HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 10-06 Joint ACHDMeridian City Council Joint Meeting October 6, 2008
"'
t(~
i
I
The Meridian City Council special /joint meeting was called to order at 12:00
P.M. on Monday, October 6, 2008 by Mayor Tammy de Weerd at the ACHD
Auditorium, Garden City, Idaho.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, David Zaremba, Brad Hoaglun,
Charlie Rountree.
Members Absent: Keith Bird.
ACHD Members Present: Carol McKee, David Bivens, Rebecca Arnold, Sheny
Huber.
ACHD Members Absent: John Franden.
McKee: Ladies and Gentlemen we are going to start our joint meeting with the
City of Meridian and the ACHD. These meetings typically are a work meeting for
the City of Meridian and for the ACHD and today the only comments I am going
to be taking from the audience are from the City of Meridian and the ACHD staff.
With that we are going to turn it over to Adam. Thank you very much and we are
going to talk about the split corridor.
Item 1. Discussion -Split Corridor Phase 2:
Zaragoza: Good afternoon, Madame President, Commissioners, Madame Mayor
and Council Members. Adam Zaragoza, Project Manager for ACHD. I am going
to cover the design for a split corridor as well as some information that we got
from the public open house. Just kind of an overview of where we are at.
Preliminary design is scheduled to be completed this winter (inaudible) traffic
studies - we have another public involvement meeting coming up the first of the
year. All of our environmental reports will be in. The (inaudible) design will be
complete next summer, 2009. We will have the roadway cross section update
construction (inaudible) and the right of way plans. Right of way we will go into
FY2010 and 2011 and construction is still on schedule for the fall. The Main and
Fairview intersection - we received a letter from Madame Mayor back in April of
this year looked at those alignments and this is the current configuration that we
are going to prefer at this point. With this intersection configuration, we leave
access for businesses open to the Cheny Lane Plaza and we minimize the right
of way costs. The west bound left turn on Main Street is still here. The west
bound vehicles still cuing at Main Street from Meridian Road during the peak
hour and the operation of the intersection itself still operates like it is currently
configured. However, in 2020 to 2025 somewhere in there with the peak hour
analysis with the Fairview Avenue, assuming the straight line increase in
vehicles, the intersection operates at level service D. The east bound Fairview
Avenue operates at level service F; the same for west bound and we still have
;~ "~ ~
~. _~ ~ : `~
4g iF' `•~'' .'i'~i "~FF <% a Z°~:: ~ ~yy j;: ~: d
,:
;;,
~!
i
k'
~ ''.
a
i
''~i
''~~
F
E i
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 2 of 19
(inaudible) problems between the intersections. Again this is the preferred
alignment for 2012 when the intersection gets constructed. However, we do
need at this point 2020 or 2025 these types of scenarios here; we will need a
long term solution to these and I am going to go through those right now. So,
scenario A that we looked at we removed the signal at Main Street to leave a
right in, right out at Cherry Lane Plaza. This assumes that full signal is installed
at 3~d Street and Fairview, intersection operates at level service B. North bound
Main, level service C and maintain the access to the plaza there for 2035. This
includes the additional left tum lane at west bound Fairview approaching
Meridian Road. So we have two lefts as we approach Meridian Road. This was
scenario A traffic control. Scenario B was to close the Cherry Lane Plaza
approach. This is the left in, left out and right in, right out access at Main Street;
assumes no signal at 3~d Street intersection. The intersection operates at level
service C in 2035 and it leaves the full access on Main Street to Fairview. For
scenario C, this restricts the left toms and eliminates through movement from
Main Street into the Cheny Lane Plaza. If you see and follow the cursor, it is this
movement here, straight across. Cheny Lane Plaza comes right in, right out and
Main Street comes left lane west bound from Fairview traffic, which is this tum
movement right here. Main Street's right in, right out, 3~d Street has assumes has
a full operational signal and it operates at level service B for 2035. Scenario D
removes the Cherry Lane Plaza entrance. Main Street comes left in for west
bound Fairview traffic, which is this lane right here and right in, right out access
at Main Street. This assumes 3~d Street has full signal operation and again
operates at level service B for 2035. Before I proceed on, is there any questions
in regards to any of the scenarios for the current preferred interim solutions for
2012.
De Weerd: Madame Chair, just to kind of clarify. The letter that we wrote on this
was presented to Council and the discussion was that we maintain our right in,
right out on Main Street and that was the point of our letter to make sure that
whichever option is selected that that left out maintained, not the Lake on Cherry
Lane Plaza, but that we would have a left out and a right in. Is that correct,
Council?
Zaragoza: Madame Chair, Madame Mayor we received that letter - if again we
can go back to the preferred alignment for the interim solution for 2012 it does
maintain what you requested, however, when we get to the point where the
intersection starts to fail in 2020, these four scenarios, we will have to retook at
those when that happens.
De Weerd: Madame Chair, we would like you to look at that in the design and in
the design on Fairview and even as it aligns with 3~d Street to see that all of those
can function and that we want to see the interim as long term.
Zaragoza: Madame President, Madame Mayor, just so I am clear and I just want
to reiterate it is the interim that you want that to be the long term solution --?
I
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 3 of 19
De Weerd: That as long as you have the right and left tum lane off of Main
Street.
McKee: Is there any other comments? Okay.
Zaragoza: Now just a high level of where we are at right now with the cross over
concept. As you look at the screen here on the left side of the screen is Franklin
Road and on the right side of the screen is the railroad tracks and this is the
current proposed alignment for cross over. You have two lanes of traffic going
north bound through the cross over and three lanes of traffic going south bound.
Again, this is for the Downtown Meridian Transportation Management Plan that
was adopted in 2005 as sponsored by the city and it was to revitalize the center
community of (inaudible) center by the major commercial hub of the Treasure
Valley. On September 11 ~' of this year, we had an open house with a 127
attendees, comment period ended September 24th. That comment period being
a total of 35 comments via forms at the open house or via email. The most
common concerns I have listed here of the ratio percentage of the 35 comments
or excuse me 35 comments was the business impacts on Main Street and that is
51 percent of the 35. I considered one way couplet verses the cross over that
was 40 percent. There was concern of the five lane traffic near the residences
and the school at 31 percent. Pedestrian features was called out for at 20
percent and a little kudos here for our staff as we report for public involvement at
11 percent. I had to throw that in there. We received the petition - unofFcial
account -where we sit at right now is 755 signatures and the signatures for the
one way couplet verses the cross over.
McKee: Any comments? Okay, Matt come on up.
Ellsworth: Madame President, Madame Mayor, Council and Commissioners,
ACHD's staff gave our staff a heads up about this petition and when they
received it. Immediately following that the public .information meeting on
September 11th, so I just wanted to take a second to provide staffs preliminary
responses to that petition and brush up on a couple of high points from the
DNTMP process back in 2004 and 2005. One point that I just wanted to
underscore here briefly and this is in reading an excerpt from the DNTMP and
that is the universal (inaudible) for this process based on the history; the history
surrounding it was going to be tough from the outset and that is something that is
addressed specifically in the DNTMP. One of the ways they term this is there is
one transportation improvement priority in Meridian that has got the unanimous
support and that is that the current system must be changed. Drop planning
process (inaudible--) adequately. Nearly a decade however, the community has
debated what system improvements would be appropriate. The debate has been
heavy and often emotional. All parties also appear to agree on one other issue -
(inaudible) systematic changes adopted and some people will be unhappy. So
that to me was a fairly strong acknowledgement in the introduction in the DNTMP
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 4 of 19
that unlike other planning processes where ideally you are shooting for
consensus across the board, the consultants and the project team that was
involved in this realized that that wasn't necessarily an option. So what they did
was take a step back and identify the different priorities that we factored in to
making this decision to go out and move forward. Again, the DNTMP itself does
a great job documenting what the decision making process was. It was
(inaudible) in part by a steering team with both the City of Meridian and ACHD
staff (inaudible), the business community, the Chambers and others. There was
a public involvement process including meetings that occurred in September
2004, November 2004 and January 2005 and that was all pre hearing public
information meetings. Again, both ACHD and the city engaged in the public
hearing process when they were considering adoption of the plan, which again,
ACRD and the city both end up doing a summary in the fall of 2005. At that point
and staff looking at the history of this that is when the project really turned the
comer between having a preferred alignment and having an alignment. At this
point in the process, ACHD's public information meeting at least the way I
understood the process was to solicit feedback on the design for phase 2 of the
split corridor project, not to reopen the DNTMP and to rehash the entire decision
making process. So, since the preferred alignment was identified and adopted
by these private sectors and made certain investment decisions in downtown
Meridian that hinge on that preferred alignment, staff feels that at this point in the
process that it's a bit late in the game to reopen the entire discussion with the
understanding that the various sides of this debate might end up going around
and around and around and stalling the progress indefinitely. The decision has
been made and staff's recommendation is that the bodies act accordingly with
the decisions that have been made. So, I suppose I would stand for any
questions at this time.
McKee: Any questions or comments?
Zaremba: I would have a comment if it is appropriate.
McKee: Absolutely.
Zaremba: I was a member of the committee and we spent as you can tell many,
many hours anguishing over what to do with downtown Meridian. The one way
couplet was one of the options that was considered very seriously. It was costed
out along with a couple other options and before any decisions were made there
was a thorough comparison made. We started out with something like 35
possible options to do in the downtown area and narrowed it down to three or
four that we were willing to put money into and resolving whether they were a
good idea and the one way couplet remained one of those that we did do the
study on. The plus for the one way couplet is that it moves a lot of traffic. That,
however, was not Meridian's goal for Main Street. Our goal was to get the
through traffic off of Main Street so that we have destination traffic and one of the
things that came out in the study in the configuration like our downtown and the
r j• I ,.
E ~ - ~ : v t s,; . t
!' rr
a
1~
Y
~ 4 ~
'~
' ~ .T. y
>
~; F
~
,k ~ :
f
i
i
F
!
l ~
i,
~ .
N'
~
, f 's ~ ~ .,
~~ ~
' ,a ~ g! i ¢
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 5 of 19
consultant had worked with many similar downtowns before working with ours;
you want to target about 8,000 vehicles that want to be there, not 20,000 vehicles
that want to be passing through and have no intention of being customers in the
first place. The problem when you get to 20,000 or 25,000 vehicles passing
through is that it scares those of us that would be customers away. So, it isn't
that you still have 8,000 potential customers and all of this extra traffic, you end
up only having thru traffic and their target was that we should aim for having
about 8,000 vehicles. 12,000 would still be okay, but when you get over that you
are starting to have the thru traffic again. The issue was what do you do with it If
you did the one way couplet? What ended up being the great expense with the
one way couplet is how to solve it at the north end. It didn't meet the criteria of
making downtown a pedestrian friendly place, but it also had the added problem
of how do you uncouple it when you get to the north end? And the choices were
to take out the Albertson's and have traffic continue beyond Fairview and take
out the Albertson's or to have the cross over be just south of Fairview, which
would mean taking out probably the five or six businesses that are just south of
Fairview in order to make the cross over to Meridian. What became known as
the split corridor -move that cross over down below the railroad tracks that
ended up solving almost all of the criteria that the committee had put together.
Actually as 1 recall it ended up being cheaper than the one way couplet. But, it
did solve the problem of not having all the thru traffic being focused on Main
Street so that we could, some day meet our vision of having downtown being a
pedestrian friendly welcoming place that people actually went to as a destination
as opposed to just through. Like I say that is summarizing hours and hours of
work, but that was how we got to where we were and that was the
recommendation that was made to the public hearings in Meridian and thereafter
passing onto ACHD. Again, there was participation by a lot of people. ACHD
was part of it, Meridian was part of it and one of the drawbacks is, I suppose,
there is no perfect solution but we picked what we thought was the best solution
and the public has supported that.
