HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 06-11Meridian City Council Special Workshop June 11, 2001
The special workshop of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:00 P.M. on Monday June 11, 2001 by Mayor Robert D. Corrie.
Members Present: Robert Corrie, Keith Bird, Cherrie McCandless, and Tammy de Weerd.
Members Absent: Ron Anderson.
Others Present: Bill Nichols, Will Berg, David Turnball, Justin Martin, Greg Johnson, Ramon Yorgenson, Becky Bowcutt, Brian McColl, Frank Varialle and Elaine Clegg.
Corrie: This is a special workshop on Monday June 11, 2001 at 6:00. The Meridian City Council will be discussing strategic planning for the City of Meridian. At this point, I’ll open
the meeting. Let the record show that all the Council people are present except Ron Anderson. David Turnball called me and said he would like to discuss a few things with the developers
up in the north area of our area of impact before the meeting on the 18th to kind of get you a little background. I said that would be fine. I appreciate the Council coming out (inaudible).
Turnball: Thank you. We really appreciate this opportunity because it’s often hard to have a real exchange of ideas and opinions (inaudible) public hearing type of format. The rules
are so rigid. I just want to thank the Council for meeting with us. The genesis of this meeting goes back about a month. (inaudible) We were called to a meeting, Ron and I were called
to a meeting where Mayor Corrie, Commissioner Simmons, Commissioner (inaudible), and Clare Bowman attended. It was the same type of a format. Everybody wanted to get together and discuss
what’s going on out in this area because it seems like everybody’s kind of afraid of the unknown. What might be happening out there. So, we wanted to get everybody together and discuss
the issues and common concern to (inaudible). That meeting was a precursor to another meeting that they’re going to have following up at the end of May. (inaudible) As we discussed it,
I can’t remember, one of the members of the different agencies suggested that maybe we get the developers that we know (inaudible) Meridian area together and see if we could come up
with some kind of a game plan or some ideas about how we can address the issues and the concerns of the city and ACHD and (inaudible). We talked about ACHD issues, Meridian City issues.
We felt it was probably in everybody’s best interest, instead of getting together in this larger format that’s going to happen on June 18th and going into that cold turkey, if we had
the opportunity to sit down with the Meridian City Council and the Mayor and have the same type of a format. Where we can talk about your concerns. Talk about ours and see (inaudible).
Ramon and I were asked to kind of spearhead that on in the developer's side of the table. That’s why I called Mayor Corrie and
asked if there would be some opportunity to do that. That’s why we’re here today. We’re assuming that your issues are going to (inaudible) fire and police protection, parks and probably
land use issues. It was discussed in that May 15th meeting (inaudible)
(inaudible discussion)
Turnball: This is really ground zero for the Treasure Valley now. There’s some great opportunities out there because you have some larger contiguous parcels that you can really do some
nice planning on instead of having 5 acres here and 20 acres there and trying to mix different developers together. This is really a prime opportunity. (inaudible) I hope you take advantage
of it (inaudible). (inaudible).
Corrie: Okay. Do you have any specific concerns as far as developers are concerned that you have that hasn’t been answered by our Council within the meetings that we’ve had? Primarily
the sewering and watering and the trunklines and where they’re going in? Being contiguous annexation as we go rather than having spot areas being built and having their own water and
sewer systems and all that. That’s one of the things that I believe that the Council is not for. (inaudible) We just thought that with this meeting with the Ada County Highway District,
ACHD, they have concerns with roads. The county has concerns with development and with their watering and sewering outside of (inaudible). We have a time table planned of all our sewers
and (inaudible). Primarily that’s just, -- you and I were talking to make sure that developers realize that what we’re trying to do is, we’ve got a plan to work with the area of impact
and the County Commissioners and to put that into place within that 10 year period. Sewer plants and everything else and that. So, that’s where the Council is coming from. You can jump
in here anytime you want, Council. What we don’t want to see is just, (inaudible)
(inaudible discussion)
Corrie: (inaudible) Then of course at the meeting you’re going to have the people from the smart growth there as well having things that they want to see done. Primarily, I guess what
we’re asking for you people is, with us is the fact that we have a plan we want to follow as much as possible. There’s certain areas that Ada County has given us the area of impact with
a 10 year period we will sewer all this. We want to do everything in a contiguous fashion. (inaudible). I guess with that, what kind of questions would you have --?
Turnball: Obviously, development (inaudible) service and you’re talking about 3 major trunklines in that area. The one that you have probably on your front burner is the (inaudible).
I think there is a fair amount of confusion or frustration or misunderstanding about what the status of that is. I don’t go to all of your meetings obviously but I’ve been to some where
schedules have been talked
about and those dates have come and gone. I think, we’d like to have an understanding about whether (inaudible) obviously a major part of that.
Varialle: We have some questions and concerns we’d like to bring up (inaudible). (inaudible) a brief update on that. (inaudible) easement documents for (inaudible). I believe then that
the city (inaudible) public works has shown (inaudible). Construction should start (inaudible).
Bird: (inaudible) if we don’t have any more hold ups like we’ve had for the last year. And getting easements.
(inaudible discussion)
Johnson: Is that just on the first phase though?
Bird: No, that would start on the complete. That would be on the complete White.
Johnson: Does that take it from Ten Mile to Linder?
Bird: No.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: It takes it from Ten Mile to Locust Grove. Locust Grove is where it will wind up. They are supposed to be getting the easements done right now.
Johnson: My question was, the easements. That includes all the easements from Ten Mile to the east side of your property?
Varialle: Right.
Johnson: So, that easements in place. It’s a matter of –
Bird: NO, I don’t think it’s in place yet.
(inaudible discussion)
Varialle: I just received it. My attorney has it. Part of that ground is (inaudible) option so we’ve got to work with that landowner. (inaudible) structuring the easement language to
allow continued farming. (inaudible) talked with Brad today about that. He doesn’t see a problem.
Johnson: So, did you say that your understanding is it’s going to start in October?
Varialle: that’s when they expect to have the engineering complete.
Bird: The engineering complete and it go out for bid and as I understand it that would be the complete trunkline over to Locust Grove. We’ve got to get the easements and stuff like that.
The Council, a couple weeks ago, pretty well instructed the public works from now on, we’re not going to be held by easements. We’re going to have to start however we have to do it.
Condemnation, we’ve never done this before, never had any problems but we’ve been held up big time off the white trunk by right-of-way easements. No more, it’s not going to happen anymore.
We’re going to forge ahead and follow where we can. If we have to do like Nampa, go down the road and put a lift station in.
Varialle: Is that a consideration, of running it down McMillan Road and serving both of those miles from the same trunk?
Bird: I don’t think it is. No, it isn’t. You’ve got 2 different drains there.
Varialle: You’d have to have a couple pump systems.
Bird: Pumps are very expensive and very high maintenance.
Varialle: Long term.
Bird: Yes, they are. We hope to get away with (inaudible).
Varialle: Most (inaudible) is gravity, is that correct?
Bird: Yeah. This will all flow gravity if we can stay with the right deal. It has all been, -- 3 years ago JUB come in and did an extensive survey for us. Sewering out the rest of our
impact area. The only lift station I can recall on that, is the big one there at Ten Mile and Ustick for the Black Cat.
Varialle: Black Cat and Ustick?
Bird: Yeah. Black Cat and Ustick.
Varialle: And then the one at McDermott?
Johnson: For the Black Cat Trunk to pump back to the sewer treatment plant?
Bird: Yeah. There will probably be one more over; it won’t be the same size though, over at McDermott.
Johnson: Do you see in the properties you’ve got to go through, do you expect any that you’re going to have to condemn?
Bird: I don’t think so. I’d have to go back and look at the map that we’ve got but I don’t think so. I don’t know what the hold up (inaudible).
Johnson: So, completion time, I think when we discussed it in a meeting, Gary was talking about a 9 month construction period?
Unidentified: Which one are you talking about, the White?
Johnson: White trunk.
Unidentified: I don’t think so.
Bird: I don’t think so.
Unidentified: They’ll lose their fanny if it they take that long.
Bird: I was going to say if they take that long that contractor is –
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: It will be finished (inaudible). I think you’re right.
Unidentified: April of 2002?
Varialle: Do you have all of the easements now?
(inaudible discussion)
Varialle: We’re still not going to be able to start until such time as you have all of those? (inaudible)
De Weerd: The engineering has started.
Bird: Yeah. The engineering has started.
Varialle: The engineering has started?
Bird: Yeah. I don’t see any problems. You know there’s some things, a big development ready to go through. I notice that after it leaves your place, there’s a couple of places it’s
got to go through. Then it comes back up by our park. Goes across the street, goes down through there and then we’re basically there.
(inaudible discussion)
Clegg: I’m Elaine Clegg from (inaudible). I want to apologize for being late. (inaudible)
Martin: I’m Justin Martin. (inaudible) So the white trunk is the one that the City’s been concentrating heavily on? I know you have some concerns Frank about not having (inaudible).
Varialle: The only questions I have is even after they have the start of the trunkline. After that takes place would they want to wait until all the trunkline is in before they’ll allow
applications to go forward? Or is there some way we can have applications at least go through the paperwork and the bureaucratic process and maybe not start construction. It’ll probably
take 6 or so months to plow a plat or to process a plat before they can start construction.
Bird: Once we’ve got the final engineering and got the construction bidding, in the process. I don’t know why applications couldn’t go forward at that time because like you said it takes
a while to get the applications through and everything like that. I don’t see any reason why it can’t. Plus the people that are developing out there is going to have an idea where the
trunkline is coming through anyway. Our original plan 3years ago, once the White’s done, immediately do the north, get it going.
Unidentified: We happen to have a small parcel. It’s an 80-acre parcel (inaudible). Doc Howard’s parcel. Of course everyone hopes that that would have had sewer to it last fall.
Bird: Yes.
Unidentified: That was the intended –
Bird: That was the original plan.
Unidentified: -- of course we’ve had things that didn’t allow that to happen and made it so it couldn’t happen. We went ahead and bought it on that basis. A year later, next October
it costs us 200,000 just in interest. If it takes another 6 months, that’s another 100,000. Ours is a small parcel compared to some of them. My point being, I’m not whining about it,
but if we could start the process of having a plat approved ahead of time. But you can’t start construction, at least we could start the paperwork process and you wouldn’t have a great
big jam of plat applications right at the last minute just as soon as the trunk goes in. It would allow a more orderly process for the paperwork and the Planning and Zoning and the City
Council and everyone.
Bird: You’re contiguous to the city.
Unidentified: We aren’t at this point. We have to be (inaudible) Keven Howell’s project to make us contiguous. That’s our, their east of us. East and south of us, we’re west of them.
(inaudible)
Bird: You’ve got Dr. Howard’s place?
Unidentified: Yes. It’s unfortunate. He had a very nice home there that had to burn. He still has a home.
Unidentified: That house burnt?
Bird: Oh, yeah big time. Right in the middle.
Unidentified: It’s been several months now.
Unidentified: Did you set that fire too? We were just talking about it.
(inaudible discussion)
Unidentified: But, he can’t get a building permit to go in and do anything because he can’t (inaudible) a subdivision. It’s less than 5 acres. So, he’s held up which (inaudible). It
makes it difficult for him too.
Bird: The problem that I see for you guys and you know I hope you can (inaudible). You guys (inaudible) unless you’ve just got an option on it. (inaudible). We understand that but we
hope that we can work out a timetable. We’ve asked public works to come up with a timetable and live by it which (inaudible). The problem is if the county starts allowing water systems,
water tank or sewer systems out there, then it’s a real problem. It’s a real mess to be flat truthful with you. We know that that (inaudible) along Chinden Boulevard down to Cherry Lane
is a very fast growing area that would boom a lot faster if we had our sewer trunks in. We don’t happen to have it in. We hope we don’t get held up as long on anymore of them than what
we did this time regardless of what the problem is. We just ask for your patience to work with us and not against us. We’ll try to work and grow out there in a feasible manner to grow
from the inside of the city out instead of jumping around like the Mayor said and having a bunch of (inaudible) in our impact area that don’t do us any good. It don’t do us any good
to have a whole bunch of water and sewer systems out there. We’ve got one south of us that we’re going to inherit if we ever take them in the city. That isn’t a really, I don’t know
how they get by with all their testing. I don’t think they do.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: That’s the thing I fear. We get a bunch of off-shoot deals out there. Then it don’t benefit the city, don’t benefit the county and it certainly don’t benefit you guys.
Unidentified: (inaudible) applications proceed based on using the city sewer system, especially like the white trunk because it’s supposedly imminent. If you
wait until the sewer lines are in or even until they start construction. There’s another 6 months after that before anything can happen. Plus, you’re going to get crushed.
Bird: Personally, as a CouncilPerson I have no problem with that. We have this stipulation that we don’t start building, no occupancy until you’re in the city because I’m selfish. I
want the building permits and I want all that in our city not to the county. I have no problem with that. I don’t know if we can legally do it. This guy right here can tell us.
Unidentified: Other cities do it.
Bird: I know other cities do it but that’s their (inaudible)
(inaudible discussion)
Nichols: Let me ask a question then. Are you saying then as developers you’re willing to accept as a condition of final plat approval that the sewer (inaudible)?
(inaudible discussion)
Nichols: What happens if we have a plan that calls for the construction of a sewer trunk to a parcel and we have a timetable? So, you’re planning your stuff based upon some sort of
margin of error with regard to the timing. What happens when we miss the timetable?
Unidentified: We already missed it.
(inaudible discussion)
Yorgenson: It’s no worse than what we have. It just makes it better because you don’t have another 6 months on the tail end.
Nichols: Mr. Yorgenson, with all due respect though. We don’t have a development agreement with you. (inaudible) not made and application or some of the things that you need to do
in connection with the development(inaudible). My concern is I don’t want us to get sued because we don’t have something there when we thought we’d have it there.
Yorgenson: That has to be one of the conditions of the approval. We have made application but it won’t go anywhere because we’re not contiguous with the city. Just make it as a condition.
That’s one of the conditions. We always have a litany of conditions. That’s just one of the conditions.
Nichols: So, what you’re saying is you’re willing to waive –
(inaudible discussion)
Unidentified: We understand that the city can have problems doing those things too. Our timetables don’t always work the way we would like them to either. But, we’ll save a year by starting
to process this stuff now as opposed to waiting until the day that that’s built. Then everybody in the world tries to process all at once. Even now, it takes a year.
(inaudible discussion)
Unidentified: Otherwise it’s like plugging up the Boise River with a beaver dam and then all of a sudden it breaks lose (inaudible).
Bird: That does sound feasible. As long as like Mr. Nichols said that we don’t commit to a timetable and then have something go wrong and can’t make it and come back and get ourselves
sued and he’s the one that has to defend us.
Unidentified: I think one thing that we would like from our end is a commitment and you’ve already mentioned that if the city gets in a spot where it has to condemn, you’re willing to
go ahead and proceed. If it takes an extra 9 months, we understand that. But, if it just sits and doesn’t progress, that gets very expensive.
Bird: Yes, it does. To be truthful with you, we’ve let this white take us to 9 months by not doing something.
(inaudible discussion)
Nichols: (inaudible) but as I understand, we’ve always tried to work cooperatively with everyone. (inaudible) trying to make (inaudible). In the acquisition of these easements (inaudible).
(inaudible) where it can go without screwing up the ability to sell it to somebody to develop it. (inaudible). Where the white trunk was going, the city was (inaudible) and get the stuff
in as opposed to having the development community sort of drive where these things go (inaudible) downstream by the sewer plant (inaudible). That’s why we run into this problem, is because
it’s sort of a maturing process. Things aren’t like they use to be. We know how to condemn property (inaudible). Nampa’s done it before (inaudible) but done it for other things. We’re
ready to go but up until recently the City’s never had to even look at that option.
Turnball: I think one of the things that you’ll run into a little bit more now is people that not only don’t want to develop their property but they don’t want anybody else to develop
theirs. They can prevent it by not giving an easement. (inaudible) That’s why the city has to be (inaudible) condemnation.
Nichols: The other thing I think is a part of that is (inaudible).
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: That helps everybody.
Nichols: But you can’t build it from one end to the other without the piece in between.
Bird: Mr. Nichols’ right, it’s just something we’ve always had good luck you know. Knowing you guys that have been developing around here, you know, you give us easements and stuff to
get through your property. It isn’t that way anymore. I think the south slough extension shows that. (inaudible).
Turnball: Yeah. There’s 2 more trunklines and we’ve talked with the Mayor a little bit about it in that one meeting about where those are in the process. (inaudible) years now about
the Black Cat Trunk –
Bird: That’s right.
Turnball: Frank is involved in that. Basically that area that goes north on the Black Cat Trunk is primarily (inaudible) our property and the (inaudible). We all got together and came
up with a plan to get that trunk built. We’ve corresponded with you on that. I think it’s in your court now. As we talked to the Mayor here last month, he indicated that he had a plan
for the treatment plant expansion and talked about how your enterprise funds were (inaudible). Make a comment that there’s developers on the north trunk and the Black Cat Trunk that
are willing to go in to get those trunklines built. I think we can do it almost entirely through our own property or through right-of-ways where maybe very few easements required. If
there is an odd easement that’s required, we would work to get that. If we weren’t able to acquire it, we would ask the city to step in (inaudible).
Unidentified: On the north slough trunk, we wouldn’t have a problem at least halfway through between Meridian Road and Locust Grove. From Ten Mile to halfway to Locust Grove, the easements
are not a problem.
Bird: I don’t think, knowing some of the property owners out there, talking to them there wouldn’t be any problem with running it right through the edge of where it goes.
Unidentified: Could go over to Locust Grove.
Bird: Yeah. I don’t think so.
De Weerd: I think what (inaudible) is the planning issue. It’s the planning issue of the trunklines. It’s the planning issue of roads, which will be addressed, on the
18th. It’s a planning issue of what are we expecting? What is this big (inaudible) thousand-lot acreage or thousand lot developments and all of that.
Unidentified: All at one time.
De Weerd: It would just be a lot easier if everyone in this room got together and said this is what’s planned for this area at full build out. This is how the sewer’s going to have to
run. We’re still understanding the city wants to grow from the outside out so properties will have to be contiguous but this is our plan. Then everyone sees how they can make it work.
I hear, now we have easements for the beginning of the white and now we have some easements that we thought we had but we may not have now. So, if everyone could just get in the same
room and plan what this is going to look at, how we’re going to service. Where the fire stations need to be. Where the parks need to be. How the trunkline’s going to be put in. What
is the solution on roads? It just seems like it’s going to be an easier process to say yeah well we’re contiguous in these areas but because they’ve all worked together. They’ve all
planned it out and they’ll build before us because they can’t their acts together. At least everyone knows. The school districts know where they’re going to have be placing the bond
authorities to build schools and all of that. It’s more than just roads. It has a lot to do with schools and public safety and what are the essential services to have in a community?
I just think if everyone got together and really said this is our vision for it. I mean, like I said we have a lot of bare ground out there. What a great opportunity to plan the community.
It looks like everyone here has something at stake and it’s the stakeholders that can make things happen. You developers know that because you’ve been building our trunklines for years.
If we could all just come together, make a good smart plan that we can live by and we all know what we’re dealing with. It seems like, and it’s all fair and consistent with everyone.
It’s not the first one in gets the best deal because they’re impacting everyone else but they don’t have to pay the way. You know, if you can all get together and make a plan and have
everyone agree with it, the easements and everything, it seems like it would make the whole process a lot easier.
Turnball: Right. And, that’s exactly what we’re trying to do here. It’s interesting where you get into a situation (inaudible) roads and with parks where you have impact fees. Those
impact fees are suppose to kind of level the playing field like we’re talking about here. But, we can all work together and plan where the parks need to be and how things get planned
(inaudible). (inaudible) from the Highway District’s side looking at it saying we can’t afford to acquire the right-of-way and build the roads both. Obviously, and we’ve done some analysis
on that, if you take what a section of real estate would generate in impact fees, it more than pays for itself. The problem is they don’t get that up front. It’s over time. So, she made
the suggestion that we give the right-of-way to you guys up front and as impact fees are collected, get reimbursed. That kind of levels the playing field and makes it fair for everybody.
It solves ACHD’s cash flow crunch problem. (inaudible) That’s what they’re trying to do, is come up with some solutions that
can solve their problem. We’re trying to do that. We have to do it as we (inaudible) ACHD. Those are really the 2 major players. Ada County is kind of sitting on the sidelines and refereeing
I guess. Compass is involved in the planning aspect because their projects, you can always take a look at those and say --. Greg knows where the development’s going to happen and Ramon
knows. Compass takes a broad-brush approach (inaudible)
De Weerd: I think we’re kind of dealing with some issues here. You know if you have community design involved in this and everyone knew what each other were doing, we wouldn’t have that
difficulty. We see nothing but R-4 8,000 by 100 square foot lots and we’re so sick of it, I could just puke up there.
Turnball: We are too.
De Weerd: But, you know, if I made of it, this is going to be R-4 80 by 100 square foot lot but next to it’s going to be R-8 and here’s multi family and here’s some commercial. If you
could see a big picture, it would be easier to even look at your applications and see how it fit in the picture. With such large applications you have the ability to maybe work with
(inaudible).
Johnson: Tammy, we’re a little slow to react to things but the reason you see R-4 (inaudible) is that is the only thing (inaudible).
(inaudible discussion)
Johnson: I tried for 3 years to get Highland’s Ranch approved because of mixed use, Becky worked on it for ages (inaudible). Because of the commission structure at that time, they didn’t
like it. They didn’t want to look at that type of thing. Now that’s changed. All you guys are new and that’s (inaudible). We’re like appraisers, we’re driving in the rearview mirror
looking at what’s been approved in the past thinking that that’s all we can get through. It’s going to take us a while to shift to that. But, we need to know that feedback as soon as
it comes so we know how to react.
De Weerd: I think our new ordinance for planned developments is going to really make a big statement on what we want to see.
Johnson: But, we still haven’t worked through all the --. We haven’t worked through the comp plan yet.
Bowcutt: That’s the other issue I was thinking about. You know we talk about the sewer issue, Pete and I know that’s an important topic, but nobody has brought up the Comprehensive Plan.
To be honest, I know members of your staff have a lack of enthusiasm pursuing this growth to the north because we have a plan in place. You know, you’ve got Mr. Yorgenson saying I want
to bring mine in. You’ve got your staff on the other hand saying, hey, hold them out until we get
some guidelines, until we get an overall game plan here. We’re almost caught in limbo but that’s just as important as it is that sewer line.
Turnball: The draft plan, as it sits now is going to be exactly the opposite of (inaudible).
Bird: That’s right.
Turnball: It’s basically low density residential. As I told the Mayor in our meeting, (inaudible) look at that whole north area and designate it a mixed-use development area with, I
don’t know if you do it through the planning and development process.
Bird: That’s not the only place, David. We’ve got some good commercial corners designated residential.
(inaudible discussion)
Turnball: When you look at traffic problems, it helps a lot if some people in the community can live close to where they work.
De Weerd: Right.
Bird: That’s right.
Turnball: If you get those work bases where they can walk to work, ride to work –
De Weerd: And, that new comp plan is suppose to accomplish that.
Corrie: That’s what we’d like to see.
Turnball: (inaudible) currently is there, gets less density as you get out from the city center. It’s the standard old thing that we always use, that downtown is the center of the earth
and as you get out from there, you get less and less. (inaudible) You take a look at your city. You’re bound basically on the south by the interstate, on the north by Chinden, on the
east by Eagle Road and presumably a new Ten Mile Road connection. You’ve got some major transportation hubs around your city, which is absolutely great. That’s wonderful. We need to
take advantage of them. Five years ago if I came into this city, the mentality was, we don’t want any small lots, small houses, small anything. We were just pushed and pushed and pushed
to R-4. In fact the city looked (inaudible) lovingly at Eagle City as their example. I’ll tell you what, that’s the prototype for urban (inaudible). That is not going to solve this valley’s
problems if we fall into that kind of mode. I am as big a proponent as anybody about mixed-use development, about having a variety of housing types so that you don’t have
you know an enclave with big monster houses with only rich people. Then enclaves with (inaudible). You know, mixing it up –
(inaudible discussion)
Unidentified: (inaudible) Bristol Heights. Bristol Heights has a range from –
Turnball: 5,000 square foot lots to 12,000 square foot lots. Cheaper homes, smaller homes, not cheap homes. (inaudible) there aren’t any cheap homes (inaudible). $150,000 homes to $300,000
plus homes. Now, believe me you can go much higher than that with even larger but there’s a real mix. Small homes, you have parks. You have walking trails. We need commercial. That’s
one thing we don’t have. We want to have commercial on our property.
Unidentified: We need pockets like Dave developed there with Boise Research.
(inaudible discussion)
De Weerd: Have you guys been looking at the same comp plan proposal I have?
Bird: I don’t think they have.
(inaudible discussion)
Unidentified: I’ve got a brand new comp plan actually. It came out this week.
McCandless: It just came out.
(inaudible discussion)
De Weerd: I’m thinking wow, I’m really missing something here.
(inaudible discussion)
Turnball: That north area has Chinden Boulevard as a major transportation corridor, Ten Mile presumably on the west side. Tale advantage of it by getting more density, more shopping
and employment opportunities and things like that.
De Weerd: Maybe we should (inaudible) at this point.
Clegg: If you guys don’t mind. Idaho Smart Growth has been involved with a big project with a lot of partners in the Treasure Valley. I’ve seen some of you (inaudible). It’s called Treasure
Valley Futures. It includes a Treasure Valley Partnership, which is the mayors, the county commissioners. It includes Compass, ACHD, ITD, the counties and as a result of that, we’ve
come up with a
couple of things. One was (inaudible). Compass’ projections. July 12th, we’ll be releasing the preliminary transportation model and really is going to be different (inaudible) because
it’s not based on broad brush. It’s based on trying to actually predict where growth is going to occur. Another thing that we did is publish what’s called a toolkit of alternative choices.
In that toolkit are 2 particular tools that as I’m listening to this conversation I think would be certainly not be all, end all but at least I think a start for solving some of these
problems. One is a specific area plan, which has been done a little bit by the City of Boise. It’s used widely in a lot of places. California uses it as part of their Comprehensive Plan
and requirements. Also a local circulation map which is something I don’t think really has ever been used in this valley. I know that ACHD doing a collector particularly arterial circulation
plan for north Meridian but they didn’t consider any of the local circulation. One of the things smart growth considers a (inaudible) is the local connectivity and the ability then to
walk to work or shopping or schools because you’ve taken advantage of the proximity. A lot of times the way we – you guys probably know this better than any of us, is that even though
locations may be proximate, there’s no way to get from here to there because the connection never got made. I guess, the suggestion that I’ve been kind of playing around with ACHD and
the planning staff here in Meridian and the school district in the county and ITD and now with you is that you all who have an interest do a specific (inaudible). That would include
all of the things that you’ve been talking about. I think we’d also get at Ramon’s concern which is this long process between application and when you actually get approved. If you have
a specific area plan that’s adopted –
***End of Side One***
Clegg: -- doesn’t have to be a special fee. It doesn’t have to be a Conditional Use as long as it meets all the requirements that have already been written into the specific area plan
and it really speeds up that process if you’re willing to play by the rules that everyone agreed to. The circulation plan would do the same thing. It would predetermine the connectivity
so somebody can’t come in later and say well, we don’t really want to connect to the other subdivision so we’re just going to make this (inaudible). Then you don’t get the path to the
school or whatever. It’s something that would require some money. You would have to hire a planner and (inaudible) to work with you all to pull it all together. Hopefully somebody who’s
had some experience. All of you probably are going to be spending money on engineering and planning anyway. It might be something that can be worked out collaboratively. I don’t know
if those (inaudible) are available in the Public Hearing realm. To be honest with you, I’ve been kind of poking around with this and (inaudible). I think there’s probably an opportunity
to do something on a collaboratively basis that would include the developers and include all the public agencies and include the citizen interest organizations like ours. A suggestion.
Unidentified: You’d be interested to know they would not let us build a street connection between Hobble Creek and Boise Research Center.
Clegg: I know. I actually found out about that afterward.
(inaudible discussion)
Unidentified: So, people when they go to the YMCA, they come out on Chinden and whip right back around.
(inaudible discussion)
Clegg: So, it’s a 10-minute wait to get onto Chinden at 8:00. That’s exactly the thing that we’d like to see avoided. We did some quick numbers and you look at that 12 square miles in
north Meridian. You could have 55,000 people. That’s the second biggest city in the state of Idaho. That’s not really all that dense development.
Turnball: What kind of density were you --?
Clegg: I think it was only 4 and a half units per acre.
Turnball: With 4 units per acre, you have almost 30,000 units.
Clegg: Okay. So, it was less than that. Trisha Nielson did those numbers for me so and I couldn’t remember them. So, you could have the second biggest city in Idaho in those 12 square
miles. If it’s not planned right it could be just a parking lot most of the day.
Yorgenson: By the same token if there were to be 25 to 30,000 and you do it at 8,000 (inaudible)
Bird: 800 is what we’re doing per year.
Yorgenson: You’re talking 25 to 30 (inaudible).
Bird: You’re not going to develop this over night.
Yorgenson: The thing is, you’ve got to plan it though.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird; That’ll depend on how you sell.
Yorgenson: This is all going to happen this year so, this traffic congestion is going to be there. If we open this up in a year all the roads are going to be (inaudible). We’re going
to have to do some traffic but it’s not going to happen this year. It’s not going to happen next year.
Bird: But, you’ve still got to plan ahead for it Ramon.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: That’s what Elaine is stating is we need to plan for it. I think you’re going to see Ustick is planned to be a 5-lane road. Chinden, I think those 2 roads are definitely going
to be commercial. We already know Eagle is.
Johnson: If we don’t start working now as a support group though, to Chinden. If Chinden doesn’t get developed, it doesn’t do any good to have all these other roads so that you can get
to Chinden and just stop. It’s a state road and we need to get that thing improved in the next 3 or 4 years so that when you come out of these side streets and even out of the current
city as you move up north. That needs to be a major north connection. Maybe it even needs to be built on frontage roads with limited access.
Bird: That’s a good idea.
(inaudible discussion)
Johnson: I personally would support the frontage roads and we’ll build our portion (inaudible). Because it’ll make the commercial land valuable and you can get up an d down that corridor.
If you have street lights out at that intersection, it isn’t going to help a whole lot. It’s kind of like Eagle. No matter how wide you make it, you can only get so many cars on it.
Bird: I like that idea. I wish we would have thought about it on Eagle.
Corrie: Ramon is absolutely right. Seven, eight years I came in our thought was downtown and then as it goes out to Chinden, (inaudible) R-4s and R-8s (inaudible). You’re right (inaudible).
The times have changed now and we need to put everybody together now. That’s one of the reasons for the 18th meeting but. (inaudible). I wanted the Council (inaudible) because they’re
the ones that make those policy changes. I think if you look ahead, think ahead, plan ahead and like you’re saying, side roads and commercial and plan for that if the Council has the
feeling that’s what they want to do, that’s fine.
Johnson: We really need a frontage road along the (inaudible) between Meridian and Nampa on the north side of that freeway.
Bird: Absolutely.
Johnson: You know we accidentally have one with Overland Road on the south side.
Bird: For a while.
Johnson: It’s perfect. For a ways but that was an accidental deal but it works perfectly.
Bird; Franklin’s too far away to be a frontage road.
Johnson: Unfortunately we’ve got one subdivision that goes all the way to the freeway there. Somewhere there’s got to be a connection that you can get through and go back all the way
to Garrity and connect that. Put industrial out there by the freeway so that we don’t have to build these high walls for sound barriers. Put industry there that loves advertising and
loves the noise. (inaudible)
Turnball: We just need to continue this and understand the city’s mindset. 8 years ago I think when you came in Bob, the city was going like it was a bedroom community to Boise and all
you were getting was the residential housing and no commercial.
Bird: And we were.
(inaudible discussion)
Turnball: I remember talking to (inaudible) saying Walt it will come but you just don’t have the (inaudible). Now you’re going to get 2 major business centers out on Overland and Eagle.
You’ve already got a huge hospital in the works. You’re getting all those commercial opportunities that you longed for 8 years ago because you have the residential. The commercial doesn’t
come until the residential is there. This commercial out in this north area won’t come until there’s more residential in place. As developers, we’re market driven and we cannot subsidize
things. It has to make market sense to make it work. But, we need to preserve those commercial areas so that when they are viable they get built.
Bird: They pay the taxes.
Yorgenson: I don’t know how many of us have seen the latest land use map but it shows 2 miles of Chinden frontage a quarter mile deep. That’s half-acre lots and residential lots, no
commercial.
Bird: On our side?
Yorgenson: 2 miles long. From Ten Mile down to Linder and then down to Meridian. Half acre and larger lots and a quarter mile deep.
(inaudible discussion)
Yorgenson: It came from Spur Wing. It came from the Eagle side is what I would think.
(lengthy inaudible discussion)
De Weerd: Yeah, but not all because there is a lot of mixed use (inaudible). That mixed use really allows for some creativity. If you don’t take advantage of it (inaudible).
Bowcutt: My only concern about – Well, there’s a lot of things that in theory they sound really good. In a perfect world, yes. Everybody would walk to work. Everybody would walk to shop.
But we don’t live in a perfect world. I guess some of the comments that I’ve heard is you know, taking out some of the new urbanism which (inaudible). But I’m sorry every time (inaudible)
you don’t want to look like the north end of Boise. There are groups out there that that’s exactly what they (inaudible).
(inaudible discussion)
Bowcutt: I know that. I said some of the concepts of new urbanism work well. But I guess you know we need, when you’re talking about creativity and diversity I hope that there’s a flexibility
there so that we don’t have subdivisions that all look alike. I think that’s one of the criticisms that Keith and you had recently is that a lot of subdivisions just look like every
other one. Do something different and unique.
Yorgenson: I only want to make one more comment about the planning and development process and versus R-4 development. The other reason why everybody is gravitating towards R-4 is because,
and Eagle does this especially, (inaudible). You go through a planned unit development in Eagle you’re just asking to get picked apart by buzzards. You’re just like this dead carcass
lying in the middle of the street for 2 years, 3 years getting picked apart.
(inaudible discussion)
Yorgenson: A PUD needs to be as easy of a process as a subdivision.
Bird: That’s right.
Yorgenson: You need to –
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: PUD should be easier to run through. It’s a planned development.
Turnball: I remember your comment of you guys have to use this. If the process is reasonable to use, we will use it. But it has to be somewhat reasonable. The difference is like Ramon
(inaudible).
Unidentified: I remember sitting in one of Ramon’s hearing out in Eagle, on this project he got approved in six months. At the same time he’s been going through this other one for 3
years. The city council kind of lamented that well this is just a subdivision application so our hands are tied. If it were a PUD project we could require this and that and tie you up
for 3 years. That’s the wrong mentality.
Bird: That is.
Johnson: Because you’re trying to make something really nice and a little bit different and have some mixed involvement. Different size lots and different things in it and they just
throttle you.
Bowcutt: That’s what he tried to do. (inaudible)
(inaudible discussion)
Bowcutt: Yeah. We were trying to provide different lot sizes and even our smaller lots were still 12 or 15,000 square foot lots. (inaudible). You would think that if (inaudible)
De Weerd: Why don’t you try that in Meridian?
Bird: Yeah.
De Weerd: We’d be drooling. I just think from the sounds of everything that maybe what Elaine recommended, to get together a plan like that would not only expedite the process from
that end. I’ve never heard of it so I don’t know what –
Johnson: Are you suggesting in addition to the Comprehensive Plan, (inaudible) make a Comprehensive Plan for just the north side?
Clegg: That’s exactly what it is. It’s an overlay of the Comprehensive Plan.
Bird: I also think when we have the Comprehensive Plan. Now, how many of you guys in here went to the Comprehensive Plan meetings?
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: Let’s make sure that we get to the Public Hearings. In fact coming to the Public Hearings, maybe we can get ahead of some of the problems we foresee because are the ones out there
doing the plannings. We’re not. I’ve never put in a subdivision in my life. None of us have.
Bowcutt: That’s June 28th, right?
Unidentified: Is that the Planning and Zoning on June 28th?
Bird: That’s Planning and Zoning.
De Weerd: There’s something on the 21st.
Bird: The 21st is the , Will what is the 21st?
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: when is the Public Hearing?
Berg: The 28th at the Meridian high school auditorium.
Bowcutt: What time is that Will?
Berg: 6:30.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: You know you guys can help us out by doing that. Then we don’t have the problems down the road maybe because we’ve got all the bugs that we can ironed out.
Johnson: I’m going to provide some – I won’t be able to be at the 28th meeting because I’ll be at the regional soccer tournament but I’m going to provide some written input and have
one of my representatives come and suggest that that north area be overlaid with a mixed, some kind of mixed use development designation instead of the R --.
De Weerd: Maybe you and Elaine can talk about it.
Corrie: Well, this is the general conception that Compass (inaudible). They came into (inaudible). That’s why again, I wanted Council to hear what your plans are (inaudible). Then
working together. As you well know, I don’t make the decisions around here (inaudible). I agree with them it needs to be planned (inaudible).
(inaudible discussion)
Yorgenson: But if it takes you 5 times as long, there’s not going to be a whole lot of people want to do it.
(inaudible discussion)
Corrie: They’re going to do exactly like what we don’t want to happen.
Bird: We deserve to get you guys timetables on our part. What we think we can get. Like Mr. Nichols said, there are things that might hold us up down the road. We need to have some timetables
lined out. Gary is getting some timetables and stuff like that lined out for the sewer.
Johnson: Back to Ramon’s original question here. Is Council prepared to accept applications on those land contiguous to the city that will be served by the white trunk?
Bird: This one Councilman is as long as it’s legal. That’s up to Bill. As long as we don’t get ourselves in trouble, I’m for it.
(inaudible discussion)
Nichols: The only problem I have with the thing is that, Council can make general policy (inaudible). Typically (inaudible). They have not approved developments where the sewer was
not (inaudible). You’re asking them to make a policy change. I would rather that they think about it and look at it (inaudible).
De Weerd: But, that was just one issue too.
(inaudible discussion)
Nichols: I guess what I’m saying is while I understand Mr. Johnson’s (inaudible). He wants to get you pinned down (inaudible).
Johnson: We’re talking about a schedule and yeah we would like to make some (inaudible)
Nichols: I understand that.
Johnson: Mr. Bird is asking us not to go to the county and not to do separate sewer systems and that. I’m one that’s willing to listen to that if we know what the time frame is.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: As far as I know it is. The Mayor and the Council’s idea. Just to bang right on up and go through. The north Black Cat which they’ve referred to. I think they’re looking right
now on what kind of a lift station (inaudible).
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: I would hope so.
Unidentified: (inaudible)
Bird: (inaudible). You wouldn’t have to. No way –
(inaudible discussion)
Johnson: (inaudible). I understand that my application we didn’t have an annexation route. The reason we didn’t have that annexation route is because the applications on the white trunk
weren’t allowed to process. Otherwise we would have had an annexation route. If Marty Goldsmith’s property and my property have a contiguous annexation route to the city, will you allow
that application to be submitted and that sewer trunk to be built?
Bird: Now, you’re getting into something else. You’re getting some farther, Greg. See I thought you were talking about stuff that was going to be sewered by the white that we were going
to have in.
Johnson: I was with Ramon’s.
Bird: Yeah. With Ramon’s deal.
Johnson: But you said that you would allow the application –
Bird: Application if you’re contiguous but you’re not contiguous because until we annex them in the city, you’re not contiguous. Now, we’re talking about something else.
Johnson: When that happens though?
Bird: Yeah.
Johnson: And there’s a contiguous route to the city will you allow us to proceed?
Corrie: Perhaps.
Nichols: Let me break in here. Still one of the issues is leapfrogging (inaudible). You might have a piece of property that’s contiguous to the city. Maybe it’s been annexed in (inaudible).
Maybe yours builds out quicker than Frank’s or Marty’s or somebody’s so you don’t get (inaudible) We still have to send that police officer clear out to Chinden and he’s got to go through
a whole bunch of rural stuff to get there. We still have those issues about providing those kinds of services out on the edge of the area of impact.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: I don’t know what Bill was talking about. Leapfrog would be and you wouldn’t be doing it within the city because you’re going to develop your city from the in out as far as I’m
concerned. I realize that some subdivision might get started a little sooner that’s on McMillan Road at Chinden instead of between Ustick and. Well, we’ve go that within the city limits
right now.
(inaudible discussion)
Johnson: The area that Dave developed and Ramon developed in the city of Boise, developed from Chinden down towards (inaudible). That infrastructure from a marketing standpoint I would
much rather be out on Chinden because they can get there and move especially if we can get Chinden built. That’s why I bought that ground.
Unidentified: I guess I get a little concerned when you talk about – I don’t disagree with some of the concept. But take a look at the map. You’re not going out to Columbia Road here
like Boise city is. They’re out to Columbia Road. We’re talking about a pretty packed area. There’s probably one piece of ground right now that has sewer in that north Meridian section
and they won’t sell because they’re the kind of people that just don’t want to sell. If you’re talking about that next 50 acres has to develop before you can go outside of that, you’re
going to drive the prices of land through the roof. You’re going to have all sorts of pressures (inaudible) because the land is so expensive. The higher you drive up the price of the
land, the more pressure you’re going to get from the city and you’re probably not going to get the lenience (inaudible). A bunch of landowners (inaudible) figure out all they need to
do is say I’m not going to let mine develop because the next guy can’t develop his and it just drives the price right through the ceiling.
Bird: I don’t think that’s what I meant.
De Weerd: That might be the advantage to a plan.
Unidentified: I agree with that. I just wanted to – you know Lexington Hills, I had the opportunity to buy 10 years ago, $3500 an acre. I didn’t because it was way out there. Bryce Peterson
and his group bought it and they’ve got a really nice project but at the time that way out there. Look at it now. (inaudible) and they were able to do some (inaudible) the price wasn’t
sky high. It’s part of the advantage of what we have in this north Meridian area right now. We’ve got larger parcels of contiguous property that we can get for a reasonable price. (inaudible).
Bowcutt: I think we’ve got an (inaudible) you know there’s only just a few developments in Boise where you had just this blank slate to create new parks
and schools and transportation. With Eagle, Cloverdale, McMillan, Chinden area there’s one –
Johnson: (inaudible) a high school and a junior high school all in one area. Plus Boise Research Center (inaudible) multi family. We’ve got single family ranging from 100,000 to 4 or
500,000.
Bowcutt: Then they’ve got Columbia Village and then your Harris Ranch stuff. You guys, I mean it’s an opportunity most cities don’t see.
Johnson: I might suggest too since you’re talking about an overlay plan. In my mind if you have an overlay plan in place and you then allow expansion to only happen contiguously, you’re
going to hurt that plan because, one example is in working with the school district. You know they’ve got school sites picked, scattered out throughout the area. You’ve got parks scattered
out throughout the area. The next elementary school just may not happen to be contiguous and they need it but we can’t get to it. The same thing with the park, we can’t get to it.
De Weerd: Greg, the nice thing about an overlay is it might, and you write it into your policy or you’re buying off on it that that might be allowed. That’s what the beauty is of coming
to the table and seeing how some of the service issues are going to be addressed and you know, it’s not just water and sewer. It’s police and fire and schools and parks. That’s the beauty
in everyone coming together and seeing staff’s comfort and the elected official’s comfort. Safety services are assured and you know everyone being a part of planning that area. Then
it may not have to be that you plan it contiguously, as long as everyone’s dedicated to the plan and everyone knows what to expect.
(inaudible discussion)
Turnball: Tammy, how do we do that and not take another 2 years?
De Weerd: I don’t know. I just said it.
Turnball: How does that process take place in a compressed time?
(inaudible discussion)
Clegg: It’s a smaller area of land than the whole city so it shouldn’t take as long to plan (inaudible). The resources are probably the biggest question. If you can find the resources
to get professional planners to work on it.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: That’s right.
Johnson: IF the city really goes on board and said that maybe they would (inaudible). Then the developers would be willing to do it. The difficulty that we have now is (inaudible).
That’s all an incentive for developers to sit down with other developers and with the city and to do an area plan (inaudible).
Turnball: Unless you can get this done in a reasonable time frame –
De Weerd: Unless you can. I mean, that’s as far as I’m concerned, it’s also in your hands.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: But, we have to buy off on it.
(inaudible discussion)
Bowcutt: But, we need your support and obviously your input. I guess one thing that bothers me is that we have different parties that are at different steps in the process. Some people
haven’t even put the pencil to the paper. Others are just poised to submit. Some of us are half way in the process.
Yorgenson: I’m on my 4th plan.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: David, how long did it take you to do BRC?
Turnball: You mean build it out?
Bird: Yeah, from when you started.
Turnball: I started infrastructure in 89 and we’re still going at it but it’s mostly –
Bird: You’ve got to realize this, even though it’s 12 square miles or whatever and we could have 80,000 people out there one of these days. It’s going to be 25 or 30 years before it’s
out.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: But, we need –
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: I was going to say I won’t have to worry about it. That’s why we need this plan, David. I think Becky hit, or somebody hit it on the head that you guys are
the players that we need to help and look with the help of the city also. Have a plan and how long can you guys give us? You’re asking us a deal. I mean. How long before you start pressuring
Ada County? We know it’s going to happen. We know there’s plans out there right now with United Water for sewer and water. We know that.
Turnball: Who told you?
Bird: They did. You know, how long are you willing to not create a monster out there, which I believe if we bring other water and sewers in it creates a monster?
Turnball: I believe that if we have the cooperation and the support of the city, we can go to work. You know, I don’t know if we can get everybody on exactly the same page.
Bird: I understand that.
Turnball: I’m ready to go to work right now. My only question is what are they going to do with Ten Mile Road? (inaudible)
Bird: We have no control over that.
Clegg: That’s why ITD should be part of it too.
Turnball: Well, they are going to supposedly going to be at the June 18th meeting. I think we should sit down and get something going from the developers side. But we need the commitment
from the city whether it’s a liaison person from the Council plus staff. We need somebody that is willing to be there and meet frequently so it doesn’t get bought down on monthly meetings
and stretch out over 2 years. It almost needs to be a member of staff that’s not so busy already with the Comprehensive Plan.
Bird: That’s right.
Turnball: You know what it’s like to get reports and everything right now. I mean, say okay we’re going to give this a priority and not have a staff person that has the time to do that
(inaudible).
(inaudible discussion)
Turnball: Just to load this onto Shari –
Bird: That isn’t fair.
De Weerd: Well, and you have to have public works there.
Bird: I was going to say, yeah –
Turnball: You’ve got to have a member, they’re trying to process everything that’s going through right now too.
Corrie: It’s and important project of this overlay and everything else. The county and the city and ITD and ACHD, it probably would behoove us to, if we could make the manpower and
the time for those places to work with you. You tell us what your timetable is. We can work that and go together and the Council can, has given you a pretty good idea tonight what we
would like to see. We’re not going to be doing it alone. Neither are you. We work together, the overlay and then you tell us okay, we can do this—As long as the Council and you have
the vision, it’s going to be out there in 25 30 years and we do it now and set it up and do it and plan for it. We’ll be fine. It’s just the fact that we don’t know where we’re going
for sure. I mean, we’re going here, we’re going here. We’ve got a sewer over here. By working all together we can do it I think. If we hang together we’re fine. If we hang separately
we’ll all die.
De Weerd: We’ll all hang together.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: I think the Mayor’s 100 percent right. I think that if we work together, we’re much – If we go in here and we get battling the developers, the city it outs Ada County Planning
Department in a bad spot. It puts the commissioners in a bad spot because you guys are hounding them. We’re hounding them. I think that we can make it. I understand from the private
business point that you guys can’t afford to have your money sitting out there for 50 years. That you’ve got to turn your money to make profit so you can do these. I hope we can work
something out where we can have this overlaying plan and get it in place. You know the city will work the best we can to help. We don’t have this confusion and stuff that, the in fighting
that we’ve had up to this point with the county and us.
Yorgenson: Can I ask Elaine a couple of questions? One, about how long it would take to do an overlay plan. If we said tonight, today okay let’s find some professional people to help
us with the overlay. Is it conceivable that it could be done in 6 months.
Clegg: I wish I could answer that question. I think it is but I honestly don’t know. I was just going to say, one of the other things that we can offer, at least to get this started
is that Deanna Bellser and Phil Errickson, a man by the name of Jim Dica, have offered to come. Jim’s going to come at his own expense and we’ve got some money left in (inaudible) for
Deanna and Phil because they all have experience with these and are professional planners and can answer those kind of questions better than I can. They’re willing to come and spend
half a day with
a group and whoever, ACHD, whoever is interested and just go through all of that kind of stuff. What would be involved. How long would it take? All of that.
Yorgenson: Do we have any idea what the cost would be to do an overlay zone? Is it a $50,000 bill? Is it $150,000 bill?
Clegg: I’m thinking 150 or so. I wish I did know the answers to those things.
Yorgenson: In that realm?
Clegg: I can get the answers to all those questions. If you’ll give me a list of the questions, I can get answers for you on June 18th. So, time, money, anything else?
Bird: How can they get this to you Elaine? Can you give us a number ?
Clegg: Well, are you going to come on June 18th? How many of the people here are going to be there?
(inaudible discussion)
Clegg: Okay. I’ll just bring it to that meeting.
Bird: David, you can keep that.
McColl: Mayor can we get (inaudible). (inaudible) set up a committee with the city’s cooperation. So, instead of having the developers all up in here coming up with their plan and then
bringing it back to the city and the city saying wait a minute this is totally inconsistent with our revised comp plan. (inaudible) I think the city has to (inaudible).
Turnball: Brian, I think that comes into having somebody from the planning staff, public works staff, (inaudible).
(inaudible discussion)
Nichols: (inaudible) on the planning contacts that’s fine. But, we’ve got to be careful about those (inaudible) contacts. You know when they have a screw up like Fosters Warehouse
case where you get into enough specifics in working on the plan as a CouncilPerson somehow or another when a project comes up, it (inaudible) screwed up.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: Yeah, but it gets into that. That’s the problem. Every time you get talking it comes into that. Maybe the Mayor could serve on it. Would he get the same --?
(inaudible discussion)
De Weerd: Maybe that’s another question Elaine that you can have answered as well.
(inaudible discussion)
De Weerd: Because ACHD would have to be on it as well.
Turnball: At a minimum, as we progress the Council should be involved. Like if we get a month down the road, let’s go through what we’ve come up with and make sure we’re going down the
right road.
Bird: That’s a different deal when we’re all here.
Turnball: I don’t have a problem with staff doing it as long as you’re looking at it as it goes and we’re all kind of singing off the same page.
Johnson: We need to have this be a compact group though. We can not –
Turnball: if we get it too big, it’s going –
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: If you do you’ll get in trouble.
Nichols: Let me say one other thing and it goes back to Greg’s question about what’s the city’s commitment (inaudible). One of the problems (inaudible) the legislature just to try
to (inaudible). To the extent that if you have any contacts with any of the legislators, if we could just leave the annexation law alone and not foul it up by some of these things (inaudible).
Some of these things wouldn’t be an issue. Service outside the city limits. You know (inaudible)
De Weerd: That’s another question then for(inaudible).
(inaudible discussion)
De Weerd: I’ll put another pitch in (inaudible).
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: we did not do a very good job.
De Weerd: You don’t make the same mistakes twice.
Bird: And, all 5 of us can take the blame.
Unidentified: All we would have had to do is get Ramon to move his whole family to Meridian and we’d get 14 votes.
(inaudible discussion)
Yorgenson: They’re not all married yet.
Martin: I have a comment that somewhat relates. If we’re going to do an overlay in this area which includes north and south of McMillan Road. It seems that the new comp plan with the
urban service-planning boundary here, your planning area. The way it’s proposed, Meridian seems like it’s going to cut the north side out for some undetermined amount of time.
Turnball: Is that still in there?
Martin: It is and if it goes into effect, one of their first actions is to put into place, I think, and any of you correct me if I’m wrong, how to open up a square mile at a time outside
of that service area. Included in that would be, it would have to, the park site happens to be a 30 acre regional park site in there committed is the term that I got from the Planning
and Zoning. How does that relate? I mean. That almost forces those developers in that mile section to be donating that as opposed to seeing services purchased.
Turnball: I told the Mayor that if that line stays in place I would view that as a terrible act of bad faith on the city’s part.
Martin: So, what I’ve just spoken I’ve heard from several different people in the city. That’s the plan. That’s what they would like to see if that urban service plan area stays in effect.
That would seem a little bit contradictory to the people north of McMillan wanting to be involved in this overlay area if they’re going to be held out anyway until they donate all the
services needed.
De Weerd: I would imagine that if you did an overlay, you wouldn’t need the urban service area. That was the purpose for that.
Turnball: That’s what was driving everybody to the county.
Bird: You’re 100 percent right.
Martin: Absolutely. That’s what makes us do that.
Bird: I don’t feel comfortable addressing our Comprehensive Plan until we have the Public Hearing and we get it. Bill just (inaudible) and stuff so, I will say one thing. There are a
lot of things in the Comprehensive Plan that I don’t agree with.
Martin: Okay. I have one last question that doesn’t relate to that. Would be the intent of getting this – you guys are obtaining sewer easements from Ten Mile over to Locust Grove, is
the intent of those, when there’s a property that isn’t laid out where the sewer lines not going to follow some plan, such as a dead end in you guys project at Bridgetower, do they plan
to put that on the center section line so that it matches both property owners north and south of that line? Is it the intent of the city to have an easement at the section line so if
there’s 2 property owners (inaudible).
Bird: I can’t answer that for you except I can tell you that JUB basically laid, I mean it’s as close to being engineered as you can get. From the lay of the ground. You’re welcome to
go down and pull the, if I had mine with me, you’d be welcome to look at mine.
Martin: And, I have.
Nichols: (inaudible) some adjustments though based upon the desire to have that trunk in the right-of-way. So, they tried to work with the development layout so that the trunk is in
a right-of-way when it’s all done. Rather than having some unbuildable lots because of your trunkline.
De Weerd: I might offer one more suggestion since we (inaudible). From Council Members who’s had it forever. If you would submit your comments in writing as soon as possible so staff
actually knows what’s coming and what issues are a concern. I mean, this thing has been out there for a whole year.
Johnson: I’m just waiting for the drafts to sit still.
Bowcutt: Yeah, me too.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: Which draft do you want us to respond to?
Martin: The land use map that just came out is so drastically different from the one that we had back in June of last year or the one in March of last year that I think it’s going to
be shocking to most everybody.
Clegg: (inaudible) based on comments that we received (inaudible).
Martin: I guess in our defense, or maybe Marty’s defense is that we were never once invited to any of those meetings. One time did I find out because I happen to rent a house in Meridian
and the owner of the house sent me the water bill. It had one of the hearings or workshop maybe it was where you could come and view the charts on the walls.
Johnson: I don’t think the BCA does a very good job on those (inaudible) to tell you the truth.
De Weerd: The BCA was involved last fall, asked for comments.
Martin: So was the last, --
De Weerd: We still never got any.
(inaudible discussion)
Martin: -- and we submitted our comments then and they’re still the same.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: Mayor, we’re getting off the subject.
Corrie: Anything else?
(inaudible discussion)
Varialle: I can’t speak for Marty but I know for myself. Marty and I started working on this about a year and a half ago. We signed an agreement that we would participate to bring city
services to those areas. That is our first choice of all choices. We will stick by that. We want to do that. The only reason we have pursued the other routes is we both (inaudible).
You know I don’t know what Marty’s is but my interest bill is about 60,000 a month. I am not going to sit there forever waiting for that. When I came to the city and was declined for
annexation, the impression was given to me that it would be several years before the city would look at it. If that’s the case, I can’t wait. But, if we’re going to work through this
timely and there’s a reasonable solution to it, we would like to build city services. I would be glad to develop within the city when it’s annexed but it needs to happen (inaudible).
Corrie: Well, I think that’s also going to be in the meeting the 18th. We need to bring that in. I think the county has pretty much made up their mind already. It’s neither here nor
there.
Varialle: I don’t want to fight wars and I don’t need to spend my energy uselessly and cause problems for anybody here. We would like to do that.
Corrie: I think the city would too. We want to do this right. Like she said, we need to plan this because (inaudible). 20 years is nothing, really. It’s going to take 20 to 30 years
to build that all out. If we’ve got a plan and we’re going to
follow it and everybody’s together on it, we’ll do fine. If somebody sits there and don’t get together and talk it out, then nothing gets done.
Bowcutt: I say that the meeting on the 18th is the first step in bringing all of the interested parties together. Then from there, are you (inaudible) splitting off into groups Tammy
and looking at these overlay issues and trying to create some group from that group?
De Weerd: I think you would need to create a group from that group.
Corrie: Try to play with it. See what happens.
De Weerd: You have a key contact person that would be helpful. You know if it’s Dave or –
Nichols: Dave has kind of been appointed by default or whatever.
De Weerd: So, you know if you can get questions to Elaine that you would like to have answered that night –
***End of Side Two***
Bird: (inaudible) problem why we can’t work through it instead of fight it.
Corrie: Work together, work through it and get it done for the – I mean, none of us are going to be here then but we can set the ground work right. Then it works out.
Bird: I don’t know. There are a couple of young people here.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: Tammy plans on being here. She’ll be my age by that time.
(inaudible discussion)
Corrie: Okay. With that –
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: I move that we adjourn the meeting.
McCandless: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and second to adjourn. All in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:35P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK