Boise City ClubNovember 17, 2004

Dr. Robert H. FreilichFreilich, Leitner & Carlisle

Plan

• An orderly arrangement of parts of an overall design or objective

• The use of man’s or woman’s intelligence with a little forethought

Impending Growth Problems• Decline in existing built-up areas• Degradation of the environment• Over utilization of energy sources• Fiscal strains• Deficiencies in public facilities • Overburdened transportation facilities• Loss of hillside and habitat areas

Sprawl is a Conservative Fiscal Issue

Growth has helped fuel … unparalleled economic and population boom and has enabled millions … to realize the enduring dream of home ownership … but sprawl has created enormous costs… Ironically, unchecked sprawl has shifted from an engine of … growth to a force that now threatens to inhibit growth and degrade the quality of our life.Beyond Sprawl, 1995Bank of America

The Public Infrastructure Gap

National infrastructure deficiencies now exceed

$4 trillion

$4,000,000,000,000

Capital Costs Shifted to Existing Development

Population A B C D

10,000 $12,000

20,000 6,000 6,000

30,000 4,000 4,000 4,000

40,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000

Total $25,000 $13,000 $7,000 $3,000

Relative Cost of Planned Development v. Sprawl

Facility Sprawl Planned DevelopmentDuncanBurchell Frank

SynthesisRoads 100% 40% 76% 73% 75%Schools 100% 93% 97% 99% 95%Utilities 100% 60% 92% 66% 85%Other 100% 102% N/A 100% N/A

Goals

• Urban Growth• Reduce Sprawl• Economic

Development• Property Rights• Agricultural

Preservation

• Open Space & Recreation

• Environment• Citizen

Participation & Coordination

• Public Facilities and Services

Growth Management Rationale

• Adequate Public Facilities• Off-Site Impacts• Comprehensive Plan Consistency• Integrated v. Incremental

Approach• Defined Growth Areas• Resource Protection (ag. & env.)

Ancillary Techniques• Inter-governmental agreements• Corridors/ Centers• Joint Development• Concurrency• Environmentally Sensitive Lands

Importance of Alternatives

• Identify reasonable choices• Analyze the impacts of those

choices• Use process to forge consensus /

long-term support

Alternatives

• Alternative Scenario Maps• Policy Alternatives• Preferred Alternative Selection• Policy Refinement• Analysis of fiscal, transportation,

environmental, and legal impacts

San Diego

Before

After

Transportation Planning & Joint Public/PrivateDevelopment

Joint Planning - Bridging the City/County Gap

• Comprehensive Plan as Constitution• Mutual definition of growth tiers• Targets State funding to priority growth

areas• Linkage between CIP, development and

annexation• Adequate public facilities required• Promotes creative, efficient development• Limitations on sprawl

Local Government Roles in Joint Development of Transit Centers

• assemble property• provide flexible zoning / incentives• secure low cost financing• construct infrastructure• coordinate gov’t agencies• expedite development process• designate transit corridor• establish transit service / centers

Joint Development: Regulatory Incentives

• Parking reductions• Impact fee reductions• Concurrency waivers (TCMA)• Density bonuses• TDR• Expedited processing

Joint Development: Techniques

• Excess Condemnation• Long term leasing/value capture• Negotiated private sector

investments• Connection fees• Concessions

Concurrency and Adequate Public Facilities Planning

Concurrency

• Timing and Sequencing (police powers)

• CIP (fiscal powers)• Carrying Capacity

Timing of Development & Public Facilities

Capacit

y

Time

Growth

FundingFacilities

DeficienciesDeficiencies No DeficienciesNo Deficiencies

Facilities for New Dev.

Facilities for New Dev.

Facilities forExisting Dev.

Facilities forExisting Dev.

General Rev. TransfersAd Valorem Tax Joint FundingLicense/Excise Tax Asset Mgmnt.Utility Rates Trans.CorpsUser Fees

General Rev. TransfersAd Valorem Tax Joint FundingLicense/Excise Tax Asset Mgmnt.Utility Rates Trans.CorpsUser Fees

Impact Fees, TDDs, Mandatory Dedications

Improvement RequirementsMitigation Fees, CDDs

Impact Fees, TDDs, Mandatory Dedications

Improvement RequirementsMitigation Fees, CDDs

Adopt LOSStandards

Adopt LOSStandards

AnalysisAnalysis

Dolan/Ehrlich Analysisof Concurrency

Impact Fees Concurrency Good Faith Test

Rough Proportionality Dolan v. City of Tigard

Deny Approval Deficiencies in public services

Florida Rationally Related Test

Development Agreement

CIP will solve deficiencies within reasonable period of time

Leveraged Negotiation (Ehrlich v. Culver City)

Developer gains vested rights, local gov’t gains

facilities in greater capacity than rough

proportionality

Golden v. Planning Board, Town of

Ramapo: applies to school facilities

New Growth Related Facilities

Development Agreements

• Concurrency management• Serve new demand• Solve existing deficiencies• Growth management• Litigation defense

Congestion Management: Regulatory Alternatives• Zoning• Subdivision Approval• CUP/SUP• Impact Analysis• DRI/Special Review• Exactions/

development agreements

• Impact fees

• Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances (APFO’s)/ Concurrency

• Congestion Pricing• Neotraditional/TOD• TDM• Access management• TDR

Transportation

• Patterns• Corridors - linear land use patterns that form around

regional transportation connectors• Centers - the nuclei of the region, with a

concentration of the land use activity and transportation improvements; the commercial, residential, entertainment and employment hubs for a region

• Nodes - concentrations of land use activities that form at the intersection of corridors or other transportation routes

• Adequate public facilities based on established levels of service

Corridors, Nodes

and Centers Concept

Multiple Use

Conventional v. Traditional Neighborhood Development

Separation of uses Mixed uses Maximum densities Minimum densities Street standards designed for cars

Street standards designed for pedestrians

Curvilinear streets Interconnected streets Private open space Public open space Large lots Small lots Wide setbacks Build-to lines Private orientation Orientation to public

realm Minimum parking Government as Regulator

Maximum parking Public – Private Partnerships

Mixed Use

Rural Design – the “New Ruralism”

Urban Design– the “New Urbanism”

Design & New Urbanism

• Actions:• Transportation investment in highways• Land use standards promote auto-oriented

development

• Reactions:• Hastened decline of urban core• Forced a love-hate reliance on autos• Fostered call for transit supportive land use

policies

Elements of New Urbanism

• Use• Density• Proximity• Bulk/Setback/Area • Mixed uses• Grid street

system• Urban design

Joint Development: Regulatory Incentives

• Parking reductions• Impact fee reductions• Concurrency waivers (TCMA)• Density bonuses• TDR• Expedited processing

Joint Planning - Bridging the City/County Gap

• Comprehensive Plan as Constitution• Mutual definition of growth tiers• Targets State funding to priority growth

areas• Linkage between CIP, development and

annexation• Adequate public facilities required• Promotes creative, efficient development• Limitations on sprawl

Concurrency and Adequate Public Facilities Planning

Timing of Development & Public Facilities

Capacit

y

Time

Growth

FundingFacilities

DeficienciesDeficiencies No DeficienciesNo Deficiencies

Facilities for New Dev.

Facilities for New Dev.

Facilities forExisting Dev.

Facilities forExisting Dev.

General Rev. TransfersAd Valorem Tax Joint FundingLicense/Excise Tax Asset Mgmnt.Utility Rates Trans.CorpsUser Fees

General Rev. TransfersAd Valorem Tax Joint FundingLicense/Excise Tax Asset Mgmnt.Utility Rates Trans.CorpsUser Fees

Impact Fees, TDDs, Mandatory Dedications

Improvement RequirementsMitigation Fees, CDDs

Impact Fees, TDDs, Mandatory Dedications

Improvement RequirementsMitigation Fees, CDDs

Adopt LOSStandards

Adopt LOSStandards

AnalysisAnalysis

Development Agreements

• Concurrency management• Serve new demand• Solve existing deficiencies• Growth management• Litigation defense

Congestion Management: Regulatory Alternatives• Zoning• Subdivision Approval• CUP/SUP• Impact Analysis• DRI/Special Review• Exactions/

development agreements

• Impact fees

• Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances (APFO’s)/ Concurrency

• Congestion Pricing• Neotraditional/TOD• TDM• Access management• TDR

Transportation

• Patterns• Corridors - linear land use patterns that form around

regional transportation connectors• Centers - the nuclei of the region, with a

concentration of the land use activity and transportation improvements; the commercial, residential, entertainment and employment hubs for a region

• Nodes - concentrations of land use activities that form at the intersection of corridors or other transportation routes

• Adequate public facilities based on established levels of service

Corridors, Nodes

and Centers Concept

Multiple Use

Conventional v. Traditional Neighborhood Development

Separation of uses Mixed uses Maximum densities Minimum densities Street standards designed for cars

Street standards designed for pedestrians

Curvilinear streets Interconnected streets Private open space Public open space Large lots Small lots Wide setbacks Build-to lines Private orientation Orientation to public

realm Minimum parking Government as Regulator

Maximum parking Public – Private Partnerships

Blueprint for Good Growth & Communities in Motion

Blueprint for Good GrowthProcess

Demographics

• Population – to increase by 220,000 by 2030 or 8,200 people per year in Ada County

• Housing – nearly 3,800 new housing units needed each year in Ada County

Population Projections

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

1980 1990 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Canyon County

Ada County

Source: COMPASS Demographics Advisory Committee

Ada Co. Population Projections

City/County Name

Population Percent Increase

Percent of Total

Growth

2003 2030Change

Rural County 9,800 22,830 13,030 132.96% 5.86%

Boise 222,740 324,330 101,590 45.61% 45.69%

Eagle 17,090 30,040 12,950 75.78% 5.82%

Garden City 11,570 14,870 3,300 28.52% 1.48%

Kuna 9,380 28,180 18,800 200.43% 8.45%

Meridian 52,900 116,820 63,920 120.83% 28.74%

Star 2,360 11,140 8,780 372.03% 3.95%

Total Population 325,840 548,210 222,370 168.25% 100.00%

Source: COMPASS Demographics Advisory Committee

Anticipated Growth Means

• Increased traffic• Increased demands for utilities and

services leading to:• Major deficiencies• Fiscal impacts

• Need for new schools and other public facilities

• Increasing land use conflicts

Protect Taxpayers from Costs of

Growth

Link development and facility availability

Provide flexible tools to achieve

goals

Strengthen neighborhoods &

downtowns

Protect natural resources

Encourage public and private

investment that achieves goals

Preserve quality of life

Manage traffic congestion and air

pollution

Link public investment to

community goals

Contact Information

• Karen Doherty• kdoherty@dohertyeng.com• 208-336-0420

• Blueprintforgoodgrowth.com• Communitiesinmotion.org