The URL can be used to link to this page

2012-04-17_. 1. Roll-Call Attendance ~,~ X David Zaremba _ Brad Hoaglun X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird ® O Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Community Invocation by Rusty Bang with Holy Apostles 4. Adoption of the Agenda Adopted 5. Consent Agenda Approved A. Approval of 2012-2013 Beer, Wine and Liquor License Renewals as follows: Fiesta Guadalajara 704 E. Fairview Ave. BWL Lucky Fins 1441 N. Eagle Rd. #100 BWL Sizzler #215 3380 N. Eagle Rd. BW Goodwood BBQ 1140 N. Eagle Rd. BWL Fuddruckers 3421 N. Eagle Rd. BW Chicago Connection 1629 N. Main St. B Chicago Connection 1935 S. Eagle Rd. BWL R&R Public House 1626 S. Wells Ave. BWL Divine Wine 2310 E. Overland Rd. #105 BW Gelato Cafe 2053 E. Fairview Ave. #101-103 BWL KB's Burritos 3240 E. Louise Dr. #110 BW The Big Smoke #6 234 W. Franklin Ave. BW Texas Roadhouse 3801 E. Fairview Ave. BWL B. Approval of Beer and Wine Owner Transfer from Helina Maries Inc. to DR3, LLC. dba Divine Wine Bar Located at 2310 Overland Rd. Suite 105 C. Approval of Award of Bid and Agreement for "Sewer Line Repairs -Tuscany and Paramount" to Pipeline Inspection Services for the Not-To-Exceed Amount of $219,400.00 and Authorize the Mayor to Sign and Clerk to Attest Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, April 17, 2012 Page 1 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. CITY C®UNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 17, 2012 at 7:00 PM D. Approve Minutes of April 3, 2012 City Council PreCouncil Meeting 6. 7. E. Second Amendment to Development Agreement for Knight Sky MDA 11-011 Spurwing Challenge by The Club at Spurwing, LLC Located Northwest Corner of Chinden Boulevard and N. Linder Road Request: Amend the Recorded Development Agreement (Inst. #106122365) for the Purpose of Excluding the Property AND Creating a New Development Agreement to Include a New Project Boundary and Concept Plan for the Proposed Spurwing Challenge Subdivision Removed F. Development Agreement AZ 11-005 and RZ 11-006 Spurwing Challenge by The Club at Spurwing, LLC Located Northwest Corner of Chinden Boulevard and North Linder Road Request: Annexation of 30 Acres of Land with an R-8 Zoning District and Rezone of 51.61 Acres of Land from R-4 (Medium Low- Density Residential) and TN-C (Traditional Neighborhood Commercial) to R-8 (Medium-Density Residential) (46.97 Acres) and C-C (Community Business) (4.64 Acres) Zoning Districts emove Items Moved From Consent Agenda None Action Items A. Close Public Comment Period on the Analysis of Impediments(AI)to Fair Housing Choice Study and Adopt the Study and the Fair Housing Action Plan Approved B. Public Hearing: ZOA 12-001 Unified Development Code (UDC) Text Amendment by City of Meridian Community Development Department Request: Amend Specific Sections of the UDC to Include General Clarifications/Clean-up Items; Specific Use Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities; OPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) Strategies, etc. Approved with ®ne xception C. Public Hearing: MDA 12-001 Sgroi Property by Nunzio Sgroi Located at 4405 E. Ustick Road Request: Amend the Development Agreement to Modify the Conceptual Development Plan to Allow 14 Single-Family Homes and Two (2) Townhomes on 2.81 Acres of Land in an R-8 Zoning District Denied Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, April 17, 2012 Page 2 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. D. Public Hearing: TEC 12-006 Ambercreek No. 2 by Trilogy Department, LLC Located Near Southwest Corner of N. Meridian Road and W. McMillan Road Request: Two (2) Year Time Extension on the Preliminary Plat Approved E. FP 12-003 Paramount No. 18 by Brighton Development, Inc. Located West of N. Meridian Road Between W. Producer Way and N. Fox Run Way Request: Final Plat Consisting of 19 Residential Building Lots and One (1) Common Lot on 5.66 Acres in an R-8 Zoning District Approved F. FP 12-004 Zebulon Heights Subdivision No. 5 by The Traditions by Amyx II, LLP Located South of E. McMillan Road and West of N. Eagle Road Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of 39 Building Lots and 3 Common Lots on 14.39 Acres of Land Approved 8. Department Reports A. Planning Department: Home Occupation Discussion B. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 12-847: A Resolution reappointing Bill Nary and Tim Curns to the Meridian Traffic Safety Commission Approved C. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 12-848: A Resolution re- appointing Carol Harms to Seat 5 of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission Approved F. Police/Clerk's Office/Legal Department Report: State Legislation to Preempt Massage Therapist License as of July 1, 2013 G. Clerks Office: Approval of New Liquor License Application for Smoky Mountain Pizza ~ Pasta Fairview Lakes LLC dba Smoky Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, April 17, 2012 Page 3 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Mountain Pizzeria Grill Located at 980 E Fairview Ave. Pending Ada County Approval Moved to Consent Agenda H. Solid Waste Advisory Commission Report and Request for Funding Authority for Two Projects for the Community Recycling Fund Approved 9. Ordinances A. Ordinance No. An Ordinance (AZ 11-005) for the Annexation of a Parcel of Land Situated in a Portion of the S'/2 of the Southeast'/4 and in a Portion of the Southwest '/4 of Section 23, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, of Meridian Idaho, Establishing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of Said Lands from RUT to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) and Providing an Effective Date Removed B. Ordinance No, _ n _~ : An Ordinance (RZ 11-006) for the Re-Zone of a Parcel of Land Situated in a Portion of the South '/2 of the Southeast °/4 of Section 23, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, of Meridian Idaho, Establishing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 4.64 Acres of Land from the R-4 (Medium-Low Density Residential) Zoning District and TN-C (Traditional Neighborhood Center) Zoning District to C-C (Community Business District) Zoning District and Providing an Effective Date emoved C. Ordinance No. ~ An Ordinance (RZ 11-006) for the Re-Zone of a Marcel of Land Situated in a Portion of the South '/Z of the Southeast '/4 of Section 23, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, of Meridian Idaho, Establishing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 46.97 Acres of Land from the R-4 (Medium-Low Density Residential) Zoning District and TN-C (Traditional Neighborhood Center) Zoning District to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District and Providing an Effective Date Removed 10. Future Meeting Topics None Adjourned at 9:27 p.m. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, April 17, 2012 Page 4 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 A meeting of the. Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, April 17, 2012, by President Brad Hoaglun. Members Present: David Zaremba, Keith Bird, Brad Hoaglun and Charlie Rountree. Members Absent: Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Sonya Wattes, Kyle Radek, Bruce Chatterton, John Overton, Perry Palmer, Lori den Hartog, Keith Watts, Molly Mangerich, Kristy Vigil, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd Hoaglun: Thank you for your patience tonight and we are going to move right into our regularly scheduled Council meeting. Today is Tuesday, April 17th. It is five minutes after 7:00 and our first item of business is roll call. Madam Clerk. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance Hoaglun: Our next item of business is the Pledge of Allegiance. Would you all rise and join me in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Rusty Bang with hioly Apostles Hoaglun: Item 3 is our community invocation. That will be given tonight by Rusty Bang of Holy Apostles Catholic Church and if the audience would join us at this time or take this as a moment of personal reflection. Thank you for being here. Bang: Thank you. Let us pray. Almighty God of the universe, we give you thanks for giving us another day. We thank you that you give us a share in your creative work, having endowed each with unique and important talents. On this day we ask your blessing on the members of the City Council who have been entrusted with the care of this city and its people and on all who have heeded the call to public service throughout our state and nation. Please teach each member of this Council to be generous with the gifts you have given and the opportunities with which they have been presented. May they give and not count the cost, fight for the greater good and not count the wounds, toil in their efforts and not seek rest, labor and not ask for reward, other than to Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 2 of 56 know that they are doing your will. May all that they do this day be for your greater honor and glory. Amen. Hoaglun: Rusty, is this your first time doing this for us? Bang: Yes. Hoaglun: Great. Let me give you a City of Meridian pin, as a token of our appreciation and thank you. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda Hoaglun: Our next item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Rountree: With some changes, Item 8-G on the agenda we would like to move to the Consent Agenda. Items 5-E and F on the Consent Agenda are requested to be removed. And Items 9-A, B and C have been requested to be removed. And with those changes I move that we adopt the agenda. Bird: Second. Hoaglun: We have a motion to adopt the agenda as amended. All those in favor please say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Consent Agenda A. Approval of 2012-2013 Beer, Wine and Liquor License Renewals as follows: Fiesta Guadalajara 704 E. Fairview Ave. BWL Lucky Fins 1441 N. Eagle Rd. #100 BWL Sizzler #215 3380 N. Eagle Rd. BW Goodwood BBQ 1140 N. Eagle Rd. BWL a Fuddruckers 3421 N. Eagle Rd. BW Chicago Connection 1629 N. Main St. B Chicago Connection 1935 S. Eagle Rd. BWL R&R Public House 1626 S. Wells Ave. BWL a Divine Wine 2310 E. Overland Rd. #105 BW Gelato Cafe 2053 E. Fairview Ave. #101-103 BWL KB's Burritos 3240 E. Louise Dr. #110 BW ~l'he Big Smoke #6 234 W. Franklin Ave. BW Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 3 of 56 Texas Roadhouse 3801 E. Fairview Ave. BWL B. Approval of Beer and Wine Owner Transfer from Helina Maries Inc. to DR3, LLC. dba Divine Wine Bar Located at 2310 Overland Rd. Suite 105 C. Approval of Award of Bid and Agreement for "Sewer Line Repairs -Tuscany and Paramount" to Pipeline Inspection Services for the Not-To-Exceed Amount of $219,400.00 and Authorize the Mayor to Sign and Clerk to Attest D. Approve Minutes of April 3, 2012 City Council PreCouncil Meeting G. Clerks Office: Approval of New Liquor License Application for Smoky Mountain Pizza ~ Pasta Fairview Lakes LLC dba Smoky Mountain Pizzeria Grill Located at 980 E Fairview Ave. Pending Ada County Approval Hoaglun: Next item is Consent Agenda. Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve the Consent Agenda. Zaremba: Second. Bird: With changes. Rountree: With the changes. Hoaglun: Yes. The Consent Agenda has been moved -- and we have a second, Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: I agree with that and are we including approving the President to sign and the Clerk to attest? Rountree: Yes. Hoaglun: Great. We have a motion to approve the Consent Agenda with the additional item and the President to sign and Clerk to attest. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 4 of 56 Item 6: Items fUloved From Consent Agenda Hoaglun: We did not have any items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 7: Action Items A. Close Public Comment Period on the Analysis of Impediments(AI)to Fair Housing Choice Study and Adopt the Study and the Fair Housing Action Plan Hoaglun: So, we move onto 7-A and this is a public comment on the analysis of impediment to fair housing choice study and adopt the study in the Fair Housing Action Plan. Did I get that all in? Den Hartog: Thank you, President Hoaglun, Members of the Council. I was before you on March 7th to present, along with our consultant from BEC research, to present the Analysis Of Impediments In Fair Housing Action Plan. We have not had any comments to date, unless we have anyone here this evening on the draft plan, so I'd like to ask you to approve that report and to adopt the fair housing action plan. The one thing I did want to address when I was before you on March 7th, Councilman Zaremba had a question regarding the potential cost to the fair housing action plan items. I provided that to you. Most of the action items in terms of cost can be covered by my staff time. Most of the action items simply require staff time. There are a few things that require some expenditures, approximately 3,000 per year, and that can be covered out of the administrative budget from our Community Development Block Grant. So, with that I would ask your approval of the Analysis of Impediments report and the Fair Housing Action Plan. Thank you. Hoaglun: Thank you, Lori. Are there any questions, Council? Bird: I have none. Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: Thank you for your extra research and those answers. Rountree: Mr. President? Zaremba: Do we want to ask if there is any public testimony before we -- Hoaglun: Yes, we should before we close it. Is there anyone who does wish to speak to this -- this item on the agenda? Last chance, folks. Going once -- okay. Council? Zaremba: Mr. President, I move we close the public hearing on Item 7-A. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 5 of 56 Rountree: Second. Hoaglun: Motion and a second to close the public comment period -- Zaremba: Public comment period. I'm sorry. Hoaglun: -- on 7-A. Let's see. Closing public comment period, do we need a roll call on that? Just a -- I think that's just a motion. Okay. Or voice vote. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, we close the public comment period. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: I think there is two parts to this. I move that we adopt the study and the Fair Housing Action Plan. Rountree: Second.. Hoaglun: Okay. We have a motion to adopt the study and Fair Housing Action Plan and this will be a roll call vote. So, Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. B. Public Hearing: ZOA 12-001 Unified Development Code (UDC) Text Amendment by City of Meridian Community Development Department Request: Amend Specific Sections of the UDC to Include General Clarifications/Clean-up Items; Specific Use Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities; CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) Strategies, etc. Hoaglun: Thank you. Moving on to 7-B. This is a public hearing on text amendment by the City of Meridian Community Development Department and, Sonya, are you up on this? Watters: I am. Hoaglun: Okay. Turn it over to you. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 6 of 56 Watters: Thank you, Council President Hoaglun, Councilmen. The next application before you is a text amendment to the Unified Development Code. The Planning Department is the applicant requesting specific amendments to sections of the UDC in order for the code to function more efficiently and meet the needs of our customers and the city. This application includes changes to Chapters 1 through 5 of the UDC as detailed in Section 7 of the staff report. Many of the proposed changes are clean-up items. Some are requested by code enforcement, Council, and others as follows: Replace all references to planning director with community development director. Modify definition of construction sand and gravel mining to exclude crush operations at the direction of Council. Modify healthcare and social services definition to include examples of social service uses not previously included. Add definitions for full array, slim line, and stealth wireless communication towers, along with a diagram of full array and slim line towers. Allow group daycares as a conditional use, instead of a prohibited use in the R-4 zoning district. Restrict business hours of operation in the C-C and C-G districts from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. when the property abuts a residential use or district. Extended hours may be requested through a conditional use permit. Incorporation of CPTED, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, strategies in collaboration with the police department to reduce the opportunities of fear and incidents of crime and improve the quality of life in the city as follows: Illumination of pathways through internal common areas. Safe access and adequate lighting for outdoor service and equipment areas. Landscaping design and installed to provide natural surveillance opportunities from public areas. Location of open space and site amenities in areas of high visibility. An example along streets where doors and windows overlook public areas, et cetera. Locate drive-thrus so they are visible from a public street for surveillance purposes. Locate all approaches and entrances to ATMs so they are highly visible and adequately lit. And, then, to change the setback for free- standing signs back to one foot from five feet as previously required. The five foot setback created too many nonconforming signs, so we are changing it back. More code amendments addressing signs and home occupations will follow. Removal of the requirement for a conditional permit for daycare facilities to be modified when a change in ownership occurs. The new owner would still be required to obtain a license from the Department of Health and Welfare in their name and comply with the specific use standards listed in the UDC for daycare facilities. New specific use standards for wireless communication facilities that are more concise, user friendly, and up to date with the current technology. The new standards encourage the location of facilities in nonresidential areas. The co-location of new wireless equipment on existing structures and the ability for future co-location on new towers and use of stealth towers that are compatible with the surroundings and don't detract from the visual quality of the city. Highlights of the proposed standards include specific standards for street light, roof and wall mounted antennas. Specific standards for stealth, slim line and full array tower facilities, as well as amateur radio antennas. Lattice or guide designed structures are prohibited. Full array towers shall be deemed a principal permitted use in industrial districts and prohibited in all other districts. All new communication tower facility structures, except for those contained within an underground vault, require administrative design review in addition to other necessary permits. The Commission recommended approval of the subject application. Planning Department testified in Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 7 of 56 favor of the application. There was no one testifying in opposition or commenting on the application. Dave Splett from Idaho Transportation Department submitted written testimony. He was concerned that ITD's communications towers located in a right of way might be prohibited by the proposed changes to the wireless communication facility code, but this is not applicable, as ITD is not a wireless communication industry. Key issues of discussion by the Commission. They discussed the proposed restriction on the business hours of operation in a C-C and C-G districts when adjacent to residential zoning and use. And key Commission changes to the staff recommendation. At staff's request they amended the following sections shown in Section 7 of the staff report: 11- 5B-3C3. 11-5B-3C4. 11-4-3-43E8. And Table 11-5B-5. There have been no written testimony submitted to the city since the Commission hearing. And there are no outstanding issues for City Council. Staff will stand for any questions the Council may have. Hoaglun: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions for Sonya? Bird: I have none, Mr. President. Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: Just one. On the -- there was a lot of stuff there. That's very comprehensive and thank you very much. All good stuff that -- most of which I think have been talked about a little bit already. On the -- moving the sign setback, replacing it to one foot, instead of five foot, that -- signs still have to fall under the safety triangle rules as well, their distance from a driveway or intersection setback in a safety triangle. That doesn't cancel that, does it? Watters: No. Zaremba: Okay. Watters: Councilman Zaremba, it does not. Zaremba: Just wanted to make sure that was still clear. Watters: The site triangle still has to be observed. Yes. Zaremba: Okay. Hoaglun: Any other questions? Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 8 of 56 Rountree: Sonya, give me some background on the fourth bullet --fifth bullet point from allowing daycare -- a group daycare as a conditional use, as opposed to a prohibited use in an R-4. Having been all around the circle on this over the years, it seems like we are right back to the beginning of time. Watters: President Hoaglun, Councilman Rountree, it seems, you know, okay with staff that it be allowed as a conditional use in the R-4, so that's why we are proposing the changes. There didn't seem to be any harm to go through the conditional use permit on it. Do you have any concerns with that? Rountree: Well, previously it was that way years ago. comes up there is such a human cry about not allowing prohibited and now we are going back the other way same kind of response, that neighbors are not going t group daycare in an R-4 zone. Watters: It is -- it is allowed in an R-8 district, too. Rountree: I understand that. It seems that every time that it that it was changed to make it and we will have I believe the o be particularly excited about a Watters: But I don't recall whether that -- you apparently, do -- that that was allowed before. Kristy may be able to give some input on that. Come on up, Kristy. She's been involved in the daycare stuff more than I have. Hoaglun: And, Kristy, just for the record give us your name so we get it on the record correctly. Vigil: Okay. Kristy Vigil. Assistant city planner. Hoaglun: Thanks, Kristy. Vigil: Good evening, Council President, Members of the Council. I do most of the daycare --Ideal with most of the daycare conversations, the people who call into our office and people who call into us don't understand why they can't apply for a group for up to 12 children within their home in one district and not another district and so we wanted to bring it before the public hearing process to see how it would workout and see what they -- maybe if there was history and be able to give them some better answers, because from my limited knowledge -- UDC is my first knowledge from 2005, really. The Title 11 -- Title 12 I didn't really get into very much, so I had pretty limited knowledge on that and I didn't really have a very good answer for them, so I told them that I would take it before and let it run the due process and, hopefully, to get some enlightenment on it. Hoaglun: Thank you, Kristy. Any questions for Kristy? Councilman Bird. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 9 of 56 Bird: I agree if we -- it is in R-8. I never have understood why we don't have it in R-4. You got the same traffic problems in R-8 as you do in R-4 and that's the most problems that I have been approached with is the traffic -- the extra traffic on the street. But if we are going to allow it in R-8 I don't see why it's going to hurt us in R-4, if we are consistent. Hoaglun: Any other comments or questions, Council? Rountree: I have none. Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: I was just going to -- my recollection is similar to Councilman Rountree's and my experience on the Planning and Zoning Commission was that every application -- at the time it was a conditional use in R-4 and every application was accompanied by a full room full of neighbors and friends objecting to it. It raised many issues. Noise. Safety. Traffic. And that happened so many times that I think at one point we did say, okay, let's just say this is not possible. R-8 did seem to be enough different in that people expect traffic and some amount of noise in an R-8 zone, so I'm -- I'm not really falling on one side or the other, although I am commenting that I agree with why that happened, along with Councilman Rountree. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. Zaremba: There was a reason. Hoaglun: This is a public hearing on the changes to the UDC. We didn't have anyone sign up, but does anyone wish to comment? You're welcome to do so at this time. It's a quiet bunch tonight. Okay. Sonya, anything you want to wrap up with? Last thoughts? Watters: No. Hoaglun: Okay. Council, what are your wishes on this? Bird: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Bird. Bird: I move we close the public hearing on ZOA 12-001. Rountree: Second. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 10 of 56 Hoaglun: We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on ZOA 12-001. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, we close the public comment hearing. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Hoaglun: Council, it is before you. Rountree: Mr. President, discussion. I would like to see that particular item that we talked about explored a little more with staff and get into the history. There is some interesting history there I think that might bring both of those residential districts in line, but Idon't -- I don't want to approve that particular element right now without a little more information. Hoaglun: Okay. Are you moving to hold this item to a time certain to -- what's your -- Rountree: What I'm suggesting is if there is an inclination of approving it, that we approve it with that one item referred back to staff for further analysis. Hoaglun: Okay. Bird: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Bird. Bird: Councilman Rountree, you want to reopen the public hearing and, then, continue it? That way we can get some public input if they want. Rountree: That's fine. Bird: I think that would be the best way to continue it, in my opinion. Rountree: That's fine. Hoaglun: We can do that if changes are brought back. Rountree: Do you want to -- Watters: Well, if I may input. President Hoaglun, if you would rather you can do that or if you would rather we can hold this over until a future code amendment if you would like to. Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: That is an option. Councilman Zaremba. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 11 of 56 Zaremba: Again, giving my interpretation of what I think Councilman Rountree was suggesting, I would be comfortable approving everything with the exception of that one paragraph, if that's possible to do, and just holding that one subject over. Hoaglun: And Councilman Zaremba -- and still have staff research that, come back and say there is still a need for a change or after looking at it again we don't need it. It sounds like to me that we have gone through and they are getting from the one side people who are trying to make the application and wondering why it doesn't work the same way. So, we know that -- it sounds like there is a need to do it from that perspective, but historically it sounds like -- and not having been on the Council as long -- that you guys have run into that where there have been push back when you try to do that in those -- those zoning areas. So, I wouldn't mind having the historical background and learning more about that to see if there is a way to make it work or not work, so -- Zaremba: Mr. President, I am agreeing with that. I'm just saying I don't feel the need to hold up all the rest of the changes just for that one thing that I would like to discuss farther as well. Hoaglun: Okay. Bird: Make it a motion. Hoaglun: We can -- Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman. Rountree: I move that we adopt the UDC text amendments, with the exception of the one amendment that -- with respect to group daycares. Do you need any more than that? Zaremba; I'll second that. Hoaglun: There is a motion and a second to accept the changes to the UDC, with the exception as noted to group daycares in R-4 districts. Roll call vote on that, Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. Hoaglun: All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Hoaglun: Great. And, Sonya, we can get that process rolling on that other and we can schedule a time to hear that again, so -- Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 12 of 56 Watters: For clarification, do you want that to come back for that information and, then, after that meet in a subsequent meeting for the findings? Hoaglun: My thinking is I would like to receive that information and we can do that publicly to find out the background, history, a little more about what those pressures are to make a change versus why it hasn't been changed or -- the cycle, as Councilman Rountree referred to it, it sounds like it's been through that a couple times. And, then, we can determine what we do from there with that particular portion. Watters: Okay. So, findings don't need to be prepared for the next meeting on this, then? Hoaglun: Unless -- Council, does anyone have the needed for findings? Watters: I won't necessarily be able to, I guess, is what I'm getting at without a decision on this -- this one, so -- Hoaglun: Sonya, I'm missing the point here. Rountree: Don't understand why that would be the case. Watters: Well, if I prepare findings it's going to include the one that you have a question about, so -- Hoaglun: We didn't approve that one. Watters: I know. That's my point. Are you just wanting this continued for discussion at the next hearing on this one item and, then, I will come back at another meeting for the findings? Rountree: Mr. President, my understanding is it would come back with a future text amendment for the UDC. Watters: You want this one just pulled out of this amendment and it will come back with another application down the road? Rountree: Yes. Watters: Okay. I didn't understand what you meant. Okay. Sounds good. Nary: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Yes, Bill. Nary: Did I -- maybe I misunderstood. Do you want this to go -- if you do that this is going to go all the way back to Planning and Zoning or do you just want to separate this Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 13 of 56 -- we still have to bring you an actual ordinance, so we would bring you an ordinance to make all these other changes into the UDC but for this one and you're going to have a future discussion within the next month or so on this particular item. If you decide to grant this, then, we would bring that forward as an ordinance as well. Rountree: Correct. Nary: Was that your intent? Rountree: Yes. Nary: Okay. So, we are not going to start all the way over -- Watters: Right. I didn't expect that. Nary: Okay. Zaremba: Yeah. Mr. President, that -- that was my understanding that the whole offering ZOA 12-001 has been approved with this one exception, which we withdrew from it and have not approved yet. Nary: Yes. Zaremba: So, the rest of it can go forward and be implemented however it needs to be done. Hoaglun: And, Mr. Nary, you suggest they will work on that, come back, and, then, we will decide to go from there. So, I think we are in agreement on how to move forward, so -- Zaremba: Separated them. C. Public Hearing: MDA 12-001 Sgroi Property by Nunzio Sgroi Located at 4405 E. Ustick Road Request: Amend the Development Agreement to Modify the Conceptual Development Plan to Allow 14Single-Family Homes and Two (2) Townhomes on 2.81 Acres of Land in an R-8 Zoning District Hoaglun: Yep. All right. We will move on to Item 7-C, public hearing on MDA 12-001. And who -- Sonya, are you up? Watters: Uh-huh. Hoaglun: All right. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 14 of 56 Watters: Thank you, President Hoaglun, Members of the Council. The next application before you is a development agreement modification. The subject property consists of 2.81 acres of land. It's currently zoned R-8 and is located at 4405 East Ustick Road, on the south side of Ustick, approximately a quarter mile west of Cloverdale Road. And I guess just for clarification, this hasn't technically been annexed yet, but Council did approve annexation of the property with an R-8 district back in 2008 and we are still waiting for the development agreement to be signed. So, we are doing a modification to a development agreement that's been approved, but not yet signed by the applicant. A summary of the request. The applicant requests approval to amend the existing development agreement to modify the conceptual development plan, building elevations, and certain provisions of the agreement. The previous development plan for this site was for an assisted living facility that you see here on the overhead. The applicant now proposes to construct 14 single family detached homes and two townhomes on 2.1 acres of land with a gross density of 5.7 dwelling units per acre, consistent with the R-8 zoning and medium density residential future land use map designation for this property. Access to the site is proposed at the south boundary of the property via Sharon Avenue and Red Feather Estates Subdivision in accord with the UDC and Ada County Highway District standards, since access to Ustick Road is prohibited. A driveway is depicted on the concept plan on Lot 6 where you see the arrow there to the property to the west for cross-access as required by the development agreement. The applicant proposes to modify certain provisions in the development agreement as follows: Number 5.1.3, remove the requirement for residential densities not to exceed that allowed in the R-4 zoning district. This was a provision placed on this. Although the property was zoned R-8, they restricted densities to the R-4 standards. Zoning of this site is R-8, consistent with the future land use map designation of the medium density residential, which allows three to eight dwelling units per acre. The density that is proposed is below the maximum amount of -- at 5.7 dwelling units per acre. And, then, a second modification is to number 5.1.4, to modify the requirement for the certificate of zoning compliance and design review approval to apply it to the proposed townhomes only and be consistent with the site and elevations proposed with this application. Written testimony was received from James and Irvana Sell. They had concerns about unsafe traffic conditions, especially in regard to school children. They would like to have safety measures implemented, such as signage notifying motorists of the school zone, speed bumps, et cetera. Additionally, they oppose the density increase from the previous approved use of the assisted living facility and the residents will have access to the common area in Red Feather Subdivision. Written testimony was also received from Thomas Whitworth, the applicant's representative, in agreement with the staff report, except for the following change: The applicant requested that DA provision 5.1.A be modified to allow -- would require the septic system within the project to be removed upon development of the property, rather than within six months after the date of annexation ordinance approval. And staff is okay with that request. Staff is recommending approval of the development agreement modification application with the modifications noted in Exhibit A and the previously mentioned change to 5.1.A. Staff will stand for any questions Council may have. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 15 of 56 Hoaglun: Thank you, Sonya. Questions from Council? Bird: I have none. Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Rountree: Sonya, would you put up the previous display? I guess the one prior to that. The layout. And what's the zoning around this parcel again? Watters: It is R-8. Rountree: And what's to the -- to the east? Watters: That is a school. Elementary school. It's in the county. Rountree: Okay. Hoaglun: Sonya, I have a question. When the assisted living was being proposed was the access off the same street or was it off of Ustick? Watters: Councilman Hoaglun, the access was shown on the concept plan off of Ustick, but the development agreement did require the access be taken off of Sharon. Bird: Yeah. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. Anything else, Council, right now? Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Rountree: Does the development agreement address the amenities that might be proposed with this and the sidewalk and that sort of thing and how that would be phased in with the project? Watters: Councilman Rountree, Councilmen, the sidewalk will be constructed with the road improvements to Ustick, the widening, and the site is under five acres in size, so there are not site amenities required or open space with this subdivision. Rountree: Thank you. Hoaglun: Okay. This is a public hearing. We do have some folks signed up. If you would like to testify I'll call your name, come up, give your name and address and you have up three minutes to state your case. If you just signed up, you're for or against the Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 16 of 56 project and don't want to speak, just indicate and we have your name on the record. So, we will start that right now. Adam Flaherty has signed up against, so Adam, welcome. Flaherty: City Council, Mr. President, I'm on the HOA in Red Feather -- Hoaglun: Okay. Name and address. Flaherty: Adam Flaherty. 536 North Sharon Avenue. Bird: Thank you. Flaherty: Meridian. We have currently 46 signatures against the rezoning of this property. Highly based on the fact that Ustick Elementary is there, our children walk right past there to get there and there is nothing really other than across-walk for them now. Roughly 61 homes now, which is by the plans not -- you mentioned Sharon. But it's actually going to tie into Race the way it's drawn out and there is -- if you look at our subdivision currently there is all kind of homes that use Race now. My biggest concern -- you get more homes in there, obviously, they are going to use our HOA and our amenities on top of the increased traffic flow. I mean you're adding four lanes to Ustick, but you're going to pack more traffic onto a residential street. The prior access to this property was Ustick, so that's my biggest complaint is why can't we continue to come off of Ustick. The other thing I would like to propose is to have this delayed to after our annual meeting next month, so we can approach it to our homeowners, so they have a better understanding of what's going on, because most did not know about this, other than the ones we went around home to home to talk about and talk to. And, then, like the one homeowner had mentioned about adding speed bumps, because we had proposed that, speed bumps at Granger and Grenadier with ACHD in the past and it had gotten denied, but I think adding even more vehicles we would -- that would almost have to be a must. And they also had a temporary speed -- stop signs in there right now for the road construction on Ustick and the other thing I would ask if this did get approved if we could leave them stop signs in place, because it's helped traffic flow for safety of our kids already. That's all. Thank you very much. Hoaglun: Okay. Any questions for Adam? Bird: I have none. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you, Adam. And now I'm going to do what I should have started out -- you got a preview of coming attractions on the list. We usually let the applicant go first and present their case. So, is the applicant here to speak? We will do this and, then, we will go back to the list of people signed up. So, sorry about that. Got a little ahead of myself. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 17 of 56 Whitworth: Thomas Whitworth. 953 North Roosevelt, Boise. 83706. Basically, we agree with all the items in the staff report and just waiting for a positive reaction from you. Hoaglun: Okay. Whitworth: Any questions for Tom while he's here? Rountree: I have none. Hoaglun: Okay. And, of course, I will give, you time to close following the testimony. Whitworth: Thank you. Hoaglun: Thank you, Tom. Okay. Continuing on. Jeanie Bail is signed up against. Jeanie. Bail: Thank you. Jeanie Bail. 4371 East Spear Fish Drive. And as Adam had presented, we are very concerned about the school children and how this will impact their availability of safety going to and from school. As you can see with Ustick School, that actually is an opening off of their yard for many children that ride their bikes and walk past there to and from school, as well as a lot of events that happen after school hours. There is continual parents that park along there to pick up their children and drop them off as well and many of us don't see how adding at least two cars per residence will insure safety for our children, as well as maintaining the safety for us property owners of them respecting our areas and doing the speed limits that they should, you know, just generally being safe for our families. So, this is a great concern for many of us. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you, Jeanie. Any questions? Rountree: Yes, Mr. President. Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Rountree: Could you point what you just talked about out on a graphic? Bail: Yes. Rountree: Because I'm confused where the traffic conflict is. Holman: If you -- Sonya, if you could get it back on the right slide? If you push one of the colored buttons on top of the screen there, that will change your color and, then, your pen will write with that color, rather than changing the slide. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 18 of 56 Bail: So, the area that the children come out is actually right here. There is a walk and a crosswalk area and it is our understanding that the access is probably going to be along this area here. But, again, a lot of the, you know, parents and everything are parked along here to pick up and drop off their children every day. Hoaglun: And, Jeanie, I might ask -- that particular lot where you just drew the line where they walk to, is that just the ACHD drainage lot? What is right there? Bail: Yes. That is a drainage area, as well as a home is next to it. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions, Council? Rountree: I have none. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. Bail: Thank you. Hoaglun: Also signed up Judy Barney against. Welcome. Barney: Hello. Judy Barney at 4008 East Conklin Drive. The -- the things that I was going to talk about have been addressed, but I would like to reiterate them at Ustick, why it isn't there if it has was already been approved by the prior homeowners. This creating -- if you come off Cloverdale -- if you come off Cloverdale their major drive is going to be up Sharon to come back into this area and so, again, it's going to increase your traffic area on this street and so if this is approved we would like to see flashing lights approved here. Maybe one speed bump in the middle of Sharon right here to decrease that speed. Traffic signs at 20 miles per hour here and here. The usage of the children coming from this school is going to affect it right here, coming up here to the school, usage of our greenways for their playground area, since it doesn't seem to be approved in here for any -- for them. They are going to use our greenways and perhaps our pool and, yet, not be part of our association. So, again, the Ustick access is what we would like to see. Keeping this part as a fence. If they are going to use our greenways what is going to be done to clear that up? The access from Cloverdale coming up to here, there is a stop sign here. They come up here to Spear Fish. Right -- it doesn't show on here, but they are going to come right down here, come up Sharon and come here. Otherwise it's off Ustick and it's going to be along that major street right here. So, it's an increase of at least 40 cars and probably more and, again, this not only affects Red Feather, but Dawson Creek -- Creek is right over here and it also will affect that area and those children that also use this same area to get to Ustick School. So, those were the concerns of that -- that we were talking about so far that we would like to see addressed or the improvements for the safety of our children addressed being one speed bump into here, flashing light, and a cross ways -- all children are taught to -- to cross at crosswalks and there is not one crosswalk marked on those 11 stop signs, except right there at the school. That's a major issue. Those children are crossing everywhere, including at the stop signs, but they are crossing in the middle of the road, Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 19 of 56 because there is nowhere shown where to cross at. Is there anything else I needed to address on that? Okay. So, that should reiterate what was said and, hopefully, make that a little clearer as to how much usage is coming off Cloverdale right here, Dawson Creek, our neighborhood and the addition of the motor vehicles there. Thank you. Hoaglun: Thanks, Jeanie. Any questions for Jeanie? Rountree: I have none. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. Next person signed up -- yes, Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: Better turn my mike on. A number of the subjects that have come up are actually under the jurisdiction of Ada County Highway District and I guess my question is I know the original proposal would have been run past the Ada County Highway District. My question for staff is on a modification of a development agreement do we run that by Ada County Highway District as well? Have they commented on these changes? Watters: President Hoaglun, Councilman Zaremba, Councilmen, yes, ACHD did submit a report on this and they are in agreement with the applicant's proposal. ACHD, as well as city code, does not allow access to an arterial street when access to a local street is available, such as in this case. Zaremba: Thank you. Watters: Their current plan complies with city code and ACHD standards. Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. Continuing on. Christina Barney has signed up. Okay. She agrees with the previous speaker. Since they share the last name it's in her best interest, I assume. No. Brenda Ross signed up against. Brenda, do you wish to address the Council? Ross: President Hoaglun and Councilmen, my name is Brenda Ross. I live at 3720 East Tahiti Drive in Meridian in the Red Feather Subdivision. And I agree with everything that has been brought to your attention already. I wanted to make it clear that the main Red Feather access to Ustick Road is right -- I mean we only have the one that accesses Ustick. There is no traffic light there, it's just a stop sign, and if we add all this traffic from this additional complex I think it's going to create some serious problems. The other thing is people chose Red Feather as a place to live and picked their lots according to the original plan where they would be on a nice quiet street and their children would have access to a school and this is going to be a huge major change for all those residents. Basically, that's all I have to say. When we first heard about the plan to put these homes in we didn't really have any objection to it until we realized that they would -- their only access to Ustick would be though our Red Feather Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 20 of 56 Subdivision. I think that's our biggest concern and that's all I'd like to say. So, I hope it will be reconsidered. Thank you. Hoaglun: Any questions for Brenda? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. Hoaglun: Thanks, Brenda. Also signed up Carol Menton. Carol? Okay. You're signed opposed. Other person Dick Ross signed up -- D.Ross: I'm Dick Ross. 3720 East Tahiti. The first gentleman that spoke about this asked that this wait until after the gathering of the Red Feather Subdivision folks next month and I would like to encourage that. I'm in Red Feather, 3720 West Tahiti Drive. Didn't know this development was going in until I saw the flier, which must have been with the original senior center or what -- I'm sorry. What was it called before? Hoaglun: Assisted living center or -- D.Ross: Assisted living. And at that time the access was off lJstick, so I didn't have any problems with that. Now, as you have already heard, we have concerns, because it's coming back into Red Feather. If this is approved these folks need to be part of the Red Feather Association and pay dues, which there hasn't been any presentation to the association to do that as far as I know. The other thing that concerns me -- and if I can put another red line on here, there is talk right here in the development that there is going to be an access road to this piece -- parcel that's still undeveloped. What's going to happen there? If we approve it today we know what's going on with that acreage or that -- I have no idea what size it is or what kind of use it is. Why would those people also have to go back through Red Feather Subdivision, instead of going out onto Ustick. A simple solution to all these problems, in my mind, seems to be to go either back to Ada County Highway and see why we can't access Ustick and apparently you folks have already approached them, but that needs to be readdressed again. We don't need this kind of traffic in the Red Feather Subdivision. Another possibility would be for the developer -- whoever owns this property to do a land switch or a land trade with the Meridian School District. These are done all the time and that property would very nicely work well with Meridian School District, which adjoins it right now and those folks have all kinds of land available for this kind of development somewhere else. It's the old NIMBY thing, right? Not in my backyard. Thank you. Hoaglun: Thank you, Dick. And any questions? Rountree: I have none. Thank you. Bird: I have none. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 21 of 56 Hoaglun: Okay. Diane Madsen. Signed up against. Madsen: Good evening, Council. Diane Madsen. I'm at 4247 East Palm Street. I just am mostly concerned about the children crossing. There is a sidewalk there. They don't just go to and from school there, they linger there after school playing in that little green area and on the sidewalk right where that street would come out of that proposed subdivision. Sometimes I go, you know, like an hour after school and there is still -- there is kids there all the time. So, I just wanted to reiterate that. And I also agree that this should be part of our subdivision and they should pay dues. We already have problems with neighboring subdivisions of children climbing the fences to get into the pool. I'm head of the neighborhood watch and I'm -- I'm concerned about that also, just because we already have the problems with people climbing the fences with the safety issues with the pool and things like that. Hoaglun: I have a question real quick. Do you guys do the cards or some sort of access for -- Madsen: We do have cards, but they climb over the fence. Hoaglun: Sure. Okay. Same thing in ours, so -- okay. Madsen: Yeah. Okay. That's all I have. Hoaglun: Thank you. Madsen: Okay. Hoaglun: Shawna Smith. Smith: Never done this before. You guys all seem calm. Shawna Smith. 2504 North Lancer Avenue, Red Feather Subdivision. I actually had a lot of different complaints that haven't been addressed. Their lot sizes are really small and even with that the floor plan for these houses and all of the bedrooms are upstairs -- because they were proposing -- I was looking at some of the prior notes that maybe like seniors could buy those homes and different things like that, but we are just looking at those homes thinking they are really small, you're going to end up with a lot of new beginning people moving in, they won't take care of the houses, and we bought in Red Feather, because it's the top of Corey Barton. It had, you know, all hardwood floors. You had to have hardwood floors, stainless steel appliances -- you know what I mean? It has fiber optics. It's supposed to be this nice neighborhood. And, then, it's not a trailer park per se, but it's almost like they want to put a trailer park into your neighborhood and so I do have issues with that. You know, it's a townhome, it just doesn't stand par with what we were held accountable for to be in our neighborhood and so it doesn't meet any of the standards that we had to meet to live in that neighborhood. I have a problem with that. And, then, my other issue was, again, with the pool. I'm actually on the pool committee. We do have keys. And, then, they break the fences and they have broken clocks, they Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 22 of 56 have broken lights -- you end up with all these teenagers that come through and don't take care of it. I would like to see them part of the Red Feather neighborhood, so that we can fine them, we can have some sort of access -- they -- tiny houses. This isn't always the case, but if they park a great big -- okay. My neighbor in my old neighborhood he would work on his truck and he had a great big crane that takes your engine out of your car in your driveway, we will have no way to have any control over that if it's just a junk yard in our neighborhood. So, I have a concern with that. And, then, our kids walking to school and all the other issues I believe have been addressed. And if you are adding stop lights or leaving the stop signs in, there is one turn that's not on your map where the biggest accidents would be. I would like to add one more stop sign there. Any questions? Hoaglun: Any questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: No. Hoaglun: Thank you, Shawna. Amber Woolner. Woolner: Good evening. Which -- this one? Hoaglun: That works. Woolner: My name is Amber Woolner and I live on 4228 East Race Street in Red Feather. And just to reiterate -- I mean pretty much everything I have been thinking and feeling and concerned about has already been addressed, but just to reiterate it, number one, I'm concerned about our property values and what's going to happen and the economy is not great as it is and we have seen our home values already decrease and, then, to add to it homes that are not part of the HOA that are not concerned about our green spaces, our pools, our parks and they are just going to have access to them and there is no way for us to keep them out and they are not going to be paying -- we pay quite a substantial amount of money every year just to keep them nice and to keep them going and to be able to use them and to feel safe using them. My other concern is, obviously, with the school -- the access to the school is right there right where they are proposing access to these homes. I have a six year old son and I have two other little ones who are going to be going to Ustick Elementary and I let him walk to school with his friends and there is one little area out to Race Street -- I was going to -- Hoaglun: You can use either microphone if you want, Amber. Woolner: I can see him almost get to the school. He goes to his friends house straight ahead and they turn the corner and I would be really concerned for those five feet I can't see him going to the school property, because all those cars and whoever else is there zooming in and out and having no respect for our neighborhood or our children and what's happening there. So, those are really my biggest concerns. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 23 of 56 Hoaglun: Okay. Great. Thank you. Last one signed up Lacey Holzbauer. Holzbauer: Good job. Hoaglun: I try. With a name like Hoaglun you kind of get used to it being mispronounced, so -- Holzbauer: Yeah. Exactly. Lacey Holzbauer. I'm at 4026 East Chandler Street. I'm sorry. I'm trying not to think of the worst case scenario, but with kids you really don't want to think it could ever happen. We live on this street. If you were to follow this street right here, this is Chandler and so we live -- if you were to continue with this picture we live right here or on this one it's right here. So, my daughter likes to ride her bike to school. A lot of times that is in the street. She always wears a helmet. But I can't guarantee, unless I'm there, that she is going to stay on the sidewalk and so I -- I see issues and the odds going up that there are going to be accidents with children, because she's ten, she's not going to be thinking -- you know, she can't even remember to make her bed, let alone I better watch out for those cars. Cars are quiet. If they had a horn on them you could see them coming, like the ice-cream truck, you could see them coming, but you can't see that. On that street -- on the road that -- the access that is proposed, if there isn't room for visitors of the people that are in that complex where are they going to park? Is there going to be an overflow of parking -- I have a neighbor who likes to have family parties and those bring 20 cars and so -- but those cars -- under our HOA those cars can't be overnight and so -- and they can't -- it can't be a regular thing. So, those cars are going to be associated with someone who doesn't have to follow those rules, unless we can tow them. And so there is more parking there that is just a two lane residential road, it's not made for parking on this side, parking on this way, and two lanes in the middle and, kids, watch out. There could be continual parking all the way on both sides. And what if they don't park all the way to the sidewalk, you're now even more -- if you're in a regular residential road typically only one can go by if you got parking on either side. And so it's -- I -- my daughter comes out, here is the walkway, she's coming from school, there is a sidewalk there, she goes straight for it and there is the drainage here, tons of kids going on here and so, then, she gets to the sidewalk and -- before she gets to the street there is a sidewalk, then, it goes this way, the entrance would be right there. And, then, there is a sidewalk that goes this way. And so she, coming off the sidewalk, goes off there, and there she goes. So, that's all I have to say. Hoaglun: Okay. Holzbauer: It's for the kids. That's all it is for me. Hoaglun: Thank you, Lacey. That's all I have signed up to testify. Is there anyone who didn't sign up that would like to testify? The gentleman in the back. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 24 of 56 Fuhrman: My name is Curtis Fuhrman. I live on 4171 East Race Street in the Red Feather Subdivision. And, you know, just express my sentiments that's already been related by many of the people here. Biggest concern is about where the outlet of this new housing would be located at. Red Feather is a really big subdivision. There is a lot of families in the subdivision and that means that there is a lot of the kids that go to that school and the way that it's designed really isn't very ideal, there has been a lot of people speaking about how even that drop off area at the capacity that we are now is actually very stressed and so there is a lot of different situations where it's hard to see the kids, there is cars, because the subdivision is so large some people do bring their kids and so it is stressed as it is right now. It's actually -- I don't feel that it is safe in its current state and the location where that outlet would be is a very difficult area, because it's putting stress on an area that's already past its capacity and so if I were just to say, you know what, my biggest concern on that would be is if I'm taking my kids to school and felt it would be unsafe as it is now, just to add this additional stress to that, it's really not an appropriate place to do and, you know, my personal sentiment would be that there shouldn't be an outlet there. You know, if there is no way to prevent that type of outlet, then, I believe that the responsible thing is to keep the -- the density of that traffic to as minimal as possible. Thanks. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you, Curtis. Okay. The developer -- Tom, back up to make your closing remarks. Whitworth: Thank you. The access -- our hands are tied on that. There is nothing we can do about it because of -- ACRD is requiring it to be there. So, as far as the lot sizes, the lots are all meeting the requirements and the guidelines and the parking -- each unit has two covered parking, which is a two car garage and, then, two parking stalls in the driveway and, then, there would be additional parking -- some minimal amount along the street. And, then, other than that, yeah, we would love it if we could access straight across and align with the roadway directly on the other side, but, like said, we are just following the guidelines from ACRD. So thank you. Hoaglun: Quick question. You know, the couple comments have been that they think this development ought to be part of the homeowners association of Red Feather. Comment on that? Whitworth: It would be -- yeah, we could meet with them to discuss that. That would be fine. Hoaglun: Okay. Questions from Council? Rountree: Mr. President? Have you had a homeowners meeting? Whitworth: Meaning -- we did have one where the -- the open meeting? Yeah. And at that point we originally looked at using all of the site with duplexes and there was opposition to that, so we went back and redesigned it, so that each one of the lots would Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 25 of 56 be a single family home, except for the two on the side where we couldn't fit anything in except the duplex there. Or a townhome. Rountree: So, you haven't taken this concept back to the homeowners, other than through this process? Whitworth: I sent this in an e-mail back to the homeowners is all. Rountree: Have you approached ACRD on what they would do with respect to the school access? Because I'm not sure they are aware that that's there. Whitworth: The school access on that -- Rountree: The sidewalk that provides access to the school that's off that particular street that you would be -- Whitworth: Well, the sidewalk is actually at the end of that property, isn't it? It's not even next to this. Rountree: I understand that. Whitworth: So, what's your question? Rountree: My question is have you approached ACHD with what they might do at that crossing with an additional access point coming onto that street. Whitworth: I have not. Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: I have a question that's actually more process oriented. With the original proposal that this be an assisted living center, I can understand why it came through as an R-8 zone. That would be required for the assisted living. Had this been originally presented as a single family residential I would want to have discussed it as an R-4, as is the surrounding subdivision. To me changing from an assisted living to single family dwellings, however many of them there are, is a more significant change than I would make with a development agreement. I would want to review the possible rezone as an R-4. So, I guess my question to staff is wouldn't it be more appropriate to be discussing what the zoning of this should be if we are changing from an assisted living, which was the original plan? Watters: President Hoaglun, Councilman Zaremba, Councilmen, the Council has already acted on the annexation request, so I don't believe we could go back and change that at this point. Correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Nary. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 26 of 56 Zaremba: Actually, that can be withdrawn if the development agreement has not been signed. And, actually, it's not valid until that's signed. Hoaglun: Mr. Nary? Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Council Member Zaremba, no, you're asking a fair question. I mean, yes, they have an R-8 entitlement now. If they were to sign the development agreement they have an R-8 entitlement, but it was based on an assisted living as you stated. The Council is free to consider, because it is contractual with the development agreement, to reject this alternative. They can come back and consider whether or not an R-4 would be more appropriate, if that's the more compatible uses in the area or if you feel this is not consistent with development in that area, they are allowed to, essentially, request what they have, but your question is legitimate, certainly can -- the Council can reject it and say, no, you want what's already been approved or if you were to consider residential in this area it has to be compatible with the other zoning in the area as well. That's perfectly fine. Zaremba: Thank you, Mr. Nary. And I would add to that, though, it's approved subject to the signing of the development agreement and some time ago we put a time limit on development agreements as well. Watters: That is correct, Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: Refresh my memory. Was it originally done in 2005? I -- Watters: No. 2008, I believe. Zaremba: Okay. Watters: And this applicant did request an extension to that time limit. Zaremba: Okay. Watters: So, they are within their time. Zaremba: Within their time? Okay. Watters: Yeah. And just for clarification on that, the future land use map designation for this property is medium density residential. Densities are proposed -- or allowed between three and eight dwelling units per acre. This one comes out at 5.7 dwelling units. That is a little higher than the adjacent R-4 zoning. The R-4 zoned area is also designated medium density on the Comp Plan. Just information. Zaremba: Thank you. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 27 of 56 Bird: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Bird. Bird: Sonya, Red Feather is R-4? Watters: Yes, it is. Bird: Okay. Hoaglun: Tom, question -- I'm sure you looked at this in a number of different configurations on what to do and you have an investment and -- as a return on that and did an R-4 pencil out for you? Whitworth: An R-4 does not at this time. It would be approximately 11 units on the property. Eleven to twelve. But the major issue is still there. All of the traffic does have to still flow into Red Feather. Hoaglun: Okay. Anything further for the applicant? Thank you, Tom. Whitworth: Thank you., Hoaglun: Council, what is your -- use the word pleasure, but that's a tough one in these things. Rountree: Mr. President, I'm inclined to stick with the original DA. I do understand that the access would be back into the subdivision no matter what happens here, with the exception of a commercial establishment and that might change it. That would keep the densities at the R-4. Just as a suggestion, I would suggest that the developer work with the subdivision and Ada County Highway District. This is not much different than a subdivision that I live adjacent to and drive though on a daily basis and the crosswalk situation from the school is -- is painted, it's signed, and there is daily crossing guards. So, that kind of thing can be worked out. But I -- I don't -- I don't have a strong desire to change what's been already approved. Bird: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Bird. Bird: I agree wholeheartedly. I do not see any reason to change it from an R-4 zoning period. I will say one thing, that if we -- if you leave an entrance there and -- on their drive to the south and you get an entrance to the -- to Ustick off -- in that deal, well, then, we will be hearing complaints of these people in this subdivision from the Red Feather people going through their subdivision. So, if you get one from Ustick you better close the one on the back. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 28 of 56 Hoaglun: Well, fortunately, Councilman Bird, we have dealt with ACHD on that and that's going to beano go, so -- Bird: Yeah. Hoaglun: -- so that's beating your head against the wall on that one, so -- and, Councilman Rountree, I do agree, I think they would be more amenable to doing some things -- signage and striping on the streets for the crossing. The issue of the school kids and keeping them safe -- and it sounds like the situation is such they could use that right now, even if this development is not going in, that this is something that needs to be done. Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: I agree with those suggestions and it is something that I think needs to be addressed with Ada County Highway District whether this subdivision moves forward or changes form and doesn't change form. ACHD needs to be made aware of and to deal with those issues, regardless of what happens here. I tend to agree with what I think Councilman Rountree said is I'm not favor of this modification. The original development agreement, which is not signed, is still available to be signed. That would be an assisted living center and, yes, it would still have access not to Ustick, but to this internal street. But I'm inclined to deny this modification to the DA and if they want to make it something other than assisted living, then, I want to talk about it going to R-4. Nary: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Mr. Nary. Nary: Yeah. Mr. President, Members of the Council, if you approve Item 8-B, which is the appointment for the Traffic Safety Commission, I will add this to our next agenda discussion. ACHD is a member of that commission as well and they do -- they do have all the schools in mind. I don't know if Ustick Elementary is slated for any of these types of school safety crossing types of improvements, but I would agree, basically, from the information you have tonight, at least it needs to be brought to their attention. It may be in the program somewhere. I don't know that. But we will add it to the traffic safety agenda for the May meeting just to get it on their radar, because, obviously, by the next school year you would want to have crossing signs and the like there now. I agree that it's certainly -- at least needs to be evaluated today. Bird: Or look at what happens. Zaremba: Great. I appreciate that for sure. Bird: Mr. President? Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 29 of 56 Hoaglun: Councilman Bird. Bird: Well, hearing no more public testimony or stuff, I move we close the public hearing on MDA 12-001. Rountree: Second. Hoaglun: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on 7-C. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Hoaglun: Council, MDA 12-001 is before you. Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: I move that we deny MDA 12-001. Rountree: Second. Hoaglun: I have a motion and a second to deny MDA 12-001. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. Hoaglun: All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. ®. Public Hearing: TEC 12-006 Ambercreek No. 2 by Trilogy Department, LLC Located Near Southwest Corner of N. Meridian Road and W. McMillan Road Request: Two (2) Year Time Extension on the Preliminary Plat Hoaglun: Continuing on, we have Item 7-D, a public hearing TEC 12-006, Ambercreek No. 2 by Trilogy. And, Sonya, you're up again. Watters: Yes. Hoaglun: Okay. Watters: Thank you, President Hoaglun, Councilmen. The next application before you is a request for a two year time extension on the preliminary plat for Ambercreek Subdivision No. 2 to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat. The site Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 30 of 56 consists of 16.47 acres of land that's currently zoned R-8 and is located near the southwest corner of Meridian Road and McMillan Road. Hoaglun: Sonya, one second. Folks, I need you to take the conversations outside, please. We still have many more meetings to go through. Thank you. Okay, Sonya, go ahead. Watters: The subject preliminary plat consists of 74 building lots. This is the fourth time extension requested by the applicant. If approved the applicant will have until March 23rd, 2014, to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat. Staff recommends three new conditions of approval with the subject time extension to coincide with the recently adopted surety requirements set forth in the UDC and the new Public Works street light requirement. Written testimony was received from Shawn Brownley, the applicant's representative, in agreement with the staff report. There are no outstanding issues for City Council and staff is recommending approval of the subject time extension. Hoaglun: Any questions for Sonya, Council? Bird: I have none. Hoaglun: Not -- Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Yes, Councilman Rountree. Rountree: I missed this. The zoning to the south is R-8 as well? Watters: That is correct. Rountree: Okay. Thank you. Hoaglun: Is the applicant's representative here? Shawn? Brownley: President and Members of the Council, for the record Shawn Brownley. Business address at 2358 South Titanium Place in Meridian. And we are just requesting approval for a time extension and reasoning for -- unfortunately, economic slow down. I think it's getting better, so, hopefully, this is the last time, knock on wood, we will be before you for a time extension. And thank you, Sonya, we do concur with the staff report and with that said I will stand for questions. Hoaglun: Thank you, Shawn. Any questions? Rountree: I have none. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 31 of 56 Hoaglun: Thank you. Brownley: Thank you. Zaremba: Public comment? Rountree: Public hearing. Hoaglun: Oh, yeah. They kind of cleared out, so I thought -- this is a public hearing on TEC 12-006. Is there anybody else who would like to speak to this issue? As I suspected, but I have to do that for the process. Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Yes. Rountree: Seeing none, I move that we close the public hearing on Item 7-D. Bird: Second. Hoaglun: Motion has been made and seconded to close the. public hearing on 7-D. All those in favor say aye. None opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve the time extension for TEC 12-006. Zaremba: Second. Hoaglun: I have a motion and second to approve the time extension on 7-D. Madam Clerk, please, call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. Hoaglun: All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. E. FP '12-003 Paramount No. 18 by Brighton Development, Inc. Located West of IV. tVleridian Road Between W. Producer Way and N. Fox Run Way Request: Final Plat Consisting of 19 Residential Building Lots and One (1) Common Lot on 5.66 Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 32 of 56 Acres in an R-8 Zoning District Hoaglun: Moving on to 7-E, FP 12-003. Paramount No. 18. I will just call Sonya, just out of habit. Watters: Thank you, President Hoaglun, Members of the Council. The next application before you is a final plat for Paramount Subdivision, Phase 18. The site consists of 5.66 acres of land. It's currently zoned R-8 and is located west of North Meridian Road between West Producer Way and North Fox Run Way. Subject property was annexed and preliminary platted in 2003. This is phase 18, consisting of 19 residential building lots and one common lot on 5.66 acres of land. The gross density proposed in this phase is 3.36 dwelling units per acre, with an average lot size of 8,515 square feet. Open space consists of six and eight foot wide parkways adjacent to the proposed public streets. Staff finds the proposed final plat to be in substantial conformance with the approved preliminary plat. Written testimony was received from Mike Wardle, the applicant's representative, in agreement with the staff report. There are no outstanding issues for City Council and staff is recommending approval of the. final plat with conditions in the staff report. Hoaglun: Thank you, Sonya. Any questions for staff? Okay. Mike, any comments? Okay. Bird: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Bird. Bird: I move we approve FP 12-003, Paramount No. 18. Rountree: Second. Bird: Final plat. Hoaglun: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 7-E. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call the roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. Hoaglun: We have before us -- all ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. F. FP 12-004 Zebulon Heights Subdivision No. 5 by The Traditions by Amyx II, LLP Located South of E. McMillan Road and West of N. Eagle Road Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of 39 Building Lots and 3 Common Lots on 14.39 Acres of Land Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 33 of 56 Hoaglun: We now have before us Item 7-F, FP 12-004. Sonya. Watters: And the last public hearing before you is the final plat application for Zebulon Heights Sub No. 5. This site consists of 14.39 acres of land. It's currently zoned R-4 and is located south of East McMillan Road and west of North Eagle Road. The proposed final plat consists of 39 single family residential building lots and three common area lots on 14.39 acres of land, for a gross density 2.71 dwelling units per acre. Staff has reviewed the proposed plat for consistency with the approved preliminary plat and found there to be two fewer building lots than shown on the preliminary plat. Because the number of building lots is fewer and the amount of common open space has not decreased, staff finds the proposed plat to be in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat as required. Written testimony was received from Becky McKay, the applicant's representative, in agreement with the staff report. There are no outstanding issues for City Council and staff is recommending approval of the proposed final plat with the conditions in the staff report. Hoaglun: Thank you, Sonya. Questions for staff? Rountree: No. Bird: I have none. Hoaglun: Is there a representative of the applicant anywhere? Rountree: There is Sheri. Hoaglun: Okay. Council? Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve the final plat 12-004 for Zebulon Heights, subject to staff's comments. Zaremba: Second. Hoaglun: We have a motion and a second to approve Item 7-F. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call the roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. Hoaglun: All ayes. Motion carries. 7-F is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 34 of 56 Item 8: Department Reports A. Planning Department: Home Occupation Discussion Hoaglun: Moving on. We will start with Department Reports. First up is Planning Department home occupation discussion. Kristy, do you have this one? Vigil: Now you know why I'm really here. Hoaglun: That's right. You do not look like Pete Friedman, that's for sure. Vigil: No, I'm not Pete Friedman. Kristy Vigil with the -- assistant city planner, Planning Department. And I'd like to thank Sonya for clearing the room for me. All right. I am here before you tonight to present my research on home occupations and accessory structures with other codes across the nation and locally and what I have found. I researched, gosh, probably 50 to 75 different home occupation codes all over the place and I have to start by saying the City of Meridian really is normal. We are not out of the box by not allowing them in accessory structures. I did find few of them that did allow them in accessory structures and the ones that I did find, most of them allowed them for like 25 percent or they even capped them at 250 square feet or something like that. Boise City, they actually allow them in accessory structures and they capped it at 500 square feet. Locally also I called Eagle. Their code is actually written not to allow them in accessory structures, but their determination has been made to allow them in accessory structures. Most of the places that do allow them in accessory structures were not on the west coast. Most of them were not on the west coast. Most of them were out of our region for the most part. And also I researched storage of materials, because that's been a hot topic also lately and we are absolutely on topic with storage of materials. Nobody allows them outside. Period. They all required them to be inside, whether it's within the dwelling unit or an accessory structure. As I kept going into this researching, I thought, well, let's look at incompatible land uses, because if you're approving a home occupation and you have an accessory structure, you don't want somebody who goes in there and opens, you know, vehicle repair or a kennel or something that is more intensive land use than really a residential unit is allowed and so I went through and a lot of these codes that I researched actually listed prohibited uses and the UDC is consistent with listing the prohibited uses, we just do it within the standards -- in the home occupation standards, we do it in Chapter 2 of the residential zoning districts by stating that if the use is not allowed within our table, then, it is a prohibited use. So, an example would be motor repair. It is not allowed within the residential districts, so we would not even allow that as a home occupation. And, then, the last area I researched was retail sales, again, another topic has come up recently and we are -- we are either ahead of the curve on that by allowing the -- on a limited basis, has to be associated to the personal aspect of it, so if you have a hair salon or something like that, or if you fabricated on site. My example, typically, for fabricating on site is a bird house or something of -- you know, it's small in nature than if you're trying Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 35 of 56 to make very large objects and, then, a lot of codes I read don't even allow retail sales at all and we used to not allow retail sales at all as well and, then, we started allowing them fabricated or produced on site and as part of a personal service home occupation, like a hair stylist or something like that. So, I kind of went quickly through my memo that I gave to you guys, but I want to give you plenty of opportunity to have discussion and ask any questions that you might have. Rountree: Mr. President? Kristy, did you find in any case where it wasn't allowed there was some appeal process that was clear, maybe not quite as expensive and laborious as ours -- Vigil: President Hoaglun, Councilman Rountree, Councilmen, I actually did not look at fees when I was doing this research to see if there was another process where it wasn't as laborious as ours, but I didn't see during my process where they really had an appeal if you didn't meet the home occupation standards either. In Boise city if you want to go over 500 square feet you're required to have a conditional use permit. Rountree: Okay. Vigil: So, which would be even more than what we do with the appeal process. Rountree: Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Vigil: You're welcome. Hoaglun: Question, Kristy. So, in the valley Boise and Eagle do allow accessory structures, but the limit in Boise is 500 square feet and is that the same for Eagle or are they 250? Vigil: Eagle doesn't have a standard. It actually says it's prohibited, but their determination has been that they do allow them, because they had -- it was just an out cry. I had a feeling when I was looking at Eagle's code, I'm like, you know, you better call them and check, because that's just kind -- I know Mike Orien in Eagle and I just had a feeling to call him and he told me it's been a determination to allow them. Hoaglun: Okay. Interesting on retail sales, I understand where retail sales are, but like hair salon, that is for self service, so there is kind of -- we do allow a mix to some extent of retail sales as kind of broadly defined, I guess. Vigil: Well, it says to the personal service aspects, so if -- if you look at the definition of personal service in the UDC it's going to be limited to your hair salons and your massage -- your spas, those kinds of things. Honestly, when I approve most of these home occupations most of them don't even have a retail sales component. The ones I have really ever approved have been in home salons. Most people when they call -- and they do sell other stuff out of their home, it's just -- they stop. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 36 of 56 Hoaglun: Okay. Vigil: They don't pursue. They look for a commercial location. Hoaglun: Okay. To follow up on that. But if I guess sales -- thinking of products where they may go out and visit other people to sell their product -- I mean that's -- they can store that stuff, they can do all that. What if they have in-home demonstrations, but they are selling the product there or they are selling other things that -- opportunity for another person to take part in that sale, so -- Vigil: They all tell me they go other places. Hoaglun: Okay. Vigil: I will be honest with you, they -- they do, they all tell me that they go other places. Scentsy, Avon, Pampered Chief -- all of those distributors or representatives, they tell me that they go other places, so I -- I don't have probably a very good answer for you. Hoaglun: And I think, Kristy, you know, most of them do. You know, I know my wife has received those calls for the latest products, to, hey, can I come to your house and call your friends and do a demo, et cetera, et cetera, so I think for the most part they do, but it's interesting. Watters: Yeah. Hoaglun: So -- it's a social gathering. Watters: It is. Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Rountree: So, Kristy, do you have any recommendations for us after your research? Vigil: I do. Rountree: Well, very good. And what are those? Vigil: I think we should stay status quo. I think -- the home occupation standards are written to allow people who want to run an office or a small -- very -- you know, very small business out of their home to give them the opportunity to be successful and actually have these opportunities out of their home and still protect the residential character. and surroundings for what their neighbors signed up for. Their neighbors signed up to live next door to a residential area and we have -- we have plenty of commercial locations where people can locate if they want a bigger operation than what Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 37 of 56 our home occupation standards allow. I have been doing home occupations for probably eight years within the Planning Department and this is the first time I'm before you on this subject and 1 don't know if we need to reinvent the wheel for all of those different kinds of aspects and I understand we might have some piecemeal residentials that are on -- along arterial roads and if we need to we could always put some standards in that, if you're along an arterial road you get a little bit more than if you're within a subdivision. We could do that as well, but I think our standards have been working and I don't know that we need to open up and compromise the residential character in districts that we have. And after what we saw tonight it's pretty important to them that their residential districts stay how they are. Rountree: Well, I think that's a grant recommendation. Vigil: Well, thank you, Councilman Rountree. Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: First, thank you very much for all of that research and that's nice to know that we have acceptable rules in place and, as you have stated, it's really for the protection of the residential feel of a residential neighborhood. It needs to say that way and customer traffic and delivery and shipping isn't normally considered appropriate in a residential neighborhood and even the issues that neighbors with this use all have to go through a CUP process before Planning and Zoning Commission and, then, the Council -- again, the neighbors would come and say this isn't what I bought my neighborhood in. My neighborhood for and, you know, I want my kids to be able to play in my front yard, not have strangers parking there, and worry about what they are doing and I appreciate and am comfortable with your suggestion that we don't need to change it and I think one of the things that makes me even more uncomfortable with that is that we do actually have an appeal process if -- if somebody just simply thinks that they ought to be the exception, we have an ,appeal process, but that appeal process incorporates the neighbors into the process as well. So, I'm comfortable with and appreciate your suggestion that we got something right. Vigil: Thank you. If I may just have a few more minutes, President Hoaglun, Council Members. When we had these other topics of discussion recently about, okay, well, want to attach my accessory garage, so I can actually meet your standards, I think if we need to have more of direction on what a structure needs to look like. Roof. Walls. Actual breezeway. And I'd like to get your feeling on how you guys feel about that as well, because that really is my bone to people that I throw out there to them when I say, okay, it's not allowed here and they are like, well, how do I attach it without spending a whole bunch of money. I'm like, well, it has to be a structure and a breezeway is a structure, but I think we probably need to give them a little bit more direction on where we want to go with that. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 38 of 56 Hoaglun: You mean you don't like the response: We know it when we see it? Because that doesn't help you? Okay. I understand. Rountree: Mr. President, I think that's a good suggestion and I would recommend that you sit down with the rest of the planning staff and identify what would fit within the design criteria of the structure and put some words on paper that -- or maybe some graphics that show us some types of architectural elements that would be considered a structure for people to see and visualize and move forward with, as opposed to a few two-by-fours and a couple of vines. Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: And I agree with that. Looking towards it being a more substantial new connection and I would involve the building services part of your group, now that you're all together, in that discussion, as well as what it should look like and -- and I agree if we are going to allow people to say, well, I can connect these two structures, we need to have some rules about that, that it should be something more substantial. The one thing that I would add into that discussion is a distinction between what's an accessory structure and what's actually the garage. There are detached garages around. as well and we do have a Meridian ordinance that says you must use the garage for parking your car. Vigil: Yes. Zaremba: I would not want to redefine a garage as an accessory structure and give up parking the car there. So, kind of keep that in mind -- Vigil: We will be careful with that, I promise. Zaremba: -- as well, so -- Vigil: Yes. Zaremba: Great. Thank you. Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Rountree: One thing you might want to add to that, what's a structure, you might put in a definition of what may or may not require a building permit. Vigil: Okay. Good point, Councilman Rountree. Anything else for Kristy at this point? Bird: Good job, Kristy. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 39 of 56 Vigil: Well, thank you. Hoaglun: And to note no one left during your presentation, so -- Bird: You didn't run anybody off. Vigil: There was people though. Thank you. B. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 12-847: A Resolution reappointing Bill Nary and Tim Curns to the Meridian Traffic Safety Commission Hoaglun: Thank you. Council, next up Item 8-B is a resolution that's reappointing Bill Nary and Tim Curns to the Meridian Traffic Safety Commission. Bird: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Bird. Bird: I move we approve Resolution 12-847. Zaremba: Second. Rountree: We have a motion and a second approving resolution 12-847. Madam Clerk, would you, please, call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. Hoaglun: Item 8-C is -- all ayes. Motion carries. I guess I need to get that on the record, I guess, so -- MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. C. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 12-848: A Resolution reappointing Carol Harms to Seat 5 of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission Hoaglun: Item 8-C, Resolution 12-848 is reappointing Carol Harms to Seat 5 of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission. Councilman Bird. Bird: We approve Resolution No. 12-848. Rountree: Second. Zaremba: Second. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 40 of 56 Hoaglun: I have a motion and a second reappointing Carol to the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call the roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. Hoaglun: Item -- thank you. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. D. Parks & Recreation Department: Improvements at 8th Street Park Discussion Hoaglun: And we are now at Item 8-D, Parks and Recreation Department, improvements at the 8th Street Park. And, Mike, are you going to lead us in that one? Barton: Yes, I am. Hoaglun: Great. Barton: Good Evening, Mr. President, Council Members. We need your direction this evening on the. use of an existing budget. We have an existing budget of 64,000 dollars that was -- that is budgeted for improvements at 8th Street Park. This is money that was budgeted originally for a pathway construction that connected Bud Porter Path across the new pedestrian bridge and on through the -- the park itself to 8th Street. The pathway we were able to build with CDBG grant money, so the existing budget that was originally earmarked for that pathway construction is -- is still there. So, as you know the 8th Street Park is one of our older parks -- or one of our oldest parks. It has an aging playground and really no other amenities to speak of. Open play field and some drinking water, so what we would like your approval on is to utilize some of that remaining budget money to replace the playground as currently the playground is in disrepair. It's about 18 years old. Replacement parts are no longer available. We are kind of piecing it together in plastic welding and, actually, removing some components as they fail. So, what we would like to do is replace that existing playground. We'd like to construct a 20 by 20 picnic shelter. Part of the playground replacement would be combined with a SWAC application and try to have SWAC do a 50 percent match on that playground purchase. Also, the Parks and Rec Commission did a -- did an amenity survey and identified 8th Street Park as one of the -- one of the parks that is in need of an upgrade and a face lift. They feel that it's underutilized and the addition of some of these amenities -- the playground is a -- you know, kind of a need or a replacement need. Picnic shelter would be an upgrade. We are planning to submit a CDBG application for the next program year to construct a small restroom on the site as well. And so with that we would like your direction on using our existing budget for a different purpose. Same park, different purpose. Hoaglun: Council, questions from Mike? Comments? Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 41 of 56 Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Rountree: I appreciate the need at 8th Street, but we have had a discussion here I believe last week about another major initiative on the part of the Parks Department and my response was what aren't we going to do in order to move forward with the maintenance facility and to me you're looking at 64,000 dollars that's -- oh, it's a tenth of what we are short. Is it better spent there than here? I don't know. I just bring that up, Mike. I appreciate the need. Barton: That's an excellent question. Rountree: But there are other funds that would be available to do the park with CDBG and SWAC monies and those kinds of things, as opposed to out of your General Fund budget. Barton: Yeah. And I think part of the -- part of the discussion and the real -- the real need, if we just set aside the upgrades, the picnic shelter and, you know, put aside the CDBG application for a restroom -- we do have an aging playground that is really in need of replacement, so I think at a -- maybe at a minimum a request to replace the playground or at least provide enough money to do a 50 percent match for some SWAC funds would bring that up to standard. Rountree: That sounds good to me. Hoaglun: That sounds good as well. Councilman Rountree is correct. We are looking for those funds and how do we make it work and if there is a real need, we need to address those, but at the same time we got to make the other work as well, so -- Barton: And that's why we are here, so -- Hoaglun: Any other comments? Zaremba: Mr. President, (just -- I agree with what's been said. Just to kind of put a target on it, if -- if it were the playground equipment and a 50-50 match, then, that would be 6,000 dollars or 8,000 dollars or -- Barton: Closer -- closer to 15. Zaremba: The half of it? The 50-50 match would be 15 -- the whole cost would be the 30? Barton: Yeah. There is some potential ADA issues that would have to be addressed at the same time and -- Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 42 of 56 Zaremba: And the fall zone, whatever that material is, and stuff? Barton: Yeah. Maybe reconfiguring the pit a little bit. Not much. I mean there is an existing space there, but it might have to be pushed out in some areas to accommodate something that's -- Zaremba: But that would still leave in the neighborhood of 50,000 that could go into the new facility. Barton: Correct. Zaremba: The new maintenance facility, so -- Barton: Yes. Zaremba: That makes sense to me. Barton: And it's my understanding that SWAC is going to open their program year -- open it up again for future applications, so if -- if the direction is to use 15,000 in combination with a SWAC application, there is a good possibility we can do that this year. Rountree: We will find out here in a little bit if that's going to happen. Barton: Okay. Hoaglun: Okay. So far so good. Barton: Thank you. E. Purchasing: Protest of Non-Responsive Bid Finding and Award of Bid for "Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) Sludge Handling fed Improvements -Construction" did PW- 12-10049C by GUHO Corp. Hoaglun: You got your direction there and we will see what -- see what else is said. Thanks, Mike. Okay. We have before us Item 8-E, a protest of a nonresponsive bid finding and award of bid and, Keith Watts, you're going to be talking about this I assume. Watts: Yes, thank you, Council President Hoaglun. In March the Purchasing Department went out for abid -- issued an invitation for a bid for wastewater treatment plant sludge handling bed improvements. We opened bids on March 30th and the apparent low bidder was Guho Corporation. When we came back to the office to review the bids for -- to make sure they were complete, I did notice that the list of subcontractors that Guho Corp had listed exceeded 80 percent -- it was actually about Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 43 of 56 94 percent and I have given you a copy in your packet of Statute 54-1902, which states that it's unlawful for any public works contactor to subcontract in excess of 80 percent of their total project and the Purchasing Department consulted with the Legal Department on whether or not that we deem their bid nonresponsive, since they did list 94 percent of their project subcontractors and they advised me to do so, which I, then, sent Mr. Guho a letter -- or an a-mail letting him know the finding of nonresponsive and giving him the opportunity to come forward. He did send me an a-mail and request to be here tonight and protest that finding. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you, Keith. Council, any questions for Keith at this point? Bird: No, I don't have any. Rountree: No. Hoaglun: Okay. We do have a request by Mr. Guho to speak and, Nick, if you want to come up and -- and if you wouldn't mind, name and address for the record. Guho: Nick Guho. 1300 West Osprey Ridge Drive, Eagle, Idaho. President and Council Members, can I distribute some paperwork? Hoaglun: Yeah. Go ahead and give it to the City Clerk and she can get that out to us. Guho: What I tried to do is to make something real simple and if you turn to the third page of the bid documents, this particular bid was formatted by the Purchasing Department to have a base bid and one alternate and that bid comprised of, basically, the concrete work under the base bid and the pavement and, then, under the alternate was for the screw conveyor and on the bid documents what I attached was our worksheet. I didn't give you the bid documents, because I don't have them. But when we filled out the list of subcontractors what we did is we -- being that there is a base bid and an alternate, we took the percentage of the electrical and the water control corp, who supplies the screw auger, who is actually a supplier, which we are going to install. It was 61 percent of the alternate bid of 123,000. So, the 75,000 dollars 120 -- or 61 percent of the 123,000 dollars. So, back to my first sheet under the base bid, we self perform all of our concrete work and we built Generations Plaza for you here in the city. We also did the treatment plant's laboratory out at the treatment plant now and we -- under the base bid we -- and I don't know if the city is going to just accept the base bid or the base bid with the alternate, so under the base bid we are actually performing 64 percent of the bid item three and nine percent of bid item four, which means that we are actually self-performing 73 percent of the base bid project. And, then, if you add the alternate to the base bid project, we are doing those two items, plus we are self performing bid item one, which is a demo of the conveyor, which means that we are actually performing 39 percent of the work self performing that. And -- and we are also supplying the conveyor, which I even think the Council you're supplying and installing the conveyor, so I think there was a misinterpretation by the Purchasing Department and the way the bid was presented and the way the -- it says a percentage of the bid Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 44 of 56 price and is that of alternate or is that of the -- of the bid plus the alternate is what the confusion is and we -- we put it down as a percentage of the alternate price. So, that's where the confusion is and I think we are very justifiable in being awarded the contract as is and we accept our bid on the project. Hoaglun: Thank you, Nick. Is there any questions for Mr. Guho? Great. Thank you. Guho: Okay. Hoaglun: Mr. Watts, if you would like to follow up. Watts: As far as misinterpreting, Ican see in -- you have a copy of Exhibit 1 that Mr. Guho submitted for his bid and it does say conveyor on there and it -- this form is for the list of subcontractors and I think Mr. Guho will attest that he -- he is stating that that conveyor is -- that's 61 percent isn't even a subcontractor, it's an equipment supply. And I understood that was the claim when we had had conversations prior to this meeting. The fact that we discussed it in the Legal Department was that they put it down as a subcontractor and that's why I wanted to bring it to Council and let Council take a look at that and declare either way. It addresses it yourselves as whether or not you want to allow a minor technicality that the -- that the bidder placed supplier, not a subcontractor, in a list of subcontractors in his bid. So, basically, the form was filled out incorrectly, that if you're supplying -- if you have equipment that's being supplied you wouldn't put them down as a subcontractor typically on a bid that you're submitting. And in this instance it actually looks like that's what took place. Nary: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman -- Mr. Nary. Former councilman. Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, yeah, just to supplement what Keith's saying, I totally get what -- the discrepancy here. The problem we have at the staff level is we can't make that assumption. When someone lists that as a conveyor, my -- would have assumed it was a piece of equipment as well, but a conveyor could be a person, it could be a subcontractor, I don't know what. So, the law doesn't give us that leeway, but it does give you that leeway in this -- in the bid protest to be able to clarify those errors or inaccuracies or whatever you want to call them. It just doesn't give us that at the staff level the ability to do that. The courts are pretty strict at staff, if we simply said, oh, we know what that is, we are going to just change it, we will make it right, we get it, court's don't let us do that, they don't give us that kind of leeway, it's a very strict interpretation that we are left with, but in the protest you are allowed to at least consider that and hear all of the evidence that we aren't able to do at the staff level, so that's why it's in front of you tonight. Rountree: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 45 of 56 Rountree: I see in the breakdown and the list of subcontractors that that item apparently is either -- I suppose is suppliers, water control corp, but in the trade it talks about screw auger supply slash installation. To me that implies subcontractor. Watts: Yeah. And, actually, that form that you're looking at that Mr. Guho gave you was not part his bid package. That's something he did afterwards to help clarify to you. The other form -- Rountree: Which further compounds it. Watts: Correct. Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: At this point what have the other bidders been notified? What have they been told? Watts: When the Legal Department gave us the direction that we were to take, we did notify the second low apparent bidder that this process was going on, that we were officially notifying them that they were the apparent low bidder at that point and that they did know that Mr. Guho would be coming forward. I let them know that this process was taking place. Zaremba: Thank you. Rountree: Mr. President, what was the intent breaking out the base bid versus the add alternate and was the intent to award both or -- you haven't answered that, Keith. Watts: From my discussion with the project manager it was a decision based on funding. If the funding was available or they thought they could get a good price they would add the add alternate. That's why we broke it out -- they were definitely going to award the base bid and, then, if funds were available they would do that add alternate and I don't believe that Public Works has made that distinction, that determination yet. Rountree: Mr. President, then, I would have a question for Mr. Nary. If -- if we are not clear on what we are going to award, how can we reject this? Nary: Mr. President or Members of the Council, Councilman Rountree, (thought -- thought they were clear on what they were going to award. They are going to award the base bid to the low bidder. Depending -- I think what the intent of Public Works was -- if the low bid was low enough that they had enough funds budgeted to do the add alternate now, they would do the add alternate now. If the -- if the base bid wasn't low enough, then, they would do the add alternate at some other point in time. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 46 of 56 Watts: That is my understanding as well and that is fairly common practice. Hoaglun: Keith, what was the percentage of -- under the base bid? Seventy-three percent? Watts: That is what it appears to be, yes, sir. That they will be self-performing, so they would be well within that range. The -- one of the things that the list of subcontractors does not break down the add alternate from the base bid. Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: I'm not sure I'm getting the math. I'm looking at the revised bid form, either page 17 of 25 or page four of five. And there is two. Under the base there is a lump sum total, 107,200 and, then, under the add alternate one there is a lump sum total, 117,700. Is the add alternate total cost 117,700 or is the add alternate like 10,500 dollars in addition to the base price? Watts: The add alternate in Mr. Guho's bid was 117,700. If you look at Exhibit 1 that he submitted with his bid and you remove the conveyor it looks like that they were only contracting out 33 percent. So, if Council looks at the -- Exhibit 1 and beings that that conveyor is actually that add alternate, then, you would have to come to the conclusion that he was only subcontracting 33 percent of the base bid, not 94. And I guess the question that I was posing before Council was whether you wanted to give Mr. Guho leeway and say that the -- even though he incorrectly added the conveyor as a subcontractor, it's actually an equipment supply, if you want to -- that's the question before Council is whether or not you want to remove that from the list of subcontractors that he provided with his bid documents. Hoaglun: I wouldn't mind, Mr. Guho, if you wouldn't mind responding to a question that have. Come back up. Can you -- now that we have zeroed in on the specific problem, what went wrong? I mean you do good work around the community, you have done this before, what happened? Guho: The -- what happened in today's environment is that the different municipalities and stuff are getting very technical as far as listing all the people that you are using on a particular project. I went to the -- the mandatory pre-bid opening and one of their worries of the project was that they were going to -- wanted to match the screw conveyor that was existing with the new screw conveyor that we were supplying, so that both pieces of equipment were equal. So, what I did is I listed the screw conveyor company that was the one that they were looking for, so that they knew they were getting the right product and that they weren't getting a brand X, which is allowed by -- allowable by substitution and everything else. So, I was trying to clarify my bid and it's hard to -- when you -- when you do all these percentages and everything, are you taking Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 47 of 56 it of the base bid or are you taking it of the alternate or are you taking it of a combination. There is all different kinds of combinations on what that percent could be, so -- in how you can interpret it. So, to me what the most important thing is is that, you know, that I am here stating that and we self perform all of our own concrete work, so I -- and it states on the bid document -- I didn't list any subcontractors that are concrete guys and that's the majority of the work. And even if you -- you threw -- even if you included the alternated the alternate and just took the concrete work by itself and took out everything else, I'm still performing more than 10 percent of the work, so -- Hoaglun: Okay. So, it was just a matter of trying to show Public Works in the bid documents that you match the equipment that they were -- Guho: They were very specific on the job walk that we were -- that we do that and that's what I was trying to do. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. Guho: You're welcome. Hoaglun: Well, Council, what's your pleasure on this? And I did want to ask, Mr. Nary, that whatever decision the Council comes to, if someone's unhappy -- in protests somebody's always unhappy, because you're choosing winners and losers -- from a legal perspective are we -- will we be on solid ground either way? Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, that depends. That's the reality of the question. But, no, I -- if the Council is comfortable with the finding of the explanation and what Mr. Guho was trying to accomplish giving the information regarding equipment, the volume of work that his company will be doing, that there was -- there wasn't a method to divide in that -- in that bid document for subcontractors between base bid and bid alternate, if you're satisfied with all of that and with the intent, that's fine. Then, that's the finding you would make and you would allow that to be a responsive bidder. Hoaglun: Mr. Watts, have you dealt the -- with the Guho Corporation before? Watts: I believe they have done work for us out at the treatment plant I believe in the past. Hoaglun: Okay. Have there been any problems in previous bids? Watts: No, sir. Zaremba: I -- Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 48 of 56 Zaremba: Just to throw a thought and -- I am concerned that we do need to be legally covered. I do think that it certainly would be fair to declare Mr. Guho a responsive bidder, having had the further explanation. In the fairness, what opportunity -- normally to me the requirement would be if -- if we are going to re-interpret something that was in the bid, there needs to be some equal opportunity to all bidders to reinterpret something in their bid I would think and that doesn't appear to be necessary in this case. So, I'm not really helping myself on the legal part of it, but I still think it would be fair to reconsider and consider Mr. Guho to be responsive. Hoaglun: We are not changing -- he's not changing any of the numbers. The bid amount remains the same, which most bidders, if they don't win, they want to change their number if they would have known, but, Mr. Watts, comment? Watts: Just -- just some information for you. In my discussions with the second low bidder I do not anticipate any recourse if you do award this to Mr. Guho. Hoaglun: Thank you for that information. Rountree: Is that a motion? Zaremba: Yes. I appreciate that. In that case, Mr. President, I would make a motion that we accept the explanation -- the further explanation of the numbers that were already given and, therefore, consider Guho Corporation's submittal as responsive. Rountree: Second. Hoaglun: We have a motion and a second to -- Mr. Nair, is this an acceptance of the protest or what is the actual -- Nary: It is an acceptance of the protest, yes. Hoaglun: Okay. A motion to accept the protest of Guho Corporation as the low for this project. So, Madam Clerk, would you, please, call -- we don't do many protest bids, so I'm assuming this is a roll call vote, so go ahead with that. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. Hoaglun: All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Watts: Thank you, Council Members. I will plan on having an agreement back to you next week for approval. Hoaglun: All right. Thank you. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 49 of 56 Watts: Thank you. F. Police/Clerk's Office/Legal Department Report: State Legislation to Preempt Massage Therapist License as of July 1, 2013 Hoaglun: Council, we now move to Item 8-F. Police/Clerk/Legal Department report on state legislation to preempt massage therapists and we have been at this for awhile, that would feel good, actually, about now, but, Lieutenant Overton, are you going to be chatting with us? Overton: Council President -- President Hoaglun, Members of Council, I figured at 9:00 o'clock massage therapy might work. We really wanted to make this report this evening to kind of update you on the status of the new approved Idaho state statute and how that's going to affect our city and how we do business and concerns we have currently that we need to get resolved within the next year. The new legislation that was passed goes into effect July 1 of 2012. But, in effect, it leaves open our law until July 1 of 2013 and it does not require that people get their license until July 1 of 2013. They are going to spend a lot of this first year building their board and developing their rules and regulations for how they are going to operate. Currently it's probably one of the most expensive background checks that we do, not. so much on renewals, but on new applicants. And, for example, it's a little tricky and I'm not going to get into a lot of details, because we don't like to give away too many tips of the trade, but, for example, four weeks ago we had an applicant that came in for a massage license in our city. There is very little required, other than applying for a massage license. We were able to discover through the background that they had two charges of prostitution in the state of Nevada, as well as finding in the state of Nevada their online ad for prostitution and we were able to deny that license and you don't find that information out unless you're willing to do a pretty extensive background check and looking for it, from where they came from and where their previously locations were. And one of our biggest concerns right now is the language used in the state code is kind of -- well, it says they could do a background check. They are not talking yet about what kind of background check they are going to do or how expensive it will be. They are requiring certain things, a high school diploma, a G.E.D., they must be 18, they have a certain certification in massage, but the background check is probably one of the most important aspects. In working with Emily in legal, one of the things that we are going to make sure we do and get on their agenda as soon as they get their board set, so that we can approach them from our city's perspective to find out what exactly those steps are going to be, because when July 1 of 2013 hits and our code gets sent into the sunset, we need to make sure that we feel comfortable with what the state's process is going to be. Another aspect of this is to just update you -- we want to ask for your continued support that we continue with our current process for how we approve massage licenses in the city until that point of July 1 of 2013 when we get into the point of starting 2013 we fully understand and appreciate that we are going to have some folks that would be faced with having to recertify a license in the city and turn right around and get one with the state and we don't -- we don't wish to try to penalize with that process. So, before that time period we Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 50 of 56 will have some sort of a process with the state worked out where we are comfortable with allowing them to continue to operate if it's a renewal while they apply with the state license board. Most of our problems right now have to do with new licenses versus renewals anyway. Most of the renewals we have enough background information on them, because they have been working in our community and they are not generally a problem. It's the new license applications that tend to come from out of state that are new people we are aware of. Some of you probably have a good idea -- currently we probably have -- and I don't have the exact numbers. We didn't grab them before the meeting, but somewhere between 30 and 40 active applicants in the city right now -- and (probably have done 70 to 80 just in the last four years. When the economy started to go down, we saw certain career paths going up. Massage therapy went through the roof and we started to get applications tripling coming into the city and we did a lot of background checks and approved a lot of people. Now, most of them didn't survive, but there is a whole lot of places to get legitimate massage therapy in this community that didn't exit just five years ago. So, we want to assure you that we have got a really good hand on this. We have denied probably less than ten for various provisions of our current code. We have one of the strictest codes in the state right now. In fact, we want to come forward either next week or in a few weeks with some revisions to the current code that are actually going to drop by a couple of years so many the requirements on some of the offenses we look at, trying to bring them more in line with some of the other licenses that we have already modified and that will still keep us as the most -- the strictest in the state on those provisions. We don't get too much of a kick back from that. I think as a city we do a darn good job of screening who gets to do what job in our city. We just went out this last week, for another example, we had a new one we knew coming into the city. We saw the applications. They are all from out of state. When they came in we noticed they immediately opened a store front. The store front was advertising. Most of these do it through online advertising. I find them, because I go through those every day. I found the online advertisement. We found the store front. I had two of our officers in that place Friday afternoon and we caught them operating without their licenses, because we had yet to find -- we have yet to do the complete background checks on them. So, the message is out there that if they operate within our community we are not only going to do a thorough job, but we are going to follow up on them and we are going to check on them to make sure they are legitimate. So, really, the bulk of this report tonight is just to kind of enlighten you to what we have been doing, what we continue to do, how we are going to work with integrating this within the state and try to assure that as the state process goes forward we get right on their agenda first thing to have some assurances to give you and for us that they are going to give some sort of an in-depth background to these applicants and notify us of who these applicants are within our community when they are approved. And I would allow -- if legal has any further comments and I'd stand for any questions if you have them. Hoaglun: Bill. Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, I just want to I guess add onto what John said is that what he finds more often than not is that the ones that we do reject -- which Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 51 of 56 isn't very many, but those that we do have licenses in other cities in our area. So, they don't do a thorough background, some of the other cities, we don't think that's the best for our community. There are legitimate people who are educated and trained to do this type of work and I believe that's the intent of the legislature is to make sure that if people are doing this type of massage therapy in the state, are licensed and trained to do so. It's in their best interest to make sure that people who aren't, who are using this as an in road to something else, are not licensed and competing with them or giving the community the impression that that's the type of business it is. I don't think that's the intent. I think the board would be at least willing to listen to that. The problem you're going to have at the state level, of course, always is going to be manpower, time, effort, those types of things. There is preemption language that takes effect in 2013, but once 2013 rolls around if -- if somebody claims they are a massage therapist they have to get -- they have to get licensed by the state and we can't -- we can't a get license of any to related that. I think there will always be potential of people who can't pass the state requirements of either testing or experience that will still want to do something like this as an in road to something else, so we may still need an ordinance and it may just be called something else. But we will get to that road when we need to. We just wanted to make you aware that this ordinance was changed -- or this state statute was implemented. It goes into effect July of 2012. But there is a whole bunch of rule making and board configuration that needs to happen and so we have a year to see if we can have some impact at the state level and, then, see how that impacts us. Hoaglun: Thank you. Council, any questions, comments? Bird: I have none. Rountree: Just keep on doing what you're doing, John. Zaremba: Yeah. Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: Yeah. I -- and many of the things that we have in our ordinances that you enforce and take care of are what make this city the family friendly city that it keeps being rated very highly and these are the important things that make us a family community and I think I'm understanding clearly that the state law is not a minimum that allows us to add to it, it's a replacement and we don't get to add to it. So, I appreciate your being on this and letting us know what's happening and, yes, please, be in front and whatever commission they put together or committee that they are putting together, please, do take Meridian's word to them. Appreciate that. Overton: Councilman Zaremba, that's our plan. We hope to be one of the first items -- agenda items they hear. Thank you. Zaremba: Thank you. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 52 of 56 H. Solid Waste Advisory Commission Report and Request for Funding Authority for Two Projects for the Community Recycling Fund Hoaglun: Yes, we do have good experience, John, and I think you can help them get them off on the right foot and right direction, so good luck on that. Okay. That was Item 8-F. Item 8-G was moved to the Consent Agenda, so now 8-H, Solid Waste Advisory Commission report and request for funding authority. Molly. Mangerich: Good evening, Council President, Council Members. I'm here on behalf of our Solid Waste Advisory Commission for the purpose of seeking -- of providing you a recommendation for funding for the community recycling fund and, then, seeking a motion in approval or disapproval of such recommendation. That's okay. I can speak to it. I appreciate that. I wanted to give you some details about -- we came to you in early January for the approval of 38,000 dollars to be made available for our community -- thankyou, Kyle. In which we had a cycle that was opened from launch to deadline from February 1st to March 31st. Would like to let you know that within the time period I was point of contact for our SWAC and we received nine contacts during this application period, of which three sent in applications and tonight we are recommending two for immediate funding and the third applicant I have worked with personally, along with our Parks Department, and we keep that window open for them to resubmit and provide a more clear, more refined application. So, that third applicant is the Meridian dog park task force. In front of you you will see the two organizations that SWAC is recommending for funding. The Western Ada Recreation District is requesting 5,000 dollars cash within the criteria of this community recycling fund requires no match, but the money will be used to procure two amenities at both here in downtown, both benches, tables, and trash can receptacles. What's amazing about what they have selected to purchase is that these items are manufactured from post-consumer plastic, mixed resins, and they are fabulous and are used throughout. Seventy to a hundred percent recycled content materials in this, blended with the wood fiber. The second recommendation for finding that in front of you tonight is an application by our Old Town clean up. This is the seventh year they are coming into with this effort within our community and this is the first time that they have been able to have funding available to them to provide for the fees necessary for a household hazardous waste collection truck to be made available during the clean up, so that we have a safe diversion and recycling and recovery from paint, solvent, cleaners, et cetera -- pesticides -- instead of going into our landfill, as well as the many volunteers that support this effort annually, that the volunteers will receive a T-shirt made from a hundred percent PET, that's a number one, resin, plastic, your water bottles and your soda bottles and they have got about 135 T-shirts made and that's the number of youth. The Ten Mile Christian Church provides a lot of youth and -- to do the clean up. And as well that they have provided informational and educational materials in paper format that's using a hundred percent post-consumer recycled paper. So, both of these applicants have really come forward with -- have met all the criteria and obligations of the community recycling fund and SWAC asks that you consider them for approval. Looking forward, SWAC recognizes that we have had a very poor response to the application period, so we are devoting our Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 53 of 56 May SWAC recycling meeting to get some feedback to evaluate how well -- where we can improve upon the next cycle, which we hope to slate within this fiscal year. We have available, as a proof by your recommendation or your approval back in January -- we still have 30,000 dollars available to our community and we certainly want to get the word out and see if we can't get some more information out to our people who want to -- need some funding. So, if you have any questions and need help in making the motion, there is your reason. Bird: Mr. Chairman? Hoaglun: Councilman Bird. Bird: Molly, what -- on Ward, what are you -- you're recommending 5,000 or 4,400; is that right? Mangerich: Five thousand dollars cash. Bird: Or 4,400 if they -- if they got a -- Mangerich: If they chose to not go with the match, the program criteria, but if they ask for greater than 5,000 dollars -- Bird: They got to match. Mangerich: -- it pushes them to a 50-50 match. And so we provided them two options and approved two options and this is the option that they choose. Bird: They went to five and -- Mangerich: Yes. With no match. Bird: Okay. Mangerich: So, they would reduce probably the number of benches by two hookups. And this is also a wonderful time for us to consider -- to provide comments to me that I can relay back to SWAC. Hoaglun: Molly, when is the next period for applicants? Mangerich: To be determined. Hoaglun: Okay. It depends on the money; is that right? Mangerich: The money is there, we just need consent for the advisory commission. Bird: And you got 30,000. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 54 of 56 Zaremba: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Zaremba. Zaremba: Conversation we had earlier about 8th Street Park on playground equipment there is -- is our Parks and Recreation Department eligible to apply? Mangerich: As a member of our commission I would heartily suggest that they do and that would be an appropriate -- an appropriate submission to this community recycling fund, because it would be a broad use by our community and it is a special park that is in need of some building up and freshening up. Zaremba: Okay. Hoaglun: Councilman Bird. Bird: Just -- David, SWAC has put a lot of money into our playground equipment for us. They have matched funds. Hoaglun: Councilman Rountree. Rountree: Mr. President, I have to declare a potential conflict. Since I'm a director of the Western Ada Recreational District I will abstain from voting. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. Bird: Mr. Chairman -- or Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Bird. Bird: I move that we approve the Solid Waste Advisory Commission's recommendation of giving the Old Town clean up $2,346.80 -- I don't know why it isn't 2,350, but -- and to Western Ada Recreation District for their pool amenities, a total of 5,000 dollars. Zaremba: Second. Hoaglun: We have a motion and a second to approve the funding authority for two projects for the recycling fund. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, abstain; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. Hoaglun: Carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSTAIN. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 55 of 56 Hoaglun: Molly, go forth and keep doing good. Mangerich: Thank you. Overton: Council President Hoaglun? Hoaglun: Yes. Lieutenant. Overton: May I approach Councilman Bird? You saw that odd number for the Old Town clean up. Those folks work for me and we count every penny, so that's why you saw that. Bird: And, you know what, I'm so happy, because it saved me a whole bunch of money for T-shirts that I had purchased in the past for participants. Item 9: Ordinances (Removed.) Hoaglun: That's right. That's right. We are at Item 9, Ordinances, and 9-A we will have the Clerk read the -- Rountree: They have all been removed. Hoaglun: Oh, that's right. They have been removed. I forgot to make a note. We removed those, so -- Item 10: Future Meeting Topics Hoaglun: We are at Item 10, Future Meeting Topics. Council, any discussion on future meeting topics? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. Hoaglun: We have none. Motion? Rountree: Move to adjourn. Bird: Second. Hoaglun: Move to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Hoaglun: We are adjourned. Meridian City Council April 17, 2012 Page 56 of 56 MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:27 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) ~1 / ~ l v' DATE APPROVED CEE'f-fOLMAN, CITY CLERK Changes to Agenda: None Item #76: Unified Development Code Text Amendment (ZOA•12.001) Application(s): - UDC Text Amendment Summary of Request: The Planning Department is the applicant requesting specific amendments to sections of the UDC in order for the code to function more efficiently & meet the needs of our customers & the City. This application includes changes to Chapters 1-5 of the UDC as detailed in Section VII of the staff report, Many of the proposed changes are clean-up items, some are requested by Code Enforcement, & others are as follows: ® Replace all references to "Planning Director" with "Community Development Director" ® Modify definition of "construction sand & gravel mining" to exclude crushing operations ® Modify "healthcare & social services" definition to include examples of social service uses not previously included. ® Add definitions for full array, slimline, & stealth wireless communication towers along with a diagram of full array &slimline towers. ® Allow group daycares as a conditional use instead of a prohibited use in the R-4 district ® Restrict business hours of operation in the C-C & C-G districts from 6 am to 11 pm when the property abuts a residential use or district; extended hours may be requested through a CUP. ® Incorporation of CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) strategies in collaboration with the Police Dept. to reduce the opportunities of fear & incidence of crime & improve the quality of life in the City, as follows; Illumination of pathways through internal common areas Safe access & adequate lighting for outdoor service & equipment areas Landscaping designed & installed to provide natural surveillance opportunities from public areas Location of open space & site amenities in areas of high visibility (i.e. along streets, where doors & windows overlook public areas, etc.) Locate drive-thru's so they are visible from a public street for surveillance purposes Locate all approaches & entrances to ATM's so they are highly visible & adequately lit ® Change the setback for free-standing signs back to 1' from 5' as previously required (the 5' setback created too many non-conforming signs) More code amendments addressing signs & home occupations to follow. ® Removal of the requirement for CUPs for daycare facilities to be modified when a change in ownership occurs -the new owner would still be required to obtain a license from the Dept. of Health & Welfare in their name & comply with the specific use standards listed in the UDC for daycare facilities. ® New specific use standards for wireless communication facilities that are more concise, user-friendly & up to date with current technology. The new standards encourage the location of facilities in non-residential areas; the collocation of new wireless equipment on existing structures & the ability for future collocation on new towers; & the use of stealth towers that are compatible with the surroundings & don't detract from the visual quality of the city. Highlights of the proposed standards include: Specific standards for streetlight, roof & wall mounted antennas Specific standards for stealth, slimline, and full array tower facilities as well as amateur radio antennas - lattice or guyed designed structures are prohibited. - Full array towers shall be deemed a principal permitted use in industrial districts & prohibited in all other districts. All new communication tower facility structures, except for those contained within an underground vault, require administrative design review in addition to any other necessary permits. Commission Recommendation: Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Planning Dept. ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: Dave Szplett, ITD [concerned that ITD's communications towers located in the ROW might be prohibited by the proposed changes to the wireless communication facility code (Not applicable as ITD is not a wireless communication Indust .] Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. Proposed restriction on business hours of operation in C-C & C-G districts when adjacent to residential zoning/uses. Key Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: ' i. At staffs request, amend 11-56-3C.3 as shown in Section VII; ii. At staffs request, add 11-5B-3C.4 as shown in Section VII; iii. At staffs request, amend 11-4-3-43E.8 as shown in Section VII; iv. At staffs request, amend Table 11-5B-5 as shown in Section VII. Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: None Notes: Item #7C: Sgroi Property (MDA-12-001) Application(s): - Development Agreement Modification Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 2.81 acres, is currently zoned R-8, and is located at 4405 E. Ustick Road on the south side of Ustickapproximately'/4 mile west of Cloverdale Rd. Summary of Request: The applicant requests approval to amend the existing DA to modify the conceptual development plan, building elevations, and certain provisions of the agreement. The previous development plan for this site was for an assisted living facility. The applicant now proposes to construct 14single-family detached homes & 2 townhomes on 2.81 acres of land with a gross density of 5.7 dwelling units/ acre consistent with the R-8 zoning & MDR FLUM designation for this property. Access to the site is proposed at the south boundary of the property via Sharon Avenue in Redfeather Estates subdivision in accord with UDC & ACHD standards since access to Ustick is prohibited. A driveway is depicted on the concept plan to the property to the west for cross-access as required by the DA. The applicant proposes to modify certain provisions in the DA as follows: ® 5.1.3 -Remove the requirement for residential densities not to exceed that allowed in the R-4 zoning district (zoning of this site is R-8 consistent with the FLUM designation of MDR -MDR allows 3-8 d. u./acre - density is proposed below the max. amount at 5.7 d. u./acre) ® 5.1.4 -Modify the requirement for CZC & design review approval to apply to the proposed townhomes only & be consistent with the site plan & elevations proposed with this application. Written Testimony: ® James & Roseanna Selle (concerns about unsafe traffic conditions especially in regard to school children - wouldlike to have safefy measures implemenfed such as signage notifying motorists of a school zone, speed bumps, etc. Additionally, fhey oppose the density increase from the previous approved use and that residents will have access fo common area in Redfeather subdivision.) ® Thomas Whitworth, Applicant's representative (in agreement w/staff report except for the change noted below) Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: ® At the applicant's request, modify DA provision #5.1.8 as follows: "Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8, ,^~~+h;,, a m„n+hs cffor±h~ upon development of the property. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208) 375-5211." Staff Recommendation: Approval w/the modifications noted in Exhibit A of the staff report & the change to provision #5.1.8 noted above. Notes: Item #7D: Ambercreek Subdivision No. 2 (TEC-12-006) Application(s): Two (2) year time extension on the preliminary plat to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the final plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 16.47 acres of land, is currently zoned R-8 and is located near the southwest corner of Meridian Road and McMillan Road. Summary of Request: The subject plat consists of 74 building lots. This is the 4th time extension requested by the applicant. If approved, the applicant will have until March 23, 2014 to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the final plat. Staff recommends (3) new conditions of approval with the subject time extension to coincide with the recently adopted surety requirements set forth in the UDC & the new Public Works street light requirements. Written Testimony: Shawn Brownlee, Applicant's Representative (in agreement w/staff report) Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: None Staff Recommendation: Approval Notes: Item #7E: Paramount Subdivision No. 18 (FP-12.003) Application(s): Final Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 5.66 acres of land, is currently zoned R-8, and is located west of N. Meridian Road, between W. Producer Way & N. Fox Run Way. Summary of Request: The subject property was annexed & preliminary platted in 2003. This is Phase 18 consisting of 19 residential lots & 1 common lot on 5.66 acres of land. The gross density proposed in this phase is 3.36 dwelling units per acre with an average lot size of 8,515 square feet. Open space consists of 6 & 8-foot wide parkways adjacent to the proposed public streets. Staff finds the proposed final plat to be in substantial conformance with the approved preliminary plat Written Testimony: Mike Wardle, Applicant's Representative (in agreement w/staff report) Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: None Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions Notes: Item #7F: Zebulon Heights Sub. No. 5 (FP•12.004) Application(s): Final Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 14.39 acres, is currently zoned R-4, and is located south of E. McMillan Road & west of N. Eagle Road. Summary of Request: The proposed final plat consists of 39single-family residential building lots & 3 common area lots on 14.39 acres for a gross density of 2.71 dwelling units/acre. Staff has reviewed the proposed plat for consistency with the approved preliminary plat & found there to be 2 fewer building lots than shown on the preliminary plat. Because the number of buildable lots is fewer & the amount of common open space has not decreased, staff finds the proposed plat to be in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat as required. Written Testimony: Becky McKay, Applicant's representative (in agreement w/staff report) Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: None Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions Notes: e~i ®n ®y ucil in : April i 7, 2012 IT U A J T' N . ITEM TITLE: rvl of 01 - 013 eer, ine and Liquor License nl follows: Fiesta Guadalajara 704 E. Fairview Ave. BWL -- Lucky Fins 1441 N. Eagle Rd. #100 BWL Sizzler #215 3380 N. Eagle Rd. BW Goodwood BBQ 1140 N. Eagle Rd. BWL Fuddruckers 3421 N. Eagle Rd. BW - Chicago Connection 1629 N. Main St. B - Chicago Connection 1935 S. Eagle Rd. BWL R&R Public House 1626 S. Wells Ave. BWL - Divine Wine 2310 E. Overland Rd. # 105 BW -- Gelato Cafe 2053 E. Fairview Ave. #101-103 BWL KB's Burritos 3240 E. Louise Dr. #110 BW -The Big Smoke #6 234 W. Franklin Ave. BW Texas Roadhouse 3801 E. Fairview Ave. BWL MEETING NOTES "`~ Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FIN~4L ~4CTION I DATE: IE-MSTAFF T®I AGENCOY I APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS I ~~r, ir~~ L.iq~r L.ic~r~~~ ~~r~ewl~ f~ 2012®2 1 Approval by City C"ouncil on rI,uesday, April 17th, 2012 DBA LOCATION B/W/L Fiesta Guadalajara 704 E. Fairview Ave. BWL Lucky Fins 1441 N. Eagle Rd. #100 BWL Sizzler #215 3380 N. Eagle Rd. BW Goodwood BBQ 1140 N. Eagle Rd. BWL Fuddruckers 3421 N. Eagle Rd. BW Chicago Connection 1629 N. Main St. B Chicago Connection 1935 S. Eagle Rd. BWL R&R Public House 1626 S. Wells Ave. BWL Divine Wine 2310 E. Overland Rd. #105 BW Gelato Cafe 2053 E. Fairview Ave. #101-103 BWL KB's Burritos 3240 E. Louise Dr. #110 BW The Big Smoke #6 234 W. Franklin Ave. BW Texas Roadhouse 3801 E. Fairview Ave. BWL O`vnet• Tr°ansfer ~/' From Helina Maries Inc. to DR3 LLC dba Divine Wine 2310 E. Overland Rd. ~~ ~--~ ~ V~-O r' ~~ ~ h/1-~-n 1.22c~ ri i n iy nil in T :April 17, 2012 IT U 5 J T ITEM TITLE: rovl o eer and ine caner Transfer Transfer from Helina Maries Inc, to DR3, LLC. dba Divine Wine Bar Located at 2310 Overland Rd. Suite 105 MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: IE-MSTA D TOI AGENCOY I APPL CANT I NOTES ( INITIALS ri i n ity u®1 for "Sewer Line Repairs -Tuscany and Paramount" to Pipeline Inspection Services for the Not-To-Exceed Amount of $219,400.00 and Authorize the Mayor to Sign and Clerk to Attest MEETING NOTES ~~~~~ Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: (E_MSTAFF TOI AGENCY I APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS ~-:~_ -z ~~~ _ ~ ~ / To: Jaycee L. Holman, City Clerk, From: Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager CC: David Allison, Jacy Jones IDate: 4/9/12 Re: April 17~' City Council Meeting Agenda Item The Purchasing Department respectfully requests that the following item be placed on the April 17~' City Council Consent Agenda for Council's consideration. Approval of Award of Bid and Agreement for "Sewer Line Repairs - Tuscany and Paramount" to Pipeline Inspection Services and authorize the Mayor to sign the Agreement and Clerk to Attest for the Not-To-Exceed amount of $219,400.00. This award is the result of Formal IFB #PW-12-10324B issued March 6, 2012 and opened March 23`d. One bid was received. Recommended Council Action: Approval of Award of Bid and Authorize the Mayor to sign the Agreement for the Not-To-Exceed amount of the Low Bid of $219,400.00. Thank you for your consideration. Page 1 _ Mayor Tammy de Weerd `~ `-' ' 1~ { l; ^ ity a~anetl eet~l,eo°se ~,,r' ~~i,, ~~ -~~, ~{ \, . .. ~'--~ Keith Bird '`1 ~~ Brad Hoaglun r} i . . ~~ ° ~, ~ '~" " Charles Rountree __ . , _ David Zaremba ~ „ ~~ TO: Keith Watts FROM: David Allison Staff Engineer DATE: 3/27/2012 SUBJECT: Pro,~ect Information; Sewer Line Repairs -Tuscany and Paramount I. DEPARTMENT CONTACT PERSONS David Allison, Staff Engineer (Project Manager} 489-0370 Clint Dolsby, Asst. City Engineer 489-0341 Warren Stewart, PW Engineering Manager 489-0350 Tom Barry, Public Works Director 489-0372 II. DESCRIPTION A. Back ound During routine Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Camera inspection work performed by the Wastewater Department, approximately 65 cracked sewer laterals and tees were identified throughout the Tuscany and Paramount subdivisions. Infiltration from groundwater was seen on the inspection videos at most of these locations. Most locations identified are below groundwater approximately twenty to twenty-Eve feet below ground surface. As seasonal groundwater elevations change with irrigation and precipitation, infiltration into the sewer system becomes more prevalent. This infiltrated groundwater is conveyed to the City's treatment plant. The infiltrated groundwater reduces capacity within the WWTP system. B. Proposed Proms , This project entails repairing the cracked laterals and tees utilizing Cured in Place Pipe (CIPP) technology. The failing fixtures will be sealed and reinforced with fiberglass and resin to stop infiltration and strengthen the joints. CTPP technology allows the repairs to be made without any excavation or disturbance at the ground surface. Page 1 of 2 iii; IMPACT A. Strate is Impact: This project meets our mission requirements to indentify and prioritize work in order to anticipate, plan and provide public services and facilities that support the needs of our growing community, and to ensure modern reliable facilities while maintaining financial stewardship. B. Service/Deliverv Impact: The replacement of the failing mainlines in this project will improve customer service, ensure that dependable service is provided to current and future customers, and extend the life of City infrastructure. C. Fiscallmpacts: Budgeted Amount (3590-95000) $946,032.82 Current Obligations (3590-95000) $433,981.00 Balance Available for Construction (3590-95000) $512,051.82 Proposed Construction Cost ;3590-95000 $219,400.00 Ur<obligated Balance $292,651.82 Approved for Council Agenda: ~ ,_~_~,,, "Warren Stewart f~ e Page 2 of 2 AGREEMENT FOR INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR SERVICES (SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY) PROJECT # 103246 THIS AGREEMENT FOR INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR SERVICES is made this ~ day of April, 2012, and entered into by and between the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Idaho, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, and Pipeline Inspection Services ,hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR", whose business address is 4423 E Victory Rd Nampa, ID 83687 and whose Public Works Contractor License # is C-15828. INTRODUCTION Whereas, the Gity has a need for services involving Sewer Line Repairs FY12 -Paramount and Tuscany; and WHEREAS, the Contractor is specially trained, experienced and competent to perform and has agreed to provide such services; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, terms and conditions hereinafter contained, the parties agree as follows: TERMS AND CONDITIONS Scope of Work: 1.1 CONTRACTOR shall perform and furnish to the City upon execution of this Agreement and receipt of the City's written notice to proceed, all services and work, and comply in all respects, as specified in the document titled "Scope of Work" a copy of which is attached hereto as Attachment "A" and incorporated herein by this reference, together with any amendments that may be agreed to in writing by the parties. 1.2 All documents, drawings and written work product prepared or produced by the Contractor under this Agreement, including without limitation electronic data files, are the property of the Contractor; provided, however, the City shall have the right to reproduce, publish and use all such work, or any part thereof, in any manner and for any purposes whatsoever and to authorize others to do so. If any such work is copyrightable, the Contractor may copyright the same, except that, as to any work which is copyrighted by the Contractor, the City reserves a royalty-free, non-exclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish and use such work, or any part thereof, and to authorize others to do so. SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY page 1 of 11 Project 103246 1.3 The Contractor shall provide services and work under this Agreement consistent with the requirements and standards established by applicable federal, state and city laws, ordinances, regulations and resolutions. The Contractor represents and warrants that it will perform its work in accordance with generally accepted industry standards and practices for the profession or professions that are used in performance of this Agreement and that are in effect at the time of performance of this Agreement. Except for that representation and any representations made or contained in any proposal submitted by the Contractor and any reports or opinions prepared or issued as part of the work performed by the Contractor under this Agreement, Contractor makes no other warranties, either express or implied, as part of this Agreement. 1.4 Services and work provided by the Contractor at the City's request under this Agreement will be performed in a timely manner in accordance with a Schedule of Work, which the parties hereto shall agree to. The Schedule of Work may be revised from time to time upon mutual written consent of the parties. 2. Consideration 2.1 The Contractor shall be compensated on a Lump Sum basis as provided in Attachment B "Payment Schedule" attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof for the Not-To-Exceed amount of $219,400.00. 2.2 The Contractor shall provide the City with a monthly statement, as the work warrants, of fees earned and costs incurred for services provided during the billing period, which the City will pay within 30 days of receipt of a correct invoice and approval by the City. The City will not withhold any Federal or State income taxes or Social Security Tax from any payment made by City to Contractor under the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Payment of all taxes and other assessments on such sums is the sole responsibility of Contractor. 2.3 Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, Contractor shall not be entitled to receive from the City any additional consideration, compensation, salary, wages, or other type of remuneration for services rendered under this Agreement including, but not limited to, meals, lodging, transportation, drawings, renderings or mockups. Specifically, Contractor shall not be entitled by virtue of this Agreement to consideration in the form of overtime, health insurance benefits, retirement benefits, paid holidays or other paid leaves of absence of any type or kind whatsoever. 3. Term: SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY page 2 of 11 Project 103246 3.1 This agreement shall become effective upon execution by both parties, and shall expire upon (a) completion of the agreed upon work, (b) September 30, 2012 or (c) unless sooner terminated as provided below or unless some other method or time of termination is listed in Attachment A. 3.2 Should Contractor default in the performance of this Agreement or materially breach any of its provisions, City, at City's option, may terminate this Agreement by giving written notification to Contractor. 3.3 Should City fail to pay Contractor all or any part of the compensation set forth in Attachment B of this Agreement on the date due, Contractor, at the Contractor's option, may terminate this Agreement if the failure is not remedied by the City within thirty (30) days from the date payment is due. 3.4 TIME FOR EXECUTING CONTRACT AND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES Upon receipt of a Notice to Proceed, the Contractor shall have 90 (ninety) calendar days to complete the work as described herein. Contractor shall be liable to the City for any delay beyond this time period in the amount of five hundred dollars ($500.00) per calendar day. Such payment shall be construed to be liquidated damages by the Contractor in lieu of any claim or damage because of such delay and not be construed as a penalty. 4. Termination: 4.1 If, through any cause, CONTRACTOR, its officers, employees, or agents fails to fulfill in a timely and proper manner its obligations under this Agreement, violates any of the covenants, agreements, or stipulations of this Agreement, falsifies any record or document required to be prepared under this agreement, engages in fraud, dishonesty, or any other act of misconduct in the performance of this contract, or if the City Council determines that termination of this Agreement is in the best interest of CITY, the CITY shall thereupon have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to CONTRACTOR of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least fifteen (15) days before the effective date of such termination. CONTRACTOR may terminate this agreement at any time by giving at least sixty (60) days notice to CITY. In the event of any termination of this Agreement, all finished or unfinished documents, data, and reports prepared by CONTRACTOR under this Agreement shall, at the option of the CITY, become its property, and CONTRACTOR shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily complete hereunder. SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY page 3 of 11 Project 103248 4.2 Notwithstanding the above, CONTRACTOR shall not be relieved of liability to the CITY for damages sustained by the CITY by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by CONTRACTOR, and the CITY may withhold any payments to CONTRACTOR for the purposes of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the CITY from CONTRACTOR is determined. This provision shall survive the termination of this agreement and shall not relieve CONTRACTOR of its liability to the CITY for damages. 5. Independent Contractor: 5.1 In all matters pertaining to this agreement, CONTRACTOR shall be acting as an independent contractor, and neither CONTRACTOR nor any officer, employee or agent of CONTRACTOR will be deemed an employee of CITY. Except as expressly provided in Attachment A, Contractor has no authority or responsibility to exercise any rights or power vested in the City and therefore has no authority to bind or incur any obligation on behalf of the City. The selection and designation of the personnel of the CITY in the performance of this agreement shall be made by the CITY. 5.2 Contractor, its agents, officers, and employees are and at all times during the term of this Agreement shall represent and conduct themselves as independent contractors and not as employees of the City. 5.3 Contractor shall determine the method, details and means of performing the work and services to be provided by Contractor under this Agreement. Contractor shall be responsible to City only for the requirements and results specified in this Agreement and, except as expressly provided in this Agreement, shall not be subjected to City's control with respect to the physical action or activities of Contractor in fulfillment of this Agreement. If in the performance of this Agreement any third persons are employed by Contractor, such persons shall be entirely and exclusively under the direction and supervision and control of the Contractor. 6. Indemnification and Insurance: 6.1 CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for any and all losses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, or injury to persons or property and losses and expenses and other costs including litigation costs and attorney's fees, arising out of, resulting from, or in connection with the performance of this Agreement by the CONTRACTOR, its servants, agents, officers, employees, guests, and business invitees, and not caused by or arising out of the tortious conduct SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY page 4 of 11 Project 103248 of CITY or its employees. CONTRACTOR shall maintain, and specifically aarees that it will maintain, throughout the term of this Agreement, liability insurance in which the CITY shall be named an additional insured in the minimum amounts as follow: General Liability One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per incident or occurrence, Automobile Liability Insurance One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per incident or occurrence and Workers' Compensation Insurance, in the statutory limits as required by law.. The limits of insurance shall not be deemed a limitation of the covenants to indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY; and if CITY becomes liable for an amount in excess of the insurance limits, herein provided, CONTRACTOR covenants and agrees to indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for all such losses, claims, actions, or judgments for damages or injury to persons or property and other costs, including litigation costs and attorneys' fees, arising out of, resulting from , or in connection with the performance of this Agreement by the Contractor or Contractor's officers, employs, agents, representatives or subcontractors and resulting in or attributable to personal injury, death, or damage or destruction to tangible or intangible property, including use of. CONTRACTOR shall provide CITY with a Certificate of Insurance, or other proof of insurance evidencing CONTRACTOR'S compliance with the requirements of this paragraph and file such proof of insurance with the CITY at least ten (10) days prior to the date Contractor begins performance of it's obligations under this Agreement. In the event the insurance minimums are changed, CONTRACTOR shall immediately submit proof of compliance with the changed limits. Evidence of all insurance shall be submitted to the City Purchasing Agent with a copy to Meridian City Accounting, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642. 6.2 Any deductibles, self-insured retention, or named insureds must be declared in writing and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles, self-insured retentions or named insureds; or the Contractor shall provide a bond, cash or letter of credit guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. 6.3 To the extent of the indemnity in this contract, Contractor's Insurance coverage shall be primary insurance regarding the City's elected officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City or the City's elected officers, officials, employees and volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with Contractor's insurance except as to the extent of City's negligence. 6.4 The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY page 5 of 11 Project 103246 6.5 All insurance coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the insurance and indemnity requirements stated herein. 6.6 The limits of insurance described herein shall not limit the liability of the Contractor and Contractor's agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. 7. Bonds: Payment and Performance Bonds are required on all Public Works Improvement Projects per the ISPWC and the City of Meridian Supplemental Specifications & Drawings to the ISPWC, which by this reference are made a part hereof. 8. Warranty: Contractor must warrant the project per the ISPWC and the City of Meridian Supplemental Specifications & Drawings to the ISPWC, which by this reference are made a part hereof. 9. Notices: Any and all notices required to be given by either of the parties hereto, unless otherwise stated in this agreement, shall be in writing and be deemed communicated when mailed in the United States mail, certified, return receipt requested, addressed as follows: CITY City of Meridian Purchasing Manager 33 E Broadway Ave Meridian, ID 83642 208-888-4433 CONTRACTOR Pipeline Inspection Services Attn: Scott Wendling 4423 E. Victory Rd Nampa, ID 83687 Phone: 208-941-9434 Email: pipelineinspections@hotmail.com Idaho Public Works License # C-15828 Either party may change their address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving written notice of such change to the other in the manner herein provided. 10. Attorney Fees: Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief as may be granted, to court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees as determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement. 11. Time is of the Essence: The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition and provision hereof, and that the failure to timely perform any SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY page 6 of 11 Project 103246 of the obligations hereunder shall constitute a breach of, and a default under, this Agreement by the party so failing to perform. 12. Assignment: It is expressly agreed and understood by the parties hereto, that CONTRACTOR shall not have the right to assign, transfer, hypothecate or sell any of its rights under this Agreement except upon the prior express written consent of CITY. 13. Discrimination Prohibited: In performing the Work required herein, CONTRACTOR shall not unlawfully discriminate in violation of any federal, state or local law, rule or regulation against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age or disability. 14. Reports and Information: 14.1 At such times and in such forms as the CITY may require, there shall be furnished to the CITY such statements, records, reports, data and information as the CITY may request pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. 14.2 Contractor shall maintain all writings, documents and records prepared or compiled in connection with the performance of this Agreement for a minimum of four (4) years from the termination or completion of this or Agreement. This includes any handwriting, typewriting, printing, photo static, photographic and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing, any form of communication or representation including letters, words, pictures, sounds or symbols or any combination thereof. 15. Audits and Inspections: At any time during normal business hours and as often as the CITY may deem necessary, there shall be made available to the CITY for examination all of CONTRACTOR'S records with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall permit the CITY to audit, examine, and make excerpts or transcripts from such records, and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls, records of personnel, conditions of employment and other data relating to all matters covered by this Agreement. 16. Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material: No material produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to copyright in the United States or in any other country. The CITY shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose and otherwise use, in whole or in part, any reports, data or other materials prepared under this Agreement. 17. Compliance with Laws: In performing the scope of work required hereunder, CONTRACTOR shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and codes of Federal, State, and local governments. SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY page 7 of 11 Project 103246 18. Changes: The CITY may, from time to time, request changes in the Scope of Work to be performed hereunder. Such changes, including any increase or decrease in the amount of CONTRACTOR'S compensation, which are mutually agreed upon by and between the CITY and CONTRACTOR, shall be incorporated in written amendments which shall be executed with the same formalities as this Agreement. 19. Construction and Severability: If any part of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such holding will not affect the validity or enforceability of any other part of this Agreement so long as the remainder of the Agreement is reasonably capable of completion. 20. Waiver of Default: Waiver of default by either party to this Agreement shall not be deemed to be waiver of any subsequent default. Waiver or breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach, and shall not be construed to be a modification of the terms of this Agreement unless this Agreement is modified as provided above. 21. Advice of Attorney: Each party warrants and represents that in executing this Agreement. It has received independent legal advice from its attorney's or the opportunity to seek such advice. 22. Entire Agreement: This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other agreements or understandings, oral of written, whether previous to the execution hereof or contemporaneous herewith. 23. Order of Precedence: The order or precedence shall be the contract agreement, the Invitation for Bid document, then the winning bidders submitted bid document. 24. Public Records Act: Pursuant to Idaho Code Section 9-335, et seq., information or documents received from the Contractor may be open to public inspection and copying unless exempt from disclosure. The Contractor shall clearly designate individual documents as "exempt" on each page of such documents and shall indicate the basis for such exemption. The CITY will not accept the marking of an entire document as exempt. In addition, the CITY will not accept a legend or statement on one (1) page that all, or substantially all, of the document is exempt from disclosure. The Contractor shall indemnify and defend the CITY against all liability, claims, damages, losses, expenses, actions, attorney fees and suits whatsoever for honoring such a designation or for the Contractor's failure to designate individual documents as exempt. The Contractor's failure to designate as exempt any document or portion of a document that is released by the CITY shall constitute a complete waiver of any and all claims for damages caused by any such release. SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY page 8 of 11 Project 103248 25. Applicable Law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho, and the ordinances of the City of Meridian. 26. Approval Required: This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN Approved by Council: Attest: JAYL'EE L~JbLMAN, CITY CLERK Purchasing Approval BY: KEITH ATTS/ urchasing Manager DATE: L~/ 16~ Z. PIPELINE INSPECTION SERVICES ~' \ ~9 of DIAN~ ,ioAwo ~,. SEAL ~~ e~ ~~~ie LiER~ ~``/ BY: WA EN STE ART, Engineering Manager DATE: '~ ~~ ~ i Z SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY page 9 of 11 Project 103248 Attachment A SCOPE OF WORK T INVITATION T I W-12-10324b ALL ADDNDUS, ATTACHMENTS, AND XHIIT included in the Invitation to Bid Package # PW-12-10324b, are by this reference made a part hereof. SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY page 10 of 11 Project 103246 Attachment B MILESTONE /PAYMENT SCHEDULE A. Total and complete compensation for this Agreement shall not exceed $219,400.00 PRICING SCIiEt~ULE Contract includes furnishing all labor, materials, equipment, and incidentals as required for the SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY per IFB PW-12-10324b. Total Bid Schedule ...................$219,400.00 CONTRACT TOTAL ....................... 219,400.00 ITEM PRICING BELOW WILL BE USED FOR CHANGE ORDER PRICING ONLY. Item No. Item Description Unit Unit Price 509.4.1.A.1 CIPP SEGMENT MOBILIZATION EA X200.00 509.4.1.B.1.a. CIPP SEWER SERVICE CONNECTION EA $4,000.00 REPAIR (INITIAL 5 SEGMENT) B.1.b. 4 509 1 CIPP SEWER SERVICE CONNECTION EA $4,400.00 . . . REPAIR (ADDITIONAL 5' SEGMENT) B 509 4 1 i c CIPP SEWER SERVICE LINE REPAIR EA $i,soo.oo . . . . . . (INITIAL 2 SEGMENT) 509.4.1 B 1 d. CIPP SEWER SERVICE LINE REPAIR EA $400.00 . . , (ADDITIONAL 2' SEGMENT) Travel expenses, if applicable, will be paid at no more than the City of Meridian's Travel and Expense Reimbursement Policy. SEWER LINE REPAIRS FY12 -PARAMOUNT AND TUSCANY page 11 of 11 Project 103248 ri ®an iy unc®I AT' :April 17, 2012 I1' U : 5 J T U ITEM TITLE: pproval mutes of April , 201 re®ouncil etin ~~~~~ MEETING NoTEs Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: IE_MSTAFFTO) AGENCY I APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS ri i n it until tin T :April 17, 2012 IT ll 5 ~ : M A 11®011 irEnn TITLE: con mnnt to veloent re ent for Knight Sky MDA 11-011 Spurwing Challenge by The Club at Spurwing, LLC Located Northwest Corner of Chinden Boulevard and N. Linder Road Request: Amend the Recorded Development Agreement (Inst. #106122365) for the Purpose of Excluding the Property AND Creating a New Development Agreement to Include a New Project Boundary and Concept Plan for the Proposed Spurwing Challenge Subdivision I DATE: IE-MSTAFFTOI AGENCY I APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS I ~-i i n iy ucil a tin Spurwing Challenge by The Club at Spurwing, LLC Located Northwest Corner of Chinden Boulevard and North Linder Road Request: Annexation of 30 Acres of Land with an R-8 Zoning District and Rezone of 51.61 Acres of Land from R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) and TN-C (Traditional Neighborhood Commercial) to R-8 (Medium-Density Residential) (46.97 Acres) and C-C (Community Business) (4.64 Acres) Zoning Districts MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: IE-MSTAFF TO) AGENCYO I APPL CANT I NOTES I INITIALS r®i n ity unil tirr T :April 17, 2012 I U J U ITEM TITLE: Items oved from nsent Benda /~ U~ J MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: IE-MSTAFFTOI AGENCOY ( APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS ri i n iy Cecil T e April 17, 2012 I 7A J T lJ iTEnn TITLE: lose ulic oment eriod DATE: (E_MSTA D TOI AGENCOY I APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS April 12, 2012 1VIEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Tammy de Weerd City Council Members CC: Caleb Hood, City Clerk FROM: Lori Den Hartog, CDBG Administrator RE: Estimated Cost of Fair Housing Action Plan (FHAP) items A. INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND On March 7, 2012, staff and a consultant from BBC Research and Consulting presented the draft Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice report. Included in that report, is the Fair Housing Action Plan (FHAP) that lists the identified impediments and specific action items that the City will address over the next five years. A question was raised at that hearing regarding the potential costs associated with the FHAP items. Staff has prepared a cost estimate for each action item, and the estimates are included below. All of the costs associated with the FHAP can be classified as an administrative expense under the City's Community Development Block Grant Program. B. FHAP ESTIMATED COSTS FHAP ACTION ITEM SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES COST ESTIMATE 1.1 Preserve existing affordable housing Identify existing owners of affordable Staff Time units in the city, housin units in Meridian. Meet with affordable housing owners and Staff Time help encourage them to not let contracts on affordable units ex ire. 1.2. Convene an affordable housing task Meet with affordable housing task force Staff Time force to investigate ways to develop new quarterly to discuss strategies for affordable housing, developing new affordable housing units in Meridian Identify tools that the city could Staff Time implement to encourage affordable housing development in Meridian. Discuss implementation of these tools in Meridian. Present two strate ies develo ed b the Staff Time Planning Department . 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Meridian, ID 8364z Phone zo8-884-5533 ^Fsxzo8-888-6854 . www.meridiancity.org Page affordable housing task force to City Council for consideration. Implement affordable housing tools in Meridian. 2.1. Continue to participate in the Monetarily sponsor the regional fair $500 annually regional fair housing awareness housin awareness cam ai n. campaign and tailor it to current needs. Design and distribute flyers and display $1,500 annually posters in Meridian specific to the current fair housin needs in Meridian. 3.1 Continue to stay engaged in regional Research state and federal transportation Staff Time transportation planning efforts, leverage grants and determine if they could help local resources for local transit support public transit planning efforts in opportunities and seek partnerships. Meridian. Meet monthly with the Meridian Staff Time Transportation Task Force, the ACRD Capital Improvement Citizen Advisory Committee (ACHD CICAC), the COMPASS Regional Technical Advisory Committee (COMPASS RTAC), and Meridian's Traffic Safet Task Force. 4.1 Tailor fair housing outreach As part of regional fair housing Included in costs identified above for campaign to address the needs of persons awareness campaign, address needs of ouh•each campaign with disabilities. persons with disabilities, such as including information about reasonable accommodations and service animals in cam ai n mesa e. 4.2 Expand outereach and education to Conduct a fair housing training in $1,000 each training (3 trainings over a Meridian's landlords. Meridians ecific to landlords, flue- ear eriod 4.3 Train community development staff Conduct an internal paining for Staff Time on ADA and fair housing design and Community Development staff on fair construction guidelines. housing design and construction guidelines. ®RAFT REt~ORT S S f rP"-~~~rT~=-~ City of Meridian, Idaho i ` ~ ~ Et ,r, -.~t.. -- ~.~" ~s t i + ~ ~ ~ ry ~ ~ h- ~ ~1 ~I l1 ~ ~~ dd I . I I ~Ij ~ ~~ _. _ ~ ~~ ~~~- ~~r,`jtc d ~~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~.fi ili~_ ~~I ra~~~ ~i ~. y ~ ~..-__ t ,fie a ~s... ~' _ _ -F~ __ I _xo,~ 1 ~.~~ Y~ IIII ~ J ~ ~ ~ `~ '' ' ~`~ i j ~ +._J I~I~ :~ s, yY `~ t Y ~ ~~ ~~ i. 4~, ~ ~. Ste, '`: ra caI" i~ ~ ii - u ®RAFT REI~ORT February 24, 2012 SiS i S !' SI 1 Prepared for City of Meridian 33 E. Broadway Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Prepared by BBC Research bt Consulting 3773 Cherry Creek N. Drive, Suite 850 Denver, Colorado 80209-3868 303.321.2547 fax 303.399.0448 www.bbcresearch.com bbc@bbcresearch.com ,~ ltl'SLAItLH u`ti C()NSIILTI NG S I. Demographic and Housing Market Analysis Population and Household Composition ..................................................................................... I-1 Economic Characteristics ........................................................................................................... I-10 Housing Market Analysis ........................................................................................................... I-12 Foreclosure Analysis .................................................................................................................. I-18 Transportation ........................................................................................................................... I-19 11. Public Policies and Praetices Public Housing Authority ............................................................................................................ II-1 Assisted Housing Units ............................................................................................................... II-5 Land Use Policy Review .............................................................................................................. II-5 Other Public Sector Programs and Services ................................................................................. II-9 I11. Fair Lending and Complaints Fair Housing Complaints ........................................................................................................... III-1 Legal Cases ................................................................................................................................ III-4 Fair Lending Analysis ................................................................................................................. III-8 IV. Public Input and Participation Resident Survey ......................................................................................................................... IV-1 Stakeholder Survey and Focus Group ...................................................................................... IV-10 V. Fair Housing Impediments and Aetion Plan Summary of Needs ..................................................................................................................... V-1 Fair Housing in Meridian ............................................................................................................ V-3 Fair Housing Impediments and Action Plan ................................................................................ V-4 BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ® ~' 1 i' I SI ~' ,/SI This section provides a community and housing profile for the City of Meridian. It includes the racial, ethnic and income concentration maps required by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for Analyses of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AIs). The primary data sources for the demographic and housing profile include the following: the Census (2010), American Community Survey (ACS) 1-year (2010), 3-year (2008-2010) and 5-year (2005- 2009) estimates, Claritas (2010), COMPASS, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Population and Household Composition Population growth. The current population in Meridian is 75,092. ivicridian is a fast growing community that has more than doubled its population in the last 10 years. In fact, Meridian accounted for 44 percent of Ada County's growth in the last 10 years. Figure 1-1. Population of Cities within Ada County, 2000 and 201 O Source: 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census. I:1~~r~IF~t3h:~i {~1,.r~~,.ifl ~-~-~ti~.i. - ~X(°Yi _ __ r.7n1H0 l;k<:r~i7~t ~"'-liC~3fL; Meridian 34,919 75,092 1150 12°ro [3oisc 185,787 205,671 11% 1% Eagle 11,085 19,908 80% 8% Garden City 10,624. 10,972 3°10 0% Kuria 5,382 15,210 183% 18% Star 1,795 5,793 22396 22% Ada County Total 300,904 392,365 30% 3% Age. Like Illany communities in the U.S., Meridian's population is aging. The city's population contains a larger proportion of Baby Boomers and seniors now than 10 years ago. Figure 1-2. Age Distribution, City of Meridian, 2000 and 2070 I nfants and Toddlers (Age 0 to 4) School Aged Children (Age 5 to 19) College Aged Adults (Age 20 to 24} Young Adults (Age 25 to 44) Baby Boomers (Age 45 to 64) Seniors (Age 65 and older) Car@ro) ,~pio> ~~~I!I7il fa Ir7 ~ aeL<' l•ln 1fY~lay iTi.-... Source: 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census. 3,973 11% 6,981 9°r6 8,493 2496 19,685 26% 1,717 5% 3,296 4% 12,964 37°.6 22,875 309'0 5,521 16% 15,542 21% 2,251 6% 6,713 9% Senior residents currently comprise 9 percent of the city's population. As demonstrated in Figure I-3, there are three block groups within the city that contain a relatively large proportion of seniors. One of the block groups (tract 103.22, block group 2) encompasses the core of the downtown business district. BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION I, RAGE 1 Figure 1-3. Percent Seniors of Total Population by Block Group, City of Meridian, 2010 Source: 2010 U.S. Census. Legend -i 7 ~ j ss toss than S;Q4b ~ 5.096 to 15,446 Mope than 15,046 t ~~ ~! Race and ethnicity. "1'he City of Meridian is largely racially White (92%) and ethnically non- Hispanic (93%). The cit}''s Hispanic population has been the fastest growing racial or ethnic group in the last I 0 years, and no~~~ comprises 7 percent of the city's population, compared with just 3 percent in 20(?0. Figure I-4. Race and Ethnicity, City of Meridian, 201 O -- - --- _ ___ - LC[.77, p: l ldl~t<iFG, '~:,:q~ri /1.(l~di(~ {i't~{:.1 ;'i iil. American Yndian and Alaska Native 117 0.3%0 37.5 0.5% 0.2% Asian 516 1.5% 1,345 1.8% 0.3% Black orAfrican American 43 0.1% 573 0.8% 0.6% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 66 0.2% 106 0.1 % 0.0°h White 32,776 94.0% 69,071 92.0% -2.0% Some other race 479 1.4% 1,449 1.9% 0.6% Two or more races 861 2.Soh 2,173 2.9% 0.4% ,,;~ Hispanic/Latino 1,128 3.2% 5,111 6.8% 3.6°k Non-Hispanic/Latino 33,730 96.8% 69,981 93.2% -3.6% Source: 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census. BBC RESEARCH Si CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 2 Racial and ethnic eoneentration. One of the key components of a fair housing analysis is an examination of the concentration of different races and ethnicities within a jurisdiction to detect evidence of segregation. In some cases, racial and ethnic concentrations are a reflection of preferences-e.g., people of different races and ethnicities may choose to live where they have access to grocery stores or restaurants that cater to them. In other cases, different race/ethnic populations are intentionally steered away or discouraged from living in certain areas. Housing prices can also heavily influence where minorities live. This report uses HUD's definition of "disproportionate need" to define racial, ethnic and income concentrations. Using this definition, concentrations occur when the percentage of residents of a particular group is 10 percentage points higher than the community-wide average. For example, if 20 percent of residents in a particular Census block group are Hispanic and Hispanics comprise 10 percent of a community's population overall, that Census block group contains a concentration of Latino residents. The following maps show the proportions of Non-White and Hispanic residents by Census block group for the City of Meridian. The concentration thresholds used fot- the concentration maps are: ® Non-White. In 2010, 8 percent of residents in the city reported their race as something other than White. Census block groups that have 18 percent and more non-White residents are concentrated by the disproportionate need definition. ® Hispanic concentrations. In 2010, 7 percent of residents in the city reported their ethnicity as Hispanic. Census blocks that have 17 percent and more Hispanic residents are concentrated by the disproportionate need definition. The maps also report areas that HUll terms "minority areas" or "racially/ethnically-impacted areas" which are block groups in which minorit}~ populations are 20 percentage points higher than the City of Meridian overall. As demonstrated in Figures I-5 and 1-6, there are no areas of concentration or any impact areas in the city. The Census block group with the largest proportion of non-White residents (14%) is block group 2 of Census tract 103.22, which encompasses the city's downtown business district. The Census block group with the largest proportion of Hispanic residents (14%) is block group 2 of tract 103.21. This block group lies adjacent to the city's main downtown area. BBC RESEARCH ~T CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 3 Figure 1-5. Concentration of j Non-White - _ -:{~r~ -- :: -- - _ -- - Residents, City of {€ Meridian, 2070 ~5, ~~ Source: 2010 U.S. Census. i I _ i ~ ~ j (i t 1 - ~ f - ~F, ~( ~ -~- - 1 ~ i i i ,~ . _ .__ ~._- w, t legend !as Less than 5.096 , 5.09$ to 18.09b - ~~ More Uratt 18.096 ~~~ -~ __ , Impacted Area -~ h Figure 1-6. € Concentration of Hispania/Latino ~ -~~ - ~~~- -- = - _.__ Residents, City of Meridian, 2010 `65) Source: ~, 2010 U. S. Census. jj (((I ,, -_ f ,, ~ I i - ~ - - ~ - ~---- I t "! ~~~ ~~~=- ~ I wi Legend 65 LOSS than 5.096 L~_ ~ 5.096 to , 7.096 I ~ tvtore than 120°6 Impacted Arca ` ` _~I r, +~~a ~ 4.:.3 ~ _ _ t ~ € BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 4 Type of households. Seventy-nine percent of the city's households are family households, including 64 percent husband and wife families. By comparison, family households comprise a much larger proportion of Meridian's household composition than neighboring Boise. Family households only account for 59 percent of Boise's households, and 44 percent of Boise's households are husband and wife families. Figure 1-7. Household Composition, City of Meridian, 2010 Source: 2010 U.S. Census. : i ~r~, .U ~.~~ r,.~a t Family Households 19,91.6 Y9 ~u Husband-wife family 16,173 64°'0 with children 8,859 35oi~ without children 7,314 29% Male Householder - no wife 1,117 4% with children 777 3% without children 340 1 Female Householder- no husband 2,626 10% with children 1,761 7% without children 865 3% Nonfamily Households 5,386. `21% Total Households 25,302 ' 700% Familial status is protected under the Fair Housing het. In Meridian, 11 percent of fair housing complaints f led in 1vAcridian since 2005 were based on familial status. Similar to race and ethnicity, it is important a> note the place of residence of female households with children to determine whether discrimination is preventing them fiom moving into certain portions of the city. Seven percent of Meridian's households arc single female households with children. Families comprised of a single female householder and children are far more likely to live in poverty, and may require some form of public assistance to afford housing and other basic needs. This is certainly the case in Meridian. For example, 5 percent of all Meridian families live in poverty compared with 13 percent of all single female headed households and 45 percent of female households with children under the age of 5 years old. As demonstrated in Figure I-8, female-headed households are most likely to reside in the city's downtown area. BBC RESEARCH Si CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 5 _- F~gure 1-8. Geographic Distribution of - ''~` Single Female Households with r„ Children, City of Meridian, 2O1A Source: - - - - -. -. -- '----- ---~ - - __.. T.. ...: 2010 U.S. Census, i - . I 'r __ _ f ~_~~--- ~, _---~- 1 55. Legend L less than 5.096 -'( "- 5.0°.b to 17.040 ~ ~~.. 16f1 More than 17.046 It _ ~ , ., _ t ---- Income and poverty. The American Communit}~ Survey (ACS) estimated the city's 2010 median household income at $60,2.30. Meridian's households earn more than state and national residents; the median household income is X43,490 in Idaho and $50,046 for the U.S. overall. Figure I-9 displays Meridian's household income distribution. About half of Meridian's households earn becwcen $25,000 and $75,000 per year. 11n additional 16 percent of the city's households earn less than $25,000 per year. Figure I-9. Household Income Distribution, City of Meridian, 2010 Source: 2010 American Community Survey. lit~3~11 12=1r.~iSiOSi lot~l~tit-liX~lYkt 3~htrM1a_jity[~1~ Less than $10,000 1,012 4°h $10,000 to $24,999 3,140 12% $25,000 to $49,999 6,563 25% $50,000 to $74,999 6,370 24% $75,000 to $99,999 3,473 13% $100,000 to $149,999 2,911 11% $150,000 or more 2,563 1086 BBC RESEARCH Si CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 6 Figure I-10 displays the geographic distribution of the city's lowest income households by Census block group. Two block groups contain more than 26 percent low income households, By HUD's definition of disproportionate need, these two block groups contain a concentration of low income households in the city. Both block groups are located in downtown Meridian. Figure 1-10. Geographic Distribution of Low Income Households, City of Meridian, 2010 Note: Households earning less than $25,000 peryear used as a proxy for low income. Source: 2010 Claritas. _..__,,, - ------==~r_=~i i legend Lest than 1U.U96 tRaeSlo 26.tlv6 -.. - -- > More than 26,U4S t!q~ iffN) Defignated LMI Nea -i ~f-_ /, -- - ~~ s Median Family Income (MIDI} is used by HUll and state and local policy makers to qualify households for various housing programs. According to HUD, the MFI for the Boise-Nampa MSA in 2011 was$62,100. The f=ollowing classifications utilize MFI to define income levels according to HUD's categorization: ® Extremely low-30 percent and less of MFI ($18,630 and less); ® Very low-31 to 50 percent of MFI ($18,631 to $31,050); Low and moderate-51 to 80 percent ($31,051 to $49,680); ® Above low and moderate-80 percent and above of MFI (more than $49,680); BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 7 Figure I-11. Distribution of Low Income Households by HUD Income Classification Categories, City of Meridian, 2010 3096 of MFI (10.896) _ _ _ _ so96 of ~'~~ MFI (11.696) J~ Above 80°ti, ~`-v,~ MFI (59.196) 8096 of MFI (18.596) Figure I-11 shows the percentage of Meridian households within each MFI category. The largest proportion of households in Meridian (59%) were considered "above low and moderate income," earning more than $49,680. These households would likely not qualify for HUD-funded programs. Eleven percent of Meridian's households earn less than 30 percent of the local MFI and would be considered by HUD's standards "very low income." Source: 2010 American Community Survey. Meridian's 6 percent poverty rate is relatively low compared to the povert~r rate in Idaho (16%) and the U.S. (15%). Moreover, Meridian's child poverty rate of 7 percent is much lower than the national child poverty rate of 21 percent.' Figure I-12 displays poverty rates by age group for Meridian residents. The city's college age students have the highest poverty rate at 14 percent, which is nor surprising given that many of these individuals are likely enrolled in college or are just beginning careers. Moreover, this segment of the population has been heavily impacted by the recent economic downtown. Surprisingly, only 1 percent of the city's seniors are living in poverty. Given that this segment of the population often lives on a fixed income, poverty rates among seniors are t}~piatlly higher than 1 percent. Figure I-12. -~ ~~~ ~- ii ta;i iit ~ ~n ~_~~i ~ s~ hoverty Status by Age, It~a,n1F;1~f0u ~l =~~; ~ ,.-~~~,,~nir~ City of Meridian,'201p - _-- - - Infants and Toddlers (Age 0 to 4) 520 10.9~Sb 8390 source School Aged Children (Age 5 to 17) 1,175 24.5% 6.2% zoloArnarican Community survey' College Aged Adults (Age 18 to 24) '551 11.5% 13.8°h Young Adults (Age 25 to 44) 1,715 35.8% 7.4% Baby Boomers {Age 45 to 64) 763 15.9% 4.5% Seniors (Age 65 and older) 65 1.4°h 1.1% Total 4,789 100% ' Poverty rate includes all children under the age of 18. Data source is the 2010 U.S. Census. BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION I, RAGE 8 Disability status. Disability status is an important component of fair housing analysis, particularly in Meridian and the Boise region. Disability status has been the basis for a number of fair housing related lawsuits. And, according to HUD, 61 percent of the 18 fair housing complaints filed in Meridian between 2005 and 2011 were on the basis of disability. Nearly 7 percent of all residents in Meridian report having a disability. The city's seniors have the highest rate of disability at 24 percent. Figure I-13. Disability Status by Age, City of Meridian, 2010 Source: 2010 American Community Survey. ~'I=1n13:(lijitl ,re"ii{t;.. a<<~.~il,~.~il i;.~_f}`CGld.lil ![16;..~lilllm% ~ - ~~~~~, UnderS years of age 6,284 - O.O~io 5 to 17 years of age 19,030 372 2.090 18 to 34 years old 14,389 594 4.1 °h 35 to 64 years old 29,846 2,615 H.8% 65 years and older 5,697 1,347 23.6% Total 75,246 4,928 56.5% Ambulatory or physical disabilities are the most commonly cited type of disability among Meridian's residents. Forty-six percent of persons with a disability aged 18 to C~ report having an ambulatory disability, as do 18 percent of disabled seniors. Figure I-14 maps the location of the cir~~'s residents ~wirh disabilities by Census tract. Tracts located in the central portion of the cite do contain concenn~ations (according to HUD's definition of disproportionate need) of persons with disabilities. 'Phis is partially impacted by the city's disabled senior population, Figure I-14. ~~ percent of population a with a Disability by - ~ _.~{ _ Census 7•ract, City of ~ °n- Meridian, 2017 (t _ f~` nu~ Source: L J 2005-2010 ACS 5-year estimate. ~ __ y~ q 0 ~ r L~ r o~ . ~~ [1LI~b ~~ _ it ~,~ ~/ ~- I ~ • I ~.,.t _ ~_ I ! 1 ~ i -,L I i u I{ ~;~[ ~~ I 7 -~ i ,' 1~ ~~ ~~~ ~L ~ ', j ~_ l ~ ~ g 6 ~, -rU legand ~ - ~~ Leis than 17.OSu '•<~' I7.C'>o. nW.c ~ r; BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 9 c®n®mic Characteristics Unemployment. In the midst of the recent economic recession, the Boise region and the Ciry of Meridian have not been immune to increases in unemployment. The city and the region experienced substantial job loss between 2007 and 2009, which resulted in unemployment rates in Meridian growing from 2.5 percent to 7.9 percent between 2007 and 2009. Meridian's unemployment rates have historically trended below the MSA, the state and the U.S., and it remains that way in October 2011. Figure 1-17. Unemployment Rate, Boise VISA, Idaho, U.S, 2000 to 2017 d A M C d E 0 a E a Note: Data are notseasonally adjusted annual averages. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics. zoi~ {October) Jobs and wages, ns dcmonsn~atcd in Figure I-18, Ada County's employment base is largely associated with service jobs (85%) Lhat pay an average annual wages of $37,000 per year. Manufacturing jobs pay the highest tivages in the county; however, they only comprise 9 percent of the county's total etnploymcnt. Overall, the cottnry's private sector employment opportunities pay an average of $40,000 per year. Figure I-18. Employment and Wages, Ada County, 1 Q2017 Note: Employment data only available by county. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics. 1~~3d:Y1:(~ j I ir_i(ifa'A -- ut-liC` ..Y_rLir_tJI ~~~r~r,~rxa, ~;r~~~a~,,, ~r~~r t,~=~4 Goods Producing 23,252 14.6°,'u $58,344 Natural Resources and Mining 722 0.5.6 $32,084 Construction 8,118 5.1°.6 $39,156 Manufacturing 14,412 9.Ooi6 $70,512 Servicing Producing 136,317 85.4°io 537,024 Trade, Transportation, and Utilities 36,306 22.8°.6 $36,036 Information 3,514 2.2.6 $46,072 Financial Activities 10,661 6.7°.6 $51,688 Professional and Business Services 32,785 20.5°r6 $43,680 Education and Health Services 30,241 19.0% $39,936 Leisure and Hospitality 17,649 11.1.6 $14,664 Other Services 5,143 3.2o~fi $24,024 Unclassified 18 0.0°h $50,908 Total Private Employment 159,568 $40,092 BBC RESEARCH bi CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 10 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 7009 2010 Largest employers. Figure I-19 displays the largest employers in the Boise-Nampa MSA, Many of the region's largest employers have multiple locations, some of which are in Meridian (e.g., St. Luke's Regional Medical System, Wal-Mart). The Meridian School District is the fifth largest employer in the region with 4,000 employees. The school district is very large, and does extend outside the city's boundaries. Most of the region's largest private sector employers included in Figure I-17 are located in Boise. Meridian's employment base is primarily comprised of smaller firms involved in retail and services. Figure 1-19. Major Employers, Boise City-Nampa MSA, 2011 -- -- -_ I~hli;ilx~r~{h l_1 1,1~'f=r'~' 1~i1~1t'3fxss (I,ctPrr3i~% State of Idaho 8,4$9 Government St. Luke's Regional Medical System 7,677 Healthcare Services Micron Technology, Inc. 5,000 Semi Conductor Mfg... WalMart 4,235 RetailJGrocery Meridian Joint School District #2 4,000 Education Boise State University 3,952 Education St. Alphonsus Regional Medical System 3,407 Healthcare Services Hewlett-Packard Company 4,000 Laser Printing Div Albertson's/A Supervald Company 2,500 Grocery/Retail Ada and Canyon County 2,308 Govcrnrnent Bosse School D'IStrict 7_,7.00 Education IDACorp. (Idaho Power) 1,961 Utility J.R. Simplot 1,800 HQ/Food Production Nampa School District 1,700 Education City of Boise 1,600 Government DirecTV 1,400 Customer Service -Citi 1,250 Inbound -.Credit Card Sales/Service Darrnody Enterprises (McDonald's) 1,250 Retail Food Veteran's Affairs/Medical Center 1,250 Healthcare Services Fred Meyer 1,200 Retail/Grocery WDS Global Services 1,100 Customer Service Call Center EDS 1,000 Inbound - 3rd Party (military) 'Teleperformance USA 950 Inbound Customer Service Vallivue School District#139 950 Education URS 900 Construction/Engineering Services (Gov't, Minlnq & Power Industries) Source: Boise Valley Economic Partnership. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 11 housing Market ~-naiysis Development trends. Figure I-20 displays the number of residential building permits issued in Meridian. As is the case in many communities, residential permitting peaked in the middle portion of the last decade and drastically declined starting in 2007. Figure 1-20. Residential Permits, City of Meridian, 2007 to 201 O Source: COMPASS. 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000,1 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 Number of Residential hermits Figure I-21 examines the number of permits issued in Meridian byproduct type. According to permit data, single family units comprised much. of the qty's development in the last 10 years. Assuming permits resulted in built units, the largest proportion of multifamily units was constructed in 2008 when 26 percent of all permits were issued for multifamily development. Figure 1-27. Percent of Regional Permits by Product Type, City of Meridian, 2001 to 2010 1 BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION I, RAGE 12 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Note: Percentages based on estimates with imputations. Source: U.S. Census Building Permit Estimates. Housing supply. There are currently 26,674 housing units in the City of Meridian. The vacancy rate reported in the 2010 Census was 5.1 percent, indicating that 1,372 of the city's housing units were vacant at the time of the Census. Most units were vacant because they were either for sale (612) or for rent (293). The city's housing market has experienced remarkable growth in the last 20 years. The city had approximately 3,700 housing units in 1990 and 12,300 in 2000. The 600 percent increase in the size of the city's housing inventory since 1990 has resulted in the city's evolution from a small farm community to the 3`d largest community in Idaho. Tenure. Between 1990 and 2000, the proportion of homeowners in the city grew from 71 percent to 84 percent. However, the percentage of homeowners decreased in the last 10 years and currently stands at 77 percent, which indicates that 23 percent of the city's households currently rent their home. Figure 1-23. Housing Tenure, City of Meridian, 7990, 2000 and 2070 Source: 1990, 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census. 1990 2000 2010 Type. llespite the extensive growth in the local housing market, the distribution by type of housing unit has changed very little in the last few years. This means that housing construction in the last 10 years reflected the city's existing housing stock in 2000. The city has lost some of its existing mobile home stock, which has resulted in a larger proportion of single family detached units. Figure 1-25. Distribution. by Type of Housing Unit, City of Meridian, 2000 and 2010 Source: 2000 U.S. Census and 2008-2010 American Community Survey. Detache Single Family Attache 2to4Unit 5 to 50 Unit 50 or more unit Mobile Homes ss.z96 d - -- -- - -~ 88.296 2.696 d 2000 2.996 6.096 s 4.796 ••!' 1.496 s ' 0.896 0.396 s U 2010 1.746 i j 4.596 1.896 j 0°,6 20~~ 40~~ 60~~ 80.6 100.6 BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 13 100°~fi 8096 60°io 40°0 20°6 0°6 Renter 0°~6 2096 40°,6 60e,6 8096 10096 Homeowner Age. Given the city's rapid growth in the last 20 years, it's no surprise that nearly 90 percent of the city's housing units were constructed after 1990. However, there are homes in Meridian constructed in the 1970s, indicating that 6 percent of the city's homes are approaching 40 years of age. Figure I- 26 displays the age distribution of the city's housing stock. Figure 1-26. Age Distribution of Housing Built 2005 or late Stock, City of Meridian, 2010 Built 2000 to 2004 Built 1990 to 1999 Built 1980 to 1989 source: 2010 American Community Survey. Built 1970 t0 1979 Built 1960 to 1969 Built 1950 to 1959 Built 1940 to 1949 Built 1939 or earlie 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 100% - _ __,24.746 -- ,24.396 __ ) 137.695 3.796 6.096 - j i 1.0°r6 1.4°~ 0.496 i I 0.795 I I r r Housing demand and cost. This section discusses the cost of housing for both rental and homeownership housing. It then discusses demand and gaps in provision of housing to determine the greatest housing needs in Meridian. Rental costs. Thegross median rent in the Cit)~ of Meridian in 2010 was $965, which was an increase of 53 percent from the 2000 median rent of $629. The ciry's median gross rent is significantly higher than the median gross rent for Ada County overall ($751), as well as neighboring Boise $7l 8. Figure I-27 displays the distribution of gross rcural rates within the City of Meridian in 2000 and 2010. In the last l 0 years, the city's rental rates have become increasingly more expensive. In 2000, residents would be challenged to find a unit requiring a rent of $1,000 or more; currently, half the city's rental units have rents of $1,000 or more. 2 The Census Bureau defines gross rent as "the amount of the contract rent plus the estimated average monthly cost of utilities (electricity, gas, water and sewer) and fuels (oil, coal, kerosene, wood, etc.) if these are paid for by the renter (or paid for the renter by someone else). BBC RESEARCH Ei CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 14 figure 1-27. Gross Rental Rate Less than $250 Distribution, City of Meridian, 2000 and 201 O $250 to $499 Source: $500 to $749 2000 and 2010 Census. $750 to $999 $1,000 to $1,249 $1,250 to $1,499 $1,500 or more Renter incomes have increased in the last 10 years to account for increased rectal rates. The median household income of a renter household in 2000 was $27;148; it ~a~as $35,494 in 2010. While the city's median renter household income did not grow as quickly rental rates in Meridian, the median household income of renters is enough to afford the city's median gross rental rate. Despite increases in renter's income, the city's median rental rates now require a larger proportion of renters' household income. Median gross rent as a percentage of renter household income in 2000 was 26 percent; the 20101~CS reported that the percentage had increased to 33 percent. HUD's generally accepted definition of affordability is for "a household to pay no more than 30 percent of its annual income on housing."' On a~~cragc, Meridian's renter households slightly exceed HUD's affordability standard. Rental gaps. To understand more specifically where the rental market in Meridian fails to meet residents' needs, ewe performed an exercise called a "gaps analysis." The gaps exercise compares the supply of rental housing at various price points to the number of households who can afford such housing. if there are more rental units than households, the market is "over-supplying" rental housing at that price range. Conversely, if there are too few units, the market is "under-supplying" housing. Figure I-28 displays the results of the rental market gaps analysis. 312tt€~alw~~v.hud.gcsvlofftceele~ad/a€'fe~rdablehousin~/ BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 15 0°ib 10°rb 20°~6 3090 40°i6 50°h 1 Uu Figure 1-28. Mismatch in Rental Market by Household Income, City of Meridian, 201 O ~.~,~1' ri~~~ ~s~, :?i'~~,~ L~~t~:dt~n~i ~ i~~ ~l ~rn~ ,, ~~ 1Rt.,~r,~t;~ft~l i tai ;_ ,, . J~lii.,;~i i.i, ~~~;~-nr~ ~ . .r , ,~,~,n ,,;u.,? ;t~_~r,ii f~YQnT-'I1~-1+1=f` 7.`'19ri1~,-Tr ~. _~ ~i~iviil~6,~ nr-,./! irii!~r rl,, _ ~' ., -u _.- ~rLi Less trait $10,000 682 '.2°.6 $ 250 229 ~°h X453) $10,000 to $14,999 442 8°.6 $ 375 197 3°.b (245) $15,000 to $19,999 336 6°h $ 500 74 196 (262) $20,000 to $24,999 270 5°,6 $ 625 153 2°.6 (117) $25,000to$34,999 703 13°r6 $ 875 1,768 29°.6 1,065 $35,000 to $49,999 1,037 18°.6 $ 1,250 2,804 46°h 1,767 $50,000 to $74,999 1,371 24°~ $ 1,875 775 13°,6 (596) $75,000 to $99,999 357 6°.6 $ 2,500 147 2°,6 (210) $100,000 to $149,999 288 596 $ 3,750 0 0°.0 {288) $150,000ormore 123 2°,6 $ 3,751 0 O;o (123) Total 5,609 100% 6,147 Source: BBC Research & Consulting. As shown in Figure I-28, there are 682 renters earning less than $10,000 pa year living in Meridian-but just 229 units to serve them. This leaves a shortage of 453 units for the city's lowest income households. These renters have such low incomes ,that they can only afford to pay $250 per month in rent. Altogether, the City's rental gap is 1,077 for renters earning less than $25,000 per year. Renters earning more than this can find an adequate supply of units. In particular, renters earning between $25,000 grid $50,000 have an abundance of units affordable to them. The City's highest income renters could pay more in rent than what the market has available to serve them; however, these renters likely pa}=less than their maxinutm affordable rent to save for a down payment for a home purchase, Owner costs. 7'he median value of an owner-occupied home in the City of Meridian is $190,400 according ro the 2010 Census. By comparison the median home value in Boise is $188,900. In 2000, the Census estimated Meridian's median home value to be at $119,800. Based on these estimates, the median has increased by $70,600 (59%), or by an average of $7,060 per year. BBC RESEARCH Si CONSULTING SECTION I, RAGE 16 Figure I-29 demonstrates how the city's owner-occupied housing market has changed in the last 10 years. More than half the city's homes were valued between $100,000 and $150,000 in 2000. Many of those homes likely appreciated between 2000 and 2010, and are now valued higher than $150,000. Additional changes to the distribution of the city's housing market are likely attributed to new construction that occurred in the last 10 years. New construction likely favored homes valued at $200,000 or more. Figure 1-29. Owner-Occupied Home Less than $50,000 Value Distribution, City of Meridian, 2000 and $50,000 to $99,999 2070 $100,000 to $149,999 Source: 2000 and 2010 Census. $150,000 to $199,999 $200,000 to $299,999 $300,000 to $499,999 $500,000 to $999,999 $1,000,000 or more The housing market downturn impacted Meridian profoundly both in sales activity and sales prices. In the last four years, the average sales price has declined by 37 percent. And, 2010 produced the lowest number of annual sales of the last five years. Figure 1-30. Frequency and Average Sales F'rice of MLS Sales, City of Meridian, 2006 to 201 O Source: COMPASS and Intermountain MLS . .:kit=~ :i~~,,;:. 2006 3,271 $ 269,515 2007 1,864 $ 167,924 2008 1,464 $ 234,706 2009 1,614 $ 187,171 2010 1,426 $ 168,547 BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 17 U°.6 10°.5 2U°i6 3U';o 4096 SU96 6Uh 1UU96 Figure I-31 maps the 2010 median sales price by Census tract. There was no portion of the city that did not experience a decline in home prices in the last five years. Average sales prices declined by 35 to 40 percent in every Census tract in the city but one (103.31). Figure 1-31. Average MLS Sales Price ._._.~- ~ z,r __,- by Census Tract, City of Meridian, 2070 Source: COMPASS and Intermountain MLS. f 17F~ iReC4i ,Z~r~. l ,i j. 103.13 $305,631 7197,150 35 5°,0 103.21 4208,229 $130,599 -37.3°,u 103.22 $170,319 ' $103,177 -39.495 103.31 $338,371 $233,869 -30.995 103.32 $251,264 $160,474 -36.195 103.33 $251,640 $162,566 -35.495 103.34 $222,421 $139,081 -37.596 103.35 $285,419 $172,668 -39.595 Legend Leas than $150,000 $1 SO,OOO to $200,000 More than 8200,000 - -._.~ ,,..iv ~- --- `i:3 j ~l ~l i ~__ J. (,55 f~f 1 __._.~_ i Foreelosur~ /~r~alysis According to RealtyTrac, there were 324 new foreclosure filings in Ada County in November 2011. This foreclosure rate indicates that one in every 485 homes in the county received a foreclosure filing in November 2011. This was a higher foreclosure rate than the State of Idaho (one in every 770 housing units) and the U.S. overall (one in every 579 housing units). Meridian's housing stock represents 17 percent of the county's housing stock. Assuming foreclosures in Meridian occur in proportion with the city's contribution to the county's housing stock (17%), Meridian may have had 55 foreclosure filings just in November 2011. BBC RESEARCH bi CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 18 Figure II-40 maps the percentage of bank owned properties of total home sales in 2010 by block group. Since foreclosures are not identified in the MLS, bank owned properties are used as a proxy for foreclosures. Bank owned properties accounted for 30 to 50 percent of all home sales in 2010 in most of the ciys's block groups. The proportion of banked owned properties of total sales exceeded 50 percent in two of the city's block groups. Both block groups were located in central Meridian. Figure I-32. Percent Bank Owned Properties, of Total Sales by Block croup, 2010 Source: COMPASS and BBC Research Fr Consulting. Ss~l__ f . _- - -- i Transportafiorn Legend ~ - ~ _ 3 lets Than 30,09E ~ ~~ _ ~. 3U.U95 to ~U.U95 (c~i blvre Ulan 50.09E I i i Act j. _. ~~.. S Like many «~cstern communities, residents in Meridian and the Boise region are primarily dependent on cats for transportation. Nearly 80 percent of Meridians residents drove alone to work each day. And, less than 1 percent of the city's workers relied on public transportation for their work commute 4 The Boise region is served by Valley Regional Transit (VRT), which provides public transit for both Ada and Canyon counties. Figure I-33 displays VRT's inter-county bus lines. The purpose of the inter-county bus line is largely to connect Boise with the City of Nampa; however, Meridian is served along Interstate 84. Stakeholders and residents engaged during the public input process both noted that public transportation opportunities are very limited in Meridian. 4 Means of transportation to work statistics from the 2010 American Community Survey 1-year estimate. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 19 Figure 1-33. Valley Regional7'ransit Bus Lines, City of Boise, 2071 r` ~ °~ _4 '~-yFrank~tr, ' ._ I ~ ,~ AJ -~ w i W S~ .~ f /'+." ~~ ({~~ 'S] ~_ lga b~~i bC 1 til r.i3 ,„ ~ lJa~J~~ :~.~rs?~ ~ k _ I{ ~. I §'r1 . ~~,~~, ~ ~ ~ '- Q~aria~d 1- ' - 'I ~~, ~', 1~,.,,9N~ ~ ~u it ' i „I~!. V Source: Vafley Regional Transit. d ~ I ° ~ t~. a r 2 ~. f~i ~.i ~.-1 r a lj ' 1 Public transportation for special needs population. The VRT's ACCESS program is a paratransit service for regional residents tivith disabilities who are unable to access ValleyRid,e's traditional busservices. ACCESS is an origin to destination transit service operating Monday through Saturdaywirh the same hours as the fixed-line bus system. ACCESS will travel up to three-fourths of a mile off fixed-lint routes for service pickups. If residents live further than three-fourths of a mile from afixed-line service, they must get to a bus stop to receive ACCESS services. The Meridian Senior Center n~ansporrs homebound seniors from their homes to the Meridian Senior Center Monday through Friday for lunch. Every Wednesday, the Senior Center will also take seniors to Albertsons for grocery shopping. BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION I, PAGE 20 ® 1 1 1 1 S 1° t S This section reviews city zoning and land use policies, as well as the policies and practices of the Boise City Ada County Housing Authority (BCACHA), for barriers to fair housing choice and violations with the Federal Fair Housing Act. The section also contains the results of an examination of a sample of Homeowners Associations' covenants. It concludes with an overview of city goals and objectives related to housing and community development. Public Housing Authority BCACHA selves as the housing authority for the City of Meridian, as well as Ada County, and provides housing to the city's lowest income households primarily through the Section 8 voucher program and public housing units. Section 8 Voucher Program. The BCACHA administers 1,794 Section 8 vouchers in Ada County. Most BCACHA vouchers are used within the City of Boise (64%). The remaining 36 percent of vouchers are spread throughout the remaining portions of the county, including Meridian. The BCACHA currently administers 185 vouchers to residents of Meridian. As of May 2011, there were 5,331 households on the Section 8 waitlist. It is likely that as many as 550 Meridian households are currently waiting for a Section 8 voucher.' The BCHACHA estimates that households on the waitlist will wait four to five years for a voucher. Figure II-1 displays the demographic characteristics of all households on the Section 8 waitlist. Waitlisted households are lar el cate orized as extremel low Figure II-1. BCACHA Seetion 8 Waitlist, Household Demographics, City of Meridian, 2011 - ~i~~r~~~~ :~ ~.<<,,~ Applicants on Active Waitlist 5,331 10040 Household Characteristics Families with children 2,920 55% Elderly families 495 9% Families with disabilities 2,064 39% Income Extremely low income 4,449 83% Very low income 820 15% Low income 23 0% Race/Ethnicity American Indian/Alaskan Native 127 2% Asian 211 4% Black/African American 394 7% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 63 1% White 4,237 79% Hispanic 523 10% Non-Hispanic 4,053 76% g Y g Y income. African American and Hispanic Note: Demographic data is not provided for all applicants. Household characteristics income and race/ethnicity categories will not sum to 100 percent. residents are disproportionately represented Source: BCACHA. on the Section 8 waitlist; African Americans account for less than 2 percent of the city's population, but 7 percent of waitlisted households. The BCACHA does not differentiate between City of Boise and Ada County applicants on the waitlist. Meridian residents account for 10 percent of all voucher recipients, and are assumed to account for 10 percent of all waitlisted households. BBC RESEARCH ~i CONSULTING SECTION II, PAGE 1 Section 8 policies. According to BCACHA's website, households can check their status on the waitlist online or by calling or visiting the BCACHA office. Households are notified by mail when a voucher becomes available to them. To stay on the Section 8 and/or public housing waitlist, residents must report changes of address, phone, household members or local preference in writing within 10 working days of the change. Residents must also respond to requests made by the BCACHA. Failure to abide by these rules may result in the removal of residents from the waitlist.2 This information is presented on the rental assistance application found on the BCACHA's website. The online application is only available in English. The BCACHA closed its Section 8 waitlist on Apri129, 2011 citing "large demand for rental assistance in the community, a limited amount of funding and federal budget cuts." 3 The BCACHA also recently suspended all Section 8 waitlist preferences, with the exception of the following categories: ^ Applicants with a Family Unification Program referral from the Department of Health and Welfare; ^ Applicants with a Homeless Program referral from one of the BCACHA recognized referring agencies; ^ Applications with a CATCH program referral from the City of Boise; ^ A household whose head or co-head (or at least one adult member) is working at least 20 hours per week, with verifiable income or whose head or co-head is participating in a BCACHA recognized job preparedness/self-sufficiency program or a household whose head or co-head is either elderly (62 or older), and/or handicapped and unable to work; and ^ A household whose head or co-head is fleeing their home due to domestic violence. If a household does acquire a Section 8 voucher, the BCACHA provides assistance to recipients in the following ways: ^ The BCACHA provides recipients with information on the location of accessible units in the region; They provide residents with an online checldist to evaluate apartments. The BCACHA encourages residents to evaluate the condition of the unit and the neighborhood; the cost of utilities; and the home's proximity to public transportation, employment, schools, medical facilities and shopping. ^ The BCACHA encourages residents to find housing outside of high poverty areas in hopes of increasing access to good schools, job opportunities, better quality housing and responsive landlords. These policies are presented on the rental assistance applications found here: http:/(iu v_.' _/rental assist apE~ 12- o~-2aa9.pdf For more information on the Section 8 program: h[tp:/hvww.BC/ACHA.org/Rental_Assis[ante/Section_8/section_8.htm1 BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION II, RAGE 2 i~ublic housing. The BCACHA has 230 public housing units located in Boise. There are no public housing units in Meridian. Both facilities serve elderly residents and persons with disabilities. Both facilities contain a mix of studio, one bedroom and two bedroom apartments. The BCACHA also manages five scattered site duplexes in Boise with federal aid from HUD. If a Meridian resident was interested in moving into a public housing unit, they could obtain a public housing application at the BCACHA office or online. Applications must be mailed or hand delivered to the BCACHA office in Boise. The BCACHA website can be interpreted into many languages through the Google Translate tool; however, the public housing application is only available online in English. There are currently 168 families on the waitlist for public housing units. It is unknown whether any of these families currently reside in Meridian. The average wait time for a public housing unit ranges from three months to two years depending on the unit size requested. Figure II-2 summarizes the demographic characteristics of families on the public housing waitlist. Nearly all households on the waitlist (93%) have a household member with a disability. Figure 11-2. BCACHA public Housing Unit Waitlist, 2017 Note: Demographic data is not provided for all applicants. As such, household characteristics, income and race/ethnicity categories will not sum to 100 percent. Source: BC/ACHA. i~;l~io~u~ 1::~~,~-ass, Applicants on Active Waitlist 168 100°0 Household Characteristics Families with children - 0~,6 Elderlyfamllies 34 20°,6 Families with disabilities 156 93°,6 Income Extremely low income 7 4°~6 Very low income 2 1 °.6 Low income 2 1 °~ Race/Ethnicity American Indian/Alaskan Native 3 2°~ Asian 2 196 Black/African American 10 6°r6 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 1 1 °.6 White 138 82°.6 Hispanic 15 9°.6 Non-Hispanic 114 68°,6 BBC RESEARCH bi CONSULTING SECTION II, PAGE 3 Limited English I~rofieieney policy. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is "the federal law that protects individuals from discrimination on the basis of their race, color, or national origin in programs that receive federal financial assistance."4 Compliance with Title VI requires that recipients of federal dollars provide language assistance to individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP). Otherwise, "failure to ensure that persons who are limited English proficient (LEP) can effectively participate in, or benefit from, federally assisted programs may violate Title VI's prohibition against national origin discrimination.i5 In 2007, HUD issued guidance to help federal assistance recipients understand their obligations to serving individuals with LEP. HUD suggests federal assistance recipients conduct afour-factor analysis to determine how to best service LEP individuals (explained below); develop a Language Assistance Plan (LAP); and provide appropriate language assistance to LEP individuals. HUD's four-factor analysis is a "flexible and fact-dependent" approach to helping federal assistance recipients determine which LEP populations to serve and how to best serve these populations. The four-factor analysis includes identifying the following: The number of proportion of LEP persons eligible to be served or likely to be encountered by the program or grantee; The frequency with which LEP persons come in contact with the program; ® The nature and importance of the program, activity or service provided by the program to peoples' lives; and The resources available to the grantee/recipient and costs. In addition to the four-factor analysis, HUD provides more specific guidance for Title VI compliance. HUD recommends recipients provide written translation of vital documents and oral translation of non-vital documents for LEP languages if the LEP group represents either 5 percent of the total population or 1,000 persons. HUD recommends that federal assistance recipients develop a language assistance plan (LAP) to describe how they intend to serve LEP individuals in their communities. The BCACHA's LAP was last updated in 2004, prior to HUD's 2007 guidance. According to the BCACHA's LAP, the housing authority is committed to quicldy connecting LEP individuals to interpreters at no cost to the individual. BCACHA explicitly states that friends or family members of the LEP individual are not valid interpreters. Instead, the BCACHA utilizes bilingual staff members when available and a telephone interpreter service known as the Language Line Services. 4 Information on Tide VI and HUD programs can be found here: httroal~ortal.h€xd.govlhud~ortal~illiD?sre=( ~ ro~rant oEfictslfais~ hc~€rsie.g ed€aaI o~plpromo~ ,_ x~c s IBID. BBC RESEARCH EI CONSULTING SECTION II, PAGE 4 The BCACHA's implementation plan does not specify when written interpretation of vital documents will be provided for residents, which is an important component of HUD's 2007 Title VI guidance. However, the BCACHA's rental assistance application for its Section 8 and public housing programs does aslc residents whether they need assistance with language interpretation. Assisted Housing Units The following summarizes the city's inventory of affordable housing units directly owned and operated by the city or constructed with federal subsidies and tax credits. Assisted units. There are 50 assisted units in Meridian developed from federal subsidies. All units are contained in one building, the James Court Apartments, located in central Meridian. The affordability requirement of this facility is set to expire in 2018. Figure 11-3. Units with Subsidized Rent, City of Meridian, 2011 {,>_; al 1, .l ;ial a' I.ciC-11 I~f Vila I ~ ~;i=~.~~rt~~~lii~~, ~!~ ~o~- ;'; ih nl~i l:. ~, so V. L.".. liar,.. i~rji;~, itt t~?ni "11r #v. ,gfn-;: .~n,_ fames CourtApartrnents 2190 N. Meridian Rd. 2018 50 0 20 20 10 0 Total 50 O 20 20 10 O Source: U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development. land Use Policy Review The following section reviews important pieces of the city's overall land use policy. This includes a review of how land use decisions are made and approved and the long-range growth vision for the city. Additionally, a HUD checklist was used to conduct a general analysis of the city's zoning code. Planning and Zoning Commission. Meridian's Planning and Zoning Commission is responsible for reviewing all zoning changes and conditional use applications. All five members of the Commission are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council. The Planning and Zoning Commission is responsible for upholding the city's land use policies and ensuring that all planning decisions support the city's development goals, objectives, and action items. According to city staff, the commission very rarely recommends denial of housing developments as long as they align with the city's adopted land use policy plan, and public opposition alone is not a reason for the commission to recommend denial of a proposed project or development. Comprehensive Plan. During 2010-2011, the city updated its Comprehensive Plan. The process commenced in early 2010 with a town hall meeting and revised goals, objectives, and action items were adopted by the Planning and Zoning Commission in March 2011. The City Council conducted a public hearing and adopted the updated Comprehensive Plan in Apri12011. The updated Comprehensive Plan was based upon the concerns and expressions of the community, as well as the Existing Conditions Report that was adopted concurrently as an addendum to the plan. The Existing Conditions Report includes background information and analysis about the built and natural environment in Meridian in 2010, trends, and a strategic plan for the future. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION II, RAGE 5 The Idaho State Code requires that Idaho communities examine a number of community development categories in their Comprehensive Plans including land use; school facilities and transportation; housing; and economic development. The city's Comprehensive Plan examines these elements within the framework of seven key community values: ® Manage growth to achieve high-quality development; ® Enhance Meridian's quality of life for all current and future residents; ® New growth should finance public service expansion; Prevent school overcrowding and enhance education services; Expand commercial and industrial development; ® Improve transportation; and ® Protect Meridian's self-identity. The Comprehensive Plan states, "opportunities for housing should be available for all income groups with a mix of housing including modular, ranchettes, townhouses, apartment housing, low-income housing, and mansions. A vibrant community needs a good cross-section of housing and therefore must guard against an abundance of subdivisions in like density and price range. High-density housing must be strategically located to public transportation, community services, and not negatively affect property values."G Related to the goal of offering a diversity of housing types for a great range of choice are several action items listed in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Those action items are as follows: ® Adopt land use designations that will allow for housing opportunities for all income levels. ® Support a variety of residential categories (low, medium, medium-high, and high-density single- family, multi-family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities. ® Require an open housing market for all persons, regardless of protected class, ie: race, sex, age, religion, disability, handicap, family status or ethnic background. ® Ensure that no discriminatory restrictions are imposed by local codes and ordinances. ® Look for incentives to encourage the development of accessible, single-family home designs. ® Provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, mobile homes and multi-family arrangements) and choices between ownership and rental dwelling units for all income groups in a variety of locations suitable for residential development.' The Comprehensive Plan states, "The City of Meridian, as a recipient of the CDBG federal funds, and its partnering non-profits, are obligated to not discriminate in housing or services directly or indirectly on the basis of race, color religion, sex, national origin, age, familial status, or disability."8 6 City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan, Adopted April 19, 2011: page 36 ~ City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan, Adopted April 19, 2011, page 53-55 $ City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan, Adopted April 19, 2011, page 82 BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION II, PAGE 6 Zoning code review. To evaluate potential fair housing concerns within the city's zoning code, a "Review of Public Policies and Practices (Zoning and Planning Codes)" form recently circulated by the Los Angeles fair housing office of HUD was utilized. This section poses the questions from this checldist, along with responses about the city's code. Does the code definition of family"have the effect of discriminating against unrelated individuals with disabilities who reside together in a congregate or group living arrangement? The City's code defines dwelling or dwelling unit as any structure, or portion thereof, providing independent living facilities for one "family" as herein defined, including provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation. The City's code defines the term family as A) a person living alone or two or more persons related by blood or marriage; B) A group of not more than ten persons who need not be related by blood or marriage living together in a dwelling unit; C) Eight or fewer unrelated mentally and/or physically handicapped or elderly persons residing in a dwelling under staff supervision, provided that no more than two staff members reside in the dwelling at any one time. Thus, group living for individuals with disabilities is allowed at the same level as individuals without disabilities, and group homes are allowed in all residential districts. The code does not discriminate against unrelated individuals with or without disabilities. The Meridian City Code does not reference Idaho State Code Section 67-6531 which defines a single family dwelling to include "any group residence in which eight (8) or fewer unrelated persons with disabilities or elderly persons reside and who are supervised at the group residence in connection with their disability or age related infirmity." However, the Meridian code does restrict the number of physically handicapped or elderly persons living together to eight persons when there is a need for supervision, similar to the State code. Zoning Regulation Impediment: Does the Code definition of `family" have the effect of discriminating against unrelated individuals with disabilities zuho reside together in a congregate org~•oup living arrangement? N/A, see above. Zoning Regulation Impediment: Does the Code definition of `disability" the same as the Fair Housing Act? The Zoning Code does not provide a definition of "disability," "disabled" or "handicap." Practice Impediment: Does the zoning ordinance restrict housing opportunities for individuals with disabilities and naischaracte~zze such housing as a `boarding or rooming house"or• "hotel"? No. As discussed above, individuals with disabilities may live together in asingle-family dwelling unit. The City code does not have a definition for boarding or rooming house. Practice Impediment.• Does the zoning ordinance decay hoaasing opportunities foy disability individuals with on site housing supporting services?The definition of family that addresses individuals with disabilities recognizes the need for supervisors, which is linked to on-site support services. However, Meridian's Code does not go beyond that definition to address support services for individuals with disabilities living together in a single family dwelling unit. Does the jurisdiction policy allow any number of unrelatedpersons to reside together, but restrict such occupancy, if the residents are disabled? No. The Ciry code restriction on the number of unrelated persons who may reside together is the same for all residents, regardless of ability. BBC RESEARCH bt CONSULTING SECTION II, PAGE 7 Does the jurisdiction policy not allow disabled persons to make r°easonable modif cations or provide reasonable accommodation for disabled people who live in municipal-supplied or managed residential housing.?There are currently no municipal supplied or managed residential housing units in Meridian. Does the jurisdiction require a public hearing to obtain public input for specific exceptions to zoning and land-use r ales for disabled applicants and is the hearing only for disabled applicants rather than for• all applicants? No. Public hearings are required to obtain a conditional use permit or zoning variance, but the hearing is not specific to persons with disabilities. Does the zoning ordinance address mixed uses? How are the residential land uses discussed? A~hat standards apply?Yes. The Meridian City Code does encourage mixed use, and there are 8 different future land use designations and 3 zoning districts. Depending on the type of mixed use area envisioned, and the zoning district, land uses are discussed/addressed differently. Some of the mixed use land use designations prohibit residential altogether, some have a minimum number of residential required, and some have a maximum. The emphasis in the City of Meridian Design Manual is on promoting aesthetically pleasing mixed-use developments within neighborhoods and building designs that vertically integrate mixed-use structures and/or horizontal mixed-use forms to create compact developments. Does the zoning ordinance describe any areas in this jurisdiction as exclusive? No. Are there exclusions or discussions of limiting housing to any of the followinggrottps: race, color, sex, religion, age, disability, marital status or familial status and/or creed of national origin? No. Are there any restrictions for Senior Housing in the zoning ordinance? Ifyes, do the restrictions comply with Federal law on housing for older persons (i. e., solely occupied by persons 62 years of age or older or at least one person SS years of age and has significant facilities or• services to meet the physical or social needs of older people)? No. Does the zoning ordinance contain any special provisions for making housing accessible to persons with disabilities?No. However, Meridian City Code 1-15-2.A, Fair Housing, states: With available resources, the City will assist all persons who feel they have been discriminated against because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, or familial status to seek equity under Federal and State laws by filing a complaint with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, Compliance Division. Does the zoning ordinance establish occupancy standards or maximum occupancy limits? Only based on the definition of family which provides for a maximum of 10 unrelated persons in one dwelling unit. No other maximum occupancy for a residential dwelling unit. Does the zoning ordinance include a discussion of fair hottsirrg?The zoning ordinance does not include a discussion of fair housing, but City code 1-15-2 contains the City's Fair Housing Ordinance which outlines how the City will assist those who feel they have been discriminated against and how the City will promote and publicize the Federal Fair Housing Law. BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION II, PAGE 8 Describe the mircimacm standards and amenities required by the ordir2ance for a multiple family project with respect to handicap parking. Meridian zoning code requires compliance with ADA accessible parking standards. Does the zoning code distinguish senior citizen hoccsing from other single family residential and multifamily residential uses by the application of a conditional use permit (cup)? No. There is no separate definition for senior citizen housing. Does the zoning code distinguish handicapped housing from other single family residential and multifamily residential uses by the application of a conditional use permit (cup)? No. How are "special group residential housing" defined in the jurisdiction zoning code? There is no definition for special group residential housing or similar term. The term family is used, and sometimes Nursing or Residential Care Facility is used to define/classify a use. A Nursing or Residential Care Facility (NAILS Code 623) is defined as the "use of a site for providing assistance to individuals needed to perform the routines of daily life. The use includes, but is not limited to, children's treatment facility, assisted care, skilled nursing facility, residential care facility and drug and alcohol treatment facility." Does the jurisdiction's planning and building codes presently make specific reference to the accessibility requirements contained in the 1988 amendment to the Fair Housing Act? Is there any provision for monitoring compliance? There is no reference to the Fair Housing Act in the zoning code and no provision for monitoring compliance. Meridian City Code Title 1, Chapter 15 discusses Fair Housing discrimination and complaint procedures. The Meridian Building Code (2009 IBC, IRC) does contain accessibility requirements. The code references American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A 117.1 which contains similar language to accessibility requirements contained in the 1988 amendment to the Fair Housing Act. The city actively enforces its building code to ensure compliance with the Fair Housing Act's construction and design guidelines. Other Public Sector Programs and Services Gity housing and community development activities. Meridian works to ensure that residents have adequate and affordable housing by partnering with the Ada County Housing Authority (ACHA) and Neighborhood Housing Services (NHS) to provide down payment and closing costs assistance to low and moderate income homebuyers through the City's Community Development Block Grant program. COMPASS. The Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS) serves as the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the Boise region. Unlike some states, regional planning organizations and jurisdictions in Idaho are not required to establish and monitor regional and local affordable housing development goals. Instead, COMPASS and other regional planning organizations in the state function as traditional MPOs, whose primary objectives include developing a regional transportation plan that adheres with federal regulations, allocating transportation improvement program funding and serving as a conduit of regional demographic, land use, transportation and GIS data and information. BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION II, PAGE 9 COMPASS is an active regional planning organization and many of COMPASS's past and current studies encourage the coordination of transportation and land use planning to promote higher density development and transportation access. Public service provision in LI1A1 areas. The city has served the defined LMI area in a variety of ways to ensure that municipal services are equally provided for throughout the community. The city recently used its CDBG funds for improvements to Centennial Park, located directly south of one of the city's identified LMI Census tracts. The improvements included the installation of a state-of-the- art NEOS 360 electronic play system, a picnic shelter, bike racks and game tables. The city has used CDBG funds to design improvements to sewer and water lines within the LMI area, and those improvements were recently constructed and paid for with city general funds. The main branch of the Meridian Library is located directly north of an identified LMI Census tract, and the Meridian Community Center which offers a wide variety of classes and activities, is located directly south of an identified LMI census tract. The city has used CDBG funds for the design of a segment of the Five Mile Creek Pathway within the LMI Area. CDBG funds will also be used to construct this pathway segment in 2012. This pathway segment will provide an important recreational opportunity as well as an alternative transportation corridor. In addition to the location of these municipal services, the city has coordinated a Community Clean- Up Day for the past 7 years. This Clean-Up Day has taken place within the downtown core of the city, at the heart of the identified LMI Area. The city's contracted waste collection company, SSC, is one of the primary partners for this important community event, and all the metal recycling money collected during the day is given to a local charity. Environmental justice. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires consideration of the environmental and human health condition in minority and low income communities. Consideration of these areas must include an identification of geographic concentrations of minority and low income areas and analysis of benefits or burdens resulting from activities (e.g., transportation planning) that take place in these communities. The figure on the following page identifies COMPASS' "areas of environmental justice consideration" in Meridian and the Boise region. Meridian has one Census tract identified as an area of environmental justice (EJ) consideration. Currently, COMPASS reviews areas of EJ consideration for new projects. COMPASS tries to determine the impacts new projects (e.g., roadway, transit stop) will have on EJ areas, but projects are not funded simply because they fall within an EJ consideration area. ~ Currently, the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) awards points during the scoring process for transportation projects located in EJ consideration areas. BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION II, PAGE 10 % ~ >, / ~ ~ use i~~~ ~~'~ ~I r' ~ ~ ~,..-~ ~-~ ~ ~,~ i ~- .~--;,:-mot ~ ~ ~ '- ~, ,a ~s~~~~_ ~" ~ ~~ ~~- i } ,~.~t , ,. (~~ l ' ~~ ~- ~rj ~ {: ((-~~I Y ~., ~ ~'~ r ~. 7 ~' ~, _~ ~ T ._ ~ '~~' ~ ~ t J7 ~'~ u \\\ ~ .; t c ~'o ~ ~ ~ ::~ ~ ~~ ~~ , .;. _~ ~ C w 1- tC! ~ 1 ,l~ i 1 N ~ y J U ~/ w~r~ ~1 I_I~ ~~ '~~~ ~~ aE ~~ ~ ~I ~~Liu c '~n ~P~. ~a~ :: ~~a k c o os a mn ~~' a~ C o ~w Q`o Z' C C 'a E ~ 1 ~ ,`~:i i F .__. C ... _~ i _.~ 3 ~ i- i yCj ---~ _ ~ ,,: N ~ ~ ' a _ ~ -` ~c ~u vi c 7 N W u a Z O H V In V Z J z 0 V U CL w W u m m ® 1 0 i r° i i S This section of the City of Meridian AI is divided into two sections. The first section reviews fair housing complaint data and legal cases related to fair housing violations to highlight the prevalence of and trends in fair housing violations. The second part of this section contains an analysis of mortgage loan and community reinvestment data to detect fair lending concerns. Fair Ffousing Complaints The Federal Fair Housing Act, passed in 1968 and amended in 1988, prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, gender, familial status and disability. The Fair Housing Act covers most types of housing including rental housing, home sales, mortgage and home improvement lending, and land use and zoning. Excluded from the Act are owner-occupied buildings with no more than four units, single family housing sold or rented without the use of a real estate agent or broker, housing operated by organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy to members, and housing for older persons.' HUD has the primary authority for enforcing the Fair Housing Act. The State of Idaho's fair housing act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin and disability. It does not recognize familial status as a protected class. The law is also different from the Federal Fair Housing Act in that it covers providers with two or more units or properties. The state's fair housing law is enforced through the Idaho Human Rights Commission. The City of Meridian does not have a fair housing ordinance. Contaets for complaints. Meridian residents who feel that they might have experienced a violation of the Fair Housing Act can contact one or more of the following organizations: ® HUD's Office of Fair Housing and Opportunity (FHEO); The Idaho Housing and Finance Association (IHFA); ® The Intermountain Fair Housing Council (IFHC); Idaho Legal Aid; and ® The Idaho Human Rights Commission. Legal Aid and the Idaho Human Rights Commission refer residents who call about fair housing complaints directly to HUD. Similarly, IHFA does not enforce fair housing law and refers complaints or questions to the appropriate service provider. The city was a sponsor of the City of Boise's fair housing public awareness campaign in Apri12011. The campaign was called Good Neighbors + Fair Housing =Strong Communities and was intended to increase community awareness and understanding of fair housing rights and responsibilities. Fair This is a very general description of the Fair Housing Act and the actions and properties covered by the Act. For more detailed information on the Fair Housing Act, please see the full text, which can be found on the U.S. Department of Justice's website, www.usdoj.gov/crtlhousing/title8.htm. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 1 housing messages were spread to Treasure Valley residents through radio and television public service announcements, billboards, bus panels, bus benches and community presentations. The initiative was supported through the financial contributions of 15 partners, including Idaho Housing and Finance Association (IHFA), the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare, local banks, Valley Regional Transit and local broadcasting companies. FIU® complaint investigation process. Housing discrimination complaints filed with HUD may be done online at (http://www.hud.gov/complaints/housediscrim.cfm), toll free at 1-800-669-9777, or by contacting the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity in Washington D. C. or Idaho's Fair Housing Hub located in Seattle, Washington. When HUD receives a complaint, HUD will notify the person who filed the complaint and will normally notify the alleged violator and allow that person to submit a response. The complaint will be investigated to determine whether there has been a violation of the Fair Housing Act. A complaint may be resolved in a number of ways. First, HUD will try to reach an agreement between the two parties involved. A conciliation agreement must protect the filer of the complaint and public interest. If an agreement is signed, HUD will take no further action unless the agreement has been breached. HUD will then recommend that the Attorney General file suit. If HUD has determined that a state or local agency has the same housing powers ("substantial equivalency") as HUD, they will refer the complaint to that agency and will notify the complainant of the referral. The agency must begin work on the complaint within 30 days or HUD may take it back. If, during the investigation, review, and legal process, HUD finds that discrimination has occurred, the case will be heard in an administrative hearing within 120 days, unless either party prefers the case to be heard in Federal district court. The State of Idaho and Meridian do not currently have substantial equivalency nor are they seeking such. HUD complaint trends. BBC obtained data from HUD's Seattle Regional Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) on the number of housing discrimination complaints filed in Meridian from 2005 through 2011. Figure III-1 presents complaints by year. During the six year period, 18 complaints were filed in Meridian. The largest number of annual complaints was five in 2011. Figure 111-1. Plumber of Fair Housing Complaints Filed zoos with HUD, City of Meridian, 2005 to 201 O 2006 Source: 2007 HUD. 2008 2009 2010 - l -~3 I j -- _ ~3 I1 -~ 1 ~ --- _ _ ---- _ _-- - __ __- _ j4 I 2011 i= __ 2 3 4 Number of Complaints BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 2 Most complaints filed in Meridian were on the basis of disability status (61%). The remaining complaints were filed on the basis of race (17%), family status (11%) and national origin (6%).z Two-thirds of all complaints filed in Meridian were filed by Meridian residents. Six of the 18 complaints filed in Meridian between 2005 and 2011 were filed by individuals from other communities loolung for housing in Meridian, including Boise. The most common violation cited in complaints was failure to make reasonable accommodations (25%).3 An additional 18 percent of complaints were filed because of discrimination in the terms, conditions and privileges relating to a rental property. Figure 111-2. Discrimination In terms/ conditions/privileges Issues Cited in Complaints, Failure to make reasonable relating to rental (17.996) City of Meridian, 2005 to 201 O accommodation (25.0%) Discrimination in the ~ selling of residential -r''~~~'~ real property (3.6%) Source: '• Discriminator refusal I '~ to rent 3.6% HUD. Discriminatory terms, ~ ( ) conditions, privileges _ /•~ orservices and ~'~~~ ~Dlscriminatory acts under facilities (14.3%) Section 818 (10.746) Discriminatory refusa~~ Discriminatory advertising, to sell (3.646) statements and notices (7.196) Discriminatory refusal Discriminatory refusal to rent (3.6%) to rent and negotiate for rental (10.796) Of the 18 cases filed in Meridian, 11 cases were closed. Seven cases are still open. These cases were all filed in 2010 and 2011. The largest proportion of cases (64%) closed following a successful conciliation or settlement. The remaining cases (36%) closed after HUD found "no reasonable cause to believe that housing discrimination occurred."4 IFHC complaint process. The Intermountain Fair Housing Council (IHFC) "is a nonprofit organization that promotes fair housing practice for housing consumers and housing providers throughout Idaho.i5 The IHFC is involved in fair housing education, compliance monitoring, enforcement activities (e.g., complaint investigation, testing, complaint filing) and mediation. When IFHC receives a complaint, they collect all information from the complainant that supports the complaint (e.g. doctor note) and determine whether the complaint meets four important factors to determine whether a complaint is valid: The complaint occurred within the last year; ® The action seemed to occur because the person fell within a protected class; ® The individual that committed the potential violation is subject to Fair Housing Act; and ® The complaint appears to be a prohibitive activity. a One case was filed by a relief agency. No basis for discrimination was provided. 3 Complainants are allowed to cite more than one reason for discrimination when filing a complaint. For example, a complainant may cite discriminatory terms, conditions, privileges of services and facilities, as well as discrimination in terms/conditions/privileges relating to rental. 4 Fot• a definition of no cause determination, please visit: http:f(portal.}aud.aovlhudportallHUI7?sec=lproeram oE#iceslfair housin~.~ee~ual oppfcomplaint-p?ocess s Por more information on the Intermountain Fair Housing Council, please visit: http:/IiEll~idaho.or~(abortthrml. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 3 If the complaint requires additional facts to prove its validity, IFHC will conduct extra research and investigation (e.g., testing, check property tax records with the Assessor's office, gather additional documentation). Once sufficient information has been gathered, IFHC will advise the client on next steps. Next steps could include calling HUD directly to file a complaint by phone or IFHC staff can help individuals fill out complaint forms to ensure the complaint has strong documentation. IHFC faxes the complaint directly to HUD and also sends the complaint via registered mail. If IFHC has invested sufficient administrative resources into the complaint filing, they co-file a complaint. IFHC believes co-filing demonstrates to FHEO that there is strong merit to the case. Legal Cases As part of the fair housing analysis, legal cases occurring in the past ten years were reviewed to determine significant fair housing issues and trends in Meridian and the Boise region. None of these lawsuits occurred in Meridian; however, it is important to include them in the analysis to understand the types of cases that could occur in Meridian. Cases were found on websites maintained by the Department of Justice, the National Fair Housing Advocate and HUD. In many cases, text was borrowed directly from the legal briefs. An analysis of statewide complaints completed by BBC in summer 2011 found that the vast majority of fair housing legal cases in the State of Idaho occurred in Ada County and were related to developers, builders, engineers and/or architects failing to comply with the accessibility requirements of the federal Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Disability. United States v. Canal Street Apartments, et al. In 1998, the IFHC filed a complaint with HUD alleging that the Canal Street Apartments located in Boise, Idaho frustrated the IFHC's mission of eliminating discrimination by failing to construct and design the complex so that the public use and common use portions are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities and ground floor units contain features of adaptive design.G Upon finding reasonable cause for discrimination based on disability, HUD referred the case to the DOJ. In September 2002, the court filed a consent decree requiring the defendants to retrofit the ground floor units and public and common areas to make them accessible to persons with disabilities; submit to periodic inspections and record-keeping; and pay $3,300 in monetary damages to IFHC, $5,000 to the Accessibility Improvement Program (AIP) of the Idaho Housing and Finance Association to promote handicap accessible housing construction and fair housing in the City of Boise and Ada County area, and a $6,500 civil penalty. The five-year consent order also requires the defendants notify HUD if they again design or construct multifamily dwellings and provide a written statement from any architect involved with the project that the plans include design specifications that comply with the requirements of FHA Accessibility Guidelines. G In this case, adaptive design included: (i) doors sufficiently wide to allow passage into and within the unit by persons in wheelchairs; specifically including: doors to the bedrooms; doors to the bathrooms; doors to the walk-in closets; doors to the patio; (ii) threshold at the exterior primary entrance low enough to allow entry by persons in wheelchairs; (iii) bathroom floor space sufficiently clear for an individual in a wheelchair to enter and close the door; (iv) providing reinforcement in the walls at the tub and water closet to permit the later installation of grab bars. BBC RESEARCH SI CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 4 United States v. Pacific Northwest Electric, Inc., et al. In January, 2001 the United States filed a complaint alleging that the defendants developers Walter T. Sigmont and Wirt Edmonds, Pacific Northwest Electric, Inc., Edmonds Construction Co., Inc., and architects Teal Whitworth Architects, P.A. and Capstone, Inc. located in Boise, Idaho discriminated on the basis of disability by failing to design and construct five Boise apartment complexes in accordance with the FHA's accessibility requirements for new multifamily housing. The five Boise complexes that were the subject of the suit are Grayling Place, Jade Village, Imperial Court, Eagleson Park and Harborview Station (formerly known as Lawton Apartments). Specifically, the defendants failed to design the apartment complexes so that the public and common areas are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities; all doors within the 72 ground floor units are sufficiently wide to allow passage by persons with disabilities who use wheelchairs; and the 72 ground floor units contain the features of adaptive design.' In October, 2003, the court entered a consent decree, which required the defendants to retrofit the complexes by, among other things: removing steps; reconfiguring kitchens and bathrooms to provide added maneuvering space; widening doorways; leveling sidewalks; and adding accessible parking and curb ramps at an estimated cost of approximately $300,000. In addition, the defendants were required to pay damages in the amount of $29,000 to persons harmed by the lack of accessible features at the complexes, pay $5,000 in damages to the IFHC, and ensure that any new construction complies with the FHA. The consent decree remained in effect for two years. United States v. Thomas Development Co., et al. In February, 2002 the United States filed a complaint alleging that Thompson Development Co, and affiliated companies (defendants) engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination on the basis of disability by failing to design and construct the ground floor units and public /common use areas in compliance with the accessibility requirements of the FHA. The defendants were alleged to commit these violations at 17 apartment complexes located throughout Southern Idaho in the cities of Boise, Meridian, Nampa, Shelly, Rexburg, Caldwell, Rigby, Lewiston and Jerome. The complaint also alleged that some of the defendants retaliated against a tenant family at one of the complexes by attempting to evict the family after one of the family members requested a reasonable accommodation for their disability. In March, 2005, the court entered a consent order, which included injunctive relief and monetary payments totaling $125,000. The consent order remained in effect for three years. Garcia v. Brockway. In May 2003, Noll Garcia (plaintiff) filed a complaint against the original owner/developer and designer of his apartment building in Boise, Idaho. The complaint alleged a failure to accommodate disabilities as mandated by the FHA. Mr. Garcia is disabled and uses a wheelchair for mobility and filed a complaint because the apartment complex he was lacked curb cuts from the parking lot to the sidewalk, didn't have a ramp to the front entrance door, and the doorways were too narrow to allow clear passage of his wheelchair. Mr. Garcia requested that management make appropriate accessibility improvements, which were ignored, as was his request that management build a ramp to his door or that he be relocated to a more accessible unit. In addition, Mr. Garcia sued the original builder and architect (Brockway and Robert Stewart, respectively), and the current owners and management (the Zavoshy defendants). ~ See footnote 2 for qualifications of "adaptive design." BBC RESEARCH bT CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 5 The defendants (Brockway and Stewart) argued that because they no longer owned the building (which they sold in 1994), their liability was time-barred by the statute of limitations in the FHA. Thus, the plaintiff s complaint would have had to been filed within two years following construction of the apartment building in 1993. The plaintiff countered, arguing that the failure to remodel the apartments constituted a continuing violation and that the statute of limitations take effect upon discovery of the alleged violations. Mr. Garcia also claimed that failure to make modifications constituted new violations. The court ruled that the continuing accessibility issues were an effect of a prior discriminatory act but not a continuing violation. The argument that the two-year statute of limitations should begin at discovery of a violation was deemed unworkable, as a developer would be liable for these violations indefinitely in spite of his or her ownership of the complex. Finally, the original developer was not found to be liable for refusal to make modifications while current management company was at fault. The defendant still had a remedy under the FHA with building owners, but his motion against the developers was dismissed. Claims against the current owners and management were settled out of court. United States v. 5-16 Limited f~artnership, et al. In April, 2003, the United States filed a complaint alleging that the owners and developers of the 254-unit Village at Columbia apartment complex in Boise, Idaho and the architects and engineering firm involved in its design failed to design and construct the complex in compliance with the accessibility requirements of the FHA. Specifically, the defendants failed to design the apartment complexes so that the public and common areas are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities; all doors within the 76 ground floor units are sufficiently wide to allow passage by persons with disabilities who use wheelchairs; and the 76 ground floor units contain the features of adaptive design.g In March, 2005, the court entered the consent order requiring the defendants to retrofit the common use areas of the complex and 76 ground-floor apartments. The order also required defendants to pay $2,000 in damages to the IFHC, the original HUD complainant in the case, and to establish a fund of $40,000 to compensate victims of defendants' discriminatory practices. In addition, the order included a general injunction against future discrimination; arequirement that defendants inform HUD of future development and design work in which they become involved and obtain statements that design plans comply with the FHA; a mandate that defendants require all supervisory employees and agents to participate in fair housing training and certify that they have read the order; post signs describing their policy of nondiscrimination in housing; and meet reporting and record-keeping obligations. The consent order remained in effect for three years. Familial status. United States v. Blue Meadows Apartments, et al. In July, 1995 Blue Meadows Limited Partnership, the owner of Blue Meadows Apartments in Boise, Idaho (defendant) stated, adopted, and enforced a policy that imposed a limitation on the use of facilities by persons under the age of 18 years. Specifically, those rules required all occupants under the age of 18 years to be supervised whenever they were outside of their apartments; the rules also prohibited all people under the age of 18 years from using or occupying any of the common areas after 10 p.m., irrespective of adult or parental supervision. Defendants incorporated these rules into an addendum to the lease that tenants $ See footnote 2 For qualifications of "adaptive design." BBC RESEARCH bt CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 6 were required to sign. Several residents of Blue Meadows that had children under the age of 18 filed complaints with HUD in 1999 and 2000. Upon finding reason for discrimination based on family status HUD referred the case to the DOJ for resolution. In September, 2002, the court entered a consent decree where the defendants agreed to delete the current restriction on persons under 17 from using the pool unless accompanied by a parent; limit any future age restrictions governing unaccompanied children using the pool to those under age 13; and refrain from instituting any other rules that restrict the use of common areas at by persons under 18, except those that apply to all persons, regardless of age. Defendants were also required to pay one of the plaintiffs $1,200 in damages. Religion. Intermountain Fair Housing Council v. Boise Rescue Mission Ministries. The Rescue Mission is an Idaho nonprofit funded through charitable donations from businesses, churches and the general public. The Rescue Mission operates two facilities in Boise. There were recently two cases filed against the Rescue Mission on the basis of religion. Case #1: Plaintiff Richard Chinn was periodically homeless during the years 2005 and 2006 and a guest of the homeless shelter located at the River of Life Facility. During his stays at the shelter, he had no other place to stay and intended to remain in the shelter in excess of several months. Chinn asserts that he was told by shelter staff that he would be required to participate in Christian religious activities such as chapel services in order to reside and eat meals at the shelter. He observed that guests of the shelter who did not attend chapel services were either required to wait in the dining room or were not permitted to enter the shelter until chapel services were completed. Chinn found the practices of the shelter to be coercive, unpleasant, embarrassing, and offensive to his religion. He did, however, participate in the religious services out of fear that if he did not participate, he would be denied housing and other services. ® Case #2: In addition to the homeless shelter, the Rescue Mission also provides a New Life Discipleship/Recovery Program, which is an intensive, one-year Christian-based residential recovery program for individuals with drug or alcohol dependency. In October 2005, Plaintiff Cowles was in jail on drug-related criminal convictions. Cowles contacted the Rescue Mission and requested that she be admitted into the Discipleship Program, stating that she was "focused on changing my life through God and spiritual growth," and that she is "desperately looking to fill this void in my life with spirituality and not drugs." Following admittance to the program, Cowles was required to participate in religious activities Cowles was upset at being forced to adopt the Christian religion. When Cowles requested that she be allowed to change to a non- religious program, she was put on " 30-day restriction" during which all her telephone calls with her attorney were monitored by Program staff and she was not allowed to participate in other limited activities that she previously had been allowed. Eventually, Discipleship Program staff wrote a letter to the judge presiding over Cowles' criminal case and informed the judge that Cowles "struggled with the Christian based program that was offered." Staff recommended to the judge that Cowles be given an opportunity to complete anon-faith-based program to allow her to "better focus on her recovery without the confliction of her beliefs." BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 7 Both cases were resolved recently in appellate court. The court found that since the Boise Rescue Mission is not a "dwelling," it is not subject to the requirements of the Fair Housing Act. The court also concluded that the religious practice requirements are protected by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Fair Lending Analysis This section analyzes fair lending conditions in the City of Meridian using residential mortgage lending data from 2010 (the latest data available at the time this report was prepared). Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) ratings and Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data are commonly used in AIs to examine fair lending practices within a jurisdiction. As of 2004, HMDA data contain interest rates of high cost loans, which allows an analysis of high cost (subprime) lending patterns. CRA review. The CRA requires that financial institutions progressively seek to enhance community development within the area they serve. On a regular basis, financial institutions submit information about mortgage loan applications as well as materials documenting their community development activity. The records are reviewed to determine if the institution satisfied CRA requirements. The assessment includes a review of records as related to the following: Commitment to evaluating and servicing community credit needs; ® Offering and marketing various credit programs; ® Record of opening and closing of offices; ® Discrimination and other illegal credit practices; and ® Community development initiatives. The data are evaluated and a rating for each institution is determined. Ratings for institutions range from substantial noncompliance in meeting credit needs to an outstanding record of meeting community needs. There are 24 banks with headquarters in Idaho; however, none of those banks are located in Meridian.9 The Farmers and Merchants State Bank was located in Meridian, but moved its headquarters to Boise. Its last CRA rating while headquartered in Meridian was in 2002, and the bank received a "Satisfactory" rating. HMDA data analysis. HMDA data are widely used to detect evidence of discrimination in mortgage lending. In fact, concern about discriminatory lending practices in the 1970s led to the requirement for financial institutions to collect and report HMDA data. The variables contained in the HMDA dataset have expanded over time, allowing for more comprehensive analyses and better results. However, despite expansions in the data reported, HMDA analyses remain limited because of the information that is not reported. ~ 2011 State of Idaho AI completed by BBC Research & Consulting. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 8 As such, studies of lending disparities that use HMDA data carry a similar caveat: HMDA data can be used to determine disparities in loan originations and interest rates among borrowers of different races, ethnicities, genders, and location of the property they hope to own. The data can also be used to explain many of the reasons for any lending disparities (e.g., poor credit history). Yet HMDA data do not contain all of the factors that are evaluated by lending institutions when they decide to make a loan to a borrower. Basically, the data provide a lot of information about the lending decision-but not all of the information. Since 2004, HMDA data include the interest rates on higher-priced mortgage loans. This allows examinations of disparities in high-cost, including subprime, loans among different racial and ethnic groups. It is important to remember that subprime loans are not always predatory or suggest fair lending issues, and that the numerous factors that can make a loan "predatory" are not adequately represented in available data. Therefore, actual predatory practices cannot be identified through HMDA data analysis. However, the data analysis can be used to identify where additional scrutiny is warranted, and how public education and outreach efforts should be targeted. HMDA data report several types of loans. These include loans used to purchase homes, loans to make home improvements and refinancing of existing mortgage loans, as defined below. ® Home purchase loan. A home purchase loan is any loan secured by and made for the purpose of purchasing a housing unit. ® Home improvement loan. A home improvement loan is used, at least in part, for repairing, rehabilitating, remodeling, or improving a housing unit or the real property on which the unit is located. ® Refinancing. Refinancing is any dwelling-secured loan that replaces and satisfies another dwelling-secured loan to the same borrower. The purpose for which a loan is refinanced is not relevant for HMDA purposes. The HMDA data are separated into two primary loan categories: conventional loans and government- guaranteed loans. Government-guaranteed loans are those insured by the Federal Housing Administration and the Veterans Administration. This section uses the analysis of 2010 HMDA data to examine: ® The geographic areas in Meridian where high-cost lending and loan denials are concentrated, and the correlation of these areas with concentrations of minority and low income households; and ® Disparities in high-cost lending and loan denials across different racial and ethnic groups. BBC RESEARCH bT CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 9 Methodology notes. There are two important methodological notes to highlight as part of this HMDA analysis: Only loan applications for owner-occupied properties are analyzed. ® Loan applications are analyzed at the Census tract level. Aggregating Census tract data to jurisdictional boundaries may result in loan applications outside jurisdictional boundaries being included in community-level analysis. Types of loans. In 2010, there were 6,1961oan applications filed in the City of Meridian.10 Figure III-4 presents the distribution of loan applications by the types of loans applicants applied for in 2010. Most loans in the city were for conventional loans (67%). Figure III-4. Types of Loan Applications, City of Meridian, 2010 Note: Less than 1 percent of loan applications were for FSA or Rural Housing loans. These loans are not included in this Figure. The percentages in this Figure will not add to 100 percent. Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, 2010. Conventional (67.4°k) Twenty-six percent of loans in 2010 were for Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans. Meridian residents were slightly more likely to apply for FHA-insured loans in 2010 than Boise (22%) and Ada County residents (23%). Purpose of loan applications. When Meridian residents applied for mortgage loans in 2010, 60 percent of loan applicants applied for a mortgage refinance and 38 percent of applicants applied for a loan to purchase a home. Figure III-5. Purpose of Loan Applications, City of Meridian, 207 0 Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, 2010. FSA-RHS Farm Service (0.0°.6) VA-guaranteed (6.596) ~ FHA-Insured (26.2°.6) - Home Purchase (38.3°~6) ~~ ~~ Refinancing -- - (59.9°.6) Home improvement (1.8%) 10 These loans were filed in Census tracts that overlap with city boundaries. BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 10 The purpose of loan applications by Meridian residents changed between 2009 and 2010. In 2009, 69 percent of all loan applicants sought loans for a mortgage refinance and 29 percent applied for a loan to purchase a home. This change is due to a larger number of Meridian residents applying for refinances in 2009 compared to 2010. This could suggest that the Meridian housing market has stabilized a bit, as homeowners are less urgent to restructure existing home loans. Figure I11-6. Purpose of Loan Applications, City of Meridian, 2009 and 201 O Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, 2009 and 2010. Action taken on loan applications. Sixty-seven percent of loan applications submitted by Meridian residents in 2010 originated, while 14 percent were denied. The city's loan denial rate decreased slightly between 2009 and 2010; subsequently, its loan origination rate increased. Figure 111-7. Action Taken on Loan Loan originated Applications, City of Meridian, 2009 and 201 O Application approves by not accepted source: Application denied by Home Mortgage DisdosureAd, 2009 financial institution and 2010. Application withdrawn by applicant File closed for incompleteness Meridian's 2010 denial rate was slightly lower than denial rates experienced by Boise (16%) loan applicants. Ada County residents overall had a 15 percent loan denial rate. BBC RESEARCH Si CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 11 Home Purchase Home Refinancing Improvement 0°,6 20°,f, 40°,5 60°.6 80e,6 100°,6 Figure III-8 compares loan outcome by loan type. Meridian residents primarily applied for conventional, FHA-insured and VA-guaranteed loan products. Conventional loan products had the highest denial rate at 15 percent, while VA-guaranteed loans had the lowest denial rate at 9 percent. FHA-insured loans had a denial rate of 12 percent. Figure 111-8. Action Taken on Loan Applications by Loan Type, City of Meridian, 201 O Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, 2010. Figure III-9 compares loan outcome by loan purpose. Home improvement loans have the highest denial rate at 33 percent. In fact, only one in eve>y two home improvement loan applications submitted by a Meridian resident was approved in 2010. Home refinance loans had a denial rate of 18 percent, and only 7 percent of home purchase loans were denied by the lending institution. Figure 111-9. Action Taken on Loan Applications by Loan Purpose, City of Meridian, 2010 !`1.196 j _ ~'j~1.896 `---' --- - ( i -- `_ „r~, ~ r ,t~s, ----- ___ _ __ __ File closed for incompleteness Application withdrawn by applicant Application denied by financial institution ~s.~ss so.o~a 603';5 Application approved by not accepted 10°h 0°~ Home Home Refinancing Purchase improvement Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, 2010. Loan originated BBC RESEARCH ~ CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 12 Conventional FHA-Insured VA-guaranteed FSA-RHS Farm Service Seventy-eight percent of Meridian's home purchase loans were approved in 2010. This is good news for the city's housing market, as it demonstrates that the city has qualified buyers waiting to purchase homes. Meridian had a higher home purchase loan origination rate in 2010 than neighboring Boise (73%) and the county overall (75%). Denial rates by race and ethnicity. When applicants identified their race and ethnicity as part of their mortgage application, they most often identified themselves as racially white (96%) and ethnically non-Hispanic (97%)." Figure III-10 presents loan outcomes by race and ethnicity. Denial rates were highest for applicants who were Black/African American (31%) and Native Hawaiian (19%). The city's Asian loan applicants had the lowest denial rate in the city (10%). As the last part of Figure II-10 shows, the most extreme disparity in lending occurs between African Americans and Whites: White applicants had loan origination rates that were 26 percentage points higher than African American applicants'. Similarly, African American applicants had denial rates that were 18 percentage points higher than White applicants'. It is acknowledged that African Americans comprised less than 1 percent of all loan applicants in the city in 2010. There is very little lending disparity between the city's Hispanic and non-Hispanic residents. Figure III-1 O. Action Taken on Loan Applications by Race and Ethnicity, City of Meridian, 201 O ~;Ilt~~t.in ~u~l~,: ~ ~.;,~~~ ~i',,~~ i~il' IEta~.t3i[~ ;f;.7L1 1.1.7, ,. .n:. ~ i~ sl~ ~tilia. ~ ~~ I,~~.,,.~,~,i, c<i~(br_nr, i.]~Clht.tC1;1 nti :~;,,;:. ,i i, ~~,~rl~,,,. ,.l;;i,,!~. ~ .!,i;1t-„ ~, ,~_ i~FE' Amzrican Indian or Alaska Native 0.445 75.090 Asian 2.246 66.996 :Black or African American 0.59'0 42.345 Native Hawaiian or Other 0.545 69.290 ..White i 1 96.49'0. 68.696 i~ iil!1 4, ..Hispanic or Latino 3.096 67.595 Not Hispanic or Latino 97.09'0 68.39'0 i;d-err it I~rtii:i i~i:..,H r~ a i, t l :::a ~,a ~.._...... _... __ 'Non-White/White 3.646 African American/White -26.39'0 HispaniclNon-Hispanic -0.945 8.345 8.3:6 8.3°.5 0.046 9.445 10.246 11.845 1.646 3.846 30.895 19.296 3.84'0 7.745 19.29'0 3.895 0.095 6.295 13.295 10.0°f~ 1.995 2.4°!0 15.445 11.845 3.045 6.595 13.245 1 0.145 1.945 2.195 0.695 1.396 _0.495 -2.445 1 7.645 9.245 2.09'0 -4.146 2.246 -1.795 1.145 Note: Nine percent of applicants did not identify their race and 9 percent did not identify their ethnicity in their loan application. This analysis only Includes applicants that identified their race and ethnicity. Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, 2010. f f Nine percent of applicants did not provide their racial or ethnic information. BBC RESEARCH ~i CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 13 Denial rate by race/ethnicity by census tract. A further examination of loan approvals by race/ethnicity is provided in the maps that follow. Figures III-11 and III-12 overlay Census tracts containing loan denial rates above the city's 14 percent denial rate with the city's racial and ethnic concentration maps. While there are no racial or ethnic concentrations in the city, the city does have LMI Census tract. One of those tract-103.22-has a higher denial rate than the city overall (16%), as does the adjacent tract, 103.21 (17%). However, the denial rates are not significantly different in these tracts than the city's denial rate overall. Figure 111-17. Census Yracts with Higher than City-Wide Average Denials by Percent Non- White, City of Meridian 2010 Note: The denial rate for all loans In the city overall was 14 percent, Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), 2010 and 2010 Census. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 14 Figure III-12. Census Tracts with Higher than City-Wide Average Denials by (percent Hispanic, City of Meridian, 207 O Note: The denial rate for all loans in the city overall was 14 percent. Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), 2010 and 2010 Census. _ ___ v f1 - ~ _ - legend -. ~ , ---~ Htgherthan Ciq-Wic'a ~liEra3E(13%) less that 3.0:6 5.0%to 17.0% (r9', .:. _. __- ~ -+~...-- ~d AtOtE that 17.0% ~ xr,} Applications submitted for loans in these two Census tracts comprise less than 10 percent of all loan applications submitted in the city. Loan applications submitted in these two tracts resembled loans for the city overall by purpose; however, loans applicants were more likely to apply for an FHA-insured loan in this portion of the city (35%) compared to the city overall (26%). Loan applicants applying for loans in these two tracts were slightly more likely to be denied loans for both conventional (18%) and FHA-insured loans (14%). Subprime analysis. Less than 1 percent (17 of 4,154) of Meridian's originated loans were considered subprime in 2010. There was no racial or ethnic disparity in Subprime lending in 2010, indicating that subprime loans were not targeted to the city's racial or ethnic minorities. For example, nearly all subprime loan recipients that identified their ethnicity were non-Hispanic.12 Additionally, subprime loans in Meridian are geographically dispersed, indicating that low income residents in the city's lowest income Census tracts were not targeted for subprime loans. 1z None of the subprime loan recipients provided racial information. BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION III, PAGE 15 ® 1 1• 1 1 This section discusses input from citizens, stakeholders and service providers regarding the development of the city's AI. Public input was gathered in the following ways: ® A resident survey was distributed online and on paper between November 16`h and December 15`h of 2011-330 residents participants in the survey; ® An online stakeholder survey was promoted by city staff and BBC in fa1120ll-15 housing, fair housing and social service professionals responded; and ® A focus group and in-depth interviews with service providers and housing developers were conducted in the fall and winter of 2011-12-11 individuals participated. The city's AI was completed in conjunction with its 2012-2016 Consolidated Plan. All public input components of the Consolidated Plan and the AI included questions pertinent to both studies. This insured maximum resident and stakeholder input into both processes. Resident Survey This section presents the results from the resident survey. ®istribution strategy. A variety of organizations and mediums were used to publicize and distribute the resident survey. They are summarized in Figure IV-1. Survey Distribution, City of Meridian, 2071 Figure III-1. Additionally, the resident survey was publicized in utility bills mailed to Meridian residents. The resident survey was publicly promoted through the city's website and public schools, as well as distributed through nonprofit organizations. As such, the survey is not meant to be interpreted as a statistically valid survey of all Meridian residents. Rather, the survey reflects the experiences and opinions of residents who were interested in responding to questions about their housing experiences. .;ua County Uoys and Girls Club. Boise City(Ada County Housing Authority Chief Joseph Elementary School City of Meridian City Clerk City of Meridian Planning Department EI Ada Community Action Partnership Friends in Action - Idaho Leagal Aid Services Idaho OfficeforRefugees Intermountain Fair Housing Council Linder Elementary School Meridian Community Center Meridian Elementary School Meridian Food Bank Meridian High School Meridian Library Meridian Middle School Meridian Senior Center Terry Reilly Health Services United Way of Treasure Valley City of Meridian website City of Meridian electronic newsletter City of lvleridian Facebook page City of Meridian Twitter page HOA email distribution lists Press release to local newspapers Public school email list Source: BBC Research iY Consulting and City of Meridian. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION IV, PAGE 1 Demographic profile. The resident survey included several demographic and socioeconomic questions. Where possible, comparisons are made between survey respondent demographics and those for the city overall. Geography. Figure IV-2 displays survey respondents' place of residence in Meridian. The largest proportion of survey respondents live in North Meridian, defined as the area of the city north of Fairview Avenue/Cherry Lane. The remaining 44 percent of respondents were equally split between South Meridian (south of the Interstate 84) and Downtown/Central Meridian. Figure IV-2. Residence of Survey Respondents, City of Meridian, 2011 Note: n=329. Source: Meridian Resident Survey, 2011 and BBC Research ~ Consulting. BBC RESEARCH ~i CONSULTING SECTION IV, PAGE 2 Household profile. Figure IV-3 compares the household size of survey respondents to the size of all households in Meridian. On average, survey respondents have larger households than residents in the city overall. The vast majority of survey respondents have a household size of four (31%). Figure IV-3. Household Size of Survey Respondent Compared with Household Size for Meridian, 2011 ~~>o 40% _ -- --- _ _ _ _ _ _ ~iorser,aid size of survey 31.496 31.2% Respondent 304b i 21.6 ;b I 204'0 _ _. ....17.3%.. 18.9%... _. _.._. 16.6% 15.896 ~ 14.4% '~. ~ o Syn 70.696 ~ Household 104b 6.5°5 ~ 6.346 ~ Size (Census) 1 person 2 person 3 person 4 person 5 person More than 5 person Note: n=292; According to the 2010 ACS, the average household size in Meridian is 2.89. Source: Meridian Resident Survey, 2011 and 2010 U.S. Census. Survey participants were asked to identify the language most commonly spoken in their home. Most respondents speak English (98%) at home.' Race and ethnicity. Figure IV-4 presents the race/ethnicity of survey respondents. Ninety-two percent of survey respondents identified themselves as racially White. Approximately 3 percent of survey respondents identified themselves as Hispanic. Compared to the proportion of Hispanics in the city (7%), a smaller proportion of Hispanics responded to the resident survey. Figure IV-4. other (1.696) Race/Ethnicity of Native Hawaiian or Survey Respondents, Other Pacific Islander (0.346) Asian (2.3°,6) City of Meridian, 2071 HispanicJLatino (2.64b) ~\. ~ Black orAfrican American (1.096) Note: ~, n=305. ~ Source: Meridian Resident Survey, 2011. Caucasian/White (92.146) 1 n=299. BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION IV, PAGE 3 Income. Figure IV-5 compares the household income distribution of survey participants with the distribution of the city overall. The largest proportion of survey participants earn between $50,000 and $75,000 per year (28%), which is close to the proportion those households represent in the city (24%). Overall, the survey has strong participation from the city's highest earning households. It should be noted that many survey respondents chose not to disclose their household's income. Figure IV-5. Household Income of Survey Respondents Compared with the Overall Household Ineome for Meridian, 207 7 10096 Household 409'0 Income of Survey 3096 --___ ---. __. --_ -_--27.7°,6 --_____- __-. -.. ---- Respondents 26.446 25.296 24.546 ~ 21.0°.6 3 ~ , _. 2090 _ __ -- 19.046 ~ 12.196 14.746 ' ', 13.39G _ Household 1096 -..5.246 --_ _ ; ~ ~ i ~ ~ Income ... ' (Census) 3.9°.6 3.996 i . I , , i -- -: - 096 ___.._ r - __,- r Less than $10,000 to $25,000 to $50,000 to $75,000 to $100,000 $10,000 $24,000 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 or more Note: n=231. Source: Meridian Resident Survey, 2011. Age. Figure IV-6 compares the age of survey respondents with the age of the city's householders. The survey had high participation from residents between 35 and 44 years of age. Sixteen percent of the city's householders are seniors, compared with 9 percent of survey respondents. Exhibit IV-6. Age of Survey Respondent Compared with Age of Householder, City of Meridian, 2011 10096 YV'N 3096 2096 - _...._.._.18.396 19.246- 1096 - - 37 Age at survey Respondent 26.5°,6 ~. 23.6°.6 ~' ?_0.396 ~' ..14.596.....- 16.34f~ Age of i Householder '~ 10.0;6 ~ 8.6;' II (Census) 1.795 3.29b - -_ __ 1 _... _. __ _T 096 Less than 25 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 years years old years old years old years old years old and older Note: n=301. Source: Meridian Resident Survey, 2011 and 2010 U.S. Census. BBC RESEARCH bi CONSULTING SECTION IV, PAGE 4 Disability. Ten percent of survey respondents reported that a member of their household had a mental and/or physical disability. This is a higher rate of disability than that seen citywide (7%).2 Most households with a disabled household member live in housing that meets their accessibility needs, as shown in Figure IV-7. Only one survey respondent provided information on their home's accessibility deficiencies. That individual was a senior in need of home modifications to make their home livable for their wheel chair, walker and oxygen machine (e.g., no bathroom on main floor, wider doorways). Exhibit IV-7. Does your arrrent home meet the needs of the disabled Disability and DO you Or any rneinbers of your nlrrent household? Housing member of No (~°~> Accessibility of your family have Survey Respondents, a disability? Yes (70%) City of Meridian, 2071 Note: n=322 and n=33. .Yes (94%) Source: Meridian Resident Survey, 2011. No (90%) Fair housing knowledge. Survey respondents were also asked whether they knew who to contact if they wanted to report an incidence of discrimination. Seventy-seven percent of survey respondents said they did not know who they would contact. Figure IV-8. Yes (22.80,5 Response to Question: "If you ever felt discriminated against and wanted to report it, do you know who you would contact?" Note: n=312, - Source: No (77.2°ifi) Meridian Resident Survey, 2011. 2 2010 1-year American Community Survey. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION IV, PAGE 5 Survey respondents were asked what they would do if they or someone they knew felt discriminated against when trying to find a place to rent or buy a home. When respondents were provided with a list of potential fair housing resources, 44 percent of all survey respondents said they would contact the Boise City Ada County Housing Authority. Nearly 30 percent of respondents simply didn't know what they would do if they or someone they knew experienced discrimination when loolcing for a home. Figure IV-9. Action/Recommendation in Response to Housing Discrimination Note: n=323. Survey respondents were not limited in the number of choices they selected. As such, survey responses do not add to 100 percent. Source: Meridian Resident Survey, 2011. - - - X44.0°,6 4.0°,6 - 3.7°~6 0°~ 10°~ 20°~ 30°,6 40°.6 50°.6 100°,6 Three percent of survey respondents responded to the question with "other." Some of the following responses were provided: "It depends on the complaint. I need more information." ® "HUD." ® "I think people should be allowed to discriminate. Who am I to say someone else can't choose not to rent me their home for any reason." "Find a different, more tolerant place to live." ® "Depends on the situation. We have a gay couple in the community that has been targeted since they moved in, which is not OI{." ® "Call TV cable news." Call/see Boise City Ada County Housing Authorit; I don't know File a complaint Call/see the Better Business Bureat Call/see Community Legal Services Call/see/get a lawyer Call/see ACLU Call/see the District Attorney Other Nothing Call/see church/priest/pastor BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION IV, PAGE 6 Experience with housing discrimination. Most survey respondents do not believe they've experienced housing discrimination. Five percent of respondents do think they have experienced discrimination. Figure IV-10. Response to Question: "Have you ever experienced housing discrimination?" Note: n=321. Incidence of discrimination may have occurred outside the City of Meridian. Source: Meridian Resident Survey, 2011. I don't know (3.4°.6) Yes (4.796) ~ ~. ,~ " ~ i ~/ \/ ~ '~ ~, ~~ No (91.9°.6) As demonstrated in Figure IV-11, most residents that said they had experienced discrimination or were "not sure" if they had experienced discrimination provided their own reason for the basis of their discrimination, which were mostly related to credit and finances (e.g., self employed, on unemployment, partner's credit history). Figure IV-11. Reasons for Discrimination other I have children _ - --- 20.096 Note: n=20. Incidence of discrimination may have occurred outside the city of Meridian. I have bad credit/bankruptcy/debts o 20.0,6 I'm poorJl couldn't afford It ~ 15.0°k Source: --- - -~ Meridian Resident Survey, 2011. My race ~ ---i 10.0°r6'. I'm a student __ __~ 10.0°k~ My gender __._____1 10.0°~ My partner/girlfriend/boyfriend 1 10 096! and I are not married _ _____ . . My sexual orientation 0.0% I have a disability i 0.0°.6 j i I am not a U.S. citizen 0.0°~6 My religion 0.0°,6 I'm on Section 8/receive 0 0°.6 government assistance for housing i j45A°~ 096 10°~ 20°.6 3096 40% 50°.6 100°,6 Most survey respondents that felt they had experienced discrimination or were unsure as to whether they'd experienced discrimination (85%) did nothing about the discrimination. In other words, they did not report it, nor did they file a complaint.3 3 n=2~. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION IV, RAGE 7 Fair housing information and resources. Figure IV-12 presents the resources most residents would use for finding information about fair housing rights, Most survey respondents (77%) would rely on a general Internet search to find information about fair housing. The Boise City Ada County Housing Authority was also identified by survey respondents as an important fair housing resource in the community. Figure IV-11. Reasons for Discrimination Source: Meridian Resident Survey, 2011. Internet search Housing Authority HUD website Real estate offices or realtors City of Meridian website Call a IawyerlACLS or Legal Aic Don't know Call City Councilor Mayoi Library N Other Radio 0°h 20oi6 40~i6 60~i6 8096 100,6 Summary of housing and community development needs. As part of the Consolidated Plan and AI survey, residents were asked to identify the most important needs in the community. Figure IV-12 summarizes the average response ranl~ing for all activities across all seven housing and community development categories. On average, survey respondents considered fair housing services a low to moderate need (3.9 out of 9.0) in Meridian. BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION IV, PAGE 8 Figure 111-21. Summary of Housing and Community Development Needs, City of Meridian, 207 7 Senior Center Youth Center «_ Child Care Center ~ ~j 7 ' Park and 1lccreational Facilltie. e Health Care Facilltic C A m Community Center u Fire Stations and Equipmen Librarfe ~ Drainage Improvemen ~ Water/Sewerlmprovemen ` Street/Alley Improvemen ~ Street Llghtin ~ Sidewalk Improvement ADA Improvement Centers/Services torDisabled ,o Aaessibilirylmprovement ~ Domestic Violence Service Z Substance Abuse Services ~? Homeless Shelters/Services a HIV/AIDS Cen[ers and Service vai Neglected/AbusedChlldren Center and Services FamilySelf-SuffklencyServ(ces Senior Activitie Youth Activitie ~~ v ChlldCareServfces E Public Transportation Services u H Antl-Crime Programs u Health Services Mental Heal[h Services Legal Services ~ ° Tree Planting o M Trash and Debris Removal e u GraHitiRemoval '~ 2 Code Enforcement o, vt Parking Facilities CleanupofAbandonedLotsandBUildings Start-Up Business Assistance Small Business Loans m lob Creation/Retention 5 Employment Trafning m Fa4ade Improvements Business Mentoring Commercial/Industrial Rehabilitation Accessibility/ADAlmprovements Owner-0ccupied Housing Rehabilitation Rental Housing Rehabilitation Homeownership Assistance Q' c Affordable Rental Housing '~ Housing for Disabled o Senior Housing = Housing for Large Families {a¢HousingServices Lead-Based Paint Testing/Aba[em e nt `.EnergyEffidentlmprovements Housing forFosterYouth Source: Meridian Resident Survey, 2011. 4.4 5.8 5.5 4.( ~ 5.4 '. 4.4 4.9 -. 1 ,.4.0 t 4.1 .,t ~ _. _. __ .. 15.1 I _ _..._. _... X5.3 i _; q. I I 4.4 '.. I. _ , 4.0 I. ', '. 9.8 4J 4J 3.3 _ SS '~, 5.0 '.4.6 - 6.1 14.3 5.9 5.2 I 48 4.5 4 U _i '4.1 4.6 j 3.9 4J 39 15.1 53 i 5.2 ' 6.6 I S.E.: 4.1 4J 4.7 ! 3.S '. 4.1 - ,4.p : 4.S ~'. a.r, - 4.2 4.5 13.5 39 ' 3.~1 ,. 5.2 S.0 s s s s t s t t g s s s s s s s 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 BBC RESEARCH Si CONSULTING SECTION IV, PAGE 9 Stakeholder Survey and Focus Group Fifteen stakeholders participated in the online stakeholder survey, and an additional 11 stakeholders participated in a stakeholder focus group or key person interview.4 Organizations participating in the public input process represent individuals from a number of protected classes including seniors, immigrants, low income residents, persons with disabilities, persons and families who are homeless, persons with HIV/AIDS, persons with substance abuse/addition, victims of domestic violence, youth refugees, and veterans. Stakeholder survey and focus group results are summarized below. Fair housing discrimination in Meridian. As part of the stakeholder survey, stakeholders were asked to identify the types of discrimination their clients are most likely to experience. Stakeholder responses primarily fall under the following categories: ^ Problems obtaining housing because of strict credit requirement, unreasonable deposits, and a lack of rental history; ^ Denial of service animal requests; ^ Refusal to rent or steering to other properties away from desired property; ^ Discrimination targeting non-English speakers. Discrimination includes lack of interpretation of important documents, retention of security deposit; and ^ Denial of reasonable accommodation requests or requiring too much information for reasonable accommodation requests. Stakeholders were asked to identify the most common reason for housing discrimination in Meridian (e.g., race, familial status, disability). Stakeholders believe residents are most likely to be discriminated against because of disability status.5 Stakeholders also believe residents may experience discrimination in Meridian because of familial status (presence of children) and national origin.6 As demonstrated in their survey responses, stakeholders feel that the most common activity taking place in Meridian is "housing providers placing certain tenants in the least desirable units in a development,"' followed by "housing providers refusing to make reasonable accommodations for tenants with disabilities."8 a Stakeholders were allowed to participate in the online survey and participate in the focus group or key person interviews. As such, there maybe some overlap. s Five stakeholders identified this is a common discriminatory activity. G Four stakeholders identified this is a common discriminatory activity. ~ Five stakeholders identified this is a common discriminatory activity. $ Four stakeholders identified this is a common discriminatory activity. BBC RESEARCH ~i CONSULTING SECTION IV, PAGE 10 Fair housing barriers in Meridian. As part of the stakeholder survey, participants were asked to evaluate possible fair housing barriers as "not a barrier," a "minor barrier," a "modest barrier," or a "serious barrier" to fair housing in Meridian. "Restrictive covenants by homeowner associations or neighborhood organizations" received the most designations as a serious barrier to fair housing in Meridian. To further evaluate fair housing barriers in Meridian, focus group participants were asked to identify what they think are the greatest fair housing barriers in Meridian. Focus group participants identified the following fair housing barriers in Meridian: Economic constraints. Census tracts that comprise downtown Meridian are HUD-designated LMI areas. Stakeholders feel it would be difficult for low and moderate income residents currently residing in the city's LMI area to move to other portions of Meridian. ® Lacl< of affordable housing. Stakeholders said a lack of affordable housing is a barrier to fair housing in Meridian. There are few subsidized units in Meridian and the BCACHA has no public housing units in Meridian. Additionally, the city's limited affordable housing stock is primarily located in central Meridian. ® Lack of public transportation. Stakeholders recognize that a lack of public transportation is a barrier to fair housing choice in Meridian. A lack of public transportation may prevent residents from moving into Meridian and it may dictate where some residents reside in Meridian. Stakeholders suggested it was not uncommon for low income residents to move to Boise for greater public transit access. ® NIMBYism. Stakeholders suggested that certain types of residential projects, such as multifamily development, have been met by resident opposition in the past. As such, NIMBYism could impact future affordable and multifamily housing projects that could diversify neighborhoods and provide low income residents with opportunities to into traditionally higher income neighborhoods. Affordable housing development in Meridian. Three regional affordable housing developers were interviewed to determine why affordable housing has not occurred in Meridian and to identify opportunities for the city to help encourage affordable housing development in Meridian. Their input on the city's affordable housing market is summarized in this section. Development barriers. Affordable housing development, particularly for projects relying on Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), has slowed down in all portions of the country. As such, there have been few affordable housing projects completed in the Boise region in recent years. ~ Five stakeholders responded to this question. Three out of five stakeholders identified this as a serious barrier. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION IV, PAGE 11 Developers are not optimistic about the return of the LIHTC market because of federal budget cuts and the 5 percent local project investment required by IHFA for LIHTC projects. As such, local affordable housing developers are increasing the affordable housing stock in other ways. One developer has partnered with local private lenders to fund single family acquisition and rehabilitation projects in Meridian. Developers suggested that Meridian has a limited supply of affordable and available land for affordable housing development. More specifically, one developer said "land is currently not available where affordable development would make the most sense." Developers suggested that city-owned land in downtown Meridian should be used for affordable housing development. Affordable housing strategy. Developers suggested that the city first focus on preserving existing affordable units in the city by working with current property owners to ensure that existing affordable housing contracts do not expire. Secondly, the city should adopt a variety of tools to help reduce affordable housing development costs. These tools should be implemented soon to encourage affordable housing development when the market returns. Developers suggested the city should consider adopting the following tools and policies to help encourage affordable housing in Meridian: ® Land donations, particularly in downtown Meridian where some density currently exists; ® Property tax abatements on affordable projects; ® Relax building code and design guidelines for affordable projects (rehabilitation and new construction); ® Expedited review and permitting process for affordable housing projects to alleviate additional carrying costs; and Development fee waivers (e.g., building permits, infrastructure costs, utility hook ups). BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION IV, PAGE 12 e ~ SI 1 S 1 This final section of the Meridian AI identifies impediments found during the research process; and concludes with a recommended Fair Housing Action Plan for the Ciry of Meridian. Summary of Needs The following summarizes the major findings from Sections I through IV of this report. Demographic and racial and ethnie coneentrations analysis. The last 10 years in Meridian have been defined by rapid population growth. The city grew from approximately 35,000 residents to 75,000 residents between 2000 and 2010. Meridian currently accounts for 19 percent of Ada County's total population; however, the city accounted 44 percent of Ada County's growth in the last 10 years. The city's residents are primarily racially White (92%) and ethnically non-Hispanic (93%). Hispanics are the fastest growing minority group in Meridian. In 2000, there were approximately 1,100 Hispanics living in Meridian, compared with more than 5,000 in 2010. There are no areas of racial or ethnic concentration in the city. The city's original downtown area, which is a HUD LMI area, contains concentrations (based on HUD's definition of disproportionate need) of low income households. This portion of the city also contains a larger proportion of persons with disabilities. Housing market analysis. Since 2000, the proportion of renter households in Meridian has grown froml6 percent to 23 percent. In other words, more households rent their home now than in 2000. The median rental rate in Meridian is $965, which is higher than the median rent in Ada County ($751) and neighboring Boise ($718). The rental market has primarily been constructed for households earning between $25,000 and $50,000 per year. As such, there is a gap of approximately 1,000 rental units for the 1,700 renter households in Meridian earning less than $25,000 per year. There are no public housing units and 50 subsidized units in Meridian. An estimated 185 Section 8 vouchers administered by the Boise City Ada County Housing Authority are used in Meridian, and 550 Meridian households are currently on the Section 8 waitlist. The BCACHA recently closed the Section 8 waitlist, indicating that households needing housing assistance in the near future will not be able to apply for the Section 8 program. Like most communities in the U.S., Meridian has been impacted by foreclosures. According to RealtyTract data, Meridian may have had as many as 55 foreclosure filings just in November 2011. While no portion of Meridian has been immune to foreclosures, the city's downtown area has been particularly impacted. For example, in 2010, more than half of all sales in one downtown Census block group were for bank owned properties. BBC RESEARCH ST CONSULTING SECTION V, PAGE 1 Public transportation and amenities, Like many western communities, residents in Meridian and the Boise region are primarily dependent on cars for transportation. Nearly 80 percent of Meridians residents drove alone to work each day. And, less than 1 percent of the city's workers relied on public transportation for their work commute.' Public transportation opportunities are limited in Meridian. Although Meridian lies along Valley Ride Transit's regional bus line, the purpose of the regional bus system is largely to connect Boise to Nampa. Residents and stakeholders both noted that public transportation opportunities in Meridian are very limited. The city has served the defined LMI area in a variety of ways to ensure that municipal services are provided equally throughout the community. The city recently used its CDBG funds for improvements to Centennial Park, located directly south of one of the city's identified LMI Census tracts. The city has used CDBG funds to design improvements to sewer and water lines within the LMI area, and those improvements were recently constructed and paid for with city general funds. The main branch of the Meridian Library is located directly north of an identified LMI census tract, and the Meridian Community Center is located directly south of an identified LMI census tract, The city has used CDBG funds for the design of a segment of the Five Mile Creek Pathway within the LMI Area. CDBG funds will also be used to construct this pathway segment in 2012. This pathway segment will provide an important recreational opportunity as well as an alternative transportation corridor. In addition to the location of these municipal services, the city has coordinated a Community Clean- Up Day for the past 7 years. This Clean-Up Day has taken place within the downtown core of the city, at the heart of the identified LMI Area. The city's contracted waste collection company, SSC, is one of the primary partners for this important community event, and all the metal recycling money collected during the day is given to a local charity. Complaint, legal and lending analysis. In the last six years, 18 fair housing complaints were filed for activities taking place in Meridian. Most complaints were filed on the basis of disability status (61%), followed by race (17%), familial status (11%) and national origin (6%). Eleven of the 18 cases are closed. Most (64%) cases closed following a successful conciliation or settlement; these cases involved discrimination based on disability or familial status. No recent fair housing legal cases have occurred in Meridian. An analysis of statewide complaints completed by BBC in summer 2011 found that the vast majority of fair housing legal cases in the State of Idaho occurred in Ada County and were related to developers, builders, engineers and/or architects failing to comply with the accessibility requirements of the federal Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). There is no evidence of lending discrimination occurring in Meridian. In 2010, Hispanics accounted for 7 percent of the city's population and 3 percent of the city's loan applicants, Denial rates among Hispanic loan applicants (15%) were slightly higher than White applicants (13%); however, the difference is not enough to suggest lending discrimination. Denial rates among Black/African American loan applicants were 31 percent, which is much higher than White applicants, While Black/African American loan applicants experienced much higher denial rates (38%) than White Means of transportation to work statistics from the 2010 American Community Survey 1-year estimate. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION V, PAGE 2 applicants; however, too few applications were submitted by African Americans to truly analyze lending disparities. There were two Census tracts in Meridian that had higher loan denial rates than the city overall; these areas did not correlate to the city's low income areas. Furthermore, there was no racial or ethnic disparity in subprime lending in 2010, indicating that subprime loans were not targeted to the city's racial or ethnic minorities. Publie input. The public input process for the city's Consolidated Plan and AI included a resident survey (330 responses), a stakeholder survey (15 responses), a stakeholder focus group (seven participants) and key person interviews (six interviews).2 The city's outreach effort involved numerous organizations representing individuals from a number of protected classes including seniors, immigrants, low income residents, persons with disabilities, persons and families who are homeless, persons with HIV/AIDS, persons with substance abuse/addition, victims of domestic violence, youth refugees, and veterans. Five percent of survey respondents definitively reported that they had experienced housing discrimination in Meridian. Many stakeholders feel that discrimination happens more frequently in Meridian, particularly for persons with disabilities, families with children/pregnant women and persons of a different national origin. Stakeholders identified a number ways discrimination may be occurring in Meridian. These include: ® Problems obtaining housing because of strict credit requirement, unreasonable deposits, and a lack of rental history; ® Denial of service animal requests; ® Refusal to rent or steering to other properties away from desired property; Discrimination targeting non-English speakers. Discrimination includes lack of interpretation of important documents, retention of security deposit; and Denial of reasonable accommodation requests or requiring too much information for reasonable accommodation requests. Stakeholders identified a number of potential fair housing barriers in Meridian. Survey participants noted that "restrictive covenants by homeowner associations or neighborhood organizations" is potentially a serious barrier to fair housing in Meridian. Focus group participants also believe economic constraints, lack of affordable housing, lack of public transportation and NIMBYism may also be barriers to fair housing in Meridian. Fair housing in Meridian In 2007, one of the housing impediments identified in the city's AI was related to the need for potential renters, buyers, and the general public to understand the requirements of the Fair Housing Act. In response to this impediment, the city added information to its website about the city's Fair Housing Strategy and other housing related resources for members of the community to access. z Some stakeholders participated in more than one outreach effort. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION V, PAGE 3 In addition, the City was a sponsor of the City of Boise's fair housing public awareness campaign in Apri12011. The campaign was called Good Neighbors + Fair Housing =Strong Communities and was intended to increase community awareness and understanding of fair housing rights and responsibilities. Fair housing messages were spread to Treasure Valley residents through radio and television public service announcements, billboards, bus panels, bus benches and community presentations. The initiative was supported through the financial contributions of 15 partners, including Idaho Housing and Finance Association (IHFA), the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare, local banks, Valley Regional Transit and local broadcasting companies. Fair Flouring Impediments and Action flan The City of Meridian has evolved from a small, isolated farm community to an integral part of the Boise region. The city's convenient proximity to the region's major service centers, Boise and Nampa, has undoubtedly contributed to the city's rapid growth in the last 10 to 20 years. However, the city is more than a bedroom community to its neighbors. The city is now the home of a major regional medical facility (St. Luke's), and Meridian is well-positioned to attract additional business growth in the future. As the ciry's role in the region has evolved, so has its population. The city's residents are aging, and its Hispanic population has grown in the last 10 years. The city's changing population makes fair housing awareness even more important. As such, the Fair Housing Action Plan (FHAP) is intended to help the city welcome new residents and retain existing residents as it continues to grow and evolve in the region. IMPEDIMENT NO. 1. Lack of affordable housing. The city has a limited inventory of affordable units for its size. Affordable housing development has recently been limited to acquisition and rehabilitation of single family units in the downtown area. As such, low and moderate income residents may have a hard time finding an affordable unit, particularly outside the downtown area. Stakeholders participating in the public outreach efforts all suggested that a lack of affordable housing was a barrier to fair housing in Meridian. Wiry is this a barrier? Lack of affordable housing can lead to income, racial and ethnic segregation and may disproportionately restrict housing choices for certain protected classes. This may occur because racial and ethnic minorities have lower incomes or because persons with disabilities require specific housing accommodations and need affordable housing due to limitations on employment. Action item 1.1. -Preserve existing affordable housing units in the city. The city has a limited affordable housing stock. The city should aggressively attempt to preserve existing affordable units in the city by worl~ing with current property owners to ensure that existing affordable housing contracts do not expire. This would include identifying affordable housing owners in the city and understanding their needs for retaining the affordability component of their property. Action item 1.2. -Convene an affordable housing task force to investigate ways to develop new affordable housing. The city should convene an affordable housing task force to identify ways to encourage affordable housing development in Meridian. The task force should include community development staff, developers, representatives of the finance and banking industry and representatives from the city's economic development organizations. The task force could also include existing affordable housing property owners. BBC RESEARCH Si CONSULTING SECTION V, PAGE 4 The primary task of the committee would be to identify tools used by other neighboring and regional communities to encourage affordable housing development, and determine what may work in Meridian. Some of these tools, which were identified by local affordable housing developers during the public input process, include the following: ® Property tax abatements on affordable projects (this task will require input from Ada County); Relaxed design guidelines for affordable projects (rehabilitation and new construction); ® Expedited review and permitting process for affordable housing projects to alleviate additional carrying costs; and ® Development fee waivers (e.g., building permits, infrastructure costs, utility hook ups). The Idaho Housing and Finance Association (IHFA) is responsible for administering the Low Income Housing Tax (LIHTC) program in Idaho. Local communities are required to contribute 5 percent of the cost of the project to be eligible for LIHTCs projects in their community. As such, Meridian should identify ways to generate funds for this local match if a potential affordable project is proposed in their community. The city should investigate the fiscal tools other Idaho communities have implemented to generate this local contribution. IMPEDIMENT NO. 2. Potential resident opposition to affordable housing development. Stakeholders suggested that certain types of projects in Meridian have historically been met with resident opposition. Opposition against certain types of development is often referred to as "Not in My Backyard Syndrome" (NIMBI. Strong resident opposition to affordable projects may result in future projects being declined. W/hy is this a b~tf r•ie~:? In reviewing AIs, HUD gives consideration to how communities hold themselves out to residents. Do they appear to be welcoming? Warm? Or exclusive? It is thus important in this era of fair housing that communities and residents project a positive image of housing choice and diversity. Action item 2.1. -Continue to participate in the regional fair housing awareness campaign and tailor it to current needs. In 2011, the city participated in the Good Neighbors + Fair Housing Strong Communities campaign to raise awareness of fair housing in Meridian. The city should continue this campaign to ensure residents are aware of their responsibilities, as well as the city's responsibilities, in affirmatively furthering fair housing in Meridian. The campaign should be modified to include issues raised as part of this AI. For example, the campaign should discuss the importance of having a variety of housing types in all neighborhoods to ensure all residents are welcome throughout Meridian. The campaign should also include some outreach to local HOAs to ensure their covenants, conditions and restrictions (GCBs) do not violate the Fair Housing Act. The city should provide HOAs with the contact information for community development and legal staff to review CCRs if necessary. IMPEDIMENT NO. 3. Limited public transportation opportunities. The city has limited public transportation opportunities. This has the effect of disconnecting Meridian from the rest of the region, particularly for residents reliant on public transportation. This has a disproportionate impact on persons with disabilities who often rely on public transportation, as well as low income residents. BBC RESEARCH bT CONSULTING SECTION V, PAGE 5 Why is this a barrier?Lack of transit opportunities creates a barrier to fair housing choice because it may have the effect of preventing certain types of residents-specifically persons with disabilities, seniors and low-income individuals-from living in a community or in certain parts of a community. Action Item 3.1. Continue to stay engaged in regional transportation planning efforts, leverage local resources for local transit opportunities and seek partnerships. Regional transit is costly, and solutions to solving regional transit issues will not occur overnight. The city must develop a long term strategy to solving public transportation issues in the community. The city's Transportation Task Force should stay intact and should continue working on the city's initial transit plan. This plan is still in its early stages, but is envisioned to eventually provide reliable, fixed-route service throughout the community. Partnerships will be key to getting a public transit system off the ground. Besides VRT, COMPASS, Joint School District #2 and the City Council will all need to play a role. The city should stay engaged in regional planning efforts and identify opportunities for modifying existing bus routes or adding stops to existing routes. The city should also work with the Idaho Transportation Department to identify grant opportunities for improving public transportation infrastructure if additional bus stops become available (e.g., bus shelters, curb cuts). The city should also identify local partners reliant on public transportation to leverage resources and generate local transportation partnerships. This could include using the senior center transportation service' for persons with disabilities or identifying opportunities to partner with the local school district for out of district trips. IMI~EDIMENT NO. 4. Lack of understanding by developers and landlords about housing accessibility requirements. A "lack of understanding by developers and landlords about housing accessibility requirements under the ADA" was identified as an impediment in the city's last AI, and continues to be an impediment in the city. Nearly all legal cases that have occurred in the Boise region in recent years have occurred against developers, builders, engineers and/or architects failing to comply with the accessibility requirements of the federal Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Additionally, 61 percent of all fair housing complaints filed in Meridian in the last six years have been on the basis of disability status, primarily for failure to make reasonable accommodations for a disability.3 Why is this a bar~r~ier?Persons with disabilities are a protected class under the Fair Housing Act. Action Item 4.1. Tailor fair housing outreach campaign to address the needs of persons with disabilities. BBC recommends that the city continue its fair housing outreach campaign (Action Item 2.1). As part of that campaign, the city should tailor its message to highlight the needs and rights of the city's disabled population. 3 Twenty-five percent of all complaints filed in Meridian between 2006 and 2011 cited "failure to make a reasonable accommodation." BBC RESEARCH St CONSULTING SECTION V, PAGE 6 Action Item 4.2. Expand outreach and education to Meridian's landlords. As part of the city's fair housing outreach campaign, city staff should visit multifamily properties in the city to ensure landlords are aware of fair housing law and requirements for serving persons with disabilities. City staff could also coordinate with a local FHIP to conduct outreach and training to Meridian landlords. Action Item 4.3. Train community development staff on ADA and fair housing design and construction guidelines. The city should ensure that all staff members involved in the building plan review process are aware of the design and construction requirements of the ADA and the Fair Housing Act to ensure all new units are in compliance with the legislation. I~Y2012-2016 fair housing goals. The matrix on the following page summarizes the city's FHAP to minimize impediments. BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING SECTION V, PAGE 7 O N N C .a .~ g O K ~L A C O v Q w C '~ 0 i 3 L 66 Y. I I -I'','" l I I i I ~ ,I I I - i '- ~~ X i ~ ' ~ X X I- i j i ~ ~ X i ~ ~ X X X X X X X I X ~ X X I I ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ X X X ? X ~ X X 1 ~ X X X ~ ~ X X ~: X i X i X X X ~' j X ~ - I X X ~ X ~ X X ~ ~ X X X ~ ~~ ~ , ~~ Y N w 7 ,~ p V yo { Y I O V R N C U A W v ~ o .n c R H o c ~ ' $ a0~ ~ a q o C E ~ a+ ~p O Y .q W ~ v N U .II ~ v •D ~ N I 'o d ra u i `^ 0 0 ~ ~ rn d E ~- c C ; E N N C '; ~ N I m o .~ d ~ H ~, O O C ~ N N ' N w '' V V ~ A Ol ~ a C d G " Y V 4 N p 0 L ~ ~ ~ V O V Vf !, G a W ~ O C ~ ~ N `w `w C O v' •p m c N 3 H i ~~ Q cxa. = 4 a€ ~ '~ > v rn d r~ 013 •° g ~ '° `w ~ c c °v~ - 1 ( E ° '~ a ^ °~~ v E A v I , , o I rn~ I o' •c m ~~ j E m O d w ~ c o '= ° >d, A c j o ~° v a z a a, y a v c ~ '~ ° v E . °' ~ ° dE ~ _ . c ! aA I rn ~ E ~ ~ c ~' n E'er v 3 • ° c E~ ~ °o ( i •'~° v~ ;~ ~ ° ~ '~ ~ A c c U c O x ' Ol a ~ Ol O j V O- 01 ~ C C~ ~ C R E V ~ ~' V tt~ i E Old 'C CI w Q A c~ E~ o 'p v c 1 4 .rn N c P n. o v` ~ _, U R H v 'c rn c s v L a •~ m 'o o s _~~ ! v w w v~ a Q •> cr,I ~ I '~ ° o • ~ ~ va w a ~ w•O- y ` v.~ ' v ~ _ y m e 5 rn v ~ ~ Y c•oLL v¢ I _ ' v ~ -v rn c :° .• V y 3 p ~v ~o ~ ~ 16 w ~ rnv 'O d "RO = ~ d C j C~ L N V h N N q O m v m O N O N Y C y „ ~ n' ~ ~~ L C v r° C L c ~ O V ~ fJ c Q• _ ~ O ~ L ~ d t' ~ a >, a+ .C C V ~ E F v i I t' i t C v a.C.+ O • i ~0 Ol A o o~ ~ o T ; i ~ 3 s m - f 3~ 3 ~ v m > E " ~ m o v v i -. C O1 ° UI ° C v c ~ d ~ C rn v an d O ~ o d '- ~ o d V C C j ° I ~ ~o ~ ~ . ~v ~a a V E _ ~ _;. ;~ o u . i ~r _~. ~ E ~ ~~ I ~ aA U r V . ~ '~ m _ , :, ~ -~ -~ ~,. _ ~.~ I_ I ~ ' y~ _ , `i Y N w Y o :;~ ~v . I;~ ~o ~ : °~ p ~ ~ N a ~ p am ° ~ ~( m o v i~ , - c f m~ ' - ,1 ~ . ~ Y~ ~Y ;, o ~q a o ~G O d ~~ N O I I V Y N ._ ~ G ' W - N p J ~' p O A ~ L C/ y C a0+ N l C ~ ~ 10 ~ ` ~ ' N G W O ~~ ~ m~ _ - R G d ~ ' I Ol °~ i ' F > 7 r o . G d > v ~ c . R ~ c - ~ i, ~ m ~ a a N c o r i ' c ~ u ~ rn :~ I N I ~ :j ; $ ~ ~ _ -_, ~ y m v '° F ~~ ~ °' v r,, w v ~ ~ °' of - ~ a ~ o ° E a v w L _ i ~ c. , c_o E t, ~ cV ~ r; ~ 4 e; ~~~ ~~'~ N m i d, u° s v m m v A c 'o v U w V Q z 0 u in u z J z O U t~ x s W U m CD Strueture for ®versight Responsibilities, Monitoring bt Evaluation The completion of this AI was overseen by the City of Meridian's Department of Community Development. Community Development will be ultimately responsible for carrying out the Fair Housing Action Plan. To ensure that each activity is carried out, Community Development will conduct an evaluation of each activity during each program year and identify additional areas that require study or analysis and how to address the additional areas. As part of the annual Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER), Community Development will include a summary of the following: ® Actions taken to affirmatively further fair housing: A summary of impediments to fair housing choice in the AI; and ® Identify actions taken to overcome effects of impediments identified in the AI. Per Section 2.14 in HUD's Fair Housing Planning Guide, Community Development will maintain the following data and information as documentation of the city's Fair Housing Action Plan: ® A copy of the AI and any updates. ® A list of actions taken each year as part of the Fair Housing Action Plan to eliminate the impediments identified in the AI. At the end of each program year, the city will submit information to HUD about the actions taken to fulfill the Fair Housing Action Plan and an analysis of their impact. BBC RESEARCH SI CONSULTING SECTION V, PAGE 9 ~ ii ITl( U CAL LI I ~ N® T AT it 1 ITEM R®JECT NUM ER Close Public Comment Period for Fair Housign PR®J CT NAM Action Plan PLEAS P INT NAM F I AGAINST I NEUTRALI r® is ity ouncil in T :April 17, 2012 11' U 7 J U OA 12-001 ITEM TITLE: ulic Baring: Unified evelopment Code (U ) Text Amendment by City of Meridian Community Development Department Request: Amend Specific Sections of the UDC to Include General Clarifications/Clean-up Items; Specific Use Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities; CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) Strategies, etc. MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: IE_MSTAFFTOI AGENCY I APPLICANT ( NOTES I INITIALS ri i iy ncil satin T :April 17, 2012 IT' U : 7 J ~ M A 12-001 ITEM TITLE: ulic Hearing: roi roerty by Nunzio Sgroi Located at 4405 E. Ustick Road Request: Amend the Development Agreement to Modify the Conceptual Development Plan to Allow 14Single-Family Homes and Two (2) Townhomes on 2.81 Acres of Land in an R-8 Zoning District MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION ( DATE: (E-MSTA D TOI AGENCOY I APPLICANT ( NOTES I INITIALS I ri ian iy ncil ein T :April 17, 2012 I U : 7D J T u T C 12-006 ITEM TITLE: ublic Hearing: mbercreek o. by Trilogy Department, LLC Located Near Southwest Corner of N. Meridian Road and W. McMillan Road Request: Two (2) Year Time Extension on the Preliminary Plat ~~ MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: IE-MSTA D TOI AGENCYO I APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS ri i n iy ucil tin CLERKS oFF~cE FINAL acr-on- DATE: IE-MSTAFFTOI AGENCY I APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS r®i i uc®1 tin DATE: IE_MSTA D TOI AGENCY I APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS ~i Ian iy uil tin °T :April 17, 2012 IT l1 8A J . iTEnn TITLE: tanning et.: Home ccupation icussion DATE: IE_MSTAFFTOI AGENCOY I APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS April 12, 2012 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kristy Vigil, Assistant City Planner CC: City Clerk RE: Home Occupation Standards Research Baclc~round The Unified Development Code (UDC) defines a home occupation as: An occupation, profession, activity or use that is clearly an incidental and seconday y arse of a residential dwelling unit and that does not alter the exterior of the property or affect the residential character of the neighborhood.. The purpose of regulating home occupations is to provide a modicum of opportunity to conduct a business in a residential setting without impacting the use and enjoyment of residential properties. The intent of the current regulations addresses the operational and visual characteristics of these uses. Based on recent home occupation discussions before City Council staff placed this subject on the Council agenda for a discussion on appropriateness of the City's regulations. Outlined in this memo is the research of many online codes, which I compared to the City of Meridian home occupation standards. My research focused on if home occupations maybe conducted in a dwelling unit or an accessory, the storage of materials, incompatible land uses, and retail sales. Both national and local codes were researched for comparison. I have included some of the results from my research in this memo. Dwelling Unit vs. Accessory Structure Like the City of Meridian, most of the codes researched required the home occupation to be conducted entirely in the dwelling and not to exceed 25% of the gross floor area. Community Development Department 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Suite 102, Meridian, ID 83642 Phone 208-884-5533 . Fax 208-888-6854 . www.meridiancity.org Page 2 I did find some codes allowing the home occupation to be conducted within an accessory structure: • Burlington, Vermont: No more than thirty-five percent (35%) of the floor area of said residence, including accessory structures, up to a maximum of seven hundred fifty (750) square feet, whichever is less, shall be used for such purpose. • Medford, Oregon: Home occupation activities conducted at the authorized residential property shall be restricted to the interior of the dwelling unit or enclosed accessory structure. • Boise, Idaho: The home occupation must be conducted entirely within a dwelling or accessory structure in no more than 500 square feet of floor area. Home occupations that exceed 500 square feet require a conditional use permit. • Eagle, Idaho: The use of the dwelling unit for the home occupation shall be clearly incidental and subordinate to its use for residential purposes by its occupants, and not more than twenty five percent (25%) of the floor area of the dwelling unit shall be used in the conduct of the home occupation. NOTE: Although the Eagle, Idaho code states "the dwelling unit", I called to verify if the code is interpreted strictly to living area. The City of Eagle has determined the home occupation is allowed in an accessory structure. Storage of Materials I did not find a code that allowed for storage of materials visible to the public or outside of the dwelling unit (or the accessory structure if allowed). Here are few examples of standards I found in other municipalities: • Burlington, Vermont: There shall be no outside storage of any kind related to the home occupation. • Medford, Oregon: Outdoor storage, including but not limited to trailers, inventory, supplies, or equipment, visible from the public right of way or adjacent properties or common areas is prohibited. • Eagle, Idaho: No storage of materials or supplies outdoors. Note: In Addition to the standards in the UDC for home occupations, outdoor storage as an accessory use is required to be screened by a solid six-foot fence (11-3A-14). Incompatible Land Uses Some of the codes I researched prohibited certain uses in their Home Occupation Standards. For example, auto repair services, kennels, retail, and, welding. The cities listing the prohibited uses in their standards are consistent with the UDC. The UDC states the following: • Any use not explicitly listed, or listed as a prohibited use in table 11-2A-2 of this section is prohibited in all residential districts. It shall be unlawful and a violation of the unified development code for any person to conduct in a residential district any prohibited use. Page 3 Retail Sales During my research for retail sales related to home occupations, I found the standards to be consistent with the UDC or the standards did not allow retail sales at all. In summary The City of Meridian standards for home occupations are typical and generally adopted nationwide. During my research, I found more codes requiring the home occupation be conducted in the dwelling unit rather than an accessory structure. Also, storage of materials, protection from incompatible land uses, and retail standards were consistent with the UDC. In addition, the codes researched clearly defined a home occupation as incidental, secondary, and/or subordinate to a primary dwelling. In addition, I have included the UDC standards adopted for your review. UDC Standards 11-4-3-21: A. In no way shall the home occupation cause the premises to differ from its residential character in the appearance, lighting, signs, or in the emission of noise, fumes, odors, vibrations, or electrical interference. B. The home occupation shall be conducted entirely in the dwelling, and not more than twenty five percent (25%) of the gross floor area of said dwelling shall be used for a home occupation or for storing goods associated with the home occupation. Materials maybe stored in an attached garage or storage area, provided it shall not reduce the required off street parking below the standard established for that district. C. No activity connected to the home occupation or any storage of goods, materials, or products connected with a home occupation shall be allowed in any detached accessory structure. D. (Rep. by Ord. 07-1325, 7-10-2007) E. The home occupation shall not have more than two (2) outgoing pick ups per day from a common carrier. F. The home occupation shall be conducted by the inhabitants of the dwelling, and no more than one nonresident employee shall be permitted. G. The home occupation shall not serve as a headquarters or main office where employees come to the site and are dispatched to other locations. H. No retail sales shall be permitted from the dwelling except the sale of: 1) services or items produced or fabricated on the premises as a result of the home occupation; or 2) products secondarily related to the personal service aspect of the home occupation. Page 4 I. Off street parking shall be provided as set forth in section 11-3 C-6 of this title, in addition to the required off street parking for the dwelling. J. All visits by clients, customers, and/or employees shall occur between the hours of eight o'clock (8:00) A.M. and eight o'clock (8:00) P.M. K. The home occupation shall only be allowed as an accessory use to an allowed residential use. ~-®i n iy until satin T :April 17, 2012 IT 8 J 1° iTEnn TITLE: yor's ffice: esolution o. / ~ ~`~~ A Resolution reappointing Bill Nary and Tim Curns to the Meridian Traffic Safety Commission MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Motes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: IE_MSTAFF TO) AGENCY ( APPL CANT ( NOTES ( INITIALS CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. ~~ ~ ~ BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, HOAGLUN, ROUNTREE, ZAREMBA A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, REAPPOINTING BILL NARY TO THE CITY ATTORNEY SEAT AND TIM CURNS TO THE MERIDIAN TRANSPORTATION ISSUES SEAT OF THE MERIDIAN TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Meridian City Code Title 2, Chapter 3 established the Meridian Traffic Safety Commission, its members and terms of their appointments; and WHEREAS, Bill Nary currently holds the Meridian City Attorney seat on the Meridian Traffic Safety Commission with a term to expire April, 2012; and WHEREAS, Tim Curns currently holds the Meridian City Transportation Issues seat on the Meridian Traffic Safety Commission with a term to expire April, 2012; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Meridian deems the re-appointment of Bill Nary to the Meridian City Attorney seat of the Traffic Safety Commission and Tim Curns to the Meridian City Transportation Issues seat to be in the best interest of the Meridian Traffic Safety Commission and of the City of Meridian; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY, IDAHO: Section 1. That pursuant to Meridian City Code § 2-3-3, Bill Nary is hereby appointed to the Meridian City Attorney seat of the Meridian Traffic Safety Commission, and Tim Curns is hereby appointed to the Meridian Transportation Issues seat of the Meridian Traffic Safety Commission, for terms to expires Apri130, 2015. Section 2. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this ~ ! day of , 2012. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this t f -day of ~=_ ;,, 2012. APPROVED: a~ ~ _ Tammy de Weerd ATTEST: By: ,~ - - - ~, ®, Jaycee 2~. Holman, City ~ RESOLUTION FOR RE-APPOINTMENT OF BILL NARY AND TIM CURNS -MERIDIAN TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSIONERS ri ian ity or-cil tin T ®April 17, 2012 IT l1 8C J T ITEM TITLE: ayor' fice. eolution oa l ~l A Resolution re-appointing Carol Harms to Seat 5 of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: IE_MSTAFF T°I AGENCY I APPL CANT I NOTES I INITIALS CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, HOAGLUN, ROUNTREE, ZAREMBA A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, APPOINTING A COMMISSIONER TO SEAT 5 OF THE MERIDIAN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Meridian City Code Title 2, Chapter 1 establishes the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission, its members and terms of their appointments; and WHEREAS, Carol Harms was appointed in April of 2009 to Seat 5 with a term to expire in April, 2012; and WHEREAS, Carol Harms may be reappointed to Seat 5 to a term of 3 years to expire in April of 2015; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Meridian deems the appointment of Carol Harms to Seat 5 to be in the best interest of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission and of the City of Meridian; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY, IDAHO: Section 1. That pursuant to Meridian City Code § 2-1-3, Carol Harms is hereby appointed to Seat 5 of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission, for a term to expire on April, 2015. Section 2. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this ` t day of April, 2012. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this ~' day of April, 2012. r®di iy ncil t®n T :April 17, 2012 I : $p J T U eTEnn TiTL~: arks ecretion ept.: Improvements at 8th treet ark Discussion /~I,IIC,C ~~ r® ian iy uncil a ®n :April 17, 2012 IT U 8 J T U irEnn Ti~LE: urchin: rotet of on- esponive id Finding and Award of Bid for "Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) Sludge Handling Bed Improvements - Construction" Bid #PW-12-10049C by GUHO Corp. DATE: IE_MSTA D TO) AGENCOY I APPL CANT I NOTES I INITIALS {~. , i { ~ ,_ r /~,~~ ~~ °To: Jaycee L. Holman, City Clerk, From: Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager CC: Roxanne Holland, Jacy Jones Date: 4/9/12 e: April 17~' City Council Meeting Agenda Item The Purchasing Department respectfully requests that the following item be placed on the April 17~' City Council Agenda under a Purchasing Department Report for Council's consideration. Protest of non-responsive bid finding and award of bid to Ewing Company for "WWTP Sludge Handling Bed Improvements -Construction". The apparent low bidder , GUHO Corp, listed subcontractors totaling 94% of their bid total. Per State Statute 54-1902 (2), a contractor may not subcontract in excess of 80% of the bid total. Finding that the total of the subcontractors totaled more than 80% on the "List of Subcontractors" required for the bid, GUHO Corp was found to be non-responsive. Mr. Guho claims that the majority of his bid was for equipment and not subcontracted work, that he simply put the equipment on the wrong form, and that the equipment is for the bid alternate and not the base bid for which the award is based. He has requested a hearing with Council. Thank you for your consideration. Page 1 Kei#h Watts From: Nick Guho [Nick@guhocorp.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 12:36 PM To: Keith Watts Cc: Anthony Guho; Mark Guho Subject: RE: IFB #PW-12-10049C WWTP Sludge Handling Bed Improvements -Construction Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged April 4,2012 Keith Watts Reference: IFB #PW-12-10049C WWTP Sludge Handling Bed Improvements -Construction Reference letter dated April 4, 2012 Guho Corp would like to contest and protest your findings that our bid was non-responsive Under the base bid Guho Corp is self performing all of the Concrete work which is item #3 on the Bid Form which is $68,000 or Ei4% Water Control Corp is our supplier an Alternate 1 and their supply dollar amount is $75,000 or 61% of Our Alternate 1 bid of item 1 & 2 =$122,700 Please advise me on how you would like to proceed Nick Guho Guho Corp From: Keith Watts [mailto:kwatts@meridianeity.org] Sent: Wednesday, Apri104, 2012 11:45 AM To: Nick Guho Cc: Roxanne Holland Subject: IFB #PW-12-10049C WWTP Sludge Handling Bed Improvements -Construction Mr. Guho, after review of your bid for the above named project, your bid has been deemed non-responsive. Please see the attached letter with the reason for the finding and fees free to contact me for any questions you may have. Thank you, Keith Watts, CP Purchasing Manager City of Meridian 33 East Broadway Meridian, iD 83642 Ph. 208-489-0417 Fax: 208-887-4813 Mayor Tammy de Weerd City Council Members: Keith Bird Brad Hoaglun Charles Rountree David Zaremba April 4, 2012 Nick Guho, Secretary/Treasurer Guho. Corp. 391 W. State St, Ste G Eagle, ID 83616 RE; WWTP Sludge Handling Bed Improvements-Construction Bid Dear Mr. Guho: Upon final review of the bid your firm submitted for the above named project, it was found that you have subcontracted 94% of the work as stated on Exhibit 1. Subcontracting in excess of 80% of the work is prohibited per Idaho State Statute 54- 1902 (2). With this finding the City ttnds your bid non-responsive and will proceed with awarding the contract to the lowest responsive bidder of record. I have enclosed a copy of the Statute for your reference. Please feel free to give me a call at 489-4417 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~~Gti~~~ Keith Watts, CPPB Purchasing Manager Purchasing Department ®33 E. Broadway Avenue, Ste. 106, Meridian, ID 83642 Phone 20889-0416 a Fax 208-887-4813 ® www.meridiancity.org Statutes Page 1 of 1 ~. ~~ ~, -- - _,~ TITLE 59 PROFESSIONS, VOCATIONS, AND BUSINESSES CHAPTER 19 PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTORS 59-19Q2. UNLAWFUL TO ENGAGE IN PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTING WITHOUT LICENSE - - INVESTIGATIONS. (1) Tt shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the business or act in the capacity of a public. works contractor within this state without first obtaining and' having a license issued pursuant to the provisions of this chapter by the administrator of the division of building safety,. unless such person is particularly exempted as provided in this chapter. (2) It shall be unlawful for any public works contractor to subcontract in excess of eighty percent (80 a) of the work under any contract to be performed by him as such public works contractor according to the contract prices therein set forth, unless otherwise provided in the specifications of such contracts. (3) Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, it shall be unlawful for any public works contractor to; (a) Accept a bid from any person who at that time does not possess the appropriate license for the project involved; or (b) Accept bids to sublet any part of any contract for specialty construction from a specialty contractor who at that time does not possess the appropriate license in accordance with this chapter. (4) No contractor shall be required to have a license under this chapter in order to submit a bid or proposal for contracts for public works financed in whole or in part by federal aid funds, provided that, at or prior to the award and execution of any such contract by the state of Idaho ar any other contracting authority mentioned in this chapter, the successful bidder has secured a license as provided in this chapter. (5) The administrator may, upon his own motion or at the direction of the board,, and shall, upon the verified written complaint of any person, investigate allegations of unlicensed practice of public works contracting. The Idaho Code is made available on the Internet by the Idaho Legislature as a public service. This Internet version of the Idaho Code may not be used for commercial purposes, nor may this database be published or repackaged for commercial sate without express written permission. The Idaho Code is the property of the state of Idaho, and is copyrighted by Idaho law, L C. ~ 9 352. According to Idaho law, any person wlio reproduces or distributes the Idaho Cade for commercial purposes in violation of the provisions of this statute shall be deemed to be an infringer of the state of Idaho's copyright. httpa/legislature.idaho.gov/idstatJTitle54/T54CH 19SECT54-19Q2PrinterFrie... 4/3/2012 u ~ ~` 33 . Est ro way Avg., Sts 1Qa Mridi~n, I 8 Phone: (208} x417 F • (gyp) 87-x813 INVITATION FQC. fllD w DATE: IDAHO DON'T Cl`OR~ LiC N N. ~.Q P i I .~ iAiiO PUtiC WOKS GONr OTORS SIC N5E No. I ~~ ~~~ ~~-. Business Emafl Add : , ~` ~t _. .~ To the City of rfdfan: Typed or f~rint Name at$d~~Tfs~e (ff different than abov 3 of 2 Bid was opened on a ve date at pr rib pla . Bid bond required; [ j No [ )Yes Amount % of bid amount Purchasing Agent, City of iVieridin 5 of Zia u U,)~u I deoiare tt er Welty of perjury that the for oing i true and ct. CO CT® I M: ~~ , `Y'om IDAHO CNT CTa~ I~IG~NS : p -~°° -~ ~ a I ~ IDAHO PUt.IC Y: TITL ~t~~a w I ® ~~~ ~l..o ~~ Slln Ylii ,. PHNE Nulu1 ER:,IT °~:~~~~ DAT : , ~ 1 ~ 1 i ~.- I of 25 LU H N LING I !/ 1° - C N T U'TI I NU ®1-100 - ----- R;~. ~ -- -- , , - ~~~1~5E~E31~.F~~tlt~ii~It~~~~CIE~~LE Furnish ail labor, materials, equipment, installation, and incidentals as required for the WWTP Sludge Handling Bed improvements Project, per the attached drawings and specifications. Item No, ecri tion .Price 1 ®emolition and removal of site materials, asphalt paving, concrete, and ~~ ~ ~~ __, other material associated with the d 'n bed site construction. 2 Supplying, placing, grading, compaction, and geotechnical testing for sub- ~, base material. ~~ ~~~ 3. Installation of concrete pavement. 4 Temporary support, concrete footings, and permanent support for existing*~ y. ~a ~,~~ ~L~ ~- - ~~ LUMP SUM T4TAL ....................................................................................$ ~ l - Z t..~t~,' .~ i'RIC::II~lO;SCHEUI)k.~ -A®®~ALT~RIV/4`tI~ ~ SCRio1~V ~ONVEYt~i~ Furnish all labor, materials, equipment, instailation, and incidentals as required for the installing the SCREW CONVEYOR, per the attached drawings and specifications. Item No. Description Price Demolition and removal of site materials, belt conveyor, mechanical piping, 1. electrical items, and other material associated with the screw conveyor ~ ~ 7~~r1 installation. ~~LJ/ Furnish and installation of the new screw conveyor including all supports, 2. mechanical piping, electrical items, instrumentation, and other materials i 6 `7l necessa for a full functional screw conve r s tem. S. Credit (deduct) for not providing temporary support, concrete footings, and permanent support for existing belt conveyor. i LUMP SUM T®TAL .................................................. ..................................~_ 1~~1 ~' use fi urea Total cost to include all labor, material, equipment, freight, insurance, travel, lodging, incidental, and applicable taxes 97 of 25 Addendum No 1 Page 4 of 5 VVW'TP Sludge Handling Bed Improvements Certificate o Una r~ciin The undersigned represents and warrants that the undersigned has examined the location of the proposed work and is familiar with the local conditions at the place where the work is to be done, and the undersigned has reviewed and understands the plans, specifications and other documents. and the undersigned is satisfied with all conditions for performance of the work. The undersigned has checked carefully al[ the abave figures and understands that the City of Meridian wilt net be responsible for any errors or omissions on the part of the undersigned in creating this bid. The undersigned declares: that he/she holds the pasition indicated below as a corporate officer or the owner or a partner in the business entity submitting this bid; that the undersigned is informed of the relevant facts surrounding the preparation and submission of this bid, that the undersigned knows and represents and warrants to the City of Meridian that this bid is prepared and submitted without collusion with any other person, business entity, ar corporation with any interest in this bid. i declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. CONTRACTOR/FlRM: Guk-iv CU~2p r ®•- ~-- --.,~ ® ®.6 I" T fi TFII "P a SUB I NTII~B I C GE AS YOUR ID 18 of 25 ®®® ., C ®. o~®+ x '~~ Z' 7 r ®~s® Addendum Na 1 Page 5 of 5 WWTP Sludge Handling Bed Improvements i i ~- '~ ~'~ L ~~ ~(~ ., k D U .1 -1-100 c TO: ALL PR05PECTIVE BIDDERS Reference: WWTP SLUDG HANDLING BED IMPRbV~MNTS Subject: Project PW-12-10049C - Addendum No.1 March 2$, 2012 Prospective Bidders for the above mentioned Request for Bid is hereby corrected and amended as follows: Clarifications: It is the intent for the contractor's base bid to focus on removal of existing asphalt and subgrade material within the delineated area on the plans. The base bid work will include temporary support, permanent support(s) and concrete footings necessary for the existing belt conveyor. Add alternate 1 includes provisions to replace the existing belt conveyor with a screw conveyor. The drawings associated with the add alterna#e are DM-1, DM-2, M-1, M-2, -0, D-1, D-2, E- 1, E-2, -3, and E-4. Drawings: Add the following key note to Drawing DG-1: 8. Contractor shall provide temporary support of the existing belt conveyor sufficient to prevent damage to the existing equipment until such time as the existing conveyor can be anchored to the new concrete surface. The temporary support shall allow for remove! of the existing footings and construction of the proposed concrete surface. Add the fogowing key notes to ®rawing C-1: 8. Beneath existing belt conveyor supports, contractor shall construct a minimum 24-inch thick equipment footing extending a minimum ®f 12-inches in any direction from the existing steel support braces (3 total}. Equipment footing shall be consistent with Detail S/S-2. 9. Contractor shall adjust existing belt conveyor steel support braces as needed to match existing elevations on new concrete pavement, and provide means of securing the braces to the new concrete equipment footings. The means of connection shall be such that PUCt[A$ING AGER 33 East Broadway Ave. Meridian, I® 83642 Phone:208-888-4433 Fax: 208.887-4813 Addendum No 1 Page 1 of 5 WWTF' Sludge Handling Bed Improvements once the existing conveyor is removed, a smooth, continuous plane surface suitable for equipment operation and loading remains. Drawing C-1: 1. Change the north-south dimensian of the screw auger equipment footing located between the west wall of the;drying bed and the proposed 6-foot containment wail from 12-feet to 14- feet. The footing shall be extended to the south an additional 2-feet. Specifications: 1. Remove and replace Bid Form (Pages 17 and 18) of the contract spec~ications with the attached pages 17 and 18. 2. Division 1. a. Delete paragraphs 1.4.D and 1.4.E in their entirety. b. Add the following paragraph: 1.4.D. The following project submittals shall be submitted within 45 days after the Notice to Proceed is issued: • Screw conveyor • Pipe insulation and jacketing • Screw conveyor heat tracing Electrical and instrumentation equipment • Concrete pavement 3. Spec~catian 14555 -Screw ConveyorlAuger a. Revise 2.01.A.2. from "Covers: 12 gauge minimum Type 304 stainless steel." to ""Covers: 12 gauge minimum Type 304 stainless steel, maximum 48 inches in length." b. Add 2.03. .Trough shall include a 4-inch NPT diameter drain Hippie extending 3° inches below the screw conveyor trough, with a threaded cap, lacated at the low point of the trough. c. Add 2.03.. Trough shall include wash-water nozzles spaced at a maximum of 4feet, or as recommended by manufacturer. Each nozzle shall include a %a inch or 3/, inch union connection exterior of the trough. d. Add 2.07.A. Metallic non-stainless steel components shall be shop primed and coated per manufacturer's recommendations. Exterior components, such as the conveyor supports, shall be coated with exterior rated coatings. Addendum No 1 Page 2 of 5 VIfWTP Sludge Handling Improvements 4. Remove specification Section 312000- Earth Moving in its entirety. Replace with Civision 200 of the ISPWC . 5. Remove specification Section 321313-.Concrete Paving in its entirety. Replace with Section 703 of the ISPWC and the referenced related sections. 6. RemovespecificationSect~on 321373- Concrete Paving Joint Sealants in Its entirety. Replace with Section 705 of the ISPWC. 7. Joint sealant backer rods will be required at ail locations that joint sealant is required. Refer to ISPWC Section 705 and ISPWC S®-7145, B. C. D. C~~NU Cv R,C~ _ Firm Name NIG. K ~ . C-~U ~-~ o Sc c l r~~ Date Addendum No 1 Page 3 of 5 vVWTP Sludge Handling Bed Improvements I~UI~CMASlNG M ~4GER 33 East Broadway Ave. Meridian, IC3 $3642 Phone; 208x888-4433 Fax: 208-687'-4813 ADDEND ~. # P -1 z-10048c T®: ALL PROSPECTIVE BIDDERS March 28, 2012 Reference: WWTP SLUDGE HANDLING BED fMPROVEMENTS Subject: Project PW-12-10049C - Addendum No. 2 Prospective Bidders for the above mentioned Request for Bid is hereby carrected and amended as follows: 1. larlflcatlons: Sheet E~O, General electrical note # 15 needs to be revised as follows: "ALL ABOVE GRADE CONDUIT SHALL $E RIGID PVC COATED AND SWALL BE A MINIMUM OF 3/4" UNLESS OTHERWt$E NOTED." Sheet E-1, Key Hate 6 shah be revised as fallows: "PROVIDE AND INSTALL HEAT TRACE (RAYCHEM-5BTV1-CR/CT) OR EC~UIVALENT WITH A MINIMUM OF 5 WATTS PER FOOT, CONDUIT, CONDUCTORS, POWER ON INDICATOR LIGHT, TERMINATION KIT AND ALL ACCESSORIES FOR A COMPLETE AND OPERATIONAL SYSTEM. MAKE FINAL TERMINATIONS. SEE MECHANICAL DRAWINGS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION." THIS ADDENDUM MUSTE SIGNED AND SUBMITTED WITH YOUR BID. 3. ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF TWE BID REMAIN TWE SAME. Please note the corrections by signing below and call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, fr >r Keith Watts ~ ~ Purchasing Manager Addendum No 2 Page 1 of 2 WW7'p Sludge Handling Bed Improvements ~, , ' ~ Addendum No 2 Rage 2 of Z WWTP Sludge Handling Bed Improvements THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE ®F ARCHITECTS AIA Document A310 1 KNOW ALL MEN BY TWESIE PRESENTS, that we Guho Corp.. 391 W. State St: Ste.. G Eagle, lp. 83616 as Principal, hereinafter called the Principal, and Western Surety Company P:0 Box 5077 Sioux Falls, SD 57117-5077 a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of South Dakota as Surety,_hereinafterealled the Surety, are held and firmly bound unto Gity of Meridian 33 East Broadway Ave. Meridian ID, 836~t6 as Obligee, hereinafter called the Obligee, in the sum of *5% of the total amount of the bid attached her@t0*k•~.e:•.a,~*+.,a,r~a,t** DollarS ~~"""~`aa~*.~***~ for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, the said Principal and the said Surety, bind ourselves; our heirs, executors, administrators,. successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. WHEREAS, the Principal has submitted a bond for WWTP Sludge Handling Bed Improvements NOW, THEREFORE, if the Obligee shall accept the bid of the Principal and the Principal shalt enter into a Contract with the Obligee in accordance with the terms of such bid, and give such bond or bonds as may be specified in the bidding or Contract Documents with good and sufficient surety for the faithful performance of such Contract and for the prompt. payment of labor and material furnished in the prosecution thereof, or in the event of the failure of the Principal to enter such Contract and give such bond or bonds, if the Principal shall pay to the Obligee the difference not to exceed the penalty hereof between the amount specified in .said bid and such larger amount for which the Obligee may in good faith contract with another party to perform the Work covered by said bid, then this obligation shall be null and void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect. _®.~ra~ee..e Sign. d and sealed this 30 day March , 2012. __. (t~fiessj ~-P Natalia Robb (Witnessj" AIA DOCUMENT A310 • SID BOND •AIA ®• FEBRUARY 1970 ED • THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1738 N.Y, AVE., N.W., WASHINGTON„ D..C., 20008 Western Surety Company .~~•••~~ Seat) Western Surety Company POWER OF ATTORNEY APPOINTING INDIVIDCJAL ATTORNEY-IN-FACT Know All Men Qy These Presents, That WESTERN SURETY COMPANY, a South Dakota corporation, is a duly organized and existing corporation having its principal office in the City of Sioux Falls, and State of South Dakota, and that it does by virtue of the signature and seal herein affixed hereby make, constitute and appoint William F Post, Mary Jaquier, Terry S Robb, Individually of Boise, ID, its true and lawful Attorney(s)-in-FncE with full power and authority hereby conferred to sign, seal and execute for and on Its behalf bonds, undertakings and other obligatory instruments of similar nature - In Unlimited Amounts - and to bind it thereby as fully and to the same extent as if such instruments were signed by a duly authorized officer of the corporation and all the acts of said Attomey, pursuant to the authority hereby given, are hereby ratified and Confirmed. This Power of Attorney is made and executed pursuant to and by authority of the By-Law printed on the reverse hereof, duly adopted, as ittdieated, by the shareholders of the corporatist. In Witness Whereof, WESTERN SURETY COMPANY has caused [here presents to be signed by its Senior Vice President and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed on this 14th day of November, 2011. ~'~uaa~,~ WESTERN SURETY COMPANY ~~'4~~vOR ~~1~ s~>~!f DP~~~P Paul . Bruflat, Senior Vice President State of South Dakota SS County of Minnehnha On this 14th day of November, 201 I, before me personally came Paul T. Bruflat, to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say: that he resides in the City of Sioux Falls, State of South Daksa; that he is the Senior Vice President of WESTERN SURETY COMPANY described in and which executed the above instrument, that he knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed to the said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so afftxed pursuant to authority given by the Board of Directors of said corporation and that he signed his name thereto pursuam to like authority, and acknowledges same to be the act and deed of said corporation. My commission expires +`°h`+'+~y`+'+'+6~'+hti'+`~hhtiy'+aaaa } i D, KRELL ~ November 30, 2012 SNOTARY PUBLICs s ~ SOUTH DAKOTAS ~ s ~NhA0.hhAia4Y~fh~+44e+44M+sAN4 D. Krell, No ry Public CERTIFICATE I, L. Nelson, Assistant Secretary of WESTERN SURETY COMPANY do hereby certify that the Power of Attorney hereinabove set forth is stilt in Force, and further certify that the 8y-Law of the corporation printed on the reverse hereof is still in force. In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the seal of the said corporation this 3 ~ day of !vIa r'CYl 2 ~ ~ 2 s~ WESTERN SURETY COMPANY ~3~00~~; s W ° ~~z ''k`S€ Avj'.Y ~~ ~~a L. Nelson, Assistant Secretary Form F4280.09-06 0 M N N r O N O C7 .~ V i c0 vl E'° J W r T W 00 (3 Z Z = W C9 Uc~ 0 p ~ o r ,J N G N . d W W / /~y~ W Z Z 00 00 O O ~ O O O O O O 00 O I.[) O O C O ~ f~ ~ O') f~ N dM" ~ N C~ C~ CAD _ Ef} 00 (f} ~ Ef? ER Z 0 ° ° ° ° o ~ o o, o, o c~i o r~ o d- o ~ ~ N O ~ Q r d ~ dam' ~ n ~ ER p EA (f} 6F} Ef} Z > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~ > ~ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > C ~ O O '`~ U U • 3 L L ~ o U ~ ~ U U O U c = U ~ ~ ~ `~ W (.7 0 .. ~ (~ o .. Q F- W p>+ Y a> c 0 a O a C O 2 C C K MO 4v +: Q Statutes Page 1 of 1 TITLE 54 PROFESSIONS, VOCATIONS, AND BUSINESSES CHAPTER 19 PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTORS 54-1902. UNLAWFUL TO ENGAGE IN PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTING WITHOUT LICENSE - - INVESTIGATIONS. (1) It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the business or act in the capacity of a public works contractor within this state without first obtaining and having a license issued pursuant to the provisions of this chapter by the administrator of the division of building safety, unless such person is particularly exempted as provided in this chapter. (2) It shall be unlawful for any public works contractor to subcontract in excess of eighty percent (80%) of the work under any contract to be performed by him as such public works contractor according to the contract prices therein set forth, unless otherwise provided in the specifications of such contracts. (3) Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, it shall be unlawful for any public works contractor to: (a) Accept a bid from any person who at that time does not possess the appropriate license for the project involved; or (b) Accept bids to sublet any part of any contract for specialty construction from a specialty contractor who at that time does not possess the appropriate license in accordance with this chapter. (4) No contractor shall be required to have a license under this chapter in order to submit a bid or proposal for contracts for public works financed in whole or in part by federal aid funds, provided that, at or prior to the award and execution of any such contract by the state of Idaho or any other contracting authority mentioned in this chapter, the successful bidder has secured a license as provided in this chapter. (5) The administrator may, upon his own motion or at the direction of the board, and shall, upon the verified written complaint of any person, investigate allegations of unlicensed practice of public works contracting, The Idaho Code is made available on the Internet by the Idaho Legislature as a public service. This Internet version of the Idaho Code may not be used for commercial purposes, nor may this database be published or repackaged for commercial sale without express written permission. The Idaho Code is the property of the state of Idaho, and is copyrighted by Idaho law, I. C. ~ 9 -352. According to Idaho law, any person who reproduces or distributes the Idaho Code for commercial purposes in violation of the provisions of this statute shall be deemed to be an infringer of the state of Idaho's copyright. http://legislature.Idaho.gov/idstat/Title54/T54CH19SECT54-1902PrinterFrie... 4/3/2012 ~~~~~~ ApR ~ ~ 2~1~ CITY OFG~C~I~':`o'~' CITY CLERKS OFFICE April 17, 2012 Keith Watts Purchasing Manager City of Meridian 33 E. Broadway Ave. ,Suite 106 Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: WWTP Sludge Handling Bed Improvement -Letter dated April 4, 2012 Base Bid $107,200.00 Guho Corp is self performing all concrete work Item 3 of Base Bid = $68,000.00 Guho Corp is self performing temp support and footing Item 4 of Base Bid= $9.700.00 Total self performed work under base bid 77,700.00 Alternate 1 Total Bid if Alternate 1 is added to contract = 64% of Base Bid = 9% of Base Bid 73 % of Base Bid $117,700.00 $224,900.00 Guho Corp is self performing all concrete work Item 3 of Base Bid & Alt 1= $68,000.00 = 31% of Base Bid & Alt 1 Guho Corp is self performing temp support and footing Item 4 of Base Bid & Alt 1= $9,700.00 = 5% of Base Bid & Alt 1 Guho Corp is self performing Demo of conveyor Item 1 of Alternate 1= 5,700.00 = 3% of Base Bid & Alt 1 Total self pertormed work under base bid and Alternate 1= 77,700.00 = 39% of Base Bid & Alt 1 Water Control Corp (Suppling KWS Screw auger) $75,000.00 = 61 % of Alt 1 Sincerely, .~ Nick J. Guho Guho Corp 391 W. STATE ST., SUITE G • EAGLE, IDAHO 83616 • (208) 939-8850 • FAX (208) 939-8928 ID PUBLIC WORKS LICENSE #12569-U-1-3 • ID STATE CONTRACTOR LICENSE #RCE~8113.OR LICENSE # 182239 • CA LICENSE # 362513 WA LICENSE # UHOCC913C3 • MT LICENSE # 160567 WWW.GUH000RP.COM Mayor Tammy de Weerd City Council Members: Keith Bird Brad Hoaglun Charles Rountree David Zaremba April 4, 2012 Nick Guho, SecretarylTreasurer Guho Corp. 391 W. State St, Ste G Eagle, ID 83616 RE: WWTP Sludge Handling Bed Improvements-Construction Bid Dear Mr. Guho: Upon final review of the bid your arm submitted for the above named project, it was found that you have subcontracted 94% of the work as stated on Exhibit 1. Subcontracting in excess of 80% of the work is prohibited per Idaho State Statute 54- 1902 (2). With this finding the City finds your bid non-responsive and will proceed with awarding the contract to the lowest responsive bidder of record. I have enclosed a copy of the Statute for your reference. Please feel free to give me a call at 489-0417 if you have any questions. Purchasing Department ®33 B. Broadway Avenue, Ste. 106, Meridian, 113 $3642 Phone 208-489-0416. Fax 208-887-4813. www.meridiancity.org -- ~.A - R- 'BF~~~B1D#I~~I~;I.NG~SCI~Et~UL~., ,? ~umish all labor, materials, equipment, installation, and incidentals as required far the P Sludge :'Handling Bed improvements Project, per the attached drawings and specifications. Itenn ®. ._. .ascription ric 1 Demolition and removal of site ..materials, asphalt paving,. concrete, and ~~~o~a~ other material associated with the`d 'n bed site construction. _ ~.~ 2 Supplying, placing, grading, compaction, and geotechnicai testing for sub- # ~5~500~` base material. _._„ ..~ 3. Installation of concrete pavement. 6~$, ~®°~ 4 Temporary support, concrete footings, and permanent support for existing ~- 9~ 100 ~~ belt conveyor. ~e ..m -- ,.~..r_.~. - --..~.. - - ~.~,~ .~.. .,u~.. LUMP SUM TOTAL, .................................................................................... 1®1~ Zoo F _ k .. ~. __--._ ,,,. _,.~ . ~ -Y.~-•, -=~PICINC'SCH~.y(DU~.Et~-"°} fADD~~~I~T~ENi4t ~F.`i Furnish ail labor, materials, equipment, installation, and incidentals as required for the installing the SCREW CONVEYOR, per the attached drawings and spec cations. Total cost to include all labor, material, equipment, freight, insurance, travel, lodging, incidental, and applicable taxes 17 of 25 Addendum No 1 Page 4 of 5 Sludge Handling Improvements ~ ~~'~ ~~r s , ,w~~,; .,`;_ ,}, ~,~x.. __ ~~ ," i'1 _ " i' ' ,~, ~~'~~ ~,,,. r~ f ~ it ~ '• ' i V ~~`~ ~~ £' i /, },; r _ . ; ~ ~EL ~ ~ o r137 I Z3, o00 ~ ~~o ~i' ~~~. ITC/ l1~ _ JC{LP,~-~1 ~'11~4~{S~L. SU ~l. ~A(ST~~.L Jr Vo o ~ Z-~ r d~ ~ ~ IA >~; _ i ~ .. .. ,, w .'~ 1 of r® in iy unc®I in State Legislation to Preempt Massage Therapist License as of July 1, 2013 DATE: IE-MSTAFF TOI AGENCOY I APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS ri ian iy un®I in Application for Smoky Mountain Pizza & Pasta Fairview Lakes LLC dba Smoky Mountain Pizzeria Grill Located at 980 E Fairview Ave. Pending Ada County Approval MEETING NOTES v® Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: IE_MSTA D TO) AGENCOY I APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS ri in ity uncil in AT' :April 17, 2012 I U R: 8H J 1' NU R: ITEM TITLE: oli sate Advisory Commission Report and Request for Funding Authority for Two Projects for the Community Recycling Fund MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: IE-MSTA D TOI AGENCY I APPLICANT ( NOTES ( INITIALS Solid Waste Advisory Commission: Report and Request for Funding Authority for Two Projects To: Mayor and City Council Re: City of Meridian Community Recycling Fund (CRFP) Date: April 12, 2012 There is approximately $38,000 in the Community Recycling Fund available for distribution to eligible public community projects. SWAC received three applications during the first quarter of 2012 (open period).1 Two applications have been reviewed and approved by SWAC as meeting all of the CRFP's eligibility criteria and program requirements: (1) Old Town Clean-up 2012; and (2) Meridian Public Pool- related Improvements. The following is a summary of each application: 1. Old Town Clean-Up 2012 (Exhibit A): • Date of event: May 12, 2012 Summary: This event has been inexistence since 2005. The intent of the program is to educate residents about recycling, clean up a different neighborhood each year, assist senior and disabled residents with home and yard clean-up, and establish community pride. 2012 proceeds from recycled metals will be disbursed to two groups-Meridian Food Bank and the Meridian Valley Humane Society. New to this year's event is the added household hazardous waste pick-up component. Amount Requested: 2 346.80 for rental fees for HHW collection truck(s), flyers, and volunteer T-shirts. • Eligibility Analysis: This project meets CRFP criteria and program elements including: ~ Increasing community awareness to the benefits of waste reduction and recycling; ~/ Diversion of recyclables and household hazardous waste from landfill disposal; V Promoting the use of recycled content materials in outreach materials (flyers) and T-shirts; V Value to broader community w/involvement of many community sponsors and volunteers SWAC Recommendation: SWAC requests that City Council authorize funding as requested in the amount of $2,346.80. Additionally, SWAC would like to specifically request that the applicant list the CRFP as a sponsor on the back of the T-shirts along with its other sponsors. 1 One application (Meridian Dog Park Task Force) was deemed insufficient as it lacked necessary permits. The applicant has been instructed to bring back the application to SWAC with an updated application meeting program requirements. The applicant is receiving assistance from appropriate City staff to facilitate the process. 2. Meridian Public Pool-related Improvements, Western Ada Recreation District (Exhibit B): Summary: Funds will be used to purchase 7 benches, 2 picnic tables and 4 trash can enclosures made from recycled materials with the intent being for pool users to have more permanent type of seating, eating areas, and trash disposal enclosures to encourage proper disposal of trash. Amount Requested: 7 800.00 for purchase of cedar-colored recycled plastic materials to assemble tables, benches and trash can enclosures. Matching funds are available. Total estimated cost of project is $8,800.00. • Eligibility Analysis: This project meets CRFP criteria and program elements including: ~ Promoting use of recycled, reused or repurposed, or composted materials; ~ Creating high public visibility for signage/recognition of the CRFP; V Increasing community awareness to the benefits of waste reduction and recycling SWAG Recommendation: The applicant is seeking $7,800.00 of a total estimated project cost of $8,800.00. Under the CRFP a 50% match in funds or donated materials is required for projects that exceed $5,000.00. Although the applicant indicated that matching funds are available, in further discussions it turns out that may not be the case. Therefore, SWAC requests that City Council authorize funding as follows: The applicant may choose to either accept a $5,000.00 funding award and reduce the size of its project accordingly or accept a $4,400.00 funding award for the project as submitted with the applicant required to match with equivalent funds or materials. Additionally, SWAC would like to specifically request that the applicant include on its signage the percent recycled materials used to build the tables, benches, and trash can enclosures. SWAC respectfully requests City Council authorize funding of the two projects as recommended. Funding will occur on a reimbursement basis. The Mayor and City Council will be kept informed as to the status and progress of the projects. Thank you. ~i i ity until a ®n :April 17, 2012 IT l1 9A J . iTEnn ~ri~rLE: rdinance An Ordinance (AZ 1 1-005) for the Annexation of a Parcel of Land Situated in a Portion of the S'/2 of the Southeast'/< and in a Portion of the Southwest'/4 of Section 23, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, of Meridian Idaho, Establishing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of Said Lands from RUT to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) and Providing an Effective Date I DATE: I E-MSTAFF TOI AGENCOY ( APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS I IVlri Ian ity ucil in :April 17, 2012 IT U 9 J T U STEM TITLE: rdinnce o. An Ordinance (RZ 11-006) for the Re-Zone of a Parcel of Land Situated in a Portion of the South'/2 of the Southeast'/< of Section 23, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, of Meridian Idaho, Establishing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 4.64 Acres of Land from the R-4 (Medium-Low Density Residential) Zoning District and TN-C (Traditional Neighborhood Center) Zoning District to C-C (Community Business District) Zoning District and Providing an Effective Date DATE: IE-MSTAFFTOI AGENCOY ( APPLICANT ( NOTES ( INITIALS ~-i i n iy nil ®n T :April 17, 2012 11' U 9C J 1° U ir~nn T~TL~: rinc o. An Ordinance (RZ 11-006) for the Re-Zone of a Parcel of Land Situated in a Portion of the South'/z of the Southeast'/4 of Section 23, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, of Meridian Idaho, Establishing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 46,97 Acres of Land from the R-4 (Medium-Low Density Residential) Zoning District and TN-C (Traditional Neighborhood Center) Zoning District to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District and Providing an Effective Date DATE: IE-MSTAFF TOI AGENCOY I APPLICANT I NOTES I INITIALS ri i n ity until in T ®April 17, 2012 I U 10 J U irEnn TITLE: Future eetiCl oic ~~~,~_. ( DATE: (E_MSTA D TOI AGENCY I APPL CANT I NOTES ( INITIALS I