McKee: Okay. Is there any other comments or questions? No? Well, thank you
both. I appreciate it.
Item 2. Discussion - Ustick / Linder Intersection Project:
McKee: Lisa, are you ready?
Applebee: I have hand outs here and displays that I am going to show you.
De Weerd: Madame Chair, my manners have been very poor. I would like to
introduce you to our new Council Member, Brad Hoaglun. He officially joined us
in September; the second week in September and he is a long time Meridian
resident and he has had a lot of various experience that he is bringing to the
Council and we are just thrilled to have him here.
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 6 of 19
McKee: Welcome, Brad and we are song we didn't - we are already treating you
like you are just one of the group.
Applebee: Thank you Madame President, Madame Mayor, Commissioners and
Council Members. I am Lisa Applebee, Project Manager (inaudible). I come to
you today with findings of our evaluation of interim pedestrian facilities. We met
out in the field and took a look at a couple of different options as far as the
interim pedestrian facilities. Right here we are looking at the (inaudible) at the
north end of the project limits, at the sidewalk from the street where we would
connect with an asphalt pathway and travel south along the length of Linder to
the intersection. Here we have a break. I don't see a particular option and that is
where that break signifies permanent facilities; facilities to the north are the
asphalt pathway and the facilities from the south would be temporary and would
be removed after construction. This particular option is a confirmation of a
consultant contractor and ACRD forces. So, we continue with the asphalt
pathway crossing pedestrians at the intersections and then move them onto the
west side of the roadway and then crossing the pedestrian bridge at Five Mile.
Creek, connecting again with the existing sidewalk along Turtle Creek
Subdivision. So, this was one option. Now we will look at the other drawing.
This option was all contractor, so they would do all of the work. This would take
a little bit more time we would have to get contract up when it is ready
(inaudible). But, in this case we would have more permits (inaudible) would
connect at the school sidewalk, bring the asphalt pathway south, which was part
of the original plan and construct concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk up to the
intersection where we would use asphalt again to connect over to the west side,
constructing concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk where we can for the facilities
and then again a temporary asphalt connection to the pedestrian bridge and
(inaudible). So these were the two options that we looked at. Because we were
not able to take the project to construction this fall, we will have to wait until next
summer. Both of these options present some challenges as far as time. The first
option construction by ACHD forces and a combination of a contractor can go out
sooner and we could potentially have a bridge in place by January and asphalt
pathways. The other option, however, will take longer because of the (inaudible)
process. So, we can actually be able to construct that pathway and get that
bridge into place until potentially March, April or May -temperature depended on
the asphalt pathway. So the usefulness of the two options is approximately nine
months to twelve months. Nine months for the contractor constructed option
verses the twelve months if we can get our forces out for combination contracted
pathway. I presented a table of costs associated with the two options. Option
one, again the combination of ACHD forces with the contractor turned out to be
$125,000. But, $25,000 of that (inaudible) facilities could remain in place when
we come out for the full intersection build out. So, that leaves about $120,000 on
recoverable costs that we could put out in interim facilities. Again, option one is
the option that would be used for approximately twelve months. Option two -
contractor constructed, a little higher price of $170,000, but more of the facilities
would be permanent in this case (inaudible). Unrecoverable costs of $115,000.
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 7 of 19
Option three is to wait, build the full intersection next summer and fall and we
would not have any of the interim construction costs. At our commission meeting
when we presented it to the commissioners, they suggested they were leaning
toward option three and I think that is where they would like to start the
discussion.
McKee: Any questions for Lisa?
Huber: There was one thing - I know a question that we asked - we did a count
of the pedestrian use. Could you give us that, please?
Applebee: Yes. We did a count at peak school hours. So first a.m. peak was
6:50 to 7:55 a.m. We have full pedestrians traveling west to north. (Inaudible).
In the afternoon, the peak was 2:30 to 3:40 for a total of eight pedestrians in
place. One pedestrian was west to east. One bike north to south, four peds
north to south and two pedestrians north to west and then after football practice
we had five total pedestrians and bikes and one pedestrian north south, one
north west, one bike east to west, one west to south and one pedestrian south to
north. So there is not a significant (inaudible) traffic from our head counts,
including south north on there.
Zaremba: Madame President, I would factor into that that I believe the School
District is doing short distance bussing just so that pedestrians are not required
to walk across this intersection. That is a tremendous expense for the School
District for a half a mile a trip that they normally wouldn't do if the intersection
were safe for pedestrians and you know it isn't costing the City of Meridian, but it
is definitely costing the School District.
McKee: Right. We have talked about safety bussing and do you guys know how
many children are safety bussed because of this situation?
Zaremba: I don't know the answer to that.
Amold: To do a cost analysis we need to know that because are they spending
more than $115,000 to buss on Diesel? My guess is no, but I mean we need to
know that.
McKee: But we still have the issue of taking care of children after sporting events
which is going on all over the county. We (inaudible) safety bussing for those
kids.
De Weerd: Madame Chair. I guess one of the goals is to try and reduce the
number of trips on the roads. It is a real congested intersection with a large
volume of traffic that travels through that and I would imagine that a certain
percentage of that is due to parents driving their kids short distances because
kids refuse to ride the bus and that sort of thing. Also, it is the after school
-~
~~~.~
=i
it
~a
i~
~[
(f~
I.3~
i']
Yj
.;. i : .... ~:4w~
S ~w ~ ~~R ~~ ~~, ~ .i ~; +z~ ~ ! ~;
y`= .
~ ~': ~.'
#'. :
'
' ' "
~ s. : ~-' : ~ ~ .`~:.:
s
( {':: ~f
i fir;" ~:~'.` .: : ~; ('
'
~
.
! ~ S } ;
.
A
.
~
.
' ~`q
t
~ ~ ~ K FF
.
~; .
f
r '
f
"T
i
C
i
i
i , -'
i
t
e
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 8 of 19
activities that parents also are in the intersection when it hits its peak hours with
the drive home traffic. So certainly if there are only eight kids that are in that
vicinity and one of them dies what is the price we put on that? Certainly the
school principal -; and I am sorry I put that bluntly, but I didn't know how else to
say it. The school principal is really concerned at that intersection and the safety
of his students and as the city has been and they have appreciated your staff
working to find solutions in the interim. We went out and walked the area and we
had the Core of Engineers and Water Resources and my staff really searching
for an interim solution. Certainly none of us want to see a cost that is
unrecoverable and I believe that the option three also included an attempt to see
if you could bump up the time schedule on the permanent (inaudible).
McKee: Yeah, it did.
De Weerd: And if it is a savings of - or if getting that completed intersection
done in a plus two or three months, I think that the citizens in that area and Will
and I will be talking to one of the homeowner's associations later this month, give
then an update on this, I think they can understand why that investment would
take the consideration of the permanent road fixture over the safety of the
students. But, what does it mean in completion time?
Applebee: Completion time, Madame Mayor, of the interim?
De Weerd: Of the permanent.
Applebee: Right now we are looking at starting the construction in the summer
(inaudible) and that is based on constructing the structures after imgations is in.
However, we are investigating constructing the structures during the summer.
That would be also costly to us because we would have to do some things
moving water around. We are looking into that right now and trying to figure out
if that is a doable scenario.
McKee: Lisa, when will we find out about that scenario because we had talked
about that in the work session about moving it up and I know it is going to cost us
more money, but we are looking at doing this as well, but how long do you think it
is going to be?
Applebee: Design staff is currently working on it right now. I expect to have
something by the end of the week from them. I will meet with the team again and
have to take a look at all of the (inaudible) as well.
McKee: I think that is where I am leaning. I would like to find out what it is going
to cost and what it is going to take to move it up because I think certainly moving
up the whole project makes more sense than putting this together and you know
maybe using it for just a short time. I would like to get the whole thing done.
i , +; ~ ~, a
x ~ = ' ~ ~,
3 ~~ y ,yY ~Ztre ~~ -f ~:
l ~ ~;' ,~ y. ~~ ` `.... Y 1. a ~(
i ;• ,
~t
~
< f~:~ ~
g
.F•
~.. ;^ gA~ !
34 ..
J
i
i
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 9 of 19
Huber: But, didn't we have discussion too and nobody knew about crossing
guards - if the school was and maybe they are not because of the safety
bussing? But that also could potentially be an interim solution if there is a
concern of having appropriately timed - I know junior high kids probably don't like
that and that is primarily who uses that -didn't we decide that that was what the
age group was?
De Weerd: Yes, and the shoulder is so narrow -
McKee: I think that is the problem. There is no place for them to walk to get to
the intersection, so you could have a crossing guard. That is the issue.
De Weerd: And all of the water rights prove a challenge as well.
Zaremba: Madame President, do we have any news from the Army Core of
Engineer that is taking an interest in this intersection?
De Weerd: That is the good news, right? The good news is you can take a
picture of the historical irrigation wall and call it good.
McKee: Well, that is good news, right? We have gotten our Polaroid out there,
right?
Huber: That is critical for even thinking about moving it.
(Speaker unknown): If I may, Madame President, we have (inaudible). We do
have to do (inaudible) wetlands (inaudible) report for the (inaudible) full build out
of the intersection and with these interim projects we don't have to have a
(inaudible) permit. That was part of the purpose of our meeting out there.
McKee: Okay, but we are going forward with the Army Core of Engineers and it
seems like everything is moving along.
De Weerd: Madame Chair, if I could get the information for option three, the cost
of moving the project up and what that would mean in time schedule so that I can
share that with the neighbors and certainly, I would invite anyone of you to join
us, since I will be telling your story.
McKee: Does that sound good? Okay, you need to give us the date of that
meeting and we will make sure that there is somebody from the district there.
(Speaker unknown): Madame President, I plan on attending that meeting, so I
will be there.
McKee: Okay, great. Perfect. With pictures. Pictures are good. Okay, thank
you Lisa.
+t p ~
~ ~ ~ ~ -~ j ~, ~ ~~
x ~ I , ~ ~
f
f ~ _ k
PfS ~ ~ `~ M
{B ~
~ I k !
f
s ~ ~ - ~ 1
•
_
i f ~ ~ .
f ~ ' t I
E 1 ~
~
~ F 1
t
~~,€ I
' ~ j ~ ' ~ f I ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ `
~~i '
i
~ - ~
I
' f ~;~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ .~i ~ E
'~ h - ~ ~ ~ 1 r ~
.~ ..
;. ~
`
~~ ~:! I
E
j ( I ~
~
~
I' .
~ i ~
i f
~ ~E, ~ ~
~ ,
~I 4
~
!
~ $
~
'f
~
t
fl
~~
`
~ ,
s E
r
.i
~` ~ r ~~~ ~ ~ x i r;
t ~ {17
t. r ~
a t t
~ i . f
f
; F
{'
, ~ ~
~ i
~ I
'
111
'. _',., ;. ~ i `' ~ S ~ i~ '. r )1) ~ ~
~ ~ ~ . ~... ~ ( I. ~ ~ ~j
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 10 of 19
Item 3. Update on E. 3`d Street Alignment Study:
Ellsworth: Madame President, to provide a little bit of background information
(inaudible) and I will tell a story about where we are in the process. For the past
several months the city and Meridian Development Corporation have worked with
ACHD on an alignment for future accession for E. 3~d Street and that was one of
the recommendations that came out of the Downtown Master Transportation
Plan in 2005. Part of the purpose of extending E. 3`~ Street is to provide further
relief for Main Street through downtown. So the project team in working through
this process came up with a recommended alignment and that was based on
stakeholder and public involvement, (inaudible) costs, estimated construction
costs and some studies and so on and so forth and what we came up with is the
E. 3~d Street to 3~d Street alignment and that is extension option two, the yellow
line that is up on the board in front of you there as based on all factors
considered, the recommended alignment for this future roadway accession.
ACHD staff presented this study and its findings to the Commission in August of
this year and requested that ACHD Commission get us feedback on the
alignment that was recommended and other feedback to bring back to the city for
other deliberations. What the Commission did at that time was somewhat of
conditions for that second extension option two and they acknowledged that
based on all factors considered by the project team that extension option two is
the one that makes most sense. There is some concern regarding securing right
of way for that alignment. Those familiar with the area know that there is a four
plex that is currently under construction in that alignment and ACHD Commission
indicated which was consistent with staff's involvement throughout this process
that at the time Ada County Highway District does not have the intention to
contribute monetarily for the design right of way for the construction of this
roadway alignment so what they requested from the city, the culmination of that
conversation was for some acknowledgment from the city that the city and MDC
would secure the necessary right of way for this future roadway extension and
again their support of that 3`~ Street alignment was conditioned on that. So we
brought the issue back before City Council. A couple of weeks later City Council
acknowledged their appreciation to the Commission first of all for considering this
issue and for providing feedback through this process, but they also indicated
that as a non (inaudible) entity that they were somewhat reluctant at this time to
contribute or to set the funding aside to secure that right of way at this time as
well. One possible option that they (inaudible) looking forward in order to
(inaudible) more public private partnership opportunities is to examine the
possibility of classifying this future extension as minor arterial roadway, which
again may change what impact fees it would be eligible for and so forth. I sat in
on with ACHD staff last week and discussed that possibility in greater detail and
Gary, I imagine could answer any specific questions that you may have.
Ultimately, the designation as a minor arterial is step one in that process. Steps
that we would have to follow in order to make that roadway project impact fee
eligible include getting it into the capital improvements plan and then other
Meridian City Council. Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 11 of 19
measures from there that -based on all things considered and the funding
situation there may be some additional barriers that could present themselves
down the road and again Gary is here and I imagine he can answer the specific
questions you may have. He is a lot more familiar with the CIP than I am, but
with that I suppose I just wanted to give that brief introduction and turn it over to
the Commission and Council to engage in for discussion about possible next
steps with the 3~d Street extension alignment study.
McKee: Okay, any comments?
Huber: Well, what happens if we don't get a selected preference? I mean we
kind of get in a circle of nobody has any money. I am just asking. I don't know.
De Weerd: I guess the discussion at our City Council meeting was one a desire
by Council to have the middle alignment and two to work with ACRD in
designating that a minor arterial so it would be impact fee eligible so that
development can pay for the cost of that growth.
Arnold: But, I guess the next question is when you talk about -and Gary is
going to have to -talk about getting it into the CIP is where does it hit with regard
to priorities and getting into the CIP isn't always the easiest thing and I don't
know on this. So we need to get Gary.
McKee: Gary is coming forth.
De Weerd: I would say that our Transportation Task Force does list this as a
priority. I believe it is in the top 12. It is number 12 on our priority list.
Inselman: Madame President, the discussion I had with Meridian staff was first
of all the Council suggesting to try and get it classified minor arterial. That is a
COMPASS decision; not an ACRD one. Even if it were classified minor arterial,
there is no guarantee that it would ever get included in our capital improvements
plan, it has to show a need or it has to be an enhancement, which means it
needs to show the projected traffic volumes on that roadway would require not
only an extension of the roadway through (inaudible) existing roadway. The
discussion was at City Council an improvement from Fairview to Franklin, not
simply an extension of 3~d from Carlton to Fairview. If that hurdle were cleared
and it did make it into our capital improvement plan, as you are all aware we do
have a number of projects that are capital improvements plan and it is currently
listed with no construction dollars because we don't have enough money to fund
all of the improvements and the current update that we are looking at, we may
have to drop some projects entirely. We have over a billion dollars of roadway
projects that include capital improvements plan over the next 20 years and we
cannot fund all of them. So, then it would become a matter of prioritization on
which ones allow the plan completely or listed as funded which ones are simply
listed for preservation and which projects were included for full funding. A three
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 12 of 19
lane roadway with our prioritization system would not show a high priority. You
probably would be looking at a bigger bang for the buck and widening a roadway
to provide more capacity. Tentatively that is the prioritization that we are looking
at right now for improvements plan -moving more cars for the dollars spent. So
that was a caution that I presented to the city staff and while it may fall into place,
there is no guarantees and there are other ways to fund the roadway. Our staff
has always assumed that this connection would be built through development as
the properties developed, granted as a piece meal solution and depends on the
parcels coming in one at a time. and picking an alignment is the first step because
without an alignment as we saw with the four plexes that we can't even preserve
the right of way. To both staffs it is imperative that we get an alignment
established so that the next application we can at least preserve the right of way
(inaudible) part of the road built. Funding the rest of it is (inaudible).
De Weerd: Madame Chair just to add to what Gary was saying, I guess Meridian
sees the benefit of working with ACHD to get that designated as a minor arterial
through COMPASS, but also to and perhaps view this area as you have the
extension of time and make it development driven. But I think in order to get a
development driven type of section you need to have a possibility of payback and
that is where we see that we can probably get the greatest movement on this by
first getting the re-designation of the importance of that corridor and then working
with the community to see how we can fund that section and maybe not even
have it on the Five Year Plan but as you worked with the developer on the
extension of time when that time comes when funding is committed then you
work to get it on the Work Plan.
Huber: It seems to me the first thing that should be done is to agree on the
alignment and both bodies make a formal designation. Second thing is you want
to go to COMPASS, fine, but that is going to take time and you know things have
slowed down a little bit now, but none of us know that there won`t be an
application come in before it goes to COMPASS and then we are back in the
duplex or triplex or whatever it is.
McKee: Gary do you know how much time it takes for that COMPASS process
for Meridian and the Highway District to go through COMPASS to get that re-
designated.
Inselman: Madame President, I do not. I don't know if they can designate what
roadway or if we wait for the next update from the long range plan and get
(inaudible).
Rountree: They can update the functional classification every year.
