Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002 01-07 Joint Ada County ACHDMeridian City Council Special Joint Meeting January 7, 2002 With Ada County and Ada County Highway District The special meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 8:30 A.M. on Monday January 7, 2002 by Ada County Commissioner Judy Peavey-Derr. Council Present: Mayor Robert Corrie, Keith Bird, Bill Nary, Tammy de Weerd, and Cherie McCandless. ACHD Commissioners Present: David Wynkoop, David Bevins, and Judy Peavey-Derr. Ada County Commissioners Present: Sharon Ullman. Wardle: -- for the item that I sent out to you. Nothing has changed except just the location of a footer on that page that shifted one paragraph into the wrong location. Tom Kuntz called and said did something change. I said no. (inaudible). (inaudible) stick to page seven. (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Wardle: You don’t have to do it right now. Eventually if you want to put it into your files. The other thing I would like to do for the sake of being able to get information out more directly is to also get --. Put one down each side here. The other side as well. (inaudible discussion amongst commissioners) Wardle: I want to get your email addresses because we did at least get ahead of the game this cycle. Everybody, 65 individuals on our stakeholder list either by hand or by mail received a copy of today’s report. That was handed out Wednesday of last week and mailed last Wednesday morning so hopefully everybody here has one. If you don’t have one, I’d be happy to provide this. I’m down to four now out of the 75 that we made. Those are available. (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Wardle: Charles got one and one got mailed. Ullman: Oh, did it? Okay. Wardle: One other thing that basically we put down at the end of the table, an opportunity to express back either by telephone, by fax, or email any thoughts or comments that you have. So, we’ll just put these out on the end of the table. They are comment sheets, an open format for you to say or suggest anything that you choose to do. I appreciate the opportunity to be here this morning. Since the last meeting that we had, which I believe was November 7th or there about. The date escapes my mind at the moment. We had several sessions. On Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 2 of 15 December 13th we had a land use discussion with basically all of the staff folks from the various organizations, the public and the private sector. On the 14th of December in this room there was a session that was sponsored by the City of Meridian that dealt with the commercial issues confronting the community. That was Ed Starky, who I believe out of Portland had been invited in to present, --. Actually he did primarily ask questions and listen. He didn’t really make a presentation per say. That was a very instructive session because we had a number of individuals that are involved in the commercial aspect of the community as well as planners that are dealing with those questions in their projects. We also, as you know on the cover sheet of this status report, we have a transportation workshop this Friday. Again, anybody is welcome but it's at ACHD. It's primarily to work with staff to talk about how the infrastructure for the roadway system will come together. The types of potential standards and certainly get into the discussion of the impact fees, LIDs and so forth. That, as noted, is at 2:00 at ACHD this Friday. Then the next significant public forum will be in since the schools were closed during the holidays we didn’t have the opportunity to get the location established but we do have January 30th from 6:00 to 8:00 P.M. a public information open house. We’re going to be working with the school district today and tomorrow to try and get our location established. Partly we’ll use both the newspaper, we will use fax, we will use email to inform everybody of that specific location. Those are the main next big steps coming. The information that we presented to you is actually the third generation draft. As we have worked with the various staff level groups and the developers themselves, we had started with a draft foundation report. There have been some modifications, not dramatic but some. A couple of seats at the table and two right over here. The information that is contained here is as noted not intended to incorporate everything that you would see in a Comprehensive Plan. The City is working on a comp plan. They’ve got background information from the June 2000 document that’s being updated and will eventually have all of the demographic employment and other projections contained therein. But this effort, as noted on the bottom of the first page of this, the North Meridian Plan is going to be a framework within which development proposals will be reviewed, approved and constructed including the means by which public infrastructure and community facilities will be implemented. In instance work, we’re focussing our efforts and attention to that north Meridian area and this will become the guide both in terms of policies but perhaps specific ordinance amendments. Perhaps a specific overlay that will fix on North Meridian a set of standards and guidelines by which all development applications will be reviewed and approved. I’m going to just make a few comments that I choose to make from this. I’m assuming that if you’ve had it for a few days, you’ve had an opportunity to look at it somewhat. I’d like to take you to page three of that white foundation report. The conclusion noted there in the middle of the page basically suggests the products of this effort will be the land use overlay or some similarly agreed upon form with specific development standards and incentives. It will have detailed implementation policies. It will have a structure for public and private agreements setting forth phasing and construction of infrastructure including the parks, schools, public facilities, and transportation system. That’s really what we’ve been, I guess, moving toward that long-term objective for the last six, seven Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 3 of 15 months. On the top of page four, it's kind of a startling statistic but the first paragraph it talks about density. It's interesting to note that according to the background report of the Comprehensive Plan that in 1990, Meridian had a total of just over 3600 housing units of all types, 3600. The WGI study through ACHD suggested that at build out north Meridian would have 15,912 housing units. That’s about a quarter and a half times factor. That’s actually based on an overall density less than what I think we need to shoot for. So, I’ve suggested that, depending on what the density ranges are, we could see about six times the 1990 number up to 21,000 and some odd dwelling units in north Meridian. Whatever that number is, the range of population in north Meridian will be between 43 and 58,000 people. That’s an area that’s in and of itself demands a significant number of services and support facilities. That in part is discussed as we go along. Among the significant issues that will have to be addressed, one of them that deal s with the question of growth is of course the basic element of sewer. I know that on Tammy’s draft she had an exclamation point and a question mark at that particular section. What we’re proposing is that there would be two methods, and that’s discussed somewhat in here but it's also discussed in the tan section, which commences the provocative discussion, of how these facilities are done. On page three of that tan section, where it talks about urban service policy issues, it talks about sanitary sewer. I want to use that as just an example. We suggest that expansion of the sanitary sewer and or water service shall be at the option of either the City of the developer. The developer initiative and this is item No. 3 under that policy compilation (inaudible). Number three there, it says the developer initiated efforts shall be approved as long as the area to be served conforms to the City’s long term system expansion plan. Developer initiated system expansion must be for properties that comply with the City’s annexation policies (inaudible) where sewer and water services are or will be available. Now, let me take you back to page five of the white. The statement that we make is that, let me go to this map as an example. There’s the Bridgetower project, which I think, is fully approved now, right? Bridgetower has taken essentially the City’s limit up to McMillan Road. The sewer treatment plant in this location and the trunkline that’s in the ground, we’re suggesting that orderly growth could be just as easily in this kind of increment outward as it would be necessarily in just filling up the mile section immediately around. As long as it conforms to the City’s plan for the way that the systems are expanded and as long as it meets the objectives for the property being contiguous to existing City limits and is serviceable. That’s a major discussion. Again, the provocation document here is to get people thinking about this is going to be done. One other significant thing that came up really, it was serious, you know given a great deal of discussion but you know drainage is going to be a real challenge. You’ve been thinking about drainage for a long time haven't you Commissioners? (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Wardle: I’ve heard it before. We’re either going to see a great deal of land surface used or we’re going to have to find some other solutions. One of the challenges I think is where the public entities and the developers are going to Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 4 of 15 have to work together and where there are natural drains controlled by the irrigation, and we’ve got to find a way to be able to use those because we can't see all of north Meridian, or frankly any part of any community covered with extensive areas that are set aside purely for drainage. ACHD has studied part of north Meridian and they’ve got a --. They’re working on a scope for, I’m not sure if it's the balance but a significant portion of the rest of the area to a consultant. They’re working on a scope of services for that effort. You’re looking at from the perspective of ACHD’s responsibility but frankly all the local streets that are developed in this area, as they have in the rest of the community are also part of that equation as they develop and become your responsibility. You’ve got the drainage issues to deal with. (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Wardle: Yes, David? Bivens: One thing I didn’t notice in here is, dealing with water. I would hope that this can emphasis the fact that all of this new development, (inaudible) would be used by surfaced water. This would help some. In other words for gardens lawns, all of this would be used (inaudible). Wardle: You’re talking about stormwaters that --? Bivens: Yes, water that you could use like drain water. Using your drainage water to irrigate with. I mean, it could be done and is done. It may have to be strained. It may have to be pressurized, probably. Peavey-Derr: Is that for the purposes of recharging the aquifers? Bivens: (inaudible). Number one it helps the drainage. Number it cuts down on the draw out of the aquifers. (inaudible) it does help with the recharge. Any time you don’t do that and let it run down the river, it's gone forever. Wardle: Sure enough. Unfortunately most of the drainage water we get is non- irrigation season. We will have the drainage coming out of the irrigated yards and so forth and off the streets. I don’t disagree but there certainly needs to be some consideration. I’m not sure how that necessarily plays into at least the land use, the primary emphasis here but I’m, we’ll just make sure that the discussion (inaudible). Bivens: Just note it so that you don’t forget to deal with water availability as well as drainage. Peavey-Derr: One more thing Mike. When you say that a significant amount of the land might have to be used to handle the drainage problem, have you projected how much of this? Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 5 of 15 Wardle: No. The challenge in north Meridian is the (inaudible) water table. Standards for subsurface drainage become quite frankly unfeasible unless there’s a change and some new concepts on how to deal with it. It becomes obvious that surface drainage systems are going to be a real fact of life. One of the things that we note here is that you can combine usable open spaces and drainage as long as you find a way to handle the low volume nuisance water so that they don’t impede the use for recreation or whatever other purpose it might be there. Clegg: The City of Boise sponsors a stormwater drainage conference every year. I think, I’m not positive but I think it's the 14th and 15th of February this year. Tom Richmond is going to be here. I think that that would be maybe a good place to get informed. (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Wardle: That January thing I think is on the river and --. Clegg: Yes. This one is specifically stormwater. Wardle: Stormwater is an issue that has an impact on the land use aspects of our community development. On page six, we get into a discussion of the concepts that starts to carry some weight with regard to the way the City will be dealing with the issue of parks and open space. We’ve reviewed and I think that, --. Tom when is your --? You’ve got a hearing coming up on the parks plan? Kuntz: February 7th yes. Wardle: It's going to BCA? Kuntz: It went to them and we’re going to the Realtor’s Association at the end of this month. Wardle: Okay. This plan is important in that because of the nature of the proposals that are contained in that plan. We’re suggesting a change that needs to be thoroughly discussed as that plan goes through the process. That is to include neighborhood parks at a correct size and standard that would be both manageable and easily maintained so that the system in north Meridian includes --. Right now, the plan calls for three community [parks and of course there is the large regional park. We’re suggesting that consideration needs to be given to a neighborhood park system that is public. In part because the plan talks about co- location of schools and parks for instance but encourages neighborhood parks, at least in that initial draft to be private. Our concern is that as you see a private park you really will never have the joint use because you’ve got then the Homeowners Association maintenance responsibilities, the turf issues, liability issues and so forth. We don’t want to encourage or suggest that the City needs to take in small hard to manage parks but a system now that somehow gets beyond the question of the large regional and the community size parks and Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 6 of 15 something that serves these neighborhoods in a public sense because we’ve got a lot of territory out here that will not have that service and availability. It's a discussion that needs to be had through the process of review. At the same time, we’ve also suggested a way to help get parks and other facilities improved. I think the priority right now is acquisition. But acquisition without improvement really doesn’t serve the community. So, among the considerations that we’ve discussed is a concept to bank the difference between a standard development responsibility for five percent open space. If you went through a PUD process project which now requires ten percent or other amenities. Take the difference between those two and put that money into a fund that adds to the resources that would be available for acquisition and improvement. Of the ten policy issue discussion we talk about that concept so that it becomes a win, win for the City and the developers both. The developers get to use that land for the purpose of recouping the cost but contribute that value into the fund that’s above and beyond the impact fee contribution. One of the things that I want to stress is that I want you to pick up the comment sheets today as you go out today because I’m hoping that you’ll have some responses to some of these ideas. If you haven't had time to read it, take it and read it and then make your comments because some of these are new and some of them are an attempt to try and help find solutions to problems that you are experiencing. Twice now, the voters have not supported your efforts to try and help get some additional resources into the funds to help on these public facilities. Peavey-Derr: Mike, where has this banking program been tried in other communities? Wardle: I’m not aware that it's been tried anywhere. Peavey-Derr: I think it's a great idea. Wardle: Well, we’re trying to provoke some thought in this process. This would be on page four of the tan section. (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Wardle: (inaudible). I’m sorry the tan section. But it basically says the developer will have the option to A, contribute the value of increased open space or amenity requirements, ie the five percent difference between a subdivision and a planned development or substitute public open space for required private open space if that property is (inaudible) a public park site or open space facility. The second bullet, the developer would be entitled to develop that land for which the contribution is made or add the equivalent of some unit count per acre for that land donation. An attempt to try and get some ideas to overcome some of the challenges that we have faced as we’ve gone through development up to this point. Another significant challenge that faces the community, we don’t really necessarily offer any solutions other than to say that it really has to be set up carefully is the question of being able to provide the fire stations in north Meridian. We’ve had several sessions with the fire department to talk about the Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 7 of 15 constraints on the funding and the ability to get a million plus dollars to construct and to equip a station. There needs to be some serious review and discussion on how that significant community facility is put in place. EMS actually appears to be doable in the structure that they’re proposing they would probably go into the established community in the west part of Meridian to serve both north and west Meridian. The Police Department and the program that they are using, it appears that they would be able to use facilities in commercial areas and so forth as you know just spots to do some of their paperwork and so forth, would not need necessarily any facilities of their own but could use any, even a fire station for that matter. The only comment that I want to make about the transportation system is that we have the workshop coming up Friday in which we will start discussing a bit more on how the transportation system and the costs associated with that system will be factored. I do have I guess a comment on the concern about on page nine talking about a collector system. I am concerned that, right at the beginning of that first paragraph under collectors, it says the transportation system’s second fear is the collector. ACHD in a study that was funded last year drew a conclusion number three which states collectors should be continuous within any given one mile section. I’m going to talk about land use here in a moment because I think that’s a significant concern for the integrity of a neighborhood. We’ve got some concepts on how to deal with that. It’s our feeling, at least my feeling, and it may or may not, --. The collector system should be required only where the number of trips actually requires it to occur and not necessarily go all the way through. I can see a question on one of the Commissioner’s minds back there. I’m going to get back to that one in just a second. (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Wardle: I have a board you haven't seen yet here today that I want to get into. The last comment is that with regard to the commercial, Tammy picked up a word in part of this text that said that the north Meridian would be predominantly residential. While that’s true in terms of sheer numbers, the concern is that it's not only residential. It has to have something more than that because if in fact, we ended up only with a bedroom community, then all that community, 43 to 58,000 people or whatever the number finally turns out to be are all going to be headed across this community to the regional services that are available currently. We make a note of that in the draft. We had a meeting last Thursday, which is a follow onto the meeting that we had in December. We started talking about the land use portion of this effort. We had really kind of an interesting discussion. A lot of people didn’t stay in their seats. We got up around the boards and went through several literations, started to talk about how we structure the services and so forth. This was an early concept. (inaudible) get into this kind of a concept. After that meeting Thursday morning, we went back to our office and tried to put it on the board. Now, we need to hand out two items here. (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 8 of 15 Wardle: We have (inaudible) table. Here’s a larger copy of --. The white sheet is the same thing as the cover sheet of this tall green but it might be more readily seeable. (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Wardle: The conversation that we had last Thursday led to the idea what we need is a great deal of flexibility but we also have the need to assure that we have the services that are necessary to take care of this community in the future. Now, among the considerations, you’ve got from our perspective a couple of givens in the transportation system. You have Chinden Boulevard, which is the major east west corridor for this entire region coming out of Canyon County. It serves certainly the drain of Eagle and west Boise and Meridian for that matter. We also have an existing connection on Linder Road from Highway 44 down into Meridian. We’ve got the future Ten Mile interchange and the potential for a connection to the Emmett Highway. So, what we have done in the transportation discussion is propose that Black Cat Road be the one designated and reserved for the future north south connection in part because if we ended up only on Ten Mile just one mile west of Linder, there’s a very real possible from my perspective that we would never see the funding for a bridge that close. That would put this crossing roughly half way between the Star and the Linder Road area. It would also then make access from Ten Mile eventually to Robinson Road somewhat more feasible. We’re not the transportation planners but we wanted to at least get something on the board that becomes the starting point of the discussion. As a result of that assumption, we see that Chinden Road and Black Cat would be the main focal points with Linder Road being the second here. What we’re proposing in this concept, I guess we started with the residential first and (inaudible) start with that building block. No, I’m going to reverse it. I’m going to go to the last sheet and talk about the concept of a mixed-use regional designation. That regional mixed use does not preclude residential but it does require a mixture of commercial, employment and residential and allows a higher density of residential but it restricts single family detached within an eighth of a mile of that intersection. Essentially you can't put your single family development right up against a major intersection in either of this corridor or this corridor or this corridor. But, you could have single family detached within these areas as long as they have a certain provision. The regional mixed use allows for the major employment centers that could happen. Could be tech parks, could be a shopping center, could be some large elements that we’ve seen as Meridian has developed to the south. Any of those uses would be allowable within the mixed- use regional designation. That again, Chinden Boulevard and the notes here on Black Cat. The next designation would be community. Community scale and let me just note that we’re talking projects that would be 25 acres or more, perhaps substantially with 300,000 square feet of space in those regional centers, or more. The community mixed use designation which is along Linder Road would be a community scale center of 200 to 250,000 square feet occupying 18 acres or more. We have essentially a service area of up to three miles to include grocery, department stores, home supplies, discount retailers and higher density residential uses would be allowed. Again, anything less than 8 units per acre Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 9 of 15 would not be allowed to closer than an eighth of a mile from that intersection. Now, I want to show one other important concept. We talked about access controls and so forth on the transportation system and ITD has such a policy in play on Chinden. We expect the same thing to occur. I’m using this corridor right here as the example. We would certainly expect to see at the quarter mile section, at the half mile section, essentially three major intersections potentially. Not all of them (inaudible) within that area. You would also have then no direct frontage. You could have some right in right outs on some of these systems. But you would essentially have the access into your major corridors through these controlled intersections. The same thing would occur that out of the residential component within each of these you have to have access into those service nodes. You cannot force people to the outside edge and require them to go on an arterial to get to the services. It has to happen. So, we’re simply showing that there’s a multitude of access opportunities and controls that provide for the residential components to move actually through the sections to get to any one of these nodes as well as the ability to get off the major roadways at intersections that make it (inaudible). So, that concept applies particularly to the community and regional components. It also applies then to the next tier down which is neighborhood. We’re proposing in the document, the foundation document that there needs to be more definition in the comp plan and the zoning ordinance on what the size and the hierarchy of commercial is. The neighborhood concept here is a little bit different from the concept that’s being proposed by the staff in the existing comp plan. The neighborhood is a five to 12 acre development that again, could have retail, could have offices, could have residential of eight units per acre or more. It serves primarily the surrounding neighborhood elements. You would not expect to see anything that would draw on a regional or community wide basis therein. You could have your grocery store, drug store, a restaurant, food, banks, and other services. All of those uses, again, focus somewhat but with the same types of controls. Access from the neighborhood and probably controlled intersections back into the quarter of a mile or slightly less in the case of the neighborhood centers. So, at least we’re not impeding our intersections. We’re moving the traffic through and that’s one of the standards that we’re going to have to discuss with ACHD on what those roadways start to look like. The fourth tier, is probably what the planning staff has been calling out for neighborhood centers. We call it the village center. This would be again, a mixed-use designation with a building area of typically of 15 to 35,000 square feet occupying perhaps up to six acres. It would allow for those smaller possible retails. Quite often you would expect more of the professionals, the dentists and the doctors and others that might be more appropriately located close to the community but don’t necessarily want to be in the higher use nodes. We suggested that any of these areas along these roadways allows for that opportunity instead of necessarily specifying specific locations the door is open for that. Again, it has to be a mixed-use concept. It can't be just one use only. It has to incorporate, and typically it would be residential along with it. Finally the last element in there is a simple, central designation of residential. No definition by R-2 or R-4 or R-6 or whatever the designation may be. Residential and residential only. A minimum density of three units per acre. That doesn’t mean that one guy gets to come in with one acre lots and somebody else has to make Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 10 of 15 up the difference. It means that every project that comes in has to have the mixture of uses that at least achieves at least three units per acre. It doesn’t seem that dramatic but when you look at the changes that occur, no the changes but the growth that occurs up to Ustick Road and in West Boise. The density coming out of full build out are less than three units per acre. They’re at 2.8 or less. The WGI study suggested that there would be sections out here that would be far less than three units per acre. We’re talking about an urban community in the future. We’re talking about the possibility and hopefully the encouragement for public transportation in the future. We can't do that if in fact, we don’t get our densities up. So, we’re suggesting a minimum but we’re also suggesting that you could have higher density uses but in this R designation if you go above eight units per acre overall, you’re going to have to come through for a Conditional Use Permit because there are plenty of opportunities within the other tiers, these mixed use tiers to have your higher density uses and see your higher density is toward the outside and your lower densities, typically your single family detached unit is to the interior. I want to go back to the transportation comment we made earlier. We’ve got of course the grid for the arterial system. I interpret the study that was done for ACHD is saying that a continuos collector whether it might even have some squiggles but an arterial to arterial connection across those sections. My concern is that if we do that we’ve now subdivided our square miles down to the quarter mile sections. I would much rather see something where the traffic build up requires just beyond the local standard wherever that occurs, that segment of the system has to be a collector. But not necessarily to include the collector system all the way through the section. If we accomplish what we’re looking at here, we’re going to have the services, everything is going to be available to those folks. They can get out to any component of the system that they want to through their own neighborhoods but we don’t need to necessarily encourage higher speed, higher traffic volumes through those sections. I want to just show a couple of examples of how some of these may occur. I’m trying to protect the innocent here in doing so but --. These happen to be concepts that I’ve been working on for the last several years. This is one that shows a commercial component in the corner with office and higher density elements around it. I don’t know if this project has actually gone forward yet but this is a concept that I did in October of 99. Basically, in a smaller scale back to the neighborhood scale, but gets this type of a use and focuses some of the attention out of the residential component into that area, provides some buffering. Here’s actually one that we’re working on in north Meridian. It happens to be right at the half mile line. We don’t straddle the half mile line but we’re right at the half mile line. It takes up the concept of the neighborhood, excuse me the village center. Also then a tremendous amount of interconnectivity and smaller blocks and the street system so that you don put all of the traffic on any one particular part of that community. This is still very early. You can see it's in rough form. We’re working with the adjacent properties on this currently so that we can at least mesh this together. This point right here is the center of the section. It creates the opportunity for, by the way this is what I call my Darth Vader. I’ve been working for years to get this concept (inaudible). Then another concept that fits more what we’re talking about here, the concept to get your major retail spaces buffered with office and high density residential and a major intersection Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 11 of 15 component, not easily cut through but never the less a component that would allow transportation to come into this basically from behind. These locations would probably fit the standards currently. But the emphasis here is form the interior and not from the corner. These concepts, from my perspective, and of course one of the tings that I have to put a (inaudible) on this, is you think that by creating this flexible pattern that you’re going to see nothing but wall to wall commercial out there. You’re wrong. Commercial developers are not going to make the investment for more than what the market will bear. You can see a lot of vacant commercial land around communities because the analysis that people do to secure and make their investment payback are going to be factored on the reality of the marketplace. The reality of the market place in north Meridian is going to be a tremendous (inaudible). We want to provide not only the elements of a community but we also want to provide the elements of service and commercial uses (inaudible). This is not isolated only for Meridian. The interface that you have with Eagle and West Boise, all of this becomes part of the factor of north Meridian as well and pass by traffic from Canyon County. Anyway this is where we are at the moment. Hopefully, provoke some of your thoughts and discussion. Yes? Peavey-Derr: (inaudible) gasoline stations. Let me ask you, I mean, we did (inaudible) you’re not talking about that? You’re just talking about smaller trucks making deliveries, is that correct? You understand where I’m going with this, when they spill or something to that effect. (inaudible). Wardle: Frankly, (inaudible). Peavey-Derr: Okay. Wardle: Maybe gasoline is the trophy to that building center, maybe it's just a neighborhood center. I don’t know. That’s a (inaudible). Peavey-Derr: I’ve been thinking about environmental spills and those kinds of issues and trying to get the large vehicles, the service delivery vehicles out of communities. (inaudible) (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Peavey-Derr: I don’t know exactly what I’m talking about but I don’t know that a neighborhood needs to have (inaudible) residential. Wardle: Those would be located however at the arterial. So, I mean it's not that they would be going through the neighborhood per say. Wynkoop: I’ve got a couple of comments. One is that I really think that the analysis in the white pages is excellent. There are still some things that need to be debated but the first (inaudible). I at least, as one commissioner, I’m very interested in some of these kind of village concepts so long as there is acceptable interconnectivity so that we don’t have to end up building the section Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 12 of 15 line roads to seven lanes by ending up doing that. So, I would kind of advocate maybe on page nine of the white page for example adding in something like or other acceptable interconnectivity concepts. Or something like that to leave that door open to have further discussion. I think if our board of Commissioners is persuaded it accomplishes a goal that we seek to accomplish on interconnectivity we may be very open to some other ideas. Wardle: (inaudible) I’m sure Kristy you’re putting that down for a discussion on Friday. Wynkoop: That’s right. In that regard, just a couple of comments if I may on the tan pages. Wardle: Yes. Wynkoop: You saw me smiling earlier. One is on page three, drainage policy issues. Of course this is where we start getting into the tough stuff, the tan pages. The general goal statements in the white pages are a little easier. Blanket speech 286, I’ll just give you the executive summary. That is ACHD is not a drainage district and does not have funding to be a drainage district. Since there is an acknowledgement there in paragraph one under drainage and the development community, I would urge considering the same acknowledgement in paragraph three, the public agencies and the development community shall be responsible. We sometimes have some influence over the irrigation and drainage entities but as you know it may not be any more than anybody else has. That’s something that I think is going to have to be a partnership effort. That the public agencies alone are not going to be able to solve the long standing debates with the drainage and irrigation entities. Then if I may on page six, I have just a couple of small wording suggestions. I think that you’re getting into some very complicated concepts here. I may be trying to oversimplify the debate just a little bit. For example, under paragraph one that second black bullet. I realize this is a draft but I would urge that that be deleted at this point because I think it may be misleading. Wardle: Developer shall be compensated for --? Wynkoop: Correct. There are certainly some circumstances where under our impact fee program developers will be compensated. There are other instances where projects are going to be developer funded. I think the debate and discussion that will be had later this week is how do you pay for all of this if you have an impact fee program that is not generating enough revenue to pay for all of this. So, I would urge you to delete that bullet. I would urge that you delete the bullet, the last under paragraph two there’s a three blanks and delete that little bullet, if by donation the developer shall be entitled to impact fee offset credit, then it's not a donation. So, that’s not an accurate statement, I don’t believe. At this point --. Wardle: Maybe donated and part of it comes out of their other part. Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 13 of 15 Wynkoop: Yes. Correct. The right-of-way shall be acquired by ACHD by purchase or donation. That’s acceptable. The black bullet next, I think is (inaudible) misleading. Wardle: Obviously, I’m going to leave this here for that future discussion. Wynkoop: Yes, I understand. I’m just making my comments as one commissioner about some language changes that I think would make this a little bit more straight forward. Then, that bullet under the section on improvement of section line arterial roadways, that statement is fine. Wardle: The last bullet there was intended to be a footnote. It's to the asterisk above. It's simply a note that we’ve got this meeting coming up. That last bullet is not really a part of this draft. Wynkoop: I’m talking about the one just right above it there. If by the developer, the developer may be entitled to impact fee credit. For some situations, certainly the developer will be. But, for example, mid mile collectors, some of those things that may or may not be depending upon whether it really is a state related improvement or not. But I think in this statement on the funding, we maybe just jumped the gun a little bit on the mechanism and there does need to be some substantial debate. Wardle: We haven't had that discussion yet. Wynkoop: With a couple of those wording changes I would feel much better about it. Peavey-Derr: Anybody else? Bivens: One of the notes in the transportation in the white area. I realize that (inaudible) but in the process (inaudible). I think we should recognize the use of public transportation, locations of park and rides to pick up whatever it might be, probably on the collectors and the --. Well the arterials first and then the collectors. I think we should identify locations for that to be done. Wardle: I appreciate that. I chatted with Kelly (inaudible) last week. They have actually a study effort going on currently that would come up with a concept for Meridian over the next several years. So, it's an opportunity to start looking at how that would occur. I appreciate --. I’ve been thinking about it. I just didn’t put anything in. Bivens: I think it should be noted that we should have it in there. Every one of these changes like the (inaudible) the community availability of commercial services, retail outlets and so on will have a direct effect on the transportation, congestion and movement of traffic. This is another one of course. Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 14 of 15 (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Bivens: So, if you walk down to the grocery store or ride your bicycle rather than having to drive your car, (inaudible). Peavey-Derr: Mike, you may be waiting until we have the meeting on Friday but I would like to see some reference in the rules or policies (inaudible) under arterials about different section line designs. (inaudible) (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Peavey-Derr: I was unable to be there. I’m sorry. Wardle: -- specifically noted that we have an opportunity to have quite a different standard and a look out here rather than you know the Eagle Road type facilities. Peavey-Derr: Yes. I think it would be good when we get to that point to reference it in this. Clegg: Mike, (inaudible) an interchange at Ten Mile further across town ought to line up (inaudible). Is that correct? Wardle: I’m just like one of these transportation planners. All I’ve done is put a big block on there. Let somebody else figure that out. (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Wardle: (inaudible) several points of the established community right now on Ten Mile Road and the still somewhat more open opportunity on Black Cat. But again, the more realistic expectation with Star Road and with Linder in place that something out here rather than back here is more feasible. That was all we were trying to do is get the thinking moving toward where that should occur and what the opportunities or options are today. Peavey-Derr: Okay, anybody else? De Weerd: Other than I always thought ACHD stood for Ada County Highway and Drainage. (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Peavey-Derr: Out time is up. I applaud all the effort (inaudible) and I appreciate very much (inaudible). De Weerd: Judy, quick introductions. Our new Council Member Bill Nary. We have two of our Planning and Zoning Commissioners. Keith Borup is our chair and a new member David Zaremba. Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 7, 2002 Page 15 of 15 Peavey-Derr: Thank you. I appreciate you making us aware. Thank you very much and welcome. When is our next meeting? WE have the 30th and (inaudible). (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Wardle: Technically speaking it doesn’t occur until March 4th but we’re going to keep you informed. Did everybody --? I want to get your email on those --. (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Wardle: We’ll get notices out as we do that. For right now it's March 4th . We’re going to cover a lot of ground between now and then. Peavey-Derr: Okay. Thanks very much and happy New Year everybody. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:32 A.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: / / ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR DATE APPROVED WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK