Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999 01-19 SpecialMERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING JANUARY 19. 1999 The special meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:33 p.m. on January 19, 1999 by Mayor Corrie. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ron Anderson, Keith Bird, Glenn Bentley, Charlie Rountree. OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Mayor Bob Corrie. Corrie: The City Council will hear a presentation report by the Mayor's Ad Hoc Transportation Historical Task Group and at this point note that all the Councilmen are present, so I will invite Mr. Clair Bowman. Bowman: You have a number of members of the transportation task force tonight. (Inaudible). The origin for this group was a set up as a task force by the Mayor with the purpose of responding to some of the concerns that had been raised by proposed actions of the Highway District originally. I would like to take you through a little bit of background and (inaudible) so that the recommendations are specifically. You should have a couple of things in your hand right now. You have a little summary of what some of the overheads are and I'll go through them a little bit and you should have a memorandum that was from me on behalf of the transportation task force dated December 8 that went to Mayor Corrie. I believe he got tonight's presentation. This is a formal effort on behalf of the (inaudible) to make a report to the Mayor and City Council tonight. The initial question as I've said was raised because of some of the proposed actions of the Highway District regarding the Meridian Road E. 1St couplet and some questions that came up both on behalf of City Council and Chamber of Commerce and some other individuals about the appropriateness of that action. The charge that was actually given to this committee by the Mayor allowed the committee to choose either to focus just on that couplet issue or try to take some other avenue. In this case the committee took another avenue and that is to try to see the specifics of the Meridian E. 1 st couplet in the context of a much broader view beginning with the vision statement that had been adopted immediately prior to the start of this committee's (inaudible). I believe there was a little bit of wordsmithing done to this by the City Council before you finally accepted it. I'm not sure about that. It was accepting in this form? Okay. That is the beginning place in terms of the large picture where this group began its efforts. Very early a decision was made kind of a policy decision was made by the committee to focus on efforts to minimize traffic that is causing congestion but has not been official or does not have any reason for being in the downtown area other than through traffic. This was the specific way of trying to state that minimizing traffic through downtown area which did not have a downtown origin or destination was intended (inaudible). We believe there are things that can be done outside that area, which minimize the traffic that comes through there. That's really what the rest of the process that this group is all about. We began talking those kind of concepts, the big picture background at first. Had a session at which we brought in a good deal of outside input. The Idaho Transportation Department, the Ada County Highway District, my staff to talk about costs of various kinds of things. What's in the plan now? What isn't in the plan? What Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 19, 1999 Page 2 are things that are currently under construction and programmed to be built? What are on some of the wish lists the Ada County Highway District in particular the unfunded list that they put together and finally prioritizing those and getting ready for recommendations to City Council and the Mayor. We've grouped the recommendations after we had been through this whole process spent a couple of sessions drawing out identifying projects things that needed to be done. When we made it through the prioritization process, we ended up with categories of things. Tier 1 the top priority for (inaudible) for all groups that actually was top priority for two or more of the five individual groups that we have on there. You'll see some of these in the memo which I'll point out a little bit later on. Two were identified as a top priority by at least one group along the way and tier 3 is a list of all the other projects that were or activities that were considered along the way. Tier 1 projects, three big ones. If we had all of these done, we might not need anything else. In fact there was a strong sense on the part of the committee that we ought to try all of these tier 1 projects before we feel forced to address a one way couplet issue on Meridian / E. 1St. They really don't believe that the E. 1St / Meridian Road couplet is essential until we have tried all of the tier 1 projects (inaudible) and have demonstrated that that's not enough. So that is the specific recommendation that comes back to the couplet issue. Question? Unidentified: Clair, what do you mean by tried? Probably the lowest cost project of any one of those up there would be somewhere around 4 million up to 20.5-30 million. That's a pretty significant try. Given the dollar constraints that we all -- Bowman: I understand. I'll take you to the memorandum. After I get through this, I'll show you the language that end up agreeing on for in that memorandum and then you have a number of folks here that could comment on that more than me. I just was the facilitator. Trying to understand the urgency of some of these things and get them intc words. Unidentified: Would a better word be implement? Bowman: Yes, it would be. Excuse me when I said try I meant implement. I apologize for using (inaudible). The other two main projects which got two or three prioritization groups who identified it as a top priority, fixed route transit, widen Franklin east of Five Mile, increase the capacity on Meridian Road between Franklin and Cherry, Meridian I- 84 improvements several components to that along the way and increase the capacity on Overland. All of those, the two overpasses, the interchange and these projects together essentially provide a number of alternative ways of getting north south to and from the interstate without having to use Meridian and E. 1 st and without having to go all the way out to Black Cat or wherever to try to cross an access. That was the package that was identified as the primary (inaudible). Tier 2 projects, those which received one of the groups who identified them as top priority. There was a group in favor of identifying E. 1 St and Meridian Road couplet as a top priority item to be implemented. Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 19, 1999 Page 3 New road east of Corporate Park to Locust Grove, increase the capacity of north and south in the vicinity of downtown. There are a number of ideas here. We talked about E. 1St as possibility of additional railroad crossing. The possibility although we know that's very difficult and probably unlikely unless you're willing to give up one of the other ones as you currently have. So there's a little more detail to some of that in the memorandum. The number of traffic signals were considered. The only one that received a high priority ranking was the last item here, the 1 —84 east bound off ramp to have a traffic signal installed at the earliest possible time. Tier 3 projects. These are ones that were in the original list of projects being and considered and were not identified by any one of the prioritization groups as being a top priority given the limits that we put on how many top priority choices they could make. Frontage roads along the interstate, widen existing roads, the number of pathway options, right-of-way protection in there. Some cooperative efforts to use to share rights-of-way is an idea. A lot of increase capacity projects and a number of traffic signals all of which will be in memorandum I'll take you to here in a moment. Ultimately the philosophy statement or the purpose statement that the committee opted tried to minimize the through traffic essentially, maximize the emphasis on traffic that is starting from or going to the downtown area, however you choose to put that and the Meridian Vision Statement were the criteria by which the committee evaluated options with a little bit of their own personal bias here and there I suspect. That was minimal. If I could direct you to the memorandum for just a couple of moments, I would direct your attention to the second paragraph after the italicized line there which is the guiding principle. The task group believes the following Tier 1 projects, by themselves, will solve the issues which brought about the formation of the task group, without the E. 1 st Street and Meridian Road couplet being required within the foreseeable future. The task group specifically recommends that the Tier 1 projects be implemented as soon as possible, recognizing that the E. 1St Street and Meridian Road couplet may still be required if the Tier 1 projects do not solve the issues. That was language that was agreed upon unanimously by the members of the committee who attended the last meeting. That was all but two of the folks we had on the list. We had about 25 people there. With that would put this in context a little bit and then wind up my presentation. Meridian has long had another committee looking at transportation issues and making sure that those get into the process every time we update our long range plan or when the Ada County Highway District has project requests out there. I noticed that you have minutes from that committee on the agenda tonight as your consent agenda. This committee was really set up originally to handle to be a special purpose task group. I think that's why the Mayor called it a task group in its origin. It chose to treat that responsibility much more broadly than just dealing with a yes/no answer to you on the E. 1 St Meridian Road couplet. So in essence you have two sets of projects that you're going to get to deal with. The set that is in this memorandum tonight and the set that will come out of the other group. What I need now switching my hat for being chair of this committee or facilitator of this committee to be the Ada Planning Association Director what I need from you by approximately the first week in February maybe second somewhere around Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 19, 1999 Page 4 there, and I can extend that a little bit. Charles has some advance warning. What we need from you is a list of what you what in destination 2015, the update to destination 2015 which we are in the process of right now and which will be designated as destination 2020. It doesn't matter to me whether it comes from this list or from the other list. You won't see Fairview and Eagle Road questions on any of this list. If you go down into the detail. That didn't get mentioned. The Mayor mentioned to me tonight there's a question there we need to deal with because our long range plan does indicate that the long term design for Eagle Road is that quasi limited access roadway, which would have some overpasses. One of which would be at Fairview and this group did not deal with issues like that so you're probably better off even though it maybe a bit tougher for you to make the decision, you're probably better off in having the two sets of things come to you pretty much simultaneously. The goal that I have short term is to have a list of projects from you that we put into the update which will be called destination 2020. The committee also stands ready at whatever point Shari is far enough along with the Comprehensive Plan to require or to be ready to deal with the update of the transportation component to the plan. This committee stands ready to support that activity as well. (Inaudible — off the microphone) Corrie: Any questions? One of the things that I think ACHD is going to be taking a very close I mean close look at is Locust Grove very quickly. We've got some things that are coming in that are going to make Locust Grove a hot spot especially at Locust Grove and Franklin. And I think there's two ACHD commissioners right now that are really wanting to do that Locust Grove project as soon as possible. Ten Mile we have to (inaudible). Council have any questions on (inaudible). Anderson: Mr. Mayor I just had a question. You kept referring to different groups. What kind of groups are you talking about? Groups that are within this — Bowman: I'm sorry Councilman. When we got to setting priorities, we had a list of projects that everyone had finally got all their items on the list. We divided the group or the committee the task group up into five smaller subgroups and each of them were given I forget how many — they had so many items that they could identify as top priority. They got to choose those. That's how these rankings got established. Anderson: Okay, thank you. (Inaudible) Rountree: Clair, you've had an opportunity I think to look at the transportation committee's city's how do I differentiate these? This group and the CIC committee. Both the recommendations a good share of the projects that have been recommended Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 19, 1999 Page 5 from both groups are surprisingly similar so as far as (inaudible) job goes I think it's pretty straight forward. A couple of factors that seem apparent to me is one a lot of the recommendations on the part of this group center around some fairly significant expenditures and commitments on the part of the transportation department and ACHD. The Mayor may not come as a result of the ongoing quarter study. Was that discussed at all with this group? Bowman: Mr. Mayor and Councilman, the answer was yes that was discussed a bit. I think what you have by having an ongoing committee providing one set of recommendations, there's a tendency for any of us when we do the same task repetitively to narrow our focus of it of what we think is possible. Because we asked for Ten Mile interchange years ago and didn't get it. Well it's off the list now. We don't ask again. So there's a refreshing newness when you have another group of individuals charges with essentially doing the same thing. What is intriguing to me is the enormous overlap between the two as you correctly point out. That tells me the issues are not since justified folks who have been around paying attention to transportation specifically for five or six years nor are they just the flesh and pen issues that (inaudible). They're issues that seem to have been around and seem to have permeated the community. With respect to the question about how some of these dovetail into the corridor study. I'd ask you to bear with me just a second because I think something about the corridor study is probably (inaudible). That 1-84 corridor study began in large part because of the actions of Mayor Corrie and Mayor (inaudible). They were the two who came to me and said we got to get this thing going. It was prompted in large part by the Idaho Center opening fiasco. I guess I could call it that at this point. Since they've ironed out a lot of difficulties since then. The state's participation in that came after we initially started talking about it and it is the first project that I know of anywhere in the State of Idaho where the Idaho Transportation Department has essentially given up control of the process that involves priorities on its system to a locally constituted group. Out of the ten voting members on that 1-84 task group, only two of them are Idaho Transportation Department representatives. That's an precedented action. I believe that despite the controversies about the Karcher interchange in Canyon County, that those ten folks will come out of there with a set of recommendations that are pretty unanimous for the two counties. My suspension is that Ten Mile interchange is likely to be the second highest priority item on there, and that at least one of the two overpasses is like to end up on that list as well or perhaps even a shorter time frame than other interchange after Karcher. (Inaudible) this committee in other words has already had an impact on what I take with me and what Roland and Terry Little take with us to those I- 84 corridor studies, and I'm just pretty optimistic that those things are going to end up in a relatively high priority position on that despite the fact that they large ticket items from a cost standpoint. Pardon me taking a long time to answer a short question. I do recognize the concern, but I believe if somebody doesn't push for those projects here locally, we lose some chance of getting them high on the corridor study priority list. That's a personal observation. Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 19, 1999 Page 6 Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to thank the committee for the work they've done and I must say that your tier one projects are the ones that I've been discussing with the Mayor and with APA for some time, and I feel were top priority items and I'm glad to see the thought trains were the same. Thank you. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I have another question for Clair. If I understand the language in the memo correctly, the recommendation of the group is to implement all the tier one projects before anything in tier two is done or before the couplet is done. Bowman: I believe the recommendation was limited to just the tier one projects before the couplet is done. I don't believe we had any discussion about tier one before tier two. I think there's was some discussion to the contrary saying that there's some tier two projects in there that are far easier to do and relatively easy fixes. One of the traffic signals as an example. (Inaudible) things that can help out in large ways and they ought to be done right away. Rountree: I'm sure I know the answer to this question, but I just have to ask it. Was the subject or the idea of implementing the couplet on the temporary basis discussed and the removal of it be considered after all the tier one projects were completed given my look at this and the dollar commitment, it's going to be a fair amount of years and that would be my second question. What kind of time line was the group working with in terms of implementing all these projects? This isn't going to happen in a couple of years. Bowman: The answer to your first question is no, there was no discussion of temporary implementation of the couplet to be reversed if these projects worked out satisfactorily. The second question about the time frame, we're looking at a ten to twenty year time period. You've worked with enough (inaudible) recognize that the problem I had this morning getting from point A to point B becomes a very important issue to me. (Inaudible) had that same problem. Even if it's a pot hole in the street, and you're talking about a 20 year time frame, that pot hole may end up in a 20 year list project for fixing the pot hole. It may end up on a list of projects that you intend for a 20 year horizon because it's the bur under the saddle that agitates and irritates and needs to be soft. I think this group did a remarkable job of staying away from those little issues like that and focusing on the larger picture. They were perhaps one of the most fun groups to work with I have ever worked with in this kind of context. Rountree: They're Meridian citizens. Of course they would be. We would expect nothing else. Unidentified: Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, with respect to the last question in the tier one project for the Ten Mile interchange, some of the discussion led to the flavor that it Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 19, 1999 Page 7 takes anywhere from five to seven years on a fast track to get an interchange put in and the two overpasses Locust Grove and Linder were part of the discussion that the groups had with respect to getting that done and what do you do with the other two and the group would encourage the Ten Mile situation because that solves most of the problems the quickest and the best even though it is the largest price tag. The overpass on Locust Grove was the second consideration if we don't get — Locust Grove if we do get the Ten Mile overpass and interchange in. If we didn't get Ten Mile interchange, then the Linder overpass would be the top priority to relieve the congestion we have out there, and the concern we had as a group is that the residential traffic load out in that area at Kuna and west Meridian, east Nampa is the heaviest out there and that seems to be what's burdening the downtown area and keeping with our philosophy if we can gain some relief with that installation then that's going to put us ahead and I guess we didn't talk extensively about the economic development out there, but with that kind of an installation and we have an increase in the economic opportunities out in that area which would enhance some of the other considerations for the community, so that was some of the direction we had a feeling for. Rountree: Clair, the previous discussion we had or presentation we had from I believe they were Earth Tech or their predecessor, anyway Gary Funkhowser and Jim Pine, consultants for ACHD indicated that a good number of the projects specifically the Ten Mile interchange would not necessarily relieve the congestion problem that we see now in downtown Meridian. Did ACHD's participation and/or the state's participation in this effort provide information that's contrary to that or different information or revised information? Bowman: We asked the staff, district 3, Idaho Transportation Department ,of the Ada County Highway District and of the Ada Planning Association to explore exactly that question. Again there was a tendency to disagree a bit with Mr. (Inaudible). Rountree: Wouldn't be the first time. Bowman: I think the shortest answer to the recommendation of the folks from the three agencies (inaudible) that was Charles (inaudible), my staff, Terry Little from the Highway District and Jeff Miles from the Idaho Transportation Department, District 3 office. Their belief as they expressed it to this group was that a combination of Ten Mile and Locust Grove overpass does a lot to provide alternative traffic movements around Meridian and E. 1St. If you add the Locust Grove or add the Linder Road overpass in there as well that it can really draw off much of the through traffic that is currently used in that provided you also fix up Overland Road between Linder and Locust Grove so that it makes an easy access back to the interstate so that folks coming from the north have three avenues to cross the interstate instead of one within the two mile block of Linder and Locust Grove and can still easily get to the interstate. That was their conclusions. We did a little bit of modeling on that, but not with all three. We did Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 19, 1999 Page 8 modeling with the two overpasses and we did modeling with the interchange and one of the overpasses. Both cases they provide some relief to Meridian and E. 1 t. Rountree: Thank you. Bentley: Clair, was there any discussion, I don't see it in here on building out of Linder Road between Franklin and Cherry? Bowman: Yes, there was. (Inaudible) Bentley: Yeah, did I pass it up? Bowman: (Inaudible) Bentley: I don't see it on the list. Bowman: (Inaudible) Bentley: Linder — between Franklin and Cherry. All I see listed is the overpass. Bowman: (Inaudible) Bentley: So you're saying that your (inaudible) 02 is actually the overpass and the widening out of — Bowman: Yes. Bentley: Okay, thank you. (Inaudible) Corrie: Any other comments on the transportation? Rountree: Mr. Mayor I just wanted to make a comment similar to Glenn's to thank you all for taking this on. I know I kind of threw challenge out some months ago that if you wanted us to hear something different, bring us back something different and I think you've done a great job in coming together. I think it was very wise to use a facilitator. It probably made your work a little easier even though it's not easy work. I appreciate the effort and what is really unique I think out of this effort is as Clair put it how close both these different committees looked at the issues in Meridian and how similar a good share of the solutions are. Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 19, 1999 Page 9 (Inaudible) Rountree: And I'm a perfect example of that. Corrie: Thank you Clair. Patton: Mayor Corrie and members of the Council, it's good to meet with you this evening. The first thing I'd like to do is recognize the members of the committee that participated in the Mayor's Ad Hoc Historic Group. We have some of them here this evening and one had to leave a little bit early, but we attended several 7:00 in the morning meetings, cold mornings sometimes and I appreciate the work of this committee to get up out of bed early and come out and do that. All of the members of the committee served double duty. We served on the transportation committee as well as the historic committee. So we've been at this for quite some time. What we saw as the charge for the committee was what should be done to preserve the historic integrity of Meridian and look at that from the viewpoint of both the scope of the mission statement that was done in the Comprehensive Plan that was coming up and we came up with a set of recommendations that I'd like to pass out to you. These recommendations what we've done is come up with a description for a historic district that we would like to see implemented in the Comprehensive Plan and in the planning for Meridian City. That district is fairly large as we will see in just a second and it tries to incorporate all the significant historic properties that we would like to see conscience preserved in the area. There's a description over here that kind of outlines it and I also have an overhead here that I think Gary prepared for us or the Mayor. Basically the description runs from Cottonwood Avenue which is we learned is the old name for Franklin on the bottom here on the south side and proceeds up all the way to Fairview Cherry Lane on the north side. The boundary of this historic district would include both sides of the street of the boundary that's outlined as you can see here. The historic properties within the district are scattered pretty much and therefore that's one reason for being fairly large and another reason for being fairly large is this is an area that we have not designated there be necessarily limitations on the building or construction in the property areas, but rather go through a review process when those events were to take place. As part of our recommendations then the task force recommends that this district boundary be put into place but that further study be done so that sub -districts within the boundary can be identified for specific building requirements within smaller sub -districts. An example of this might be the area of old town in Meridian. The original plat probably for the commercial properties in Meridian and that area would have specific limitations that might be different than limitations that are in other parts of the city. We recommended that there be a goal, an objective established you see these on the second page of this letter. The goal would be to preserve and enhance all the features of the community's heritage that define and contribute to Meridian's sense of identity and unique quality of life. And then to implement that the objective would be to Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 19, 1999 Page 10 preserve and enhance the aesthetic natural and cultural resources of the Meridian area. Then we set forth some policies that we would like to see incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. Actually we don't want to replace the policies that are already in the Comprehensive Plan that deal with historic areas, but rather use these policies to match up with those and see where both can be implemented together. The first policy is to encourage programs that will increase the community's awareness of its heritage as well as the economic and aesthetic value of preservation. Much of Meridian as you are aware are new residents. They are not aware of the historic aspects of the community and we think programs to enhance that would be very beneficial. The second policy is to support private and public investment in the restoration of historic properties, outdoor spaces and natural features. Number three is to identify sites and structures of historical or cultural importance, and initiate programs to preserve such areas and facilities. Number four ensure that all new development enhances the visual quality of its surroundings. Number five establish an aesthetically consistent community that is identifiable and compatible with the historic heritage of Meridian. Six to ensure that all new developments and property alterations within the historic district be submitted to the Certified Local Government for review, comment and recommendation to the Meridian City Council. This deserves a little bit of comment and that is you might notice that approval is not included in this. What we're looking at is that a Certified Local Government have an opportunity to look at construction within the district for review, comment and recommendation so they can help the Council making decisions in terms of what should be done with those properties and finally the requirements and guidelines should not unduly restrict investment and development but should promote consistent development that enhances the visual quality of the community. What we're looking for here is to help developers to maintain the goals of the community as opposed to limiting developers and so we'd like to see more emphasis placed on that. We also came across the concept that Main Street used to be — at one point in time was passed we understand by the City Council to be named in place of E. 1 st Street. And we would recommend that Main Street be implemented again that for E. 1 St Street be renamed Main Street. So with all the time that we spent on this, I think the recommendations that we made are general in a sense that what we're trying to do is not force any hard and fast rules on people but rather to give recommendations to have a kind of concept that the community understand that Meridian has historic value and those values should be maintained and preserved. So I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to present this to you and thank the committee for their hard work in putting it together. Corrie: Any comments from the Council? Patton: By the way, I'm not at all an expert on historic preservation and therefore the other members can respond to that. Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 19, 1999 Page 11 Rountree: Mr. Mayor apparently a question for other members then. You proposed a boundary of the historic district. Is the intent of that historic district meet the requirements of the national historic register listing the historic area and my real question is there enough continuity and historicity within those boundaries to make that boundary real? They're pretty restrictive on how things have to come together so is it more of a planning boundary or is it something you're actually going to look for national recognition? Patton: My response would be more of a planning boundary. The historic properties and they are scattered as I mentioned. Gwen might have more information on that though. (Inaudible — off the microphone) Rountree: I guess I see this somewhat similar to what other communities are doing and it's not necessarily related to a historic area, but neighborhoods and pretty much being recognized in the Comp. Plan with a set of goals and standards and that they want to accomplish through neighborhood association and I think that's what you are trying to propose that it be recognized in the Comp Plan and you have some input and guidance in how this area goes forward. Is that what you're trying to accomplish which keys in really well with our effort to update the Comp Plan. Patton: I don't think we originally planned it that way, but I do believe that is the way it's kind of ended up to be. Rountree: I guess having heard some of the warm and the fuzzy words that we all talk when we talk in these kinds of things, does the group have any idea what to do with our neighbor to the south? (Inaudible) Corrie: Any other comments? Bird: I have none, just very good job. Bentley: I have none. Rountree: Mr. Mayor again I express my appreciation and thanks to the group for doing this aspect of the visioning process as well, but again I know you spent a lot of time and this particular piece in terms of the Comp Plan update is very timely and probably can slip right in there. Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 19, 1999 Page 12 Corrie: If that concludes the presentation of the two Ad Hoc Committees and again I want to thank you very much for presenting that to us and we'll be working on that with the Comprehensive Plan as well and have you in part of it. So thank you very much. At this time I'll ask for a motion for adjournment. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I would move that we adjourn this special meeting. Bird: I'll second that. Corrie: Motion made and second that we adjourn the special meeting. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:22 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK