Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 06-18 Joint Ada County & ACHDMeridian City Council Joint Meeting June 18, 2001 Ada county Commissioners and Ada County Highway District The special joint meeting of the Meridian City Council with Ada County Commissioners and the Ada County Highway District Commissioners was called to order at 8:30 A.M. on Monday June 18, 2001 by Ada County Commissioner Chairman Roger Simmons. Members Present: Mayor Robert Corrie, Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird and Cherie McCandless. Members Absent: Ron Anderson. Other Staff Present: Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Will Berg and Joe Silva. Item 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Tammy de Weerd O Ron Anderson X Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird X Mayor Robert Corrie ADA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS JOINT MEETING MINUTES JUNE 18, 2001, 8:30 AM The Board of Ada County Commissioners (Board) met this date in an Open Meeting in the Boise City Council Chambers to act on the following item. The following were present: Roger D. Simmons, Sharon M. Ullman, Grant P. Kingsford, Jeff Patlovich, Patricia Nilsson, Nichoel Baird Spencer, and Scott Cook, Ada County; Judy Peavey-Derr, Susan Eastlake, Sherry Huber, Dave Wynkoop, Dave Bivens, J. Schweitzer, Christy Richardson, Diane Kushlan, Terry Little, Joe Rosenlund, Ada County Highway District, Mayor Robert Corrie, Keith Bird, Tammy deWeerd, Cherie McCandless, Shari Stiles, Bill Nichols, Gary Smith, and Will Berg, City of Meridian; Tami Bromly, Christine Donnell, Wendell Bigham, and Bruce Gestrin, Meridian School District; Dave Turnbull, Brighton Corporation; Frank Varriale, Primeland Development Company; Clair Bowman, COMPASS; Elaine Clegg, Idaho Smart Growth; Joe Silva, Meridian Fire Department; Mike Ingram and Steve Bravo, Meridian Rural Fire Protection District; Hal Bunderson; Idaho Senate; John Eaton, Building Contractors Association; Shawn Nickel, Land Consultants; Becky Bowcutt, Primeland Development; John Paulson, Dakota Company; Daren Fluke, J-U-B Engineers; James Jewett, Stetsorl Properties; and Sharon Gallivan, Moffatt Thomas. Minutes Recorder: Gloria Uscola. (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( I. IN THE MATTER OF CALL TO ORDER: Commissioner Simmons called the meeting to order at approximately 8:32 a.m. II. IN THE MATTER OF CHANGES TO THE AGENDA: There were none. III. IN THE MATTER OF NEW BUSINESS: R. Simmons said this was a follow-up meeting on the Meridian Area of Impact issue. He asked that everyone in the room introduce themselves and whom they represent. J. Peavey-Derr requested the meeting so he turned the meeting over to her after the introductions. J. Peavey-Derr said the meeting is to discuss an alternative to developing Meridian application by application. If they look at this as a whole, with the cooperation of all parties, they could end up with a product that would be better than if they did it the ordinary way. She thought there was an opportunity to set precedent and establish something really wonderful for Meridian and Ada County. This could be a model to look at in the United States as the way to do development. She said they would have to have everyone’s cooperation in order to do it. They have to look at the developers to put forth some money and land and the other entities will have to be cooperative in terms of thinking outside of the box and allowing for quicker approvals to see these things go forward. She said she wanted to have C. Richardson and D. Kushlan explain how many applications have come in and what area they involve. C. Richardson said they have seen an application for Bridgetower Subdivision. It’s between Linder and Ten Mile Roads, south of McMillan. R. Simmons said he wanted everyone to be sensitive to the fact that there are applications pending and because of that, they need to be aware of ex-parte communication. C. Richardson said she would speak from the ACHD Staff’s perspective as far as what they have received. She pointed out on a map the areas for which ACHD had received applications or expected application for and briefly described the projects. J. Peavey-Derr asked what area they are looking at in terms of this discussion. C. Richardson replied it is from Meridian Road to half mile west of Black Cat Road and from Ustick up to Chinden. There were some initial concerns when they first met that the area should be expanded. They wanted to include the area from McDermott clear over to Eagle Road. J. Peavey-Derr asked if all of the applications that ACHD has were done as proposed, how many trips would they be looking at. C. Richardson replied that just looking at residential lots alone, there would probably be 21,000 trips. J. Peavey-Derr asked if it were to develop at full build out, how many trips would they be looking at. C. Richardson replied that she was not sure but estimated it to be about 50,000 trips. J. Peavey-Derr asked how many developers were in the area that the six-mile study identified. C. Richardson replied that she was aware of six major property owners but there are several little pieces under different ownership and she could not identify all of those. J. Peavey-Derr said the last time they met, they gave instructions to the developers to get together and come forward with some parameters. She asked if they had an opportunity to meet and what they came up with. D. Turnbull replied that they met on May 29, 2001, and addressed some of the ACHD’s concerns. They thought it would be best before this meeting, to go ahead and meet directly with the Meridian Mayor and City Council, which they did on June 11, 2001. They looked at the ACHD issues and they do not have a comprehensive approach because they need to involve the Meridian School District. He thought individual developers had been approached by the Meridian School District but no overall plan has been established. In their meeting with the City of Meridian, they agreed to take a look at the overall area and maybe do some overall planning work that would involve schools. He thought the sewer and utilities have a master plan in place but they need to look at schools, parks and recreation, and public safety issues. As for the Meridian City issue, D. Turnbull thought it was something that would need to take place within a short period of time. The developers do not want this to become a protracted planning process. They look at it as being measured in months, not years. They want to get all the stakeholders together and go forward with the process. He thought in the previous meeting with ACHD, they expressed concerns about impact fees and how they could acquire right-of-ways in advance of development. He said they discussed that issue at the May 29, 2001, meeting and came up with some ideas that probably need to be discussed more in depth with ACHD. He thought they could set-up a mechanism where they could get their right-of-way dedicated in advance and that would be reimbursed as impact fees were collected. They understood there was a cash flow issue because plats come in before impact fees were actually collected. He thought there would be a way to commit aright-of-way to ACHD and it would be reimbursed at a later time. They did not view this area as being any different than any other part of Ada County as far as requiring any special treatment for impact fees. They would work with ACHD to ensure the right-of-way is dedicated without the cash flow crunch. J. Peavey-Deer asked if the 12-mile area were built out, how many schools would the Meridian School District need. D. Wynkoop replied that they would need an elementary school about every square mile, a middle school about every second or third square mile, and a high school about every fourth, fifth, or sixth square mile. J. Peavey-Derr asked how many schools that would be. W. Bigham replied that he felt the report Centennial prepared for the original Ustick/Chinden corridor was accurate and it indicated roughly 100,000 square feet of educational facilities within that seven square mile area. Those figures could easily be extrapolated out to the 12 square mile area. He estimated they would need about 180,000 square feet. The elementary schools need to reside about a mile and three-eights apart and the ideal location of the elementary school is the northwest corner of one section and the southeast corner of the other section. The Ustick Road corridor is loaded up with schools and they need to get onto McMillan. He thought they would need to designate about 22 acres per square mile for schools in the 12-mile area. The hardest task they’ve had is trying to identify where school sites should be. They have a planning committee that is trying to put together a comp plan to identify where school sites are needed. He thought it may be a futile effort because they follow the development patterns. If development is spotty and jumping around, their ability to site schools is compromised. If they could look at the 12 miles as an entire entity, they could identify geographically within a half-mile where they would like a school and then start working with the developers. D. Turnbull asked if W. Bingham could give them statistics or parameters on how many elementary, middle, and high school students there would be per household. W. Bingham replied that the school district did not have the household information by census track yet. As soon as they can get the census track information, they will be able to identify the number. From a historical perspective, the number is about .8 K-12 students per household. However, that is for the district as a whole and the figure depends greatly on the nature of the development. For example, if you put in high-density housing, the .8 figure will increase dramatically. He said until they could determine the type of housing, they don’t know the figure. When they get the census track information, they can take an existing subdivision for comparison and get a figure. J. Peavey-Derr asked C. Bowman if he knew when the census information would be available. C. Bowman replied that he anticipated the data would be released by August or September. He did not think the data would change the numbers that W. Bingham provided by much. W. Bingham said if anything could be done to look at the area in its entirety they would favor it because it is very difficult for the school district to plan with each development. The difficult decision to make is which developer does the school district try to extract a school site from. J. Peavey-Derr asked J. Paulson if he had anything on the Dakota Company side to add to the discussion. J. Paulson replied that the Dakota Company is in the process of developing a major mixed-use project at the intersection of Interstate 84 and Ten Mile between Interstate 84 and Franklin. They are working closely with the City of Meridian on developing utilities and participating in an independent study regarding the provision of utilities to the site. J. Peavey-Derr asked J. Paulson if he could give some guidance as to how to approach the 12-mile section even though he was not doing any development in that area. J. Paulson replied that the more the community can work with the developers and vice-versa to identify the needs would be beneficial for all involved. Also, they should work on a program to get utilities to the area. He thought the area needed to be looked at as an overall development as opposed development by development. There is a major growth corridor that is occurring through Meridian and there needs to be a concerted effort for everyone to work together. J. Peavey-Derr asked Mayor Corrie where Meridian was as far as sewer and water is concerned and what would they need from the developers. B. Corrie replied that G. Smith could give them a quick overview of the water, sewer, and utility services. G. Smith said the City of Meridian is presently designing the White Drain sewer trunk, which is located between McMillan and Ustick. The treatment plant is at Ten Mile Road and Ustick Road. The White Drain picks up from the treatment plant and it will extend through Bridgetower and down the half-mile line all the way to Locust Grove. The project is estimated to be completed by the Spring 2002. The north slough will be on the midsection line between McMillan and Chinden from Locust Grove to Ten Mile. It has been generally designed and no detailed design has been done for that portion of sewer line. The drainage system for the area west of Ten Mile drains to Black Cat and then south to a major lift station at Five Mile Drain where it crosses Black Cat Road and then it pumps back to the wastewater treatment plant. There is also another lift station in the midsection between Ustick and McMillan, west of Black Cat, that will pick up the drainage about a quarter of a mile west of Black Cat to McDermott. It will also pump back to the wastewater treatment plant. There is a significant amount of ground to the south and east that will be served by the Black Cat Trunk. It flows into the large lift station at Black Cat Road. The preliminary cost figure to extend the trunk to serve the area to the south and east is about nine million dollars. G. Smith continued by saying that providing water is not as difficult because they try to locate groundwater wells about every mile. They have been successful getting water in all of the wells they’ve drilled so far. Last year, they completed a two million gallon storage tank at Ustick and Meridian Roads. They have one well under construction currently in the area south of the interstate and south of Overland Road, west of Kuna-Meridian Road. They have another well scheduled to be built at Eagle Road and Overland. Those specifications are under way and the land is being acquired. J. Peavey-Derr asked G. Smith, in terms of servicing this 12-mile section that they are concerned about, if he felt they have adequately planned and are prepared to address the situation if this project moves forward and what timeframe they would be comfortable with. G. Smith replied that three square miles are under design now and they expect that to be constructed by Spring 2002. The master planning has been done for the other three square miles above that between McMillan and Chinden so it would just be a matter of obtaining easements and making the final design. D. Turnbull said in regard to the area between McMillan and Chinden, there are two trunks, which are Black Cat North and the North Slough. G. Smith added that the North Slough is between McMillan and Chinden, east of Ten Mile Road. D. Turnbull continued by saying two developers control the primary area served by the North Slough or property owners who have proposed to move forward with construction in conjunction with Meridian. It will take that burden off of G. Smith and move forward with the engineering on their own and the same can be said of the Black Cat North trunk. He thought the developers could assist the City of Meridian in moving those projects forward. In regard to easements, there may be a few required but the developers addressed that issue with Meridian at their meeting last week. For the most part, the easements would run through the developers’ properties but there may be one or two that Meridian may have to help the developers acquire if there are some holdouts. J. Peavey-Derr asked if the 12 miles are taken care for the most part. D. Turnbull replied it is only a matter of engineering, construction, and funding. He said the developers have approached Meridian about those details and they are moving forward on that basis. G. Kingsford asked G. Smith for the status on the plant capacity. G. Smith replied they currently have about a million gallons a day capacity in the treatment plant. The gravity collection lines can be built faster than capacity can be constructed at the treatment plant. They have a proposal for consulting work to conceptually engineer all the other elements of the treatment plant to bring it to its maximum capacity. It will be before the council within a week and the designing would get started for the wastewater treatment plant. D. Turnbull asked how much did a typical residential unit generate per day in wastewater. G. Smith replied about a hundred gallons per day per person. D. Turnbull said the City of Meridian has a plan for moving forward on its wastewater treatment capacity and he had discussed the issue with the City of Meridian. He thought they needed to be clear that the 12-mile area is not going to develop at once. He believed everyone was comfortable that the City of Meridian would be able to keep up with it. K. Bird replied that he believed that was correct. D. Turnbull said just because they are looking at this 12-mile area does not mean that Meridian is going to go from its current 800 building permits per year up to 8,000. It is not going to happen. J. Peavey-Derr asked in regard to the capacity for fires, if Meridian had enough water in their wells to address any fire situation. G. Smith replied that as developments occur, they would need to supplement their existing water supply system to provide fire flow. Also, wells would need to be constructed as development takes place. He said one well per mile would be adequate to provide fire flow protection. S. Huber said she was assuming they were looking at a 20 or 25-year buildout for this area and asked how many per year would be completed and the incremental estimated growth so they could know what they need with each service. D. Turnbull replied that there had not been a definitive study on it. C. Bowman said COMPASS had not done a study of it but if you look at the areas that have sewer, water and roadway systems in place, 20 or 25-year build out is too long. He guessed it would be a 10 to 12-year build out. D. Turnbull replied that he thought it would be in that range but it was something that needed to be looked at. E. Clegg said the Treasure Valley Futures Project has estimated that there will be 77,000 new households in the next 20 years in the Treasure Valley. She said she could find out how many of those are predicted to be in this area but she thought it was high. J. Peavey-Derr asked B. Bowcutt in regard to the Bridgetower Project, did she anticipate a seven-year build out. B. Bowcutt replied that she thought it was about 10 years for approximately 100 units. T. deWeerd said at their meeting last week with the development community, they talked about an overlay for the north corridor. The overlay would address a lot of the different components to planning for this area, which would include the roadways, sewer, water, fire protection, substations, and school sites. She said there are a number of different things other than sewer, water, and roads that they need to be concerned about. E. Clegg was suppose to bring some information to this meeting and thought she could provide an overview of what they talked about and what the overlay district would be. Many of these things are planning issues and the developers seem to be amenable to this kind of approach. She said Meridian is very interested in this happening and it seems like it will benefit every planning interest in this room. She said this is an ideal opportunity to plan this area and plan it right. E. Clegg said at the meeting last Monday, the City of Meridian talked about doing a comp plan overlay, which would cover the 12 square-mile area. She checked with planners and consultants in other areas who do this kind of project regularly. She found that it would take 12 to 18 months to complete. She thought the developers would probably think that is too long but if they are considering a 12 to 15-year build out, it would work. In regard to cost, a detailed transportation component would cost about $150,000 and a detailed plan for the entire area would cost about $500,000 to $700,000. However, this is the kind of planning that developers would do in the end for their developments so the master plan would not necessarily have to get that detailed. She thought the plan could be conceptual with the developers doing the planning or the project could be phased. The conceptual part could be done quickly and then the project phased as development occurs. The way this type of project is done in other states is that a group of agencies operating under a joint powers agreement puts out a Request for Proposal (RFP) and they control the planning process. Typically, the developers pay at least part of the cost, if not all of it. The advantage for the developers is that the plan gets adopted and they get to develop by right. Since the agency is controlling the plan, the public has the advantage of knowing that it is not just for special interests but that public good is being considered. The public agencies have the advantage of establishing a master plan for the whole area and they do not have to consider each development and how it is going to occur. D. Turnbull said when he looks at this whole area, it is an ideal area for planning. This area is where a lot of things are going to happen in Ada County in the next decade so it is an important issue. The transportation elements seem to be coming together because there are some major transportation corridors that really bind this area. There is Chinden Boulevard on the north, Eagle Road on the east, and the proposed connection from Highway 16 all the way up to the Ten Mile interchange. There are some good connections to the interstate and good east/west connections. The transportation corridors are in place but there will be some improvements that will have to take place. In a sense, there is a beltway around the 12 square-mile area, which is a positive. Also, there are large tracks of land that can be master planned so they would not be dealing with five acres here and 20 acres there. They would be dealing with about 200 acres per developer and that is an ideal situation. He said there are different developers on different timelines. For example, F. Varriale has an application currently pending and if he is told that he has to wait 18 months for a comprehensive plan overlay to be developed for this area, he’d probably walk out now. He said they have to come up with a way to set some planning in place but allow the developers the flexibility to move forward. He did not think they could bottle up this area for two years because it is not realistic. First of all, there is a lot of pressure building for lot availability. There is a lot crunch in Ada County and prices are going to skyrocket if they do not have the ability to move some of these areas forward. The other thing they talked about at the meeting with Meridian is the idea of getting the same thing over and over again because of the way ordinances are written. He thought they needed to have some ordinance updates and some planning and development updates. They cannot use Planned Unit Development (PUD) as a tool for delay and picking apart a developer. The reason most developers go the subdivision process instead of the PUD process now is because it is the path of least resistance. When you go through the PUD process, the developer tends to get picked apart until they don’t have anything left. He thought some ordinance updates could make the process provide more variety in lot sizes and development types so there is truly a mixed-unit type of development. J. Peavey-Derr asked F. Varriale to talk about his application to the extent he could and what his timeframe was for it. F. Varriale replied that they are currently constructing Phase I of Bridgetower, which is 54 lots on Ustick to Ten Mile and Linder. Phase II is tied to a PUD, which is before the City of Meridian, of approximately 750 lots, which would take them all the way up to McMillan and it goes from Ten Mile to Linder. The buildout of Phase II would happen in about one year. Phase III would be about three quarters of a mile up Ten Mile, heading east toward Linder. He thought that was about two years out and would add another 100 lots. After that is complete, they anticipate adding 100 lots a year for a total build out of 10 to 12 years. In the meeting with Meridian, there were discussions of creating an overlay plan for this area. One possibility that came out of it was to be able to look at that as an entity rather than as pieces, which may allow Meridian to look at annexation in pieces. If they were able to be comfortable in knowing that their investments were protected, then it will allow Meridian to control the planning that they cannot control currently. When the Meridian School District needs a parcel for a school, currently they have to wait for annexation. In his project, they will have a school but as the Meridian School District looks up into the next mile, they have no idea where to go because annexation is happening little pieces at time when they want to be a mile away. They have no idea when that is going to happen. If you are able to look at a development that is happening up in that area, they then have much more time to establish and secure the school site than if they had to wait a number of years until the developer is actually able to develop in that area. He thought they could carry that through to every phase of the services that would need to be brought to that area because Meridian would be certain, through the overlay plan, that the whole area would be within their control. D. Turnbull said he thought the overlay they were talking about is conceptual in nature. He thought each developer is going to have to do detailed planning of his own parcel, which he believed was appropriate. He could not see a detailed plan being worked out for this area. There is going to have to be a diversity of development types and he thought that was desirable from the communities’ standpoint. He thought they can incorporate many of the elements that E. Clegg talked about as far as smart growth. However, the developers are always going to be market-driven and providing the customers what they want. He thought it was desirable to have a mix of development in this area. J. Peavey-Derr said she did not think anyone had a problem with development being market-driven but they would like to have a marriage that is also good for the public agencies. She thought the agencies needed to work with the developers and the market but they need to include things that make sense. If 20 years out they are going to be required to have mass transit, they should look at it now and build our communities in such a way that people will want to get on a bus and make it convenient for them. If they could consider those types of things when doing development, that only makes sense and that is what they are asking. She asked for thoughts on annexation. R. Simmons said they have recognized for some time that this is a difficult area to deal with. He appreciated the effort of bringing all of the people together in the same room because it is something that needs to happen. He said he looks at this area in some respects the way Ada County looked at Hidden Springs several years ago. It is different in that you have competing developers. Hidden Springs only had one developer so that developer could bring forth an overall plan for the area to create a small city out in Ada County. Ada County is in a unique position where they have a bunch of developers who are creating a similar situation but on a spotty basis. He thought they needed to get everyone together and coordinate how they do this so it does not become a hopscotch type of issue. In terms of annexation, he thought it was something that the City of Meridian is going to have to determine and Ada County will have to try to help them deal with it. He said there is not much Ada County can do in terms of the individual applications because when they come in, Ada County has to consider them application by application. He would like to see an overall plan with the developers participating that gives him something better to deal with in terms of making those decisions. When Ada County extended Meridian’s Area of Impact into the northeast corner, it was because they realized that development was headed that way. He said Ada County wants to help Meridian deal with it, but also, they do not want to ignore that the push is on so they will all have to work together to accommodate it. J. Peavey-Derr asked G. Kingsford what his thoughts were about annexation. G. Kingsford replied that this whole area has got to be within Meridian’s city limits and be dealt with as a unit. He agreed with Commissioner Simmons’ comments that you cannot have each development come into Ada County and have it work. He thought the overlay idea was an excellent one. It is not something that is totally new to Meridian. The planning area is spread out so to get there, they would have to have an overlay of the whole area. He wished the areas to the south would be included in this package also. Mayor Corrie said one of the things that he encourages is that Meridian and Ada County work together on this. He said they are looking an area with 55,000 people, which is a large city and if you add that to the other part of Meridian, you got the second largest city in the state. He thought there is an excellent chance they can do this whole area as an overlay and that it will work for everyone. As far as the Council and the City of Meridian is concerned, he thought they could work with the developers as far as annexation. He said they have to look forward. Previously, they looked at this area north of them as going to lower density but that does not help anyone. It was a grand plan at that time but they are into transportation issues now and you have to have a mixed use. He believed the Council felt the same. If they plan for it, in 15 or 20 years, it will work. Meridian is planning for it with water and sewer service and want to work with the developers. He said with the cooperation between Meridian and Ada County, this can be a great project. It just needs the planning. He thought they needed ITD because of Chinden, Ten Mile with the new interchange, and Highway 16. If everyone gets into the picture and works together, they can get it done. If they continue the way they have done previously, it will not work. J. Peavey-Derr asked in regard to changing the ordinances and PUD process to make this easier, was there any thought from Meridian about allowing that procedure to change. T. deWeerd replied that Meridian is in that process with Bridgetower. They submitted an ordinance change for a planned development ordinance and that is going through with Bridgetower. She thought Meridian would be very interested in hearing from the developers which ordinances need some updating. Meridian realizes that they have a lot of antiquated ordinances but it is a matter of staff time and prioritizing. Many of these issues could be worked through the overlay process. She was very struck by an article in the Idaho Statesman this past weekend, which contained a lot of the information that came out of the leadership conference in Sun Valley. It discussed some of the things going on in the Treasure Valley and identifying the characteristics of the individual cities in order recognize when you travel from one city to the next. This overlay is going to be a real asset in trying to maintain what the community of Meridian would like to see as their character and their identity. She said everyone present has stated the importance of this overlay district and the longer they talked about it, the longer it was going to take. F. Varriale said in looking at this entire area, the issue of timing is going to be very critical if the developers are going to support and be a part of this. There are a number of developers that own large parcels and to design those parcels and bring them though the current process takes time. He said Bridgetower took 12 to 18 months to get before the Meridian City Council. If they were to do an overview plan of this area and took another 12 to 18 months, he did not think they would get a lot of cooperation. The developers are interested in being a part of this overlay concept from day one so they can bring their projects forward and at the end of the year, they have a project that can be approved rather than waiting a year and then starting the process. Also, he said if they delay things and hold back the process, they will have an onslaught all at once. S. Huber said it appears to her that someone needs to establish what the ultimate goals are. As they have been talking, she thought some of the questions she had might be for developers if in fact they are asking the developers for money or dedicated right-of-ways. They talked about identifying school sites and how the various developers can contribute to the costs. She thought that was a huge obstacle to overcome because it may be on one developer’s site but several developers are contributing for it. It seemed they needed to decide if there is a funding mechanism. Other issues to consider were the timing issue of the water and sewer service and how the planning effort costs could be shared. She was not sure if the group wanted to have four or five issues that they tried to solve but the questions had to be answered. D. Turnbull said from the developers meeting on May 29, 2001, they want to drive this process because if they leave it to an overburdened City of Meridian staff, it could take forever. He did not know if Meridian had the staff right now that has time to take on this kind of project. The developers would like to sit down with ACHD and discuss how they deal with right-of-way issues. They can also talk about whether they need any further study on traffic patterns. The developers would also like to sit down with the school district and talk about their issues. He did not think they wanted to get everyone in the same room to talk about one party’s interests. The developers can go to the school district and find out what their needs are. Also, they can get with the City of Meridian and talk about planning issues, ordinances, utilities, public safety, and park and recreation issues. In summary, the developers are willing to meet with all of the agencies to reach solutions. J. Peavey-Derr asked if they were willing to make recommendations for the ordinances and about the process so the agencies can see where things are not working. D. Turnbull replied they were willing. F. Varriale replied they have already done that by assisting the City of Meridian with the PUD ordinance. He said they were absolutely available to do those things. Mayor Corrie said he thought it was stated earlier that a lot of people are going to be looking at them and what they do here. He thought it was going to be driven by money. This project can be laid out really well and it will be a flagship for a lot of other communities. The partnership is the way to go. He was thankful that Commissioner Kingsford had the common sense to help Meridian look forward when he was mayor because they really helped with the wastewater treatment plant in terms of thinking ahead. He thought they needed vision and then to go after it. He thought if the developers are driving this, it would get done. It would be done well and he believed a partnership is great. J. Peavey-Derr asked if it was reasonable that the developers take the lead on this. Mayor Corrie replied he thought so. E. Clegg replied that she understood the developers’ concerns about there not being capacity on staff, especially the Meridian staff at the moment, to handle something like this but she had concerns about it being developer driven. She thought the public and the whole region would be better served if the developers were a partner in a joint powers agreement but that it was staffed by Ada County because they have the best staffing capacity. She was not sure if Ada County was willing to do it but that was a question to ask. This would not mean that Ada County would do the planning because a consultant could be hired. The consultant would make sure that everyone in the process had a voice and that public concerns and the developers’ interests are addressed because they have to be or else this would not work. R. Simmons said from Ada County’s standpoint, he would have to get the approval of his fellow commissioners, but he was willing to recommend that the Ada County staff be involved in the process. He appreciated the comment that this had to be developer driven. He thought the developers are the ones who would put up the money in order to make this work. Also, he thought this had to be a partnership to work. He appreciated E. Clegg’s comments but when they say it should be developer driven, they are not saying that the developers should be able to do whatever they want. They are looking at a planning process and he thought Ada County staff as well as Meridian staff needs to be involved. He said he would ask his fellow commissioners that Ada County give this priority in terms of planning. D. Turnbull said he did not mean to suggest that developers would decide this project. He said he was suggesting that the developers go to the different agencies and they would include E. Clegg in the process. The developers can go to the various agencies involved and get this done in an expedited fashion. It is all going to be decided by public agencies and open to public review. S. Ullman said they are talking about this being developer driven but it is demand driven. There is a demand for more housing and it just makes sense, in a process like this, that the developers want this happen as quickly as possible. The rest of the agencies are here because the developers are proposing to develop this portion of Ada County right now. She said she would concur with Commissioner Simmons that the Ada County staff should be involved in this process. However, she fully expected that the developers are the ones who will want to move this along and would go along with the concept that it be developer driven. The governmental agency representatives will be making the decisions. E. Clegg said she still had some concerns. If this is going to be an effective overall master plan, there has to be someone pulling the pieces together. One of the problems with the development that has occurred in the past is that agencies do not talk to each other. This may be an opportunity to get agencies talking to each other rather than going to all of them separately. It does not mean that each agency is going to be wasting time solving the other agencies’ problems but in fact, there are common problems. She thought part of the solution was for everyone to work together. She said there is a misconception about what smart growth is. Smart growth is not neo-traditional development. It is a pattern of development that services a variety of housing and transportation needs and recognizes environmental issues. She thought it was important to provide mixed uses so people have choices in what kind of housing they want and that there is commercial and retail space available. She thought the planning should also include the public facilities like schools, parks and fire stations. Hopefully, if all of this works well, you also get a more efficient kind of development that requires fewer trips. She thought perhaps in lieu of bigger roads, more transit service could be available. She said there are tradeoffs and she was not saying it would be cheaper, but it is a different expenditure. D. Wynkoop said he was hearing a lot of goodwill but he was wondering where do they go from here and how do they actually start this process. He asked if they would all chip in to hire a consultant to prepare a master plan and who would do what in the process. Also, how would they do this in a timely way so that they do not have a huge demand that gets pent up causing a lot of pressure on everyone to just start approving things because they have not done anything. He thought they needed to get started immediately and they got to have a short timeframe for it. He thought there had to be someone in charge or coordinating the effort. D. Bivens said the quicker they could get on with the process of planning and establishing a plan, the better off they would be. He thought they should not forget that the final approval still stands with the various agencies. This project is not the only concern of Meridian at this time. If they allow the developers to move on with this, the process can move on much faster. He thought it was critical that the representatives from the various agencies be kept up to speed on what is going on and giving that information to those who they represent. He thought the quicker this was done, the better. Also, he thought ITD needed to be involved in this process because that is going to be extremely important. R. Simmons said they already have some agencies in place that could help. Someone has to coordinate this and his recommendation was that it should be done through COMPASS, which all entities are members of, or Treasure Valley Partnership. However, ACHD is not part of the Treasure Valley Partnership so he thought it was probably more appropriate to go through COMPASS. If they go through COMPASS, they have to have a majority vote from the COMPASS board to do it. He said when entities that are members of COMPASS request something over and above what COMPASS would normally do, they have to be willing to step up and help fund it. He was willing to asked his fellow commissioners to make that commitment. S. Eastlake said she wanted to point out what she perceived to be ACHD’s problem. They have just talked about what appears to be about 1,200 houses per square mile for 12 square miles. In that area, ACHD has 22 miles of roads that are currently all two-lane roads. The densities they are talking about are going to require that every one of those roads be a four-lane road. The lane mile costs per mile right now is between $1.2 million to $1.5 million. In order to take each one of these roads to four-lane roads, they are talking about $2.5 million per roads that needs to be improved at buildout. If they are talking about 500 units coming on per year in this area, at their current impact fee rate, that comes out to about $600,000 a year. She asked if they were going to build a quarter of one road every year with impact fees. She said this did not compute. There is no way that you can take the money that this group of developments are going to create and pay for the road system that is going to be needed unless there is massive commercial or something else that has much higher impact fees per square foot than residential does. She thought the planning they are talking about needs to take into account the tremendous cost of the infrastructure needed and recognize they need the kind of mixed use that would pay very substantial impact fees in order to pay for the roads that this area is going to need. She was not sure whether Meridian was planning for this. She said she did not disagree with D. Turnbull about this area being surrounded by major roads. However, those major roads are in no condition to carry the kind of traffic they are talking about. If Ten Mile Road needs to be the north/south connector, it has to go through a lot of houses that are currently on Ten Mile Road. The costs are way more than what she proposed if they are doing anything like that. Senator H. Bunderson said he was very excited about this event today. He thought there was whole-hearted cooperation. They have one group saying they will finance and take the lead and that is not an exclusionary lead as he understood it. Anyone would be able to come to those meetings. This meeting was a fact-finding effort so developers are saying they will go out and do the legwork to get the facts and bring them before everyone. Then all the issues have to be dealt with and hopefully, they can reach a resolution. The reality is that there is large growth occurring in Meridian and that is going to keep going. He thought it was marvelous that the developers are going to take the lead on this and cooperate with everyone and he was pleased with the comments to move forward. D. Turnbull said he knew that Senator Bunderson wrote some letters to ITD regarding the Ten Mile to Highway 16 connection and asked if he had any insight to provide in that regard. Senator Bunderson replied that clearly there is not enough north/south connectors to the freeway in this valley and they need to fix that problem. In regard to S. Eastlake’s comments on Ten Mile Road, the article he wrote did not specify Ten Mile Road but somewhere in that area there should be a road connecting to the freeway. It might move over to connect with the proposed Ten Mile Interchange. One of the huge complaints he has had over the years is that the public is always behind the curve. No one acts until everyone else has acted and then it costs a lot of money. For example, the road going up Eagle to Horseshoe Bend, ITD said they could have bought that land when they originally proposed it at $2,000 an acre but by the time the land changed hands six or seven years later cost over $20,000 an acre. He thought this current project was an opportunity for them to get ahead. He thought they should think about some legislation and they should make it so that government entities can cooperate with local entities to trade zoning. He thought that innovative ideas should be considered as they go through the process. D. Turnbull said he knows exactly what Senator Bunderson is saying. He developed a parcel on the corner of Cloverdale Road and the interstate. When they were starting the third phase of the four-phase development, ITD said they might want an interchange there. He was flabbergasted and thought they might as well have condemned what he was doing because an interstate would take up a lot of territory. It was frustrating to see that lack of foresight because they had already engineered the whole development and it was built out within a year. He said he has the land between Black Cat Road and Ten Mile Road and if they want to put a road through there, he would like to know now. F. Varriale said in regard to impact fees and zoning, he thought that was exactly what they were talking about with getting PUD’s and proper ordinances in place that will allow those things to happen. That process is already in the works because the City of Meridian is updating ordinances, which will allow for the higher impact fee areas and generate more fees than just residential development would. He thought the City of Meridian was already in the process of moving forward on this and they have been concerned about it. They have had a lot of foresight in order to meet this and they were not at ground zero. J. Peavey-Derr asked C. Bowman if there was a need for a joint powers agreement. She said she did not have a problem with letting the developers do research and bring it back to the decision makers. C. Bowman replied that COMPASS could serve in a facilitator role and he thought that was the only role they could serve in. They could keep everyone talking to one another, get the costs on the table, and bring the transportation department in. He said they did not need another joint powers agreement because they already have one. G. Kingsford said COMPASS could coordinate all the staff involved. He said Commissioner Simmons proposed that Ada County staff be made available and he was amenable to that idea. He thought C. Bowman’s function would be to coordinate the efforts of all the staff and allocate time at various intervals. He said this would include the school district also. He thought if this was coordinated, there was enough staff to accomplish where they are going. If the developers are driving the process, they will keep everyone’s’ feet to the fire and with C. Bowman working with them, this could get accomplished. In regard to S. Eastlake’s comments, he said they would not only look to impact fees because for every new house there is an increased registration and for every new car there is an increased motor fuel tax. He realized those things do not accomplish the full amount but it would help get close to it. J. Peavey-Derr said she wanted to discuss timelines because if they walk away now without having establishing a timeline, they will not see the end of day on this. She asked D. Turnbull what the developers’ timeline was for going out and visiting with the various agencies. D. Turnbull replied that they would like to have their initial meetings with each individual entity within the next four weeks. T. deWeerd said she thought it was great having the staff and the development community involved, but she thought this had to be pulled together by a professional consultant. She did not see this going anywhere fast without someone professionally in charge of driving this. The developers can do a lot of the background but she did not think anyone at this table has the expertise to pull this together. She thought it was wonderful that COMPASS be the oversight body for this but she thought there needed to be a consultant that helps drive this and pull all of the pieces together. She did not see all of them in fragmented pieces being able to keep it in the focus it needs to be in. D. Wynkoop said he supported T. deWeerd’s comments because he thought with all the entities involved, they could have too many meetings and unless they have someone that is really driving this as their first priority, he was afraid the project would languish. Then the development community would get frustrated with them because they are taking forever. He thought they needed some specifics of how, when, and who. D. Turnbull said it was his intention to have a professional consultant involved. He said the developers would come up with a professional consultant and they would be willing to work with E. Clegg. E. Clegg said it seemed reasonable that if they were going to hire a consultant that they have a bid process. The overall reaction was they did not want to do that. R. Simmons said they need to be sensitive to some of the issues that the developers have brought forward. They have applications pending out there and he did not know if they could spend a lot of time talking about and looking for someone to drive the process. In terms of the timeframe, he said there is a COMPASS meeting in the afternoon and he did not think there would be an objection to them raising this issue outside of the agenda. J. Peavey-Derr asked R. Simmons what his view was on the outside consultant issue. R. Simmons replied that he did not have any problem with the developers hiring an outside consultant. He thought all the agencies could work with an outside consultant. J. Peavey-Derr asked T. deWeerd if her concerns would be addressed if the developers hired an outside consultant in coordination with E. Clegg and C. Bowman. T. deWeerd replied that she thought E. Clegg had talked to D. Turnbull about some possible names for a consultant. She thought if they could work that out, they could just bring the name of the consultant and move forward. She said all of the staffs are going to have little pieces of interest and she did not want to see a fragmented effort. It will turn into a long process unless they can keep someone focused on it. E. Clegg said she would be concerned if the developers hired a consultant because the consultant would be working for the developers and not for the public interest. She thought it would have to be a partnership. She supported what the developers are trying to do and realizes they are trying to do the best thing. She thought the consultant should work for everyone if this is going to be a publicly adopted overlay district. Senator H. Bunderson said there is great fear that the developers will hire someone and they will not be able to present information in an independent sort of way. However, he spent time as an independent public accountant that was hired by one side. He had to represent his views in an independent matter to all parities. He said it was not unprecedented for government to accept a private party to hire someone and be an independent party to all the others involved. He thought it was a practical matter and the developers cannot make one decision. The entities will make the decisions. S. Ullman said they like to talk about development paying for itself and in this case, the developers are volunteering to pay for a consultant rather than the entities paying. She thought that was wonderful and she applauded them for doing that. They have talked about the developers driving this development and they are driving this process. If they go out and find a person, that is the way to get it going in a speedy fashion. As far as independence, she was not sure it mattered in this particular case because as Senator Bunderson pointed out, they are still the decision makers. The developers are not ultimately going to be making the decision. She did not think there was any problem with the development community finding somebody to push this forward. K. Bird said he agreed with Commissioner Ullman’s comments. The public entities still have the final say on it. If the developers are willing to get a consultant, this will be done much faster than if it went though the public entity process. S. Huber said this is an opportunity to think outside of the box. They do not know that the end result is going to be acceptable. They need to do things faster because development is going to move with or without them. She said doing this would mean they thought outside of the box and it was successful. She thought the developers needed to go with it and run. D. Wynkoop said there is a certain safeguard to what is being suggested and that is that if the various agencies feel that their input was legitimately considered, the agencies would be far more likely to feel favorable about approving the plan. If they feel like it becomes a ramrod job, then the agencies will not be very cooperative. R. Simmons said earlier he alluded to Hidden Springs developing an entire community outside of anybody’s area of impact and a long way from anybody’s city center. He noted that Ada County was not the entity that developed Hidden Springs. They did not come forth with the plan but they looked at it to determine if it was a good one. He did not think that they have to select who it is that drives the process because they ultimately will be deciding. C. Donnell said that school districts have no approval authority so they really are at all the agencies’ mercy in terms of what they have to do. They can only tell the agencies that they do not believe a development should be approved because they cannot provide the schools. The school district wants the developers to consider the school district’s position. G. Kingsford said what they are talking about is not new and it is certainly not new to this area. If you consider the planning for the Towne Square Mall, the transportation plan was done by an outside consultant and all the agencies bought off on it. If you go back and look at the transportation done at that time, they have come to pass almost exactly. He did not see anything wrong with an outside consultant no matter who pays the bill. The agencies involved will review the plans and make determinations as they have in the past. D. Turnbull said he wanted to reassure C. Donnell about her concerns. He said he had the opportunity to buy two middle school sites and when he found out the school district was negotiating with the same property owner, his company backed off. He felt very strongly about taking care of the schools. J. Peavey-Derr said she felt very comfortable with the developers, particularly those present, and she appreciated them coming to give their opinions and suggestions and their willingness to move forward. She said she wanted to see if the developers could get a consultant and meet with the agencies by Monday, July 23, 2001. R. Simmons said there is a Building Contractors Association (BCA) meeting in July and that might be a good time for the next meeting. F. Varriale replied they could look at that option. D. Turnbull said he was not sure the BCA would be the appropriate forum. He thought the current forum was more appropriate because this was the group of people to discuss it. At the BCA meetings, there are other uninterested parties that attend. J. Peavey-Derr said the next meeting would be on July 23, 2001, in the Ada County public hearing room again at 8:30 a.m. She thanked everyone for coming and said she appreciated their efforts. IV. IN THE MATTER OF ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Board on this date, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:15 a.m. ____________________________________ Roger D. Simmons, Chairman ATTEST: ________________________________ J. David Navarro, Ada County Clerk (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK