HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 09-16Meridian City Council Special Workshop Meeting September 16, 2008
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday,
September16, by President Charlie Rountree.
Members Present: Tammy de Weerd, David Zaremba, Keith Bird, Brad Hoaglun, and
Charlie Rountree.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Caleb Hood, Will Berg, Tom Bany, Keith
Watts, Matt Ellsworth, Bruce Freckleton, Scott Steckline, Kyle Radeck, Jeff Lavey,
Steve Siidoway, Mark Niemeyer, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
Rountree: I'm going to open the meeting for this evening, September 16th, at 6:00
o'clock. First item, roll call attendance.
Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda:
Rountree: And I'd like to welcome us all and all you here this evening and the next item
on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda.
Zaremba: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Let's see. No comments on the Consent Agenda. Item -- under Item 4,
community items, there has been a request to move Item C to our October workshop.
And there has also been a request under Item 5-B -- to move 5-B earlier in the program.
So, if we could actually put 5-B in front of 4-A, the participants in that discussion would
also like to .make it to Kuna City Council meeting. So, that would help them
considerably.
De Weerd: Depends on what they say.
Rountree: Depends on what they are going to say.
Zaremba: Yeah. You have to tell Kuna what we want you to tell Kuna. And those
would be the only two changes, dropping 4-C and moving to 5-B up to the first thing in
four. With that I move that we adopt the agenda as revised.
Merldlan City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 2 of 96
Bird: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor? Unanimous. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: AYES.
Item 3: CONSENT AGENDA
A. Professional Services Agreement with
Filip Vogelpohl for City Hall Public Art
Proposal
B. Silverstone Corporate Plaza Water Main
Easement
C. Contract with Berry Electric for Streetlight
Maintenance
D. Award of Bid and Authorization to Enter
into Contract with (name) for Old Town
Streetscape Reconstruction
E. Environmental Assessment for CDBG
Project Site
F. Ratification of MOU Regarding Sanitary
Sewer Lift Station at Whitestone
Subdivision
Rountree: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda.
Zaremba: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we adopt the Consent Agenda as published.
Hoaglun: Second.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: Moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda. All those in favor?
Unanimous. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 3 of 96
Item 5: Department Reports.
B. Discussion on Overland Road Realignment.
Rountree: Item 4, community items, and with the change we will have Item 5-B first,
discussion of the Overland Road realignment and is somebody going to introduce this
or -- Mr. Jewett, you've got the floor, then.
Jewett: Jim Jewett, 1560 Carol Street, Meridian, Idaho. For the record, I will be pro
Meridian tonight.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Jewett: Okay. I appreciate the opportunity to come in front of you tonight to discuss the
Overland realignment and how the agreement with the city, with ACHD, and me is
working out. I'll give you a quick update of where we are. This is a recap of how we got
to where we are today. A few years back I -- you know, I submitted South Ridge and
during the submittal process the city went forward with some charrettes that determined
whether the realignment of Overland Road was appropriate to fix an intersection at Ten
Mile and Overland. I was called into those meetings and I found it very appropriate and
agreed to be a willing participant with ACHD and the city in that realignment. Since that
date we have gotten South Ridge approved with that realignment. We have got ACHD
to recognize the realignment, added into their five year work CIP, so it could be a
funded project in the -- for an impact fee agreement that we have since entered into with
ACHD. Currently the plans are a hundred percent complete for construction. The right
of way plans are within a day of being completed and sending them back to ACRD so
they can finish their final acquisition for non-developer owned properties, so that the
notice to proceed can go forward. The components that involve the city were the sewer
and water lines that went into Overland. The sewer line was previously approved by the
city and the credit agreement impact of a reimbursement agreement was entered into.
The water line is the outstanding -- the last outstanding issue. With the cooperative
agreement with ACHD, they have agreed to waive all of their fees associated with right
of way and inspection fees having to construct that in the spirit of the cooperative
agreement. Also, as long as the water line is built as part of that project there would be
no right of way fees charged for that. So, what I'm asking of the Council tonight is to
recognize the cooperative spirit of both the agreement between the city and myself and
ACHD and waive your inspection fees for the water line. With that I would stand for any
questions.
Rountree: Any questions? Any comments from Public Works first?
Barry: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we want to provide just a
little bit of information with regard to Mr. ,lewett's request. The sewer trunk line
associated with the project he was just mentioning has inspection and plan approval or
plan review fees on the order of $11,045.37, which were paid on September 4th of
2007. The water trunk line with the first and second review and QLPE was approved on
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 4 of 96
6/20/08 and there was an invoice on June 10th of 2008 in the amount of $9,582.35. It,
too, was paid on June 25th of 2008, so -- and, then, there are some outstanding sewer
and water main stubs review and inspection fees on the order of $962..40, making the
total for the project thus far $21,590.19. $20,627.72 have already been paid. So, if Mr.
Jewett was to have fees waived, then, there would be a significant portion of that,
obviously, which would be refunded to him. I think the question for -- of the day is
whether or not the Council believes that the project that Mr. Jewett is discussing with
you tonight is that of a cooperative project with the city and should be treated like an
ACHD project. If that is the case and the Council so determined, then, the Public Works
staff would recommend treating this as we would an ACHD project and, thus, waiving
the fees. So, we just need your direction and approval if that is your direction to waive
fees in order to do that. So, with that we will stand for any questions.
Rountree: Any questions of Mr. Jewett or Tom?
Zaremba: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Just so I'm clear, it's only the fee that's waived, not the inspection; right? It
still gets inspected.
Barry: Yes, sir. It does get inspected. Just the fees for plan review and inspection.
Zaremba: Okay.
Bany: Thank you.
Rountree: Further comments, questions?
Jewett: One point of clarification. The two previous payments that were made for the
fees were, in fact, paid by the contractor, not by me. One of them I -- you know,
unknown to me and that was the latter two. They were both paid by Brown
Construction. So, I would be asking that we reimburse to him, not to me.
Zaremba: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would say that I have been enthusiastic about the realignment of Overland
from the very start, participated in the same charrette where I advocated that this
realignment happen and I do feel like it's a cooperative agreement between us and
ACHD and the developer and contractors and everybody that's in there. I appreciate
Mr. Jewett's willingness to step up and consider the realignment and realign his project
around it. I -- I don't know if there is any other discussion, but I would make the motion
that we approve the waiving of the inspection fees as a cooperative agreement.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 5 of 96
Rountree: I need a second.
Bird: Does that include reimbursement?
Zaremba: I beg your pardon? And refund of fees that have already been paid in that
relation.
Bird: To Brown Construction.
Zaremba: To Brown Construction.
De Weerd: To the appropriate party.
Zaremba: Maybe I shouldn't have made the motion. I should have let someone else do
it.
De Weerd: You're doing fine.
Zaremba: All of those elements are included in my suggestion.
De Weerd: Does staff have further coaching?
Rountree: So, I have a motion to refund the fees paid and waive the remaining fees for
the sewer and water installation on the Overland realignment, payment to be made to
Brown Construction. Do I have a second?
Rountree: I will second it to get the motion out.
Rountree: Okay. Moved and seconded. Any discussion? I have a question for Jim.
Our concern all along is that we get this done and we get it done before we have Ten
Mile interchange in place and we get it done before we start looking at either
subdividing along the interstate or on the ridge. What assurance can you give us that
it's going to be done anytime soon?
Jewett: Councilman Rountree, obviously, we haven't -- we haven't started phase one of
the subdivision yet. The residential market is in such a state that bringing on a whole lot
of residential isn't the most prudent thing. We do have some commercial sales that we
are focusing on that Overland is the component that makes those work. That's why our
focus has been getting those plans approved. Really, the need and the reason for this
request is just to make sure that we count every penny that's out there. Banks are tight
right now, we have a commitment, and we need to make sure that we stay within that
commitment and this commitment from this Council will help assure that we stay on
task. Right now I talked with my banker just before I came over here to make sure that
the question was asked, the timing. You now, right now we are about two weeks away
from issuing the letter of credit to ACHD for them to issue the notice to proceed, once
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 6 of 96
those right of way plans have been reviewed and approved and the bridge will go on,
that's the first component of the construction is the bridge. It will go forth as soon as the
water comes out of the canal, with, hopefully, finishing right around Thanksgiving or the
first week after. We are, essentially, shut down for the winter until March 1st and, then,
ACHD let's us get in there and we still anticipate having it done by June 1st.
Hoaglun: Mr. President? Question -- I'm not sure if this is to legal counsel, to the Public
Works, or maybe a fellow Council member, but I just want to be sure I understand the
basis of what an ACHD project is versus a city project, that would warrant the -- the no
payment of these fees or the refunding of these fees in this case.
Jewett: I can try to answer that for you. When ACRD brings a project forward in the
city, the city takes the utilities on themselves. The other scenarios were the developer
takes the utilities on for this own project. The difference with South Ridge is South
Ridge is a very large master planned community. The phase one that we have
approved is way on the east end where there is already infrastructure. The Ten Mile
alignment goes a whole mile to the west where we are not planning anything. So, our
development is way ahead of our own need and with ACHD putting it in their five year
work CIP, it would either be built by ACHD within the five years or I can build it now
under an impact fee credit agreement where they pay me back through impact fees.
So, all I'm doing is moving that timing up, like Councilman Rountree states, to make
sure we get it done ahead of Ten Mile, instead of behind.
Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Jim, if I understood you right, in June of '09 you will be completed?
Jewett: That's with the realigned section. The section that's existing will probably be
built over the summer and fall of next year. The realignment's the first part that --
Bird: The realignment from Ten Mile back down to where you're going to tum off at
Overland will be done by June of'09.
Rountree: We are going to hold you to that.
Bird: We are going to hold -- we are going to put your foot to the fire.
Jewett: Our agreement with ACHD is 40 weeks, so --
Bird: Okay. Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 7 of 96
Bird: I don't know if we have ever done something like this before and this is -- I hope
we are not setting a precedent that we -- some Council gets turned upside down with.
But I believe to get that in in a timely manner, because, hopefully, Ten Mile is going to
be done and we have got Mr. Jewett's sworn testimony that it's going to be done June
of '09.
De Weerd: Sworn testimony. We will hold you to it.
Bird: So, I can support it that way.
Zaremba: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would add that I believe there is an additional incentive, the -- as liaison to
the fire department I know they are trying to build Fire Station Six, at least buy the
property for it, and that is adjacent to the new realigned Overland section and I'm not
absolutely certain, but I believe the fire department asked that in that agreement to buy,
that the fire department not pay until the road is there.
Jewett: That is correct.
Zaremba: So, there is an additional incentive to get it done.
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Mr. President. I guess I would also take Councilman Bird's comments to
heart and ask that if this Council does vote to reimburse the fees, that the -- or the intent
is confirmed and a letter is drafted by our attorney to really define what makes this
project different from others, so we really aren't setting a precedent on these kind of
partnerships. We have partners up in the north -- north Meridian that have done
intersection improvements that we haven't reimbursed fees to and we need to be able to
really delineate what the difference this project carves and the significance of the road
project and the significance of the investment as well. So, maybe it is also in light of
ACHD agreeing to waive their fees. Certainly if you get two agencies to agree to waive
their fees maybe that is a once in a lifetime happening. So, I guess that would be my
cautionary comment and just making sure that we can make -make -- separate this
from maybe similar type of projects that might come back.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 8 of 96
Bird: The second would like to see if the maker of the motion would agree. I'd like to
see the time limit put on June '09 completion -- put in the motion or it would be revisited
by the Council.
Zaremba: The maker of the motion agrees.
Bird: Second agrees.
Rountree: Okay. Again, we have an amended motion. Any further discussion?
Bany: Just so staff are clear on the motion, we are referring to the refund of $20,627.72
already paid, as well as a waiving of the $962.45 outstanding and the -- and all future
assessed -- or all future plan review and inspection fees associated with this particular
component, but not interior plats or any of that.
Bird: That's right.
Rountree: That's correct.
Bany: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Mr. Chair?
Rountree: With the caveat of being done by June 9th or June '09 and, if not, we will
revisit, depending on the outcome of the motion. Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess we want to also make clear that these are for fees the city collects.
I don't think we can make a commitment on behalf of our building inspector or building
official or anything like that. So, do want to make that statement on the record.
Nary: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, so is your anticipation
that we -are going to have an agreement with Mr. Jewett and what happens in June of
'09? I mean revisit doesn't -- that's not an enforcement tool. Are you saying in June of
'09 if this isn't completed you revisit and Mr. Jewett will repay us back the 21,000 dollars
that we have reimbursed him? Is that what you would like to see in an agreement?
Bird: I would.
Rountree: The maker of the motion is that what your intent was?
Zaremba: I guess the choice would be to withhold the payment until that date or go
ahead and pay him and expect to be -- get it back if it's not finished by that date. I'm --
Meridian City Council Special Meetlng Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 9 of 96
Nary: There is certainly great incentive if you withhold to June of '09, but that's up to
you. I'm just -- I think -- I just want to be clear. If we are going to have an agreement, I
-- we need a mechanism for enforcement and if it's just that you're going to revisit, there
is really no mechanism to do anything. If you want that the agreement that Mr. Jewett is
going to commit to is that he's going to return that 21,000 dollars, then, I can certainly
prepare an agreement that says that.
Zaremba: If the thrust is that we should pay them back soon, then, I would say there
should be some kind of a sun setting clause in there that says that the waiving of the
fees is no null and void if pavement is not completed by June of '09.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess in fairness to the applicant, too, it has to be circumstances under his
control. You know, if there is an unforeseen circumstance, which we certainly have
experienced some of those in construction projects, we would want to make sure that it
-- it's quantified that if that incident was of his making, we would have the discussion on
whether those funds would need to be reimbursed to the city or not in June of '09. If it
could be termed something like that.
Hoaglun: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I just want to comment. I agree with those comments, that these are things
under his control, but at the same time if we are waiving the fees in this instance where,
basically, if we had not paid them and they were waived, there would be no payment
and then -- in June. So, my expectation is that they would be paid back to him and,
then, in June if there was an issue, then, we can revisit that and determine the course of
action at that point in time. Now, what the lever is I'm not sure, but, hopefully, he will be
able to accomplish what his goal is and make that happen, so --
Rountree: Given the discussion, I would entertain a new notion that tries to wrap up all
of the things that we have talked about, if the maker would like to do that.
Zaremba: Let's try this --
De Weerd: You want to withdraw your motion first?
Zaremba: Yes. Let me withdraw the previous motion.
Bird: Second agrees.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 10 of 96
Zaremba: Okay. Mr. President, I move that we approve the repayment of inspection
fees already paid and the waiver of future inspection fees that would normally be paid
for the water and sewer installation in the realigned portion of Overland Road. Payment
actually to be made to Brown Construction Company. With the additional agreement
between the applicant and the city -- I'm sorry. And the basis for making that waiver
and refund is that this is seen to be a cooperative project that would actually be done by
ACHD, except that the applicant is offering get it done sooner and, then, with the
additional agreement that if the pavement is not completed on the realigned section by
June, that we may reconvene and reconsider whether to continue the waiver or ask for
the inspection fees back.
Rountree: Do I have a second?
Barry: Madam Mayor?
Hoaglun: I'll second that.
Rountree: Discussion? Tom.
Bany: Mr. President. Mr. Zaremba, I just wanted to make sure that we were clear. Did
you want only inspection fees or plan review and inspection fees for water and sewer?
Zaremba: I only heard inspection fees, so I didn't realize a did I miss something?
Barry: They lumped them all together.
De Weerd: It was plan review and --
Zaremba: Then, the plan review as well. Including the --
Rountree: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Second concurs on that.
Rountree: And a question for the maker of the motion. The June date was June of '09.
Zaremba: June 2009. Yes.
Rountree: Okay.
Zaremba: That was the intent.
Rountree: You have heard the motion. There has been a second. Any further
discussion?
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 11 of 96
Freckleton: Mr. President, just one other point. Mr. Zaremba, you said paving is
complete and I assume you meant the project would be complete to ACHD's
satisfaction, whatever the plan may include, could be curb, gutter, sidewalk -- it wasn't
just paving.
Zaremba: Yes. I would include that in there. Where I was going was to make sure we
weren't just talking about the pipe being buried.
Freckleton: Right. Right.
Zaremba: The road is completed to ACHD's satisfaction is a better way to put it and I
would include that in the motion.
Freckleton: Great.
Rountree: Second concurs?
Hoaglun: Yes.
Freckleton: One last thing. I'm sorry.
Rountree: Bruce.
Freckleton: And that also included all future fees that would be charged associated with
this project. Plan and inspection fees.
Zaremba: As I understood the request and the intent of my motion was that it would
only apply to the realigned portion of Overland.
Freckleton: Correct.
Zaremba: And not future fees on any other parts of the project.
Freckleton: Correct.
Zaremba: Is that what you --
Freckleton: Just future fees that are associated with the realignment of Overland Road,
not South Ridge Subdivision.
Zaremba: On the other parts of the project or even other parts of Overland. Just the
realigned portion.
Freckleton: Correct.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 12 of 96
Rountree: Which you included in your motion, so -- any further discussion? All those in
favor of the motion -- by roll call, Jaycee.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 4: COMMUNITY ITEMS/PRESENTATIONS
A. Update from Petra on New City Hall Building.
Rountree: Good luck in Kuna. Next item on the agenda is the update from Petra on
City Hall. Gene.
Bennett: Thank you. My name is Gene Bennett. I'm with Petra, 1097 North Rosario,
Meridian, Idaho. Madam Mayor, Members of City Council, you have before you the
report for the 1st of September. I will briefly review the executive summary for you. On
the schedule we are racing to the finish line. Punch lists have been done. We have two
weeks left to complete those punch items that are on the punch list and, then, we have
two weeks to let the air blow through the building, so that it will satisfy the LEED
requirement. We are still scheduled at -- for a silver LEED on the project. Budgetwise
-- the budget remains as established back in December. There are no changes there.
With that, the financials -- Tom is not here tonight. Financially, if you tum to section
four, you can see that the financials remain the same. Percentagewise, the project
buildingwise is 94 percent complete and that has sense changed in the last two weeks
to we are really done at this point with the building. The plaza is about halfway
completed at this point, concretewise and paverwise. We have started excavation on
the new parking lot to the east to the gas station. We have submitted all of the
requirements as of yesterday that ACRD has requested and so we are off and running
on the east parking lot. With that I will tum it over to Jack, superintendent, for a brief
review on schedule and, then, to Nick on the LEED. Thank you.
Vaughan: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Mr. Bennett, Gene,
pretty well completed our schedule and we are racing to the finish line. Many of you
have been in the building in the last week or so, you have seen how we are
progressing. It's looking pretty good. I don't really have anything to add. He gave a
pretty quick overview. I would be willing to entertain anything you have on the
schedule. We have got a little bit of painting left, which is, basically, stairs, which we
intentionally held off, because of the amount of traffic going up and down. We are
punch listing. A little bit more cabinet -- miscellaneous cabinet things to install and we
are just consolidating the punch list as it's come in from all the engineers and architects
and getting it out to all the trades on almost a daily basis, checking that list off and going
on with the project. I will be happy to entertain any questions on the overall schedule or
the site schedule or the schedule on the east parking lot.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 13 of 96
Rountree: Any schedule questions? Staff? Okay. Last week still waiting for some
indication on the parking lot and the contamination. Was there -- have we gotten that
cleared and ready to move forward?
Vaughan: I'm going to see if Keith has heard from our mutual -- Kurt Priebe from
Terracon. I have not talked to him this week. As of last Friday. We were kind of letting
that air out, because of the smell and we are also having a hard time determining
whether or not we could see if there is any petroleum there, because they were laying
pavement right beside us on Broadway here and that was creating some -- some
problem with our testing. So, I haven't talked to Keith this week. I'm sorry, Curt --
Watts: I have. I did get a -- I got a letter from Curt last week that -- it was last week or
yesterday. I think it was Friday -- that stated exactly what area needed to be removed
and he had been in contact with ACRD and they have approved his plan. I did get a
letter from ACHD and forwarded that onto Ted I believe this morning. I believe we are
good to go with everything, as we said.
Vaughan: We did receive that letter and he did come out and do a -- when we started
the excavation he did a visual and he did require us to go a little bit wider than what was
originally on his scope of work. We went about three feet wider and down seven feet
deep -- in that seven foot depth range, because of some observations he made and the
color of the soil and that was all done that day and all this material has been properly
hauled off to proper disposal sites and I will follow up with him tomorrow originally on
that as far as his final. He needs to come back one last time and look at that. I think he
did that on Friday, I just haven't been able to confirm that yet, sir.
Rountree: Thanks, Jack. Okay. Thank you.
Ploetz: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, City Council, Nick Ploetz with Petra, lead AP. If
you could turn to section three, it's a LEED update. We are currently projecting 36
points that we have been attempting. Not many changes in that area. Heery is on site.
They have a new commissioning agent that they hired on, Ed Martin from Spokane, but
a new guy from the office who will be helping, along with Martin, to get the
commissioning going. I have been working pretty closely with them compiling O&M
documentation through the M-E-P systems and getting training ready for you guys to
take over your new project. Indoor air quality is -- we have currently started up both one
and two, the roof top units, so we are returning air in the building and proper filtration
has been set into place. Recycling. Turn to the next page. We are running roughly at
81 percent diversion and I don't see it changing much from there. Any questions?
Rountree: Questions? Staff? Thank you. If you want to wrap up, Gene, or have you
said enough?
Bennett: I don't have anything else to add, but we are pushing to the end. It's been an
exciting time. Thank you.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 14 of 96
Rountree: Very good.
Watts: President, Madam Mayor, Council Members, I'd like to add also that we have
sent our RFP out for the move this week as well. Thursday we will be walking all the
potential contractors through all of our facilities that are moving and through City Hall
and having a question and answer and we open those next Thursday. I believe it's the
25th.
B. Community Liaison update -Will Berg.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you. Next item on the agenda is the community liaison
update. Will.
Berg: Thank you, Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, before we
leave the new building project I just want to say that Petra staff has been really great to
work with. We have been pushing the punch list in the walk through in the last two
weeks and it's been kind of hectic with people moving all over trying to finish up their
work, but they have been great trying to get us to the building and notated. The
remarks that we made and LCA has been helpful with working with that same project.
So, it's been unique trying to do a punch list right after somebody didn't really finish the
room, but is going onto the next room because we are there.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess I understand why it's called a punch list. I think Jack has wanted to
punch us after every tour he's given, because we got real wild with the blue tape. But
thank you for your patience. We will assume that they all get done.
Vaughan: For the record, Jaycee is not allowed in my building any longer.
De Weerd: Hey, Jaycee.
Rountree: Duly noted.
De Weerd: Yeah. She wasn't good with the blue tape.
Berg: I stole a roll of blue tape, so --
Rountree: Okay.
Berg: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Madam Mayor, in front of you is a report
that I -- that the Mayor and I have been working putting together that I give to her on a
weekly basis of information and things that I have been doing and I know it's kind of
bulky, but I want you to kind of look through it. The idea is to get you some of the
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 15 of 96
information from some of the committees, agencies, associations that I go to. I have
been charged to make sure some of the minutes and agendas get to you and in this
little quarter inch booklet is all the information that I have given to the Mayor and as you
can see it goes through a wide variety of different subject matters and committees and
agencies. So, I want to highlight on a couple things that I have been involved with. The
Pine Street School, we -- I know Councilman Bird wants to really finish this project up
and I would, too, but we have kind of come to a stalemate that we have the building in
place and it's functional as far as the inside, but we are working on the landscaping. I'm
trying to meet with all the parties that are involved with that to see what we have left to
do with the landscaping, who is going to be paying for it, or if Elroy and I are going to
solicit Boy Scouts and finish the project up that way. So, I showed some pictures and,
hopefully, you had maybe an opportunity to go over and look at it. It is set in a nice
location, we just need to finish the outside of it. And we are looking at separate parts of
phasing that into design and sprinkler system to actual landscape, flower beds, shrubs,
trees, to also the picket fence and the -- I don't want to say making the playground
equipment functional, but we have to make it presentable. I don't think the meny-go-
round will ever go around again, but it has to be -- at least look like what it was back in
the old days. There is another item that we have decided on a town hall meeting on
September 29th at the new elementary school in Tuscany Lakes. I think you have a
flier in your packet that talks about that. We are going to concentrate -- we have a
presentation -- a presentation by the county on open space and community connectivity,
as well as some upcoming projects from ACHD, so that is going to be held in their
gymnasium, so kind of make yourself available if you'd like to attend that. 1 know I was
told to keep my comments pretty brief. If you have any other things that you want to get
back to me, if you can a-mail or call me or whatever. But I'm -- this is kind of the things
that I do on a weekly basis. If you want to see something else different or maybe
spread out, let me know how we can kind of fit all this together. I want you informed
about the issues that are going on out there.
Rountree: So, note that and if you have some comments for Will about the information
he's provided, get with him in terms of organization and structure. The one item you did
mention, the Pine Street School, I think that that would be an excellent Eagle Scout
project or two or three. Yeah. That would be a fun one for them to do and I think we'd
really benefit. Any other comments for Will?
Zaremba: I would just comment in taking a quick glance at what you provided for us, I
really appreciate this. This is great.
Berg: Okay. If it's all right with the Mayor, I will try to just copy what I give to her and go
through it every month, on a weekly basis, and, then, once a month we can just kind of
overview the -- what the month had been and any other direction that you may have for
me.
Rountree: It certainly would better prepare us for questions.
Berg: I'm sorry for that --
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 16 of 96
Rountree: That's all right.
Berg: It's been a hectic one week, so --
Rountree: That's all right.
Berg: And there is a lot that went on last week.
De Weerd: We will give you a test next time.
D. Interagency Agreement Between the Ada
County Highway District, City of Meridian,
and Meridian Development Corporation
for Street and Landscaping
Improvements to Meridian Split Corridor
Rountree: Yeah. Give us a test of five minutes. Thanks, Will. Next item on the
agenda, the interagency agreement between ACHD, City of Meridian, and MDC for
streetlighting and landscaping. Matt.
Ellsworth: Thank you, Mr. President, Members of the Council. Madam Mayor. As you
know, Ada County Highway District is set to begin construction of phase one of the split
corridor roadway project coming up next year in 2009. Concurrently, MDC has
designed and will install landscaping to go along with that project. The item in front of
you here is an interagency agreement between the highway district, MDC, and the city
outlining the various roles and responsibilities of each entity as this project comes
together. What it entails for the city is ongoing maintenance of whatever landscaping is
installed with this project. We presented an update on this agreement to Council
several months back. One member of Council raised the question of whether a
warranty was included along with this agreement. ACHD staff confirmed that a one
year warranty is included per standard ACHD policy and, actually, it would route through
ACRD and, then, be passed along to the city on whatever landscape maintenance -- or
landscape materials, excuse me, the city will assume responsibility for. Public -- excuse
me. The Parks Department generated some costs estimated for the maintenance
responsibilities for this landscaping and they came up with in 2009 13,698 dollars. 2010
the estimated costs are 17,703 dollars. And 2011 the estimated cost is 18,234 dollars.
That kind of gives you an idea of what to expect in upcoming years and looking forward
now to the next step in this process, assuming the agreement can come together.
ACHD will include the interagency agreement in the bid documents that are set to go
out later this month. Construction project is set to kick off in February of next year and
continue on until August of next year. So, with that I would stand for any questions.
Rountree: Any questions for Matt?
Bird: I have none.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 17 of 96
Rountree: I have a question. Not for you, Matt, but for Steve in terms of -- you have
gone over the agreement and you're okay with the terms and conditions?
Siddoway: Mr. President, the main section that I see affecting the Parks Department is
section six under maintenance, which says that the city shall be solely responsible to
provide a long going and periodic maintenance and energy costs of the landscape
improvements, sprinkler system, streetlights, and associated items installed during this
agreement. That is my understanding that we are agreeing to do that. I just wanted to
make sure that the Council had an understanding of the costs that are likely to be
associated with that on an annual basis, so we requested that those numbers from
Sensky, who we currently have a contract with and that's where the numbers came
from, so we figure they are pretty accurate, we do intend to competitively bid them when
it does come to us next year. I don't anticipate needing an amendments for this amount
in the coming fiscal year, because we don't expect to receive the project to take over for
maintenance until there is only one month left in the fiscal year, but I want you to
anticipate an enhancement for the following year for those amounts.
Rountree: Thanks, Steve. Any questions of Steve?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Mr. Nary?
Nary: Yes, sir.
Rountree: You have gone this agreement from a legal perspective and is it ready for
action this evening?
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Mr. Baird from my office was involved in
the changes that were necessary from the last time you discussed it in April. I spoke
with him yesterday and this morning and this is ready to go forward, so --
Rountree: Okay. Any further comments or questions? Any additional information,
Matt?
Ellsworth: No, sir.
Rountree: I'd entertain a motion pertaining to this interagency agreement.
Bird: So moved.
Zaremba: Second.
Rountree: That is to approve it?
Meridian City Council Special Meetlng Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 18 of 96
Bird: Approve it.
Rountree: Okay.
Bird: That's what you were stating, wasn't it?
Rountree: No. I have a motion to approve the interagency agreement and authorize
the Mayor to sign. Roll call vote.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
E. Art in Public Spaces Selection Committee
Recommendation on Art for City Hall
Rountree: Next item. And this agenda item is Art In Public Spaces selection
committee's recommendation for art in City Hall. David.
Stolhand: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm just very excited
to be here tonight, to be able to present for recommendation for your approval the first
pieces in the Art In Public Spaces project. This is kind of a first unveiling of the work
that's being done by the Meridian Arts Commission and I think I'd like a special thank
you to Emily Kane from the city attorney's office for her help on this project, along with
others. The mission of the Art In Public Spaces project is to make visual art part of the
regular experience for those who visit Meridian City Hall. To encourage dialogue about
creativity in our community among the elected officials. Community leadership. Staff
and visitors to the city's government center and to provide inspiration for new ways of
experiencing the arts. The artwork composing the Art In Public Spaces collection will be
displayed to the public in the corridors of the newly built City Hall and the selection
committee -- our goal was to procure at least three two dimensional pieces and we want
to have those in place prior to the end of the fiscal year and have installed when the City
Hall is ready to go. The selection committee met yesterday, September 15th, and
members of that committee included Anna Canning from planning, Shelly Houston from
the Mayor's office, Tere Foley, a citizen of Meridian, and also an owner of a -- previous
owner of an art gallery. Julie Clemons, who is a local artist, Mary Jensen, who is a
newly appointed commissioner from the Arts Commission. Walt Lingdren from Johnson
Architects, Bonnie Metcalf, who is our youth representative to the Arts Commission and
myself. In our committee meeting yesterday we looked at 32 total pieces from 11
different artists and of those we chose three and if I could get some help on the
presentation. We could just go to -- a lot of these should be -- stop. Go back. Go back.
One more. This is the first one we chose. This is called A Lost Generation. It was
done by the artist Sherry Carter. It is a -- the size of this is 36 by 60, oil on canvas. Just
a statement from the artist on this. As the City of Meridian continues to prosper and
grow we are saying goodbye to the past generations of farmers that lived off the land.
The painting A Lost Generation is a tribute our past. And I think it should be noted that
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 19 of 96
Sheny was awarded best of show at the 2008 Art in the Park Festival that was just held,
presented by the Boise Art Museum. If we could go on to the next one. Right there.
This piece is called Brook Blues. It was done by Joyce Green, who has been a resident
of Meridian since 1983. Obviously, the subject matter relates directly to our water and
streams in the area. This is a water color piece, size 22 by 30, and I think it was
interesting as we were going through the selection yesterday that everybody on the
committee saw a little bit something different in this piece and I think as folks come to
City Hall I hope that they see the same thing. Okay. The third one -- we are good on
the presentation. The third one is actually -- I'll pass it around. We did not have a slide
of this one. This one we are calling Meridian Creamery No. 5. It was a photograph
taken by Charles Hoffman. It was taken right before the old Creamery building was
demolished back in 2006 and it wasn't long after he took this photo that the property
was fenced off and subsequently tom down to make way for the new City Hall. One of
the comments by one of the folks on the commission -- or on the selection committee
said just looking at this makes me want to -makes me want to see what's inside the
building. And somebody also said that if you look at that patchwork on one of the
windows -- also said that it looks like the work of her -- of her Uncle Martin, but I'm not
sure what that's all about. I think somebody mentioned that the patchwork on the
window kind of reminded them of some of the things that had to be done to the old
Creamery building over the years just to keep that thing going, so -- that is all I have got.
Rountree: Any questions?
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Yes.
Bird: What size is that now going to be?
Stolhand: That is going to be -- the size of that will be framed -- our minimum
specification for framing is 24 by 36. The artist states that the minimum size on that --
to fit that frame would at least be 16 by 24. And he feels that based -- yeah, he says
based -- he says it was done with such quality and resolution that he doesn't have a
problem or doesn't see a problem if that was to be blown up.
Bird: To 16 by 20?
Stolhand: Right.
Bird: Okay.
Rountree: Any questions? Comments? Okay.
Bird: I like the choice.
Rountree: Okay. Keith.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 20 of 96
Watts: Madam Mayor, Council President, Council Members, is it the direction of Mayor
and Council that these all be framed alike? Have had discussions with LCA about
coming up with a spec to provide the artist on framing.
Rountree: I believe we have provided a specification to the artist, if I'm not mistaken.
Stolhand: We are -- on our last commission meeting we were working with LCA to
come up with some sort of specification that we could provide the artist when we
entered into that agreement with them -- or when the city enters into that agreement
with them and we kind of left that up to the architect, LCA, and I guess legal. Emily was
kind of working on that part of it.
Nary: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, the problem is -- is having the expertise
to do that. I think the discussion, when I discussed it with Mrs. Kane, the discussion by
the commission was -- they had two options. They could make the framing part of the
presentation. The concern was -- is that it-would be quite eclectic with them all being
different and that may or may not -- that may have impacted the selection and so the
decision by the commission was the preference would be that the framing be done after
the selection, so that they would all be similar. The problem is that we only have a few
frame -- frame shops in town that we could even get expertise from and so that was why
the discussion was LCA has interior designers that might be more appropriate to have
them prepare at least the specs of what's appropriate, because what we don't want is
the artist to simply go get it framed themselves and, again, it would all look different or
there is certainly no incentive to really make that a part of the presentation. So, I think
that's what Keith is asking is we didn't have any authorization to, essentially, ask LCA to
take on an additional task without the approval of the Council and we don't have any
other way for us to come up with that. I mean I could certainly come up with it, but you
may not like the result. So, I think we are wanting someone more professional that
knows what they are doing and that's what I think we are looking for.
Rountree: Was that your question, Keith?
Watts: Yes, it is. Thanks, Bill.
Rountree: Okay. Now we understand.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 21 of 96
Bird: Every picture sometimes don't need the same color or type of frame. I mean the
picture -- and I'm not an art critic by a long shot, but there is some pictures that you
want a certain type color frame on and there is other pictures that you don't. You stay
within a material specification, but -- man, I don't know if we want -- do you want all the
same color frames? Do you want all the same color frames?
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess the reason it went to the architect is because you're not going to get
the same frame.
Bird: That's right.
De Weerd: You're going to get frames that are compatible with each other, but that
complement the art. And so -- and the architect and their designers have a better eye
to that -- certainly than I am, because I had someone come in my office and call it
something like shaggy sheik or something like that. I think that was a compliment.
Stolhand: And I think it is important to note that each one of these -pieces is different.
We have a photograph. We have a water color. We have canvas. And each one of
those frames is going to be a little bit different. I think what we were looking for is just a
recommendation to the artist that would provide something that would not be the same,
but would have an esthetic feel that it would fit where that piece is going to be placed.
Or conducive to being in City Hall have a -- I guess a look that's consistent.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I think it would be great if we let LCA -- if they have got somebody to do that, let's
get it done.
Rountree: Keith, comment?
Watts: I know they were also thinking of putting glass in front of everything, because
they were worried about, you know, the public being able to touch them and I don't
know if there is a direction on that as well.
Stolhand: I think with -- with certain pieces I don't think you can have glass over the top,
especially on oils and that sort of thing. Over photographs, obviously, you would want
to have, you know, some sort of light protection, UV ray glass, that -- so that the piece
does not, you know, fade over the years.
De Weerd: Whatever is appropriate.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 22 of 96
Stolhand: Yeah.
Bird: Yeah. Use a true sight with just non-glare or something.
Rountree: Okay. We have -- we have, I believe, two items here for action. One concur
in the recommendation made by the committee and concur with moving forward with
LCA on developing an appropriate framing standard that would be passed on to the
artists. Do I have a motion?
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve the three pieces of art that the Arts Commission
committee approved and that we authorize that the Art Commission and Mr. Watts to go
forward with LCA pertaining to the framing of the art pieces.
Rountree: I will second.
Hoaglun: I will second that.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor? All ayes. Motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rountree: Thank you. And thanks to the Commission, you did an excellent job and it
looks like you had some tough decisions to make as well. And, hopefully, some of
those other pieces will be resubmitted.
Stolhand: We are hoping -- I mean in our letter to the folks that were not chosen we are
requesting that they -- because I mean in certain instances it was very close.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Can I submit?
Rountree: Can the Mayor submit? I don't think so.
Bird: Are you an artist?
De Weerd: I took a really good picture this morning.
Item 5: Department Reports.
A. Discussion on Downtown Streetscape Project
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 23 of 96
Rountree: Next item on the agenda, Department Reports. Discussion of downtown
streetscape project. Steve Siddoway.
Siddoway: Thank you, Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This is
just a discussion item tonight to seek your counsel. We have the streetscape project
that -- for the downtown trees that was approved earlier tonight. This project was
originally put out for bid about a month ago. The intent was to complete it this fiscal
year. There was a problem with the first bidding process and it had to be rebid. The
new bids closed last Friday. Due to that second bidding process lost three weeks and
it's about a four week project. The funding for this project cannot be carried forward
from this fiscal year to next, because it is -- those funds are operating funds. So, we
have two options and either of which work. One is to bring forward to you a budget
amendment after the start of the next fiscal year to spend the funds that we have
allocated for this fiscal year, just use that as the mechanism -- sorry -- to cant' forward
this year's funds for that project. The second option is to let this year's funds expire.
We do have funds in the next fiscal year that could be used, but I anticipate needing
those funds next spring and summer to do additional downtown streetscape projects.
So, the only unacceptable option to me was to do the latter, but not come and talk about
it and discover next summer that we need an amendment without being deliberate
about it and talking about it now. So, again, we have the funds in this fiscal year. We
cannot simply carry them forward, because they are operating expenses and I just need
some direction from you as to whether you would like me to come forward with an
amendment to spend the funds that we currently have allocated or whether I should just
spend the funds that we have allocated for next year and wait until the spring to see if
we need an amendment at that time.
Rountree: Recommendations? Mr. Bird.
Bird: I got a question, Mr. President. Steve, we awarded that to Hess Construction, I
believe?
Siddoway: That's correct.
Bird: The awarding of it, basically, ties that money up, doesn't it? So, it automatically
carries forward?
Siddoway: In talking with finance it does not. They have informed me that it's -- the
funds are not from the contract date, but from the date the services are delivered and
the project is completed. So, we do have an option of mobilizing them and seeing how
much we can get billed, which I think we would -- we could do --
Bird: You're going to -- if they mobilize up, we got two weeks. They are going to send
you a bill for this month, so we are into the contract already. I don't know. I have --
Siddoway: I don't know that there is anyone here from finance to speak to it, but --
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 24 of 96
Bird: I thought once we signed it before the 1st of October we would be fine, but maybe
-- maybe this new government rules and regulations might not allow us to do it
anymore.
Siddoway: Well, that's what I thought as well, but I did my homework, checked with
finance, and I have been told by Rita that that cannot -- we cannot do it that way, that I
needed to come before you and have this conversation.
Bird: Okay. If you mobilize -- excuse me, Mr. President. If you mobilize them up and
they -- and I know by the 25th they are going to give you a bill if they get started right
now and, then, that partial part of the money you have got now is already spent for this
fiscal year.
Siddoway: Sure. And, then, we could just bring an amendment for the remainder.
Bird: And, then, bring an amendment -- man, I hate all these amendments when we got
the money.
Siddoway: I know. We have the money in this fiscal year, we just can't carry it forward
without doing an amendment.
Bird: And I'm certainly for not paying it up front, so --
Siddoway: Yeah.
Rountree: Well, my comment is is we have the money, we would not necessarily carry
it forward, but it doesn't go away.
Siddoway: Okay.
Rountree: It goes to another account. So, my recommendation is to do a budget
amendment and that money will reappear.
Siddoway: Okay.
Rountree: I mean it's an accountant's process. An accountancy thing.
De Weerd: In other words, get it done.
Rountree: Yeah. That's my recommendation.
Siddoway: Okay. I will be back in a couple of weeks with an amendment and we will
move forward that way.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 25 of 96
Rountree: That way it's up front. It's out in front, it's something different for next fiscal
year, even though it was planned and --
Siddoway: In this fiscal year.
Rountree: -- budgeted this fiscal year, so --
Siddoway: Correct. Okay. Any other questions? Thank you.
Bird: Thank you.
C. Update on Meridian Heights/Kentucky
Ridge and Leisure Lane Subdivisions
Rountree: Thanks, Steve. Next item on the agenda -- and one I think most everybody
is waiting for. Tom, you want to start this one, the update on Meridian Heights,
Kentucky Ridge, and Leisure Lane Subdivision.
Bany: Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. President. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council,
Tom Barry, Public Works Department. I wanted to update you on some of the latest
developments concerning the Meridian Heights, Kentucky Ridge, and Leisure Lane
Subdivision. As you may know, on September 8th of this month - or on the 8th of this
month staff from the Public Works Department met with representatives from both
Kentucky Ridge and Meridian Heights, their engineers, or engineering representatives
and homeowners from the Leisure Lane Subdivision, four homeowners there, and their
engineering representative. Also we had the Mayor, the city attorney, a planner, myself,
a couple folks in Public Works, as well as some financial consultants at that meeting.
This meeting was to really get our arms as a group around the issues of concern in both
these subdivisions. Just as preliminary background for those in the audience, as well
as Mr. Hoaglun, both Meridian Heights and Kentucky Ridge, as well as Leisure Lane
Subdivisions have failing water and/or sewer systems or infrastructure and are under
consent order from the Department of Environmental Quality to remedy their failing
system. There is about 286 homes in the Kentucky Ridge, Meridian Heights
Subdivision. That subdivision is not annexed, so they are not in the city. There is about
11 homes in Leisure Lane Subdivision, which is annexed, but does not have water or
sewer services. The total improvement costs for Meridian Heights and Kentucky Ridge
to bring their systems up to city standards so the city can take on the infrastructure is on
the order of 3.2 million dollars and for Leisure Lane it's on the order of about 300,000
dollars. Initially Public Works staff thought that a community infrastructure district might
be a viable option for both Meridian Heights and Kentucky Ridge, as well as the Leisure
Lane Subdivision. However, based on our discussions with the representative from the
financial firm that were present and other engineers and our research, we determined
that, really, a CID is not going to work for the Leisure Lane Subdivision. So, what we
wanted to do is give you at least a brief update on the courses of action that both of
these subdivision representative groups are moving toward. In Meridian Heights and
Kentucky Ridge, since these are adjoining -- adjoining subdivisions and share a
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 26 of 96
common water and sewer system, they are moving together and what they are being
asked to do is refine their financials and immediately begin discussions with their
community, as has been urged at several different points along the way, to talk with
their -- their neighborhood representatives to discuss annexation. Really, the city, as
we have talked with them before, is not in a position to even begin to discuss the
formation of a CID, because that CID formation would be -- would require, of course,
City Council action and since they are not in the city, of course, we have no jurisdiction
there. So, that is a major stumbling block at the moment is annexation and they need to
make a determine as to what they would like to do as it relates to annexation. My
understanding from the representative of the -- of the association there that they were
planning to have meetings with various members of their community to talk about
annexation. I haven't heard an update since. However, we are supposed to get
information from them. We ask to have an update sometime in early October from that
group, at least so we can continue discussions and help them to the best degree that
we can as it relates to their current situation. I want to divert most of the time and
attention this evening to Leisure Lane, because we had thought originally that we could
develop a CID with Kentucky Ridge and Meridian Heights and, then, bring in or open up
the district to incorporate or include the Leisure Lane Subdivision and because that no
longer seems the case, we need to talk about another option for the Leisure Lane
Subdivision and the option that keeps coming back before us is the formation of an LID
or a Local Improvement District. I wanted to give you a -- I want to frame the concerns
here, maybe in dollars and cents for you, because the Leisure Lane problem is a difficult
challenge, because we have so few residents in a community that has both awater -
that lack both water and sewer infrastructure and so the burden, although financially
less, is distributed over a much, much smaller group and, therefore, the costs are
significant. Just as a reference point, the Meridian Heights and Kentucky Ridge
Subdivision have, as I mentioned, about 3.2 million dollars infrastructure improvements
that need to be done. We have been talking about the formation of a CID and what that
might run and when you take into consideration cost to develop the CID, as well as to
put together the various bond reserve and issuance of the bond and all the other fees
associated with the bond, we are talking on the order of about 1.1 to 1.2 million above
the infrastructure improvement costs to the actual community and that's significant.
Now, I have talked with a couple financial consultants as it relates to LIDs and
issuances of bonds and those kinds of things and they are saying pretty much the same
thing, that we are looking anywhere between around 13 to 18 percent in order to go
about the issuance of a bond for - on top of whatever the infrastructure cost is. So, in
the case here of the Leisure Lane Subdivision, if you do the math back to the envelope
here real quick we are looking at taking an improvement cost of 300,000 dollars for 11
homeowners and tacking on another close to 50,000 dollars or so just to issue a bond
that would help them attain the financing necessary to bring about the improvements to
their community. That is based, you know, as a rough number about 16 to 17 percent
for bond issuance. Again, including reserve amounts, issuance of the bond, bond
ratings and all those kinds of things. To put that in perspective, when we looked at the
financials for Meridian Heights and Kentucky Ridge -I'll boil it down really quickly -- we
are talking about, essentially, an assessment value per lot -- and, again, there is 286 of
these in those subdivisions -- of around 15,000 to 15,500. If you take that over a -- a 30
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 27 of 96
year time period at seven and a half percent, you're looking at an annual payment for a
lot of 1,300 dollars or a monthly total payment of about 108 dollars to the Meridian
Heights, Kentucky Ridge Subdivision folks. Now, that's for issuance of the bond and the
cost to obtain the bond, as well as all the money that that bond gives them to make the
improvements to their subdivision. By the same token, if you look at Leisure Lane, if --
and it's ironic that it comes out to somewhat similar numbers, but, essentially, if you take
the 300,000 dollars and you add on a 16 percent factor bond issuance, you're looking at
about 350,000 dollars, over a 30 year period -- I didn't do the total assessment per lot,
but the monthly assessment for each homeowner would be on the order of about 88
dollars per month for 30 years. If you shorten that time horizon to 20 years, then, you're
looking at 132 dollars or a difference of 45 dollars a month for a different time horizon.
And the reason I throw these numbers out is because these are big dollars to the
number of folks that we have in this community and with 11 folks you're now going to
have to bear a burden of about 350,000 dollars to bring their water and sewer systems
up to par. They are annexed, so they are members of our community. I wanted to
discuss with you what the Council's thoughts were as it related to moving towards an
LID and with those options, if we were to move towards an LID, to talk about the roll of
the city in that LID. Certainly, we are aware of the requirement for formation, the public
hearings, and the notices and all of those things that go along with the development of a
CID. There are acouple -- or, excuse me, an LID., There are a couple options here
available now that we see for the Leisure Lane folks. One of those options is for those
folks to come together as a community and form some sort of entity that, then, goes, as
an entity, out and tries to procure private financing for their improvements. Those a that
may be tough to come by now in this economic climate. It may be very very difficult for
them to prove any meaningful equity that they can use to leverage the acquisition of
bonds or to even acquire bonds of any interest payment or any interest, rather, that
would be even viable for those folks. Another way for them to do it is to, essentially, just
-- each one of them goes on their own and in good faith goes and gets home equity
lines of credit or whatever else and privately finances their portion that they all agree to
in advance and it's contingent upon each of them procuring 11 different financing
vehicles to do that and they pool their money and they come together as a community
and go ahead and develop their infrastructure. A third one is to develop an LID and we
could -- we could develop a traditional LID, which is where the city, either on its own --
the Council can on its own or with the petition of the 60 percent vote from the
community members, petition to form an LID and, then, go through the process of an
LID, which we have to go through in either event. If you were to form an LID, then, the
-- then, you could take that through two different paths. One is you could finance the
LID traditionally, as I mentioned, through the issuance of bonds, which adds another 50
or so thousand, you know, plus or minus, five thousand -- are we not really sure,
because we haven't really crunched the numbers on those as of yet, but you're looking
on the order of probably around 350,000 dollars for those folks over a 20 or 30 year
bonding period. Another option, however, is for the city to consider becoming the
financier for the -- you know, to, essentially, instead of going after a bond, for the city to,
essentially, use its reserves to go ahead and finance the improvements to the
community, saving them on the order of around 50 or so thousand dollars, not
necessarily saving them all of that money, because certainly we would want to recoup
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 28 of 96
our costs as it related to administration and interest and those kinds of things over a
period of time. But those are, essentially, the various options that we have come to a at
this point in time two of them private financing, two of them LID-type of financing, along
with the city being a financier and the other being a traditional bond issue. The security,
of course, is going to be the property owners, the property themselves. If we form the
LID I have been informed that, essentially, after taxes, which is primary on the -- as a
guarantee LID or the lien for an LID would be secondary. So, it comes even before the
first mortgage on their home, so there are -- there is some assurance as it relates -- or
security, rather, as it relates to that, but, obviously, some concerns are, you know, if you
don't have payment by these folks, if they default, you know, what happens particularly
if the city is taking on the financing role here, there is certainly a lot of risk and exposure
in doing some of that, but at least those are the four options that we have come back
with at this point in time and just wanted to get your thoughts and input and provide any
additional information that we might be able to at this point in time.
Rountree: Questions for Tom?
Bird: Not at this time.
De Weerd: Yeah. Can you give us a reader's digest of what you just said?
Barry: Yes, ma'am.
De Weerd: Do we have any of these numbers in writing, Tom?
Bany: We don't.
De Weerd: Up to one, two, three and four?
Bany: No. We -- well, no, not really available, is probably the best answer for you.
De Weerd: You just gave us a lot of numbers and, you know, I didn't see anyone writing
them down.
Zaremba: I remember at least three of them.
Nary: Dean was writing them down.
Bany: There is, really, two numbers for Leisure Lane. That's what we are talking about
right now, the Leisure Lane Subdivision. Because the Kentucky Ridge and Meridian
Heights folks, they have got some work to do on the whole annexation question mark
and we can't even entertain that until they are part of the city and we can --then., we can
talk about whether we want to do a CID or not. But as it relates to Leisure Lane, there
is four options and there is two numbers to consider.
De Weerd: Why don't you just tell us the one you prefer. What do you recommend?
Meridian City Council Special Meetlng Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 29 of 96
Bany: I'm recommending the formation of an LID and the question now before the
Council is do you -- do you do an LID with the city being the financier or do you do an
LID where you want to go through traditional bond issuing. The bond issuance has me
a little bit concerned, because it's going to be tough for those guys to get a bond of
300,000 dollars for the homes that they are in with this economic climate and create the
situation where it could maybe be quite impossible for them to do that. I don't know. I'm
not in the bonding, you know, business. So, I would like maybe for Carter Froelich and
his team to maybe give you some additional background as it relates to issuance of
small bonds and the cost associated with those, as well as the likelihood of this
community procuring a bond of that amount. Carter, if you don't mind, maybe you could
help address --
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess, first, does legal have any kind of summary on a preferred financing
route on these LIDs, city or a bonding agency?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, you know, I couldn't give you a direct
answer on that tonight. I think we would need to look at what the risks are to the city. I
mean there is, obviously, a different concern. If the city were the financier of this -- of
this improvement -- at the end of the day, really, the issue becomes more in the
collection of that and that would be our concern and I don't have enough information
tonight to be able to give you an assessment or a recommendation on that. There are
more safeguards in the LID statute for the city than if we were the direct financier of
these improvements and so my initial reaction is the LID is probably safer to use the
bonding method that the statute sets up, rather than the city to finance it up front. But
that's just my quick read of the statute. So, I'd like some time to at least ponder that and
be able to give you a better assessment than simply my initial thought, so --
Rountree: Tom, with respect to the numbers, that's just a construction cost and a
financing cost. Can the LID or whatever structure is set up, include the hook-up fee
costs?
Bany: Yes, sir, it can.
Rountree: And is that cost in that 300,000?
Barry: Yes, sir, it is.
Rountree: Okay.
Barry: The hook-up fees are all included.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 30 of 96
Rountree: Okay.
Barry: The infrastructure costs, improvement costs, are all included, and the financing
cost is that 50,000 dollars in this case that we are talking about. So, 300 covers
everything including hook-up fees, all of that stuff, that we would require anybody to pay
in order to come into the city by the capacity of our system.
Rountree: Same situation with the Kentucky Ridge and Meridian Heights?
Barry: Yes, sir.
Rountree: Okay.
Barry: Exactly the same.
Rountree: Thank you. You have the floor. Thanks for your patience.
Barry: I just had one other point. And maybe, Carter, you could speak to this, too. My
understanding is that it's possible that even after the LID is formed that the city could
finance and have protection under the statute, even though it's self -- even though it
financed the LID, but it would still have all the rights and privileges of a formal LID if it
went through that process; is that correct?
Froelich: And I might have to defer to Victor on that one.
Barry: Okay.
Froelich: As he is the legal mind here. But, Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of
the Council, Carter Froelich, with the Development Planning & Financing Group. To
respond to Tom's question to me about the LID, it may be challenging to issue an LID
bond in the. amount of 350,000 dollars. Why? Well, first of all, you have to get an
underwriter to be interested to go after a 350,000 dollar bond, which -- I mean it's the
same amount of work for them and the reward for them is not very much vis-a-vis that
we are -- if they could be spending their time on a 35 million dollar bond. So, that's
going to be one of the challenges. Not being an underwriter, I can't speak to that
directly, but my experience would lead me to believe that that could be a challenge, so
-- and it may be something -- if the city has a relationship with an underwriter who you
have done other types of financing with, that might be something you could ask them to
do as a favor to put them in the good graces of the city for -- it's just an idea. And so,
anyway, that's my response to that specific question and I can stand for any other
questions you may have. Or Victor may also address questions related to the legal
aspects and security aspects of the LID.
Rountree: If Victor has a response to the question Tom posed about our security if we
did the financing. If you would come up to the podium and give us your name and --
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 31 of 96
De Weerd: We will put you on the spot on the record.
Rountree: You will be on the record.
Vallagus: Good evening., Victor Vallagus. I'm going to have to side with what Mr. Nary
said. I don't know the answer to that. A lot of the LIDs I have done -- have done them
in sewer districts and usually we do bonds. So, I'm not sure what the answer would be.
If I had a code book I would probably be able to give you a better answer, but I don't.
Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. Now, it seems to me we are kind of angling towards an LID.
The other option is private financing and homeowners doing it themselves and I think
we have a bunch of homeowners here this evening and though this isn't set up to take
testimony, I'd like to get a sense of what you're thinking and -- I guess what I'm thinking
is that if an LID is a way to go, I'm not opposed to that and I certainly would like to
explore the option of the city doing the financing with our reserve account, because I --
our meager reserve might be able to handle that much, but not much more. But if the
homeowners want to take it on themselves, I don't want to get in their way, so --
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. President.
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess my suggestion is -- or even my thoughts are the homeowners are in
the same predicament we are, not knowing all the information. It would be helpful to
maybe have a pros and cons evaluation that maybe Mr. Nary can work with Mr. Mason
with AIC, who seems to -- he's done a couple of workshops on this and has a good
grasp of the different types of LIDs and what the risk would be to the city and what
some of it would mean to the homeowners as well. And maybe they are more
sophisticated in this than we are at this point, because they have been living it, trying to
find out what their options are. So, is there a spokesperson for the homeowners that
might know more than we do?
Rountree: Okay. I guess my point is if you want to take it on yourself, then, we will step
back and we appreciate it, but --
Zaremba: Before he starts can I ask a question?
Rountree: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Maybe be illuminating and something I didn't quite understand and I don't
know if Mr. Barry knows this answer or not, but in options that you proposed, if they
were to choose to do a self financing, such as a second mortgage on the homes or, you
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 32 of 96
know, home equity financing or however they did it by themselves, they would avoid
that additional 16 percent charge for the bond; is that correct? There would be no bond.
Bany: Correct. There would be no bond and there would be a different set of financing
rules. It would be just as if you went to get a home equity line of credit or -- I wouldn't --
I don't know what they would do, but, essentially, the cost conceivably would be
significantly less. Maybe just closing costs for whatever security they were to obtain,
which is, you know, generally on the order of two to five thousand dollars. I can't really
comment on -- on that, so -- but if you got 11 homeowners going after individual
financing and it costs 2,000 for each one to get separate financing, you're already up to
22,000 dollars, conceivably. So, I don't know that -- you know, if you do five, I don't
know that -- you know, you're up to 55,000 dollars. So, it's hard to say, Mr. Zaremba,
what the difference would be and it's hard to say what people have as far as equity in
their homes they could even show that there was any kind of security there to obtain
any kind of secondary mortgage, if they didn't already have a secondary mortgage, so --
Mr. President, if I may, one other thing that's important to note about an LID. Whether
the city chooses to finance it or whether we go through a bonding agency to issue a
bond and capture the financing necessary, the LID process can be long, it can be
arduous, as you may well know, and it really requires every single property owner to
accept their inclusion into the LID in order for it to be successful. In talking with a
couple of folks who have done this more, certainly, than we have, that process can take
anywhere from a minimum of -- I have heard it a minimum of about three to four months
to a maximum of five years, depending upon, you know, how many folks you have
involved, if they are going to hold out, if -- you know, it really -- you know, we are kind of
back to the case where we had in Kentucky Ridge and Meridian Heights where we need
every single person to agree, you know, to the course of action in order for it to be
successful. So, there is -- there is some risk there. I also wanted to point one other
thing out and that is, you know, we had a representative from the Department of
Environmental Quality, who -- who was asked to make an opinion about the
circumstances at both Kentucky Ridge and Meridian Heights and, of course, Leisure
Lane, and we took delivery of this letter, I apologize, on Friday afternoon, so it didn't end
up in your boxes. I'd like to distribute it to you now. Essentially -- I will be very brief in
the assessment of Leisure Lane. Of course, here their well is contaminated with
uranium and the driver of the situation is that contamination in the well and this has
been classified by the Department of Environmental Quality as a serious health threat
as associated with their contamination. In the case of Meridian Heights and Kentucky
Ridge, it's a little bit more significant. The Department of Environmental Quality has
made the assessment that, essentially, that -- at least as it relates to the wastewater
threat that it is an impending public health emergency, likely to have it's consequences
in the spring of 2009 and that, of course, their water system as well is contaminated with
uranium and that that also poses a serious public health concern. So, I just wanted to
make sure you had all of that information. We were trying to get that to you in advance,
but this is just another one of those pieces to the puzzle.
Nary: Madam Mayor -- Mr. President.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 33 of 96
Rountree: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Ithink -- I guess in talking
with the Leisure Lane folks I don't anticipate -- and I reserve the right to be a hundred
percent wrong, but I don't anticipate that they are really going to have an issue of their
consent. Ithink the LID statute does give you -- an individual person -- I mean it
requires a percentage, that's the petition, and the Council can accept that, and you can,
essentially, opt out of the district and opt to not have the improvement done and there is
a mechanism to do that in the statute. So, I don't think anybody would do that in this
small of group, because there really isn't any logic to them. They have no other
alternative for long term services. Their issue, predominately, is going to be over the
financing structure. We discussed it with these -- with these homeowners. Their
concerns were they have a private roadway and we don't normally use the private
roadway for these types of improvements. There may be a long term value to it being a
public roadway, but that will impact them even more. That mayor may -- those types of
conditions may be problematic to them. So, that may be where some of the discussion
around this project would be. At the end of the day, though, you're still looking at a 350
to 400 thousand dollar cost that's going to be divided by 11 people -- or 11
homeowners. So, it's a fairly significant amount of assessment on those properties and
I -- again, Idon't -- I'm not in the bond business, we would hire bond counsel, likely, if
we are going to do this, but I would agree with Mr. Froelich that that's a pretty small
bond, in my experience, to go out and get. I mean we may do a lot of work and have a
very difficult time in financing this project and I don't have an answer for that. I guess
our fall back with them would be to reassess with this Council on whether or not to fund
it out of the city and, again, the risks are greater, because now the city is the collecting
agency, the city is the one that is on the hook for these potential forfeitures and one of
the things I talked with Mr. Bany after our meeting with the property owners is it's not
clear to me, because I don't think we just had this level of discussion, but it wasn't clear
to me that each of those property owners recognize that their home is the security for
this note and that's a fairly significant second mortgage for some folks and that may or
may not be, again, within the values of these properties. I just don't know. I have no
idea what these properties would assess at. They are fairly large parcels, but, again, I
don't know what their -- what mortgage they already have and if they have seconds and
if they have other things on them, I don't know. So, I think there is some work to be
done. Ithink all we have done, really, honestly, in the Leisure Lane at this point from
their perspective is really get at least some round numbers as to what the cost of
improvements would be, but could we financially and mechanically make this work, I
don't think we have had that level of discussion and we probably need to have that
done. Ithink Mr. Bany indicated in his memo the folks there are believing they need to
get some work done and they need to come back in front of you in two months. We can
have some of that more real serious discussions about costs and risks, as well as to
meet the Mayor's need of really assessing this LID and how this could work for the city
and what the risks to the city are for this type of financing, whether it's through the LID
process or on our own. Does that seem -- make sense, Mr. Bany, from our discussions
with them?
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 34 of 96
Barry: Yes, sir, Mr. Nary.
Nary: Okay.
Barry: I think what we are after, again, this evening is just to report back to the Council
and say the CID doesn't appear to be the financing vehicle we thought it would be as it
related to helping the Leisure Lane folks out. It looks like an LID is where we need to
go. The question is do we want to -- do we want to finance it with city funds or do we
want to finance it with a bond and we would like, essentially, Council's blessing to go
and investigate those options, but before we invest staffs time and resources into doing
that, we'd like to know that that's a direction you'd like us to look into. Alternatively, we
can -- we can, you know, just put it back to the homeowners and tell them that they
need to finance it privately. So, thus, the crossroads we are at, you know, to move
forward.
Rountree: I guess I'd still -- how many folks are from Leisure Lane out in the audience
tonight? So, Leisure Lane's apparently not an issue tonight. But it is an issue. I guess
my comment to your comment, Tom, is that I think we have a couple options and not
just LID. We have the option of the homeowners coming together as a group of 11 and
seeking some kind of private financing and for that kind of money I think they could
probably do it and save them a whole bunch of money and time. I am, however, willing
to entertain pursuing an LID, but only after we have got an indication from the
homeowners group that that's -- that's where they want to go. I mean if they are -- they
are not here tonight, apparently they are doing something else. They have either got it
figured out or they are going to wait until we figure it out, but I think we need their input.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: What do they want to do. And I think the next step is to get back with that
group individually and find out what sense they have as a community and get them
organized and find out where they want to go. If they want to do it on themselves,
great. If they want the city's support, then, we need to start working on the issues there.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Mr. President, I guess I believe they are not here, they were there during
the discussion on the CID and the LID. There were several homeowners in attendance
and I think it was determined, then, that the CID would not be an option for them and
that Tom would be bringing the LID discussions here to tonight to see what the city was
willing to contemplate and ask staff to discover and I believe that's why they are not
here this evening. I guess what I would like is just what I asked of Mr. Nary, to bring
back a pros and cons in the LID with the city financing, if it would be something that
could be funded through bonding with this small amount, what those percentage rates
would be and what the risk would be to the city and also maybe in the third column a
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 35 of 96
comparison to private financing that would need to be supplied by the residents and so,
then, you have acomplete -- a complete piece of information in front of you and so does
the homeowners.
Rountree: Further discussion?
Hoaglun: Mr. President, Ijust -- if that analysis could also include what are the levels of
protection to the city. I mean is it just liens, what are those levels to the taxpayers if
something -- if someone goes upside down and can't make those payments, what
happens? What are our options on that? My two cents on it, I'm willing to look at it, you
know, it's a lot of money for those folks and bonding I think will be difficult in that small
amount, but -- so, I'm wiling to take a look at all options, but we got to know all the pros
and cons on that.
Zaremba: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I think along those same lines if we end up talking about something where
people would owe an amount like 88 dollars a month to the city and they missed it, I'd
have a tough time foreclosing on them. So, we do need to talk about what the
protections are and what we would do about that. But I think it is worth investigating
this. I can anticipate in the future there are going to be a number of currently county
subdivisions that apply for annexation and we will be dealing with the subject either in
regard to their private roads or their sewers or their water service where they need to
have hydrants where they don't have hydrants and pressure. So, I think the research
that would go into teaming what we can do about this is something that we will be able
to use a number of times over the next few years. So, I'm certainly in favor of those -- of
putting the effort into discovering what we can do.
Rountree: Further comments? Can we summarize the direction we want staff to go?
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Does Mr. Nary need further direction?
Nary: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, what I understand what
you would like is you'd like a legal assessment of both the risks to the city, as well as to
the homeowners -- is you want an assurance from them that's what they want is for us
to proceed down this LID path. I guess confirmation of the CID is probably not the most
practical choice. I think we have come to that conclusion, but I think you want a little
more assurance than that, you want an evaluation of whether the LID process as the
statute contemplates it, whether private financing is an option and what the risks are to
the homeowners if .they choose to do that, or if the city were to publicly finance this
Meridian Clty Council Special Meetlng Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 36 of 96
project, you want to know what all of those risks and assessments would be and I don't
-- I think all -- unless I missed something, the only thing I don't know is when do you
want that.
De Weerd: When can you have it?
Rountree: Whenever we want it.
Bird: Whenever we want it.
Nary: Whenever you want it.
De Weerd: Tomorrow.
Nary: All right. I'll call Mrs. Kane tonight and se if she's busy. No. We can certainly
have it to you in -- next Tuesday would probably be pushing it, but we can certainly
have it to you by your first meeting in October.
De Weerd: October 7th?
Rountree: October 7th?
Nary: Yeah.
Rountree: Okay. And part of that, (believe -- and if Tom hasn't done so, that the
numbers you have derived for the LID in terms of potential cost to them the
homeowners need, so if they want to pursue their own approach, they will at least have
a basis to pursue that approach. Now, the next piece of the puzzle, Kentucky Ridge
and Meridian Heights and it appears that the CID is a potential solution and there is just
one caveat that's holding things up and that for city to be a participant, they need to be
annexed and there needs to be a vote on both accords. There has to be a vote for
annexation and there has to be a vote to establish the CID. We have heard a number
of times from representatives of Meridian Heights and Kentucky Ridge and apparently
we have a few folks here tonight from those areas. This is not testimony. We will not
be making a decision this evening on this particular item. But I certainly would like to
hear what your comments are with respect to the issues as you see them, because we
have -- we have had these issues presented to us at least three times by
representatives of your subdivisions and your associations, so if somebody wants to
come up here and give us your name and your address and give us your comments,
we'd appreciate it.
Hamilton: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the City Council, my name is
Gordon Hamilton and I'm a resident and the president of the homeowners association
for Kentucky Ridge. Your discussions previously have always been with Meridian
Heights Water Association and there is a significant difference. There is no -- this was
especially pointed out by the article that was in the paper this morning, which referred to
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 37 of 96
it as a homeowners association. It is not. It's Meridian Heights Water Association.
Every member -- every person that lives in Kentucky Ridge is a member of that
association, which is represented -- Meridian Heights Water Association has a board of
nine members, only two of which are from the Kentucky Ridge Subdivision. So, there is
two subdivisions that are being supplied water and sewer services by Meridian Heights.
But we are an independent and we are a recognized and active homeowners
association. If anything that I would like to ask tonight is that we be invited to the table
when discussions about how annexation and -- or any future actions are being
undertaken, because I think that we have standing and that's really all I would like to
request is that when those discussions take place that we be invited.
Rountree: Now, if you would get us your name and address, a-mail, and any other
pertinent information, we can do that.
Hamilton: Okay.
Rountree: We haven't had that to this date.
Hoaglun: Quick question, Mr. Hamilton. How big is your association in Kentucky
Ridge?
Hamilton: Our homeowners -- we have 65 houses in the Kentucky Ridge Homeowners
Association. And I really want to have that opportunity to talk with Public Works,
because I think there is a significant difference between our subdivision and the rest of
the association and I think that it's -- that it's something that needs to be taken into
account when we look at the costs that are associated with switching over to a legal
water system and to a sewer system -- I mean part of our covenants of our subdivision
state that we will hook up to the City of Meridian when those services become available
and that's independent from the agreements that the DEQ entered into with Meridian
Heights Water Association. So, do you want me to put that on the record right now?
Rountree: If you just want to give it to Tom that would be great. Any other questions?
Nary: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I just want to ask -- so, then, sir, would you be the representative or do you
have --
Hamilton: Yes.
Nary: -- do you have counsel as well that represents your homeowners association?
Hamilton: Not at this time.
Merldtan City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 38 of 96
Nary: Okay.
Rountree: They may, though.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess -- but you do fall under the same systems of Meridian Heights, so
you do have a water and a sewer delivery issue.
Hamilton: Yes. That's correct.
De Weerd: Okay.
Hamilton: Yes. They supply the services to us as -- as the development was built, you
know, that was one of the agreements in the covenants that we would become a
member of the Meridian Heights Water and Sewer Association. So, we are all members
of that association and as I pointed out there is a board that is made up of two people
from Kentucky Ridge and seven from Meridian Heights, based on the division of the
number of households.
De Weerd: Uh-huh. Mr. Barry, I believe Val -- and I can't remember his last name.
Hamilton: Val Hill.
De Weerd: Yes. Has he been included you in the discussions?
Hamilton: We have had discussions. I -- based on what
heard in the report, I certainly would have liked have
meeting that was held with the city. I was not invited.
De Weerd: I believe you will have that opportunity, so --
Hamilton: Okay.
Nary: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Nary.
I read in the paper today and
the opportunity to attend the
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, and, sir, just so -- just so you're clear, the
direction the Council has always had in this discussion with the water association, is the
Council was aware that they were an association and not the homeowners directly, for
either Meridian Heights or Kentucky Ridge, and so every time we have had a discussion
with them -- it is their request from the water association. The Council's direction and
the Mayor's direction has always been you need all of these homeowners to know what
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 39 of 96
it costs, what is involved, and whether or not they are going to annex into the city as
part of this arrangement and you need to go do that work to do it. So, understand there
certainly never was an intent to leave anyone out and that's always been the direction
back to them, so just wanted to make sure you knew that.
Hamilton: It did seem to be a significant change in direction, as I read the newspaper
this morning, from all of the information that I have received previously.
Nary: And I just wanted to make sure you knew, because, obviously, there has been
some miscommunication in this issue and that has been the city's direction each time to
the association was to make sure these folks get informed before we go any further.
Hamilton: And they do have a meeting I know scheduled for next week for that
communication and so we are looking forward to that, so --
Rountree: And, likewise, we'd like to be informed so we can have someone there that
can provide specifics, so if you could get that --
Hamilton: Do you have that?
Barry: We don't have that. Mr. President?
Rountree: Tom.
Bany: I just want to apologize to Mr. Hamilton and the rest of the folks for that. We
weren't -- we had no idea that there was a homeowners association -- a separate
Kentucky Ridge Homeowners Association. We weren't trying to exclude you and as Mr.
Nary said, we tried to make sure that all of the folks in the community were being
carried back the message through the representative of the water and sewer
association as to what Council's directives and requests were. So, we apologize, we
will incorporate you certainly into the conversation and are pleased and happy to do
that. And we would be very interested in speaking with you after the meeting, getting
your information. Also information about that meeting, so we could attend and hopefully
answer any questions on that circumstance.
Hamilton: Okay. Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. Anybody else?
Gerhill: Members of the Council, my name is Josh Gerhill at 3708 South Springfield
Avenue. I just want to note for the record -- I'm not sure if it was stated in the DEQ
letter, but from what we know from our -- a letter that we got from Meridian Heights was
it was spring of 2009 that the sewage would not be able to be let out of the lagoon. So
I'm not sure if that was noted for the record or if that was on your guys' paper, but spring
2009, for give my informalities, we will be knee deep in it.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 40 of 96
De Weerd: And we know the urgency.
Gerhill: Yeah. So, thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rountree: Anybody else? Thank you for coming and I'm glad that somehow we met
and that's important. We have all along been assured the homeowners were being
involved in this and apparently that assurance did not come true. So, thanks for being
here.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess it is important to note that the CID discussion came up within this
last month as maybe a viable option for the residents to consider in a form of financing
and so they were trying to look for the best possible option for the homeowners and,
you know, again, I would strongly encourage to have a pros and cons of an LID versus
a CID and everything that we have discussed, so that everyone is as well informed as
we possibly can as we enter into implementing the solution, because we do know the
urgency. DEQ provided the letters that they -- they brought in front of you today on both
Leisure Lane and the Meridian Heights and Kentucky Ridge situation. There is a public
health emergency. DEQ has deemed that and they did that because there is a tight
time frame and as we continue to struggle with the appropriate financing method it is
imperative that we do have those comparisons so that you and the city know the
direction we are entering into and there is nothing -- everything is as transparent as we
can make it.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I have one question and I don't know who can answer it. I'm sure Bill can, but if
this group would want to start a CID without being annexed, they could through the
county. Counties can issue CIDs. They cannot issue LIDs. And, then, can we -- if they
get their annexation in place, can we assume the CID or would it stay at the county
level? Who can answer that?
Rountree: Carter can.
Bird: Carter can. Okay.
Froelich: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council that is one legal
question that I can answer and, yes, you could form a CID within the county. The
county -- the landowners would petition the county to form the CID. The CID would be
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 41 of 96
established once the City Council concurred with its formation. At that -- once it was
formed the county commissioners would be the governing board of the CID to the extent
that the land was later annexed within the city boundaries, the district board
membership would change from the county to the city.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess from previous discussions, Mr. Bird, we did talk about that and
because we do have a policy of not extending our services to un-annexed property, we
did discuss running this as a parallel process to forming the CID while the application for
annexation would run concurrently with that. Now, what is needed to be known is three
of the four of you Council members will consist of that board and you would meet
annually to set the levy rate for that taxing district, so -- and the Mayor's not part of that.
So, I just wanted to make sure you knew that.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: And I knew that, Mayor, that we had discussed that, but I thought maybe they --
thefinancing takes longer than the annexation, that they could get started at least and --
with the CID and get that in place and, then, we could just assume it once they were
annexed into our deal. I realize we are not going to go out and give them service until
they are annexed, but they could at least get the paperwork and the financing started, if
that's the route they want to go.
D. Rate Update on SewerlWater
Rountree: Okay. Next item on the agenda. Update rates. Tom.
De Weerd: You know how to clear a room.
Rountree: Man. Must be a party someplace.
Bany: Thank you, Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I was asked
to report back to the Council with a recommendation as it related to moving forward
regarding modification to our rates. We certainly know that there is a need to modify
our water and sewer rates to keep pace with utility capital infrastructure needs,
increased operational and maintenance costs, and the rising cost of capital construction
and we also understand that any modification to our rate structure or amounts could
have significant impact on our customers and to this end staff and both public works
and the finance department have come together to develop a strategy by which we may
move forward toward resolution of this concern and I have provided a memo to you in
your boxes on Friday of last week outlining a process which comprises two various
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 42 of 96
components, each with two tasks leading up to a rate hearing. I just wanted to walk you
through that very quickly and, then, address any questions you might have. Certainly
you know that we have presented information regarding rates to you. One of the things
we would like to have you consider is having an independent third party review of our
work, so that we can insure that we have in place what we need to feel comfortable to
bring to the community recommendations regarding the rates. This rate validation
process would involve the hiring of an independent financial consultant who could
review our method, approach, inputs and ultimate recommendation and develop a
neutral third party opinion letter as it related to the work that we have done internally.
From this particular point we would like to take the recommendation or opinion letter, I
should say, from this consultant, review that and make modifications as appropriate,
depending upon on what those recommendations were, of course, keeping the Council
and Mayor informed and up to date as to those as we go along in the process. Once
we had a confirmation and/or modification to our ultimate structure and rates, we would
like to implement a fairly robust public education involvement program that involves
working with a -- a public relations firm to help us develop a focus group of stake
holders that would be able to help us to provide input -- we would help provide input
from their perspective regarding their perception on the recommended rates, as well as
implementation recommendations. We'd like to use that group to help tailor our public
education campaign, so that we address the specific concems or needs or issues of the
community and incorporate those into the ultimate -- into the process. After we got --
and this focus group we imagine would take -- the work of the focus would take on the
order of something like four to six weeks, probably three to four e maybe three weeks to
assemble and, then, maybe four to six weeks to do their work. That work would
culminate in a series of recommendations and ultimately in the generation of a public
education and outreach campaign that we would, then, move to community and try to
get as much education and involvement from the community members at that point in
time relating to our various strategies as it relates to modification of our rates. This kind
of education outreach campaign might include things like town hall meetings, a
presentation to homeowners associations, bill inserts or fliers or other sorts of
correspondence and informational materials, with the hope that we would educate the
public and apprise them of the goings on of the city related to rates, all leading up to the
rate hearing, which would, essentially, be the opportunity for them to come and provide
input to the Council regarding their questions, comments, or concems. This process I
have outlined for you in the memo is a six to eight month process. I have included a
project schedule, which talks about the various components as mentioned, as well as a
timeline. We would certainly try to move through this process as quickly as we can,
however, we feel like this is a very aggressive schedule to begin with right off the bat, so
this is, essentially, our recommendation to you for moving forward with regard to a
process that involves both rate validation, as well as public input, and so I'm willing to
take questions, comments that you might have or concems therein related to the
information presented. So, with that I will turn it back to the Council.
Rountree: Council, questions? I can't see Mr. Hoaglun. Is he still there? Yeah, there
he is.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 43 of 96
De Weerd: He's there.
Zaremba: Deep in thought.
Rountree: He's deep in thought, uh?
Zaremba: I guess that's better than being deep in other stuff. .
Rountree: Well, I guess my initial comment -- that's certainly a lot better than the post
card I just got in the mail from the gas company saying you're going to see a 16 percent
increase in rates. So, yeah. My concern is the length of time and the difficulty we have
right now in -- in our reserve accounts for these Enterprise Funds. We have got to get
after this. Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I do have a question, Tom. On the focus group I think, if I recall previous
discussion, it was to talk about the need to raise rates and was there going to be a
discussion -- I know you presented to the Council before on how to raise those rates in
terms of the -- you know, we have talked about the value of the money and the rate
increases, stair step, different things, and the loss of funding and -- was that going to be
part of the focus group discussion as well.
Barry: Yes. Mr. Hoaglun, Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that
is the intent of the focus group. The focus group will likely not be making comment as it
relates to what the rate is or should be, we -- once we get the financial consultant's
opinion as to our assumptions and inputs, we will know what we need to do. The work
of the focus group is to help us identify implementation of the rate structure, whether it
be one time, multiple years, how much in multiple years, over what period of time, and
to certainly helps us to identify concems, likely concems from in the community as it
related to implementation on that schedule and stuff recommended by the group.
Hoaglun: Okay. Follow up, Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Thanks, Tom. Yeah. I was first understanding that they were going to look at
the validity of the rate increase and, then, possibly move into how that would be. So, it
is -- the validity has been established, so now it's how we do that is that what the focus
group will concentrate on.
Bany: Yes, sir. The validity portion we felt would be better suited for financial experts
who would have background, knowledge, skills, abilities in understanding rates, rate
structures, and those sorts of things. So, that's why we have separated that portion out
and trying to go after a neutral third party financial consultant whose bread and butter is
that work and, then, bring that back to the focus group to help us talk about
implementation.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 44 of 96
Hoaglun: Thank you.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess this process is similar to those we have done in the past. In the
past rate increases have been validated by a technical review, as Mr. Bany is
suggesting and, then, it's vetted through a focus group similar to our impact fee
committee, because in fees we usually have an obvious stake holder group that we are
able to vet it through and kind of looking at it from every different angle and providing
direction to the Public Works staff before we take it to the public hearing, so we
understand all of the questions, concerns, and we are able to provide answers or
adequate responses to it. So, this is the process that we usually do follow, but there is
no obvious stake holder group and that is why Mr. Bany is suggesting the focus group
and perhaps as some other cities do have, they have a public works citizens committee
that --that look at different items, that this may even kick off something like that.
Rountree: Further comment? Direction? General concurrence? Shakes of the head?
Thumbs up? Let's go forward, Tom.
Barry: Thank you, sir. I appreciate your time.
Zaremba: Sounds good to me.
Bird: We have cried wolf. Let's get it done.
E. Room Reservation Policy and
Accompanying Fee in New City Hall
Rountree: Next item on the agenda is the room reservation policy and accompanying
fees. Robert.
Simison: Council President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, in your packet
hopefully you have the recommendations for public meeting reservations, policies, and
regulations. We have been looking at this for quite a few months and what we have
attempted to do was look at other best practices that other cities use, as well as meets
the intended uses of the facilities that we have in Meridian. So, what the direct use of
what Ada County does or what the city of Boise did not seem to meet with what we
wanted our City Hall to be used for by other groups to have a community meeting place
for people to come together. So, this has been vetted through the directors, as well as
working with Chief Lavey with the police department to make sure it met their needs for
how they use their room as well and these were the recommendations to come forward,
at least for a room portion. I don't know if in your packets you had any information
regarding to the proposed fees for use of the room or not. Was that provided?
Meridian City Council Special Meetlng Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 45 of 96
Rountree: We don't have our computers on, Robert, so you'll have to explain it to us.
Simison: Okay. Currently the police department has a fee of 25 dollars for a half day
and 40 dollars for a full day. What we thought we would do for right now and make a
recommendation for is 25 dollars and 50 dollars respectively for a half day versus full
day use of the room until we can truly determine any costs that are going to be
associated above and beyond that for cleaning or staff time that might be used for
setting up those rooms once we know what their real use is going to be. So, we are, in
essence, leaving the fees at what they currently are being charged at the police
department, just -- instead of giving a break, perhaps just making if full and half day
rates. So, those are the recommendations that we are bringing before you tonight.
Rountree: Questions? Comments? I have a question for chief. Do those fees that
you're generating from your spaces over there, have you created a reserve account for
like annual rug maintenance and that sort of thing? It seems to me that fees ought to
defray the wearing out in the long term maintenance of those spaces, not just moving
tables and picking up after folks on a one time occasion.
Lavey: Councilman Rountree, Council, Mayor, we had that discussion. I believe
currently that once that revenue comes in finance just snags it from me and I don't know
where it goes. I think it goes back in the General Fund. And so I have used my --
De Weerd: I'm sure it goes into a line item.
Lavey: In the General Fund. The -- I currently use my maintenance budget to pay for
those costs. We did have that discussion in our leadership meetings as far as having
some sort of account and setting it aside to do that exact purpose and that was part of
our discussion. I just don't believe we are here ready to propose that here today.
Rountree: So, we need to look at the line items to see if we have that kind of a long
term maintenance account set up for our buildings.
Lavey: Correct. We actually have -- we actually have line items right now, but it goes
toward our janitorial staff and this would be something separate from that or a sub
column to that:
Rountree: Thank you.
Zaremba: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: This may be in the materials which I'm song I'm not looking at, but is there in
the discussion any interagency waiver of fees or -- I mean is this -- we are going to
collect from everybody that asks for a room or are there exceptions?
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 46 of 96
Simison: There is a way to have all fees waived and the intention would be primarily for
govemmental type groups that the intention would be we want them to use the room as
well, that there is a way to have those fees waived. So, not everybody has to pay fees
when they use the room at all times. And I know that we have had requests from BRT,
for example, to hold their meetings there and -- as a govemmental group. And that's in
line with what other people do as well in the valley, they do waive fees. Ada County
waives fees. That's really who can use Ada County's facilities is only govemment or
quasi-govemment and they don't charge them a fee for that use.
Nary: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, to shed a little light on kind of where our
discussion was, we -- the traditional uses that we have allowed in this City Hall facility is
what we were trying to transfer to the new facility and in looking at the other
govemmental agencies, some don't allow anyone but other govemment to use it and
no public -- or no private citizen groups of any sort. That really doesn't work, again, with
our use. Some only allow it 8:00 to 5:00. That hasn't been our traditional use either.
So, we didn't find those to be very helpful. So, we tried to balance in these rules
allowing the -- essentially the practices that we have had to continue -- to place some
structure around them. When our -- as Chief Lavey stated, when we had a discussion
about fees, it was primarily for cleaning. That was the real necessity. Most everything
else is probably negligible when you're talking about lights and water and those types of
things. So, realistically, the cleaning that is probably necessary to keep these rooms up
with heavy use, we probably will be coming back to you at some point in the future with
better numbers and some way to assess what uses of these facilities have been, what
costs they are to the city for that, what the cleaning -- and maybe -- and probably with a
recommendation with finance that we target all the fees that are collected towards that
type of use, so that they aren't just swept in the General Fund and, then, not accounted
towards those room usage, but we figured up front there really isn't a way to capture
that. So, we thought this is probably the best starting point with these rules and
regulations and we will probably be looking to amend them at some point or putting a
little bit more meat around them in the future.
Rountree: Thank you. Any comments? You need action on the rates?
Simison: I believe the action is that legal will bring back aresolution --
Rountree: A resolution.
Simison: -- in the coming weeks.
Nary: We are going to have to advertise the fee.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 47 of 96
Simison: Right.
Nary: We are going to have to have a fee hearing, so we will start that process.
Rountree: Okay. That's the action, then. Move forward with that bill. Thank you,
Robert.
F. Update on City-Initiated Annexation of Properties
Rountree: Caleb, update on the city initiated annexations.
Hood: Thank you, Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Just a quick
refresher. I know at least one of you weren't here last time when I gave the
presentation. It was actually June 10th, earlier this year, and I got some direction from
the Council, so I wanted to just come back with you kind of what - a status update of
the new direction, incorporating some of the comments that I received last time, either
via a-mail or just during that meeting. I have bulleted some of them on the overhead
and it's been long enough where I thought it was worth our time and I'll try to be brief, to
just come back and give a quick refresher on this issue. I didn't want to just send an e-
mail saying here is the letter we are sending these folks, what do you think, so -the
direction given was that we need to be sensitive in our approach to these folks to go
after those property owners that are currently receiving some services from the city,
sewer and/or water service or are enclaved and go after those folks first. They should
be in the first round of the city initiated annexations. The direction given also -you
wanted staff to provide a letter to those affected property owners with pertinent
information regarding process and why the city is pursuing annexation. Again, why they
-- if they are enclaved or receiving those services. I did have a draft letter -just as a
side note, I did have a draft letter. It wasn't ready for the packet late last week and I
haven't had -- Mr. Nary hasn't had a chance to look at it first. I will be e-mailing you that
draft letter of a letter that we would like to send to these property owners to make sure it
says what we all want it to say before I actually send it out. Once that letter -once I
kind of get the okay from everyone, I'll send that letter out, inviting those property
owners to meet probably at the new City Hall, probably the timeline there, and I'll get to
timelines here in just aminute -- to just discuss with them the process, that way through
the public hearing process you don't have to field some of those questions at the
annexation public hearing, we can, hopefully, answer a lot of those questions just at the
staff level and you don't have to answer those questions through the public hearing
process. So, that's kind of the direction we are going with this is we will handle,
hopefully, a majority of the heavy lifting at the staff level and we will still have to go
through the processes outlined in state code, obviously, for a category A, that's what we
are going to first, is process those or propose to annex those properties that meet the
criteria outlined in state code for a category A annexation. I do want to jump real quick
into the new criteria based on those -that comments and the feedback there were
provided last time. We have broken the properties before -there were about 70 that
were on the list previously that were provided to you. I think we are going to end up
with somewhere in the neighborhood of about 35 that meet the following criteria. They
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 48 of 96
are contiguous to the city limits. Have a service, as I mentioned. And are in our Comp
Plan and area of impact as designated being part of Meridian some day. And, then,
aren't developed. And I put that in quotes, because developed can mean some things.
I'll touch on that here in just another second and define what we in the planning
department at least use to, again, define developed or the properties are enclaved,
again, totally surrounded by city zoned properties, they are residential in nature, and are
fully developed. The properties that we haven't included in this list have the following
characteristics: They are either vacant or underdeveloped. And, again, there is some --
staff has bounced -- either bounced to the site or looked at them in our -- an aerial view
and saying, hey, this property is probably going to redevelop, we probably don't want to
annex them, because, then, we don't have a development agreement that we can tie
them to, we don't want to just annex this property and give them free development rights
without having a development agreement to tie them to. So, the most common example
is a single family home on a five acre parcel. Those have been left out of this. They
may meet some of the other criteria, but even if they are receiving a city service, if they
are on a five acre parcel we don't e I think that's the direction -- and correct me if I'm
wrong, that's one of the questions here tonight, is if they are on five acres there is
certainly redevelopment potential there. If we annex them, we have lost some of that
stick in the future to say what that subdivision needs to look like, if we just give them an
R zone in the City of Meridian. So, that's the most common example there. And, then,
if a property has -- is underdeveloped and designated mixed use or commercial or office
on the Comprehensive Plan, those have also been left off of this first round. Now, we
can go back and we can reevaluate and see if these are people we want to annex in a
future category B annexation, potentially, or category C, but for right now I'm proposing
that we don't touch these, because they have, again, mainly due to redevelopment
potential. The two most common examples of property falling out there are the Heppers
Acres Subdivision, which is on Linder just north of Franklin, they have pieced out one
acre parcels, just -- all of them are about one acre and there is seven of them that are
right there between Hark's Comer and the railroad tracks. There is a day care right
there. That subdivision is mixed use on our Comprehensive Plan. If we annex them,
we are going to lose a lot of our ability to dictate development there and they are going
to be annexed with a zone that we may or may not be happy with. So, we are going to
let them initiate or at least, again, put them on hold for right now and, then, Onweiller is
on Pine and there are about six properties there, right along -- on the south side of Pine,
just east of downtown. There are some one acre parcels on there, too, which are also
called out as mixed use. There is single family homes on -- I think five of the six, if not
six of the six homes there and we are saying, you know, this is pretty sensitive area
right near our downtown area and let's not just give them zoning, let's have them ask for
zoning. So, those are some common examples of how some of the properties fell out.
The other -- not as common, although there is more of these than I thought there would
have been, if services are unverified. So, Public Works -- I have asked for about -- I
think I have gotten responses for about 25 or 30 of the properties from Public Works.
Field inspectors have gone out there and physically located a service line going into the
house or at least going towards the house. There are quite a few properties out there,
though, where Public Works hasn't verified. They show up as being connected, we are
just going to have to field verify every single one of these. So, right now some of them
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 49 of 96
may be on the list and may fall out, we may find new ones that actually do .have
services that weren't on the original list. But I'm expecting about 35 or so properties in
this first round. I do want to talk real quick -- a majority of those 35 that I have got on
the list right now are residential in nature. There are three commercial properties,
though, that I want to call out specifically, just to make sure I'm on the right track with
some of these. One of them -- and all of these have some history with the city. One of
them is the drive-thru on Fairview Avenue, what was commonly -- or was recently -- I
think it's vacant now, but Brood Awakenings, that property is one of the ones -- it's small
enough where it's going to redevelop, but it has a lot of history here. It met a lot of the
criteria to be included in the list. I have got it on the list right now to go ahead and bring
them into the city. Now, they don't have -- they are nonconforming in that they don't
have our landscape buffers we need, but we can get through some of those things that
we need with a development application or a CZC, application for certificate of zoning
compliance or a building permit, when a use is established. One of the other
businesses that's on a list currently -- and I don't know the name of the business -- but
there is a rock placing business on Franklin between Linder and Meridian Road on the
south side and they are currently un-annexed. They are an enclave on Franklin Road.
They are by H&H Utility there. I can't remember the name of that business offhand. But
they are an enclave. Again, we don't have the landscaping that's required by city code
there, but they are receiving some service, so they are on our list. A large parcel. It
certainly could redevelop, but they have got quite an inventory there and didn't see the
redevelopment potential there being extremely high, at least not right now. And, then,
the final one I just wanted to call out is Mountain View Equipment, which is on Overland
Road between Overland and the freeway, west of Meridian Road, slightly Boondocks
area or kind of right in there. They are also an enclave parcel. Large parcel. So, those
are three commercial properties that did meet these criteria here, which we are
including, at least right now on the list and feel free to a-mail me or say, hey, you know,
maybe we want to do them, you know, let's -- let's hold off or whatever. And just to
point to that, too, tonight I was told to be brief, so I didn't print out the list I had before
with all 35 properties on there that show which have service and what we are proposing
to zone them. I will a-mail that to you, though, along with this draft letter. So, you can
study it at your own leisure and get back with me with any comments you may have on
that, so -- I just -- again, I just want to call out those three commercial -- there are a
couple of churches and some other -- not residential properties, but they aren't
commercial either, so I didn't -- I didn't go into detail on those, but there are a few of
those on the list as well.
Rountree: Caleb, before you leave -- you already left it. Under the first bullet, the
second plus, enclaves totally surrounded by city zone, shouldn't that be annexed --
zoned and annexed?
Hood: Mr. President, if there -- if they are zoned, they are annexed. If they are
annexed, they are zoned. So, they are interchangeable.
Rountree: Well, we have zoning classifications on our map on properties that are not
annexed.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 50 of 96
Hood: Mr. President, we may have some properties on our future land use map that
have future zoning, but if they are currently zoned, then, they are annexed and vice-
versa, if they are annexed, then, they are zoned. So, yeah, that word could be used
interchangeably. In that case, anyways. So, here an anticipated timeline. We are
doing the first plus tonight. And that feedback I would like to get sometime in the next
30 days or so, if you get a chance. And I will get that a-mail, the draft letter, and the list
to you here shortly. We will get that letter after I hear feedback from the Council and,
again, our legal staff, get that out to the affected property owners in that letter and some
of the direction that was given before is we will definitely include the reason or the
justification for the annexation and what these folks can expect and why they have been
getting somewhat of a free ride thus far in your -- and it's time for you to come into the
city type stuff. I'll phrase it on --
Rountree: Caleb, I think one of the things we talked about in that letter -- and it's going
to be property specific, but some folks are receiving services because we extended
them services at one point in time, since they had no annexation path to the city and it
was a condition that they annex into the city at such time as they could and I think
where we know that's the situation, we need to remind folks that that was part of their
agreement. And I don't know how many of those still exist, but I think there is probably
still a few of them out there.
Hood: Yeah. Mr. President, that's a good point. And Idid -- I failed to mention -- the
letter that I'm going to be e-mailing you is going to be modified somewhat for different
situations. If you're an enclave you're going to get a little bit different language at the
beginning. If you're receiving sewer or water, but we don't have some written consent
from you, you're going to be getting a little bit different letter. If you're Eastbrook
Subdivision, which is on Ustick and Meridian and back in 1994 you're in a county
subdivision, but everyone that signed in we -- you know, you hooked up, but when you
are contiguous you come in -- a little bit different letter. So, thank you for bringing that
up, because we will have to modify that letter somewhat, property specific or subdivision
specific. In the meantime, I need to sit down still with legal staff and just make sure I
understand the updated Idaho Code that went into effect July 1 to make sure we are
doing everything by the book according to the new code under that category A process.
So, there is still some research that I need to make sure I'm comfortable and fully
understand before we start sending letters out saying, hey, this is what we are going to
do. So, I will work with Mr. Nary and his staff to make sure that we are doing everything
above board and by the laws and a lot of the details below in that time line really get to
that point. I'm not sure if we have to post every specific site with a four by four notice of
public hearing, I'm not sure if we are exempt from doing that, if we could just do a public
service announcement and send that out, you know, city wide -- there is a lot of those
details process-wise that I'm just not quite sure how we are going to qualify and meet
some of those things or if we need to send a mailed notice out to everyone in the city or
-- or what we need to do that way, so there is some research there that needs to be
done on my part. I guess one of the other things that I was going to just bring up tonight
-- I do have in November, so after I get all that information and we get that flier out to
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 51 of 96
property owners, we are going to hold that public meeting at the new City Hall and I
didn't know -- we will certainly -- you're more than welcome to attend that meeting. I
have asked Mr. Nary to attend that meeting, just to kind of help me out with any legal
questions that may be there. Bruce Freckleton will represent Public Works Department
at that meeting, so if the Mayor or City Council person wants to be there, Ithink -- I can't
remember if the Mayor was there at the Edinburgh -Vienna one in this room here four
or five years go now, but if you want to, you're certainly welcome to attend, so a and,
then, I'm thinking about maybe putting some just FAQ type stuff on our website to --
here is what an annexation is and does and we can have that, you know, link below the
Planning Department, common, you know, frequently asked questions or any
comments, maybe that way, or questions.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Caleb, I think the frequently asked questions was a good thing. Also the tax
comparison was also very helpful for the residents that did attend.
Hood: And, Madam Mayor -- Mr. President, Madam Mayor, that is something that I
have got right now in this draft letter that will go out to those folks asking them to come
to this neighborhood meeting. So, if you want do that in some other form e this letter
has turned out right now to be about six pages long, so we may want to pare that back
and that's why I'm going to send you this stuff and if you think this is better for our
website or this, I mean a lot of it I'm getting into more details -- I'm just trying to be up
front with people, quite honestly. I mean I'm trying to put out there that, hey, if you're
annexed, this is what's going to happen, you're going to see this tax levy rate is going to
change and, you know, you come to the City of Meridian now if you want a building
permit and here all -- everything that changes, you know. The police department is now
-- you know, we are the main responsibility, although there is, you know, cooperative
agreements -- all those things are laid out in this letter. So, I'm not trying to lose in there
that you're coming into the City of Meridian, but I do just want to give them a lot of that
information in the letter. So, again, I'll get that draft to you and, again, if we want to pull
that tax levy rate stuff out, we can certainly pull it out and put in an FAQ on our website,
too, so --
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Caleb, I would suggest that maybe you work with the attorney's office to see
what should be a part of the letter and what should be an attachment, so those that
want the more detailed information, they can go to the appropriate sheet and, then, they
don't have to read through the letter to find out -- because I don't know how many
people are going to read a six page letter and really walk away with a clear
understanding of what's happening.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 52 of 96
Hood: Duly noted. And I will just -- and I know you haven't seen that letter. I did give a
draft copy to Mr. Nary late last week or middle of last week. About three of those pages
are just Idaho -- is an attachment of Idaho Code, Title 50, Section 222, saying here --
here is by law how we can annex you. So, I have given them that information, too. So,
if we don't want to put it in there, that's fine, I don't expect people to read those three
pages, because it's just --
De Weerd: An attachment is good.
Hood: Yeah. So --
Zaremba: I agree with the Mayor, that shouldn't be in the body of the text, but an
attachment would be --
Hood: So, I think that's probably it. I will -- if there are any other questions -- this is kind
of the time I -- maybe just to cut to the chase, if everything goes the way things are
planned, we are looking at a Planning and Zoning Commission hearing sometime in
January and the City Council here and ordinances sometime in February. So, first part
of next year is kind of what we have got as a goal right now to have these properties
annexed and zoned and have them to the Tax Commission for annexation into the City
of Meridian. So, with that I will stand for any other comments or question you may
have.
Zaremba: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: This probably isn't a question about the first wave, but maybe -- I assume we
may have a second wave and a third wave that incorporates some of the ones that you
have excluded from the first wave. On the ones that we would avoid in the first wave,
just because they are five acres with one house on them or something like that, is there
-- and maybe this is a question for Mr. Nary. Is there a generic development agreement
that we could attach to those with annexation that says, you know, you're grandfathered
in in your current use, you're fine, but the DA makes it clear that should they change
their use, then, there were hoops to jump through? Can we do --
Hood: I'm sorry. Mr. Nary, if you don't mind, I think I can probably field that one. The
reason that that -- I don't see that working, especially in all these cases, is that
development agreement is just that, an agreement, and if that other party doesn't sign
that agreement, the agreement doesn't happen. So, your development agreement is
the city and a developer, usually, entering into an agreement. If they say, well, I don't
want to sign your DA, then, we never annex them and we are back to start and they
stay in the county and, essentially, haven't gotten anywhere. And I don't think there is
any way we can force them to sign an agreement, so that's -- that's one of the things.
And, two, I have never seen a generic agreement. Now, Mr. Nary's department
certainly drafts those and they may have a template they use, but I haven't seen a -- I
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 53 of 96
think it would have to be somewhat specific to each and every five acre parcel and there
are -- one of the subdivisions there were at least four of those within their Magic View
Heights off of Eagle and back in there. So, I guess at this point I'll defer to Mr. Nary, but
that's why we didn't think, well, we can just annex these and have a DA, is because
what about if they don't want to sign it?
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Council Member Zaremba, I mean
Caleb's hit at really the problem. That's why I think leaving them out at this time -one,
you're going to have the problem it's going to be confusing to folks. We don't have a
holding zone. We don't have -- some cities have -- for lack of a better term, a hold
zone. They may have an A open zone, like the city of Boise has. They may have an R-
1zone that applies to a single acre, but the intent of the local Land Use Planning Act is
to create urban densities and create development. And so what you would be doing is,
essentially, either annexing somebody at a zone that's not -- that's appropriate for today
and would have to be amended and I think what Caleb's concerned with is right now we
could only do that, if we wanted to do that, at an R-2. I mean because you would -- I
mean you can imagine folks that have five acres today have -- are just living there, have
no idea what they may or may not want to do and it's probably best leaving it to them in
the future to initiate that action, rather than annexing them now -- you know, I can only
think of one project that was an old -- that had an old zone on, it was Mill Iron, and it had
an R-4 designation that was significantly old. They brought in an R-4 subdivision that a
number of neighbors didn't particularly like, but we didn't have any authority as the city
to advise them that they had to do it differently, they had no standards, no requirements,
no nothing. And so I think that's what Caleb is trying to avoid is creating those types of
problems and he's right, in a development agreement situation, again, we could propose
it. If they don't want to sign that, they don't want to agree to future conditions, you're
going to end up with a very, very sketchy plan, if anything, and, again, you're just going
to have it in front of you later. So, I think it's probably wise to just leave those out and
deal with the -- the ones that are, essentially, the most obvious, the most necessary.
They are already enclaved. They are already receiving services. They are small
enough that their development is probably fairly unlikely. Maybe where they are located
it might have some redevelopment, but there is not a great risk to the city if it were. I
think those are the ones to get the first wave of these out there. I think Caleb is right,
the key is education and finding that balance between information and too much
information. The more you provide sometimes the more concerns you may raise, but I
do think we have to provide as much information to folks up front. I think the more we
provide, the less resistance that we get back and we will still probably have a few, but
we may not have as many if they understand they already get services, they may have
already consented, maybe they had forgotten, or maybe they weren't aware, because
they are the second or third property owner since the property was originally granted
services and reminding them of those things is really all we are trying to do, is very
gently just let these folks understand we are trying to move this forward. One of the
things that the timing works out in our favor, many times the people who are opposed to
this type of action by cities, the criticism is that the city is looking to initiate more tax
base. By initiating, really, this into the next fiscal -- or into the next calendar year, this
won't affect our tax base for a significant time. If they get on the tax rolls in 2009, the
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 54 of 96
taxes won't be assessed on the city until 2010 and they don't get paid until December of
2010. This is not a revenue generator, this is, really, cleaning up our city map. This is
really cleaning up our borders. This is really making those that are getting services
come into the city, because it's the right time to do that and it's not a tax generator and
that's probably the biggest criticism or complaint I have heard from people and I think
just the way the timing of this worked out I think it really gets away from that.
Hood: Mr. President?
Rountree: Caleb.
Hood: If I can add just one comment to what Mr. Nary said. I don't -- these folks are,
essentially, the low lying fruit. These are the ones that we either have that written
consent or we don't see them having much grounds to say, no, I shouldn't be part of the
City of Meridian. We haven't gone -- he made a comment about cleaning up some of
our city limits. There still, certainly, are going to be a lot of enclave type properties, total
subdivisions even, and if that's the case I'll definitely bring something back for this round
four or five or six and we can do like the city of Boise does and we can take these whole
subdivisions in. That's not what this round is about.
Rountree: We won't do anything like that.
Hood: And that's a policy change. That's why I just wanted to clarify what Mr. Nary
said, is that this round does not include any of those. There are a couple subdivisions
where we have written consent for, but -- but that's not what's proposed at this time.
Rountree: Any other questions for Caleb? Guidance? Direction? Move forward.
Bird: Yeah.
Caleb: Thank you.
G. E. 3rd Street Extension $ Alignment Study
Rountree: Matthew. 3rd Street Extension, Alignment and Study. Would you like one?
All you have to do is ask. Matt, while you set up we are going to take about a ten
minute break.
(Recess.)
Rountree: All right. I'm going to call the meeting back in session. You ready, Matt?
And Jaycee and Dean?
Matt: Mr. President?
Rountree: All right. Take it away.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 55 of 96
Ellsworth: Okay. Well, update number one is the 3rd Street Extension and Alignment
Study, which, as you all know, is a joint effort between Meridian Development
Corporation and the city. Presented City Council an update on this study several
months back and just to recap here briefly, the extension options considered -- there
were three out of the starting block and those were over here along 2nd and a half
street, extending 3rd Street. And to orient you here we have Fairview to the north.
Main Street on the east. This is Cole Valley School. Here is 3rd Street. Option one
was to jog to the west, continue along 2nd and a half, jog back to the east, and, then,
make a connection from Franklin north to Fairview. Option two was 3rd Street to 3rd
Street. It's the yellow alignment here. And option three was, essentially, along 4th
Street, although we did slightly jog to the west to avoid the Idaho Piua Company up
here. Sort of option four and a half, which came out of the state holder involvement
process was to run along 4th Street and, then, to jog back to the existing 3rd Street
alignment as you make the connection north to Fairview. So, as you recall all four of
those -- all four of those options, when we ran them through the scoring matrix, if you
will, which took a look at right of way costs, construction costs, stake holder input, and
traffic operations. The 3rd Street alignment rose to the top in all those categories. So,
during that update Council directed staff to do two things. The first -- first part of that
direction was to explore various funding options for implementing the construction of
this corridor. As ACRD has indicated from the outset of this process, construction of 3rd
Street through downtown does not fit well into their structure and, in fact, they have
gone as far as to say they cannot contribute funds to this roadway. Their financial
situation is such that this -- this doesn't fall onto their radar. With that in mind, some of
the other ones that MDC and city staff discussed -- of course, there is the possibility of
requiring the construction of this roadway through development, which I suppose to be
the conventional method of constructing a collector roadway in an undeveloped part of
town. Of course, that becomes problematic if the chosen alignment is the 3rd
alignment, for reasons that we can discuss later. Another possibility is the city or MDC
financing the construction of this roadway and in preliminary discussions with MDC's
administrator he didn't sound that a it didn't sound like the MDC board would be all that
enthusiastic about that prospect and based this, again, preliminarily, on the feedback I
received at the last update. I'm not sure how -- how eager City Council would be to
jump on that band wagon either. But we can speak to that in several minutes here as
well. Another possibility that MDC and city staff discussed is the possibility of forming
an LID. And I appreciate Tom's comments earlier about LIDs. Basically, if that's the
chosen direction, staff will go back to take a look at the parameters of an LID, find out
what -- what the geographic scope of that would be, how many properties would be
involved and so forth. Again, getting back to the structure of the way that ACHD funds
roadways. These last two sort of brush on that and in conversations with the
transportation task force and others. The last two options that I wanted to get in front of
you are to propose the classification of East 3rd Street as a minor arterial and at present
East 3rd Street does not have a functional classification to it. We have been discussing
it thus far as a future collector roadway, but that hasn't fed through COMPASS's
process and COMPASS is the entity that designates functional classifications. So, even
if it was designated as a collector, ACHD does not collect impact fees for collector
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 56 of 96
roadways. They collect impact fees for arterials. So, the link there would be to propose
the classification as a minor arterial and there is a brief little description from
COMPASS's website about arterials versus collector roadways, which you can read on
the screen up there. The fourth and final option -- or fifth, excuse me, and final option
that I wanted to roll out for you guys is the possibility of encouraging ACHD to revisit the
impact discussion to include collector roadways and, again, that would have to be a
multi-step process. Step one is engaging ACHD with that possibility and, then, take it
from there. The second piece of Council's direction from the update several months
back was to get this in front of ACHD to gauge their input, so the Council could consider
that in identifying a preferred alignment. On August 1st, 2008, the ACHD commission
received an update from ACHD staff about this study and the Commission tentatively
gave support to option two, which is that 3rd to 3rd Street alignment. A couple of large
caveats in there. Again, they reiterated the fact that ACHD will not contribute monetarily
to the construction of this roadway and, secondly, they voice concems about the four-
plex that is under construction directly in the alignment for 3rd Street and, of course, if
you put those concems together what it amounts to is uncertainty as to the time line for
ultimate implementation. A brand new four-plex and it's going to be a long ways out on
redevelopment, so unless we can identify some other way to pay for this thing, it won't
happen in the foreseeable future with that 3rd Street alignment. So, to document
ACHD's perspective on this, the city -- city staff received a letter dated August 19th,
2008, which is included. in your packet there and a couple of requests in that letter. On
the one hand it was written acknowledgement that ACHD will not fund East 3rd Street
and, additionally, confirmation that the City of Meridian and/or MDC will acquire the
necessary right of way for this project and the letter, then, continues to state that the city
will not seek compensation from ACRD for that -- for securing that right of way in the
future. So, before you this evening I have kind of athree-pronged request for you. The
first is to provide a response to ACRD based on that letter dated August 19th. The
second -- and, again, these sort of mesh together a little bit. They will influence one
another. One is some direction from Council on the preferred funding strategy. And,
then, finally, feedback from Council on a preferred alignment for East 3rd Street. So,
with that I would stand for any questions and I would be interested in Council's feedback
on each of those three.
Rountree: Comments? Preferences? Don't everybody jump at once.
Zaremba: Mr. President?
Rountree: David.
Zaremba: I have opinions, so I will throw them out there. Working up from the bottom,
the preferred alignment for me is the center alignment, 3rd Street to 3rd Street. The
proposed funding strategy, I like the reclassification as a minor arterial. There are
several advantages to that. We do intend it to be used as an arterial, I believe, as one
of the few remaining underused streets that has a railroad crossing and coupled with
our intent to move the through traffic off of Main Street. I can easily see East 3rd as
being at least a minor arterial. It may be our truck route. It may be a number of things
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 57 of 96
that we wish it to be. During the discussions of the downtown transportation steering
committee, which is the group that came up with the split corridor, we talked about East
3rd a few times, but it was not part of the consultant's statement of work. So, we really
didn't delve into it and the consultant kept keeping us off that subject, but it was
mentioned a couple of times and the thought there was that when you intend to have
Main Street and downtown be a pedestrian friendly area, you do need back access to it
and what was suggested was that East 3rd would be an excellent place to have all the
traffic go, very possibly have parking structures that would be accessed from East 3rd,
have people walk into the rest of the area and around in the west of the area -- around
in the rest of the area. That to me would make East 3rd Street a minor arterial. It would
be a busy street and we want it to be a traffic street. That being said, ACRD does
collect impact fees and reimburse impact fees along minor arterials, which means that
developers would be more inclined to do something there. At ACRD I serve on the
capital investment citizens advisory committee. The ACRD commission and the citizens
advisory committee are very happy with collectors not being part of the impact fee
program. That was changed about -- I'm forgetting, four years, five years ago,
something like that. They used to be part of the impact fee program. It was a challenge
for ACRD to keep that going at the time that Micron went and had the impact fee
ordinance changed. ACHD decided that it wasn't worth the battle and they said, okay,
collectors are out. But my feeling is that the future intended use of East 3rd Street
would qualify it as a minor arterial. It is COMPASS that has to make that designation.
But I would propose that to them. That would be my opinion. If that happens, that
changes what the response to ACHD would be. As a collector or a local road or
something, we would not have a leg to stand on to have them contribute funds to it. As
a minor arterial we need to -- if we choose to go the minor arterial route, which I
propose we should do, our response to ACRD needs to leave that avenue open and we
don't want to agree to have it be a minor arterial and not qualify for impact fees and --
and some funding. So, I understand their position at current when it's not a classified
road at all, it's not even a road, most of it. So, the response they are asking for would
be appropriate. But if we choose to go the minor arterial route, then, the response they
are asking for is not appropriate. So, we need to phrase it in some way that leaves that
option open. That's my opinion.
Rountree: Anyone else? Shaun, did you want to give MDC's perspective?
Wardle: Thank you, Mr. President. Shaun Wardle with the Meridian Development
Corporation. I'm going to give you a little background on the issue and I can tell you
that one of the -- one of the most difficult things forme in this process is having been on
the other side of this and Matt's done a good job of giving an update in terms of time
lines and what I'm going to give you is a little bit of historical perspective. 3rd Street has
been both to the Development Corporation and to the City of Meridian and the business
community in Meridian, dating back to a number of bankers to Teny Smith's name, has
been on the radar since the 1980s. This is not a new issue and has never been a new
issue. The Development Corporation instituted the downtown Meridian transportation
plan. This was a part of that. That study was conducted in conjunction -- and the
ultimate outcome of that was the split corridor, but had a number of other items in there
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 58 of 96
and the split corridor just happens to be the most politically charged of those items.
This City of Meridian through the planning department allocated fundings to look at the
3rd Street comdor. At that time, assuming that it would be in conjunction with the Ada
County Highway District. At such time that the planning department and the new
transportation staff member put together a scope of work and had something put
together that came to the Development Corporation and the Development Corporation
agreed to partner. The other player in this -- in this process chose not to participate
financially and that would be the highway district. So, the Development Corporation and
the city have gone through this process, hired a consultant, have come up with these --
these options, have done numerous hours and hours of public outreach. The highway
district has been involved at the staff level and so what you have in front of you is a -- in
my opinion, I guess -- and this is -- certainly I'm not speaking for our board of directors,
I'm speaking from someone that's been in the process, you have got an item which is
very, very important to the development of downtown and as Mr. Zaremba talks about
we want to keep that thoroughfare traffic -- traffic traveling north and south not destined
for a business or a home downtown, we want to keep those on the peripheral of our
downtown, on Meridian Road with the split comdor and 3rd Street is this extension with
the rail crossing. And so it still continues to be a very important item for the
development of downtown. Now, putting on my development hat, we don't have in this
particular case the opportunity for a developer at this current time to come in and
acquire all these parcels to do the roadway. We are talking about a very narrow strip of
land and a real hodge podge of ownership and that's one of the challenges in the urban
renewal area is consolidating all of those areas. And, trust me, Matt and I have taken a
look at how can we do that. We have a number of willing property owners, but we don't
have one ultimate financing entity that will come and master plan the area, do a
development, and in conjunction with that build -- is that a quarter mile of roadway,
Matt?
Ellsworth: I couldn't tell you offhand.
Wardle: So, I should say a significant piece of roadway. In addition to that, I will
mention that there are a number parcels that could potentially be difficult to acquire.
One very large parcel on the comer of 3rd and Carlton Street, which is -- I know a
number of private developers that would be open to acquiring that parcel, however, it
becomes difficult. So, that's where we are at in terms of a process. I understand the
highway district's decision and their staff recommendation. However, this is one of the
areas where those elected officials get involved. I mean at the City Council level. Our
board of directors is not -- they have seen this item on a number of occasions. They
have not closed the door on participation and so Matt gives an accurate assumption of
what we are talking about, but we are currently funding within our budget half a million
dollars of improvements at the split corridor landscaping phase one, a number of other
studies, and, frankly, that eats up a large percentage of our increment, which is
projected to be about 1.3 million .dollars this year. So, with that I would stand for any
questions.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 59 of 96
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Shaun, I guess your preference is number two or the middle one?
Wardle: The public input and public preference was if all things else -- all things were
equal, that a straight road alignment provided the best connectivity and what we
discovered through our -- our real concern from a staff level was that those owners,
which were impacted would be -- would be negatively impacted and that they would feel
that -- that that was outside the realm of possibility. What we found was exactly the
opposite, that those people understood and actually said that -- that they would prefer
that route and they would be open to acquisition. And I think that's where this timing
issue comes up. You have got a number of people -- you have got one project, which is
-- which is a four-plex project which Matt refers to, which is right in the middle of this
area. As I understand it, the owner is attempting to finalize construction and sell those
units off, but how can he sell those units off with the uncertainty of what's going to be
there in the future? I mean that's -- that's his quandary. The other property owner
directly affected has been there for a number of years, living there in a single family
home, but would just like to know what to do with his property if it needs to be utilized in
the future.
De Weerd: If it were designated as a minor arterial and eligible for impact fees, would
MDC -- can MDC look at constructing that and be the entity that ACHD pays back?
Wardle: That's -- Madam Mayor, that's an interesting question and I don't have my legal
counsel to know if that's -- that's an area that MDC could be involved. I would certainly
think that it would be - it would be open to discussion. Whether that -- I know there has
been some discussion within the urban renewal districts that impact fees in their current
state make redevelopment in the urban renewal areas somewhat less attractive and
there has been talk at looking of -- at looking at how urban renewal districts could
potentially buy down some of those to incentivize and I don't know if that would be part
of the process, but it would certainly be an interesting exercise to go through.
De Weerd: Well, you can definitely claim that that's a blighted area, so -- and it is -- it is
part of the plan; right?
Wardle: Yes. This -- the eastern edge of Meridian Development Corporation's district is
4th Street and roughly along the canal that comes over to 5th Street. So, this entire
area is incorporated in the URA. And there is certainly -- and we have worked with
Public Works to talk about some of the other needed areas. In addition to this road
project there is Public Works projects that will need to come along to accommodate
redevelopment in the future.
De Weerd: Just one final question.
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 60 of 96
De Weerd: And it's of Shaun or Matt. Do you know what the cost of this is?
Ellsworth: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the very rough high level planning
analysis that the consultant prepared indicate that the construction for the 3rd to 3rd
Street alignment would be roughly two and a quarter million dollars. That's about 1.12
for the estimated right of way and an additional 1.12 for the estimated construction.
Those estimates do include securing both the four-plex and the other property owner
immediately to the south that Shaun mentioned. Although they -- it's just a high level
planning analysis. Those numbers are subject to change, but that's the rough estimate,
though.
De Weerd: 2.2 million for 1/4th of a mile?
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: If we make that a minor arterial, we will actually have to improve that road from
Franklin, won't we, to Fairview and plus put in the new and also can you have a minor
arterial on a stopped, not a signalized railroad crossing?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Councilman Bird, Members of Council, the designation for
functional classification ties in a lot of different factors. You're correct, Councilman Bird,
that the crossing on 3rd Street would need to be improved in order to attain, I assume,
the minor arterial status. Another thing that they would look at there is the level of
access that's currently present on 3rd Street and also that is proposed on 3rd Street
once it's ultimately constructed. I think that would be another part of the discussion that
we would need to engage both ACRD and COMPASS with and attaining that
designation, but those are very relevant points.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I feel that if we do this right, 3rd Street will be a small Locust Grove, it just won't
go across. But for people to get from Fairview to Franklin or Franklin to Fairview, it's
going to be used and I hope it becomes a truck route, something like that, if we go
ahead with it and if we are going to do that, you just can't have a 30 foot road. So, this
2.2 million surely covers fixing this up, not just aquarter -- not just from Carlton to
Fairview.
Ellsworth: Unfortunately, Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council,
Councilman Bird, the estimate that the consultant generated goes roughly for the stretch
of roadway that's shown on the overhead there, from Fairview to about Carlton. It's also
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 61 of 96
based on a proposed three lane cross section, so the short answer is, no, it doesn't tie
in the rest of those costs that Councilman Bird just mentioned.
Hoaglun: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Question for Shaun. You know, I like public-private partnerships. I mean --
but it's kind of a chicken and the egg type thing, you know. Is the city doing enough
that, you know, potential developers are looking at this? I mean should we be doing
more talking about it or is there sufficient interest and now it's just a matter of funding
sources and different things like that? What's your thoughts on that?
Wardle: Mr. Hoaglun, there is one particular property owner that has amassed over
about the last 15 years a large portion of this area of town and has been intimately
involved in all the planning processes, has been involved with the Development
Corporation and, frankly, he's told me that he would like to redevelop this area. He's got
a vision in his mind for what it can be, but he needs some certainty and he needs some
certainty as to what that road lane is going to look like before he can commit to any type
of financial design or -- and he also happens to own the two ofFce buildings on Main
Street and so is very tied to this area and has a real financial gain and that's one of the
reasons that the City Council at the time that it allocated the funds and the Development
Corporation board of directors allocated funds to do the study, they see -- they saw the
need for that. The question is I think where your -- your point is the difficulty is
consolidating someone to get all of those properties to make a developer driven
development happen. I don't know that -- that was -- I can tell you that it wasn't an
economic reality even two years ago and I'm not sure that given today's climate that
without some sort of participation by agencies in general it will happen. This is a very --
avery ripe area of town for redevelopment. As the Mayor talks about, there are some
areas over there which have some older housing projects -- I can tell you that we have a
number of people looking at affordable housing in this area, but they want -- they want
some certainty that the investment that they make is going to be sustainable long term.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
Wardle: And if I might just make two points to Mr. Bird's question, the first is about the
rail crossing. I know that the traffic -- traffic safety committee has looked at that 3rd and
3rd Street and rail crossing a number of times in its current configuration, even before
the current operators moved out of there. So, I know that's been an area that's been
looked at and, secondarily, I can tell you from a public downtown street user, I come off
Fairview and 2 1/2 Street and get down 3rd and make that jog, even though it's only half
a right of way there, and take 3rd Street to get to Franklin and I see a number of other
people utilizing that on a regular basis.
Rountree: Further Comments? Questions? Okay. We still need to provide consensus
in terms of direction to Matthew --
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 62 of 96
Bird: What direction do we go, Mr. President?
Rountree: Well, the preferred alignment I think is the first thing you -- of the three do
you have a preferred alignment or do you want to see something different? Is it the
general consensus that alternative -- option two is the preferred alignment? I see heads
nodding. Okay.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: And I guess, Matt, I think you covered this last time we got an update on the
3rd Street extension study. What was the public feedback on this?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Madam Mayor, during the stake
holder involvement process essentially 3rd Street rose to the top in that as well. You
know, similarly, in the construction costs, the right of way costs and all factors
considered throughout this process 3rd Street separated itself from the rest of the pack.
In examining 3rd Street as opposed to 2nd and a 1/2 Street, a lot of folks raised concern
about the school, about existing constraints. Looking the opposite direction, 4th Street
has substantial property owner impacts and, again, as Mr. Wardle mentioned, it's the
straightest line. There was a lot of people through the public involvement process and
the stake holder involvement process that said, hey, if you are going to do this, do it
right, build as straight of a roadway as you can. More user friendly. It makes sense.
So, consistent with all the other factors that were considered during this analysis, the
public and stake holder involvement also pointed to 3rd Street.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rountree: The next question is preferred funding strategy and I -- I'll chime in with Mr.
Zaremba in terms of the proposed classification as a minor arterial and build a case why
it could meet that definition, as well as the first bullet point and require it through
redevelopment or development as part of the development costs. They are going to
have to have a road through some of that anyway. So, a portion of it is going to be
borne by development anyway. Anybody else have any suggestions on that one?
David, you have spoken.
Bird: Mr. Rountree?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. President. While I agree with you, I just don't -- I just don't feel that this
section is what -- is all that we have to improve on 3rd Street.
Rountree: Oh, I agree.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 63 of 96
Bird: I think you have got to curb and gutter and widen it out if we are going to expect
trucks and stuff to go down it. So, I think the financing is really, really going to be the
toughest part of this whole deal and I -- while I agree with you and Councilman Zaremba
both on that area there, what are we going to do from Carlton to Franklin, because it's
got to be improved, too, and you're through two pieces of property that we know we are
not going to get no help from and to be flat truthful with you, I think there is a lot of
people along there that aren't going to be willing to look at any kind of funding that
comes out of their pocket. So, I don't know, I mean I think it's something that's got to be
continued and looked at and figured out, but, man, if it's 2.2 million for that -- it's more
than a quarter mile, but if it's that we are looking probably seven or eight million for the
whole street.
Rountree: Well, the cost that Matt gave us, half of that's right of way cost for this
particular piece. I don't know that you have -- you would incur that kind of cost for the
rest of it. If we are looking at having to improve the entire stretch, the idea that it
remains a collector means it isn't going to happen. If it gets reclassified at least there is
a potential that it could be added in the capital improvements program and at some
point in time it potentially could happen.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Madam Mayor, and Councilman
Bird, President Rountree brings up a good point and that is that if this roadway were to
fall under a minor arterial classification that would apply not just to the study area here,
it would run the extent of the corridor, which is from Franklin to Fairview. So, some
funds could come from that. And the other point -- and I haven't looked at the exact
right of way that's there in awhile. From what I recall ACHD does own a bit more as you
continue to the south than they do further to the north. For some reason 80 feet is
jumping out at me, but I would need to go back to verify that, but I'm fairy confident that
they do own a wider corridor as we continue south over the railroad tracks and toward
Franklin than they do in the area that's subject to this study.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I am in favor of going ahead -- you know, I think it's an important road to get a
roadway, but I also want to do it right and even -- even from Carlton to Fairview would
be an improvement, don't get me wrong, because I'm -- I'm like Shaun, Itake -- a lot of
times take 2 1/2 Street and, then, swing over and -- to get to the Legend field or to
Storey Park, the speedway a lot of times, so I -- I think we need to push on with it, but
how are we going to --the financing is going to be hanging.
Rountree: Any other comments on financing? And I don't disagree. I think they are all
potentially as viable as any other one up there, but Ithink we -- I personally would like to
see us concentrate on the two I mentioned. I don't see an LID happening and I think the
last one is probably not going to happen. I don't know where we'd get the resources or
Meridian City Council Special Meetlng Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 64 of 96
MDC would get the funding, unless there is some kind of partnership on a
reimbursement for impact fees, if we can get it reclassified, so that's a possibility.
De Weerd: Mr. President? I guess step one is to ask staff to detail the steps needed to
pursue the minor arterial classification and just like many of these other connections,
the example being Pinebridge and their bringing Pine Street from Eagle to the
connection at Locust Grove, but it's development driven, unless there is another funding
mechanism. But I think the first step is to look at seeing if we can get it designated as a
minor arterial.
Rountree: And I think that's the basis of the response to ACHD. Thank you for your
comments and we understand your position, however, here is what we see in terms of
the traffic movement on 3rd Street and we believe it could function as a minor arterial.
ACHD's jumping up and down back there now. Gary.
Inselman: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Council, I didn't want to complicate things, but
I would --
De Weerd: Would you state your name for the record.
Inselman: Gary Inselman representing Ada County Highway District. As you stated,
just making the classification minor arterial doesn't mean it will get in our Capital
Improvements Plan. As you well know, there are many minor arterials in the city that
are not in our Capital Improvements Plan and, therefore, not eligible for impact fees.
Pine is a great example from Locust Grove west, it's not in our Capital Improvements
Plan and it needs some improvements as well. Probably will carry a lot more traffic than
3rd Street. The section that Dennis Baker is developing now was -- you know, we had
issues with that for quite some time trying to get it into our Capital Improvements Plan
and eligible for these type of deals. I just want to point that out, that, unfortunately, it's
not a guarantee and could, you know, delay things potentially.
Rountree: It's the first step, though.
Inselman: Absolutely. It would be a first step for the potential that you mention.
Rountree: Yeah.
Inselman: If I might, I would like to point out, too, that the main concern of our
commission was the four-plexes. If the city and MDC could solve that issue, Ithink we -
- it would go a long ways in resolving the rest of the corridor. That was the huge
stumbling block our commission had is they didn't want to be in the position of having to
buy afour-plex or condemn one. If that could be resolved, I think it would go a long
ways.
Ellsworth: And, Mr. President, if I might, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I
spoke to the developer of that project today and he's been involved throughout this
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 65 of 96
whole process and his position, which Shaun alluded to, this whole time has been right
now I'm a willing seller. I'm not sure how long that will remain the case. So, again, to
further muddy the waters, that's -- I spoke to him today and he, again, reiterated that
prospectus.
Rountree: It's a money deal.
Bird: Yeah. If you have got unlimited money you can do anything.
Rountree: Thank you, Gary. Matt.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, maybe -- and I hate
to jump ahead in the agenda here. One of the -- the next agenda items is the upcoming
potential meeting topics for the upcoming October 6th joint meeting with the Ada County
Highway District and I wonder if Mr. Inselman would be willing to sit down at some point
with staff to discuss what other steps would hypothetically be necessary after -again, a
hypothetical reclassification of a future East 3rd Street roadway extension to a minor
arterial would need to follow in order to get that into the CIP and ultimately to construct
this roadway and maybe that's -- that's the sort of thing we need to report back to
Council and to the Commission on the 6th, if that seems like an appropriate direction.
Rountree: I see Gary's head nodding that he's willing to do that, so I think that would be
a good item, since we both have been updated on this, maybe we can move it forward.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess if the -- as Mr. Inselman spoke about, if we could find out the cost of
the four-plex that is the road block, that would be good to have as part of that
discussion.
Rountree: Do you know?
De Weerd: Do you know?
Rountree: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, I do not have a cost for that four-plex and to be
real honest with you, have not had that discussion with the property owner for specific
reasons and that's -- and that's one of the things that the Development Corporation
does property acquisitions and has a process. This is a little more open in terms of --
it's not -- it's been on the public record that we have got a willing seller. I know that our
board of directors is going to want to have some type of commitment before they would
expend those funds and we have to make certain findings when we purchase
properties. Obviously, this is for a public purpose, but one of the things that we do to go
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 66 of 96
out and get financing -- and we would probably, at the level that we are looking at, we
would probably be entertaining some sort of term financing for this item. We would
need to know with some certainty for our lending institutions how long a wait that may
be before those public improvements are brought to fruition. So, I can certainly do a
little background research, but there are a couple side boards for those property
acquisitions.
Rountree: I guess the fundamental question, Shaun, was -- was there potential value,
not whether or not MDC would move forward with acquisition. You have a willing seller
there, what's his willing price.
Wardle: Right. And the issue for us is -- I can tell you that sort of this chicken and egg
game, but, you know, if we were to purchase that -- that parcel, we really would -- I
mean if this roadway would not go through, the Development Corporation would be in
ownership of a parcel that would be sort of at the end of nowhere if there is no
improvement there, so - and I know that our board's been sensitive to those issues, so
-- in addition to that, I would also -- if I can update our board of directors, we have a
special meeting next Wednesday morning and invite any of those that would like to be
in attendance at the 6th meeting -- at the joint meeting, just to give them an update.
Rountree: Thank you. Do you need anything more on that, Matt?
Ellsworth: No, Mr. President. Thank you.
H. Split Corridor Phase 2 Design Update
Rountree: Okay. Go on to Item H.
Ellsworth: And Item H is an update on the Meridian split comdor phase two concept
design and what -- what this largely focuses on is some of the phasing that's associated
with this project that's set to move forward for construction in 2012. There are some
improvements that will go on or proposed to go on with this construction in 2012 and
some longer term improvements that the traffic analysis is showing may be necessary
within the 30 year timeline of that project. So, here with us this evening to dive into that
is Adam Zaragoza, he's the project manager for the split corridor phases one and two.
Zaragoza: Thanks, Matt. Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Council Members, like Matt
said, my name is Adam Zaragoza, I am the ACHD project manager for the split comdor
phase two project. Just kind of a high level general overview of where we are at with
the schedule right there. Those slides that you have are up here on the board, so if you
have any difficulty looking at it up there, you can look at it with the slides that you have
in hand.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 67 of 96
Zaragoza: But just kind of an eye level where we are at with the schedule right now.
Preliminary design completes this winter. That will include the traffic studies, our public
involvement, environmental reports. Final design completion is scheduled for next
summer. That's the roadway update construction and right of way. From there we will
go into the right of way acquisition process that's scheduled in 2010 and 2011 and,
then, construction is still scheduled for 2012. What I'm here to talk to you about tonight
is the intersection alternatives that we are proposing right now. I know this is kind of
hard to see, but it's kind of a pan out of the overall area of what we are going to be
looking at. If we go -- this is -- this slide right here is the Meridian and Cheny
intersection. If we were to go from the top right comer in a clockwise direction -- 1 will
walk you through what the lane configurations are going to be like at the intersection.
Right there there is a dedicated right if you're going westbound on Fairview Avenue.
There is two through lanes and two left-hand turn lanes from Fairview onto Meridian
Road. Going northbound on Meridian Road past Fairview Avenue there is -- there is
one dedicated right-hand turn lane, two through lanes, and two left-hand turn lanes.
Rountree: So, just to refresh us -- and I know it's true, that free running right on
Meridian will go away.
Zaragoza: On Main -- on Main Street?
Rountree: On Main, yes.
Zaragoza: Yeah. We will get to that here in a minute.
Rountree: Okay.
Zaragoza: I will walk you through that. North -- or where did I leave off? Eastbound on
Fairview Avenue, what we are looking at is a right-hand turn lane with astraight -- two
straight -- dedicated straight through lanes and two left-hand turn lanes. And, then,
southbound on Meridian Road you're looking at a dedicated right-hand turn lane with
two through lanes and two left-hand turn lanes. Those numbers that you see on the
board right there are the 2035 p.m. peak hour forecasts. One thing to note here is the
westbound traffic, it does cue you through Main Street with this configuration still. The
Main and Fairview intersection, same thing here, if we were to go from the top right
comer, go clockwise all the way around. Fairview Avenue westbound we are looking at
aright-hand turn lane with the through lane, two through lanes, and alert-hand turn
lane. Northbound on Main Street, the right-hand turn lane with the through lane to the
Albertson's plaza and, then, alert-hand -- and, then, both those would be left-hand turn
lanes there and this, Mr. President, goes to your dedicated right-hand lane. Main Street
going eastbound on Fairview you have one dedicated right-hand turn lane on Main
Street and, then, two through lanes and, then, coming out of the plaza there you have a
right-hand turn lane with a straight option and alert-hand turn. Going to the free right
removal, I did speak to our right of way agent for the project this morning. She said,
basically, what we would do there is just go through the typical vacation process of what
to do with the property.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 68 of 96
Ellsworth: Mr. President, to clarify -- and, Adam, please, correct me if I'm wrong, in
earlier discussions with ACHD they indicated -- and this is his follow up to one of the
questions that Council raised, that free right is wholly owned by ACHD at this time.
Zaragoza: Yes. That's correct.
Zaremba: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I think the other piece of that question was -- is who actually owns that little
triangular park and if I'm understanding your answer, then, that's ACHD right of way and
we have just been maintaining it, but the park would go away.
Zaragoza: Correct. Mr. President, Councilman Zaremba, that's correct. We do own
that piece of property.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: So, you're saying the land that the city has been maintaining and the flag
pole is owned by ACHD?
Zaragoza: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, from -- the information I did receive is that we
own that piece of property. As far as what maintenance is, I don't know what the
maintenance agreement is.
Bird: There isn't any.
De Weerd: Well, we can just charge you back for what we have --
Zaragoza: All those years of service.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor. Or ACHD could feel free to give it to the city
for whatever uses the city feels is in the city's best interest.
Zaragoza: All right. Jumping onto the -- let's see. I want to go through the scenario C.
Awhile back this Council here requested our commission to look at different altematives.
We did look at the four altematives and came up with the best case scenario for
scenario C, which you have been provided information on earlier in the week. This
scenario C is with the 2035 p.m. forecast. I do have the numbers here if -- if you want
those, but what we came up with here for the Main and Fairview intersection, again, this
makes this -- if 3rd Street goes in, this would be the optimal configuration for the long
grand master plan. What you're looking at here is, if you're going, again, the clockwise
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 69 of 96
direction from the top right is Fairview Avenue with the three lanes through with the
optional tum right into the Albertson's plaza and, then, alert-hand tum lane. Coming up
Main Street right tum only. Going eastbound on Fairview you would have the three
lanes through, with the optional right. And, then, coming out of the Albertson's Plaza
you would have a right tum only. So, it limits that to right-in, right-out. Again, this is the
optimal solution if 3rd Street were to go through and 3rd Street were to be signalized.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I thought that the city requested to look at this with closing the Cherry Lane
Plaza and allowing the Main Street to have the right tum and the left tum with that
signalization.
Zaragoza: I think that was -- was that alternative A?
Ellsworth: I'll dive into the memo here to find that out, if you will give me just a second.
Zaragoza: Again, this is our team's recommendation at this point for the best case
scenario here, but I know you did give us that request to look into that information.
De Weerd: And so based on what did you come up with this?
Zaragoza: What were the bullet points for that?
De Weerd: Yeah.
Zaragoza: I can dig back into the --
De Weerd: Or even the consideration factors.
Zaragoza: Yeah. I can dig back into the traffic study and provide you information on
that. That way we can have these bullet points and they are clear and concise and I
can get that information over to you.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: On this -- this one you got here, I take it going north on Main, no left-hand turns
onto a --
Rountree: Fairview.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 70 of 96
Bird: -- Chevy Lane.
Zaragoza: Correct.
De Weerd: We were just talking about that.
Zaragoza: Yeah.
Bird: That's what I thought you were talking about and I was just wanting to clear up
why.
Hoaglun: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Then, to follow up on that, would that be coming from 3rd Street, then, you do
the left tum or is that going to be Meridian would take the bulk of that going onto Chevy
heading west?
Zaragoza: Mr. President, CouF~cilman Hoaglun, yes, the optimal location for the signal
would be at 3rd Street, so you would have the trafFc diverted off over to 3rd Street and,
then, take the signal left onto Fairview.
Hoaglun: Okay.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Man, if I owned a retail spot on Main Street and they are going -- and they are
going north and they have to tum right only, I -- I don't think that's - 1 don't think that's
practical at all.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Bird: But I'm not an engineer, so --
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I -- I can't support that, but I would like to know what the rationale is so that
when we talk about this on the 6th we can talk about that with the detail.
Zaragoza: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, yeah, we will have those bullet points
available for you.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 71 of 96
Rountree: I'm trying to recall our discussion on the Fairview concept that -- as I recall,
we drew the line in the sand on seven lanes at some point and I -- was it Main Street or
was it Meridian or was it before that? Because that would depict seven lanes through
that intersection.
De Weerd: It was Meridian I thought.
Rountree: Okay.
De Weerd: Wasn't it?
Zaremba: The discussion was seven lanes --
Bird: That's right to Meridian --
Zaremba: -- beyond Meridian and, then, we got a later a-mail that said they were
thinking it may need to go all the way to Linder, while the study only goes to Linder,
so --
Bird: Yeah.
Zaremba: -- my assumption was that if you need seven lanes to Linder you probably
need it all the way to the county line, but the original thing that was shown to us, the
seven lanes went back to five just west of Meridian.
Rountree: Okay.
De Weerd: That's what I thought.
Rountree: That's what I thought, yeah.
Zaremba: And when we were at that point in the discussion I was saying it should not
happen in the Meridian -- in the Meridian intersection, it should happen just slightly west
of that.
De Weerd: They moved it way far --
Zaremba: Well, the new discussion is Linder.
De Weerd: -- west of that.
Bird: But they are afraid of their right of way purchases, remember, David, on that?
Zaremba: Yeah.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 72 of 96
Zaragoza: Mr. President, Council Members, that's something that we can confirm prior
to the October 6th meeting on where that Fairview Avenue study could have the stop
point at for the seven lanes. Mr. Inselman just notified me it's just west of Meridian.
Bird: That's what I thought.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, if I may, another point about the slide that is --
that is currently up on screen over there is that with this proposed configuration -- and,
again, this does not factor into consideration the community oriented concems that the
Mayor and, then, other Council members brought up at the last update, this
configuration would still function at a level of service F during the peak hour in 2035
based on those forecasts of traffic volumes. So, purely from a technical traffic
perspective, this still is not a free flowing, well functioning corridor. But, again, having
said that, City Council has various other community oriented concems to factor into that
decision. So, I did feel that that was worth pointing out.
Zaremba: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Actually, I think that's the point. We want people who are just through traffic
and don't intend to shop on Main Street anyhow, not to be on Main Street. We don't
want them to think of that as an attractive through comdor, we want destination traffic
on Main Street. We want the people who are going through to be over on Meridian.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. Zaremba, if you -- if you want to encourage business down on Main Street,
you got to -- and you want the traffic to be able to go west also off of Main, you got to at
least have one tum west -- to the west. I mean, holy Toledo, what are you going to do,
just tell these people on Main Street, these businesses that's got investments and stuff,
that -- to move over on 3rd Street, that's where all the traffic is going to be? I thought
3rd Street was going to be for trucks and stuff like that.
Zaremba: Well -- and I agree with the Mayor. The option that included the left tum off
of Main onto Fairview included closing the driveway out of where Albertson's is and -- I
mean there is two or three other driveways in there and plenty of access off of Meridian,
so I -- if that's scenario A, then, we -- we need to see the list of why that was
discounted.
De Weerd: And we need to support it.
Zaremba: Yes.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 73 of 96
De Weerd: I'm sorry, Mr. President.
Zaremba: Just to follow up, I mean I think our objective is to reduce the tuming
movements and if the driveway is going to remain open, then, this would be an option.
But I agree, I would like to explore having that driveway closed if possible and, then, I
could see a left tum from Main to Fairview. One -- one lane.
Rountree: I guess my comment is that the eastbound trafFc's going to function at level
of service Fwhat -- how much worse level of service F is it going to be if you have aleft-
hand tuming move there. This will never be a free flowing intersection at peak hours,
so --
De Weerd: But, Mr. President, you have a left tum in off of Fairview, so it's -- you
already have that open, you have those lanes, so I guess without seeing the rationale
as to why -- if you close off the entrance to the Cheny Lane Plaza, why you couldn't
have a left tum movement when you had the light to show right tum and left tum. I don't
know. I'm not a traffic engineer, but, you know, I do know what our goals are for Main
Street and it's not to dead end it.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, if I may, and Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I, too,
am by no stretch of the imagination a traffic engineer. I know in discussions with ACRD
right of way regarding closing that Cheny Lane Plaza approach, it sounded like a non-
starter, based on the analysis on cost and the legality of the situation, ACHD right of
way was extremely tentative to go there. They had some pretty serious concems with
it.
Inselman: Mr. President, if I could address that a little bit. The right of way concems for
closing the driveway were -- that's a concern, but leaving the right-in, right-out function
of that driveway doesn't impact the level of service of the intersection or the delay, it's
just when there is a gap someone will turn right and continue, on, it wouldn't be a
signalized movement. So, that's not an issue at the intersection. The lefts are the issue
at the intersection. I believe what we discussed is closing the driveway further down
near the bank and leaving this one open, because it's a better location for it and it
functions better without interfering with the Meridian intersection, but -- so that's why
that was left. But it has nothing to do with the other left turn movements or those
considerations, it's just it's there and it would function as a right-in, right-out without
interfering with the delay at the intersection.
Bird: Gary, I -- Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Gary, I got a question. We are not going into Albertson's or into that deal, so I'm
coming down Main Street and I want to get in there, go to Albertson's or UPS or
somebody in there, so I got to turn right under this plan and probably head down and
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 74 of 96
figure out somewhere to turn around and so I'm -- I'm going back and heading west, so I
can get in there; is that right?
Inselman: Mr. Bird, either that or plan your trip ahead and cut over to Meridian sooner
to get down and --
De Weerd: But you don't even have access.
Bird: What if I'm -- what if I'm up at Wells Fargo Bank doing business there?
Inselman: I believe what this is showing is the best the intersection could possibly do.
It doesn't mean it's a preferred alternative for any of the businesses of the city, but that's
the best it would ever do. What you see is level of service E and F, traveling seven
miles per hour through that area. You add additional turn movements, you degrade that
further.
Ellsworth: And, Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this alternative
C that's shown on the screen right now is somewhat of a compromise at the staff level
that we sort of walked through. What it does still allow is access for motorists traveling
westbound on Fairview to still make that left to get to those businesses up and down
Main Street, do their shopping, but part of that compromise, again, is that from there, in
order to make a left and continue west on Fairview, they would need to head east to
East 3rd Street or west over to Meridian in order to make that left and continue with their
trip. It was better than the full on right-in, right-out that was initially proposed based on
the traffic operations of the intersection.
Rountree: But I just have to ask the question, because we are going to hear it a would
a one way couplet resolve that issue.
Zaragoza: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, and Council Members, I did receive -- or I
have received word that there is a petition of over a thousand signatures that are in
opposition of the cross over. I do not physically have that in hand. We did have our
public involvement meeting last week. Our comment period closes next Wednesday.
So, we are going to summarize those and have a synopsis for you available during the
October 6th joint meeting.
Rountree: Okay.
Hoaglun: Mr. President, I just think we ought to have some fun and just recommend
both of them be roundabouts and, then, we could really have a e
Bird: That's just what I was going to bring up. I think we ought to try a roundabout
there.
De Weerd: I think they need to buy a shopping center and put a roundabout in it.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 75 of 96
Zaragoza: One other note to make with regards to the Meridian split corridor is we are
looking at the Pine -Main intersection. We are aware that that does have backing up
problems for anybody that's turning southbound off of Pine. I have asked our traffic
folks to take a look at that and see if we can have some sort of resolution or some sort
of proposal prior to the October 6th meeting as well. That was an item of discussion
during the open house, so --
De Weerd: Thank you. Well, it will be a lively discussion on the 6th. I do look forward
to it. I have no further comments.
Rountree: Any additional comments, questions? Thanks for the update. You kind of
know where we stand about left-hand turn movement.
Zaragoza: Thank you.
I. Discussion of City Council ACRD Joint
Meeting Topics for October 6th Meeting
Rountree: Okay. Item I. Matt.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it sounds like two of
these may already be -- may already be established based on previous conversations
here this evening. The joint meeting with the Ada County Highway District commission
is coming up at lunchtime on October 6th. Pete Friedman, the long range planning
manager, forwarded a memo to the Mayor and Council on the 12th outlining some
recommended discussion items for that meeting, so we wanted to get those in front of
you this evening, so that staff has enough time to coordinate with ACHD and prepare
whatever background materials will make for a productive discussion on the 6th. So,
the options -- or, excuse me, the items that -- that Pete and I discussed that we wanted
to get in front of you are, of course, the 3rd Street Extension and Alignment Study. The
proposed cost sharing policy, which is one component of the ACHD's transportation and
land use integration plan. Right of way vacation, review, authority, and responsibilities.
An update on Ustick -Linder intersection, which is -- which is currently -- it's
programmed for construction in 2009. It's probably due for an update and Mr. Berg may
wish to give a nod to an additional issue associated with it relating back to pedestrian
movement --
De Weerd: Matt, before Gary leaves, I would like to know -- does the city need to
comment on the phase two split corridor in writing before our joint meeting? So, we
don't need to prepare written comments?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, without Adam in the room I'm not sure what it
would do to his timelines to not have a concrete response to that proposed alternative C
between now and October 6, so I certainly don't think it hurts to have something in
writing, just to forward the conversation, make sure everybody is on the same page, and
I'm happy to prepare something in writing for Council's consideration at a future meeting
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 76 of 96
or a consent agenda item, whatever -- whatever Mayor and Council are comfortable
with, again, just to clarify City Council's stance on things.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I agree with the Mayor, I'd like to see something in writing regarding -- man, I can't
buy into that at all, period. That one deal. I think we are asking for nothing but trouble.
And I feel sorry for any retail outlet that's sitting between Carlton and Washington, I
guess it is, and Fairview, because people can't go west when they get done, they are
not going to come. I mean, you know, I just think we are -- I just don't think we are
using our marbles, which wouldn't be the first time, but we don't need to do it again.
Rountree: Matt, I think that -- yeah, a letter would probably be in order and I think
probably -- I don't know that we need to address whether or not we got all our marbles,
but -- but our concern for -- for the businesses and the operation and the development
and redevelopment of Main Street to accommodate the traffic moves. Whether the
solution is a left-hand turn or doing some improvements mid block somewhere, so you
can go left over the Meridian someplace down in that area, because you can't, because
there is no through road at this point in time for multiple blocks. So, anyway, I agree, I
don't think what we have got there is going to -- going to fly.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, what is the best
capacity to get a letter to you for your consideration? Would that be preferred as a
Consent Agenda item next week? Is that something you would need additional
discussion of a letter for? What's the best way to do that?
De Weerd: What's the deadline for comment?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, there isn't an official deadline for comments. I
think if it's going to feed into the discussion on October 6th, then, getting it to ACHD with
enough lead time for them to soak that in before that -- that meeting would be the best.
That would ideal.
De Weerd: Well, Matt, can you have it for the Consent Agenda on the 23rd, but get it to
Council sometime by the -- before the end of the week, so that they can give you
comments? Does that sound reasonable?
Rountree: Uh-huh.
Bird: It sounds fair to me.
Rountree: Gary's got a comment.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 77 of 96
Inselman: Mr. President, Council, I just want to make sure you were clear that he
showed two options for that intersection, one that -- what it would be to start and, then,
that last one was the ultimate configuration that would be converted to a time in the
future that hasn't been determined, so --
Rountree: Right.
De Weerd: So, our comment would be to keep it and not do the ultimate, but keep it
with --
Inselman: Or perhaps a suggestion of some process that would happen before
changes were made or additional study, something along those lines, would be
appropriate.
De Weerd: Did you catch that?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, I believe so and that's a good point that Gary
brings up, the improvements that are slated with phase two in 2012 would not remove
those free -- or those through movements. The alternative C that we referred to would
have to occur at some point in the future after a 3rd Street extension is made. I would
also -- as a subcomponent of that discussion entail possibly the construction of an
additional east-west connection from that extension over to Main Street. But
understanding Council's concerns, Ican --Ican tailor that written response accordingly
and get it back to you guys for consideration and comment by the end of the week here.
Rountree: I don't know what the analysis indicated, but in my mind if they could take a
look at -- is there any improvement at all in terms of capacity, if they were just to do
right-in, right-out, and not have signalization into the shopping center with that first
scenario, whether it makes any difference or not in its operation. If you have got a little
more green time on some of the legs it would help and if that could do it --
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, a lot of that
information is included in the draft traffic study report and Ican -- included along with
the draft written comments to Mayor and Council, I can include sort of the high points of
that analysis, so you have that in front of you as well. From what I recall, it did
operationally show some improvement over what's proposed in 2012 and ultimately in
2035, but I don't have those numbers in front of me right now.
Rountree: Okay. Thanks, Matt. Any other guidance, direction? All right.
Zaremba: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Zaremba.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 78 of 96
Zaremba: Before we move on from the joint meeting topics, though, I have been asked
by Chief Anderson to add one, if we can. He is struggling to get the signal in for fire
station five on Linder.
De Weerd: Still? I thought that was resolved.
Bird: I thought that was done.
Zaremba: The issue at the moment is they won't let him cut across the street while Ten
Mile is closed. Linder is the alternate and he is wanting to find a way that he -- his
contractor says they can get it done in a day or less and he wants us to discuss it at the
joint meeting and see if we can help him get a resolution.
Rountree: Gary doesn't want to discuss that at the meeting. He's going to take care of
it for us.
Zaremba: Well, the issue is if it gets pushed off -- apparently there is also a
requirement that they can't do it after the middle of November, because asphalt, you
know, freezes, which means he ends up being next April before he gets his signal in
there and -- he's been trying to do this since last February, so --
De Weerd: Understood. Gary will --
Rountree: Gary's feverishly writing notes down there. I'll bet it's going to happen soon.
But maybe you could just give us an update on that, just -- it's happened.
Zaremba: Yeah. Well, maybe -- maybe an update agenda item and if it's resolved by
then we just scrap -- we skip it on the agenda.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you. I guess my comment was I think we are going to be
occupied with two of those items for the whole hour that we probably ought to be
prioritizing them and maybe e I think the split corridor update and the 3rd Street
extension is probably going to occupy most of our time.
Zaremba: I'm just trying to show my support for the chief.
Rountree: Yeah. I appreciate that.
Zaremba: Help him get it done.
De Weerd: Mr. President. I guess I don't understand why the proposed cost sharing
policy is up there. I thought we were supposed to do -- to be further along in TLIP and
understanding that before we got to this. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council --
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 79 of 96
Rountree: Matt will.
Ellsworth: -- I think that's -- that's a valid point. Staff sat down -- city staff and ACRD
staff sat down last week to go over preliminary staff level comments on the cost share
policy and some of the other documents associated with TLIP. ACRD staff has yet to
have an opportunity to -- to fully engage in that discussion, we were somewhat limited
on time, so that -- that might be an appropriate item to remove in favor of some of the
more pending issues that Councilman Rountree alluded to. We can bring that to you
further along in the discussion.
De Weerd: Well -- and, Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess beings how next week we can't talk about it, we have an extremely
full agenda. There is no meeting on the 30th. So, there is no time for the Council to
even talk about -- to get an update from staff on what some of the discussions were.
So, the timing is not good on that topic on our side.
Ellsworth: Understood.
De Weerd: Okay.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, then, am I correct,
then, in assuming, then, that the two items that you would like to propose to ACHD for
inclusion on that agenda are 3rd Street Extension and Alignment Study and the split
corridor update?
De Weerd: And safe routes to school.
Bird: We have got to do that Ustick -Linder one.
De Weerd: We have to. Yes.
Bird: We have to do that.
De Weerd: No. They will update you as --
Rountree: Okay. We will just have a quick update on that.
Bird: Update on it. Yeah. We got to leave that one on. But I'm like Council President, I
think those two are going to take all our time and, then, some.
Rountree: Okay. Sufficient direction, Matt?
Ellsworth: Yes, Mr. President. Discussion of City's Transportation.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 80 of 96
K. Reconsider SWAC Recommendation on
Playground Equipment at Compass
Public Charter School
Rountree: Next item. Reconsideration of SWAC's recommendation on playground
equipment for Charter School. Mr. Nary.
Nary: Thank you, Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Last week I
brought the SWAC's recommendation for an expenditure of 12,000 dollars for
playground equipment at the Compass Public Charter School. In further reviewing that
-- that expenditure, one -- I was not in attendance at the meeting in August where this
was approved by the committee. I live across the street from this location and so I was
curious if there had been a discussion about access to this play equipment. One of the
things that the SWAC has been pretty consistent on in all of these expenditures for
different projects around the city was that the public have access to them. Now,
sometimes, obviously, on a school site they don't have access during the school time,
but they have access on the weekends and the evenings and the afternoons and
Sundays and Saturdays. So, I contacted the PTA -- the PTA president to ask and she
said there is no pathway access to the school. So, I drove over to the school myself,
because they have constructed a new building on this property and if you're not familiar
where this is, this is where the -- it used to be Cherry Lane Christian Church. They
have built a new building on the property that blocks the view of the rear section of the
property. They have also built a vinyl fence now along Cherry Lane, so, again, it's great
for the school to have more fencing, but it's difficult to imagine how the public would
have access to this play equipment that they are helping fund. When I drove over there
there is also two access gates that are open during the day -- I don't know when they
are closed, but there is two chain link fence gates that would block access to this area.
This play equipment is already constructed, it is immediately behind a building and it's
not visible for anywhere, except when you get right up to it. So, I did ask the rest of the
committee if they would like to reconsider and discuss this again, because that wasn't a
question that got discussed. What the question that had been discussed at the meeting
was whether the school was public or private and it is a public charter school, which
means anyone can attend it. It doesn't mean anyone can get to it. So, the commission
-- the committee members did request that I bring this forward to you to recommend
returning it to the committee for discussion at our next meeting in October to see ff it fits
our criteria and as a -- I guess a follow up to that I did report to you last week -- one of
the focuses the committee wants to do is to create some structure and, then, probably
weighted criteria, because, one, as I told you last week, the funds are going to be
coming more limited. We are getting more applications and requests and we do want to
make sure that, again, the funds that are being used from recycling benefit the most
amount of people the most times that are available. So, they did ask that I bring this
back to request you reconsider the expenditure and refer it back to the solid waste
committee and with the follow up on criteria would, then, be coming back to you with a
recommendation about this project. I did notify the applicant. I did advise them that if
you granted that it wouldn't be discussed until the October 6th meeting of the solid
waste committee and that was fine.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 81 of 96
Rountree: Comments? Discussion?
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: If the SWAC committee would like it to go back, I have no problem reconsidering
our recommendation that we passed. I'm quite surprised. I drive by there quite a bit
and I'm quite surprised that -- you can't see -- if they have got the playground equipment
in, it's in. I mean you can't see it. And I -- I have seen more fencing going up and I just
-- I thought that these funds were supposed to be for the public, as you had stated. So,
I'd like to see the committee and -- because I felt the committee, after hearing this, I feel
the committee probably give a recommendation without knowing all the facts and I'd like
to see them at least get an opportunity to -- to reconsider and, you know, we can -- they
can bring it back positively, again, you know, and then -- but I feel more comfortable if
the committee is more comfortable with it and I take it that they don't without doing
some more discussion.
Rountree: So, is that a motion?
Bird: That was a motion. Long and lean.
Zaremba: I'll second it. I think the fence changes things.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to reconsider and send this back to SWAC
for further discussion. All in favor? Unanimous.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
J. Discussion of City's Transportation
Request List for ACHD for Use in FYWP
Update
Rountree: Now, Matt, after you have had a breather, let's go back to transportation
issues.
Ellsworth: Sony, Mr. President, Members of the Council, I'm back. But the last
transportation related item on the agenda this evening is the transportation project
request list, which was prepared by the Transportation Task Force for Council's
consideration this evening. And, again, just the way this process typically works is
ACHD solicits a list of transportation projects from each city as they approach their
annual update of the five year work plan. The tentative schedule moving this year's
update forward is to receive input from cities on September 30th, factor that into their
prioritization criteria and so forth to generate draft A on the November 11th, followed up
by a draft B after -- after additional input from cities and stake holders and so forth in
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 82 of 96
December and ACHD has targeted January 28th, 2009, for the public hearing and
adoption of the five year work plan. A couple of side boards that ACHD recommended,
the task force and Council. Keep in mind as we are preparing this year's list -- the first
one, a bit of a departure from previous year's list. They requested that the city break
down recommended roadway projects into one mile segments, if you will recall in past
years the downtown split corridor, for example, which is a two mile project, was the
city's number one priority. They said it's getting tight enough and they want more
specific direction from cities, so go ahead and break those down in one mile segments.
They also suggested that we extract intersections that are included already in roadway
projects. Case in point is Eagle and Victory. The intersection of Ten Mile and Ustick is
included. And Ten Mile from Cheny to Ustick. It's those sorts of intersections that
ACRD staff indicated were not worth isolating as their own intersection project for
purposes of preparing this list, we could let those fall within the projects that they are
proposed along with. Finally, ACHD staff requested that the city not include any new
projects in this year's list, but, instead, that we reprioritize the projects that were
included in last year's list. So, with those in mind in front of you, there is the top 28
projects recommended by the transportation task force and in addition to going to
ACHD with this a with this compiled list, in the past the city has also forwarded it along
to COMPASS and the Idaho Transportation Department for their use in making
programming decisions over the course of the year. It gets a little bit dicey because
representatives of different entities when they have their eyes on it have different things
in mind and different funding realities within which they work, but, generally speaking,
the way that we have broken this list down in the past is to isolate ACHD roadway
projects, ACRD intersection projects and ITD projects. So, with that background, diving
into the ACHD roadway priorities, the top ten, as forwarded by the transportation task
force area on the screen in front of you. A couple of noteworthy inclusions are, number
five, Pine from Meridian to Locust Grove. As Mr. Zaragoza mentioned, that stretch has
some additional analysis forthcoming. That's a good one to keep an eye on.
Additionally, number ten is Ten Mile from Ustick to McMillan and if you look back at the
previous fully compiled list, number 25, is Ten Mile from Cheny to Ustick and that's one
that I -- it just came to my attention today. I didn't notice it on first brush, but that's one
that I felt the need to highlight for Council to make sure that you were aware of the way
that that shook out. The way that ACHD typically uses these recommendations in each
of these categories, intersections versus roadways, is they will take the first five priority
requests and they will allocate a certain number of points to those based on where they
fall within the city's -- the city's broader list of requests.
De Weerd: Matt, number seven, I think, Linder, Ten Mile to Ustick. Linder and Ten Mile
are parallel to each other. So, is that maybe Cheny Lane to Ustick?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Member of the Council, that's a good catch.
I'm going to have to dive back into my notes and the list. That was a typo on my part
somewhere in the process here and I'd have to dive back in to figure out exactly what I
did there.
De Weerd: Okay.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 83 of 96
Ellsworth: But, again, what ACHD primarily looks at with these are the top five roadway
and the top five intersection requests and that's how the city's feedback is, then,
integrated into ACHD's priority system. So, they are the top ten roadways. We can
revisit these in just a minute, but moving forward here, the intersection priorities that the
group identified -- and this is -- the reason that I identified those side boards that ACHD
put on this discussion earlier in the process, because there were several other
intersection projects that the city included in last year's list, in particular Ten Mile and
Ustick, for example, but, like I mentioned, that's included in the Ten Mile, Cheny to
Ustick project. So, based on their direction that would have been extracted. The other
project that was on last year's list that I didn't feel was relevant to include this year is the
relocation of the signals from Main and Idaho to Main and Broadway. That -- the project
that comes from a different funding pool that ACHD indicates will be up and running by
the time City Hall opens. So, it didn't seem appropriate to include in this year's list.
However, understanding that ACRD will take a look at the top five roadway requests, I
was going to recommend that City Council include an additional roadway as a priority.
It falls into the way that they are divvying up points and I didn't want to see the city get
short changed by limiting the number of projects that they submit to ACHD. So, several
other intersection priorities that the group discussed included Locust Grove and Victory,
Ten Mile and Victory, and, then, the last two there along Highway 20-26. Those would
be combination state slash ACHD projects. One of the other sort of qualitative
comments that the task force asked that I bring forward to you is the possibility in
certain instances, depending on how the broader ACHD five year work plan is coming
together, it's the possibility of looking into temporary signals at some of these higher
priority intersections that maybe don't fall within the five year work plari at this time.
That would divert funds from other capital projects, but as in the case of Meridian -
Ustick, it may provide some temporary relief in the interim. It may also be an
opportunity to improve the function along certain corridors, rather than having piecemeal
projects that are only helping little bits in segments at a time, which is another one of
those qualitative comments that the group ask -- recommends that the Council include
in sort of a narrative that goes over to ACHD. So, those are a couple issues that I also
wanted to bring to your attention there. Moving on to state projects. Here they are in
front of you and another suggestion that ACRD had -- and for consistency purposes we
carried it over to the ITD projects as well, it's, basically, until the concrete is poured,
keep projects on the list. In the past if a project was slated on ACHD's calendar for the
next year of construction, the logic has been the funds are there, the project is a go, so
we don't need to include that in our priorities. Due to the funding situation that ACRD
currently faces, they want, again, absolute clarity from the city about what their priorities
are. So, they recommended that until construction is underway tell us what your
priorities are. So, again, it's a slightly different circumstance with Ten Mile interchange,
I realize, but for consistency between the two, that's why that's still there. So, we can
approach this one of two ways. We can take a look specifically at each of these three
sub groups, that might be the easiest way to break this down, or we could try to tackle
the broader list here and I would tum it over to Council for questions and for your input
and direction on this.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 84 of 96
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: What's the deadline?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Madam Mayor, ACHD has requested
city feedback and a finalized list on September 30th. So, what I was hoping for is based
on the direction from -- from Council this evening to prepare in letter format a final
prioritized list from the city for Council's consideration at either a future Consent Agenda
or if it warrants additional discussion, then, I can work with the clerk to identify a time
that might work between now and, then, to bring this back to you.
Rountree: If nobody has a preference, if you'd go back to your top ten list, there is a
comment or two I'd like to make. Number ten, Ten Mile, Ustick to McMillan, so you start
hour-glassing Ten Mile away from the improvements. I would say my number ten on
Ten Mile would be from Cherry to Ustick. There is one I'd add, though. It's not
necessarily all Meridian and I guess it's a question for Gary, but Franklin from -- what is
it, Five Mile? Five Mile to Meadow Lake, is that programmed?
Inselman: President, Council Members, Franklin Road, Touchmark, Five Mile is
programmed, but it's a federal aid project and we are having difficulties with federal aid
funding and we are currently looking at ways to split some of those federal aid projects
up, so I don't -- I can't tell you what the timing of that is going to be.
Rountree: It's in the hopper, though. Okay. Now, does this ranking establish priority or
are these just projects one through ten?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Members of the Council, this is the -- the prioritized list is
forwarded by the transportation task force. Now, some of these projects would have
been tied in the raw scores, but the group did not recommend making any -- any single
project tweaks to reflect any particular priority, so I took the list as you see it there and
they didn't recommend any changes to that.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess in light that Ten Mile interchange is -- is getting constructed, to East
3rd and Pine as four and five, it really -- they are a priority, but we need to make sure
that ACRD is supportive of the Ten Mile interchange and necessary local road
improvements as well.
Rountree: I guess my observation would be number nine ought to be number four.
Number 11 that's not up there, Ten Mile, Franklin to -- or Cherry to Ustick ought to be
number five and, then, I don't know what Linder to Ten Mile is meant to be.
Meridian City Council Special Meetlng Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 85 of 96
De Weerd: Well -- and, then, Franklin, Linder to Ten Mile.
Rountree: Yeah. Yeah.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, to make sure I'm
keeping up here, President Rountree's recommendation was to advance Overland from
Linder to Ten Mile up to project priority number four in the roadways category, followed
by Ten Mile, Cheny to Ustick, is number five, which would, then, lead into East 3rd
Street as six, Pine, Meridian to Locust Grove as seven, and Ten Mile, Franklin to
Cherry, as number eight. But with that Iwould -- I would point back to the Mayor's
comment to request clarification as to how -- how Council sees that playing out.
Rountree: And the asterisks on those mean the projects that have been programmed
previously?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Members of the Council, those indicate that there is an
intersection involved in those projects. That was to remain consistent with -- with the
first slide there showing the overall prioritization. I guess by default that would also
mean that they are included in the five year work plan somewhere, otherwise, they
wouldn't have identified the inclusion of those intersections with those projects. So, let's
see --
Rountree: On the list you have presented I would move the Ten Mile, Franklin to
Cherry, above Cheny to Ustick. I -mean build out. But those two in consecutive
priorities. So, it would be, what, five and six. They are -- it would be five and six.
De Weerd: Could it be Ten Mile to -- Ten Mile, Franklin to Cherry, and, then, Franklin,
Linder to Ten Mile. If we are trying to build out.
Rountree: Right. And, then, we have got that --
De Weerd: And, then, Overland, Linder to Ten Mile. And I would suggest changing the
Eagle, Victory to Ridenbaugh, to the number two spot and put the split corridor phase
two in number three. We have got to get that --
Rountree: I don't disagree with that.
Bird: I agree.
Rountree: Because that's one that could easily slip.
De Weerd: Well, not if -- if one retail outlet has anything to say about it. Walgreens
will --
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 86 of 96
Rountree: Walgreens' business plan has changed. They are not building anymore
buildings. And after yesterday they might not be building much business, so --
De Weerd: So, that's even emphasizes the -
Rountree: So, how confused have we gotten the list so far, Matt?
Ellsworth: Well, Mr. President, Members of the Council, Madam Mayor, just to, again,
make sure that we are on the same page, what I have so far is priority number one
downtown split corridor phase one. Priority number two, Eagle, Victory to Ridenbaugh.
Number three, downtown split comdor phase two. Number four, Overland, Linder to
Ten Mile. Number five, Ten Mile, Cherry to Ustick. Number six, Ten Mile from Ustick to
McMillan and I apologize, I missed some of the comments from there on with the list.
De Weerd: Now, that first Ten Mile, Matt, needs to be Franklin to Cherry. Did you
already --did you say that? I thought you said Cherry to Ustick.
Ellsworth: I think so.
Rountree: And, then, the next one needs to be --
De Weerd: Franklin.
Rountree: -- Cherry --
De Weerd: Linder to Ten Mile.
Rountree: -- to Ustick.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, should we go
consecutively, then, with number five, Ten Mile, Franklin to Cherry, followed by number
six, Ten Mile, Cherry to Ustick, into a number seven with Ten Mile, Ustick to McMillan,
or does Ustick to McMillan fall further down on the - on the roadway prioritization?
De Weerd: No. I think you have to get Franklin from Linder to Ten Mile, before you go
Ten Mile, Cherry to Ustick.
Rountree: Given the traffic volumes that have already started to relocate to Ten Mile,
when that interchange opens up, Ten Mile from Chinden to the interchange is going to
be --
Bird: Very busy.
Rountree: -- tough to even get out on. It's getting harder now. So, I don't know that
there is a whole lot of traffic diverting -- or going to be diverting on Franklin.
Meridian City Council Special Meei3ng Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 87 of 96
De Weerd: I sure like having that lighted intersection there.
Rountree: Well, yeah.
Bird: It definitely helps.
Rountree: That helps.
Bird: And, then, you're going to be -- you know, they are putting in that new intersection
at Ten Mile --
De Weerd: Okay. Maybe you can read it back --
Rountree: One more time, Matt, and, then, we will take it and get back to you tomorrow.
Ellsworth: One more time, Mr. President --
Rountree: One more time.
Ellsworth: -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we have priority roadway --
roadway priority number one, downtown split corridor phase one. Number two is Eagle
Victory to Ridenbaugh. Number three is split corridor phase two. Number four we have
Ten Mile from Franklin to Cherry. Number five Franklin, Linder to Ten Mile. Number
six, Ten Mile, Cherry to Ustick. Am I going in the right direction so far?
De Weerd: What was Overland, Linder to Ten Mile? Where is that one?
Rountree: That was four.
De Weerd: That was four?
Ellsworth: Okay. So, then, starting with number four, we have Overland, Linder to Ten
Mile.
De Weerd: Okay.
Ellsworth: Number five, Ten Mile, Franklin to Cheny. Number six, Franklin, Linder to
Ten Mile. And number seven, Ten Mile, Cherry to Ustick.
De Weerd: Uh-huh. And, then, East 3rd and Pine; is that correct?
Hoaglun: And, then, the Linder -- I think that's number seven.
Rountree: We don't know what that is.
Hoaglun: It comes in last, that Linder, Ten Mile to Ustick.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 88 of 96
De Weerd: Well, yeah, Linder probably -- Linder is Franklin to Cheny should be first.
Bird: Which one?
Rountree: The one that doesn't make sense.
De Weerd: That's only -- we need the intersection -- I'm sorry. We need the
intersection of Linder and Pine. If we could get that flowing, you don't really need to
improve Linder, do you?
Rountree: It would work a lot better if they would change the school start times.
De Weerd: Matt, I think you need to just type up what you think we have said so far
and, then, we can have it under a department report next week.
Ellsworth: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President, Madam Mayor, I can do that
on the roadways. Shall we continue on with the intersections and also the --
De Weerd: Yeah.
Ellsworth: Okay. And those are going to get a bit easier. The lists are a bit shorter.
So, on the intersections, priority number one is identified by the group as Linder to
Ustick, followed by number two, Linder and Pine. Number three McMillan and Locust
Grove. And number four is Meridian and Ustick.
De Weerd: That's good.
Ellsworth: And, again, staff would recommend that e that Council also include a fifth
priority, because that will wind up receiving points in ACHD's prioritization criteria. A
couple of possible projects to choose from are listed below under other priority
intersections there.
Rountree: I guess I have a question on the Meridian Ustick intersection. What more do
we want done there before we get a signal someplace else?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council -- and Gary may be
able to speak to this better than me. As I understand it, the interim improvements
included the addition of a center tum lane, but the ultimate configuration would also
include dedicated rights.
De Weerd: Well, I'd almost put Locust Grove and Ustick before I'd do Meridian and
Ustick, because that's so nasty.
Inselman: Gary Inselman. Mr. President, Council, on Meridian Ustick -- ultimately
Ustick will go to five lanes. We will widen that out at the time we would study if we want
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 89 of 96
to put dedicated rights or not. We certainly probably wouldn't get one on Meridian, at
least on the northbound leg, but -- I don't know what more you would do until we
actually widen Ustick Road.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess, you know, I go through that intersection quite a bit and it's really not
too bad, but Locust Grove and Ustick is just a bugaboo. I mean it's nasty.
Zaremba: Locust Grove and Victory?
Rountree: Locust Grove and Ustick.
De Weerd: What did I say?
Rountree: That's what you said. And it is. It's --
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I agree with you wholeheartedly, Mayor, but I'll tell you what, I think until they can
get some more right of way there is not much they can do at that intersection. It's all
signalized and the only place we got is in front of Dr. Johnson's place that is --
De Weerd: Yeah. And that is -- that's nasty.
Bird: I know. It's very, very nasty, but
Hoaglun: Mr. President?
Bird: I don't know what you can do.
Hoaglun: It seemed to work better when they had the right tum, but they moved that
over. When you had the free right going down south on Locust Grove, but because of
people swinging too far I guess they made that change and I noticed the change,
because that's the way I travel to work every day and when they made that change it
definitely backed things up quite a bit, so -- but that's -- because of that they said that
was too dangerous and Dr. Johnson's place there, it does make it tough to do anything
right now.
Bird: And if the economy changes, he's got a -- you know, he's got a nice deal going in
there, so maybe it goes away and we get it re-fixed, but --
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 90 of 96
De Weerd: Articulate, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Oh, I was just talking to myself. Mr. President, I think Locust Grove and Victory is
a -- is a very priority to me. Not one of the top three, but I think it -- or four, but it could
definitely be a five. That's pretty traveled and, you know, being just a four way stop you
really back -- you back up a lot of -- a lot of area there and it's -- now that we got the
Locust Grove overpass and it's being used more that way, it's -- it's -- it's about one --
it's about one step under Eagle and Victory, in my book.
De Weerd: Yeah. Those next two are good.
Rountree: I would -- I would say -- we have no idea when Ten Mile is going to be
improved, but Ten Mile and Ustick real soon is going to be real bad and if we don't have
that improvement done until we do the improvement on Ten Mile, which could be
multiple years away, we are going to need something done there. So, I think we
probably ought to think about looking at that one, putting on --sliding that in the list.
Ellsworth: And, Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that Ten Mile
Ustick intersection is currently programmed as a component of the Ten Mile from
Cherry to Ustick roadway project, programmed for construction in 2013. It would be a
departure from the direction that staff gave us, but we could certainly include that in the
intersection priorities here, if Council feels it's that high of a priority.
Rountree: Well, my concern is that 2013 is a couple three years past when the
interchange opens up and it's probably three or four years generous in timing. I mean it
could be -- it could be out there pushing 2020.
Hoaglun: Mr. President, if I could speak to that, since that's my neck of the woods
where I live. You know, when that Ten Mile interchange opens, all those people who
come from Emmett and anywhere west, that's their first opportunity to get on the
freeway from Star and Gem county and everything else. They are going be headed
down that Ten Mile Road until -- and when, someday, that Highway 16, et cetera, opens
up and -- that's just going to be one big raceway coming down there to that first Ten
Mile interchange and all those -- all those areas are going to have to be improved. And
much sooner than 2013. My goodness.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I wholeheartedly agree. Everyone but Ten Mile and Ustick will have signalized
from the interchange and I don't think we -- I don't think we realize or can project the
use Ten Mile is going to get once that interchange is put in. I mean I think we are going
to be baffled, period. And so I'm like Councilman Rountree, Ithink -- I think that should
be a very high priority for getting -- thanks to contractors, developers, we are getting
McMillan and Ten Mile taken care of, now we need -- we have got Cheny Lane and Ten
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 91 of 96
Mile signalized. We have got Franklin and Ten Mile signalized. Now we got to get
Ustick and Ten Mile signalized. And I think that's got to be a priority.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Members of-the Council, Madam Mayor and Councilman Bird,
you bring up an excellent point and along similar logic there I would also point out that
ACHD's programmed the construction of a roundabout at Amity and Ten Mile in I
believe 2011. So, it will fall in there right around the same time as the construction of
the interchange. Ten Mile and Victory currently is not programmed with the five year
work plan. So, I just thought I'd throw that out there as well.
De Weerd: Where is the roundabout?
Ellsworth: Ten Mile and Amity.
De Weerd: So, that will go in before Victory?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, that's the way it is currently programmed. And
another -- if you look at the traffic numbers there, the numbers are in favor of Amity
Road and I think part of the reason for that is that's a main corridor going into downtown
Nampa, so a lot of folks are either going there continuing east, for example, in the a.m.
and vice-versa in the p.m. Not everybody there is currently heading north into a onto I-
84 until you hit Meridian, obviously. That circumstance, of course, will change with the
construction of the interchange, so that's exactly why I pointed it out. It could remain a
two way stop with -- with a stop occurring on Victory, rather than on Ten Mile, but folks
trying to continue east-west on Victory would likely be waiting for awhile if that were the
case.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess I would like to see the Ten Mile and Ustick as number four and
number five -- or other priority intersections -- number one be Locust Grove -- no.
Yeah. Number one would be Locust Grove and Ustick. Number two would be Locust
Grove and Victory. And number three would be Ten Mile and Victory. And number four
would be whatever I just missed. Locust Grove and Victory. Did I already say that?
Meridian Ustick would be number four.
Ellsworth: Okay. Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, then, start to
finish, the intersection priorities that you just identified are Linder and Ustick. Number
two Linder and Pine. Number three, McMillan Locust Grove. Number four, Ustick Ten
Mile. Number five, Locust Grove and Ustick. Number six, Locus Grove Victory.
Number seven, Ten Mile Victory. And number eight, Meridian Ustick.
De Weerd: Yes. When you see it next week you may --
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 92 of 96
Rountree: We will see that next week with the list. Okay.
Bird: We will probably change it.
De Weerd: It helps when you see it.
Ellsworth: Okay. And, then, moving onto the state projects here. Project priority
number one as forwarded by the task force is Ten Mile interchange. Number two is
Meridian interchange rebuild. Number three is the Linder Road overpass. Number four
is widen Chinden. Number five State Highway 16 extension. And number six, Eagle
Road comdor improvements. And, again, the circumstances surrounding this element
of the list is a bit different than the ACHD projects. Mayor and Council are familiar with
ITD's current funding situation. The likelihood of any of these projects, other than the
Ten Mile interchange being constructed in the immediately foreseeable future without a
large infusion of cash is somewhat unlikely, but, again, remaining consistent with past
years and letting them know what the city's priorities are, we wanted to get this in front
of you as well.
De Weerd: Mr. President?
Rountree: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess, Matt, in the written comment in the letter, I think it's important to
note on the Meridian interchange rebuild, if additional monies are available for projects
that are not ready to build, that that should be a priority. And I don't know how you word
that. I'm sure you do. Because I believe at our COMPASS meeting we heard of some
projects in the north that are not necessarily going to be built on schedule and there is a
possibility those monies can go to another project that's ready and they are looking at
the Treasure Valley. I'd much rather see that done on the unfunded rebuild -- I think
Orchard -- is Orchard already funded, but Vista is not or is it vice-versa?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, I'd have to go back into the GARVEE projects
to --
De .Weerd: Well, I'd like to see that Meridian is the first interchange rebuild that they
would consider.
Ellsworth: That they would consider adding?
De Weerd: Uh-huh. If there was additional monies found. But I mean those are all
number one.
Ellsworth: Well, Mr. President, Members of the Council, Madam Mayor, if everybody is
happy with the list that's in front of you, then, I can bring that back, as well as with the
other two categories as a department report next week and we can get additional
thoughts and comments at that time.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 93 of 96
Rountree: Very good.
Ellsworth: Thank you.
Item 6: CITY ORDINANCE/POLICY REVIEW
A. No Smoking Policy
Rountree: Thank you, Matt. Last item on the agenda, the no smoking policy.
Nary: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I know it's late, so I will
just try to keep this short. We have had the discussion for awhile with the directors and
the Mayor regarding a no smoking policy for the City Hall campus. As part of the LEED
certification for the building it does require that we prohibit smoking away from all
entryways of the building, as well as any operable windows. I don't know that there are
any operable windows in the building. But, anyway, it does require that the discussion
and recommendation from the directors in this policy that is in your packet is to prohibit
smoking in not only around the building in the doorways, entryways, off of the windows,
but the entire campus of the City Hall, as well as Chief Lavey was also in support of
making no smoking around the entire campus of the Meridian Police Department also
required by policy. And, then, the grounds and amphitheater around the City Hall as
well be no smoking and, additionally, all city vehicles, which is currently the state. The
only area of city property that is allowed for smoking currently; then, would be park
properties and the director, Mr. Siddoway, has requested us to evaluate and bring back
at a different time, maybe having certain areas at certain times by designation of the
director, to be no smoking. He's received a number of complaints from citizens
attending movie night that they are trying to enjoy the movie and there is people
interspersed in that crowd and there is fairly large numbers of people smoking in the
middle of the -- of the movie view area and so they may want to section areas off for
people to smoke in portions of that area, but not necessarily right in the middle of the
crowd, but they haven't flushed all that out, but he wanted to just be sure this didn't
prohibit smoking in the parks and it does not, it just prohibits on city buildings and their
facilities and specifically the campus of the police and the City Hall. If you have
questions I hopefully can answer them. If you're in agreement with this policy or you
have other suggestions you want us to consider, we have a directors meeting tomorrow,
I can certainly bring it to their attention.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Bill, the only thing I -- the only question I had is don't we need to list the
wastewater and water facilities campus also as being nonsmoking? Being an ex -- an
ex-smoker I -- I certainly -- I do, I feel for the people that -- that Ihad -- that I put through
misery by smoking around and so I -- but I thought we was going to limit all -- all of our
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 94 of 96
campuses. I don't know why you would not keep wastewater and water from not
smoking, too.
Nary: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, Mr. Bird, Members of the Council, we could
certainly include that. I think the reason we didn't is the wastewater plant it would a this
would prohibit the entryways and the doorways of those buildings. Whether you want to
make the entire grounds of the wastewater plant, that's certainly an option. I don't -- I
don't have a preference. I understand what you're saying. Same thing with the water
department. This prohibits it in the entryways and doorways. The water department, as
you all know, is right next to a city park. So, certainly any employees can walk right
next to the park, which is 30 feet away and have a cigarette there. So, we could
certainly include that if you wish. I don't have a preference. I'm not sure smoking is the
most foul thing going on at the wastewater plant, but that's certainly something -- if
you'd like, we can certainly add that. I can bring that up to the directors in the morning.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I don't -- and you have got agood -- you have a good point there on that, but
what's the difference of their campus against City Hall plaza? I think we also have to
look farther down. I like your ordinance, don't get me wrong, I don't want to change it,
but I think we got to also look down and do what companies have done is build outside
in fresh air -- build some kind of a little smoking snack for the -- for the employees that
do smoke. So, I definitely see both, but I like the ordinance, I just thought we -- and you
have probably got a good point, maybe we don't need the campuses of the -- of
wastewater and water shut down, just the buildings. So, I just say bring it forward and
let's get it going.
Rountree: Further comments? I would second Councilman Bird's question about why
we are discriminating or not. It seems to me we treat all our campuses the same or o I
mean you start slicing and dicing and, then, you have enforcement issues and people in
water coming to City Hall forget. Well, we could smoke over there and now we can't
smoke in the parking there and et cetera, et cetera. The other thing that I would like to
see -- and I don't know if this is the right spot, either here or in the wellness packages,
that I think if we are going to do this and it affects mostly our employees, certainly the
general public, but our employees that are there during the working hours, we need
some kind of a cessation program that is available to the employees and that they can
take advantage of and, you know, if they are successful and quit smoking, then, it's paid
for and if it's not successful and they continue to smoke, then, it's on their dime kind of
an approach..
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, we have already had those conversations
with the Y. The Y is willing to come and put those types of courses on for us, so -- for
minimal to very -- very minimal cost to almost no cost for the employee. So, we did --
we did anticipate that as part of it. Again, if you want me to leave it the way it is,
Meridian City Council Special Meetlng Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 95 of 96
because just -- I guess for discussion purposes, if we want to include the campuses of
water and wastewater, then, we would also want to include -- we are including all fire
stations -- we are talking about well sites -- I mean I don't know it's a user problem, but
certainly the entryways of all the buildings I think are the most critical points. It doesn't
matter which buildings they are, we don't really want to have people smoking where
other people are entering or exiting the buildings. But we thought at least it was
probably the best to start right now with those two larger campuses of ours and we can
certainly bring back more if we think that's -- that's the response we get.
Rountree: I just see once we start this it's going to cascade into other things.
Nary: Sure.
Rountree: Other comments?
Hoaglun: Mr. President, I just agree with what's been said here. It's -- having worked
with the American Cancer Society for a number of years and the toll of smoking and
insurance and medical care and different things, it's something that long term it will
benefit everybody.
Rountree: So, I guess the direction is it bring it forward, Bill, after you have a discussion
with the directors. If you get a lot of push back I'd like to hear that as well in terms of
how closed campuses would be or wouldn't be.
Nary: Okay. I can do that.
Rountree: All right. That includes our agenda. I need one more motion.
Bird: I move we adjourn.
Hoaglun: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor? Unanimous.
Motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:47 P.M.
(AUDIO~RDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) ,9~
~~~~~
TAMMY DEW RD, MAYOR DATE APPROVED
Meridian City Council Special Meeting Workshop
September 16, 2008
Page 96 of 96
ATTEST: ~«pd'UV~``"- ~,,,,,,,,~,,,,0, ~',
JAYCE L. HOLMAN, CITY ~ I~f '' ,,
r~
a
s~~
~~
.9 ~ ~~