Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003 09-09 PreMeridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 The Pre-Council Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:30 P.M. on Tuesday, September 9, 2003, by Mayor Robert Corrie. Members Present: Mayor Robert Corrie, Cherie McCandless, Bill Nary, and Keith Bird. Members Absent: Tammy de Weerd. Others Present: Bill Nichols, Gary Smith, Brad Watson, Anna Powell, Kenny Bowers, Stacy Kilchenmann and Will Berg. Item 1. Roll-call Attendance: O Tammy de Weerd X Bill Nary X Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird X Mayor Robert Corrie Corrie: I’ll open the Pre-Council Meeting on Tuesday September the 9th , 2003 6:30 P.M. City Council Chambers. I would like to have the City Clerk give roll call please. Item 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Corrie: The second item on the agenda is adoption of the agenda. Is there any corrections or alterations from the Council? Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I’d move that we adopt the agenda as published. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to adopt the agenda as published. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT Item 3. Update on One-Way Street Discussion: Corrie: Item number three is an update on one way street discussion. I believe is that going to be you Anna? Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 2 of 16 Powell: Yes. Corrie: Okay. Powell: Microphone might help huh? Am I on? Corrie: Yes. Powell: Okay. I provided a rather detailed summary that is based off of this matrix and this is one diagram I found in one of the articles that I read. I thought it gave the best summary as to the pros and cons of the one way couplet in general and I’ll try and go through those quickly. I just noticed there is also the results from the Chamber that I did not see until I just opened this up so I won’t be prepared to speak on that. I’m sorry I didn’t notice. Quickly with regard to motorists, there are several factors that were looked at. One was mobility, the others were vehicle miles, turns, the through travel time and then the local travel time. You can see on the diagram the mobility refers to kind of how easy it is to get somewhere. Can you go there directly or do you have to make a bunch of turns, do you have to make turns to get there. The point being that on a two way street you can get there directly you don’t have to go down Main Street go on a cross street and then come up Meridian Street. So the mobility is in the direction and vehicle miles is directly related to that so you will get a few more vehicle miles, I think they say a 30 to 40 percent increase with a one way couplet. This isn’t exactly tied to our situation this is just kind of a generic case. Turns likewise you’ll have more turns on a one way couplet all those are protected turns but you still do have to make more turns to get somewhere. The travel time as you see is clearly out of all the articles they all said that the travel time is better and in this case it says its minutes better on a one way system and that along with the capacity which is two down are the two key advantages to the one way system. You can increase capacity by increasing speed and you can also obviously increase travel time by increasing speed so those are the two real kind of winners as far as the one way couplet. The travel time for local though can be increased, mostly because of this issue up here where you are having to go down one street make a couple turns to get back up the other street so its more direct on a two way then it actually is or because its more direct it can be closer on a two way system than a one way system. Then they looked at the issues of pedestrians and I thought it was rather biased analysis as far as pedestrians go but the point was the conflicts that you might have between cars and pedestrians go. The point was the conflicts that you might have between cars and pedestrians and because the possibilities on a one way configuration can vary. Like one way to two way, one way to one way. There’s just more varieties possible but really if you are in the habit of looking both ways the conflict sequences really shouldn’t be an issue. The one thing they don’t talk about though is with the increase travel times is there is an incidence where pedestrians gets hit by a car if you have a faster moving speed then that is potentially a bigger problem. Transit was an interesting issue that was brought Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 3 of 16 up and what it gets at is if you are taking transit on a frequent or perhaps more importantly an infrequent basis you need to know where it stops on Main Street as well as where it stops on Meridian Street. Rather than you get off at Main and Pine on a two way street you can go back to Main and Pine and pick it up. So there is a little bit of confusion or just a little more learning that has to occur for transit riders when there is a one way couplet. The retail, what that refers to is the visibility of a business because traffic is moving in a one direction only on the street you are going to have some of that store frontage is - the term they use is eclipsed – so you are not going to see a portion of that and they have 25 percent and that’s kind of for more stand alone businesses so you just wouldn’t ever see that unless you looked in your rearview mirror you wouldn’t see that one building façade as you went by. The neighborhoods, the access and mobility – these were a little even less scientific analysis on those. There’s factors both ways and I think in my summary I got to both of those but I think most people would agree that the identity for an area is better on a two way just because you have traffic going both ways. There’s certainly other people would say as is the argument that’s here in Meridian that because you are getting more through downtown or encouraging more people to use the downtown that that would improve the access and identity. So there’s really kind of proponents in both directions there that I believe I summarized in my short report there. I believe you also have a statement from Joe Silva regarding the fire truck, and those are again related largely to those three items up there for motorists because of the location of the Fire Station on Franklin Road, basically anything south of Franklin the travel times would kind of be increased because they kind of have to go out of direction to get there. That’s the very short and sweet summary of Joe’s report. I guess I’ll leave it at that. Corrie: Council do you have any questions of Anna? Bird: I don’t. Corrie: Okay. If anybody here wants to say anything at this point, we don’t have a lot of time but if you have anything you’d like to say I would give you about three minutes. Exline: I’ll do this quickly. I’m a Meridian resident - Corrie: Name and address. Exline: Gerald Exline. 415 West Lake Hazel Road. Corrie: Thank you. Exline: I’m a design consultant and I’ve worked on architectural projects, planning projects all over the United States. Everything from Los Angeles International Airport to Kennedy Airport. I was in charge of esthetics on the Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 4 of 16 Orange County Toll Road. I had designed every kind of building you could imagine including the design of a very large number of small towns throughout the United States, largely in the Midwest and in the South. One of my former students has designed more small towns than anybody in the United States and I have helped him on a lot of these towns. One of the things that we found and my purpose in speaking at this point is that going to one way couplets in small downtowns is a killer. It destroys small towns. What the trade off is numbers and quantity and a few seconds of increase speed until you wait for the next stop light for the price of the downtown. In my opinion the price is too great and I think if you go to a one way couplet, this be my prediction and this is from experience, that it will destroy downtown Meridian, the business aspects of downtown Meridian and the quality of a small town. So as I said the issue is about quality versus quantity and a very small amount of time saved. By the way I might mentioned that I’m also involved in some preliminary design work on the old creamery project, and it’s not that vested interest in for which I’m speaking but it’s a factor in that regard. That will become quite a major landmark in this community. I have some drawings of that if you are interested in seeing any of it. Corrie: We will do that another time. Thank you very much. Johnson: Jay Johnson, business property on Main Street. I wish to concur what was just spoken. If you all remember or have copies that I distributed to you sir and the Mayor and a number of other people in regard to a periodically that was a trade journal that the ACHD association belongs to, that more less this information out how devastating one way streets are in their own publication. Their own trade journal in small towns because it becomes nothing more then ingress and egress to – in the town goes. That was out of their own publication. I hope somebody has a copy of it. I’ve moved, I’ve lost my copy of that but I made over a 100 copies and also I did a walk up and walk down the street survey that was turned in at the same time that 96, 97 percent of the businesses and or workers up and down Main Street would prefer the streets to maintain the same way they are. In my specific interest at Pine and East First, I would lose approximately five parking spaces that I have no place to replace to put my tenants or my employees. Thank you sir. Corrie: Thank you very much. Veneziano: Everybody knows me. Giussepe Veneziano, a resident of Meridian. I want to concur with what they say but also I want to add that one way couplet requires (inaudible) speed which can occur major accidents. Second of all would not benefit any business whatsoever because a customer has to pay us through in front of that business at least 23 to 25 times before he gets noticed. So I don’t understand why some people didn’t just put that petition – it just doesn’t make any sense. Okay we want to line down the traffic has been proposed and I don’t know if its ever going to go. Locust Grove Overpass, Ten Mile Overpass, you want to line up the traffic just open up the size of the town. Ten Mile at the other Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 5 of 16 end of the town, Meridian has extended over the Ten Mile Road over Locust Grove, that will cut practically the traffic in half on both sides. It lines up the traffic. Corrie: Okay thank you Giussepe. Anybody else? Council anything? Nary: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I wasn’t here at the Pre-Council where this was discussed previously but isn’t the proponents of this here? I mean isn’t that what part of this discussion – Bird: Mr. Mayor I believe that what they were told at the other Pre-Council, I’m quite shocked its back on here that we would have a public hearing before the City Council and we would do it sometime in probably October. That is the reasoning and I don’t know about the rest of the Council but I want to see a public hearing because we are getting all kinds of different sources you know. Some of the business people that if 96 or 98 percent of the people that were for two way streets up and down the road like Mr. Johnson said. Well they sure signed the petition that said they want one way streets. I want to see a public hearing at a regular council meeting where everybody can come before I make any decision. Corrie: We aren’t going to make a decision tonight. We just wanted to talk about it but we can certainly do that. That’s fine we will set a time Council can hear it as a public hearing and notify it so we will have to look to you to time. Berg: Thank you Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to make a comment. This was put on the agenda so it wouldn’t be lost, but we are still waiting for an update from the study of 1997 from ACHD’s contractor. As soon as that information is probably brought forth then I think we were trying to set up a public hearing and invite all the property owners on both streets to that public hearing. Nary: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: So my assumption is from a process standpoint is the attempt is after this public hearing then we would either make no recommendation to study it further because its really up to the highway district unless I misunderstand. Or we make a recommendation to them to study it further to see whether or not that’s a viable alternative. Is that process wise what we are doing? Corrie: Okay. Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 6 of 16 Item 4. Discussion with Lee Centers on Silvercreek Subdivision (fka Powder River Subdivision): Corrie: Item number four is discussion with Lee Centers on Silvercreek Subdivision. Also known as Powder River Subdivision. Okay David. McKinnon: Thank you Mayor, members of the Council. Dave McKinnon. 12552 West Executive Drive, Boise, Idaho 83716. I guess I’m back in front of you again just like old times and I know that you guys have had numerous meetings about Silvercreek, formerly known as Powder River. We really are not looking forward to rehashing everything, so what I did is tried to take everything condense it to tell you what changes we’ve made, tell you what kind of process we are trying to go through right now and tell you how you are involved and what type of information we are seeking from you tonight. I handed out before the meeting just a little packet of paper. If you could all grab that and we can go through this really quick. It’s condensed, it’ll explain to you everything that we need to talk about tonight. For those people who don’t know who haven’t been on the process before, this is just on the east side of Linder Road about a half mile south of Victory and it’s located of course in Meridian’s area of impact and that’s part of the reason we are talking tonight. Tonight is different from everything else because in the past we’ve dealt with everything from a 455 unit subdivision to a 29 unit subdivision to a 39 unit subdivision and tonight we are coming forward to you with a proposal for a 44 unit subdivision. The reason why we came up with the number of 44 is because 44 is more than 39, it’s also more than 29 but it’s not quite that 455 number. It becomes a key number because that’s about where the break even point would be for us as we develop this site. On the piece of paper you should have a little bit of the top area under what underlined and it says that we are dealing with 152 acres and there’s 44 lots on approximately 17 or 18 of those acres and that is all that we would develop in this subdivision right now if that’s your desire until municipal services from the Black Cat trunk become available. That could be limited by a development agreement. When I worked for the city there was some discussion as to whether or not the City of Meridian could by a third party to a development agreement with the county and I believe State Code 67-6411(a) would allow Meridian to become a third party to that development agreement. So the City of Meridian could allow the development agreement and be a signing party to that which would limit the development of this to just 44 lots. At the last discussion there was a great deal of debate as to whether or not this property should remain in the area of impact and because sewer service is a ways out. This would be a way of prohibiting it from continuing to grow until those services become available and keep it in the area of impact for the City of Meridian. There’s a number of reasons why this is a good project this time around as compared to other times. The first one would be this subdivision would be built to city standards rather than Ada County RUT development standards. It would be a rural, that would be one for every five acres or a cluster development. In the cluster development we would be looking at one to one and a half acre lots with Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 7 of 16 their own septic systems, with their own wells and we wouldn’t have the typical curb, gutter and sidewalk. We would just have sidewalk on one side of the street. There would be no fire hydrants. So this would allow the City of Meridian when they come to annex this, to annex the property with all of those things that you would typically see in a city in place rather than having the rural feel and then annexing the property. Second reason why this would be a great deal for the city is because there is a city well – we would be developing and building a city well. This city well would be given first rights of refusal to the City of Meridian to purchase this at a later date when it becomes needed for the City of Meridian to provide water service to this area. We would agree to pay for sewer connections up front. We would like to propose two inch water line that would reach from this development – a two inch sewer line that would reach from this development to the Bear Creek lift station. Therefore we wouldn’t have a need for a package plant for a sewer system and has soon as the Black Cat trunk became available they would be able to hook up with the City of Meridian sewer system. The remainder of the property would again remain undeveloped. We would agree to pay for park impact fees right now even though we would not be in the city. We would have fire hydrants that would be part of the well agreement. Number eight is kind of an interesting number. We are basically looking for 14 more lots then we could develop in the county. In the county we could develop a cluster of subdivision with approximately 30 houses and we are asking for 14 more but it would be built to the city standards then county standards so that in the future when the city does reach out this far there would be an easy meshing of the two together. The final reason that we really felt that this would be important and for you guys to know is that the benefits would be both for the city and for the developer. The developer would be able to get a higher density there which means higher profit for him and at the same time it would be an urban style development that’s been forecasted by the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan is shown in this area, three to eight units per acre, which is the same density we are proposing right now. If we were to go to a higher density at a rural development it wouldn’t comply with the Comprehensive Plan. It is something that the city can keep us in line with because it would be through the development agreement to meet those city standards. The reason why we are in front of you tonight is because we don’t have a path for annexation we are having to process this through Ada County. There is no way for us to be annexed into the city at this time, but in order to rezone you become a recommending body. We wanted to make sure that before we start the rezone process that this is something that you could live with and something that would be a viable choice for us as we continue to move forward with this project. The question of how this development is – the question is no longer is if this develops how will it develop, it’s when this develops how is it going to develop? We are going to develop this property, we want to do it in compliance with Ada County’s requirements and we want to do it within Meridian City’s requirements. If we can do it with the approval of the City of Meridian, both the City of Meridian and us as a developer we’re in a better position for the future. So we are asking tonight for your opinions on how this development Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 8 of 16 should move forward whether you think this is something that would be beneficial for the city as well as for us. If you have any additional concerns or questions if we could answer those now before we start the process with the county. Nary: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Dave on the issue of density. If it’s in the county and the county rezones it to R-4, will they allow further density that’s (inaudible) cluster density because it’s in the city’s impact area? McKinnon: Yes they would. If the city provides services to it. Nary: So the key would be the link to the Bear Creek lift station? McKinnon: That’s correct. Nary: (Inaudible) question, Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Yes. Nary: Brad it seems like whenever we have talked about it that, I seem to recall that there’s been Bear Creek here every single time saying no one else is supposed to attach to that lift station but them. I don’t recall if that’s by agreement or was that a written agreement or was that the Council’s agreement. Watson: Council member Nary, Mayor, Council members. There’s no official document that says that but when that particular Council made the motion to approve Bear Creek’s preliminary plat I think part of the motion was that this was only approval to pump into another drainage area was only for that subdivision. I don’t remember the exact language but we’ve been operating under the premise that no others could but there’s no official document other than the findings of that preliminary plat that I know of. McKinnon: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, Councilman Nary. When Bear Creek was approved it was approved for a certain number of units and since that time Bear Creek’s actually expanded the number of lots within Bear Creek and so there have been additional units already placed on that lift station then were originally approved. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 9 of 16 Bird: I believe when we passed Bear Creek and that lift station there wasn’t any limit put on it other than the fact of how full the sewer line would be capacity of that. I believe at that point, Brad and Gary, we aren’t completely to full capacity on the sewer line are we? Watson: Council member Bird. No the discharge, the line to which it discharges is not at capacity but the lift station was physically designed to only accommodate a certain number of lots. Dave is correct, there are more lots going into that now and that’s simply because we have done flow monitoring to compare what we projected that would come in there, compared to what actually is in there. We’ve been able to squeeze in a few more. I think the additional lots are what you will see later in the agenda tonight. Bird: I don’t recall that we had any kind of restrictions or anything else on that lift station, I don’t recall. Maybe you or Gary do but I don’t think we had any restrictions or anything on hooking up to it or anything like that. Watson: Council member Bird. There wasn’t a resolution or anything that was approved by you or the rest of the Council that said this is it. It was more of an understanding and what we made into a policy that no others were going to utilize that lift station at the time. That’s what we’ve told anyone else that comes along including that very same developer on his property west of Stoddard, is we are not going to entertain that. Nary: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: So Dave what is it that you are seeking tonight? I mean do you want us to give you an answer tonight? Or do you want us to make sure we keep this in front of us so set it over so we have – Council member De Weerd isn’t here, we probably need some time to kind of decide what kind of answer we can give you. What were you thinking we would do tonight? McKinnon: Well we are under the gun a little bit to get this process rolling with Ada County because they are currently using our old Comprehensive Plan from the City of Meridian. They are going to be adopting the new Comprehensive Plan and all of a sudden the rules changed with Ada County. They’ve got that on their agenda to get rolling in October. So when we start dealing with the area of impact of Meridian and the way they’ve got it on the Comprehensive Plan all of a sudden it’s going to change for Ada County. We don’t want to be stuck in the middle of that change. So before October we were looking for an answer, some sort of warm fuzzy from the Council that would say, this is something that we can live with, its something that we don’t want to see. You guys have had numerous meetings. I know that Clint Boyle of Pinnacle Engineers before me, he had dozens of meetings with everybody from the Fire Department, to Public Works, Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 10 of 16 to meeting with the Mayor, to meeting with Tammy, to meeting with Ada County. We are starting that process all over again. We want to get to a point instead of spending all the time meeting and meeting and meeting to get to a point where we can say let’s go with something that everybody can live with. That’s what we are looking for is to find out if this is something that everybody can live with. That’s what we are looking for is to find out if this is something that everybody can live with and everybody can be happy with. Rather than starting a whole new series of meetings all over again. Nary: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I guess before – at least for me before I would want to do that I think I’d like to hear from Bear Creek. I see Mr. Arnold here and I guess I’d like to hear from them because that’s the way I recall it and I think Mr. Birds right and I think Brad’s right that there may not be necessarily something in writing or there may not be a resolution. At least I’ve heard it enough to know that’s always been there perception is that this wasn’t – and if its not going to make it over capacity at that lift station that’s fine but I guess before I’ll be willing to give you any warm fuzzy I think I’d want to hear what they have to say about it too because they are the ones that I think at least are directly affected right now. Before we get to the other issues of annexation and the future and the other things, I think the sewer obviously is the lynch pin here. So I guess I would want to hear from them. I don’t know whether or not we could request they come back next week, two weeks. Corrie: Next week you are going to have one council and Mayor gone. McKinnon: Mr. Mayor. Nary: Next week or the week after? Bird: 23rd . Nary: 23rd would probably be better, we’d all be here. McKinnon: Mr. Mayor can I ask a question? Just one question for you Mr. Nary. The concern with the lift station is that Bear Creek owns the lift station or the maintenance of the lift station is being handled by – I guess the – Nary: I don’t want to cut you off, but I guess what I have heard for the last couple years from Bear Creek is that there was some commitment of some sort from this Council that there would be no other people hooking on to that lift station. That’s been reiterated to us a number of times. I wasn’t here when that was done but I guess I want to hear their side of it before we would agree Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 11 of 16 because that seems to be the key to your proposal and I’d like to give them the opportunity to at least give us their thoughts about that. You are right it has increased in size from the original proposal they’ve added on some other phases. It may not be a capacity issue so they may not be a problem, I just don’t know that but I’ve heard enough of their concerns when other developments have come forward when other developments have come forward like the Valley Shepherd Church and when that Kodiak Subdivision before they purchased that piece. That I’ve heard it enough that I guess before I would be willing to simple say, yeah that sounds reasonable to us, that we hear their side of that since that would directly effect them now. Powell: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Corrie: Anna. Powell: Usually when there’s an Ada County application it does come through our office and we offer comments related to the Comprehensive Plan. It would be nice if staff could have that same opportunity on this one. Bird: David I want to commend you guys. You have done a real good deal of changing this around and I think I’m like Councilman Nary, we need to straighten out the lift station deal. Bear Creek in it from what they originally passed and stuff has grown quite a bit. I believe that Kodiak and the Valley Shepherd, I believe they flow into a different trunk with their original deal coming down Meridian Road. Do they flow backwards Brad? Or flow to the west? Watson: Again, I’m sorry Councilman Bird. I had asked Anna a question. Bird: Just on the Kodiak and the Valley Shepherd new site out there. They would flow into the sewer that would be laid down Meridian Road as I understand instead of going back to the lift station. Watson: The new Bear Creek lots that occupy the former Kodiak project will go into the Bear Creek Subdivision and at the lift station. Bird: Valley Shepherd will be on its own. Watson: It would go north into the existing line on Meridian Road. Bird: Okay then. My understanding was the capacity of the sewer line. Is that called the Locust Grove sewer line? Watson: It was the Ten Mile trunk. Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 12 of 16 Bird: Ten Mile trunk. The capacity of it was what I was understanding was the problem (inaudible) capacity of the lift station and stuff like that. They have added quite a bit of usage to it. I mean Bear Creek themselves. Watson: Yes, Council member Bird. What happened is if you recall we require them to build a parallel line to remove or at least relocate a bottleneck and they did that. They did actually create some excess capacity. There is still a bottleneck, it’s just a bigger one in a different spot. The lift station was sized and constructed in the force main to only serve what we thought at that time would be the Bear Creek Subdivision. Like I said earlier we had done some subsequent flow monitoring and the unit flows are somewhat less than what we projected. There is some extra room at the pumping station. If I may just real briefly, in January there was a list of questions that Public Works had on this when Council decided not to entertain this proposal anymore. We didn’t follow through, didn’t follow up on those because there was no reason we had better things to do. So we would need some time to ask those questions and make comments on some of this proposal. Bird: Mr. Mayor. I would like comments from the staff, not only from Public Works, Brad you and Gary. But also Anna’s staff and Anna because I think they have really went back and have done a commendable job at changing the thing and something that if we can figure out a sewer hook up or something that I might be able to support but I’m like Councilman Nary. I need some answers before I would make a recommendation on the deal even though – David you guys have done a real nice job of changing it and getting it more in deal. I would like the staff to do it and if we put this off to the 23rd would that give you guys time at the staff level? Watson: Mayor, Council member Bird. It’ll give me enough time to transmit the questions to Dave but I don’t know that it’s necessarily going to give us enough time for him to answer them and for me to prepare comments based on his answers. Just as an example, one of these was talked about and maybe this isn’t part of their proposal anymore, water facility O and M agreements, how are those drafted? We need to review those, whose involved in those. Review of a non-development agreement I would presume would be a fairly substantial issue, not only for us but for Council and legal staff. Very specific agreements on the construction of the well and details and specifications. McKinnon: Mayor and Council. I can address actually a few of those issues right now. It’s expensive to do all those things that Brad asked. It’s expensive to write up an operations and maintenance agreement. It takes time and money to do that in addition to that it takes time and money to come up with the well agreement before hand to do that and it’s an awful lot of money to ask of us to come up with before we have any idea of whether or not this is something you’ll even support. Those are typically things that get worked out as it happens. We’ve come to a pretty much straight forward discussion with you saying these Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 13 of 16 are the things we are willing to do. We would do that. The operation and maintenance is something that we could work out with the staff once that happens but it’s not worth putting in more and more money. This project I know that the owner has spent thousands and thousands of dollars to get it to this point already and to say we need to see all these things before we can approve them is typically not the way its done. A development agreement for a typical subdivision in Meridian is not written up until the developments been approved. The same type of situation would be here rather than having all the legal documents in front of you now, we would agree in principal to all the things we’ve discussed tonight, those are things that could be worked out. Corrie: Well Daivd, I guess I’m going to throw the ball back in your court. Council has made it pretty plain to me that they want some answers and if you can supply them and take your luck in answering those we can put it on the September the 23rd . You realize that you are taking a risk here if you don’t have the information they want. You may get turned down. Otherwise you can have it October the 7th , which is the next one we have. That would give you time to get all that information. So what do you want to do? Powell: Mr. Mayor while they are talking just because there is a fair number of public here I have to make a statement. I did work on this project for Mr. Centers so I would not work on this as it came through our office, just to clarify that point. Bird: Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. McKinnon: Mayor, members of the Council. We prefer to be in September. We think we could provide those answers if Brad’s got that list of questions we will get those for you. Corrie: Okay. Well know you threw that ball back in my court. I’m going to ask the Council, do you want to do it the 23rd and then if you have enough information – Bird: That would be fine with me Mayor. Nary: Mr. Mayor. Maybe if we met at six on the 23rd . Corrie: We can’t do that we’ve got executive session at six o’clock. Nary: Okay. Corrie: That’s in reference to – Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 14 of 16 Bird: Well maybe we will just have this one thing for the half hour just at 6:30 to meet with and just have this. Do we have other stuff? Corrie: It’s going to take an hour. Bird: The executive session is? Nary: I don’t have a problem with even meeting at 5:30. Bird: I don’t either Mayor. McCandless: I don’t either. Corrie: All right then we will meet at 5:30. McKinnon: 5:30 on the 23rd . Nary: And I think I can echo maybe the same thing that Council member Bird. I’d commend Mr. Centers for bringing this project back again. I know it has been a tremendous effort to get it to even this. You know I do want to hear from Bear Creek, I think the staff has to have an opportunity to comment as well but I certainly think it looks very attractive from what we’ve seen before. It looks like something that might be workable but I really do want to hear from all the other folks and have their opportunity to give us their input about it. McKinnon: Okay. Corrie: Then we could have it at 5:30 and notice it for that. You have 30 minutes, is that going to give you enough time? McKinnon: Depends on the list of questions? How fast you want me to talk. Corrie: Six o’clock we’ve got to do. There’s no question about it. McKinnon: I’ll talk very fast Mayor. Corrie: All right David. Then you will notify staff. Will you notify and make sure that Bear Creek is here. Well he’s here tonight but he knows about it. 5:30 on September the 23rd in the Chambers here. McKinnon: All right, we’ll see you then. Bird: Thank you. Item 5. Discussion of Utility Billing Directive Ordinance: Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 15 of 16 Corrie: Discussion of utility billing directive ordinance. Stacy. Kilchenmann: With much assistance with Bill Nichols we have drafted a new ordinance that addresses the billing portion of the utilities. Which will allow us to move to the split billing cycle and also accommodate the third party billing directive. So we wanted to just get this in front of you and see if you had any questions or suggestions because we would like to implement this in November before we do the sewer averaging. We have a list of names of landlords that have expressed an interest in the landlord portion so we are going to pull together a committee of those people. Kind of meet with them and talk about the actual details of implementing the third party directive but did after this is languished for awhile – wanted to see if you have any questions or suggestions. Nary: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: No I really don’t. I think its very good. We do have a letter here from Ms. Stevens that really doesn’t relate at least I don’t think it relates to the billing issue, it’s a different issue. I guess it’s a fee issue and I’m assuming somebody’s talked to her or at least tried to respond to her concerns about that but I don’t think that’s really on the utility billing directive stuff and I think it’s really good. Thanks to you, thanks to Bill. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I echo the words of Councilman Nary. In fact when I went through this and seen the stuff that Mr. Nichols I presume had scratched out, I can’t believe this ordinance was in here. I mean this is very clear, a common dumb person like me can read it and understand it. So I think its great. Another deal I think we do need to look in if somebody hasn’t talked to the lady. I presume the Mayor has probably returned her call, I was quite disturbed that we have a practice like that to be truthful. As far as the ordinance, I’m for bringing it forward and getting it passed. It looks good to me. Corrie: Okay lets do it, thank you. Good job I can even read it. With that then I will entertain a motion for closing the Pre-Council meeting. McCandless: So moved. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion made and second to close the Pre-Council Meeting. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. All ayes motion carried. Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting September 9, 2003 Page 16 of 16 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:15 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: / / ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR DATE ATTESTED: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK