HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 07-10Meridian City Council Workshop July 10, 2001
The regularly scheduled workshop of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:29 P.M. on Tuesday, July 10, 200, by President Keith Bird.
Members Present: Mayor Robert Corrie, Keith Bird, Ron Anderson, and Cherie McCandless.
Members Absent: Tammy de Weerd.
Others Present: Bill Nichols, Brad Watson, Shari Stiles, Pauline Skeggs, Ken Bowers, Bill Gordon, and Will Berg.
Roll Call: O Tammy deWeerd X Cherie McCandless
X Ron Anderson X Keith Bird
X Mayor Robert Corrie
Bird: The City Council Planning Session Workshop was called to order at 6:29 p.m. Note that all Council People are present except for Tammy. Also Mayor Corrie is here. With your
permission Council and Mayor, we had a misunderstanding with Russ Moorehead and Mike Berrard from Kreizenbeck. They’ve come to present some stuff to us I believe. With your permission
I would like for them to do that now. We’ll give them about 15 minutes then we’ll go on with our agenda, if that’s okay with you guys.
Corrie: (Inaudible)
Bird: Those two aren’t even here so we wont –
Corrie: I apologize to you Mike and Mike, my fault. It slipped my mind because I know that we wanted to bring the Council up to date on what’s going on here. My apologies.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Bird: Yes, wherever. Yes, we would like you on a microphone Russ. You can grab this mic, whichever you want to do.
Moorehead: We appreciate the opportunity to give you guys an update on the new Meridian –
Bird: That looks like something I would draw Russ. This side.
Moorehead: I’m Russ Moorehead with Lombard Conrad Architects. I just wanted to give you a short update on the project, the new Meridian City Police Station. The last time we gave
you guys an update on this project I think we
were at a building of 42,000 square feet. Since then we’ve cut the size of the building down to meet the budget. We’re now at approximately a 30,000 square-foot building. We’re still
on the same site off of Water Tower Lane. We have however reduced a little bit of the site work, left it for future -- the building of course is here. We have left this for future
expansion on both sides and we have parking around the building. We have included what was originally in the project last time you saw it as a future parking lot here. This is for
future development, not in the project at this time and some future parking back here for future expansion and growth. The building has been reduced. Of course the first thing that
came out of the building was the dispatch center. That was the easy thing to pull out of it to get square footage out of it. Since that time, we’ve really had to work with the Police
Department on trying to find ways to cut the size of this project down to get it on budget. Some of the things that we cut out of it, since the time we had a space on, on this side
of it of about 2,500 square feet for future growth for the police station. It was going to be leased out to the State Parole and Probation Division in the short term. That’s been removed.
At the same time, we made the lobby a little bit smaller since we don’t have that component on here. The meeting room, which was originally sized for 150 people is now sized for 100
people so that got a little bit smaller as well. The patrol area which is down here was left the same size. We didn’t reduce any of the space there. The evidence processing and evidence
storage stayed the same size. The staff support areas, the reception, training room, briefing rooms, men’s and women’s locker rooms those stayed all the same size. We didn’t reduce
any of that. So it’s sized for the future growth. We lost one DRE room, or an intox room on the backside and a little storage area that was out on the backside. Those were things
that came out on the first floor. The second floor really took a big hit and got reduced. Originally this was all over, almost a build out over the complete first floor situation with
the dispatch center in here. Since then of course we cut that out. We had a large records archive storage space back here. We cut that out of the project. We left detective areas
here on both sides. Those got about 500 square foot smaller, about 225 square feet on each side. Those are still sized for about 18 to 20 detectives in those two areas. We have an
administrative area for the Chief and the Captains and a conference area. The building has changed since the last time you looked at it. One of the reasons for that is in order to
meet the budget we had to, with the previous design that you’ve seen we had a slope roof design on there which was forcing us into a mechanical system that was about 6 to 7 dollars a
square foot more expensive than what we could do with a roof top packaged unit. So, to do that what we had to do was get rid of the sloped roofs and change the mechanical system to
packaged roof top units on the roof as opposed to a water loop heat pump system. This is the new concept that we have for the building. It’s still a block veneer building, metal factious
sidings, and windows into the lobby area with a two-story lobby. Kind of a raised planter area as you walk up to the front area so it sits up above the grade just a little bit. Mostly
earth tone colors that we’re proposing at this point. Then here’s the other elevations. We want to keep this short because I wanted
to give you an update on the building. We’ve got Mike Berrard from Kreizenbeck Constructors whose going to give you an update on the budget and the schedule.
Berrard: Good evening. As Russ’s group has been drawing and diligently working on trying to get plans done, we’ve been kind of running with them to get the project out to bid, to try
and maintain the scheduled stuff and stay up on top of the budget. I’d say first of all as far as the plan, we start, we had advertised formally within the last week in June. We’ve
been getting plans out at this point. Right now we’ve got about 30 sets out. We’ve got a bid day set up for the 26th of July which in most cases, we don’t see a lot of activity until
that last week, week and a half when the subcontractors. So, we feel real good right now that we’ve got 30 sets out. I think there are 4 or 5 Mechanical Contractors and 5 or 6 Electrical
Contractors so far that have picked up plans. Those are usually a significant area. The 26th is our bid opening. We’re going to have that here in Council Chambers I believe. It’s
at 2:00. It’ll take a couple hours to go through the multiple bid packages to do that. Then based on getting all those bids back in, we’ll kind of assemble a final tally of prospective
low bidders and we’ll set up, probably have to set up some sort of a special meeting with you guys to review the bids and have a formal discussion review and awarding so we can get going.
Based on that 26th of July bid opening we have a construction start date, physically start moving dirt around the middle of August. We’re going to work through the winter. We’re assuming
we’re going to have a relatively normal winter condition. We’re going to continue to work through the winter then we will have a project completion and after we move in date about the
middle of July, 10 and a half, 11 month window. Then, we’ll kind of play the weather game through the winter. Our goal there as we are trying to work through that process is to work
intelligently and not do anything that would compromise the integrity of the building or some of the systems as we try and close things up. So we’re just going to have to play that
weather by ear but we’re going to be optimistic at this point. We have a budget update that I’ll pass out to you guys on kind of where we’re out based on the final revisions that Lombard
Conrad has made in the things that are actually out for bid. This is our estimate. This is our estimate of where we are anticipating the cost to come in. We’ve tried to break the
project down into what we call soft costs and construction costs. As you can see, the soft cost things, building permits, ACHD fees, architecture costs, testing, inspection, et cetera,
et cetera. That stuff is right around 570,000 dollars. The construction costs to date are 3.135 million. We’ve got a 90,000-dollar contingency in the project so far today. As you
compile all that up it works out to a total project budget of just under 3.8 million. The funds available that we’ve been trying to work with as we’ve condensed square footage and we’ve
squeezed it as hard as we can. We’ve been working with a number around 3.55 as our starting point. We had to up that to 3.70 in order to accommodate what we perceive the plans are
going to take to build. Right now, they’ve given us a variance of just under 22,000 dollars in the negative. That 22,000 today, we could take that for contingency to make that work.
We’ve just tried to not play a lot of monkey business with the numbers at this point. Once we get the bids on
the 26th, we’ll be able to fine tune our construction costs and determine, hopefully that 21,000 dollars number goes away. We’ll be able to determine exactly what the construction costs
are and then we’ll have an actual update on the total project budge variance, (inaudible). Obviously if the project comes in under the 3.77 number it just goes to contingency. If it
comes over that number, we’ll probably need to take some money out of that contingency in order to make it work. That’s a three and a half minute snapshot of where we’re at. Are there
any questions on any of that stuff?
Bird: Questions, Council? I have none.
Berrard: We appreciate your time.
Bird: Thank you guys. Have you got anymore Russ? Do you want to say anymore?
Corrie: Again, I apologize Russ it’s been a bad day.
Issue 1 Executive Session in accordance with Idaho State Code 67-2345 (c) relating to labor negotiations
Bird: Thank you very much gentlemen, nice job. Okay, Council Item No. 1 is an Executive Session so I would entertain a motion to go into Executive Session.
McCandless: I move we go into Executive Session in according to discuss personnel matters, 67-2345.
Anderson: Second.
Bird: It’s been moved and second. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor vote aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
Reconvened at 7:26 P.M.
Bird: I’ll entertain a motion to come out of Executive Session. No decision was reached.
McCandless: So moved.
Bird: Do I hear a second?
Anderson: Second.
Bird: It’s been moved and second to come out of the Executive Session. All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
Issue 2 Discussion of the Updates of the White Trunk Line and South Slough Trunk Line Projects
Bird: Thank you for your patience people. Next up, discussion of updates of the white trunk line and south slough trunk line projects by Mr. Brad Watson City Engineer.
Watson: Thank you President Bird, Mayor and Council. I’m just going to pass out quite a bit of stuff. I’m going to take a while.
McCandless: More paper?
Watson: More paper.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Watson: The first thing I handed out was just something from Gary. He said that he had told somebody that he was going to give that to you and he just asked that I bring tonight.
The 5-year ACHD work plan. I don’t have any comments on that because I saw it at 5:00 tonight. The other stuff that I gave you, there’s several different things in there. The first
thing is a list of property owners on both the White Drain Trunk and the South Slough Trunk sewer lines that we need easements from. It shows the easement length, the status and what
we’re doing to get those easements. We did have a minor victory today. We did get another one signed. I could go through some of those if you have any specific questions. One of
the other papers attached to that is a schedule for the White Drain Trunk only. I met with Keller Associates, the consultant on that project yesterday. We went over the schedule.
Its fairly ambitious but they know that we’re under the gun and they’re getting daily calls from me, sometimes Gary too on all the minor things that go into this. We have about 50 percent
of the appraisals done on the White Drain line. Keller told me yesterday that they could get to the 90 percent stage design completion in about 30 days so, we have told them to proceed.
The reason it’s only going to 90 percent is there are some of these easements that are posing a bit of a problem where we actually have signed and recorded easements. Now the property
owners are dealing developers who are wanting to change the alignment to conform to future streets in the subdivision. Dean Briggs from Briggs Engineering is representing both those
property owners and I have met with him and told him that we’re proceeding on. If they can get something done immediately, we may be able to look at it. One of the things that I wanted
to bring up tonight is how the Council felt about that situation when they want to change the alignment to match future streets in a subdivision that
hasn’t even been officially submitted yet. I don’t want it to become a situation where they come in here with this application and they say, the sewer’s here. This is where the street
has to go and pin the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council into a corner. I guess I’m just looking for some feedback on this because it’s not just a single property owner.
There are three or four that are wanting to do this now. Its over a mile, it constitutes more than a mile.
Anderson: I’ll offer my feedback on it. I think that the whole plan was designed to go along the White Trunk Line and by them altering the plan and wanting to align it with streets,
if they move it away from that White Trunk Line then it changes completely who we’ve been negotiating with for easements and all that stuff. If we’re going to allow them to change the
alignment, each developer, then we might as well have went out and went down the middle of Ustick Road because we’re going to be fighting easements and the battle for the next 20 years
to even get this line done. So I would say you stick with the White Trunk Line and they either conform to that or, you know the one developer, the first one, they realigned the White
Trunk Line and the Irrigation District of the drainage agreed with that. So I was okay with that one but the rest of the people as far as I know are not going to be realigning the White
Trunk so, I don’t know why you would allow them to change that alignment every time they want to.
Watson: Councilman Anderson, Mr. President, Mayor and Council. These aren’t substantial changes in alignment. They are changing like form their boundary line in one lot width so
they’re moving it maybe, and it’s the same property owner that we already have existing easements on. They would be moving it 110, 15 feet so that it would be in the centerline of a
street. They’re planning to put their lots backing up to the White Drain so they will have one row of streets. Then, part of their reasoning is that if we have this 20 to 30-foot permanent
sewer easement running right along the White Trunk. They’ve go to bring all their lots farther out from where they ordinarily would on the drain. The second thing is they can realize
some cost saving because we’ll have the sewer in that street. All they will have to do is tap into it. It’s not a huge, huge change. I just don’t want to get into the situation where
you are pinned down on future streets but I want to be able to work with these guys too if it makes sense for everybody. I don’t know that you want this 30-foot swath, no man’s land
behind the lots either.
Anderson: I guess my thought is though that the trouble is if it’s just a single lot adjustment, they want to move it out 100 feet but where do you draw the line? Now they want to
move it 5 or 600 feet because it’s more convenient for them, you know. That’ll be the next question once you allow them to go off of there for even one lot. Then, there’ll always be
something that’s more convenient. I mean, all of their reasoning for wanting to move that is financial on their end. They get the City to lay the main line through the subdivision
and they get to put more lots right up against the –
Watson: Sure.
Anderson: -- so that they can dissect that and make more lots.