McKee: So we would just have to make the request maybe during this next
update and they can do it.
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 13 of 19
Huber: Excuse me, just for my own education. They will make the request and
so what is the -have we looked at the potential maximum volume for minor
arterial? That if it got designated does it meet that criteria would be my
question?
Inselman: Commissioner Huber our discussion with Matt was and I believe
COMPASS will look at it more as a function not volumes.
Huber: Not volumes? Okay.
Inselman: And there was some discussion with Matt that the city may look at
wanting to down grade Main (inaudible) three plus by a third (inaudible) during
that function. (Inaudible).
De Weerd: Madame Chair, we are trying to look at options for the duplex
section. I can't say that there is any solution yet, but we will continue to look
under rocks and challenge staffs' creativity and imagination.
McKee: I would start that process of asking COMPASS to help us out. Who
does that?
Bivens: Madame President, I think that most everyone remembers this E. 3~d has
been a choice for an alternate route around, I guess, around the business area or
to accommodate some of the traffic to cut through that goes through. To me, I
have to agree with Commissioner Huber. I think the first thing that we need to do
is identify that location as a future corridor because as business grows and your
new City Hall becomes active, you are going to need another cut through or
access for people that are not necessarily interested in going downtown and like
delivery trucks and this type of thing. To me I think it is going to - and I don't
know how to calculate what the potential traffic would be through there, but I
think it is going to be greater than what we had expected because of that
opportunity that has been there and the one thing that it does have it has a
railroad crossing, which is critical in my estimates.
Huber: And, too, Madame Mayor I want to be clear in my understanding and
somebody can correct me on staff is you talk about getting it in the Five Year
Work Plan. Right now without funding that is probably not realistic and I want to
be honest with you.
De Weerd: Yeah.
Huber: Well, just so you know that from our perspective, there is probably a long
time range for that and I know you want it sooner and we would like to have it
sooner, but I don't want to leave anybody with the impression, knowing our
funding situation -
^ R
~ ' z
~ I
~ ~
~
~ t ~ I
~ ~ ~ i,~
'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1- ~~~~ e i t i`
f
t
~
~
e ~~1 i } C
~ :, i ~
S ~ ~ t it ~ s
~
~ ! ~ 1 fS
[
1 ~ i p t
~r q t ~
~
f
[[']
I f
I . 'f 1
S i d, F' - ~ .. ~.
~
}
t ~ , ~ 1 ~ r ' f + ~ ~ t ~I k ~ ~ ~ S ~ ~ ~ i , E
~
~ ~
~
~a1
# i 4 ~ ` i ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
° i
~
~
- -
S 4{~
~..~ ~ ~
~ f f
~ i ~.
~ 1
I
~' !i'
~ t
1
> f
S ~ ~ -.
I:f ¢ t ~
~ r
' '
g ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ! r _ ~ ~
~ : ~ g ; ; . . ~ t ~~~ ,~ ~ I: >,: , ~ ~ ~ ~ .a ~ ~ : f ~
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 14 of 19
De Weerd: I just think the sooner is on the realization of development driven.
McKee: I think we will get it done faster that way. Now, is Meridian leaning
towards option two?
Rountree: We have already approved that.
Huber: Okay, so that is the first thing that we need to get on our agenda and
officially adopt that.
McKee: Right and get that officially adopted because that is the one that we are
leaning with and then we can go to COMPASS and see what we need to do
during that process.
Zaremba: Madame President, the issue of trying to raise the awareness of this
and even if it is Meridian that takes it to COMPASS to get it onto the CIP, I don't
think that Meridian is saying at this point that we need it on the Five Year Work
Plan. We do want to get it on the CIP and the issue to there is precisely the
problem with the duplex or four Alex or whatever it is and when that plan came
through the Planning and Zoning Commission and eventually to City Council, I
was on the Planning and Zoning Commission. We had discussions about there
is going to be a roadway through here at some point and what happens with any
of these things is that if it isn't on anybody's plan - I mean, we can all - I mean,
Teny Smith has been talking about this for 20 years, precisely the point that
Commissioner Bivens points is there is a railroad crossing on it and a good
connection between Fairview and Franklin and it what discussed heavily in the
Downtown Transportation study as a back way into if we really want Main Street
to be the pedestrian friendly place, then the back streets in Meridian at E. 3~d are
where the traffic is and that is actually people's access into that area. But, the
issue of why it is important to raise the awareness of it and get it through
COMPASS is that a lot of those properties that front 2 '/2 Street are long, deep
properties and they cross where this right of way would go and we only have had
one application for people to build a duplex on the back of their property. There
is no reason why we might not get more of those -
Huber: No, I agree. We definitely need the alignment.
Zaremba: -- and Meridian's concern is we need to get this on somebody's
record, not just talk so that we are able to point to it when a property owner
comes in and says well there will be a road there someday because we couldn't
do that before with the duplex.
McKee: I agree. We don't need more of these issues with duplexes and roads
going through them.
i# ~ ~ (~ ~
i ~= ~ ~ ~ ~~~
i ~~
d~
i ~
i
1 ~
j ~~ ~ ~, j
~
3 3~~ s
__
~ i ~
3~ ~~~ ; i~
; I ;
i~
~{~
~~ t ~ ' t
~ ~ ~ ' ~~
i
~~
i ~ y~ ~
,~ }, ~
~~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ k
~r ~ ,
ii
~3 '~
y 'ilj4 ~ k ~
Ft' ,j ;
~
i~ 3J i 't
~ ~ ~ ~.
-
~ i
~R
s~
~ { ~
i ~ ~
~f 4
ff
° e ~
~C ~ rr.
~ '~ ~ ~ .
4 i ~`~~~
i ~~
' EF
~
l{
'~
'}~~ ;s ~ x
~
~ i ~
i
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 15 of 19
Huber: I think the sooner we get it to COMPASS the better and I am probably
over thinking this right now, but if you down grade Main and upgrade third, the
timing of when those two happen are pretty important. So can you upgrade one
and then wait several years to down grade the other? Which you probably can't.
Do you see what I am saying? There is a timing issue that you couldn't do them
at the same time because you don't have 3~d built.
Zaremba: Yeah, it isn't there.
McKee: Well, we will tum that issue over to the COMPASS people. We will
delegate that right over to COMPASS.
De Weerd: Well, certainly I think it dictates further evaluation of downgrading
one and upgrading the other and I don't know if that was part of the 3~ Street
alignment, but if our staffs could work together on what all of that means would
be good.
McKee: So we can work on moving that forward? Okay.
Bivens: I think one other point and (inaudible) but I think a connection from
whatever route was chosen there to Main Street could have a great deal help or
negative impact on the connection of Main and Fairview. So, that was the
problem with the whole one way couplet that was talked about 20 years ago or
roughly that. The main problem was there was no connection between the two.
McKee: Okay, so the ACRD needs to make sure that we get option two for the
3~d Street alignment on our agenda and we can get that formally adopted and
then move it on down to COMPASS. Okay, is there anything else on 3~d Street?
Huber: Well, the only thing is when we adopt it - so for anyone in the audience
that may be interested there is an opportunity at that time for public comment in
the event there is something that we all haven't seen that the public has.
McKee: Yes, definitely. Okay anything else about 3~d Street? We have some
extra time.
Item 4. Other (time permitting)
De Weerd: Madame President if I - I have just a comment on ACHD's new way
of processing vacation applications. Our staff has found it challenging to review
this as to why there is a need for the vacation of the right of way and what
actually is being vacated. So, we have found that it has caused some
consternation with our staff.
Huber: What is the issue?
1 g r '~ ~; ~ j ~ ~ ~~ ' ~ € a ~
~ f ;~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ F ~
! ~ 7 f
~~ a } b 1 _ _ F,
` ~ ~ ' ~
~ F ~,
~ i , ~ ~ li ~ ~t~
` ~
E i' ~ , ~ ~ i J
i ~ .
~ ~ F
~ } ~
f
1
'
'
~
~ i
,
I
'~
' ~ ~
E
~ ~
~
I k
ff 1 ~
k ;.
~ E
~
'
~
~r
~'
~
' s .~~j
';
~
~ ( ~ _
i ~
# i a c
~;
~ I it $
~ V ~ ~ ~ I~ ~
~ {
`
.. a ,~
' i
~ . . i r 3
4
1 ~ ..
i
t
I
~ f
!
f~ ~' ~
I
~
~ '
~'
' ~ ,I
f t
~
t
;i
~
~
x
~ R
~
~
, ~
t
~
t i ~i .
f
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 16 of 19
McKee: Yeah. Do we have a staff member that can talk about vacations? Mr.
Price?
Price: I can. Under the state statutes, if the city doesn't have a functioning street
department and we have jurisdiction of right of way, then the statute says we
have the authority to give them vacations. We still will request consent from the
city, so that will not change. It is just that it won't take (inaudible) to process the
vacation that is under Title 50 for an applicant to go through two processes,
essentially go through a city process for vacation and then ACRD process of the
vacation. This is a big issue for the development community and others to try
and simplify that. We will still get your comments just like we have in the past
and we will take your opinions very seriously in granting those and so we will
work with your staff in getting your comments whenever a vacation application
comes forward, it is just that it won't require an applicant to go through two
different processes. That is all we are trying to do.
De Weerd: Anna do you have anything to add?
Canning: Madame Mayor, Members of the Commission and Council, President
part of it would -
McKee: Anna I think you are going to have to come up to the -
Canning: Mr. Price got away with it, I thought I could. Part of the problem was
with the actual materials that we received that presumably are what you are
getting from the applicant. It is not clear exactly what vacation they are
requesting, so it is just the clarity of the materials that we are receiving is not
there. It was just difficult to figure out what was -there are no narratives that go
along with it that we couldn't figure out. Then the other one was what is the
process; like if the city is opposed to the right of way vacation, what will be the
process with regards to that and if ACHD decides to approve it when the city is
opposed to it. We just need some clarification on that. That was all.
De Weerd: Madame Chair. I guess we don't want to add another layer to the
process, but if our staffs could work together on how we could make it workable
for our staff to make comments and recommendations and maybe even a
(inaudible) process on the city's part if there is (inaudible) is approved that cause
concern. Does that --?
Huber: And the clarity issue is if your staff doesn't understand it then the
members of the public don't, so we have to resolve that because people have to
be able to comment on a vacation even aside from the city.
McKee: Gary, are you going to be working with Anna? Okay. So you guys just
get together and clear everything up. Okay, perfect. I love delegating. It is
great. Did you have anything else?
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 17 of 19
De Weerd: What time is this supposed to be over?
McKee: Anytime the Mayor and the President says it's over. We have some
time.
De Weerd: I would just ask if - I know it is not normal protocol to invite a
member of the public to comment, but if you did receive a petition of a number of
names if the petitioner would like to make a few remarks?
McKee: That will be fine. Do we have the petitioner here with us? And give your
name and your address too, please, so we can have that for the record.
Forsberg: I am John Forsberg owner of Main Street Burger and Stake and Ale
House. I have been working with this problem for -well, since I started the two
businesses and this is owners on both Main Street and Meridian all have signed
a petition that you guys have seen, all but maybe five businesses total that agree
that it should not be a split corridor. It should be a one way couplet. The cost is
cheaper to do it. The traffic flow is better at the north end with these one way
couplets. The traffic studies clearly show that. The only thing that is really
keeping this from happening is the city's desire to make it a pedestrian friendly
area and I don't see any reason why it couldn't be a pedestrian friendly area from
Main Street over to E. 3`d Street, rather than from Meridian Street over to E. 3~d
Street. It still opens the whole area up and provides for better traffic for now. It
helps the businesses that are on Main Street. It doesn't destroy them, which is
what we are all worried about. There is not a single business owner that I spoke
to out of all of the business owners, I spoke to over 80 people and not one of
those people were thinking that the split comdor was going to be a good idea for
them. So, I can't think that doing the split corridor or moving forward with it is a
good idea. The general public is not behind the split corridor. There is more
names on the petition than attended all of the public meetings combined. I
provided all of the information to everybody. I gave them the original study for
anybody to read it that wanted to. The consensus is against the split corridor and
for the one way couplet. So, I don't know what could possibly be said that could
be more direct than that.
McKee: Do we have any questions?
Huber: I have a question for staff. Could somebody from staff clarify the costs
on the two because there seems to be some differing opinions and I don't
remember.
Forsberg: The original couplet according to their study was $8,095,000. The
split corridor was $11,588,000, so clearly $3.5 million cheaper to do the one way
couplet than the split corridor. If you would like to see that it is page 58 of your
guys' plan, if anybody cares to read it or -
~~ .,
f
~~ r
it ~ ~ i
~' , ~ t
s
~~
~
r
~.
~E ~, ~`
~
:.
~.
~ i~. Y _ ? .lr i ~ ~ 9 a~ `
3' ; ;:y r, !; ~~
if
i >.
f
i ~
~ '
~ 1
} Y
1
i
S
3 _
t '1
4
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 18 of 19
Huber: Well, I am wondering if that is the final numbers.
McKee: Are those the current number? I think Adam will have that information.
Huber: And that is what I wanted to get confirmed.
Zaragoza: I have asked our consultants to look at the costs for the current
alignment for right of way and construction, so I have asked them to look at that
and we should have a number by the end of the week. A rough magnitude
estimate.
Zaremba: Madame President in my earlier comments I have made the remark
that the one way couplet was more expensive. What didn't make it into the study
- the one way couplet was studied as if the traffic from Main Street would
continue to use a left tum on Fairview and a right tum on Meridian to get back to
Meridian. It did not include any kind of a cross over. I mentioned that we would
have to take Albertson out or have to take five businesses south of Fairview out.
The cost of doing that is not included in the figures for the one way couplet. It
was assumed that we would keep using Fairview and of course that breaks down
very quickly.
McKee: Okay, are there any other questions? Thank you very much for coming
in. I appreciate it. I am glad we had time for this. Thank you.
Huber: (Inaudible) the one way couplet is significantly more money either way.
McKee: Well, I am thinking in today's dollars that we have to buy an Albertson's
Huber: -- any time you have to take out businesses -
McKee: -- well, yeah and that is going to be millions.
Huber: I mean it is not an 8 to 11 difference.
Rountree: Not in long term.
McKee: Yeah, I don't think we can put the couplet in without dealing with
Fairview. We can't just leave Fairview the way it is.
De Weerd: Councilman Zaremba said that is why they moved that couplet where
they did.
Forsberg: John Forsberg again. The regional study also showed that the Main
Fairview, Meridian Road Fairview or Cheny Lane intersections actually worked
better as a one way couplet. Under their study page 101, it showed that the split
~~
i
~
I
~
~~ L
If
i
~~
i
i
t{
{
!
~~
~~ ~ i
~
t
77
1~ 4
~ ,`
3 i
Meridian City Council Joint Meeting /Workshop
October 6, 2008
Page 19 of 19
corridor intersection at Fairview Cherry Meridian Road actually got a D rating and
it is two tenths of a point off of it being an E rating and all the other intersections
were in pretty good shape, whereas the one way couplet there was nothing on
the one way couplet that went under a C rating. So just from the very start
leaving that intersection basically as it is, a few little changes of (inaudible) and
such that they are showing on a current plan, you could make that intersection
rate a C level from day one. Whereas the split comdor was coming close to
failing from the very day that you opened it up.
McKee: Okay, thank you very much. Okay, I am going to have to call this
meeting to a close. I certainly thank you all very much. It was lovely to meet you
Brad, and now you are one of the troops so when you come in you are just going
to be one of the gang.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 1:30 P.M.
(AUDIO ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
~~
TAMMY D ERD, MAYOR
ATTESTED:
~a ~ i~ ~ o~
DATE APPROVED
`~~ ,O~u~uii,,, . ~',
.Q~
1' qT ®'-.
Fo
.n
I'Clfi"~~F~C
q ,~
1 o I
~ ~ i t ~
l~ I i a~ 1 ~ t
~
~ ~ f ~ ,~ '
' r ~ it'
~
i ~~~
c
'- i a
~ F ~ ~;
1
(('
[ ~ ~ {{ ~
~ S
i ~ t
~ i `~ '
~ ~ ~
k
~ i ~
` '~. '
{
u' ~ 7;
~
ii '
~p t
n .
~_'~
} ~
~ i r i
f E • ~ i;'
~ ~ F~~ i ~ ;,~t~ t ; ~ ~'
4
j
I " ~ } k ~ i
F
,^ ~ r E
I~S ~, k~ r., v1
t ~~f 1 ~
5 ~ ~
i
~
,,: i ~ ~,~, ~. f . .
~ ~ . z ~
i
~
~= .
~
,
. ~
~
> >
~
j E
k ~ ~
~~3
~
fl~
1 ~ T
y ~
L~ ~ ~
~ t
I~
~r f- k S,
k ~ i #
'~ ~ ~~
~: ~
~
~ t ~
a I
f
;
~
~
~ ~
}}1
}
11 i
~ ~
f
3 1 }
f
i ~ x `
1
i
fi
1
i{ 1
i,
g X s f
~ j
~'
~ ~ its f~ }~ ';i ~
F: ~ '~~
~.}
3~ t
1
T +~ i i'l j"
;;
3 i
')t
i e 1
.k. .i.
• ~~
Ski ~~
; +` ~ ' ,d' ~ ±1 .i t
« s .
F; g
~ 3i. ~ ~, t `3 ~- ~~ rf
ykr
t i.j, ~yy g
'
,~' i,~ ~ i.
1~ •
Y, 4
t~ `
'
1 ~~
i v T
j j ~ 1
41
~
•
t