Institutional: $43.95 Proposed Maximum Fees per Analyses Residential Only (Per Unit): Single Family Residential: $2,136.93 Multi -Family Residential: $1,731.65 Residential: Single Family Residential: $514.22 Multi -Family Residential: $652.18 Non -Residential (per 1,000 sq ft): General Commercial: $890 Office: $40 Institutional: $350 Residential: Single Family Residential: $441.91 Multi -Family Residential: $458.76 Non -Residential (per 1,000 sq ft): General Commercial: $480 Office: $160 Institutional: $30 Please review attachments 9, 10, and 11 to determine if you believe the land use assumptions were accurate and come to the meeting to discuss. The Committee will provide a recommendation to the City Council regarding the new draft plans and analyses. 3 HISTORICAL FEE REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES; UPCOMING PROJECTS In terms of reporting how development impact fee monies have been collected and spent, the following is a summary: Parks & Recreation • Since its creation, the park development impact fee fund has collected $1,149,953.65 (not including interest). o FY 19: $13,424.00* o FY20: $1,994.93* o FY21: $220,857.18 o FY22: $321,199.76 o FY23: $503,585.38 o FY24 fiscal year to date: $88,882.40 *In FY79 and FY20, developments which had started the platting process were deemed exempt from paying impact fees as homes in those developments were built. As such, monies collected in those years are much lower than subsequent years. • Until recently, no park development impact fee monies were spent. Recent expenditures have been for $111,634.02, which includes the follow expenses: o Landscape design and project oversight of park next to City Hall- $15,000 o '/z cost of Impact Fee update- $4,000 o '/z cost of All -Wheels Park Study and Design- $7,500 o '/z costs of Long Park and Hiram Park playgrounds- $85,134.02 • Outstanding project obligations are approximately $96,634, and include: o '/z cost of Impact Fee update- $4,000 o Remainder of landscape architect fee for city hall park- $2,500 4 o '/z cost of Skatepark Study and Design- $7,500 o '/z costs of Long Park and Hiram Park playgrounds- $85,134 (final cost TBD based on actual project costs). • Estimated non -obligated funds, not including interest, as of 11/1/23 equal $939,185.63. • Future Impact Fee -funded Project: Miller Park Master Plan (As of 11/1/23, currently waiting on scope of work and cost from large landscape architect). Cost unknown currently. • Future Impact Fee -funded Project: Based on a discussion between community members, staff, and the Council/Mayor, the Council is supportive of using a significant portion of non -obligated funds for an all - wheels park at Miller Park (corner of Angela and Philbin). In addition to the all -wheels park amenity, because the land is currently unimproved, the project will also include a parking lot, restroom, likely concession stand, and other similar improvements. We anticipate that the full all -wheels park will be funded through impact fee funds as well as private donations and grants. • Future Impact Fee -funded Project: City Hall Park Power Upgrades to increase event capacity • Impact Fee Credit Agreements: o In 2023, the City entered into 2 development agreements to allow developers to either build an equal value of park system improvements, or to hold funds in escrow with the City for future use in a park. ■ Brookstone Estates Div. 12: Developer will be constructing a small public park adjacent to the development and will also be constructing a separated pathway with adjacent landscaping on Lamar Street (a classified arterial). Because small parks such as this park are against the desires of the City, the developer has formed an HOA which will maintain the public park space in perpetuity while providing public access. ■ Copperfield Div. 6: Although the single-family residential parks development impact fee is $2,366.78, the developer approached the City about putting that amount and additional funds into an escrow account to be used for building public park amenities at Trueman Park. $270,000 ($5,000/door) is currently in the escrow account for future improvements. Police • Since its creation, the police development impact fee fund has collected $195,932.16 (not including interest). 5 o FY19: $12,388.09 o FY20: $30,833.85 o FY21: $44,046.80 o FY22: $38,239.65 o FY23: $63,657.49 o FY24 fiscal year to date: $6,766.28 • Until recently, no police development impact fee monies were spent. Recent expenditures have been for $3,000 for 1/2 of the cost of the impact fee update. The remaining 1/2 is the only current obligation on the fund. • Estimated non -obligated funds, not including interest, as of 11/1/23 equal $189,932.16. • Future Impact Fee -funded Project: Impact fees will be used for bond repayment for the police headquarters expansion and the new animal control facility. Emergency Services • Since its creation, the EMS development impact fee fund has collected $249,279.09 (not including interest). o FY19: $12,498.84 o FY20: $35,018.97 o FY21: $52,388.04 o FY22: $50,786.62 o FY23: $88,401.60 o FY24 fiscal year to date: $10,185.02 • Until recently, no EMS development impact fee monies were spent. Recent expenditures have been for $3,000 for 1/2 of the cost of the impact fee update. The remaining 1/2 is the only current obligation on the fund. 0 • Estimated non -obligated funds, not including interest, as of 11/1/23 equal $243,279.09. • Future Impact Fee -funded Project: Possible building at future fire station site at Miller Park. Other options are also being explored. Attachments: 1. Idaho Code Title 67 Chapter 82, Development Impact Fees 2. Ordinance No. 783- Police and EMS 3. Ordinance No. 791 4. (Ord. No. 804- corrected No. 791)- Parks 5. Current Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis 6. Current Emergency Services and Impact Fee Analysis 7. Current Parks & Recreation and Impact Fee Analysis 8. Impact Fee Inflationary Adjustment Resolution - January 1, 2020 9. 2023 Draft Updated Parks & Recreation and Impact Fee Analysis 10. 2023 Draft Emergency Services and Impact Fee Analysis 11. 2023 Draft Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis 7 TITLE 67 STATE GOVERNMENT AND STATE AFFAIRS CHAPTER 82 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES 67-8201. SHORT TITLE. This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Idaho Development Impact Fee Act." [67-8201, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 861.1 67-8202. PURPOSE. The legislature finds that an equitable program for planning and financing public facilities needed to serve new growth and de- velopment is necessary in order to promote and accommodate orderly growth and development and to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the state of Idaho. It is the intent by enactment of this chapter to: (1) Ensure that adequate public facilities are available to serve new growth and development; (2) Promote orderly growth and development by establishing uniform standards by which local governments may require that those who benefit from new growth and development pay a proportionate share of the cost of new public facilities needed to serve new growth and development; (3) Establish minimum standards for the adoption of development impact fee ordinances by governmental entities; (4) Ensure that those who benefit from new growth and development are required to pay no more than their proportionate share of the cost of public facilities needed to serve new growth and development and to prevent dupli- cate and ad hoc development requirements; and (5) Empower governmental entities which are authorized to adopt ordi- nances to impose development impact fees. [67-8202, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 861.1 67-8203. DEFINITIONS. As used in this chapter: (1) "Affordable housing" means housing affordable to families whose incomes do not exceed eighty percent (800) of the median income for the service area or areas within the jurisdiction of the governmental entity. (2) "Appropriate" means to legally obligate by contract or otherwise commit to use by appropriation or other official act of a governmental en- tity. (3) "Capital improvements" means improvements with a useful life of ten (10 ) years or more, by new construction or other action, which increase the service capacity of a public facility. (4) "Capital improvement element" means a component of a comprehensive plan adopted pursuant to chapter 65, title 67, Idaho Code, which component meets the requirements of a capital improvements plan pursuant to this chap- ter. (5) "Capital improvements plan" means a plan adopted pursuant to this chapter that identifies capital improvements for which development impact fees may be used as a funding source. (6) "Developer" means any person or legal entity undertaking develop- ment, including a party that undertakes the subdivision of property pursuant to sections 50-1301 through 50-1334, Idaho Code. 2 (7) "Development" means any construction or installation of a building or structure, or any change in use of a building or structure, or any change in the use, character or appearance of land, which creates additional demand and need for public facilities or the subdivision of property that would per- mit any change in the use, character or appearance of land. As used in this chapter, "development" shall not include activities that would otherwise be subject to payment of the development impact fee if such activities are undertaken by a taxing district, as defined in section 63-201, Idaho Code, or by an authorized public charter school, as defined in section 33-5202A, Idaho Code, in the course of carrying out its statutory responsibilities, unless the adopted impact fee ordinance expressly includes taxing districts or public charter schools as being subject to development impact fees. (8) "Development approval" means any written authorization from a gov- ernmental entity that authorizes the commencement of a development. (9) "Development impact fee" means a payment of money imposed as a con- dition of development approval to pay for a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements needed to serve development. This term is also re- ferred to as an impact fee in this chapter. The term does not include the following: (a) A charge or fee to pay the administrative, plan review, or inspec- tion costs associated with permits required for development; (b) Connection or hookup charges; (c) Availability charges for drainage, sewer, water, or transportation charges for services provided directly to the development; or (d) Amounts collected from a developer in a transaction in which the governmental entity has incurred expenses in constructing capital im- provements for the development if the owner or developer has agreed to be financially responsible for the construction or installation of the capital improvements, unless a written agreement is made pursuant to section 67-8209(3), Idaho Code, for credit or reimbursement. (10) "Development requirement" means a requirement attached to a devel- opmental approval or other governmental action approving or authorizing a particular development project including, but not limited to, a rezoning, which requirement compels the payment, dedication or contribution of goods, services, land, or money as a condition of approval. (11) "Extraordinary costs" means those costs incurred as a result of an extraordinary impact. (12) "Extraordinary impact" means an impact that is reasonably deter- mined by the governmental entity to: (a) Result in the need for system improvements, the cost of which will significantly exceed the sum of the development impact fees to be gener- ated from the project or the sum agreed to be paid pursuant to a develop- ment agreement as allowed by section 67-8214 (2) , Idaho Code; or (b) Result in the need for system improvements that are not identified in the capital improvements plan. (13) "Fee payer" means that person who pays or is required to pay a de- velopment impact fee. (14) "Governmental entity" means any unit of local government that is empowered in this enabling legislation to adopt a development impact fee or- dinance. (15) "Impact fee." See development impact fee. 3 (16) "Land use assumptions" means a description of the service area and projections of land uses, densities, intensities, and population in the ser- vice area over at least a twenty (20) year period. (17) "Level of service" means a measure of the relationship between ser- vice capacity and service demand for public facilities. (18) "Manufactured home" means a structure, constructed according to HUD/FHA mobile home construction and safety standards, transportable in one (1) or more sections, which, in the traveling mode, is eight (8) feet or more in width or is forty (40) body feet or more in length, or when erected on site, is three hundred twenty (320) or more square feet, and which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems contained therein, except that such term shall include any structure that meets all the requirements of this subsection except the size requirements and with re- spect to which the manufacturer voluntarily files a certification required by the secretary of housing and urban development and complies with the stan- dards established under 42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq. (19) "Modular building" is as defined in section 39-4301, Idaho Code. (20) "Present value" means the total current monetary value of past, present, or future payments, contributions or dedications of goods, ser- vices, materials, construction or money. (21) "Project" means a particular development on an identified parcel of land. (22) "Project improvements" means site improvements and facilities that are planned and designed to provide service for a particular devel- opment project and that are necessary for the use and convenience of the occupants or users of the project. (23) "Proportionate share" means that portion of the cost of system im- provements determined pursuant to section 67-8207, Idaho Code, which rea- sonably relates to the service demands and needs of the project. (24) "Public facilities" means: (a) Water supply production, treatment, storage and distribution fa- cilities; (b) Wastewater collection, treatment and disposal facilities; (c) Roads, streets and bridges, including rights-of-way, traffic signals, landscaping and any local components of state or federal highways; (d) Stormwater collection, retention, detention, treatment and dis- posal facilities, flood control facilities, and bank and shore protec- tion and enhancement improvements; (e) Parks, open space and recreation areas, and related capital im- provements; and (f) Public safety facilities, including law enforcement, fire stations and apparatus, emergency medical and rescue, and street lighting facil- ities. (25) "Recreational vehicle" means a vehicular type unit primarily de- signed as temporary quarters for recreational, camping, or travel use, which either has its own motive power or is mounted on or drawn by another vehicle. (26) "Service area" means any defined geographic area identified by a governmental entity or by intergovernmental agreement in which specific public facilities provide service to development within the area defined, on the basis of sound planning or engineering principles or both. B! (27) "Service unit" means a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. (28) "System improvements," in contrast to project improvements, means capital improvements to public facilities designed to provide service to a service area including, without limitation, the type of improvements described in section 50-1703, Idaho Code. (29) "System improvement costs" means costs incurred for construction or reconstruction of system improvements, including design, acquisition, engineering and other costs attributable thereto, and also including, without limitation, the type of costs described in section 50-1702(h), Idaho Code, to provide additional public facilities needed to serve new growth and development. For clarification, system improvement costs do not include: (a) Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan; (b) Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital im- provements; (c) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards; (d) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital im- provements to provide better service to existing development; (e) Administrative and operating costs of the governmental entity un- less such costs are attributable to development of the capital improve- ments plan, as provided in section 67-8208, Idaho Code; or (f) Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on be- half of the governmental entity to finance capital improvements identi- fied in the capital improvements plan. [67-8203, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 861; am. 1996, ch. 366, sec. 1, p. 1226; am. 2002, ch. 347, sec. 1, p. 983; am. 2007, ch. 252, sec. 16, p. 753; am. 2008, ch. 389, sec. 1, p. 1068; am. 2019, ch. 70, sec. 1, p. 164; am. 2021, ch. 199, sec. 1, p. 546.1 67-8204. MINIMUM STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES ORDINANCES. Governmental entities which comply with the requirements of this chapter may impose by ordinance development impact fees as a condi- tion of development approval on all developments. (1) A development impact fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements determined in accordance with section 67-8207, Idaho Code. Development impact fees shall be based on actual system improvement costs or reasonable estimates of such costs. (2) A development impact fee shall be calculated on the basis of levels of service for public facilities adopted in the development impact fee ordi- nance of the governmental entity that are applicable to existing development as well as new growth and development. The construction, improvement, ex- pansion or enlargement of new or existing public facilities for which a de- velopment impact fee is imposed must be attributable to the capacity demands generated by the new development. (3) A development impact fee ordinance shall specify the point in the development process at which the development impact fee shall be collected. The development impact fee may be collected no earlier than the commencement 5 of construction of the development, or the issuance of a building permit or a manufactured home installation permit, or as may be agreed by the developer and the governmental entity. (4) A development impact fee ordinance shall be adopted in accordance with the procedural requirements of section 67-8206, Idaho Code. (5) A development impact fee ordinance shall include a process whereby the governmental agency shall allow the developer, upon request by the developer, to provide a written individual assessment of the proportionate share of development impact fees under the guidelines established by this chapter which shall be set forth in the ordinance. The individual assessment process shall permit consideration of studies, data, and any other relevant information submitted by the developer to adjust the amount of the fee. The decision by the governmental agency on an application for an individual assessment shall include an explanation of the calculation of the impact fee, including an explanation of factors considered under section 67-8207, Idaho Code, and shall specify the system improvement (s) for which the impact fee is intended to be used. (6) A development impact fee ordinance shall provide a process whereby a developer shall receive, upon request, a written certification of the development impact fee schedule or individual assessment for a particular project, which shall establish the development impact fee so long as there is no material change to the particular project as identified in the individual assessment application, or the impact fee schedule. The certification shall include an explanation of the calculation of the impact fee including an explanation of factors considered under section 67-8207, Idaho Code. The certification shall also specify the system improvement(s) for which the impact fee is intended to be used. (7) A development impact fee ordinance shall include a provision for credits in accordance with the requirements of section 67-8209, Idaho Code. (8) A development impact fee ordinance shall include a provision prohibiting the expenditure of development impact fees except in accordance with the requirements of section 67-8210, Idaho Code. (9) A development impact fee ordinance may provide for the imposition of a development impact fee for system improvement costs incurred subsequent to adoption of the ordinance to the extent that new growth and development will be served by the system improvements. (10) A development impact fee ordinance may exempt all or part of a par- ticular development project from development impact fees provided that such project is determined to create affordable housing, provided that the pub- lic policy which supports the exemption is contained in the governmental en- tity's comprehensive plan and provided that the exempt development's pro- portionate share of system improvements is funded through a revenue source other than development impact fees. (11) A development impact fee ordinance shall provide that development impact fees shall only be spent for the category of system improvements for which the fees were collected and either within or for the benefit of the ser- vice area in which the project is located. (12) A development impact fee ordinance shall provide for a refund of development impact fees in accordance with the requirements of section 67-8211, Idaho Code. (13) A development impact fee ordinance shall establish for a procedure for timely processing of applications for determination by the governmental entity regarding development impact fees applicable to a project, individ- I ual assessment of development impact fees, credits or reimbursements to be allowed or paid under section 67-8209, Idaho Code, and extraordinary impact. (14) A development impact fee ordinance shall specify when an applica- tion for an individual assessment of development impact fees shall be per- mitted to be made by a developer or fee payer. An application for an individ- ual assessment of development impact fees shall be permitted sufficiently in advance of the time that the developer or fee payer may seek a building permit or related permits so that the issuance of a building permit or related per- mits will not be delayed. (15) A development impact fee ordinance shall provide for appeals re- garding development impact fees in accordance with the requirements of sec- tion 67-8212, Idaho Code. (16) A development impact fee ordinance must provide a detailed de- scription of the methodology by which costs per service unit are determined. The development impact fee per service unit may not exceed the amount determined by dividing the costs of the capital improvements described in section 67-8208 (1) ( f) , Idaho Code, by the total number of projected service units described in section 67-8208 (1) (g) , Idaho Code. If the number of new service units projected over a reasonable period of time is less than the total number of new service units shown by the approved land use assumptions at full development of the service area, the maximum impact fee per service unit shall be calculated by dividing the costs of the part of the capital improvements necessitated by and attributable to the projected new service units described in section 67-8208 (1) (g) , Idaho Code, by the total projected new service units described in that section. (17) A development impact fee ordinance shall include a schedule of de- velopment impact fees for various land uses per unit of development. The or- dinance shall provide that a developer shall have the right to elect to pay a project's proportionate share of system improvement costs by payment of de- velopment impact fees according to the fee schedule as full and complete pay- ment of the development project's proportionate share of system improvement costs, except as provided in section 67-8214 (3) , Idaho Code. (18) After payment of the development impact fees or execution of an agreement for payment of development impact fees, additional development impact fees or increases in fees may not be assessed unless the number of service units increases or the scope or schedule of the development changes. In the event of an increase in the number of service units or schedule of the development changes, the additional development impact fees to be imposed are limited to the amount attributable to the additional service units or change in scope of the development. (19) No system for the calculation of development impact fees shall be adopted which subjects any development to double payment of impact fees. (20) A development impact fee ordinance shall exempt from development impact fees the following activities: (a) Rebuilding the same amount of floor space of a structure which was destroyed by fire or other catastrophe, providing the structure is re- built and ready for occupancy within two (2) years of its destruction; (b) Remodeling or repairing a structure which does not increase the number of service units; (c) Replacing a residential unit, including a manufactured home, with another residential unit on the same lot, provided that the number of service units does not increase; (d) Placing a temporary construction trailer or office on a lot; W (e) Constructing an addition on a residential structure which does not increase the number of service units; and (f) Adding uses that are typically accessory to residential uses, such as tennis courts or clubhouse, unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a significant impact on the capacity of system improvements. (21) A development impact fee will be assessed for installation of a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle unless the fee payer can demonstrate by documentation such as utility bills and tax records, either: (a) That a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle was legally in place on the lot or space prior to the effective date of the development impact fee ordinance; or (b) That a development impact fee has been paid previously for the in- stallation of a modular building, manufactured home or recreational ve- hicle on that same lot or space. (22) A development impact fee ordinance shall include a process for dealing with a project which has extraordinary impacts. (23) A development impact fee ordinance shall provide for the calcula- tion of a development impact fee in accordance with generally accepted ac- counting principles. A development impact fee shall not be deemed invalid because payment of the fee may result in an incidental benefit to owners or developers within the service area other than the person paying the fee. (24) A development impact fee ordinance shall include a description of acceptable levels of service for system improvements. (25) Any provision of a development impact fee ordinance that is incon- sistent with the requirements of this chapter shall be null and void and that provision shall have no legal effect. A partial invalidity of a development impact fee ordinance shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the ordinance that are consistent with the requirements of this chapter. [67-8204, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 864; am. 1996, ch. 366, sec. 2, p. 1229; am. 2002, ch. 347, sec. 2, p. 986.1 67-8204A. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS. Governmental entities as defined in section 67-8203(14), Idaho Code, that are jointly affected by development are authorized to enter into intergovernmental agreements with each other or with highway districts, fire districts, ambulance districts, water districts, sewer districts, recreational water and sewer districts, or irrigation districts for the purpose of developing joint plans for capital improvements or for the purpose of agreeing to collect and expend development impact fees for system improvements, or both, provided that such agreement complies with any applicable state laws. Governmental entities are also authorized to enter into agreements with the Idaho transportation department for the expenditure of development impact fees pursuant to a developer's agreement under section 67-8214, Idaho Code. [67-8204A, added 1996, ch. 366, sec. 3, p. 1232; am. 2007, ch. 167, sec. 1, p. 496; am. 2021, ch. 95, sec. 1, p. 325.] 67-8205. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ADVISORY COMMITTEE. (1) Any governmen- tal entity that is considering or that has adopted a development impact fee ordinance shall establish a development impact fee advisory committee. 3 (2)(a) The development impact fee advisory committee shall be composed of not fewer than five (5) members appointed by the governing authority of the governmental entity. (b) Two (2) or more members shall be active in the business of devel- opment, building, or real estate. An existing planning or planning and zoning commission may serve as the development impact fee advisory com- mittee if the commission includes two (2) or more members who are active in the business of development, building, or real estate; otherwise, two (2) such members who are not employees or officials of a governmen- tal entity shall be appointed to the committee. (c) New appointments and reappointments to a committee on and af- ter July 1, 2021, must comply with the provisions of this paragraph. All members must reside within the jurisdictional boundaries of the governmental entity. Two (2) or more members 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. Employees or officials acting in their official capacity for a governmental entity may not be appointed as members of the committee. An existing planning or planning and zoning commission may serve as the development impact fee advisory committee for the governing authority if the commission includes two (2) or more members who are active in the business of development, building, or real estate and two (2) or more members who are not in such business; otherwise, two (2) such members who are not employees or officials of a governmental entity shall be appointed to the committee until the membership requirements of this subsection are met. (3) The development impact fee advisory committee shall serve in an ad- visory capacity and is established to: (a) Assist the governmental entity in adopting land use assumptions; (b) Review the capital improvements plan, and proposed amendments, and file written comments; (c) Monitor and evaluate implementation of the capital improvements plan; (d) File periodic reports, at least annually, with respect to the cap- ital improvements plan and report to the governmental entity any per- ceived inequities in implementing the plan or imposing the development impact fees; and (e) Advise the governmental entity of the need to update or revise land use assumptions, the capital improvements plan, and development impact fees. (4) The governmental entity shall make available to the advisory committee, upon request, all financial and accounting information, profes- sional reports in relation to other development and implementation of land use assumptions, the capital improvements plan, and periodic updates of the capital improvements plan. [67-8205, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 867; am. 2021, ch. 136, sec. 1, p. 382.1 67-8206. PROCEDURE FOR THE IMPOSITION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. (1) A development impact fee shall be imposed by a governmental entity in compli- ance with the provisions set forth in this section. (2) A capital improvements plan shall be developed in coordination with the development impact fee advisory committee utilizing the land use assump- I tions most recently adopted by the appropriate land use planning agency or agencies. (3) A governmental entity that seeks to consider adoption, amendment, or repeal of a capital improvements plan shall hold at least one (1) public hearing. The governmental entity shall publish a notice of the time, place and purpose of the hearing or hearings not fewer than fifteen (15) nor more than thirty (30) days before the scheduled date of the hearing, in a newspa- per of general circulation within the jurisdiction of the governmental en- tity. Such notices shall also include a statement that the governmental en- tity shall make available to the public, upon request, the following: pro- posed land use assumptions, a copy of the proposed capital improvements plan or amendments thereto, and a statement that any member of the public affected by the capital improvements plan or amendments shall have the right to appear at the public hearing and present evidence regarding the proposed capital improvements plan or amendments. The governmental entity shall send notice of the intent to hold a public hearing by mail to any person who has requested in writing notification of the hearing date at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing date, provided that the governmental entity may require that any person making such request renew the request for notification, not more frequently than once each year, in accordance with a schedule determined by the governmental entity, in order to continue receiving such notices. (4) If the governmental entity makes a material change in the capital improvements plan or amendment, further notice and hearing may be provided before the governmental entity adopts the revision if the governmental en- tity makes a finding that further notice and hearing are required in the pub- lic interest. (5) Either following or concurrently with adoption of the initial or amended capital improvements plan, a governmental entity shall conduct a public hearing to consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the impo- sition of development impact fees or any amendment thereof. Notice of the hearing shall be provided in the same manner as set forth in subsection (3) of this section for adoption of a capital improvements plan, and such hearing, at the option of the governmental entity, may be combined with the public hearing held to adopt, amend or repeal the capital improvements plan. (6) Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to alter the procedures for adoption of an ordinance by the governmental entity. Pro- vided, however, a development impact fee ordinance shall not be adopted as an emergency measure but may be read for the first and second times on succes- sive days prior to the public hearing to consider its adoption and shall not take effect sooner than thirty (30) days following its adoption. [67-8206, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 868; am. 2006, ch. 321, sec. 1, P. 1019.1 67-8207. PROPORTIONATE SHARE DETERMINATION. (1) All development impact fees shall be based on a reasonable and fair formula or method under which the development impact fee imposed does not exceed a proportionate share of the costs incurred or to be incurred by the governmental entity in the provision of system improvements to serve the new development. The proportionate share is the cost attributable to the new development after the governmental entity considers the following: (i) any appropriate credit, offset or contribution of money, dedication of land, or construction of system improvements; (ii) payments reasonably anticipated to be made by or as a result of a new development in the form of user fees and debt service 10 payments; (iii) that portion of general tax and other revenues allocated by the jurisdiction to system improvements; and (iv) all other available sources of funding such system improvements. (2) In determining the proportionate share of the cost of system im- provements to be paid by the developer, the following factors shall be con- sidered by the governmental entity imposing the development impact fee and accounted for in the calculation of the impact fee: (a) The cost of existing system improvements within the service area or areas; (b) The means by which existing system improvements have been financed; (c) The extent to which the new development will contribute to the cost of system improvements through taxation, assessment, or developer or landowner contributions, or has previously contributed to the cost of system improvements through developer or landowner contributions. (d) The extent to which the new development is required to contribute to the cost of existing system improvements in the future. (e) The extent to which the new development should be credited for pro- viding system improvements, without charge to other properties within the service area or areas; (f) Extraordinary costs, if any, incurred in serving the new develop- ment; (g) The time and price differential inherent in a fair comparison of fees paid at different times; and (h) The availability of other sources of funding system improvements including, but not limited to, user charges, general tax levies, inter- governmental transfers, and special taxation. The governmental entity shall develop a plan for alternative sources of revenue. [67-8207, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 869; am. 1996, ch. 366, sec. 4, p. 1233; am. 2002, ch. 347, sec. 3, p. 989.1 67-8208. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN. (1) Each governmental entity in- tending to impose a development impact fee shall prepare a capital improve- ments plan. That portion of the cost of preparing a capital improvements plan which is attributable to determining the development impact fee may be funded by a one (1) time ad valorem levy which does not exceed two one -hun- dredths percent (.020) of market value or by a surcharge imposed by ordi- nance on the collection of a development impact fee which surcharge does not exceed the development's proportionate share of the cost of preparing the plan. For governmental entities required to undertake comprehensive plan- ning pursuant to chapter 65, title 67, Idaho Code, such capital improvements plan shall be prepared and adopted according to the requirements contained in the local planning act, section 67-6509, Idaho Code, and shall be included as an element of the comprehensive plan. The capital improvements plan shall be prepared by qualified professionals in fields relating to finance, engi- neering, planning and transportation. The persons preparing the plan shall consult with the development impact fee advisory committee. The capital improvements plan shall contain all of the following: (a) A general description of all existing public facilities and their existing deficiencies within the service area or areas of the govern- mental entity and a reasonable estimate of all costs and a plan to de- velop the funding resources related to curing the existing deficiencies including, but not limited to, the upgrading, updating, improving, ex- 11 panding or replacing of such facilities to meet existing needs and us- age; (b) A commitment by the governmental entity to use other available sources of revenue to cure existing system deficiencies where practi- cal; (c) An analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of capacity of existing capital improvements, which shall be prepared by a qualified professional planner or by a qualified engineer licensed to perform engineering services in this state; (d) A description of the land use assumptions by the government entity; (e) A definitive table establishing the specific level or quantity of use, consumption, generation or discharge of a service unit for each category of system improvements and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, including residential, commercial, agricultural and industrial; (f) A description of all system improvements and their costs necessi- tated by and attributable to new development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions, to provide a level of service not to exceed the level of service adopted in the development impact fee or- dinance; (g) The total number of service units necessitated by and attributable to new development within the service area based on the approved land use assumptions and calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning criteria; (h) The projected demand for system improvements required by new service units projected over a reasonable period of time not to exceed twenty (20) years; (i) Identification of all sources and levels of funding available to the governmental entity for the financing of the system improvements; (j) If the proposed system improvements include the improvement of public facilities under the jurisdiction of the state of Idaho or another governmental entity, then an agreement between governmental entities shall specify the reasonable share of funding by each unit, provided the governmental entity authorized to impose development impact fees shall not assume more than its reasonable share of funding joint improvements, nor shall the agreement permit expenditure of de- velopment impact fees by a governmental entity which is not authorized to impose development impact fees unless such expenditure is pursuant to a developer agreement under section 67-8214, Idaho Code; and (k) A schedule setting forth estimated dates for commencing and com- pleting construction of all improvements identified in the capital im- provements plan. (2) The governmental entity imposing a development impact fee shall update the capital improvements plan at least once every five (5) years. The five (5) year period shall commence from the date of the original adoption of the capital improvements plan. The updating of the capital improvements plan shall be made in accordance with procedures set forth in section 67-8206, Idaho Code. (3) The governmental entity must annually adopt a capital budget. (4) The capital improvements plan shall be updated in conformance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section each time a governmental en- 12 tity proposes the amendment, modification or adoption of a development im- pact fee ordinance. [67-8208, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 869; am. 1996, ch. 322, sec. 71, p. 1098; am. 1996, ch. 366, sec. 5, p. 1233; am. 2002, ch. 347, sec. 4, P. 990.] 67-8209. CREDITS. (1) In the calculation of development impact fees for a particular project, credit or reimbursement shall be given for the present value of any construction of system improvements or contribution or dedica- tion of land or money required by a governmental entity from a developer for system improvements of the category for which the development impact fee is being collected, including such system improvements paid for pursuant to a local improvement district. Credit or reimbursement shall not be given for project improvement. (2) In the calculation of development impact fees for a particular project, credit shall be given for the present value of all tax and user fee revenue generated by the developer, within the service area where the impact fee is being assessed and used by the governmental agency for system improvements of the category for which the development impact fee is being collected. If the amount of credit exceeds the proportionate share for the particular project, the developer shall receive a credit on future impact fees for the amount in excess of the proportionate share. The credit may be applied by the developer as an offset against future impact fees only in the service area where the credit was generated. (3) If a developer is required to construct, fund or contribute system improvements in excess of the development project's proportionate share of system improvement costs, including such system improvements paid for pursuant to a local improvement district, the developer shall receive a credit on future impact fees or be reimbursed at the developer's choice for such excess construction, funding or contribution from development impact fees paid by future development which impacts the system improvements constructed, funded or contributed by the developer (s) or fee payer. (4) If credit or reimbursement is due to the developer pursuant to this section, the governmental entity shall enter into a written agreement with the fee payer, negotiated in good faith, prior to the construction, funding or contribution. The agreement shall provide for the amount of credit or the amount, time and form of reimbursement. [67-8209, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 871; am. 1996, ch. 366, sec. 6, p. 1235; am. 1999, ch. 291, sec. 10, p. 730; am. 2002, ch. 347, sec. 5, P. 991.] 67-8210. EARMARKING AND EXPENDITURE OF COLLECTED DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. (1) An ordinance imposing development impact fees shall provide that all development impact fee funds shall be maintained in one (1) or more interest-bearing accounts within the capital projects fund. Accounting records shall be maintained for each category of system improvements and the service area in which the fees are collected. Interest earned on development impact fees shall be considered funds of the account on which it is earned, and not funds subject to section 57-127, Idaho Code, and shall be subject to all restrictions placed on the use of development impact fees under the provisions of this chapter. 13 (2) Expenditures of development impact fees shall be made only for the category of system improvements and within or for the benefit of the service area for which the development impact fee was imposed as shown by the capi- tal improvements plan and as authorized in this chapter. Development impact fees shall not be used for any purpose other than system improvement costs to create additional improvements to serve new growth. (3) As part of its annual audit process, a governmental entity shall prepare an annual report: (a) Describing the amount of all development impact fees collected, ap- propriated, or spent during the preceding year by category of public fa- cility and service area; and (b) Describing the percentage of tax and revenues other than impact fees collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements during the preceding year by category of public facility and service area. (4) Collected development impact fees must be expended within eight (8) years from the date they were collected, on a first -in, first -out (FIFO) basis, except that the development impact fees collected for wastewater collection, treatment and disposal and drainage facilities must be expended within twenty (20) years. Any funds not expended within the prescribed times shall be refunded pursuant to section 67-8211, Idaho Code. A governmental entity may hold the fees for longer than eight (8) years if it identifies, in writing: (a) A reasonable cause why the fees should be held longer than eight (8) years; and (b) An anticipated date by which the fees will be expended but in no event greater than eleven (11) years from the date they were collected. [67-8210, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 871; am. 1996, ch. 366, sec. 7, p. 1236; am. 2002, ch. 347, sec. 6, p. 992; am. 2006, ch. 321, sec. 2, p. 1020.] 67-8211. REFUNDS. (1) Any governmental entity which adopts a develop- ment impact fee ordinance shall provide for refunds upon the request of an owner of property on which a development impact fee has been paid if: (a) Service is available but never provided; (b) A building permit or permit for installation of a manufactured home is denied or abandoned; (c) The governmental entity, after collecting the fee when service is not available, has failed to appropriate and expend the collected de- velopment impact fees pursuant to section 67-8210 (4) , Idaho Code; or (d) The fee payer pays a fee under protest and a subsequent review of the fee paid or the completion of an individual assessment determines that the fee paid exceeded the proportionate share to which the governmental entity was entitled to receive. (2) When the right to a refund exists, the governmental entity is re- quired to send a refund to the owner of record within ninety (90) days after it is determined by the governmental entity that a refund is due. (3) A refund shall include a refund of interest at one-half (1/2) the legal rate provided for in section 28-22-104, Idaho Code, from the date on which the fee was originally paid. (4) Any person entitled to a refund shall have standing to sue for a re- fund under the provisions of this chapter if there has not been a timely pay- ment of a refund pursuant to subsection (2) of this section. 14 [67-8211, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 872; am. 2002, ch. 347, sec. 7, p. 993.] 67-8212. APPEALS. (1) A governmental entity which adopts a development impact fee ordinance shall provide for administrative appeals by the devel- oper or fee payer from any discretionary action or inaction by or on behalf of the governmental entity. (2) A fee payer may pay a development impact fee under protest in order to obtain a development approval or building permit. A fee payer making such payment shall not be estopped from exercising the right of appeal provided in this chapter, nor shall such fee payer be estopped from receiving a refund of any amount deemed to have been illegally collected. (3) A governmental entity which adopts a development impact fee ordi- nance shall provide for mediation by a qualified independent party, upon voluntary agreement by the fee payer and the governmental entity, to address a disagreement related to the impact fee for proposed development. The ordinance shall provide that mediation may take place at any time during the appeals process and participation in mediation does not preclude the fee payer from pursuing other remedies provided for in this section. The ordinance shall provide that mediation costs will be shared equally by the fee payer and the governmental entity. [67-8212, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 872; am. 1996, ch. 366, sec. 8, p. 1236.] 67-8213. COLLECTION. A governmental entity may provide in a develop- ment impact fee ordinance the means for collection of development impact fees, including, but not limited to: (1) Additions to the fee for reasonable interest and penalties for non- payment or late payment; (2) Withholding of the building permit or other governmental approval until the development impact fee is paid; (3) Withholding of utility services until the development impact fee is paid; and (4) Imposing liens for failure to timely pay a development impact fee following procedures contained in chapter 5, title 45, Idaho Code. A governmental entity that discovers an error in its impact fee formula that results in assessment or payment of more than a proportionate share shall, at the time of assessment on a case by case basis, adjust the fee to collect no more than a proportionate share or discontinue the collection of any impact fees until the error is corrected by ordinance. [67-8213, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 872; am. 2002, ch. 347, sec. 8, p. 993.1 67-8214. OTHER POWERS AND RIGHTS NOT AFFECTED. (1) Nothing in this chapter shall prevent a governmental entity from requiring a developer to construct reasonable project improvements in conjunction with a development project. (2) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent or pro- hibit private agreements between property owners or developers, the Idaho transportation department and governmental entities in regard to the con- struction or installation of system improvements or providing for credits or reimbursements for system improvement costs incurred by a developer 15 including interproject transfers of credits or providing for reimbursement for project improvements which are used or shared by more than one (1) development project. If it can be shown that a proposed development has a direct impact on a public facility under the jurisdiction of the Idaho trans- portation department, then the agreement shall include a provision for the allocation of impact fees collected from the developer for the improvement of the public facility by the Idaho transportation department. (3) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate a governmental entity to ap- prove development which results in an extraordinary impact. (4) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate a governmental entity to approve any development request which may reasonably be expected to reduce levels of service below minimum acceptable levels established in the development impact fee ordinance. (5) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to create any additional right to develop real property or diminish the power of counties or cities in regulating the orderly development of real property within their bound- aries. (6) Nothing in this chapter shall work to limit the use by governmen- tal entities of the power of eminent domain or supersede or conflict with re- quirements or procedures authorized in the Idaho Code for local improvement districts or general obligation bond issues. (7) Nothing herein shall restrict or diminish the power of a govern- mental entity to annex property into its territorial boundaries or exclude property from its territorial boundaries upon request of a developer or owner, or to impose reasonable conditions thereon, including the recovery of project or system improvement costs required as a result of such voluntary annexation. [67-8214, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 873; am. 1996, ch. 366, sec. 9, p. 1237.1 67-8215. TRANSITION. (1) The provisions of this chapter shall not be construed to repeal any existing laws authorizing a governmental entity to impose fees or require contributions or property dedications for capital improvements. All ordinances imposing development impact fees shall be brought into conformance with the provisions of this chapter within one (1) year after the effective date of this chapter. Impact fees collected and developer agreements entered into prior to the expiration of the one (1) year period shall not be invalid by reason of this chapter. After adoption of a development impact fee ordinance, in accordance with the provisions of this chapter, notwithstanding any other provision of law, development requirements for system improvements shall be imposed by governmental entities only by way of development impact fees imposed pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. (2) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, that portion of a project for which a valid building permit has been issued or construc- tion has commenced prior to the effective date of a development impact fee ordinance shall not be subject to additional development impact fees so long as the building permit remains valid or construction is commenced and is pur- sued according to the terms of the permit or development approval. [67-8215, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 873.] MA. 67-8216. SEVERABILITY. The provisions of this chapter are hereby de- clared to be severable and if any provision of this chapter or the applica- tion of such provision to any person or circumstance is declared invalid for any reason, such declaration shall not affect the validity of remaining por- tions of this chapter. [67-8216, added 1992, ch. 282, sec. 1, p. 873.] CHAPTER 83 IDAHO FOOD QUALITY ASSURANCE INSTITUTE -- [REPEALED] CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, ADOPTING CHAPTER 17.28 "POLICE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES IMPACT FEE" TO PROVIDE AN IMPACT FEE UPON NEW DEVELOPMENT EFFECTIVE MARCH 26, 2019 PROVIDING NEW DEVELOPMENT SHALL PAY IMPACT FEES TO BE APPLIED TOWARDS POLICE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF SAID IMPACT FEES AND PERIODIC ADJUSTMENT THEREOF; ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLANS DATED SEPTEMBER 1, 2018 FOR THE POLICE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENTS; REPEALING PRIOR CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING WHEN THIS ORDINANCE IS EFFECTIVE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO: Section I. Adoption of Title 17, Chapter 24, "Police and Emergency Services Impact_ Fee". The following is adopted effective March 26, 2019- 17.24.100 LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS: The city council of the city of Chubbuck, Idaho, finds that: (A) Based on the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City pursuant to Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, including, but not limited to, the capital improvements element of the comprehensive plan, and the general governmental goal of protecting the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the city, and its Area of City Impact, it is necessary for; 1) police public facilities; and 2) emergency services public facilities to accommodate new development within the city, and its area of city impact. (B) New residential and nonresidential growth and development imposes and will impose increasing and excessive demands upon the public facilities. (C) The revenues generated from new residential and nonresidential growth and development often does not generate sufficient funds to provide the necessary levels of service provided by these public facilities to accommodate new development. (D) New development is expected to continue, and will place ever increasing demands on the city to provide and expand the public facilities to serve new development. ORDINANCE - Page l . chubbuck 021 1 l9 polio & emergency sn imp fee ord.wpd (E) The city has planned for the improvement of the public facilities in the capital improvements element of the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan and in the impact fee analysis and the capital improvement plan reviewed and adopted therewith. (F) The creation of an equitable impact fee system in accordance with Title 67. Chapter 82, Idaho Code would enable the city to impose a proportionate share of the costs of needed improvements to the public facilities to accommodate new development, and would assist the city iii implementing the capital improvements element of the comprehensive plan. (G) In order to implement an equitable impact fee system for the public facilities, the city retained Zions Public Finance, Inc. ("Zions") to prepare an impact fee studies for these types of facilities. The resulting documents are titled: Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis, and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis, and all dated September, 2418 (the "Impact Fee Study"), and recommended for approval by the Impact Fee Advisory Committee. The studies are on file in the office of the city clerk of the city of Chubbuck, Any reference herein to the Impact Fee Study shall be to the respective study for that service. (H) The Impact Fee Study is consistent with the capital improvements element of the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan, and uses the levels of service set forth in the Comprehensive Plan for these public facilities. 1. Police level of service from page 2 of the Police Impact Fee Study is .4599 calls per capita for 2016 with an estimated number of calls per capita at build out to be .4574. 2. Emergency Services level of service from page 3 of the Emergency Services Impact Fee Study is .0762 calls per capita for 2016 with an estimate number of calls per capita at build out to be .064T (I) The Impact Fee Study sets forth reasonable methodologies and analyses for determining the impacts of various types of new development on the public facilities, and determines the cost of acquiring or constructing the improvements necessary to meet the demands for such public facilities created by new development. (!) The Impact Fee Study uses a calculation methodology in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. This chapter shall not be deemed invalid because payment of an impact fee may result in an incidental benefit to others within the service area other than the fee payer. ORDINANCE - Page 2. chuhbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fre ord,wpd (K) The impact fees described in this chapter are based on the Impact Fee Study, and do not exceed the costs of system improvements for the public facilities to serve new development that will pay the impact fees. (L) The police and emergency services included in the calculation of impact fees in the Impact Fee Study will benefit all new development throughout the city, and it is therefore appropriate to treat all areas of the city and the area of city impact as a single service area for purposes of calculating, collecting and spending the impact fees collected. (M) There is both a rational nexus and a rough proportionality between the development impacts created by each type of development covered by this chapter and the impact fees that such development will be required to pay. (N) This chapter creates a system by which impact fees paid by new development will be used to finance, defray or to provide capital improvements for the public facilities in ways that benefit the development for which impact Fees were paid. (0) This chapter creates a system under which impact fees shall not be used to correct existing deficiencies in public facilities, or to replace or rehabilitate existing public facilities, or to pay for routine operation or maintenance of those public facilities. (P) This chapter creates a system under which there shall be no double payment of impact fees, in accordance with Idaho Code § 67-8204(19). (Q) This chapter is consistent with all applicable provisions of title 67, chapter 82, Idaho Code, concerning impact fee ordinances. 17.24.200: AUTHORITY, APPLICABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE: (A) This chapter is enacted pursuant to the city's general police powers pursuant to the authority granted to the city by title 50, Idaho Code, and pursuant to the authority granted to the city by § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. (B) The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all of the territory within the limits of the city and to any unincorporated areas of the city within the city's area of city impact where the city has executed an intergovernmental agreement with Bannock County For purposes of collection or expenditure of impact fees pursuant to § 67-8204A, Idaho Code, and other applicable laws of the state of Idaho. (C) This chapter is effective March 26, 2019 ("Effective Date"), which effective date is more than thirty (30) days subsequent to the passage, approval and publication, according to law, of the ordinance codified herein, which adopted the provisions hereof. ORDINANCE - Page 3. chubbuek 021119 poiic & emergency sry inip f'ee ord.wpd (D) Applications for building permits received by the city prior to the effective date hereof, or amendments hereto, adopting impact fees or amending or adopting any methodology by which impact fees are calculated, will be exempt from that portion of this chapter, or amendment enacted after such building permit application, if a valid building permit has been issued or construction has commenced prior to the effective date hereof, or amendment. For building permits that expire or are revoked after the effective date hereof, the fee payer shall be entitled to a refund of previously paid fees as provided herein, provided that in the case of reapplication for building permit, the impact fee in effect at that time shall be paid. (E) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, development requirements for system improvements shall be imposed by the city only by way of impact fees imposed pursuant to and in accordance with § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, and this chapter. 17.24.300: INTENT: (A) The intent of this chapter is to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the city and its area of city impact. (6) The intent of this chapter is to be consistent with those principles for allocating a fair share of the cost of capital improvements to public facilities to serve new development in compliance with the provisions set forth in § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. The provisions of this chapter shall be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the provisions set forth in § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code - (C) The intent of this chapter is that impact fees should be charged, collected, and expended for police and emergency services capital improvements to increase the service capacity of such categories of public facilities, which capital improvements are included in approved capital improvements plans that list the capital improvements that may be funded with impact fees. (D) The intent of this chapter is to ensure that: 1. public facilities are available to serve new development; 2. new development bears a proportionate share of the cost of police and emergency services capital improvements to such public facilities; 3. such proportionate share does not exceed the cost of the capital improvements to such public facilities required to serve new development; and 4. the funds collected from new development are used for capital improvements for public facilities that benefit new development. (E) It is not the intent of this chapter to collect any monies from new development in excess of the actual amount necessary to offset new demands for capital improvements to public ORDNANCE - Page 4. chubhuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd facilities created by such new development. (F) It is not the intent of this chapter that the impact fees be used to remedy any deficiency in police and emergency services capital improvements existing on the effective date hereof, or ever be used to replace, rehabilitate, maintain and/or operate any public facilities. (G) It is not the intent of this chapter that any monies collected from an impact fee deposited in an impact fee find ever be commingled with monies from a different fund, or ever be used for capital improvements that are different from those for which the impact fee was paid. (H) It is not the intent of this chapter that impact fees be used for: 1. Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. 2. Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards. 4. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development to provide better service to existing development. Administrative and operating costs of the city unless such costs are attributable to development of the capital improvements plan used to determine impact fees by a surcharge imposed by ordinance on the collection of an impact fee, which surcharge shall not exceed a development's proportionate share of the cost of preparing the capital improvements plan. 6. Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the city to finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. 17.24.444: DEFINITIONS: 401. APPROPRIATE: To legally obligate by contract or otherwise commit to use by appropriation or other official act of a governmental entity. 402. BUE DING PERMIT: An official document or certificate by that name issued by the city authorizing the construction or siting of any building. 443. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS: Improvements with a useful life of ten (10) years or ORDINANCE - Page S. chubbuck 021119 pplic & emergency sry inip fee ord.wpd more, by new construction or other action, which increase the service capacity of a public facility. 404. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT: A component of a comprehensive plan adopted pursuant to chapter 65, title 67, Idaho Code, which component meets the requirements of a capital improvements plan pursuant to this chapter. 405, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN: A plan adopted pursuant to this chapter that identifies capital improvements for which impact fees may be used as a funding source. 406. CITY: The city of Chubbuck, Idaho. 407. CITY COUNCIL: The legislative body of the city of Chubbuck, Idaho. 408. DEVELOPER: Any person or legal entity undertaking development, including a party that undertakes the subdivision of property pursuant to §s 50-1301 through 50-1334, Idaho Code and this title. 409. DEVELOPMENT: Any construction or installation of a building or structure, or any change in use of a building or structure, or any change in the use, character or appearance of land, which creates additional demand and need for public facilities or the subdivision of property that would permit any change in the use, character or appearance of land. As used in this chapter, "development" shall not include activities that would otherwise be subject to payment of the development impact fee if such activities are undertaken by a taxing district, as defined in § 63-201, Idaho Code, in the course of carrying out the taxing district's public responsibilities, unless the adopted impact fee ordinance expressly includes taxing districts as being subject to development impact fees. 410. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL: Any written authorization from a governmental entity which authorizes the commencement of a development. 411. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE: See definition of Impact Fee. 412, DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT: A requirement attached to a development approval or other governmental action approving or authorizing a particular development including, without limitation, a rezoning, which development requirement compels the payment, dedication or contribution of goods, services, land and/or money as a condition of approval. 4I3. DWELLING UNIT; A building or portion of a building designed for or whose primary purpose is for residential occupancy, and which consists of one or more rooms which are arranged, designed or used as living and/or sleeping quarters for one or more persons. Dwelling unit includes a multi -family building, a mobile home, a manufactured home, a modular building and/or a motel/hotel/rooming house. ORDINANCE - Page 6. ehubbuck 021119 polie & emergency sn imp Fee ard.wpd 414. EXTRAORDINARY COSTS: Those costs incurred as a result of extraordinary impact. 415. EXTRAORDINARY IMPACT: An impact which is reasonably determined by the city to: result in the need for system improvements, the cost of which will significantly exceed the sum of the impact fees to be generated from the project; or the sum agreed to be paid pursuant to a development agreement as allowed by § 57-8214(2), Idaho Code, or result in the need for system improvements that are not identified in the capital improvements plan. 416. FEE ADMINISTRATOR: The Public Works Director or the Director's designee. 417. FEE PAYER: A person who pays or is required to pay an impact fee or the fee payer's successor in interest. 418. GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY: Any unit of local government that is empowered by § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, to adopt an impact fee ordinance. 419. IMPACT FEE: A payment of money imposed as a condition of development approval to pay for a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements needed to serve development. The term does not include a charge or fee to pay the administrative, plan review or inspection costs associated with permits required for development; connection or hookup charges; availability charges for drainage, sewer, water, or transportation charges for services provided directly to the development; or amounts collected from a developer in a transaction in which the city has incurred expenses in constructing eapital improvements for the development if the owner or developer has agreed to be financially responsible for the construction or installation of the capital improvements, unless a written agreement is made pursuant to § 67-8209(3), Idaho Code, for credit or reimbursement. 420. IMPACT FEE STUDY: The documents entitled: Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis, and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis dated September, 2018, prepared by Zions Public Finance for the city. 421. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS: A description of the service area and projections of land uses, densities, intensities, and population in the service area over at least a twenty (20) year period. 422. LEVEL OF SERVICE: A measure of the relationship between service capacity and service demand for public facilities. 423. MANUFACTURED HOME: A structure, constructed according to HUDIFHA ORDINANCE - Page 7. chuhhuck 021119 po[sc & emergency %ry imp fee ord.wpd mobile home construction and safety standards, transportable in one or more sections, which, in the traveling mode, is eight feet (8) or more in width or is forty (40) body feet or more in length, or when erected on site, is three hundred twenty (320) or more square feet, and which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems contained therein, except that such term shall include any structure which meets all the requirements of this definition except the size requirements and with respect to which the manufacturer voluntarily files a certification required by the secretary of housing and urban development and complies with the standards established under 42 USC 5401 et seq. The definition in this chapter of a Manufactured Home shall have no application to the definition of a Production Building in Title 18. 423. MODULAR BUILDING: Is defined in § 39-4301, Idaho Code, and means any building or building component, other than a manufactured or mobile home, which is of closed construction and is either entirely or substantially prefabricated or assembled at a place other than the building site. § 67-8243(19), Idaho Code. 424. MULTI -FAMILY: A building or portion thereof, containing two (2) or more dwelling units, excluding attached single-family townhouse units located on individual lots. 425. OWNER: The person holding legal title to real property, including the local, state or federal goveminent or any subdivision thereof. 426. PERSON: An individual, corporation, governmental agency, business trust, estate, partnership, association, two (2) or more persons having a joint or common interest, or any other entity. 427. PRESENT VALUE: The total current monetary value of past, present or future payments, contributions or dedications of goods, services, materials, construction or money. 428. PROJECT: A particular development on an identified parcel of land. 429. PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS: Site improvements and facilities that are planned and designed to provide service for a project and that are necessary for the use and convenience of the occupants or users of the project. 434. PROPORTIONATE SHARE: That portion of the cost of system improvements determined pursuant to § 67-8207, Idaho Code, and this title, which reasonably relates to the service demands and needs for public facilities of a project. 431. PUBLIC FACILITY: (A) Water supply production, treatment, storage and distribution facilities: ORDINANCE - Page 8. rhuh�uek 021119 polie & emergency ,ry imp fee ord.wpd (B) Wastewater collection, treatment and disposal facilities; (C) Roads, streets and bridges, including rights of way, traffic signals, landscaping and any local components of state or federal highways; (D) Stormwater collection, retention, detention, treatment and disposal facilities, flood control facilities, and bank and shore protection and enhancement improvements; and (E) Public safety facilities, including law enforcement, emergency services, emergency medical and rescue and street lighting facilities. 432. RECREATIONAL VEHICLE: A vehicular type unit primarily designed as temporary quarters for recreational, camping, or travel use, which either has its own motive power or is mounted on or drawn by another vehicle. 433. SERVICE AREA: Any defined geographic area identified by a governmental entity or by intergovernmental agreement in which specific public facilities provide service to development within the area defined, on the basis of sound planning or engineering principles or both. 434. SERVICE UNIT: A standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. 435. SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST: A person who gains legal title in real property for which an impact fee is paid or a credit is approved pursuant to the terms of this chapter. 436. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT COSTS: Costs incurred for construction or reconstruction of system improvements, including design, acquisition, engineering and other costs attributable thereto, and also including, without limitation, the type of costs described in § 54-1702(h), Idaho Code, to provide additional public facilities needed to serve new development. For clarification, system improvement costs do not include: (A) Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan; (B) Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements; (C) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing developments in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards; ORDINANCE - Page 9. chubbuck 021119 polis & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd (D) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to provide better service to existing development; (E) Administrative and operating costs of the governmental entity unless such costs are attributable to development of the capital improvements plan, as provided in § 67-8208, Idaho Code; or (F) Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the governmental entity to finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. 437. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS: In contrast to project improvements, means capital improvements to public facilities that are designed to provide service to a service area including, without limitation, the type of improvements the city has the authority to make as described in § 50-1703, Idaho Code 17.24.500: IMPOSITION AND COMPUTATION OF IMPACT FEES: (A) Any application for a building permit enabling the construction, and in the case of construction that does not require a building permit, any building that takes place on or after the effective date hereof shall be subject to the imposition of impact fees in the manner and amount set forth in this chapter. The methodology adopted for the purpose of determining police, emergency services, and parks and recreation impact fees shall be based upon the assumptions set forth in the Impact Fee Study for that respective service. (S) Impact fees shall be required as a condition of approval of all residential and nonresidential development in the service area for which a building permit is required and shall be payable prior to the issuance of any building permit for installation permit in the case of a manufactured home) for a dwelling unit or a nonresidential building. Except as otherwise provided herein, after the effective date hereof, no building permit shall be issued until the impact fees described in this chapter have been paid, unless the development for which the permit is sought is exempted by § 17.24.800 of this chapter or approved credits are used to cover the impact fee, as set forth in § 17.24.900 of this chapter. The fee administrator shall have the authority to withhold a building permit, stop construction, withhold utility services or impose liens as the case may be, until the appropriate impact fee has been collected. (C) After payment of the development impact fees or execution of an agreement for payment of development impact fees, additional development impact fees or increases in fees may not be assessed unless the number of service units increases or the scope or schedule of the development changes. in the event of an increase in the number of service units or schedule of the development changes, the additional development impact fees to be imposed are limited to the amount attributable to the additional service units or change in scope of the development. ORDINANCE- Page 10. chubbuck 921 I 19 polic & emergency m imp fee ord.wpd (D) A fee payer required by this chapter to pay an impact fee may choose to have the amount of such impact fee determined pursuant to either the fee schedule (whereupon such payment shall be recognized as full and complete payment of the development's proportionate share of system improvement costs, except as provided in Idaho Code § 67-8214(3)) or subsections (E) through (G) of this section. If the fee payer chooses to have the amount of such impact fee determined pursuant to subsections (E) through (G) of this section, such impact fee shall be subject to the adjustment described in section 17.24.900 of this chapter, if applicable. if the project is a mix of those uses listed on the fee schedule, then the impact fees shall be determined by adding up the impact fees that would be payable for each use as if it were a freestanding use pursuant to the fee schedule. (E) Individual assessment of impact fees is permitted in situations where the fee payer can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the established impact fee is inappropriate for the project. Written application for individual assessment shall be made to the fee administrator at any time prior to receiving building permit(s). Late applications for individual assessment of impact fees may be considered for a period of sixty (60) days after the receipt of a building permit only if the fee payer makes a showing that the facts supporting such application were not known or discoverable prior to receipt of a building permit and that undue hardship would result if said application is not considered. Such independent impact fee calculation study for the fee payer's development shall be prepared at the fee payer's cost by a qualified professional and contain studies, data and other relevant information and be submitted to the fee administrator for review. Any such study shall be based on the same methodology and the same level of service standards, improvements and costs used in the Impact Fee Study, and must document the methodologies and assumptions used. The city may hire a professional consultant to review any independent impact fee calculation study on behalf of the city, and may charge the reasonable costs of such review to the fee payer. (F) Any independent impact fee calculation study submitted by a fee payer may be accepted, rejected or accepted with modifications by the city as the basis for calculating impact fees. The city shalt not be required to accept any study or documentation the city reasonably deems to be inaccurate or unreliable, and shall have the authority to request that the fee payer submit additional or different documentation for consideration in connection with review of any independent impact fee calculation. if such additional or different documentation is accepted or accepted with modifications as a more accurate measure of the impact fees due in connection with fee payer's proposed development than the applicable impact fees set forth in the fee schedule, then the impact fee due under this chapter shall be calculated according; to such documentation. (G) The fee administrator shall render a written decision establishing the impact fees in connection with the individual assessment within thirty (30) days of the date a complete application is submitted. The decision shall include an explanation of the calculation of the impact fees, shall specify the system improvement(s) for which the impact fees are intended to be used, and shall include an explanation of the following factors considered: okDINANC$ - Page IV chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency mN imp fee ord.wpd l . Any appropriate credit, offset or contribution of money, dedication of land, or construction of system improvements; 2. Payments reasonably anticipated to be made by or as a result of a new development in the form of user fees and debt service payments; 3. That portion of general tax and other revenues a] located by the jurisdiction to system improvements; 4- All other available sources of funding such system improvements; 5. The cost of existing system improvements within the service area; b. The means by which existing system improvements have been financed; 7. The extent to which the new development will contribute to the cost of system improvements through taxation, assessment, or developer or landowner contributions, or has previously contributed to the cost of system improvements through developer or landowner contributions, 8. The extent to which the new development is required to contribute to the cost of existing system improvements in the future; 9. The extent to which the new development should be credited for providing system improvements, without charge to other properties within the service area; 10. Extraordinary costs, if any, incurred in serving the new development; 11. The time and price differential inherent in a fair comparison of impact fees paid at different times; and 12. The availability of other sources of funding system improvements including, but not limited to, user charges, general tax levies, intergovernmental transfers, and special taxation. The city shall develop a plan for alternative sources of revenue. (H) Certification of the impact fee for a project may be applied for in the following manner: I . Written application may be made to the fee administrator not Iater than sixty (60) days after development approval by the city council. Late applications for certification of the impact fee will not be considered unless the fee payer makes a showing that the facts supporting such application were not known or discoverable until after the time had run and that undue hardship would result if said application is not considered. ORDINANCE - Page 12. chnbbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp Fee ord.wpd 2. The fee administrator shall provide the fee payer with a written impact fee certification for the project within thirty (30) days of the date a complete application is submitted. The certification provided by the fee administrator shall establish the impact fee for the project in question so long as there is no material change to the project as identified in the certification application or the impact fee schedule. The certification shall include an explanation of the calculation of the impact fees, shall specify the system improvement(s) for which the impact fees are intended to be used, and shall include an explanation of the factors considered, which factors are identified in subsection (G) of this section. (1) Appeals of the fee administrator's determination of an individual assessment or certification shall be made to the city as provided further in this chapter. (J) The city recognizes that there may be circumstances where the anticipated fiscal impacts of a proposed development are of such magnitude that the city may be unable to accommodate the development without excessive or unscheduled public expenditures that exceed the amount of the anticipated impact fees from such development. If the city determines that a proposed development would create such an extraordinary impact on the city's police and emergency services, the city may refuse to approve the proposed development. to the alternative, the city may calculate a pro rata share per dwelling unit, or square feet of nonresidential buildings, of the extraordinary impact and charge a reasonable extraordinary impact fee that is greater than would ordinarily be charged. (K) If the city discovers an error in its impact fee formula that results in assessment or payment of more than a proportionate share, the city shall, at the time of assessment on a case by case basis, adjust the impact fee to collect no more than a proportionate share or discontinue the collection of any impact fees until the error is corrected by ordinance. 17.24.600; PAYMENT OF NPACT FEES: (A) After the effective date hereof all fee payers shall pay the impact fees as provided by this chapter to the fee administrator following application for a building permit and prior to the issuance of any building permit for a dwelling unlit, or nonresidential building. (B) All impact fees paid by a fee payer pursuant to this chapter shall be promptly deposited in the impact fee fund described in section 17.24,700 of this chapter. (C) if a fee payer fails to pay the impact fee when required and due, the city may (1 ) Charge interest on the amount of the fee from the due date until the date paid at the rate provided in Idaho Code § 28-22-104; ORDINANCE - Page 13_ chubbuck 0.11119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd (2) Withhold of the building permit or other governmental approval until the development impact fee is paid; (3) Withhold the providing of utility services until the development impact fee is paid; and/or (4) Impose and file a lien against the property subject to the impact fee following procedures contained in chapter 5, title 45, Idaho Code. 17.24.700: IMPACT FEE FUNDS; REFUNDS OF IMPACT FEES PAID: (A) There is hereby established a police impact fee fund into which shall he deposited all police impact fees for the purpose of ensuring police impact fees collected pursuant hereto are designated for the accommodation of police capital improvements reasonably necessary to serve new development that paid the impact fee. (B) There is hereby established a emergency services impact fee fund into which shall be deposited all emergency services impact fees for the purpose of ensuring emergency services impact fees collected pursuant hereto are designated for the accommodation of emergency services capital improvements reasonably necessary to serve new development that paid the impact fee. (C) Each fund shall be an interest bearing account which shall be accounted for separately from other impact fee funds and from other city funds. Any interest or other income earned on monies deposited in a fund shall be credited to such fund. Expenditures of impact fees shall be made only for the category of system improvements for which the impact fees were collected and as identified in the capital improvements pian. (D) Except as otherwise provided herein, monies from each fund, including any accrued interest, shall be limited to the financing of acquisition, expansion, and/or improvement of capital improvements, or for principal and interest payments on bonds or other borrowed revenues used to acquire, expand or improve such capital improvements, necessary to serve new development. Impact fees in each fund shall be spent within eight (8) years from the date such impact fees were collected on a first in/first out (FIFO) basis. The city may hold the impact fees longer than the prescribed time period if the city identifies, in writing: 1) a reasonable cause why the impact fees should be held longer; and 2) an anticipated date by which the impact fees will be expended but in no event longer than eleven (11) years from the date the impact fees were collected. (E) The fee administrator shall prepare annual reports to be provided to the advisory committee and the city council, which reports shall: 1) describe the amount of all impact fees collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements during the preceding year, as applicable, by category of public facility and service area; and 2) describe the percentage of tax and revenues ORDINANCE -Page 14. chub buck 021 1 19 polis & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd other than impact fees collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements during the preceding year, as applicable, by category of public facility and service area. (F) Funds shall be deemed expended when payment of such funds has been approved by the city. The fee payer or successor in interest shall be entitled to a refund of the impact fee if: 1) service is available but never provided; 2) a building permit or permit for installation of a manufactured home is revoked or abandoned; 3) the city, atter collecting the impact fee when service is not available, has failed to appropriate and expend the collected impact fees; or 4) the fee payer pays an impact fee under protest and a subsequent review of the impact fee paid or the completion of an individual assessment determines that the impact fee paid exceeded the proportionate share to which the city was entitled to receive. (G) When the right to a refund exists, within ninety (90) days after the city determines that a refund is due, the city shall provide written notice of entitlement to a refund, to the owner of record and the fee payer who paid the impact fees at the address shown on the application for development approval, or to a successor in interest who has notified the city of a transfer of the right or entitlement to a refund and who has provided to the city a mailing address. When the right to a refund exists, the city shall also publish the notice of entitlement to a refund within thirty (30) days after the expiration of the eight (8) year period after the date that the impact fees were collected. Such published notice shall contain the heading "Notice of Entitlement to impact Fee Refund". (H) A refund shall include interest at one-half ('/2) the legal rate provided for in § 28-22-104, Idaho Code, from the date on which the impact fee was originally paid. (I) In order to be eligible for a refund, a tee payer, successor in interest or owner of record shall file a written application for a refund with the fee administrator within six (6) months of the time such refund becomes payable under this Chapter, or within six (6) months of publication of the notice of entitlement to a refund, whichever is later. If a successor in interest claims a refund of impact fees, the fee administrator may require written documentation that such rights have been transferred to the claimant prior to issuing the requested refund. Refunds shall be paid within sixty (60) days after the date on which the fee administrator determines that a sufficient proof of claim for a refund has been made. (K) Any person entitled to a refund shall have standing to sue for a refund under the provisions of this chapter if there has not been a timely payment of a refund as provided herein. 17.24.800: EXEMPTIONS FROM IMPACT FEES: (A) The following types of land development shall be exempted from payment of the impact fees imposed by this chapter: ORDINANCE - Page 15. chubhuck 0.11119 polis & emergency sn imp fee ord.wpd Rebuilding the same amount of square feet of a dwelling unit or nonresidential structure that was destroyed by fire or other catastrophe, provided that the structure is rebuilt and ready for occupancy within two (2) years of its destruction. 2. Construction of an unoccupied, detached accessory structure, or addition of uses related to a dwelling unit unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a significant impact on the capacity of system improvements. 3. Remodeling or repairing a dwelling unit or a nonresidential structure in a manner that does not increase the number of service units. 4. Replacing a dwelling unit with another dwelling unit on the samc lot, provided that the number of service units does not increase. 5. Placing a temporary construction trailer or office on a lot. b. Constructing an addition on a residential structure which does not increase the number of service units. 7. Adding uses that are typically accessory to residential uses, such as tennis courts or clubhouse, unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a significant impact on the capacity of system improvements. (B) An impact fee will be assessed for installation of a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle unless the fee payer can demonstrate by documentation such as utility bills and tax records, either: 1) that a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle was legally in place on the lot or space prior to the effective date hereof; or 2) that an impact fee has been paid previously for the installation of a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle on that same lot or space. Lawful storage of a recreational vehicle shall not be deemed installation for purposes of this chapter. 17.24.900: CREDITS; REIMBURSEMENTS: (A) No fee payer shall be required to construct, fand or contribute any capital improvement to meet the same need for police and emergency services improvements for which an impact fee is imposed. All system improvements constructed, funded or contributed over and above the proportionate share of system improvement costs, including such system improvements paid for pursuant to a local improvement district, shall result in either a credit on future impact fees or reimbursement (at the fee payer's option) for such excess construction, funding or contribution to be paid from impact fees paid by future development that benefits from such system improvements constructed, funded or contributed by the fee payer. However, no credit or reimbursement shall be provided for: 1) project improvements; 2) any construction, funding or ORDLRANCE - Page 16. chubbuek 021119 poIic & mergeney sry imp Fee ord.wpd contribution not agreed to in writing by the city prior to commencement of such construction, funding or contribution; and 3) any construction, funding or contribution of a type of capital improvements not included in the calculation of the applicable impact fee. (B) In the calculation of impact fees for a project pursuant to subsections 17.24.500 (E) through (G) of this chapter, credit shall be given for the present value of all tax and user fee revenue generated by the fee payer 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 payer shall receive a credit on future impact fees. The credit may be applied by the fee payer as an offset against future impact fees only in the service area where the credit was generated. (C) In the calculation of impact fees for a project, credit or reimbursement (at the fee payer'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 developer for system improvements of the category for which the impact fee is being collected, including system improvements paid for through local improvement district assessments. (D) If credit or reimbursement is due to the fee payer, the city and fee payer 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 payer. 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. (E) 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 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 payer and shall note in the city records the amount of credit remaining, if any. Upon request of the fee payer, the city shall issue a letter stating the amount of credit available. If the credit has not been exhausted within eight (S) 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 17,21.700 (J) of this chapter. ORDINANCE- Page 17. chubbuck 021119 palic & ernergencysry imp Pee ord_wpd (F) 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 payer in cash or in credits against any other monies due from the fee payer to the city. (G) Credit for land dedications shall, at the fee payer's option, be valued at: 1) one hundred percent (100%) of the most recent assessed value for such land as shown in the records of the Bannock County assessor; or 2) fair market value established by a private appraiser reasonably acceptable to the city in an appraisal paid for by the fee payer. 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 payer 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. (H) 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: 1) al l required construction has been completed and has been accepted by the city; and 2) 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 payer posts security in the form of a performance bond, irrevocable letter of credit or escrow agreement in the amount and under teens reasonably acceptable to the city. (I) Credit may only be transferred by a fee payer that has received credit to such fee payer'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. 17.24.1000: APPEALS: The decisions of the fee administrator may be appealed as provided below: (A) Any fee payer who is or may be obligated to pay an impact fee, may appeal a decision made by the fee administrator in applying this chapter to the city council. Such decisions that may be appealed include: ORDINANCE - Page 18_ chuhhuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp Fre ord.wpd I . The applicability of an impact fee to the development. 2. The amount of an impact fee to be paid for the development. 3. The availability, amount or application of any credit. 4. The amount of any refilnd, reimbursement or credit. 5. Any discretionary action or inaction by or on behalf of the city, A fee payer 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 payer 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. (B) In order to pursue an appeal, the fee payer shall file a written notice of appeal with the city clerk with a copy to the fee administrator within fifteen (15) days after the date of the decision being appealed, or the date on which the fee payer 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. (C) The city clerk shall notify the fee payer 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 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 payer to demonstrate that the amount of the impact fee, credit, reimbursement or refund was not properly calculated by the city. (D) The criteria to be used by the city council in evaluating the appeal shall be whether: 1) the decision or interpretation made by the fee administrator; or 2) the alternative decision or interpretation offered by the appellant, more accurately reflects the intent of this chapter that new 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 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 shall modify the amount of the impact fee, credit, refund or reimbursement only if there is ORDINANCE - Page 19. chub buck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee Ord.wpd substantial evidence in the record that the fee administrator erred. based upon the methodologies contained in the impact Fee Study, this chapter and/or the capital improvements plan. The decision of the city council shall be final. (E) Upon voluntary agreement by the fee payer and the city, the fee payer and the city may enter into mediation with a qualified independent party to address a disagreement related to the impact fee for proposed development. Costs for the independent mediation service shall be shared equally by the fee payer and the city. Mediation may take place at any time during an appeals process and participation in mediation does not preclude the fee payer from pursuing other remedies. 17.24.1100: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS: (A) As used in this chapter, 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. (B) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to create any additional right to develop real property or diminish the power of the city in regulating the orderly development of real property, (C) Nothing in this chapter 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. (D) Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the city from requiring a developer to construct reasonable project improvements in conjunction with a project. (E) Nothing in this chapter shall limit the ability of the city to enter into inter- governmental agreements as provided in § 67-8204A, Idaho Code. (F) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve any development request that may reasonably be expected to reduce levels of service below minimum acceptable levels established in the development Impact Fee Study. (C) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve development which results in extraordinary impact. (H) Notwithstanding any agreement by the fee payer to pay the proportionate share of system improvement costs documented by the supplemental study, nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve development that results in an extraordinary impact. (1) Nothing in this chapter shall work to limit the use by the city of the power of eminent ORDINANCE - Page 24. chubbuck 021119 potic R emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd domain or supersede or conflict with requirements or procedures authorized in the Idaho Code for local improvement districts or general obligation bond issues. M A development impact fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements determined in accordance with § 67-8207, Idaho Code. Development impact fees shall be based on actual system improvement costs or reasonable estimates of such costs. (K) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent or prohibit private agreements between developers, the city, the Idaho transportation department, and/or other governmental entities in regard to the construction or installation of system improvements or providing for credits or reimbursements for system improvement costs incurred by a developer or fee payer, including interproject transfers of credits, or providing for reimbursement for project improvements that are used or shared by more than one development project. If it can be shown that a proposed development has a direct impact on a public facility under the jurisdiction of the Idaho transportation department, then the agreement shall include a provision for the allocation of development impact fees collected from the developer or fee payer for the improvement of the public facility by the Idaho transportation department. (L) Nothing in this chapter shall restrict or diminish the power of the city: 1) to impose reasonable conditions on the annexation of any property to the city in accordance with Idaho Code, including conditions for recovery of project or system improvement costs required as a result of such voluntary annexation, or 2) to negotiate and execute development agreements that may impose additional conditions on development, including the recovery of project or system improvement costs, either in connection with a proposed annexation or in connection with any other development within the city. (M) The impact fees described in this chapter, and the administrative procedures of this chapter shall be reviewed at least once every five ( 5) years to ensure that: I) the demand and cost assumptions and other assumptions underlying such impact fees are still valid; 2) the resulting impact fees do not exceed the actual costs of providing police and/or emergency services system improvements required to serve new development; 3) 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 4) such system improvements will benefit those developments for which the impact fees were paid. (N) Violation of this chapter shall be subject to those remedies provided in this code. Knowingly furnishing false information to any official of the city charged with the administration ORDINANCE - Page 21. chabbuck 021119 polis & emergency sry imp Fee ord.wpd of this chapter on any matter relating to the administration of this chapter including, without limitation, the furnishing of false information regarding the expected size or use of a proposed development, shall be a violation of this chapter. (0) The captions used in this chapter are for convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation of any portion of the text of this chapter. (P) The respective capital improvement plans for Police, Emergency Services and Parks and Recreation as set forth in the respective: Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis, and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis both dated September, 2018 are hereby adopted and accepted as the capital improvement plan for the respective department set forth in the Plan for that department, 17.24.1200: FEE SCHEDULE: This fee schedule shall be in effect March 26, 2019. Except for such impact fee as may be calculated, paid and accepted pursuant to an independent impact fee calculation study, the amount of each impact fee shall be as follows: Police impact fee schedule per unit: Residential: Single Family Residential $ 231.56 Multi Family Residential 154.86 Non -Residential General Commercial per 1,440 sq. ft. $ 371.61 Office per 1,404 sq. ft. 47.72 Institutional per 1,000 sq. ft. 67.92 Emergency Services Impact Fee per unit: Residential: Single Family Residential $ 274.41 Multi Family Residential 243.45 Non -Residential General Commercial per 1,000 sq. ft. $ 308.13 Office per 1,040 sq. ft. 145.41 ORDINANCE - Page 22. chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd Institutional per 1,000 sq. ft. 43.73 On January 1, 2020, and on January 1 of each year thereafter in which an impact fee is in effect, the amount of the impact fee skull be automatically adjusted to account for inflation increases in the cost of providing police, emergency services, and parks and recreation facilities to serve new development utilizing the municipal cost index as published by "American Cities And County Magazine". Nothing herein shall prevent the city from electing to maintain a then existing Police, emergency services, and parks and recreation impact fee or from electing to waive the inflation adjustment for any given fiscal year, or years. Any such action to determine an inflation factor shall be by city council resolution. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS Section 1. Reveal of Conflicting Ordinances. The provisions of any Ordinance of the City and any provision of the Municipal Code which are in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section 2. Severability. The sections of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of a section shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections. Section 3. Effective Date. The rule requiring an ordinance to be read on three separate days, one of which shall be a reading in full, is dispensed with, and this Ordinance shall become effective upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL AND APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, this Z'11" day of Le- Z�7 2019. 44. Kevin B. England, ATTEST: /4, J&.t 1) Richard Morgan, CITE CLERK ORDINANCE - Page 23. chubbuck 021 1 19 p011c & emergency m imp Fee ord.wpd SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 3 An ordinance of the City of Chubbuck, a municipal corporation of the state of Idaho, Adopting Chapter 17.28 "Police and Emergency Services impact Fee" to Provide an Impact Fee upon New Development Effective March 26, 2019; Providing New Development Shall Pay Impact Fees to Be Applied Towards Police and Emergency Services; Providing a Schedule for said impact fees; Providing for the Administration of Said impact Fees and Periodic Adjustment Thereof, Adopting the Capital Improvements PIans Dated September 1, 2018 for the Police and Emergency Services Departments; providing for the repeal of conflicting ordinances; providing for the severability of the provisions of this ordinance; providing when this ordinance shall be in effect. The full text of this ordinance is available at the City Clerk's Office, Chubbuck City Offices, 5160 Yellowstone, Chubbuck, ID 83202. 1 have reviewed the foregoing summary and believe it provides a true and correct summary of Ordinance No. 7 $5, and that the summary provides adequate notice to the public of the contents of this ordinance. DATED this Z-0 day of �� 2019. SUMMARY OF ORDNANCE - Page 1. chubhuck 021119 sum Poi & em sry ord.wpd CITY OF CHUBBUC:K, IDAHO ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, REPEALING SECTIONS 17.16, l 10, 17.16.130, and 17.16.150; AMENDING 17.16.100 AND 17.16.140 OF THE CFIUBBUCK MUNICIPAL CODE EFFECTIVE JUNE 3, 2019; ADOPTING CHAPTER 17.24 "PARK IMPACT FEE" TO PROVIDE A PARK IMPACT FEE UPON NEW DEVELOPMENT EFFECTIVE JANE 3.2019 PROVIDING NEW DEVELOPMENT SHALL PAY IMPACT FEES TO BE APPLIED TOWARDS PARKS, PROVIDING FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF SAID IMPACT FEES AND PERIODIC ADJUSTMENT TIIEREOF; ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN DATED SEPTEMBER 1, 2018 FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT; REPEALING PRIOR CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING WHEN T141S ORDINANCE IS EFFECTIVE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CH UBBUCK, IDAHO: Section 1, Repeal of Certain Sections of Chapter 17,15. Effective ,lune 3, 2019, Section 17.16,110, 17.16, l 30 and 17, 16.150 shall be repealed; provided however any existing development implementing a park under this Chapter shall, at the discretion of the city, complete the development of the park in accordance with the plans previously approved tinder- this Chapter. Section 2. Amended Section 17.16. 100 and 17.16.140. Effective June 3, 2019, Section 17.16. 100 and 17,16.140 are amended to read as follows: 17.1 fr.100 REQUIRED; As a condition of approval of any development required to be platted tinder the provisions of this title, which includes residential structures, each developer will be required to dedicate land for park and recreational purposes to serve the immediate and future needs of the residents of the development, or pay an Impact Fee for Parks as provided for in Chapter 17.24 i nake a conttibu tion in lie n c Factual inj td dedicati an, or a cornbi nation of both, at the option of the city, and post around the exteriot ofthe park 11-1 a z tion to be approved by the 6!y building. 17.16.140. CRITERIA FOR REQUIRING A CONTRIBUTION IN LIEU OF PARK ORINNANCE-Page 1. a hub buck 041819 park inip fee nrd.vvpd AND RECREATION SITES: Where the development is small and resulting park and recreational site is too small to be practical, or when the available land is otherwise inappropriate for a park and recreational site, the developer shall pay the city the impact fee in lieu of the land dedication and improvements required. A park or recreational site smaller than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet shall be considered too small to be practical for purposes of this section unless approved by the public works director. The cash contribution in lieu of park and recreation land dedication shall be held in trust by the cit ,or other public body designated by the city, solely fo, tire acquisition ofpark and reereation land as classified in section 17.16.110 of this chapter, which vvill such needs., in accordance with Chapter 17.24 Section 3. Adoption of Title 17, Chapter 28, "Park Impact Fee". The following is adopted effective June 3, 2019: 17.24.100 LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS: The city council of the city of Chubbuck, Idaho, finds that.- (A) hat: (A) Based on the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City pursuant to Title 57, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, including, but not limited to, the capital improvements element of the comprehensive plan, and the general governmental goal of protecting the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the city, and its Area of City Impact, it is necessary parks and recreation public facilities to accommodate new development within the city, and its area of city impact. (B) New residential and nonresidential growth and development imposes and will impose increasing and excessive demands upon the public facilities. (C) The revenues generated from new residential and nonresidential growth and development often does not generate sufficient funds to provide the necessary levels of service provided by these public facilities to accommodate new development. (D) New development is expected to continue, and will place ever increasing demands on the city to provide and expand the public facilities to serve new development. (E) The city has planned for the improvement of the public facilities in the capital improvements element of the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive flan and in the impact fee analysis and the capital improvement plan reviewed and adopted therewith. (F) The creation of an equitable impact fee system in accordance with Title 67, Chapter 82, Idaho Code would enable the city to impose a proportionate share of the costs of needed ORDINANCE - Page 2. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd improvements to the public facilities to accommodate new development, and would assist the city in implementing the capital improvements element of the comprehensive plan. (G) In order to implement an equitable impact fee system for the public facilities, the city retained Zions Public Finance, Inc. ("Zions") to prepare an impact fee study for these types of facilities. The resulting document is titled: Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis dated September, 2018 (the "Impact Fee Study"), and recommended for approval by the Impact Fee Advisory Committee. The studies are on file in the office of the city clerk of the city of Chubbuck. Any reference herein to the Impact Fee Study shall be to that study. (H) The Impact Fee Study is consistent with the capital improvements element of the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan, and uses the levels of service set forth in the Comprehensive Plan for these public facilities. Parks and recreation level of service from page 7 of the Park Impact Fee Study is 5.22 acres per thousand population. (I) The Impact Fee Study sets forth reasonable methodologies and analyses for determining the impacts of various types of new development on the public facilities, and detennines the cost of acquiring or constructing the improvements necessary to meet the demands for such public facilities created by new development. (J) The Impact Fee Study uses a calculation methodology in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. This chapter shall not be deemed invalid because payment of an impact fee may result in an incidental benefit to others within the service area other than the fee payer - (K) The impact fees described in this chapter are based on the Impact Fee Study, and do not exceed the costs of system improvements for the public facilities to serve new development that will pay the impact fees. (L) The parks and recreation services included in the calculation of impact fees in the Impact Fee Study will benefit all new development throughout the city, and it is therefore appropriate to treat all areas of the city and the area of city impact as a single service area for purposes of calculating, collecting and spending the impact fees collected. (M) There is both a rational nexus and a rough proportionality between the development impacts created by each type of development covered by this chapter and the impact fees that such development will be required to pay. ORDNANCE - Page 3. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd (N) This chapter creates a system by which impact fees paid by new development will be used to finance, defray or to provide capital improvements for the public facilities in ways that benefit the development for which impact fees were paid. (0) This chapter creates a system under which impact fees shall not be used to correct existing deficiencies in public facilities, or to replace or rehabilitate existing public facilities, or to pay for routine operation or maintenance of those public facilities. (P) This chapter creates a system under which there shall be no double payment of impact fees, in accordance with Idaho Code § 67-8204(19). (Q) This chapter is consistent with all applicable provisions of title 67, chapter 82, Idaho Code, concerning impact fee ordinances. 17.24.200: AUTHORITY, APPLICABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE: (A) This chapter is enacted pursuant to the city's general police powers pursuant to the authority granted to the city by title 50, Idaho Code, and pursuant to the authority granted to the city by § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. (B) The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all of the territory within the limits of the city and to any unincorporated areas of the city within the city's area of city impact where the city has executed an intergovernmental agreement with Bannock County for purposes of collection or expenditure of impact fees pursuant to § 67-8204A, Idaho Code, and other applicable laws of the state of Idaho. (C) This chapter is effective June 3, 2019 ("Effective Date"), which effective date is more than thirty (30) days subsequent to the passage, approval and publication, according to law, of the ordinance codified herein, which adopted the provisions hereof. (D) Applications for building permits received by the city prior to the effective date hereof, or amendments hereto, adopting impact fees or amending or adopting any methodology by which impact fees are calculated, will be exempt from that portion of this chapter, or amendment enacted after such building permit application, if a valid building permit has been issued or construction has commenced prior to the effective date hereof, or amendment. For building permits that expire or are revoked after the effective date hereof, the fee payer shall be entitled to a refund of previously paid fees as provided herein, provided that in the case of reapplication for building permit, the impact fee in effect at that time shall be paid. (E) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, development requirements for system improvements shall be imposed by the city only by way of impact fees imposed pursuant to and in accordance with § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, and this chapter. ORDINANCE - Page 4. chubbuck 041819 park imp Fee ord.wpd 17.24.300: INTENT: (A) The intent of this chapter is to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the city and its area of city impact. (S) The intent of this chapter is to be consistent with those principles for allocating a fair share of the cost of capital improvements to public facilities to serve new development in compliance with the provisions set forth in § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. The provisions of this chapter shall be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the provisions set forth in § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. (C) The intent of this chapter is that impact fees should be charged, collected, and expended for parks and recreation capital improvements to increase the service capacity of such categories of public facilities, which capital improvements are included in approved capital improvements plans that list the capital improvements that may be funded with impact fees. (D) The intent of this chapter is to ensure that: 1. public facilities are available to serve new development; 2. new development bears a proportionate share of the cost of parks and recreation capital improvements to such public facilities; 3, such proportionate share does not exceed the cost of the capital improvements to such public facilities required to serve new development; and 4. the funds collected from new development are used for capital improvements for public facilities that benefit new development. (E) It is not the intent of this chapter to collect any monies from new development in excess of the actual amount necessary to offset new demands for capital improvements to public facilities created by such new development. (F) It is not the intent of this chapter that the impact fees be used to remedy any deficiency in parks and recreation capital improvements existing on the effective date hereof, or ever be used to replace, rehabilitate, maintain and/or operate any public facilities. (G) It is not the intent of this chapter that any monies collected from an impact fee deposited in an impact fee fund ever be commingled with monies from a different fund, or ever be used for capital improvements that are different from those for which the impact fee was paid. (H) it is not the intent of this chapter that impact fees be used for: 1. Constriction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. ORDINANCE - Page 5. ehubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd 2. Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards. 4. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development to provide better service to existing development, 5. Administrative and operating costs of the city unless such costs are attributable to development of the capital improvements plan used to determine impact fees by a surcharge imposed by ordinance on the collection of an impact fee, which surcharge shall not exceed a development's proportionate share of the cost of preparing the capital improvements plan. 6. Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the city to finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. 17.24.400: DEFINITIONS: 401. APPROPRIATE: To legally obligate by contract or otherwise commit to use by appropriation or other official act of a governmental entity. 402. BUILDING PERMIT: An official document or certificate by that name issued by the city authorizing the construction or siting of any building. 403. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS: Improvements with a useful life of ten ( 10) years or more, by new construction or other action, which increase the service capacity of a public facility. 404. CAPITAL CAPROVEMENTS ELEMENT: A component of a comprehensive plan adopted pursuant to chapter 65, title 67, Idaho Code, which component meets the requirements of a capital improvements plan pursuant to this chapter. 405. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN: A plan adopted pursuant to this chapter that identifies capital improvements for which impact fees may be used as a funding source. 406. CITY: The city of Chubbuck, Idaho. 407. CITY COUNCIL: The legislative body of the city of Chubbuck, Idaho. 408. DEVELOPER: Any person or legal entity undertaking development, including a ORDINANCE - Page b. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd party that undertakes the subdivision of property pursuant to §s 50-1301 through 50-1334, Idaho Code and this title. 409. DEVELOPMENT: Any construction or installation of a building or structure, or any change in use of a building or structure, or any change in the use, character or appearance of land, which creates additional demand and need for public facilities or the subdivision of property that would permit any change in the use, character or appearance of land. As used in this chapter, "development" shall not include activities that would otherwise be subject to payment of the development impact fee if such activities are undertaken by a taxing district, as defined in § 63-201, Idaho Code, in the course of carrying out the taxing district's public responsibilities, unless the adopted impact fee ordinance expressly includes taxing districts as being subject to development impact fees, 410. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL: Any written authorization from a governmental entity which authorizes the commencement of a development. 411. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE: See definition of Impact Fee. 412. DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT: A requirement attached to a development approval or other governmental action approving or authorizing a particular development including, without limitation, a rezoning, which development requirement compels the payment, dedication or contribution of goods, services, land and/or money as a condition of approval. 413. DWELLING UNIT: A building or portion of a building designed for or whose primary purpose is for residential occupancy, and which consists of one or more rooms which are arranged, designed or used as living and/or sleeping quarters for one or more persons. Dwelling unit includes a multi -family building, a mobile home, a manufactured home, a modular building and/or a motel/hoteI/rooming house. 414. EXTRAORDINARY COSTS: Those costs incurred as a result of extraordinary impact. 415. EXTRAORDINARY IMPACT: An impact which is reasonably determined by the city to: result in the need for system improvements, the cost of which will significantly exceed the sum of the impact fees to be generated from the project; or the sum agreed to be paid pursuant to a development agreement as allowed by § 67-8214(2), Idaho Code, or result in the need for system improvements that are not identified in the capital improvements plan. 416. FEE ADMINISTRATOR: The Public Works Director or the Director's desgnee. 417. FEE PAYER: A person who pays or is required to pay an impact fee or the fee payer's successor in interest. ORDINANCE - Page 7. chubhuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd 418, GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY: Any unit of local government that is empowered by § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, to adopt an impact fee ordinance. 419. IMPACT FEE: A payment of money imposed as a condition of development approval to pay for a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements needed to serve development. The term does not include a charge or fee to pay the administrative, plan review or inspection costs associated with permits required for development; connection or hook -Lip charges; availability charges for drainage, sewer, water, or transportation charges for services provided directly to the development; or amounts collected from a developer in a transaction in which the city has incurred expenses in constructing capital improvements for the development if the owner or developer has agreed to be financially responsible for the construction or installation of the capital improvements, unless a written agreement is made pursuant to § 67-8209(3), Idaho Code, for credit or reimbursement. 420. IMPACT FEE STUDY: The document entitled Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis dated September, 2018, prepared by Zions Public Finance for the city. 421. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS: A description of the service area and projections of land uses, densities, intensities, and population in the service area over at least a twenty (20) year period. 422. LEVEL OF SERVICE: A measure of the relationship between service capacity and service demand for public facilities. 423. MANUFACTURED HOME: A structure, constructed according to HUD/FHA mobile home construction and safety standards, transportable in one or more sections, which, in the traveling mode, is eight feet (8) or more in width or is forty (40) body feet or more in length, or when erected on site, is three hundred twenty (320) or more square feet, and which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems contained therein, except that such term shall include any structure which meets all the requirements of this definition except the size requirements and with respect to which the manufacturer voluntarily files a certification required by the secretary of housing and urban development and complies with the standards established under 42 USC 5401 et seq. The definition in this chapter of a Manufactured Home shall have no application to the definition of a Production Building in Title 18. 423. MODULAR BUILDING: is defined in § 39-4301, Idaho Code, and means any building or building component, other than a manufactured or mobile home, which is of closed construction and is either entirely or substantially prefabricated or assembled at a place other than the building site. § 67-8203(19), Idaho Code. ORMANCE - Page 8. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd 424. MULTI -FAMILY: A building or portion thereof, containing two (2) or more dwelling units, excluding attached single-family townhouse units located on individual lots. 425. OWNER: The person holding legal title to real property, including the local, state or federal government or any subdivision thereof. 426. PERSON: An individual, corporation, governmental agency, business trust, estate, partnership, association, two (2) or more persons having a joint or common interest, or any other entity. 427. PRESENT VALUE: The total current monetary value of past, present or future payments, contributions or dedications of goods, services, materials, construction or money. 428. PROJECT: A particular development on an identified parcel of land. 429. PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS: Site improvements and facilities that are planned and designed to provide service for a project and that are necessary for the use and convenience of the occupants or users of the project. 430. PROPORTIONATE SHARE: That portion of the cost of system improvements determined pursuant to § 67-8207, Idaho Code, and this title, which reasonably relates to the service demands and needs for public facilities of a project. 431. PUBLIC FACILITY: (A) Water supply production, treatment, storage and distribution facilities; (B) Wastewater collection, treatment and disposal facilities; (C) Roads, streets and bridges, including rights of way, traffic signals, landscaping and any local components of state or federal highways; (D) Stormwater collection, retention, detention, treatment and disposal facilities, flood control facilities, and bank and shore protection and enhancement improvements; (E) Parks, open space and recreation areas, and related capital improvements; and (F) Public safety facilities, including law enforcement, emergency services, emergency medical and rescue and street lighting facilities. 432. RECREATIONAL VEHICLE: A vehicular type unit primarily designed as temporary quarters for recreational, camping, or travel use, which either has its own motive power or is mounted on or drawn by another vehicle. ORDINANCE - Page 9. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd 433. SERVICE AREA: Any defined geographic area identified by a governmental entity or by intergovernmental agreement in which specific public facilities provide service to development within the area defined, on the basis of sound planning or engineering principles or both. 434. SERVICE UNIT: A standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. 435. SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST: A person who gains legal title in real property for which an impact fee is paid or a credit is approved pursuant to the terms of this chapter. 436. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT COSTS: Costs incurred for construction or reconstruction of system improvements, including design, acquisition, engineering and other costs attributable thereto, and also including, without limitation, the type of costs described in § 50-1702(h), Idaho Code, to provide additional public facilities needed to serve new developmcnt. For clarification, system improvement costs do not include: (A) Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan; (B) Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements; (C) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing developments in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards; (D) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to provide better service to existing development; (E) Administrative and operating costs of the governmental entity unless such costs are attributable to development of the capital improvements plan, as provided in § 67-8208, Idaho Code; or (F) Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the governmental entity to finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. 437. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS: In contrast to project improvements, means capital improvements to public facilities that are designed to provide service to a service area including, without limitation, the type of improvements the city has the authority to make as described in § 50-1703, Idaho Code ORDINANCE - Page 10. ehubbuck 041819 park imp Fee ord.wpd 17.24.500: IMPOSITION AND CDMPUTATiON OF IMPACT FEES: (A) Any application for a building permit enabling the construction, and in the case of construction that does not require a building permit, any building that takes place on or after the effective date hereof shall be subject to the imposition of impact fees in the manner and amount set forth in this chapter. The methodology adopted for the purpose of determining parks and recreation impact fees shall be based upon the assumptions set forth in the Impact Fee Study for that service. (B) Impact fees shall be required as a condition of approval of all residential and nonresidential development in the service area for which a building permit is required and shall be payable prior to the issuance of any building permit (or installation permit in the case of a manufactured home) for a dwelling unit or a nonresidential building. Except as otherwise provided herein, after the effective date hereof, no building pen -nit shall be issued until the impact fees described in this chapter have been paid, unless the development for which the permit is sought is exempted by § 17.24.840 of this chapter or approved credits are used to cover the impact fee, as set forth in § 17.24.900 of this chapter. The fee administrator shall have the authority to withhold a building permit, stop construction, withhold utility services or impose liens as the case may be, until the appropriate impact fee has been collected. (C) After payment of the development impact fees or execution of an agreement for payment of development impact fees, additional development impact fees or increases in fees may not be assessed unless the number of service units increases or the scope or schedule of the development changes. In the event of an increase in the number of service units or schedule of the development changes, the additional development impact fees to be imposed are limited to the amount attributable to the additional service units or change in scope of the development. (D) A fee payer required by this chapter to pay an impact fee may choose to have the amount of such impact fee determined pursuant to either the fee schedule (whereupon such payment shall be recognized as full and complete payment of the development's proportionate share of system improvement costs, except as provided in Idaho Code § 57-8214(3)) or subsections (E) through (G) of this section. If the fee payer chooses to have the amount of such impact fee determined pursuant to subsections (E) through (G) of this section, such impact fee shall be subject to the adjustment described in section 17.24.900 of this chapter, if applicable. If the project is a mix of those uses listed on the fee schedule, then the impact fees shall be determined by adding up the impact fees that would be payable for each use as if it were a freestanding use pursuant to the fee schedule. (E) Individual assessment of impact fees is permitted in situations where the fee payer can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the established impact fee is inappropriate for the project. Written application for individual assessment shall be made to the fee administrator at any time prior to receiving building permit(s). Late applications for individual assessment of impact fees may be considered for a period of sixty (60) days after the receipt of a building ORDINANCE - Page 11. chubhuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd permit only if the fee payer makes a showing that the facts supporting such application were not known or discoverable prior to receipt of a building permit and that undue hardship would result if said application is not considered. Such independent impact fee calculation study for the fee payer's development shall be prepared at the fee payer's cost by a qualified professional and contain studies, data and other relevant information and be submitted to the fee administrator for review. Any such study shall be based on the same methodology and the same level of service standards, improvements and costs used in the Impact Fee Study, and must document the methodologies and assumptions used. The city may hire a professional consultant to review any independent impact fee calculation study on behalf of the city, and may charge the reasonable costs of such review to the fee payer. (F) Any independent impact fee calculation study submitted by a fee payer may be accepted, rejected or accepted with modifications by the city as the basis for calculating impact fees. The city shall not be required to accept any study or documentation the city reasonably deems to be inaccurate or unreliable, and shall have the authority to request that the fee payer submit additional or different documentation for consideration in connection with review of any independent impact fee calculation. If such additional or different documentation is accepted or accepted with modifications as a more accurate measure of the impact fees due in connection with fee payer's proposed development than the applicable impact fees set forth in the fee schedule, then the impact fee due under this chapter shall be calculated according to such documentation. (G) The fee administrator shall render a written decision establishing the impact fees in connection with the individual assessment within thirty (30) days of the date a complete application is submitted. The decision shall include an explanation of the calculation of the impact fees, shall specify the system improvement(s) for which the impact fees are intended to be used, and shall include an explanation of the following factors considered: Any appropriate credit, offset or contribution of money, dedication of land, or construction of system improvements; 2. Payments reasonably anticipated to be made by or as a result of a new development in the form of user fees and debt service payments; That portion of general tax and other revenues allocated by the jurisdiction to system improvements; 4. All other available sources of funding such system improvements; 5. The cost of existing system improvements within the service area; 6. The means by which existing system improvements have been financed; ORDINANCE - Page 12. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd 7. The extent to which the new development will contribute to the cost of system improvements through taxation, assessment, or developer or landowner contributions, or has previously contributed to the cost of system improvements through developer or landowner contributions; The extent to which the new development is required to contribute to the cost of existing system improvements in the future; }. The extent to which the new development should be credited for providing system improvements, without charge to other properties within the service area; 10. Extraordinary costs, if any, incurred in serving the new development; 11. The time and price differential inherent in a fair comparison of impact fees paid at different times; and 12. The availability of other sources of funding system improvements including, but not limited to, user charges, general tax levies, intergovernmental transfers, and special taxation. The city shall develop a plan for alternative sources of revenue. (H) Certification of the impact fee for a project may be applied for in the following manner: Written application may be made to the fee administrator not later than sixty (60) days after development approval by the city council. Late applications for certification of the impact fee will not be considered unless the fee payer makes a showing that the facts supporting such application were not known or discoverable until after the time had run and that undue hardship would result if said application is not considered. 2. The fee administrator shall provide the fee payer with a written impact fee certification for the project within thirty (30) days of the date a complete application is submitted. The certification provided by the fee administrator shall establish the impact fee for the project in question so long as there is no material change to the project as identified in the certification application or the impact fee schedule. The certification shall include an explanation of the calculation of the impact fees, shall specify the system improvement(s) for which the impact fees are intended to be used, and shall include an explanation of the factors considered, which factors are identified in subsection (G) of this section. (i) Appeals of the fee administrator's determination of an individual assessment or certification shall be made to the city as provided further in this chapter. (J) The city recognizes that there may be circumstances where the anticipated fiscal ORDINANCE - Page 13. chubbuck 041814 park imp f' a ord.wpd impacts of a proposed development are of such magnitude that the city may be unable to accommodate the development without excessive or unscheduled public expenditures that exceed the amount of the anticipated impact fees from such development. If the city determines that a proposed development would create such an extraordinary impact on the city's parks and recreation department and facilities, the city may refuse to approve the proposed development. In the alternative, the city may calculate a pro rata share per dwelling unit, or square feet of nonresidential buildings, of the extraordinary impact and charge a reasonable extraordinary impact fee that is greater than would ordinarily be charged. (K) If the city discovers an error in its impact fee formula that results in assessment or payment of more than a proportionate share, the city shall, at the time of assessment on a case by case basis, adjust the impact fee to collect no more than a proportionate share or discontinue the collection of any impact fees until the error is corrected by ordinance. 17.24.600: PAYMENT OF IMPACT FEES: (A) After the effective date hereof all fee payers shall pay the impact fees as provided by this chapter to the fee administrator following application for a building permit and prior to the issuance of any building permit for a dwelling unit, or nonresidential building. (B) All impact fees paid by a fee payer pursuant to this chapter shall be promptly deposited in the impact fee fund described in section 17.24.700 of this chapter. (C) If a fee payer fails to pay the impact fee when required and due, the city may (1) Charge interest on the amount of the fee from the due date until the date paid at the rate provided in Idaho Code § 28-22-104; (2) Withhold of the building permit or other governmental approval until the development impact fee is paid; (3) Withhold the providing of utility services until the development impact fee is paid; and/or (4) Impose and file a lien against the property subject to the impact fee following procedures contained in chapter 5, title 45, Idaho Code. 17.24.700: IMPACT FEE FUNDS; REFUNDS OF IMPACT FEES PA117: (A) There is hereby established a parks and recreation impact fee fund into which shall be deposited all parks and recreation impact fees for the purpose of ensuring parks and recreation ORDINANCE - Page 14. ehubbuek 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd impact fees collected pursuant hereto are designated for the accommodation of parks and recreation capital improvements reasonably necessary to serve new development that paid the impact fee. (B) The fund shall be an interest bearing account which shall be accounted for separately from other impact fee funds and from other city funds. Any interest or other income earned on monies deposited in a fiend shall be credited to such fund. Expenditures of impact fees shall be made only for the category of system improvements for which the impact fees were collected and as identified in the capital improvements plan. (C) Except as otherwise provided herein, monies from the fiend, including any accrued interest, shall be limited to the financing of acquisition, expansion, and/or improvement of capital improvements, or for principal and interest payments on bonds or other borrowed revenues used to acquire, expand or improve such capital improvements, necessary to serve new development. Impact fees in each fund shall be spent within eight (8) years from the date such impact fees were collected on a first in/first out (FIFO) basis. The city may hold the impact fees longer than the prescribed time period if the city identifies, in writing: 1) a reasonable cause why the impact fees should be held longer; and 2) an anticipated date by which the impact fees will be expended but in no event longer than eleven (11) years from the date the impact fees were collected. (D) The fee administrator shall prepare annual reports to be provided to the advisory committee and the city council, which reports shall: 1) describe the amount of all impact fees collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements during the preceding year, as applicable, by category of public facility and service area; and 2) describe the percentage of tax and revenues other than impact fees collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements during the preceding year, as applicable, by category of public facility and service area. (E) Funds shall be deemed expended when payment of such funds has been approved by the city. The fee payer or successor in interest shall be entitled to a refund of the impact fee if: 1) service is available but never provided; 2) a building permit or permit for installation of a manufactured home is revoked or abandoned; 3) the city, after collecting the impact fee when service is not available, has failed to appropriate and expend the collected impact fees; or 4) the fee payer pays an impact fee under protest and a subsequent review of the impact fee paid or the completion of an individual assessment determines that the impact fee paid exceeded the proportionate share to which the city was entitled to receive. (F) When the right to a refund exists, within ninety (90) days after the city determines that a refund is due, the city shall provide written notice of entitlement to a refund, to the owner of record and the fee payer who paid the impact fees at the address shown on the application for development approval, or to a successor in interest who has notified the city of a transfer of the right or entitlement to a refund and who has provided to the city a mailing address. When the right to a refund exists, the city shall also publish the notice of entitlement to a refund within ORDINANCE - Page 15. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd thirty (30) days after the expiration of the eight (8) year period after the date that the impact fees were collected. Such published notice shall contain the heading "Notice of Entitlement to Impact Fee Refund". (G) A refund shall include interest at one-half ('/2) the legal rate provided for in § 28-22-104, Idaho Code, from the date on which the impact fee was originally paid. (H) In order to be eligible for a ref ind, a fee payer, successor in interest or owner of record shall file a written application for a refund with the fee administrator within six (6) months of the time such refund becomes payable under this Chapter, or within six (6) months of publication of the notice of entitlement to a refund, whichever is later. If a successor in interest claims a refund of impact fees, the fee administrator may require written documentation that such rights have been transferred to the claimant prior to issuing the requested refund. Refunds shall be paid within sixty (60) days after the date on which the fee administrator determines that a sufficient proof of claim for a refund has been made. (1) Any person entitled to a refund shall have standing to sue for a refiind under the provisions of this chapter if there has not been a timely payment of a refund as provided herein. 17.24.800: EXEMPTIONS FROM IMPACT FEES: (A) The following types of land development shat l be exempted from payment of the impact fees imposed by this chapter: 1. Rebuilding the same amount of square feet of a dwelling unit or nonresidential structure that was destroyed by fire or other catastrophe, provided that the structure is rebuilt and ready for occupancy within two (2) years of its destruction. 2. Construction of an unoccupied, detached accessory structure, or addition of uses related to a dwelling unit unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a significant impact on the capacity of system improvements. 3. Remodeling or repairing a dwelling unit or a nonresidential structure in a manner that does not increase the number of service units. 4. Replacing a dwelling unit with another dwelling unit on the same lot, provided that the number of service units does not increase. 5. Placing a temporary construction trailer or office on a lot. 6. Constructing an addition on a residential structure which does not increase the number of service units. ORDINANCE - Page 16. chubhuck D42819 park imp Pee ord.wpd 7. Adding uses that are typically accessory to residential uses, such as tennis courts or clubhouse, unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a significant impact on the capacity of system improvements. (B) An impact fee will be assessed for installation of a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle unless the fee payer can demonstrate by documentation such as utility bills and tax records, either: 1) that a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle was legally in place on the lot or space prior to the effective date hereof; or 2) that an impact fee has been paid previously for the installation of a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle on that sane lot or space. Lawful storage of a recreational vehicle shall not be deemed installation for purposes of this chapter. 17.24.900: CREDITS; REIMBURSEMENTS: (A) No fee payer shall be required to construct, fund or contribute any capital improvement to meet the same need for parks and recreation improvements for which an impact fee is imposed. All system improvements constructed, funded or contributed over and above the proportionate share of system improvement costs, including such system improvements paid for pursuant to a local improvement district, shall result in either a credit on future impact fees or reimbursement (at the fee payer's option) for such excess construction, funding or contribution to be paid from impact fees paid by future development that benefits from such system improvements constructed, funded or contributed by the fee payer. However, no credit or reimbursement shall be provided for; 1) project improvements; 2) any construction, funding or contribution not agreed to in writing by the city prior to commencement of such construction, funding or contribution; and 3) any construction, funding or contribution of a type of capital improvements not included in the calculation of the applicable impact fee. (B) In the calculation of impact fees for a project pursuant to subsections 17.24.500 (E) through (G) of this chapter, credit shall be given for the present value of all tax and user fee revenue generated by the fee payer 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 payer shall receive a credit on future impact fees. The credit may be applied by the fee payer as an offset against future impact fees only in the service area where the credit was generated. (C) In the calculation of impact fees for a project, credit or reimbursement (at the fee payer'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 developer for system. improvements of the category for which the impact fee is being collected, including system improvements paid for through local improvement district assessments. (D) If credit or reimbursement is due to the fee payer, the city and fee payer shall enter ORDINANCE - Page 17. Chubhuek 041819 park imp Fee nrd.wpd into a written agreement, negotiated in good faith, prior to the construction, fiunding 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 payer. 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. (E) 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 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 payer and shall note in the city records the amount of credit remaining, if any. Upon request of the fee payer, 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 17.24.700 (J) of this chapter. (F) 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 payer in cash or in credits against any other monies due from the fee payer to the city. (G) Credit for land dedications shall, at the fee payer's option, be valued at: 1) one hundred percent (100%) of the most recent assessed value for such land as shown in the records of the Bannock County assessor; or 2) fair market value established by a private appraiser reasonably acceptable to the city in an appraisal paid for by the fee payer. 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 payer 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. (H) 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 ORDINANCE - Page 18. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd been accepted by the city. Approved credits for contribution or construction of system improvements shall generally become effective when: 1) all required construction has been completed and has been accepted by the city, and 2) 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 payer 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. (I) Credit may only be transferred by a fee payer that has received credit to such fee payer'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. 17.24.1000: APPEALS: The decisions of the fee administrator may be appealed as provided below: (A) Any fee payer who is or may be obligated to pay an impact fee, may appeal a decision made by the fee administrator in applying this chapter to the city council. Such decisions that may be appealed include: 1. The applicability of an impact fee to the development. 2. The amount of an impact fee to be paid for the development. 3. The availability, amount or application of any credit. 4. The amount of any refund, reimbursement or credit. 5. Any discretionary action or inaction by or on behalf of the city. A fee payer may pay an impact fee under protest in order to obtain a development approval or building permits) and, by paying such impact fee, shall not be estopped from exercising the right of appeal provided herein, nor shall the fee payer 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. ORDINANCE - Page M chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd (B) In order to pursue an appeal, the fee payer shall file a written notice of appeal with the city clerk with a copy to the fee administrator within fifteen (15) days after the date of the decision being appealed, or the date on which the fee payer 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. (C) The city clerk shall notify the fee payer 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 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 payer to demonstrate that the amount of the impact fee, credit, reimbursement or refund was not properly calculated by the city. (D) The criteria to be used by the city council in evaluating the appeal shall be whether: 1) the decision or interpretation made by the fee administrator; or 2) the alternative decision or interpretation offered by the appellant, more accurately reflects the intent of this chapter that new 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 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 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 chapter and/or the capital improvements plan. The decision of the city council shall be final. (E) Upon voluntary agreement by the fee payer and the city, the fee payer and the city may enter into mediation with a qualified independent party to address a disagreement related to the impact fee for proposed development. Costs for the independent mediation service shall be shared equally by the fee payer and the city. Mediation may take place at any time during an appeals process and participation in mediation does not preclude the fee payer from pursuing other remedies. 17.24.1100: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS: (A) As used in this chapter, 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 ORDINANCE - Page 20, chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd dictates; the word shall, wi ll or must is always mandatory; the word may is permissive; and the word should indicates that which is recommended, but not required. (B) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to create any additional right to develop real property or diminish the power of the city in regulating the orderly development of real property. (C) Nothing in this chapter 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. (D) Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the city from requiring a developer to construct reasonable project improvements in conjunction with a project. (E) Nothing in this chapter shall limit the ability of the city to enter into inter- governmental agreements as provided in § 67-8204A, Idaho Code. (F) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve any development request that may reasonably be expected to reduce levels of service below minimum acceptable levels established in the development Impact Fee Study. (G) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve development which results in extraordinary impact. (H) Notwithstanding any agreement by the fee payer to pay the proportionate share of system improvement costs documented by the supplemental study, nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve development that results in an extraordinary impact. (I) Nothing in this chapter shall work to limit the use by the city of the power of eminent domain or supersede or conflict with requirements or procedures authorized in the Idaho Cade for local improvement districts or general obligation bond issues. (J) A development impact fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements determined in accordance with § 67-8207, Idaho Code. Development impact fees shall be based on actual system improvement costs or reasonable estimates of such costs. (K) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent or prohibit private agreements between developers, the city, the Idaho transportation department, and/or other governmental entities in regard to the construction or installation of system improvements or providing for credits or reimbursements for system improvement costs incurred by a developer or fee payer, including interproject transfers of credits, or providing for reimbursement for project improvements that are used or shared by more than one development project. If it can be shown that a proposed development has a direct impact on a public facility under the jurisdiction of the Idaho transportation department, then the agreement shall include a provision for the allocation ORDINANCE - Page 21. chubbuck 041819 park imp Fee ord.wpd of development impact fees collected from the developer or fee payer for the improvement of the public facility by the Idaho transportation department. (L) Nothing in this chapter shall restrict or diminish the power of the city; 1) to impose reasonable conditions on the annexation of any property to the city in accordance with Idaho Code, including conditions for recovery of project or system improvement costs required as a result of such voluntary annexation, or 2) to negotiate and execute development agreements that may impose additional conditions on development, including the recovery of project or system improvement costs, either in connection with a proposed annexation or in connection with any other development within the city. (M) The impact fees described in this chapter, and the administrative procedures of this chapter shall be reviewed at least once every five (5) years to ensure that: 1) the demand and cost assumptions and other assumptions underlying such impact fees are still valid; 2) the resulting impact fees do not exceed the actual costs of providing parks and recreation system improvements required to serve new development; 3) 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 4) such system improvements will benefit those developments for which the impact fees were paid. (N) Violation of this chapter 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 chapter on any matter relating to the administration of this chapter including, without limitation, the furnishing of false information regarding the expected size or use of a proposed development, shall be a violation of this chapter. (0) The captions used in this chapter are for convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation of any portion of the text of this chapter. (P) The capital improvement plans for Parks and Recreation as set forth in the Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis dated September, 2019 is hereby adopted and accepted as the capital improvement plan for the Parks and Recreation Department. ORDINANCE - Page 22. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd 17.24.1200: FEE SCHEDULE: This fee schedule shall be in effect June 3, 2019. Except for such impact fee as may be calculated, paid and accepted pursuant to an indcpendent impact fee calculation study, the amount of each impact fee shall be as follows: Parks and Recreation Impact Fee per Household: Single Family Residential Multi Family Residential $ 2,355 $ 2,195 Notwithstanding the foregoing, the implementation of the fee shall be phased in as follows: Effective June 3, 2019: Single Family Residential $ 1,800 Multi Family Residential $ 1,678 Effective April 1, 2420 Single Family Residential $ 1,985 Multi Family Residential $ 1,851 Effective April 1, 2021 Single Family Residential $ 2,170 Multi Family Residential $ 2,023 Effective April 1, 2022 Single Family Residential $ 2,355 Multi Family Residential $ 2,195 On January 1, 2020, and on January 1 of each year thereafter in which an impact fee is in effect, the amount of the impact fee shall be automatically adjusted to account for inflation increases in the cost of providing parks and recreation facilities to serve new development utilizing the municipal cost index as published by "American Cities And County Magazine". Nothing herein shall prevent the city from electing to maintain a then existing parks and recreation impact fee or from electing to waive the inflation adjustment for any given fiscal year, or years. Any such action to determine an inflation factor shall be by city council resolution. ORDINANCE - Pagc 23. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS Section 1. Repeal of Conflicting Ordinances. The provisions of any Ordinaucc of the City and any Provision of the Municipal Code which are in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section 2. Severability. The sections of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of a section shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections. Section 3. Effective Date. The rile requiring an ordinance to be read on three separate days, one of which shall be a reading in full, is dispensed with, and this Ordinance shall become effective upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL AND APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF T14E CITY fi OF CHUBBUCK, iDAI-la, thisday of }� 2019, LAJ Kevin B. England, MAYO R. ATTEST: o wers, VITYCLERK ORDSNANCF - Page 2E4. chubbuck 041 & 19 Park imp fee ord.wpd SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 7 r An ordinance of the City of Chubbuck, a municipal corporation of the state of Idaho; repealing sections 17.16.110, 17.16.130, and 17,16.154 of the ChLibbuck Municipal Code; amending 17.16. 100 and 17.16.110 of the Chubbuck Municipal Code effective June 3, 2019; adopting Chapter 17.24 "Park Impact Fee" to provide a Park Impact Fee upon new residential and multi -family development effective June 3, 2019; providing new development shall pay impact fees to be applied towards parks; providing for the administration of said impact tees and periodic adjustment thereof; providing for the fee to he phased in over four years with the hill fee being implemented effective Apri1 1, 2422; adopting the Capital Improvements flan dated September 1, 2018 for the Parks and Recreation Department; providing for the repeal of conflicting ordinances; providing for the severability of the provisions of this ordinance; providing when this ordinance shall be in effect, The full text of this ordinance is available at the City Clerk's Office, Chubbuck City Offices, 5160 Yellowstone, Chubbuck, ID 83202. 1 have reviewed the foregoing summary and believe it provides a true and correct summary of Ordinance No. 7 '� 1 and that the summary provides adequate notice to the public of the contents of this ordinance. DATED this l day of Al A Y , 2019, SUMMARY of ORDINANCE - Page I . chubbuck D41819 sum park Cee ord.wpd CITY OF CHUBBUC:K, IDAHO ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, REPEALING SECTIONS 17.16, l 10, 17.16.130, and 17.16.150; AMENDING 17.16.100 AND 17.16.140 OF THE CFIUBBUCK MUNICIPAL CODE EFFECTIVE JUNE 3, 2019; ADOPTING CHAPTER 17.24 "PARK IMPACT FEE" TO PROVIDE A PARK IMPACT FEE UPON NEW DEVELOPMENT EFFECTIVE JANE 3.2019 PROVIDING NEW DEVELOPMENT SHALL PAY IMPACT FEES TO BE APPLIED TOWARDS PARKS, PROVIDING FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF SAID IMPACT FEES AND PERIODIC ADJUSTMENT TIIEREOF; ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN DATED SEPTEMBER 1, 2018 FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT; REPEALING PRIOR CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING WHEN T141S ORDINANCE IS EFFECTIVE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CH UBBUCK, IDAHO: Section 1, Repeal of Certain Sections of Chapter 17,15. Effective ,lune 3, 2019, Section 17.16,110, 17.16, l 30 and 17, 16.150 shall be repealed; provided however any existing development implementing a park under this Chapter shall, at the discretion of the city, complete the development of the park in accordance with the plans previously approved tinder- this Chapter. Section 2. Amended Section 17.16. 100 and 17.16.140. Effective June 3, 2019, Section 17.16. 100 and 17,16.140 are amended to read as follows: 17.1 fr.100 REQUIRED; As a condition of approval of any development required to be platted tinder the provisions of this title, which includes residential structures, each developer will be required to dedicate land for park and recreational purposes to serve the immediate and future needs of the residents of the development, or pay an Impact Fee for Parks as provided for in Chapter 17.24 i nake a conttibu tion in lie n c Factual inj td dedicati an, or a cornbi nation of both, at the option of the city, and post around the exteriot ofthe park 11-1 a z tion to be approved by the 6!y building. 17.16.140. CRITERIA FOR REQUIRING A CONTRIBUTION IN LIEU OF PARK ORINNANCE-Page 1. a hub buck 041819 park inip fee nrd.vvpd AND RECREATION SITES: Where the development is small and resulting park and recreational site is too small to be practical, or when the available land is otherwise inappropriate for a park and recreational site, the developer shall pay the city the impact fee in lieu of the land dedication and improvements required. A park or recreational site smaller than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet shall be considered too small to be practical for purposes of this section unless approved by the public works director. The cash contribution in lieu of park and recreation land dedication shall be held in trust by the cit ,or other public body designated by the city, solely fo, tire acquisition ofpark and reereation land as classified in section 17.16.110 of this chapter, which vvill such needs., in accordance with Chapter 17.24 Section 3. Adoption of Title 17, Chapter 28, "Park Impact Fee". The following is adopted effective June 3, 2019: 17.24.100 LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS: The city council of the city of Chubbuck, Idaho, finds that.- (A) hat: (A) Based on the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City pursuant to Title 57, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, including, but not limited to, the capital improvements element of the comprehensive plan, and the general governmental goal of protecting the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the city, and its Area of City Impact, it is necessary parks and recreation public facilities to accommodate new development within the city, and its area of city impact. (B) New residential and nonresidential growth and development imposes and will impose increasing and excessive demands upon the public facilities. (C) The revenues generated from new residential and nonresidential growth and development often does not generate sufficient funds to provide the necessary levels of service provided by these public facilities to accommodate new development. (D) New development is expected to continue, and will place ever increasing demands on the city to provide and expand the public facilities to serve new development. (E) The city has planned for the improvement of the public facilities in the capital improvements element of the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive flan and in the impact fee analysis and the capital improvement plan reviewed and adopted therewith. (F) The creation of an equitable impact fee system in accordance with Title 67, Chapter 82, Idaho Code would enable the city to impose a proportionate share of the costs of needed ORDINANCE - Page 2. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd improvements to the public facilities to accommodate new development, and would assist the city in implementing the capital improvements element of the comprehensive plan. (G) In order to implement an equitable impact fee system for the public facilities, the city retained Zions Public Finance, Inc. ("Zions") to prepare an impact fee study for these types of facilities. The resulting document is titled: Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis dated September, 2018 (the "Impact Fee Study"), and recommended for approval by the Impact Fee Advisory Committee. The studies are on file in the office of the city clerk of the city of Chubbuck. Any reference herein to the Impact Fee Study shall be to that study. (H) The Impact Fee Study is consistent with the capital improvements element of the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan, and uses the levels of service set forth in the Comprehensive Plan for these public facilities. Parks and recreation level of service from page 7 of the Park Impact Fee Study is 5.22 acres per thousand population. (I) The Impact Fee Study sets forth reasonable methodologies and analyses for determining the impacts of various types of new development on the public facilities, and detennines the cost of acquiring or constructing the improvements necessary to meet the demands for such public facilities created by new development. (J) The Impact Fee Study uses a calculation methodology in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. This chapter shall not be deemed invalid because payment of an impact fee may result in an incidental benefit to others within the service area other than the fee payer - (K) The impact fees described in this chapter are based on the Impact Fee Study, and do not exceed the costs of system improvements for the public facilities to serve new development that will pay the impact fees. (L) The parks and recreation services included in the calculation of impact fees in the Impact Fee Study will benefit all new development throughout the city, and it is therefore appropriate to treat all areas of the city and the area of city impact as a single service area for purposes of calculating, collecting and spending the impact fees collected. (M) There is both a rational nexus and a rough proportionality between the development impacts created by each type of development covered by this chapter and the impact fees that such development will be required to pay. ORDNANCE - Page 3. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd (N) This chapter creates a system by which impact fees paid by new development will be used to finance, defray or to provide capital improvements for the public facilities in ways that benefit the development for which impact fees were paid. (0) This chapter creates a system under which impact fees shall not be used to correct existing deficiencies in public facilities, or to replace or rehabilitate existing public facilities, or to pay for routine operation or maintenance of those public facilities. (P) This chapter creates a system under which there shall be no double payment of impact fees, in accordance with Idaho Code § 67-8204(19). (Q) This chapter is consistent with all applicable provisions of title 67, chapter 82, Idaho Code, concerning impact fee ordinances. 17.24.200: AUTHORITY, APPLICABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE: (A) This chapter is enacted pursuant to the city's general police powers pursuant to the authority granted to the city by title 50, Idaho Code, and pursuant to the authority granted to the city by § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. (B) The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all of the territory within the limits of the city and to any unincorporated areas of the city within the city's area of city impact where the city has executed an intergovernmental agreement with Bannock County for purposes of collection or expenditure of impact fees pursuant to § 67-8204A, Idaho Code, and other applicable laws of the state of Idaho. (C) This chapter is effective June 3, 2019 ("Effective Date"), which effective date is more than thirty (30) days subsequent to the passage, approval and publication, according to law, of the ordinance codified herein, which adopted the provisions hereof. (D) Applications for building permits received by the city prior to the effective date hereof, or amendments hereto, adopting impact fees or amending or adopting any methodology by which impact fees are calculated, will be exempt from that portion of this chapter, or amendment enacted after such building permit application, if a valid building permit has been issued or construction has commenced prior to the effective date hereof, or amendment. For building permits that expire or are revoked after the effective date hereof, the fee payer shall be entitled to a refund of previously paid fees as provided herein, provided that in the case of reapplication for building permit, the impact fee in effect at that time shall be paid. (E) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, development requirements for system improvements shall be imposed by the city only by way of impact fees imposed pursuant to and in accordance with § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, and this chapter. ORDINANCE - Page 4. chubbuck 041819 park imp Fee ord.wpd 17.24.300: INTENT: (A) The intent of this chapter is to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the city and its area of city impact. (S) The intent of this chapter is to be consistent with those principles for allocating a fair share of the cost of capital improvements to public facilities to serve new development in compliance with the provisions set forth in § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. The provisions of this chapter shall be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the provisions set forth in § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. (C) The intent of this chapter is that impact fees should be charged, collected, and expended for parks and recreation capital improvements to increase the service capacity of such categories of public facilities, which capital improvements are included in approved capital improvements plans that list the capital improvements that may be funded with impact fees. (D) The intent of this chapter is to ensure that: 1. public facilities are available to serve new development; 2. new development bears a proportionate share of the cost of parks and recreation capital improvements to such public facilities; 3, such proportionate share does not exceed the cost of the capital improvements to such public facilities required to serve new development; and 4. the funds collected from new development are used for capital improvements for public facilities that benefit new development. (E) It is not the intent of this chapter to collect any monies from new development in excess of the actual amount necessary to offset new demands for capital improvements to public facilities created by such new development. (F) It is not the intent of this chapter that the impact fees be used to remedy any deficiency in parks and recreation capital improvements existing on the effective date hereof, or ever be used to replace, rehabilitate, maintain and/or operate any public facilities. (G) It is not the intent of this chapter that any monies collected from an impact fee deposited in an impact fee fund ever be commingled with monies from a different fund, or ever be used for capital improvements that are different from those for which the impact fee was paid. (H) it is not the intent of this chapter that impact fees be used for: 1. Constriction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. ORDINANCE - Page 5. ehubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd 2. Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards. 4. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development to provide better service to existing development, 5. Administrative and operating costs of the city unless such costs are attributable to development of the capital improvements plan used to determine impact fees by a surcharge imposed by ordinance on the collection of an impact fee, which surcharge shall not exceed a development's proportionate share of the cost of preparing the capital improvements plan. 6. Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the city to finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. 17.24.400: DEFINITIONS: 401. APPROPRIATE: To legally obligate by contract or otherwise commit to use by appropriation or other official act of a governmental entity. 402. BUILDING PERMIT: An official document or certificate by that name issued by the city authorizing the construction or siting of any building. 403. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS: Improvements with a useful life of ten ( 10) years or more, by new construction or other action, which increase the service capacity of a public facility. 404. CAPITAL CAPROVEMENTS ELEMENT: A component of a comprehensive plan adopted pursuant to chapter 65, title 67, Idaho Code, which component meets the requirements of a capital improvements plan pursuant to this chapter. 405. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN: A plan adopted pursuant to this chapter that identifies capital improvements for which impact fees may be used as a funding source. 406. CITY: The city of Chubbuck, Idaho. 407. CITY COUNCIL: The legislative body of the city of Chubbuck, Idaho. 408. DEVELOPER: Any person or legal entity undertaking development, including a ORDINANCE - Page b. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd party that undertakes the subdivision of property pursuant to §s 50-1301 through 50-1334, Idaho Code and this title. 409. DEVELOPMENT: Any construction or installation of a building or structure, or any change in use of a building or structure, or any change in the use, character or appearance of land, which creates additional demand and need for public facilities or the subdivision of property that would permit any change in the use, character or appearance of land. As used in this chapter, "development" shall not include activities that would otherwise be subject to payment of the development impact fee if such activities are undertaken by a taxing district, as defined in § 63-201, Idaho Code, in the course of carrying out the taxing district's public responsibilities, unless the adopted impact fee ordinance expressly includes taxing districts as being subject to development impact fees, 410. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL: Any written authorization from a governmental entity which authorizes the commencement of a development. 411. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE: See definition of Impact Fee. 412. DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT: A requirement attached to a development approval or other governmental action approving or authorizing a particular development including, without limitation, a rezoning, which development requirement compels the payment, dedication or contribution of goods, services, land and/or money as a condition of approval. 413. DWELLING UNIT: A building or portion of a building designed for or whose primary purpose is for residential occupancy, and which consists of one or more rooms which are arranged, designed or used as living and/or sleeping quarters for one or more persons. Dwelling unit includes a multi -family building, a mobile home, a manufactured home, a modular building and/or a motel/hoteI/rooming house. 414. EXTRAORDINARY COSTS: Those costs incurred as a result of extraordinary impact. 415. EXTRAORDINARY IMPACT: An impact which is reasonably determined by the city to: result in the need for system improvements, the cost of which will significantly exceed the sum of the impact fees to be generated from the project; or the sum agreed to be paid pursuant to a development agreement as allowed by § 67-8214(2), Idaho Code, or result in the need for system improvements that are not identified in the capital improvements plan. 416. FEE ADMINISTRATOR: The Public Works Director or the Director's desgnee. 417. FEE PAYER: A person who pays or is required to pay an impact fee or the fee payer's successor in interest. ORDINANCE - Page 7. chubhuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd 418, GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY: Any unit of local government that is empowered by § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, to adopt an impact fee ordinance. 419. IMPACT FEE: A payment of money imposed as a condition of development approval to pay for a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements needed to serve development. The term does not include a charge or fee to pay the administrative, plan review or inspection costs associated with permits required for development; connection or hook -Lip charges; availability charges for drainage, sewer, water, or transportation charges for services provided directly to the development; or amounts collected from a developer in a transaction in which the city has incurred expenses in constructing capital improvements for the development if the owner or developer has agreed to be financially responsible for the construction or installation of the capital improvements, unless a written agreement is made pursuant to § 67-8209(3), Idaho Code, for credit or reimbursement. 420. IMPACT FEE STUDY: The document entitled Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis dated September, 2018, prepared by Zions Public Finance for the city. 421. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS: A description of the service area and projections of land uses, densities, intensities, and population in the service area over at least a twenty (20) year period. 422. LEVEL OF SERVICE: A measure of the relationship between service capacity and service demand for public facilities. 423. MANUFACTURED HOME: A structure, constructed according to HUD/FHA mobile home construction and safety standards, transportable in one or more sections, which, in the traveling mode, is eight feet (8) or more in width or is forty (40) body feet or more in length, or when erected on site, is three hundred twenty (320) or more square feet, and which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems contained therein, except that such term shall include any structure which meets all the requirements of this definition except the size requirements and with respect to which the manufacturer voluntarily files a certification required by the secretary of housing and urban development and complies with the standards established under 42 USC 5401 et seq. The definition in this chapter of a Manufactured Home shall have no application to the definition of a Production Building in Title 18. 423. MODULAR BUILDING: is defined in § 39-4301, Idaho Code, and means any building or building component, other than a manufactured or mobile home, which is of closed construction and is either entirely or substantially prefabricated or assembled at a place other than the building site. § 67-8203(19), Idaho Code. ORMANCE - Page 8. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd 424. MULTI -FAMILY: A building or portion thereof, containing two (2) or more dwelling units, excluding attached single-family townhouse units located on individual lots. 425. OWNER: The person holding legal title to real property, including the local, state or federal government or any subdivision thereof. 426. PERSON: An individual, corporation, governmental agency, business trust, estate, partnership, association, two (2) or more persons having a joint or common interest, or any other entity. 427. PRESENT VALUE: The total current monetary value of past, present or future payments, contributions or dedications of goods, services, materials, construction or money. 428. PROJECT: A particular development on an identified parcel of land. 429. PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS: Site improvements and facilities that are planned and designed to provide service for a project and that are necessary for the use and convenience of the occupants or users of the project. 430. PROPORTIONATE SHARE: That portion of the cost of system improvements determined pursuant to § 67-8207, Idaho Code, and this title, which reasonably relates to the service demands and needs for public facilities of a project. 431. PUBLIC FACILITY: (A) Water supply production, treatment, storage and distribution facilities; (B) Wastewater collection, treatment and disposal facilities; (C) Roads, streets and bridges, including rights of way, traffic signals, landscaping and any local components of state or federal highways; (D) Stormwater collection, retention, detention, treatment and disposal facilities, flood control facilities, and bank and shore protection and enhancement improvements; (E) Parks, open space and recreation areas, and related capital improvements; and (F) Public safety facilities, including law enforcement, emergency services, emergency medical and rescue and street lighting facilities. 432. RECREATIONAL VEHICLE: A vehicular type unit primarily designed as temporary quarters for recreational, camping, or travel use, which either has its own motive power or is mounted on or drawn by another vehicle. ORDINANCE - Page 9. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd 433. SERVICE AREA: Any defined geographic area identified by a governmental entity or by intergovernmental agreement in which specific public facilities provide service to development within the area defined, on the basis of sound planning or engineering principles or both. 434. SERVICE UNIT: A standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. 435. SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST: A person who gains legal title in real property for which an impact fee is paid or a credit is approved pursuant to the terms of this chapter. 436. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT COSTS: Costs incurred for construction or reconstruction of system improvements, including design, acquisition, engineering and other costs attributable thereto, and also including, without limitation, the type of costs described in § 50-1702(h), Idaho Code, to provide additional public facilities needed to serve new developmcnt. For clarification, system improvement costs do not include: (A) Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan; (B) Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements; (C) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing developments in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards; (D) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to provide better service to existing development; (E) Administrative and operating costs of the governmental entity unless such costs are attributable to development of the capital improvements plan, as provided in § 67-8208, Idaho Code; or (F) Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the governmental entity to finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. 437. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS: In contrast to project improvements, means capital improvements to public facilities that are designed to provide service to a service area including, without limitation, the type of improvements the city has the authority to make as described in § 50-1703, Idaho Code ORDINANCE - Page 10. ehubbuck 041819 park imp Fee ord.wpd 17.24.500: IMPOSITION AND CDMPUTATiON OF IMPACT FEES: (A) Any application for a building permit enabling the construction, and in the case of construction that does not require a building permit, any building that takes place on or after the effective date hereof shall be subject to the imposition of impact fees in the manner and amount set forth in this chapter. The methodology adopted for the purpose of determining parks and recreation impact fees shall be based upon the assumptions set forth in the Impact Fee Study for that service. (B) Impact fees shall be required as a condition of approval of all residential and nonresidential development in the service area for which a building permit is required and shall be payable prior to the issuance of any building permit (or installation permit in the case of a manufactured home) for a dwelling unit or a nonresidential building. Except as otherwise provided herein, after the effective date hereof, no building pen -nit shall be issued until the impact fees described in this chapter have been paid, unless the development for which the permit is sought is exempted by § 17.24.840 of this chapter or approved credits are used to cover the impact fee, as set forth in § 17.24.900 of this chapter. The fee administrator shall have the authority to withhold a building permit, stop construction, withhold utility services or impose liens as the case may be, until the appropriate impact fee has been collected. (C) After payment of the development impact fees or execution of an agreement for payment of development impact fees, additional development impact fees or increases in fees may not be assessed unless the number of service units increases or the scope or schedule of the development changes. In the event of an increase in the number of service units or schedule of the development changes, the additional development impact fees to be imposed are limited to the amount attributable to the additional service units or change in scope of the development. (D) A fee payer required by this chapter to pay an impact fee may choose to have the amount of such impact fee determined pursuant to either the fee schedule (whereupon such payment shall be recognized as full and complete payment of the development's proportionate share of system improvement costs, except as provided in Idaho Code § 57-8214(3)) or subsections (E) through (G) of this section. If the fee payer chooses to have the amount of such impact fee determined pursuant to subsections (E) through (G) of this section, such impact fee shall be subject to the adjustment described in section 17.24.900 of this chapter, if applicable. If the project is a mix of those uses listed on the fee schedule, then the impact fees shall be determined by adding up the impact fees that would be payable for each use as if it were a freestanding use pursuant to the fee schedule. (E) Individual assessment of impact fees is permitted in situations where the fee payer can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the established impact fee is inappropriate for the project. Written application for individual assessment shall be made to the fee administrator at any time prior to receiving building permit(s). Late applications for individual assessment of impact fees may be considered for a period of sixty (60) days after the receipt of a building ORDINANCE - Page 11. chubhuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd permit only if the fee payer makes a showing that the facts supporting such application were not known or discoverable prior to receipt of a building permit and that undue hardship would result if said application is not considered. Such independent impact fee calculation study for the fee payer's development shall be prepared at the fee payer's cost by a qualified professional and contain studies, data and other relevant information and be submitted to the fee administrator for review. Any such study shall be based on the same methodology and the same level of service standards, improvements and costs used in the Impact Fee Study, and must document the methodologies and assumptions used. The city may hire a professional consultant to review any independent impact fee calculation study on behalf of the city, and may charge the reasonable costs of such review to the fee payer. (F) Any independent impact fee calculation study submitted by a fee payer may be accepted, rejected or accepted with modifications by the city as the basis for calculating impact fees. The city shall not be required to accept any study or documentation the city reasonably deems to be inaccurate or unreliable, and shall have the authority to request that the fee payer submit additional or different documentation for consideration in connection with review of any independent impact fee calculation. If such additional or different documentation is accepted or accepted with modifications as a more accurate measure of the impact fees due in connection with fee payer's proposed development than the applicable impact fees set forth in the fee schedule, then the impact fee due under this chapter shall be calculated according to such documentation. (G) The fee administrator shall render a written decision establishing the impact fees in connection with the individual assessment within thirty (30) days of the date a complete application is submitted. The decision shall include an explanation of the calculation of the impact fees, shall specify the system improvement(s) for which the impact fees are intended to be used, and shall include an explanation of the following factors considered: Any appropriate credit, offset or contribution of money, dedication of land, or construction of system improvements; 2. Payments reasonably anticipated to be made by or as a result of a new development in the form of user fees and debt service payments; That portion of general tax and other revenues allocated by the jurisdiction to system improvements; 4. All other available sources of funding such system improvements; 5. The cost of existing system improvements within the service area; 6. The means by which existing system improvements have been financed; ORDINANCE - Page 12. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd 7. The extent to which the new development will contribute to the cost of system improvements through taxation, assessment, or developer or landowner contributions, or has previously contributed to the cost of system improvements through developer or landowner contributions; The extent to which the new development is required to contribute to the cost of existing system improvements in the future; }. The extent to which the new development should be credited for providing system improvements, without charge to other properties within the service area; 10. Extraordinary costs, if any, incurred in serving the new development; 11. The time and price differential inherent in a fair comparison of impact fees paid at different times; and 12. The availability of other sources of funding system improvements including, but not limited to, user charges, general tax levies, intergovernmental transfers, and special taxation. The city shall develop a plan for alternative sources of revenue. (H) Certification of the impact fee for a project may be applied for in the following manner: Written application may be made to the fee administrator not later than sixty (60) days after development approval by the city council. Late applications for certification of the impact fee will not be considered unless the fee payer makes a showing that the facts supporting such application were not known or discoverable until after the time had run and that undue hardship would result if said application is not considered. 2. The fee administrator shall provide the fee payer with a written impact fee certification for the project within thirty (30) days of the date a complete application is submitted. The certification provided by the fee administrator shall establish the impact fee for the project in question so long as there is no material change to the project as identified in the certification application or the impact fee schedule. The certification shall include an explanation of the calculation of the impact fees, shall specify the system improvement(s) for which the impact fees are intended to be used, and shall include an explanation of the factors considered, which factors are identified in subsection (G) of this section. (i) Appeals of the fee administrator's determination of an individual assessment or certification shall be made to the city as provided further in this chapter. (J) The city recognizes that there may be circumstances where the anticipated fiscal ORDINANCE - Page 13. chubbuck 041814 park imp f' a ord.wpd impacts of a proposed development are of such magnitude that the city may be unable to accommodate the development without excessive or unscheduled public expenditures that exceed the amount of the anticipated impact fees from such development. If the city determines that a proposed development would create such an extraordinary impact on the city's parks and recreation department and facilities, the city may refuse to approve the proposed development. In the alternative, the city may calculate a pro rata share per dwelling unit, or square feet of nonresidential buildings, of the extraordinary impact and charge a reasonable extraordinary impact fee that is greater than would ordinarily be charged. (K) If the city discovers an error in its impact fee formula that results in assessment or payment of more than a proportionate share, the city shall, at the time of assessment on a case by case basis, adjust the impact fee to collect no more than a proportionate share or discontinue the collection of any impact fees until the error is corrected by ordinance. 17.24.600: PAYMENT OF IMPACT FEES: (A) After the effective date hereof all fee payers shall pay the impact fees as provided by this chapter to the fee administrator following application for a building permit and prior to the issuance of any building permit for a dwelling unit, or nonresidential building. (B) All impact fees paid by a fee payer pursuant to this chapter shall be promptly deposited in the impact fee fund described in section 17.24.700 of this chapter. (C) If a fee payer fails to pay the impact fee when required and due, the city may (1) Charge interest on the amount of the fee from the due date until the date paid at the rate provided in Idaho Code § 28-22-104; (2) Withhold of the building permit or other governmental approval until the development impact fee is paid; (3) Withhold the providing of utility services until the development impact fee is paid; and/or (4) Impose and file a lien against the property subject to the impact fee following procedures contained in chapter 5, title 45, Idaho Code. 17.24.700: IMPACT FEE FUNDS; REFUNDS OF IMPACT FEES PA117: (A) There is hereby established a parks and recreation impact fee fund into which shall be deposited all parks and recreation impact fees for the purpose of ensuring parks and recreation ORDINANCE - Page 14. ehubbuek 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd impact fees collected pursuant hereto are designated for the accommodation of parks and recreation capital improvements reasonably necessary to serve new development that paid the impact fee. (B) The fund shall be an interest bearing account which shall be accounted for separately from other impact fee funds and from other city funds. Any interest or other income earned on monies deposited in a fiend shall be credited to such fund. Expenditures of impact fees shall be made only for the category of system improvements for which the impact fees were collected and as identified in the capital improvements plan. (C) Except as otherwise provided herein, monies from the fiend, including any accrued interest, shall be limited to the financing of acquisition, expansion, and/or improvement of capital improvements, or for principal and interest payments on bonds or other borrowed revenues used to acquire, expand or improve such capital improvements, necessary to serve new development. Impact fees in each fund shall be spent within eight (8) years from the date such impact fees were collected on a first in/first out (FIFO) basis. The city may hold the impact fees longer than the prescribed time period if the city identifies, in writing: 1) a reasonable cause why the impact fees should be held longer; and 2) an anticipated date by which the impact fees will be expended but in no event longer than eleven (11) years from the date the impact fees were collected. (D) The fee administrator shall prepare annual reports to be provided to the advisory committee and the city council, which reports shall: 1) describe the amount of all impact fees collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements during the preceding year, as applicable, by category of public facility and service area; and 2) describe the percentage of tax and revenues other than impact fees collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements during the preceding year, as applicable, by category of public facility and service area. (E) Funds shall be deemed expended when payment of such funds has been approved by the city. The fee payer or successor in interest shall be entitled to a refund of the impact fee if: 1) service is available but never provided; 2) a building permit or permit for installation of a manufactured home is revoked or abandoned; 3) the city, after collecting the impact fee when service is not available, has failed to appropriate and expend the collected impact fees; or 4) the fee payer pays an impact fee under protest and a subsequent review of the impact fee paid or the completion of an individual assessment determines that the impact fee paid exceeded the proportionate share to which the city was entitled to receive. (F) When the right to a refund exists, within ninety (90) days after the city determines that a refund is due, the city shall provide written notice of entitlement to a refund, to the owner of record and the fee payer who paid the impact fees at the address shown on the application for development approval, or to a successor in interest who has notified the city of a transfer of the right or entitlement to a refund and who has provided to the city a mailing address. When the right to a refund exists, the city shall also publish the notice of entitlement to a refund within ORDINANCE - Page 15. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd thirty (30) days after the expiration of the eight (8) year period after the date that the impact fees were collected. Such published notice shall contain the heading "Notice of Entitlement to Impact Fee Refund". (G) A refund shall include interest at one-half ('/2) the legal rate provided for in § 28-22-104, Idaho Code, from the date on which the impact fee was originally paid. (H) In order to be eligible for a ref ind, a fee payer, successor in interest or owner of record shall file a written application for a refund with the fee administrator within six (6) months of the time such refund becomes payable under this Chapter, or within six (6) months of publication of the notice of entitlement to a refund, whichever is later. If a successor in interest claims a refund of impact fees, the fee administrator may require written documentation that such rights have been transferred to the claimant prior to issuing the requested refund. Refunds shall be paid within sixty (60) days after the date on which the fee administrator determines that a sufficient proof of claim for a refund has been made. (1) Any person entitled to a refund shall have standing to sue for a refiind under the provisions of this chapter if there has not been a timely payment of a refund as provided herein. 17.24.800: EXEMPTIONS FROM IMPACT FEES: (A) The following types of land development shat l be exempted from payment of the impact fees imposed by this chapter: 1. Rebuilding the same amount of square feet of a dwelling unit or nonresidential structure that was destroyed by fire or other catastrophe, provided that the structure is rebuilt and ready for occupancy within two (2) years of its destruction. 2. Construction of an unoccupied, detached accessory structure, or addition of uses related to a dwelling unit unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a significant impact on the capacity of system improvements. 3. Remodeling or repairing a dwelling unit or a nonresidential structure in a manner that does not increase the number of service units. 4. Replacing a dwelling unit with another dwelling unit on the same lot, provided that the number of service units does not increase. 5. Placing a temporary construction trailer or office on a lot. 6. Constructing an addition on a residential structure which does not increase the number of service units. ORDINANCE - Page 16. chubhuck D42819 park imp Pee ord.wpd 7. Adding uses that are typically accessory to residential uses, such as tennis courts or clubhouse, unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a significant impact on the capacity of system improvements. (B) An impact fee will be assessed for installation of a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle unless the fee payer can demonstrate by documentation such as utility bills and tax records, either: 1) that a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle was legally in place on the lot or space prior to the effective date hereof; or 2) that an impact fee has been paid previously for the installation of a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle on that sane lot or space. Lawful storage of a recreational vehicle shall not be deemed installation for purposes of this chapter. 17.24.900: CREDITS; REIMBURSEMENTS: (A) No fee payer shall be required to construct, fund or contribute any capital improvement to meet the same need for parks and recreation improvements for which an impact fee is imposed. All system improvements constructed, funded or contributed over and above the proportionate share of system improvement costs, including such system improvements paid for pursuant to a local improvement district, shall result in either a credit on future impact fees or reimbursement (at the fee payer's option) for such excess construction, funding or contribution to be paid from impact fees paid by future development that benefits from such system improvements constructed, funded or contributed by the fee payer. However, no credit or reimbursement shall be provided for; 1) project improvements; 2) any construction, funding or contribution not agreed to in writing by the city prior to commencement of such construction, funding or contribution; and 3) any construction, funding or contribution of a type of capital improvements not included in the calculation of the applicable impact fee. (B) In the calculation of impact fees for a project pursuant to subsections 17.24.500 (E) through (G) of this chapter, credit shall be given for the present value of all tax and user fee revenue generated by the fee payer 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 payer shall receive a credit on future impact fees. The credit may be applied by the fee payer as an offset against future impact fees only in the service area where the credit was generated. (C) In the calculation of impact fees for a project, credit or reimbursement (at the fee payer'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 developer for system. improvements of the category for which the impact fee is being collected, including system improvements paid for through local improvement district assessments. (D) If credit or reimbursement is due to the fee payer, the city and fee payer shall enter ORDINANCE - Page 17. Chubhuek 041819 park imp Fee nrd.wpd into a written agreement, negotiated in good faith, prior to the construction, fiunding 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 payer. 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. (E) 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 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 payer and shall note in the city records the amount of credit remaining, if any. Upon request of the fee payer, 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 17.24.700 (J) of this chapter. (F) 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 payer in cash or in credits against any other monies due from the fee payer to the city. (G) Credit for land dedications shall, at the fee payer's option, be valued at: 1) one hundred percent (100%) of the most recent assessed value for such land as shown in the records of the Bannock County assessor; or 2) fair market value established by a private appraiser reasonably acceptable to the city in an appraisal paid for by the fee payer. 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 payer 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. (H) 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 ORDINANCE - Page 18. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd been accepted by the city. Approved credits for contribution or construction of system improvements shall generally become effective when: 1) all required construction has been completed and has been accepted by the city, and 2) 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 payer 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. (I) Credit may only be transferred by a fee payer that has received credit to such fee payer'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. 17.24.1000: APPEALS: The decisions of the fee administrator may be appealed as provided below: (A) Any fee payer who is or may be obligated to pay an impact fee, may appeal a decision made by the fee administrator in applying this chapter to the city council. Such decisions that may be appealed include: 1. The applicability of an impact fee to the development. 2. The amount of an impact fee to be paid for the development. 3. The availability, amount or application of any credit. 4. The amount of any refund, reimbursement or credit. 5. Any discretionary action or inaction by or on behalf of the city. A fee payer may pay an impact fee under protest in order to obtain a development approval or building permits) and, by paying such impact fee, shall not be estopped from exercising the right of appeal provided herein, nor shall the fee payer 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. ORDINANCE - Page M chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd (B) In order to pursue an appeal, the fee payer shall file a written notice of appeal with the city clerk with a copy to the fee administrator within fifteen (15) days after the date of the decision being appealed, or the date on which the fee payer 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. (C) The city clerk shall notify the fee payer 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 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 payer to demonstrate that the amount of the impact fee, credit, reimbursement or refund was not properly calculated by the city. (D) The criteria to be used by the city council in evaluating the appeal shall be whether: 1) the decision or interpretation made by the fee administrator; or 2) the alternative decision or interpretation offered by the appellant, more accurately reflects the intent of this chapter that new 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 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 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 chapter and/or the capital improvements plan. The decision of the city council shall be final. (E) Upon voluntary agreement by the fee payer and the city, the fee payer and the city may enter into mediation with a qualified independent party to address a disagreement related to the impact fee for proposed development. Costs for the independent mediation service shall be shared equally by the fee payer and the city. Mediation may take place at any time during an appeals process and participation in mediation does not preclude the fee payer from pursuing other remedies. 17.24.1100: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS: (A) As used in this chapter, 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 ORDINANCE - Page 20, chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd dictates; the word shall, wi ll or must is always mandatory; the word may is permissive; and the word should indicates that which is recommended, but not required. (B) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to create any additional right to develop real property or diminish the power of the city in regulating the orderly development of real property. (C) Nothing in this chapter 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. (D) Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the city from requiring a developer to construct reasonable project improvements in conjunction with a project. (E) Nothing in this chapter shall limit the ability of the city to enter into inter- governmental agreements as provided in § 67-8204A, Idaho Code. (F) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve any development request that may reasonably be expected to reduce levels of service below minimum acceptable levels established in the development Impact Fee Study. (G) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve development which results in extraordinary impact. (H) Notwithstanding any agreement by the fee payer to pay the proportionate share of system improvement costs documented by the supplemental study, nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve development that results in an extraordinary impact. (I) Nothing in this chapter shall work to limit the use by the city of the power of eminent domain or supersede or conflict with requirements or procedures authorized in the Idaho Cade for local improvement districts or general obligation bond issues. (J) A development impact fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements determined in accordance with § 67-8207, Idaho Code. Development impact fees shall be based on actual system improvement costs or reasonable estimates of such costs. (K) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent or prohibit private agreements between developers, the city, the Idaho transportation department, and/or other governmental entities in regard to the construction or installation of system improvements or providing for credits or reimbursements for system improvement costs incurred by a developer or fee payer, including interproject transfers of credits, or providing for reimbursement for project improvements that are used or shared by more than one development project. If it can be shown that a proposed development has a direct impact on a public facility under the jurisdiction of the Idaho transportation department, then the agreement shall include a provision for the allocation ORDINANCE - Page 21. chubbuck 041819 park imp Fee ord.wpd of development impact fees collected from the developer or fee payer for the improvement of the public facility by the Idaho transportation department. (L) Nothing in this chapter shall restrict or diminish the power of the city; 1) to impose reasonable conditions on the annexation of any property to the city in accordance with Idaho Code, including conditions for recovery of project or system improvement costs required as a result of such voluntary annexation, or 2) to negotiate and execute development agreements that may impose additional conditions on development, including the recovery of project or system improvement costs, either in connection with a proposed annexation or in connection with any other development within the city. (M) The impact fees described in this chapter, and the administrative procedures of this chapter shall be reviewed at least once every five (5) years to ensure that: 1) the demand and cost assumptions and other assumptions underlying such impact fees are still valid; 2) the resulting impact fees do not exceed the actual costs of providing parks and recreation system improvements required to serve new development; 3) 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 4) such system improvements will benefit those developments for which the impact fees were paid. (N) Violation of this chapter 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 chapter on any matter relating to the administration of this chapter including, without limitation, the furnishing of false information regarding the expected size or use of a proposed development, shall be a violation of this chapter. (0) The captions used in this chapter are for convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation of any portion of the text of this chapter. (P) The capital improvement plans for Parks and Recreation as set forth in the Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis dated September, 2019 is hereby adopted and accepted as the capital improvement plan for the Parks and Recreation Department. ORDINANCE - Page 22. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd 17.24.1200: FEE SCHEDULE: This fee schedule shall be in effect June 3, 2019. Except for such impact fee as may be calculated, paid and accepted pursuant to an indcpendent impact fee calculation study, the amount of each impact fee shall be as follows: Parks and Recreation Impact Fee per Household: Single Family Residential Multi Family Residential $ 2,355 $ 2,195 Notwithstanding the foregoing, the implementation of the fee shall be phased in as follows: Effective June 3, 2019: Single Family Residential $ 1,800 Multi Family Residential $ 1,678 Effective April 1, 2420 Single Family Residential $ 1,985 Multi Family Residential $ 1,851 Effective April 1, 2021 Single Family Residential $ 2,170 Multi Family Residential $ 2,023 Effective April 1, 2022 Single Family Residential $ 2,355 Multi Family Residential $ 2,195 On January 1, 2020, and on January 1 of each year thereafter in which an impact fee is in effect, the amount of the impact fee shall be automatically adjusted to account for inflation increases in the cost of providing parks and recreation facilities to serve new development utilizing the municipal cost index as published by "American Cities And County Magazine". Nothing herein shall prevent the city from electing to maintain a then existing parks and recreation impact fee or from electing to waive the inflation adjustment for any given fiscal year, or years. Any such action to determine an inflation factor shall be by city council resolution. ORDINANCE - Pagc 23. chubbuck 041819 park imp fee ord.wpd ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS Section 1. Repeal of Conflicting Ordinances. The provisions of any Ordinaucc of the City and any Provision of the Municipal Code which are in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section 2. Severability. The sections of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of a section shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections. Section 3. Effective Date. The rile requiring an ordinance to be read on three separate days, one of which shall be a reading in full, is dispensed with, and this Ordinance shall become effective upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL AND APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF T14E CITY fi OF CHUBBUCK, iDAI-la, thisday of }� 2019, LAJ Kevin B. England, MAYO R. ATTEST: o wers, VITYCLERK ORDSNANCF - Page 2E4. chubbuck 041 & 19 Park imp fee ord.wpd SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 7 r An ordinance of the City of Chubbuck, a municipal corporation of the state of Idaho; repealing sections 17.16.110, 17.16.130, and 17,16.154 of the ChLibbuck Municipal Code; amending 17.16. 100 and 17.16.110 of the Chubbuck Municipal Code effective June 3, 2019; adopting Chapter 17.24 "Park Impact Fee" to provide a Park Impact Fee upon new residential and multi -family development effective June 3, 2019; providing new development shall pay impact fees to be applied towards parks; providing for the administration of said impact tees and periodic adjustment thereof; providing for the fee to he phased in over four years with the hill fee being implemented effective Apri1 1, 2422; adopting the Capital Improvements flan dated September 1, 2018 for the Parks and Recreation Department; providing for the repeal of conflicting ordinances; providing for the severability of the provisions of this ordinance; providing when this ordinance shall be in effect, The full text of this ordinance is available at the City Clerk's Office, Chubbuck City Offices, 5160 Yellowstone, Chubbuck, ID 83202. 1 have reviewed the foregoing summary and believe it provides a true and correct summary of Ordinance No. 7 '� 1 and that the summary provides adequate notice to the public of the contents of this ordinance. DATED this l day of Al A Y , 2019, SUMMARY of ORDINANCE - Page I . chubbuck D41819 sum park Cee ord.wpd CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO ORDINANCE NO. 804 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, MAKING TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 791; REPEALING SECTION 17.16.160; AMENDING SECTION 17.16. 100 TO CLARIFY EITHER A PARK LAND DEDICATION WILL BE MADE OR AN IMPACT FEE PAID; AMENDING ALL REFERENCES IN ORDINANCE 791 THAT REFERENCE THE PARK IMPACT FEE SECTIONS FROM 17.24 TO 17.28; REPEALING PRIOR CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; ALL OTHER SECTIONS OF CHAPTERS 17.16 AND 17.24 NOT AMENDED SHALL REMAIN IN EFFECT; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING WHEN THIS ORDINANCE IS EFFECTIVE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO: Section 1, Repeal of Section 17.16.160. Section l 7.16,160 is hereby repealed. Section 2. Amended Section 17.16. 100 and 17.16.140. Section 17.16, 100 and 17.16,140 are amended to read as follows: 17.16. 100 REQUIRED. As a condition of approval of any development required to be platted under the provisions of this title, which includes residential structures, each developer will be required to either dedicate land for park and recreational purposes to serve the immediate and future needs of the residents of the development, or pay an Impact Fee for Parks as provided for in Chapter 17.248. 17.16.140: CRITERIA FOR REQUIRING A CONTRIBUTION IN LIEU OF PARK AND RECREATION SITES: Where the development is small and resulting park and recreational site is too small to be practical, or when the available land is otherwise inappropriate for a park and recreational site, the developer shall pay the city the impact fee in lieu of the land dedication and improvements required. A park or recreational site smaller than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet shall be considered too small to be practical for purposes of this section unless approved by the public works director. The cash contribution in lieu of park and recreation land dedication shall be held in trust by the city, in accordance with Chapter 17.248. Section 3. Change in references from Title 17, Chapter 24 to Chapter 28. The following changes are adopted: ORDINANCE - Page 1. chubbuck 082219 ord carr 791.wpd 17.248.100 LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS: The city council of the city of Chubbuck, Idaho, finds that: (A) Based on the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Pian adopted by the City pursuant to Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, including, but not limited to, the capital improvements element of the comprehensive plan, and the general governmental goal of protecting the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the city, and its Area of City Impact, it is necessary parks and recreation public facilities to accommodate new development within the city, and its area of city impact. (B) New residential and nonresidential growth and dcveloptncnt imposes and will impose increasing and excessive demands upon the public facilities. (C) The revenues generated from new residential and nonresidential growth and development often does not generate sufficient funds to provide the necessary levels of service provided by these public facilities to accommodate new development. (D) New development is expected to continue, and will place ever increasing demands on the city to provide and expand the public facilities to serve new development. (E) The city has planned for the improvement of the public facilities in the capital improvements element of the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan and in the impact fee analysis and the capital improvement plan reviewed and adopted therewith, (F) The creation of an equitable impact fee system in accordance with Title 57, Chapter 82, Idaho Code would enable the city to impose a proportionate share of the costs of needed improvements to the public facilities to accommodate new development, and would assist the city in implementing the capital improvements element of the comprehensive plan. (G) In order to implement an equitable impact fee system for the public facilities, the city retained Zions Public Finance, Inc. ("Zions") to prepare an impact fee study for these types of facilities. The resulting document is titled: Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis dated September, 2018 (the "Impact Fee Study"), and recommended for approval by the Impact Fee Advisory Committee. The studies are on file in the office of the city clerk of the city of Chubbuck. Any reference herein to the Impact Fee Study shall be to that study. (H) The Impact Fee Study is consistent with the capital improvements element of the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan, and uses the levels of service set forth in the Comprehensive Plan for these public facilities. ORDNANCE - Page 2. chubbuck 082219 ord carr 791.wpd Parks and recreation level of service from page 7 of the Park Impact Fee Study is 5.22 acres per thousand population. (I) The Impact Fee Study sets forth reasonable methodologies and analyses for determining the impacts of various types of new development on the public facilities, and determines the cost of acquiring or constructing the improvements necessary to meet the demands for such public facilities created by new development. (1) The Impact Fee Study uses a calculation methodology in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. This chapter shall not be deemed invalid because payment of an impact fee may result in an incidental benefit to others within the service area other than the fee payer. (K) The impact fees described in this chapter are based on the Impact Fee Study, and do not exceed the costs of system improvements for the public facilities to serve new development that will pay the impact fees. (L) The parks and recreation services included in the calculation of impact fees in the Impact Fee Study will benefit all new development throughout the city, and it is therefore appropriate to treat all areas of the city and the area of city impact as a single service area for purposes of calculating, collecting and spending the impact fees collected. (M) There is both a rational nexus and a rough proportionality between the development impacts created by each type of development covered by this chapter and the impact fees that such development will be required to pay. (N) This chapter creates a system by which impact fees paid by new development will be used to finance, defray or to provide capital improvements for the public facilities in ways that benefit the development for which impact fees were paid. (0) This chapter creates a system under which impact fees shall not be used to correct existing deficiencies in public facilities, or to replace or rehabilitate existing public facilities, or to pay for routine operation or maintenance of those public facilities. (P) This chapter creates a system under which there shall be no double payment of impact fees, in accordance with Idaho Code § 67-82114(19). (Q) This chapter is consistent with all applicable provisions of title 67, chapter 82, Idaho Code, concerning impact fee ordinances. 17.248.200: AUTHORITY, APPLICABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE - Page 3. chubbuek 082219 ord torr 791.wpd (A) This chapter is enacted pursuant to the city's general police powers pursuant to the authority granted to the city by title 50, Idaho Code, and pursuant to the authority granted to the city by § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. (B) The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all of the territory within the limits of the city and to any unincorporated areas of the city within the city's area of city impact where the city has executed an intergovernmental agreement with Bannock County for purposes of collection or expenditure of impact fees pursuant to § 67-8204A, Idaho Code, and other applicable laws of the state of Idaho. (C) This chapter is effective June 3, 2019 ("Effective Date"), which effective date is more than thirty (30) days subsequent to the passage, approval and publication, according to law, of the ordinance codified herein, which adopted the provisions hereof. (D) Applications for building permits received by the city prior to the effective date hereof, or amendments hereto, adopting impact fees or amending or adopting any methodology by which impact fees are calculated, will be exempt from that portion of this chapter, or amendment enacted after such building permit application, if a valid building permit has been issued or construction has commenced prior to the effective date hereof, or amendment. For building permits that expire or are revoked after the effective date hereof, the fee payer shall be entitled to a refund of previously paid fees as provided herein, provided that in the case of reapplication for building permit, the impact fee in effect at that time shall be paid. (E) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, development requirements for system improvements shall be imposed by the city only by way of impact fees imposed pursuant to and in accordance with § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, and this chapter. 17.248,300: INTENT; (A) The intent of this chapter is to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the city and its area of city impact. (B) The intent of this chapter is to be consistent with those principles for allocating a fair share of the cost of capital improvements to public facilities to serve new development in compliance with the provisions set forth in § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. The provisions of this chapter shall be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the provisions set forth in § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. (C) The intent of this chapter is that impact fees should be charged, collected, and expended for parks and recreation capital improvements to increase the service capacity of such categories of public facilities, which capital improvements are included in approved capital improvements plans that list the capital improvements that may be funded with impact fees. ORDINANCE - rage 4. chubbuck 082219 ord carr 791.wpd (D) The intent of this chapter is to ensure that: 1. public facilities are available to serve new development; 2. new development bears a proportionate share of the cost of parks and recreation capital improvements to such public facilities; 3. such proportionate share does not exceed the cost of the capital improvements to such public facilities required to serve new development; and 4. the finds collected from new development are used for capital improvements for public facilities that benefit new development. (E) It is not the intent of this chapter to collect any monies from new development in excess of the actual amount necessary to offset new demands for capital improvements to public facilities created by such new development. (F) It is not the intent of this chapter that the impact fees be used to remedy any deficiency in parks and recreation capital improvements existing on the effective date hereof, or ever be used to replace, rehabilitate, maintain and/or operate any public facilities. (G) It is not the intent of this chapter that any monies collected from an impact fee deposited in an impact fee fiend ever be commingled with monies from a different fund, or ever be used for capital improvements that are different from those for which the impact fee was paid. (H) It is not the intent of this chapter that impact fees be used for: 1. Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. 2. Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements. 3. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards. 4. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development to provide better service to existing development. 5. Administrative and operating costs of the city unless such costs are attributable to development of the capital improvements plan used to determine impact fees by a surcharge imposed by ordinance on the collection of an impact fee, which surcharge shall not exceed a development's proportionate share of the cost of preparing the capital improvements plan. 6. Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other ORDINANCE - Page 5. chubbuck 092219 ord can 791.wpd indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the city to finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. 17.248.400: DEFINITIONS: 401. APPROPRIATE: To legally obligate by contract or otherwise commit to use by appropriation or other official act of a governmental entity, 402. BUILDING PERMIT: An official document or certificate by that name issued by the city authorizing the construction or siting of any building. 403, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS: Improvements with a useful life of ten (10) years or more, by new construction or other action, which increase the service capacity of a public facility. 404. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT: A component of a comprehensive plan adopted pursuant to chapter 65, title 67, Idaho Code, which component meets the requirements of a capital improvements plan pursuant to this chapter. 405. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN: A plan adopted pursuant to this chapter that identifies capital improvements for which impact fees may be used as a funding source. 406. CITY: The city of Chubbuck, Idaho. 407. CITY COUNCIL: The legislative body of the city of Chubbuck, Idaho. 408. DEVELOPER: Any person or legal entity undertaking development, including a party that undertakes the subdivision of property pursuant to §s 50-1301 through 50-1334, Idaho Code and this title. 449. DEVELOPMENT: Any construction or installation of a building or structure, or any change in use of a building or structure, or any change in the use, character or appearance of land, which creates additional demand and need for public facilities or the subdivision of property that would permit any change in the use, character or appearance of land, As used in this chapter, "development" shall not include activities that would otherwise be subject to payment of the development impact fee if such activities are undertaken by a taxing district, as defined in § 63-201, Idaho Code, in the course of carrying out the taxing district's public responsibilities, unless the adopted impact fee ordinance expressly includes taxing districts as being subject to development impact fees. 410. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL: Any written authorization from a governmental entity which authorizes the commencement of a development. ORDINANCE - Page 6. chuhhuck 082219 ord carr 791.wpd 41 1. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE: See definition of Impact Fee. 412. DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT: A requirement attached to a development. approval or other governmental action approving or authorizing a particular development including, without limitation, a rezoning, which development requirement compels the payment, dedication or contribution of goods, services, land and/or money as a condition of approval. 413. DWELLING UNIT: A building or portion of a building designed for or whose primary purpose is for residential occupancy, and which consists of one or more rooms which are arranged, designed or used as living and/or sleeping quarters for one or more persons. Dwelling unit includes a multi -family building, a mobile home, a manufactured home, a modular building and/or a motcl/hotel/rooming house. 414. EXTRAORDINARY COSTS: Those costs incurred as a result of extraordinary impact. 415. EXTRAORDINARY IMPACT: An impact which is reasonably determined by the city to: result in the need for system improvements, the cost of which will significantly exceed the sum of the impact fees to be generated from the project; or the sum agreed to be paid pursuant to a development agreement as allowed by § 67-8214(2), Idaho Code, or result in the need for system improvements that are not identified in the capital improvements plan. 416. FEE ADMINISTRATOR: The Public Works Director or the Director's designee desgnee. 417. FEE PAYER: A person who pays or is required to pay an impact ice or the fee payer's successor in interest. 418. GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY: Any unit of local government that is empowered by § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, to adopt an impact fee ordinance. 419. IMPACT FEE: A payment of money imposed as a condition of development approval to pay for a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements needed to serve development. The term does not include a charge or fee to pay the administrative, plan review or inspection costs associated with permits required for development; connection or hookup charges; availability charges for drainage, sewer, water, or transportation charges for services provided directly to the development; or amounts collected from a developer in a transaction in which the city has incurred expenses in constructing capital improvements for the development if the owner or developer has agreed to be financially responsible for the construction or installation of the capital improvements, unless a written agreement is made pursuant to § 67-8209(3), Idaho Code, for credit or reimbursement. 420. IMPACT FEE STUDY: The document entitled Parks and Recreation Capital okDINANCE - Page 7. chubbuck 082219 ord can 791.wpd Improvement Plan and impact Fee Arid -1-Y& 5eptpmber, 2018, prepared by Zions Public Finance for the city. 421. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS: A description of the service area and projections of land uses, densities, intensities, and population in the service area over at least a twenty (20) year period. 422. LEVEL OF SERVICE: A measure of the relationship between service capacity and service demand for public facilities. 423. MANUFACTURED HOME: A structure, constnlcted according to HUD/FHA mobile home construction and safety standards, transportable in one or more sections, which, in the traveling mode, is eight feet (8) or more in width or is forty (40) body feet or more in length, or when erected on site, is three hundred twenty (320) or more square feet, and which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems contained therein, except that such term shall include any structure which meets all the requirements of this definition except the size requirements and with respect to which the manufacturer voluntarily files a certification required by the secretary of housing and urban development and complies with the standards established under 42 USC 5401 et seq. The definition in this chapter of a Manufactured Home shall have no application to the definition of a Production Building in Title 18. 423. MODULAR BUILDING: Is defined in § 39-4301, Idaho Code, and means any building or building component, other than a manufactured or mobile home, which is of closed construction and is either entirely or substantially prefabricated or assembled at a place other than the building site. § 67-8203(19), Idaho Code. 424. MULTI -FAMILY: A building or portion thereof, containing two (2) or more dwelling units, excluding attached single-family townhouse units located on individual lots. 425. OWNER: The person holding legal title to real property, including the Iocal, state or federal government or any subdivision thereof. 426. PERSON: An individual, corporation, governmental agency, business trust, estate, partnership, association, two (2) or more persons having a joint or common interest, or any other entity. 427. PRESENT VALUE: The total current monetary value of past, present or future payments, contributions or dedications of goods, services, materials, construction or money. 428. PROJECT: A particular development on an identified parcel of land. ORDINANCE - Page 8. ehubbuck 082219 ord corn 791.wpd 429. PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS: Site improvements and facilities that are planned and designed to provide service for a project and that are necessary for the use and convenience of the occupants or users of the project. 430. PROPORTIONATE SHARE: That portion of the cost of system improvements determined pursuant to § 57-8207, Idaho Code, and this title, which reasonably relates to the service demands and needs for public facilities of a project. 431. PUBLIC FACILITY: (A) Water supply production, treatment, storage and distribution facilities; (B) Wastewater collection, treatment and disposal facilities; (C) Roads, streets and bridges, including rights of way, traffic signals, landscaping and any local components of state or federal highways; (D) Stormwater collection, retention, detention, treatment and disposal facilities, flood control facilities, and bank and shore protection and enhancement improvements; (E) Parks, open space and recreation areas, and related capital improvements; and (F) Public safety facilities, including law enforcement, emergency services, emergency medical and rescue and street lighting facilities. 432. RECREATIONAL VEHICLE: A vehicular type unit primarily designed as temporary quarters for recreational, camping, or travel use, which either has its own motive power or is mounted on or drawn by another vehicle. 433. SERVICE AREA: Any defined geographic area identified by a governmental entity or by intergovernmental agreement in which specific public facilities provide service to development within the area defined, on the basis of sound planning or engineering principles or both. 434. SERVICE UNIT: A standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. 435. SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST: A person who gains legal title in real property for which an impact fee is paid or a credit is approved pursuant to the terms of this chapter. 436. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT COSTS: Costs incurred for construction or ORDINANCE - Page 9. chubbuck 082219 ord torr 79 I "d reconstruction of system improvements, including design, acquisition, engineering and other costs attributable thereto, and also including, without limitation, the type of costs described in § 50-1702(h), Idaho Code, to provide additional public facilities needed to serve new development. For clarification, system improvement costs do not include: (A) Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan; (B) Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements; (C) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing developments in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards; (D) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to provide better service to existing development; (E) Administrative and operating costs of the governmental entity unless such costs are attributable to development of the capital improvements plan, as provided in § 67-8208, Idaho Code; or (F) Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the governmental entity to finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. 437. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS: In contrast to project improvements, means capital improvements to public facilities that are designed to provide service to a service area including, without limitation, the type of improvements the city has the authority to make as described in § 50-1703, Idaho Code 17.248.500: IMPOSITION AND COMPUTATION OF IMPACT FEES: (A) Any application for a building permit enabling the construction, and in the case of construction that does not require a building permit, any building that takes place on or after the effective date hereof shall be subject to the imposition of impact fees in the manner and amount set forth in this chapter. The methodology adopted for the purpose of determining parks and recreation impact fees shall be based upon the assumptions set forth in the Impact Fee Study for that service. (B) Impact fees shall be required as a condition of approval of all residential and nonresidential development in the service area for which a building permit is required and shall be payable prior to the issuance of any building permit (or installation permit in the case of a manufactured home) for a dwelling unit or a nonresidential building. Except as otherwise ORDINANCE - Page 10. chubhuck 082219 ord carr 791.wpd provided herein, after the effective date hereof, no building permit shall be issued until the impact fees described in this chapter have been paid, unless the development for which the permit is sought is exempted by § 17.248.800 of this chapter or approved credits are used to cover the impact fee, as set forth in § 17.248.900 of this chapter. The fee administrator shall have the authority to withhold a building permit, stop construction, withhold utility services or impose liens as the case may be, until the appropriate impact fee has been collected. (C) After payment of the development impact fees or execution of an agreement for payment of development impact fees, additional development impact fees or increases in fees may not be assessed unless the number of service units increases or the scope or schedule of the development changes. In the event of an increase in the number of service units or schedule of the development changes, the additional development impact fees to be imposed are limited to the amount attributable to the additional service units or change in scope of the development. (D) A fee payer required by this chapter to pay an impact fee may choose to have the amount of such impact fee determined pursuant to either the fee schedule (whereupon such payment shall be recognized as f l I and complete payment of the development's proportionate share of system improvement costs, except as provided in Idaho Code § 67-8214(3)) or subsections (E) through (G) of this section. If the fee payer chooses to have the amount of such impact fee determined pursuant to subsections (E) through (G) of this section, such impact fee shall be subject to the adjustment described in section 17.248.900 of this chapter, if applicable. If the project is a mix of those uses listed on the fee schedule, then the impact fees shall be determined by adding up the impact fees that would be payable for each use as if it were a freestanding use pursuant to the fee schedule. (E) Individual assessment of impact fees is permitted in situations where the fee payer can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the established impact fee is inappropriate for the project. Written application for individual assessment shall be made to the fee administrator at any time prior to receiving building permit(s). Late applications for individual assessment of impact fees may be considered for a period of sixty (60) days after the receipt of a building permit only if the fee payer makes a showing that the facts supporting such application were not known or discoverable prior to receipt of a building permit and that undue hardship would result if said application is not considered. Such independent impact fee calculation study for the fee payer's development shall be prepared at the fee payer's cost by a qualified professional and contain studies, data and other relevant information and be submitted to the fee administrator for review. Any such study shall be based on the same methodology and the same level of service standards, improvements and costs used in the Impact Fee Study, and must document the methodologies and assumptions used. The city may hire a professional consultant to review any independent impact fee calculation study on behalf of the city, and may charge the reasonable costs of such review to the fee payer, (F) Any independent impact fee calculation study submitted by a fee payer may be accepted, rejected or accepted with modifications by the city as the basis for calculating impact ORMNANCE - Page 11. chuhbuck 082219 ord torr 791.wpd fees. The city shall not be required to accept any study or documentation the city reasonably deems to be inaccurate or unrcliable, and shall have the authority to request that the fee payer submit additional or different documentation for consideration in connection with review of any independent impact fee calculation. If such additional or different documentation is accepted or accepted with modifications as a more accurate measure of the impact fees due in connection with fee payer's proposed development than the applicable impact fees set forth in the fee schedule, then the impact fee due under this chapter shall be calculated according to such documentation. (G) The fee administrator shall render a written decision establishing the impact fees in connection with the individual assessment within thirty (30) days of the date a complete application is submitted. The decision shall include an explanation of the calculation of the impact fees, shall specify the system improvement(s) for which the impact fees are intended to be used, and shall include an explanation of the following factors considered: Any appropriate credit, offset or contribution of money, dedication of land, or construction of system improvements; 2. Payments reasonably anticipated to be made by or as a result of a new development in the form of user fees and debt service payments; 3. That portion of general tax and other revenues allocated by the jurisdiction to system improvements; 4. All other available sources of funding such system improvements; 5. The cost of existing system improvements within the service area; 6. The means by which existing system improvements have been financed; 7. The extent to which the new development will contribute to the cost of system improvements through taxation, assessment, or developer or landowner contributions, or has previously contributed to the cost of system improvements through developer or landowner contributions; The extent to which the new development is required to contribute to the cost of existing system improvements in the future; 9. The extent to which the new development should be credited for providing system improvements, without charge to other properties within the service area; 10. Extraordinary costs, if any, incurred in serving the new development; ORDINANCE -Page 12. chubbuck 092219 ord carr 791.wpd 11. The time and price differential inherent in a fair comparison of impact fees paid at different times; and 12. The availability of other sources of funding system improvements including, but not limited to, user charges, general tax levies, intergovernmental transfers, and special taxation. The city shall develop a plan for alternative sources of revenue. (H) Certification of the impact fee for a project maybe applied for in the following manner: Written application may be made to the fee administrator not later than sixty (60) days after development approval by the city council. Late applications for certification of the impact fee will not be considered unless the fee payer makes a showing that the facts supporting such application were not known or discoverable until after the time had run and that undue hardship would result if said application is not considered, 2. The fee administrator shall provide the fee payer with a written impact fee certification for the project within thirty (30) days of the date a complete application is submitted. The certification provided by the fee administrator shall establish the impact fee for the project in question so long as there is no material change to the project as identified in the certification application or the impact fee schedule. The certification shall include an explanation of the calculation of the impact fees, shall specify the system improvement(s) for which the impact fees are intended to be used, and shall include an explanation of the factors considered, which factors are identified in subsection (G) of this section. (1) Appeals of the fee administrator's determination of an individual assessment or certification shall be made to the city as provided further in this chapter. (J) The city recognizes that there may be circumstances where the anticipated fiscal impacts of a proposed development are of such magnitude that the city may be unable to accommodate the development without excessive or unscheduled public expenditures that exceed the amount of the anticipated impact fees from such development. If the city determines that a proposed development would create such an extraordinary impact on the city's parks and recreation department and facilities, the city may refuse to approve the proposed development. In the alternative, the city may calculate a pro rata share per dwelling unit, or square feet of nonresidential buildings, of the extraordinary impact and charge a reasonable extraordinary impact fee that is greater than would ordinarily be charged. (K) If the city discovers an error in its impact fee formula that results in assessment or payment of more than a proportionate share, the city shall, at the time of assessment on a case by case basis, adjust the impact fee to collect no more than a proportionate share or discontinue the collection of any impact fees until the error is corrected by ordinance. ORDINANCE - Page 13. chubhuck 082219 ord carr 79l.wpd 17.248.600: PAYMENT OF IMPACT FEES: (A) After the effective date hereof all fee payers shall pay the impact fees as provided by this chapter to the fee administrator following application for a building permit and prior to the issuance of any building permit for a dwelling unit, or nonresidential building. (B) All impact fees paid by a fee payer pursuant to this chapter shall be promptly deposited in the impact fee fund described in section 17.248.700 of this chapter. (C) If a fee payer fails to pay the impact fee when required and due, the city may (1) Charge interest on the amount of the fee from the due date until the date paid at the rate provided in Idaho Code § 28-22-104; (2) Withhold of the building permit or other governmental approval until the development impact fee is paid; (3) Withhold the providing of utility services until the development impact fee is paid; and/or (4) Impose and file a lien against the property subject to the impact fee following procedures contained in chapter 5, title 45, Idaho Code. 17.248.700: IMPACT FEE FUNDS; REFUNDS OF IMPACT FEES PAID: (A) There is hereby established a parks and recreation impact fee fund into which shall be deposited all parks and recreation impact fees for the purpose of ensuring parks and recreation impact fees collected pursuant hereto are designated for the accommodation of parks and recreation capital improvements reasonably necessary to serve new development that paid the impact fee. (B) The fund shall be an interest bearing account which shall be accounted for separately from other impact fee funds and from other city funds. Any interest or other income earned on monies deposited in a fund shall be credited to such fund. Expenditures of impact fees shall be made only for the category of system improvements for which the impact fees were collected and as identified in the capital improvements plan. (C) Except as otherwise provided herein, monies from the fund, including any accrued interest, shall be limited to the financing of acquisition, expansion, and/or improvement of capital improvements, or for principal and interest payments on bonds or other borrowed revenues used to acquire, expand or improve such capital improvements, necessary to serve new development. Impact fees in each fund shall be spent within eight (8) years from the date such ORDINANCE - Page 14. chubbuck 0822 19 ord torr 791.wpd impact fees were collected on a first in/first out (FIFO) basis. The city may hold the impact fees longer than the prescribed time period if the city identifies, in writing: 1) a reasonable cause why the impact fees should be held longer; and 2) an anticipated date by which the impact fees will be expended but in no event longer than eleven (I 1) years from the date the impact fees were collected. (D) The fee administrator shall prepare annual reports to be provided to the advisory committee and the city council, which reports shall: 1) describe the amount of all impact fees collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements during the preceding year, as applicable, by category of public facility and service area; and 2) describe the percentage of tax and revenues other than impact fees collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements during the preceding year, as applicable, by category of public facility and service area. (E) Funds shall be deemed expended when payment of such funds has been approved by the city. The fee payer or successor in interest shall be entitled to a refund of the impact fee if: 1) service is available but never provided; 2) a building permit or permit for installation of a manufactured home is revoked or abandoned; 3) the city, after collecting the impact fee when service is not available, has failed to appropriate and expend the collected impact fees; or 4) the fee payer pays an impact fee under protest and a subsequent review of the impact fee paid or the completion of an individual assessment determines that the impact fee paid exceeded the proportionate share to which the city was entitled to receive. (F) When the right to a refund exists, within ninety (90) days after the city determines that a refund is due, the city shall provide written notice of entitlement to a refund, to the owner of record and the fee payer who paid the impact fees at the address shown on the application for development approval, or to a successor in interest who has notified the city of a transfer of the right or entitlement to a refund and who has provided to the city a mailing address. When the right to a refund exists, the city shall also publish the notice of entitlement to a refund within thirty (30) days after the expiration of the eight (8) year period after the date that the impact fees were collected. Such published notice shall contain the heading "Notice of Entitlement to Impact Fee Refund". (G) A refund shall include interest at one-half ('/2) the legal rate provided for in § 28-22-104, Idaho Code, from the date on which the impact fee was originally paid. (H) In order to be eligible for a refund, a fee payer, successor in interest or owner of record shall file a written application for a refund with the fee administrator within six (6) months of the time such refund becomes payable under this Chapter, or within six (6) months of publication of the notice of entitlement to a refund, whichever is later. If a successor in interest claims a refund of impact fees, the fee administrator may require written documentation that such rights have been transferred to the claimant prior to issuing the requested refund. Refunds shall be paid within sixty (60) days after the date on which the fee administrator determines that a sufficient proof of claim for a refund has been made. ORDINANCE -Page 15. chubbuck 082219 ord torr 79 l.wpd (I) Any person entitled to a refund shall have standing to sue for a refund under the provisions of this chapter if there has not been a timely payment of a refund as provided herein. 17.248.800: EXEMPTIONS FROM IMPACT FEES: (A) The following types of land development shall be exempted from payment of the impact fees imposed by this chapter: 1. Rebuilding the same amount of square feet of a dwelling unit or nonresidential stricture that was destroyed by fire or other catastrophe, provided that the structure is rebuilt and ready for occupancy within two (2) years of its destruction. 2. Construction of an unoccupied, detached accessory structure, or addition of uses related to a dwelling unit unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a significant impact on the capacity of system improvements. 3. Remodeling or repairing a dwelling unit or a nonresidential structure in a manner that does not increase the number of service units. 4. Replacing a dwelling unit with another dwelling unit on the same lot, provided that the number of service units does not increase. 5. Placing a temporary construction trailer or office on a lot. 6. Constructing an addition on a residential structure which does not increase the number of service units. 7. Adding uses that are typically accessory to residential uses, such as tennis courts or clubhouse, unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a significant impact on the capacity of system improvements. (B) An impact fee will be assessed for installation of a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle unless the fee payer can demonstrate by documentation such as utility bills and tax records, either: 1) that a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle was legally in place on the lot or space prior to the effective date hereof, or 2) that an impact fee has been paid previously for the installation of a modular building, manufactured home or recreational vehicle on that same lot or space. Lawful storage of a recreational vehicle shall not be deemed installation for purposes of this chapter. ORDINANCE - Page 16. chubbuck 082219 Ord torr 791.wpd 17.248.904: CREDITS; REIMBURSEMENTS: (A) No fee payer shall be required to construct, fund or contribute any capital improvement to meet the same need for parks and recreation improvements for which an impact fee is imposed. All system improvements constructed, funded or contributed over and above the proportionate share of system improvement costs, including such system improvements paid for pursuant to a local improvement district, shall result in either a credit on future impact fees or reimbursement (at the fee payer's option) for such excess construction, funding or contribution to be paid from impact fees paid by fiuture development that benefits from such system improvements constructed, funded or contributed by the fee payer. However, no credit or reimbursement shall be provided for: 1) project improvements; 2} any construction, funding or contribution not agreed to in writing by the city prior to commencement of such construction, funding or contribution; and 3) any construction, funding or contribution of a type of capital improvements not included in the calculation of the applicable impact fee. (B) In the calculation of impact fees for a project pursuant to subsections 17.2-48.540 (E) through (G) of this chapter, credit shall be given for the present value of all tax and user fee revenue generated by the fee payer 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 payer shall receive a credit on future impact fees. The credit may be applied by the fee payer as an offset against future impact fees only in the service area where the credit was generated. (C) In the calculation of impact fees for a project, credit or reimbursement (at the fee payer'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 developer for system improvements of the category for which the impact fee is being collected, including system improvements paid for through local improvement district assessments. (D) If credit or reimbursement is due to the fee payer, the city and fee payer 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 payer. 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. ORDNANCE - Page 17. chubbuck 082219 ord torr 79 i .wpd (E) 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 development unti I 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 payer and shall note in the city records the amount of credit remaining, if any. Upon request of the fee payer, 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 refilnd of the remaining credit is applied for as set forth in subsection 17.248.700 (J) of this chapter. (F) 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 payer in cash or in credits against any other monies due from the fee payer to the city. (G) Credit for land dedications shall, at the fee payer's option, be valued at: 1) one hundred percent (100%) of the most recent assessed value for such land as shown in the records of the Bannock County assessor; or 2) fair market value established by a private appraiser reasonably acceptable to the city in an appraisal paid for by the fee payer. 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 payer 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. (H) 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: 1) all required construction has been completed and has been accepted by the city; and 2) 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 payer 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. (1) Credit may only be transferred by a fee payer that has received credit to such fee payer'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 ORDINANCE - Page 18. chuhhuck 082219 ord torr 791.wpd 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. 17.248.1000: APPEALS: The decisions of the fee administrator may be appealed as provided below: (A) Any fee payer who is or may be obligated to pay an impact fee, may appeal a decision made by the fee administrator in applying this chapter to the city council. Such decisions that may be appealed include: 1. The applicability of an impact fee to the development. 2. The amount of an impact fee to be paid for the development. 3. The availability, amount or application of any crcdit. 4. The amount of any refund, reimbursement or credit. 5. Any discretionary action or inaction by or on behalf of the city. A fee payer 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 payer be estopped from receiving a reftlnd 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. (B) In order to pursue an appeal, the fee payer shall file a written notice of appeal with the city clerk with a copy to the fee administrator within fifteen (15) days after the date of the decision being appealed, or the date on which the fee payer 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. (C) The city clerk shall notify the fee payer of the hearing date on the appeal, which notice shall be given no less than fifteen (I5) 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 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 payer to demonstrate that the amount of the impact fee, credit, reimbursement or refund was not properly calculated by the city. ORDINANCE - Pagc 19. ehuhhuck 082219 ord torr 791 _wpd (D) The criteria to be used by the city council in evaluating the appeal shall be whether: I ) the decision or interpretation made by the fee administrator; or 2) the alternative decision or interpretation offered by the appellant, more accurately reflects the intent of this chapter that new 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 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 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 chapter and/or the capital improvements plan. The decision of the city council shall be final. (E) Upon voluntary agreement by the fee payer and the city, the fee payer and the city may enter into mediation with a qualified independent party to address a disagreement related to the impact fee for proposed development. Costs for the independent mediation service shall be shared equally by the fee payer and the city. Mediation may take place at any time during an appeals process and participation in mediation does not preclude the fee payer from pursuing other remedies. 17.248.1100: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS: (A) As used in this chapter, 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. (B) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to create any additional right to develop real property or diminish the power of the city in regulating the orderly development of real property. (C) Nothing in this chapter 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. (D) Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the city from requiring a developer to construct reasonable project improvements in conjunction with a project. (E) Nothing in this chapter shall limit the ability of the city to enter into inter- governmental agreements as provided in § 67-8204A, Idaho Code. ORDINANCE - Page 20. ehubbuek 082219 ord corr 791_wpd (F) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve any development request that may reasonably be expected to reduce levels of service below minimum acceptable levels established in the development Impact Fee Study. (G) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve development which results in extraordinary impact. (H) Notwithstanding any agreement by the fee payer to pay the proportionate share of system improvement costs documented by the supplemental study, nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve development that results in an extraordinary impact. (1) Nothing in this chapter shall work to limit the use by the city of the power of eminent domain or supersede or conflict with requirements or procedures authorized in the Idaho Code for local improvement districts or general obligation bond issues. (J) A development impact fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements determined in accordance with § 67-8207, Idaho Code. Development impact fees shall be based on actual system improvement costs or reasonable estimates of such costs. (K) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent or prohibit private agreements between developers, the city, the Idaho transportation department, and/or other governmental entities in regard to the construction or installation of system improvements or providing for credits or reimbursements for system improvement costs incurred by a developer or fee payer, including interproject transfers of credits, or providing for reimbursement for project improvements that are used or shared by more than one development project. If it can be shown that a proposed development has a direct impact on a public facility under the jurisdiction of the Idaho transportation department, then the agreement shall include a provision for the allocation of development impact fees collected from the developer or fee payer for the improvement of the public facility by the Idaho transportation department. (L) Nothing in this chapter shall restrict or diminish the power of the city; 1) to impose reasonable conditions on the annexation of any property to the city in accordance with Idaho Code, including conditions for recovery of project or system improvement costs required as a result of such voluntary annexation, or 2) to negotiate and execute development agreements that may impose additional conditions on development, including the recovery of project or system improvement costs, either in connection with a proposed annexation or in connection with any other development within the city, (M) The impact fees described in this chapter, and the administrative procedures of this chapter shall be reviewed at least once every five (S) years to ensure that. 1) the demand and cost assumptions and other assumptions underlying such impact fees are still valid; oRDWANCE - Page 21. chub buck 082219 ord carr 79 i .wpd 2) the resulting impact fees do not exceed the actual costs of providing parks and recreation system improvements required to serve new development; 3) 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 4) such system improvements will benefit those developments for which the impact fees were paid. (N) Violation of this chapter 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 chapter on any matter relating to the administration of this chapter including, without limitation, the furnishing of false information regarding the expected size or use of a proposed development, shall be a violation of this chapter. (0) The captions used in this chapter are for convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation of any portion of the text of this chapter. (P) The capital improvement plans for Parks and Recreation as set forth in the Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis dated September, 2018 is hereby adopted and accepted as the capital improvement plan for the Parks and Recreation Department. 17.248.1200: FEE SCHEDULE: This fee schedule shall be in effect .Tune 3, 2019. Except for such impact fee as may be calculated, paid and accepted pursuant to an independent impact fee calculation study, the amount of each impact fee shall be as follows: Parks and Recreation Impact Fee per Household: Single Family Residential Multi Family Residential $ 2,355 $ 2,195 Notwithstanding the foregoing, the implementation of the fee shall be phased in as follows: Effective June 3, 2019: Single Family Residential $ 1,800 Multi Family Residential $ 1,678 OPLDINANCE - Page 22. chubhuck 082219 ord corr 79 I .wpd Effective April 1, 2020 Single Family Residential $ 1,985 Multi Family Residential $ 1,851 Effective April 1, 2021 Single Family Residential $ 2,170 Multi Family Residential $ 2,023 Effective April 1, 2022 Single Family Residential $ 2,355 Multi Family Residential $ 2,195 On January 1, 2020, and on January I of each year thereafter in which an impact fee is in effect, the amount of the impact fee shall be automatically adjusted to account for inflation increases in the cost of providing parks and recreation facilities to serve new development utilizing the municipal cost index as published by "American Cities And County Magazine", Nothing herein shall prevent the city from electing to maintain a then existing parks and recreation impact fee or from electing to waive the inflation adjustment for any given fiscal year, or years. Any such action to determine an inflation factor shall be by city council resolution. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS Section 1. Repeat of Conflicting Ordinances. The provisions of any Ordinance of the City and any provision of the Municipal Code which are in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are repealed to the extent of such conflict. All other sections of Chapters 17.16 and 17.24 not herein amended shall remain in effect. Section 2. Severability. The sections of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of a section shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections. Section I Effective Date, The rule requiring an ordinance to be read on three separate days, one of which shall be a reading in full, is dispensed with, and this Ordinance shall ORDINANCE - Page 23. chubbuck 082219 ord torr 791.wpd become effective upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE COUNUL AND APPROVED BY THE, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, this 4th day of September, 2419. l�evn B- England, �1"5'� ATTEST; ;Jy B s, 'ITY CLERK ORDINANCE - Page 24. chubbuck 082219 ord corn 791.wpd City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis September 2018 ZIONS ©© PUBLIC FINANCE,INC. ©© ME PRE um ©© No No so ME so ■■ so ■■ ME ME ME iM No ha ME so ME ME 101.01 WIN ME so 10.10. City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis Contents Section I: Introduction to the Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis...........................................2 ProjectOverview.......................................................................................................................................................2 ImpactFee Service Area............................................................................................................................................2 Populationand Police Call Data................................................................................................................................2 Use of Buildout Call Data in the Impact Fee Planning Horizon.............................................................................3 LandUse Analysis......................................................................................................................................................3 ServiceUnits..............................................................................................................................................................3 CallData Analysis......................................................................................................................................................4 UndefinedCalls.....................................................................................................................................................4 Calls to Public Areas, Roads, and Non -Qualifying Calls Generated by Non-Residents.........................................5 Callsper Unit Calculation......................................................................................................................................5 LandUse and Future Calls.........................................................................................................................................5 Section II: Police and Animal Control Capital Improvement Plan..................................................................................6 SystemImprovements..............................................................................................................................................6 Existing Equipment and Capital Facilities..................................................................................................................6 ExistingEquipment Inventory...............................................................................................................................6 ExistingCapital Facilities.......................................................................................................................................7 Future Police Infrastructure......................................................................................................................................7 ExistingDeficiencies..............................................................................................................................................7 Schedule For Improvements.................................................................................................................................7 Funding Future Capital Facilities...............................................................................................................................8 HistoricFunding Sources.......................................................................................................................................8 BondFunding........................................................................................................................................................8 ImpactFees...........................................................................................................................................................8 Summary of Time and Price Differential...................................................................................................................8 Equityof Impact Fees................................................................................................................................................8 Section III: Police and Animal Control Impact Fee Analysis...........................................................................................9 ImpactFee Overview.................................................................................................................................................9 PoliceLevel of Service...............................................................................................................................................9 ProportionateShare Analysis..................................................................................................................................10 Calculation of Proportionate Share....................................................................................................................10 ImpactFee Cost per Call..........................................................................................................................................10 Impact Fee Cost per Development Unit..................................................................................................................11 CreditsOwed to Development................................................................................................................................11 GrantFunding.....................................................................................................................................................11 Developer Dedications and Exactions.................................................................................................................11 DeficiencyCredit.................................................................................................................................................11 Individual Impact Fee Assessment..........................................................................................................................12 Appendix......................................................................................................................................................................13 1 NN City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis SECTION I: INTRODUCTION TO THE POLICE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS ■■ PROJECT OVERVIEW ■■ Chubbuck City (the City) has commissioned Zions Public Finance, Inc (Zions) to put together a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Impact Fee Analysis (IFA) prior to imposing police and animal control development impact fees authorized by Title 67, Chapter 82, Idaho Code, known as the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act (Impact Fee Act). IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREA .■ Chubbuck is a city located in Bannock County, Idaho. It is immediately north of the City of Pocatello. At the 2010 census, the population was 13,922 and the 2016 population was estimated to be 14,644. I� •I The purpose of the Police Capital Improvement Plan is to provide Chubbuck with substantive planning for future ■■ police capital infrastructure for which development impact fees may be used as a funding source including facility ■■ sizes, costs, funding, and allocation to growth. This information will be used as the basis of calculating the Police IFA. A CIP must be prepared before the City can adopt and assess a police impact fee. This CIP and IFA have been prepared for a single, City-wide Service Area (Service Area) with the same impact fee cost per call assessed throughout the Service Area. The cost per call is the relationship between the City's population and annual police calls generated .■ within the City's boundaries and will be discussed in Section III: Police and Animal Control Impact Fee Analysis. POPULATION AND POLICE CALL DATA 2016 is the baseline year for police call data and land use units used in this analysis. The growth in calls between the 2017 projected calls and buildout calls was then used to estimate the growth in annual calls that will occur in the ■■ City. 2017 calls were 6,498 and are expected to grow to 18,405 calls by buildout resulting in an increase of 11,671 ■. calls as shown in Figure 1. FIGURE 1: PROJECTIONS IN POPULATION AND POLICE CALLS �E E1 No No Historic and Chubbuck Future Population Total Police Projections Average Calls per Buildout Calls Year Undeveloped Calls 11,671 o /Call Growth Population Calls Capita 2016 14,644 6,463 0.4599 4.2% 2017 15,072 6,734 0.4648 4.0% 2018 15,501 7,006 0.4520 4.0% 2019 15,929 7,277 0.4568 3.9% 2020 16,358 7,549 0.4615 3.7% 2021 16,786 7,820 0.4659 3.6% 2022 17,215 8,091 0.4700 3.5% 2023 17,643 8,363 0.4740 3.4% 2024 18,072 8,634 0.4778 3.2% 2025 18,500 8,906 0.4814 3.1% 2026 18,929 9,177 0.4848 3.0% 2027 19,357 9,449 0.4881 3.0% Buildout 40,238 18,405 0.4574 Growth in Police Calls 2017 Calls 6,734 Buildout Calls 18,405 Undeveloped Calls 11,671 % Undeveloped 63% Calls Added at Buildout 11,671 MIN ME Em ME on ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ WE No so I loll. ME ME 101 101 I. INS INS ME No I■ E No No City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis USE OF BUILDOUT CALL DATA IN THE IMPACT FEE PLANNING HORIZON In compliance with the Impact Fees Act the system improvement timeframe will not exceed twenty years; however, these twenty-year system improvements are being constructed to serve the City's full buildout demand, not twenty- year demand. Therefore, if twenty-year call volumes were used rather than the buildout call volume, then the police impact fee would overstate the capacity need to serve new development which would result in a higher impact fee that wouldn't fairly allocated the proportionate share of cost to the new development coming within the twenty- year impact fee horizon. Even though buildout call data is used in this analysis the CIP and IFA will still need to be updated periodically as actual annual call data, planning projections, construction costs, and other projections may change over time. LAND USE ANALYSIS Figure 2 shows the current and proposed residential and non-residential units. It is estimated that the population will grow to 20,109 residential units by buildout. The non-residential units, divided by General Commercial, Office, or Institutional land uses, show 2,543 kSF which will increase to 9,530 kSF by buildout. For residential uses, the current persons per household figures were applied to the buildout population to determine the projected residential future units. Similarly, the current non-residential square footage per capita estimates were applied to the future population projections to estimate the future non-residential square footage. FIGURE 2: EXISTING AND FUTURE LAND USE SERVICE UNITS A service unit is defined by the Impact Fees Act as a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. In the case of police impact fees an emergency call is the basic unit for measuring the demand for services for each land use. The impact fee is calculated based on the "cost per call" and applied to each land use category according to the historic calls per unit generated by that land use category. 2016 Existing Development Development to be Added Existing+ Growth at Buildout Current Persons Buildout Persons Residential Units Population Total Units Population Units Population Total Units per Household per Household Single Family 10,117 2.79 3,622 27,800 9,964 37,905 2.79 13,586 Multi -Family 4,527 2.60 1,739 12,438 4,784 16,960 2.60 6,523 Total 14,644 2.70 5,361 40,238 14,748 54,865 2.73 20,109 Private Non -Residential Units SF per Capita Estimated kSF SF per Capita Estimated kSF SF per capita Estimated kSF General Commercial 149.4 2,188 149.4 6,013 149.4 8,201 Office 6.6 97 6.6 266 6.6 363 Institutional 17.6 258 17.6 708 17.6 966 Total 174 2,543 6,987 174 9,530 SERVICE UNITS A service unit is defined by the Impact Fees Act as a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. In the case of police impact fees an emergency call is the basic unit for measuring the demand for services for each land use. The impact fee is calculated based on the "cost per call" and applied to each land use category according to the historic calls per unit generated by that land use category. ME WIN ©© ©© so ■ ■ ■ No pq �E 01 No ■ ■ City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis CALL DATA ANALYSIS The following tables detail the cost per call calculation by showing the existing number of calls that went to each land use category (Figure 3), the number of future calls that are estimated to take place when the City is built out (Figure 4), and the calls per unit of each land use category (Figure 5). FIGURE 3: RAW POLICE CALL DATA Category 2015 2016 2 yr Total Average % of Total Calls to Private Land Uses Single Family Residential * 2,203 2,463 4,666 2,333 38% Multi -Family Residential 831 775 1,606 803 13% General Commercial 2,130 2,459 4,589 2,295 37% Office 17 14 31 16 0% Institutional ** 67 53 120 60 1% Calls to Public Land Uses/Other Public Buildings and Land 5 39 44 22 0% Traffic 113 299 412 206 3% Mutual Aid 60 61 121 61 1% Undefined *** 364 300 664 332 5% All Calls 5,790 6,463 12,253 6,127 100% Single Family = single family detached, all others are considered "Multi -family' for impact fee assessment purposes "Institutional includes churches and private non profit uses *** Undefined includes all other calls not able to be assigned to a private land use within the service area UNDEFINED CALLS One of the call categories shown in Figure 3 is Undefined. Undefined calls are calls that were unable to be geocoded due to lack of available information. For example, an incomplete or incorrect address may have been recorded when the call was received. To estimate the land use distribution for undefined calls, the undefined calls are assigned to a land use using the same proportions as the direct calls. For example, 40% of all calls received by the City in 2016 were direct calls to a single-family residential land use. Therefore, 40% of undefined calls were allocated to single- family residential as shown in Figure 4 below. FIGURE 4: ALLOCATION OF UNDEFINED CALLS Land Use Type Calls To Direct Land %to Direct Undefined Land Use calls to Land tal Calls by Land Use (After Undefined Residential Use Uses Allocation) Single Family Residential * 2,463 40% 120 2,583 Multi -Family Residential 775 13% 38 813 Non -Residential General Commercial 2,459 40% 120 2,579 Office 14 0% 1 15 Institutional 53 1% 3 56 Public Land Uses Public Buildings and Land 39 1% 2 41 Traffic 299 5% 15 314 Mutual Aid 61 1% 3 64 Undefi ned 300 0% - - Total 6,463 100% 300 6,463 ME 10IN City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ©© I©© CALLS TO PUBLIC AREAS, ROADS, AND NON -QUALIFYING CALLS GENERATED BY NON-RESIDENTS h ii Similarly to how undefined calls were allocated to specific land uses, calls to public land uses were also allocated to direct land uses. Public land use calls are generated by either residential developments, non-residential developments, or by non-residents passing through the Service Area. ■■ FIGURE 5: FINAL CALL DATA DISTRIBUTION By LAND USE ■ ■ Direct Direct Calls Allocated to Land Use 5,764 89% 6,045 6,045 ■■ Public Buildings and Land 39 1% 37 4.09 41 Traffic 299 5% 157 157 314 .■ Mutual Aid 61 1% 64 64 Undefined 300 5% - Total 6,463 100% 6,045 37 157 225 6,463 I� �I CALLS PER UNIT CALCULATION ■■ Figure 6 shows the number of 2016 calls assigned to each land use type according to a land use call analysis performed by the City of Chubbuck. Once the final call distributions were determined, the number of calls generated by each land use (single-family residential, multi -family residential, general commercial, office, or institutional) referred to as the "calls per unit" could be determined by divided the calls to each land use by the corresponding .■ land use units. ■■ FIGURE 6: POLICE CALLS PER UNIT ■■ 1pql No go Land Use Type 2016 Calls To Undefined Direct Land Calls Use Calls to Land Public Use to Areas Mutual Calls to Aid Traffic 2016 Total Calls Existing Land Use Unit Calls per Unit Residential 9,964 0.781 7,785 Multi -Family unit 4,784 per Unit 2,499 SingleFamily Multi -Family 2,463 775 120 38 16 5 67 21 2,666 839 3,412 1,605 0.781 0.522 Non -Residential 266 0.161 43 Institutional (kSF) 708 per kSF 162 General Commercial Office Institutional 2,459 14 1 53 1 120 1 3 1 16 0 0 1 67 0 1 1 2,661 15 57 1 2,122 94 250 1 1.254 0.161 0.229 Non -Qualifying Police Calls 18,405 Police Calls Allocated to Outside City 4 1 64 157 225 Total 1 5,764 1 281 1 41 1 64 314 1 6,463 LAND USE AND FUTURE CALLS The calls per unit by land use in Figure 6 are multiplied by the number of future units shown in Figure 7. This results in the number of future police calls that will be created by new development through buildout. Between 2017 and buildout, it is anticipated that 11,671 future police calls will be added. FIGURE 7: EXISTING AND FUTURE POLICE CALLS— BASED ON HISTORIC LAND USE Projected Future Police Development Type Future Calls Units Calls per Unit Future Buildout Single Family (unit) 9,964 0.781 7,785 Multi -Family unit 4,784 0.522 2,499 Non -Residential General Commercial (kSF) 6,013 1.254 7,540 Office (kSF) 266 0.161 43 Institutional (kSF) 708 0.229 162 Non -Resident Police Calls Future Calls per Future Deve opment pe Population Police Cal Is Allocated to Outside City 25,165 Capita 0.015 Buildout 375 Total Undeveloped Future Private Police Calls 18,405 'Projected Future Calls are based only on future units in addition to existing calls from existing units ■ 9 City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis SECTION II: POLICE AND ANIMAL CONTROL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ME PLAN ■■ SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS . ■ The Impact Fee Act allows that an impact fee be collected for the cost to construct system improvements which have capacity to serve future growth. A system improvement is defined as an improvement which will provide service to a service area not an improvement than only serves one specific development. The system improvement must also have a useful life of ten or more years. System improvements which are impact fee eligible may be "buy -in" to the MM City's existing inventory of equipment and facilities or may future improvements within a twenty-year planning ■■ horizon. The impact fee should be calculated to assess an impact fee for the proportionate share of system improvement costs which is available to serve future growth. The Police and Animal Control CIP documents the City's impact fee qualifying existing and future expenditures. ■■ EXISTING EQUIPMENT AND CAPITAL FACILITIES ■. EXISTING EQUIPMENT INVENTORY Figure 8 shows the City's existing police equipment inventory listing each vehicle the City owns, the year it was purchased, and the price for which the vehicle was acquired. The City will routinely replace these vehicles and add ■■ additional vehicles to the inventory when staffing needs increase; however, the City and Development Impact Fee ■■ Advisory Committee have determined that planned future equipment acquisitions will not be added to the impact fee inventory until the time that future vehicles are actually acquired by the City. FIGURE 8: EXISTING EQUIPMENT INVENTORY NoPolice Equipment Inventory ■ ■ Make Model Purchase Historic Year Equipment Cost Ford Exp PI 2016 $ 33,000 Tchev Tahoe 2012 34,000 ■■ Chev Tahoe 2012 34,000 Ford F150 2017 33,000 . ■ GMC Envoy 2006 28,400 Chev Tahoe 2015 36,000 Chev Tahoe 2015 36,000 Chev Tahoe 2012 34,000 GMC Yukon 2007 32,500 ■. Ford Exp PI 2017 36,000 Ford Explorer 2016 32,000 ■ ■ Chev Malibu 2009 23,000 Ford F150 2015 28,000 Chev Tahoe 2013 34,000 Ford Exp PI 2017 36,000 Chev Tahoe 2008 35,500 ■■ Chev Malibu 2009 23,000 ■ ■ Dodge Durango 2018 33,000 Ford Expl PI 2016 33,000 Chev Equinox 2009 27,200 GMC Sierra 2007 21,200 Chev Tahoe 2013 33,000 ■. Ford Exp PI 2016 33,000 Ford Exp PI 2016 33,000 ■ ■ Dodge Durango 2018 33,000 Reader Board 1997 13,000 Chev Tahoe 2013 34,000 Chev Silverado 2011 26,500 Dodge Durango 2018 33,000 ■■ Chev Silverado 2014 35,000 ■ ■ Chev Tahoe 2009 33 000 Total Existing Equipment Cost: $ 969,300 NN ME Em ME No ME ■■ City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis EXISTING CAPITAL FACILITIES The police department currently operates out of one headquarters station located within City Hall and the City owns a small animal shelter to handle animal control. As will be discussed throughout this Police CIP and IFA, the current police facilities are not sufficient to meet the current demands of the City; therefore, there is no capacity in either existing facility to serve future growth. The building floorspace will be used in the impact fee proportionate share to document existing and future capacity to serve police emergency calls, but no costs have been included in the impact fee calculation for the existing police facilities due to this existing deficiency. Figure 7 shows the building floorspace for each existing facility. FIGURE 7: EXISTING CAPITAL FACILITIES Project Existing Facilities %Impact Fee Impact Fee Total Cost Acres Total Building SF Eligible Qualifying Existing Police Station $ 6,400 0% $ Existing Animal Shelter 900 0% Fee Cost Total $ 7,300 $ FUTURE POLICE INFRASTRUCTURE EXISTING DEFICIENCIES .■ The demand placed on existing police services by new development activity is attributed to growth in emergency ■■ calls. This growth will increase demands upon police services, requiring an increase in number of police officers and public safety vehicles. This will in turn cause a need for more floorspace for offices, evidence rooms, storage areas, training rooms, etc. The City operates the police department from 6,400 square feet of space within the City Hall. To meet the demand created by future development, the City will need to expand its facilities. No 0114 No No 101.01 W1101 ■■ No ■■ ■ ■ MINI 1001 No No SCHEDULE FOR IMPROVEMENTS After a new public works building is constructed in 2019 the Police Department will be able to expand into an additional 3,200 square feet of the City Hall floorspace which the public works department will vacate. Within the impact fee planning horizon, the City also plans to build two satellite stations in conjunction with the proposed future fire stations, and construct a new animal shelter facility. To avoid double counting costs for the same capacity, no cost for the existing animal shelter (which will be replaced by the new animal shelter facility) or the existing police station (which has an existing deficiency in capacity) will be included in the impact fee calculation. Once the ten-year police station and animal shelter projects are completed the City anticipates having sufficient capacity to meet the buildout facility floorspace needs for police and animal control demands. Figure 8 shows the future capital facilities planned for police and animal control. FIGURE 8: SUMMARY OF FUTURE POLICE FACILITIES Project Construction Year Future Police Facilities Within 10 Years Floorspace [SF) Cost per SF Land PV (Acres) Expense Project $ Construction YearExpense % to Impact Impact Fee Eligible Eligible Fee Cost Police Facility Expansion 2019 3,200 $ 180 $ 576,000 $ 593,280 0% $ - (Public Works Building Relocation) West Substation 2021 1,500 $ 285 $ 427,500 $ 467,141 100% $ 467,141 (West Fire Station) West Substation (West Fire Station) Owned By City 2.0 24,000 3,370 100% 3,370 Land 14% to Police North Substation 2028 1,500 $ 285 $ 427,500 $ 574,524 100% $ 574,524 (North Fire Station) North Substation (North Fire Station) Owned By City 2.0 70,000 9,828 100% 9,828 Land 14% to Police New Animal Shelter Facility 2028 5,000 $ 175 $ 875,000 $ 1,175,927 100% $ 1,175,927 New Animal Shelter Land (Owned by City) - 1.0 - - 100% - Future Facilities Built Within 10 Years 11,200 - $ 2,400,000 $ 2,824,069 $ 2,230,789 Total Future Police Facilities 11,200 - $ 2,400,000 $ 2,824,069 - $ 2,230,789 ME City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ©© FUNDING FUTURE CAPITAL FACILITIES ■, HISTORIC FUNDING SOURCES Police facilities can be funded in a variety of ways including tax revenues, impact fees, grants, bonds, vehicle leases, etc. Tax revenues—property and sales—are the primary source of revenue for the City. The City has authority to ■■ collect a portion of the property and sales taxes within its boundaries. The revenues collected can cover the ■■ operational expenses, non -impact fee qualifying capital expenses, and other general needs of the police department. As stated above, due to the age of the existing facilities and lack of funding records coupled with the deficiency that currently exists there is no impact fee qualifying cost to be included in the impact fee calculation for existing facilities. i■ BOND FUNDING NoThe Impact Fee Advisory Committee has recommended that bond costs (such as cost of issuance and interest) not be included in the impact fee calculation until the time that future bonds have been approved by the voters. There are no outstanding bonds related to the police department and no future bonds are currently proposed. If a bond is 1� �J proposed and approved in the future by City residents, then the impact fees will be revised at that time to include Noany additional bond costs. ■■ IMPACT FEES Impact fees have become an ideal mechanism for funding growth -related infrastructure. It is recommended that .■impact fees be used to fund growth -related capital projects as they help to maintain an adequate level of service ■■ and prevent existing users from subsidizing the capital needs for new growth. SUMMARY OF TIME AND PRICE DIFFERENTIAL The Impact Fees Act allows for the inclusion of a time and price differential to ensure that the costs incurred at a ■■ later date are accurately calculated. To account for this, 2018 project cost estimates for future projects are inflated ■■ at 3% annually to a future value cost based on the year of anticipated construction. EQUITY OF IMPACT FEES The impact fee calculations are structured to fund 100% of the growth -related portion of system improvements as presented in the impact fee analysis. Even so, there may be years that impact fee revenues cannot cover the annual F1 growth -related expenses. Other revenues will be used to make up any annual deficits given gaps in development or other factors. Any borrowed funds are to be repaid in their entirety through impact fees at the time that impact fee funds become available. No No 101.01 W11W1 ME ME iml iol I.ii�� WIN 1010 ME No �E 0' No No 8 MM City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis SECTION III: POLICE AND ANIMAL CONTROL IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS ■■ IMPACT FEE OVERVIEW The impact fee for police and animal control services is calculated using the growth projections, current call data ■■ and future call projections, current and estimated future land use, and existing and future equipment and facilities on costs which have been described in Sections I & II of this document. The final components necessary to complete the Impact Fee Analysis include: level of service (LOS), proportionate share analysis, impact fee cost per call, impact fee cost per development unit, and proposed credits to development. Each of those components are discussed in the following section. ■ POLICE LEVEL OF SERVICE .o One key component of the impact fee calculation is the level of service. The level of service is the measure of the relationship between service capacity and service demand for public facilities. In the case of police impact fees that I� �I means the total building square footage (capacity) relative to the number of police calls the police department receives each year (service demand). Unlike a utility such as culinary water where capacity can be added gradually to the system by upsizing an existing transmission line segment, public safety floorspace has to be built station -by -station not line -by-line. New police stations or expansions of existing police stations must be done well ahead of the increase in call volume that the .■ station expansion is designed to serve. Therefore, we look at the call volume the stations are being built to serve ■■ (rather than the LOS observed today) as the true measure of LOS. In the case of the police impact fee, the future capital projects identified in the CIP are needed to serve a buildout population of the City and a buildout LOS. Any square foot per call calculations that exceed the buildout LOS are considered unused excess capacity that will be utilized once the City reaches buildout. Figure 9 shows the buildout level of service of 0.96 square feet (SF) per call ■■ which is higher than the currently observed LOS of 0.95 SF per call which means a slight deficiency in police square ■■ footage currently exists. FIGURE 9: CURRENT AND PROJECTED POLICE LEVEL OF SERVICE Time Frame Floorspace (SF) Calls SIP per Call Current 6,400 6,734 0.95 :: Within 10 Years 17,600 9,449 1.86 Buildout 17,600 18,405 0.96 IN Impact Fee Level of Service Used 17,600 18,405 0.96 Im..NI ■■ .■ I�II�I is is is I01 No WIN INS 0 ■ ■ �E EI ■■ 9 No ME WIN ©© ©© so ME on ■ ■ ■ City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis PROPORTIONATE SHARE ANALYSIS As part of this analysis, the Impact Fees Act requires that the calculated impact fee be roughly proportionate and reasonably related to the development activity. Ideally, implementing an impact fee to pay for needed infrastructure places a burden on future users that is equal to the burden that was borne in the past by existing users. To determine the fair share an impact fee payer should pay for system capacity in the police and animal control services, a proportionate share analysis was performed as described below. CALCULATION OF PROPORTIONATE SHARE Figure 10 displays the current and future facility floorspace and the calls they will serve. With this information, it is possible to calculate the percentage that will serve new growth, and thus the portion that future growth will be expected to fund. FIGURE 10: PROPORTIONATE SHARE CALCULATION rime Frame Added Station Floorspace % of Buildout Floor Space Capacities Station (Call) 2017 Calls to Stations Future Calls % to Serve Existing Users %to Serve Future Growth Existing Construction Within 10 Years Construction Beyond 10 Years 6,400 11,200 - 36.4% 63.6% - 6,693 11,712 - 6,693 42 - - 11,671 - 100.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 99.6% 0.0% Buildout 17,600 100.0% 18,405 6,734 11,671 $ Existing Construction Within 10 Years 6,400 11,200 36.4% 63.6% 6,693 11,712 6,693 42 - 11,671 100.0% 0.4% 0.0% 99.6% Existing and Within 30 Years 17,600 100.0% 18,405 6,734 11,671 2,824,069 99.6% IMPACT FEE COST PER CALL Once the proportionate share has been determined the impact fee cost per call can be calculated. The impact fee cost per call divides the impact fee qualifying costs to new growth by the total future calls new growth will generate. ■■ The value found in the "% growth related" column comes directly from the proportionate share analysis "% to Serve Future Growth" column. The total impact fee qualifying cost is $3,823,369 of which $3,458,660 pertains to new growth. This results in a cost per call of $296.35. �E 01 No ■ ■ FIGURE 11: POLICE IMPACT COST PER CALL CALCULATION Impact Qualifying Fee Cost % Growth Related Impact Qualifying Assigned Fee Cost to New Future Calls Impact Cost Fee per Cal I Police Facilities Existing Facilities $ 0% $ 11,671 $ Existing Debt Service (interest) - 0% 11,671 - Future Facilities within 30 Years 2,824,069 99.6% 2,814,026 11,671 241 Equipment (Vehicles or Apparatus) 969,300 63.4% 614,634 11,671 53 Future Debt Service (Interest) - 0% - 11,671 - Total $ 3,793,369 $ 3,428,660 $ 294 Miscellaneous Professional Services $ 30,000 100% $ 30,000 11,671 $ 3 Total Miscellaneous $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 3 Grand Total $ 3,823,369 $ 3,458,660 $ 296.35 ME WIN ©© ©© so ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 0114 No go loll. ME so No on City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis IMPACT FEE COST PER DEVELOPMENT UNIT The impact fee is assessed to each user category based upon the historic calls per unit generated by that land use. The City's observed annual police calls per unit by development type are multiplied by the impact fee cost per call to calculate the final impact fee per land use. FIGURE 12: RECOMMENDED POLICE IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT CREDITS OWED TO DEVELOPMENT Certain circumstances may result in the need to provide a credit to development. Impact fee credits are detailed below. GRANT FUNDING Any improvement donated to the City which the City has no obligation to repay is assumed to be donated to the City residents through buildout. Therefore, if a capital facility is acquired through a grant or another source that does not require the City to pay for the project, then the value of that improvement would not be an impact fee qualifying cost. An impact fee should not be collected for a project or expense otherwise covered through a grant without an appropriate credit. If any grant funding is received for impact fee eligible expenses, then the impact fee will be reviewed at the time that the funding is received to account for any appropriate reduction in impact fee project costs. DEVELOPER DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS Developer exactions are not the same as grants (which should be credited from the impact fee). If a developer constructs a police station, donates impact fee qualifying equipment to the City, or dedicates land within the development for use by police/animal control facilities, then the value of the dedication is credited against that particular developer's impact fee liability. It is rare for developers to construct an entire police station for a credit, but land dedication for a station or training facility does sometimes occur. If the situation arises that a developer chooses to construct facilities found in the CIP in -lieu of impact fees, appropriate arrangements must be made through negotiation between the developer and the City on a case by case basis. All police stations are considered to be system improvements, not project improvements. Thus, an impact fee credit will be due to the developer and the dedication/exaction will be classified in the inventory as if it had been funded directly by the City through impact fees collected. If the value of the dedication/exaction is less than the development's impact fee liability, the developer will owe the balance of the liability to the City. If the value of the improvements dedicated is worth more than the development's impact fee liability, the City must reimburse the difference to the developer which can be done using impact fee revenues collected from other developments benefitting from the system improvement. DEFICIENCY CREDIT When the LOS calculation indicates there is an existing deficiency it is generally appropriate to include a deficiency credit in the impact fee calculation. The purpose of the deficiency credit is to avoid new growth from being required ■■ to fund their capacity through an impact fee and then also having to help pay to correct the deficiency and essentially ■■ be double charged for their system capacity. To prevent this double charge being assessed to new growth, any appropriate deficiency credit is subtracted from the total impact fees owed to account for any deficiency projects I■ 0 No No 11 NIN City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ©© paid for through other funding mechanisms which all City residents/businesses are required to pay (such as bonds, M property tax revenue, or user rate revenue, when applicable to the project). ■■ Although the police department does have a slight existing deficiency there were no historic costs included for the existing police station or the existing animal shelter and no deficiency credit was required at this time. ON INDIVIDUAL IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT The Impact Fees Act states that the impact fee ordinance should include a process whereby the City shall allow a developer, upon request by the developer, to provide a written individual assessment of the proportionate share of development impact fees. The individual assessment process permits consideration of studies, data, and any other �. relevant information submitted by the developer to adjust the amount of the fee. For police impact fees the variable that would be reviewed in the individual impact fee assessment would be the average annual police calls generated by the proposed development. Once the City and the developer have reviewed relevant information and determined the number of average annual police calls for the proposed development, then the City can calculate the individual impact fee assessment using the formula in Figure 13. I� �I ■■ FIGURE 13: INDIVIDUAL IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT FORMULA so ■ ■ �likal 1111111111111111111111 101 No No INS INS No No 1001 �E..E1 No No 101.01 WIN ME ME iml iol WIN 1010 ME No I■ 0 No No # of Annual Calls Individual Impact $296.35 x Proiected to be Created Fee Assessment 12 ■■ OEM ©© ©© i■ City of Chubbuck Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis APPENDIX 13 APPENDIX A: POLICE GROWTH FORECAST A B C D E F 1 TABLE A.1: Historic and Future Population Growth 2 Historic and Future Population Projections c 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 G W 1 TABLE A.2: Summary of Chubbuck Growth Projections 2 2017 Calls Chubbuck Total Police Average Calls per Undeveloped Calls Year % Undeveloped 63% Calls Added at Buildout % Call Growth Population Calls Capita 2010 13,922 2011 14,086 2012 14,251 2013 14,415 2014 14,579 0.3971 2015 14,744 5,790 0.4384 11.6% 2016 14,644 6,463 0.4599 4.2% 2017 15,072 6,734 0.4648 4.0% 2018 15,501 7,006 0.4520 4.0% 2019 15,929 7,277 0.4568 3.9% 2020 16,358 7,549 0.4615 3.7% 2021 16,786 7,820 0.4659 3.6% 2022 17,215 8,091 0.4700 3.5% 2023 17,643 8,363 0.4740 3.4% 2024 18,072 8,634 0.4778 3.2% 2025 18,500 8,906 0.4814 3.1% 2026 18,929 9,177 0.4848 3.0% 2027 19,357 9,449 0.4881 3.0% FBuildoutl 40,238 1 18,405 1 0.4574 G W 1 TABLE A.2: Summary of Chubbuck Growth Projections 2 2017 Calls 6,734 Buildout Calls 18,405 Undeveloped Calls 11,671 % Undeveloped 63% Calls Added at Buildout 11,671 A B C D E F G H c 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 APPENDIX 6: FORECAST OF DEVELOPMENT UNITS A B C D E F G H I 1 TABLE B.1: Existing and Future Population, Residential Units, and Private Non Residential Floor Space 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Source: City of Chubbuck GIS Analysis A B C D E F G H I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Development to be 2017 Existing Development BuildoutFuture Added Current Persons Buildout Persons Residential Units Population Total Units Population Units Population Total Units per Household per Household Single Family 10,117 2.79 3,622 27,800 9,964 37,905 2.79 13,586 Multi -Family 4,527 2.60 1,739 12,438 4,784 16,960 2.60 6,523 Total 14,644 2.70 5,361 40,238 14,748 54,865 2.73 20,109 Private Non -Residential Units SF per Capita Estimated kSF SF per Capita Estimated kSF SF per capita Estimated kSF General Commercial 149.44 2,188 149.44 6,013 149.4 8,201 Office 6.62 97 6.62 266 6.6 363 Institutional 17.60 258 17.60 708 17.6 966 Total 174 2,543 1 6,987 173.66 9,530 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 APPENDIX C: EMERGENCY POLICE CALL DETAILS A B C D E F TABLE C.1: Chubbuck City police calls responded to from 2015 to 2016 Calls to Private Land Uses Single Family Residential * 2,203 2,463 4,666 2,333 38% Multi -Family Residential 831 775 1,606 803 13% General Commercial 2,130 2,459 4,589 2,295 37% Office 17 14 31 16 0% Institutional ** 67 53 120 60 1% Calls to Public Land Uses/Other Public Buildings and Land 5 39 44 22 0% Traffic 113 299 412 206 3% Mutual Aid 60 61 121 61 1% Undefined *** 364 300 664 332 5% All Calls 5,790 12,253 6,127 100% 16 *Single Family= single family detached, all others are considered "Multi family"for impact fee assessment purposes 17 ** Institutional includes churches and private non profit uses 18 *** Undefined includes all other calls not able to be assigned to a private land use within the service area A B C D E F 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 APPENDIX D: ALLOCATION OF POLICE CALLS TO PUBLIC/PRIVATE LAND USES A B C D E F TABLE D.1: Allocation of Police Calls to Public/Private Land Uses 1 Calls To % to Direct Undefined •... Calls Land Use 2 Direct Calls Allocated to Land Use 5,764 89% 6,045 3 Public Buildings and Land 39 1% 37 4 Traffic 299 5% 157 5 Mutual Aid 61 1% 6 Undefined 300 5% - - - 7 Total 6,463 100% 6,045 37 157 8 9 TABLE D.2: Undefined Police Calls Allocated to Land Use 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 22 A B C D E F 9 G 4.09 157 64 225 iJ H 1 6,045 2 41 3 314 4 64 5 6 6,463 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 22 Calls To % to Direct Undefined Total Calls by Land Land Use .•UndefinedLand Use Use Uses Allocation) Residential Single Family Residential * 2,463 40% 120 2,583 Multi -Family Residential 775 13% 38 813 Non -Residential General Commercial 2,459 40% 120 2,579 Office 14 0% 1 15 Institutional 53 1% 3 56 Public Land Uses Public Buildings and Land 39 1% 2 41 Traffic 299 5% 15 314 Mutual Aid 61 1% 3 64 Undefined 300 0% - - Total 6,463 100% 300 6,463 A B C D E F 9 G 4.09 157 64 225 iJ H 1 6,045 2 41 3 314 4 64 5 6 6,463 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 22 APPENDIX E: AVERAGE POLICE CALLS PER UNIT A B C D E F G H I 1 TABLE E.1: Average Historic Police Calls per Unit to Development Types 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 TABLE E.2: Projected Future Police Calls 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 *Projected Future Calls are based only on future units in addition to existing calls from existing units A B C D Policeure 2016 Calls To Undefined DevelopmentFuture Existing Buildout Residential Calls to Mutual Calls to 2016 Total 0.781 Calls per Land Use Type Direct Land Calls to Land Public Areas Aid Traffic Calls Land Use Unit Residential Use Use 7,540 Office (kSF) 266 Unit per Unit 43 Single Family 2,463 120 16 - 67 2,666 3,412 0.781 Multi -Family 775 38 5 - 21 839 1,605 0.522 Non -Residential 25,165 0.015 375 Total Undeveloped Future Private Police Calls per kSF 18,405 General Commercial 2,459 120 16 - 67 2,661 2,122 1.254 Office 14 1 0 - 0 15 94 0.161 Institutional 53 3 0 - 1 57 250 0.229 Non -Qualifying Police Calls Police Calls Allocated to Outside City - - 4 1 64 1 157 1 225 Total 5,764 281 41 1 64 1 3141 6,463 13 14 TABLE E.2: Projected Future Police Calls 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 *Projected Future Calls are based only on future units in addition to existing calls from existing units A B C D Policeure DevelopmentFuture Buildout Residential Single Family (unit) 9,964 0.781 7,785 Multi -Family (unit) 4,784 0.522 2,499 Non -Residential General Commercial (kSF) 6,013 1.254 7,540 Office (kSF) 266 0.161 43 Institutional (kSF) 708 0.229 162 Non -Resident Police Calls Future DevelopmentFuture Calls per Buildout Population Capita Police Calls Allocated to Outside City 25,165 0.015 375 Total Undeveloped Future Private Police Calls 18,405 F F G H I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 APPENDIX F: APPARATUS INVENTORY A B C D 1 1 2 TABLE F.1: Apparatus Inventory 2 3 Police Eaulinment Inventory 3 Purchase Historic 4 Make Model 4 Year Equipment Cost 5 Ford Exp PI 2016 $ 33,000 5 6 Tchev Tahoe 2012 34,000 6 7 Chev Tahoe 2012 34,000 7 8 Ford F150 2017 33,000 8 9 GMC Envoy 2006 28,400 9 10 Chev Tahoe 2015 36,000 10 11 Chev Tahoe 2015 36,000 11 12 Chev Tahoe 2012 34,000 12 13 GMC Yukon 2007 32,500 13 14 Ford Exp PI 2017 36,000 14 15 Ford Explorer 2016 32,000 15 16 Chev Malibu 2009 23,000 16 17 Ford F150 2015 28,000 17 18 Chev Tahoe 2013 34,000 18 19 Ford Exp PI 2017 36,000 19 20 Chev Tahoe 2008 35,500 20 21 Chev Malibu 2009 23,000 21 22 Dodge Durango 2018 33,000 22 23 Ford Expl PI 2016 33,000 23 24 Chev Equinox 2009 27,200 24 25 GMC Sierra 2007 21,200 25 26 Chev Tahoe 2013 33,000 26 27 Ford Exp PI 2016 33,000 27 28 Ford Exp PI 2016 33,000 28 29 Dodge Durango 2018 33,000 29 30 Reader Board 1997 13,000 30 31 Chev Tahoe 2013 34,000 31 32 Chev Silverado 2011 26,500 32 33 Dodge Durango 2018 33,000 33 34 Chev Silverado 2014 35,000 34 35 Chev Tahoe 2009 33,000 35 36 36 37 Total Existing Equipment Cost: $ 969,300 37 A B C D APPENDIX G: Existing and Future Stations A B C D 1 TABLE G.1: Existing Police Facilities 2 3 4 5 6 E F Project Existing Facilities .. .. (SF) Cost per SF Total Building % Impact Impact Fee Total Cost Acres SF Fee Eligible Qualifying Existing Police Station $ 6,400 0% $ - Existing Animal Shelter 900 0% - Total $ - - 7,300 $ - 7 8 9 TABLE G.2: Future Police Facilities - Within 10 Years 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 G H Current Year 2018 Inflation Rate 3.00% Project Construction Year .. .. (SF) Cost per SF . PV (Acres) Expense ProjectConstruction $ Year Expense . Impact Fee Eligible Impact Eligible Cost Future Police Facilities Within 10 Years Police Facility Expansion (Public Works Building 2019 3,200 $ 180 $ 576,000 $ 593,280 100% $ 593,280 Relocation) West Substation 2021 1,500 $ 285 $ 427,500 $ 467,141 100% $ 467,141 (West Fire Station) West Substation (West Fire Station) Owned By City 2.0 24,000 3,370 100% 3,370 Land 14% to Police North Substation 2028 1,500 $ 285 $ 427,500 $ 574,524 100% $ 574,524 (North Fire Station) North Substation (North Fire Station) Owned By City 2.0 70,000 9,828 100% 9,828 Land 14% to Police New Animal Shelter Facility 2028 5,000 $ 175 $ 875,000 $ 1,175,927 100% $ 1,175,927 New Animal Shelter Land - 1.0 - - 100% - (Owned by City) Future Facilities Built Within 10 Years 11,200 - - $ 2,400,000 $ 2,824,069 $ 2,824,069 Total Future Police Facilities 11,200 - - $ 2,400,000 $ 2,824,069 1 - $ 2,824,069 A B C D E F G H I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 i[" 17 18 19 20 21 A B C D A B C D 1 Table H.1: Police Level of Service Square Footage per Call 1 2 06 Time Frame Floorspace2 3 Current 6,400 6,734 0.95 3 4 Within 10 Years 17,600 9,449 1.86 4 5 Buildout 17,600 18,405 0.96 5 6 Impact Fee Level of Service Used 17,600 18,405 0.96 6 A B C D APPENDIX I: PROPORTIONATE SHARE ANALYSIS A B C D E F G H 1 2 TABLE 1.1: Summary of Police Facilities 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Time Frame AddedBuildout Floorspace ..r Space CapacitiesStations Users Growth Existing 6,400 36.4% 6,693 6,693 - 100.0% 0.0% Construction Within 10 Years 11,200 63.6% 11,712 42 11,671 0.4% 99.6% Construction Beyond 10 Years - - - - - 0.0% 0.0% Buildout 17,600 100.0% 18,405 6,734 11,671 Existing 6,400 36.4% 6,693 6,693 - 100.0% 0.0% Construction Within 10 Years 11,200 63.6% 11,712 42 11,671 0.4% 99.6% Existing and Within 10 Years 17,600 100.0% 18,405 6,734 11,671 A B C D E F G H 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 APPENDIX J: POLICE COST PER CALL A B C D E F 1 TABLE J.1: Police Impact Fee Cost per Call 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 A B C D E F 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Impact Qualifying Fee Cost % Growth Related Impact Qualifying Assigned Fee Cost Future to New Growth Calls Impact Cost Fee per Call Police Facilities Existing Facilities Existing Debt Service (Interest) Future Facilities within 10 Years Equipment (Vehicles or Apparatus) Future Debt Service (Interest) $ - - 2,824,069 969,300 - 0% 0% 99.6% 63.4% 0% $ 2,814,026 614,634 - 11,671 11,671 11,671 11,671 11,671 $ - - 241 53 - Total $ 3,793,369 $ 3,428,660 $ 294 Miscellaneous Professional Services 30,000 100% 30,000 11,671 3 Total Miscellaneous $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 3 Grand Total $ 3,823,369 $ 3,458,660 $ 296.35 A B C D E F 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 APPENDIX K: FINAL IMPACT FEE CALCULATION A B C D 1 Table K.1: Police Impact Fee per Unit PJ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 A B C D E F G H I J TABLE K.2: Individual Police Impact Fee Assessment Formula # of Annual Calls Individual Impact $296.35 x projected to be Created Fee Assessment E F G H I J 1 N 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis September 2018 ZIONS ©© PUBLIC FINANCE,INC. ©© No 1! � RM ©© so ME No ■■ ■■ ME ■■ No ME ME M M No No �or 00 No MINI �E..01 No so ME MM MINI 1001 so No City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis Contents Section I: Introduction to the Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis .....................3 ProjectOverview.......................................................................................................................................................3 ImpactFee Service Area............................................................................................................................................3 Population and Emergency Services Call Data..........................................................................................................3 Use of Buildout Call Data in the Impact Fee Planning Horizon.............................................................................4 LandUse Analysis......................................................................................................................................................4 ServiceUnits..............................................................................................................................................................4 CallData Analysis......................................................................................................................................................5 UndefinedCalls.....................................................................................................................................................5 Calls to Public Areas, Roads, and Non -Qualifying Calls Generated by Non-Residents.........................................6 Callsper Unit Calculation......................................................................................................................................6 LandUse and Future Calls.........................................................................................................................................6 Section II: Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan...........................................................................................7 SystemImprovements..............................................................................................................................................7 Existing Equipment and Capital Facilities..................................................................................................................7 ExistingEquipment Inventory...............................................................................................................................7 ExistingCapital Facilities.......................................................................................................................................7 Future Emergency Services Infrastructure................................................................................................................7 ExistingDeficiencies..............................................................................................................................................7 Schedule For Improvements.................................................................................................................................8 Funding Future Capital Facilities...............................................................................................................................8 HistoricFunding Sources.......................................................................................................................................8 BondFunding........................................................................................................................................................8 ImpactFees...........................................................................................................................................................8 Summary of Time and Price Differential...................................................................................................................9 Equityof Impact Fees................................................................................................................................................9 Section III: Emergency Services Impact Fee Analysis...................................................................................................10 ImpactFee Overview...............................................................................................................................................10 Emergency Services Level of Service.......................................................................................................................10 Proportionate Share Analysis..................................................................................................................................11 Calculation of Proportionate Share....................................................................................................................11 ImpactFee Cost per Call..........................................................................................................................................11 Impact Fee Cost per Development Unit..................................................................................................................12 CreditsOwed to Development................................................................................................................................12 GrantFunding.....................................................................................................................................................12 Developer Dedications and Exactions.................................................................................................................12 1 No City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis © © Deficiency Credit.................................................................................................................................................12 Individual Impact Fee Assessment..........................................................................................................................13 Appendix......................................................................................................................................................................14 so ME MIR City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ©© ©© SECTION I: INTRODUCTION TO THE EMERGENCY SERVICES CAPITAL of IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS PROJECT OVERVIEW •■E Chubbuck City (the City) has commissioned Zions Public Finance, Inc (Zions) to put together a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Impact Fee Analysis (IFA) prior to imposing emergency services development impact fees authorized by Title 67, Chapter 82, Idaho Code, known as the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act (Impact Fee Act). .� IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREA .■ Chubbuck is a city located in Bannock County, Idaho. It is immediately north of the City of Pocatello. At the 2010 census, the population was 13,922 and the 2016 population was estimated to be 14,644. The purpose of the Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan is to provide Chubbuck with substantive planning for future capital infrastructure for which development impact fees may be used as a funding source including facility ■■ sizes, costs, funding, and allocation to growth. This information will be used as the basis of calculating the Emergency Services IFA. A CIP must be prepared before the City can adopt and assess an emergency services impact fee. This CIP and IFA have been prepared for a single emergency services service area (Service Area) which encompasses the City of Chubbuck, north Bannock County and eastern Power County. The same impact fee cost per call will be ■■ assessed throughout the Service Area. The cost per call is the relationship between the Service Area's population and annual emergency services calls generated within the Service Area's boundaries and will be discussed in Section ■■ III: Emergency Services Impact Fee Analysis. POPULATION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES CALL DATA ■■ 2016 is the baseline year for emergency services call data and land use units used in this analysis. The growth in calls ■■ between the 2017 projected calls and buildout calls was then used to estimate the growth in annual calls that will occur in the Service Area. 2017 calls were 3,702 and are expected to grow to 3,702 calls by buildout resulting in an increase of 2,415 calls as shown in Figure 1. lit 1L. ME ■ ■ FIGURE 1: PROJECTIONS IN POPULATION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES CALLS Growth in Emergency Services Calls Historic and Service Area Future Population Projections Total Emergency Average Calls 3,700 Year 2,413 % Undeveloped 65% o /Call Growth 2,413 Population Services Calls per Capita 2016 14,644 1,231 0.0841 2017 16,899 1,287 0.0762 4.6% 2018 17,328 1,399 0.0808 8.7% 2019 17,756 1,512 0.0851 8.0% 2020 18,185 1,624 0.0893 7.4% 2021 18,613 1,736 0.0933 6.9% 2022 19,041 1,848 0.0971 6.5% 2023 19,470 1,961 0.1007 6.1% 2024 19,898 2,073 0.1042 5.7% 2025 20,327 2,185 0.1075 5.4% 2026 20,755 2,297 0.1107 5.1% 2027 19,357 2,410 0.1245 4.9% Buildout 57,149 3,700 0.0647 Growth in Emergency Services Calls 2017 Calls 1,287 Buildout Calls 3,700 Undeveloped Calls 2,413 % Undeveloped 65% Calls Added at Buildout 2,413 ME EP RM ©© ■o o m MM so on ■■ on No is ME No City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis USE OF BUILDOUT CALL DATA IN THE IMPACT FEE PLANNING HORIZON In compliance with the Impact Fees Act the system improvement timeframe will not exceed twenty years; however, these twenty-year system improvements are being constructed to serve the Service Area's full buildout demand, not twenty-year demand. Therefore, if twenty-year call volumes were used rather than the buildout call volume, then the emergency services impact fee would overstate the capacity need to serve new development and wouldn't fairly allocated the proportionate share of cost to the new development coming within the twenty-year impact fee horizon. Even though buildout call data is used in this analysis the CIP and IFA will still need to be updated periodically as actual annual call data, planning projections, construction costs, and other projections may change overtime. LAND USE ANALYSIS Figure 2 shows the current and proposed residential and non-residential units. It is estimated that the population will grow to 20,940 residential units by buildout. The non-residential units, divided by General Commercial, Office, or Institutional land uses, show 2,543 kSF which will increase to 12,977 kSF by buildout. For residential uses, the current persons per household figures were applied to the buildout population to determine the projected residential future units. Similarly, the current non-residential square footage per capita estimates were applied to the future population projections to estimate the future non-residential square footage. FIGURE 2: EXISTING AND FUTURE LAND USE SERVICE UNITS A service unit is defined by the Impact Fees Act as a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development and calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. In the case of emergency services impact fees, an emergency call is the basic unit for measuring the demand for services for each land use. The impact fee is calculated based on the "cost per call" and applied to each land use category according to the historic calls per unit generated by that land use category. 4 2017 Existing Development Development Future Added Buildout Current Residential Units Population Persons per Total Units Population Units Population Persons per Total Units Household Household Single Family 11,747 2.79 4,211 27,980 10,029 39,727 2.79 14,239 Multi -Family 5,152 2.60 1,981 12,270 4,719 17,422 2.60 6,701 Total 16,899 2.73 6,192 40,250 14,748 57,149 2.73 20,940 Private Non -Residential Units SF per Capita Estimated kSF SF per Capita Estimated kSF SF per capita Estimated kSF General Commercial 129.47 2,188 129.47 8,745 191.31 10,933 Office 5.74 97 5.74 461 9.77 558 Institutional 15.27 258 15.27 1,227 25.99 1,485 Total 150.48 2,543 10,434 227.07 12,977 SERVICE UNITS A service unit is defined by the Impact Fees Act as a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development and calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. In the case of emergency services impact fees, an emergency call is the basic unit for measuring the demand for services for each land use. The impact fee is calculated based on the "cost per call" and applied to each land use category according to the historic calls per unit generated by that land use category. 4 City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis CALL DATA ANALYSIS The following tables detail the cost per call calculation by showing the existing number of calls that went to each land use category (Figure 3), the number of future calls that are estimated to take place when the Service Area is built out (Figure 4), and the calls per unit of each land use category (Figure 5). FIGURE 3: RAW EMERGENCY SERVICES CALL DATA Category 2015 2016 2 yr Total Average % of Total Calls to Private Land Uses Single Family Residential 409 Single Family Residential 445 409 854 427 34% Multi -family Residential 204 171 375 188 15% General Commercial 221 239 460 230 18% Office* 1 5 6 3 0% Institutional ** 6 4 10 5 0% Calls Public Land Uses/Other Public Buildings and Land 13 1% Public Buildings and Land 8 13 21 11 1% Traffic 15 7 22 11 1% North Bannock County, Eastern Power County 308 309 617 309 25% Mutual Aid 41 51 92 46 4% Undefined *** 27 23 50 25 2% All Calls 1,276 1,231 2,507 1,254 1009/o `Single Family = single family detached, all others are considered Wuiu-ramuy ror i pacr rcc assessmcnr purposcs " Institutional includes churches and private non profit uses *** Undefined includes all other calls not able to be assigned to a private land use within the service area UNDEFINED CALLS One of the call categories shown in Figure 3 is Undefined. Undefined calls are calls that were unable to be geocoded due to lack of available information. For example, an incorrect address may have been recorded when the call was received. To estimate the land use distribution for undefined calls, the undefined calls are assigned to a land use using the same proportions as the direct calls. For example, 34% of all defined calls received by the City in 2016 were direct calls to a single-family residential land use. Therefore, 34% of undefined calls were assumed to have also been generated by a single-family residence as shown in Figure 4 below. FIGURE 4: ALLOCATION OF UNDEFINED CALLS Land Use Type Calls To Direct Land Use %to Direct Undefined Land Use Calls to Land Uses Total Calls by Land Us (After Undefined Allocation) Residential Single Family Residential 409 34% 8 417 Multi -family Residential 171 14% 3 174 Non -Residential General Commercial 239 20% 5 244 Office 5 0% 0 5 Institutional 4 0% 0 4 Public Land Uses Public Buildings and Land 13 1% 0 13 Traffic 7 1% 0 7 North Bannock County, Eastern Power County 309 26% 6 315 Mutual Aid 51 4% 1 52 Undefined 23 0% - - Total 1,231 100% 23 1,231 ME City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ©© CALLS TO PUBLIC AREAS, ROADS, AND NON -QUALIFYING CALLS GENERATED BY NON-RESIDENTS ■i Similarly to how undefined calls were allocated to specific land uses, calls to public land uses (roads and public areas) were also allocated to direct land uses. Public land use calls are generated by either residential developments, non- residential developments, or by non-residents passing through the Service Area. . ■ FIGURE 5: FINAL CALL DATA DISTRIBUTION BY LAND USE ■ Direct■ Outside Summary ■■ No ■■ on No so CALLS PER UNIT CALCULATION Figure 6 shows the number of 2016 calls assigned to each land use type according to a land use call analysis performed by the City of Chubbuck. Once the final call distributions were determined, the number of calls generated by each land use referred to as the "calls per unit" could be determined by divided the calls to each land use by the corresponding land use units. FIGURE 6: EMERGENCY SERVICES CALLS PER UNIT Land Use Type Direct Calls Allocated to Land Use 828 69% 828 - - - - 828 per Unit Public Buildings and Land 13 1% - 11.70 - - 1.30 13 .M Traffic 7 1% - - 4 - 4 7 8 North Bannock County, Eastern Power County 309 26% - 309 - 309 ■■ Mutual Aid 51 _ 4% _ 51 51 1,981 Undefined 23 N/A 16 0.2 - 6 1 23 ■■ No ■■ on No so CALLS PER UNIT CALCULATION Figure 6 shows the number of 2016 calls assigned to each land use type according to a land use call analysis performed by the City of Chubbuck. Once the final call distributions were determined, the number of calls generated by each land use referred to as the "calls per unit" could be determined by divided the calls to each land use by the corresponding land use units. FIGURE 6: EMERGENCY SERVICES CALLS PER UNIT Land Use Type 2016 Calls To Undefined Calls Calls to Public Calls to 2016 per Unit Residential Direct Land Use to Land Use Areas Roadways Multi Family (Units) Calls A§L— Use per Unit 423 Single Family 8 6 2 424 4,211 0.101 Multi -Family 461 3 2 1 177 1,981 0.090 Non -Residential 7239 Total Undeveloped Future Private Fire Calls per k5F 2,469 General Commercial (per 1,000 SF) 5 3 1 248 2,188 0.113 Office (per 1,000 SF) 0.1 0.1 0.0 5 97 0.053 Institutional (per 1,000 SF) 0.1 0.1 0.0 4 258 0.016 Non -Qualifying Calls Calls Outside Service Area 360 7 1 1 4 1 372 Total 1,188 23 1 13 1 7 1 1,231 LAND USE AND FUTURE CALLS The calls per unit by land use in Figure 6 are multiplied by the number of future units shown as Figure 7. This results in the number of future emergency services calls that will be created by new development through buildout. Between 2017 and buildout, it is anticipated that 2,469 future emergency services calls will be added. FIGURE 7: EXISTING AND FUTURE EMERGENCY SERVICES CALLS— BASED ON HISTORIC LAND USE Projected Future Emergency Services Calls - 2017 to Buildout Calls Added at Development Type Future Units Calls per Unit Single Family (Units) 10,029 0.101 1,011 Multi Family (Units) 4,719 0.090 423 Non -Residential General Commercial (per 1,000 SF) 8,745 0.113 991 Office (per 1,000 SF) 461 0.053 25 Institutional (per 1,000 SF) 1,227 0.016 20 Non -Resident Calls Total Undeveloped Future Private Fire Calls 2,469 *Projected Future Calls are based only on future units in addition to existing callsfrom existing units ME w� City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis SECTION II: EMERGENCY SERVICES CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The Impact Fee Act allows that an impact fee be collected for the cost to construct system improvements which have ■■ capacity to serve future growth. A system improvement is defined as an improvement which will provide service to .■ a service area not an improvement than only serves one specific development. The system improvement must also have a useful life of ten or more years. System improvements which are impact fee eligible may be "buy -in" to the City's existing inventory of equipment and facilities or may be future improvements within a twenty-year planning horizon. The impact fee should be calculated to assess an impact fee for the proportionate share of system .■ improvement costs which is available to serve future growth. The Emergency Services CIP documents the City's .■ impact fee qualifying existing and future expenditures. EXISTING EQUIPMENT AND CAPITAL FACILITIES EXISTING EQUIPMENT INVENTORY Figure 8 shows the City's existing emergency services apparatus inventory listing each apparatus the City owns, the ON year it was purchased, and the price for which the apparatus was acquired. The City will routinely replace each apparatus and add additional apparatuses/vehicles to the inventory when staffing needs increase; however, the City and Development Impact Fee Advisory Committee have determined that planned future apparatus acquisitions will ■■ not be added to the impact fee inventory until the time that future apparatus are actually acquired by the City. ■■ FIGURE 8: EXISTING APPARATUS INVENTORY Apparatus Inventory 1li,.— Asset Description Equipment Purchase Historic Apparatus MYear Cost ■■ Pumper 301 Fully Equipped 1993 $ 114,000 Pumper 302 Fully Equipped 1993 114,000 Pumper 303 Fully Equipped 2000 200,227 L Ladder 304 Fully Equipped 1983 238,000 Totals: $NMI 666,227 EXISTING CAPITAL FACILITIES The emergency services department currently operates out of one station, Station #1. The City has already acquired ■■ the land for two future stations, Stations #2 and #3. The building floorspace will be used in the impact fee 1011 proportionate share to document existing and future capacity to serve emergency services calls, but no costs have been included in the impact fee calculation for the existing emergency services facilities due to the age of Station #1 and the lack of construction cost records. Figure 7 shows the building floorspace for Station #1. MIM ■. ME No FIGURE 7: EXISTING CAPITAL FACILITIES Existing Fire / EMS Facilities Impact Impact Fee Total Cost Acres SF of Space Fee Qualifying Cost Eligible Fire Station#1 11,716 100% $ - Total $ - 0.00 11,716 $ - FUTURE EMERGENCY SERVICES INFRASTRUCTURE EXISTING DEFICIENCIES The demand placed on existing emergency services by new development activity is attributed to growth in emergency calls. This growth will increase demands upon emergency services, requiring an increase in number of 7 ME Op RM ©© ■el ■ ■ MM ME on ■■ OR No ON City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis professionals and public safety apparatus. This will in turn cause a need for more station floorspace for offices, storage areas, training rooms, housing apparatus, etc. The existing station has some capacity to serve future growth, so no existing deficiencies currently exist, but to meet the demand created by future development the City will need to expand its facilities. SCHEDULE FOR IMPROVEMENTS Within the impact fee planning horizon, the City plans to build two new stations in conjunction with the proposed future police sub -stations. Once the emergency services projects are completed the City anticipates having sufficient capacity to meet the buildout facility floorspace needs for emergency services demands, however, at some point in the future Station #1 will need to be rebuilt due to its age. At this time firm plans for the reconstruction and possible relocation of Station #1 are not finalized. Once these plans have been solidified the CIP and IFAS will need to be updated to account for the Station #1 relocation plans. Figure 8 shows the future capital facilities planned for emergency services. FIGURE 8: SUMMARY OF FUTURE EMERGENCY SERVICES FACILITIES Project Year Floorspace Cost (SF) per SF* Land PV Project Construction. (Acres) Expense $ Year % to Expense- Growth Expansionary Cost Future Emergency Services Facilities Within 10 Years Future West Fire Station West Fire Station Land 86% to Emergency Services 2021 Owned by City 9,184 $ 285 $ 2,617,440 2.0 24,000 $2,860,147 20,630 100% $ 100% 2,860,147 20,630 Future North Fire Station North Fire Station Land 86% to Emergency Services 2028 Owned by City 9,184 285 2,617,440 2.0 70,000 3,517,620 60,172 100% 100% 3,517,620 60,172 Within 30 Years 18,368 4.0 $5,328,880 $6,458,571 $6,458,571 Future Emergency Services Beyond 30 Beyond 10 Year Land -Relocate Existing Station Beyond 10Year Facilities- Relocate Existing Station 11,716 $ - - $ - $ - - - $ - Beyond 10 Years 11,716 - - - Total Emergency Services Facilities 30,084 - $ 5,328,880 $ 6,458,571 $ 6,458,571 *$285 per SF based off of a comparable recent station constructed in Idaho Falls ** 3%Annual Inflation FUNDING FUTURE CAPITAL FACILITIES HISTORIC FUNDING SOURCES Emergency services facilities can be funded in a variety of ways including tax revenues, impact fees, grants, bonds, vehicle leases, etc. Tax revenues—property and sales—are the primary source of revenue for the City. The City has authority to collect a portion of the property and sales taxes within its boundaries. The revenues collected can cover the operational expenses, non -impact fee qualifying capital expenses, and other general needs of the emergency services department. As stated above, due to the age of the existing facilities and lack of funding records there is no impact fee qualifying cost to be included in the impact fee calculation for existing facilities. BOND FUNDING ONThe Impact Fee Advisory Committee has recommended that bond costs (such as cost of issuance and interest) not ,■ be included in the impact fee calculation until the time that future bonds have been approved by the voters. There are no outstanding bonds related to the emergency services department and no future bonds are currently proposed. If a bond is proposed and approved in the future by City residents, then the impact fees will be revised at that time to include any additional bond costs. ■■ IMPACT FEES Impact fees have become an ideal mechanism for funding growth -related infrastructure. It is recommended that impact fees be used to fund growth -related capital projects as they help to maintain an adequate level of service and prevent existing users from subsidizing the capital needs for new growth. NO ME ME MIR City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ©© ©© SUMMARY OF TIME AND PRICE DIFFERENTIAL ED The Impact Fees Act allows for the inclusion of a time and price differential to ensure that the costs incurred at a later date are accurately calculated. To account for this, 2018 project cost estimates for future projects are inflated at 3% annually to a future value cost based on the year of anticipated construction. ■■ EQUITY OF IMPACT FEES ME The impact fee calculations are structured to fund 100% of the growth -related portion of system improvements as presented in the impact fee analysis. Even so, there may be years that impact fee revenues cannot cover the annual growth -related expenses. Other revenues will be used to make up any annual deficits given gaps in development or o■ other factors. Any borrowed funds are to be repaid in their entirety through impact fees at the time that impact fee ■■ funds become available. ■■ on Im,.— No �r■ �i � No so ii 1L. ME ■ o ME w� City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis SECTION III: EMERGENCY SERVICES IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS IMPACT FEE OVERVIEW The impact fee for emergency services is calculated using growth projections, current call data and future call ■■ projections, current and estimated future land use, and existing and future apparatus and facilities costs which have .■ been described in Sections I & II of this document. The final components necessary to complete the Impact Fee Analysis include: level of service (LOS), proportionate share analysis, impact fee cost per call, impact fee cost per development unit, and proposed credits to development. Each of those components are discussed in the following section. �■ EMERGENCY SERVICES LEVEL OF SERVICE One key component of the impact fee calculation is the level of service. The level of service is the measure of the relationship between service capacity and service demand for public facilities. In the case of emergency services impact fees that means the total building square footage (capacity) relative to the number of emergency services calls the department receives each year (service demand). Unlike a utility such as culinary water where capacity can be added gradually to the system by upsizing an existing transmission line segment, public safety floorspace has to be built station -by -station not line -by-line. New emergency services stations or expansions must be done well ahead of the increase in call volume that the station ■■ expansion is designed to serve. Therefore, we look at the call volume the stations are being built to serve (rather ■■ than the LOS observed today) as the true measure of LOS. In the case of the emergency services impact fee, the future capital projects identified in the CIP are needed to serve a buildout population of the Service Area and a buildout LOS. Any square foot per call calculations that exceed the buildout LOS are considered unused excess capacity that will be utilized once the Service Area reaches buildout. Figure 9 shows the buildout level of service of ■■ 8.13 square feet (SF) per call which is lower than the currently observed LOS of 9.52 SF per call which means excess ■■ capacity in the existing emergency services square footage currently exists. FIGURE 9: CURRENT AND PROJECTED EMERGENCY SERVICEs LEVEL OF SERVICE ■ ■ ■ ■ Current 11,716 1,231 9.52 Within 10 Years 30,084 2,410 12.49 Buildout 30,084 3,700 8.13 Impact Fee Level of Service Used 30,084 3,700 8.13 No so li 1L. ME ■ o .Z ■ . 10 ME OF RM ©© Sol o m SO ME No City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis PROPORTIONATE SHARE ANALYSIS As part of this analysis, the Impact Fees Act requires that the calculated impact fee be roughly proportionate and reasonably related to the development activity. Ideally, implementing an impact fee to pay for needed infrastructure places a burden on future users that is equal to the burden that was borne in the past by existing users. To determine the fair share an impact fee payer should pay for emergency services system capacity, a proportionate share analysis was performed as described below. CALCULATION OF PROPORTIONATE SHARE Figure 10 displays the current and future facility floorspace and the calls they will serve. With this information, it is possible to calculate the percentage that will serve new growth, and thus the portion that future growth will be expected to fund. FIGURE 10: PROPORTIONATE SHARE CALCULATION Capital Project Time Frame Added Station Floorspace % of Buildout Floor Space Station Capacities (Call) 2017 Calls to Stations Deficiency % to Serve Existing Users % to Sery Future Grol Existing Floorspace Construction Within 10 Years Construction Beyond 10 Years 11,716 18,368 - 38.9% 61.1% - 1,441 2,259 - 1,287 0.0% 0.0% - 0.0% 89.3% 0.0% 0.0% 10.7% 100.0% 0.0% 30 Years 30,084 100.0% 3,700 1,231 2,413 2,413 2,413 2,413 2,413 $ - 29 - 2,676.37 - Existing Floorspace Construction Within 10 Years 11,716 18,368 38.9% 61.1% 1,441 2,259 1,287 0.0% 0.0% 89.3% 0.0% 10.7% 100.0% Existing and Within 10 Years 30,084 100.0% 3,700 1,287 IMPACT FEE COST PER CALL Once the proportionate share has been determined the impact fee cost per call can be calculated. The impact fee cost per call divides the impact fee qualifying costs to new growth by the total future calls new growth will generate. The value found in the "% growth related" column comes directly from the proportionate share analysis "% to Serve Future Growth" column. The total impact fee qualifying cost is $7,154,798 of which $6,559,738 pertains to new growth. This results in a cost per call of $2,718.29. FIGURE 11: EMERGENCY SERVICES IMPACT COST PER CALL CALCULATION Expense QualifyingImpact Fee % to Growth Impact Fee Qualifying New Growth Growth Calls Impact Fee Emergency Services Stations Existing Facilities ExistingApparatus Inventory Exi sti ng Debt Servi ce (I nterest) Future Facilities within 10Years Futu re Debt Servi ce (I nterest) $ - 666,227 - 6,458,571 - 10.7% 10.7% 10.7% 100.0% 100.0% $ - 71,167 - 6,458,571 - 2,413 2,413 2,413 2,413 2,413 $ - 29 - 2,676.37 - Total $ 7,124,798 $ 6,529,738 $ 2,705.86 Miscellaneous Professional Services $ 30,000 100% $ 30,000 2,413 $ 12 Total Miscellaneous $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 12.43 Grand Total $ 7,154,798 $ 6,559,738 $ 2,718.29 11 ME MIR Em ©© Ma City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis IMPACT FEE COST PER DEVELOPMENT UNIT The impact fee is assessed to each user category based upon the historic calls per unit generated by that land use. The Service Area's observed annual emergency services calls per unit by development type are multiplied by the impact fee cost per call to calculate the final impact fee per land use. FIGURE 12: RECOMMENDED EMERGENCY SERVICES IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT Emergency Services Residential Cost per Call Calls per Impact Unit per Fee Unit Single Family Residential Unit Multi -Family Residential Unit $ 2,718 2,718 0.101 $ 0.090 274.01 243.45 Non Residential General Commercial (per 1,000 SF) Office (per 1,000 SF) Institutional (per 1,000 SF) $ 2,718 2,718 2,718 0.113 $ 0.053 0.016 308.13 145.41 43.73 CREDITS OWED TO DEVELOPMENT Certain circumstances may result in the need to provide a credit to development. Impact fee credits are detailed below. GRANT FUNDING Any improvement donated to the City which the City has no obligation to repay is assumed to be donated to the Service Area's residents through buildout. Therefore, if a capital facility is acquired through a grant or another source that does not require the City to pay for the project, then the value of that improvement would not be an impact fee qualifying cost. An impact fee should not be collected for a project or expense otherwise covered through a grant ■■ without an appropriate credit. If any grant funding is received for impact fee eligible expenses, then the impact fee will be reviewed at the time that the funding is received to account for any reduction in impact fee project costs. DEVELOPER DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS 00 Developer exactions are not the same as grants (which should be credited from the impact fee). If a developer oil constructs an emergency services station, donates impact fee qualifying apparatus or equipment to the City, or dedicates land within the development for emergency services, then the value of the dedication is credited against that particular developer's impact fee liability. It is rare for developers to construct an entire emergency services station for a credit, but land dedication for a station or training facility does sometimes occur. If the situation arises ■■ ,O that a developer chooses to construct facilities found in the CIP in -lieu of impact fees, appropriate arrangements must be made through negotiation between the developer and the City on a case by case basis. All emergency services facilities and apparatus are considered to be system improvements, not project improvements. Thus, an impact fee credit will be due to the developer and the dedication/exaction will be classified ON in the inventory as if it had been funded directly by the City through impact fees collected. ■■ If the value of the dedication/exaction is less than the development's impact fee liability, the developer will owe the balance of the liability to the City. If the value of the improvements dedicated is worth more than the development's impact fee liability, the City must reimburse the difference to the developer which can be done using impact fee ■■ revenues collected from other developments benefitting from the system improvement. on DEFICIENCY CREDIT When the LOS calculation indicates there is an existing deficiency it is generally appropriate to include a deficiency credit in the impact fee calculation. The purpose of the deficiency credit is to avoid new growth from being required MIN to fund their capacity through an impact fee and then also having to help pay to correct the deficiency for existing residents and essentially be double charged for their system capacity. To prevent this double charge being assessed ■. to new growth, any appropriate deficiency credit is subtracted from the total impact fees owed to account for any ■ . 12 No ME ■p City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ©© deficiency projects paid for through other funding mechanisms which all City residents/businesses are required to .� pay (such as bonds, property tax revenue, or user rate revenue, when applicable to the project). The emergency services department does not have an existing deficiency; therefore, no deficiency credit is required at this time. ■■ INDIVIDUAL IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT No The Impact Fees Act states that the impact fee ordinance should include a process whereby the City shall allow a developer, upon request by the developer, to provide a written individual assessment of the proportionate share of development impact fees. The individual assessment process permits consideration of studies, data, and any other relevant information submitted by the developer to adjust the amount of the fee. For emergency services impact ME fees the variable that would be reviewed in the individual impact fee assessment would be the average annual Noemergency services calls generated by the proposed development. Once the City and the developer have reviewed relevant information and determined the number of average annual emergency services calls for the proposed development, then the City can calculate the individual impact fee assessment using the formula in Figure 13. ■W FIGURE 13: INDIVIDUAL IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT FORMULA Cost Per Call ■ ■Emergency Services Non -Standard Impact Fee Development # of Annual Calls ■■ $2,718.29 x Projected to be - Non -Standard Created I mpact Fee M IV No so Ii 1L. ME ■ o .Z ■ . 13 ME MIR City of Chubbuck Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ©© ©© E& No No ME ME ISO' ■■ on APPENDIX im,.— ■■ No INS ■' �i � No so ii 1L. ME ■ o .Z ■ . 14 APPENDIX A: GROWTH FORECAST A B C D 1 TABLE A.1: Historic and Future Population Growth 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 E F A B C D E F G H TABLE A.2: Summary of Growth Projections .. and PopulationHistoric Future 1,287 Buildout Calls 3,700 Service Area Total Emergency Average Calls 65% Year 2,413 / Call Growth Population Services Calls per Capita 2016 14,644 1,231 0.0841 2017 16,899 1,287 0.0762 4.6% 2018 17,328 1,399 0.0808 8.7% 2019 17,756 1,512 0.0851 8.0% 2020 18,185 1,624 0.0893 7.4% 2021 18,613 1,736 0.0933 6.9% 2022 19,041 1,848 0.0971 6.5% 2023 19,470 1,961 0.1007 6.1% 2024 19,898 2,073 0.1042 5.7% 2025 20,327 2,185 0.1075 5.4% 2026 20,755 2,297 0.1107 5.1% 2027 19,357 2,410 0.1245 4.9% Buildout 57,149 3,700 0.0647 A B C D E F G H TABLE A.2: Summary of Growth Projections .. 2017 Calls 1,287 Buildout Calls 3,700 Undeveloped Calls 2,413 Undeveloped 65% Calls Added at Buildout 2,413 G H 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 APPENDIX 6: FORECAST OF DEVELOPMENT UNITS A B C D E F G H I 1 TABLE B.1: Existing and Future Population, Residential Units, and Private Non Residential Floor Space 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 A B C D E F G H I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Future Development to be 9-k Development2017 Existing o Buildout it j Added Current Buildout Residential Units Population Persons per Total Units Population Units Population Persons per Total Units Household Household Single Family 11,747 2.79 4,211 27,980 10,029 39,727 2.79 14,239 Multi -Family 5,152 2.60 1,981 12,270 4,719 17,422 2.60 6,701 Total 16,899 2.73 6,192 40,250 14,748 57,149 2.73 20,940 Private Non -Residential Units SF per Capita Estimated kSF SF per Capita Estimated kSF SF per capita Estimated kSF General Commercial 129.47 2,188 129.47 8,745 191.31 10,933 Office 5.74 97 5.74 461 9.77 558 Institutional 15.27 258 15.27 1,227 25.99 1,485 Total 150.48 2,543 10,434 227.07 12,977 A B C D E F G H I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 APPENDIX C: EMERGENCY SERVICES CALL DETAILS A B C D 1 TABLE CA: Chubbuck Citv emereencv services calls responded to from 2015 to 2016 2 e 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 E F 1 *Single Family= single family detached, all others are considered "Multi family" for impact fee assessment purposes ** Institutional includes churches and private non profit uses *** Undefined includes all other calls not able to be assigned to a private land use within the service area A B C D E F 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Calls to Private Land Uses Single Family Residential 445 409 854 427 34% Multi -family Residential 204 171 375 188 15% General Commercial 221 239 460 230 18% Office* 1 5 6 3 0% Institutional ** 6 4 10 5 0% Calls Public Land Uses/Other Public Buildings and Land 8 13 21 11 1% Traffic 15 7 22 11 1% North Bannock County, Eastern Power County 308 309 617 309 25% Mutual Aid 41 51 92 46 4% Undefined *** 27 23 50 25 2% All Calls 1,276 1,231 2,507 1,254 100% *Single Family= single family detached, all others are considered "Multi family" for impact fee assessment purposes ** Institutional includes churches and private non profit uses *** Undefined includes all other calls not able to be assigned to a private land use within the service area A B C D E F 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 APPENDIX D: ALLOCATION OF EMERGENCY SERVICES CALLS TO PUBLIC/PRIVATE LAND USES A B C D E F G H TABLE D.1: Allocation of Fire Calls to Land Uses 1 2 Direct Calls Allocated to Land Use 828 69% 3 Public Buildings and Land 13 1% 4 Traffic 7 1% 5 North Bannock County, Eastern Power County 309 26% 6 Mutual Aid 51 4% 7 Undefined 23 N/A 8 Total 1,231 100% 9 10 TABLE D.2: Undefined Emergency Services Calls Allocated to Land Use 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 828 - 828 - 11.70 - 1.30 13 4 4 7 - 309 - 309 - - - 51 51 16 0.2 - 6 1 23 844 12 4 315 57 11231 A B C D E F G H J 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 J Calls To % Direct Undefined Total Calls by Land Use Land Use Type Direct Land Land Use Calls to Land (After Undefined Residential Use Uses Allocation) Single Family Residential 409 34% 8 417 Multi -family Residential 171 14% 3 174 Non -Residential General Commercial 239 20% 5 244 Office 5 0% 0 5 Institutional 4 0% 0 4 Public Land Uses Public Buildings and Land 13 1% 0 13 Traffic 7 1% 0 7 North Bannock County, Eastern Power County 309 26% 6 315 Mutual Aid 51 4% 1 52 Undefined 23 0% - Total 1,231 100% 23 1 1,231 A B C D E F G H J 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 J APPENDIX E: AVERAGE EMERGENCY SERVICES CALLS PER UNIT A B C D E F 1 TABLE E.1: Average Historic Calls per Unit to Development Types 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 G H Land Use Type 2016 Calls To Direct Land Use Undefined Calls to U Calls to Public Areas Calls to Roadways 2016 Total Calls Existing Land Use per Unit Calls per Unit Residential Single Family Multi -Family 409 171 8 3 6 2 2 1 424 177 4,211 1,981 0.101 0.090 Non -Residential 0.101 1,011 Multi Family (Units) 4,719 0.090 per kSF Non -Residential General Commercial (per 1,000 SF) Office (per 1,000 SF) Institutional (per 1,000 SF) 239 5 4 5 0.1 0.1 3 0.1 0.1 1 0.0 0.0 248 5 4 2,188 97 258 0.113 0.053 0.016 Non -Qualifying Calls 0.053 25 Institutional (per 1,000 SF) 1,227 0.016 20 Non -Resident Calls Calls Outside Service Area 360 7 1 4 372 2,469 Total 1,188 23 13 7 1,231 TABLE E.2: Projected Future Calls Projected Future Emergency Services Calls - 2017 Buildoutr to Calls Added at Development.• Future Units Calls per Unit Residential Single Family (Units) 10,029 0.101 1,011 Multi Family (Units) 4,719 0.090 423 Non -Residential General Commercial (per 1,000 SF) 8,745 0.113 991 Office (per 1,000 SF) 461 0.053 25 Institutional (per 1,000 SF) 1,227 0.016 20 Non -Resident Calls Total Undeveloped Future Private Fire Calls 2,469 Projected Future Calls are based only on Juture units in addition to existing calls from existing unit A B C D E F G H 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 APPENDIX F: EXISTING AND FUTURE STATIONS A B C 1 TABLE F.1: Summary of Existing Facilities 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 D E F Existing Fire / EMS Facilities Floorspace Cost (SF) . PV ProjectConstruction per SF* (Acres) Expense $ Year % Impact Total Cost Acres SF of Space Fee Eligible Impact Fee Qualifying Cost Fire Station #1 11,716 100% $ Total $ - 0.00 11,716 $ G H Assumptions Current Year 2018 Inflation Rate 3.00% TABLE F.2: Projection of Future Facilities Project Future Emergency Services Facilities Within 10 Years Year Floorspace Cost (SF) . PV ProjectConstruction per SF* (Acres) Expense $ Year Expense" Expansionary % to Growth Cost Future West Fire Station West Fire Station Land 86% to Emergency Services 2021 Owned by City 9,184 $ 285 $ 2,617,440 2.0 24,000 $2,860,147 20,630 100% $ 2,860,147 100% 20,630 Future North Fire Station North Fire Station Land 86% to Emergency Services 2028 Owned by City 9,184 285 2,617,440 2.0 70,000 3,517,620 60,172 100% 3,517,620 100% 60,172 Within 30 Years 18,368 4.0 $5,328,880 $6,458,571 $6,458,571 Future Emergency Services Beyond 10 Beyond 10 Year Land -Relocate Existing Station Beyond 10 Year Facilities- Relocate Existing Station 11,716 $ - - - $ $ - - - - - $ - - - Beyond 10 Years 11,716 - - Total Emergency Services Facilities 30,084 - $ 5,328,880 $ 6,458,571 $ 6,458,571 24 *$285 per SF based off of a comparable recent station constructed in Idaho Falls ** 3% Annual Inflation A B C D E F G H 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 APPENDIX G: APPARATUS INVENTORY A B C D 1 2 TABLE G.1: Apparatus Inventory 3 Apparatus Purchase Historic 4 Asset Description Equipment Year Apparatus Cost 5 Pumper 301 Fully Equipped 1993 $ 114,000 6 Pumper 302 Fully Equipped 1993 114,000 7 Pumper 303 Fully Equipped 2000 200,227 8 Ladder 304 Fully Equipped 1983 238,000 9 10 11 Totals: $ 666,227 A B C D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 APPENDIX H: LEVEL OF SERVICE A B C D TABLE H.1: Emereencv Services Level of Service Current 11,716 1,231 9.52 Within 10 Years 30,084 2,410 12.49 Buildout 30,084 3,700 8.13 Impact Fee Level of Service Used 30,084 3,700 8.13 A B C D 1 2 3 4 5 6 APPENDIX I: PROPORTIONATE SHARE ANALYSIS A B C D 1 2 TABLE 1.1: Summary of Emergency Services Facilities 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 E F G H J K Capital Project Time Frame Added Station Floorspace % of Buildout Floor Space Station Capacities (Call) 2017 Calls to Deficiency Stations Available for Growth Calls Existing Calls Deficiency % to Serve Existing Users % to Serve Future Growth Existing Floorspace 11,716 38.9% 1,441 1,287 1,287 154 0.0% 89.3% 10.7% Construction Within 10 Years 18,368 61.1% 2,259 17 - 2,259 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% Construction Beyond 10 Year - - 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10 Years 30,084 100.0% 3,700 1,231 1,287 2,413 Existing Floorspace 11,716 38.9% 1,441 1,287 1,287 154 0.0% 89.3% 10.7% Construction Within 10 Years 18,368 61.1% 2,259 - 2,259 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% Existing and Within 10 Years 30,084 100.0% 3,700 1,287 11 12 TABLE 1.2: Proportionate Share of Emergency Services Facilities Impact Fee % of Allocated % 13 Timeframe Qualifying Cost of of Allocated to % of Allocated to Amount to be Amount to Amount to be Pail Future Facilities to Deficiency Existing Users DeficiencyDevelopment 14 Existing $ - 0.0% 89.3% 10.7% $ $ $ - 15 Within 10 Years 6,458,571 0.0% 1 0.0% 100.0% 6,458,571 16 Total $ 6,458,571 0.0% 44.7% 55.3% $ $ $ 6,458,571 17 A B C D E F G H J K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 APPENDIX J: EMERGENCY SERVICES COST PER CALL A B C D E F 1 TABLE J.1: Emergency Services Impact Fee Cost per Call 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 A B C D E F 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Impact Fee % to Growth Impact Fee Qualifying New Growth Calls Impact Fee Expense Qualifying Cost Related Cost Assigned to New Added Growth to Buildout Cost per Call Emergency Services Stations Existing Facilities $ - 10.7% $ - 2,413 $ Existing Apparatus Inventory 666,227 10.7% 71,167 2,413 29 Existing Debt Service (Interest) - 10.7% - 2,413 - Future Facilities within 10 Years 6,458,571 100.0% 6,458,571 2,413 2,676.37 Future Debt Service (Interest) - 100.0% - 2,413 - Total $ 7,124,798 $ 6,529,738 $ 2,705.86 Miscellaneous Professional Services $ 30,000 100% $ 30,000 2,413 $ 12 Total Miscellaneous $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 12.43 Grand Total $ 7,154,798 $ 6,559,738 $ 2,718.29 A B C D E F 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 APPENDIX K: FINAL IMPACT FEE CALCULATION A B C 1 TABLE K.1: Emergency Services Impact Fee Per Unit 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 D E F G TABLE K.2: Non -Standard WEmergency Service per Call Calls per Unit ImpactCost per Single Family Residential Unit Multi -Family Residential Unit $ 2,718 2,718 0.101 0.090 $ 274.01 243.45 Non Residential General Commercial (per 1,000 SF) Office (per 1,000 SF) Institutional (per 1,000 SF) $ 2,718 2,718 2,718 0.113 0.053 0.016 $ 308.13 145.41 43.73 $2,718.29 11 A B C D E F H I J ment Impact Fee CalculationWon-Stanclar Impact Fee 1 2 Development 3 # of Annual Calls 4 x Projected to be = Non -Standard 5 Created Impact Fee 6 7 8 9 10 11 G H I J City of Chubbuck Parks & Recreation Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis September 2018 ZIONS ©© PUBLIC FINANCE,INC. ©© ©© City of Chubbuck Parks Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ©© ME Contents MESection I: Introduction to the Parks Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ............................................2 ProjectOverview.......................................................................................................................................................2 M■ Impact Fee Service Area............................................................................................................................................2 MEPopulation Growth....................................................................................................................................................2 PersonsPer Household (PPH)...............................................................................................................................2 ServiceUnits..............................................................................................................................................................3 MESection II: Parks Capital Improvement Plan...................................................................................................................4 ONSystem Improvements..............................................................................................................................................4 Existing Park Acreage and Amenities........................................................................................................................4 16- No Existing Park Acreage Inventor 4 NoExisting Park Amenities.........................................................................................................................................5 - Land Improvement Costs......................................................................................................................................5 ScheduleFor Improvements.................................................................................................................................5 FundingCapital Facilities...........................................................................................................................................6 HistoricFunding Sources.......................................................................................................................................6 BondFunding........................................................................................................................................................6 ImpactFees...........................................................................................................................................................6 Summary of Time and Price Differential...................................................................................................................6 Equityof Impact Fees................................................................................................................................................6 Section III: Parks Impact Fee Analysis............................................................................................................................7 ImpactFee Overview.................................................................................................................................................7 ParksLevel of Service................................................................................................................................................7 i.r Proportionate Share Analysis....................................................................................................................................7 Calculation of Proportionate Share......................................................................................................................7 Impact Fee Cost per Development Unit....................................................................................................................8 mir Credits Owed to Development..................................................................................................................................8 GrantFunding.......................................................................................................................................................8 Developer Dedications and Exactions...................................................................................................................8 DeficiencyCredit...................................................................................................................................................8 Individual Impact Fee Assessment............................................................................................................................9 Appendix......................................................................................................................................................................10 E 0M No No 1 No No or ©© ©© 00 ■■ 00 No on ■ o No ON No No it ME No City of Chubbuck Parks Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis SECTION I: INTRODUCTION TO THE PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS PROJECT OVERVIEW Chubbuck City (the City) has commissioned Zions Public Finance, Inc (Zions) to put together a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Impact Fee Analysis (IFA) prior to imposing parks development impact fees authorized by Title 67, Chapter 82, Idaho Code, known as the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act (Impact Fee Act). IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREA Chubbuck is a city located in Bannock County, Idaho. It is immediately north of the City of Pocatello. At the 2010 census, the population was 13,922 and the 2016 population was estimated to be 14,644. The purpose of the Parks & Recreation Capital Improvement Plan is to provide Chubbuck with substantive planning for future capital infrastructure for which development impact fees may be used as a funding source including facility sizes, costs, funding, and allocation to growth. This information will be used as the basis of calculating the Parks & Recreation IFA. A CIP must be prepared before the City can adopt and assess a parks impact fee. This CIP and IFA have been prepared for a single, city-wide service area (Service Area). The same parks & recreation impact fee cost per capita will be assessed throughout the Service Area. The cost per capita is the relationship between the Service Area's population and park acreage, amenities, and improvement costs. The cost per capita will be discussed further in Section III: Parks Impact Fee Analysis. POPULATION GROWTH 2016 is the baseline year for population estimate used in this analysis as shown in Figure 1. By buildout the City anticipates have a resident population of approximately 40,238. FIGURE 1: POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS Year Population Annual Population Change Estimated Households Annual Households Change 2016 14,644 5,249 2017 15,072 428 5,402 154 2018 15,501 428 5,556 154 2019 15,929 428 5,709 154 2020 16,358 428 5,863 154 2021 1 16,786 428 6,017 154 2022 17,215 428 6,170 154 2023 17,643 428 6,324 154 2024 18,072 428 6,477 154 2025 18,500 428 6,631 154 2026 18,929 428 6,785 154 2027 19,357 1 428 1 6,938 154 Buildout 40,238 1 1 14,422 PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD (PPH) Persons per household estimates are important for the parks impact fee calculation because the impact fee is calculated as a cost per capita and then applied to each type of residential development using the persons per household values shown below. FIGURE 2: PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATES Development Single Family (2015 ACS) 2.79 Multi -Family (2015 ACS) 2.60 No ME Em ©© i ME 00 No No No 16 No ON No No IL_ No No 101 101 ME ME ME ON No No so .00 MIN 1010 ME ME SIX 1001 so so 101 101 101 101 City of Chubbuck Parks Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis SERVICE UNITS A service unit is defined by the Impact Fees Act as a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development and calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. In the case of parks impact fees, parks cost per capita is the basic unit for measuring the demand for services for each land use. The impact fee is calculated based on the "cost per capita" and applied to each land use category according to the historic persons per household. Parks impact fees are assessed to residential land uses only. 3 No ©© City of Chubbuck Parks Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis un 00 SECTION II: PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The Impact Fee Act allows that an impact fee be collected for the cost to construct system improvements which have 00 capacity to serve future growth. A system improvement is defined as an improvement which will provide service to a service area not an improvement than only serves one specific development. The system improvement must also have a useful life of ten or more years. System improvements which are impact fee eligible may be "buy -in" to the City's existing inventory of amenities and park acreage or may be future improvements within a twenty-year ■� planning horizon. The impact fee should be calculated to assess an impact fee for the proportionate share of system improvement costs which is available to serve future growth. The Parks CIP documents the City's impact fee qualifying existing and future expenditures. Qualifying system level improvements include neighborhood or community parks, public trails, open space, recreation centers, sports fields, and special use parks (such as fitness parks and skate parks). ■■ EXISTING PARK ACREAGE AND AMENITIES ■ EXISTING PARK ACREAGE INVENTORY No No ■M ■ ■ Figure 3 shows the City's existing parks acreage inventory listing each park location, the type of park, funding source, the year it was purchased/developed, and the cost of the parkland. Only community or neighborhood parks were considered system improvements and thus impact fee qualifying. Any land that was donated was excluded from the total qualifying acreage and parkland cost. FIGURE 3: EXISTING PARK ACREAGE INVENTORY Name Type of Park Total Funding Acres Community Parks Year Purchased Current Cost QualifyingPark Capell Park I Community 1 17.51 Grants orfunding 1 1996 $ 2,734,157 Yes Cotant Park I Community 1 21.11 Cash In Lieu of Park 1 1967 3,209,279 Yes Park Meadows Park I Community 18.21 City Funded 1 2002 1 916,727 1 Yes Stuart Park Neighborhood/Community 1 4.91 Cash In Lieu of Park 1 1958 279,001 Yes Neighborhood Parks Armstrong Park Neighborhood 1.6 Cash In Lieu of Park 1975 $ 26,645 Yes Bicentennial Park Neighborhood 0.0 Land was donated 1975 - No Bistline Park Neighborhood 1.2 Cash In Lieu of Park 1985 27,835 Yes Briarwood Park Neighborhood 1.5 Cash In Lieu of Park 1993 23,644 Yes Chase Park Neighborhood 0.8 Cash In Lieu of Park 1963 6,975 Yes Dalton Park Neighborhood 0.5 Cash In Lieu of Park 1997 2,138 Yes Espie Park Neighborhood 0.9 City Funded 1993 4,256 Yes Homestead Park Neighborhood 2.6 City Funded 2005 76,529 Yes Mary Harker Park Neighborhood 1.3 Cash In Lieu of Park 1975 17,127 Yes Heartland Park Neighborhood 2.2 City Funded 2004 53,445 Yes Heritage Park Neighborhood 2.7 Cash In Lieu of Park 1993 86,521 Yes Jerry Rowland Park Neighborhood 2.2 Cash In Lieu of Park 2003 52,438 Yes Larry Miller Park Neighborhood 2.3 Cash In Lieu of Park 2003 58,552 Yes Long Park Neighborhood 0.0 Land was donated 2013 - No Mary's Park Neighborhood 4.3 City Funded 1978 207,310 Yes Sample Park Neighborhood 0.0 Land was donated 2007 - No Sunset West Neighborhood 0.0 Land was donated 2006 No Tree Valley Park Neighborhood 0.8 City Funded 2000 6,862 Yes Totals 76.5 1 1 $ 7,789,442 4 No or Em ©© am ■. IL ■■ ■■ 101101 City of Chubbuck Parks Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis EXISTING PARK AMENITIES Figure 4 shows the existing amenities and their cost. The City has invested over $3.3M in park amenities costs. Please see Appendix D for the detailed inventory of parks documenting where each amenity is located. FIGURE 4: EXISTING AMENITIES LAND IMPROVEMENT COSTS Improvements Cost Total VALUE Gazebos, Pavillions, Bowery $ 384,588 Pavilion $ 20,000 7 $ 140,000 Memorial Gazebo 71,588 1 71,588 Small Pavilion with Picnic Tables 20,000 6 120,000 Bench 500 24 12,000 Covered Picnic Tables 2,000 4 8,000 Picnic Tables 1,000 33 33,000 Fields, Courts, Diamonds $ 674,000 Basketball Full Court $ 16,000 3 $ 48,000 Basketball Half Court 8,000 10 80,000 Tennis Courts 16,000 15 240,000 Ball field 30,000 10 300,000 Volleyball Court 2,000 3 6,000 Restrooms $ 150,000 Restroom building $ 50,000 3 $ 150,000 Other $ 2,119,624 Playground 50,000 19 950,000 Swing Set 12,000 16 192,000 Splash Pad 250,000 1 250,000 Concessions Stand 80,000 1 80,000 Horse Shoe Pits 3,262 2 6,524 Refrigerated Ice Skating Rink with Lights 100,000 1 100,000 Concrete Skating Rink 100,0001 1 1 100,000 Paved parking area (per Stall) 1,200 278 333,600 Gravel Non -Paved Parking Area 2501 30 7,500 Storage Structure /Tennis Service Shop 100,0001 1 1 100,000 Total $ 3,328,212 In addition to the inventory of qualifying park acreage and amenities, an improvement cost has also been included. The City has determined that each park requires an average of $2.25 per square foot for improvement costs such as ■■ landscaping. ■ ■ SCHEDULE FOR IMPROVEMENTS The parks & recreation impact fees will be assessed according to historic dollars invested per capita and not be based on the cost of future improvements. However, Jackson Land Design, PC is currently in the final stages of completing ■� the City of Chubbuck Parks Master Development Plan 2018 and has identified future park improvements the City intends to complete in the near future. The parks improvement planned within the immediate horizon are as follows: ■■ Espie Park Water Education Center: Preliminary Cost Estimate: $841,500 Water education will be the theme of this 5 -acre community park that abuts the existing Espie Park on its west and north sides. The park will capitalize on the newly constructed City water tank, and provide additional amenities and ■■ attractions designed to educate park users on how a municipal water system operates, and to demonstrate how valuable water is in this high desert community. Additional amenities include a slide to link the top of the water tank with the patio below, a community garden, park benches strategically placed throughout the park, picnic pavilions and arbor shade structures, and restroom facilities. ■■ Chubbuck City Downtown Park: Preliminary Cost Estimate: $2,502,000 METhis park's classification will be that of a Community Park, and would consist of approximately ten (10) acres of area in the center of a new City Downtown. The park's function would be to provide a pleasing green space in the middle SO so 101 101 101 101 No ®© City of Chubbuck Parks Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis un IN Mi of a new downtown area that would be bordered by a mixed use of restaurants, retail space, and large to medium ■. commercial businesses. This new park would consist mainly of passive recreation elements such as open lawn areas with lots of large shade trees and decorative shrub and flower beds. Wide walking paths with strategically placed benches and picnic tables would line these paths. ■■ Miller Park Preliminary Cost Estimate: $3,075,750 ■■ Currently, this park is undeveloped farm land that abuts several developing and proposed single-family home neighborhoods. The park's size and gentle topography provides a blank canvas to create a park that will serve current and future residents of this developing area. Central to the park is a 2 -acre lake that will have ADA access around the entire perimeter. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game has indicated an interest in stocking this lake with a mixture of bass and bluegill fish to provide year-round fishing opportunities. Utilizing the fill material generated from ■■ lake excavation a gently sloped community amphitheater will be built and oriented to maximize views of the lake and park. Also, the remaining lake fill material will be used to slightly elevate the park's northeast corner to provide the elevated launch pad necessary for a proposed water slip & slide feature. The park would be looped by an 8' wide walking path. Along the looped path a series of exercise stations, park benches, and picnic tables would be placed. A 9 -hole frisbee golf course would be located mainly outside of the looped path around the park's perimeter. ■� FUNDING CAPITAL FACILITIES HISTORIC FUNDING SOURCES ■■ Parks can be funded in a variety of ways including tax revenues, impact fees, grants, bonds, etc. Tax revenues— property and sales—are the primary source of revenue for the City. The City has authority to collect a portion of the �C property and sales taxes within its boundaries. The revenues collected can cover the operational expenses, non- impact fee qualifying capital expenses, and other general needs of the parks department. ■■ BOND FUNDING ■, The Impact Fee Advisory Committee has recommended that bond costs (such as cost of issuance and interest) not be included in the impact fee calculation until the time that future bonds have been approved by the voters. There are no outstanding bonds related to the parks improvements and no future bonds are currently proposed. If a bond is proposed and approved in the future by City residents, then the impact fees will be revised at that time to include any additional bond costs. ■■ IMPACT FEES Impact fees have become an ideal mechanism for funding growth -related infrastructure. It is recommended that impact fees be used to fund growth -related capital projects as they help to maintain an adequate level of service ME and prevent existing users from subsidizing the capital needs for new growth. ■■ SUMMARY OF TIME AND PRICE DIFFERENTIAL The Impact Fees Act allows for the inclusion of a time and price differential to ensure that the costs incurred at a later date are accurately calculated. To account for this, 2018 project cost estimates for future projects can be ■0 inflated at 3% annually to a future value cost based on the year of anticipated construction; however, the parks & ■■ recreation impact fees are based on the current level of investment per capita, not based on the costs of future park improvements. Therefore, it was not necessary to include an inflation component in the parks & recreation impact fee calculation. ■■ EQUITY OF IMPACT FEES ■■ The impact fee calculations are structured to fund 100% of the growth -related portion of system improvements as presented in the impact fee analysis. Even so, there may be years that impact fee revenues cannot cover the annual growth -related expenses. Other revenues will be used to make up any annual deficits given gaps in development or ■■ other factors. Any borrowed funds are to be repaid in their entirety through impact fees at the time that impact fee ■■ funds become available. E1 1N1 1001 ■■ 6 ME 101 101 101 101 No ®© City of Chubbuck Parks Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ©© ME SECTION III: PARKS IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS IMPACT FEE OVERVIEW The impact fee for parks is calculated using growth projections, current populations and persons per household 00 projections, and existing and future parks acreage and amenities costs which have been described in Sections I & II Noof this document. The final components necessary to complete the impact fee analysis include: level of service (LOS), proportionate share analysis, impact fee cost per capita, impact fee cost per development unit, and proposed credits to development. Each of those components are discussed in the following section. No ■o No ON No ■ ■ ME No ME No no No ME ■■ WIN ■■ ■■ ■M 101101 101101 PARKS LEVEL OF SERVICE One key component of the impact fee calculation is the level of service. The level of service is the measure of the relationship between service capacity and service demand for public facilities. In the case of parks impact fees that means current park acreage per 1,000 residents coupled with the parks & recreation amenities dollars invested per 1,000 residents. If the City did not continue to invest in new or expanded parks & recreation projects which have capacity to serve new growth, then the current level of service of 5.22 acres per 1,000 residents and $227,275 invested in amenities per 1,000 residents will drop and the level of service would be reduced over time. It is the intention of the City of Chubbuck to maintain the current level of service by continuing to invest in future parks & recreation land and amenities. FIGURE 5: CURRENT PARKS & RECREATION LEVEL OF SERVICE Parks Impact Fee Qualifying Parks & Recreation LOS - Current Inventory Acres Qualifying Cost Acreage LOS Per 1,000 Community Neighborhood 51.69 $ 7,139,163 24.78 650,279 3.53 1.69 Park Total 76.45 $ 7,789,442 5.22 Amenities Total Cost of Existing Amenities Amenities LOS Per 1,000 Amenities - $ 3,328,212 $ 227,275 Amenities Total - $ 3,328,212 $ 227,275 PROPORTIONATE SHARE ANALYSIS As part of this analysis, the Impact Fees Act requires that the calculated impact fee be roughly proportionate and reasonably related to the development activity. Ideally, implementing an impact fee to pay for needed infrastructure places a burden on future users that is equal to the burden that was borne in the past by existing users. To determine the fair share an impact fee payer should pay for parks & recreation system capacity, a proportionate share analysis was performed as described below. CALCULATION OF PROPORTIONATE SHARE Figure 6 displays the proportionate share of the impact fee eligible costs for existing park acreage, amenities, improvements, and associated professional expenses. The total impact fee eligible costs are divided by the City's population to arrive at an impact fee per capita of $844.25. FIGURE 6: PROPORTIONATE SHARE CALCULATION/IMPACT FEE COST PER CAPITA Total Impact Fee Eligible Park Acres (76.5 acres @$20,000) Population Cost $ 1,529,538 Served 14,644 $ Capita 104.45 Amenities Cost 3,328,212 14,644 227.27 Improvement Costs ($2.25 per Sq Ft) 7,495,501 14,644 511.85 Professional Expenses 10,000 14,644 0.68 Total Park Impact Fee Per Capita $ 844.25 No or Em ©© ism ME 00 No No ON No No it ME No ME No no ■ ■ ■■ No �� ME ME SIX 1001 so so 101 101 101 101 City of Chubbuck Parks Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis IMPACT FEE COST PER DEVELOPMENT UNIT The land use plan provided by the City identified the persons per household for both single-family and multi -family residential units (see Appendix B). Parks & Recreation impact fees are assessed to residential land uses only. The parks & recreation impact fee per capita has been assigned to each residential land use according to the persons per household for that type of development as shown in Figure 7. FIGURE 7: RECOMMENDED PARKS & RECREATION IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT CREDITS OWED TO DEVELOPMENT Certain circumstances may result in the need to provide a credit to development. Impact fee credits are detailed below. GRANT FUNDING Any improvement donated to the City which the City has no obligation to repay is assumed to be donated to the City's residents through buildout. Therefore, if a capital facility is acquired through a grant or another source that does not require the City to pay for the project, then the value of that improvement would not be considered an impact fee qualifying cost. An impact fee should not be collected for a project or expense otherwise covered through a grant without an appropriate credit. If any grant funding is received for impact fee eligible expenses, then the impact fee will be reviewed at the time that the funding is received to account for any reduction in impact fee project costs. DEVELOPER DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS Developer exactions are not the same as grants (which should be credited from the impact fee). If a developer constructs a system improvement level park/amenity or donates land to the City for a system improvement park, then the value of the dedication is credited against that particular developer's impact fee liability. If the situation arises that a developer chooses to construct facilities in -lieu of impact fees, appropriate arrangements must be made through negotiation between the developer and the City on a case by case basis. An impact fee credit will be due to the developer and the dedication/exaction will be classified in the inventory as if it had been funded directly by the City through impact fees collected. If the value of the dedication/exaction is less than the development's impact fee liability, the developer will owe the balance of the liability to the City. If the value of the improvements dedicated is worth more than the development's impact fee liability, the City must reimburse the difference to the developer which can be done using impact fee revenues collected from other developments benefitting from the system improvement. DEFICIENCY CREDIT When the LOS calculation indicates there is an existing deficiency it is generally appropriate to include a deficiency credit in the impact fee calculation. The purpose of the deficiency credit is to avoid new growth from being required to fund their capacity through an impact fee and then also having to help pay to correct the deficiency for existing residents and essentially be double charged for their system capacity. To prevent this double charge being assessed to new growth, any appropriate deficiency credit is subtracted from the total impact fees owed to account for any deficiency projects paid for through other funding mechanisms which all City residents/businesses are required to pay (such as bonds, property tax revenue, or user rate revenue, when applicable to the project). The parks inventory does not have an existing deficiency; therefore, no deficiency credit is required at this time. 8 No ®© City of Chubbuck Parks Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ©© JE IS INDIVIDUAL IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT ME The Impact Fees Act states that the impact fee ordinance should include a process whereby the City shall allow a developer, upon request by the developer, to provide a written individual assessment of the proportionate share of development impact fees. The individual assessment process permits consideration of studies, data, and any other ■■ relevant information submitted by the developer to adjust the amount of the fee. For parks & recreation impact fees ■■ the variable that would be reviewed in the individual impact fee assessment would be the persons per household generated by the proposed development. Once the City and the developer have reviewed relevant information and determined the persons per household for the proposed development, then the City can calculate the individual impact fee assessment using the formula in Figure 8. ■o FIGURE 8: INDIVIDUAL IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT FORMULA ■■ ImpactParks Non -Standard Multiply Number of Persons per Household by Impact Fee per Capita $844.25 IL ■ ■ ■ ■ 101101 W IL ■■ ■■ 101101 City of Chubbuck Parks Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis APPENDIX 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 APPENDIX A: POPULATION PROJECTIONS/ GROWTH IN DEMANDS Chubbuck City Parks CIP and Impact Fee Analysis A B C D E F G H Growth Projections Persons per Household Year mv Population Annual Population Change Estimated Households Annual Households Change 2016 14,644 5,249 2017 15,072 428 5,402 154 2018 15,501 428 5,556 154 2019 15,929 428 5,709 154 2020 16,358 428 5,863 154 2021 16,786 428 6,017 154 2022 17,215 428 6,170 154 2023 17,643 428 6,324 154 2024 18,072 428 6,477 154 2025 18,500 428 6,631 154 2026 18,929 428 6,785 154 2027 19,357 428 6,938 154 Buildout 40,238 14,422 A B C D E F G H 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 APPENDIX B: FORECAST OF DEVELOPMENT UNITS Chubbuck City Parks CIP and Impact Fee Analysis A B C D E F G H I 1 TABLE B.1: Existing and Future Population, Residential Units, and Private Non Residential Floor Space 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Source: City ofChubbuckGlSAnalysi, A B C D E F G H I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2016 Existing Development Pr Residential Units Population Current Persons per Household Total Units Population Units Population Buildout Persons per Household Total Units Single Family Multi -Family 10,117 4,527 2.79 2.60 3,622 1,739 27,800 12,438 9,964 4,784 37,905 16,960 2.79 2.60 13,586 6,523 Total 14,644 2.70 5,361 40,238 14,748 54,865 2.73 20,109 Private Non -Residential Units SF per Capita Estimated kSF SF per Capita Estimated kSF SF per capita Estimated kSF General Commercial Office Institutional 149.4 6.6 17.6 2,188 97 258 149.4 6.6 17.6 6,013 266 708 149.4 6.6 17.6 8,201 363 966 Total 174 2,543 6,987 174 9,530 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 APPENDIX C: EXISTING PARK ACREAGE Chubbuck City Parks CIP and Impact Fee Analysis A B C D G H L Existing Park Acreage Park Name .Year Community Parks Purchased Qualifying Capell Park Community 17.5 Grants or funding 1996 $ 2,734,157 Yes Cotant Park Community 21.1 Cash In Lieu of Park 1967 3,209,279 Yes Park Meadows Park Community 8.2 City Funded 2002 916,727 Yes Stuart Park Neighborhood/Community 4.9 Cash In Lieu of Park 1958 279,001 Yes Neighborhood Parks Armstrong Park Neighborhood 1.6 Cash In Lieu of Park 1975 $ 26,645 Yes Bicentennial Park Neighborhood 0.0 Land was donated 1975 - No Bistline Park Neighborhood 1.2 Cash In Lieu of Park 1985 27,835 Yes Briarwood Park Neighborhood 1.5 Cash In Lieu of Park 1993 23,644 Yes Chase Park Neighborhood 0.8 Cash In Lieu of Park 1963 6,975 Yes Dalton Park Neighborhood 0.5 Cash In Lieu of Park 1997 2,138 Yes Espie Park Neighborhood 0.9 City Funded 1993 4,256 Yes Homestead Park Neighborhood 2.6 City Funded 2005 76,529 Yes Mary Harker Park Neighborhood 1.3 Cash In Lieu of Park 1975 17,127 Yes Heartland Park Neighborhood 2.2 City Funded 2004 53,445 Yes Heritage Park Neighborhood 2.7 Cash In Lieu of Park 1993 86,521 Yes Jerry Rowland Park Neighborhood 2.2 Cash In Lieu of Park 2003 52,438 Yes Larry Miller Park Neighborhood 2.3 Cash In Lieu of Park 2003 58,552 Yes Long Park Neighborhood 0.0 Land was donated 2013 - No Mary's Park Neighborhood 4.3 City Funded 1978 207,310 Yes Sample Park Neighborhood 0.0 Land was donated 2007 - No Sunset West Neighborhood 0.0 Land was donated 2006 - No Tree Valley Park Neighborhood 0.8 City Funded 2000 6,862 Yes Totals 76.5 $ 7,789,442 A B C D G H L 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 F] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 APPENDIX D: EXISTING AMENITIES Chubbuck City Parks CIP and Impact Fee Analysis A B C D E F G H I J K L M N 0 P Q R S T U V W X Y Z A B C D E F G H I J K L M N 0 P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Y Y 4J a a a NO O •� o O aJ Y � a) � 3 �_ a � 0 J 4-0 •C v0f O •� ++ ca �. M Q E GJ � > V O +�• cn E !r H t u W E L fC a, J +' *' V i a u m •L m O c0 _ 2 i Y N N L L CO = C 41 J f0 ~ LLI LLI Improvements Cost a Total VALUE Gazebos, Pavillions, Bowery $ 384,588 Pavilion $ 20,000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 $ 140,000 Memorial Gazebo 71,588 1 1 71,588 Small Pavilion with Picnic Tables 20,000 1 2 1 1 1 6 120,000 Bench 500 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 2 1 2 24 12,000 Covered Picnic Tables 1 2,0001 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 8,000 Picnic Tables 1,0001 1 1 1 4 1 8 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 4 41 4 4 1 2 33 133,000 Fields, Courts, Diamonds $ 674,000 Basketball Full Court $ 16,000 1 1 1 3 $ 48,000 Basketball Half Court 8,000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 80,000 Tennis Courts 16,000 8 4 2 1 15 240,000 Ball field 30,000 3 6 1 10 300,000 Volleyball Court 2,000 1 1 1 3 6,000 Restrooms $ 150,000 Restroom building $ 50,0001 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 $ 150,000 Other $ 2,119,624 Playground 50,000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 19 950,000 Swing Set 12,000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 16 192,000 Splash Pad 250,000 1 1 250,000 Concessions Stand 80,000 1 1 80,000 Horse Shoe Pits 3,262 1 1 2 2 6,524 Refrigerated Ice Skating Rink with Lights 100,000 1 1 100,000 Concrete Skating Rink 100,000 1 1 100,000 Paved parking area (per Stall) 1,200 200 16 30 15 12 5 278 333,600 Gravel Non -Paved Parking Area 250 30 1 1 1 30 7,500 Storage Structure /Tennis Service Shop 1 100,000 1 1 1 1 100,000 Total $ 3,328,212 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N 0 P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 APPENDIX E: CURRENT PARKS LEVEL OF SERVICE Chubbuck City Parks CIP and Impact Fee Analysis 2016 Chubbuck City Population 14,644 A B C Current Park & Recreation Level of Service E Parks : Recreation LOSInventory Qualifying Cost Acreage LOS Per 1,000 Impact Fee Qualifying Parks Acres Community Neighborhood 51.69 24.78 $ 7,139,163 650,279 3.53 1.69 Park Total 76.48 $ 7,789,442 5.22 Amenities Total Cost of Existing Amenities Amenities LOS Per 1,000 Amenities - $ 3,328,212 $ 227,275 Amenities Total - $ 3,328,212 $ 227,275 A B C D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 APPENDIX F: IMPACT FEE CALCULATION Chubbuck City Parks CIP and Impact Fee Analysis A B Calculation of Park Impact Fee Per Capita Ir 0 Total Impact Fee Eligible Park Acres (76.5 acres @$20,000) Cost $ 1,529,538 Population Fee Served 14,644 $ Per Capita 104.45 Amenities Cost 3,328,212 14,644 227.27 Improvement Costs ($2.25 per Scl Ft) 7,495,501 14,644 511.85 Professional Expenses 10,000 14,644 0.68 Total Park Impact Fee Per Capita $ 844.25 Calculation of Park Impact Fees by Development Type Impact Fee Calculation Fee Per Unit , Average Household Size/Total Single Family Residential (SFR) Units 2.79 Gross Park Impact Fee per SFR Household $ 2,355 Average Household Size/Multi Family (MFR) Units 2.60 Gross Park Impact Fee per MFR Household $ 2,195 Calculation of Non -Standard Park Impact Fees Multiply Number of Persons per Household by Impact Fee per Capita $844.25 A B C D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 1.0 INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 Project Description/Objectives 3 1.2 Background 4 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 5 2.1 Inventory of Existing Facilities 5 3.0 COMMUNITY SURVEY 22 3.1 Survey Results 22 4.0 PARK PROGRAMMING 23 4.1 National Standards 25 4.2 Standards Based on Population 25 4.3 Park Classification 26 5.0 NEEDS ANALYSIS 28 5.1 Demographics & Economics 28 5.2 Site Evaluations 31 6.0 COMMUNITY PARKS MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN 34 6.1 Espie Park Water Education Center 34 6.2 Chubbuck City Downtown Park 35 6.3 Miller Park 36 6.4 Multi -Use Trail System 37 7.0. FINANCIAL PLAN 38 7.1 Introduction 38 7.2 Summary of Park Development Costs 38 7.3 Local Funding Sources 43 7.4 State and Federal Grants 43 8.0 PARK CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS 46 8.1 Construction Details and Descriptions 46 8.2 Construction Specifications 62 9.0 REFERENCES 61 Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A well-designed park system that meets the needs of the public it serves is a key component in creating a high quality of life in a community. Parks and recreational facilities can: • affect the type and direction of growth in an area • enhance the overall look and feel of a community • facilitate positive interactions among community members. Essential to the successful development of a community park system is the planning process. This requires city planners to 1) work in partnership with their community and professional design consultants and 2) to find the right tools for creating and implementing a sound plan. This City of Chubbuck Parks Master Development Plan (Plan) is a tool for guiding the City of Chubbuck (City) in its efforts to maintain quality and continuity within its park system. The City is home to 22 named park facilities, occupying 87.4 acres of land. Found in this Plan is an inventory of these parks and their amenities with suggestions for improvements based in part on National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) guidelines, results of a community survey, and a community needs analysis. In addition, there are three proposed park master plans and one master plan for a proposed multi -use trail system all of which include a concept rendering and construction cost estimate. The Park Development Standards detailed in this Plan include the following: • The City has established a standard of providing six (6) acres of developed park land per 1,000 residents. • Neighborhood Parks should be at least 1/3 acre in size unless authorized by the City, or designated as a Mini Park such as a trailhead, or historical marker, etc. • A City park should be within '/z mile of every resident, or closer. • The NRPA provides guidelines for park development including types, quantity, and service distance, etc. as shown in Table 4.0 in this plan. However, caution will be used when following NRPA guidelines exclusively. The results of the Community Parks and Recreation Survey, input and experience of City staff, and information gathered at public meetings, etc. should take precedence in park planning. • Park construction standards should meet or exceed the details as illustrated in this plan. All plans must be approved by the City prior to construction. • All park construction work MUST meet local, state, and federal building codes. With the population growth rate for the City of Chubbuck projected at 3.5% per year, this Plan will help the City successfully develop its park system to meet the current and future needs of its residents while avoiding the costly and time-consuming mistakes attributed to the lack of proper planning. As the City Public Works Director, Rodney Burch, has often said: "Good public space does not happen by accident." Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 2 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Description/Objectives This Parks Master Development Plan has been prepared by Jackson Land Design, PC at the request and direction of the City of Chubbuck, Idaho. Because Chubbuck City is experiencing growth every year, and is expecting a jump in growth as a result of incoming businesses and upcoming developments like Northgate, the City understands the importance of developing a comprehensive master plan for a community -wide park system that satisfies the current and future recreation needs of its residents. The 2001 Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan states that as the City "grows and a denser pattern of land use emerges, the park system will become more valuable to residents. The City will expect new development to help expand the park system." It is the purpose of this Plan to provide a general guide to the City for making land use decisions pertaining to future park development, and to provide an outline of suggested park functions along with conceptual designs for four (4) sites included in the proposed community -wide park system. Cost estimates for these parks and multi -use trail system are also included in this Plan. The development of this Plan was based upon responses to a community survey distributed to a sampling of Chubbuck City residents, input from City personnel, and an evaluation of existing parks and recreation facilities in Chubbuck City as compared to standards for parks facilities as set by the National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA). Park spaces and recreation facilities are integral components of community development. The location of a park or types of facilities within a park, can affect the type and direction of growth of surrounding areas. Furthermore, the physical attributes of a park can contribute positively to a community's aesthetics. It is also true that park facilities enhance the quality of life experienced by community residents by providing convenient recreational outlets, opportunities for community members to associate with one another, and an enhanced atmosphere contributed by pleasing green spaces. Essential to the successful development of community park systems is the planning process. Typically, it is more expensive and time-consuming to retrofit a park facility to an existing community, than if the park facility had been developed as an integral part of the planned community. In addition to the difficulties associated with retrofitting an existing park or open space, it can be especially problematic if a city must acquire land for "after the fact" park construction. The quantity and quality of available property diminishes, even vanishes, over time due to the encroachment of growing communities upon available open space. Cities are often faced with the costly option of purchasing land back from developers when the need for a new park or recreation facility arises. Therefore, it is necessary to begin allocating property for park sites now. This Plan will help the City successfully develop its park system to meet the current and future needs of its residents while avoiding the costly and time-consuming mistakes attributed to the lack of proper planning. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 3 1.2 Background Chubbuck City is a quiet growing community located in the northwest portion of Bannock County in southeast Idaho. The City's population is approximately 14,644, making it the second largest city in Bannock County. The nearest large urban areas are Boise (Idaho's capital) and Salt Lake City, Utah, located approximately 230 miles to the west and approximately 170 miles to the south of Chubbuck City, respectively. The climate of Chubbuck City is characterized by long, hot summer days and cold winters, with average annual precipitation of approximately 12 inches. July tends to be the hottest month with an average daytime high of 88 degrees F; January is the coldest month with average overnight low of 16 degrees F. Less precipitation falls in August than any other time of year, averaging 0.59 inches of rain. May is the wettest month with an average precipitation of 1.5 inches. Winter snow levels vary from year to year, but on average Chubbuck receive 44 inches of snowfall annually. Chubbuck sits at an elevation of 4,472 feet above sea level in part of the extensive Snake River Plain marked by seas of sagebrush landscape, fertile agricultural land, and historic lava flows. Chubbuck lies close to juniper -covered foothills and forested mountains banking the Portneuf Valley and is surrounded by diverse recreational opportunities, including but not limited to mountain biking, camping, hiking, snowmobiling, skiing, bird watching, hunting, and fishing. Popular recreational attractions in the area include Yellowstone National Park, American Falls Reservoir, Craters of the Moon National Monument, Massacre Rocks State Park, Pebble Creek Ski Resort, and an abundance of public lands and sportsmen access sites managed by the Bureau of Land Management, United States Forest Service, and the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. In the early 1800s, French hunters and trappers from Canada and British traders visited southeast Idaho to trade with the native Shoshoni and Bannock peoples of the region. John C. Fremont -- an American explorer and expert surveyor and map maker-- came through Idaho in 1843. Among his many observations, he noted that this region of Idaho was appropriate for agriculture. Today, agriculture remains a keystone in southeast Idaho's economy --including areas surrounding Chubbuck-- with the production of potatoes, hay, wheat, and alfalfa as well as livestock and dairy farming. The railroad came through southern Idaho in 1880. Sugar beets were one of the principle crops of the area and were loaded onto railroad cars at a siding where Chubbuck is now located. The siding became known as "beet run siding". A senior conductor for the Oregon Short Line by the name of Walter Elmer Chubbuck was in charge of loading the railroad cars at "beet run siding". The railroad later began a tradition of naming sidings after senior conductors, so "beet run siding" was renamed Chubbuck in 1889 [Source: A History of Chubbuck written by Bessie M. Shrontz Roberts- Wright]. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 4 51 T&N I -��-rrr!� Or- i O A Ji Y A Y � t s T&N I -��-rrr!� Or- i O A Ji Y T&N I -��-rrr!� low IVJG. Ub66C- —TEM , L 1 i �E�Ehubbucka Map 2.1 - Existing Facilities 1. Armstrong Park - 837 Boyd Street 2. Bicentennial Park - 300 Abraham Street 3. Bistline Park - 701 East Chubbuck Road 4. Briarwood Park - Eagle Rd. & Briarwood 5. Capell Park - 5246 Park Lawn Drive 6. Chase Park - 4559 Pinewood Avenue 7. Cotant Park - 625 Victor Avenue 8. Dalton Park - 400 Idealya Lane 9. Espie Park - 692 Darris Street 10. Heartland Park - 967 Striped Road 11. Heritage Park - 1051 Pennsylvania Ave. 12. Homestead Park - 715 Dell Road 13. Mary Harker Park - 5110 Kay Street 14. Jerry Rowland Park - 405 Hampton Avenue 15. Larry Miller Park - 801 Alpine Avenue 16. Long Park - 550 Thomas Street 17. Mary's Park - 854 Washburn Drive 18. Park Meadows Park - 4765 Galena Avenue 19. Sample Park - 5415 Stuart Avenue 20. Stuart Park - 5161 Stuart Avenue 21. Sunset West Park - 1360 Jenna Drive 22. Tree Valley Park - 810 Garden Drive - Park Idnetifier S Ptd —.yit Yft iz 1�1 1, 1 1 rix t J • . .' +a. 77- 4� J Or- i O A Ji low IVJG. Ub66C- —TEM , L 1 i �E�Ehubbucka Map 2.1 - Existing Facilities 1. Armstrong Park - 837 Boyd Street 2. Bicentennial Park - 300 Abraham Street 3. Bistline Park - 701 East Chubbuck Road 4. Briarwood Park - Eagle Rd. & Briarwood 5. Capell Park - 5246 Park Lawn Drive 6. Chase Park - 4559 Pinewood Avenue 7. Cotant Park - 625 Victor Avenue 8. Dalton Park - 400 Idealya Lane 9. Espie Park - 692 Darris Street 10. Heartland Park - 967 Striped Road 11. Heritage Park - 1051 Pennsylvania Ave. 12. Homestead Park - 715 Dell Road 13. Mary Harker Park - 5110 Kay Street 14. Jerry Rowland Park - 405 Hampton Avenue 15. Larry Miller Park - 801 Alpine Avenue 16. Long Park - 550 Thomas Street 17. Mary's Park - 854 Washburn Drive 18. Park Meadows Park - 4765 Galena Avenue 19. Sample Park - 5415 Stuart Avenue 20. Stuart Park - 5161 Stuart Avenue 21. Sunset West Park - 1360 Jenna Drive 22. Tree Valley Park - 810 Garden Drive - Park Idnetifier S Ptd —.yit Yft iz 1�1 1, 1 1 rix t J • . .' +a. 77- 4� J 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS This chapter inventories existing park facilities within the City of Chubbuck. Information was gathered during field investigation and through information supplied by City personnel. Park area and acreage were determined by reviewing City base map material provided by the City of Chubbuck's GIS Department. 2.1 Inventory of Existing Facilities Currently, there are twenty-two (22) parks encompassing 87.4 acres which fall under the jurisdiction of the Parks and Recreation Department in the City of Chubbuck (see Map 2.1 Existing Facilities). The forethought and vision of previous City leaders to require that developing neighborhoods have a neighborhood park is commendable. Most of these parks are very similar in design and contain a playground with swings, picnic pavilion, walking trail, open grass area, and some landscaping. These "prototypical" parks are ideally located throughout the City. The following is an inventory and evaluation of these facilities. 2.1.1 Armstrong Park: (1.6 Acre Neighborhood Park) 837 Boyd Street • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. Pavilion c. 4 picnic tables d. 1 Bench e. Half -court basketball (asphalt) f. Open grass with some trees Adjacent Land Use — Armstrong Park is bordered on the east and west sides by multi -family housing. On the park's north and south sides are single-family homes. Park Evaluation - This park is in fairly good shape are in great shape, but the pavilion slab is beginning to crack and show signs of age. It is recommended that ADA (American Disabilities Act) pathways are installed to connect the park's amenities with the adjacent sidewalk and roadway. . The grass and landscaping Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 5 2.1.2 Bicentennial Park: (6.9 Acre Neighborhood Park) 300 Abraham Street • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. Pavilion c. 8 picnic tables d. Park Benches throughout e. Full -court basketball (asphalt) f. Ball field with grassed infield g. Perimeter walking trail (8' wide asphalt) h. 2 horseshoe pits i. 2 asphalt tennis courts (needs removal / replaced) j. Asphalt play area (needs removal / replaced) k. 30 -stall parking lot 1. Open grass with mature shade trees Adjacent Land Use - This neighborhood park is located in an established neighborhood, and is surrounded on all four sides by single-family housing. Park Evaluation - This older neighborhood park is in fairly good shape with a variety of park amenities to accommodate many user groups. The grass and landscaping are in great shape with large shade trees located around the park's perimeter. Most of the park's amenities are connected with ADA pathways. There are two (2) very old asphalt tennis courts that appear to have been taken out of service. These courts need to be removed or rebuilt, and in their current state are a safety hazard. Also, there are two (2) horseshoe pits located within this old asphalt pad that need to be removed, or repaired. Adjacent to the full -court basketball court is another old asphalt pad that needs to be removed. The park's condition is consistent with a park of this age. Adding additional planter areas to eliminate some of the turf areas could be - considered to reduce watering requirements. Also, additional benches, shade trees, and site lighting would help to beautify and add to user enjoyment. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 6 2.1.3 Bistline Park: (1.2 Acre Neighborhood Park) 701 East Chubbuck Road • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. 1 bench c. Sloped hill on park's east boundary popular for sleigh riding and ice blocking d. Open grass e. Few trees Adjacent Land Use — This neighborhood park is bordered on the north by Chubbuck Road, and to the west by Hiline Road and an irrigation canal. To the south and east are single-family homes. Park Evaluation — Along the park's eastern boundary is a 20'-40' slope which is very popular with the community for sleigh riding and ice blocking. There are only a half dozen trees and no shrub beds in the entire park. There are no pedestrian pathways, or ADA connection to the nearby streets with park amenities. These pathways should be provided. The park is elevated which allows for spectacular views to the west and south. 2.1.4 Briarwood Park: (1.5 Acre Neighborhood Park) Eagle Road & Briarwood Street • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. Half -court basketball (asphalt) c. Perimeter walking trail (8' wide asphalt) d. Open grass with pine trees Adjacent Land Use — This park is bordered on the west by railroad tracks. To the south are commercial storage units, and to the north and east are a mixture of single family homes, trailer homes, and multi -family townhomes. Park Evaluation - This park is a long narrow park, and is in fairly good shape. The perimeter asphalt trail is looped and bordered by mostly pine trees which only provide limited shade. The asphalt basketball court is beginning to crack and settle. The park has no benches, picnic tables or pavilion. These should be considered along with adding additional large shade trees and shrub beds to help beautify and add to user enjoyment. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 7 2.1.5 Capell Park: (17.5 Acre Community Park) 5246 Park Lawn Drive • Amenities include: a. Refrigerated ice skating rink with lights b. Concrete skating rink c. 3 ball fields with skinned infields & warning tracks d. Pavilion e. Restroom building f. Osborne Tennis Complex with 8 asphalt tennis courts g. Storage structure and tennis service shop h. Perimeter walking trail (8' wide asphalt) i. Open grass with mature shade trees j. Large parking lot along western boundary Adjacent Land Use — This park is mainly located in a commercial area. To the north of the park are the Diamond Court apartments. Along the park's eastern boundary are railroad tracks, and to the west and south are commercial businesses. Park Evaluation — This large community park boasts a variety of active recreational activities and amenities. A refrigerated ice skating rink, and concrete skating rink are fairly unique park amenities not commonly found in municipal parks in this area and anchor this park. These skating rinks are in fairly good shape with the exception of the perimeter safety fence. The fence has some exposed sharp edges which could present a safety issue. A PVC coated chain link fence replacement should be considered. Also, additional bleachers and seating opportunities for spectators should be provided. There are three (3) ball fields in excellent shape that all have skinned infields and outfield warning tracks. The Osborne Tennis facility is located at the park's north east corner and is in excellent condition. The site's parking is mainly located along the entire western boundary of the park. The parking stalls are not striped which could create confusion and safety concerns during large events. Adding striped parking stalls will help maximize the number of parking spaces and provide safer F edestrian and vehicular travel. Many of the park amenities do not have ADA connection to the parking lot. The large perimeter looped walking trail is in good shape, but could use park benches placed along the route. A community park of this size could use additional pavilions, and covered picnic areas. Shrub beds could be added to help beautify and remove some of the large expanses of turf and water requirements. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 8 2.1.6 Chase Park: (0.8 Acre Neighborhood Park) 4559 Pinewood Avenue • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. 1 bench c. Open grass d. 2 trees, 1 deciduous and 1 evergreen e. Park connects to Cotant Park to the east Adjacent Land Use — This small prototypical neighborhood park is mostly surrounded by single-family homes with an irrigation canal running along the park's southern boundary. Park Evaluation - This grassed park is in excellent condition. The playground structure is the only active park amenity. This park does touch Cotant Park to the east, but does not have an ADA pedestrian connection. The park's proximity to the canal and possible future trail along the canal would make this small park an ideal candidate for a trailhead with possible restrooms and water filling station. Parking for a possible future trailhead here could be accommodated by street side parking, or at the nearby Cotant Park. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 9 2.1.7 Cotant Park: (21.1 Acre Community Park) 625 Victor Avenue • Amenities include: a. 6 ball fields with skinned infields. Fields are sleeved to allow for temporary fencing to accommodate joint use with open field sports, etc. b. Large asphalt slab with full court basketball & 4 tennis courts (rough condition) c. Half -court basketball (asphalt) d. Grass volleyball court e. Large decorative memorial gazebo f. Restroom / concession building centrally located g. Small pavilion with picnic tables h. Recently demolished playground that needs to be replaced i. Perimeter walking trail (8' wide asphalt) j. On street parking along park's north & east boundary. Isolated parking lot at southeast corner of park k. Open grass with mature trees Adjacent Land Use — This large community park is ideally situated within an older established neighborhood, and is surrounded on all four sides with single- family homes. The park's immediate southern boundary is an irrigation canal. Park Evaluation — This parks main function is ball field complex. There are six (6) fields total all with skinned infields, and varying base path lengths, and distances to the outfield fences. Four fields are in a "wheel & spoke" pattern with a central concession and restroom facility. The interior asphalt walkways and bleacher pads that service this area are in rough shape, and soon will need to be replaced. Consider replacing with concrete. The lone two ball fields have no ADA connection to the parking lots, or other ball fields and park amenities. In addition, the picnic pavilion at the northwest corner of the park has no ADA accessible routes. An ADA pedestrian evaluation plan should be conducted for this community park, and ADA pedestrian pathways should be installed. During the time of this evaluation the asphalt tennis courts, basketball court, and nearby playground appeared to be under construction. These amenities should be replaced. The perimeter walking trail is in good shape, but could use additional benches and shade trees. Consider replacing the turf between the perimeter trail and park boundary with drip irrigation and shrub beds. This will help to beautify the park and reduce water requirements. The gravel parking lot at the south east corner of the park could be paved and striped to increase parking spaces and safety between vehicles and pedestrians. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 10 2.1.8 Dalton Park: (0.5 Acre Neighborhood Park) 400 Idealya Lane • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. 1 bench c. Open grass d. 2 trees Adjacent Land Use — This very small half -acre park is bordered on the north, east, and west sides with single-family homes, and to the south by an irrigation canal Park Evaluation — This park is typical of many of the existing City parks. It contains a playground, 1 bench, a couple of trees, and no picnic tables or shrubs. The existing amenities are in very good shape, but the park could use some updating. This could be achieved very __WW simply by adding shrub beds throughout the park to add color and beauty. These shrub beds could be mulched with bark mulch, or rock mulch to minimize maintenance requirements. The turf area would be reduced by these plant beds, and drip irrigation could be installed that would reduce water usage. Also, ADA pathways could be added to link the nearby sidewalk with the park amenities. 2.1.9 Espie Park: (0.9 Acre Neighborhood Park) 692 Darris Street • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. Small picnic pavilion c. 3 picnic tables d. 1 bench e. Open grass with trees Adjacent Land Use — This small "L" shaped neighborhood park is located in a developing neighborhood of single-family homes. Located within this park's boundary is a new City water tank. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 11 Park Evaluation — Espie Park in its current state is a "prototypical" neighborhood park, and is in very good condition. The City is currently installing a new water tank here, and has plans to create a new park and municipal water education themed park on this site (see Espie Park Water Education Center Concept Masterplan in this Plan). Once completed the newly renovated park will be 4.25 acres in size. 2.1.10 Heartland Park: (2.2 Acre Neighborhood Park) 967 Stripes Road • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. Small picnic pavilion c. Half -court basketball (concrete) d. Open grass with evergreen tree screen above ravine Adjacent Land Use — Heartland Park is bordered on the north, east and west with single-family homes, and to the north a very large drainage ravine. Park Evaluation — This park is a typical neighborhood park for the City of Chubbuck. What's here is in great shape. However, a park of this size needs more amenities. The park's size would allow for additional amenities to be added increasing the park's use and appeal. These amenities should be linked to the street side parking with ADA accessible routes. Plant beds with drip r irrigation could be added to help beautify and add needed shade. The nearby drainage could be utilized to possibly add a "nature" themed play area that utilizes the slopes and natural vegetation in this area. Additional park benches could be placed along a new looped ADA trail that would allow users to enjoy the magnificent views visible in all directions from this elevated park site. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 12 2.1.11 Heritage Park: (2.9 Acre Neighborhood Park) 1051 Pennsylvania Avenue • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. Pavilion c. 4 picnic tables d. 3 Benches e. Half -court basketball (asphalt) f. Perimeter walking trail (8' wide asphalt) g. Large elevated mound (grassed) for winter sledding, etc. h. 15 -stall parking lot at park's south end i. Open grass with mature shade trees Adjacent Land Use - This rectangular shaped park is surrounded on all four sides by single-family homes. Park Evaluation - This is a very nice older park located in an established neighborhood. The trees are large and mature and add lots of shade. Central to this park is a large grassed hill that can be used for winter sledding, or summer ice blocking, etc. The park has an asphalt walking trail that e loops the park, and provides connection to the adjacent homes. - Additional benches could be placed along a trail of this length. The 15 - stall parking lot at the park's south end is in good shape with ADA = - parking and accessibility to park amenities. There are several portable potties servicing this park that should be replaced with a new permanent restroom facility. Additional shrub beds with drip irrigation would help to beautify and reduce maintenance and water requirements. 2.1.12 Homestead Park: (2.6 Acre Neighborhood Park) 715 Dell Road • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & wood mulch surfacing) Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 13 b. Pavilion c. 4 picnic tables d. 1 bench e. Full -court basketball (asphalt) f. Grass Volleyball Court g. Perimeter trail (8' wide asphalt) h. Open grass with mix of trees Adjacent Land Use — This long narrow park is surrounded on all four sides by newer single-family homes, and is serviced by several streets and cul-de-sacs. Park Evaluation — Homestead Park is a very nice newer park located in a developing neighborhood. The layout of the park allows for excellent connection to the nearby homes, and the road layouts provide excellent vehicular access. There are a wide variety of park amenities that are all in very good condition. The lawn and plant material are in good condition. Additional trees, and shrubs would help to add interest and beauty to the park. Also, a permanent restroom building should be considered for a park this size. There is no visible park sign. 2.1.13 Mary Harker Park: (1.3 Acre Neighborhood Park) 5110 Kay Street • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. Half -court basketball (asphalt) c. 1 bench d. Open grass with trees Adjacent Land Use — This "L" -shaped park is surrounded on all four sides by established single-family homes. Park Evaluation — Mary Harker Park is an older park that is beginning to show some age. There are two (2) playground structures that are nearing the end of their safety cycle. Rust and faded plastic are indications that these play structures should be replaced. There are no visible park benches in the entire park. Benches should be provided at a minimum close to the playgrounds. There is no pavilion, or covered picnic structures in this park. Also, there are no visible picnic tables in this park. There are no ADA connections to park amenities. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 14 2.1.14 Jerry Rowland Park: (2.2 Acre Neighborhood Park) 405 Hampton Avenue • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. Small picnic pavilion c. 4 picnic tables d. 1 bench e. Half -court basketball (asphalt) f. Grass volleyball court g. Elevated mound (grassed) for winter sledding, etc. h. 12 -stall parking lot at park's southeast edge i. Trail connector spurs to north and south neighborhoods j. Open grass with a mix of trees Adjacent Land Use — This prototypical neighborhood park is bordered on the north, south and east sides by single-family homes, and to the west by railroad tracks. Park Evaluation — This is a very nice neighborhood park with added interest due to the park's undulating topography. Central to the park is a grassed mound approximately 20' tall for winter and summer fun. The perimeter looped walking trail has excellent connection and tie-ins to the neighborhood and 12 -stall parking lot. The park has a nice mixture of evergreen and deciduous trees placed throughout the park. The small pavilion and play structure are in fair condition. Additional picnic tables and benches could be placed along the walking path. Shrub beds could replace some of the turf to minimize watering requirements, and add beauty and additional interest to this efficient park. 2.1.15 Larry Miller Park: (2.3 Acre Neighborhood Park) 801 Alpine Avenue • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. Half -court basketball (asphalt) c. Perimeter trail (8' wide asphalt) with some benches d. 5 -stall parking lot at park's northeast edge e. Open grass with mix of trees Adjacent Land Use — This "L" -shaped park is located in a single-family neighborhood with I-86 running along the park's southern boundary. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 15 Park Evaluation — Like several of the City neighborhood parks this site also serves as a storm water management site for the surrounding area. On the day of this site evaluation the grass area was very wet and saturated. In the photo below tire tracks are visible caused by a stuck maintenance vehicle when it encountered the soggy lawn. In addition, due to the wet ground several trees along the perimeter trail have settled and are leaning. The trail is also rutted and settled due to the wet 1 ad% - ground. This wet condition may only be an occasional concern during spring melt and heavy rains, but it is LARRY MI engineer recommended that a licensed civil LAR CITY PARK engineer examine the site for drainage issues. The perimeter looped walking trail connects the park to the surrounding neighborhoods, and streets. There are no visible benches, or picnic tables in the park. The park has good visibility from the interstate, but visibility from the nearby streets and neighborhood is difficult. A landscape park entrance feature could help potential users find this hidden park. 2.1.16 Long Park: (1.4 Acre Neighborhood Park) 550 Thomas Street • Amenities include: a. Park is underdevelopment with only 1 bench & landscaping b. Open grass area was recently hydro -seeded c. A mix of trees have been recently planted around the park Adjacent Land Use — This brand new park is surrounded on all four sides by a developing single-family home neighborhood. Park Evaluation — Currently, this park is underdeveloped. The only amenity is a single park bench at the end of a small sidewalk surrounded by a few shrubs and trees. The park appears to be tiered to provide some storm water management. A few additional trees have been planted throughout the park. The grass has recently been hydro -seeded and is filling in. The grass has some bare spots and weedy areas. These areas will need to be watched and repaired as needed to ensure a healthy thick stand of grass is achieved. Parking for this park is available on -street. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 16 2.1.17 Mary's Park: (4.3 Acre Neighborhood Park) 854 Washburn Drive • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. Pavilion c. 4 picnic tables d. 2 benches e. Half -court basketball (asphalt) f. Tennis -court (asphalt) — striped for pickleball g. Perimeter trail (8' wide asphalt) h. Open grass with mature trees i. Large drainage ravine with nature trails Adjacent Land Use — Mary's Park is located in an established neighborhood, and bordered on the south, east and west sides by single family homes. On the north border is a very large drainage ravine. Park Evaluation — This neighborhood park is packed with amenities. In addition to the many activities available to park visitors this park also enjoys spectacular views in all directions. The park is older, but is in fairly good shape. The asphalt tennis courts and basketball court are in good shape. The tennis court does lack a sidewalk connection to the gate opening. Also, there is no ADA connection to the picnic pavilion, or playground benches. The park has a nice mix of mature shade and evergreen trees. 2.1.18 Park Meadows Park: (8.2 Acre Neighborhood Park) 4765 Galena Avenue • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. 2 benches c. Multi -parcel park that serves as a community grassed storm detention facility d. Trail connection (8' wide asphalt) with some benches e. Open grass with mix of trees Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 17 Adjacent Land Use — Park Meadows Park is a multi -parcel park that serves as a neighborhood park and storm water control facility for the Park Meadows Neighborhood which is comprised of single family homes. Park Evaluation — This multi -parcel park serves as a neighborhood grassed storm water detention facility linked by an 8' wide asphalt trail. Besides the trail the only other active park amenity includes a playground off of Galena Avenue on the west side of the road. The playground has a mix of toys for a variety of ages with two (2) park benches. The trail connects all of the different park parcels and is mostly located behind the nearby single-family homes. A few trees have been planted along the trail and throughout the park. Additional plant material and shrub beds could be added to beautify and enhance park's identity. These strategically placed shrub beds would replace some of the large .� expanses of grass which would help reduce maintenance and watering requirements. Benches should be placed along the - trail along with additional Ran W shade trees. The park also needs signage. Except for the parcel that contains the playground it is difficult to distinguish this site as a neighborhood park. Additional park amenities such as pavilions, picnic tables, exercise stations, frisbee golf, etc. would also help to create identity, and increase park use and user enjoyment. 2.1.19 Sample Park: (0.7 Acre Neighborhood Park) 5415 Stuart Avenue • Amenities include: a. Playground with small play structure & wood mulch surfacing b. Open grass are with tow (2) trees Adjacent Land Use — This very small neighborhood park is surrounded by single-family homes on all four sides. Park Evaluation — This small park which is in excellent condition also serves as a storm water detention basin with an outlet control structure. The park's lone amenity is a small playground and two trees. There are no spectator benches at the playground, or ADA Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 18 access from the nearby sidewalk to the playground. Additional park amenities could be added to this park to increase park use and user enjoyment. Shrub beds and additional trees could be added to further beautify this park. 2.1.20 Stuart Park: (4.9 Acre Neighborhood Park) 5161 Stuart Avenue • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure (concrete curb & wood mulch surfacing) b. 2 small pavilions c. 4 covered picnic tables d. Water splash pad e. Restroom building f. Perimeter trail (8' wide concrete) g. City well -house h. Parking along park's north & east edge with a 16 -stall parking lot at south edge i. Decorative shrub planter beds placed throughout park j. Open grass with mix of young trees Adjacent Land Use — This park is located in an older, established neighborhood with single family homes located at the park's south, and east boundaries. An LDS Chapel is located to the north of this park, and the Fort Hall Canal runs along the park's western boundary. Park Evaluation — Stuart Park was recently completely renovated in 2017, and is technically classified a neighborhood park. However, the newly renovated park boasts the areas first splash pad which brings users to this park from around the community. In addition, this park is often used by the City to house community events such as the Friday Night Movie in the Park. The park and its amenities are in excellent condition due to its recent renovation. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 19 2.1.21 Sunset West Park: (1.6 Acre Neighborhood Park) 1360 Jenna Drive • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure (rubber curb & wood mulch surfacing) b. 1 bench c. Mounded play area that serves as a community grassed storm detention facility d. Trail connection to playground from Kirsten Drive (5' wide concrete) e. Open grass Adjacent Land Use — This park is located in a newer subdivision Sunset West and is surrounded on all four sides by single-family homes. Park Evaluation — Sunset West Park is defined by a series of berms, swales and depressions. This undulating topography is stabilized with all grass. A few trees are planted near the park's lone amenity, a new playground structure. The park is hard to`. distinguish as a neighborhood park, and no park sign was visible. The main entrance to _ the park appears to be off of Kiersten Drive. A park sign, or _ several signs would help to improve park visibility and use. The grassed berms and interesting topography could be further enhanced with long linear shrub and rock mulch beds. Additional amenities such as ADA pathways, picnic areas, benches, etc. would further help to distinguish this site as a neighborhood park. 2.1.22 Tree Valley Park: (0.8 Acre Neighborhood Park) 810 Garden Drive • Amenities include: a. Playground with play structure & swing set (concrete curb & gravel surfacing) b. Pavilion c. 2 picnic tables Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 20 d. 2 benches e. Half -court basketball (asphalt) f. Open grass with mix of trees Adjacent Land Use — Tree Valley Park is surrounded by a developing single-family home neighborhood. Its location is in close proximity to a drainage area and large mature trees. Park Evaluation — This neighborhood park is similar to the other prototypical parks in Chubbuck with similar amenities. Additional landscaping and shrub beds with drip irrigation would help to beautify this park while reducing grass, water use and maintenance requirements. ADA connection from the street to the park amenities should be provided. Also, the basketball court is beginning to crack creating a safety issue that needs to be repaired. The lawn area and trees are in excellent condition. Playground Surfacing Note: Many of the existing playgrounds in the City do not meet current safety surfacing standards and ADA requirements. For example many of the existing playgrounds as identified in this master plan have "pea -gravel" surfacing. This surfacing does not meet current ADA accessibility requirements. Also, "pea -gravel" surfacing is no longer an acceptable surface for any play structure that have a potential fall height of greater than five (5) feet. A popular playground surfacing that does meet current ADA and safety guidelines in sterilized wood chip mulch such as Fibar Playground Surfacing. Other acceptable playground surfacing materials include crump - rubber, rubber tiles, and poured in place rubber surfacing. These compliant rubber surfacing products are more expensive than the wood chip surfacing material. It is recommended that the City has all of their existing playgrounds evaluated by a Certified Playground Safety Inspector to help develop a plan and strategy to bring all of the City's playgrounds in to compliance with current accessibility and safety standards. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 21 3.0 COMMUNITY SURVEY To better determine the community's needs and desires pertaining to park and recreation facilities a joint community survey was designed by Jackson Land Design, VCBO Architecture, and the City of Chubbuck. The main objective of the Chubbuck City Community Parks and Recreation Survey (Survey) was to gain an understanding of how the community felt about its current park system, and what facility additions or improvements to existing facilities were desired. A key component of the joint survey was to determine if the residents of Chubbuck would support a new Community Recreation Center. VCBO Architecture is currently preparing a Feasibility Study (Study) for the proposed Community Recreation Center, and additional information regarding specific questions pertaining to the proposed center can be found in VCBO's Study. The Survey was distributed to residents of Chubbuck in various ways. In December 2017, 600 households in Chubbuck were randomly selected to receive through the U.S. Mail a copy of the Survey. These 600 residents were asked to complete the Survey and return it to City Hall by December 31, 2017. In addition, the Survey was made available for residents to give their input on the City's website and Facebook page during this same time period. Response to the Survey was good and we received approximately 450 completed surveys during the 30 -day period. Respondents gave tremendous insight into the pulse of the community and what specific types of facilities the community would support to meet their current and future park and recreational needs. The survey results (Section 3.1) do not include all of the additional and personal comments some participants chose to give; however, this information can be provided upon request. Results from the survey along with NRPA community standards for park facilities and input from City staff will be used in master planning future park facilities for the City of Chubbuck. 3.1 Survey Results (see attached Chubbuck City Community Parks and Recreation Survey Summary) Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 22 CHUBBUCK CITY COMMUNITY PARKS & RECREATION SURVEY SUMMARY Chubbuck, Idaho ARCHITECTURE PARKS AND RECREATION Questions and Response Summary VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE Generally speaking, how would you rate the quality of life in the City of Chubbuck, as compared to other cities of comparable size? Much better Somewhat better About the same Somewhat worse Much worse VCBO AR CH ITECTVRE In your opinion, are the services you receive from the City of Chubbuck worth the taxes you pay? (Consider police, fire, parks, sanitation, streets, water, etc...) Definitely yes Probably yes Might or might not Probably not Definitely not VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE How important is public recreation and parks to you at the present time? Extremely important C Very important Moderately important Slightly important �1 Not at all important VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE Do City of Chubbuck park and recreation facilities meet your family's recreation needs? Definitely yes Probably yes Might or might not Probably not Definitely not _ Jig i i� ,• � • i.i � .. VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE Do you have a City of Chubbuck park in your neighborhood? Yes Maybe No VCBO ARCHITECTURE From your perspective, does the City of Chubbuck have enough parks to serve the community? Definitely yes Probably yes i` Might or might not Probably not Definitely not VCBO A R CHI TECT LIKE The City of Chubbuck has a number of parks. We would like to know which of these you are aware of and use. Please drag and drop the facility listed on the left into the appropriate box, based on how often you or a family member uses the facility, or if you were unaware of the facility. Use often 0Armstrong Park (8 37 Boyd Street) (3%) 0 Bicentennial Park (300 Abraham Street) (B°lo) BistIine Park (701 East Chubbuck Road) (290) Briarwood Park (Eagle Road & Briarwood Street) (0°10) CapelI Park (5245 Park Lawn Drive) (11°10) Ch ase Park [4559 Pinewood Avenue] (31)/0) Cotant Park (825 Victor Avenue) (25%) 0 Dalton Park (400 Idealya Lane) (1%) 0 Espie Park (692 Darris Street) (2010) 0 Homestead Park (715 Dell Road) (4%) Mary Harker Park (5110 Kay Street) (1%) Heartland Park (967 Stripes Road) (1%) Heritage Park (1451 Pennsylvania Avenue) (4%) Jerry Rowland Park (405 Hampton Avenue) (201o) 0 Larry Miller Park (406 Hampton Avenue) (1%) 0 Long Park (550 Thomas Street) (0%) 0 Mary's Park (B54 Washburn Drive) (2010) 0 Park Meadows Park (4765 Galena Avenue) (1%) Sample Park (5415 Stuart Avenue) (6010) Stuart Park (6161 Stuart Avenue) (1 B%) III Sunset West Park (1360 Jena Drive) (3010) Tree Valley Park (8 10 Garden Drive) (11 %) VCDO ARCHITECTURE The City of Chubbuck has a number of parks. We would like to know which of these you are aware of and use. Please drag and drop the facility listed on the left into the appropriate box, based on how often you or a family member uses the facility, or if you were unaware of the facility. Use occasionally �Armstrang Park (8 37 Boyd Street) (41/°) 0 Bicentennial Park (300 Abraham Street) (12010) Bistline Park (701 East Chubbuck Road) (8%) Capell Park (5246 Park Lawn drive) (811/6) Briarwood Park (Eagle Road & Briarwood Street) (2%) Chase Park (4559 Pinewood Avenue) (311/o) FCotant Park (525 Victor Avenue) (13% Dalton Park (400 Idealya Lane) (1%) 0 Espie Park (592 Darris Street) (Wo) 0 Homestead Park (715 Dell Road) (6%) Mary Harker Park (5110 Kay Street) (2%) Heartland Park (967 Stripes Road) (2%) Heritage Park (10 51 Pennsylvania Avenue) (4%) Jerry Rowland Park (405 Hlampton Avenue) (1%) 0 Larry Miller Park (405 Hampton Avenue) (1%) 0 Long Park (550 Thomas Street) (1%) Mary's Park (854 Washburn Drive) (3%) 0 Park Meadows Park (4765 Galena Avenue) (3%) Sample Park (5415 Stuart Avenue) (4%) Stuart Park (5161 Stuart Avenu e) (1b%) UCBD Sunset West Park (1360 Jena Drive) (2%) Tree VaIIey Park (8 10 Garden Drive) (1%) l ARCHITECTURE The City of Chubbuck has a number of parks. We would like to know which of these you are aware of and use. Please drag and drop the facility listed on the left into the appropriate box, based on how often you or a family member uses the facility, or if you were unaware of the facility. Never use NArmstrong Park (837 Boyd street) (6%) 0 Bicentennial Park (3 00 Abraham Street) (5°l0) Bistline Park (701 East Chubbuck Road) (6%) Briarwood Park (Eagle Road & Briarwood Street) (6%) CapelI Park (5246 Park Lawn Drive) (51%) 6 Chase Park (4559 Pinewood Avenue) (5%) Cotant Park (625 Victor Avenue) (211/0) 0 Dalton Park (40D Idealya Lane) (4%) 0 Espie Park (692 Darris Street) (6010) 0 Homestead Park (715 Dell Road) (611/fl) Mary Harker Park (5110 Kay Street) (5%) Heartland Park (967 Stripes Road) (5010) Heritage Park (1451 Pennsylvania Avenue) (511/0) , Jerry Rowland Park (405 Hampton Avenue) (40/o) 0 Larry Miller Park (405 Hampton Avenue) (4%) 0 Long Park (550 Thomas Street) (4%) 0 Mary's Park (854 Washburn Drive) (5%) 0 Park Meadows Park (4765 Galena Avenue) (5%) Sample Park (5415 Stuart Avenue) (5%) Stuart Park (5161 Stuart Avenue) (2%') Sunset West Park (1360 Jena Drive) (49{0) Tree Valley Park (8 10 Garden Drive) (31/16) VCBTO The City of Chubbuck has a number of parks. We would like to know which of these you are aware of and use. Please drag and drop the facility listed on the left into the appropriate box, based on how often you or a family member uses the facility, or if you were unaware of the facility. Have not heard of NArmstrong Park (837 Boyd Street) (41/6) 0 Bicentennial Park (300 Abraham Street) (11%) Bistline Park (701 East Chubbuck Road) (29#o) Briarwood Park (Eagle Road & Briarwood Street) (51%) Capell Park (5245 Park Lawn Drive) (3%) a Chase Park (4559 Pinewood Avenue) (5%) 0 Cotant Park (625 Victor Avenue) (1%) 0 Dalton Park (400 Idealya Lane) (61/a) 0 Espie Park (692 Darris Street) (5°%) 0 Homestead Park (715 Dell Road) (3%) j Mary Harker Park (5110 Kay Street) (61/6) Heartland Park (967 Stripes Road) (51'4) Heritage Park (1x51 Pennsylvania Avenue) (50/0) Jerry Rowland Park (405 Hampton Avenue) (61/1o) 0 Larry Miller Park (405 Hampton Avenue) (7°%) 0 Long Park (550 Thomas Street) (7°%) 0 Mary's Park (854 Washburn Drive) (6%) 0 Park Meadows Park (4765 Galena Avenue) (5°%) Stuart Park (5161 Stuart Avenue) (1%) Sample Park (5415 Stuart Avenue) (4°%) Sunset West Park (1360 Jena Drive) (6%) Tree Valley Park (814 Garden Drive) W*) VCBO ARCHITECTURE In your opinion, should the City of Chubbuck provide additional outdoor recreational facilities? Yes No 0 50 100 131 150 200 250 2 C-0 VCBO A R CHI TECT LIKE If yes, which of the following outdoor activities need to be provided? (Check all that apply) Picnic areas with covered areas Hiking trails Equestrian trails - Playground equipment Softball diamonds Baseball diamonds Open play fields Volleyball courts Soccer fields Golf course Nature center Tennis courts Basketball courts (standard) Basketball courts (lower) Biking trails Mountain biking trails Horseshoe pits Skateboarding area Barbeque grills Rock climbing area other VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE This question has to do with your interest in outdoor recreation activities. During the past year... - Current Frequency 1 Relaxing in a Park 27.97% 99 22.88% 81 15.82% 56 23.45% 83 9.89% 35 354 2 Picnicking 13.35% 45 16.62% 56 13.06% 44 41.54% 140 15.43% 52 337 3 Using Playground Equipment 34.30% 118 16.57% 57 12.21% 42 15.99% 55 20.93% 72 344 4 Team Sports 27.58% 91 6.36% 21 11.21% 37 12.73% 42 42.12% 139 330 5 Golfing 5.10% 16 4.78% 15 7.32% 23 11.15% 35 71.66% 225 314 6 Playing Tennis 4.49% 14 5.45% 17 3.21% 10 15.38% 48 71.47% 223 312 7 Riding a Bicycle 28.41% 98 21.16% 73 10.72% 37 17.97% 62 21.74% 75 345 8 Off-Roading 7.72% 24 5.79% 18 7.07% 22 14.79% 46 64.63% 201 311 9 Skateboarding 2.29% 7 3.27% 10 2.29% 7 2.61% 8 89.54% 274 306 10 11 Camping Walking or Hiking 7.27% 46.84% 24 163 11.52% 19.25% 38 67 20.00% 13.51% 66 47 29.70% 10.92% 98 38 31.52% 9.48% 104 33 330 348 12 Nature Walks / Studying 20.25% 66 13.19% 43 16.87% 55 20.86% 68 28.83% 94 = 13 Horseback Riding 1.32% 4 2.30% 7 2.63% 8 9.21% 28 84.54% 257 304 14 Boating 6.07% 19 7.35% 23 8.95% 28 19.49% 61 58.15% 182 313 15 Swimming / Water Play 20.67% 68 21.88% 72 17.33% 57 20.06% 66 20.06% 66 329 16 Fishing / Hunting 7.69% 25 12.00% 39 16.62% 54 19.69% 64 44.00% 143 325 17 Barbecuing 27.52% 90 22.94% 75 15.29% 50 14.37% 47 19.88% 65 327 18 Other (specify) 20.00% 9 13.33% 6 2.22% 1 6.67% 3 57.78% 26 45 This question has to do with your interest in outdoor recreation activities. During the past year... - Future Frequency 1 2 Relaxing in a Park Picnicking 72.77% 69.86% 163 153 27.23% 30.14% 61 66 224 219 3 Using Playground Equipment 75.23% 161 24.77% 53 214 4 Team Sports 82.35% 168 17.65% 36 204 5 Golfing 82.41% 164 17.59% 35 199 6 Playing Tennis 80.93% 157 19.07% 37 194 7 Riding a Bicycle 58.14% 125 41.86% 90 215 8 Off-Roading 83.51% 162 16.49% 32 194 9 Skateboarding 90.10% 173 9.90% 19 192 10 Camping 68.87% 146 31.13% 66 212 11 Walking or Hiking 60.99% 136 39.01% 87 223 12 Nature Walks / Studying 67.13% 145 32.87% 71 216 13 Horseback Riding 86.73% 170 13.27% 26 196 14 Boating 80.60% 162 19.40% 39 201 15 Swimming / Water Play 62.96% 136 37.04% 80 216 16 Fishing / Hunting 76.30% 161 23.70% 50 211 17 Barbecuing 70.89% 151 29.11% 62 213 18 Other (specify) 82.93% 34 17.07% 7 41 VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE We would like to know, in general, what might prevent your participation in recreation activities? Please indicate your agreement or disagreement with each of the following statements, as they apply to you. 1 You do not have enough time. 14.79% 54 34.52% 126 22.47% 82 18.08% 66 10.14% 37 365 2 You do not have enough 5.10% 18 25.21% 89 21.81% 77 32.86% 116 15.01% 53 353 energy. 3 It is too expensive. 6.11% 22 25.28% 91 22.78% 82 25.56% 92 20.28% 73 360 4 You do not have transportation 2.82% 10 3.66% 13 8.17% 29 28.17% 100 57.18% 203 355 available. 5 You are not aware of available 6.94% 25 34.17% 123 25.28% 91 18.89% 68 14.72% 53 360 facilities. 6 You do not understand how to 2.23% 8 20.95% 75 21.79% 78 27.65% 99 27.37% 98 358 use the available equipment or facilities 7 You are not interested in 3.64% 13 12.32% 44 17.93% 64 30.25% 108 35.85% 128 357 available recreation opportunities 8 You do not have anyone to go 3.64% 13 14.57% 52 22.97% 82 29.13% 104 29.69% 106 357 with 9 You are satisfied with your 11.85% 43 30.03% 109 26.72% 97 23.97% 87 7.44% 27 363 current activities and interests 10 You do not like organized 4.79% 17 8.73% 31 25.35% 90 36.62% 130 24.51% 87 355 activities VCBO We would like to know how you feel about your community, its parks and recreation system, and other related items in the following statements. 1 Sports and recreation are 46.34% 171 40.38% 149 10.84% 40 1.63% 6 0.81% 3 369 important to me and/or my family 2 1 am satisfied with the recreation 10.87% 40 33.42% 123 31.52% 116 21.20% 78 2.99% 11 368 opportunities in my community. 3 There are sufficient opportunities 14.75% 54 34.70% 127 24.86% 91 21.31% 78 4.37% 16 366 for children. 4 There are sufficient sports and 10.14% 37 23.84% 87 31.51% 115 26.85% 98 7.67% 28 365 recreation activities for teens. 5 There are sufficient recreation 7.97% 29 22.80% 83 32.97% 120 30.49% 111 5.77% 21 364 opportunities for adults. 6 There are sufficient recreation 6.03% 22 11.23% 41 50.41% 184 22.74% 83 9.59% 35 365 opportunities for seniors. 7 There are sufficient parks in my 23.42% 85 43.80% 159 18.46% 67 12.40% 45 1.93% 7 363 community. 8 The parks in my community are 28.26% 104 42.93% 158 16.58% 61 8.42% 31 3.80% 14 368 well maintained. 9 There are sufficient playgrounds 22.38% 81 40.06% 145 14.09% 51 17.40% 63 6.08% 22 362 in my area. 10 There are sufficient play fields in 21.70% 79 35.71% 130 22.53% 82 15.93% 58 4.12% 15 364 my community. 11 1 would like more information about 23.12% 83 38.44% 138 27.30% 98 6.96% 25 4.18% 15 359 activities offered by the Department of Parks and Recreation. VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE Would you support a network of bicycle and pedestrian trails that would connect parks and other recreational facilities to neighborhoods, to the center of town, and possibly to other neighboring communities? Yes Maybe No i6i I XDLG .,� I- _..I I II VCBO ARCHITECTURE If available, would you use a trail network as an alternative mode of transportation, rather than your vehicle for some trips or activities? Yes Maybe No 74 6o ago 0 20 40 00 B0 100 120 1-00 100 1B0 200 224 244 VCBO ARCHITECTURE COMMUNITY ACTIVITY & RECREATION Questions and Response Summary VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE VCBO ARCHI TECTVRE Are you or other members of your household currently using any recreation, sports, fitness or aquatic facilities, including facilities in your home? Yes No 107 0 50 100 150 200 25C- 2CC• VCBO A R CHI TECT LIKE From the following list, please check ALL of the recreation, sports, fitness, and aquatic facilities you and members of your household currently use. Private fitness clubs i Church facilities Other public recreation centers _ Ross Park Aquatic Complex Pocatello Community Recreation Center Recreation programs in schools � Idaho State _ University facilities iL _ + , Home fitness None, do not use facilities VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE Which ONE of the following statements best represent how the recreation, sports, fitness and aquatic facilities that you are currently using meet your needs? Meets all of your needs Meets some of yourneeds Does not meet any of your needs MI VCBO AR CH ITECTVRE Please select the activities or space types below that would best meet the needs of Chubbuck residents. Please note that you can select multiple options. (Once you have selected an image it will turn green. If you want to deselect that image, click on the same image two more times.) # Question Dislike Neutral Like 1 Outdoor Pool Facility 0.85% 51.41% 47.74% 2 After School Program 0.28% 62.99% 36.72% Area 3 Indoor Recreation 0.00% 36.16% 63.84% Center 4 Indoor Community 0.00% 56.50% 43.50% Activity Center 5 Indoor Pool Fun 0.56% 31.36% 68.08% 6 Indoor Pool - Fitness 0.56% 43.50% 55.93% VCBO A RCH ITECT LIKE Listed below are various specific community activity and recreation features. For each one, please indicate whether you think each of these features is very strongly needed, somewhat needed or not needed in the community. 1 Preschool program space P5 After school program space Youth and teen program space 6 Arts and crafts rooms [7 Senior citizen activity space 15.06% 50 32.83% 109 26.81% 89 25.30% 84 332 Iq 29.82% 99 38.86% 129 14.76% 49 16.57% 55 332 39.16% 130 37.05% 123 8.73% 29 15.06% 50 332 19.39% 64 38.18% 126 22.42% 74 20.00% 66 330 29.17% 98 37.50% 126 11.01% 37 22.32% 75 336 8 Child care area for children of parents using 34.64% 115 35.24% 117 14.46% 48 community facilities 15.66% 52 332 l 9 Gymnasiums for basketball, volleyball, etc 41.79% 140 36.42% 122 12.84% 43 8.96% 30 335 10 Dance rooms for tap & ballet, ballroom, and 21.08% 70 40.06% 133 23.19% 77 15.66% 52 332 square dancing 11 Multipurpose space (with kitchen) for classes, 31.83% 106 39.04% 130 17.12% 57 12.01% 40 333 meetings, receptions, and birthday parties 12 Aerobics I fitness space 31.02% 103 48.19% 160 12.05% 40 8.73% 29 332 13 Weight room cardiovascular equipment area 33.53% 111 41.09% 136 15.71% 52 9.67% 32 331 14 Racquetball handball I wallyball courts 32.42% 107 38.79% 128 18.48% 61 10.30% 34 330 or swimming I aquatics center 66.16% 219 20.85% 69 8.46% 28 4.53% 15 331 or running walking track L 53.13% 178 28.96% 97 12.24% 41 5.67% 19 335 k climbing wall 33.84% 112 34.74% 115 19.34% 64 12.08% 40 331 18 Gymnastics area 23.56% 78 38.67% 128 22.05% 73 15.71% 52 331 VCBO ARCHITECTURE Please rank the features listed below from most important(1)toleastimportant (17) b/ Clicking on each item and dragging it into the preferred location in the list. -7- 5-65 Y SO } = Q E =\ >1 m f o ® $ \ _o =_ \ k ° a) \ \ E - e / / M % E o § E / =� ao §e % 2 u� \ 00 m E f=7 _0 E 2 7 5 = b e% k o= - q 2 s o E E - E® m m s y y >= R CIO 0E 2� \\/ \ / ° \ �\ E $\ - m m \ F / $ ° ® E / E a 7= =5 m ES) / 2 \ E / \ E2 \f 2 / E f a § \ \ e 2 n § : \ e / - ( k CU \ k / < CU '§ 2 E E C./ CM k t ƒ s » o = CU f 2 e '3 4 \ = 0 O 2 = ) § ■ M -ea n ± K� za r771 E E E \ \ 2 ƒ_ 0 E 2 CU m / E \ E U E \ / VCBO Listed below are various specific AQUATIC features. For each one, please indicate whether you think each of the features is strongly needed, somewhat needed, or not needed in Chubbuck. 1 Area for swim lessons 67.57% 225 21.92% 73 8.11% 27 2.40% 8 333 2 A warm water family oriented swimming center 64.74% 213 22.80% 75 9.42% 31 3.04% 10 329 12.61% [leisure pool] with features such as slides, 6.01% 20 333 23.77% 77 34.57% 112 30.86% 100 10.80% lazy river, water sprays for children and zero 324 depth entry so you can walk into the pools Warm water area for therapeutic purposes 45.62% ' 151 34.44% 114 15.71% 52 4.23% 14 331 4 Competition pool for swim I dive team use 27.96% 92 39.82% 131 22.80% 75 9.42% 31 329 5 An area with deep water 35.95% 119 37.46% 124 18.13% 60 8.46% 28 331 6 Diving boards 7 Spa with raised temperature 1 8 Lanes for lap swimming 9 Dry sauna and steam room [ 10 Area for water fitness 31.21% 103 41.82% 138 20.30% 67 6.67% 22 330 34.25% 112 36.70% 120 20.80% 68 8.26% 27 327 42.94% 143 38.44% 128 12.61% 42 6.01% 20 333 23.77% 77 34.57% 112 30.86% 100 10.80% 35 324 44.38% 146 41.03% 135 9.73% 32 4.86% 16 329 tRk 91 � rt.- !Mi r III I .) (,e, , Please select up to TWO reasons you or members of your household would use an aquatic center. Aquatic classes Competitive L61, swimming Year-round recreation or leisure swimming Exercise -� I _...00j Therapeutic purposes �} .i, VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE New community activity and recreation spaces for Chubbuck could be designed to serve different groups of people. Please drag and drop each group into the appropriate box, based on how important it is to provide activity and recreation space for each group. Senior citizens Families Children Teenagers Young adults Adults 2C -C- 25C- Baa Very Important Somewhat Important ■ Not Important VCBO A R CHI TECT LIKE The cost of operating the recreation components will need to be covered by some user fees. Which ONE of the following would you prefer? Annual family pass Annual adult pass Pay per visit Don't know w; I'm not wiling to pay to use the center VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE How should the cost for OPERATING a new community activity and recreation center be paid for? Please select ONE option. 100% through taxes Taxes should pay the majority of the costs and fees from users the remaining costs Fees from users should pay the majority of the costs and taxes the remaining costs - 100% through user fees Don't know q, VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE Which ONE of the following statements best represents how often you think that you or other members of your household would visit a community activity and recreation center? Several times a week Once per week A few times a month Monthly Less than once a month Never VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE Construction and operations of the community recreation center would likely require property tax support in addition to user fees. Please check the MAXIMUM AMOUNT you would be willing to pay in property taxes PER YEAR to support a community recreation center. C $300 per year $240 - $288 per year $180 - $228 per I — — year $120 - $168 per , year Less than $120 per year H No property tax funding VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE Would you support a TAX INCREASE in a future election, of the dollar amount you indicated above, to be used to construct and operate a new community recreation center with the features your household prefers? Would support (50%) Might support (20%) Not sure (14%) Would not support (17%) I I I T I If ( IAS. III0 VCBO ARCHITECTURE DEMOGRAPHIC DATA Questions and Response Summary VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE Are you a current resident of Chubbuck City? Yes No im ] 50 100 150 200 250 VCBO A R CHI TECTVRE Counting yourself, how many people live in your household? Average — 4.18 people per household 24% of respondents had 2 people / household 10% had 3 people per household 21% had 4 people per household 17% had 5 people per household 14% had 6 people per household 14% had 7 or more people per household VCBO A R CHI TECT LIKE How many persons in your household (counting yourself) are? 1O0 — 50 — D— T 1J�nar 6 �baa.� uld FI -14 par -4 170 I i I I 1 1 20-24 2Er3dl 3544 46-E4 55-61 M or uear:S Yaws V6.31 913arG ysarG u1dai 0 sum VCBO ARCHITECTURE What is your gender? Male 124 Female 203 20 40 00 BO 100 120 140 160 1BO FOO 220 VCBO ARCHI TECTVRE CHUBBUCK CITY COMMUNITY PARKS & RECREATION SURVEY SUMMARY Chubbuck, Idaho ARCHITECTURE 4.0 PARK PROGRAMMING This section identifies national standards for the development of park facilities for communities as established by the NRPA. The NRPA has established these standards to help communities set guidelines for the type, size, proximity, and number of recreational facilities that should be provided for communities (see Table 4.0). These standards are national standards and are general in nature. The NRPA cautions communities that these standards are only guidelines, and it is up to the individual communities to adjust these standards to meet their individual recreational requirements. One such adjustment to consider is that the City of Chubbuck is ideally located in close proximity to numerous golf courses, state parks, county parks, national parks, and church fields and courts which all contribute to the recreational needs of the community. Based upon this, it might not be necessary for the City to provide these facilities in duplicate. In general, however, national standards are useful in developing recreation facility guidelines. Using the NRPA's standards, and keeping Chubbuck's unique characteristics in mind coupled with information gathered from the Community Survey, recommendations for recreational facility guidelines can begin to be established. Table 4.0 - NRPA Standards for Facility Development ACTIVITY/ RECOMMENDED RECOMMENDED RECOMMENDED NO. OF UNITS SERVICE LOCATION FACILITY SPACE SIZE AND ORIENTATION PER RADIUS NOTES REQUIREMENTS DIMENSIONS POPULATION Badminton 1,620 sq. ft. Singles - 17'x 44' Long axis north 1 per 5000 1/4 - V mile Usually in school, doubles - 20'x 44' to south recreation center, or church with 5' unobstructed facility. Safe walking or biking area on all sides Basketball 2400 - 3036 sq. ft. 46'- 50'x 84' Long axis north 1 per 5000 1/4 - V mile Same as badminton. Outdoor 1. Youth 5040 - 7280 sq. ft. 50'x 84' to south courts in neighborhood and 2. High School 5600 - 7980 sq. ft. 50' x 94' community parks, and in other 3. Collegiate with unobstructed park facilities. space on all sides Handball 800 sq. ft. for 4 wall, 20'x 40'- minimum of Long axis north to 1 per 20,000 15 - 30 minute 4 wall usually indoor as part of (3-4 wall) 1000 for 3 wall 10' to rear of 3 wall south. Front wall at travel time multi-purpose facility. 3 wall court. Minimum 20' north end. usually outdoors. over head clearance Tennis Minimum of 7,200 sq. 36'x 78' Long axis north to 1 court per 2000 1/4 - V mile Best in batteries of 2-4, located in ft. single court. 12' cleamnce on both south neighborhood park adjacent to (2 acres for complex) sides; 21' clearance on school. all sides Volleyball Minimum of 4,000 sq. 30'x 60'. Minimum 6' Long axis north to 1 court per 5000 1/4 - V mile Same as other court activities ft. clearance on all sides south Baseball 3.0 - 3.85 A minimum Baselines - 90' Locate home plate so 1 per 5000 1/4 - V mile Part of neighborhood complex. 1. Official Pitching distance - 60 pitcher is throwing Lighted fields part of a community W. Foul lines -min. across sun and batter Lighted - 1 per 30,000 complex. 320'. Center field -400+ not facing into it. Line from home plate 2. Little League 1.2 A minimum Baselines - 60' through pitcher's Pitching distance - 60' mound run east -north - Foul lines -200' east. Center field- 200'-250' Field Hockey Minimum 1.5A 180'x 300' with a Fall season- long axis 1 per 20,000 15 - 30 minute travel Usually part of sport complex or minimum of 10' northwest to southeast time adjacent to high school. clearance on all sides. For longer periods, north to south Football Minimum 1.5A 160'x 360' with a Same as field hockey 1 per 20,000 15 - 30 minutes travel Same as field hockey minimum of 10' time clearance on all sides Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 23 ACTIVITY/ RECOMMENDED RECOMMENDED RECOMMENDED NO. OF UNITS SERVICE LOCATION FACILITY SPACE SIZE AND ORIENTATION PER RADIUS NOTES REQUIREMENTS DIMENSIONS POPULATION Soccer 1.7 to 2.1 A 195' to 225'x 330' to Same as field hockey 1 per 10,000 1 - 2 miles Number of units depends on 360' with a 10' popularity. Youth soccer on small minimum clearance on fields adjacent to neighborhood all sides. parks. Golf -Driving Range 13.5A for minimum of 900'x 690' wide. Add Long axis south-west- 1 per 50,000 30 minutes travel time Part of golf course complex. As a 25 tees 12' width for additional northeast with golfer separate unit, may be privately tee. driving toward operated. northeast. 1/4 Mile Running 4.3A Overall width - 276' Long axis in sector 1 per 20,000 15 - 30 minute travel Usually part of high school, or in Track length - 600.02' from north to south to time community sports complex e.g. Track width for 8 to 4 north-west-south-east soccer, football etc. lanes is 32' with finish line at northerly end. Softball 1.5 to 2.OA Baselines - 60' Same as baseball 1 per 5,000 (if also 1/4 - % mile Slight difference in dimensions for Pitching distance - 46' used for youth 16" slow pitch. May also be used min 40'-women. Fast baseball) for baseball. pitch fields radius from plate -225' between foul lines. Slow pitch - 275' (men) 250' (women) Multiple Recreation 9,840 sq. ft. 120'x 80' Long axis of courts 1 per 10,000 1 - 2 miles Court (basketball, with primary use is volleyball, tennis) north-south Trails N/A Well defined head N/A 1 system per region N/A Connectivity is key. Trails should maximum of 10' width, connect to neighboring maximum average communities to neighborhoods to grade 5% not to exceed parks to the center of town. 15%. Capacity rural trails-40 hikers/day/mile. Urban trails-90 hikers/day/mile. Archery Range Minimum 30A 300' length x minimum Archer facing north + 1 per 50,000 30 minute travel time Part of a regional / metro park 10' wide between or -45 degrees complex. targets. Roped clear space on sides of range minimum of 30', clear space behind targets minimum of 90'x 45' with bunker. Combination Skeet and Minimum 30A All walks and Center line of length I per 50,000 30 minutes travel time Part of a regional / Trap Field structures occur within runs northeast- metro park complex. (8 station) an area approximately southwest with shooter 130' wide by 11 5'deep. facing northeast. Minimum cleared area contained within two superimposed segments with 100 yard radii Golf * Average length-vary Majority of holes on V to 1 hour travel time * 9-hole course can accommodate 1. Par 3 (18-Hole) * 50-60A 600-2,700 yards north-south axis. 350 people/day. * Average length- 2250 * 18-hole course can 2. 9-Hole standard * Minimum 50A yards * 1/25,000 accommodate 500-550- people a * Average length -6500 day. 3. 18-Hole Standard * Minimum 110A yards * 1/50,000 Course may be located in community or district park. Swimming Pools Varies on size of pool Teaching- minimum of None - although care 1 per 20,000 15 to 30 minute travel Pools for general community use and amenities. Usually 25 yards x 45' even most be taken in the (pools should time should be planned for teaching, to 2A situ depth of 3 - 4 feet. locating of lifeguard accommodate 3 to 5% competitive, and recreational Competitive-minimum stations in relation to of total population at a purposes with enough depth (3- of 25m x 16m. afternoon sun. time) 4m) to accommodate lm and 3m Minimum of 27 square diving boards. Located in feet of water surface community park or school site. per swimmer. Ratios of 2:1 deck - vs- water Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 24 4.1 National Standards The NRPA has suggested that communities should have between 6.25 to 10 acres of developed parks and open space for every 1,000 residents. This planning team has evaluated the City of Chubbuck and compared it with communities used by the NRPA to establish their 6.25 - 10:1,000 standard. We have determined that caution will be used when establishing standards for this Plan based solely on the NRPA guidelines. It is felt that the high end of this standard is more applicable to more urbanized areas than the City of Chubbuck. In addition, the City's ideal location in relation to the other recreational facilities mentioned above, and the amount of Impact Fees charged (see Section 7.0), suggest that the high end of this standard might be a little too aggressive. Currently, the City of Chubbuck has 22 parks encompassing 87.4 acres. The City's current estimated population is 14,644 people. Thus, the City is currently providing 6.0 acres of developed park land per 1,000 residents. We feel that this 6:1000 is ideal. This design team has determined that the City will adopt the 6:1000 standard which aligns well with NRPA guidelines, and the City's current level of service. 4.2 Standards Based on Population The goal of this Plan is to not only plan for the current recreational needs of the City, but for the future needs as well—especially in regards to the recommended 6:1000 standard. To accomplish this estimated population projections must be calculated. These estimates are based upon current and potential future growth rates for the City of Chubbuck. The City of Chubbuck has 14,644 residents according to the July 2016 population estimate conducted by the United States Census Bureau. During the years 2010 to 2016, the percentage population change for the City was 4.9% (see Table 4.2.1). Table 4.2.1 - Population Trends for Chubbuck, Idaho, from 2010 to 2016 Population Estimate (as of July 1) 2010 2011 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 2016 14,002 1 14,109 1 14,162 1 14,163 1 14,260 1 14,438 1 14,644 Source: US Census Bureau To maintain the adopted standard of providing six acres of developed park land per 1,000 residents for the next ten (10) years the City of Chubbuck will need to develop additional park lands. It is estimated that the City's annual growth rate will be 3.5% over the next ten (10) years due to steady growth in the City's northwest quadrant, and the planned New Day Development on the City's northeast side. To keep up with projected growth rates over this period, future projections of population size and the associated need for developed park acreage to maintain the 6:1000 standard have been calculated (see Table 4.2.2). Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 25 Table 4.2.2 - Projected Population Growth @ 3.5% Annually and Recommended Park Acreage at 6:1000 Standard for Chubbuck. Idaho YEAR POPULATION ACRES RQD. PARK NEED 2020 (Estimate) 15,687 94.1 acres 6.7 acres 2022 (Estimate) 16,804 100.8 acres 13.4 acres 2024 (Estimate) 18,000 108.0 acres 20.6 acres 2026 (Estimate) 19,282 115.7 acres 28.3 acres 2028 (Estimate) 20,655 124.0 acres 36.6 acres Note: Existing developed park acreage maintained by the City in 2018 = 87.4 acres. As Table 4.2.2 indicates, by the year 2028 the City of Chubbuck will need a projected 124.0 acres of developed park land to meet the 6:1000 standard. With the City's current park acreage at 87.4 acres the City will need to plan an additional 36.6 acres of developed park land by 2028 if the population continues to increase by an annual growth rate of 3.5%. 4.3 Park Classification Standards for park space and recreation areas are helpful in establishing an initial estimate of land and facility types that a community should commit to recreation. The following classifications for parks, recreation areas, and open spaces are provided to identify the numerous types of recreational facilities that are required to meet the various demands for recreational facilities for the City of Chubbuck. Using the NRPA's standards as a basis, five types of recreational facilities which allow for active and passive recreation are illustrated: 1) Regional Park, 2) Community Park, 3) Neighborhood Park, 4) Linear Park, and 5) Mini Park. The following is a description of each type of facility and discusses their minimum requirements. Regional Park - This is the largest of the park types classified. It usually covers areas greater than 200 acres. The NRPA defines this park type as "areas of natural quality for nature oriented outdoor recreation, such as viewing, and studying nature, wildlife habitat, conservation, swimming, picnicking, hiking, fishing, boating, camping, and trail uses. This park type may include active play areas. Generally, 80% of the land is reserved for conservation and natural resource management, with less than 20% used for recreation development." This park type will not be considered specifically in this Plan. The City of Chubbuck is ideally located in close proximity to the Portneuf Wellness Complex, and the Bannock County Event Center which fall under the description of this park type. Community Park - This park type is generally between 20 acres to 50 acres in size, and services a wide range of recreational activities for the entire community. However, for the purposes of the Plan, the City will define a community park as encompassing between 5 acres to 50 acres. This park type should have easy access for the majority of the Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 26 population, and should provide both passive and active types of recreation, with the emphasis on the latter. An example of this type of facility would be a soccer or sports complex that contains areas of passive recreation such as walking trails, covered picnic areas, and natural areas. The more passive activities should be programmed at the periphery of the park. Neighborhood Park - This type of park should address the specific recreational needs of the nearby neighborhood it serves. The NRPA states that generally this park type encompasses between 5 acres to 10 acres in size. However, to meet the specific needs of Chubbuck City and its development patterns, this park type will range in size from to 0.33 acres to 5 acres. Neighborhood parks remain the basic unit of the park system, and serve as the recreational and social focus of the neighborhood. The theme of this park type is on informal active and passive recreation. They should be uninterrupted by non- residential roads and other physical barriers. Generally, they contain play structures for at least two age groups: toddlers and pre -teens. They provide covered picnic areas, shaded seating, and havens for quiet reflection, trails, and informal open areas for unorganized play activities. Their location should be within 1/4 to %2 mile of the community they serve. Linear Park - Linear park types are generally transportation corridors for non -motorized modes of transportation such as walking or cycling. They are used to connect parks and other recreational facilities to neighborhoods, to the center of town, and to other neighboring communities. They are generally located in natural corridors such as along stream and river banks and along side washes. These natural corridors allow for passive and active recreation. Extreme care should be taken to ensure the safety and proper separation of these two types of recreation. In addition, extreme care should be taken to preserve and enhance these natural corridors during the construction of Linear Parks. Wetlands and natural habitat for wildlife should be left alone during the planning and developing of Linear Parks whenever possible. This park type can contain some of the most beautiful and fragile ecosystems. Since water is generally nearby or available during raining seasons, Linear Parks can provide for a diversity of wildlife and vegetation, and promote conservation and storm water management. Mini Park - These parks are used to address limited, isolated or unique recreational needs, and are generally one acre or less in size. An example of this type of park would be a trail head, or an historical marker. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 27 5.0 NEEDS ANALYSIS This section begins to assimilate all of the information given thus far in the Plan and apply it to meeting the individual and specific recreational needs of the City of Chubbuck. It will take a look at the demographic make-up of the City. An Evaluations Matrix of ten (10) possible sites to house potential recreational facilities servicing the individual neighborhoods along with community parks servicing the entire City will be analyzed. This will help the City meet the current and future recreational needs of its residents and introduce the Plan to the community. 5.1 Demographics and Economics The City of Chubbuck has a population of 14,644 people according to 2016 U.S. Census Bureau information. Approximately 35.5% of the population is less than 19 years of age, 10.4% is aged 20-29, 22.1% is aged 30-44, 20.8% is aged 45-64, and 11.5% of the population is older than 65. The average age of Chubbuck's citizenry is approximately 33. The percentage of those individuals who fall in the age categories of 5-19 and 20-29 for City of Chubbuck differ in comparison to those same age groups for Bannock County and State of Idaho with some degree of significance. The data shows that the percentage of the population under 19 years of age is higher by approximately 6 percent in the City of Chubbuck, and the percentage of people in their 20s is lower by as much as 5.5%. Figure 5.1.1 illustrates this point and shows the age of population by percentage for all age categories for the State of Idaho, Bannock County, and the City of Chubbuck, Idaho for 2016 (5 -year estimate). There are 4,918 households in the City of Chubbuck with an average of 2.91 persons per household. Nearly 80% of Chubbuck citizens is living in the same house as one year ago. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 28 Figure 5.1.1 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 Age of Population by Percentage for: State of Idaho, Bannock County and Chubbuck City 0 -19 20-29 30-44 45-64 65 - over ❑ State of Idaho ❑ Bannock County ❑ City of Chubbuck Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2012-2016 American Community Survey, 5 -Year Estimate Idaho was the nation's fastest growing state by percent growth (2.2%) between July 1, 2016, and July 1, 2017, according to a US Census Bureau report. The report attributed the increase to domestic migration—more people moving in from other parts of the United States. The City of Chubbuck has seen continual growth over the years, with a population change of 4.9% between 2010 and 2016 (see Table 4.2.1). As part of this growth, there have been recent additions of new businesses in this community, new restaurants, an FBI expansion, and improvements to Pine Ridge Mall. Residential development continues with subdivisions such as Sunset West, Brookstone Estates, and the proposed Bilyeu Estates. The planned Northgate Development will also bring new businesses, jobs, and housing. In anticipation of this growth construction on the new Siphon Road Interchange on I-15 has begun. Continued growth and need for amenities is an undeniable part of the City of Chubbuck's future. Over the past decade, Bannock County has enjoyed an employment boost of close to 2,500 new private sector jobs created mainly by the entry of the Portneuf Regional Medical Center and expanding home health care services. More than 5,500 jobs are involved in education of which two-thirds are provided by Idaho State University (Source: Idaho Department of Labor, Workforce Trends in Bannock County, December 2017). Not surprisingly, educational services Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 29 and health care jobs make up the largest portion of employment opportunities in the City of Chubbuck followed by the retail trade and services associated with finance, insurance and real estate (see Table 5.1.1). Table 5.1.1 Industry by the Civilian Emaloved Population 16 vears and older. Ranking Employer Service Type Number of People Employed in Specified Service 1 Educational services, and health care and social assistance 1,591 Health care and social assistance 1,135 Educational services 456 2 Retail trade 763 3 Manufacturing 606 4 Professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste management services 520 5 Finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing 503 Finance and insurance 428 Real estate and rental and leasing 75 6 Public administration 475 7 Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 391 Transportation and warehousing 372 Utilities 19 8 Arts, entertainment, and recreation, and accommodation and food services 385 9 Construction 331 10 Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, mining 227 11 Other services, except public administration 166 12 Wholesale trade 82 13 Information 28 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011-2015 American Community Survey, 5 -Year Estimates According to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate in Bannock County has been declining since a spike of 8.0% in 2010 and now sits at 2.6%. In the City of Chubbuck, the unemployment rate is 2.7%. Both are lower than the unemployment rate for the whole state of Idaho -3.2%. In addition, the median household income in the City of Chubbuck is $53,354 (Source: U.S. Census Bureau), and the median cost of a house is $189,900 (Source: Realtor.com). Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 30 5.2 Site Evaluations Currently, the City has 22 parks encompassing approximately 87.4 acres (see Table 5.2 Chubbuck City Park Acreage). The City's current population is approximately 14,644 residents. The City's current level of service is providing 6 acres of developed park land per 1,000 residents. This 6:1000 standard will be adopted by the City moving forward. Results of the Community Survey indicated that numerous residents are not aware of many of the City's park facilities, and therefore are not utilizing these facilities. Also, some residents commented that many of these facilities are underdeveloped and underprogramed. Residents indicated that they would use these faculties more, if more recreational opportunities were provided. Park sites need to be well marked and promoted. The sites themselves should exhibit the physical characteristics appropriate for both active and passive recreational uses. Since the primary reason people go to a park is to experience a pleasant outdoor environment, the site should exhibit pleasing aesthetic qualities and compliment its surroundings. TABLE 5.2: CHUBBUCK CITY PARK ACREAGE No. Park Description Acreage* 1. Armstrong Park: (837 Boyd Street) 1.6 acres 2. Bicentennial Park: (300 Abraham Street) 5.0 acres 3. Bistline Park: (701 East Chubbuck Road 1.2 acres 4. Briarwood Park: (Eagle Road & Briarwood Street) 1.5 acres 5. Ca ell Park: 5246 Park Lawn Drive 17.5 acres 6. Chase Park: 4559 Pinewood Avenue 0.8 acres 7. Cotant Park: 625 Victor Avenue 21.1 acres 8. Dalton Park: 400 Ideal a Lane 0.5 acres 9. Espie Park: (692 Darris Street) 0.9 acres 10. Heartland Park: (967 Stripes Road) 2.2 acres 11. Heritage Park: (1051 Pennsylvania Avenue) 2.9 acres 12. Homestead Park: (715 Dell Road) 2.6 acres 13. Mary Harker Park: (5110 Kay Street) 1.3 acres 14. Jerry Rowland Park: (405 Hampton Avenue) 2.2 acres 15. Larry Miller Park: (801 Alpine Avenue) 2.3 acres 16. Long Park: (550 Thomas Street) 1.4 acres 17. Mary's Park: (854 Washburn Drive) 4.3 acres 18. Park Meadows Park: (4765 Galena Avenue) 8.2 acres 19. Sample Park: (5415 Stuart Avenue) 0.7 acres 20. Stuart Park: (5161 Stuart Avenue) 4.9 acres 21. Sunset West Park: (1360 Jenna Drive) 1.6 acres 22. Tree Valley Park: (8 10 Garden Drive) 0.8 acres TOTAL 87.4 Acres +/- * Note all acreage quantities are approximate. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 31 In maintaining the 6:1000 standard, and considering the projected growth of the City it is necessary to identify additional land within the City for the possible future development of parks to maintain this standard. Ten (10) possible sites have been identified by City Staff for evaluation throughout the City (see Table 5.2.1 POTENTIAL PARK SITES) TABLE 5.2.1: POTENTIAL PARK SITES No. Property Location* Acreage +/- 1. Miller Park 30 acres 2. Urban Park 8-10 acres 3. Knudsen Area 3 acres 4. Pine Ridge Mall 3 acres 5. Idaho Central Credit Union Overlay Area 2 acres 6. Mobile Manor Area 2-3 acres 7. Linear Paths — Bike & Pedestrian 20-40 acres 8. Capell Extension 10-20 acres 9. Northgate Area 5-10 acres 10. East Bench 3-5 acres * See locations of these sites on Map 5.3 - Site Evaluations. These sites were selected to be evaluated based upon availability, proximity to one another and proximity to residential areas, aesthetic quality, and the availability of site amenities and utilities. To evaluate and rank each site for the above mentioned criteria, a matrix was formulated (see Figure 5.2.1 - Site Evaluations). The matrix identified sites which viably allow the City to move quickly into the beginning stages of park master planning and design in order to meet the increasing need for developed park land in these areas. With the sites selected, master planning can begin. Recreation facilities identified in the Community Survey and as recommended by NRPA guidelines can be programmed into an all inclusive master plan to meet the current and future needs of the City. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 32 Figure 5.2.1: Chubbuck City Potential Park Site Evaluations: A 8 Topography 4 Vegetation � Surface Water 4 Subtotal �Cd 0 0 p 0.0 W sem.'" a a c oA -a ° w �C W a> 0 CRITERIA:A o o �Z as �D Visual Quality 8 Topography 4 Vegetation 4 Surface Water 4 Subtotal 20 Vehicular Access 10 Bicycle Access 5 Pedestrian Access 5 Subtotal 20 Potential Constraints 5 Gradin / Drainage 5 Soil / Site Characteristics 5 Capability for Expansion 5 Subtotal 20 Water / Sewer 5 Power 5 Roadway 5 Paths / Sidewalk 5 Subtotal 20 Purchase / Donation 10 Property Cost 5 Obstacles for Use 5 Subtotal 20 TOTAL 1100 1 84 1 56 1 68 1 70 1 63 1 58 1 49 1 68 1 61 1 60 Note: A Site Evaluation Team consisting of six (6) City staff members evaluated all ten (10) sites listed above. They visited each site independently and scored each site based on the criteria above. Only the average point values are given in the TOTAL Score for each site evaluated. Each member's Evaluation Matrix for each site are not shown in this Plan, but are on file and available for inspection at City Hall. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 33 J 4P L -; L tno;f �V"CKyIJUDCWRd r- zm� i I L&030. 1.21 sw I -XI 4 `41 .r_ h Map 5.3 - Site Evaluations 1. Miller Park 2. Urban Park 3. Knudsen Area 4. Pine Ridge Mail 5. I.C.C.U. Overlay Area 6. Mobile Manor Area 7. Linear Paths - Bike & Pedestrian 8. Capell Extension 9. Northgate Area 10. East Bench Area �\F� W Site Identifier -m-m Proposed Linear Paths / Reach City—Limits-2017 Existing Parks & Maintained Grass Ak, 6.0 COMMUNITY PARKS MASTER PLAN The goal of this Plan is to provide a model for applying a systematic approach to the planning for parks and recreation areas. This approach includes a level of service guidelines that are needs based, facilities driven, and land measured. A key component for the City of Chubbuck's recent growth is the quality of life it offers. Pleasing green spaces and the quantity and quality of the existing neighborhood parks provides a critical foundation for Chubbuck's high quality of life. It is up to responsible planners to ensure that through proper planning, this level of quality is maintained and enhanced. Planners should enlist a partnership with the community they serve. It is hoped that with the aid of this Plan, residents of Chubbuck will adopt the basic principle that their entire community is a park and that all land uses should result in an environmentally harmonious park, recreation, and open space system. In the analysis of the data presented in this Plan, currently the City meets or exceeds NRPA guidelines for park facility development in terms of quantity. However, the quality of existing facilities could be enhanced or improved by renovating and adding additional park amenities to existing facilities. An example of this is Stuart Park. In 2017 the City completely renovated Stuart Park. Renovations included a new playground structure with wood chip surfacing, new picnic pavilions and covered picnic shelters, looped 8' wide concrete pathway, renovated restrooms, installed all new landscaping and irrigation, and the addition of a 2,500 square foot splash pad. Community use and response to the newly renovated Stuart Park has been tremendous. To continue this momentum and to meet the needs of a growing population four (4) new, and or renovated park master plans are illustrated in this Plan. These parks include; (1) Espie Park Water Education Center, (2) Chubbuck City Downtown Park, (3) Miller Park, and (4) Multi -Use Trails System. Within the following proposed park designs and renovations, a diverse range of recreational facilities have been provided. These plans are conceptual. They are to be used as a guideline for future park development and are intended only to convey the basic character of the proposed parks. 6.1 Espie Park Water Education Center Location - The existing Espie Park is located at 692 Darris Street. Currently, the City is constructing a new City water tank on this site. Program — Water education will be the theme of this 5 -acre community park that abuts the existing Espie Park on its west and north sides. The park will capitalize on the newly constructed City water tank, and provide additional amenities and attractions designed to educate park users on how a municipal water system operates, and to demonstrate how valuable water is in this high desert community. The 9,000 square foot surface of the water tank will be utilized, and a new 30'x50' picnic pavilion will be constructed. Shade trees in decorative planters will be located on the tank's surface. A Water Production Information Kiosk will be located on top of the water tank. Other information kiosks will Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 34 be visible from this elevated vantage point, and will include a Water Conservation Information Kiosk, an Aquifer Information Kiosk, and views of an urban orchard and meandering stream and pond feature. A fun slide feature and stairs will link the top of the water tank to the patio below. A community garden is shown that members of the community can reserve to plant flowers and vegetables, etc. in raised planters. Active recreational amenities include a looped perimeter trail, two (2) new pickleball courts, bocce ball, and playground structure. Additional amenities include park benches strategically placed throughout the park, picnic pavilions and arbor shade structures, and restroom facilities. Plant material will be used that is especially hardy in this climate and labeled with the plant name and characteristics. This will help to educate and inspire park visitors to incorporate some of these water wise plants in to their own gardens. A 30 -stall parking lot completes the design of this park. (see Espie Park Water Education Center Conceptual Master Plan). 6.2 Chubbuck City Downtown Park Location — This park will be centrally located in an area identified by City Planners as the proposed new downtown and City center. This area is delineated by Yellowstone Avenue on the west, Chubbuck Road on the north, Union Pacific Railroad tracks on the east, and Interstate 86 to the south. Program - This park's classification will be that of a Community Park, and would consist of approximately ten (10) acres of area in the center of a new City Downtown. The park's function would be to provide a pleasing green space in the middle of a new downtown area that would be bordered by a mixed use of restaurants, retail space, and large to medium commercial businesses. A proposed multi -use municipal building with parking anchors the proposed downtown area. This new park would consist mainly of passive recreation elements such as open lawn areas with lots of large shade trees and decorative shrub and flower beds. Wide walking paths with strategically placed benches and picnic tables would line these paths. These pathways would connect the park to the nearby businesses and associated parking. Near the proposed multi -use municipal building would be a community amphitheatre and gathering space to hold community events. A town Christmas Tree Plaza is shown that could be decorated and lighted during the holidays that would help to attract users to the space even during the cold winter months. A food truck court is planned to allow for different and unusual dining options. A skate park would be prominently located to give youth a safe and visible opportunity to practice and demonstrate their skating skills. The park will help facilitate a new walk- able downtown that will encourage users to park their cars and walk to the nearby attractions, shopping, and dining opportunities. Idaho Central Credit Union's corporate headquarters is located within this area and would provide a ready-made user group to help attract the businesses and shops that will aid the success and vibrancy of this new downtown area and City Park. (see Chubbuck City Downtown Concept Master Plan). Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 35 6.3 Miller Park Location - Located just north of the Sunset West Subdivision and West Chubbuck Road off of Philbin Road is this 30- acre community park. Program - Currently, this park is undeveloped farm land that abuts several developing and proposed single-family home neighborhoods. The park's size and gentle topography provides a blank canvas to create a park that will serve current and future residents of this developing area. The attached concept illustrates a variety of active and passive recreational opportunities. Central to the park is a 2 -acre lake that will have ADA access around the entire perimeter. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game has indicated an interest in stocking this lake with a mixture of bass and bluegill fish to provide year round fishing opportunities. Utilizing the fill material generated from lake excavation a gently sloped community amphitheatre will be built and oriented to maximize views of the lake and park. Also, the remaining lake fill material will be used to slightly elevate the park's northeast corner to provide the elevated launch pad necessary for a proposed water slip & slide feature. The slip & slide could be built using synthetic turf to minimize mud and wear and tear. This would allow a drain to be installed at the bottom of the slope beneath the synthetic turf to capture the slip & slide water and divert it to the nearby lake to be utilized in the irrigation of the park at night. The park is looped by an 8' wide walking path. Along the looped path are shown a series of exercise stations, park benches, and picnic tables. A 9 -hole frisbee golf course is shown mainly outside of the looped path around the park's perimeter. The 9 -holes consist of a mixture of 3, 4 and 5 par holes. Strategically placed deciduous and evergreen trees will help to define the frisbee course fairways, and to provide beauty and screening for park users. A dog park is shown that will be segregated in to two areas; a small dog area (under 20 pounds), and a large dog area (over 20 pounds). Two (2) parking lots with a total of 230 parking stalls are provided. In between these two parking lots is a large play area and plaza that houses a large water splash pad, nature playground and fossil dig area, and swings. Picnic pavilions and picnic arbor structures flank each end of this play -plaza. Two restroom facilities are shown with the main restroom facility also accommodating a concession stand with covered picnic seating. Four (4) pickleball courts are shown at the park's south west corner. A city well -house is proposed in the northwest corner of the park, and a new City fire station will be located within the park's boundaries at the corner of Philbin Road and Angela Street. Large decorative planter areas with drip irrigation will help to minimize lawn areas and water requirements while helping to add beauty, shade, and interest to this fun new park. (see Miller Park Conceptual Master Plan). Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 36 6.4 Multi -Use Trail System Location — This multi -use trail system will be mainly located along the Hiline Canal and lateral canal waterways. The locations of these linear waterways provide ideal routes for connecting neighborhoods to City parks and other recreational facilities to the center of town. (see Map 5.3 — Site Evaluations, Proposed Linear Paths / Reach). Program — The City's proposed trail system will be multi -use, and able to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle use, etc. It is proposed that all trails will be accessible and meet the Americans with Disability Act Standards. The typical trails will be 10' wide with an asphalt surface. These non -motorized linear corridors will offer an alternative mode of transportation for commuters wishing to leave their cars at home. The City will work closely with the Portneuf Greenway Foundation and developers to create a connected comprehensive network of paved trails throughout the City of Chubbuck. These trails will connect the City to neighboring communities that will enhance the quality of life for its residents and visitors alike. (see Figure 1: 6.4.1: Typical Trail Cross -Section below). 1s_D RIGHT OF WAY SHARED USE PATH CIL 2.0' 5.0' S.0' 2.0' 1.5' SHLf]R SNLOR �A .1 sr. oaf SUS -GRADE 0.2' PLANT MIX FOR SHARED USE PATH. PG 58-28 CONTROL LINE (ESTIMATED AT 16 TON5I5TA) 0,4• AGGREGATE RASE FOR SHARED USE PATH (ESTIMATED AT 45.1 7ONSISTA7 TYPICAL TRAIL CROSS-SECTION Not to scale Figure 1: 6.4.1: Typical Trail Cross -Section Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 37 7.0. FINANCIAL PLAN 7.1 Introduction This section outlines cost estimates for the parks illustrated in this document, and suggests financial avenues the City can pursue in terms of possible local, state, and federal funding for the implementation of the Plan. The following cost projections are estimates ONLY, and do not include design or environmental mitigation costs. The cost estimates developed for each park include landscaping, irrigation, utility services, amenities, and infrastructure. 7.2 Summary of Park Development Costs The cost estimates are preliminary and are for planning purposes only. As designs are finalized, more precise cost estimates can be generated. 7. 2.1 Espie Park Water Education Center Cost estimates for Espie Park Water Education Center are shown in Table 7.2.1. Cost estimates are preliminary, and are for planning purposes only. 7. 2.2 Chubbuck City Downtown Park Cost estimates for Chubbuck City Downtown Park are shown in Table 7.2.2. Cost estimates are preliminary, and do not include land acquisition. 7. 2.3 Miller Park Cost estimates for Miller Park are shown in Table 7.2.3. Costs estimates are preliminary, and are for planning purposes only. 7. 2.4 Multi -Use Trail System Cost estimates for the Multi -Use Trail System are shown in Table 7.2.4. Costs estimates are preliminary, and are for planning purposes only. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 38 Table 7.2.1 Espie Park Water Education Center NO. ITEM QTY UNIT $ UNIT TOTAL 1. Site Work - Grading (rough to finish - complete) - complete 4 AC $7,500 $30,000.00 2. Site utilities (water, sewer, power) 1 LUMP $50,000 $50,000.00 3. 30 -stall parking lot (asphalt, curb & gutter, etc.) 30 stalls $1,250 $37,500.00 4. Concrete paving, sidewalks, patios etc. 20,000 SF $5.00 $100,000.00 5. Pickle ball courts — post tension concrete 2 Each $25,000 $50,000.00 6. Pond and stream feature I LUMP $100,000 $100,000.00 7. Pavilion (34' x 44') 1 LUMP $50,000 $50,000.00 8. Arbor shade structures 3 Each $10,000 $30,000.00 9. Raised planters 23 Each $500.00 $11,500.00 10. Information kiosks 3 Each $5,000.00 $15,000.00 11. Slide feature & stairs at water tank 1 LUMP $15,000 $15,000.00 12. New playground structure & surfacing 1 LUMP $50,000 $50,000.00 13. Bocce Ball Court 1 LUMP $15,000 $15,000.00 14. Restroom 1 LUMP $95,000 $95,000.00 15. Landscaping allowance I LUMP $100,000 $100,000.00 16. Irrigation allowance 1 LUMP $75,000 $75,000.00 17. Site furnishings, benches, fountains, tables, etc. 1 LUMP $15,000.00 $15,000.00 18. Park Sign 1 LUMP $2,500 $2,500.00 $841,500.00 Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 39 Table 7.2.2 Chubbuck City Downtown Park NO. ITEM QTY UNIT $ UNIT TOTAL 1. Site Work - Grading (rough to finish - complete) - complete 10 AC $7,500 $75,000.00 2. Site utilities (water, sewer, power) 1 LUMP $250,000 $250,000.00 3. Site electrical 1 LUMP $150,000 $150,000.00 4. Concrete Flat Work 50,000 SF $5.00 $250,000.00 5. Pavilion 40' x 40' 4 Each $50,000 $200,000.00 6. Arbor shade structures 10 Each $10,000 $100,000.00 7. Restrooms 2 Each $100,000 $200,000.00 8. Amphitheatre 1 LUMP $150,000 $150,000.00 9. Water fountain feature 1 LUMP $25,000 $25,000.00 10. Clock tower 1 LUMP $20,000 $20,000.00 11. Picnic Tables 40 Each $800.00 $32,000.00 12. Benches 50 Each $600.00 $30,000.00 13. Skate park 1 LUMP $500,000 $500,000.00 14. Landscaping - Allowance 1 LUMP $300,000 $300,000.00 15. Irrigation - Allowance 1 LUMP $200,000 $200,000.00 16. Park sign 4 Each $5,000 $20,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATE $2,502,000.00 Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 40 Table 7.2.3 Miller Park NO. ITEM QTY UNIT $ UNIT TOTAL 1. Site Work - Grading (rough to finish - complete) - complete 30 AC $7,500 $225,000.00 2. 230 -stall parking lot - Complete 230 Stalls' $1,250 $287,500.00 3. Storm Sewer System- Complete 1 LUMP $50,000 $509000.00 4. Culinary Water System- Complete 1 LUMP $25,000 $25,000.00 5. Site Electrical - Complete 1 LUMP $75,000 $75,000.00 6. Concrete Flat Work 65,000 SF $5.00 $325,000.00 7. Pavilion 40' x 40' 3 Each $50,000 $150,000.00 8. Arbor Structure 3 Each $15,000 $45,000.00 9. Picnic Tables 15 Each $800.00 $12,000.00 10. Benches 20 Each $600.00 $12,000.00 11. Play Ground Equipment 1 Each $75,000 $75,000.00 12. Water Splash Pad I LUMP $250,000 $250,000.00 13. Slip & slide (synthetic turf surround) 1 Each $250,000 $250,000.00 14. Pickle ball courts - post tension concrete 4 Each $25,000 $100,000.00 15. Frisbee tee -box & goals 9 Each $750.00 $6,750.00 16. Exercise stations 5 Each $1,000 $5,000.00 17. Dog park fence (PVC chain link) 1,500 LF $15.00 $229500.00 18. Pond feature 1 LUMP $300,000 $300,000.00 19. Amphitheatre 1 LUMP $100,000 $100,000.00 20. Restroom & concession 1 LUMP $150,000 $150,000.00 21. Restroom (no concession) I LUMP $100,000 $100,000.00 22. Landscaping - Allowance 1 LUMP $300,000 $300,000.00 23. Irrigation - Allowance 1 LUMP $200,000 $200,000.00 24. Park Sign 1 Each $10,000 $10,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATE $3,075,750.00 Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 41 Table 7.2.4 Multi -Use Trail System One -Mile Length NO. ITEM QTY UNIT $ UNIT TOTAL 1. Right -of -Way Acquisition Cost 1 Mile $10,000 $10,000.00 2. Clearing & Grubbing 1 Mile $12,250 $15,000.00 3. Grading & Drainage 1 Mile $5,000 $5,000.00 4. Gravel Base 1 Mile $65,500 $65,000.00 5. Asphalt Paved Surface 1 Mile $80,000 $80,000.00 6. Small Bridge 1 Each $5,000 $5,000.00 7. Signage & Trailhead Kiosk 1 Lump $5,000 $5,000.00 8. Landscaping 1 Lump $15,000 $15,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATE $200,000.00 NOTE: This Cost Estimate is for one (1) mile of a typical trail built along an existing waterway or canal with a 16' wide right-of-way. Cost Estimate does not include possible electrical costs, retaining walls, fencing, or difficult rock removal such as basalt outcrops, etc. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 42 CONCEPT IMAGES: Revealed Water Tank WATER TANK HOUSE PAVILION (44'X30') RAISED PLANTERS FOR SHADE TREES SLIDE AND STAIRWAY DOWN SLOPE PATHWAY THROUGH CONSERVATION AREA CONSERVATION KIOSK URBAN ORCHAR I) TAIL (TYP: March 2017 ISLAND PICNIC ARBOR (TYP.j POND & . . GRASS TROOM P. KIQSK' Espie P OVER-FLOW POND Water Education Center I CONCEPT MASTER PLAN - WATER TANK f ' WATER PRODUCTION KIOSK _SPRAY IRRIGATION TOYS CHUBBUCK L SAFETY RAIL 1HAH0 —EXPOSED FACE oir SEATING STEPS rAQUIFER INFORMATION KIOSK Ile f • rrirr • t � 01 EL_ �'•�rrrrr q I '•� 00 )C 0 k 0 F90 X0000 PICKLEBALL ._s COURTS DARRIS STREET F — — — — `BENCHES (TYP.) McKAY STREET — — I T-------1 I Concept Rendering - PLAN VIEW j Scale: 1"=30'-O" 0' 15' 30' 60' JL—]! JACKSON LAND DESIGN, PC 10■1 � 11 • • , Yi' PARKING LO TROOM P. KIQSK' Espie P OVER-FLOW POND Water Education Center I CONCEPT MASTER PLAN - WATER TANK f ' WATER PRODUCTION KIOSK _SPRAY IRRIGATION TOYS CHUBBUCK L SAFETY RAIL 1HAH0 —EXPOSED FACE oir SEATING STEPS rAQUIFER INFORMATION KIOSK Ile f • rrirr • t � 01 EL_ �'•�rrrrr q I '•� 00 )C 0 k 0 F90 X0000 PICKLEBALL ._s COURTS DARRIS STREET F — — — — `BENCHES (TYP.) McKAY STREET — — I T-------1 I Concept Rendering - PLAN VIEW j Scale: 1"=30'-O" 0' 15' 30' 60' JL—]! JACKSON LAND DESIGN, PC w x� _ g ,m �a I _� 11111111111111 - ON 1. adv&r te SID so tT 17 IV, ,;'� AV C ' F LU W w �� �� X ✓wi V W 0 V .' ibig R�rrrr aM M LU �::llllTl� U) Z LLQ a r a YP r '71nb ]NOlSM0113A nAWC1 _�yT +' Coj/��T\IJ� a a La 3 Q LU 0 V O N Lill 9 a I { och wm 8 POW o - rN o 0 o u o = C:) a) LID o � co C 3 0 4-1c 3 0 0 ri1 71 O f G 4 �U w x� _ g ,m �a I _� 11111111111111 - ON 1. adv&r te SID so tT 17 IV, ,;'� AV C ' F LU W w �� �� X ✓wi V W 0 V .' ibig R�rrrr aM M LU �::llllTl� U) Z LLQ a r a YP r '71nb ]NOlSM0113A nAWC1 _�yT +' Coj/��T\IJ� a a La 3 Q LU 0 V O N Lill 9 a I { och wm 8 POW o - rN o 0 o u o = C:) a) LID o � co C 3 0 4-1c 3 0 0 ri1 71 O f G 7.3 Local Funding Sources 7.3.1 Impact Fee Study The City has contracted with Zions Bank Public Finance (Zions Bank) to prepare their City's Impact Fee Plan. Zions Bank's Plan determined the park impact fee allowable for single-family residential property is $2,084.00 per residential unit, and for multi -family property the Impact Fee is $1,942.00 per dwelling unit. These Impact Fees have been through committee and approved, but as of yet these Impact Fees have not been before City Council and approved by that body. It is anticipated that these fees will be approved by City Council in the very near future. Once approved by City Council Zion's Impact Fee Plan can be viewed at the Chubbuck City Offices. For this and future Plans to be successful the City must continue charging developers a park impact fee. It is recommended that a re-evaluation of park impact fees occur every five years and if justifiable, the amount adjusted. Also, besides cash, another method of payment of impact fees is the trading of land or "Land in Lieu." The costs of the land donated to the City for the building on new parks could be applied to owed park impact fees. With land costs in the City beginning to sky rocket, this method of payment may be more advantageous than cash depending on the location of the development and park need in that area. Impact Fees are set based on the current level of service being supplied by the City. 7.3.2 Bond Election Bond elections are methods that City's can pursue to enlist the help of the community to approve special assessments for funding specific voter -approved capital improvement projects, such as the implementation of this Plan. With strong educational campaigning of the public Bonds are a realistic option to pursue for funding the needed parks and recreational facilities identified in this Plan. 7.3.3 User Fees User's fees for "reserveable" park facilities such as covered pavilions, barbecue areas, volleyball courts, etc., are a viable option cities can employ to help build and maintain park facilities. These fees should be minimal and are not a great revenue generator. 7.4 State and Federal Grants State and Federal agencies offer a variety of funds that are available to qualifying agencies for the implementation of certain types of facilities if they are within the mission of the granting entity. These sources are most often granted with specific requirements that the applicant must meet. In addition, funds are limited and the competition for these resources is steep. However, communities that have a clear and direct parks master plan increase their odds in the competition for these funding resources. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 43 7.4.1 State Grants The State of Idaho State Division of Parks and Recreation Department of Natural Resources offers four types of grants for the building of new trails and the preservation of waterways. These include: Recreation Trails, Off -Highway Vehicle (OHV) Trails, Non -Motorized Trails, and Waterways Improvement Fund. In general, no grants are given for less than $5,000 and rarely exceed $100,000. Each project requires at least a 50% match by the applicant. More information is available on the State's website at: haps://parksandrecreation.idaho. og_v/ rg ants - and -funding. Another funding avenue is the Land and Water Conservation Fund Outdoor Recreation Grant Program (LWCF Program). It is one of the most successful and far-reaching pieces of conservation and recreation legislation in America's history. The LWCF Program provides matching grants to assist in the acquisition and development of quality, high priority outdoor recreation facilities. Grants were made for acquisition of real property for outdoor recreation use and development for a broad range of outdoor recreation facilities; including but not limited to sports and play fields, picnic facilities, playgrounds, tennis courts, swimming pools, and camping areas. According to the National Parks Service website (http://www.nps.gov/lwcf/) "in the 2006 Fiscal Year the Department of the Interior appropriations bill (P.L. 109-55) appropriated $27,994,976 for LWCF State Grants after two -across-the-board reductions. The allocation for each State and Territory is determined by formula based on law." 7.4.2 Federal Grants The United States Department of Transportation (DOT), Federal Highway Administration provides funding through the highway trust fund, with 80% participation by the Federal Government when a project is adopted. Eligibility for Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program and the Surface Transportation Program funds are awarded to those projects including construction of pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities and non -construction projects related to safe bicycle use. The Transportation Manual identifies the following requirements for qualification: • "Construction of a pedestrian walkway and a bicycle transportation facility are deemed to be highway projects. Hence the Federal share is 80%." • "Pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities to be constructed under the provisions of 23 U.S.C.217 must be included in long range plans developed by MPOs and States." Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 44 • "No motorized vehicles should be allowed on any trails or pedestrian walkways, except as necessary for maintenance purposes and possibly by snowmobiles and motorized wheel chairs." • "Bicycle projects must be principally for transportation rather than recreational purposes." • Additional information may be obtained from the Office of Environment and Planning, or see the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration's website at: www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/cmaqpgs . 7.4.3 Federal Lands Highway Program The following information was taken from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) website regarding FHWA programs which benefit recreation and trails. "Pedestrian and bicycle projects are eligible for all Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds. The STP provides more than $6 billion annually to the States through a formula apportionment. Ten percent must be used for Transportation Enhancement (TE) Activities. TE funds provide about two-thirds of the Federal -aid highway funding for pedestrian and bicycle projects and programs. TE funds may be used for project construction and related activities, but not for routine maintenance. TE projects must relate to surface transportation, but many TE projects benefit recreation. Three of the 12 TE categories specifically benefit pedestrians, bicyclists, and trails: • Pedestrian and bicycle facilities (which may include sidewalks, bicycle parking, bicycles on buses, and pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities, including shared use paths), • Pedestrian and bicycle safety and education activities, and Preservation of abandoned railway corridors (also known as rail -trails or rails -to -trails). Since 1992, more than 20,000 TE projects have been selected for funding, totaling about $6 billion. More than half of the TE funds have been used for pedestrian and/or bicycle facilities and related projects. About one-third to one-half of these projects are shared use paths or trail - related, including more than 1,000 rail -trail projects. Each State has its own application and selection process for the TE program. Generally, project sponsors must submit proposals to the State Department of Transportation (DOT). Each State has a State Transportation Enhancement Program Manager to assist project sponsors (see www.enhancements.org/statecontacts_TE.asp). Many States give extra credit to projects that benefit two or more of the eligible TE activities (including items such as scenic or historic easements, landscaping and scenic beautification, historic preservation, environmental mitigation, and transportation museums)." Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 45 8.0 PARK CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS This section contains guidelines for facilities, sites, furnishings, equipment, and systems to be included in Chubbuck City park projects. These guidelines represent the minimum acceptable standards and are not intended to be used as Technical Specifications. When converting the information into specifications, the consultant shall be responsible for expanding or clarifying the information into standard CSI -based format, three part specifications. All consultants preparing plans for the City of Chubbuck must be licensed in the State of Idaho, and qualified to prepare park construction drawings and specifications. All plans and specifications MUST comply with ALL City, State and Federal Codes, including ADA guidelines. In case of conflict, the most stringent Codes apply. 8.1 Construction Details and Descriptions 8.1.1 Hardscape Paving • Asphalt Paving for Parking Lots & Roadways: Heavy Duty, Light Duty • Asphalt Paving for Trails: • Concrete Paving: Sidewalks, Sport Courts • Concrete Edging: Mow Curb, Playground Curb 8.1.2 Sewer System Design Note: ALL Storm and Sanitary Sewer Equipment and Appurtances must meet City of Chubbuck and State Codes and Standards. 8.1.3 Planting Details 8.1.4 Irrigation Details 8.1.5 Park Furnishings and Amenities Description • Drinking Fountain: • Basketball Goal: • Prefabricated Pavilions and Shade Structures: • Playground Equipment: • Picnic Tables. Benches and Bleachers: • Trash Receptacles • Site Architecture • Signage 8.2 Construction Specifications 8.2.1 Park Construction Minimum Requirements 8.2.2 Pressure Irrigation Systems Design and Construction Standards most recent addition on file at City Hall. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 46 2" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE --- 4" GRADED t/2 IN, AGGREGATE 4 . BASE MATERIAL COMPACTED TO 98% STANDARD PROCTOR DRY DENSTTY !llllf Ill�ifl-lilllll-iI11111-IIIIII1 1IIflll=illllll ll 18" COMPACTED SUBGRADE I — 111 - {COMPACTED TO 98% OF STANDARD PROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY} NOTES: 1. LIGHT DUTY ASPHALT PAVING SECTION: 2" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE OVER 4 IN. GRADED 112 IN. AGGREGATE BASE. 2. PAVEMENT THICKNESSES: ASSUME THAT BASE COURSE IS HIGH QUALITY MATERIAL WITH A CBR OF AT LEAST 70 PERCENT. THE ASPHALTIC MATERIAL SHOULD HAVE A MARSHALL STABLITY OF 1,804. ALL MATERIAL SHALL MEET CITY STANDARDS FOR GRADATION AND QUALITY. Light Duty Asphalt Paving Section 2112" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 4" GRADED W IN. AGGREGATE BASE MATERIAL COMPACTED TO 98% STANDARD PROCTOR DRY DENSITY 18" COMPACTED SUBGRADE (COMPACTED TO 98% OF STANDARD PROCTOR MAMMUM DRY DENSTI'Yj NOTES: 1. HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT PAVING SECTION: 2112" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE OVER 4 IN. GRADED 112 IN. AGGREGATE BASE. 2. PAVEMENT THICKNESSES: ASSUME THAT BASE COURSE IS HIGH QUALITY MATERIAL WITH A CBR OF AT LEAST 74 PERCENT. THE ASPHALTIC MATERIAL SHOULD HAVE A MARSHALL STABLITY OF 1,800. ALL MATERIAL SHALL MEET CITY STANDARDS FOR GRADATION AND QUALITY. Heavy Duty Asphalt Paving Section Figure 4, 8.1.1: Asphalt Paving for Parking Lots & Roadways: Heavy Duty, and Light Duty Paving Section Details Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 47 _x. PAVING SECTION (SEE PLAN FOR WIDTH) 6.0' 2.0' 40 4.0' 2. 2. �i lig Ilf1111= IiilN- ��""�_ �='�"'a�l�llfllfi�iliillf lfllflf���i�r'� 2" ASPI3ALTIC CONCRETPIlll uii3i SLOPE= 2% FLOW IN ONE DIRECITON FLOW LINE DRAINAGE CHANNEL b" THICK AGGREGATE BASE WET AND COMPACTED AS REQUIRED BY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT. (M[IN 48 PSF-STPDD) ALL MATERIALS SHOULD MEET CITY ENGINEERING STANDARDS FOR GRADATION AND QUALITY. Section Through Asphalt Trail _ NOT TO SCALE Figure 2, 8.1.1: Section through Asphalt Trail Detail Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 48 CONCRETE PAVING - MEDTUM BROOM FINISH PERPENDICULAR TO DIRECTION OF WALKWAY. 112" INCH RADIUS - BOTH SIDES 112" IN x IA" IN DEPTH OF CONCRETE TOOLED JOINT. SEE PLANS FOR LOCATION - ADJUST LOCATIONS TO OBTAIN EQUAL SPACING. 4 I UNTREATED BASE COURSE. SIDEWALK CONTROL JOINT CONCRETE PAVING - MEDIUM BROOM FINISH PERPENDICULAR TO DIRECTION OF WALKWAY. 112" IN RADIUS - BOTH SIDES 1/2";N PRE MOLDED EXPANSION JOINT FILLER TRIM FLUSH WITH TOP OF CONCRETE. 4 IN UNTREATED BASE COURSE SII)EWALK LVANSMON JOINT NOTE: 1. ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS "A", TYPE 11 OR TYPE V SULFATE RESISTANT CEMENT WITH A MAXIMUM OF 15 PERCENT FLY ASH. 2. ALL CONCRETE WALKS SHALL BE PLACED ON TOP A MINIMUM OF 4" GRANULAR FILL. REFER TO GEOTECIINICAL REPORT FOR FURTHER INFO. 3. SAW -CUT JOINTS ARE NOT ALLOWED ON ANY PARTS OF TIES PROJECT. 4. ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE REINFORCED WITH "FIBER -MESH". CONTRACTOR HAS OPTION OF INSTALLING 6 X 6 X1040 WELDED WIRE MESH IN PLACE OF FIBER -MESH REINFORCING. WIRE FABRIC SHALL MEET ASTM A154. Sidewalks and Concrete Court Detail + Notes NOT TO SCALE Figure 3, 8.1.1: Concrete Sidewalks and Concrete Sport Court Details and Notes Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 49 12" DEEP OF SAND IN SAND PIT, OR 12" OF "FIBAR" IN PLAYGROUND. TO BE OWNER SUPPLIED AND INSTALLED. CONCRETE SAND CURB 1" FILLET BOTH SIDES __-- - 112" EXPANSION JOINT 6F q d - CONCRETE SIDEWALK QQ �° GRAVEL BASE COMPACTED SUBGRADE 12" (2) #4 REBAR CONT. _ I1I=! =III "TOOL JOINT EVERY s' i EXPANSION JORM EVERY 25' 6" Playground Curb NOT TO SCALE 6" /- TOOL EDGES (TYP.) RE Concrete Maw Curb NOT M SCALE FINISH GRADE 6"x6" CONCRETE WITH EXPANSION JOINTS @ 10'-0" O.C., AND @7u ALL INTERSECTIONS AND ABUTMENTS Figure 4, 8.1.1: Concrete Playground and Concrete Mow Curb Details Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 50 NOTE: Landscape Conwwwr is responsible for amending ALL SHRUB and FLOWER beds with a mixu a of MULCH and TURFUS or equal. MULCH amendment to be equal to 3H -LANDSCAPE MULCH, or KELLOGG. Ratio shall be 15% multi. and 5% TURFUS. All TREE PITS shall be amended with the same mnd me as gxrnfied. Submit sumpfes to OWNER for Approval. WRAP V.I.T- CINCH -TIES AROUND THE r TREE USING THE STANDARD OR FIGURE EIGHT METHOD. SECURE WITH GALVANIZED NAILS DRIVEN THROUGH TIES AND INTO THE STAKE TO PREVENT "PAGE. — LODGEPOLE STAKES BURLED MIN. OF 30" IN GROUND ON OPPOSITE SIDES OF TREE TRUNK PROVIDE SPECIFIED MULCH PROVIflE 1" . r 5LOPH 1N 4' SECOND LAYER OF COMPACTED SOIL. MDC FINISH GRADE & ROOT FLAIR CUP AND REMOVE BURLAP TWINE do WIRE FROM TOP 213 OF BAIL 1ST LAYER COMPACTED SOIL. MIX TYPICAL MUM PLANTING DEPTH: FROM ROOT FLAIR TO BOTTOM OF BALL + 2" E TYPICAL TREE PLANTING WIDTH: TWICE THE WIDTH OF BALL Deciduous Tree Planting Detail NOT TO SCALE T RAPE) ANCHOR ASSEMBLY KIT P. TREE PLANTING PIT DEPTH: ?PTH OF BALL + 6" F. TREE PLANTING PIT WIDTH: [DTH OF BALL + 6" DEEP WATER RETENTION BASIN LEE STAKES INCLUDED IN KrF -- FINISH GRADE PT BURLAP FROM TOP 113 7BALL 41, MIX GHTLY COMPACTED SOIL MIX Conifer Tree Planting Detail NOT TO SCALE Figure 1, 8.1.3: Deciduous Tree and Conifer Tree Planting Details Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 51 WATER RAM P�.BA�BL�RiAP - 1+3 uF TAB BAIL AND TUCr BELOW GRADE • 5CARB'Y SM OP f9AHf PPP ROOT8ALLON1�i0 DF - -- TAIfPSD3IIHA1iMOSM IIFINAYYCLAYSMSO$WI MTHM II A BAFD FAN, Af7GID! AN 8' EOIF 9 DEEP, 01 TMOOM THS BARD PAN (BHI M Wifff AHWXD SOIL} w TOP OF ROOT KUL 3' ABOVE FDM ULWE 4'L= -o3 ENDMOiPI ME9DGB OP&4rM BMKFDt AIDIv MAL PEAMMAND COY R fWMPIAM WME TRW ARE PART Of HA.M EDGM Ati}MPIIS OF MxU TKm. 1�.' P�ffm TABIBIE PIARTPRSQALLBE31AS WAIEASIOOTBAILANDA HRiatUl! Mr DEEPER (AMU RDES OPPIn Multi -Trunk Tree Planting Detail NOT TO SCALE ' 3DI.TAiLWAT9RBA5RiAROUND "! lHRl1{BT3?B.OPROOTBAiL SBI' TOP OF ROOT BALL ^ ! J r SL 1' ABOVE FftM GRADE SPi)CIF3E➢ AILILCH '� h FA4LSH G LLME IJ II JI ki I FERTE.MTAMM PLWrMSHALL BE3RAS WIDE AS ROM BALL AND A AMENDED SM NDNM OP 6' I ROOT BAIL WI (ANW AND SCARIFY SIDES SCARIFIED AO[ff5 OFBIAHIPM TIfL SNARE BED F"D£RIAMM TO EDGE TO A DIAPER OF V DACHAS IM ALL FLQMiCB SPAM 48 NM AN11MO HR. COH83RUCfSPIQBPIANID4O17fPORSldRUBS SPACO FARTHER TBAN 48 D1CM Shrub 1 Groundcover Planting NM TO SCALE Figure 2, 8.1.3: Multi -Trunk and Shrub and Groundcover Planting Details Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 52 Landscape Cmtructor is responsible for supplying CLEAN tap soil is ALL plantar sod turf areae. Top sM to be AmMED with mulch ogttsvalent to KELLOGG, or PAY DIRT at a ratio of 15% by volume. Alva, ALL MUB and FLOWER beds sMU be ametvW M tionadbr with TVRFUS or equal. natio shall W 15% mulch, and 3% TURFUS. All TREE PITS ahall be amended with the swe mixture as xpecified Submit umplas to LawlKspe Architoet for Approval. CURB, MOW SCRIP, SIDEWALK, DR PAVEMENT SPECM SOD , LOCALLY GROWN 1 � I�Illllillll -� AMENDED SOIL Sod Placement on Edge of Mow Curb or Pavement. NOT TO SCALE Landscape Contractor is reapottsible for supplying CLEAN top soil in ALL plaster and turf areas, Top soilm be AMENDED with mulch equivalent to KELLOGG, or PAY DIRT at a ratio of 15% by volumes Also, ALL SHRUB and FLOWER beds shaH be amended W tionaUy with TURFUS or equal Rana abaci be 15% mulch, and 5% TURFUS, All TREE PM shall be amended with the wane mixture as specified Submit samples to Landscape Ambitect for Approval. SM PLAM FLAN INOAM AMENDED Top SOEL TOP SOIL, TOPSOIL 121NCfLES _TII=1fII III II II�III 1111= 12DMS 12INCEES = — = ill =�� ill- iV,RIlI il�i� l l T&LING DEMOF - 11 I11.-1IIL IIfI II II 111111=llll�iii=f_r it 1111= - ,DE TRIG=IIH��Ei '1j Ir= ROUGH GRADE BEFORE PLACMG COMPOST AND TILLING Topsoil Preparation Detail NOT TO SCALE Figure 3, 8.1.3: Sod Placement and Topsoil Preparation Details Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 53 NOTE. USE PVC SCIIEDULE 80 PIPE PASSING UNDERNEATH ALL CONCRETE AND ASPHALT PAVED ARRAS! aIf k`i:[Fi;XI01 1 NOTE: NO ELECTRICAL LINES SHAL- SHARE TRENCHES WTTH IRRIGATION OR CULINARY WATER LINES. ELECTRICAL LINES MUST HAVE SOF HORIZONTAL SEPARATION FROM ANY WATER LINES IN ACCORDANCE WITH CrTY STANDARDS. COMPACTED BACKFILL Section Through Irrigation Piping Trench - • f -u =1111 —LIII =1111.:. � ' .1111111 7qI1 1111 III7M 1 I I li 1= CPDw - nw DI1ffit.4ECiY0N 90 DEOREFS ELL ION ut�.us asst 1111-1111-=1111=1111 =1111-1111=Ili!=flll =1ff1=111171111=1111_{1 Ifll_II 1=.. -=Illi- ilii a •.•••••a •IIID flll=ll e —IIIE=1111= 111=11 __ ���,� III - 1 1 fl -1111-1411=1111- I II I I f If€ 1= II I-1111-11�: RMUCMBUSHING TES CONN812TION CONNBCrION I I- U4 DEGREE ELL I I- U4 DEGREE ELL 300 PSI CLASS A CONCRETE. MINIMUM 12" THICKNESS IN ALL DIItECTI.ONS POURED INTO VIRGIN EARTH OR COMPACTED BACEI .L. INSTALL ON ALL PRESSURIZED MAINLINES AND LATERAL - LINES 3 INCISES AND LARGER. DO NOT ENCASE PIPE UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES WRAP ALL FITTINGS WITH POLYETHYLENE WRAP BEFORE PLACING CONCRETE Thrust Block Installation NOT TO SCALE Figure 1, 8.1.4: Section through Irrigation Piping Trench and Thrust Block Details Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 54 II1�1 l—!1I1!!1 II�- CD 1 I I=1111 PVC LATERAL LINES O 1" GRAY PVC CONDUIT FOR IRRIGATION CONTROLLER WIRE 2" SAND OR ROCK FREE 1= SOIL AROUND ALL PIPE IIIb .. . PVC MAIN LINE, DO NOT ALLOW IRRIGATION PIPE TO CROSS OR TANGLE WITH EACH OTHER - Section Through Irrigation Piping Trench - • f -u =1111 —LIII =1111.:. � ' .1111111 7qI1 1111 III7M 1 I I li 1= CPDw - nw DI1ffit.4ECiY0N 90 DEOREFS ELL ION ut�.us asst 1111-1111-=1111=1111 =1111-1111=Ili!=flll =1ff1=111171111=1111_{1 Ifll_II 1=.. -=Illi- ilii a •.•••••a •IIID flll=ll e —IIIE=1111= 111=11 __ ���,� III - 1 1 fl -1111-1411=1111- I II I I f If€ 1= II I-1111-11�: RMUCMBUSHING TES CONN812TION CONNBCrION I I- U4 DEGREE ELL I I- U4 DEGREE ELL 300 PSI CLASS A CONCRETE. MINIMUM 12" THICKNESS IN ALL DIItECTI.ONS POURED INTO VIRGIN EARTH OR COMPACTED BACEI .L. INSTALL ON ALL PRESSURIZED MAINLINES AND LATERAL - LINES 3 INCISES AND LARGER. DO NOT ENCASE PIPE UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES WRAP ALL FITTINGS WITH POLYETHYLENE WRAP BEFORE PLACING CONCRETE Thrust Block Installation NOT TO SCALE Figure 1, 8.1.4: Section through Irrigation Piping Trench and Thrust Block Details Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 54 NOTE: USE CARSON T MBO" SIZE VALVE BOXES ONLY! PVC SCH. 80 TEE FITTING (TYPICAL) r LINE SIZE PVC BALL VALVE ~~ BY "ACTION" OR APPROVED EQUAL — PVC SCH 40 MA INLINE PIPE PRE ASSEMBLED QUICK DISCONNECT UNION EQUAL TO LASCO (TYP.) SPECIFIED HUNTER VALVE NOTE: INSTALL ONLY WHERE 2 VALVE COMBINATION IS NOT PRACTICAL! Single Valve Manifold NOT TO SCALE PVC SCK 80 TEE FITTING (TYPICAL) _ — LINE SIZE PVC BALL VALVE BY "ACTION" OR APPROVED EQUAL PVC SCH 40 MAINLINE PIPE SPECIFIED HUNTER VALVE PRE ASSEMBLED QUICKDISCONNECT UNION EQUAL TO LASCO (TYP.) NOTE: INSTALL 2 VALVE COMBINATION WflnE POSSIBLE! Double Valve Manifold Combination NOT TO SCALE Figure 2, 8.1.4: Single Valve Manifold and Double Valve Manifold Details Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 55 Figure 3, 8.1.4: Fixed Spray and Turf Rotor with Swing Joint Assembly Details Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 56 WHANDEUM ONAWWWOU tao�>tarAu �e AT10tr�QA18 I ��7>DlliII�llfllf ��W1L '�APIdiiYllS LAVAL! TE Fixed Spray Sprinkler w/Funny Pipe NOT TO SCALE r HDTli B!11<I'AiI.� Ilrlll=T i I zzi I kJ — SBT SHCi1Rffi.Y AIS PLIB� LA OIL��il�[}JDIHi LATRAL PIPE u z$e NM.- Un %AX(r SWING)DIRr ASSEMY WM W MAU T[1RP' RUM (M EWAL] Turf Rotor with Swing Joint Assembly NOT TO SCALE Figure 3, 8.1.4: Fixed Spray and Turf Rotor with Swing Joint Assembly Details Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 56 LANT MATER EAL (TYP) 4 3 DRIP TUBING o (SEE DETAIL) H BED DRIP TUBING WETTED ZONE NOTE: PLACE EMISSION! DEVICES SUCH THAT HARMFUL SALTS ARE PUSMM OUT AM AWAY FROM THSPLANf ROOT TANTE. Emitter Spacing Detail LEGEND ATAFIM Dry TUBING WimrLix>;>;Iw= WTM ROOT GUARD, 1.4 GPH AT 121 U.C. — NETAFIM 314" SOLID DRIP TUBING 5INi u LOOP r ' !, DOUBLE LOOP 0 \ SHRUBS TREES Emitter Detail for Tree + Shrubs Drip Irrigation Details NOT TO SCALE Figure 4, 8.1.4: Drip Irrigation Details Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 57 ea 201H. ACCESS 4.$CAINLM STF3EL DObR ALLEN HEAD WX20 0 0 SITE CONCRETE - IN CONCRETE RT AS SP�,� 1x ooarc�sr� -:1 4 x MOST DEPWABLB FOUNTAIN MODEL MDF44M PEDESTAL MOUNnD, COLOR BY OWNFIFL VALVE BOX. VALVE AND PLUOMMFORDRMN .� DOWN (NOT 1NL%17Affi]) C--1 �---- IN a0 1 1 1-1Ct A1. WASTS i1HS O o I & L T NYLON RFIINFOR(W 101N. M TURM WATER SUPPLY (NOIR: FLUSH SUPPLY LOSS ja�ra�7 BSPORE HOOK-UP) y x 91 GRAVEL SLw NOTES: 1. MEETS ADA REGULATIONS. 2. INSTALL ACCORDING TO MANUFACT'URER'S SPECIFICATIONS. 3. RECOMMENDED RUNNING WATER SUPPLY LINE IN PVC CONDUIT, FROM PEDESTAL TO UNATTACHED VALVE BOX, FOR FUTURE ACCESSIBILITY & MAINTENANCE. 4. PROVIDE OPTIONAL HOSE BIBB, UNATTACHED VALVE BOX AND CUT OFF VALVE WITH LOW POINT DRAIN. Site Drinking Fountain Detail Figure 1, 8.1.5: Drinking Fountain Detail Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 58 COMPLETE BASMT BALL STANDARD COWLS E SET INCLUDING, GALV. STEEL POST, COATED FAN BACKBOARD, DOUBLE RIM GOAL AND NYLON NET. NOTE: SPECIAL ATTEN'T'ION SHALL BE GIVEN DURING CONCRETE PLACING AND CURING, PROPER SLUMP SHALL BE MAINTAINED TO MM0dUE EXCESSIVE CRACKING OR SHRINKAGE. ALL CONCRETE PLACEMENT AND CURING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE AND APPLICABLE CITY STANDARDS. ALL CONCRETE WORK SHALL BE CLASS "A° TYPE II OR TYPE V SULFATE RESISTANT CEMENT WIN A MAX04 M OF 15 PERCENT FLY ASH. FiN13I®GRADE 1 I:: CONCRETE PAVING WITH TURN DOWN FOOTER, I I I \ t MEDIUM BKOOM FINISH. UNTREATED BASE COURSE F COWACPEDSUB GRAM REINFORCED CONCRM FOOTING - 5/8' SP®. ANCHOR BAR Basketball Court Paving and Standard Detail Figure 2, 8.1.5: Basketball Goal Detail Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 59 8.1.5 Park Furnishings and Amenities Description Note: All equipment and Furnishings MUST be approved by the City! 1. Prefabricated Pavilions and Shade Structures: All prefabricated pavilions and shade structures are to be of the highest commercial quality and equal to Icon Shelters & Pavilions, website, www.iconshelters.com, or Polygon Pavilions, website, www.polygon.net, etc. 2. Playground Equipment: All prefabricated playground equipment is to be commercial quality, and constructed of steel and PVC. Absolutely NO wood structures are allowed. Playground equipment must meet or exceed ALL State and Federal requirements. Set up and installation must be done by a certified installer, and meet all safety guidelines etc. 3. Picnic Tables, Benches and Bleachers: All picnic tables and benches are to be commercial quality and constructed of steel with a PVC coating. Benches are to be installed according to manufacturer's recommendations. Bleachers may be constructed of either aluminum or steel, and must be commercial quality. All steel bleachers must be powder or PVC coated. 4. Trash Receptacles: All Trash Receptacles must be commercial quality steel with a PVC or powder coating. Pre -cast concrete trash receptacles are also allowed. 5. Site Architecture: Site Architecture should fit in with nearby neighborhoods in material selections and aesthetics. All plans must be prepared by a Utah licensed professional, and must pass all local, state and federal codes. Final plans must be approved by the City prior to Bid. 6. Signage: All parks must have a park sign with the name of the park and City of Chubbuck clearly marked. The sign must fit in aesthetically with the surroundings, and final design must be approved by the City. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 60 City of Chubbuck Park Construction Minimum Requirements 1. Contractor and City of Chubbuck Communication ■ All Parties are to keep good communications throughout all phases of park construction. (Landscaping), (where structures will be located such as walk paths, pavilion, basketball court, play lot, frost free faucet, etc) as to planning ahead for sprinkler system installation and seeding or sodding. 2. Topsoil and Grading ■ Park surfaces shall consist of 8 to 12 inches of clean topsoil (rock and debris free), over entire park area and swales after grading. If park grading is required, existing topsoil shall be stripped, stockpiled and replaced after grading. Area is to be graded to a smooth flowing surface with positive drainage, unless otherwise approved. Stormwater swale is to be constructed 12 inches when finished below flow line of the curb. 3. Grass ■ City must approve grass seed mixture to be planted and the minimum seed rate. ■ Pre -plant fertilizer shall be applied according to manufactures specification. ■ Post -plant fertilizer shall be applied according to manufactures specifications. ■ All storm water swale areas surrounding park shall have sod, or approved rock mulch installed. ■ Sod must be locally grown and 1 -year old minimum. 4. Tree Planting ■ Root flare needs to be at, or slightly above ground level. ■ Remove all root ball packaging, including wire baskets, from the tree unless approved by City. ■ Dig the hole for the tree 2 times bigger than the root ball. 5. Fencing ■ Park perimeter fence adjoining properties shall be at a minimum chain link, 6 feet high, with 9 gauge wire fabric, 1-7/8 inch line posts, 2-3/8 inch end and corner posts, and 1- 5/8 inch top rail. Gate posts shall be no less than 2-7/8 inch diameter. Other fence material such as vinyl, etc. will be considered by the City. If park street frontage draped chain fence is required by the City posts shall be 2-3/8 inch schedule 30 with 5/16 inch cadmium plated chain. Draped chain fence will be considered on case by case basis. 6. Sprinkler Design and Layout ■ Design and layout should be in accordance with current best practices and shall be approved by the City before construction begins. ■ Valve and control box lids and sprinkler head covers in systems using non -potable water shall be purple, denoting non -potable water in use. Pipe used shall also be purple or marked purple for non - potable water. Refer to the current edition of the City of Chubbuck Pressurized Irrigation Design and Construction Standards. Layout and design shall include the following: ✓ Location of valves, main shutoff, stop and waste valve, blowouts, location of lateral and main lines (PVC or poly pipe), pipe size, location of sprinkler heads with model and nozzle sizes and location of control box. ✓ Irrigation controller to be Rainbird with rain delay option. City to specify model. ✓ Turn on and waste valve shall be ball valves. ✓ Main irrigation service shall be constructed with City approved backflow preventer with 1 inch blowout downstream. ✓ Provide solid base for valve boxes to sit on to include brick support on top of compacted base. ✓ Provide commercial grade Rainbird sprinkler heads and valves. ✓ Sprinkler heads and valve boxes shall be installed no higher than 1 inch above ground surface. ✓ Valve boxes shall be large enough to enclose valves while providing at least 3 inches of clearance. ✓ Keep turn on valve, waste valve, controller box and double check in close proximity of each other. C:\Documents and Settings\Bill\My Documents\Drawings\Chubbuck City\Parks Master Plan\2019_Revised Master Plan\Park Construction Minimum Requirements.docx (Revised May 2019) 9.0 REFERENCES Flynn, Richard B. Revised 1985. Planning Facilities for Athletics, Physical Education, and Recreation. The athletic Institute and the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance. 257 pp. Jackson, Bill S. September 1997. Panorama Area, City of St. George Revised Parks Master Plan. City of St. George, Department of Leisure Services, Parks and Open Space Division. Jackson Land Design, PC, September 2016, Toquerville City Community Parks Master Plan 2016. The City of Toquerville, Utah, Parks Department. 41 pp. Kelsey, Craig, Ph.D. (Idaho State University, Logan, Idaho), and Howard Gray, Ph.D (Brigham Young University, Provo, Idaho). 1986. The Citizen Survey Process in Parks and Recreation. The American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance. 113 pp. Kelsey, Craig, Ph.D. (Idaho State University, Logan, Idaho), and Howard Gray, Ph.D (Brigham Young University, Provo, Idaho). 1986. The Feasibility Study Process for Parks and Recreation. The American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance. 64 pp - Metes, James D., Ph.D., CLP and James R. Hall, CLP. 1995. Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines. National Recreation and Park Association and the American Academy for Park and Recreation Administration. 163 pp. Post, Buckley, Schuh, & Jernigan, Inc. September 1995. Mesquite Comprehensive Park Master Plan. Zions Bank Public Finance, May 2018, the Impact Fee Analysis. The City of Chubbuck, Idaho. Parks Master Development Plan for Chubbuck, Idaho Page 61 Fees; CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO RESOLUTION NO. 2019- 10 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, UPDATING IMPACT FEES FOR THE INFLATION ADJUSTMENT WHEREAS, Chapters 17.24 and 17.28 of the Chubbuck Municipal Code adopted Impact WHEREAS, the Impact Fee Committee has recommended no adjustments to the impact fees for 2020 (other than the inflationary adjustment that is automatic); WHEREAS, Section 17.24.120 as to Police and Emergency Services and 17.28.120 as to Park Impact fees provide for an automatic adjustment on January 1, 2020 for the inflation increases in the cost of providing the respective services or facilities to serve new development utilizing the municipal cost index as published by "American Cities And County Magazine"; WHEREAS, that municipal cost index inflation adjustment for 2019 is an increase of .5%; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Chubbuck that the Impact fees shall be adjusted for this inflation factor resulting in the following fees effective January 1, 2020: Police impact fee schedule per unit: Residential: Single Family Residential $ 232.72 Multi -Family Residential $155.63 Non -Residential General Commercial per 1,000 sq. ft. $ 373.47 Office per 1,000 sq. ft. $47.96 Institutional per 1,000 sq. ft. $68.26 RESOLUTION - Page I . chabb=k 120519 impact fee res Emergency Services Impact Fee per unit: Residential: Single Family Residential $ 275.38 Multi -Family Residential $244.67 Non -Residential General Commercial per 1,000 sq. ft. $ 309.67 Office per 1,000 sq. ft. $146.14 Institutional per 1,000 sq. ft. $4395 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee per Household: Single Family Residential $1,809.00 Multi -Family Residential $1,686.39 Effective April 1, 2020 Single Family Residential $1,994.93 Multi -Family Residential $1,860.26 Effective April 1, 2021 Single Family Residential $2,180.85 Multi -Family Residential $2,033.12 Effective April 1, 2022 Single Family Residential $2,366.78 Multi -Family Residential $2,20598 PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, THIS Jb DAY OF _Cevv.ir , 2019. � -Z. &a) - Kevin B. England, MA R ATTEST: oe ers, CLERK '1 { I . t. m .•• •• _ .. :_ ti_ _ �. Win. . City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Parks and Trails CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Contents Contents............................................................................................................................................................................2 Background........................................................................................................................................................................3 Needfor the Study....................................................................................................................................... 3 CapitalImprovements Plan...............................................................................................................................................3 ExistingFacilities.......................................................................................................................................... 3 FundingCommitments................................................................................................................................ 5 Analysis of Current Capacity and Usage...................................................................................................... 5 LandUse Assumptions................................................................................................................................. 5 Levelof Service Analysis.............................................................................................................................. 6 Improvements and Costs Required by New Development......................................................................... 7 Service Units Required by New Development............................................................................................. 7 20 -Year Projection of Service Units Required by New Development......................................................... 8 Funding Sources for System Improvements................................................................................................ 9 Joint Development of Public Facilities......................................................................................................... 9 Schedule....................................................................................................................................................... 9 Impact Fee Proportionate Share Analysis.........................................................................................................................9 Cost of Existing System Improvements....................................................................................................... 9 Financing of Existing System Improvements............................................................................................. 10 New Development Contributions to System Improvements Other than Impact Fees ............................. 10 Financing of Existing System Improvements in the Past........................................................................... 10 Credits for System Improvements............................................................................................................. 10 ExtraordinaryCosts.................................................................................................................................... 10 Time and Price Differential in Fees Charged............................................................................................. 11 OtherFunding Sources.............................................................................................................................. 11 Proportionate Share Calculation................................................................................................................11 2 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Parks and Trails CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Background Need for the Study The City of Chubbuck ("City') is experiencing strong growth of roughly 1.5 percent per year or population growth of approximately 262 persons per year, which puts pressure on the City's existing parks and trails facilities. It is, therefore, prudent to consider the implementation of impact fees, which are one-time fees charged to new development to offset the capital costs associated with new development. The implementation of impact fees allows the City to maintain its existing service levels for park and trail facilities. Any increase in service levels will need to be funded through sources other than impact fees. The City has provided input regarding its existing capital facilities as well as future capital facility needs. This input forms the basis for this Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis. The City has determined that there is one service area citywide and that there is no excess capacity in any existing park or trail facilities. Only residential development is considered to drive demand for parks and trails facilities and therefore only residential growth has been considered in the determination of impact fees. Capital Improvements Plan Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(a) — A general description of all existing public facilities and their existing deficiencies within the service area or areas of the governmental entity and a reasonable estimate of all costs and a plan to develop the funding resources related to curing the existing deficiencies including, but not limited to, the upgrading, updating, improving, expanding or replacing of such facilities to meet existing needs and usage,- Existing sage, Existing Facilities Project improvements are not included in the analysis; only system improvements are included.'Therefore, all mini parks have been excluded from the calculations. The analysis also does not include any park or trail facilities owned by private homeowner associations, or any facilities that have been acquired through grants or donations. Therefore, only the following 24 parks totaling 89.5 acres have been included in the analysis. TABLE 1: EXISTING CHUBBUCK PARKS Trails Capell Cota nt Park Meadows Acres 17.5 21.1 8.2 Stuart 4.9 Armstrong 1.6 Bicentennial 6.9 1 Project improvements are defined by Idaho Statute as "site improvements and facilities that are planned and designed to provide service for a particular development project and that are necessary for the use and convenience of the occupants or users of the project." System improvements are defined as follows: "System improvements, in contrast to project improvements, means capital improvements to public facilities which are designed to provide service to a service area including, without limitation, the type of improvements described in section 50-1703, Idaho Code." Idaho Code 67-8203 (22) and (28). Section 67-8204 (1) further states that development fees "shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements." 3 Trails Bistline City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Parks and Trails CIP and Impact Fee Analysis® - Acres 1.2 Briarwood Chase Dalton Espie Hiram Homestead Mark Harker Heartland Heritage 1.5 0.8 0.5 0.9 1.9 2.6 1.3 2.2 2.7 Jerry Rowland 2.2 Larry Miller 2.3 Long 1.4 M a ry's 4.3 Sample 0.7 Sunset West 1.6 Tree Valley 0.8 New Day Parkway 0.4 Total 89.5 A detailed list of improvements at each park is provided in Appendix A. found at these parks is as follows: TABLE 2: EXISTING PARK IMPROVEMENTS A summary of the improvements Parks Units Eligible Acres 89.5 Restroom Building 3 Playground 19 Swing Set 16 Splash Pad 1 Concessions Stand 2 Horseshoe Pits 2 Refrigerated Ice Skating Rink 1 Concrete Skating Rink 1 Paved Parking Area (Per Stall) 639 Gravel non -paved Parking 260 Storage Structure 1 Large Pavilion 11 Memorial Gazebo 1 Small Pavilion w/ Picnic Tables 4 Covered Picnic Tables 4 Bench 29 /, I City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Parks and Trails CIP and Impact Fee Analysis® - Parks Units Picnic Tables 35 Basketball Full Court 3 Basketball Half Court 9 Tennis Courts 9 Ball Field 10 Volleyball Court 3 The City has not identified any existing deficiencies in its park system. The existing service level is 5.48 acres per 1,000 persons.' For the purposes of this Impact Fee Analysis, the level of service will be 5.48 acres per 1,000 residents. Funding Commitments Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(b) - A commitment by the governmental entity to use other available resources of revenue to cure existing system deficiencies where practical, The City currently has no existing system deficiencies. Analysis of Current Capacity and Usage Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(c) —An analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of capacity of existing capital improvements, which shall be prepared by a qualified professional planner or by a qualified engineer licensed to perform engineering services in this state, The City currently has 89.5 system park acres that qualify for the impact fee level of service. The level of service (LOS) is currently 5.48 park acres per 1,000 persons, calculated by dividing the existing 89.5 park acres by the 2023 population of 16,321 persons, divided by 1,000. TABLE 3: CAPACITY AND USAGE ANALYSIS Acres Existing Existing LOS per 1,000 Population Park Acres 89.5 5.48 Land Use Assumptions Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(d) —A description of the land use assumptions by the government entity, Only residential development creates the need for more parks and trails. Therefore, demand projections are included for population growth as follows: TABLE 4: CHUBBUCK PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH, 2023-2031 Year Population 2023 16,321 2024 16,566 2025 16,814 2 The existing service level is calculated by dividing the 89.5 existing park acres by the 2023 population of 16,321 persons, divided by 1,000. 5 Year 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 Level of Service Analysis City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Parks and Trails CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Population 17,066 17,322 17,582 17,846 18,114 18,385 Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(e) - A definitive table establishing the specific level or quantity of use, consumption, generation or discharge of a service unit for each category of system improvements and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, including residential, commercial, agricultural and industrial; The existing level of service that is impact fee eligible is 5.48 park acres per 1,000 persons, calculated by dividing the 89.5 eligible park acres by the 2023 population of 16,321 persons (divided by 1,000). Impact fees should only be charged to the existing service level. The City can include park improvements, as well as the cost of park land, in its calculation of impact fees. The table below shows the 2023 inventory of park improvements and costs. The level of service for park improvements is calculated by taking the existing improvements and multiplying them by the cost per unit to maintain this same level of investment. TABLE 5: SUMMARY OF EXISTING PARK IMPROVEMENTS Parks Units Unit Cost Total Cost Eligible Acres 89.5 $106,722 $9,551,619 Restroom Building 3 $190,000 $570,000 Playground 19 $90,000 $1,710,000 Swing Set 16 $12,000 $192,000 Splash Pad 1 $400,000 $400,000 Concessions Stand 2 $80,000 $160,000 Horseshoe Pits 2 $3,500 $7,000 Refrigerated Ice Skating Rink 1 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Concrete Skating Rink 1 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Paved Parking Area (Per Stall) 639 $1,200 $766,800 Gravel non -paved Parking 260 $300 $78,000 Storage Structure 1 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Large Pavilion 11 $80,000 $880,000 Memorial Gazebo 1 $71,588 $71,588 Small Pavilion w/ Picnic Tables 4 $20,000 $80,000 Covered Picnic Tables 4 $0 $0 Bench 29 $850 $24,650 Picnic Tables 35 $1,500 $52,500 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Parks and Trails CIP and Impact Fee Analysis® — Parks Units Unit Cost Total Cost Basketball Full Court 3 $18,500 $55,500 Basketball Half Court 9 $9,500 $85,500 Tennis Courts 9 $20,000 $180,000 Ball Field 10 $45,000 $450,000 Volleyball Court 3 $2,500 $7,500 TOTAL $18,322,657 The total cost is then divided by 89.5 park acres to arrive at an existing standard of $204,722.42 per acre. Another way of stating the existing standard for park improvements is $1,122.66 per capita ($18,322,657 divided by the 2023 population of 16,321 persons). A summary table showing the equivalent levels of service (LOS) for parks is as follows: TABLE 6: SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED SERVICE LEVELS Summary Equivalency LOS Cost per Acre Existing LOS Cost per _ Table _ Capita Parks $204,722.42 $1,122.66 Improvements and Costs Required by New Development Proposed LOS Cost per Capita $1,122.66 Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(f) —A description of all system improvements and their costs necessitated by and attributable to new development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions, to provide a level of service not to exceed the level of service adopted in the development impact fee ordinance, Based on existing service levels, Chubbuck will need to acquire and develop 11.32 park acres over the next eight years, as shown in the table below. This is equivalent to a total cost of $2,317,680. The additional park development needs are based on maintaining the existing and proposed level of service, which are the same, for new development. Based on an existing park standard of 5.48 acres per 1,000 persons, 11.32 additional park acres are needed due to the estimated growth of 2,064 persons by 2031. TABLE 7: SUMMARY OF SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AND COSTS NECESSITATED BY NEW DEVELOPMENT Population Growth, 2023-2031 2,064 Additional Acres Needed 11.32 Additional Investment Needed $2,317,680.28 Cost per Acre $204,722.42 Service Units Required by New Development Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(g) — The total number of service units necessitated by and attributable to new development within the service area based on the approved land use assumptions and calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning criteria; 7 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Parks and Trails CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 The total cost required by new development over the next eight years (2023-2031) is $2,317,680.28. These costs can be spent on a variety of park facilities, as best meets the needs of the City at the time of their expenditure. 20 -Year Projection of Service Units Required by New Development Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(h) —The projected demand forsystem improvements required by new service units projected over a reasonable period of time not to exceed twenty (20) years; The population of Chubbuck is projected to grow by 5,661 residents over the next 20 years. TABLE 8: POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS, 2023-2042 Year Population 2023 16,321 2024 16,566 2025 16,814 2026 17,066 2027 17,322 2028 17,582 2029 17,846 2030 18,114 2031 18,385 2032 18,661 2033 18,941 2034 19,225 2035 19,513 2036 19,806 2037 20,103 2038 20,405 2039 20,711 2040 21,022 2041 21,337 2042 21,657 2043 21,982 Growth, 2023-2043 5,661 Over the next 20 years, the City will need to acquire and improve 31.04 park acres in order to maintain existing service levels for system improvements. TABLE 9: 20 -YEAR CAPITAL FACILITY REQUIREMENTS Description Amount Population Growth, 2023-2043 5,661 LOS - Park Acres per 1,000 Persons 5.48 Park Acres Necessitated by New Growth, 2023-2043 31.04 8 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Parks and Trails CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 This represents an investment of $5,990,606, over 20 years, in $2023. TABLE 10: 20 -YEAR CAPITAL FACILITY COSTS 20 -Year Projections Acres Park Acres Necessitated by New Growth, 2023- 31.04 2042 Funding Sources for System Improvements Cost per Acre Total Cost, 20 Years $204,722.42 $6,355,305 Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(i) — Identification of all sources and levels of funding available to the governmental entity for the financing of the system improvements. Potential funding sources include grants, donations, general fund, impact fees and revenue allocation funds. Joint Development of Public Facilities Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(j) — If the proposed system improvements include the improvement of public facilities under the jurisdiction of the state of Idaho or another governmental entity, then an agreement between governmental entities shall specify the reasonable share of funding by each unit, provided the governmental entity authorized to impose development impact fees shall not assume more than its reasonable share of funding joint improvements, nor shall the agreement permit expenditure of development impact fees by a governmental entity which is not authorized to impose development impact fees unless such expenditure is pursuant to a developer agreement under section 67-8214, Idaho Code; Not applicable. Schedule Idaho Statute 67-8208(1)(k) — A schedule setting forth estimated dates for commencing and completing construction of all improvements identified in the capital improvements plan. The City will spend all impact fees collected within the 8 -year timeframe required by Idaho law. These funds will be spent for a wide variety of park and trail facilities including, but not limited to: park land, park improvements (restrooms, ball fields, playgrounds, picnic facilities, sport courts, etc.), and trail improvements. Impact Fee Proportionate Share Analysis The Proportionate Share Analysis follows the outline provided in Idaho Statute 67-8207 (2). Cost of Existing System Improvements Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(a) — The cost of existing system improvements within the service area or areas, 0 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Parks and Trails CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©® The City has not identified any excess capacity in any of its parks and trails facilities. Therefore, the cost associated with facilities is related to the cost of constructing similar facilities in 2023 dollars. This establishes the level of service that must be maintained by new development. The cost of existing system improvements is $18,322,657 for parks per Table 5. Financing of Existing System Improvements Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(b) — The means by which existing system improvements have been financed; There is no debt outstanding on any parks and trails system improvements. Therefore, no credits need to be made for outstanding debt. Any parks and trail facilities that were acquired through grants or donations have not been included in the level of service for the calculation of impact fees. The park and trail facilities that were included were paid for through either the General Fund or from Revenue Allocation Funds. New Development Contributions to System Improvements Other than Impact Fees Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(c) — The extent to which the new development will contribute to the cost of system improvements through taxation, assessment, or developer or landowner contributions, or has previously contributed to the cost of system improvements through developer or landowner contributions. The City does not intend to bond for future park improvements; therefore, no double payments will occur by new development. There are no bonds outstanding on existing park and trail facilities and therefore no recent past payments have been made for these types of facilities. The City may choose, at its discretion, to accept donations of land or park/trails improvements from developers. In this case, the impact fee should be offset by the donations. Financing of Existing System Improvements in the Past Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(d) — The extent to which the new development is required to contribute to the cost of existing system improvements in the future. The City has no existing, outstanding bonds or leases for park or trail facilities. Therefore, new development will not be required to pay for existing facilities. Credits for System Improvements Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(e) — The extent to which the new development should be credited for providing system improvements, without charge to other properties within the service area or areas; For parks and trails, new development will not be required to provide oversize system improvements that will benefit other properties in the service area. Therefore, no reimbursement agreements or credits are applicable. Extraordinary Costs Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(f) — Extraordinary costs, if any, incurred in serving the new development,- Not evelopment; Not applicable. 10 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Parks and Trails CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Time and Price Differential in Fees Charged Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(8) — The time and price differential inherent in a fair comparison of fees paid of different times, The City anticipates updating its CIP and Impact Fee Proportionate Share Analysis every few years. At these times, the City will update the costs associated with purchasing land, making park improvements and constructing trails. This will ensure a fair comparison of fees paid at different times. Other Funding Sources Idaho Statute 67-8207(2)(h) - The availability of other sources of funding system improvements including, but not limited to, user charges, general tax levies, intergovernmental transfers, and special taxation. The governmental entity shall develop a plan for alternative sources of revenue. User Charges. User charges are most often charged in connection with the operation and maintenance of facilities. It is not anticipated that user fees would be charged for the construction of parks and trails capital facilities. General Tax Levies. While general tax levies may be used to fund park and trail facilities, the General Fund is only intended to be used for system improvements if the situation arises that the City desires to raise the existing service levels to meet new proposed service levels. Impact fees are intended to be used to maintain existing service levels through acquisition of the facilities needed due to new growth and development. Intergovernmental Transfers. The City can borrow money from other City funds in order to construct park and trail facilities and then later repay those funds as impact fee revenues are collected. At this time the City has no plans to use intergovernmental transfers. Special Taxation. The City does not intend to issue debt or impose special taxes to fund park and trail facilities. Donations and/or Grants. The City may receive donations or grants from public or private entities, such as urban renewal, to offset some of the costs for constructing parks or trail facilities. Proportionate Share Calculation There are three main cost components in the calculation of impact fees: • New construction of parks and trails facilities; • Consultant costs; and • Credits New Construction of Parks and Trails Facilities New construction costs are calculated by first taking the number of acres needed (11.32) by new development over the next eight years. This calculation is based on population growth and maintaining the existing level of service of 5.48 acres per 1,000 persons. The cost for the additional acres is then calculated by multiplying the 11.32 acres by the cost of $204,722 per acre (existing cost for land and improvements) City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Parks and Trails CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 to reach a total cost of $2,317,680. The total cost is then divided by the projected population growth of 2,064 persons over the next eight years to arrive at a total cost of $1,122.66 per capita. TABLE 11: PROPORTIONATE SHARE CALCULATION- NEW CONSTRUCTION COST New Construction — Parks Impact -Fee Eligible Park Acres Existing LOS - Park Acres per 1,000 Existing Park Improvements - Total Cost 2023 Population Existing LOS per Capita — Parks Population Growth, 2023-2031 Acres Needed, 2023-2031 Amount 89.5 5.48 $18,322,657 16,321 $1,122.66 2,064 11.32 Existing Standard Cost per Acre $204,722.42 Park Improvements Needed at Existing Standard $2,317,680 Cost per Capita $1,122.66 Consultant Costs The cost of preparing this analysis can also be included in the calculation of impact fees. The cost of $8,000 is divided among the projected population growth of 2,064 persons over the next eight years. TABLE 12: PROPORTIONATE SHARE CALCULATION - CONSULTANT COSTS Consultant Costs Amount ZPFI $8,000 Growth, 2023-2033 2,064 Cost per Capita $3.88 Credits Credits are made for the existing fund balance in the park impact fee account. The existing funds can be used to offset the capital costs needed for future development and thus reduce the cost to new development. TABLE 13: PROPORTIONATE SHARE CALCULATION - CREDIT FOR PARKS AND TRAILS IMPACT FEE FUND BALANCE Credits for Fund Balance Balance $804,435 Growth, 2023-2033 2,064 Credit per Capita ($389.66) *Impact fee fund balance as of April 2023 provided by Chubbuck No other credits are necessary for outstanding bonds, debt obligations, leases or other factors. Summary of Proportionate Share Analysis 12 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Parks and Trails CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Total costs per capita are summarized as follows: TABLE 14: PARKS AND TRAILS IMPACT FEE SUMMARY- PER CAPITA COSTS Description Amount Improvements $1,122.66 Consultant $3.88 Fund Balance ($389.66) Summary $736.87 Fees will be charged on a residential unit basis for Single -Family and Multi -Family Housing. Therefore, the per capita cost has been multiplied by the average household size of single-family and multi -family community housing units. The City can choose to charge up to the maximum fee for single-family units and multi -family units. TABLE 15: PARKS AND TRAILS IMPACT FEE SUMMARY- PER HOUSEHOLD MAXIMUM FEES Maximum Fees HH Size* Max Fee Single -Family 2.90 $2,136.93 Multi -Family 2.35 $1,731.65 *Source:. United States Census 2020 13 01 w i r ff 0 City of Chubbuck DRAFT Fire and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ZIONS ®M PUBLIC FINANCE, INC. ®u 15 September 2023 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©© Contents Contents........................................................................................................................................................................2 Section I: Introduction to the Fire and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis .........3 ProjectOverview....................................................................................................................................... 3 ImpactFee Service Area............................................................................................................................ 3 Populationand Fire Call Data.................................................................................................................... 3 LandUse Analysis......................................................................................................................................4 ServiceUnits.............................................................................................................................................. 5 CallData Analysis....................................................................................................................................... 5 LandUse and Future Calls.........................................................................................................................6 Section II: Fire and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan...............................................................................6 SystemImprovements...............................................................................................................................6 Existing Equipment and Capital Facilities.................................................................................................. 7 Existing Equipment Inventory................................................................................................................7 ExistingCapital Facilities........................................................................................................................ 7 Future Fire Infrastructure..........................................................................................................................7 Funding Future Capital Facilities...............................................................................................................8 HistoricFunding Sources.......................................................................................................................8 BondFunding........................................................................................................................................ 8 ImpactFees...........................................................................................................................................8 Summary of Time and Price Differential....................................................................................................8 Equityof Impact Fees................................................................................................................................ 8 Section III: Fire and Emergency Services Impact Fee Analysis........................................................................................9 ImpactFee Overview................................................................................................................................. 9 FireLevel of Service................................................................................................................................... 9 Proportionate Share Analysis.................................................................................................................... 9 Calculation of Proportionate Share..................................................................................................... 10 ImpactFee Cost per Call.......................................................................................................................... 10 Impact Fee Cost per Development Unit.................................................................................................. 11 Credits Owed to Development................................................................................................................11 Impact Fee Fund Balance Credit.......................................................................................................... 11 Individual Impact Fee Assessment.......................................................................................................... 11 K City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©n Section I: Introduction to the Fire and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis Project Overview The City of Chubbuck (City) has commissioned Zions Public Finance, Inc (Zions) to put together a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Impact Fee Analysis (IFA) prior to updating fire and emergency services development impact fees authorized by Title 67, Chapter 82, Idaho Code, known as the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act (Impact Fee Act). Impact Fee Service Area Chubbuck is a city located in Bannock County, Idaho. The 2020 population was estimated to be 15,570 based on the United States Census 2020. By 2023, the population is estimated to reach 16,321 persons based on an average annual growth rate of 1.5 percent.' The purpose of the Fire and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan is to provide Chubbuck with substantive planning for future fire capital infrastructure including facility sizing, timing, costs and allocation to growth for which development impact fees may be used as a funding source. This information will be used as the basis of calculating the Fire and Emergency Services impact fees. A current CIP must be prepared before the City can update the Fire IFA. This CIP and IFA have been prepared for a single, city- wide service area (Service Area) with the same impact fee cost per call assessed throughout the Service Area. The cost per call is the relationship between the City's population and annual fire/emergency services calls generated within the City's boundaries and will be discussed in Section III: Fire and Emergency Services Impact Fee Analysis. Population and Fire Call Data The 2023 population in Chubbuck is estimated at 16,321 persons and 5,779 households. Over the next 20 years, Chubbuck is projected to grow to a population of 21,982 persons and 7,783 households. TABLE 1: ATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS Year V1 20 2024 2025 2026 2027 lqw Population Households 15,842 5,609 16,080 16,321 16,566 16,814 17,066 17.322 5,693 5,779 5,865 5,953 6,042 6.133 2028 17,582 6,225 2029 17,846 6,318 2030 18,114 6,413 2031 18,385 6,509 2032 18,661 6,607 'Source: City of Chubbuck City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Year 2033 2034 Population 18,941 19,225 Households 6,706 6,807 2035 19,513 6,909 2036 19,806 7,013 2037 20,103 7,118 2038 20,405 7,225 2039 20,711 7,333 2040 21,022 7,443 2041 21,337 7,555 2042 21,657 14L 7,668 2043 21,982 7,783 Source: City of Chubbuck Source: City of Chubb k Depa t; ZPFI Fire calls for service were provided by the City of Chubbuck for the two-year period from 2020 through 2022. Because of the significant growth in calls between 2021 and 2022, the more recent year has been used in the analysis in order to capture the increased growth demands and trends in the City. TABLE 2: FIRE CALLS FOR SERVICE Category Calls to Private Land Uses Single Family Residential Multi -Family Residential General Commercial 2020-2021 527 196 328 2021-2022 734 283 506 Office 39 37 Institutional 2 4 Calls to Public and Uses/Othe ML Public B ngs and Land ' 12 17 Traffi M,89 46- 98 North B County, Easter1qllllllllllllllllIyer COML 17 9 Mutual Aid1k 14MIL 197 197 Undefined Nr 8 4 Total Calls 1415 1889 Source: City of Chubb k Depa t; ZPFI Land Use Analysis Table 3 shows the current and proposed residential and non-residential units. It is estimated that single- family units will grow to 5,675 units by 2043 and that multi -family units will grow to 2,108 units. The non- residential units show growth to over 3.6 million square feet (sf) of general commercial space by 2043, nearly 800,000 sf of office space and just over half a million square feet of institutional space. TABLE 3: CURRENT AND PROJECTED LAND USE Year Single -Family Multi -Family Units Units 2022 4,151 1,542 General Commercial SF* 2,653,464 Office SF* Institutional SF* 581,950 371,428 4 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Year 2023 Single -Family Units 4,214 Multi -Family Units 1,565 General Commercial SF* 2,693,266 Office SF 590,679 Institutional SF 376,999 2024 4,277 1,588 2,733,665 599,539 382,654 2025 4,341 1,612 2,774,670 608,533 388,394 2026 4,406 1,636 2,816,290 617,661 394,220 2027 4,472 1,661 2,858,534 626,925 400,133 2028 4,539 1,686 2,901,412 636,329 406,135 2029 4,607 1,711 2,944,934 645,874 412,227 2030 4,676 1,737 2,989,108 655,562 418,411 2031 4,747 1,763 3,033,944 665,396 424,687 2032 4,818 1,789 3,079,453 675,377 431,057 2033 2034 2035 4,890 4,963 5,038 1,816 1,843 1,871 3,125,645 3,172,530 dj, 3,220,118 Igo 685,507 695,790 706,227 437,523 444,086 450,747 2036 5,113 1,899 AN, 3,268,419 1W 716,820 457,509 2037 5,190 1,928 3,317,446 727,573 464,371 2038 5,268 1,957 3,367,207 738,486 471,337 2039 5,347 1,986 + 3,417,716 749,563 478,407 2040 5,427 2,016 3,468,981 760,807 485,583 2041 5,509 A9111111111111111h, 2,046 3,521,016 772,219 _ 492,867 2042 5,5917 3,573,831 783,802 500,260 2043 5,675 3,627,439 795,559 507,764 *SF = square feet Service Units A service unit is defined by the Impact Fees Act as a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. In the case of fire impact fees an emergency call is the basic unit for measuring the demand for services for each land use. The impact fee is calculated based on the "cost per call" and applied to each land use category according to the historic calls per unit generated by that land use category. Call Data Analysis Traffic calls and calls to public land are then allocated to the five land use categories based on their proportion of total calls forkervice. TABLE 4: ANALYSIS OF FIRE CALLS BY TYPE - 2022 DATA FIRE CALLS Fire Calls % of Total % of Total after Allocation Single -Family Residential 734 39% 46.93% Multi -Family Residential 283 15% 18.09% General Commercial 506 27% 32.35% Office 37 2% 2.37% Institutional* 4 0% 0.26% Traffic 98 5% Public Land** 17 1% k, City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis — FIRE CALLS Fire Calls % of Total % of Total after Allocation Unknown/Out of Area 210 11% Total 1,889 100.00% 100.00% *Institutional includes uses such as civic buildings, schools and churches **Public land includes areas such as parks, trails and public open space/recreational areas ***Unknown are those calls with an unknown address or land use type After the allocation of traffic and public land calls, the resulting calls and calls per unit are shown in the table below. Note that unknown/out of area calls are not allocated to other land use categories for the purpose of calculating impact fees. These costs must be borne by the community as a whole and not solely by new development. TABLE 5: CALLS PER UNIT/SF Land Use Category 2022 Units/SF 2022 C2ft Calls per Unit/SF Single -Family Residential — unit 0.1885106 Multi -Family Residential - unit 3 0.1957004 General Commercial —sf 2,653, 539 0.0002033 Office — sf 581,950 39 0.0000678 Institutional - sf 371,428 4 0.0000115 Land Use and Future Calls Table 6 shows the growth in calls per unit by land use type. The rati f ca Is per unit remains constant for future projections with an anticipated increase of 665 calls by 2043 TABLE 6: GROWTH IN CALLS _Mh_ 20 Growth in Callser �23 Ca 43 Calls 2043 Units Calls 2023- p Units/SF 2043 Unit/SF Single -Family Residential 4,214 1,070 5,675 276 0.1885106 — unit Multi -Family Residential - 1,565 412 2,108 106 0.1957004 unit General Commercial —sf54 2,693,266 738 3,627,439 190 0.0002033 Office — sf 590,679 54 795,559 14 0.0000678 Institutional —sf 376,999 6 507,764 2 0.0000115 Non -Impact Fee Eligible 225 303 78 TOTAL 1,917 2,582 665 Section II: Fire and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan System Improvements The Impact Fee Act allows that an impact fee be collected for the cost to construct system improvements which have capacity to serve future growth. A system improvement is defined as an improvement which 6 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©© will provide service to an entire service area - not an improvement that only serves one specific development. The system improvement must also have a useful life of 10 or more years. System improvements which are impact fee eligible may have "buy -in" capacity to the City's existing inventory of equipment and facilities or may be allocated to future improvements within a 20 -year planning horizon. The impact fee should be calculated to assess an impact fee for the proportionate share of system improvement costs which are available to serve future growth. The Fire and Emergency Services CIP documents the City's impact fee qualifying existing and future expenditures. Existing Equipment and Capital Facilities Existing Equipment Inventory Table 7 summarizes the City's existing fire/emergency services equipment inventory. A portion of the existing equipment will serve growth and will be included in the impact fee calculation. TABLE 7: EXISTING EQUIPMENT INVENTORY Vehicle # Make Date in Service Usefu Actual Cost 300 Buffalo 301 KME/International 93 2 $109,000 302 KME / Internation 20 $109,000 General Fire/ 303 200 % 20 $174,719 International V&79F%j,. 304 La France 983 25 $238,000 305 G M 2007 30 $49,191 306 International 2008 20 Donated 308 Ford 2005 30 $32,499 311 Chevrolet 2016 0 $41,000 312 International 1999 36 Donated 313 vrolet 12 21 $35,094.98 315 rnational/Pierce 2013 18 $238,781 316 Ford 2002 26 $36,000 343 Polaris 11% 2012 19 $9,619 Eng1 Pierce t 2019 19 $581,421 Existing Capital Facilities The fire department currently operates out of an existing station at 4727 Yellowstone Avenue. It has 11,716 square feet. This building is at capacity; therefore, two new fire stations are planned: one on the west side of the City and one on the north side of the City in order to meet the growth in demand and maintain response times. Future Fire Infrastructure The new fire stations are planned to have 9,184 square feet each with a construction cost of $4,370,908 for the West Station and $4,919,495 for the North Station. 7 TABLE 8: FUTURE FIRE STATIONS Square Feet Future West Fire Station Future North Fire Station Source: City of Chubbuck; ZPFI 9,184 9,184 Funding Future Capital Facilities City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Cost ($2023) $4,000,000 $4,000,000 Cost per SF $436 $436 Construction Year 2026 2030 Cost in Construction Year $4,370,908 $4,919,495 Historic Funding Sources Fire facilities can be funded in a variety of ways including tax revenues, impact fees, grants, bonds, vehicle leases, etc. Tax revenues—property and sales—are the primary source of revenue for the City. The City has authority to collect a portion of the property and sales taxes within its boundaries. The revenues collected can cover the operational expenses, non -impact fee qualifying capital expenses, and other general needs of the fire department. The current fire facilities were paid for through a combination of property taxes, sales taxes and impact fees with the expectation that the City would be repaid, over time, for new development's proportionate share of the costs through impact fees. Bond Funding There are no outstanding bonds related to the fire department and no future bonds are currently proposed. If a bond is proposed and approved in the future by City residents, then the impact fees should be revised at that time to include any additional bond costs. Impact Fees Impactfees have become an ideal mechanism for funding growth -related infrastructure. It is recommended that impact fees be used to fund growth -related capital projects as they help to maintain an adequate level of service and prevent existing users from subsidizing the capital needs of new growth. Summary of Time and Price Differential The Impact Fees Act allows forthe inclusion of a time and price differential to ensure that the costs incurred at a later date are accurately calculated. These adjustments to construction costs have been made previously in Table 8. Equity of Impact Fees The impact fee calculations are structured to fund 100% of the growth -related portion of system improvements as presented in the impact fee analysis. Funds borrowed from other City accounts to pay for the new facilities are to be repaid in their entirety through impact fees at the time that impact fee funds become available. 8 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Section III: Fire and Emergency Services Impact Fee Analysis Impact Fee Overview The impact fee for fire and emergency services is calculated using the growth projections, current call data and future call projections, current and estimated future land use, and existing and future equipment and facilities costs which have been described in Sections I & II of this document. The final components necessary to complete the Impact Fee Analysis include: level of service (LOS), proportionate share analysis, impact fee cost per call, impact fee cost per development unit, and review of any credits to development. Each of those components are discussed in this section. Fire Level of Service One key component of the impact fee calculation is the level of service. The level of service is the measure of the relationship between service capacity and service demand for public facilities. In the case of fire impact fees that means the total building square footage (capacity) relative to the number of calls the fire department receives each year (service demand). Unlike a utility such as culinary water where capacity can be added gradually to the system by upsizing an existing line segment, public safety floor space has to be built station -by -station, not line -by-line. To adequately maintain the current level of service, fire stations or expansions of existing fire stations must be done well ahead of the increase in call volume that the station expansion is designed to serve. As we look at the call volume, the current level of service is 6.11 square feet per call (11,716 existing sf divided by 1,917 calls for service). A new station is planned to be built on the City's west side at a cost of $4,370,908. Maintaining the existing service level of 6.11 square feet per call results in the need for 1,881 square feet of new building space by 2033. This represents about 20.5 percent of the capacity of the new building planned because the existing building is considered to be at capacity. TABLE 9: CURRENT AND PROJECTED FIRE LEVEL OF SERVICE New Conation Amount SF per Call 'T 6.11 Growth in Calls, 2023-2033 % 308 SF Required 2023-2033 ' 1,881 New Facility Cost , L $4,370,908 SF of New Facility _" 9,184 New Growth as % of Total Cos 20.5% Proportionate Share Analysis As part of this analysis, the Impact Fee Act requires that the calculated impact fee be roughly proportionate and reasonably related to the development activity. Ideally, implementing an impact fee to pay for needed infrastructure places a burden on future users that is equal to the burden that was borne in the past by existing users. To determine the fair share of an impact fee for system capacity in fire and emergency services, a proportionate share analysis was performed as described below. City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Calculation of Proportionate Share Table 10 shows the future floor space required by the increased calls for service in 2033 due to growth from new development, as well as the cost of construction attributable to new development. TABLE 10: PROPORTIONATE SHARE CALCULATION - FACILITIES NEEDED FOR 2033 LOS 308 New Construction Amount SF per Call 6.11 Growth in Calls, 2023-2033 308 SF Required 2023-2033 1,881 New Facility Cost $4,370,908 SF of New Facility 9,184 New Growth as % of Total Cost 20.5% Cost to New Development, 2023-2033 $895,168.20 Cash on Hand $192,999.09 Remaining Balance to New Development $702,169.11 Impact Fee Cost per Call The cost per call is calculated by dividing the total cost of $702,169.11 by the growth in calls between 2023 2033. TABLE 11: FIRE COST PER CALL CALCULATION - FACILITIES New Construction Amount SF per Call 6.11 Growth in Calls, 2023-2 308 SF Required 2023-2033 1,881 New Facility Cost $4,370,908 SF of New Facility 9,184 New Growth as % of Total 20.5% Cost to New Development, 20 3 $895,168.20 Cash on Han $192,999.09 Remaining Balanq to New Develop $702,169.11 Growth in Calls, 2023-2031 308 Cost per Call, 2023-203 $2,281.17 In addition, Table 7 shows the fire vehicles used by Chubbuck which can be included in the calculation of impact fees. Appendix A reduces the total cost by subtracting 20 percent of value as residual value. The total cost less residual value is then divided by the capacity calls served by each vehicle to arrive at a vehicle cost per call of $254.44 for existing vehicles. Appendix B shows the detailed calculations for new vehicles purchased within the next 20 years. Only the portion of costs attributable to the next 20 years have been included in the study. The resulting cost per call is $419.11. 10 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 The total fire vehicle cost per call, for existing and new vehicles, is $673.55. The total cost per call is composed of the facility cost, vehicle cost and consultant costs associated with preparing the CIP and Impact Fee Analysis. This results in a total cost per call of $2,344.20. TABLE 12: FIRE COST PER CALL CALCULATION Description Amount New Construction $2,281.17 Vehicle Cost $673.55 Consultant Cost $19.49 Fund Balance Credit ($630.02) Total Cost per Call $2,344.20 Impact Fee Cost per Development Unit The impact fee is assessed to each user category based upon the historic calls per unit generated by that land use. The City's observed annual fire calls per unit by development type are multiplied by the impact fee cost per call to calculate the final impact fee per land use. TABLE 13: MAXIMUM IMPACT FEES Maximum Fees Calls per Unit Maximum Fees Single Family—unit 0.188510612 $441.91 Multi -Family — unit 0.1957004 $458.76 General Commercial —f 0.000203314 $0.48 Office — per sf 0.00006779 $0.16 Institutional —per sf7 0.000011482 $0.03 Credits Owed to Development There are no credits owed to and there are no bonds outstanding on current facilities. Impact Fee Fund Balance Credit When an impact fee fund has an available balance, which can be used towards future impact fee qualifying expenditures and thus reduce the cost to new development, then credits are made to the future impact fee. The City currently has an impact fee fund balance of $193,925.68 which was used to reduce the costs owed by new development on the fire facilities as shown in Table 12. Individual Impact Fee Assessment The Impact Fees Act states that the impact fee ordinance should include a process whereby the City shall allow a developer, upon request by the developer, to provide a written individual assessment of the proportionate share of development impact fees. The individual assessment process permits consideration of studies, data, and any other relevant information submitted by the developer to adjust the amount of the fee. For fire impact fees the variable that would be reviewed in the individual impact fee assessment would be the average annual fire calls generated by the proposed development. Once the City and the 11 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©© ©o developer have reviewed relevant information and determined the number of average annual fire calls for the proposed development, then the City can calculate the individual impact fee assessment using the formula in Table 14. TABLE 14: INDIVIDUAL IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT FORMULA Fire Cost Per Call Impact Fee Assessed $2,344.20 x # of Annual Calls Projected to be Created = Individual Impact Fee Assessment 12 City of Chubbuck 7:; Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ZIONS ©m PUBLIC FINAN E,IN . ®a 17 May 2023 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©© ©n Contents Contents........................................................................................................................................................................2 Section I: Introduction to the Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis.............................................3 ProjectOverview....................................................................................................................................... 3 ImpactFee Service Area............................................................................................................................ 3 Population and Police Call Data................................................................................................................. 3 LandUse Analysis......................................................................................................................................4 ServiceUnits..............................................................................................................................................4 CallData Analysis....................................................................................................................................... 5 LandUse and Future Calls.........................................................................................................................5 Section II: Police and Animal Control Capital Improvement Plan...................................................................................7 SystemImprovements...............................................................................................................................7 Existing Equipment and Capital Facilities.................................................................................................. 7 Existing Equipment Inventory................................................................................................................7 ExistingCapital Facilities........................................................................................................................8 Future Police Infrastructure......................................................................................................................8 Funding Future Capital Facilities...............................................................................................................8 HistoricFunding Sources.......................................................................................................................8 BondFunding........................................................................................................................................ 9 ImpactFees...........................................................................................................................................9 Summary of Time and Price Differential....................................................................................................9 Equityof Impact Fees................................................................................................................................ 9 Section III: Police and Animal Control Impact Fee Analysis..........................................................................................10 ImpactFee Overview............................................................................................................................... 10 PoliceLevel of Service............................................................................................................................. 10 Proportionate Share Analysis.................................................................................................................. 10 Calculation of Proportionate Share..................................................................................................... 11 ImpactFee Cost per Call.......................................................................................................................... 11 Impact Fee Cost per Development Unit.................................................................................................. 13 Credits Owed to Development................................................................................................................13 Impact Fee Fund Balance Credit.......................................................................................................... 13 Individual Impact Fee Assessment..........................................................................................................13 K City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Section I: Introduction to the Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis Project Overview The City of Chubbuck (City) has commissioned Zions Public Finance, Inc (Zions) to put together a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Impact Fee Analysis (IFA) prior to updating police and animal control development impact fees authorized by Title 67, Chapter 82, Idaho Code, known as the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act (Impact Fee Act). Impact Fee Service Area Chubbuck is a city located in Bannock County, Idaho. The 2020 population was estimated to be 15,570 based on the United States Census 2020. By 2023, the population is estimated to reach 16,321 persons based on an average annual growth rate of 1.5 percent.' The purpose of the Police Capital Improvement Plan is to provide Chubbuck with substantive planning for future police capital infrastructure including facility sizing, timing, costs and allocation to growth for which development impact fees may be used as a funding source. This information will be used as the basis of calculating the Police impact fees. A current CIP must be prepared before the City can update the police IFA. This CIP and IFA have been prepared for a single, City-wide Service Area (Service Area) with the same impact fee cost per call assessed throughout the Service Area. The cost per call is the relationship between the City's population and annual police calls generated within the City's boundaries and will be discussed in Section III: Police and Animal Control Impact Fee Analysis. Population and Police Call Data Police calls for service were provided by the City of Chubbuck for the two-year period from 2020 through 2022. An average of the two years has been used in this analysis in order to establish current service levels. 0 TABLE 1: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEE CALLS FOR SERVICE ategory Calls to PrivaX Land Uses Single Family Residential 2020-2021 2132 2021-2022 Average 1942 2037 Multi -Family Residential 970 949 960 General Commercial 2316 2180 2248 Office 28 21 25 Institutional 131 119 125 Calls to Public Land Uses/Other Public Buildings and Land 110 137 124 Traffic 1166 1105 1136 Mutual Aid 613 620 617 'Source: City of Chubbuck 3 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis® - Category 2020-2021 2021-2022. Average Undefined 277 236 257 Total Calls 7743 7309 7526 Source: City of Chubbuck Police Department; ZPFI Land Use Analysis Table 2 shows the current and proposed residential and non-residential units. It is estimated that single- family units will grow to 5,675 units by 2043 and that multi -family units will grow to 2,108 units. The non- residential units show growth to over 3.6 million square feet (sf) of general commercial space by 2043, nearly 800,000 sf of office space and just over half a million square feet of institutional space. TABLE 2: CURRENT AND PROJECTED LAND USE Single -Family Multi -Family General * * Year Units Units Commercial SF* %iffice SF Institutional SF 2022 4,151 1,542 2,653,464 581,950 371,428 2023 4,214 1,5%h2,693,266 IW,679 376,999 2024 4,277 1,588 2,733,665 1JW9 382,654 2025 4,341 1,612 IM2,774,670 6084,1gaL 388,394 2026 4,406 1,636 2,816,290 617,60M 394,220 2027 2028 4,472 4,539 661 2,858,534 2,901,412 626,925 636,329 400,133 406,135 2029 4,607 1,7 2,944,934 645,874 412,227 2030 2031 2032 2033 4,676 4,747 4,818 4,890 1,737 1,763 1,789 1,816 2,989,108 3,033,944 3,079,453 3,125,645 655,562 665,396 675,377 685,507 418,411 424,687 431,057 437,523 2034 4k63 1,843 3,172,530 695,790 444,086 2035 1,871 3,220,118 706,227 450,747 2036 5, 22k1,899 3,268,419 716,820 457,509 203 5,190 1,928 3,317,446 727,573 464,371 2038 5,268 1,957 3,367,207 738,486 471,337 2039 5,347 1,986 3,417,716 749,563 478,407 2040 5,42 2,016 3,468,981 760,807 485,583 2041 5,5091M 2,046 3,521,016 772,219 492,867 2042 5,591 2,077 3,573,831 783,802 500,260 2043 5,675 2,108 3,627,439 795,559 507,764 *SF = sauare feet Service Units A service unit is defined by the Impact Fees Act as a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. In the case of police impact fees an emergency call is the basic unit for measuring the demand for services for each land use. The impact fee is calculated based on the "cost per call" and applied to each land use category according to the historic calls per unit generated by that land use category. 2 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Call Data Analysis Traffic calls and calls to public land are then allocated to the five land use categories based on their proportion of total calls for service. TABLE 3: ANALYSIS OF POLICE CALLS BY TYPE Land Use Category Police Calls % of Total % of Total Single -Family Residential 2,037 27% 37.76% Multi -Family Residential 960 13% 17.79% General Commercial 2,248 30% 41.68% Office 25 0% 0.45% Institutional* 125 2% 2.32% Traffic 1,136 15% Public Land** 124 AhL Ai 2% Unknown ***/Out of Area 873 12% TOTAL 791 W. 100% *Institutional includes uses such as civic buildings, sch'lWnd churches Noll **Public land includes areas such as parks, trails and public open space/recreational areas ***Unknown are those calls with an unknown address or land use type After the allocation of traffic and public land calls, the resulting calls and calls per unit are shown in the table below. Note that unknown/out of area calls are not allocated to other land use categories for the purpose of calculating impact fees. These costs must be borne by the community as a whole and not solely by new development. TABLE 4: CALLS PER UNIT 3W L Land Use Category IT &22 Units/S 2022 Calls Calls per Unit/SF Single -Family Residential — unit 4451 2,465 0.593760 Multi -Family Residential — unit All 1,542 1,161 0.753062 General Commercial — sf r IW2,653,4642,720 0.001025 Office — sf Ilk IM81,950 30 0.000051 Institutional - sf IL371,428 151 0.000407 Land Use andFu alls Table 5 shows the growth in calls per unit by land use type in Table 5. The ratio of calls per unit remains constant for future projections with an anticipated increase of 2,298 calls by 2043. TABLE 5: GROWTH IN CALLS Growth in Calls per 2023 Calls 2023 Units/SF 2043 Calls 2043 Units/SF Calls 2023- Unit/SF 2043 Single -Family Residential 2,502 4,214 3,370 5,675 868 0.593760 Multi -Family Residential 1,178 1,565 1,587 2,108 409 0.753062 General Commercial 2,761 2,693,266 3,719 3,627,439 958 0.001025 Office 30 590,679 41 795,559 10 0.000051 k, City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Growth in Calls per 2023 Calls 2023 Units/SF 2043 Calls 2043 Units/SF Calls 2023 Unit/SF 2043 Institutional 154 376,999 207 507,764 53 0.000407 Non -Impact Fee Eligible 999 1,366 TOTAL 7,624 10,288 2,298 11 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Section II: Police and Animal Control Capital Improvement Plan System Improvements The Impact Fee Act allows that an impact fee be collected for the cost to construct system improvements which have capacity to serve future growth. A system improvement is defined as an improvement which will provide service to an entire service area not an improvement that only serves one specific development. The system improvement must also have a useful life of ten or more years. System improvements which are impact fee eligible may have "buy -in" capacity to the City's existing inventory of equipment and facilities or may be allocated to future improvements within a twenty-year planning horizon. The impact fee should be calculated to assess an impact fee for the proportionate share of system improvement costs which are available to serve future growth. The Police and Animal Control CIP documents the City's impact fee qualifying existing and future expenditures. Existing Equipment and Capital Facilities Existing Equipment Inventory Table 6 summarizes the City's existing police/animal control equipment inventory. A portion of the existing equipment will serve growth and will be included in the impact fee calculation. TABLE 6: EXISTING EQUIPMENT INVENTORY Veh # 1 Expiration 3/1/2026 Year PurchiaMake'N 2016 Ford Model Explorer Cost $27,000 2 3 3/1/2030 3/1/2029 2021 2021 Dodge Dodge Durango Durango $29,000 $29,000 4 4/30/2023 2017 Ford F150 $28,000 5 2022 Toyota Rav4 $30,000 6 3/1/2024 2015 Chevy Tahoe $30,000 7 A 3/1/2024 2015 evy Tahoe $30,000 2022 Dodge Durango $30,000 9 2022 Toyota Rav4 $30,000 103/1/2027 2017 Ford Explorer $30,000 11 5/1/2023 2016 Ford Explorer $27,000 12 5/1/2023 2009 Chevy Malibu $18,000 13 3/1/2025 2015 Ford F-150 $24,000 14 3/1/2030 2013 Chevy Tahoe $28,000 15 3/1/2027 2017 Ford Explorer $30,000 16 17 5/1/2023 2009 Chevy Malibu $18,000 18 8/1/2023 2018 Dodge Durango $27,000 19 3/1/2026 2016 Ford Explorer $27,000 20 5/1/2023 2009 Chevy Equinox $22,200 21 11/1/2023 2007 GMC Silverado $16,200 22 5/1/2023 2013 Chevy Tahoe $28,000 23 3/1/2025 2016 Ford Explorer $26,500 7 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis® - Veh # Expiration Year Purchased Make Model Cost 24 25 4/1/2023 2018 Dodge Durango $27,000 26 Reader Board $13,000 27 3/1/2029 2019 Dodge Durango $28,684 28 29 3/1/2028 2011 Chevy Silverado $21,300 30 7/1/2023 2018 Dodge Durango $27,000 31 5/1/2023 2014 Chevy Silverado $30,000 32 3/1/2029 2019 Dodge Durango $28,684 33 34 3/1/2030 2020 Durango $29,000 35 3/1/2030 2020 DoWe Durango $29,000 36 3/1/2031 2021 Dodge Durango $29,000 37 3/1/2031 2021 Dodge Durango $30,384 50 4/1/2029 2013 Jeep Rubic n Gift = 0 Existing Capital Facilities The police department currently operates out of an existing police station and an animal shelter. These new facilities were completed in May 2023 and future development will be required to buy -in to its proportionate share of these facilities based on the demand it places on these facilities. Demand is measured by calls for service. The existing police station has 18,000 square feet and was acquired at a cost of $6.8 million; the animal control shelter has 3,778 square feet and was acquired at a cost of $1.9 million. Future Police Infrastructure No new police or animal control facilities are anticipated to be needed within the next 20 years. Therefore, new development will need to buy -in to the excess capacity in the existing facilities. I Funding FutureCapital Facilitiej. Historic Funding Sources Police facilities can be funded in a variety of ways including tax revenues, impact fees, grants, bonds, vehicle leases, etc. Tax revenues—property and sales—are the primary source of revenue for the City. The City has authority to collect a portion of the property and sales taxes within its boundaries. The revenues collected can cover the operational expenses, non -impact fee qualifying capital expenses, and other general needs of the police department. The current police facilities were paid for through a combination of property taxes, sales taxes and impact fees with the expectation that the City would be repaid, over time, for new development's proportionate share of the costs through impact fees. 8 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©® Bond Fundin There are no outstanding bonds related to the police department and no future bonds are currently proposed. If a bond is proposed and approved in the future by City residents, then the impact fees should be revised at that time to include any additional bond costs. Impact Fees Impactfees have become an ideal mechanism for funding growth -related infrastructure. It is recommended that impact fees be used to fund growth -related capital projects as they help to maintain an adequate level of service and prevent existing users from subsidizing the capital needs of new growth. Summary of Time and Price Differential The Impact Fees Act allows forthe inclusion of a time and price differential to ensure that the costs incurred at a later date are accurately calculated. However, in this case no future costs are anticipated within the 20 -year planning horizon of this study. Equity of Impact Fees The impact fee calculations are structured to fund 100% of the growth -related portion of system improvements as presented in the impact fee analysis. Funds borrowed from other City accounts to pay for the new facilities are to be repaid in their entirety through impact fees at the time that impact fee funds become available. 9 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Section III: Police and Animal Control Impact Fee Analysis Impact Fee Overview The impact fee for police and animal control services is calculated using the growth projections, current call data and future call projections, current and estimated future land use, and existing and future equipment and facilities costs which have been described in Sections I & II of this document. The final components necessary to complete the Impact Fee Analysis include: level of service (LOS), proportionate share analysis, impact fee cost per call, impact fee cost per development unit, and review of any credits to development. Each of those components are discussed in this section. Police Level of Service One key component of the impact fee calculation is the level of service. The level of service is the measure of the relationship between service capacity and service demand for public facilities. In the case of police impact fees that means the total building square footage (capacity) relative to the number of calls the police department receives each year (service demand). Unlike a utility such as culinary water where capacity can be added gradually to the system by upsizing an existing line segment, public safety floor space has to be built station -by -station not line -by-line. To adequately maintain the current level of service, police stations or expansions of existing police stations must be done well ahead of the increase in call volume that the station expansion is designed to serve. Therefore, as we look at the call volume, the recently built facilities were designed to serve future development through 2043. Table 7 shows the 2043 level of service of 1.75 square feet per police call which is lowerthan the currently observed LOS of 2.36 square feet per call. The 2043 LOS for animal control is 0.37 square feet per call which is lower than the current LOS of 0.49 square feet per call. New development can only be charged for the level of service that it receives. Therefore, impact fees are calculated on the lower 2043 service levels. TABLE 7: CURRENT AND PROJECTED POLICE LEVEL OF SERVICE Police Level of Service 2023 2043 Calls for Service 7,639 10,288 Police SF Police SF per Call 18,000 18,000 2.36 1.75 Animal Control SF 3,778 3,778 Animal Control SF per Call 0.49 0.37 Proportionate Share Analys As part of this analysis, the Impact Fee Act requires that the calculated impact fee be roughly proportionate and reasonably related to the development activity. Ideally, implementing an impact fee to pay for needed infrastructure places a burden on future users that is equal to the burden that was borne in the past by existing users. To determine the fair share of an impact fee for system capacity in the police and animal control services, a proportionate share analysis was performed as described below. 10 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 Calculation of Proportionate Share Table 8 shows the future floor space required by the increased calls for service in 2043 due to growth from new development, as well as the cost of the floor space. TABLE 8: PROPORTIONATE SHARE CALCULATION - FACILITIES NEEDED FOR 2043 LOS Description 2043 Police SF per Call — Proposed 2043 LOS 1.75 Animal Control SF per Call — Proposed 2043 LOS 0.37 Calls for Service 10,288 Growth in Calls for Service, 2023-2043 2,650 Police SF Needed, 2023-2043 4,636 Animal Control SF Needed, 2023-2043 Police Cost per SF 973 $377.78 Animal Control Cost per SF3 $502.91 Police Cost Attributable to New Development, 2023-2043 $1,751,201 Animal Control Cost Attributable to New Development, 3-2043 $489,306 Total Cost Attributable to New Development, 2023-2043 $2,240,507 Impact Fee Cost per Call The cost per call is calculated by dividing the total cost of $2,240,507 attributable to new growth by 2043 by the growth in calls between 2023-2043, TABLE 9: POLICE COST PER CALL CALCULATION - FACILITIES Description Amount Cost to New Development, 2023-2043 $2,240,507.36 Cash on Hand $157,134.68 Remaining Balance to New Development Growth in Calls, 2023-204,_.3 Cost per Call $2,083,372.68 2,650 $786.30 In addition, Table 6 shows the police vehicles used by Chubbuck which can be included in the calculation of impact fees. Table 10 reduces the total cost by subtracting 20 percent of value as residual value. The total cost less residual value is then divided by the capacity calls served by each vehicle to arrive at a vehicle cost per call of $77.48. z Based on the City's recent construction of a police facility at a cost of $6.8M for 18,000 sf ($6.8M / 18,000 = $377.78 3 Based on the City's recent construction of an animal control facility at a cost of $1.9M for 3,778 sf ($1.9M / 3,778 = $502.91. 11 City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis ©0 TABLE 10: POLICE COST PER CALL CALCULATION - VEHICLES Veh # 1 2 Year Purchased 2016 2021 Cost $27,000 $29,000 Expiration Year _ 2026 2030 Total Cost Less Residual Value $21,600 $23,200 Calls by Year of Expiration - Total Capacity Calls 7,988 8,478 Cost per Call $2.70 $2.74 3 2021 $29,000 2029 $23,200 8,353 $2.78 4 2017 $28,000 2023 $22,400 7,639 $2.93 5 2022 $30,000 2023 $12,9 0 7,639 $1.70 6 2015 $30,000 2024 $24,000 7,753 $3.10 7 2015 $30,000 2024 $24,000 7,753 $3.10 8 2022 $30,000 i 9 2022 $30,000 2023 $21,600 7,639 $2.83 10 2017 $30,000 2027 $24,000 8,108 $2.96 11 2016 $27,000 2023 $21,600 7,639 $2.83 12 2009 $18,000 2023 $14,400 7,639 $1.89 13 2015 $24,000 2025 $19,200 IIIIIIIIIIIII1111L 7,870 $2.44 14 2013 $28,000 A30 522,400 M68,478 $2.64 15 2017 $30,000 NL$24,000 $24,000 8,108 $2.96 16 2019 $28,684 2029 $22,947 8,353 $2.75 17 2009 $18,000 2027-$14,400 $1.89 18 2018 $27, 2023 $21,600 7,639 $2.83 19 2016 $27,01111F2026 $21,600 7,988 $2.70 20 2009 $22,200 2023 $17,760 7,639 $2.32 21 2007 $16,200 3& 2023 $12,9 0 7,639 $1.70 22 2013 $28,000 2023 $22,4ffill 7,639 $2.93 23 2016 $26,500 2025 $21,2dW 7,870 $2.69 24 25 NW18 0 2023 $21,600 7,639 $2.83 26 NL$1 00 27 $28,684 2029 $22,947 8,353 $2.75 28 29 2011 $21,300 2028 $17,040 8,229 $2.07 2018 $27,000 2023 $21,600 7,639 $2.83 2014 $30,000 2023 $24,000 7,639 $3.14 2019 $28,684 2029 $22,947 8,353 $2.75 33 342020 $29,000 2030 $23,200 8,478 $2.74 35 2020 $29,000 2030 $23,200 8,478 $2.74 36 2021 $29,000 2031 $23,200 8,605 $2.70 37 021 $30,384 2031 $24,307 8,605 $2.82 50 Gift = 0 2029 8,353 $0.00 TOTAL $619,962 $77.48 The total cost per call is composed of the facility cost, vehicle cost and consultant costs associated with preparing the CIP and Impact Fee Analysis. This results in a total cost per call of $866.04. TABLE 11: POLICE COST PER CALL CALCULATION Description Amount Facility Cost $786.30 Vehicle Cost $77.48 Consultant Cost $2.26 12 ■ City of Chubbuck I DRAFT Police CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Description Amount Total Cost per Call $866.04 Impact Fee Cost per Development Unit The impact fee is assessed to each user category based upon the historic calls per unit generated by that land use. The City's observed annual police calls per unit by development type are multiplied by the impact fee cost per call to calculate the final impact fee per land use. TABLE 12: MAXIMUM IMPACT FEES Land Use Type Calls per tdnit Maximum Fees Single Family—unit LC. .5937601 $514.22 Multi -Family— unit 1W530616 $652.18 General Commercial —sf OMW252 $0.89 Office - sf 0.003W $0.04 Institutional - sf 0.000401&$0.35 Credits Owed to Development There are no credits owed to development. The City does not anticipate any future police facilities to be built in the next 20 years and there are no bonds outstanding on current facilities. Impact Fee Fund Balance Credit When an impact fee fund has an available balance, which can be used towards future impact fee qualifying expenditures and thus reduce the cost to new development, then credits are made to the future impact fee. The City currently has an impact fee fund balance of $157,134.68 which was used to reduce the costs owed by new development on the police facilities as shown in Table 9. OW111111111111 Individual Impact Fee Assessment The Impact Fees Act states that the impact fee ordinance should include a process whereby the City shall allow a developer, upon request by the developer, to provide a written individual assessment of the proportionate share of development impact fees. The individual assessment process permits consideration of studies, data, and any other relevant information submitted by the developer to adjust the amount of the fee. For police impact fees the variable that would be reviewed in the individual impact fee assessment would be the average annual police calls generated by the proposed development. Once the City and the developer have reviewed relevant information and determined the number of average annual police calls for the proposed development, then the City can calculate the individual impact fee assessment using the formula in Table 13. TABLE 13: INDIVIDUAL IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT FORMULA $866.04 Police Cost Per Call Impact Fee Assessed # of Annual Calls Projected to be Created Individual Impact Fee Assessment 13 City of Chubbuck DRAFT Fire and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis 14 November 2023 2 City of Chubbuck | DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Contents Contents ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Section I: Introduction to the Fire and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis ......... 3 Project Overview ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Impact Fee Service Area ............................................................................................................................ 3 Population and Fire Call Data .................................................................................................................... 3 Land Use Analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Service Units .............................................................................................................................................. 5 Call Data Analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Land Use and Future Calls ......................................................................................................................... 6 Section II: Fire and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan ............................................................................... 6 System Improvements ............................................................................................................................... 6 Existing Equipment and Capital Facilities .................................................................................................. 7 Existing Equipment Inventory ................................................................................................................ 7 Existing Capital Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 7 Future Fire Infrastructure .......................................................................................................................... 7 Funding Future Capital Facilities ............................................................................................................... 8 Historic Funding Sources ....................................................................................................................... 8 Bond Funding ........................................................................................................................................ 8 Impact Fees ........................................................................................................................................... 8 Summary of Time and Price Differential .................................................................................................... 8 Equity of Impact Fees ................................................................................................................................ 8 Section III: Fire and Emergency Services Impact Fee Analysis ........................................................................................ 9 Impact Fee Overview ................................................................................................................................. 9 Fire Level of Service ................................................................................................................................... 9 Proportionate Share Analysis .................................................................................................................... 9 Calculation of Proportionate Share ..................................................................................................... 10 Impact Fee Cost per Call .......................................................................................................................... 10 Impact Fee Cost per Development Unit .................................................................................................. 11 Credits Owed to Development ................................................................................................................ 11 Impact Fee Fund Balance Credit .......................................................................................................... 11 Individual Impact Fee Assessment .......................................................................................................... 11 3 City of Chubbuck | DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Section I: Introduction to the Fire and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis Project Overview The City of Chubbuck (City) has commissioned Zions Public Finance, Inc (Zions) to put together a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Impact Fee Analysis (IFA) prior to updating fire and emergency services development impact fees authorized by Title 67, Chapter 82, Idaho Code, known as the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act (Impact Fee Act). Impact Fee Service Area Chubbuck is a city located in Bannock County, Idaho. The 2020 population was estimated to be 15,570 based on the United States Census 2020. By 2023, the population is estimated to reach 16,321 persons based on an average annual growth rate of 1.5 percent.1 The purpose of the Fire and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan is to provide Chubbuck with substantive planning for future fire capital infrastructure including facility sizing, timing, costs and allocation to growth for which development impact fees may be used as a funding source. This information will be used as the basis of calculating the Fire and Emergency Services impact fees. A current CIP must be prepared before the City can update the Fire IFA. This CIP and IFA have been prepared for a single, city- wide service area (Service Area) with the same impact fee cost per call assessed throughout the Service Area. The cost per call is the relationship between the City’s population and annual fire/emergency services calls generated within the City’s boundaries and will be discussed in Section III: Fire and Emergency Services Impact Fee Analysis. Population and Fire Call Data The 2023 population in Chubbuck is estimated at 16,321 persons and 5,779 households. Over the next 20 years, Chubbuck is projected to grow to a population of 21,982 persons and 7,783 households. TABLE 1: POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS Year Population Households 2021 15,842 5,609 2022 16,080 5,693 2023 16,321 5,779 2024 16,566 5,865 2025 16,814 5,953 2026 17,066 6,042 2027 17,322 6,133 2028 17,582 6,225 2029 17,846 6,318 2030 18,114 6,413 2031 18,385 6,509 2032 18,661 6,607 1 Source: City of Chubbuck 4 City of Chubbuck | DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Year Population Households 2033 18,941 6,706 2034 19,225 6,807 2035 19,513 6,909 2036 19,806 7,013 2037 20,103 7,118 2038 20,405 7,225 2039 20,711 7,333 2040 21,022 7,443 2041 21,337 7,555 2042 21,657 7,668 2043 21,982 7,783 Source: City of Chubbuck Fire calls for service were provided by the City of Chubbuck for the two-year period from 2020 through 2022. Because of the significant growth in calls between 2021 and 2022, the more recent year has been used in the analysis in order to capture the increased growth demands and trends in the City. TABLE 2: FIRE CALLS FOR SERVICE Category 2020-2021 2021-2022 Calls to Private Land Uses Single Family Residential 527 734 Multi-Family Residential 196 283 General Commercial 328 506 Office 39 37 Institutional 2 4 Calls to Public Land Uses/Other Public Buildings and Land 12 17 Traffic 89 98 North Bannock County, Eastern Power County 17 9 Mutual Aid 197 197 Undefined 8 4 Total Calls 1415 1889 Source: City of Chubbuck Fire Department; ZPFI Land Use Analysis Table 3 shows the current and proposed residential and non-residential units. It is estimated that single- family units will grow to 5,675 units by 2043 and that multi-family units will grow to 2,108 units. The non- residential units show growth to over 3.6 million square feet (sf) of general commercial space by 2043, nearly 800,000 sf of office space and just over half a million square feet of institutional space. TABLE 3: CURRENT AND PROJECTED LAND USE Year Single-Family Units Multi-Family Units General Commercial SF* Office SF* Institutional SF* 2022 4,151 1,542 2,653,464 581,950 371,428 5 City of Chubbuck | DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Year Single-Family Units Multi-Family Units General Commercial SF* Office SF* Institutional SF* 2023 4,214 1,565 2,693,266 590,679 376,999 2024 4,277 1,588 2,733,665 599,539 382,654 2025 4,341 1,612 2,774,670 608,533 388,394 2026 4,406 1,636 2,816,290 617,661 394,220 2027 4,472 1,661 2,858,534 626,925 400,133 2028 4,539 1,686 2,901,412 636,329 406,135 2029 4,607 1,711 2,944,934 645,874 412,227 2030 4,676 1,737 2,989,108 655,562 418,411 2031 4,747 1,763 3,033,944 665,396 424,687 2032 4,818 1,789 3,079,453 675,377 431,057 2033 4,890 1,816 3,125,645 685,507 437,523 2034 4,963 1,843 3,172,530 695,790 444,086 2035 5,038 1,871 3,220,118 706,227 450,747 2036 5,113 1,899 3,268,419 716,820 457,509 2037 5,190 1,928 3,317,446 727,573 464,371 2038 5,268 1,957 3,367,207 738,486 471,337 2039 5,347 1,986 3,417,716 749,563 478,407 2040 5,427 2,016 3,468,981 760,807 485,583 2041 5,509 2,046 3,521,016 772,219 492,867 2042 5,591 2,077 3,573,831 783,802 500,260 2043 5,675 2,108 3,627,439 795,559 507,764 *SF = square feet Service Units A service unit is defined by the Impact Fees Act as a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements. In the case of fire impact fees an emergency call is the basic unit for measuring the demand for services for each land use. The impact fee is calculated based on the “cost per call” and applied to each land use category according to the historic calls per unit generated by that land use category. Call Data Analysis Traffic calls and calls to public land are then allocated to the five land use categories based on their proportion of total calls for service. TABLE 4: ANALYSIS OF FIRE CALLS BY TYPE – 2022 DATA FIRE CALLS Fire Calls % of Total % of Total after Allocation Single-Family Residential 734 39% 46.93% Multi-Family Residential 283 15% 18.09% General Commercial 506 27% 32.35% Office 37 2% 2.37% Institutional* 4 0% 0.26% Traffic 98 5% Public Land** 17 1% 6 City of Chubbuck | DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis FIRE CALLS Fire Calls % of Total % of Total after Allocation Unknown/Out of Area*** 210 11% Total 1,889 100.00% 100.00% *Institutional includes uses such as civic buildings, schools and churches **Public land includes areas such as parks, trails and public open space/recreational areas ***Unknown are those calls with an unknown address or land use type After the allocation of traffic and public land calls, the resulting calls and calls per unit are shown in the table below. Note that unknown/out of area calls are not allocated to other land use categories for the purpose of calculating impact fees. These costs must be borne by the community as a whole and not solely by new development. TABLE 5: CALLS PER UNIT/SF Land Use Category 2022 Units/SF 2022 Calls Calls per Unit/SF Single-Family Residential – unit 4,151 783 0.1885106 Multi-Family Residential - unit 1,542 302 0.1957004 General Commercial – sf 2,653,464 539 0.0002033 Office – sf 581,950 39 0.0000678 Institutional - sf 371,428 4 0.0000115 Land Use and Future Calls Table 6 shows the growth in calls per unit by land use type. The ratio of calls per unit remains constant for future projections with an anticipated increase of 665 calls by 2043. TABLE 6: GROWTH IN CALLS 2023 Calls 2023 Units/SF 2043 Calls 2043 Units Growth in Calls 2023- 2043 Calls per Unit/SF Single-Family Residential – unit 794 4,214 1,070 5,675 276 0.1885106 Multi-Family Residential - unit 306 1,565 412 2,108 106 0.1957004 General Commercial – sf 548 2,693,266 738 3,627,439 190 0.0002033 Office – sf 40 590,679 54 795,559 14 0.0000678 Institutional – sf 4 376,999 6 507,764 2 0.0000115 Non-Impact Fee Eligible 225 303 78 TOTAL 1,917 2,582 665 Section II: Fire and Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan System Improvements The Impact Fee Act allows that an impact fee be collected for the cost to construct system improvements which have capacity to serve future growth. A system improvement is defined as an improvement which 7 City of Chubbuck | DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis will provide service to an entire service area - not an improvement that only serves one specific development. The system improvement must also have a useful life of 10 or more years. System improvements which are impact fee eligible may have “buy-in” capacity to the City’s existing inventory of equipment and facilities or may be allocated to future improvements within a 20-year planning horizon. The impact fee should be calculated to assess an impact fee for the proportionate share of system improvement costs which are available to serve future growth. The Fire and Emergency Services CIP documents the City’s impact fee qualifying existing and future expenditures. Existing Equipment and Capital Facilities Existing Equipment Inventory Table 7 summarizes the City’s existing fire/emergency services equipment inventory. A portion of the existing equipment will serve growth and will be included in the impact fee calculation. TABLE 7: EXISTING EQUIPMENT INVENTORY Vehicle # Make Date in Service Useful Life Actual Cost 300 Buffalo 301 KME/International 1993 20 $109,000 302 KME / International 1993 20 $109,000 303 General Fire / International 2000 20 $174,719 304 La France 1983 25 $238,000 305 GM 2007 30 $49,191 306 International 2008 20 Donated 308 Ford 2005 30 $32,499 311 Chevrolet 2016 0 $41,000 312 International 1999 36 Donated 313 Chevrolet 2012 21 $35,094.98 315 International/Pierce 2013 18 $238,781 316 Ford 2002 26 $36,000 343 Polaris 2012 19 $9,619 Eng1 Pierce 2019 19 $581,421 Existing Capital Facilities The fire department currently operates out of an existing station at 4727 Yellowstone Avenue. It has 11,716 square feet. This building is at capacity; therefore, two new fire stations are planned: one on the west side of the City and one on the north side of the City in order to meet the growth in demand and maintain response times. Future Fire Infrastructure The new fire stations are planned to have 9,184 square feet each with a construction cost of $4,370,908 for the West Station and $4,919,495 for the North Station. 8 City of Chubbuck | DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis TABLE 8: FUTURE FIRE STATIONS Square Feet Cost ($2023) Cost per SF Construction Year Cost in Construction Year Future West Fire Station 9,184 $4,000,000 $436 2026 $4,370,908 Future North Fire Station 9,184 $4,000,000 $436 2030 $4,919,495 Source: City of Chubbuck; ZPFI Funding Future Capital Facilities Historic Funding Sources Fire facilities can be funded in a variety of ways including tax revenues, impact fees, grants, bonds, vehicle leases, etc. Tax revenues—property and sales—are the primary source of revenue for the City. The City has authority to collect a portion of the property and sales taxes within its boundaries. The revenues collected can cover the operational expenses, non-impact fee qualifying capital expenses, and other general needs of the fire department. The current fire facilities were paid for through a combination of property taxes, sales taxes and impact fees with the expectation that the City would be repaid, over time, for new development’s proportionate share of the costs through impact fees. Bond Funding There are no outstanding bonds related to the fire department and no future bonds are currently proposed. If a bond is proposed and approved in the future by City residents, then the impact fees should be revised at that time to include any additional bond costs. Impact Fees Impact fees have become an ideal mechanism for funding growth-related infrastructure. It is recommended that impact fees be used to fund growth-related capital projects as they help to maintain an adequate level of service and prevent existing users from subsidizing the capital needs of new growth. Summary of Time and Price Differential The Impact Fees Act allows for the inclusion of a time and price differential to ensure that the costs incurred at a later date are accurately calculated. These adjustments to construction costs have been made previously in Table 8. Equity of Impact Fees The impact fee calculations are structured to fund 100% of the growth-related portion of system improvements as presented in the impact fee analysis. Funds borrowed from other City accounts to pay for the new facilities are to be repaid in their entirety through impact fees at the time that impact fee funds become available. 9 City of Chubbuck | DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Section III: Fire and Emergency Services Impact Fee Analysis Impact Fee Overview The impact fee for fire and emergency services is calculated using the growth projections, current call data and future call projections, current and estimated future land use, and existing and future equipment and facilities costs which have been described in Sections I & II of this document. The final components necessary to complete the Impact Fee Analysis include: level of service (LOS), proportionate share analysis, impact fee cost per call, impact fee cost per development unit, and review of any credits to development. Each of those components are discussed in this section. Fire Level of Service One key component of the impact fee calculation is the level of service. The level of service is the measure of the relationship between service capacity and service demand for public facilities. In the case of fire impact fees that means the total building square footage (capacity) relative to the number of calls the fire department receives each year (service demand). Unlike a utility such as culinary water where capacity can be added gradually to the system by upsizing an existing line segment, public safety floor space has to be built station-by-station, not line-by-line. To adequately maintain the current level of service, fire stations or expansions of existing fire stations must be done well ahead of the increase in call volume that the station expansion is designed to serve. As we look at the call volume, the current level of service is 6.11 square feet per call (11,716 existing sf divided by 1,917 calls for service). A new station is planned to be built on the City’s west side at a cost of $4,370,908. Maintaining the existing service level of 6.11 square feet per call results in the need for 1,881 square feet of new building space by 2033. This represents about 20.5 percent of the capacity of the new building planned because the existing building is considered to be at capacity. TABLE 9: CURRENT AND PROJECTED FIRE LEVEL OF SERVICE New Construction Amount SF per Call 6.11 Growth in Calls, 2023-2033 308 SF Required 2023-2033 1,881 New Facility Cost $4,370,908 SF of New Facility 9,184 New Growth as % of Total Cost 20.5% Proportionate Share Analysis As part of this analysis, the Impact Fee Act requires that the calculated impact fee be roughly proportionate and reasonably related to the development activity. Ideally, implementing an impact fee to pay for needed infrastructure places a burden on future users that is equal to the burden that was borne in the past by existing users. To determine the fair share of an impact fee for system capacity in fire and emergency services, a proportionate share analysis was performed as described below. 10 City of Chubbuck | DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis Calculation of Proportionate Share Table 10 shows the future floor space required by the increased calls for service in 2033 due to growth from new development, as well as the cost of construction attributable to new development. TABLE 10: PROPORTIONATE SHARE CALCULATION – FACILITIES NEEDED FOR 2033 LOS New Construction Amount SF per Call 6.11 Growth in Calls, 2023-2033 308 SF Required 2023-2033 1,881 New Facility Cost $4,370,908 SF of New Facility 9,184 New Growth as % of Total Cost 20.5% Cost to New Development, 2023-2033 $895,168.20 Cash on Hand $193,925.68 Remaining Balance to New Development $701,242.52 Impact Fee Cost per Call The cost per call is calculated by dividing the total cost of $701,242.52 by the growth in calls between 2023- 2033. TABLE 11: FIRE COST PER CALL CALCULATION – FACILITIES New Construction Amount SF per Call 6.11 Growth in Calls, 2023-2033 308 SF Required 2023-2033 1,881 New Facility Cost $4,370,908 SF of New Facility 9,184 New Growth as % of Total Cost 20.5% Cost to New Development, 2023-2033 $895,168.20 Cash on Hand $193,925.68 Remaining Balance to New Development $701,242.52 Growth in Calls, 2023-2033 308 Cost per Call, 2023-2033 $2,278.16 In addition, Table 7 shows the fire vehicles used by Chubbuck which can be included in the calculation of impact fees. Appendix A reduces the total cost by subtracting 20 percent of value as residual value. The total cost less residual value is then divided by the capacity calls served by each vehicle to arrive at a vehicle cost per call of $254.44 for existing vehicles. Appendix B shows the detailed calculations for new vehicles purchased within the next 20 years. Only the portion of costs attributable to the next 20 years have been included in the study. The resulting cost per call is $419.11. 11 City of Chubbuck | DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis The total fire vehicle cost per call, for existing and new vehicles, is $673.55. The total cost per call is composed of the facility cost, vehicle cost and consultant costs associated with preparing the CIP and Impact Fee Analysis. This results in a total cost per call of $2,344.20. TABLE 12: FIRE COST PER CALL CALCULATION Description Amount New Construction $2,278.16 Vehicle Cost $673.55 Consultant Cost $19.49 Total Cost per Call $2,971.21 Impact Fee Cost per Development Unit The impact fee is assessed to each user category based upon the historic calls per unit generated by that land use. The City’s observed annual fire calls per unit by development type are multiplied by the impact fee cost per call to calculate the final impact fee per land use. TABLE 13: MAXIMUM IMPACT FEES Maximum Fees Calls per Unit Maximum Fees Single Family – unit 0.188510612 $560.10 Multi-Family – unit 0.1957004 $581.47 General Commercial – per sf 0.000203314 $0.60 Office – per sf 0.00006779 $0.20 Institutional – per sf 0.000011482 $0.03 Credits Owed to Development There are no credits owed to and there are no bonds outstanding on current facilities. Impact Fee Fund Balance Credit When an impact fee fund has an available balance, which can be used towards future impact fee qualifying expenditures and thus reduce the cost to new development, then credits are made to the future impact fee. The City currently has an impact fee fund balance of $193,925.68 which was used to reduce the costs owed by new development on the fire facilities as shown in Table 12. Individual Impact Fee Assessment The Impact Fees Act states that the impact fee ordinance should include a process whereby the City shall allow a developer, upon request by the developer, to provide a written individual assessment of the proportionate share of development impact fees. The individual assessment process permits consideration of studies, data, and any other relevant information submitted by the developer to adjust the amount of the fee. For fire impact fees the variable that would be reviewed in the individual impact fee assessment would be the average annual fire calls generated by the proposed development. Once the City and the developer have reviewed relevant information and determined the number of average annual fire calls for 12 City of Chubbuck | DRAFT Fire CIP and Impact Fee Analysis the proposed development, then the City can calculate the individual impact fee assessment using the formula in Table 14. TABLE 14: INDIVIDUAL IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT FORMULA Fire Cost Per Call Impact Fee Assessed $2,971.21 x # of Annual Calls Projected to be Created = Individual Impact Fee Assessment