Watson: No one has even questioned us on moving it any more than that first street. These are the engineers that we’re working with, Dean Briggs. You know him very well and he understands
that we would never even entertain something like that. The direction I have given Mr. Briggs right now is, and you’ll read it a little further down in this easement summary, is if
he can get us something immediately to Public Works can at least look at it. We’ve told him that we’re not guaranteeing anything because Council has to act on these easements. He’s
planning to do all this and get all this information to us within the next 10 days.
Bird: Any other questions on this, regarding this deal? Mayor I’ve got one question, Gary and I follow up with Ron. I agree with Ron to the point that if it’s going to be a delay
on the trunk, I’m not for it. Most of these haven’t been developed yet. They’re not platted so I don’t know how they know where their streets are going to go or anything else. If
it’s going to delay the trunk then I’m not for it at all. We already have been played around the merry go round with some others.
Watson: Sure.
Corrie: Mr. President do you think there would be much of a delay anyway?
Watson: Mayor and Council I don’t think at this point there would be if they got something into us in the next 10. They wrote the legal description and had the easement form. I’m
not seeing a big time delay. I’m just seeing, and the one thing to remember, at least on the upper mile is we do have the original easement signed, recorded and we can go straight through
there. So the downstream properties are a little more troublesome. I don’t think this is going to be a critical path item. My main concern is backing people into the corner. I do
-- you’ll notice on the schedule and I may be too optimistic, I’ve set a date in August to bring all the easements in one big package to you for approval which is August 7th. It’s about
two thirds of the way down in bold on that schedule. I guess we’ll have that discussion a little more.
Corrie: I think if they bring it in 10 days, let them look at it again. I think there’ll be a little more less cautious either. I too want that pretty well what we planned it.
Watson: Okay.
Bird: You know, I think Ron feels the same way. We don’t want to back any developer into a corner either. We have no problem working with them but we don’t want something that’s going
to delay us another 6, 8 months. By your
schedule I realize Brad you put a time limit on it. Either they perform or they don’t and we go ahead if they don’t perform.
Watson: They’re very well aware of our schedule and our demands and your desires.
Bird: I’m sure, their desire too.
Watson: This South Slough, I don’t have a schedule on that. Unless there are anymore questions on the White Trunk, I’ll just really briefly go over the South Slough.
Bird: Anymore questions on the White Trunk, Council, Mayor? Okay, go ahead Brad.
Watson: Thank you. There are only four easements on this and you’re very, very familiar I’m sure with the first property owner. Gary has been in contact with Mr. Aulman many times
over the last several weeks. At this point, Gary’s pretty optimistic. He sent some documents to Mr. Nichols for review. He just sent that yesterday, I believe. I think if we can
get those worked out we may be looking pretty good on at least those first two easements. The third one has given us good indications all along. He has some horses that he -- I don’t
know what you call it. It’s not a kennel but other peoples horses stay there. He rents it out, a boarding -- stable type thing, right. He’s got some concerns about construction around
his horses but all and all he’s fairly agreeable. We just need to get a few things out in the field for him so he can see it. The final easement there is the one that has been the
most work and taken quite a bit of time. They, at this point, they’re a little more interested in the value of that easement than the actual construction thereof. I tried to get a
hold of our easement acquisition guy late this afternoon because we met with them last week. He was supposed to go back to the Youngstroms and present that and kind of make a final
offer on it. I couldn’t get a hold of him. All the appraisals on this section are done. We have those in hand. Actually I have them here so, we’ve got several rows that we can go
down at this point on the south slough.
McCandless: What happens if they don’t accept your appraisal?
Watson: At this point, as you’re probably aware, most of the easements have been donated. That’s our first hope is that its donated. Our second is that we can simply offer them the
value of the appraisal which is 50 percent, as I understand, 50 percent of the total value of the strip that we’re taking. At that point it would probably come back to Council because
then we’ve got several choices. Either up the offer, and Mr. Nichols would have to be involved in that since the appraisals are done, we would proceed with full design and the condemnation
avenue is available. Those appraisals are done. They’re going ahead with final design so that we have everything in order.
McCandless: But the condemnation takes a long time doesn’t it?
Watson: Mr. Nichols could probably speak to that better than I can.
Bird: Mr. Nichols?
Nichols: Mayor, members of the Council. The condemnation process takes a while but that doesn’t mean that you cant get access to the property to install the infrastructure. There
is a process whereby the City can go in and have the court approve a quick take, they call it and essentially post a bond for a certain amount based upon the appraisal and son and go
forward. That’s not uncommon to do.
McCandless: Okay.
Bird: Anymore questions for the South Slough for Brad? Brad, I don’t think you want to get into the 5-year. As you can see Gary and Brad have worked out a 5-year program for us to
look over from ACHD. Whether that hits or not, I mean, we just hope some to move up but this is what is planned right now through ACHD 5 year work program. I appreciate them guys doing
this for us. This gives us an idea what’s going to be going on.
Watson: Right President Bird, Mayor and Council. Credit on that should go to Bruce Stewart. He actually –
Bird: Okay.
Watson: -- prepared all that at Gary’s request. I had nothing to do with it. He wanted to give that to you.
Bird: Thank your department.
Watson: Okay.
Bird: That’s the main thing.
Watson: One last thing that I inserted in those little packets was, I think some time ago somebody asked what all we were doing. There’s a project list, several pages of projects on
there that shows all the things that we’re doing and the percent complete -- who the consultants are. It’s just kind of our snapshot that I keep up to date. Just for your information
too, we did finally hire an engineer that started to work Monday.
Bird: Hallelujah.
Watson: It took a long time to find somebody but it’s going to help us a lot.
Bird: Any other questions for Mr. Watson?
McCandless: I have none.
Bird: Thank you very much Brad.
Watson: Thank you.
Issue 3 Discussion of the Resolution of the Urban Renewal District
Bird: Okay Issue No. 3 is the resolution, discussion of the Resolution for the Urban Renewal District. That’s you Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Perhaps, one of the things that Council asked us to do is to go back and revise our Urban Renewal Resolution. I apologize it wasn’t done any sooner. It should have been in
your boxes today, tonight. The first resolution that was prepared set the Urban Renewal Area essentially a box Fairview on the north, East Fourth on the east, West Fourth on the west
and Franklin Road on the south. The Meridian Development Committee asked that that be included to include an area south of Franklin Road between Meridian Road and North Stratford Drive
with the interstate being the southern boundary. So, that’s the revised map that you have.
Bird: Council, any questions?
Anderson: No, I have none.
Bird: Cherie?
McCandless: I have none.
Bird: Mayor, do you have any comments?
Corrie: No, thank you.
Bird: Okay.
Nichols: Mr. President that will just need to be placed on an agenda in an upcoming regular Council meeting for adoption or at least discussion and a vote.
Corrie: (Inaudible) the 17th?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Bird: That’s not a land use, is it?
Corrie: 17th isn’t.
Bird: That’s what I mean. This resolution we could do under the next one. It would be shorter. The 24th is a non-land use. We’ve got quite a few Public Hearings for the (inaudible).
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Bird: Okay Mr. Kuntz. You’ve got a whole bunch of items on here so lets just get up and tackle them.
Kuntz: With your permission President Bird, I would like to move No. 8 up to the No. 5 position –
Bird: That’s fine.
Issue 4 Discussion of Parks Department time lines for the planning, design and construction of the 56 Acres Park, Chateau Park and skateboard area at Tully Park
Kuntz: -- because they’re here to speak to you. No. 4 is discussion of the time lines and design of the, its actually a 58-acre Park, Chateau and the skate board area at Tully Park.
This really is just for your information tonight. I’m not requesting any further action. We have Dave and Doug from The Land Group here who are going to go through some of the time
lines. I’ve got a handout that I wanted to give to you.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Bird: Yes, don’t miss her or we’ll get in trouble.
Kuntz: With that, I will introduce Dave Kogo form The Land Group who will speak on the 58-acre Park. Not only the budget but the time line and also maybe a few design features. Then
we’ll follow up with the Skate Park.
Kogo: Thanks Tom. As he mentioned my name is David Kogo with The Land Group in Eagle Idaho. What I would like to do tonight is kind of brief you all on the process we have went on
the 58-acre Park. It has been a really neat project to work on, to have the opportunity to work on this. I feel it important to keep you guys up to speed. First of all a little bit
of history on this. Of course the overall site previously had a master plan by a previous landscape architectural firm out of Washington. They provided the initial master plan that
we are working with or initially working from for the first phase of the park. I think it’s easy on this first site here to kind of define an area of what we call the first phase of
the park. Through that process we went through many different design elements on that
site. Some of the specific items, first of all is we figured out what is needed with the size of the parking area for the first phase. What we’re showing right now is a parking area
on asphalt that will hold 320 stalls and then an over flow lawn area that will hold 150 cars. We also came up with a combination restroom, concession building. We also provide two
20 by 30 overhead structures. The large lawn area is approximately about 20 acres to be used mostly for combination soccer, football and softball games. We also put a lot of time in
this design, has to do with utilities. That’s one of the bigger portions of this first phase that’s very important. The sewer, the water, the power through Idaho Power, and the storm
water. Its very important to remember that even though we are working on the first phase that the utilities need to be designed to take account of the future phases on the park, mostly
the capacity for future sewer for example and location so we don’t have to redo any areas of the utilities. Next is off site street improvements. We’ve been working very closely with
ACHD. As you noticed, the first phase we have one access off Meridian Road so we have to do street improvements, do ACHD’s requirements for these access. We also have a pump station
for irrigation, landscape and an extensive sidewalks and paths. When we first came up on this phase, through the design development in regard to the cost, we came up with -- this first
phase came up to 1.928 million dollars which is very close with the original cost estimate that the initial master plan was developed on the first phase. But, it does not comply with
your budget that you have, the 1.2 million dollars so what we have done since then -- I think this is, well this should be in your package. We’ve come up with an option that basically
will not hinder the overall design but basically is a lot closer with the budget. If I kind of walk you through this really briefly, the preliminary costs take into account of what
we call this is phase one Option B. It might be confusing but it has the preliminary cost estimate with italics in some of the items. It comes up with a total of 1.36 million dollars
on that. I can just briefly tell you the large items that are deleted under this revised option. One is on the west area, we deleted about 8 acres of the lawn to the west which will
delete a lot of irrigation and lawn and effect the lot with a rough grading and the finish grading on the project. Secondly, we deleted an asphalt walking path that preliminarily was
designed along the north perimeter and we also deleted the trees on the area. We deleted an item we call sports field prep which is an item that could be used for improving the use
and play of the fields and the soccer fields but we deleted that item. We deleted the lower portion -- oh, thank you. We deleted the lower portion of the parking area of the asphalt
and also deleted the over flow lawn area. Instead of providing, for example 320 parking stalls, we now in the asphalt area have 195 parking stalls. We also deleted some different portions
of course the curbs, gutters, and concrete flat work of concrete. We also deleted one of the overhead structures. The overhead prefab structures. This change (inaudible) we’ll be
able to basically cut down half a million dollars down to 1,369,000 dollars so I feel, and that’s taking into account 5 percent contingency. Right at the sub, we’re right at 1.3 million
dollars. I feel we’re a lot closer to the budget. We, which original plan. That’s I think where we would like to possibly, could take maybe some direction from Mayor and Council in
regard to items that we might want to
consider to cut back on to the design. The other item I would like to discuss briefly and I think this is an important factor that we came up. It has to do if you noticed on (inaudible)
on this one here (inaudible) either on the northeast corner of the site or on (inaudible) the southern portion of the site relatively close to Ustick. I apologize that these drawing
do not show the roads. We had a little computer problem which I’m tired of computer but anyway. Basically that pond, its about -- each one of these ponds would be about a little more
than a half an acre pond that would be used for -- basically there’s four items that we came to the importance of these ponds. One would be and the most important is the irrigation.
On this site, and tell me if you guys don’t want to go into all these gory details. We have basically three sources of water on this site. We have surface water rights. It’s a ditch
that’s coming from, basically from the east on this site, across Meridian Road. Secondly we have a well. Of those two we have water rights of basically 900 gallons per minute. When
this site, this park is completely built out 100 percent, on our calculations we need 1,100 gallons per minute. Take into account that you’re watering this every day with an 8-hour
window at night so we’re really close. We can juggle the window to make that work but the problem is and our concern is we don’t have any backup system. Meaning that if one those elements
of distribution of water has a little hiccup, either a ditch dries out which could easily happen this year. The well that’s already there breaks or the power, or whatever, particularly
in June, July and August we have a possibility to not have the water available for the irrigation. So that’s the beauty of having a reservoir pond. So you have back up water for your
sprinkler system. With this pond, we basically only need our water rights from the surface water rights from the ditch. The well would only be used for backup if late season, early
spring late fall possibly or if for some reason we have problems with our ditch but we could almost run 100 percent off that surface water rights on that ditch. That’s a really important
factor number 1. The second factor, there’s some elements on this park on the other phases we’re not working on this first phase. One item in here and I’ll show where that is. It’s
kind of hard to see but right, kind of looks like a whale right here. That’s the location for a future water feature. This water feature we come up with calculations that it might
provide as much as 50 to 80 gallons per minute when its 100 percent use. We met with Brad with Public Works here, Brad Watson. We found that for us to discharge the wastewater from
this into the sewer would not be allowed so we have to come from a different route. That’s where we would use this reservoir as its second use. We would pump the water from this water
feature into the pond. Then that water would be used in hand for irrigation. It wont be wasted basically. It would be used for water for the irrigation so it’s a very wise use of
the water. Third, we possibly might have to use, have the same problem with an ice rink in the future. If that’s installed also we’ll probably use that pond for discharge wastewater
into that. Then fourth is, and this is one thing we’re working very closely with the Drainage District in regard to using the wastewater into this pond. So, there are basically four
needs for this pond. The fourth one would be aesthetics also. It would be used for an aesthetic into the park and also, even, we discussed recreation for fishing if possible. I know
there’s always concern
with safety with ponds there’s no doubt about that. Some of the things we do with ponds is we try to make them as visible as possible. Meaning both ponds are set right by the roads
with just grass in there and there’s nothing like, we try to keep trees and shrubs out of the way so nobody can hide in there so you have easy visibility. No. 2 its very important that
the slopes of those ponds be set properly so that nobody will not -- if somebody does get into the water, they’re in shallow water and they have easy access to get out of the water.
