Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996 01-23• s MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA TUESDAY, JANUARY 23, 1996 - 6:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 16, 1996: DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE FOR PARKS: (APPROVED CORRECTIONS; CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE ORDINANCE) ~ ~ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 23 1996 The Special Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order by Mayor Robert D. Corrie at 6:30 P. M.: MEMBERS PRESENT: Walt Morrow, Glenn Bentley, Charles Rountree, Ron Tolsma: OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Jim Johnson, Malcolm MacCoy, Richard McCuhey, Vern Alleman, Richard Donahue: Corrie: I will re-open the public hearing for the Impact Fee Ordinance for Parks. I will invite anybody from the public who would like to give testimony can do so at this time. Richard McCaughy, BCA, 2045 N. Fasfinrater Ave, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. McCaughy: First off I would like to thank you Mr. Mayor and members of the Council for continuing this public hearing for one week to give us an opportunity to review the ordinance and believe me I have gone through it with a fine tooth comb and gone back over the enabling legislation and we essentially find no problem with the ordinance as written. I do have several questions though, I noticed that, although it is referenced in the (inaudible) this is obviously a draft copy of the ordinance that you reference a credit section and suitability of land offered for dedications section 00-9 and 00-10 and those are not contained in the ordinance. I was wondering if that is by design or an error or omission. Rountree: Could you site the page those are referenced please? McCaughy: That would be following sections 0-00-8 which is exemptions and go directly into 0-00-9, this is on page 18, impact fee service area trust accounts. Our only concern on that score is that and the specific comparison would be to Boise City's impact fee ordinance which is as you are very well aware very similar to this ordinance (inaudible) and that is probably not a bad thing to do because their ordinance was well crafted, it appears very much in line with the enabling legislation. Our concern is just simply that we feel not providing for credits, in fact, -maybe detrimental to the ability of the City to provide additional park land at decreased cost both to the development community and to the City. We now have under the .Boise impact fee ordinance direct experience with certain developers wherein parkland was donated and developed at the cost of the developer. And the City in fact gained a significant neighborhood park in Hobble Creek as the example in siting it at a development cost that was less than half an acre of what it would cost Boise to develop that park. I am just wondering if it was by design or if there is the intent of this body to possibly review this ordinance in time and include provisions for credits ar~d development agreements. Morrow: If I may answer that question, the answer to your question directly is that it was by design. The issue here is that we are assessing and collecting impact fees at the ~ • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 2 building point of picking up building permit. And that there was to be in terms of simplicity no developer contribution that would off set impact fees in terms of land. We foresaw subdivisions coming in with green areas, common areas as per subdivision and that the specific parks would be developed because we had the City as one complete beneficiary zone and not split up. So therefore since we were collecting the development fees not from the developers but from the builders as they picked up their building permits then those funds would go into one trust fund and then then be expended on a city wide basis. So that was the general concept of what we were thinking in terms of not needing credits or off sets or those types of things. The whole concept was simplicity and that pretty well explains where we are at. McCaughy: We perfectly understand that and we do agree that it can inject a degree of complexity into the process, I was just curious on that score. Other than that we have reviewed it and again we are always concerned about additional upfront increases to the cost of housing and the fact that these flat fees tend to be disproportionate in terms of their impact on lower cost housing. So we always have reservations on that score. But at this point we support the City's efforts. And that is all we really have to say and again I want to thank you Mr. Mayor and Council for the opportunity to go back and review this ordinance so that we feel comfortable with it. Corrie: Thank you Mr. McCaughy, I appreciate your comments. Anybody else from the public who would like to offer comment on the ordinance? Vern Alleman, 2101 East Ustick, was sworn by the City Attorney. Alleman: I just wanted to say that I am in support of what the general concept is. Now I haven't studied it thoroughly I don't know there might be some other things, but I think as near as I can analyze it I see the need and I think that the provision whereby the fees supply that need by the ones that are causing the need or the ones that are creating the need. I think that is something that should be addressed in that manner. The need as I see it I think we need it for our young people particularly so that we, I feel that by providing this we are going to have a lesser crime problem than if we didn't have it. So I just wanted to express my support for it. Corrie: Thank you very much for your comment. Jim, would you like to address this? Walter R. Johnson, North Justin Place, was sworn by the City Attorney. Johnson: I don't know if you want editorials but since I highlighted it I will just mention it, on page 12, item B, that sentence I don't think reads completely clear. The third sentence ~ • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 3 down, the part there that confused me was "nor shall a building permit issue", probably be issued would clearer to someone like me anyway, since building permits can't issue themselves. On page 17 there is at the top of the page there at the end of 006, "any person who initiates expansion or change in use of a building shall first notify the fee administrator of the contemplated activity in those instances .which do not require a building permit." My question there is how is the individual person going to know that he is to notify the fee administrator. There must be a reason for this sentence and I was just wondering if could clarify that for me or if you know why that is in there? Anyway you can think about that I guess and then on page 18, top of the page, item 1, it says "rebuilding the same amount of floor space of a structure which was destroyed by fire or other catastrophe providing the structure is rebuilt and ready for occupancy within two years of its construction". That to me is confusing, two years of its original construction, its new construction or what is intended there I guess would be my question. On 21, there is just an editorial change under F, growth, there are 2 periods there on page 22, under individual assessment, item H, "individual assessment of park impact fees is permitted in situations where the fee payer can demonstrate by convincing evidence that the established impact fee is inappropriate." What came to mind there when I was reading that is whether that would include people that cannot use a park, since this is an impact fee for parks. I am thinking in terms of handicapped people, maybe. Just a question there on who that really was targeted at. On page 23, the last thing I have, on this 10% administrative cost. I wonder if it might be more appropriate just to have a flat charge in there as opposed to 10%. Is there that much extra work for example does it take more administration to do a single family residence for $48 than amulti-family. You might want to just consider a flat charge there is what I was thinking unless there was a reason for having it scaled on the 10% basis. That is all I have. Corrie: Thank you Jim.. Richard Donahue, 1236 E. 2 1/2, Apartment B, was sworn by the City Attorney. Donahue: I had a question on the impact fees, does it have to be a 10% fee assessed for administrative cost on this? Or should it be down to something like a 5%, I am just questioning is that, how did they arrive at 10%? It really doesn't state in this how you arrive at a 10°~ figure. Corrie: I think Richard, what we did, this was also studied by the Boise impact fee. Talking with those people over there they figure that about a 10% administration was just about covered across the line. Some was more and some was less. They figured out pretty close to 10°r6. We can look at here as a Council here as a flat charge or 10% it is entirely up the the Council how they want to do that. Talking with the people in Boise (inaudible) • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 4 it was only for the parks and the administration fees came out about a 10% flat fee across the board some were higher and some where less. Donahue: (Inaudible) does that mean that there is another (inaudible) that is going to have to be hired onto the City to administrate this or though existing people? Corrie: Yes Donahue: Just my opinion, I think 10% is high, maybe something 3 to 5% would move efficient. That is just my opinion on that and I that is what I have to say on that. Other than that most of the ordinance is pretty good. I mean I don't have much objections to it. I do think that what they based on $481 for a building permit is actually kind of low. I think that is based on a larger population with a lot more commercial in your town. We don't have a lot of commercial, we do have a lot coming in but not enough to, basically what I mean is you have other city services and it is going to start in on parks and a lot of money goes in on parks and city services are going to suffer. Because we don't have the amount of revenue coming in to the City. And to develop parks it is like, like the $1.2 million dollar park that was purchased you state you are going to pay back as probably you can with the impact fees. With the amount of years it takes to pay it back it still would be (inaudible) beyond what you were stating to actually buy more park land and also to finish the new park at Ustick and Meridian could be some time down the road beyond even four or five more years, it is hard to say. l just figure, just me speculation, I believe it should be in the neighborhood of $781 and naturally if there are credits and stuff the City can grant the developers for donating land that is great. But I believe it should be around $781 for actual cost incurred. Morrow: I want to take a little bit of a shot at that Richard. If you will look through the ordinance, there is essentially some information as to how this number is arrived at. Essentially the calculations by which the number was determined was set by the State law in terms of the enabling ordinance from the State of Idaho. It also indicates that you have to base your fee on what you have already. And so there was substantial calculations done. The amount that you see is the only amount we can support. Donahue: So that is as high as the City can legally go through the motions and that? Morrow: That is correct, there is no higher rate that can be justified. Donahue: So there is nothing, say if you came down two years from now and say somehow you could justify a higher rate increase you could re-open it and increase it at that time. • • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 5 Morrow: The impact fee is subject to annual review by the Impact Fee Committee which is a standing committee that exists today. The rationale you can cover things like inflation and those types of things but if you go above that then you have to be able to justify that based on your existing inventory of items that constitutes a park. Essentially it all starts with what you have to begin with and it would be really difficult to see any type of major increase such as you are suggesting. Donahue: What you would be saying is that it would be a little increase if there was a justification. Morrow: That is correct Donahue: According to, I understand what you mean now on that. The other question I had was is any of this money, is atl of this money going to parks, because I know one of the issues was is any of this money going to be spent at the golf course to pay off the golf course to develop a golf course or does anybody know? Morrow: The answer to that question would be is that the golf course is a stand alone entity. The golf course is not part of the basis for these impact fees therefore by State law by City ordinance that we would adopt those monies can only be spent for park facilities within the City of Meridian. Donahue: Would that include recreational facilities or something like that? Like the YMCA that was opened over in Boise or something like that? Morrow: The YMCA is a private enterprise. Donahue: Well a better example is the one over in Nampa where the public funds were used to develop that, can impact fees be used to develop that sort of recreational #acility? Morrow: Only if it is part of a capital improvement plan at some point in the future. The other thing is, this is actually a two .part step. You have any ordinance and you have a capital improvements plan for your City. Essentially in order to spend any monies from the impact fees what you are spending it on has to be identified in the capital improvements plan. Corrie: That is updated. Donahue: Is the, so the park land we do have will be developed with the impact fees that are collected when the ordinance is approved. Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 6 Corrie: That is correct Donahue: And also the funds would go naturally what Mayor Corrie was saying to pay off the park land #hat was purchased from the enterprise funds? Corrie: That is correct. We are paying an interest of 6% on that money back to the City that is why we want to (inaudible). Donahue: How long do you expect would it be for the new park land at Ustick and Meridian before the City would even have the revenue with the impact fees to be under construction? Obviously not this year. Corrie: No, that is an unknown factor right now. It depends on how many homes are built. If we have a 100 homes built a year or a month or a thousand it would probably take us three to four years or maybe five. It would depend on the scale of the building here. Right now we anticipate there is going to be a drop in building. So it would near as be as fast as it was five years ago or four years ago. We are dedicated to paying that off as quickly as we can. Donahue: Another question here, have you ever thought of moving the Water department defraying Some cost on park land out there. Like the water department is in a poor place anyway, just selling off that and defraying some cost and putting the water department down at the new park. Corrie: Well that is something the Council can look at. Any comment from the Council on that? I don't think that is involved in this impact fee ordinance at this time. Council, anybody have any comments. Morrow: I guess I am not clear as to what you are saying. Are you suggestion that .you sell the water department property and (inaudible). Donahue: Well the water department is in kind of a poor location anyway and the facility is really doesn't meet anything for the City needs today or to the future. That is quite a large parcel, possibly with the design out there possibly you could have the water department operating off of some of that land and then defraying some of that cost you have to pay back on the enterprise fund or something like that. In other words building new facilities for the water department then you could just, that would be a .separate thing down here (inaudible) selling the land down here. Moving to a place where you would have a place to grow for the water department plus you still would have plenty of park land for a park. Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 7 Morrow: I guess my answer to that is that is kind of philosophical question. The impact fees would not have any effect on that one way or another. The question for the Council is if (inaudible) Donahue: Well it would be something where they could pay back, I mean a quicker way to pay back the impact fees another source to pay it back quicker. That is about all I have. Corrie: Thank you, anybody else from the public? Hearing none I will close the public hearing. I guess my first question would be to the Counselor? There were some questions as far as different pages and the verbiage and clearing up some possible misconceptions in the wording of words and verbiage, what do you think about this? Crookston: If there is a portion of the ordinance that is incorrectly we dp need to correct that. Corrie: I guess my next question would be to the Council you have heard a couple of comments in reference to the flat charge comparing it to the 10% figure, what is the Council's decision on that, any comments on it? Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I think my comments with respect to the flat charge as opposed to the fee is that for the sake of simplicity if we have a fee percent then we don't have to constantly be making adjustments within the fee for administrative purposes on an annual basis because it will keep up with the automatic increase in the bases. So I would see that as something fairly simply to do. We just leave it as a percentage. Corrie: Any further comments. Rountree: On that particular item I agree with 1Nalt, it would be a very (inaudible kept track of what the administrative fees are going to be as the potential impact fee would be adjusted. It is also is justified at this point in time for calculations (inaudible) to go back through and try to weigh the various levels of impact fees and come up with some kind of an average fee again would be a mathematical exercise that would have to be done every time we adjusted impact fees. (Inaudible) Corrie: Okay, how would you want to handle some of the verbiage as far as what was brought up. I guess we can take it individually, on page 12, one of the comments was in reference to item B, "all fee payments should be made to the fee administrator prior to the issuance of a building permit unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the City and the • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 8 developer and no building shall commence nor shall a building permit be issued, I believed should be the correct terminology there,"unless and until the applicant is satisfied with the provision of this chapter. Morrow: I agree Rountree: Sounds appropriate to me. Corrie: On page 17, I hope I got all of these Jim, I may have missed one here. The administrator of the contemplated activity in those instances which do not require a building permit I guess the confusion, any person that initiates expansion or changed use of the building shall first notify the fee administrator of the contemplated activity in those instances that do not require a building permit. Rountree: That is a legitimate point, how are they going to be notified? Morrow: I guess the real question is how do you know whether they need a building permit or not? Does anybody have an example that this would fit? Shari? Stiles: Councilman Morrow, Mayor and Council, I guess I can't think of any expansion and not require a building permit. I don't know how a change in use would have any effect, it is going to be staying a residential home or an apartment, I don't know that it wouldn't be better to just strike the whole thing. Tolsma: (Inaudible) those instances which do not require a building permit. Morrow: If I might suggest maybe let's go a little further at the top of the page, it says, the starting of the first real paragraph, "when a structure other than a residential one has been removed or demolished the impact fee for a new development on the site shall be calculated as provided in this section." Well my question is that we don't have any impact fee on anything but residential types of uses. So do we maybe need to edit the entire paragraph? If it is other than a residential we are not doing any commercial building permits involved here. Unless it is, if it is a building been to commercial one time and it goes to residential that is the only time you get a building permit on that. So I think we need to restructure that whole paragraph to indicate that we just need it as a residential rather than a commercial. Rountree: I would have a question about the entire paragraph H to share that if it is a residential is there any expansion or change in the residential dwelling that would require, not require a building permit. • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 9 Stiles: No Rountree: So we can strike the whole paragraph. Morrow: I think that is kind of appropriate because as I read on here it is even more confusing. Like provided the prior use was removed or demolished not more than 12 months prior to the application for a building permit and the documentation of its previous existence in size is available. I guess I am having real trouble trying to figure out what it is. Rountree: The once in a lifetime that might come up. Morrow: How about we let them have it once in a lifetime and be on down the road. Rountree: I would agree with striking the whole paragraph. Corrie: Counselor, would that require a motion from this group at this point. Crookston: You should, you should have a motion to strike that. Rountree: At this point or when we get done with all of the editorials? Crookston: It would be fine to do it individually or you could do it specifically with each or rather do it as an entirety. Morrow: I will second Mr. Rountree's motion. Corrie: Okay, motion has been made to strike number H, item H on page 16 in its entirety, all those in favor say Aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: Page 18, item 1, rebuilding the same amount of floor space for a structure which is destroyed by fire or other catastrophe providing the structure is rebuilt and ready for construction within 2 years of its construction. That is a verbiage type thing again. Rountree: I had the same question, maybe it should be within 2 years of issuance of permit. Morrow: Or within two years of the anniversary of the catastrophe. • • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 10 Corrie: I think that is the intent of that. So we could add ready for occupancy within two years after the fire or other catastrophe. Any objections on that? Morrow: I have none. Corrie: Counselor, since we are doing this one by one do we need to do this one as well? Crookston: You did the first one by itself, if you want to go through the rest of the document and then say I move that all the changes that we have made now be performed, done that the ordinance be restructured to that effect. You can do it anyway you want. The first one is already done but that does not prohibit you from going through and saying, A, B, C ad X need to be changed. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I might suggest that it seems to me like the first one was done because it was a removal of an entire provision and the rest of these are small edit things so maybe they can be covered by one small motion. Corrie: Okay, page 22, H, individual assessment of park impact fees is permitted in a situation where the fee payer can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the established impact fee isn't appropriate. I guess his reference there was perhaps handicapped, Jim since you are part of staff can you give me a little more information on that? Johnson: Yes, I was just more interested in the intent of that statement as opposed to correcting anything. Kind of what the composer had in mind here when they wrote this verse. Tolsma: You mentioned handicapped people earlier but yet for summer recreation the gentleman that takes care of our summer recreation is in a wheelchair. Johnson: Right I know that, it might not have been a good example I was just more or less using none users as a broad term with maybe a handicapped person that couldn't even leave the home is what I am saying. I didn't want to insert any words in there or verbiage with respect to handicapped people I was just more interested as to what the intent might be of that. Morrow: If I might answer that, it seems to me like the intent there is just to provide a means or mechanism for the payer to have input or to be able to challenge. I think when you read sub-paragraphs 1 and 2 and finally 3 the decision of the fee administrator may be appeal to the Meridian City Council. I think maybe that is a provision by which the • • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 11 individual in this case it would be the person paying since it is the builder or other single party paying for each parcel that then they have a means of which to appeal that if they don't agree with the fee. I can't visualize a situation that this specifically addresses. But I do think our intent there was to give everyone their day in court if there is something that we have overlooked. Corrie: And I believe that is correct Mr. Morrow. We want to make sure that everybody has an opportunity to bring it to the Council if they so desire. Rountree: The way I looked at that when I read that was there may be a case where somebody is charged a single family residential rate or mutli-family residential rate may develop a convincing case that they only pay the impact fee per person. But that (inaudible) build a case because the intent is for the community good. If that helps anybody. Corrie: That makes good sense because you may have one person in the home and they don't want to be changed for single family resident for only one single person in that home (inaudible) $185 rather than $481. Johnson: I guess what I was thinking was kind of far out, I was thinking that you might be inundated with people that are saying I don't want to pay a park impact fee because I never go to the park. Corrie: The last was the 10% figure which we discussed and it was the consensus of the Council to keep the 10% fee in there. So I guess at this point unless the Council has any further corrections or alterations they would like to make. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I have a question there I would like to offer up. By way of observation and we only have essentially one in this City but there are more in other cities. We briefly talked about it before but it is not incorporated in here. My question is what about RV Parks? The point being and to use the one by the Playground is that generally speaking RV Parks are occupied by theoretically transient folk coming to visit and utilize the parks and recreations facilities within our City or they may have temporary employment. My observation also has been that in many cases there are people that stay in RV Parks for extended periods of time a year or more as a resident. Now I know that we made no provision within this impact fee ordinance or costing or assessing an impact fee to those spaces on a space by space basis. My question to the Council is, is that something that we might want to look at and incorporate in this document or study further and incorporate it further and incorporate it in our annual review that would come on the anniversary date of adopting this document. • • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 12 Rountree: What do we have in the way of spaces at this point in time? And is there a guess of what we are looking at in the near term? Morrow: No, the only one that I am really familiar with is the one at the playground. But that is not to say that we are not going to have some more of those kinds of things happen. Corrie: I believe we need to be a little cautious in putting too much into this. We don't have a lot of those I agree but I think we can get ourselves into more hot water by putting those on individual RV spaces. I don't think that was the intent of the impact fees to begin with but that is something the Council can look at. I personally don't think it should be involved on RV parks where they are coming in and maybe spending 3 days. It is going to be awfully hard to administrate that who is going to check it out. Morrow: My concept there Bob would be you know when one of those is going to get built, if there are 15 spaces maybe the appropriate dollar fee is $100 per space and so that the assessment then is done and over with. Corrie: I guess that could be looked at on this yearly committee could look at it once a year could recommend it on that if it comes down the line rather than doing it as this point. That is up to the Council. Rountree: I would say based on my experience and RV parks having stayed in a few that I didn't observe many folks leaving those facilities if there were recreational opportunities within the park to utilize something the community might be providing. But that is my limited experience. That is certainly something we ought to look at. Morrow: I think it is an appropriate topic for our annual review. I am not in favor of holding up this document at all to do something like that. Corrie: I think that can be done by the impact fee committee in their annual or semi-annual whichever they decide to do to look at that recommendation from the Council to be added to the ordinance. Any further comment of the Council? Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I have a couple minor things here if I can find them. On page 7, the definition of development approval. I guess I would like the Counselor to explain that to me what that means. Crookston: I am sorry Charlie I don't have a copy in front of me. You are talking about development impact fee? • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 13 Rountree: I am talking about development approval, any written authorization from the City or other governmental entity party, I think that is in error, or to a joint powers agreement with the City which authorizes the commencement of the development. Crookston: It probably should be only the City it is not going to be another governmental entity. To my knowledge under our ordinance unless it goes outside of the City just as we approve subdivisions that are not within the city but are within our area of impact. Rountree: So that would be the joint powers act portion of that. Crookston: That would be which we do have quite a few applications that are in the County outside of the City limits which we do approve. The question is do you want to go outside the City limits with the impact fee. Morrow: My answer to that would be no and the reason being there is another entity outside the City limits that has responsibilities for parks and if there should be an impact fee for outside the city limits then it ought to be that entity that administers it and adopts it. Corrie: I can also see them coming back and wanting some of this money back too. Mr. Bentley any comment? Bentley: I think I would have to agree with Walt on that. I can see us getting entangled with who gets what portion of the money. Rountree: So we need the rewrite of that. Corrie: That is true, Will just said how. do they get the fee if they don't get a building permit anyway. Morrow: And we would have to deal with Ada County to have them try and collect the fee and then all of the sudden you are upside down. Rountree: So development approval would actually be any written authorization from the City area. Morrow: Yes Rountree: And the rest is stricken. Morrow: Which authorizes commencement of development that is the entire sentence you Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 14 want to see Mr. Rountree? Rountree: Yes • Corrie: Okay, so it would be any written authorization from the City, which authorizes the commencement of a development? Rountree: Correct, page 16, top of the page (inaudible) by filing a formal protest. I would like to insert between formal and protest, written or does that go against any code that we have to live by Mr. Crookston? Crookston: I am sorry I am still writing down from the previous one. (End of Tape) says Meridian City Council may by, I think should be °be" brought by any interested individual within 60 days. I think it is appropriate to have it as formal written protest. Corrie: We will add the word written between formal and protest and change the, on page 15 approve by the Meridian City Council may be brought by any interested individual rather than "may by". Rountree: The next comment I have is on page 20, paragraph F on the top of that page, the third sentence. The protesting party shall specifically identify the impact fee expenditure and the basis of the protest in writing or written protest. Corrie: So (inaudible) of the written protest? Rountree: Should be in writing I think. Corrie: Okay, the protest in writing. Okay, filing a written protest on the second line of F, (inaudible) by filing a written protest with the Meridian City Clerk. Rountree: That would take care of my concern there. Corrie: That is all that would have to be changed then (inaudible) Crookston: Then you are raising the in writing in the second to the last sentence? (Inaudible) Corrie: In F is said any interested citizens may challenge the expenditure of any impact fee funds within 2 years of said expenditure by filing a written protest with the Meridian City • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 15 Clerk. It says the Clerk shall set the matter of the hearing before the City Council within 30 days of the filing of such protest. The protesting shall specifically identify the impact fee expenditure and the basis of the protest. Crookston: My question would be why are we talking about two years. Rountree: Is that in the State code? Crookston: I don't know, that would be a quite a long period of time. Corrie: Any comments from the Council do you want to leave it at two or shorten it to one. (Inaudible) Corrie: I honestly don't know why the two years. Rountree: I don't recall ever reading anything in the development of this though (inaudible) two year minimum on that. Corrie: It is on page 20. Morrow: Well, at just a quick glance at the enabling legislation, if there are more areas here under 67-8212 Appeals, one, a governmental entity which adopts a development impact fee ordinance shall provide for administrative appeals by the developer or fee payer from any discretionary action or inaction by and on behalf of the governmental entity. Item two is a fee payer may pay a development impact fee under protest in order to obtain development approval or building permit. The fee payer making such payment shall not be stopped from exercising the right of appeal provided in this chapter nor shall such fee payer be stopped from receiving a refund of the amount deemed to be illegally collected. At a quick glance those are the only two things that I can see that cover the appeal stuff. I can't tell you where the two year time period came from. I guess as an editorial comment two year time frame that is transacted in an election or you can conceivably have such as in this election two Councilman and a Mayor change positions over that time frame how would they even know what the conditions were. I am not sure that makes real good sense. Rountree: I think it makes real good sense, I think it is extremely generous to allow that kind of period. Morrow: What would you be comfortable with? Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 16 Rountree: I think a maximum would be a year and I would be comfortable with less (inaudible). Tolsma: (Inaudible) I think I would lean more towards a year only for the reason that unless your impact fee committee is meeting more frequently than one year, they ought to have some input into what that appeal might be or moving around in terms of change to the ordinance that may be necessary from an appeal. I think maybe six months unless your impact fee committee was going to meet every six months then the six months makes sense. Rountree: I think I agree with you Walt because of their schedule, they are scheduled to meet and it should coincide with how they have to deal with this. Corrie: Is the consensus of the Council to change that to one year rather than two years (inaudible). Rountree: It is agreeable with me. Morrow: I agree with that. Corrie: It shall read then any interested citizen may challenge the expenditure of any impact fee funds within one year of said expenditure. Rountree: I have one final comment Mr. Mayor, I did not mark it in here but there is a sentence that indicates that any state or federal or governmental entity that develops in the City of Meridian is going to be subject to the Impact fee. I just wanted to point out that there is a senate bill right now that would exempt the State from paying any impact fees to any municipality and it will probably pass. I am not suggesting that we amend, find that and amend this but what it did point put looking into it and I learned yesterday is that the City of Meridian is not excluded from paying impact fees when we develop something like a park. I would like to see staff look into that maybe work through the Association of Cities to maybe get that senate bill amended to include the municipalities not being subject to paying impact fees. We could be paying impact fees to ACRD. Just an aside. Corrie: Good point Crookston: Are you talking about exempting the City of Meridian or are you talking about all the cities. Rountree: I would say municipalities in general from having to pay impact fees for • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 17 development undertakings. Morrow: That would be in terms of the state legislation you are talking about. Rountree: Right, not in terms of this. It is just an aside that came up talking about this. Corrie: You are going to have the AIC look at that. Any further comments on the impact fees? Hearing none I will entertain a motion to approve the corrections that have been made on the ordinance. Morrow: So moved Rountree: Second Corrie: Discussion, Shari? Stiles: Excuse me Mr. Mayor you didn't see me waving, we need better hand signals. I did have a couple of comments on this if you don't mind. On page 20, item D, fifth line down, it also talks about construction that does not require a building permit and I think it is confusing and doesn't really need to be in there. It says and there fore any application. for a building permit enabling the construction and in the case of construction that does not require a building permit any building that takes place on or after the effective date of this impact fee ordinance and so on. I think if we took out an in the case of construction that does not require a building permit, any building that takes place the rest would read better and be less confusing. Corrie: If I understand you correctly you want and in the case of construction that does not require a building permit to be stricken? Stiles: Yes, and any building that takes place too. Corrie: So go clear across there, any building that takes place as well that is to be stricken. Council have any comment on that? Rountree: That is consistent with what we did on the previous paragraph. Corrie: Alright, Shari? Stiles: Mr. Hepper brought it to my attention on page 22, under H, individual assessment, paragraph one, I think part of the reason that Mr. Johnson had some confusion over this • Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 18 is that this seems like it is more tied back with the credit portion of the ordinance that is in the Boise City ordinance. If the fee administrator did not recognize their contribution as meeting the requirements of the City they could appeal that decision of the fee administrator. Under item one, line two, it is talking about the written application for individual assessment shall be made to the fee administrator on forms provided by that office not later than 60 days after preliminary plat approval by the Meridian City Council. Which would mean the developer, there is not going to be any building permit issued within 60 days of preliminary plat approval. I believe that is what was the intent of this section was to tie back more with the credits and the fee administrator's consideration of that credit. So, I believe that preliminary plat approval by the Meridian City Council should be stricken and it should read not later than 60 days after building permit is issued. Corrie: Okay, so we are going to, written applications (inaudible) shall be made to the fee administrator on forms provided by that office not later than 60 days after the building permit is issued. Stiles: Yes Corrie: And striking preliminary plat approved by the Meridian City Council? Stiles: Yes, I guess I find this a little confusing too because I don't know that you would call an individual assessment somebody that comes in and says I am handicapped I live alone I never go to the park when in 6 months a family with 6 kids could be moving in. I don't think that is really a valid assumption. Parks are required by the Americans with Disabilities Act to be accessible to all people now so I don't think that really applies. Who would check to make sure they weren't going to the park. Corrie: Does Council have any comments? Rountree: I agree. Corrie: Do you have anything else Shari? Council, I believe we will have to go back end redo the motion since we are incorporating her comments in here, is that correct? Crookston: That is correct. Rountree: Could we have a motion to include her comments? Crookston: You can do it either way. Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 19 Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we include the comments from the City Planning Administrator. Bentley: Second Corrie: Discussion? Morrow: Point of order, don't you have to dispense with the prior motion that was moved and seconded before adding a second motion? Corrie: It is an addendum to the original motion, I don't think we have to (inaudible) Crookston: I think you have to vote on the, since the amendment was made as part of the discussion you already have a motion before the Council so you would need a motion to either take the initial motion back withdraw it or have a motion to adopt both the change and then adopt the entire motion. Bentley: I withdraw my second. Corrie: I think under the circumstances it would be easier if we have a motion to adopt the change and then approve the original motion. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I withdraw my motion. Corrie: We need a motion, Morrow: Why don't we withdraw the first motion as well and start over. So who made the first motion? Berg: You did Morrow: I will withdraw the first motion. Rountree: I will withdraw the second. Corrie: Okay, we are back to square one. Bentley: Mr: Mayor, I make a motion that we accept all the changes. Rountree: Second Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 20 Corrie: Motion is made and seconded, any further discussion? All those in favor say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Morrow: Mr. Mayor I move that we now instruct the City Attorney to draw up the ordinance with the appropriate changes and we adopt, let me rephrase my motion. Mr. Mayor I move that we instruct the City Attorney to draw the ordinance with the changes approved this evening and that we adopt that ordinance with those changes. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion was made by Mr. Morrow and seconded by Mr. Tolsma, any further discussion? Hearing none we will have a roll call vote on the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE: Tolsma -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Morrow -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Crookston t will have the ordinance for the Council at the first meeting in February. I think we need to adopt the ordinance then as you have them before you. You shouldn't adopt an ordinance without having it written and knowing exactly what it says. Corrie: That puts too much power in your hands. Crookston: It is fine to have done what you have done, but I think you are just going to have to re-approve the ordinance after you have it written in proper form. Morrow: That would be with suspension of rules. Corrie: That is correct so we can do that at that point. Morrow: So it would become effective the first meeting in February which is the 6th? Crookston: It would be effective the date that it is published and do you want a summary so you don't pay the publication of the entire ordinance. Corrie: Remember to put that down there. Morrow: Mr. Mayor we can do the (inaudible) Mr. McCaughy Meridian City Council Special Meeting January 23, 1996 Page 21 McCaughy: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council the enabling legislation is very clear that the ordinance shall not take effect earlier than 30 days subsequent to adoption. Crookston: That is correct. Corrie: Thank you, I appreciate that. Rountree: So it would be the first part of March. Crookston: Yes it would be 30 days after the first meeting in February. Corrie: Okay I will close this special meeting do we have a motion that we adjourn? Bentley: So moved Rountree: Second Corrie: The motion made by Mr. Bentley and seconded by Mr. Rountree, all those in favor say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:45 P. M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: O ERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., ITY CLERK WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., Clty Clerk JANICE L. GASS, Clty Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E., Clly Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFf, Waste Water Supt DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt SHARI L. STILES, P 8 Z Administrator PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor KENNETH W. BOWERS, Flre Chlef W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Pollce Chlef WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney NUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 Motor Vehick/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 ROBERT D. CORRIE Mayor NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING C'OUNGIL MEMBERS WALT W. MORROW, President RONALD R. TOLSMA CHARLES M. ROUNTREE GLENN R. BENTLEY P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman TIM HEPPER JIM SHEARER GREG OSLUND MALCOLM MACCOY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, January 23, 1996 at 6:30 P. M. The Meridian City Council will be hearing the following items: • Public Hearing continued from January 16, 1996 meeting for the Development Impact Fee for Parks Ordinance: The public is welcome to attend. DATED this 18th day of January, 1996. R RT D. CORRlE, MAYOR ~°_ i ~~. CITY OF MERIDI~ PUBLIC MEETING SIGN-UP SHEET NAME PHONE NUMBER