Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-04-17 PreCi7'Y OF ~_,_ C~%~~rl~icn IDAHO ,~ ~y ~j F~, 9a Tr+E,~suati V ts~y 1983 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PRE-COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 17, 2007 at 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 1. "Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter." Roll-call Attendance: David Zaremba ~ Joe Borton _,~ Charlie Rountree ~ Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. 3. 4. Adoption of the Agenda: ~CI'i ~ 1~2 ~,~~,,~,~„~ Blueprint for Good Growth Ordinance by Anna Canning: ACHD Task Force Group Presentation on Guidelines for Contractors Working Within ACRD Right of Way: * Approximate allowable time set for agenda item may change depending on the discussion. Please use the designated minutes as a guideline only. Meridian City Council Pre-Council Meeting Agenda -April 17, 2007 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ,~Q CITY OF ~ ~'# ~` #-~~ ~YlG~1l-17 __ ,,_,,.I ~ IDAHO r; ~, SINCE 1993 MAYOR Tammy de Weerd CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Keith Bird Joseph W. Borton Charles M. Rountree Shaun Wardle CITY DEPARTMENTS City Attorney/HR 703 Main Street 898-5506 (City Attorney) 898-5503 (HR) Fax 884-8723 Fire 540 E. Franklin Road 888-1234/fax 895-0390 Parks & Recreation 11 W. Bower Street 888-3579/fax 898-5501 Planning 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 202 884-5533/fax 888-6854 Police 1401 E. Watertower Lane 888-6678/fax 846-7366 Public Works 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 200 898-5500 /fax 898-9551 - Building 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 150 887-2211 /fax 887-1297 - Wastewater 3401 N. Ten Mile Road 888-2191/fax 884-0744 - Water 2235 N.W. 8th Street 888-5242/fax 884-1159 CJ NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold aPre-Council Meeting at City Council Chambers, Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, April 17, 2007 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian City Council will be discussing the following agenda items: Blueprint for Good Growth Ordinance by Anna Canning M ACRD Task Force Group Presentation on Guidelines for Contractors Working within ACRD Right of Way The public is welcome to attend the meeting. DATED this 13th day of Apl-il, 2007. WILLIAM G. BERG, ,`,A\~~,11111 u t oliii,~i ~~ CI LERK ~~' i ~ ~'1' 1~~ • ~~ ~~ ' ~o~~ ®~ ~+ q~C ~° ~ ~~ ~,~ ''''''~~~~~fllll ttt4~1~~~~~~*$ Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting Agenda.- April 17, 2007 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours priorto the public meeting. CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 CITY CLERK -FAX 888-42]8 FINANCE & UTILITY BILLING -FAX 587-4813 MAYOR'S OFFICE -FAX 884-8119 Printed on recycled paper • Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 The Meridian City Pre-Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. on Tuesday, April 17, 2007 by President Councilman Joe Borton. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, David Zaremba, Charlie Rountree and Joe Borton. Staff Present: Ted Baird, Anna Canning, Len Grady and Will Berg. Item 1. Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X David Zaremba X Joe Borton X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd Item 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Bird: Mr. President. Borton: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we adopt the agenda as published. Rountree: Second. Borton: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda as published. All those in favor say aye. ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. Item 3. Blueprint for Good Growth Ordinance by Anna Canning: Canning: Thank you President Borton and actually I have asked Ms. Karen Dougherty to come and provide the presentation for you tonight so that you can get the full extent of the discussion by the subcommittee members and so I would like to introduce to you, to those of you who don't know her, Karen Dougherty who is the coordinator for the Blueprint for Good Growth. Dougherty: Mayor and Council Members my name is Karen Dougherty and for the record I am with Dougherty and Associates, 575 E. Park Center Boulevard, Suite 200, Boise, 83706. I am please to talk to you tonight about adequate public facilities, especially transportation and where we are in the implementation section of Blueprint for Good Growth. Tonight I want to address adequate public facilities and really in looking at the bottom of the slide this is most interesting to Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 2 of 17 you, Ithink -adequate public facilities and the ordinances that we are looking to develop is the tool that Meridian has been requesting and is looking forward to as part of Blueprint for Good Growth. Adequate public facilities, APF for short is a requirement that public facilities and services in defined areas are available at accepted levels of services -excuse me at accepted and adopted level of service standards. At the time that the impacts of development will be felt so that those adopted level of services are maintained. So bottom line what they do is that they set public facilities level of service for various services that the City of Meridian and other jurisdictions within Ada County provide, such that when development comes in if that development adversely impacts the system such that that system doesn't have the capacity or have planned capacity in the near future to adequately support that new development, these adequate public facilities ordinances would then allow you to be able to require that development to mitigate those circumstances before they come in. So, basically it is a tool for you to be able to have development pay for its self in the City of Meridian. Looking at the specified public facilities within Blueprint, the steering committee based on the existing budget that we have for our implementation phase is looking at review of adequate public facilities for three different areas and those are transportation, water and wastewater sewer. Other ones that we looked at reviewing, but decided not to review it at this point and time included schools, storm water management and fire protection. So looking at the developments that would be impacted by adequate public facilities, you would be reviewing - looking at the transportation adequate public facilities and the implementation considerations -what I am going to do tonight is really focus on those transportation adequate public facilities -Anna has indicated that those are the ones that are very interesting to your City Council and so I want to focus on those tonight. Looking at the areas of applicability they would be county wide standards; so not just within the City of Meridian limits. They are county wide within the jurisdiction of Ada County Highway District. The public facilities that are included would be all public streets under the jurisdiction of either ITD or ACHD and as you remember looking back to the adequate public facilities, I am just defining the criteria right now; the second criteria is what public facilities would be included in adequate public facilities for transportation. The level of service standards that we would look at adopting for transportation will be concurrent with what the TLIP process would be suggesting for Ada County Highway District and the TLIP process is the transportation and land use integration plan and study that ACHD is currently undergoing right now and I believe that some of you were at the hearings and meetings last week that discussed TLIP. Looking again at transportation implementation considerations - we need to look at current and projected capacities. I am going to show you a graph in just a minute that basically says we look at capacities verses what the impacts are to those capacities of a development and decide what to do for mitigation and so we need to determine not only the current capacities, but projected capacities based on the adopted CIP plan, which should be fiscally constrained. We are going to look at types of applicable development. So what types of development will these adequate public facilities standards for • Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 3 of 17 transportation be held to? I will show you in a moment that those are going to be subdivisions and some larger type scale commercial developments. Timing of determination - we are going to talk about that a moment. Depending on when you determine capacity really has an impact on whether or not you feel that a development will be, needs to have mitigation supply for a transportation facility. For instance, do you determine at preliminary plat stage? Do you determine at building permit stage? There are some issues there that we need to talk about. In the implementation considerations for these adequate public facilities - we need to talk about what happens if we do not meet level of service that is adopted for that specific area and what are the effects of a development if that development pushes the capacity beyond the adopted level of service. We are also going to talk about the need to allocate and monitor capacity as well as bottom line this is a way for the City of Meridian and the other jurisdictions within Ada County to facilitate growth paying for itself. Level of service standards: we talked about the fact that we are going to be adopting these in coordination with TLIP and basically level of service is defined as volume to capacity ratio. They should consider constrained facilities and they should be able to identify areas that allow more congestion. So, for instance, in some of the rural areas we may have a higher level of service than some of the more urban areas. We also need to consider travel mode options as well as allowing less congestion outside urban areas. Measuring capacity. So, we are going to measure capacity by looking at your existing capacity which is what is already out there, plus what is programmed into your five year CIP and then the ordinance must consider the timing of facility completion. Are you going to look at the full five year CIP or are you going to look at two years within that CIP? That are some of the intricacies that we are going to be diving into as we move forward in the implementation portion. Looking at developments -which developments will need to meet these adequate public facilities requirements? They include new subdivisions, non residential site plans and multi family site plans. There is going to be, of course, some exempt development here and those aren't going to need to fit into these adequate public facility requirements, but those all need to be tracked because they do eat at part of the capacity and we want to make sure that we don't eat up all of your capacity through these developments that are not tracked. So, we have got demand. Again you have seen the existing demand. Now we are looking at the two bars right on top of that existing demand and that is the approved and the proposed. So, the approved demand is what is approved and un-built, plus the demands from any exempt development, plus any background traffic. So that sits on top of your existing development and then bottom line you have proposed development from your proposed development's traffic. So right up at the top we are going to look at that proposed development traffic, plus the approved traffic, plus the existing traffic and measure that against our capacity and determine whether or not this development is going to push that level of service above the base line standards. Borton: Karen can you give an example of an exempt development? Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 4 of 17 Dougherty: An exempt development may be, Councilmember Borton, a development that is one or two residential homes if we are looking at maybe a 40 acres parcel that may go into 20 acres parcels just a basic split and that might not occur within the City of Meridian, that is within maybe Ada County, but it is something that is small - under an "x" number of homes or "x" number of vehicle trips. I think that threshold of exempt development needs to be further flushed out as we move forward, but it is just a minor type development. So basically your staff isn't having to go through all these exercises for every single development application that comes through the City of Meridian. Looking at the timing of determination -this is one where we need to spend some time in the steering committee with our consultant, Michael Lauer, determining when we look at the assignment of capacity and assignment of demand. Early determination of demand and capacity and any mitigation needs. Insurance predictability for everyone. It might behoove everyone to look at assignment at preliminary plat stage so that everyone has the baseline information so that a development doesn't go through all of these steps only to realize that they need to mitigate very large capital improvements. So early mitigation behooves everyone. But accordingly, we look at early assignment and want to make sure that there is someone that is willing to account for all of those approved, yet undeveloped items. So for instance if we approve at the preliminary plat stage, you have got to take the time to make sure that that capacity, if it is taken from a specific roadway for a specific development is assigned to that development and isn't held by that development unnecessarily for five to ten years; you need to look at a threshold to make sure that that development utilizes that capacity within an "x" period of time, so that your development doesn't unnecessarily hold or falsely hold hostage capacities that other development could be using. So the timing of determination is a pretty tricky one and some of those steps for determination is going to be some of the discussions that we have Michael Lauer during the steering committee if we move forward with these transportation adequate public facilities ordinances like I am going to be asking you to do so tonight. So what happens if we don't meet level of service standards that are adopted? What happens if -let's say I was a developer and I came in with my development and it pushed the level of service for a roadway above and beyond that which was accepted for that area? Let's say it pushed it to an "e" and the level of service that was adopted in that sub area for that roadway was a "d"? What are my options as a developer? I have got four bottom options that you all as a jurisdiction could give me. The first is disapproval, so you would deny my application; the second would be demand reduction - so I would come back to you and say okay I will reduce the trip demands within my development so that I don't surpass that adopted level of service. So maybe I scale down my development or I change it so it may be more pedestrian and other avenue travel friendly so it doesn't require that many cars to be out on the roadway; third is you would require me to phase my development. Let's say for instance we are looking at a roadway expansion that would, in a couple of years, change that roadway to provide added capacity. Well you could ask me to phase my development, such that I would only develop at such time that there was Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 5 of 17 adequate capacity for my additional trip demands. The last one is capacity enhancement and this is where growth can really pay for itself. We agree that a level of service "e" for instance in this roadway is not acceptable. I could come back to you and say well, I would like to enhance the capacity; I would like to add additional lanes on this roadway, would you accept that? And then that jurisdiction both the city and ACHD and I think that these are intricacies that need to be worked on so the jurisdiction then has the ability to say yes we will adopt that capacity enhancement at your dollar and put it into our CIP. Looking at (inaudible) and monitoring capacity - we touched on this a little bit and the fact that someone needs to be in charge of allocating capacity to developments at whatever stage we deem that we are going to do the mitigation and demand measurement and they also need to monitor capacity and certainly we have got three agencies: ACRD, COMPASS and ITD that could coordinate to monitor that capacity. The cities would have a responsibility as a land use designating jurisdictions to allocate capacity through the development approval process. So you are really going to be the ones that allocate that capacity in the jurisdictions, then the transportation jurisdictions monitor that capacity to make sure that that capacity does not exceed the available demand and then of course there needs to be the third bullet, that central entity to consolidate all of that data. So it is going to take someone through the county making sure that the demand and the capacity is constantly measured as well as making sure that that capacity is not tied up by developers in a five year timeframe that aren't using it, so making sure that someone doesn't tie it up unnecessarily. So looking at now -what we are trying to get out of transportation adequate public facilities and these are the intended consequences. Again capacity is coordinated with a generation of new demands. So we would make sure that we keep a handle on that volume to capacity ratio. It is coordinated with the ability to maintain facilities, so if you all accept a developer's offer to enhance the capacity you all would be looking at the maintenance of it as well and when I say you all I am looking at the jurisdictions, both the transportation and land use jurisdictions. So I want to make it clear that you have the ability to accept or reject a developer's offer to enhance the capacity realizing that you may not want to undertake those maintenance requirements. So that is your prerogative. Third -development is guided by capacity. So as a land use authorizing jurisdiction, you have the ability to guide where development goes, such that the transportation system and the other systems that I haven't talked about, but we are going to be studying which include water and wastewater has the capacity to service that new development. Then it all allows for congestion to be managed. So as far as transportation adequate public facilities deliverables, you probably are sitting there wondering well what do we get if we move forward. What do the jurisdictions get? Right now we are working with the steering committee to finalize the scope of work for these transportation adequate public facilities. I pin down the top five things that are listed in the draft and that is level of service standards and of course that is going to be something that is coordinated with ACRD through the TLIP process. We are going to be working with focus groups, specifically builders and developers as well as holding some public informational sessions to make sure Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 6 of 17 that one of the unintended consequences does not occur such that we are pushing development outside the county boundaries, outside a county that doesn't have adequate public facilities requirements for transportation. So we want to make sure we do the education upfront and we get that buy in from the folks who we are still wanting to attract to our communities and make sure they understand why we are looking at doing this adequate public facilities and you have got some developers on the steering committee, both in the commercial and residential capacity that are involved in this process and there are some pretty loyal folks and they are pretty prominent within the Treasure Valley, so they understand. But, we want to make sure that the other developers within the Treasure Valley understand what we are doing. The third item that you will be receiving as part of this package would be establishment of existing demands and capacities. So Michael will work with your staff and with ACHD staff to look at the existing capacities on the roadways as well as what are the other demands. So what are the un-built, but yet really given away if you will capacity to development. So what is our true remaining capacity that we have on these roadways? Fourth is that you will receive draft adequate public facilities ordinance language for you to modify as necessary and adopt as the City of Meridian and then finally we will look at suggestions to modify your development review process because of course this is going to be a new layer of review that will have to take place as your land use agency and this will be done in coordination with ACHD. So I can't tell you that you would need to have a staff member spend "x" amount of time. We haven't determined that yet, the logistics of if your jurisdiction would do it or ACHD would do it, but there will be additional staff time needed to enforce these ordinances and Michael has a lot of information that he has developed for this for other communities that he is willing to share so that we don't have to recreate the wheel here within Ada County. So, finally what is next? We are having a road show this week and next week to look at adoptions of resolutions by each of the jurisdictions supporting the transportation public facilities because bottom line we need all of the jurisdictions to be in within Ada County. It is not going to work if one opts out. So we are trying to get all of the jurisdictions to pass a resolution supporting moving forward with a development of transportation adequate public facilities. Next in bullet two - the consortium meets on Wednesday the 25~' and we are hoping to have the consortium at that time agree to continue with adequate public facilities work by Michael Lauer who is our consultant for phase two. Bullet three -then Michael would revise the adequate public facilities scope that he has already created based on the jurisdiction comments and send it out one more time for review by the steering committee to make sure that we have everyone's buy in and everyone's comments and then in a May timeframe we would be looking for the consortium to execute a contract with Michael Lauer and execute the first task order which would be for this adequate public facilities work. That concludes my formal presentation and I would certainly answer any questions if the Council or the Mayor have them. Thank you. Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 7 of 17 Borton: Thank you Karen. Council any questions on the presentation or information that Karen has provided? Rountree: Mr. President. Borton: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Possibly just a comment, but one thing I haven't heard in this discussion either tonight or previously is the utilization of COMPASS and their federal mandate to do - it is not a mandate to them, it is a mandate to the TMA to congestion management. COMPASS happens to be the one that is doing that and developing the technology and the system to do it. But I don't hear anybody talking about incorporating that work into the level of service analysis, (inaudible) getting down to the details and to me -just don't forget that piece because I think what they are doing is unique in the country -level of service and (inaudible) is not necessarily a great process. I don't know anybody who really likes it and that is going to be whether we like it or not that metric is going to be the inch point for all of this stuff. So, I think a fair amount of time needs to be spent just on that needy little detail thing that all of this is going to fall back on. We can all agree that this is a good concept, but if we can't agree on how we are going to measure it and who is going to measure it, it is going to be difficult. Canning: President Borton and Members of the Council I did want to point out you do have an albeit last moment resolution before you - we are not asking that you vote yea or nay today because we know you haven't had time to review it, but we do have a draft before you. Steve Price with Ada County Highway District wrote the initial draft. I edited it to be something that I thought Council could be agreeable with, but I should let you know what was in the original draft verses what you are being asked to sign. Ada County felt that it was important for each jurisdiction to have adopted Blueprint for Good Growth phase one is some form or fashion and I have not had direction to necessarily have the Council do that and I didn't feel it was ever necessary because we have been told as it stands our Comprehensive Plan and our UDC are in alignment with the Blueprint for Good Growth phase one principle. So I will use that as a guide going forward and making edits and things like that, but I have never quite frankly thought about asking you to adopt that document in full and they were asking you to do that as part of this. So, I took out all of the language with regard of the phase one of Blueprint for Good Growth and tried to limit it just to the adequate public facilities especially the transportation. So that is the resolution that is before you tonight. As Karen mentioned, the subcommittee felt it was important to get buy in from all of the jurisdictions in the form of a resolution before they moved forward with the contract just to make sure everybody was on board. That is why we are here tonight. Borton: Thank you Anna. Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 8 of 17 De Weerd: Mr. President. Borton: Madame Mayor. De Weerd: Anna does this resolution then ask that we adopt a resolution supporting moving forward to start defining the different areas that were presented tonight? Canning: Yes, ma'am that is my understanding of that resolution. De Weerd: Okay and Karen I have a couple of questions then from you. As I haven't been shy in stating my major concem -- that level of service standard and how it is contrived or conceived and the upstream affects. Our concem is that we can't just pay attention to what is happening in our own community it is the outline communities that impact us even more so and so I don't know how that works with TLIP and those determinations, but that is a big question I have and still struggle to hear how it might be addressed and how using TLIP would get those improvements done so that the level of service is not worsened because of what another community is doing and not necessarily because of what is happening in our jurisdictions. I appreciate the notation of the timing of determination on the (inaudible) capacity because that certainly has been something that has been a concem and looking at accumulative affects that definitely has an influence on it and how soon those phases are going to build out. I too, have a question as Councilman Rountree has already stated and what is that central entity that tracking and measuring -you know, is it COMPASS and how will that all work together and the congestion management and again determining the level of service. I guess how that coordination ultimately happens between all of the transportation agencies and what it does to our staff time. We don't have transportation planners on staff. We have to utilize the expertise of our road department which is Ada County Highway District and so that would be the expectation and then lastly the enhancement of capacity. If they were to do mitigation by adding lanes, we know that the base is not up to standard, so would it be tearing out that whole road and adding in a one mile section, you know what does that mean? If you add just lanes to a rural, built arterial what does that do to the integrity of the road and they are going to have to come and rip that all up at some point to replace it anyway. So what would be the expected standards of that? I guess that is all the questions that I have. Rountree: Mr. President. Borton: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I just have one comment. I made the comment previously, but this particular resolution gets us partners and Ada County together, but when you look at the cast of characters that make up the list, everybody west of Boise are significantly impacted by another area that is not even considered in this concept Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 9 of 17 and to me that is what is going to kill this whole thing is that Canyon County is not involved. I don't know that they are even interested at this point and time. But if there isn't something parallel going on over there, our state highways and our local corridors in Meridian are significantly impacted with Canyon County vehicles and our own and we can only do so much with our own within our community. The Mayor continues to say and she is right, we are at crossroads here as are a couple of other communities here on the list. The reality of it in the end, it doesn't do a lot of (inaudible). It gets our community stuff there, but it doesn't get the regional piece done and to me the regional piece goes beyond Ada County. Zaremba: Mr. President. Borton: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: At the risk of repeating some of what is already been said and the point of that would be just to indicate how widespread the concerns are. In thinking of assigning capacity that would grow to a certain point where a new capacity needs to be built, I have heard other people ask a question that I don't have the answer to and that is developer one comes in and his project doesn't push it over capacity. Developer two comes in and three, four and five come in and they don't push it over capacity. Developer six comes in and his traffic study shows that he has the car that pushes it over capacity and I guess my question is that isn't there some way to look at all of the Comprehensive Plans and maybe COMPASS is the organization to do this and I think they do some of it already and say okay at full build out, if the Comprehensive Plans build out to their full potential, here is the capacity and developer one actually has a ten percent responsibility for that full -developer two has a 12 percent; developer three has (inaudible) or whatever. But instead of waiting for developer six to have to fix the roads, is there a way that we can determine what piece every developer, including the first one needs to contribute even if they just put it in a road trust and you know, until it is built up -but the question is one of fairness. It isn't fair to number six to have us deny them when they are only a part of it and the other piece of it that has been mentioned of course, is how do we assign capacity for instance on Eagle Road when the project that makes the use go up is in Eagle? Or how do we assign capacity on Meridian Road when the project is in Kuna or in Nampa for our east west street? That question has been asked, but I just wanted you know that we are all concerned about it. Dougherty: Thank you Mayor, Council President and Council Members you have all brought up very good points tonight. I certainly don't have the answers to these. I will take them back to Michael Lauer to ask him to be prepared to come to the consortium meeting with some of these answers so that we can have a fair discussion about them. Certainly the concerns about who monitors upstream affects of level of service and Canyon County's inclusion need to be discussed at the consortium and I would respectfully request that you bring those issues at the Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 10 of 17 consortium meetings so that we can adequately address those. One that I can take a stab at was the base standards, the cost of mitigation for county roadways. Certainly one way to handle that would be to establish the cost for additional lanes and put that into a road type trust and then attach that onto another CIP project that was hopefully already programmed to rebuild that road. So I think that there are ways to address that, but I will certainly bring that and all of your other concerns to Michael Lauer so that he can adequately address those. De Weerd: Mr. President. Borton: Madame Mayor. De Weerd: I guess the impact fee and that would be the other element is how impact fee is only determined on the n~ roadway is the one that is tom up and th that goes back to the base standards an not just about adding lanes. how those are determined and I guess it conflicts with the impact fee, but the w roadway. We all know that the old ;base is improved and you know again i how all of that is figured because it is Zaremba: Mr. President. Borton: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: The thing that I hear in ACHD meetings that I go to is that the impact fees that they currently collected pay for 40 percent of the work that actually has to be done. As Mayor De Weerd is pointing out they can't just add a lane on either side of it an existing (inaudible) road. They could collect the impact fee that would add a lane on either side, but in fact they have to tear the whole thing out and start over and then add curb, gutter and sidewalk as well. So they collect 40 percent of what it cost to do them. So they are falling farther and farther behind in their budget and their ability to respond. Dougherty: Mayor and Council President and Council Members again you bring up excellent points, both of those and certainly what we are looking to do is to start to address those so that ACHD has a mechanism to collect fees that are fair for all of the developers and keep transportation capacity such that the City of Meridian and the rest of Treasure Valley is a place that people want to live, work, play and remain through their lives. So we are looking at this as a tool to be able to do that and hopefully with the information that I have provided to you tonight and with my assurance that I will take this information back that you can review this resolution and make a determination in the next few weeks to let us know that Meridian would support transportation adequate public facilities and the study of them, moving forward as part of Blueprint for Good Growth phase two. Zaremba: Mr. President. Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 11 of 17 Borton: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: We have raised the various questions that you have recorded, but I don't think any of us have said I for one am very in favor of what is going on and I think we are going in the right direction and this is the right method of doing the Blueprint for Good Growth. I don't know if you have gotten that consensus from us, but at least that is my opinion. Borton: Council any other comments? Rountree: Mr. President just a comment on Councilman Zaremba's last comment is that I agree. My only concem is that there are some issues out there and folks need to be upfront and these are issues as opposed to where we got with the last efforts on land use and transportation planning and everybody was in a kumbaya situation and at the very end hardly anybody was talking to anybody so let's get it out in front and say yeah it is a grand idea, but here are some sticking points that have got to be dealt with. Borton: Councilman Rountree you bring up an excellent point. Everyone who has spoken, I think brings up points that we probably all share and Karen I appreciate you being here and probably being in the hot seat trying to get more questions posed to you than maybe you get a chance to answer when you present -one of the fundamental concerns I have got to have this general concept succeed is ACHD's buy in and relinquishing some discretion and control and the allocation of resources for local transportation and where those funds get placed. You know if a developer through some mitigation findings and can determine where some proceeds are going to go and whether or not that alleviates any impacts, obligations they might have. There is a lot of concem so I guess before I feel comfortable with any resolution let alone an ordinance. I think it starts from the top. I would love to see ACHD's firm commitment to those types of really relinquishments of authority because you can't go forward without it. I think Councilman Rountree brings up the concem that at this stage it is all puppy dogs and apple pie and we can get together and enjoy the concept, but to pass a resolution that means something, I think I would want to know those answers that you really have a firm buy in on the people that are impacted the most. I don't know if you can get that before the 25~" of April. Dougherty: Council President and Mayor and Council Members certainly ACHD is committed to moving forward with this. I can't tell you the level of relinquishment that they are looking at, but I know that they are adopting their resolution tomorrow and they were the ones that wanted to make sure that each of the cities adopted these resolutions before they move forward. They as part of a subcommittee kind of said whoa stop and let's make sure that everyone understands that unintended consequences if someone does not opt in, but they are moving forward with this and they were really the ones that were instrumental Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 12 of 17 in pulling Blueprint for Good Growth together and so they are excited about this process. Certainly they are committed to working with them through TLIP, but you raise some good questions and maybe what I can do is have Commissioner Franden call Mayor De Weerd and have a discussion about that issue. De Weerd: Mr. President. Borton: Madame Mayor. De Weerd: I think Mr. Franden probably needs to call Council President Borton because I am already sold. You know I raise these points because I believe that even though the resolution is generic in terms of supporting the concept and actually this council committed to Blueprint for Good Growth for this product. This is really where the rubber meets the road. This is where a lot of the tough issues are going to start being discussed and worked through. So certainly I am very supportive of moving in that direction because this is what we have been anticipating all along and it has been a process to get to this point and this is where the meat of that whole process is coming down to. So if Mr. Lauer or Commissioner Franden has anything that we can get to the Council to prepare for the consideration of this resolution next week, it would be greatly appreciated and addressing some of the key elements that were brought up tonight. Dougherty: Council President, Mayor and Council Members I will certainly make sure that that happens. It is not a coincidence that we are having our meeting right after the Sun Valley Leadership Conference, I am hoping that there are some conversations with Michael who will be up at Sun Valley as well as the ACHD Commissioners. But, I will get as much information as I can that addresses these issues to you prior to that time so you have got it and can ask additional questions if they come up. Borton: Thank you, Karen. Council we will put this on the agenda for next Tuesday. Thank you Karen and thank you Anna. Item 4. ACHD Task Force Group Presentation on Guidelines for Contractors Working Within ACHD Right of Way: Huey: Thank you. How much time do I have? I will hung if you guys are running short. Borton: Fifteen minutes. Huey: Okay. My name is Bryan Huey on Business Neighborhood Relations with Ada County Highway District and I am standing before you today to get your input and your feedback on an ordinance that kind of came to a head about a year ago with our construction projects, utilities and contractors within the right of way. Presently, ACHD can determine the timeframe that they get in there but Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 13 of 17 they can't determine how long they can get in there. So if a contractor comes in and wants to get in the right of way and do his job and he puts down three months, he can have three months where the contract might only take a month. So this ordinance that I am proposing that I am kind of taking around to different cities right now and organizations is setting forth a matrix to allow a contractor to get in and do his work within an allotted amount of time and then if he goes over that allotted amount of time, he would charge a fee to that amount of time that he went over. So as I run through it here the intent of it is to encourage contractors as I said and utilities to officially use the time in the right of way. The people that put together this PowerPoint that I am showing you here and our task force. We are contractors, developers, ACHD, Boise City Public Works and citizens of Ada County. So we wanted a various background so we could get a lot of input of how we are going to implement this. When we first set down and we determined was there really aproblem - at that time, we had a road closure on Five Mile between Amity and Lake Hazel that had three extensions on it to a total of about three months beyond their completion date, I was the one answering the phone calls and taking emails and writing the letters. So it was a pretty lengthy process of people, but unhappy people. What sort of long term solution do we pursue? It was agreed upon some form of a structure fee made the most sense. Who would the fees apply to? They would apply to everyone. It would be applied to all contractors and all utilities and just to lesson the confusion a little bit, we have fees scheduled around our projects so when we go out and do a project, we allow so much time for a contractor to get in and do that and if he does go over the allotted amount of time, he gets charge fees for that. This is -- beyond that we are coming in for developers, utilities and things like that that are going to work within the right of way. How do we provide incentive for the contractors to do their work efficiently? We talked about a carrot stick approach. Basically what we talked about doing was with the days that we are going to allow that contractor -say we allowed him 30 days and he got it done within 15 days, he would have 15 more days added onto his record. So for his next job that he came out he would actually have a 15 day window there where he could add onto that. So that was (inaudible) to get them out quicker if they got out there. Then of course the grace period of matrix, which I will get to in a minute. That is the matrix and I will explain it a little bit further in detail that we are allowing the contractor to get in there and do the work and supply him an amount of time for the work that he has to do. Before you there is a grace period matrix. As you can see for a trench of asphalt less than five feet -five plus one day per 100 foot. (Tape turned over) Huey: -- plus one day per 50 foot and on down the line there. When you get into the 20 foot that is kind of a negotiating point where when we talked to the contractors and we talked to the Public Works Department it is pretty hard to determine what happens down at 20 foot -what kind of ground water you run into, what kind of ball sic rock and materials and things like that. So we decided ~ ! Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 14 of 17 that it would be best at that depth to negotiate with the contractors and decide where we go from there. Negotiation of grace period - if there was something with extenuating circumstances, like ground water rock boring or conflicts with existing underground utilities, we require the contractor to notify ACRD immediately and ACHD would respond within five working days. We also have drafted onto that ordinance two other things the contractor could do and what I would like to do is have some representative from each city, plus ACHD if we didn't agree with what the contractor was saying and we wouldn't allow an extension onto the matrix, we would sit down with the contractor and negotiate and talk to him about it, but we would also have ACRD and somebody from like Meridian if they were working within your city limits to determine if it was really extenuating circumstances or the contractor was being negligent. If we didn't agree on that they have the right to go before the Commission and plead their case to them. These are the fees that we have talked about implementing -the first lane closure would be $.25 (inaudible) for the day. The second lane closure would be $.50 per (inaudible) for the day and the $1.00 (inaudible) foot per day. With the entire road closure, all lane closure fees stated above would be $15 Oinear foot for the day. For the length of the detour; less length for the road closed. So these fees are figured for non rush hour times and these fees as you can see are a little bit higher that are figured during rush hour times. This is one project that we use as an example, the Locust Grove project involved one mile of road closure for 1,100 feet of waterline and sewer line construction. Start date was August 23, 2006; completion date was September 3, 2006 and the actual end date was November 3, 2006. With the grace period calculation of five days plus one day per 50 foot, total grace period equaled 30 working days, would have resulted in a completion date of October 3~d. The contractor was passed October 3~d by 49 days and with the calculation of the fee, the total of obstruction fee is $6,336, 49 days for a total $310,464. Actual liquated damages paid by the contractor for this particular project was only $7,000. What had happened was the contractor was out on the roadway and had another development on the other side of the road and decided that he would go ahead and hook into that development without applying for a fee and it added on for a lot of more time that what he had really applied for. So basically it really seems extreme on these numbers, but these numbers were generated by contractors and developers and Boise City Public Works and the felt that the matrix gave them plenty of time to get the work done. We are not out there to break the contractors or to run them out of business, we are out there to realize that we want to get them out of the right of ways as quick as possible so that we can not inconvenience the public and also there are other contractors we have waiting eight and nine months that are sitting out there on parallel roadways that can't get in and do their work because of other contractors holding them up. So contractors are very much behind this. Another thing I just wanted to make sure that we new is it is not something that ACHD wants to stick a bunch of money in their coffers and get another income from because we are looking at taking the money from this, hopefully we won't have a lot of money; hopefully the contractors have enough time in the matrix to get their job done, but we are looking at taking the money • Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 15 of 17 and implementing it either into sidewalks or roadwork within the particular area. Colorado and Minneapolis have already done this. That is kind of why we jumped on board of this. They have had really good results with this. In fact, they have brought the roadwork within the right of way at about a 45 percent quicker pace of getting them out of there with this implemented. So it has been working pretty well for them. We realize there is going to be a lot of hurdles as we go through this, so we are going to go out for about a six month trial period and kind of see what we fall into and what happens. We are looking at just section line roads and arterials at first and then kind of spreading out from there, but we realize we are going to have a lot of hurdles to jump through so we are going to have to work with the contractors and be patient and see how it all works out. That is about all I have unless you have questions. Borton: Thank you Bryan. You mentioned contractors - is the BCA on board with this? Huey: Yes, I presented this to them yesterday and they actually wrote us a letter of support for it. Borton: Council, any questions? Rountree: Just a question of you, Mr. President -information only? Do we give our support or --? Borton: That is a good question. Huey: If you see any concerns that you can see that pops up for you that is what we want to hear. Rountree: Yes Mr. President. My only concern and you mention it is the fees. In my mind they are too low. When you start calculating road users costs because a contractor decides he is going to work on another job as opposed to fill in the 20 foot deep hole in the arterial that day, particularly on an arterial that is running 7 to 20,000 vehicles per day, it gets really expensive in terms of road user cost. So I think you are going in the right direction and I think your idea of trying to find a carrot in there is a good thing too, but I don't know how you do when you are not really contracting with those guys and they are being contracted by somebody else. Zaremba: Mr. President. Borton: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: This was presented to ACHD's capital investments citizens advisory committee, which I am also on and some of the discussion and support of this was explaining that one of the reasons the contractors are supporting it is that Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 16 of 17 sometimes the reputable contractors lose a bid to somebody who just doesn't have the skill to complete the job or doesn't have the equipment of depth of employees or whatever, they run into a rock layer they weren't expecting and it tips it for 90 days and whereas the reputable guy who had to bid a little bit higher would have been able to handle it and get out of there on time and obstructing our roadways is serious business as you say. It has a domino affect because the next contractor that needs to do the next half mile down has to wait until it is done and as Councilman Rountree said, my only thing is I think the fee should be higher. Huey: And in response to that, let's say we did have a citizen on board who did agree totally with you and he wanted them higher and we went back and tried to fill something that was just kind of in the middle so that is how we landed with that amount. Rountree: Mr. President. Borton: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: My intent was not higher fees, but let's say your fees are probably low, but you did the right thing. Huey: Okay. Borton: Bryan I think you have got consensus from the Council and thank you for your efforts. We are on board with what you are trying to do and it is a much needed improvement and the intent behind it is right on the money. I don't know whether the fees are too high or too low. I mean the size of the stick, I guess, is depended upon your review in six months and you can see what kind of results you have got. I think we would like to hear from you at the end of the year. Huey: Okay sure. I would be glad to. Gorton: Get some feedback on how effective this has been. Rountree: We might have some ideas for that money. Gorton: Council that brings us to the end of the Pre-Council agenda. I would entertain a motion to adjoum. Rountree: So moved. Zaremba: Second. Gorton: It has been moved and seconded to adjoum. All those in favor say aye. Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 17, 2007 Page 17 of 17 ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:57 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: ~~ TAMMY EERD, MAYOR A WILLIAM G. BERG, l ~S/ ~7 DATE APPROV~F[~Ilnulii~~~e~e 0 ~® ~~, ~~ I ., CITY ALE ~c~' ~ ,~ , .~ p 1 ~1 . ~~ o i7111i1 s • April 13, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 17, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 3 REQUEST Blueprint for Good Growth Ordinance by Anna Canning AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: Se® attached CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: ~/ MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: [\- ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • ~l Blueprint for Gooc{ Growth .. ~ 4N _~ ~' ~~~ Adequate Public Facilities ~J~ ~ * Implementation ,~ Capacity Demand a --, t `- LOS Capital Plan Meridian City Council ~.~ ~~ April 17, 2007 What is APF? - A requirement that: -spec~ed public facilities and services -in defined areas are available -at the adopted level of service (LOS) standard -at the time that the impacts of development will be felt -so that adopted levels of services are maintained - Implementation tool that Meridian has been requesting) Specified Public Facilities Blueprint for Good Growth Review: - Transportation - Water - Sewer Others: - Schools - Stomtwater Management - Fire Protection 1 • Transportation APF Implementation Consic}erations - Areas of applicability -County Wide - Public facilities included -All Public Streets - LOS standards -With TLIP - Current & projected capacities - Types of applicable development - Timing of determination - Effect of failure to meet LOS -Allocating/monitoring capacity - Provides way for growth to pay for itself LOS Standarc#s - Measured based on volume/capacity - Jointly developed by local governments and ACHD through TLIP - LOS standards should -Consider constrained facilities -Identify areas that allow more congestion -Consider travel mode options -Allow less congestion outside of urban areas Measuring Capacity F-Ordinance must consider timing Programmed of facility completion Existing ~~ Applicable Development - New subdivisions -Non-residential site plans -Muhi-family site plans - Exempt (de minimis) development must be tracked Measuring Demand Proposed Proposed -traffic from proposed development Approved Approved -approved, but unbuilt + demand from exempt development + projected background Existing traffic Existing -existing internal & external traffic Timing of Determination, Assignment & Mitigation - Early determination provides more predictability for all - Early determination requires accurate tracking of approved, but un-built demand - Early assignment benefits private interests - Early assignment of capacity complicates monitoring and requires expirations - Mitigation must be coordinated with demand creation 3 .~ • • E{fect of Fa i I u re to Meet LOS - Disapproval - Demand Reduction - Demand Phasing - Capacity Enhancement -Growth Pays for Itself Allocating/Monitoring Capacity -ACHD/COMPASSATD coordinate to monitor capacity - Cities allocate capacity through development approval process - Central entity needed to consolidate development tracking and capacity allocations Intenclec} Consequences - Capacity is coordinated with the generation of new demands - Capacity is coordinated with the ability to maintain facilities - Development is guided by capacity - Congestion is managed 4 ,~ i ~ Tr~nspor~t~tion APF Deliverables - LOS Standards - Focus Group Sessions - Builders/Developers - Establishment of Existing Demands and Capacities - Draft Ordinance Language - Development Review Process Mod cations Whit's NexE - Adoption of Resolutions supporting Transportation APF - Consortium Agrees to Continue with APF work by Lauer - Lauer APF Scope Reviewed by SteeringlTech Committee - Contact and Task Order Executed by Consortium 5 ~ `~AS~e- ~os- ~~Lt ~ ti1c5~jc~ - I rtKS ~ ~ s: ,y~ . Cr1Y OF ' ~~ ~~+~ ~~~Y't PrIG~l~"Y! ~ + d IDAHO ~y F~ ~ 7'REnSUitE V ~~ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PRE-COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 17, 2007 at 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho `Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter." 1. Roll-call Attendance: David Zaremba Joe Borton Charlie Rountree Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Blueprint for Good Growth Ordinance by Anna Canning: 4. ACRD Task Force Group Presentation on Guidelines for Contractors Working Within ACRD Right of Way: * Approximate allowable time set for agenda item may change depending on the discussion. Please use the designated minutes as a guideline only. Meridian City Council Pre-Council Meeting Agenda -April 17, 2007 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. P~~ ~~s~- ~~ 1~u~I I ~ ~ -~,n>LS ~ y_~` CITY OF 'i..''~~ }''- _._ PYl~l~"~I - . ~ IDAHO 5,r. ~% Mari /eaTrte.~,si~He V~v~Y 8 c~ 1803 MAYOR Tammy de Weerd CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Keith Bird Joseph W. Borton Charles M. Rountree Shaun Wardle CITY DEPARTMENTS City Attorney/HR 703 Main Street 898-5506 (City Attorney) 898-5503 (HR) Fax 884-8723 Fire 540 E. Franklin Road 888-1234 /fax 895-0390 Parks & Recreation 11 W. Bower Street 888-3579/fax 898-5501 Planning 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 202 884-5533/fax 888-6854 Police 1401 E. Watertower Lane 888-6678/fax 846-7366 Public Works 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite Z00 898-5500/fax 898-9551 - Building 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 150 887-2211 /fax 887-1297 - Wastewater 3401 N. Ten Mile Road 888-2191/fax 884-0744 - Water 2235 N.W. 8th Street 888-5242 /fax 884-1159 NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold aPre-Council Meeting at City Council Chambers, Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, April 17, 2007 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian City Council will be discussing the following agenda items: Blueprint for Good Growth Ordinance by Anna Canning ACHD Task Force Group Presentation on Guidelines for Contractors Working within ACHD Right of Way The public is welcome to attend the meeting. DATED this 13th day of April, 2007. WILLIAM G. BERG, ~4,`t,~11111111////,r /, d CI ~LERK ~;~`' Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting Agenda.- April 17, 2007 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. CITY I IALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 CITY CLERK -FAX 888-4218 FINANCE & UTILITY BILLING - FAX 887-4813 MAYOR'S OFFICE -FAX 884-8119 Printed on recycled paper CITY OF MERIDIAN BY THE CITY COUNCIL: • RESOLUTION NO. BIRD, BORTON, ROUNTREE, ZAREMBA SUPPORTING AND PARTICIPATING IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCES, SPECIFICALLY INCLUDING THOSE FOR LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION WHEREAS, Ada County ("County"), the Ada County Highway District ("ACHD") and the Cities of Boise, Eagle, Garden City, Kuna, Meridian and Star (together the "Member Agencies"), and the Idaho Transportation Department ("ITD") executed a letter of intent on April 19, 2004 and entered into a Intergovernmental Agreement on August 9, 2004 ("IGA") to commence a regional multi jurisdictional effort to engage in a two phase countywide land use and transportation planning and implementation process ("Blueprint for Good Growth or BGG"); and WHEREAS, the IGA established a Consortium of Member Agencies, a joint Technical and Steering Committee consisting of representative of the Member Agencies, COMPASS, and other community stakeholders; and WHEREAS, the Consortium and Technical and Steering Committees approved the adoption of the BGG Phase I on or about September 14, 2006, which establishes the overall framework for growth management in Ada County; and WHEREAS, on or about March 15, 2007, the Consortium approved the implementation of the BGG phase II, including the development of adequate public facilities requirements, policies and strategies that are intended to be incorporated into the plans, regulations and ordinances of the Member Agencies and ITD; and WHEREFORE, the City of Meridian has determined that it is in the best interests of the City to continue to participate and support the development and implementation of adequate public facilities requirements, policies and strategies; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Meridian hereby approves the City's continued participation in the collaborative and coordinated development of adequate public facilities requirements, policies and strategies for transportation improvements that are intended to be incorporated into the City's plans, regulations and ordinances; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, pursuant to Idaho Code 67-2328, the City of Meridian intends to execute an acceptable Second Intergovernmental Agreement to facilitate the implementation of the BGG Phase II. Resolution -Blueprint for Good Growth Phase 2 Page 1 of 2 ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this day of 2007. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this day of 2007. APPROVED: Mayor Tammy de Weerd ATTEST: By: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk Resolution -Blueprint for Good Growth Phase 2 Page 2 of 2 . ~ ~ ~~ Blueprint for Gooc{ Growth ~~ ~~ ~' ~ °y ~ ~~ Adequate Public Facilities ~, ,, Implementation Demand pital Plan Unintended consequence slides adapted from presentation by Rich Unger, AICP Vvhat is APF? - A requirement that: -specified public facilities and services -in defined areas -are available -at the adopted level of service (LOS) standard -at the time that the impacts of development will be felt -so that adopted levels of service are maintained 1 r ~ Specif ec} Public Fdcilities - Transportation - Water - Sewer - Schools - Stormwater Management - Fire Protection Trans~po~tation APF 1 m~p[ementation Consi~eratiof7s - Areas of applicability - Public facilities included - LOS standards - Current & projected capacities - Types of applicable development - Timing of determination - Effect of failure to meet LOS - Allocating/monitoring capacity 2 • Transportation Area of Applicability - County-wide Public Facilities lnclu~e~ - All public streets -ACHD -ITD LOS Standards - Measured based on volume/capacity - Jointly developed by local governments and ACHD through TLIP - LOS standards should -Consider constrained facilities - Identify areas that allow more congestion -Consider travel mode options -Allow less congestion outside of urban areas Measuring Capacity F-Ordinance must consider timing of facility completion 4 A~p~p[icab[e Deve[o~pment - New subdivisions - Non-residential site plans - Multi-family site plans - Exempt (de minimis) development must be tracked Measuring Demand Proposed -traffic from proposed development Approved -approved, but unbuilt + demand from exempt development + projected background traffic Existing -existing internal & external traffic Proposed Approved Existing 5 • Timing of Determination, Assignment & Mitigation - Early determination provides more predictability for all - Early determination requires accurate tracking of approved, but un-built demand - Early assignment benefits private interests - Early assignment of capacity complicates monitoring and requires expirations - Mitigation must be coordinated with demand creation E{fect of Failure to Meet LOS - Disapproval - Demand Reduction - Demand Phasing - Capacity Enhancement 6 • Allocating/Monitoring Capacity - ACHD/COMPASS/ITD coordinate to monitor capacity - Cities allocate capacity through development approval process - Central entity needed to consolidate development tracking and capacity allocations Inten~e~ Cohsec~uences - Capacity is coordinated with the generation of new demands - Capacity is coordinated with the ability to maintain facilities - Development is guided by capacity - Congestion is managed 7 • Uninten~e~ Consequence #~( CREATE INCOMPATIBLE/INEFFICIENT CAPACITY - Expand Facilities (real capacity) - Reduce LOS standards (artificial capacity) - Remedies -CIP coordination -Carefully crafted LOS standards -Clear priorities for capital planning Unintended Consequence #1 1 I ~. ~, 1 ~~r °WAY TO LOWER THE LEVEL Of SERVICE ON THIS ROAD, BOB." { E Courtesy of Rich Unger, AICP Uninten~e~ Consec(uence #2 DISCOURAGE INFILL AND REDEVELOPMENT - Urban core roads already over capacity - Limiting infill development will result in urban decline - Widening roads can mean losing older, often historic, buildings or neighborhoods - Remedies - Adjust LOS standards (exception areas) - Measure alternative capacity - Limit capacity investment in rural areas 9 • Downtown Or[anc[o: 2006 Uninten~e~ Consec[uence #3 CAN ENCOURAGE SPRAWL - Roadway segments on the urban edge or in rural areas are more likely to have an acceptable LOS, which: -Inceases travel distances -Increases travel times -Increases travel costs -Increases congestion -Increases demand for other facilities 10 www.downtownorlando.com 11 Avoic{ i ng Straw[ Promotion - Coordinate APF program - Adjust LOS standards to tolerate less congestion in rural areas - Focus capacity investments to avoid sprawl Uninten~e~ Consequence #4 INABILITY TO FUND ROAD MAINTENANCE -APF requires ongoing funding for capacity improvements and maintenance - Maintenance shortfalls reduce capacity - Mitigation and impact fees can only be used for new capacity - Remedies -Secure more funding -Ensure that growth pays for its share of capital costs CIP uire mitigation projects to be included in 12 • The Bottom Line - Coordinated Transportation APF program can help manage long-term congestion - Uncoordinated Transportation APF program will: -Discourage infill -Promote sprawl -Impair funding capacity -Promote future blight in all areas Specific Consequences of Failure to Coorc{indte - Ada County - Increased service cost burdens - Increased congestion between rural and urban areas - Limited alternatives to congestion - Diminished funding capacity - Boise - Least impact -increased congestion - Lost opportunities for needed facilities 13 Specific Consequences of Failure to Coorc{indte - Eagle -Increased congestion -Limited alternatives to congestion -Lack of, or incompatible facilities -Lost opportunities for needed facilities - Garden City -Lost opportunities for needed facilities Specific Consequences of Failure to Coorc}inate - Kuna -Increased service costs -Increased congestion -No alternatives to congestion -Lack of facilities -Lost opportunities for needed facilities 14 • Specific Consequences of Failure to Coorc{indte - Meridian - Increased congestion - Lack of facilities - Lost opportunities for needed facilities - Star - Very limited alternatives to congestion - Diminished funding capacity - Lack of facilities - Lost opportunities for needed facilities 15 April 13, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 17, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 4 REQUEST ACRD Task Force Group Presentation on Guidelines for Contractors Working within ACRD right of way AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~~µ~1 ~l ~ W ~; 's O 'r1 w-: ~ N ~~~ ~F ld ~Iti?~~ ~~ ~ ~' ~ ~„ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~, ~ ~ ~~ ~i W ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ a, ~ ~ z = ~ o .; .Q ~ (~ .~ ~ ~ ~- ,~ ~ ~ a~ W ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ 0 ~ ~lir ^ •~ Q~ ~• r ~~ =d O~ Oyu, O C~~~ ~, ~ ~ _~ C ~ V '~j t ~`~ ~~ _~ C G1 ~ d O .~ V~ , ~r L. ~~I ^ ~' U L I..L (~ ~I c~ ._ C~• N O Q c~ a~ L a--~ 0 '+-~ 0 i a--~ 0 0 C~• N 0 a--+ C (~ ~ ~ 3 } ~~ ~~ O ~••~^^ V, O L O `~ +r •^~ V, ~~ ~ ~ a~ ~- a~ ~ .o ~~ c~ v ~ ~ c~ .~ ~ ~ o a~ L_ • ~ p i , p .~ ~~ ~~ ~ ^\ '~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ p _ ~ ~ V ~ O ~ a~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ c~ p -~ ~~ ~ ~ v~~~ ~, ~ ~ ,; ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ._ -~ ~ ~~ ~ p ~ .moo ~0~~ ~ ~ ~ v _ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ (n c~ ~, ,o O v O cU ~ ~ ~ ~+ V ~ '~ c~ O tZ, O p ~ --, i ~ i i ~ =~a~ c~ ~. a~ a~ ,O U i +~ 0 w w ~~~~~ ~~~"~~ ~~~~~ t~ ~D ~ ti ~ ~ F- uC1 ti ti i- ~ e- ~ ~ .~ ® a ~ ~ ~ ~ as ~ s r ~~ ~~ ,~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ - W~ S H U W~ •• ^^ •V• V, ~ p ~ •~~ ~ ~,~, L- ~ ~ O ._ p ~ ~ r •- .. ~~~ ~ ~ a~ o ~ -~ .~ C~ i cn , C~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~~° ~ ~ 4~ ~ c~ p V ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ C~ ~ ~ ~ y..•~ V~ ._ O ~ ~ ~ - v c~ _ ~ ~~ .~ V ~ ~ +~ C~ ~ ~ •~~~~ ~ ~ ~ O p ~ to ~•- p ~ ~ 4) ~ ~ ~ p CCU V, V -~--~ . i. V .~ C~ p x W .O U .~ O U L ~~ 0 O a~ O p c~ a~ v •~ .~ a~ U ._ `'_' ~ to O p V .. ~ +~ c~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ ~~ ~ o ~ ~ ~' ~ p v~ O ~ ~ ~ L ~••AA V, ~ ~ 0 V U c~ V .~ V .~ 0 ~--~ C, C~ -~ C, +~ .. 0 ._ .r c~ V a~ -~--+ Cn D 2 U Q 0 0 a--r c~ ._ a~ 0 i .~ C~ U c~ U .i V D 2 U Q C O C~ V c~ ._ a~ C) V, •^ .~ •V, V, .~ 3 O 0 C~ O 0 .~ U C~ 4) a~ 3 0 -~--+ C~ O i O a~ c~ i CL~ 3 F LL Q D ". J W V W W 1.1~ F- V H m O a O H C~ • L t~ O '~ ^~ J .O V 0 • i O s ~ ~ ~. O ~Z ~ ..~ O ._ U .~ c~ N U .~ 0 O O f~9- c~ CV .. O U c~ N 0 .. O U a~ c~ J T C~ O U a~ c~ J C~ O O T .. N O U a~ c~ J ~ ~ N M • • • • • _O U t~ c~ .. O V c~ 0 OC .= W ~+ O ~- ~+ c~ T 0 N 0 c~ -~ N O U c~ O O ^~ W ~. _~ s.. 0 a~ -~ N 0 IQ !~ ~~ ~ 0 W V t!) W _. I--' C) H m O a ~~i O C~ ;. 9 '~ O ^~ J ._ ~O i O N `/ ~+- .O U .~ c~ U c~ ._ 0 O 0 f~9- c~ N O O U c~ C!~ c~ O M O .. L O U C~ J T C~ O O 0 U a~ C~ J ~. N t~ O N T O U a~ J M • ~ • • ~ ^~ W ^~ W y--- `~ i _O V c~ c~ O V cap O ._ W W ~I- O l~ i _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~, O s- U O~ ~ ~ ~ O ~- T O ~ ~- a~ ~ ~ c~ a~ ~ i ~ ~ O o ~ ~ c~ -a L,.~I O :~= V i ~1--+ U N ._~ i.. a~ C c~ N .~ N ~'! N Q .. N O M N .O N U a~ N U C~ 0 N M O Z a~ -~ a~ c~ .~ U a .. ~~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ Q. N ~ ~ ~ ._ ~ ~ ~ ~ T _ „~ O ~ a c~ .O c~ U .o N N U c~ T 1 T ~/ O d- a~ Q c~ -~ T .-~ O T ~ • > M ~ ~ O V O ~- .o ~~ ~ ~ ~ o ._ ._ .E.-+ O ~ ~ ~ M V c~ O d' M N V 0 c~ 0 U O U -, • ~~ _O N U ~ .~ ~~ T ~1 ^~^' ^W O W 0 O M }, O V ~ i Q -~--+ ~ ~ N ~~ O c~ er 00 LCD T ~~ L ^~ W c~ O T I.C) T 0 ~- c~ M M ~~ .O ~--~ .~ 0 0 /••"^^~ V, ~ ~~ {{ `V `~ ' M ~ ~ C'7 ~ ~ t~ ~ O .. ~ Cn t~ ~~ W ~ ' ~ O ~ ~ O .O ~ ~ O + ~ ~ d' ~ ~ ~ I i ~ ~ a ~ ~+ . O o ~ ~ ~ T M ~ ~ O , V O I- II Q V • • • Sharon Smith Page 1 of 1 From: Will Berg Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 10:50 AM To: Sharon Smith; Tara Green Subject: FW: Tuesday's Agenda From: Matthew Ellsworth Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 10:46 AM To: Will Berg; Bill Nary Subject: FW: Tuesday's Agenda Bill and Will, The ACHD Pre-Council agenda item for tomorrow evening pertains to new regulations for contractors doing utility and other work within the road ROW. It proposes timelines for certain projects (laid out on a matrix), and suggests fines for parties failing to complete work in the time specified. Brian Heuy, Business/Neighborhood Relations Coordinator for ACHD, will make the presentation. Thanks, Matt Ellsworth Associate City Planner Meridian Planning Department 660 E. Watertower, Suite 202 Meridian, ID 83642 208.884.5533 From: Matthew Ellsworth Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 11:53 AM To: Bill Nary; Will Berg Subject: Tuesday's Agenda Bill and Will, I will be out of the office this afternoon, but I have a call in to ACHD about Pre-Council Agenda Item 4 on Tuesday (ACHD Task Force Group Presentation on Guidelines for Contractors Working Within ACHD Right of Way). I will find out what is going on and get back to you on Monday. Thanks, and have a good weekend, Matt Ellsworth Associate City Planner Meridian Planning Department 660 E. Watertower, Suite 202 Meridian, ID 83642 208.884.5533 4/16/2007