If you look at all the other parks, golf courses, and when you ever have a large surface area of lawn you really need some type of reservoir for this pond. First of all, if you have
any questions. I’ve kind of been rambling on.
Bird: Any questions? If not, I do on the ponds David. You’re going to fill -- to me with the ditch that comes across there and irrigates now, that one up in the northeast corner its
practical. If you move it down there, if I remember right the little ditch that runs along Ustick Road is a wastewater ditch am I not right?
Kogo: Correct.
Bird: You’ll have to bring it down out of the primary irrigation? I like your idea of a pond. Is that how you would get to the south or are we looking at two ponds? One that fills
up, we take form the wastewater and then one that we take from the irrigation ditch?
Kogo: That’s a good question. On both cases, first of all let me back up. The City of Meridian has been working very closely with W & H specific and they were the engineers that
did some of the preliminary design for the ditch. How this ditch is designed is we have (inaudible).
***End Of Side One***
Bird: -- yes.
Kogo: -- that’s coming west and delivering to other users west of the site. We also have a pipe that’s going north as a waste line. A waste line that will eventually go up to the
White Drain.
Unidentified Speaker: It’s also a delivery point here.
Kogo: Right.
Bird: It turns and goes down here.
Kogo: So for example, it’s pretty easy to figure out what to do with the ponds right here but if the ponds down here what we would do is we would run a pipe that would run this way
into the pond. We would also use this pond as possibly as part of our storm water also, No. 1. No. 2 we would still use this line to the
west because we will have a control, a sensor (inaudible) in that line and what it would do is we would have a level pipe in the pond and when it lowers in there we’ll open the line
on the ditch and discharge water into the pond. When it goes up it shuts down and it will do the same thing with that well. With the well, we’ll have to run a pipe (inaudible) but
the beauty is eventually that well’s going to have to be relocated because its outside of your new right-of-way. We could relocate that to either one of the ponds. Our recommendations
(inaudible) because we could use (inaudible) its closer for power.
Bird: That brings up a question though David. On storm water from an asphalt parking lot, don’t you get oil and stuff, grease and stuff can wash off of that off of cars and then get
down into that and then you don’t want to irrigate your yard, your ground with that do you?
Kogo: A couple of things –
Bird: And there are probably filters.
Kogo: Right also what we like to do is this area right here. The way this parking lot is designed as basically as a sheet that comes into a grassy area. The grassy lawn area is your
first filter for filters and then of course when they’re mowed that takes care of that. Secondly when it goes into the pond, the beauty of this is exactly (inaudible) and they fall
into the pond. Our pump station in taking to the pump house has a filter also and it’s more on the surface so we’re able to take relatively clean water. There are so many plusses for
this. When you’re getting your water directly from a ditch, particularly from other farmers discharge there’s a lot of siltation and there’s suspended silt in there which is always
a difficult maintenance problem with irrigation systems. There’s a lot more positives than negatives of this.
Bird: Besides ponds are we talking about and what would be the depth of the water in this pond at the highest stage?
Kogo: The one I have been working is 30,000 square feet. It’s a little more than half an acre –
Bird: A third of an acre.
Kogo: Yes, about. The first 5 or 6 feet deep. We’ll go at a 3 to 1 slope. Then we’ll have a shelf. It will come down to another 3 to 1 slope and it will go as deep as 10 feet in
the middle area but, once again, we like to keep this shelf and the slope on the first good 10 to 15 feet for safety purposes.
Bird: I would keep kids from swimming out there.
Kuntz: Our water level is at 6 feet out there right now.
Kogo: (Inaudible)
Kuntz: The ground water level.
Bird: The ground water, yes it’s at 6 feet.
Kogo: It’s 5 feet here, here and 7 feet right there.
Anderson: So, your source of water for filling that is ground water and this irrigation water?
Kogo: Yes we have the water rights for the ground water from the well and surface water from the ditch, correct. We would like to use our primary source of water and that’s what water
resource wants to do also is use our ditch water or surface right first. Use the ground water as a secondary.
Anderson: How many days could you water that grass with that size pond with that surface water if that was full?
Kogo: We have calculations that we’re able to water that every day in that 8-hour window.
Anderson: It would keep going all through the summer months?
Kogo: Yes, definitely. It will definitely take care of – we’ll have a little bit of fluctuation but it will definitely, the make up will equal out the amount of water that’s needed
on that area.
Bird: What do we have to do David to get the -- see I like your idea of being down there and bringing in the water from the drain. It just goes down there. Do we have the right to
take that drain water or would we have to --
Kogo: From the –
Bird: -- well, the drain ditch that goes through there. I mean, its not just picking up our drain.
Kuntz: There’s not a drain ditch there anymore. That’s been piped. Remember, we entered into –
Bird: That’s right, you’re right.
Kogo: Definitely we can use that also. Our only two sources for discharge or waste is either here, here or over here. That’s where we’re working really closely with J-U-B on that
subdivision.
Kuntz: President Bird, the only reason we’re looking at this as our first for the pond is you have the adventure island playground which we have a volunteer committee working on the
design with The Land Group. They’re actually raising money for it in addition to the (inaudible) feature here. The closeness of that pond to this playground area is a bit of a concern.
Bird: I’m like David. I think that is a nice logical place to put it down there even though –
Kuntz: You don’t like this one on here?
Bird: No I would take it. I mean I’m fine but –
Kuntz: We’ve got to have the elevation to get to the drain.
Bird: That’s right.
Kuntz: This site’s better because our pump station is right there.
Bird: You can pipe it down to there. I like the pond idea real well, irrigating that way. It’s like you say, golf courses, they have to do it that way because you just don’t have
that steady a flow.
Kogo: Yes I think this is a good year to even show the beauty of water saving factors. It’s going to be even a bigger deal in the future. Also, well first of all anymore questions
on the design?
Bird: Questions, Council?
Kogo: The last thing is on the schedule. We’ve originally kind of, if you look there’s two different schedules here. I think they should say A and B. Originally, the way this park
was designed is we were trying to have it so we will have this thing out to bid this fall. After looking at the cost, and the cost is truly is an issue on this. To keep the cost down
and keep it within our budget, I’m proposing that instead of putting this out to bid this fall that we put this out to bid more like in the winter and start construction in the spring.
The reason why is there’s a couple reasons. In contractors you’ll always find out is that they’re always busy themselves in the fall. You don’t always get your best prices in the
fall because they’re just always changing. They want to close up their jobs in the year anyway. When the construction is out to bid more like in the winter, they’re getting ready for
their construction in the springtime. I found that through my 20 years experience is by far the best time to put this out to bid. No. 1 and secondly is and Brad briefly mentioned it
is that we’re working very closely on that sewer line. We’re working with J-U-B and with Brad and we’re able to go ahead and design that as far as we can. That is kind of a factor
with us on, we can install
that dry also but to go through design and have it approved through Public Works and DEQ it could be a factor on the design, not the design but the bidding factor on that. My proposal
to Mayor and Council Members is that this project, on our bidding is out to bid, I think on that I think its set November.
Bird: You’ve got that December. The first week in December is the bidding.
Kogo: The bid opening on that so, the bidding goes through November. Bid opening in December. We’ll go through City Council, go through all the bonds, mobilization and get the construction
started the first of January. On that we’re showing 5 months where we’re considering to put that as a 6 months to once again, we feel we’ll have better prices on that also instead of
trying to do an accelerated on that.
Bird: You don’t think you can hit the second week of June for finish date or, third week I mean? You’re saying lets take it back to the third week of July?
Kogo: Oh, for (inaudible)?
Bird: For final walk through.
Kogo: Oh, I see. Well if we go with the 5 months, basically if it goes through a 5-month window of construction yes. That puts us in the first of June. If we go the 6 months it will
be to the end of June. That’s one of the things that we will look a lot closely. We like, we (inaudible) time with different contractors on this.
Bird: Let me ask you a question David. There’s a lot of -- a lot of this is dirt side work, putting in utilities and stuff. Is that real successful and time saving in the wintertime
when you fight snow and mud and everything? I mean I know the building part of it. I don’t know the site work part of it. To me it just, If you get sloppy rains and stuff -- I’m almost
wondering if we wouldn’t be better off to get our ducks and bid the thing about January and proceed in March and come back in fall. I mean, you know, why get a schedule and see the
poor old contractors have to shut down for start up, shut down for 6 weeks, 8 weeks and then come back and have to wallow around in mud. Nobody makes any money. No progress is made.
Kogo: I don’t deny that. One thing that we were looking at if they start the construction in January they will start the utilities and they can do that in the mud. It’s when you get
into finish grading that parking lot. That’s where it gets really ugly so, we’re kind of limited in what kind of springtime we’ll have. I don’t deny what you’re saying. I’m sure everybody
wants this park going and everybody’s excited. That’s why I kind of want to do this as well as possible. One thing also, I don’t know if anybody has really thought this also but this
whole park will be seeded and that will take -- it won’t germinate for a good week or two and then
there’s going to be, typically its three months to five months before we have a full stand of grass.
Bird: Sure.
Kogo: But, we do have that good summer to do that.
Anderson: That’s what I was going to say. It’s going to be real difficult to finish that park at the start of the summer, to keep the people off that because they’re going to see this
beautiful park is done. You’d be better off almost to finish it (inaudible).
Kogo: Oh, I see.
Anderson: So that it could actually have the fall and the spring for the growing and then you turn people lose on it.
Kogo: That’s a good point.
Bird: That’s what I was saying. Maybe we push it back and not have to fight the weather so much. Then like Ron says, if you get any kind of grass out there, you know we’re going
to have people out there. Nobody wants that thing up and running more than I do. At the same token I want it done right.
Kogo: I could revisit that for sure. I think its very important to look to make sure that when that is seeded that we do have you know we have at least like August, September and October.
Those would be three growing months.
Bird: Yes, you’re right.
Kogo: Okay I’ll revisit that.
Bird: Just look at it and see what you think would be the best for the City plus the contractor. I mean I don’t want the contractors having a time limit then get out there and up
to their tailgates in mud and we’re expecting them to get the job done. That’s not right.
Kogo: Well, you know this, if we don’t put this up in (inaudible) they look at that on their –
Bird: (Inaudible)
Kogo: I’ll look at that for sure. Any more questions?
Bird: No very good plan. Any more questions from Council? I like it.
Kogo: Thank you.
Bird: Stay with it.
Kogo: Thank you. Next, this is Doug Russell from the office. He would like to brief you on the Skateboard Park.
Bird: Okay.
Kuntz: That’s in your packets we handed out tonight.
Anderson: You handed out last Friday, you mean?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Anderson: Thanks we appreciate it.
Russell: Well, my name is Doug Russell. I’m with The Land Group also. I appreciate the opportunity to bring you up to speed on the Skateboard Park which is going to be located at
Tully Park. What I would like to do is just kind of start off and kind of debrief you on what we’ve done up to this point so far. Then talk a little bit about our time line and budget
as well. What we did is on May 31st we held a meeting. Tom put a little advertisement out to the schools and got the word out to the kids in the community and we held a design workshop
where we had the kids come in who were interested in skateboarding and highly active in the sport of skateboarding. We met them over here in the Council Chambers and basically had a
design workshop. We kind of told them a little bit about the site, talked to them about the budget a little bit, talked to them about the possibility of raising some funds and then
finally just kind of got down and dirty with what they wanted to see in their Skateboard Park. The types of elements that they wanted to include in that. We just kind of talked to
them about the process a little bit so we had a really good meeting. It was very successful. It was a good turn out. The kids were excited about it. We took it from there. At the
time we were kind of waiting on the site to be surveyed. It was pretty close to a month before we did receive that but we did receive that and we started immediately working on concepts
around June 25th after we came up with what we felt was a good concept. It was going to work pretty close to the budgets we’ve discussed with Tom. We had another meeting with a Council
of 5 to 6 kids which is something that we established at our original meeting. We showed them what we had come up with in our office and kind of had them critique it, tell us what we
did good and what we did bad and what they wanted to see. We had this meeting just this past Monday which is yesterday. We plan on revising that plan and we’ve got another meeting
scheduled with them Friday. My goal is to get that thing fine-tuned and ready and have them happy with it on Friday. Then we’re going to go full speed ahead with our construction documents
which we’re hoping to have finished around the end of August, put it out to bid and get you
know all the bidding taken care of in September. Start construction on this thing end of September, early October and hopefully finish it the very beginning of December. That is what
our goal is right now. We would consider for this type of work based on the difficulty of coming up with documents that are adequate for bidding. It’s not something that your general
contractors are building every day. It’s something they’ve got to put a lot of thought and effort into. Therefore we need to put a lot of time and effort into the drawing just to make
sure that we get good bids and just to make sure that in the end, we have something built properly and something that’s going to stand the test of time. So, its kind of an accelerated
schedule but we feel comfortable with it and don’t see any problems with meeting the time line that you have in front of you, I believe. The other thing I wanted to discuss with you
is the cost involved. We have designed a Skate Park over in Eagle. It was our first one. We had a good time with it. It was, we feel, real successful. The kids are really using
it a lot. I just cant tell you how happy the City of Eagle is to have a Skateboard Park because its really benefited the City, not only do the kids have a place to play but it’s keeping
the skateboards out of town and that sort of thing. When we designed that park, we figured up approximately 12 dollars a square foot to build it. It pretty much came in right on target.
We were pretty happy with the way that came out. We also felt that the size of that park was just about perfect, considering the size of the community, the amount of kids that are
going to use it, that sort of thing. In that park is 12,500 square feet in size so when we originally started talking with Tom about designing a park for the City of Meridian, we told
him that we thought that was a pretty good size. It accommodates a good bit of kids and you know its not too crowded in the flow and it seems to work pretty good. So, a 12,500 square-foot
park roughly comes out to about 150,000 dollars I believe. When we originally talked to Tom, we talked about maybe doing a 12,000 cutting off 500 feet and it comes in around 144,000
dollars. This current design that you see up here is 11,800 square feet which if you use that same 12 dollars per foot figure, you’re roughly at around 141,600 dollars. Then of course,
our design fees which I’m not sure if you guys saw that – well, I’m sure you saw the contract. You approved it but it’s roughly around 16,000. I’m not sure what the exact number was.
That puts us up to roughly 156, 157,000 dollars. I don’t know exactly what the budgets are. I know that Tom and I discussed it a little bit and he said that it came in, that it’s
a little bit higher than maybe what the City has allotted for that. Again, I would like to say I think this is a good size. I think you’re going to accommodate a lot of kids. I’m
not sure what your future plans are for possibly building another one in another location of the City but if its not in your plans for the near future, I would highly recommend that
you kind of try to stay around this size because I think you’re going to be surprised. Maybe you won’t be but basically it’s going to be a high use park. As a matter of fact I wouldn’t
be surprised if this is one of your highest used parks in the City. We could however, there is a little bit of room to cut back the square footage on it if it’s absolutely necessary.
I think we can still have a successful park but obviously I think that’s up to you guys. I just want to be straightforward with you, let you know where it’s
at right now. I’ll stand for any questions you might have regarding any of these issues.
Anderson: I just have a few questions. You can’t tell from your drawing, like a bower box and this other box there. Are those wood or concrete? Or what are those?
Russell: Everything in the site would be concrete. Basically there would be two materials in this site, concrete and steel. The steel is what you put along the edges of your stairways,
the areas where the kids grind. You have steel railings. I mean, I’m sure you’ve seen kids out here in the City possibly skateboarding on some of your handrails and that sort of thing.
Basically what you do is you try to create street type elements but it’s in an area that they can bang it up and not necessarily tear it up but they’re going to mark it up and scuff
it up. These things are really when you get right down to it, when they’re built right and designed right, they’re pretty indestructible. Steel and concrete is the two pieces of material
you’re going to have in this park.
Anderson: All these lines that we see around are those steps going down? Or, what are those?
Russell: I’ll give you a quick overview of it. Basically the park has three levels that differ between 5 to 2 feet in drop. We have one large flat area here. Of course at this time
its still fairly conceptual. This will give you a pretty good idea and at the end of the week we’ll have something more in stone but, we’ll have an area here, large flat concrete here
with some elements that we’re going to fit in there and another flat area here. Basically this flat area and this flat area are the same elevation. This area right here, we have approximately
a 5-foot drop down to another flat concrete area. This creates what they call in skater’s world, a half pipe. It’s where they kind of go back and forth in this little ramp area here.
From there you kind of drop down into this other bottom flat area which will have some other type of skateboarding elements which are being completely determined by the kids in your
community based on the tricks and the types of skating that they like to do. We have another area that from this level and this level you basically have about a 2-foot drop and then
we have three sets of stairs. We have a stairway here that they like to launch off of or they jump up in the air and slide down the rail on their skateboard. Then we have a shorter
set of stairs here that they basically do the same tricks but maybe some of the kids who are younger or still trying to learn tricks, they might use the smaller stairway. We’re going
to have another stairway over here that will have some rails incorporated as well providing a lawn area in the middle of it which would have kind of a slope basically that’s one of the
things that’s on top of their list. They want a lawn area that they can get cruising along and jump over it. If they don’t make it, they’ve got a nice soft lawn area that they can
land in. Then you know you see these types of things around through there. Those are just different types of elements that allow them to do these tricks and stunts that they do on
their skateboard. I
don’t know if you guys have been to any of the Skateboard Parks in the Treasure Valley but I would encourage you to maybe go and check it out if you’ve got a little bit of free time
because its pretty impressive what these kids do on these things.
Bird: My grandkids, they’ll take you out (inaudible).
Anderson: How does the water drain out of that half pipe? Does it drain out onto the grass or do you have to put drains in it?
Russell: Pretty much what will happen, we’ll probably have two drains inside the Skateboard Park itself. There is, this is in Tully Park in case you didn’t know there is a retention
area in Tully. We’ll probably have one drain around this area at the base of these steps. We might even only have one drain. I haven’t done that yet but basically everything will
go to one or two drains and will either be day lighted out to a lawn area or piped to the retention area on site. There will be no standing water. Pretty much, I don’t think we’re
going to have any sheet run off at the lawn are. If, we do it obviously wont be that big of a deal but I think most of it’s going to be piped to the retention area.
Anderson: Where’s the first aid station at?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Bird: Doug, I missed, the half-pipe you say is a 5-foot different elevation because I heard that this was going to be flat, all above ground. I go to Eagle quite a bit with my grandkids
and I love the different elevations. Where the pyramid is what’s the elevation going to be from there saying that the two places is zero? How much lower is where the pyramid’s going
to be.
Russell: From here to the pyramid, I’m guessing its going to be somewhere between 6 and 7 feet.
Bird: And then 5 there?
Russell: And then 5 here.
Bird: The only thing I don’t see that you guys designed in over at Eagle that I really like is there’s an area around the perimeter of it that beginner kids get to can skate pretty
good. I don’t see there being a perimeter even over there. If I remember right, down there where you go down in what you call the half-pipe and stuff over there, up on the outside
they’ve still got a complete level thing that beginner kids, the younger kids can do it.
Russell: This plan does not have all of the elements that it’s going to have. When I say elements I mean, like the box and the pyramids. We have a lot of room right here.
Bird: Okay.
Russell: -- that we’re planning on working to develop into something we (inaudible). Just so you know, the committee that we’re working with, we have a broad range of ages.
Bird: Okay, that’s the main thing.
Russell: The youngest kid in the committee I think is 5 years old.
Bird: Good you’ve got to consider those type of kids. I mean they’re the ones that want to be out there too as well as the experts at it.
Russell: Absolutely. Then we have over here and then right in this area we’ll have some less steep type slope (inaudible).
Bird: So the beginner kids can do them.
Russell: You know they’ll have -- I feel pretty confident about this design. I’m really happy with it. I think there’s going to be a lot of open space. I think your more experienced
skateboarders are going to be concentrating on the half-pipe, your big steps and probably this element right here, this bower box.
Bird: And then going over the lawn.
Russell: Then there will be -- basically there’s going to be lawn all around it. It’ll just slope down. If you’re familiar with the Tully Park where we’re planning on it, this plan
doesn’t reflect it. I think maybe it’s shown on the plans you have a little bit.
Bird: Yes.
Russell: Lets see, this –
Bird: There’s one right in the corner there by –
Russell: This is Linder Road that runs along this side.
Bird: Okay that’s west side and this is the south.
Russell: This is where the parking lot is right here.
Bird: Yes this is east where the basketball courts set over there. No, I just want to make sure and I’m being selfish this way because I’ve got grandkids from the little ones and up
to and so do the Mayor that all kids are able to go and participate and have fun. Not just the -- we haven’t just designed it for experts or we haven’t just designed it -- if it’s like
Eagle, and I go to Eagle quite a bit, it’s a lovely addition.
Russell: I have to tell you, on the committee we’ve got some kids on the committee who I am assuming some pretty hot skateboarders that I’ve kind of had to check them a little bit and
say okay I understand. You know they want a lot of challenging things out there. I respect that and understand it but you have to keep reminding them that there’s other kids in the
City that are going to be wanting to get to that point and they’re not going to be able to do it unless they have some elements to learn on. We’re definitely taking that into consideration
through our process. I can assure you that this will be for all levels of skateboarders.
Bird: December 1st will be the opening date?
Russell: Well, I think what we’re probably going to plan on is December 1st to be substantial completion, give them a week for punch list items. Hopefully sometime around the 8th or
the 10th would be a time for grand opening.
Bird: Okay thank you. Any more questions for Doug?
Corrie: I don’t have a question but -- the only thing I really understand about that is the lawned area. Tell me what generation I’m in.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Bird: I thought when we cut the ribbon you were going to give us a (inaudible) skateboard. I want to get the skateboard.
Corrie: I’ll bring the scissors. You bring the skateboard and ride it.
Russell: I will tell you that –
Bird: They would have to have the Fire Department there.
Russell: I’ve gone out and spent a little bit of time in Eagle and you know us having our office in Eagle I talk to the Council Members over there a lot and kind of find out what’s
going on over there. The injuries have been minimal. It’s no different than kids playing football and baseball, that sort of thing. So, I wouldn’t really worry yourselves too much
about that. They’re pretty good at it.
Bird: Scrapes and bruises.
Corrie: (Inaudible)
Bird: Thank you Doug for the report. Speed on with it.
Russell: Thank you.
Bird: Mr. Kuntz.
Issue 8 Discussion of potential indoors ice rink at the 58 acre park
Kuntz: Item No. 8 –
Anderson: Before you move off that one Tom, can I ask you what you had budgeted?
Kuntz: 120. The plan is twofold as far as financing this. One is, and we’ve discussed this with the youth who are on the committee, is we know we’ve got to go out and find anywhere
30 to 38,000 dollars in donations. We propose to do that through the donation of concrete, gravel, maybe some of the benches and trees and those types of things. But we know we’re
over budget. The other thing you’ll notice which I don’t want to talk about until next week because the Finance Director said I couldn’t, is we are asking for some additional funds
to complete this just in case we cant raise the additional donations. But that’s the plan right now. I know Mr. Kogo is looking at possibly donating part of their design feet to kind
of get the ball rolling on this. We wont pin him down tonight but I know that’s in the back of his mind.
Corrie: Tom, just to put my two cents worth in I think it would be apropos for the kids to have a stakeholder in this and put some of their effort into this as well because they would
be more apt to keep it up and not have anybody tear it up if they’ve got some money into it and gone and earn some money to put in here. I would encourage that if its possible. I don’t
know Mr. Anderson may have a different idea.
Bird: I agree with you.
Corrie: If they become stakeholders they’ll take care of it.
Kuntz: Well, we basically told them that we will not be able to build a park of this size unless they participated in knocking on some doors with us to come up with the additional funds
necessary. We did have a discussion at Monday’s meeting on cutting down the size of this to meet our budget. I guess we’re hoping that there’s business people out there, businesses
that would have a soft spot for this type of facility and would donate. I know that we can get concrete donated. To what extent, I’m not sure yet.
Anderson: The partnership’s out there.
Bird: That’s right.
Kuntz: Yes.
Anderson: Just for my two cents, I tell you I would agree with the Mayor. I think if they had some ownership in it they would take a little bit better care of it. As tight as we are
on finances, I’m not for just hand more money because something is over budget. My thought would be to scale it back down to fit the budget or a partner and come up with the other funds.
Kuntz: Yes what we’ll do time wise is, start now on the fund raising, get the kids out knocking on some doors. Then have some alternate plans to scale back. That doesn’t -- isn’t
successful.
Bird: You better have this plan done by like you said Friday before you go hit on doors or hit organizations. I think there are some organizations that could be hit that’ll –
Kuntz: We’ll probably be calling Council Member Bird because we know that he’s very talented in this area of donations.
Bird: Yes, I just about ran out of donations.
Kuntz: So, we’ll be knocking on your door.
Issue 8 Discussion of potential indoors ice rink at the 58 acre park
Kuntz: Item No. 8, just a real brief background. This information is not on your packet. A group approached us approximately 2 to 3 weeks ago. They’re called the Blackstone Foundation.
There is a need in the community for an indoor ice rink, primarily due to the fact that the PAL Hockey Program and some local figure skaters are not able to acquire ice time at the
ice world. We’ve had a couple of meetings to discuss the possibility of putting up a temporary slash possibly permanent site at the 58-acre Park. The location would be where the master
plan has the Skate Park located now which is right here. With that I think I’ll introduce Ron and I can’t pronounce Marco’s last name so I’ll just introduce him as Marco. They’re representing
not only the Blackstone Foundation but also, I believe PAL. I will mention before we start that the Blackstone Foundation is a non-profit foundation.
Stevenson: Thank you Tom, Mr. President, Mr. Mayor and Council. My name is Allan Stevenson. I’m affiliated with the Idaho Junior Steelhead Youth Hockey program as a parent. I have
two sons who skate in the Junior Steelhead Youth
Hockey Program, a 13-year-old son and a 17-year-old son. Marco and Ron had asked me to do a brief introduction about our proposal, our concept for an ice rink here in Meridian. Idaho
Junior Steelheads by way of background has been in place for 2 years has had over about 150 kids skating in the program this last year. The Meridian PAL youth hockey program probably
had another 200, 250 kids skating in their program. Then there’s a significant number of figure skaters in the Treasure valley, all of whom, PAL, Idaho Junior Steelheads and the figure
skaters are without ice for their program in this upcoming year at Ice world. Our concept is our theme for IGS is on ice for life. Its not only hockey skills but life skills. We’re
really trying to build well-rounded youth, teaching them much more than hockey experience and hockey skills. I’d like to introduce three individuals. Marco Parchinaro on my left is
a former Steelhead Hockey player here in the valley. He spent most of his youth and his young adult life playing hockey. Now he is looking and is very passionate about returning what
he learned to the Youth Hockey Program here in the Treasure Valley and is a parent who has two children under his direction. He provides just great vision, great leadership and great
coaching as part of that program. Ron Taylor, on Marco’s left is a businessman here in the Treasure Valley. Ron was instrumental in working with Marco when the Junior Steelhead Program
was started two years ago. The two of them represent the team that has put together this concept for a sheet of ice here in Meridian. It’s perfect that we go from talking about ponds
to frozen ponds on the same 58-acre site. This one would be a little more conducive obviously to ice hockey. The third individual here tonight is Rob Dumas who is back here. Rob is
recently retired from the Steelheads this past year. There are a number of former steelhead players along with Marco and Rob who are interested in returning something to the game of
hockey and to youth in the Treasure Valley. With that, I’ll have Ron and Marco take over and they can give you some of the more technical aspects of the proposed concepts for youth
hockey in Meridian. Thank you.
Taylor: We’re here primarily to –
Bird: State your name.
Taylor: Oh, I’m sorry, Ron Taylor. I’m sorry. We’re here primarily to inform the Council of the project that we are proposing. We met with the Parks and Rec. Commission last night
just to give them some information. We presented a preliminary proposal to them. The intention last night was just to get some feedback. The understanding was that they were encouraging
us to talk with you tonight and get some feedback from you and also give you some information about what we are proposing. The Blackstone Foundation is the primary interest behind this
project. Its purpose is to try and get a rink and outdoor roller hockey facility put together for the programs that were described, mentioned primarily because there is not ice available
next season. PAL has expressed concern and so has the Idaho Junior Steelheads and the families expressed concerns about not having that available. With the market demands that are
out there for hockey
in the community and the fact that we are apparently at this point limited in terms of ice to run non-profit organizations, we’re pursuing to try to get a rink put together and are just
looking forward to the cooperation and involvement of the City of Meridian. With that I’ll just hand it over to Marco and have him go over some of the details. We do have the preliminary
proposal that we gave to the Commission and talked to the Commission about last night that we can leave with you if necessary. Otherwise, we’re prepared to follow up with some of your
feedback tonight with another proposal that’ll be more specific to the concerns we hear and the objectives that we have to live with in terms of the investors we’re involved with. With
that I’ll hand it over to Marco.
Parchinaro: My name is Marco Parchinaro. I’ll just follow up a little bit of what (inaudible). Basically we are proposing to build and operate the facility on your ground which is
community (inaudible). It is kind of urgent for these kids to have a place to play. We feel that there’s two non-profit organizations which is the Junior Steelheads and PAL Organization
which are the only two existing non-profit hockey programs. Right now they are being refused (inaudible). That’s why there’s a sense of urgency to build another facility that would
accommodate those programs. There’s also a figure skating group that is in need that lives in this City limits. The urgency on our side is there’s a lot of volunteers put a lot of
work into this. That’s one of the greatest sides of (inaudible) youth association. That would be transferred into that rink where it would (inaudible). Right now there’s a lot of
discussion in the hockey community that these kids may drop out of hockey because the price is raising just because of not being able to have access to ice. Now, we feel that this community
is heavily involved in ice-skating, hockey or figure skating and also in winter skating or (inaudible). Right now it’s unfortunate for these guys not to be able to put their effort
together and put them on the ice. Right now there’s (inaudible) being built and they’re lacking a facility. So, we’re looking to a working agreement with the city so we can get this
project together and have these kids on the ice as soon as possible (inaudible).
Bird: Council, any questions for Marco?
Anderson: Not at this time. I guess –
Bird: Go ahead Cherie.
McCandless: I guess, are you talking about building a building with an ice rink?
Parchinaro: Yes we’re talking about building a temporary facility that is removable. This is kind of Tom’s desire to be able to be more flexible with the project. Two or three years
from now, we could move away from that if it doesn’t fit in the plans of the City.
McCandless: I see. Would it be ice all year round or just in the wintertime?
Parchinaro: The goal would be to have ice all year round and use the roller facility outdoor for roller activities during the summer time.
McCandless: Okay thank you.
Bird: Marco what size area would your facility need? One, two, three, four acres?
Parchinaro: We’re looking at four acres. The building itself would be 35,000 square feet. Then we were asked this morning to probably, as far as the parking goes, it would have to
be if I’m correct and Tom can correct me on that, would be 100 spaces which is more or less an acre.
Bird: Now, as I understand it, you guys have the financing to completely put this up and not asking the City to put any of the facility up or maintain it or anything?
Parchinaro: As far as maintaining it, no. We were not looking at the City to do that. We’re looking at building it and operate it. (Inaudible). Since the parking was going to be
there in the long run, we were looking at the City to do that, to put the parking lot (inaudible). Right now, we would still like to follow that path but we are told that it’s very
difficult for you guys to come forward with this. Tom, last night, this is where we learned it at the Parks and Recs. consult. They said that it would be something that they would
have to look at very closely to say yes to that.
R. Anderson: Our focus is primarily the structure and the rink in terms of putting that in. We had initially talked about getting some help with the lands and site improvements and
possibly the parking. That, we’re you know still working on it. We understand that the parking is probably something that will be very difficult if not impossible but, our focus is
on the main structure, the rink itself and the operating of it.
Bird: Let me ask you another question. Here, a year, a year and a half ago, we passed on an ice skating facility on Overland Road. I don’t know what has ever happened with that.
Were any of you folks involved with that?
R. Anderson: Marco’s the only one that was involved and it was you know indirectly on the rink side of it. That was a, as I understood it, I was not involved. It was a multi use facility
with apartments and rink and retail and so on and so forth. Marco was being looked at to run that facility. As to where it went I have no idea. It’s still something that I think is
needed in the area.
***End Of Side Two***
Parchinaro: -- keep on going with the project (inaudible). As far as that goes the details (inaudible) and I kept the concept and moved forward to benefit the kids,
(inaudible). This is our primary goal, is to keep that focus. This is why its (inaudible). It allows us to put different sports together and non-profit organizations together to emphasis
on kids and sports.
Bird: Marco, how can you put up a temporary facility that is going to look like it’s in there? I mean don’t you have to pour some permanent concrete? Put the foundation stuff to have
that ice making machinery underneath all that slabs of stuff? How can it be moveable?
Parchinaro: There are two ways of creating ice. One is with concrete and having the refrigeration system underneath the concrete. The second way of creating ice is with sand. We
would burry all the refrigeration underneath the sand and then you would put the ice on top of the sand. Ice World, for example right now has two ice services. One is on the concrete
and the other is on the sand. We would opt for the option of the sand so that we can move our material to a different location if its not suitable to the City.
Bird: I see, you answered my question. Thank you.
Anderson: Marco, I have another question. I mean this is public land and these are public funds that we’re using to build this park. You indicated this non-profit organization and
the two clubs the PAL and the Junior Steelheads would be the groups involved. Is this going to be something that’s open to the public then, that they would pay a fee and they can go
in there and play? How are you going to control the hours and the use of it?
Parchinaro: If they would participate in the program, you know they would have to participate in the two programs that are already involved with youth hockey which is PAL and IGS.
These are public identities and to play hockey, you’ve got to play under structure. You can’t just go, show up and be one single person on ice and shoot the puck when the price of the
ice is fairly high. So, you need to have a structure to do that. Now, as far as public skating, we have discussed it. As far as the public hours, what you guys would get out of that.
Yesterday was only a workshop and we were not able to define on the hours you would get (inaudible).
Bird: Marco would you guys -- I’m quite familiar with the Optimist deal with Boise City parks which would out very fine. They basically give the Optimist Club some ground and give
us a year to develop it and we developed it. We have exclusive (inaudible) Capital Youth Soccer has exclusive rights. We do have to put in certain entities like playground equipment
so the public can come. I think something like that could be drawn up probably with us on this where the public would be allowed to use this if it was not being used but they would
pay a fee or an organization would pay a fee for maintenance and stuff. We would expect the City to not pay any maintenance. When it would be for a certain bit of ground, any landscaping
that is required by our parks department or our zoning
department and the building and stuff would have to be built to our regulations. But, I think that something possibly could be worked out in that kind of agreement on that kind of a
deal where you do have public access to it.
Kuntz: I guess I would like to pull this together. The proposal is to come in and build a temporary facility, sand based. It would have some concrete structure to it for spectator
areas. Install some kind of a bubble over the top of it. Staff’s recommendation, at first we were negotiating on the parking lot, but because it will service the rest of the park.
After last night’s meeting I think the Commission and one of the Council members feels like if the foundation wants to do this, they need to come in and do it in it’s entirety. As
far as being open to the public, the only way that staff would recommend that we do this is that the facility is open to the public, whether it be PAL or the Junior Soccer Club. When
they’re not using it, it would be open for the public to come in and skate. There may be some free times available in exchange for us putting that on our park property but, those are
all issues that we would need to sit down, come up with a proposal and come back to the Council. There are a lot of details and a lot of things that need to be worked out. The very
aggressive schedule in that they would like to have this open by November of this year so that they don’t lose the PAL Soccer Program but, the answer -- excuse me, hockey. Soccer is
in the summer but to answer Council Member Anderson’s question, we support, staff supports the concept as long as it is a public facility. It’s going to be a fee-based public facility
most of the time so that the investors can recoup their investment. In exchange for putting it on our property there’s got to be some time open to the public. Those are all issues
that need to be resolved. Just the concept, we need to get some feedback on whether it’s no, you don’t want it or yes, it has some merit. Staff moves ahead working with these individuals
to answer some questions. We did meet with Shari Stiles today to find out what it would take, if it would take a Conditional Use Permit. She said it would not but there’s a lot of
work and details that have got to be defined. Thank you.
Bird: The only thing I would say Tom is whatever is designed as a building Planning and Zoning had better accept it or deny it if private comes in and asks for the same thing. I can’t
see Planning and Zoning allowing a bubble to be put up on some industrial spot out here to have an ice-skating rink. So, whatever we design, it’s got to be passed.
Anderson: Mr. President.
Bird: Yes.
Anderson: I guess just to offer a little bit of input then I guess because that’s what you’re looking for tonight. I guess I have a couple of concerns. First of all I’d like to say
that the City of Meridian would love to partner with somebody and we’d love to have an ice skating rink in Meridian. I was like Council Member Bird that I thought we had approved one
and just was kind of waiting for it to break
ground and thought that maybe it was coming. This 56-acre park site, I mean has been something that has been in the works for 10 years. There’s been a lot of planning go into that
as far as the layout of the park. You saw a lot of that being presented tonight. In this first phase, I mean the estimate was 160,000 more than what we had budgeted for. The Skate
Park was more than what we had budgeted for so all these things seem to come over budget. One of the concerns that I’ve always had about this 56-acre site is the City of Meridian has
waited so long to build a park that now we want to put everything into one basket. Even our consultant has recommended don’t do that. Spread your recreational opportunities throughout
the City so that all the citizens can enjoy those parks throughout the City. As you can see, this thing is getting so congested. We have so much stuff in it. That’s a concern. I
would like to see a Skate Park but maybe in another area of town and in another park. The problem you guys have is the time frame. That time frame is the other major concerns I have
because you’re wanting to put this out in an area that we don’t even have phase two and we’re not going to build that. I mean this other phase is going to be built next year. So, you’re
wanting to basically put this out in the middle of a field at this point that we haven’t even funded and haven’t even gotten the final design on that particular work. So, I have some
concerns there. I also, like the park stuff I have concerns that if you guys are on that tight a budget that you cant put in a parking lot and we’re looking at temporary structures,
there’s just going to be one issue after another with the City. We’re going to want you to build a structure that’s nice looking, that meets all the codes and that includes fire codes.
I just dealt with a temporary structure out at the Idaho Center. There’s a lot of cost that I don’t know if you’ve thought about from sprinkler systems and ventilation and all those
kind of things that are going to be involved in this. I don’t even know how you can get through the Planning and Zoning process and be building this thing in November. I think the
time frame is going to be way too quick to be able to go in there and I have concerns about going in this particular site that’s already been planned and designed and we’re working to
do this in phases at this point. Those are my concerns.
Bird: Any other questions for Mr. Marco?
Corrie: Is that site that was originally set up with, was it (inaudible)?
Parchinaro: Voigt.
Corrie: -- Voigt, is that gone for sure Marco do you know?
Parchinaro: If the site is gone? I have no idea.
Corrie: I talked to Gary here about three months ago. He said that was still in la la land right now. I didn’t know exactly what he was talking about. I couldn’t pin him down at
that point. I think we came to an understanding where it was going
and where it was coming from? My question is, is that area still available for this type of thing and then have other coming into that?
Parchinaro: I guess I can’t answer the question because it became so difficult to have answers from that group. I think there’s an internal fight going on. We’ve tried again to make
it happen. Basically the door is shut for whatever reason we don’t know. That’s kind of difficult. That’s why we were far away from that first project. We’ve decided, I mean when
they were involved I went in there because of my expertise. They said yes, we’d be willing to help out and then when it didn’t work this when I contacted your. Primarily I contacted
yourself and see if there was any interest. There was and then you referred me to Mr. Kuntz and we wanted to know you know what would happen. (Inaudible) as far as building a second
tajh majal in town and having the same problem. We wanted to see if there was anything possible as far as a working agreement or a usage agreement of land with the City.
Corrie: Do you have any other site that you looked at right now?
Parchinaro: We’ve looked at (inaudible) discussing (inaudible) it was kind of feasible to go there because it was a temporary building that doesn’t look like a temporary building, just
that its moveable. I mean it looks like a building that could stay there. It could be permanent for 30 years. It’s just that you have the option to move it.
Kuntz: On your agenda tonight is land acquisition consideration on Amity. There’s a site there, 50 acres, 80 acres total but 50 that she’s looking to sell now. What we’ve been discussing
is that being PAL’s future home for all their activities. The reason that we talked about starting out with the hockey at the 56-acres is because there’s such a demand and an immediate
need. That would keep the program going until possibly it could be relocated at that site as a PAL, part of the PAL Program.
McCandless: Tom, what about the area that we were looking at on Storey Park that we were talking about a Skateboard Park in there at one time?
Kuntz: Council Member McCandless, I think there’s plenty of space there for it. We would need to look at the elevations because there is some slope to it. The other bigger concern
is that the speedway is very, very dependant upon that area for their pit parking for their weekly operation. I think that would be a tough sell to go in there and say you know we’re
going to you know take half your area which could (inaudible).
McCandless: You were looking at a Skateboard Park in there and you’ve got the same problem.
Kuntz: Yes, the Skate Park is 100 by 100 and this is --
Parchinaro: 200 by 200.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
McCandless: Basically what you really need is some donated land so you can build on it. Is that what you’re saying?
Parchinaro: Correct.
Anderson: What about, maybe I’m off on the size but what about the additional land that’s at the new Police Station on the other side of the ditch?
Bird: Yes.
Kuntz: The Chief’s here tonight if he would like to comment on that.
Bird: There’s four acres there. Isn’t there Chief? You’ve got the parking lot already.
Gordon: President Bird, we wouldn’t have any problem at all using that land for this facility. The Ice Hockey program because of ice time is really in jeopardy right now. I feel it
is a, not only a good program but I think its one that we need pursue. If that four acres is fine with you folks, we don’t have any plans for it for a long time.
Bird: That would kind of be out in (inaudible) area that we could put up a temporary building without being yelled at too much?
Gordon: Correct we were looking at the three acres on this side of the canal for in line hockey pads. So, yes that would be fine.
Corrie: I’m sorry, Mr. President.
Bird: Go ahead Mayor.
Corrie: You could actually, if that worked out that could be even a permanent place there for some time.
Bird: I don’t know. Yes, for quite a while.
Corrie: But you may want to move that later to a different spot if it works out. I was thinking that same thing, Mr. Anderson, must be great minds I guess I’m sitting next to one.
I was thinking of that and another place. Go out to, have a little chat with Jabil. They’ve got a park out there that they’re -- anyway this other might be a better position but it’s
a thought.
Bird: It’s a good thought.
McCandless: It’s a real good thought.
Corrie: Because you could do that pretty fast and you wouldn’t have to go through a lot of hoops as far as you would here. This one, I think it’s a nice idea but I’m like Mr. Anderson
in that it’s iffy. By putting up something that you’d have to tear down later, you’re probably better off by the Police Department and have some of the area there. You’d have plenty
of room.
Bird: Any more questions?
McCandless: No questions, just –
Corrie: Meeting with you guys pretty soon.
McCandless: Just a thought and that is I know the interest the in line hockey is very great and we sure need something like that. It would be wonderful.
Parchinaro: Definitely and in the proposal there was a roller pad that would benefit (inaudible).
McCandless: It is growing and I think it’s a great idea if we can find a place for you.
Bird: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Shari, the police site is zoned R-8 is that correct?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Nichols: Would this sort of facility be an allowed use in that R-8 zone?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Nichols: That was a short answer.
Stiles: The reason we had talked about the L-O -- the park site is zoned L-O, public and quasi-public uses are permitted. In an R-8 zone, they do require Conditional Use. Keith has
brought up the point that with the temporary structure they should have a conditional use.
Parchinaro: If it would be permanent, is it the same thing?
Bird: Once you get a Conditional Use. You just have to go through the Conditional Use thing.
Parchinaro: Okay.
Bird: Once it’s passed then you’re okay.
Parchinaro: Okay.
Bird: But you would have to get -- out here Shari, he would definitely have to go through a Conditional Use?
Stiles: At the police site, the Police Station site yes.
Bird: Yes okay. Any more comments.
Corrie: What’s your time frame again, starting?
Parchinaro: Of getting started? Yesterday.
Corrie: I like the way you think.
McCandless: They want to do it this year.
Corrie: Yes well I was just trying to --
Anderson: I’ll just warn you now, the wheels of government move slow.
Bird: I was just going to say you’d better get started. Thank you Gentlemen, I appreciate it.
Parchinaro: I would like to thank everyone for your time.
Bird: Thank you.
Parchinaro: Thank you very much.
Corrie: Mr. Dumas, I’m glad to see you back there. I usually have to see you from the stands but I was still yelling for you.
Dumas: I appreciate it.
Corrie: Okay thank you guys.
Anderson: Keith.
Bird: Yes.
Anderson: Can we take a 5-minute break?
Bird: Lets take a 10-minute break, come back at 9:20.
Re-adjourned At 9:20 P.M.
Issue 5 Discussion of request for use of recycling commodities for Storey Park playground equipment in next year’s budget
Bird: Call the meeting back to order now. We’ve had our breaks. Mr. Kuntz is still up here. The next item is a request for recycling commodities for Storey Park playground equipment
in next year’s budget.
Kuntz: In your packets, Item No. 2, memo was a request for the use of recycling commodities for Storey Park playground equipment in next year’s budget. Real briefly, we went with this
proposal to the SWAK Committee in May and you have a letter that I just presented tonight from, I believe it’s the Chairman. The Chairman of the Committee supporting our request to
use their recycled commodities. Also the Parks and Recreation Commission unanimously supported the recommendation at their last meeting and the City Attorney has confirmed that the
playground would be an appropriate expenditure of recycled commodity fund. I would certainly stand for any questions. I do have a sample here of playground material. The aluminum
is recycled cans and the plastic is recycled milk jugs. Also there’s a picture of one of the potential facilities that could be replaced with this (inaudible). Also, it comes with
the signage. In your packet was an example of the signage. It would basically say that this playground was constructed with recycled materials. It could be one of the first ones in
the valley.
Bird: Tom, questions please?
Corrie: Mr. President.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Tom, is this – where is this playground equipment going to go?
Kuntz: It would go into what we’re proposing in next year’s budget to eliminate the lower road by the Chamber. It would be approximately dead center in that road, is where it would
go.
Bird: You’re going to move it, get some shade on it so the kids can play on it?
Kuntz: Yes sir.
Corrie: And the revenue generated so far would be enough to take care of it?
Kuntz: I believe they’re estimating 28,000 by the end of this fiscal year. I don’t know if the Finance Director wants to comment on that or not.
Bird: Is that 28,000 and I believe that, which I’ll find out for you Thursday which way the friends of park. I think they’ve got some that they wanted to put towards some equipment.
I’ve got a question Tom on the recyclable playground equipment. I like the idea but is it as nice, Tom as what we’ve got in Tully Park?
Kuntz: Yes sir.
Bird: It is as nice and practical and it’s comfortable for the kids? That’s my main concern. That one in Tully is so nice you don’t get kids hurt. The youngsters don’t get hurt or
anything like that.
Kuntz: President Bird it is. A catalog might answer some of those questions for you too but, yes its no lesser quality than what we’ve got in Tully Park.
Bird: What is the cost, Tom to that like we’ve got in Tully Park? Is it 90 percent, 80 percent?
Kuntz: Actually, the recycled material is a little more expensive but if you’re asking what kind of facility can we build for that price. That’s what we spent at Tully Park was 25
for the equipment and 25 for the installation.
Bird: Yes.
Kuntz: So it’s about a 50,000-dollar project but actually the recycled material believe it or not is a little more expensive.
Bird: It is more expensive how about durable?
Kuntz: They’re saying it’s just as durable as brand new product.
Bird: I can’t see just -- I realize we’re getting the recyclable stuff back. Money is what we’re using to buy this but if we can buy that other equipment which has been very nice in
my opinion that we put out at Tully. If we could buy an extra piece with money saved by using that, I would be in favor of that over this, myself. I personally believe that we need
to stay to a high standard and this is evidently it.
Kuntz: Well, we talked to Boise City and they actually have components of this in some of their park facilities. They speak very highly of this product in the catalog.
I can’t say that they’ve got specific playgrounds with it but I don’t think we’re short cutting quality here by using recycled materials.
Bird: No, I’m not. I’m talking about dollar. I mean if we’re looking at two products basically the same in longevity and quality and everything like that, I would opt for the -- just
because its recyclable and its more expensive I wouldn’t opt for that.
Kuntz: Sure.
Bird: Because I think its more practical to the taxpayer to get the best buy that they can get. I understand, I don’t know if it’s true. Ron might be able to answer this but Nampa’s
got a recyclable playground somewhere I heard. Do you know Ron? In their park is that the one at Lakeview is that the recyclable one?
Anderson: I couldn’t tell you Keith.
Kuntz: I’ve looked at that one and it’s not.
Bird: When we were over at that luau did you notice what the most popular item was? And you can’t have it anymore. The merry go rounds, honest to god.
Anderson: I just wanted to say something a little bit since I serve on that Solid Waste Committee. When we did implement the recycling program, one of the things that we did in that
recycling program is we made the commodities that get recycled that that money go back to the City. Then we’ve been talking about that money that comes from those recyclables really
should be used in some way to help educate or to reinforce and to firm up the recycling program. That’s part of the reason why the Solid Waste Committee has been looking at avenues
that they could spend some of that money and return that money to the community. This project seemed like a very worthwhile one because it would be from recycled projects and the signage
was very important because that would be a positive example that we could point to the community when they’re complaining about, well what do you do with all this money that you get
back from your commodities. We can say well it went to purchase some playground equipment of recycled materials. We’re taking that waste that was intended for the landfill, and through
this process part of that is being recycled and we’re using recycled materials to fund this. It could also be used to purchase things like, out in Generations Plaza, I mean it could
be park benches that are made out of recycled materials or trash receptacles or those types of things. That money should be used on projects like this and this is the first opportunity
that we’ve really had to spend that. One of the things we did talk about was getting with Tom and if these are good quality products. From Tom’s expertise and him looking at them he
says they’re very comparable in quality. I think this would be a worthwhile project to spend some of that money on and it would be a good message back to the community.
Bird: I’d be the first to say go put something in but, I think from the taxpayer point, they would, yes. If the stuff we put in Tully even though it isn’t recyclable is 5 or 6,000
dollars cheaper --
Kuntz: No, that wont be the case. There wont be that big of a difference President Bird.
Bird: Well, then lets look into this. I just like the -- we need some new stuff there and we’ve definitely got --
Kuntz: The staff feels like the educational value really is important where kids can go to playground. The signage is made out of recycled plastic. They can say hey, you know this
is what we can use from the recycled material.
Bird: That’s fine with me as long as there --
Kuntz: Okay how much time do I have left?
Bird: You’ve got a bout 15 minutes at the most.
Issue 6 Discussion of the update on Bear Creek Park (Utility Plan Agreement)
Kuntz: Okay the next is No. 6. We did not include a utility plan in the first phase of Bear Creek Park. After reviewing the need to make sure that we get the water and electric to
the sites prior to planting, we would like to get Briggs Engineering on board to do a utility plan. On Page 3 of their plan in your packets, you’ll notice that we crossed through Items
C, D and E and only went with Items A and B. Primarily because either we will do this in house as far as the trenching and putting the conduit and the plastic pipe in the ground ourselves
or we will work out some kind of arrangement with Bear Creek developer to provide that service. I know that you cant take action on this tonight but I just wanted to let you know that
we’ll be coming before you at probably your next meeting. Also that we did, the attorney’s office worked on a Construction Agreement which was given to the developer approximately the
end of June. We haven’t heard back from them yet but we will be moving ahead with that and discussing the utility plan as part of that Construction Agreement also.
Bird: Any questions regarding this item?
Anderson: I have none.
Bird: Okay, Tom --
Issue 7 Discussion of potential land acquisition off of Amity Road near Meridian Road (PAL partnership)
Kuntz: No. 7 again I want to be very brief and what I’m looking for here is some direction whether you want me to even pursue this opportunity or not. We were approached by a lady
approximately three to four weeks ago who wanted to donate 10 acres for a City Park. In exchange she would like to propose that the park be named after her husband 48 years of age who
died last year. The proposal that we have, and we have met with our attorney and also met with Ada County Developmental Services. Shari Stiles was part of that meeting to see if we
could buy this land in chunks. She has, it’s a total of 80-acre site. I believe there’s a map showing the site cross sectioned in your packets. It is in there isn’t it? Okay she
would like to sell initially 50 acres, which is the flattest part of the parcel. She wants to retain 30 acres. It’s up on Amity Road. The preliminary proposal would be that we would
purchase 15 acres and she would donate 5 acres this year looking at an additional 15 with an additional 5-acre donation in the future. The reason that we’re looking at this site is
PAL again is looking for a central location. We would look to partner with them in that we would own the property and PAL would actually develop the property. I’ll stand for any questions.
Bird: I’ve got a question. Is PAL a 503 C1? Why cant PAL just, she can get the same tax benefit, let them buy it? Tom, we’re getting at the very, very southern end -- in fact some
of it isn’t even in our impact area, some of this. Yes, I guess all this is in it. We just went in battle to keep a development form going out just north of this. I would like to
see if PAL has the money and has the deal, let them do it and let them develop it and they can own a little bit of it. They can own it. Give them a nice deal and we can get on with
putting our money and energy to getting that 56 acres developed.
Corrie: Have you approached PAL at all?
Kuntz: Yes, we met with PAL. We actually went out to the site with them. I think because of financial constraints they would prefer to see the City purchase the property and they
develop it.
Corrie: They can purchase and we can help develop it? No, we cant do that can we?
Anderson: That’s my question. I don’t know where the money would come from to purchase this. Do you have some ideas?
Kuntz: Impact fees.
Anderson: But, we’ve already committed those for this year.
Kuntz: Correct this would be a purchase in next year’s budget. Again, I can’t talk about this tonight but I do have a request in there for 225,000 that would fund this purchase for
this year.
Corrie: Under capitol?
Kuntz: Under capitol under impact fees.
Corrie: There’s enough.
Anderson: The funding is a big issue with me. Then I’m kind of like Keith, I mean this is an area of our impact area that we’ve been discouraging development. So, if we did buy it,
in my mind it would be something that we would want to set for several years because we’ve been asking all the developers not to develop their land and set on it until we’ve got sewer
and water available. We would be setting a bad example if we then turned around and pushed to develop it even within the next 5 years after we bought it. I’m not sure it’s a piece
that if we’re wanting to develop more park space immediately that that would be a good one to buy. I appreciate the lady offering the donation and that definitely would help.
Bird: What is she asking for per acre to sell?
Kuntz: 15.
Bird: 15?
Kuntz: Yes she called us and within the next two weeks she had four developers on her doorstep. Maybe an option and I agree 100 percent with what you’re saying. I mean there’s development
that was just turned down by Ada County to the west of this site but, maybe an option would be that if she’s willing to donate 10, we buy 10 and you know, we bank that so we’ve got a
20-acre site out there.
Bird: 20 acres would really do a lot for PAL. My priority right now, Tom and I think Councilman Anderson stated a long time ago that we bid on that 56 acres for 10 years. I know we
probably need more park ground but I’ll tell you. You get that 56 acres developed and our acreage of park per thousand people goes up big time.
Kuntz: Sure.
Bird: If PAL is needing things and have the finances, if they’re a 503 C-1 which Chief says they are who is head of it. She can get the same tax deal and you know, we’re helping an
organization that is basically run out of Meridian. That gives them something to build on and we take our resources and our impact fees and go get that 56 acres developed. Tom, honestly,
if we go out there and buy
that, what do you think that developer is going -- we just got up and testified in Ada County that we didn’t want anything going out there and here we’re looking at buying a park ground?
I mean as slow as we develop and I realize the sewer will be out there before it was ever developed.
Kuntz: That was my thought President Bird is we would not develop it for four or five years until you know things were starting to roll out there.
Bird: How long?
Kuntz: 20 years okay, I think I’ve got clear direction.
Bird: No, I think I would like to see the lady be able to get a tax benefit. She evidently wants to and I’m sure PAL would not mind. I’m sure she doesn’t care whether it’s a full-blown
park or whether it’s a soccer field and baseball fields and whatever PAL would be able to do that. I think this would be a very good move for PAL.
Issue 9 Discussion of completing year-end projects with line item transfers (Bear Creek softball fields, 8th Street bridge to pathway and storage shed at Bower Shop)
Kuntz: Okay thank you. Where are we here? No. 9 thank you. On Page 2 of the memo, I guess I had it towards the back here. We’re estimating that we’re going to have some savings
in two projects. One is carry over which has already been identified for 62,000. The Five Mile Creek Pathway, we’re estimating, we’re going to have approximately 100,000-dollar savings
on that project. In discussion with the Finance Department when we were looking at capitol for next year, we talked about possible projects that we can complete in this year’s budget.
Of course, number 2 Generation’s Plaza bid over run is pretty much a given. Council approved that as far as over spending that to build that but the Eighth Street Bridge, what we’re
finding is that now that the pathway is built that people are using a 2 by 10 to cross the Five Mile Creek where there is a concrete dam there. We would propose to divert some of that
pathway money and start a new design. We can purchase a bridge for about 19,000 that comes already built and you set it in place. We do think it’s going to take some time to go through
all the legal and Nampa Meridian Agreement and that type of thing. Then Bear Creek Phase 1 I know we talked with the developer and we have 90,000 approximately left in the budget.
We talked about an 180,000-dollar total for Phase 1 which would cost us another 90,000 dollars. You notice there are 129 there. The reason we upped that is our softball program went
from 12 teams to 32 teams. Building those two fields is a very high priority to our program. We would like to get the fencing up this year prior to the grass being planted so we don’t
have to go back in and tear everything up. In that 129,000 would be the fencing, possibly some concrete slabs for future bleachers and that type of thing. So, those are just some things
that we would like to try and accomplish this year
within the budget money we have. I know you can’t take action tonight but I would certainly like some direction whether you’re interested in me pursuing this or going another way.
Bird: Council?
Anderson: What did you say we had going over budget on? Another project?
Kuntz: The Generations Plaza.
Anderson: Okay.
Kuntz: When you approved that Construction Agreement, we knew going in that we were over that.
Bird: We were 9,000 over when we said we would pick it up.
Anderson: Is there a possibility we can make up that 9,000 out of this 100,000 that you said we’re going to have in excess here?
Kuntz: Yes sir.
Bird: What is the Five Mile -- was this under budget or we just didn’t do it?
Kuntz: The pathway?
Bird: Yes, the Five Mile Creek.
Kuntz: We actually paid for 90 percent of it in September of last year.
Bird: That’s what I thought. So, we were ahead.
Kuntz: Yes.
Bird: I’ve got another question. Tom, on a baseball field, softball field, what just no bleachers or anything like that what do you consider the cost per field?
Kuntz: The backstop price per field is around 15,000. That’s for the backstop, 10-foot high wing fences just passed where the dugouts would be. We would not run the fencing all the
way down the corners like we have done at Tully.
Bird: But, you’ll come around?
Kuntz: Then an outfield fence which would be I believe 8 foot in height is what we expect here.
Bird: So, what you’re saying is you’re talking about 64,5 for each baseball field or is there other stuff to be put in?
Kuntz: No that would be primarily just the fencing. We might pour some slabs right away --
Bird: That’s two softball fields at 64, 5 each?
Kuntz: No, combined.
Bird: Yes, but you’re asking for 129,000.
Kuntz: If you subtract the 90 from that, that brings us to almost 40,000 so, we’re figuring I believe it was 15,000 a field. That was 30 for the fencing and that gave us 10,000 to
make sure that we get maybe some slabs and drinking fountains in stuff that we don’t want to tear the park up after we’re done.
Bird: I said, I’m sorry --
Kuntz: Then I don’t know if you remember but as part of siting the Skate Park at Tully, we would really like to get the softball out of that park because the fences are so low the balls
are hitting the picnic shelter roof. We’d really like to get the adult softballs out of that park, possibly take that outfield fence down on the first to open up more green space, make
it a practice site for little league or something. Having two fields next year is a very high priority because we see our program expanding even further. That’s a revenue generated,
not field construction but it does return money to the general fund.
Bird: It pays for itself.
Anderson: You want to relocate these baseball diamonds we just put in a few years ago?
Kuntz: No we want to turn them over to youth baseball and get the adult softballers who hit 350-foot home runs. I mean we had balls landing in people’s back yards at one tournament
that we had.
Anderson: Tell me about that bridge you were talking about, that 19,000 dollar bridge.
Kuntz: Yes sir.
Anderson: I may be a little extreme but I mean, they’ve got a 2 by 10 there and I think there’s probably something in between. A 19,000-dollar bridge, it sounds like we’re getting
real close to Ada County Highway District that we’ve got to over engineer everything and we’ve got to put the Cadillac in.
Kuntz: Sure.
Anderson: Is there something that’s requiring us to put a 19,000-dollar bridge? I mean I think I can build a real nice bridge --
Kuntz: No sir.
Anderson: -- for two or $3,000.
Kuntz: We would certainly accept that Council Member Anderson. Actually I had a discussion with Joe Simunich last week. He thinks Ron Yankee might have some concrete footbridges that
he’s got stored in some field somewhere. He’s going to talk to him to see if we can get one of those. We certainly feel like we have to have the Cadillac but we do feel like for safety
reasons we need to connect that park to the pathway because the 2 by 10 is not cutting it. If you’ve got a bridge for 3,000 we certainly would buy it from you.
Anderson: I could build you one if you want to give me 19,000. It would withstand an air strike.
Bird: I think that’s a conflict of interest Mr. Anderson. Any other questions here? Tom, did you get the directions that you needed?
Kuntz: Yes.
Bird: (Inaudible) we can’t do that.
Issue 10 Ribbon Cutting Ceremony for the Five Mile Creek Pathway
Kuntz: No, 10 is the ribbon cutting ceremony for the pathway.
Bird: What day is it?
Kuntz: We scheduled it back one day to Thursday the 19th at the same time. There were some ITP individuals that were key in it.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Corrie: That’s where I went across there in the little 4 by 4. They take the picture and they go present --
Kuntz: Anyway, we’d love to have you all there. I’m thinking instead of having a ribbon cutting that possibly we’ll have half a dozen bicycles there. We’ll have the Mayor and some
of the individuals ride the bikes across. Just so you know, we’re planning to have in the ribbon cutting ceremony, the Mayor, Joe Simunich
who (inaudible) the property, Charlie Roundtree and Tim Burgess who was our Engineer. I asked Gary Smith but he didn’t feel like it was appropriate. Those individual have been working
on this since 1994.
Bird: The one person that you should probably make sure that gets an invitation is Ron Tulsma. He’s worked on it for 20 years.
Kuntz: Oh, he has?
Bird: He’s the one that got the original grant.
Kuntz: Maybe we should have him involved in that.
Bird: He’s probably, if you want to look to talk to somebody about getting a bridge from Yankee, he’s the one that you could talk to.
Kuntz: Okay.
Bird: Him and Ron Yankee are very, very good friends.
Kuntz: Great I will pursue that.
Bird: Great Tom. That looks good. I volunteer the mayor to get some in line skates on instead of riding the bicycle across there.
Kuntz: All right. Real briefly --
Corrie: (Inaudible)
Issue 11 Discussion of Park Impact Fees collected through Ada County
Issue 12 Discussion of Park Impact Fees Update Process
Kuntz: The last two items I have real briefly, just to update you on the impact fees, both county and out local ones. We’ve acquired the Ada County Impact Fee Ordinance with Boise
and we’re going to be working with the City -- the attorney and I met today. We’re just going to see if we cant revise that and put Meridian in there and get this back to you and move
ahead. This is our Impact Fee Committee and again --
***End Of Side Three***
Kuntz: It is based a little bit on us finishing our action plan. Jerry Degrue is flying over here on the 23rd. We’re going to meet and he’s got a final draft to me. We’re going to
go through that page by page and get that finished up and move ahead with that.
Bird: Is this the final thing now Tom on this --
Kuntz: Yes sir.
Bird: That they’ve done for us? Okay.
Kuntz: That’s just the impact fee (inaudible).
McCandless: I’m going to bury you in this paper.
Kuntz: That’s all I have.
Bird: Okay thank you Tom.
Kuntz: Thank you. Sorry it was so lengthy.
Bird: No problem.
Kuntz: I missed your workshop last month when they canceled it.
Issue 13 Discussion of Ordinance for Full-Time Mayor
Bird: To me this was very valuable. I enjoyed it. Okay the next item is a discussion of an Ordinance for a Full-time Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I’ll let you bring this thing forward.
Corrie: Okay I believe you all heard my State of the City address and what I felt that -- its time for the Mayor’s office to be full-time with the things that they have to do. I asked
the attorney to draw up a post Ordinance. I believe, is it in here? Yes it’s pretty self-explanatory. I had a discussion with Keith and where I thought we should be going and some
people in the City as well. The time is being spent and I’m not -- I still believe that it should be full-time. The citizens of Meridian have the right to expect the Mayor to be working
full-time or, they might think what the duties that the Mayor has and also bringing in more commercial and the time that’s being spent there. It’s running 40 to 50 hours a week or more
at this point. As you know it is a full-time so, I think its time to make it an Ordinance that it is full-time. Again, I’ve always said that if something happened to me, it may be
difficult to get somebody part-time to do it its impossible to do part-time work. A City of 40,000 and growing, it’s just the same as administrator and CEO and anything else in a corporation
which Meridian is. So, you heard my speech on this a thousand times. I stand for questions you might have at this point.
Bird: Council, any questions?
Anderson: I have. Did you put in here half-time positions for Council Members too?
Corrie: No, as a matter of fact, I thought maybe we should --
Anderson: If you’re going full-time, we ought to be half time.
Corrie: Well, I’d be happy to have the attorney draw that in there and then I would say that you should be half time and should be taking care compensated accordingly. Your time is
more, we’re going every week but I think you realize that you’re working for more now than you ever were before.
Anderson: Mr. President.
Bird: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: Just a couple of comments. I was really struggled with this question two years ago when it came up. I felt Meridian was kind of at a crossroads at that point as far as whether
the Mayor ought to be full-time or half-time or part time or some of the time or whatever. I have seen just a tremendous workload in the three and a half years that I’ve been on here
and in the interest of trying to save money and thinking that we could probably take advantage of the Mayor for another two years I decided to vote to keep it part time. I think at
this point, I’ve about come to the conclusion that I agree that the Mayor position needs to be full time in this City. There’s more than enough work. I think the other thing that we’ll
do is a lot of people who may be interested in making a run at politics simply couldn’t afford to do it financially unless they worked, semi retired or independently wealthy. My feeling
is by making it a full-time position that the work is there and also it will help to entice more candidates who possibly may want to make a run at something like that. I’m going to
support it this time.
McCandless: Mr. President.
Bird: Yes, Cherie.
McCandless: I too support it wholeheartedly. I know that our present Mayor works full-time anyway. I think it should be a full-time position with the growth we’ve had and everything
that has to be done. I agree with Ron when he talked about future people that might want to run. I don’t think we’d get very good candidates if it was just a part time position. Not
too many people could afford that. So, I will support it.
Bird: Okay well, I was like Ron. I was wholeheartedly against it last time because I felt we needed a Financial Director first. I didn’t feel we could have either one. I’m not 100
percent for it and I’m not 100 percent against it at this
point. I want to see some facts and figures in from other cities our size. I believe there are some cities that have full time mayors, probably don’t need full-time mayors but they
started in the 1900 with full time mayors. I think there’s some cities large or larger than us that done have full time mayors. I want to see what the deal is but, I would have no
problem bringing it forward to the Council level, taking a vote on it. I’d like to see some public opinion to it. I think that its something that we need to let the people, get out
and get some feedback from them. I think this is important as raising your mill levy. As I’ve stated when I met with a developer that came in when the Mayor was out of town. He’s
100 percent right, the first thing they ask us is if we had a full-time mayor. I said well, we have a full-time Mayor and part time pay. We’re fortunate enough to have one. I think
it would get some younger people involved that would maybe run but then I don’t know about that either. If they don’t seem to want to get out and vote I don’t know why they would want
to run. If you guys want to bring it, I would like to at least let the public kind of have a little feedback. As most of you know the Mayor and I were both interviewed on Channel 7
today regarding this. So, maybe we will start getting some stuff and take a look at it.
McCandless: Mr. President I have, it’s amazing how much public opinion I heard. They all say they think it’s the most ridiculous thing in the world to have a part-time Mayor in Meridian.
I’ve never heard anybody say we should keep a part-time Mayor. So, I would be interested hearing what people would say if they come and testify because they sure have told me.
Bird: Well, to change the Ordinance as I understand we have to have a Public Hearing don’t we?
Corrie: No, not this.
Bird: Not this?
McCandless: No.
Bird: Okay.
Corrie: We’ve got a reporter sitting out here. He could write an article and have the people call the Council or write letters or whatever they – yes or no. Let them --
McCandless: Good idea.
Corrie: Let them send some letters to us and see where they’re coming from.
Bird: Would you mind doing that Frank? I’d like to because I think this is an item that -- I mean, I’ll be up front I have no problem voting yes for it whether we have a public hearing
or not but I think its something we have to input.
Anderson: I appreciate the input but I’m kind of like Cherie. I’m starting to hear and see the input already. I mean even on the interview that you and the Mayor did tonight they
followed it up with another four or five citizens that they just randomly asked. Not a one of them said no we think it ought to be part-time. I mean it was almost overwhelmingly in
support of full time. I’m pretty sure that’s what the outcome will be of this but I have no problem trying to confirm that.
Bird: I think, you know we also thought there would be no problem with passing the mill levy too.
Corrie: I think it’s going to go this time.
Bird: I don’t think it is.
Corrie: I do.
Bird: I don’t think we can get out and sell.
Corrie: I think that’s what we better do. There’s no question. I have a question Mr. President, for the attorney. We have to do this within a certain period of time, am I correct?
I think we have 60 days from the election time that has to be made into an Ordinance before the election? It’s not an election thing but it has to be done.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council I’m not sure of the deadline of this tied into an election date. What was in my memo is this has budgetary complications so if the Council
is going to go that way it certainly needs to be there so that by October 1st you know what the base salary is going to be and what the budget’s going to be.
Anderson: Oh, wait a minute. You’re talking about raising the salary too?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Nichols: I will check on the deadline regarding the election.
Bird: Then bring it forward whenever you want.
Corrie: I think Stacy has already stuck it in. I honestly don’t know what she put in there but I think it’s in that packet right?
Bird: I was going to say, I hope it is from what I’ve seen. We were going to have a big question answer period over the mayor’s budget.
Corrie: It might be in the high 20’s.
Bird: We were going to have a good budget.
Corrie: Okay.
Bird: Bring it forward when you want Mayor, I guess.
Corrie: Okay, then Frank if you would do that.
Bird: If everybody has heard it that’s fine.
Corrie: I mean he can, Frank’s here, he can –
Bird: He can write an article that we’re going to bring it forward. Okay.
Corrie: Bill, if you’ll get it to me I will get it as soon as possible. You’ve got it I guess in the budget. See where you want to go with that little change there.
Nichols: Mayor, members of the Council I would suggest you go ahead and put it on the agenda for two weeks from tonight.
Bird: The 24th?
Corrie: The 24th? Okay.
Nichols: Then that gives time for the input and gives time for the news articles to hit. Then you can have a vote up or down. It’s a non-land use item.
Corrie: July 24th? Okay thank you.
Issue 14 Discussion of Day Care Ordinance
Bird: Okay we’ve got that taken care of? The Day Care Ordinance.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Bird: Council, would you like to delay this until next month?
Anderson: Yes, please.
Bird: Let Mr. --
Nichols: President Bird, Mayor, members of the Council. Every so often we get asked what are we doing about the Day Care Ordinance. Partly because it’s on a running list of the Mayor’s
of things to ask me about every so often to see where we’re at. I think its just a matter of this is an Ordinance which was
propagated some time ago. It was before Councilwoman de Weerd and Councilwoman McCandless came on the Council. Do you want us to do anything with it? Do you want us to shelve it?
Do you want us to revise it? Do you want Will’s input? Do you want to hold a Public Hearing on it as to whether -- I mean this was before I started coming to the Council meetings
so I don’t know enough about it in terms of A what was the problem and B will this fix the problem that was out there that caused this thing to come up with? Or where you want to go.
I don’t have a problem putting it off but we just need to get to it to where we either do something with it or simply --
Anderson: I agree wholeheartedly and I think the second meeting in January would be an excellent meeting to put that on the agenda.
Bird: No, we had kind of set it on the back burner. I believe, and Will you can you’re the youngest, got the best memory but as I understand there was some things in that Ordinance
just wasn’t going to solve the problem that we had planned on it solving or did we have the enforcement to do it with.
Corrie: That was brought up by the attorney the same thing. I’m not too sure it is --
Bird: I don’t think it’s enforceable. I mean I just don’t think it’s enforceable or has the deal. So I think we ought to just put it on the back burner.
Berg: Thank you Mr. president, Mayor and Council. I believe some of the issues dealt with an incidence that happened at one of the daycare facilities and the personnel it was involved
with. I don’t think this Ordinance helped us investigate that person because it was a relative and there are some other issues that the Police Department brought up about getting to
that solution of that problem and it wasn’t going to do it. The other issues it dealt with was inspections, enforcement, licensing and getting enough revenues to have a person inspect
and enforce out of my office without being a burden on other taxpayers. There are several issues. Boise is large enough that they have a full-time person doing that. Actually I think
it’s one and a half people so there were a few issues. We had a Committee that looked into it and brought a few items up. I have contacted a couple of those people and they kind of
didn’t think it was such a hot issue but I think the real question was, was our Ordinance going to solve that problem with that incident and I didn’t think it was. Now, it could probably
eliminate other things but it wasn’t going to prohibit that situation from happening again.
Bird: So, what do you want to do? Forget about it?
Corrie: Personally I think you’re right at this point we should kind of shelve it until it comes up. If it happens to come up again or somebody brings it up. The only reason I did
is because its back there in my file and it keeps popping back up on me.
Bird: It’s still in mine too. I’d like to get rid of it.
Corrie: If that be the case, if we’ve got a little slower time, we can address it at maybe a workshop. If its not brought up Bill, I wont bring it up to you again.
Bird: Okay, Council with that I’d entertain a motion to go home.
Corrie: So –
Bird: Go ahead Mayor.
Corrie: I can’t. You can make it --
Bird: Okay, Tammy you can talk, go ahead.
Berg: Mr. President I just wanted to –
McCandless: Where’s my cork?
Berg: -- to bring attention to the calendar that I passed out and if I don’t bring this up Shari will probably shoot me tomorrow. On August 8th is the Public Hearing before the Ada
County Commissioners on Powder River and we’ll get you some information of what the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission of Ada County was to the Commissioners but,
she would like to have some people there. So, if you could put that on your calendar that there is a Public Hearing before the Ada County Commissioners on that date, we’ll get you the
information.
McCandless: What time?
Berg: I think it’s at 6:00. I’m not sure but I’ll get that information to you. She was going to follow up this morning with me but she didn’t get back to me and I wanted to get this
calendar out so that you had some idea of what’s going on. I’m sorry.
Bird: Mayor, do you want to make a motion to adjourn?
Corrie: I’ll be happy to step in for you.
Bird: I’ll make a motion we adjourn.
Corrie: Do I hear a second?
McCandless: Second.
Corrie: All in favor say aye. It’s done. Thank you.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:10 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK