Loading...
11152007CouncilMinutes CITY OF AMMON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2007 AGENDA : CITY OF AMMON 2135 SOUTH AMMON ROAD CITY COUNCIL AGENDA THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2007 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Bruce Ard at 7:30 p.m. Pledge of Allegiance – Councilmember Bean Prayer – Councilmember Waite MINUTES: October 4, 2007 ITEMS FROM MAYOR: CONSENT AGENDA: Business License Accounts Payable – Exhibit A (docs pending) PUBLIC HEARINGS: Fire Department Fees PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA: ACTION ITEMS: 1.Ord 447 and Summary Fire Dept. Fees 2.Resolution 2007-021 Fire Dept. Fees 3.Bonneville/Jefferson County Ground Water District Invoice 4.Maverik/Portela Modified Site Plan Request 5.Hawks Landing DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1.Public Hearing Pamphlet 2.Misc. MINUTES The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ard at 7:30 p.m. in the City Building, 2135 South Ammon Road, Ammon, Idaho with the following City Officials present: City Officials Present: Mayor Bruce Ard Councilmember Lee Bean Councilmember Dana Kirkham Councilmember Rex Thompson Councilmember Randy Waite City Administrator Bruce Rose City Engineer Lance Bates City Planning Director Ron Folsom City Attorney Scott Hall City Clerk Leslie Folsom City Officials Absent: None Councilmember Bean led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag and Councilmember Waite offered the prayer. MINUTES: October 4, 2007: Councilmember Kirkham motioned to approve the minutes from October 4, 2007 as presented. Councilmember Thompson seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, Councilmember Bean – Yes, and Councilmember Waite – Yes. The motion passed. ITEMS FROM MAYOR : None City Council Minutes 11/15/2007 -- 1 CONSENT AGENDA : CITY OF AMMON CONSENT AGENDA Thursday November 15, 2007 License applications are pending in the City Office for the following: GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE 2007: 1.NEWGENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATION: th A.Beneficial Idaho, Inc. – Financial – 2011 S. 25 E. th B.Mary Kay Director/Katia Henderson – Training – 3544 E. 17 St. Suite #206 th C.Born, Sandy – Sunny Days Daycare Employee – 4366 E. 17 St. th D.Higley, Deborah L. – Sunny Days Daycare Employee – 4366 E. 17 St. th E.Eastern Idaho Wireless – Retail Sales – 939 S. 25 E. Suite #104 st F.Ockerman, Vicki Lynn - Daycare Employee – Nana’s Daycare – 2660 E. 1 Street HOME OCCUPATION PERMITS 2007: 1.NEW HOME OCCUPATION PERMITS: A. Nicolas, Camille & Lemons, Randy – Daycare – 700 Tennis Court B. Weaver Siding – Siding Installation – 2890 Teton Street C. CNS Marketing, LLC – Internet Sales – 4130 Wanda Street Councilmember Waite motioned to accept the Consent Agenda for Business Licenses. Councilmember Thompson seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Waite – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, and Councilmember Bean – Yes. The motion passed. Councilmember Waite motioned to accept the Accounts Payable Exhibit A Payment Approval Report. Councilmember Kirkham seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Waite – Yes, Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, and Councilmember Bean – Yes. The motion passed. City Clerk Leslie Folsom had each Councilmember sign the Accounts Payable Approval Report. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Fire Department Fees: Chris Ford, Fire Marshal, explained the fire department fees. He streamlined all of their fire alarms, fire hydrants, and misdemeanors into one area. City Planner Ron Folsom explained some of the fire information was in Public Safety and some were in General Police. Councilmember Thompson inquired if they were any changes to the ordinance or was it just moved around. Ron Folsom explained there were a few changes. Chris Ford explained the fees they added. Ron Folsom explained the easiest way to see the new fee is to look at the new resolution; it is called the Building Permit Fee and Fire Code Plan Review Fee. Councilmember Bean stated he was interested in where they are lined out in the code. Ron explained it was in Chapter 7 Section M. He explained it was 7-7-6 (M). It was discussed this new fee will include: 1) Structural plan review fee, 2) Fire alarms plans fee, 3) Fire sprinkler system plans fee, and 4) Fire pump plan fee. Councilmember Kirkham commented it is $50 per 5000 square feet as stated in the Resolution. Councilmember Bean inquired if this fee covers all of the four items in the plan review. Chris Ford explained that each of the fees were different as outlined in the Resolution. It was discussed we are only charging the Fire Code Plan Review fee right now. Councilmember Kirkham stated the new fees are consistent with what Idaho Falls charges. Councilmember Bean inquired what a “Life Safety” license is. Chris Ford explained it is issued to contractors in sales for checks and balances. It makes sure the contractor has certification in place to install systems. Scott Hall explained we had a flat fee and if you had a small building you got charged the same as a Wal-Mart type building even though the structures were different. Councilmember Bean inquired what a “Fire Pump Plan Review” is. Chris explained that some bigger buildings have to install fire pumps and will only be charged if they have to have that pump. We don’t charge anything right now. Councilmember Kirkham inquired where false alarms are addressed. Chris explained they are in Chapter 2. Councilmember Kirkham inquired where the cost is for what they will pay. Ron Folsom explained it is 5-2-35. He explained they changed it so that 5- 2-14, 15, and 16 are misdemeanors because the Ordinance doesn’t say if it is a misdemeanor than it is a felony. It was discussed they only get 3 false fire alarms per year. Councilmember Bean inquired if these included police false alarms. It was discussed these are only for fire. Councilmember Bean stated we need to address false alarms at the same time, because he thought that is where they fell under. He inquired if they fell under the same ordinance or code. Ron Folsom stated he didn’t think we addressed false alarms. Councilmember Bean stated he thought we did. Councilmember Kirkham stated we have talked about it, City Council Minutes 11/15/2007 -- 2 but do not have it anywhere in our ordinances, only for fire. She stated they are working on it and we should move forward with the police fire alarms. Councilmember Bean stated he did not see where it changes the fire alarms from 1 to 3 in this section. It was discussed it is still at one, but we use our discretion. Councilmember Kirkham commented having 3 is more consistent with what other cities are doing. Councilmember Bean commented he doesn’t like that we are using our discretion. Chris explained sometimes they are caused by malfunctioning systems. He doesn’t feel comfortable ticketing someone for something they didn’t cause. Councilmember Bean commented about a particular institution that has a lot of negligent alarms. Councilmember Kirkham commented she thinks they are thinking of police alarms, not fire alarms. It was discussed the facility that has a lot was given a letter of warning. It was discussed to change the ordinance to more than 2. Councilmember Bean stated he would like this on a rolling 12 month. It was discussed not a calendar year. Chris explained he has a report to tell him how many they have had. Home security alarms were discussed. Ron Folsom talked about the Building Department’s Title 7, in Chapter 1. He explained the IBC is in Chapter 1. He explained the different amendments for codes in Chapter 1. He explained they moved them to the right section pertaining to the amended code. Mayor Ard closed the Public Hearing. PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA: None ACTION ITEMS : , 1. Ord 447 and Summary Fire Dept. Fees: Councilmember Kirkham read Ordinance #447 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AMMON, OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, AMENDING TITLES 5 AND 7 OF THE CITY OF AMMON, REPEALING TITLE 5, CHAPTER 7 PUBLIC SAFETY, SECTIONS 3, 4, 5, 6 AND 7 AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS TO TITLE 5 CHAPTER 2 SECTIONS 12 THROUGH 16 RELATING TO FIRE SAFETY AND RENUMBERING THE EXISTING CHAPTER 2, REPEALING TITLE 7 SECTION 7-1-2-E, AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATION AL FIRE CODE, ADDING NEW SECTION 7-7-6 AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; Councilmember Kirkham REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. motioned that the City Council dispense with the rule requiring the reading of the ordinance on three different days and that the three readings be waived. Councilmember Bean seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Waite – Yes, and Councilmember Thompson – Yes. The motion passed. Councilmember Kirkham read Ordinance #447, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AMMON, OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, AMENDING TITLES 5 AND 7 OF THE CITY OF AMMON, REPEALING TITLE 5, CHAPTER 7 PUBLIC SAFETY, SECTIONS 3, 4, 5, 6 AND 7 AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS TO TITLE 5 CHAPTER 2 SECTIONS 12 THROUGH 16 RELATING TO FIRE SAFETY AND RENUMBERING THE EXISTING CHAPTER 2, REPEALING TITLE 7 SECTION 7-1-2-E, AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATION AL FIRE CODE, ADDING NEW SECTION 7-7-6 AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND Councilmember Kirkham motioned to adopt Ordinance #447 as an PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ordinance of the City of Ammon on this third and final reading. Councilmember Bean seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Waite – Yes, and Councilmember Thompson – Yes. The motion passed. 2. Resolution 2007-021 Fire Dept. Fees: Councilmember Kirkham motioned to approve Resolution 2007-021 for Fire Department Fees. Councilmember Waite seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Waite – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, and Councilmember Bean – Yes. The motion passed. 3. Bonneville/Jefferson County Ground Water District Invoice : Mayor Ard stated he called and talked to Ralph Isom about this. He stated Ralph told him the way they assess the fees is on the cubic feet you have as a license and everyone is billed the same. And he believes it is an annual fee. It is based on the volume of water. City Planner Bruce Rose commented his understanding is that the mitigation fee is only assessed when there is a need for mitigation or potential mitigation. He also commented the other portion is for being a member of the groundwater district. Councilmember Bean inquired to Bruce how we have accounted for this in the budget. Bruce Rose stated it is not booked as a payable and was not budgeted. Councilmember Bean inquired if the auditors can make an adjustment to put it back in 07. Bruce stated they have run a period 13 already. Councilmember Bean stated he thought they were going to run a period 14 and he would like Bruce to see if they can fit it in 07. Bruce inquired what line item. Councilmember Bean asked him to use his best judgment. Scott Hall stated it was invoiced in the 07 budget. Councilmember Bean stated it was, but he thinks everything has been closed out. It was discussed a motion was not needed since the payment was already approved; Council just needed an explanation of the invoice. City Council Minutes 11/15/2007 -- 3 4. Maverik/Portela Modified Site Plan Request: City Planner Ron Folsom stated the lady that wrote the letter has lived there for 62 years. She planted the lilacs and wants to keep them. Maverick is fine with it. It was discussed the lilac bushes are on the Maverik side of the property line. Scott Hall suggested delaying the fence being put up until that neighbor is no longer at the home. Councilmember Thompson agreed. Ron stated Maverik is going to sell the property and there will be a site plan required at that time. Councilmember Bean commented that she is providing a buffer, not Maverik. Councilmember Kirkham stated they are now their trees. Ron agreed, they do claim they are theirs, but are agreeing that at least a portion is on their property. Ron explained where the property lines are in relation to the school. Councilmember Kirkham commented that what she is hearing that we would like a provision saying to leave the lilac bushes for now, but when the property changes hands, Maverik will be required to the fence up. Councilmember Bean disagreed. He commented if the property changes hands 10 years down the road, who will remember. Councilmember Kirkham stated it would be in a provision. Ron stated there will be a site plan on this lot. Councilmember Bean stated we need to deal with it now. Councilmember Bean inquired what we do if the site plan comes in next year. Councilmember Bean inquired where the root of the lilacs is. Ron stated it is on both sides. Councilmember Bean stated we need to decide if that is the type of buffer we want. Scott Hall commented that we could have them pay the cost of it now and we put it in a separate account so the City can put the fence in later. That way you would remember because you would see it every year in the budget. Councilmember Bean stated he is willing to allow them to leave them now, but we need to decide a point and time when they will not be allowed anymore. He stated when the home changes ownership; it may be a good time. It was discussed it could be allowed for a period of time. Scott Hall stated you could state it is allowed for the period of time that she is still a permanent resident of that home. Councilmember Bean stated that asking for funding for the fence now from Maverik isn’t a bad idea either. It was discussed whether the development agreement needs to be modified. It was discussed there is a fence next to it already and we can get the amount they paid. Councilmember Bean stated to escrow 1 ½ times that amount. Lance commented about a daughter living there. Councilmember Bean motioned to amend the development agreement to indicate that we will allow the lilac bushes remain as the buffer insofar as Janet Portela is a permanent resident of the home and at such time when she is not a permanent resident of that home then we require the fence to be built. We require the owners of the property right now to escrow sufficient funds to build a vinyl fence along that portion at 1 ½ times cost. Councilmember Kirkham seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Waite – Yes, and Councilmember Thompson – Yes. The motion passed. 5. Hawks Landing: Jeff Hawkes, Sunnyside Road, stated they thought they would make sure we are clear on the final plat adjustments and then they would like to get the master development agreement approved tonight. He talked about going over the CC&Rs and the reimbursement agreement also. They would like th to make some decisions this evening and vote on them. He explained they are on the December 6 agenda for final plat approval. Ron Folsom explained that Lance, Ron, Dana and Lee met yesterday and went through this. They added some language. He explained the change that they made to Section D and E. Scott Hall inquired about the “any other agreement executed between the land owner and the City whether at this time or hereafter”. Councilmember Bean stated he was the one that requested that that be put in there. He feels at some future time we may be executing a document outside of these three that are enumerated here. He does not want to go back and amend all of these documents that we have. He feels we need to account for something of that nature in these documents. Scott Hall suggested adding “presently executed or executed here and after” or something like that. It was discussed that would be for both D and E. Ron talked about the last page of the PUD ordinance. He explained they put a special section in there when Jeff had asked to build a clubhouse. This section talked that the green space could not drop below 20%, including the clubhouse but, when they added the language we added clubhouses, pools and recreational facilities. He explained they felt when we said “recreational facilities”; they could not put a sport court in. Ron explained that was not our intent, so he explained the new language put in. Scott suggested it to say “cause the open green space to be less than the required 20%”. Ron explained the changes to Item I and K. Scott Hall inquired if there is any chance that the water meters might not be in a public area. Lance explained they are platted public areas. Ron explained they made changes to Item L. Jeff Hawkes asked if they could discuss the traffic issues now. Jeff explained he thinks we are of agreement that we don’t need to require one-way traffic in the alleyways providing that they don’t allow parking in the alleyways. Councilmember Thompson inquired how wide the alleyways are. Jeff explained they are 24 feet. He explained there is plenty of room City Council Minutes 11/15/2007 -- 4 even with parking, but they are not going to allow parking. They discussed the enforcement to preclude parking and they explained they would get a $50 fine. He explained the safety issues with the one-way alleyways also and it would also be confusing for people. Councilmember Kirkham inquired to Lance if he is okay with that. Lance stated he is if there is proper enforcement. Councilmember Thompson inquired if visitors will be coming down the alleyways. Jeff stated they would most likely be using the main roads. It was discussed the garages are accessed off the alleys. Councilmember Bean inquired how wide the alleys are in Hillview. Ron stated they are about anywhere from 27-32 feet. Councilmember Bean commented that he realizes that 24 feet is wide for an alley, but the problem is we are treating it as a street. Lance commented that is why he talked about proper enforcement. Councilmember Kirkham commented we have only one enforcing officer. He explained the enforcement is in their CC&Rs. Councilmember Bean inquired if they sign their alleys as private alleys, no through traffic. Jeff explained that they will have one as a designated private drive. Tom Hunsaker, Planning & Zoning, explained what the subdivision coordinates states. It was discussed we need to make some adjustments to it. He talked about signing it as a fire lane also. Councilmember Bean inquired to Lance about the garbage collection system, and inquired how much additional space the automated trucks would take. Lance explained they may add 6 inches to the overall truck. Councilmember Bean stated he is fine with the agreement as it stands and asked what the rest of the Council felt. Councilmember Thompson talked about the small roads and where visitors would park. Council discussed that people may be parking closer and they would park in no parking areas. Councilmember Bean stated we will have to have considerable enforcement. Jeff explained there is a way to structure parking on the lot. Lance commented they need to make it very clear to buyers that there is no parking. He explained there will be times when it is difficult, especially when people are moving in. Councilmember Bean stated if he was a homeowner buying one of these and you handed him a 22 page CC&R, it would never be seen. He feels people won’t read them and then they won’t know. He inquired how they plan to educate them. Jeff talked about signs and people in the clubhouse. He explained there will be a HOA manager. Councilmember Kirkham talked about the HOA and if they will be able to enforce other neighbors. Jeff introduced Council to Brent Lowe. He will be the manager of Hawks and the HOA manager. Brent explained he moved here from San Diego as part of the developing team and is committed to being here and they want to build an HOA that will make a difference. He talked about the parking issue and how to handle it. Councilmember Kirkham stated she feels the burden is on the City for the enforcement. Brent stated it is an educational process. Tom Hunsaker commented that HOA’s must be corporations owned by the homeowners. He talked about having too small of an HOA, they will fail. Tom feels they will be big enough with this one. Tom talked about where the driveways are located. Council discussed the homes front the green space. The alleyway width was discussed again. Jeff explained the 24 foot wide street is the safest street distance in a national study. He explained there is space for emergencies for fire trucks, etc. Leslie Folsom stated there is an ordinance for parking in alleyways. She read what the ordinance stated. It was discussed that parking in alleyways for loading and unloading is permitted if there is a clearance of at least 10 feet between adjacent buildings or structures. Councilmember Bean inquired about Section 5. He inquired if there is an area in his PUD where people can park recreational vehicles. Jeff stated it depends on the size of the lot. Councilmember Bean stated he does not see a size of lot that will handle a boat. He feels this section will be very difficult to enforce. Ron Folsom stated that Rockwell Development enforces it. Scott Hall talked about the size of the HOA. He suggested having the developer maintain the HOA until it is at least 75% billed out. He inquired about heavy maintenance and who will do it. He stated if they City has to come up and do that, who do they lien. He feels it has to go back to the individual homeowners based upon the homeowners that are there. Tom Hunsaker commented he thinks that is in our ordinance. Ron Folsom stated it is in Section D. Councilmember Bean stated we need to lien every home not just the green space. Scott Hall stated the language in Section D doesn’t work. He stated we need to take out the word “perpetual”. Councilmember Bean stated we need to have the ability to lien individual properties. He feels this will make the HOA stronger. Tom Hunsaker read the ordinance. Councilmember Bean stated then we will follow the ordinance. Scott Hall stated some of the language has to come out. He explained how it should read, “…CC&Rs shall further provide that any owner’s failure to comply with said CC&Rs shall result in enforcement of the City’s PUD ordinance in relation to enforcement and collection”. Councilmember Bean talked about 6.6, and inquired as to which document rules. Scott stated to use the same language with the City’s ordinance. It was discussed the City’s ordinance trumps the CC&Rs. Councilmember Bean talked about anywhere we refer to liens, then we should refer back to our ordinance. Scott Hall inquired if in the master plan it says if there are discrepancies between the two, then it refers back to the ordinance. Councilmember Bean stated it does not in the master plan. It was discussed whether or not it needs to be stated in them. Councilmember Bean is concerned about the future, and feels it needs City Council Minutes 11/15/2007 -- 5 to be stated in the master plan. Scott Hall talked about Paragraph 3, and stated it should say something like “further require all owners to maintain all improvements consistent with the master plan and all annexation agreements”. He stated the problem with the perpetual, if 50 years from now the Council decides the whole area has changed and they need to make a change, they cannot do it. He feels if you take out “perpetually”, it will solve that problem. It was discussed “perpetual” will come out of D and E both. Scott Hall inquired if Council wants to require the developer to maintain and enforce the HOA until a certain percentage is gained. Council discussed that is what they want. It was discussed to be about 75%, as a number. Councilmember Bean stated in terms of utilities, the HOA would initially be responsible for paying those, if they do not then the developer would be responsible. If the developer does not, then we add it on to all the individual’s utilities located there. Jeff stated the developer will be responsible if they are still holding lots anyway. Greg Meacham, attorney representing Hawks, stated in doing covenants the buyers would like to have control as soon as they can and the developer will try to hang on as long as possible. He explained what they have done with their covenants, is setting that the developer gets 3 votes for every lot he owns. He can sell out 74% and still have control. He has control at least until that point. Council discussed that the language should be in both the master plan and the CC&Rs. It was discussed people need to be made aware. Ron stated they made a change to Item C in the Reimbursement Agreement. It was discussed to talk about the sewer. Lance stated when they discussed the offside sewer; the master sewer plan shows a line running down Sunnyside Road all the way down the road. It was discussed the master plan shows a 15 inch line. Lance stated he is not sure whether that is the best or not, it does contradict where they say the line is running. He is unconvinced through the Cottages and out Majestic and onto the road that it is sized adequately for the planned additional growth. He stated until he is comfortable with this, we are up in the air as to where this offsite sewer needs to run. Councilmember Kirkham agreed. Jeff stated he would like to get comfortable with this tonight. Councilmember Bean stated he feels we are progressing too rapidly also. Councilmember Thompson stated when they started with Founder’s Point we gave approval for about 70 houses with a temporary sewer until the line went down Sunnyside. He stated we had problems with water and sewer there. George McDaniel stated when they oversized the lines in the Cottages, the City – through Mountain River - did a study of what could be developed and service to that and that is how the City determined what the oversize was. Councilmember Kirkham inquired if we have any documentation to that. Jeff stated it was hearsay. He stated it has been engineered. Bill Manwill stated the line going through Sunnyside and up through the Eucher Valley drainage is 15 inches from Crowley up and all the way up Eucher. If the intent was to put all of the other development in there, that line would change sizes or you bring the second line in. He stated it does not show where it connects to Crowley. Councilmember Thompson inquired if he had once said that the line would not come down Eucher Valley, but would come down further south. Councilmember Kirkham agreed. Bill stated it can come down Township Road if you go through the corner of the area. It was discussed there is a 200 foot ledge there. Bill stated it could be done but there is going to be some excavations to come out into Township which is the reason they came down Sunnyside Road. He stated that an oversize line already built to Crowley was much shorter than the oversize line to Crowley to Eucher Valley there. Stay it all the way down to Ammon Road to Township Road and back again. This was the most efficient way. Bill stated the capacities on the lines for use, as per the rule of thumb Mountain River uses, is for 668 based on 4 units per acre. He feels sewers are based on hookups. He stated that would come out to 2700 units, based on a Quail Ridge size, for a 12 inch line. Councilmember Thompson inquired if that is based on a grade. Bill stated is based on minimum grade. It was discussed the grade would increase the units. Lance stated he does not have any of this information. He stated he has a map that is labeled a master sewer plan. Mayor Ard stated the line may be big enough through the Cottages, but it is not when you get to Mason. Bill stated they need to decide how much they want to sewer. He said initially it was a 24 inch line from Ammon Road up to Crowley and 21 inch across Crowley to Majestic View Lane. Bill stated if you build the line up Sunnyside, you still have the bottleneck where it is now with the exception of the homes that are in Founder’s Point. Jeff inquired to Bill in terms of his plan, through the Suitter property into to the Cottages coming out at Majestic where the bottleneck is; what was that meant to service. Bill stated it is a service to the ridgeline where what is now Founder’s Point and Hawks Landing, everything in between Rimrock and where you drop down into the Eucher Valley. It was discussed it would not pick up Iona. Jeff stated with Hawks Landing, Founder’s Point, and new extension to Quail Ridge; that is actually 631 units. He stated Quail Ridge is 196, not 296. It was discussed that is Quail Ridge #2. Bill stated he came up with about 1000 hookups that have been platted and approved to Majestic Lane, leaving 1700 for the rest. He stated there is a little piece in between Rimrock and Sunnyside and on Peterson Hill. Bill stated with the 12 inch there, it is approximately 1 unit per acre. He stated that is somewhat less than City Council Minutes 11/15/2007 -- 6 the 2700. It was discussed it may be 2 units per acre. Lance stated he needs all of this data in order to make a conclusion. Councilmember Bean inquired about the reimbursement agreement. He is concerned about Section 5. He inquired if this is really front footage fees. Ron Folsom stated at some point that we discussed changing our ordinance on front footage fees so that we can collect them if we have a case where the sewer line passed the frontage property. Councilmember Bean inquired to Scott how this works in conjunction with what he sent out to us the other day. He stated is almost appears we are charging something different for those particular connections then we are to others. Scott stated this would be a contractual agreement, and that is the difference. Ron stated you have to do it at annexation. Scott stated it needs to be a condition of the annexation. Councilmember Bean stated we need to change the language. Ron stated we have to change the ordinance. It was discussed to go through the rest of the reimbursement agreement. Ron stated they would like to change C so that is says that the sewer will go wherever is determined best by the City Engineer. He stated it needs to be engineered by RMES and approved by the City Engineer. Jeff stated they have been through preliminary and final with Planning and Zoning. He stated they have been through several processes and have approval through Council on this specific sewer plan. He agrees we need to document it, and he understands Lance’s situation. He stated the current plan they are connecting into was approved. Councilmember Bean inquired where they approved the sewer. Mayor Ard stated when we told them to run the line up Crowley and down Sunnyside. Jeff stated they have already paid for those engineering costs. He stated those engineering and construction plans are done. He wants to keep that in perspective and this has been going on for a year. He agrees we need to get Lance caught up, but he would be reluctant to say it is up to the City Engineer. He stated the City Engineer decided this previously. He feels it needs to be ratified. Scott Hall stated this is no disregard to Bill, because Bill always did the City a good job, but he now rides a different horse. Jeff stated they have already approved this and they need to stand behind it. Scott stated if it were the same engineer, that would be correct. However, since there is a new engineer and he says it doesn’t work, then the City has to do what is best for the City. Jeff inquired who pays the cost. He stated he isn’t comfortable with the City changing how the want to run the sewer. Councilmember Bean inquired what he means by that Lance has decided to do it differently. He doesn’t want any negativity towards Lance if he feels it needs to be changed. Jeff stated he agrees, but wants Council to look at their side. He stated they have been working on this for a year and a half. He is concerned who pays for the engineering fees. Councilmember Bean stated is could be a point of negotiation. Councilmember Kirkham stated the sewer has not been approved. Her recollection is at the last work session it was a point of contention then. She said at that point and time they asked where the master plan was and they could not find it. She stated that Bill said it was okay because on the master plan it goes through the Cottages. She stated she contested that to Bill. She stated they could never find the master plan, it was never brought out. She stated that was the assumption on this plan is that it would show it went through the Cottages, in fact it does not. She stated this is the problem. Jeff stated this is all proposed. Councilmember Kirkham stated we adopted this as a master plan that is obviously incomplete. She stated we have to do what is best for the City. She stated she doesn’t feel this is a point of negotiation. Jeff stated he is not trying to negotiate anything; he is just trying to make a point. Councilmember Kirkham stated his point is noted. Jeff stated he basically has been given two choices from Lance. They can either monitor and maintain the City’s sewer system and public right-of-ways and the open space or they move it. He stated the reason why you go through preliminary approval is so you can go do your final engineering and they have done all that. He stated they approved the preliminary plat. Councilmember Kirkham stated it is a preliminary plat. Jeff asked if she would agree if they had their preliminary plat so that they could do their final engineering for platting. Councilmember Kirkham stated yes. Jeff stated they will do it and it will cost them more money and time. His point is we need to do the research and document this. He feels we need to verify all the information. He would like to get rid of the bottleneck at Majestic and make sure it works. He wants to see the plan work, before we say to start over. Scott Hall stated the task we are on Paragraph C. Jeff stated Ron is saying to change the specific language to generic and let’s start over. Jeff stated he feels we should keep it in there until we verify it doesn’t work. Ron stated if we are not going to change this to a generic language, there is no reason to go further in the reimbursement agreement until we have a final opinion of what is going to happen. Jeff stated Ron called him a few weeks ago and told them they would reimburse them $1000 per connection fee. He stated Lee and Dana had a meeting. Councilmember Bean stated he has never agreed or discussed about reimbursing a specific dollar amount. Jeff talked about adding back interest in at 12%. Councilmember Bean stated that is non-negotiable. Jeff stated let’s shorten the time. Councilmember Thompson stated the people that live here should not have to pay for development. Jeff stated they pay for development one way or the other. Councilmember Thompson stated not that way. Jeff stated the City’s typical policy of connection fees has been 80%; he wants to know why they would change that. City Council Minutes 11/15/2007 -- 7 Councilmember Bean stated they do not have a policy. He stated we don’t give back connection fees. Jeff stated it is not a written policy. Councilmember Bean stated he doesn’t want to give any connection fees. He stated if they are going to give us 20 years, $200 a connection fee ought to take care of that over a period of time. It was discussed it would be about $450,000 at its current design. That is for the upgrade from a 12 inch to a 30 inch. Troy stated the total $488,000 is the total cost of the project and the upsize is about $368,000. It was discussed the number for the City would be $368,000 then. Councilmember Thompson inquired where the line runs. It was discussed it is a 30 inch line all the way to Majestic. Ron stated the cost will change if the line changes. If it has to come down Sunnyside, there is another mile. Jeff stated he in not sure what the City’s position is on this. Councilmember Kirkham stated it is not disputed that we will pay for the upsize, the terms of how we are paying for it is what is being disputed. Councilmember Bean stated we have never said we would pay it back in 30 days. Ron stated one of the agreements says we will pay it back in 15 days after acceptance, but struck out. Jeff inquired about the remainder of the costs. He stated the total cost is $488,000 to get the line in and the upsize is $368,000, he wonders where the other $120,000 in costs to get the line in. Jeff stated the City didn’t want to pay for the upsize up front. He stated they suggested 15 days and it was changed to 30 and then a year. He stated that tonight he must have misunderstood because it was blocked out that you’re not paying for the upsize. Councilmember Bean stated we have a real communication problem. He stated he has never come into this with the idea that the City was going to pay anything on it, other than we were going to reimburse you through the connection fees or some method for the upsize cost. He stated developers normally pay their share of development costs. He thought through this entire process that Jeff was paying for the 12 inch line and we were paying for the upsize. Jeff stated that is why he is asking questions. Jeff stated he thought it was a full reimbursement for all their costs. George stated that from his understanding if it is in the subdivision, then the City pays the upsize. He explained they are laying the line and have to put it in anyway, if they City wants a bigger line, they pay for the upsize. Councilmember Thompson agreed. George explained the line that goes from Quail Ridge to Mason Street where they put that in; there is a reimbursement for that portion which is a front footage fee. Councilmember Bean inquired to Ron about Item 5. He inquired if that would affect the cost that the developer is putting into it. Ron stated he always thought that this was for the upsize only – the $368,000. He stated we always required the developer to extend their services to their property. Scott Hall explained it is actually “through” their property, not “to” their property. Ron explained we have only one agreement where we did a recapture. Councilmember Kirkham stated we did it on the water. Councilmember Bean stated we as a Council now need to discuss the developer’s request to be reimbursed for the entire cost. Councilmember Kirkham stated they cannot expect to be reimbursed for the entire amount because you benefit from a portion of that line. Jeff stated the City benefits also. Councilmember Thompson stated they are paying for the timing, the timing to have it done right now. Councilmember Kirkham agreed. She stated even if you go back to the water agreement, the developer is still paying a portion of that, the portion that he benefits from. She explained then they are getting the recapture or reimbursement from future development. She stated there is a portion that you are paying for. Jeff stated that is within the subdivision. Councilmember Kirkham stated no, they are paying a portion of the lines also to the subdivision and the water agreement. You are paying a percentage of what we figure you would benefit from that line. She explained that is not going to be recaptured. Jeff stated whoever figured that had really bad math skills. George stated he would like to revisit that. Jeff stated they just feel they are getting nowhere with these meetings, everything seems to change each time. Jeff stated that we should look at the way other cities have done it. Scott Hall stated he has never seen or heard an agreement in relation to these developments though as anything other than the City paying the upsize through a reimbursement from its connection fees over a 20 year period. He stated he has not been to every meeting, but has been to several and every time they talk about it from a development agreement, he has not heard anything else. Jeff inquired about other reimbursement agreements. Ron stated to his knowledge there has been two. There is one that addresses the sewer that runs into the Cottages. There is also one that is in Founder’s that talks about a reimbursement agreement for future connections. Jeff inquired about one from Quail Ridge. Ron stated no, that is the one that goes down from Majestic through the Cottages. Jeff stated to take Idaho Power for example, if he extends a line 5 miles out – he upfront pays that cost, but then over a certain period of time if anyone else comes on and connects to that line, they have to pay a portion of that back to the developer. Scott stated that is part of what happens when you develop from the outside in. Scott stated if they had taken the next contiguous piece and gone on out, we would not be having this discussion. Jeff stated they have had four or five different recapture mechanisms that got in place because they never got there. Scott stated this is development from a mile to two miles out. Troy Burnett of RMES stated if the power company can come up with a solution, why can’t we. Scott stated they are regulated through the PUC and that is a major difference. Troy talked about the way Qwest does it. Scott stated the phone companies are regulated also. Troy agreed, but they can charge the next person to come. Scott City Council Minutes 11/15/2007 -- 8 explained they are a monopoly. You can choose to come in or not. Councilmember Kirkham stated we all agree that future development should have to pay a reimbursement of a line that they benefit from; the recapture mechanism is what we don’t agree on. She stated before we move on, for both of our interests, we need to get that hammered out before we move on. Tom Hunsaker commented about the way Qwest did a similar situation. He talked about the way Idaho law works also. Scott stated if you are the next development out, you simply develop out to yours. If you develop 2 miles out and the development in between is not going to happen for the next 20-30 years, why does the City have to bear the burden of that. He explained the developer is the one that chose how far they are out. Troy stated the power company has a time limit put on it. He stated we could work with that for something that is beneficial to the City and the developer. Jeff talked about the City of Ammon building permits being down 40%, the City of Idaho Falls and Bonneville County’s are up. Scott stated foreclosures are up 40% also. The water issues were discussed. It was discussed we are on track with engineering; it is the protests that are holding us up. Councilmember Bean inquired to Ron about the area they are talking about, how much area do we have annexed up there. Councilmember Kirkham stated almost 900 lots. Councilmember Bean stated he has 791 written down, he is assuming we have more. It was discussed he doesn’t have Quail Ridge in there. Ron stated we have close to 1000. Councilmember Bean wants to know how many building lots that we already have annexed that we can charge that we can use connection fees to pay this. Ron stated this is the first proposal for reimbursement agreement he has seen. Councilmember Bean inquired what our sewer connection fee is. Ron stated it is $1300. Scott Tallman, 5308 Cabana, inquired about the connection fees. He understood for upgrading or fixing problems – he thought replacements were based off of individual monthly fees to replace those lines. It was discussed they are not. He thought the fees they paid were supposed to go in a fund to fix the problems on Mason and Majestic. He feels there should be funds to help fix this. He talked about how IBSD does it. He feels we need to look at those fees as a mechanism. Jeff stated they have been pushing this for close to 6 – 8 months. He feels we need to hammer this out now. Councilmember Kirkham agreed. Councilmember Kirkham brought up a work session because she is not sure they are going to solve anything tonight. Scott stated until Lance can get Council something, there isn’t anything they can do. Councilmember Kirkham stated they are asking for a mechanism as a policy. They would like to see a means to be able to possibly get their money back and she doesn’t think that is unreasonable. She feels we need to move it to a work session. She feels the Council needs to get educated as to how other municipalities do it effectively. Jeff stated the upsizing policy, the reimbursements, etc. he feels they have made that clear. Councilmember Bean stated there is a benefit to you for running that line that they need to pay for. He doesn’t know the dollar amount at this point and time. If it doesn’t run up there, they don’t develop it. There is a cost benefit to the developer that they need to absorb. Jeff stated he also has off sites in addition to this. He stated they have a $130,000 cost just to get the sewer line from Founder’s to Hawks landing. He is wondering if the City helps them with that because it is an offsite. Councilmember Bean stated this is the first he has heard of it. Jeff stated he knows. Councilmember Bean inquired if that is part of trunk line or is it an ancillary line. Jeff stated it services other developments as well. Councilmember Bean stated then it is for the benefit of two developments, not for the City. Scott stated we have always required water and sewer to go through the development, not to the development and out the other end. Councilmember Thompson talked about Woodland Hills and that they paid everything to get it to them. Jeff stated he just wants to know what the City’s policy is for offsite developments. Councilmember Bean stated that to his understanding, they have always had the developer run the lines to their development. There is only one time they have ever been asked for a reimbursement agreement or some type of reimbursement and that is from George. Councilmember Bean stated the other developers realize the value it is to Ammon and build it into the price of the lots. He stated there is a difference because we are asking for an upsize. He still feels there is a cost benefit to the developer that they should absorb. He feels they should pay for the 12 inch line from Majestic to Sunnyside. The City pays the upsize. He is willing to agree to that portion of it. Jeff inquired about his other $130,000 is his expense as well? Council agreed because that is what they have asked of other developers. Jeff stated their plan would be to put in an 8 inch line in there unless they want a bigger line. Councilmember Bean stated that needs to be part of Lance’s discussion as well. If that has to become part of our trunk line and others are connecting into it, then that is fine. We would pay the upsize if needed. Lance stated he cannot even guess right now. It was discussed Founder’s has 12 inch. Jeff stated he has two considerations in the Majestic / Crowley / Ammon about 1 ½ line, is there any consideration from the City in that is a little less direct impact to Foothill Developments. He sees paying the 100% bringing the line from Founder’s to Hawks Landing on an 8 inch line. Lance will verify if they need more than an 8 inch line. The City will pay the upsize on the enhancements for Majestic down to Ammon Road. He has agreed to that. Is there any consideration on their additional out of pocket on the 12 City Council Minutes 11/15/2007 -- 9 inch line because there is maybe a little less of an impact, there is regular benefit for the City and other benefits to the City. He would like to know if the City would consider paying more on their out of pocket then the direct impact on Hawks Landing. Lance stated until we come to a direction or policy we can agree on, we need to wait. Councilmember Kirkham agreed. She stated she agrees with the time problem of going 6 months each time. She feels we really need to address this. George inquired about whether the line can go into the City easement or does it go in the roadway or do we pull asphalt. He stated we talked about moving part of it into the easement. Mayor Ard stated there is a portion of it from the tracks on, which we should be able to get into the easement without tearing it up. George stated the County has been difficult to work with on that. Jeff talked about the way that it is engineered and the cost of $480,000. George talked about the cost including putting aprons out around the manholes so that they were in asphalt. Councilmember Kirkham stated we did talk about this. Mayor Ard stated he feels we are in agreement on it and will work on it together. George inquired about the water project. Mayor Ard stated they are working on that and that the hearing was supposed to be last week, but they cancelled because notifications were not correct. Jeff mentioned two other points. He talked about the Sunnyside improvements and stated they are th coming back on December 6. He would like to finalize the thought process on the improvements. They have done the traffic study per Council’s request and the recommendations are in there. He mentioned the possibility of round-a-bouts, overpass, stop signs, or stop lights. Councilmember Kirkham stated she doesn’t feel they have the room to do a round-a-bout. Jeff stated they have a 130 foot radius and it would work. He stated the round-a-bout costs more, but it will be aesthetically be better. Jeff stated the last thing is they would love to try to figure out open space water. They would like to enter into a rate agreement of some sort. He stated they are public parks and very few developers are putting that much open space in. He explained there is expense of maintenance and expense for installation. He stated the costs are going way up on their development and they are concerned about the market. He stated they have a copy of the landscape plan and they are putting in 500 trees. He stated there is a lot of upfront expense they will spend for installation and it will be public access. th Councilmember Kirkham stated they are coming back on December 6 and wanted to know what Jeff would like to see happen ideally. She stated she knows they want the final plat approved. Jeff stated he would like the final plat approved, finalize the reimbursement agreement. Councilmember Kirkham th stated she is not sure they can do that before December 6. Jeff stated they conditioned the master development agreement to finalizing, he stated it doesn’t have to all be done. Jeff stated basically he would like to see the final plat, master development agreement, CC&Rs, and reimbursement agreement. Councilmember Kirkham stated we can probably do the master development agreement and CC&Rs approved, but not the others. Councilmember Bean inquired to Lance how soon he will be able to get his information. Lance stated it depends on the previous engineer(s) and how soon they can get the information he needs to him and how much time they can dedicate to it. Councilmember Bean stated we need to put the burden on their engineer to get it to Lance because Bill can get it faster than Lance can right th now. Scott inquired if they could do it by the 20. Councilmember Bean stated we need to make sure we thth have a quorum on the 20. Scott stated the next meeting after the 20; you will have a new Council. Jeff thth agreed. Councilmember Kirkham stated we shoot for the 20, but we think like it is the 6 so we will be ready. Councilmember Bean suggested that we continue to work with Ron as best we can with the agreements with the changes we have talked about. Jeff stated he would also like to see if there is anything they can do regarding utilities. Councilmember Kirkham stated secondary water is not an option but the schools and churches make the same claim that they are providing parks. Councilmember Bean stated we can’t fix the rate for you and not the others and everyone else is in the same position as Jeff is. The schools are getting hammered. They can’t make concessions on utilities for one developer and not someone else. It was discussed a secondary water system would be very helpful up there. th Leslie Folsom inquired if we are doing a work session or going straight to December 20. It was discussed we will move forward with the things we have talked about and will keep in communication. It was discussed that all will be here for a quorum. DISCUSSION ITEMS : 1. Public Hearing Pamphlet: Ron gave each Councilmember a copy. Ron explained the testimony in Idaho Falls improved dramatically with these. He explained we can copy them here. 2. Misc.: Lance stated we are continuing to have problems with the sewer lift station. He stated we need to take a look at doing something else in the near future. He stated what we have now is not adequate. Councilmember Bean inquired if that is our responsibility. Lance stated some of it is our responsibility because of putting the hydrogen peroxide into the sewer lift station at Woodland Hills. He stated we have to keep adding chemical to it to make sure City Council Minutes 11/15/2007 -- 10 it is continuously filled and checked. Councilmember Bean inquired what we need to do to fix it. Lance stated there are a couple of different options to make it better. To correct the problem we would need to look at laying a parallel line before it enters the Ross lift station bypassing the Ross lift station going clear down to Sunnyside and dumping it in there. Mayor Ard stated it doesn’t make any sense to do that if we are going go to the region. Councilmember Thompson suggested we limp along until we go to the Regional Sewer System. Randy inquired if we still have a question of responsibility, because it is coming out of the Woodland Hills and Rockwell Development. He inquired if they have any responsibility for this. Lance stated he has not had a clear answer as to if we have totally accepted that subdivision or not. Lance feels we probably haven’t accepted all of Woodland Hills and so Rockwell Development should have some burden of responsibility. Mayor Ard inquired if our problem is the volume. Lance stated the problem is the fact it is running so far and the timing of that pump. It takes approximately two different cycles, approximately 60 minutes and it goes septic. Councilmember Bean inquired what the best fix would be. Lance stated going in and putting in a larger tank and maybe constructing a building around it making it safer for us to fill that hydrogen peroxide tank and dosing it heavy and keeping it full. He stated we have safety issues with what we are doing right now. He stated they dosed it heavily last week. Lance stated we are talking about $4000 a month for hydrogen peroxide for the dose they did last week. Councilmember Bean inquired what it would cost to do the construction. Lance stated it depends on the size of tank and building. He stated he can put some preliminary numbers for Council. It was discussed fresh water could be a temporary alternative. Lance stated with water conservation and all, it is not feasible. Ron stated we did at one time run water through it. It was discussed it needs to be corrected and we need costs. Lance inquired if Councilmember Kirkham heard back from Paul Scoresby. Councilmember Kirkham stated she tried him several times today and he never called. She plans to take care of it. She explained we are trying to get the modeling from Schiess and Associates. She stated they have not been forthcoming. She stated she needs to tell him to get us the model or get us some reimbursement money. Lance stated that he talked to him and didn’t get far. Councilmember Kirkham stated she will call him again tomorrow. Lance stated he did some rough cost estimations for Tank #8. He stated if we go out and around the street he can save upwards of $150,000. He stated if we get a boring machine in and go underneath the buildings and out, it could be a little less. Councilmember Bean mentioned the question was what it would cost us to run through the little strip of land where these are. He stated Ron told him Joe Groberg would be willing to donate it to us. Ron explained where the property is. He stated Groberg’s still own it and he called him and asked if he knew about it. Joe called him and stated he talked to Dick about it and he stated if the City needs it he will donate it to you, as long as, you pay for an appraisal so that they can get a deduction. Council agreed. It was discussed Joe will be resigning from the City Council of Idaho Falls. Councilmember Bean stated we need do decide which way to go on this tank. Council discussed which type of tank would be more cost effective. Councilmember Bean inquired how many acres we need to buy from Arave’s. Lance talked about different ways to do it, but feels an acre would be fine. Councilmember Bean asked Ron to set up a meeting with himself, Ron, Arave, and Lance. Leslie Folsom asked council to give her more notice if they cannot be at a meeting. That way they can give the developer more notice. Councilmember Kirkham motioned to adjourn to executive session for personnel issues. Councilmember Thompson seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, Councilmember Waite – Yes, and Councilmember Bean – Yes. The motion passed. The meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m. ___________________________________________ C. Bruce Ard, Mayor ______________________________________ Leslie Folsom, City Clerk City Council Minutes 11/15/2007 -- 11