HomeMy Public PortalAbout20210726 Sonfield Scope CommentsSHEREE SONFIELD
664 Woodlands Drive, PO Box 295, McCall, ID 83638
sonfield@telus.net 208.720.6889
July 26, 2021
Brian Parker, City Planner
bparker@mccall.id.us
RE: Public Comment on Draft of Scope of Environmental Assessment, Pine Creek Ranch (“PCR”)
Attached: 1) Scope document, with my specific comments in the form of proposed additional questions marked in CAPS
2) Text of my public comment in support of the AOCC designation at the June 24 Council meeting 3) Letter to the Editor July 27
Dear Brian,
The City Planners’ and City Council’s decision to designate PCR as an Area of Critical Concern was appropriate for a
project of its large size. I supported the Planning Department recommendation by appearing in person at the June 24
Council meeting (see attached). It is the largest development in McCall’s history and is the first development designated
as an Area of Critical Concern. We are all setting an important precedent and I appreciate that there is a learning curve
for most of us.
I live on Woodlands Drive in The Woodlands neighborhood adjacent to the proposed Pine Creek Ranch development
area and safety on my street and all the roadways in The Woodlands is my primary concern, so I reviewed the Scope to
see if my concerns were addressed. Where all my concerns don’t seem to be sufficiently addressed, I added text in CAPS
and highlighted that in yellow. Hopefully this presentation is an organized approach for your review of my public
comments.
I have over 45 years of financial experience, including Municipal Finance and this is a big driver for my comments and
why I limited my comments to the Built Environment section and the first page. The monetary, economic and other
fiscal impacts and costs to the City and all its taxpayers of a development of this size can easily be much more than the
benefit of the developer system upgrades, concessions, relatively minor contributions to affordable housing inventory
and development ongoing taxes and fees. The size of the development will impact future costs related to housing,
downtown use and maintenance of public streets, snow removal, Highway 55 traffic from Boise and intersections in
McCall, use of recreational and other amenities, and it will require additional water treatment capacity and sewer
system capacity. Police, fire, public works, other City services’ demand will increase in the short and long term due to a
development of this relative size. Whether it is phased in or not, the total size and future cost of services impact is the
same. And the access roads all need to be in place prior to the start of construction, this is prudent fiscal management.
Finally, I need to comment that the timeline at the end of the Scope needs to be removed, it is a timeline. Also, the
public comment period for the Environmental Assessment needs to be at least 30 days. The typical public comment
period for an Environmental Assessment is at least 30 days with a public hearing to follow. I have even seen EIS or EA’s
with more than 30 days for review and public comment. We will need that time to allow our professional advisors to
properly review and comment on the EA and related consultants’ reports.
I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Scope draft document and I appreciate the City Planning and other
offices’ and departments’ participation in this historical and important process that will set a precedent for the future
and an opportunity to do this “right”.
Please consider all of the concerns in this cover letter and attachments as my concerns that should be addressed in the
scope of the Environmental Assessment, whether or not I specifically found a good place to add it on the draft Scope or
not.
Best Regards,
Sheree Sonfield
Draft Public Review July 20, 2021
1 | P a g e
Environmental Assessment for Pine Creek Ranch
Objectives:
• To fulfill the requirements of MCC 9.7.08 for the completion of an environmental assessment
plan by an interdisciplinary team of professionals.
• To undertake a comprehensive analysis of the natural and built environment of the Pine Creek
Ranch properties and its surroundings that is contained within one document.
• To facilitate discussion and coordination among the applicant, public officials, and the public
through an integrated analysis of the environmental conditions affecting the site.
• To identify the environmental opportunities and constraints for development that balances the
various and competing interests for private development and the public interest.
• To provide the framework for the efficient review and decisions on the land use application for
the site.
TO HELP DETERMINE WHETHER THE ENVIRONMENTAL, FISCAL AND OTHER IMPACTS OF THE
PROPOSAL ARE SIGNIFICANT
TO IDENTIFY AND DETERMINE APPROPRIATE EFFORTS TO MITIGATE NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF THE
CONSTRUCTION PHASE AND DEVELOPMENT ON THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE
MCCALL COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
TO HELP DICTATE WHAT THE LAND CARRYING CAPACITY IS, WHAT THE PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE
CAPACITY IS, TO FRAME THE DESIGN OF THE PROJECT IN TERMS OF ITS LOCATION AND ITS
INTENSITY
TO CAPTURE AND ADDRESS THE CONCERNS EXPRESSED TO DATE BY THE ADJACENT
NEIGHBORHOODS IMPACTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONCERNS EXPRESSED BY OTHER
AGENCIES, AS WELL.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT:
NAME OF PROPOSED PROJECT, NAME OF APPLICANT, ADDRESS & PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT
AND CONTACT PERSON.
DATE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
PROPOSED TIMING OR SCHEDULE OF PROJECT, INCLUDING PHASING, IF APPLICABLE
BRIEF, COMPLETE DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL AND LOCATION, PROVIDING MOST RECENT
AVAILABLE PLANS, MAPS, OF THE PROJECT.
Draft Public Review July 20, 2021
2 | P a g e
Built Environment-Community Context
1. Land Use
a. What is the historical and existing land use of the property?
b. Describe any structures on the site. Will the structures be demolished?
c. What are the current uses of adjacent properties? How will the development of this site affect
adjacent properties?
d. What is the development potential and/or potential intensity of development of properties in
the immediate area?
e. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands, including by historic
indigenous populations? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term
commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any?
f. Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business
operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and
harvesting? If so, how?
g. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
h. What is the current comprehensive plan designation and policy direction for the future of the site?
i. What subdivision and PUD regulations apply to the property?
APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD RESIDE IN THE COMPLETED PROJECT, INCLUDING PERMANENT,
SEASONAL AND SHORT-TERM RESIDENCY?
WHAT MEASURES ARE PLANNED TO RESTRICT OR DISCOURAGE SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN THE NEW DEVELOPMENT?
IDENTIFY PROPOSED MEASURES TO ENSURE THE PROPOSAL IS COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING AND PROJECTED LAND
USES AND PLANS, INCLUDING GOALS IN THE CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND RELATED MASTER PLANS.
2. Transportation
a. Identify the existing street network adjacent to the site, the functional classification and carrying
capacity of existing streets. Identify the constraints posed by the conditions of existing adjacent
streets for accommodating additional traffic. Assess the alternatives for access to the site in
terms of capacity, safety, impacts on adjacent properties, direct access, cost, and multimodal
potential. Show on a site plan.
b. Identify the City’s Transportation Plan for any system improvements that would serve the site.
Are there any other planned street improvements to the streets that could serve the site?
Describe any previously undefined street improvements that would be necessary to
accommodate development of the site.
c. Identify the existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities and street crossings, including paved,
unpaved, formal, and informal paths and trails. Locate on a site plan.
d. Describe and show which phase of the project each planned street improvement, pedestrian
and bike facility will be constructed in. With a phased plan, also describe how the improvements
will be ended in the interim until all phases are constructed.
e. Is the site directly served by public transportation? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the
approximate distance to the nearest transit route? Describe the frequency and span of any nearby
transit routes and significant useful locations accessed.
f. What are the current conditions for access to the schools in terms of traffic, congestion, times of
day, pedestrian, and bicycle interface? Describe the alternatives for resolving issues including the
plan prepared for the school district and the extension of Deinhard Lane. Identify the existing
Draft Public Review July 20, 2021
3 | P a g e
pedestrian and bicycle counts from city GIS data and bus routes for current students
WHAT ARE ALL THE ACCESS OPPORTUNITIES AND ALTERNATIVES TO CREATE A GREATER NUMBER
OF USEABLE ACCESS STREETS TO THE SITE AND TO REMOVE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND
CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC FROM WOODLANDS DRIVE? INCLUDE ALL POSSIBILITIES EG
EXTENSION OF DEINHARD LANE, ACCESS TO ELO ROAD, CONNECTING ONLY BIKE PATHWAYS
(NO ROADS) TO THE WOODLANDS AT THE EXISTING STUB ROADS WITH REMOVABLE LOCKING
BOLLARDS THAT COULD BE REMOVED IN EMERGENCIES.
WHAT ARE THE PLANS TO KEEP ALL CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC OFF OF ROADS IN EXISTING
ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS?
IDENTIFY PUBLIC STREETS AND HIGHWAYS SERVING THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE EXISTING SAFETY
AND TRAFFIC ISSUES ON THESE ROADS, INCLUDING EXISTING SH 55 TRAFFIC VOLUME FROM
BOISE AND CITY INTERSECTIONS (EG AT DEINHARD, RAILROAD AVE) AND SAFETY ISSUES, AND
WHAT PLANS THE DEVELOPER HAS TO NOT EXACERBATE THESE ISSUES IN THE CONSTRUCTION
PHASE AND DEVELOPED PHASE? INDICATE HOW CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT AND CREWS
WILL BE TRANSPORTED TO THE SITE AND FROM WHERE?
WHAT ARE THE ANTICIPATED EFFECTS OF THIS DEVELOPMENT ON AIRPORT ACTIVITY, ITS ABILITY
TO SERVE THE RESIDENTS OF THE SITE AND COSTS OR THIS SERVICE, BOTH IN MONETARY,
NOISE AND PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES WHERE AN INCREASING NUMBER OF INCREASINGLY LARGER
PLANES FLY DIRECTLY OVER EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND A SCHOOL.
HOW ARE THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS COMPATIBLE WITH CITY’S TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN?
3. Housing
a. What are the existing housing market and trends for the city and region?
b. What are the opportunities in development of this site to satisfy market demand?
WHAT ARE THE CURRENT EXISTING HOUSING NEEDS IN THE COMMUNITY IN TERMS OF PRICE POINT,
LOCATION, SIZE, OWNERSHIP VS RENTAL, SEASONAL AVAILABILITY AND HOW MUCH NEED DOES
EACH NEW HOME CREATE? HOW DOES THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO MEET THESE NEEDS
IN THE SHORT AND LONG-TERM?
APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY UNITS WOULD BE PROVIDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND AT WHICH
PRICE POINTS? INDICATE WHICH TYPE OF PURCHASER (LOW, MIDDLE, HIGH-INCOME) IS TARGETED
FOR EACH TYPE AND PRICE POINT?
WHERE WILL CONSTRUCTION CREWS RESIDE WHILE BUILDING THE HOMES? WHERE WILL
CONSTRUCTION CREWS COMMUTE FROM WHILE BUILDING THE HOMES?
4. Utilities
a. What utilities are planned to serve the site?
b. What is the availability and capacity of existing water and sewer services?
c. Are there planned improvements or what improvements would be needed to serve the site?
Draft Public Review July 20, 2021
4 | P a g e
WHAT IS THE ABILITY OF THE CITY UTILITY AND OTHER UTILITY AGENCIES TO ADEQUATELY SERVICE
THE SITE, INCLUDING ITS SHORT- AND LONG- TERM FISCAL IMPACT ON CITY BUDGETS, EXISTING
TAXPAYERS AND USER FEES?
HOW WILL NEEDED UTILITY UPGRADES BE BROUGHT TO THE DEVELOPMENT (EG SEWER) AND HOW
WILL THE CONSTRUCTON OF THESE UPGRADES IMPACT THE SURROUNDING EXISTING
NEIGHBORHOODS AND THEIR ROADWAYS?
5. Public Safety
a. What are the existing service levels and jurisdiction providing service to the site?
b. What would be the response time for service? Replace with WHAT IS THE CURRENT RESPONSE TIME IN
THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES, EVACUATION TIME IN THE CASE OF WILDFIRE
AND HOW WOULD THIS TIME BE AFFECTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT?
c. Are there any known EXISTING public safety issues (INCLUDING EMERGENCY EVACUATION ISSUES)
on or IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND SCHOOLS EXISITING near the site? WHAT ADDITIONAL PLANS ARE
PROPOSED TO MITIGATE AN INCREASE IN EXISTING PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES, PARTICULARLY IN THE
CASE OF FIRE, WILDFIRE, EMERGENCY EVACUATION, EMERGENCY HEALTHCARE NEEDS?
d. Are there any fire wise practices in place?
WHAT IS THE ABILITY OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER AGENCIES TO ADEQUATELY
SERVICE THE SITE AND ITS RESIDENTS, INCLUDING ITS SHORT- AND LONG- TERM FISCAL IMPACT ON
THEIR BUDGETS, EXISTING TAXPAYERS AND USER FEES?
6. Schools:
a. What is the availability of school and capacity to serve the site?
b. What is the availability of daycare facilities and capacity to serve the site?
WHAT IS THE ANTICIPATED AND TARGETED MIX OF HOMEOWNERS IN THE DEVELOPMENT: LOCAL
FAMILIES WITH SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN, FAMILIES WITHOUT CHILDREN, SECOND HOMEOWNERS,
AND BASED ON THAT WHAT IS THE ABILITY OF THE SCHOOLS TO ADEQUATELY SERVICE THE SITE,
INCLUDING ITS SHORT- AND LONG- TERM FISCAL IMPACT ON SCHOOL BUDGETS, EXISTING TAXPAYERS
AND USER FEES?
NEW SECTION: PUBLIC SERVICES:
WHAT ARE THE EXISTING SNOW REMOVAL SAFETY AND OTHER ISSUES REPORTED IN THE ADJACENT
NEIGHBORHOODS AND SCHOOLS AND HOW WILL AN INCREASE IN THESE SAFETY ISSUES BE
MITIGATED?
WHAT ARE THE EXISTING CITY SNOW REMOVAL STORAGE ISSUES IN THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS
AND HOW WILL THIS DEVELOPMENT IMPACT THAT AND ISSUES BE ADDRESSED? WHAT ALTERNATIVE
AND/OR ADDITIONAL SNOW REMOVAL STRATEGIES WILL BE REQUIRED, WHERE WILL SNOW BE
STORED AND WHAT IS THE FISCAL IMPACT OF ADDITIONAL MEASURES TO REMOVE AND STORE
SNOW?
WHAT IS THE ABILITY OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER AGENCIES, INCLUDING
Draft Public Review July 20, 2021
5 | P a g e
HEALTH CARE AND OTHER AGENCIES TO ADEQUATELY SERVICE THE SITE AND ITS RESIDENTS,
INCLUDING ITS SHORT- AND LONG- TERM FISCAL IMPACT ON THEIR BUDGETS, EXISTING TAXPAYERS
AND USER FEES
7. Recreation/Open Space
a. What designated and informal recreational/open space opportunities are in the immediate vicinity
including school district property and city parks and pathways, IN PARTICULAR THOSE ACCESSIBLE BY
FOOT OR OTHER NON-MOTORIZED MEANS?
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational/open space uses? If so, describe.
c. What is the recreation/open space opportunities, including trails and linkages with natural
environmental conditions that could be provided WITHIN the project?
HOW ARE THE PLANNED RECREATIONAL/OPEN SPACE OPPORTUNITIES COMPATIBLE WITH THE
GOALS OF THE MCCALL COMMUNITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, PARKS & RECREATION MASTER
PLAN & PATHWAYS MASTER PLAN?
8. Historic and cultural preservation
a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old
listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers? If so, specifically
describe.
b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Native American or historic use or
occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence,
artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies
conducted at the site to identify such resources.
9. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the
completed project's energy needs?
b. What kinds of energy conservation features could be included in the design of the development?
c. List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any.
10. Environmental Health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and
explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that exist on the site?
b. What are the current sources of light or glare on or IN NEIGHBORHOODS adjacent to the site?
Could light or glare from the CONSTRUCTION OR THE development be a safety hazard or interfere
with views OR NEGATIVELY IMPACT PROPERTY VALUES OF EXISTING ADJACENT PROPERTIES?
c. What are the current sources of noise on or IN NEIGHBORHOODS adjacent to the site?
Could noise from the CONSTRUCTION OR THE development IMPACT THE ADJACENT
PROPERTIES’ OR be a safety hazard?
d. What are the current conditions that make this site AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES prone to wildland
fires? What are the considerations that should be made in the design of future site development
to mitigate the impacts TO THE EXISTING ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS from wildland fire? What are
the existing and planned evacuation strategies for the area INCLUDING IN THE ADJACENT
NEIGHBORHOOD in the event of a catastrophic fire event AND HOW CAN NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON
THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS EVACUATION PLAN BE MITIGATED? (NOTE: THIS SEEMS MORE
APPROPRIATE WITH SIMILAR PUBLIC SAFETY QUESTIONS IN SECTION 5, PUBLIC SAFETY?)
Draft Public Review July 20, 2021
6 | P a g e
How can development of this site be adequately served, CONSTRUCTED, DESIGNED AND
PLANNED to minimize public costs and impacts on existing development, THE MCCALL
COMMUNITY, ECONOMY AND FINANCES OF THE CITY?
I SUGGEST REMOVE THIS ENTIRE SECTION BELOW AS IT DOES NOT RELATE TO THE ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT
DOCUMENT ITSELF, IT IS A TIMELINE. HOWEVER, IT IS USEFUL FOR ALL PARTIES INVOLVED, SO PERHAPS THIS COULD
BE A SEPARATE DOCUMENT?
TYPICALLY, AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS AT LEAST 30 DAYS, WITH A PUBLIC
HEARING TO FOLLOW.
ITEM #7 IS ACTUALLY CITY STAFF REC ON THE EA? IN THE SCOPING MEETING, IT WAS CLEAR THAT NEITHER THE
PREAPPLICATION OR THE FULL DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION COULD GO TO PZ PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF THE EA.
Process Steps
1. Scoping meeting.
2. Revised scope of work.
3. Ten-day public comment on scope of work.
4. Draft preparation by consultants
5. One-week draft review and approval by City.
6. Ten-day distribution of environmental assessment and public meeting to discuss the
implications of the analysis.
7. Staff recommendations to applicant on development proposal.
Comment made in person at the June 24, 2021 City Council meeting:
My name is Sheree Sonfield and my residence is 664 Woodlands Drive and it has been for 18 years.
Thank you all for your hard work and service to our community.
I am here to comment on the City Planning Department’s proposed Resolution 21-25 to designate the
158 acres adjacent to The Woodlands and owned by Pine Creek Ranch, LLC as an “Area of Critical
Concern”. If passed by council, the resolution would require an environmental assessment of the
acreage.
I support Resolution 21-25 and ask that you approve it with the requirement that the assessment
specifically consider all potential options for vehicular traffic. This landlocked parcel with R4 zoning
will add over 600 single family lots, presenting issues for routine and emergency access, as well as
construction access.
I’d like you to note these points that support specifically requiring this in your approval:
1) The 158 acres is landlocked– it is surrounded by the Nokes Property, The Woodlands, Fox
Ridge, and West Place.
2) Unless a major new access point and road network is established, existing roadways will be
overwhelmed thus creating safety hazards. There are many young children who use Woodlands
roads to walk to the nearby schools.
3) The Woodlands (118 single family lots) plus Fox Ridge (32 single family lots) have 2 exits onto
Spring Mountain Rd. The 158 acres’ residents (over 600 single family lots) would go through
these 2 existing neighborhoods to access Spring Mountain Ranch. In total, more than 750 single
family lots would use 2 access points to Spring Mountain Ranch Road.
4) Compare this to current development along Spring Mountain from Lick Creek to Bitteroot Dr:
9 access points to Spring Mountain Rd 528 single family lots (East of SMR)
5) Woodlands Drive is only 23 feet wide (at its widest points), with no shoulder or separate path.
This does not meet the cross-section of a “local street’ in the Transportation Master Plan, much
less a busier street. In winter, the road is even more narrow and the snowbanks are so high that
sight lines are obscured for safe exit of driveways along Woodlands Drive.
The McCall Comprehensive Plan includes transportation goals and policies that all speak to the
importance of safe streets.
The assessment needs to recognize the acreage is landlocked and that insufficient access has been
proposed in the preliminary plan concepts. The assessment needs to look at creating additional and
practical access to the landlocked acreage.
Unless a major new access point and road network is established, existing roadways will be
overwhelmed thus creating safety hazards.
Thank you for your work and careful consideration.
Safe, Smart Growth (submitted as a Letter to the Editor of the Star News to be published on July 29)
Kids play and walk to school on my street. All ages cycle, walk dogs and exercise here. A relatively large percent of local
families with kids live here because of our proximity to schools.
Park Pointe Development of Boise’s current proposal for 585 homes in Pine Creek Ranch threatens the safety of existing
users of my street and creates real life-safety concerns due to already limited emergency evacuation routes. As the
largest development in McCall’s history, it should interest all taxpayers in McCall based solely on the estimated future
service costs such a large development would create. Whether it’s 585 homes, as presented on the preliminary plans on
the City website, or more, or fewer, 90 acres of the property would require annexation and all of the 158 acres would
require re-zoning from current zoning. Let’s take the time to determine all its impacts and take every opportunity to
speak up so McCall’s growth is safe and smart.
The proposal currently has too few and inappropriate access points. Currently, the Woodlands Drive proposed access
would be the shortest route to Pine Creek Ranch from downtown, so my street would see a dramatic increase in
construction and resident traffic volume, creating an unimaginable safety hazard. The street isn’t built for this
anticipated volume in summer and certainly not in winter when the street is narrow, snowbanks are higher, sight lines
are obscured.
Craig Groves, Park Pointe Development, said (in the July 1 City hosted scope meeting) that the “Fire Chief really has
concerns about life-safety issues as it relates to [the area] today, let alone any additional development, without
addressing transportation and other access points”. A wildfire emergency evacuation today could be catastrophic.
When there is construction, a roadway obstruction, or a big school event, we have traffic bottlenecks and no exit
alternatives today.
For the safety of myself and my neighbors of all ages, I want to see a smarter plan. Extension of Deinhard Lane was
envisioned by City Council in 1994 when there is development to the east, and now is the time. Deinhard could be the
primary entrance to Pine Creek Ranch, it’s a direct access from the property line to Spring Mountain Ranch Road. Other
additional practical access points should be considered too. No additional vehicle traffic should be allowed on
Woodlands Drive, but pathways within Pine Creek Ranch could connect to The Woodlands and locking removable
bollards could be utilized to improve everyone’s emergency routes. We could be smart and safe.
The sheer size of the development should interest all McCall taxpayers. The nearly 600 homes could easily calculate to
1,800 additional residents and visitors for our small town, and that will impact future service demands and costs. We
haven’t been taking into account all the future costs that come with each development, affordable housing is a perfect
example. The incentive system doesn’t work, we need each development to be required to contribute to short and
long-term solutions to our housing shortage crisis rather than exacerbate it. Then there’s the increased demand on
water treatment systems, sewer systems, roads and snow removal improvements to accommodate increased traffic,
police and fire emergency services, airport, parks and recreation facilities and programs, schools, just to mention a few.
Current traffic on SH 55 would increase, and the intersections in McCall that have bottlenecks now would certainly
require improvements due to more people in town.
Smart growth is a big hot topic in the Treasure Valley now, and they have at least 1 new tool to assist in identifying and
assessing the costs of growth. The “Fiscal Impact Tool,” or “FIT,” was announced recently by the Community Planning
Association of Southwest Idaho. We also need to analyze the fiscal impacts for smart decision making here in McCall.
Council’s designation of the Pine Creek Ranch area as an “Area of Critical Concern” is appropriate given its relative size
and location. The designation allows for this development proposal to be looked at through an “Environmental
Assessment” prior to the developer making any presentation to P&Z. This approach is supposed to allow us to get all
the issues identified in a central location for analysis and smart decision making. This is McCall’s first designation of this
sort and I applaud the move and recognize it requires our Planning Office and Council to learn as we progress through
this process.
Through August 5, we all have an opportunity make public comments on the Scope of this Environmental Assessment.
Please consider speaking up so this report will address your own concerns, it’s part of the process.
Sheree Sonfield, resident of The Woodlands, McCall