HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 11-08 Joint Planning & Zoning
Meridian City Council Special Joint MeetinQ
November 8. 2006
The Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting was called to order at 5:30 P.M.
on Wednesday, November 8,2006 by President Councilman Shaun Wardle.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Shaun Wardle, Charlie
Rountree and Joe Borton.
P&Z Members Present: Michael Rohm, David Moe, David Zaremba, Wendy
Newton-Huckabay and Keith Borup
Staff Present: Bill Nary, Len Grady, Anna Canning, Matt Ellsworth, Peter
Friedman and Will Berg.
Item 1.
Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X Shaun Wardle
X Charlie Rountree
X
X Joe Borton
X Keith Bird
Mayor Tammy de Weerd
Item 2.
Adoption of the Agenda:
Bird: Mr. President.
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we adopt the agenda as published.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All in favor.
ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED.
Item 3.
Overview of South Meridian Area Plan:
Wardle: Before we begin on Item 3, the 45 minutes that we have allotted is for
both three and four and is the max. So, if you will take note of that. Thank you.
Ellsworth: Mr. President, Council and Members of the Commission. South
Meridian Comprehensive Planning process is well on the way of up and running
and we will give you an overview on it this evening. The purpose of the planning
process that we are engaged in here was to prepare a plan for the South
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 2 of 26
Meridian area for eventual adoption of the city's comprehensive plan. Broadly
speaking there are three components to the process here. On the one hand was
public participation. We also had a sub-consultant involved to prepare the
market study to go along with the study area and of course the draft plan itself.
As far as public participation process was concerned that was almost separated
out as its own guiding portion of the plan that was to develop a plan that is
supported by area residents. The market assessment end of things was just to
make sure that whatever proposed land uses come forward with the plan that
those will, in fact, be feasible within the market realities. The draft plan itself is
going to integrate and incorporate three different components. On the one hand
it is going to bring in public and resident feedback, which obviously comes from
the public participation process. Of course the market conditions and other area
and regional plans, Communities in Motion and ACHD plans as well. The plan
itself is going to come down to obviously an amended future land use map that
coincides with the boundaries that we have been taking a look at and the specific
area of taxed, which will just sort of highlight some of the areas specific
concerns. The public process, once again going along with the public
participation process. Three public meetings have been conducted today. The
first one regarded community identity. We moved from there into community
visioning and based on the feedback that we received in the first two, our
consultants and staff (inaudible--) meeting. 176 folks turned out. 76 comment
forms were submitted and Members of the Council this may look familiar to you.
This was a data exercise that we asked meeting participants to participate in and
as you can see the blue dots that we asked folks to place on the aerial map there
came down to residents who identified more with the City of Meridian as opposed
to the City of Kuna and of course a lot of residents who preferred remaining
unincorporated at Ada County or with a different entity. In any event, we asked
that they placed the dots on their relevant parcels so that we could sort of gage
where an appropriate study boundary would be. The results of the exercise were
brought before Council on April 18th and during that meeting Council chose an
appropriate study boundary, which is what we have moved forward with since.
As you can see, the western boundary over there runs down McDermott Road to
Lake Hazel, then jogs east to the half mile between Linder and Meridian Road,
then it proceeds south to a half mile south of Columbia and over to coincide
essentially with existing eastern boundary of the city, one quarter mile west of
Cloverdale there. The second public meeting was conducted August 20th. The
purpose once again was to determine residents' vision for the future of the area.
It was another well attended meeting. Seventy people showed up. Not quite as
much as the first one, but it was still a product meeting nonetheless. We asked
residents to hone in on the priorities that they could identify for the future of the
area. What they brought back to us was top priority planning for responsible
growth followed by preserving rural, agricultural life style in the area and
providing better traffic infrastructure. Now a little of elaboration on the first one.
Planning for responsible growth and some of the key elements that they cited
pertaining to that issue were acquiring development to pay for itself, not forcing
annexations and planning for a balanced mix of services and then having
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 3 of 26
appropriate transitions in between different uses between your residential, your
commercials, your employments and so forth. Preserving a rural and agricultural
lifestyle - residents of the area identified protecting water resources as a top
priority, allowing existing agricultural to continue operation, preserving farmland
and open space and we also asked for a little bit of clarities to exactly what rural
means - just that it could mean a lot of different things to different people. So,
broadly speaking what we heard back during that meeting was units placed
between % acre lots and five acre lots seem to be the general consensus,
although there were a few who felt that outside of those general parameters will
also acceptable as rural. As far as traffic infrastructure was concerned, mobility
access and safety were the three main concerns of people in the area and of
course development of parks and trails, as well as open space was identified as
a priority as well. Based on the information that we learned at the second publiC
meeting we moved forward with the third and that went forward on September
20, 2006. Another (inaudible) meeting - 193 people turned out and that was the
meeting during which we presented the three different alternative land use
scenarios that the consultants and staff had been developing. The first
alternative that we presented emphasized low density and that obviously was
sort of a roll over from the feedback that we received at the previous two
meetings. As a result of course it resulted in less land for parks and schools and
there was also less of an emphasis on non-residential uses. The second
alternative that we presented on the 20th there focused on employment on job
creation and that was essentially based on two factors - broadly here - on the
one hand it was Communities in Motion, which tries to balance out the housing
(inaudible) the Valley and also the feedback that we received from residents in
the area the previous two meetings just in the desire to have more employment
options closer to home. The third alternative that we asked participants to
consider was a transit support alternative and that reflects much more closely the
recommendations that came forward in Communities in Motion. What we
learned at that meeting was that folks overwhelming preferred low density, but
the comments that they submitted were also very telling. There was a very
strong desire among meeting attendees for parks and open space, so we started
brainstorming different possible solutions to make sure that we can integrate
both. They were also fairly adamant about providing commercial businesses to
meet day to day needs and the bottom line on that was that folks didn't want to
have to cross 1-84 to get groceries everyday and things of that nature and again
some employment options and opportunities in the study area. So, we did what
we could to roll those together. I apologize if this is tough to see from where you
guys are, but this is the preliminary map -
De Weerd: Matt?
Ellsworth: Yes, ma'am.
De Weerd: Before you move on, the last meeting, the third meeting you also co-
located with the ACHD study as well. Is that not correct?
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 4 of 26
Ellsworth: Yes ma'am that is correct. ACHD is in the process of preparing a
South Meridian Transportation Study. It has been a great level of communication
between ACHD and the city so far. They lined up their boundaries for that study
to coincide with the boundaries for the South Meridian Plan and what you will see
coming forward with that is essentially three different scenarios on their end that
they are going to take a look at. They are looking in depth at Communities in
Motion type scenarios, community choices rather - also a trend scenario and
they were going to run traffic modeling on the preferred land uses that result from
the South Meridian Plan here. So, we definitely appreciate the level of
communication between the agencies as these are moving forward.
De Weerd: Okay, thank you.
Ellsworth: Sure. On the future land use map and again this is a work in progress
and this was forwarded from our consultants late last week so we are still giving it
the comb through, but in general it is predominantly low density, which again
aligns fairly closely with the desires of area residents that we heard throughout
the public participation process. It had some higher densities along the major
transportation corridors as identified in Communities in Motion and those were in
the study area Lake Hazel, Meridian and Ten Mile so we did what we could to up
the units per acre along those corridors. It does incorporate neighborhood
centers and that is primarily to meet the day to day shopping needs that were
emphasized by participants in the three public meetings. We integrated an
employment sanctuary, which is a new designation. We are still ironing out the
details on it, but on the one hand that is a response again to the desire for more
employment options, but what we envision with that designation is ultimately
business park, high tech campus type uses ideally for higher paying jobs for
living wage jobs and again we are exploring strategies with our consultants to be
responsive to the requests for preservation of open space throughout the area
and especially as you work your way south, primarily in the vicinity of Columbia
there we have been brainstorming to try to determine an appropriate method to
set up some sort of a transition between the cities of Meridian and Kuna if and
when they end up growing together. So, we have been exploring different
setbacks, different clustering options and things of that nature, but in just a
minute here I will turn it over to the Commission and the Council for any
suggestions that you may have that we should look into as we continue moving
forward with that. As the Mayor mentioned the ACHD Transportation Plan is
another one in the works at the moment. That is scheduled for completion in
March of next year and so those will fit together very well here and ultimately that
will be incorporated with the comprehensive plan at a later date and we are
exploring different ways to do so. The next steps in the process here as we
move forward - on the one hand we are going to finalize the map based on
conversations with other agencies between the staff and consultants. Once we
finalize it, it will be presented to the public on November 15th. A couple of
expected changes to the map as we move forward here is we are going to run
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 5 of 26
the locations of the proposed schools and fire stations backed by Joint School
District No. 2 as well as Meridian Fire Department. We are still considering
different ways of integrating some of the non-residential uses. There were a
couple of spots that were (inaudible) to revisit here over the upcoming weeks.
The pathways - I am not sure if you noticed or not, but on this map there aren't
any pathways indicated at the moment and the reason behind that is because at
the same time that this is moving forward the city is also developing an update to
the trails and pathway master plan. We have a consultant team out of Portland
and that is a joint project between Planning and Parks and Recreation. They
have had two public meetings to date and that plan is moving forward very well.
Doug Strong plans to schedule a Pre-Council work session with Council in the
upcoming weeks between now and when that ap~lication would be submitted as
another comp plan amendment on December 15 h. But, ultimately what is going
to wind up happening is the recommendations from the pathways plan will be
integrated directly into the South Meridian study area here so there won't be any
conflict between those. Once again the transition zones to the south, like I said
we are looking at a different setback and other ways of just establishing visually
and from a travel perspective some sort of separation between communities -
that was another recommendation that came forward in Communities in Motion.
So, if there are any suggestions from the Commission or from Council as to
different methods that we might look into for that sort of thing, we would
appreciate some direction from you guys on that.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Members, Commission Members a couple of
other changes that we are going to be looking at on this map, particularly along
Ten Mile and Lake Hazel are possibly looking at a little bit higher density with the
eye to the future with a possible transit along some of those major arterials. So
that could be a transit you see coming back in the final preferred alternative as
we move through the process. It is not shown on this map, but again there is a
couple more refinements. We are working with a consultant on what we are
going to want to put forward and bring to the Commission and the Council.
Ellsworth: Again the next steps - we have brushed on these and at this point I
would be happy to do what I can to answer any questions that Councilor the
Commission may have.
Wardle: Thank you Matt and Pete. One of the questions that I have on your
map that I noticed is that all the neighborhood centers are at major intersections.
Was there discussion - I know in the past we have had a policy in especially
north Meridian of moving some of those to the half mile or the mid point of the
mile. Was there in the discussion on that by the community?
Ellsworth: There definitely discussion, Chairman, that was had between the
consultants and staff and as I understand it, some of the locations that were
identified earlier were met with some resistance by landowners and developers
and so the impression that I was under was we shifted them to some of these
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 6 of 26
major intersections to make sure again that it flows with the realities of the
market on the one hand. On the other hand, discussions that we have had with
ACHD and COMPASS and the consultants as well is integrating language to
treat curve cuts, to treat access concerns up and down those major roads just to
make sure the intersections continues to function the way that it needs to for the
system and still allowing enough access for the neighborhood center concept to
work.
Wardle: Thank you, Matt. Council, Commission? Just to clarify, Matt, for the
public hearing process this is really an informational item for us today. We have
a series of public hearings scheduled and we expect application to the Planning
and Zoning Commission for Comprehensive Review at what --?
Ellsworth: December 15th is the date that we have and that we decided to submit
that and the pathways plan that I mentioned a moment ago as well is going to be
forwarded on the same timeline there.
Canning: President Wardle, Members of the Council and Members of the
Commission, one of the things that we would like to know today is if you see that
staff is headed down a path that you are completely uncomfortable with, you
need to let us know so we can change course here. That is what we are really
trying to get from you tonight. Not an overall approval or disapproval of this plan,
but if you are concerned with where we are headed, if you could let us know now
that would make for a much more efficient public hearing process.
Wardle: Anna, one of the questions that I have and Matt touched on it a little bit
and that is the employment sanctuary area. Can you point that out on the map
and --?
Canning: Sure. It is that gray blob on - it is the gray square on Meridian and
Lake Hazel and we use the term sanctuary only because we didn't want - not to
say that folks couldn't develop there now, but to say it would be saved for
employment uses, not for retail, not for other uses that might be acceptable in
that zoning - to use that term to say this is for employment uses, not retail
basically.
Wardle: How many total acres does that encompass currently?
Canning: It looks like about a % of a square mile so that would be -
Bird: One hundred and sixty.
Canning: One hundred and sixty.
Bird: I think that is about right.
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 7 of 26
Wardle: Anna, I guess in my mind to think of our current employment centers
this would be mirroring potentially what we have at Eagle and Overland to an
extent?
Canning: Yes because those are 90 and 90 and so those are about 180 so, yes,
similar size.
Wardle: Thank you.
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Wardle: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess I would just like to make a comment. I didn't participate - I
did - I went to all three of those meetings just to get a sense of what was the
thought of the people that participated and I know the first meeting that we had
was a lot different than the last meeting we had - tempers - maybe there has
been a lot of credibility and trust that has been built and I would like to
compliment the staff and our consultants on how they really reached out and
brought the citizens and property owners into the process. It was pretty
contentious at first and the third meeting they had there was some really good
dialogue going on and people could see that staff really did want to know what
their thoughts were and that their voices were being heard. There has been a
number of correspondence emails going out to keep the residents informed and
in the loop, so I would just like to give my kudos to staff for your approach and in
really helping smooth over a very rough start.
Wardle: Mr. Zaremba if you could please come to the microphone.
Zaremba: Mr. President, Members of the Council - Matt thank you for the
presentation. I guess the question I would ask is there an area that would be
identified for - what are they being called enterprise districts seems to be a new
economic thrust in Meridian? I don't know if that needs to be defined or not, but
like businesses together along with supply businesses in one area and is there
any place in south Meridian that is envisioned for something like that?
Canning: We hadn't yet talked about one in the south Meridian plan as far as a
districting for a specific targeted type of use, but employment sanctuary could
certainly be one. There could also be an opportunity, perhaps for something
more related - kind of a rural, agricultural, but it wasn't something we heard the
neighbors say. But, we could certainly look at trying to incorporate that into it if
that is something that the Commission and Council would like to see us work on
or work on an idea of what that employment sanctuary should be geared around.
We could also do it that way. This does share area with the Ten Mile Charrette,
which had a very focused employment - kind of office employment and industrial
employment, but we haven't talked much about the equivalent of a medical
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 8 of 26
district or what that employment sanctuary could be. We could come up with a
list if that is something Council and Mayor and Commissioners are interested in.
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Wardle: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Well, I think we have had some discussions in that area. I don't
know how it relates to some of the Ten Mile Area Specific Plan, but there has
been discussion of a particular type of industry to consider in that area.
Canning: Do you mean the pharmaceuticals?
De Weerd: Yes.
Canning: Okay.
Borton: Matt, I just have a couple of questions. One of your earlier slides when it
was talking about some of the preferences, whether it is - were you able to
determine whether or not those preferences varied based upon where the
individuals identified themselves with?
Ellsworth: Well-
Borton: Or was there any trend --?
Ellsworth: At the third meeting, I guess sort of the umbrella trend that we did
notice was that it was better attended by folks in the immediate vicinity of the
study area, whereas in some of the earlier meetings it was essentially people
within the study area. It was tougher to keep a track on exactly where these
specific comments were coming from in relation to where the attendees lived in
and around the study area, so to really nail down on the specifics on that, we
weren't really able to capture it - but, broadly speaking, like I said we did notice
there were some more people from outside of the study area at the third public
meeting than at the first one.
Wardle: Mr. Borup.
De Weerd: Sorry this isn't so conducive to good dialogue.
Borup: Mr. President, Members of the Council the question I have and I was -
and I thought it was very positive to see the number of people that attended.
Was there any effort to determine percentage of land ownership? I mean, are we
having 80 percent of the people and only 20 percent of the land in this area that
are expressing their opinion or was there any effort to determine the number of
acres with each respondent or representative or anything along that line at all?
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 9 of 26
Ellsworth: We really didn't focus in to that level of detail. I mean, the mapping
exercise at public meeting number one was really where we asked specifically to
the parcel level, you know where each attendee resided throughout the study
area. We didn't ask the number of acres that they were speaking for or anything
along those lines though.
Borup: That is something that kind of helps me determine to what light to put the
comments in and you know who it is that is responsible. Thank you.
Canning: President Wardle if I could answer too. Commissioner Borup we did -
as the Commission knows there is one major landholder to the east of Eagle.
There is really only one other major landowner to - not Eagle, but Meridian -
there is only one other person that we are aware of having considerable holdings
on the west side. If you look at the parcelization pattern, if you flip back. Part of
the struggle in this area is there are so many irregular, relatively small acreages.
Just anecdotally during the meetings, we heard from a lot of five acre owners and
some 20 acre owners. They seem to all be saying the same thing - the views
expressed by the major owners were reflected in a comprehensive plan
amendment that you have already acted on. So, you are aware of those, but the
other ones they were - there didn't seem to be a pattern because in our wrap
ups for the meetings we always queried one another about that because I was
curious about those kinds of issues too and to whether the west side felt
differently than the east side, but it seemed to be fairly consistent actually.
Borup: No big farms left in that area then?
Canning: There are a couple large farms that the daughter who happens to work
for ACHD showed up, but that was - there are some dairy farms, but not a whole
lot of large farms left.
Wardle: Thank you, Ann. Before we move on just to answer a question about
districting, looking at the employment sanctuary area, it appears to me just from
a transportation standpoint knowing what is coming from Canyon County; some
of ACHD's planning as well as ITD that that would become a very desirable
corner very, very quickly. I think it would be a great service to really define that
area so that we can get exactly what we want because I suspect that you will
have a lot of pressure from large retailers to come through and if we can plan
that area ahead of time accordingly to get a nice mix of uses it would probably
make the development area even much more desirable. Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Mr. President - for anyone of you three, I guess that particular
corridor is going to be even more heavily used as we grow. Is there anything in
mind as it relates to the proposed uses primarily medium density, residential to
factor in some kind of a buffer between the high volumes of traffic and residential
- number one as it relates to traffic and number two to minimize the amount of
access that is going to be allowed on that corridor, you know even though our
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 10 of 26
ordinance covers it, is there some way to define it in the plan map to identify that
there will be reduced access available?
Canning: President Wardle, Members of the Council, Mayor and Commission
certainly we could look at extending. We have got a transition zone shown up to
the medium density residential designation. We could continue that up until it hit
a non-residential designation. There is a question about whether that red
commercial property will stay that way. We are talking to folks now, so if that
went away we could just carry that transition all the way up to the employment
center or sanctuary, sorry. That would be one way you could get that additional
buffer.
Ellsworth: Councilman Rountree if I could add to that. Mayor, Mr. President,
Members of the Commission, Council we do have another meeting scheduled
coming up here on the 1 ih of this month to sit down with staff of ITD, ACHD, the
City of Kuna and the City of Meridian and it is to discuss that exact corridor of
State Highway 69. We noticed that in 2008 ITD's program for a corridor study of
SH 69 so the thought was between ACHD's South Meridian Transportation
Study, the city's land use plan and the State's plan forthcoming in 2008 there is
probably some opportunities to get on the same page now rather than waiting
until then and allow their needs, wants and desires to sort of shape this plan as it
moved forward. That is coming up in the next couple of weeks and this map will
definitely be a part of that conversation.
Rountree: Very good. Mr. President.
Friedman: I am sorry -- I want to follow up a little bit on that and getting back to
the employment sanctuary. As Anna indicated we still need to define what
exactly that is, but not only what it is but how it evolves. I think one of the things
we might want to put in there is sort of maybe a master plan in concept for it or
something so we can look at some of those access circulation issues that
Council member Rountree, I think, is talking about also for the residential areas
because that really is the key is how do we make them connect and if we are
fortunate enough to get someone who consolidates it all, but if we are not that
fortunate how do we make it work?
Rountree: Mr. President.
Wardle: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Just a curiosity question because I can't find it - what is that? I don't
find itonthelegend.
Canning: No, it - man you have sharp eyes, sir. That is - we originally had the
consultants identify some view lots because we were curious where those view
lots would be. It will be a separate exhibit. They were on this map for a while.
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8. 2006
Page 11 of 26
That happens to be one property that they forgot to take the layer off. That is all
it is.
Rountree: Okay.
Wardle: Thank you to staff for all your hard work and getting this public input and
so I think - do you have enough direction to go forward from here?
Ellsworth: Mr. President, I believe so.
Wardle: Great. Thank you very much. Thank you, Commission for your input.
Item 4.
Overview of Ten Mile Specific Area Plan:
Friedman: Thank you Mr. President, Mayor, Council members, Commissioners I
think as we have already talked about in the previous plan that the two planning
efforts that the city has currently going on are really meant to either reinforce or
further refine our comprehensive plan and you know the goal is to provide as city
leaders as well as property owners and business owners with what we want to
see and get in front of as far as future growth and the city goes and as you saw
on the South Meridian Plan we had one form of public engagement and as the
Mayor has indicated that has been a pretty strong hallmark of our planning efforts
and I think as you will see now on the Ten Mile Specific plan we had another
form of public engagement, but I think what I wanted to emphasize is that both of
these planning efforts have really tried to focus on and incorporate the public as
we go through the process and we will continue to do that as we take these plans
and refine them and take them before Planning & Zoning and then ultimately to
you. If you can imagine the plan in the study area up here. Give us a moment,
we have another presentation, but where we are at in the specific plan process
right now is we have been through the Charrette and we have refined some plan
alternatives, which hopefully you will see pretty soon. Some of you saw the
preferred land use alternative at the end of the Charrette on the fourth day. We
are refining a few of the land use designations. We are refining some of the
transportation and circulation patterns on that and we will be working with our
consultant to get a draft plan assembled and put together here by the end of the
month. So, there you have the Ten Mile Specific Area Plan Study area and
again as you know this is in anticipation of the construction of the Ten Mile
Interchange. The planned components are going to include, of course, your
normal goals, policies and objectives. We will have a land use plan that will
assess current conditions and then start looking at future land use and how they
are compatible with adjacent uses and how they transition to other uses as well
as the effect on transportation system. We also have a transportation plan and I
think you will see in a moment that what we have tried to do is actually identify a
collector system so that we can avoid some of the issues that relate to
congestion with multiple accesses along collectors and arterials. As part of the
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 12 of 26
planning process, what has been going on in the background is that we have had
a market analysis, trying to focus on what uses we should target for this area as
well as an industrial lands analysis, which is not only going to be focused on this
area, but will also be focused - it is a city wide analysis that is being done. The
real sort of - we are moving in a new direction now - this plan, the specific area
plan is going to have an urban design element so we can start looking at building
forms and how it relates to the streets and how buildings and development relate
to each other and then there will be some recommendations on how we
implement this plan, but there will be design guidelines or enough to give us
some direction as we are posed for future development in the area. As I said
that the hallmark of our planning efforts has been citizen involvement and
property owner involvement and so through the Ten Mile Specific plan we
undertook the Charrette process, which is a fancy word for a design exercise,
which is really an iterative process where we have ongoing discussions with
stakeholders and the public - we develop plans, they review them, they react to
them, we redevelop them, we go through alternative analysis and ultimately at
the end we bring out what we think we have heard in a graphic form for some
confirmation or buy off. So, we kicked off sort of the beginning of Charrette week
with a presentation of where we were going, what we had done that day and
where we were going and what people could anticipate over the next few days.
We started out with some basic land use scenarios and started winnowing down
which ones we thought were even worth looking at and which ones had the
strength and support of what we were getting from our interviews and our
comments that were received. For those of you that were there, in and out of
there you will remember that people were coming and going all day long and so
staff and the consultants were madly working and drawing and interviewing
people and then the people were coming in and we were talking with them and
getting their ideas and their responses and so it was a very dynamic environment
and as we develop those scenarios we started looking at the factors that we
wanted to incorporate into them. One was you can't read it on the left, but it is a
strong urban design component that looked at form and function. We had
integration of land uses, protection of - there aren't really any flood plains out
there, but some of the creeks and channels, which we could use as future
amenities for future development and then a transition to surrounding uses - we
also wanted to use sustainable design elements and really focus on high quality
design. So, that was sort of the basic factors that under laid the development of
our scenarios. Here we are another day or two into it. We have been getting
comments, we have got a lot of transparencies, we are going through them and
we are redrawing and talking about analyzing some of the comments that we
have received and things start moving along - we start (inaudible) some colors,
but while we are looking at land use we are also looking at transportation and
what the possibilities are for intersection design and collector street systems.
You know we were going back and forth trying to look at the various connection
opportunities. Well, while this was going on, we were developing the land use
continuum and trying to identify what would be sort of the range of land use
intensities that would develop in the area, how they would relate to each other
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 13 of 26
and then there was a whole other group of people working on the design element
and trying to illustrate what this area could look like as it is as we plan it. So, we
developed a land use continuum that incorporates everything from low density
residential to extremely high, not extremely high density but to high density
residential to a mixture of uses and then you can't read it very well, but one of the
focal points of the plan will be a lifestyle center that would be located on the site
of Ten Mile, north of the freeway and a lifestyle center is a combination of retail,
entertainment, office use, potentially residential use all in sort of the non-
traditional mall setting as we see it. As we get into the preferred alternative you
will see that we have laid out kind of a main street idea for that. So, as I
mentioned we were not only looking at land use, we were looking at
transportation. Our consultants were taking the land use intensities working with
COMPASS getting some projections and doing modeling on not only what the
arterial systems could accommodate, but what the potential intersections that we
have laid out would accommodate and at what level of service. In the meantime,
we are continuing to refine sort of the graphic representation of what our
preferred alternative would look like. By day four we had a plan. I will just go
through the land use element because that is of course where most of the people
really want to focus on. That is the first question they come in with is where am I
on the map and what is it? So, right now this is the preferred alternative. We do
know there is going to be a couple of adjustments up in this area and a couple
other adjustments on some other properties in it, but overall this is the plan. We
have a high density employment area here, medium which is office buildings,
three to six story office buildings, medium density employment, which could be
anything from offices to like manufacturing and that sort of thing. A low density
employment, which is office park, industrial because of its proximity to both the
future Highway 16 and the rail lines. We have medium high density residential
here, medium density residential there, this is high density residential, this is a
mixed use commercial, this is our lifestyle center. The purple areas are civic
uses. There is a church. There is a park and ride. We are anticipating in some
point in the future a commuter rail, so we have our planning for a transit station
up here at the end of this mixed use commercials street and then when we
moved down to the south we are more residential down in here, low density
residential, medium residential. Over here we have some medium to high
residential with some mixed use commercial there. If you see that when we get
to our collector system, one of the things that we have planned here is to relocate
Overland Road so it doesn't go straight out to Ten Mile, but actually starts
swinging down to the south and makes a connection down here. We have been
working with the developer of this project and we have been having discussions
with ITD and we are hopeful that we can make this all work. So, this is again our
land use continuum. This is the northeast corner. This is the lifestyle center.
This would be high density residential, mixed use commercial - again, high
density employment right adjacent to the freeway and Ten Mile Interchange and
then medium high density, medium density residential and medium density
employment to reflect some existing conditions there. Moving to the north central
part of the study area, again this is quite a bit of employment, but we have also
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8. 2006
Page 14 of 26
focused on having a residential core in there to provide some work and job
housing balancing in that area. Then again as we move to the west we are pretty
heavily focused on employment and industrial land uses. One of the unique
aspects of this plan and one of the real challenges that we are facing is we have
identified both an arterial and a collector system and the goal on this is to create
a system that circulates the traffic in the best and efficient manner and allows us
for some form of access control and so we have laid out a series of collector
streets, which are these blue ones and the arterials which are the gold color right
here. This is the Overland relocation. This is Ten Mile and here we have
Franklin. One of the things that we will be working on and part of the
implementation is just how we make this collector system work. We have also
planned for two intersections between the Ten Mile Interchange and Franklin.
This would be a signalized intersection right here and this would be a ride in, ride
out intersection here feeding into the collector system that would then provide
access to the future development and the local access streets within the
development areas. As I mentioned earlier, we have traffic planners and traffic
engineers on the consultant team, so we are not only looking at the intersections,
but we are also looking at the design and running the numbers on that to try and
assess what the traffic counts will be and based on the modeling we are finding
that there are some very acceptable levels of services at a couple of those
intersections. They seem to think it will work well. We have followed up in the
last few days with a couple alternative designs so this is still being refined at the
moment. This area right here is our lifestyle center and we are planning a main
street as one of the focus points of it and again, since we are going to be
focusing on design we will probably be getting some illustrations on the
streetscape and how we want the street to relate to the adjacent land uses. So,
the design element is one that we are incorporating into this plan that I think is
going to make it a very exciting plan. You are not going to be able to see this,
except for maybe Councilman Rountree, but I have placed before you and the
Council just some images of the types and forms of building that we are looking
at for the various densities and types of uses and we plan on incorporating some
of those images into the plan. So, this is just an idea of how we are looking at
some of these areas. Again here is the Interchange - here is some of that high
density employment centers -
(Tape turned over)
Friedman: -- Ten Mile and then you have some high density residential here and
we will be backing that with mixed use commercial and then this is more of a
graphic representation of what that area might look like and this is kind of -- oh
yes, the (inaudible). Yeah, we have been working with ITD as they are refining
their interchange options, but they are going to be looking at a couple of different
alternatives to the traditional diamond interchange and this is called a single point
urban interchange and it focuses the traffic to a couple of single points when it
gets off and it keeps it moving so that you have fewer stops within the
interchange itself. Again, another cut away. This is the area around the lifestyle
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 15 of 26
center, so over here we have the lifestyle center, this would be Ten Mile and then
across Ten Mile would be a high density residential and then the mixed use
commercial, which is - this is more of a regional center and this is more to
provide services for our residents that would be living in there. As we move back
from Ten Mile into that interior where we have high density residential, we
wanted to utilize the canals and the drainage ways as amenities for future
development and this is a graphic that the consultant prepared and took quite a
bit of liberty, I think, on the width of the canal, but the idea is to utilize those as
amenities and focal points for future residential development. This is again a
conceptual graphic of the lifestyle center, which is a combination of retail uses,
high end retail uses, potentially even big box uses and other commercial uses
organized around the larger big box developments. There may very well be a
residential component to all - just another conceptual idea of what the exterior of
the retail center could look like. Then as I noted earlier since we do have the rail
lines up there and we are planning for a commuter rail at some point in the
future, we did designate an area as a transit stop or train station, so this is a
graphic representation of what that might look at. That would be a focal point.
This would be the mixed use commercial, organized along this collector and you
would have high density residential along it and then you would come up to the
end of this to the transit station and then you would have probably some kind of a
public plaza or gathering point. So, it not only functions as a rail station, but it
also functions as a community focus point. So, our next steps we are right about
in here. We are working with a consultant to review the draft plan and as similar
to the South Meridian Plan, we will be making a comprehensive plan amendment
in December. We still have to - (inaudible) the complete market analysis and
industrial lands assessment - we are having some discussions ITD, ACHD and
COMPASS as well as the consultant on finalizing the transportation and
circulation. We need to finalize the urban design element and look at the
implementation actions and those are likely to be zoning regulations, design
guidelines and how we can affect that collector road map - how we can make it
work and that is something that we are looking forward to addressing that
challenge. There is a couple of ideas that we are kicking around are going to be
pursuing. We are talking to some of the landowners; the Transportation
Department had a couple of ideas yesterday in terms as it relates to the
interchange development. We are hoping to meet with ACHD soon and get
some ideas on how we can put this all together, but that is where we are at right
now so it is going to be kind of an interesting couple of weeks. We are going to
be pulling this all together in the next couple of weeks. So, again our next steps
are comprehensive plan amendment by mid December, Planning and Zoning
hearing in February or March and hopefully we will have the specific plans to you
for hearing an adoption in April or May, 2007.
Wardle: Thank you, Pete. Thank you to the staff and the consultants. I know
being part of the Charrette process that there was a lot of work done on the front
end - certainly a very intense four days and we are still putting all the pieces
together and so it seems to me that we have got quite a bit of public input from
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 16 of 26
the citizens and property owners. We have got about five minutes before we
move to item number five, so Council I will take any questions or Commission?
Mr. Zaremba?
Zaremba: Mr. President, Members of the Council. An excellent presentation
again, I would say as well. I personally am very thrilled to see two things in
particular and one is the possibility of realigning Overland and connecting it
across over to Black Cat I think is an excellent thing. I also like the single point
urban interchange. On the face of it, it is not intuitive, it doesn't look on the
drawing as if that is something that people would like, but I have been on several
of those and I keep trying to remember where they are. I think one of them is
North Las Vegas and another one in Arizona some place, but they function very
well. They move traffic quite well and once people get used to them they are an
excellent thing. The third thing I would make is kind of a personal rumination; I
guess is what I will call it. If you consider the growth that is currently going on in
North Meridian, what we are preparing for in the South Meridian Area Plan and in
this Ten Mile Interchange plan along with the rest of the comprehensive plan, we
are looking at a not too distant future of Meridian of about 100,000 people. My
thinking is that a city of 100,000 people ought to have a junior college. I know
that these things are being talked about on the state level, but I would think that
even without state help that with a 100,000 people we might be able to support
one on our own and in trying to think of where would that go, it seems to me and
my mind keeps focusing on this Ten Mile area. So, I guess what I would like to
throw out is a suggestion for further discussion is whether or not there could be
space in this Ten Mile Area Plan that could sometime be a community college for
Meridian. Thank you.
Wardle: Council or Commission? All right, thank you very much staff for the
presentation and any further additional action that you will need from us?
Friedman: Not unless there is some specific areas that you would like us to
address or if we really missed something here or any other ideas besides the
junior college that you might want us to consider for inclusion this week as we get
closer.
Wardle: I am just curious to see how we make those waterways to look like the
picture.
Friedman: Yeah, I think he left out the gondolas, but-
Bird: Mr. President.
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 17 of 26
Bird: I just want to know how you are going to get so much water in drain ditches
out there? I think there is only one canal out in that area. The attorneys say 100
year flood and we have got to believe what them attorneys say.
Borton: Mr. President.
Wardle: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Pete there was at one point I remember, I think it was on a Tuesday and
there was some initial discussion about rerouting or trying to reroute some of the
drain ditches. I take it that was abandoned and they remain as they currently
exist?
Friedman: I believe so. They did move one - I think there was one that bisected
one of the properties in the center there and the discussion was to move it back
along - I think the discussion was to kind of make it more of a right angle.
Canning: There are two facilities in this area that run fairly close to one another
and I think they may have relocated one of those. They were trying to get these
two together, but one was water delivery and one was drainage and we talked
them out of that. They had kind of a weak concept of what those irrigation
facilities were, but I do think they tried to consolidate one so that we could get
this kind of open space area in there and they had a consolidated easement to
create a more public place for folks.
Wardle: Thank you very much. Council before we move onto Item 5, I would like
to thank the Planning & Zoning Commission for being here. Thank you for all of
your service. I am not sure that people really recognize that you are volunteers
and that you spend a lot of time helping shape the future of the city, so thank you
very much.
Zaremba: Would a motion to adjourn the Planning & Zoning Commission be in
order? So moved.
Rohm: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn the Planning & Zoning
Commission portion of this meeting. All in favor.
ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED.
Planning Commission Adjourned at 6:30 P.M.
Item 5.
Discussion of Meridian Heights I Kentucky Ridge Subdivisions
Request for Annexation:
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 18 of 26
Grady: Thank you Mr. President. I will try to be brief; there is a lot to cover.
What I intend on doing is basically going through this presentation fairly quickly. I
do notice that a couple of the Meridian Heights' people are available to ask
questions. Meridian Heights, Kentucky Ridge is two subdivisions that sit in the
Victory Meridian area. They act together because water and sewer is combined.
The homeowner's association effectively provides that service for them. It is
actually a water and sewer district as I understand it. Recently DEQ required
that what I will call the HOA to obtain a new water source. They had some
uranium that showed up in the water and they are faced with either drilling a well
or hooking up to city services. In addition part of their permit requires them to
hook up to city sewer when available and that service will be available at the end
of 2007. We have currently stopped right up next to their (inaudible), but lack a
little bit of capacity (inaudible) that should be available, like I said in the end of
2007. What we are looking for tonight is basically some guidance. If the Council
is interested in pursuing an annexation agreement, how should that be
structured? Realizing that you won't be able to make a decision tonight, what
information wi.ll you require from us in the future so we can come back with an
application? Two questions as part of the annexation. Does the subdivision
meet the city requirements and probably very important the subdivision is asking
the city to waive approximately $650,000 worth of fees and we will get to that in
the last slide. So, as far as meeting the city requirements, you know, does it fit
our requirements? I put together a list of slides - three sets in the (inaudible)
Courts, a couple of sets in the sort of standard housing and then a couple of sets
in the very upscale Kentucky Ridge. So, really in order of probably cost, I will
start with the trailers. This would be sort of a lower scale area. This shows fairly
typical trailer house up in the northeast part of the subdivision. You do see a little
bit of a garage extension there that sits right out on the road so that there are a
few of those types of issues you need to be aware of. This would be a fairly
standard trailer house that sits in the subdivision. I believe it took trailers
(inaudible--) 20 or 30 of the 285 parcels, so not a large percentage. This would
be a standard stick house in the Meridian Heights Subdivision - fairly nice
houses and then going to Kentucky Ridge, which is pretty upscale and then
finishing up with part of Kentucky Ridge's common area. Cost breakdown -
Meridian Heights does have some water rights that are fairly old. We would be
interested in purchasing those water rights. We had our hydro geologist put
together an estimate of cost. The $375,000 shown there is the top price for
those water rights. In other words we would be paying them premium. Water
hookup -- they are willing to pay the water hookup fees. Meters - they are
asking us to waive the installation of the meters, so the hookup fees they are
paying while development. Because they are not hooked up on a PI system, we
normally charge a $1,000 per ERE for a well hookup and there is 285 lots, hence
there is part of that, $650,000 is well development fees and then finally Meridian
Heights does not have meter setters, so there really is no way of determining
what their water and sewer usage would be, so they are asking us to go and
install 200 meter setters in the Meridian Heights portion. Kentucky Ridge does
have meter setters. In fact they are dual systems just like we use, so there would
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 19 of 26
be little inconvenience to get those up and running. A couple of other issues you
need to be aware of is with the way we would be serving water to this
subdivision, they are proposing a single 10 inch connection that would tee off
branch to both subdivisions. We only require that the water lines be looped and
in fact, I think, in this case they must be looped so we would be looking for
perhaps some future development to help with that. It is one of those unknowns.
I think if we are going to provide good (inaudible--) we are going to need a
looping system for both those subdivisions. Second issue is the sewer mains in
the Meridian Heights subdivision are pretty bad. We had some video tape of
them. There is a lot of leaking lines, really substandard and our expectation is
that the water lines are in a similar state. Now the Kentucky Ridge water and
sewer systems are probably - we believe the are PBC and probably constructed
to similar standards that we would have for now and then the final thing worth
noting is when they do come forward based on input from their representatives, it
is probably - it is unlikely that all of the residents would be willing to annex and of
course we are pretty much insisting that it is all or none. So, there would be a
little bit of a situation there, potentially. With that, I would be willing to take some
questions.
Wardle: Thank you, Len on the issues for one presentation.
Nary: Mr. President.
Wardle: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I don't think Len had any of the legal issues that he was going to raise so I
thought I would bring those up real quick for you. I think some of you are worried
and I think Len did point out that obviously tonight is not intended for a decision
making opportunity. The attorney from the Water & Sewer Association is here as
well as the head of that for Kentucky Ridge and Meridian Heights so they kind of
explain their situation, dilemma. That last one obviously from the legal
perspective is probably our biggest concern. It is very clear to state law that if
they are hooked to city services that that is implied consent. What I did tell Mr.
Tyree, their attorney when we met was that it would be in the city's best interest
that if the incentive for the homeowners to consent to annexation really needs to
come from their association and explaining the value of what they are getting and
the need for what they need to do to transition from their private system they
have been using to the public system of the city. It has been the city's practice to
really go out there and coerce folks to join the city and that if this is a consensual
annexation, which is what they are seeking then really a lot of that initial
discussion needs to be had by their association and that we probably would be
needing consent to annex requests if they were going to be requesting to annex,
again, we haven't normally waited till somebody hooked up to the services and
then sought their consent. We usually want that up front. So, I did try to make
that clear, but I am sure they have some other issues or concerns to raise to you
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 20 of 26
folks and again the intent (inaudible) for you to have sort of a big global picture of
what might be coming in the form of an application.
Wardle: Thank you Mr. Nary. Council, questions for staff before we hear from
representatives? Gentlemen, if you would like to come forward. Please
introduce yourselves with your name and representation, please.
Tyree: President Wardle and Council thank you very much for this opportunity to
speak today. My name is Tim Tyree. I am counsel for the Meridian Heights
Water and Sewer Association. I have with me today Mr. Len Grady. He is the
president of the - that is Val Hill.
(Speaker unknown): That is Len Grady. That is Val Hill.
Grady: So far I am a lawyer and I run the sewer district, so pretty cool.
Tyree: What I would like to start off though is really to thank Len. It has been
great to work with the city and especially with Len. We are in a difficult situation
and trying to work through it and he has been very cooperative and very
responsive. So, I want to appreciate - to make that publicly known as my
appreciation for him. What we have is an obligation to connect to a water system
and change the Association's water quality quickly. When the EPA changed the
regulations for the minimum contaminant levels for uranium (inaudible) January
of this year the Association's water quality came out of compliance. So, IDEQ
says fix it and we have been trying to come up with a number of different
alternatives to do that. Given the wells that we have, one alternative would be to
deepen an existing well and we actually have been working with Ed Squires, who
also is a consultant for the city and possibly deepening a well. Well, that
expense is roughly (inaudible--) what we might see with some other alternatives
- actually it is cheaper than going with the city's alternative - long term it has a
lot of questions. Will it work? We will get the water quality that we need? We
could end up drilling a new well to take a test and end up going $40,000 or
$50,000 just to test and not find anything or not find the water quality that we
need. Plus going further down the line, we will always have what about the next
change in the regulations? So, that is a possibility that remains out there and we
are not certain and the other was we will treat the existing water and that doesn't
work and we wind up with concentrated uranium and we have got treatment
plants and just economically it doesn't work. So, really the alternative that we are
looking at as the primary alternative now is to connect to the city's water system.
If we can connect to the city's water system, we cure our problem. But obviously
connecting with the city's water system comes with fees and that is what we are
working on our primary issue here and as Len showed earlier are the fees and
the expenses that we are trying to come up with. Part of connecting to our water
system and coming down the line is (inaudible) to connect to the sewer system
once the sewer becomes available. As part of the plat for Meridian Heights and
for Kentucky Ridge it says that when sewer is available you need to connect
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 21 of 26
when city sewer is available. The city sewer is coming into the area. It is not yet
continuous with the subdivisions, but it is on its way and the city does not have
the capacity yet, although we are expecting we are going to land somewhere
around the third quarter or 2007, so about this time next year the city should
have the capacity to take us on. So, looking at the city as our best alternative
and in long term I think that is appropriate for the homeowners within the
Meridian Heights and the Kentucky Ridge certainly from an ongoing basis and
also it has a primary benefit for the city is that we de-commission those existing
sewer ponds. I am not sure if you are familiar - I don't think (inaudible) quite a
few acres out there that are dedicated to want a collector sewer pond and then a
secondary sewer pond that goes up. I wouldn't suggest fishing in them, shall we
say - the sewer lagoon ponds, shall we say, the large portion of the property.
What we are working on right now is how to pay for the system and as we are
moving on into the process, we found a developer who will purchase our sewer
lagoon ponds, pay for reclamation of that land, pump the water and the sludge
out of that and use that as either open space or reclaimed land for future
development in the surrounding areas. We were also able to sell off one of our
well sites to the Kentucky Ridge Homeowner's Association as used for a park --
we are able to sell oft one of our current well sites to the developer, which is an
individual (inaudible) lot. We have three well sites, one is over an easement so
that would be loss of the easement - it would expire once the well would expire.
So, by selling off the sewer lagoon ponds, by selling off the well sites and by
selling the water rights, we essentially get this to come pretty close to balancing
out. The funds that we would receive from the developer for the land, from the
city for the water, from the HOA for one of the well sites was roughly (inaudible)
to the million dollars in fees. The hookup fees were $1,111,000 and change and
we get pretty close - we are still a little bit in the red from our dollar amounts, but
we feel we could do an assessment to kind of get everybody else there - that
and the money the Association has and reserves for its maintenance. That was
working out great until we got to a recent meeting with the city and the concern
over billing practices. Right now the way the billing practices work is based on
the homeowners - they all pay a flat fee for water and sewer service and that
goes for everyone within the subdivision. You saw that everyone has a flat fee
and it is a pretty reasonable fee. The dollar amounts as we try and figure out
based on usage is not going to change too much so if we go to a city system.
We are not expecting the homeowners to have a significant change between the
current fees at a flat fee, but if we were to presume a flat fee for everyone given
their basic services and rating at the current rates for water and sewer for the
city. So, we are not expecting a significant change for service, the problem
comes in the billing. As we talked with the Municipal Utility Billing System named
"MUBS", the problem comes in utilizing that flat fee system. Currently, we have a
clerk who will take the total of sewer, take the total of water, divide by 285 and
send out bills on a monthly basis. What we were working on was a one point
connection for the Meridian Heights and another point connection for the
Kentucky Ridge and then we would meter at that spot and you divide by the
number of homes and with that everybody would have a flat fee. Unfortunately,
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 22 of 26
that does not fit with your current billing system. Your current billing system is
designed to read the meter and bill to that meter and it would require an
additional step to divide by that, whatever the numbers were. So, the staff was
pushing for having meters for water in order to be able to measure out. Well, as
we discussed the Kentucky Ridge, the newer portion of the subdivision
(inaudible) approximately 69 homes has meter setters, has dual meter sets and
the fee to set up for the meters themselves for those homes, I think we could
deal with through an assessment provision for that portion of the home - for that
portion of the subdivision. Our problem comes when we get to the Meridian
Heights. Especially - Meridian Heights it is important to understand and Len
demonstrated that with the pictures, was developed in essentially three phases
improving in the dollar value in homes over the years so that you have your first
development, which was the oldest development is the manufactured housing, it
takes a step up from there to the newer versions and as might well be imagined
the quality of the sewer and water lines follows that essential steps in their
development. So, our oldest system is going to have the lowest quality of water
and sewer lines. That has been a point in trying to get the - in how we transition
this process, which I will get to a little bit later. But, if we are going to go with
water meters for the Meridian Heights, it is going to require digging in the vault,
installing the sets and installing the meters. The dollar amount there comes at
about the (inaudible) from our perspective and what we were seeing and that is a
rough estimate. As I was explaining earlier, as the Association we don't have the
money and don't know where I am going to come up with it. That is where I run
into kind of a road block in the situation. We are looking into a number of
alternatives here. We are looking into a local improvement district. We have
been in contact with the state for a number of different loan programs. Our
problem is we are outside of the funding for those loan programs and right now
we have not been getting terribly strong reports, returns that we are going to
qualify because of the combination between the values between Meridian
Heights and the Kentucky Ridge. If we could segregate out, some of our
members for Meridian Heights would not be able to do it, but we are one
Association and whether we can do that or not is causing some problems. So,
therein lays our road. We have to fix our water. We need to be able to hook up
to the sewer. The city is, I think, long term our best alternative. Certainly by
getting rid of the sewer lagoons, we open up additional lands for development - it
wasn't shown up there, but we are currently doing land application from those
sewer and lagoon ponds up onto the upper areas, so until our sewer lagoon
ponds go away, those don't open up. So, there are long term benefits to getting
rid of those sewer lagoons, but I have run up against this - the problem is the
365, which is the request why we are looking for some waiver, some way that we
can move around this. The last issue and I would be happy to stand for any
questions that you may have is the annexation. It is something that as you well
know with any subdivision, with any members of longstanding residents of the
county that any time there is an annexation there is a concern over property
taxes are going to go up? What are the benefits that I am going to get? What is
this going to cost me? In preliminary meetings and trying to get the homeowners
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 23 of 26
within the area to understand what the situation is. We are starting to get that
buy in to the system, but the problem comes in getting the water and sewer lines.
What we would ideally like to see is that the Association itself can go away. The
Association, if we were to - depending on how this would work, if the Association
were to go away, it essentially comes into the Association goes away if we get
the water meters because right now the Association would remain in place in
order to perform the billing to divide by the 285 based on the water and sewer
ratings and to do the testing and do the maintenance. Well, if the city takes
ownership of the water and sewer lines and then the city can perform the billings
and then the Association can go away. From the homeowners' perspective, they
are saying well I don't want - if I am going to be paying more taxes and please
you don't need to explain to me the benefits of annexation -- speaking to our
homeowners to explain the benefits of annexation they are saying well then why
if I am going to pay more fees, why then I still have to pay more fees for my
Association to maintain the lines, to do the billing, why can I not be like everyone
else in the city and receive these services? That is the rub that I am in between,
so we are asking for ways that we can resolve our fee split and we can try and
work this through. So, with that lone, very much appreciate your time letting us
explain the situation we are in today and I will stand for any questions that you
may have or that Val may be able to answer.
Wardle: Thank you, Mr. Tyree. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none, at least not at this point.
Rountree: I guess my comment is and even though this isn't a hearing and we
are not necessarily are going to get that involved in this is that it seems to me
that there is a plea for a handout from the City of Meridian for some folks that
tried to get by, not necessarily on the cheap, but on the less on an independent
nature and they have not done a very good job. So, my suggestion is - I hear
the idea of Meridian taking on this infrastructure, leaking water systems, etc., etc.
We are not in the business of doing that. If these folks wonder what the fees are
for and how come they would have to pay them and nobody else does? Quite
frankly, everybody else pays them when they buy a home in Meridian. Not only
hookup fees, but they pay for it in the cost of their housing. So, there are some
real issues with this from my perspective and I am just one Councilman, but Len I
guess my direction to you is you need to put a fine point on what the cost of this
is going to be and possibly work with these folks and the idea of creating LID to
somehow defer these costs to these particular residents over time might be the
solution. But, I am not sure that three quarters of a million dollars and it sounds
like a heck of a lot of more if we are just talking (inaudible) - we are talking about
replacing water lines and sewer lines and we are talking some big bucks and I
am not sure we want to neglect to look at those and these folks need to take a
look at it as well because they are going to be in a situation where they are going
to have to come up with some solutions.
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 24 of 26
Tyree: Okay, so just to paraphrase and make sure I understand what you are
saying. We should look at alternatives to try to make them whole. In other
words, you are not really interested in waiving these fees and then also take a
look at how we can improve their water and sewer lines and there are some
things we can do. I know there is some development interested in running water
and sewer through their subdivisions and we may be able to tack on some -
build oft of that. So, it sounds like we need to go away and take another kick at
that can.
Rountree: That is just my personal opinion.
Wardle: Mr. Nary, it appears to me and I share Mr. Rountree's sentiments on the
matter of the payment. It appears to me that it would be for the four people up
here to attempt to resolve this - a very lengthy discussion. Would it be
appropriate to attempt to put together a task force to see if we can come up with
some alternatives? My question is would a Council representative on that task
force be appropriate given that it would be looking at an annexation?
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council my recommendation would be is
not to have that. I think what we looking at really is some generalized direction.
If I understand Councilman Rountree at least from his perspective that he would
like the staff to work a little harder with Mr. Tyree on some other alternatives. At
least at this juncture it is not his desire to simply waive those costs, but to look at
other methods that those costs can be recouped, whether it is through an LID or
some other method or if through Mr. Grady's analysis of what needs to be done
or when it could be done, on whether or not some of those fees are deferred or
some of those fees are not necessary and are consistent with other subdivision
applications that we have seen. That was his preference and if I got that wrong, I
am sure he will correct that. I think if that is this Council's direction, we can
continue to do that and try to find some alternatives again. We are not looking
for specific decisions tonight, but simply just that direction and then the same
thing for the applicants here as how they can go back and best tell their clients
what they are going to need to do to come up with to try to make this work for the
big picture good that they have come up with so far. Does that make sense?
Rountree: Mr. President that only qualification that I would make there is that I
am not necessarily asking Public Works to do this work. I mean, they need to
review it and they need to provide some input as to what kinds of issues need
answers, but I believe that is incumbent upon the future applicants to figure out
what kind of costs they are looking at to replace the lines, what kind of lines they
have and what kind of issues with the infrastructure. Ultimately, I mean where
we go what is the cost to get it compatible with Meridian's way of doing
business?
Wardle: Mr. Bird, did you have --?
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8, 2006
Page 25 of 26
Bird: I just have one statement and whatever we decide this one Councilman
would not be in favor of having any special billing. It would be billed just like
everything else is billed within the city. So, when they work on this they need to
also address that item as far as I am concerned.
Wardle: If I may just paraphrase, Len has got a couple of questions. I think
question one is the city interested in annexing? I think we are hearing from the
Council yes, but to the rest of that -- actually an agreement to be structured?
Certainly we are asking those questions ~ what additional information? We need
some additional information - subdivision meets the city's requirements? I think
you are hearing no. Then is the city willing to waive $365,000 dollars, I think you
heard a no as well. Council would you agree with those statements?
Rountree: Yes.
Tyree: Mr. President if I may?
Wardle: Sure.
Tyree: Council member Rountree, if I may I share your concern that there is an
element here that it is certainly fair all citizens of Meridian to be treated equally
and to have a special situation is - should be a special situation - the problem I
am at is a matter of time. If I had the opportunity, if I had a way of doing it, I
would certainly be looking at those issues, but I must, based on IDEO, I must fix
the water and if I - given the timeframes that we are being pushed against from
IDEO then my alternative is fix the water and how am I going to fix the water?
Long term the idea is to fix the water by going to the city. Long term has benefits
for the city because it opens up those sewer lagoon ponds, it opens up additional
lands and thereby opening up your tax base, but I must do something. What I
am forced against is if I want to connect to the city water system and to do so
then I have to be annexed and I have to pay for the water meters and I can't do
it, then what I need to do is just drill the well. That is my alternative that I am up
against. So, if I drill the well then we are further delayed and I am not moving
forward and if I may, Councilmember Bird on the special billing the problem
comes in just the expense and who is going to do that? It comes into again that
water meter issue. It just comes to that final $365,000 and as I said I share with
you the situation that we need to make sure that we are being fair to our citizens
here, but I have to deal with the health quality issues as well and the regulatory
issues and I must find some solution and I must do it quickly and unfortunately
the money issue is not coordinating with my timing issues.
Bird: Mr. President a reply to that.
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council Special Joint Meeting
November 8. 2006
Page 26 of 26
Bird: If you just want the one meter, then that is where the bill is going to go and
then the homeowners can pay for it out of one bill and then they can collect from
the 285 people.
Wardle: Well, Mr. Bird I think that some of the issues that we have in regard to
that are - we have got an ordinance in place and other things, but Len if you
have got enough direction?
Grady: I believe I do.
Wardle: Council anything further? Okay, we will work on this issue. That brings
us to the end of our regularly scheduled special session. I would entertain a
motion to adjourn.
Rountree: So moved.
Bird: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn the special session. All those
in favor.
ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:08 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
12-/ /2-/06
~llllii'
DATE APP,~~\ -'.1' ~'il':~),~,;(~/ll"~,
"~> '.-::~\~ ,\~,"."":~::~;0r-~:"~''"''~~:~'~:~~~ ~;;;~
~ \":"".1 r'.;/. III ~ it' ~~ ~
2 ~~I () ~
- -
~ ~