2011-05-19 JointMay 19, 2011
Joint Meeting Agenda
THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
THE ADA COUNTY COMMISSION
THE ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT COMMISSION
12:00 p.m.
Lunch — Goodwood BBQ
12:20 p.m.
Discussion
TOPICS:
Cost Share
Meridian Split Corridor Phase II
1:15-1:30 p.m.
Closing remarks
NOTICE OF SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
ADA COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Meridian City Council, Ada
County Commissioners and Ada County Highway District will hold a Special Joint
meeting at the ACHD Auditorium, 3775 Adams Street, Garden City, Idaho on
Thursday, May 19, 2011 at 12:00 p.m. They will be discussing the following
items:
Cost Share
Meridian Split Corridor Phase 11
The public is welcome to attend.
DATED this 12th day of May, 2011
JAYCEE L. HOLMAN - CITY CLERK
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting with ADA County Commissioners and ACHD Commissioners —
May 19, 2011
All materials presented at public meetings shall become the property of the City of Meridian and ACHD.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and / or hearings,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433
at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
wl
I
R
m
5R
I
M
L-
N
OO)o
Q) r-
0)
LZ
N
E
4--J
u
.i
V �
Q
+J
co
E
0C:
0 D �
.� O
LU —
C
N
p
us
4-J a�
O •4-J
Ln
u 4-J
W
��•0
4-1
• J
Ln Ln
v
•o p
O oC U
C,
C
L
—00
F�
V)
.C:
�--r
V
c�
V
• —
s
�s
4
.MOOOOI
V
dJ
4-J(3)4-J�
�4--j
Os
o
>
o
4-
4-a
o
c'
>
a
UL�v�
F�
V)
.C:
May 13, 2011
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Tammy de Weerd
City Council Members
CC: City Clerk
FROM: Caleb Hood, Planning Manager
RE: ACHD Cost Share Policy
May 19, 2011 Joint City Council-ACHD Commission Meeting Item
On May 27th, 2009 the ACHD adopted a Cost Share Policy. The purpose of the Cost Share
Policy is to: 1) Define the role of ACHD, cities, the county, urban renewal agencies and other
potential partners in funding both transportation and "non -transportation" elements of ACHD's
road projects; and, 2) Maintain flexibility for ACHD to consider unique features of projects and
recognize the desires of the partnering agencies for roadway features within their boundaries.
The primary purpose of the policy is to establish a clear and "equitable" system for ACHD to
work with its partners to include features such as landscaping, specialized pavement treatments,
decorative lighting, public art, and other aesthetic features outside the curb and beyond the
transportation elements that are necessary for safety and mobility.
Over the last few months we have discussed some upcoming roadway projects (Ustick, Duane to
Campton and Franklin, Linder to Ten Mile) and ACHD's Cost Share Policy. In April, the City
and ACHD were able to come to terms on these projects for cost share and license agreements.
However, there still seems to be some disagreement as to whether the ACHD CS policy is
equitable and fair to cities.
Here are some of the concerns that have been brought up surrounding the CS Policy:
• Through approval of the Cost Share Policy, ACHD interpreted Idaho Code, Title 40, Chapter
14 and Title 40, Chapter 13, to forbid ACHD from incurring any costs for "non -transportation"
improvements. However, State Statue seems to put sole authority of ROW acquisition and
Planning Department . 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Meridian, ID 83642
Phone 208-884-55T1 ■ Fax 208-888-6854 . www.meridiancity.orq
Page 2
costs with the county -wide highway district. The City questions whether these same State
Statutes allow the City to expend funds that go towards the purchase of ROW and/or design
and construction of improvements within the ROW. Is City participation and expenditure
within the ROW limited to landscaping? The City questions whether State Statute limits the
District's authority to those things explicitly listed in Idaho Code (e.g. — design, construction,
maintenance of travel lanes, bike lanes and curbs, etc.), or instead lists them as minimum
responsibilities of the District. Has ACHD Staff contacted the Attorney General's Office?
• The Policy seems to be written so that ACHD has the power to disregard other agency
requested improvements and even codes. For example, the City may view some roadway
related features as publically necessary, like detached sidewalks. The City typically requires,
through adopted City Code, developers to install a 25' wide landscape buffer with detached
sidewalks along arterials. There will be inconsistency in the look and feel of roadways if
ACHD does not landscape their property (e.g. — storm pond sites) as required by Code. ACHD
CS Policy seems to conflict with City Code and possibly the Local Land Use Planning Act.
• Requiring a city to pay/budget for interim treatments where ACHD could provide seems to be
a double hit. Developers, through impact fees, and property owners, through property taxes,
gas taxes and registration fees, pay for the roads. These same constituents want nice roads.
Why should the City have to pay for the installation of some landscaping from the general
fund to make a roadway "complete"?
• ACHD has adopted a Complete Streets Policy that seems to directly conflict with their CS
Policy. The Complete Streets policy states: "A "complete" street addresses the needs of all
users. Motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders of all ages and abilities can be safely
accommodated within the overall street network. Planning for this diverse user group requires
consideration of the following elements: ... 7. Adequate buffer areas for pedestrian safety,
utility placement, and possible landscaping; 8. Landscaping or hardscaping adding pedestrian
protection ..." This policy says that the District is to consider installation of landscaping for all
future streets, yet the CS Policy prohibits them from purchasing non -transportation
components.
Some of the other thoughts from the Council expressed during the May, 10th workshop include:
possibility of some sites to be used as multi -use facilities (parks); possibility of a percentage of
each project being set-aside for "enhancements", and the fact that other transportation authorities
install landscaping with their roadway/highway projects — even ITD.
ACHD is considering making their Cost Share policy ordinance. ACHD has asked the City
what part(s) of the current CS policy we don't concur with and how these areas of the
ACHD policy/ordinance could be addressed.
RESOLUTION NUMBER 897
BY THE ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS:
CAROL A. MCKEE, SHERRY R. HUBER, REBECCA W. ARNOLD, JOHN S.
FRANDEN, AND SARA M. BAKER.
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF ADA
COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT'S INTERAGNECY COST SHARE POLICIES AND
PROCEDURES.
WHEREAS, Ada County Highway District ("ACHD") is the single countywide highway
district in and for Ada County, Idaho created pursuant to Idaho Code, Chapter 14, Title 40,
and has exclusive jurisdiction over the public right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, ACHD is a special purpose government who's authority to make
expenditures and participate in interagency cost sharing for roadway projects is limited
to the specific authority granted under Idaho law.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho Code Section 40-1310 and 40-1415, any roadway
project improvements that result in costs outside of ACHD's specific statutory authority
are costs that must be paid for by a partnering agency requesting the improvements;
and
WHEREAS, the Interagency Cost Share Policies and Procedures is one of three products
of the Transportation Land Use Integration Plan ("TLIP") that was developed to clearly
define the role of ACHD, cities, the county, urban renewal agencies and other potential
partnering agencies in funding both transportation and non -transportation elements on
ACHD's road projects and maintain flexibility for ACHD to consider unique aesthetic
features of road projects and recognize the desires of the partnering agencies for non -
transportation features within their boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the Interagency Cost Share Policies and Procedures establishes clear and
equitable policies and procedures for ACHD to cooperate with other partnering agencies
within Ada County to include non -transportation components and such as landscaping,
specialized pavement and sidewalk treatments, decorative lighting and other aesthetic
features beyond the transportation elements that are necessary for safety and mobility;
and provide a framework whereby a partnering agency may enter into a cost share
partnership with ACHD to fund the incremental costs of these improvements including;
design, land acquisition, construction and perpetual maintenance of any requested
aesthetic feature and/or non -transportation component on ACHD road projects; and
WHEREAS, Resolution 897 will amend Section 3100, Development of Projects, of the
ACHD Policy Manual, and establish a new Section 3109 of the ACHD Policy Manual
entitled "Interagency Cost Share Policies and Procedures" and;
• WHEREAS, ACHD staff has prepared the Interagency Cost Share Policies and
RESOLUTION 897 — APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF INTERAGENCY COST SHARE
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
0
Procedures for the District Board of Commissioner's consideration, approval, and
adoption, as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the citizens of Ada County, Idaho, for the Ada
County Highway District Board of Commissioners to approve and adopt the Interagency
Cost Share Policies and Procedures as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Ada County Highway District Board of
Commissioners that it does hereby approve and adopt the "Interagency Cost Share
Policies and Procedures" as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the "Interagency Cost Share Policies and
Procedures" shall be incorporated into Section 3109 of the ACHD Policy Manual and
shall be in full force and effective immediately upon adoption and approval.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Ada County
Highway District at its regular meeting held on this 27th day of May, 2009.
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
By'
_�b A Roa MZ4 K a Q -,
Carol A. McKee, President
By:
Sherry . u, er, 1S Vice President
By: //4/•
ebecca W,/Arnold, 2nVice President
n S. Franden, Commissioner
By: ,,,.a -. ,,J- .k -L�, s:��
Sara M. Baker, Com issioner
RESOLUTION 897 — APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF INTERAGENCY COST SHARE
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
2
3109 INTERAGENCY COST SHARE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
3109.1 Purpose in Establishing an Interagency Cost Share Policy
The purpose of the cost share policy is to define the role of ACHD, cities, the
county, urban renewal agencies and other potential partnering agencies in
funding both transportation and "non -transportation" elements of ACHD's road
projects. The cost share policy maintains flexibility for ACHD to consider unique
features of projects and recognize the desires of the partnering agencies for
roadway features within their boundaries. Each partnering agency has its own
unique aesthetic vision for its community and the aesthetic features it desires,
from landscaped medians, to street trees, to on street parking, to types and
dimensions of sidewalks. This policy allows flexibility within the roadway
design process, establishs a consistent set of transportation elements that
ACHD will fund for all partnering agencies and provide the opportunity for
financial participation from each partnering agency to make its own aethestic
vision a reality. This policy isnot intended to cover every possible situation in
which decisions about cost sharing must occur. This policy is intended to
complement the specific authority granted to ACHD pursuant to the Idaho
Constitution and Idaho Code, not replace or supersede it. If there is a conflict
between this policy and state and/or federal law, state and/or federal law shall
control.
The Interagency Cost Share Policy may apply to the following partnering
agencies:
® 1. Cities
•
2. Counties
3. Urban Renewal Agencies
4. Idaho Transportation Department
5. Neighboring counties and highway districts
6. School districts
Utilities
8. Regional Public Transportation Authority (VRT)
9. Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) or Transportation
Management Agency (TMA)
Some projects may require ACHD and a partnering agency to partner with
private entities, such as developers or private utilities, to fund both
transportation and non -transportation elements of a project.
Adopted: 3109-1
Revised:
Section 3109 - Interagency Cost Share Policy (CLEAN 5-19-09).Docx
3109.2 ACHD Statutory Responsibilities
As a special purpose government, ACHD's authority to make expenditures is
limited to the specific authority granted under Idaho law. ACHD may only
participate in interagency cost sharing for roadway projects to the extent that its
participation complies with the specific powers granted to it by the Idaho
Legislature as provided for in Idaho Code. ACHD is statutorily authorized in
making expenditures on road improvements which include the design,
construction, reconstruction and maintenance of highways and public rights-of-
way, including drainage. ACHD is prohibited from exercising its powers of
eminent domain to acquire private property unless the improvement to the
right-of-way is consistent with ACHD's statutory authority and a public necessity
as defined by established engineering industry standards.
There are two separate chapters in Title 40 of the Idaho Code related to
powers granted to ACHD:
1. Chapter 13 — Powers of ACHD outside cities; and
2. Chapter 14 — Powers of ACHD within cities.
ACHD's powers are best summarized under applicable sections of I.C. §§ 40-
1310 and 40-1415. Any project improvements that result in costs outside
ACHD's specific statutory mandated powers are costs that must be paid for by
the partnering agency requesting the improvements.
3109.3 Transportation Components
Pursuant to Idaho law, ACHD may fund the following transportation
components:
1. Travel Lanes - Through or turn lanes for the purpose of vehicular
movements;
2. Bike Lanes - Facilities for bicycle use within the curb -to -curb section of
urban roadways or along shoulders of rural roadways;
3. Curbs and Gutter - Infrastructure for storm water conveyance on urban
cross-sections;
4. Sidewalks - Facilities for the safe movement of pedestrians; including
related safety buffers;
5. Paved Medians - Facilities installed for purposes of motorist safety,
access management and traffic flow;
6. Retaining Walls - Facilities for buttressing of slopes as a result of roadway
design;
7. Highway Lighting - Illumination for the primary benefit to the motorist;
Adopted: 3109-2
Revised:
Section 3109 - Interagency Cost Share Policy (CLEAN 5-19-09).Docx
Y
8. Traffic Control Devices - Traffic signals, flashing beacons, signage,
striping and intelligent transportation system facilities;
9. Drainage - Storm water structures where necessary for motorist safety
and maintenance.
3109.3.1 Alternative Transportation
ACHD accommodates standard pedestrian and bicycle
facilities in roadway and intersection projects, as defined
by ACHD's Livable Street Design Guide or other cross-
section policies.
2. Issues related to construction, placement or relocation of
transit structures in the right-of-way shall be addressed
through the Cooperative Agreement for Transit Structures
between ACHD and Valley Regional Transit.
3109.3.2 Intelligent Transportation System
Funding for ITS projects off of the ACHD system may be managed by ACHD,
but will require full funding or local match from the agency on whose system
the project exists.
3109.3.3 Storm Water Quality
ACHD is responsible for design, construction, and reconstruction of storm
• water drainage where necessary for motorist safety or right-of-way
maintenance. If ACHD determines that an agency's request for a project will
have an adverse affect on storm water quantity or quality, the requesting
agency, at its sole cost shall be responsible for mitigating any such adverse
effects.
0
3109.4 Non -Transportation Components
Road project elements over which ACHD has no statutory authority, must be
coordinated with the appropriate land use and/or public transportation agency.
3109.4.1 Aesthetic Features
A partnering agency may request the inclusion of aesthetic features for
roadway projects in the ACHD Five -Year Work Plan. Aesthetic features may
include, but are not limited to, landscaping, specialized pavement or sidewalk
treatments, decorative lighting, and other non -transportation component
features.
1. If a partnering agency requests an aesthetic feature on an
ACHD project that is beyond ACHD's statutory funding
authority, the partnering agency will be required to provide
for 100% of the costs of the non -transportation component
improvements including design, land acquisition,
construction and perpetual maintenance.
Adopted: 3109-3
Revised:
Section 3109 - Interagency Cost Share Policy (CLEAN 5-19-09).Docx
5
2. If a partnering agency elects to enhance a necessary
transportation component of an ACHD project with an
aesthetic feature, ACHD may provide a funding credit to
the partnering agency that contributes towards the cost of
the requested aesthetic feature under the following
conditions: (1) the credit can only be applied toward
enhancing a necessary transportation component and; (2)
the aesthetic feature cannot diminish or eliminate the
function of a transportation component; (3) the amount of
the credit will not be greater than ACHD's avoided cost of
the transportation component determined by ACHD; (4) the
credit can only be applied on the same project; (5) credits
will not be allowed for avoided costs associated with
changes to number of travel lanes, lane widths or
transportation components required for motorist or
pedestrian safety. The terms of a credit will be specified in
a project -specific interagency cost share agreement.
3. The partnering agency shall be solely responsible to
provide for the ordinary and necessary maintenance, repair
and operation of any aesthetic features installed in the
right-of-way in perpetuity. If the partnering agency fails to
ensure maintenance of the aesthetic features, ACHD may,
after reasonable efforts working the partnering agency to
cure the default, as specified in the applicable interagency
agreement, elect to remove and replace the aesthetic
features with the handscape or other materials consistent
with standard ACHD practice. All costs associated with
aesthetic removal and replacement will be borne by the
partnering agency. Failure of the partnering agency to
ensure maintenance of aesthetic features may jeopardize
the partnering agency's ability to secure cost sharing
agreements on ACHD projects until defaults are corrected
and ACHD's expenses associated with aesthetic feature
removal and replacement have been fully reimbursed.
3109.4.2 Medians
Medians can be provided for aesthetics.
ACHD Development Policy, Transportation Research
Hoard guidelines, and/or established engineering industry
standards, will be used to determine the need for medians
for access management and safety.
2. If a partnering agency requests medians that are not
justified for traffic management based upon established
engineering industry standards, then the requesting
agency shall be required to provide 100% of the costs of
the median, including, design, additional land acquisition,
construction and maintenance.
Adopted: 3109-4
Revised:
Section 3109 - Interagency Cost Share Policy (CLEAN 5-19-09).Docx
3. ACHD is responsible for the cost of medians for traffic
management which can be met with hardscaping.
4. A partnering agency is responsible for the installation and
maintenance of aesthetic features in a median.
5. The decision to install aethestic medians will require public
involvement and applicable land use jurisdiction support.
ACHD has sole discretion with regard to installation of
medians.
3109.4.3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities
Communities may desire pedestrian/bicycle facilities that are beyond ACHD's
Livable Street Design Guide or other cross-section policies .
1. In the pedestrian area, ACHD shall provide a buffer space
to meet ADA requirements as defined in the Livable Street
Design Guide. ACHD will pay for right-of-way to provide a
pedestrian safety buffer up to a total of 6' of buffer space, if
a city or partnering agency agrees to provide or ensure
installation and maintenance of landscaping in the
applicable space. On certain roadways, larger pedestrian
zones/features may be justified at ACHD's expense if it
can be demonstrated that it is needed for pedestrian safety
and otherwise complies with the public necessity
requirements for eminent domain as set forth in the Idaho
Constitution Art. I, § 13 and Idaho Code § 7-701 et seq.
2. If a partnering agency requests additional bicycle and
pedestrian facilities that are beyond ACHD's Livable Street
Design Guide or other cross-section polices, the agency is
required to provide 100% of the costs for additional
improvements, including design, land acquisition and
construction.
3109.4.4 On -Street Parking
ACHD shall fund the right-of-way, construction, and maintenance of on -street
parking where appropriate on arterials for ACHD projects. On -street parking on
collectors and local roads will come from dedications, consistent with existing
ACHD policy. On -street parking for arterials will come from dedications when
required as a condition of development approval. On -street parking must be
approved by ACHD.
3109.4.5 Federally -Funded Projects
Federal and State laws, rules and policies determine what
level of non -transportation elements should be included in
STP -TMA projects.
Adopted: 3109-5
Revised:
Section 3109 - Interagency Cost Share Policy (CLEAN 5-19-09).Docx
2. The match paid by partnering agencies on a project that
combines both transportation and non -transportation
elements shall be proportionate to the share of the non -
transportation elements of the project.
3. STP -Enhancement projects may require additional
discussion and negotiation as non -transportation features
are generally components of such projects.
3109.4.6 Mitigation
1. Site specific mitigation may include specialized treatments
such as sound walls, berms and other project components
whose purpose is to mitigate traffic impacts within the
project area. These requests stem from studies, project -
specific outreach, planning efforts, and city requests.
2. Funding of mitigation, beyond that negotiated on a
property by property basis during ACHD right-of-way
acquisition process, will be handled on a case by case
basis in consultation with partnering agencies during
project development and with written approval of the
Commission.
3109.5 Notice of Interest
Partnering agencies should indicate possible interest in non -transportation
elements during ACHD's annual request for jurisdiction priorities for the Five -
Year Work Plan (FYWP). A partnering agency should indicate such interest in a
letter to the ACHD Commission indicating project priorities. However,
partnering agencies may indicate such interest at any time by a letter to the
ACHD Commission, subject to the limitations in Section 3109.6 below.
3109.6 Project Development
During project development, ACHD will provide interested partnering agencies
the opportunity to identify desired aesthetic features and adopt an interagency
cost share agreement. ACHD will develop the project consistent with the terms
and conditions of an adopted interagency cost share agreement. General
project timelines will be indicated in the FYWP. These timelines are subject to
change through the annual update of the FYWP, project development and the
budget.
When the first project design phase is initiated, (concept
design or design) ACHD will involve the partnering
agencies who have indicated an interest in writing to
identify and evaluate alternatives and determine desired
aethestic/non-transportation features
Adopted: 3109-6
Revised:
Section 3109 - Interagency Cost Share Policy (CLEAN 5-19-09).Docx
2. ACHD establishes a detailed scope of work for the project
design prior to initiating design work. Partnering agencies
will be afforded the opportunity to review and comment on
the scope of work for project design to ensure desired non -
transportation features are included.
If an agency indicates interest in possible participation after
a consultant design agreement has been signed, or
requests changes to non -transportation features outside
the current design scope of work, the partnering agency
will be solely responsible for any additional design costs
resulting from their request.
4. At the conclusion of concept design, and prior to initiating
design, ACHD and the partnering agency shall enter into
an interagency cost sharing agreement to outline cost
share and other responsibilities for the project. Some
projects proceed to design without a separate concept
design phase. In these cases, ACHD and the partnering
agency shall determine the desired features and enter into
an interagency cost sharing agreement early in the design
process.
5. If an agency declines to enter into an interagency cost
® sharing agreement, the project may be delayed, or project
k design may proceed without incorporating the partnering
agencies' desired features. Any additional costs that result
from a partnering agency declining to enter into an
interagency cost sharing agreement, and later requesting
additional features; shall be borne by the partnering
agency.
6. Partnering agency requests after project design is
complete will require full compensation from the partnering
agency for design or other changes in the project. ACHD
will work with the partnering agency to incorporate design
features that are feasible, however not all requests,
including those fully funded by the requesting agency,
may be able to be accommodated due to site specific
design constraints, status of land acquisition, the project
schedule, and other feasibility issues.
3109.6.1 Acceleration of Project Construction
Agencies may request project construction prior to ACHD
adopted programming.
2. If a partnering agency supplements ACHD funding for the
transportation elements of a project, ACHD awards the
project points for non -ACRD funding in the prioritization of
project ranking.
Adopted: 3109-7
Revised:
Section 3109 - Interagency Cost Share Policy (CLEAN 5-19-09).Docx
W]
3. If the partnering agency makes a project a top request of
the agency, ACHD awards the project points for the
partnering agency request in the prioritization of project
ranking. A high-ranking request is also considered during
the annual Five -Year Work Plan and budget updates, with
efforts made to accommodate the request within other
funding and schedule considerations.
3109.6.2 Acceleration through Cooperative Projects
The ACHD Commission may enter into cooperative agreements with
developers to construct projects through public-private partnerships with
funding arrangements negotiated on a case-by-case basis.
ACHD will use the adopted Master Street Map and seek
local land use jurisdiction input to identify desired non -
transportation features when a development agreement is
proposed.
2. ACHD will notify the applicable land use jurisdiction of a
proposed development agreement and the land use
jurisdiction will have at least 30 days, from the date of
notification of the proposed development agreement, to
indicate their desire to become a partnering agency for
non -transportation features.
3. Partnering agencies desiring non -transportation aesthetic
features will have the opportunity to become a party to the
cooperative agreement between ACHD and the developer.
The partnering agency's. cost share responsibilities for the
aesthetic non -transportation features will be negotiated
upon terms consistent with this cost share policy, and set
forth in the cooperative development agreement.
4. Partnering agencies seeking cooperative projects for
ACHD system improvements outside of the normal
development review process shall contact ACHD to initiate
discussion and case by case negotiation of appropriate
cost share.
3109.7 Intergovernmental Agreement
Pursuant to Idaho Code 67-2332, ACHD may enter into intergovernmental
agreements with other public agencies for the purpose of performing any
governmental service, activity, or undertaking which each public agency is
authorized by law to perform. Proposed project timeframes, anticipated project
completion dates, payment and/or reimbursement provisions, as well as other
duties and obligations of the parties, shall be negotiated in terms and
conditions that are consistent with this cost share policy and set forth in a
written intergovernmental agreement. The agreement shall be adopted by both
the ACHD Commission and the partnering agency's governing body.
Adopted: 3109-8
Revised:
Section 3109 - Interagency Cost Share Policy (CLEAN 5-19-09).Docx
9
n
3109.8 Procedures for Participation Prior to Project Development
Any agency requesting ACHD consideration shall follow the following
procedure:
3109.8.1 Master Street Map and Future Acquisitions Map
Partnering agencies may indicate their desire for additional right-of-way for
non -transportation elements at any time by concurrent ACHD and applicable
land use jurisdiction adoption of a right-of-way width to accommodate the
desired elements in ACHD's Master Streets Map and the land use jurisdiction's
Future Acquisitions Map. Such adoption indicates the partnering agency is
willing to provide funding for the additional features consistent with this policy
and any interagency agreements.
1. If a partnering agency and ACHD agree on the features for
a roadway during a planning effort (e.g. comprehensive
plan update, subarea or corridor planning, etc) they will
indicate their commitment to cost share by adopting an
interagency agreement and will each adopt the appropriate
right of way width into ACHD's Master Street Map and the
land use jurisdiction's Future Acquisitions Map.
2. ACHD will seek financial participation from the partnering
agency when development applications present an
opportunity for early right-of-way acquisition.
3. If the partnering agency declines to participate in early
right-of-way acquisition, ACHD will acquire right-of-way for
the basic footprint, as defined in ACHD's Livable Street
Design Guide or other cross-section policies. Partnering
agencies will be provided a second opportunity to
purchase, at the partnering agency's cost, additional right-
of-way during the right-of-way phase of ACHD's capital
projects development provided that ACHD and the
partnering agency enter into an interagency cost sharing
agreement during the design phase.
4. If ACHD enters into a cooperative development agreement
for improvements in the public right-of-way, ACHD will
include the additional right-of-way and desired aethestic
features adopted in the Master Street Map.
3109.9 Projects for Economic Development and Land Use Goals
Projects of this nature typically evolve out of city area -specific planning
efforts and include projects and initiatives beyond the transportation
system needs and priorities identified by ACHD.
Adopted: 3109-9
Revised:
Section 3109 - Interagency Cost Share Policy (CLEAN 5-19-09).Docx
•
2. Funding expectations for such projects are to be clearly spelled out and
resolved during the planning process prior to presenting the project to the
Commission for adaption.
3109.10 Exceptions
The Commission reserves the right to consider exceptions from this policy on a
case-by-case basis,and in accordance with Idaho law.
1. The Commission may approve roadway design features that differ from
the standard policies by adopting a concept design that specifies the
alternative features.
2. A partnering agency may propose an exception during negotiation of a
project specific interagency agreement. The agency proposing an
exception should provide a justification for Commission consideration.
3. If there is an existing project specific interagency agreement, a partnering
agency may propose an amendment to such agreement proposing an.
exception, with justification for Commission consideration.
Adopted: 3109-10
Revised:
Section 3109 - Interagency Cost Share Policy (CLEAN 5-19-09).Docx
11
•
3109.11 Project Cost Responsibilities
ITEM
ACHD COST
PARTNERINGAGENCY
Design
Standard Design
Design of Amenities
Right -of -Way
Project specific design dimensions
Extra Right of Way (ROW) for
or Livable Street Design Guide basic
amenities as outlined in policy,
street section if typology adopted by
including damages, buyouts
ACHD and jurisdiction in Master
and associated legal costs
•
Street Map or ACRD Capital
Improvement Plan -subject to public
necessity requirements for eminent
domain as set forth in the Idaho
Constitution Art. I, § 13 and Idaho
Code § 7-701 et seq.
Through and
Project specific design dimensions
None
Center Turn
or Livable Street Design Guide
Lanes, Curb and
dimensions if typology adopted by
Gutter, Utility
ACHD and jurisdiction in Master
Strip
Street Map or ACHD Capital
Improvements Plan
Medians
If needed for traffic safety &
Upgraded hardscape or
operations, with hardscape
landscaping and irrigation if
median is needed for traffic
management. All ROW,
construction, and maintenance
if median is for aesthetics only
Buffer Zone
As specified in the Livable Street
Landscape costs, construction
Design Guide for the basic
and ROW in excess of 6';
pedestrian zone; 6' ROW if
perpetual maintenance of
partnering agency chooses to
landscaping
landscape -subject to public
necessity requirements for eminent
domain as set forth in the Idaho
Constitution Art. I, § 13 and Idaho
Code § 7-701 et seg.
Bike Lanes
5' unless constrained in a built
Greater than 5' unless
environment, then determined during
otherwise specified in an
project design
adopted plan
Sidewalks
5'
Greater than 5' unless
otherwise specified in an
adopted plan
On Street Parking
ROW, design, construction and
Dedicated by the partnering
maintenance on ACHD arterial
agency or developer for
projects
collectors and local roads.
Dedicated by developer for
arterials when required as a
condition of development
approval.
Illumination
Primarily of benefit to motorists
Energy and Maintenance
(lighting)
costs, Pedestrian lighting
Adopted:
Revised:
Section 3109 - Interagency Cost Share Policy (CLEAN 5-19-09).Docx
3109-11
C E IDIAN�--
Public � D A H O
Works Department
TO: Mayor Tammy de Weerd
Members of the City Council
FROM: Tim Curns, Transportation and Utility Coordinator
Caleb Hood, Planning Manager
DATE: May 12, 2011
Mayor Tammy de Weerd
City Council Mernberls
Keith Bird
Brad Hoaglun
Charles Rountree
David Zaremba
SUBJECT: SPLIT CORRIDOR UPDATE FOR MAY 2011 JOINT MEETING WITH
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
BACKGROUND
In early 2008, Public Works began design of new water main and sewer trunk line facilities for
Meridian Road between Franklin Road and Cherry Lane. Due to the extent of the utility work
and the roadwork planned for the second phase of the Split Corridor project, staff began working
with the District to explore combining the two projects. Since the summer of 2009, City Planning
and Public Works staff have held monthly meetings with District staff to closely coordinate
projects, address roadway design issues and ensure impacts to the public will be minimized.
SCHEDULE
The Ada County Highway District has completed 99% design plans and has acquired
approximately 30% of the necessary project right-of-way. Design of City utilities is at 75%
completion, with final plans expected around November of this year. A contractor
prequalification process is scheduled for February of 2012 and construction is slated to begin in
the fall of 2012.
CURRENT TOPICS OF DISCUSSION
Construction Access Options — The number and location of current utilities in Meridian
Road, planned utility improvements, narrowness of the current roadway, and planned
roadway width make the construction of Split Corridor Phase 2 more complicated than
typical roadway and utility projects in Ada County. City and District staff have been
exploring different construction phasing options to reduce the project duration and will be
consulting with a third party consultant familiar with this type of work to aid in
development of options. Preliminary research indicates that one option, closing the road
in block segments, would reduce the project duration from 18 months to 12 months and
1 of 6
reduce costs by approximately 30%. City and District staff will be holding a public
meeting late this summer to gather input on construction access and possible road closure
options. Once input has been gathered, staff will return to the Mayor, City Council and
ACHD Commission for direction on this issue.
East 3rd Street - In the spring of 2009, the City adopted the East 3rd Street Extension and
Alignment Study. This study evaluated the best route for a future connection of E. 3rd
Street between Carlton and Fairview. The preferred alternative uses 3rd Street in a straight
alignment between Carlton and Fairview. During the November 2008, ACHD
Commission meeting, the Commission voted to accept the E. 3rd Street alignment as the
preferred alignment. The City currently has policies in our Comprehensive Plan that not
only speak to making this key connection downtown, but also to a future signal at E.
3rd/Fairview. The separation of the signals along Fairview at Meridian and Main are less
than ideal today and into the future. East 3rd Street crosses the railroad tracks making it a
prime route between Franklin and Fairview - when the section north of Carlton gets
constructed to Fairview. However, to justify a signal at E. 3rd Street/Fairview in the
future, that intersection needs to probably have 4 -legs and not just three.
In addition to Split Corridor Phase 2, the Fairview Access Management Plan (AMP) is
also moving forward with ACHD. The AMP is a long-term build -out plan for Fairview
Avenue. The draft AMP currently depicts a circulator road at E. 3rd Street, both south and
north of Fairview (see Exhibit 1, attached). However, the current design of Split Corridor
Phase 2 uses some of the potential future ROW area for the E. 3rd Street extension north
of Fairview as a storm drain pond (see Exhibit 2, attached). Further, the City's Master
Pathway Plan shows a 10 -foot wide multi -use pathway along the south side of the Five
Mile Creek in this same area. Staff recommends that the Council and ACHD
Commission discuss the potential to build/accommodate/preserve the ROW
necessary to construct a local commercial street with a pathway between Carmel
Drive and the southern boundary of the Split Corridor pond site (This ROW would
be approximately 60 -feet and run about 2/3 of the entire length needed for E. 3rd to
connect Fairview to Meridian Road at Carmel Drive.) If the E. 3rd Street ROW and
pathway area north of Fairview is preserved, it would require a redesign of the pond site.
However, ACHD does have enough land to accommodate a redesigned pond site (see
Exhibit 3, attached).
2 of 6
f
Exhibit I — Draft Fairview Access Management Plan Diagram
11
0; d
ago a
IU dill
u
L
,114jO11&,151V if It
L U":p to
4,00* 60* *
V,
3 of 6
Exhibit 2 — Current Split Corridor Phase 2 Storm Drain Design
f
• � � ��
� �
tt
r:.
tib'
�, .a -.r '
Pti
r
�.$lit
/,;
f
• � � ��
� �
tt
r:.
tib'
�, .a -.r '
Pti
�.$lit
QA! All
41
qq r
� j g
A 91
4 of 6
0
M
N
d
N
N
W
Q
d
I
CE
O
O
U
d
L
Ld
aZ
d
Q
Q
O
w
g
O
N
0
of
a
0
O
N
d
z
m
'o
a.
55
Exhibit 3 — ACHD ownership between Carmel/Meridian Road and Fairview/3'd Street
1618
16'11
'1546
�
17 27 / , '1682
1/ +f
1624 16'15 -
1608
s -ng '1603
5 of 6
'1626
F rAiRvlEUv AVE
207
225
1620
302
P
E
40! 1
Exhibit 4 — Aerial with Approximate Location for 3rd Street — Carmel to Fairview
6of6