HomeMy WebLinkAbout08 16 2017 CMCITY OF CHUBBUCK
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
AUGUST 16TH' 2017 — 6:00PM
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor England
PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG: Councilmember Lewis
INVOCATION: Casey Orr
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Kevin England, Melanie Evans, Josh Ellis, Annette
Baumeister, Ryan Lewis and City Attorney Tom Holmes
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Public Works Director Rodney Burch, Devin Hillam, Paul Andrus,
Deputy Clerk Joey Bowers, and City Clerk Rich Morgan
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 261h 2017, August 2nd 2017
Councilmember Baumeister motioned for approval of minutes
Councilmember Lewis seconded motion for approval of minutes
Roll Call: Evans -yes, Baumeister -yes, Lewis -yes, Ellis -yes, motion passed
PUBLIC HEARING:
1. An application by Ellis Construction Lifestyles Homes for a Preliminary Plat for Copperfield
Landing Division 5. Located Northeast % of section 4, Township 6 South, Range 34 East, of Boise
Meridian, Bannock County Idaho. Location is between Copperfield Landing Division 3 and 4
subdivisions.
Councilmember Ellis recused himself from item of business for both the Public Hearing and General
business item #1.
Brady smith, Rocky Mountain Engineering presented the next section of single family residential
houses that would connect phases 3 and 4 together. Mr. Smith said that this phase would finish the
connection for the water, sewer, and irrigation for this project.
Mayor England opened the public hearing and due to no public comment then closed the hearing
An Application by Chris Peterson for a Preliminary Plat for Integrity Estates Division 2. Located
Northwest % of Section 4, Township 6 South, Range 34 East of the Boise Meridian, Bannock
County, Idaho. Location is south of Sunrise East Estates at the South end of Hunter & Jake
Avenues.
Chris Petersen, Pocatello presented phase 2 of Integrity Estates which would consist of 28 residential
lots. Mr. Peterson stated that he sold these lots to Rockwell homes for development, he also added four
more lots than was originally presented as requested by the builder. Mr. Peterson presented
information on the park fees and the change in cost from $400-$500 per lot that he was quoted from
City Staff on phase 1 to now for phase 2 and 3. He felt like this was a mistake created by City Staff and
wanted Council to help come up with a middle ground for his Park fee. Mr. Peterson proposed a fee of
$712 per lot plus an additional $15,000 on top of those fees for a total of $34,824 for phase 2 and 3,
instead of the quoted amount by City Staff of $3,360.50 per lot or $94,094. Mr. Peterson stated that he
understood the purpose of cash in lieu. He also stated that phase 2 did not meet the City's R-1
requirements, but did meet the R-2 zoning for the property.
Public Works Director Rodney Burch explained the difference between the park guarantee and the
cash in lieu fees. The park guarantee is a $400.00 fee that is added to a developers building permit
application for each lot. When the park is completely built the $400.00 per lot is returned to the
developer. Cash in lieu is totally different. When a developer chooses not to build a park, City ordinance
requires him to contribute to the park fund to be used in another location in the City. Mr. Burch
explained the formula used to figure out the amount required for cash in lieu. Mr. Burch felt like the City
had already cut fees for the developer by only using $28,000 per lot cost, instead of the $32,450 that the
lots are selling for in calculations. Mr. Burch stated that the developer would only be charged a fee of
$400 per lot for phase 1.
Councilmember Lewis wanted clarification on the sewer connection fees for Integrity Estates. He
asked the applicant if he understood the purpose of cash in lieu. Councilmember Lewis stated the City
should use the fair market price to calculate the cash in lieu for the park requirement. Councilmember
Lewis wanted clarification if phase 2 meet the City's R-1 requirements, because that is how the applicant
presented the development to the public in the original meeting. Councilmember Lewis stated that the
applicant stated that he had made changes to the master plan knowing that it was a concept and not a
set in stone document. He felt like if the developer had the right to make changes to the plan then the
City had the right to correct errors to follow City Ordinance.
Councilmember Ellis explained that in 2008 development had come to a halt in the City. So any land
that had already been annexed into the city and was already City property would qualify for the old
sewer connection fees, but a new fee was put in place in 2008 that would apply to any land that was
annexed into the City going forward. Councilmember Ellis recommended taking the price that the lots
are being sold for in computing cash in lieu, or the applicant can choose to build a park instead.
Councilmember Ellis felt like if the city realized that they were not following Ordinance that they have
the right to make the proper corrections to follow Ordinance between development phases.
Councilmember Baumeister wanted clarification that the original preliminary plat was presented as R-
1 even though it was zoned R-2 and that it did not have a park planned in development. Councilmember
Baumeister wanted to know why the applicant was making changes and plans on a plat that had not
been presented for Councils approval yet. Councilmember Baumeister also wanted to know if the
developer was told that he was being charged the park guarantee fee for phase 1 and not the cash in
lieu fee.
Councilmember Evans felt like the developer had assumed that the fees would be the same a year
later and for a different phase, when making contracts with Rockwell.
City attorney Tom Holmes felt like that park fees discussion should be moved to a future Council
meeting, because it is not listed on the Council's agenda for tonight. Mr. Holmes felt like the City needs
to follow the current Ordinance and if Council wants to change policy they need to change the
Ordinance.
The four Councilmembers felt like City Staff had honored the quoted price of $400 for phase 1. They
also felt like the developer had entered into contracts for phase 2 and 3, before doing his due diligence
to make sure the quoted price would remain the same, and had final approval by City Council.
Mayor England opened the public hearing for public comment.
Brady Smith 4550 Hersey Loop, was in favor of the project. He felt like the developer has the right to
make a development as dense as possible, but felt like this development made more sense as an R-1
development and not an R-2 development.
Darris Ellis 4470 Wasatch Street, felt like if a development was proposed R-1 then it should remain R-1
Nick Jensen 1526 East Point Pocatello, was in favor of the project. Mr. Jensen felt like there was some
missed communication on both City Staff and the developer. But he didn't want to see another
developer come to the City of Chubbuck and fail. He would like to see Council work with the developer
on this situation. Mr. Jensen stated that he does contact City Staff before moving forward with each of
his developments to make sure he uses the right calculations for fees.
Jason Holm 570 Homestead Pocatello, was in favor of the project. Mr. Holm stated he would work
with the developer as his excavator to help determine if it would be better to build a park or pay the
cash in lieu fees.
Doug Briscoe 5344 Kymball, was in favor of the project. Mr. Briscoe wanted to know if this was the
first time that the City had a developer choose the cash in lieu instead of building a park. Mr. Briscoe felt
like the developer should consider building a park. But he felt if the City prefers not having a park in this
development, then it would be beneficial for Council to work with the developer to make that possible.
Greg Hanson 3386 Maple, Rockwell Homes Idaho Falls, was in favor of the project. Mr. Hanson stated
that a home in Chubbuck cost $12,000 more than the exact same home in Idaho Falls and Bonneville
County. Mr. Hanson thinks that it would be better to work with the developer then to financially force a
park to be built.
Todd Briscoe 876 Hallmark Pocatello, was in favor of the project. Mr. Briscoe agreed with Mr. Ellis
that if the development was proposed R-1 then it should remain R-1.
Mayor England closed the public hearing
Public Works Director Rodney Burch answered Mr. Doug Briscoe's question about cash in lieu. Mr.
Burch stated that Council had approved three other subdivisions in 2017 that have agreed to the cash in
lieu instead of building a park. Mr. Burch also stated that the same formula was used for these
subdivisions that is being used for the Integrity Estates calculations.
GENERAL BUSINESS:
1. Approval of Copperfield Landing Div. 5 Preliminary plat
Councilmember Lewis motioned to approve Copperfield Landing Div. 5 preliminary plat.
Councilmember Baumeister seconded motion for approval of the plat
Roll Call: Lewis -yes, Evans -yes, Baumeister -yes, Ellis -recused, motion passed
2. Approval of Integrity Estates Div. 2 Preliminary plat
Councilmember Ellis motioned to move the approval of Integrity Estates Div. 2 preliminary plat
to the first Council meeting in September and the first item of business on the study session.
Councilmember Lewis based on the applicants approval seconded motion
Roll Call: Lewis -yes, Evans -yes, Baumeister -yes, Ellis -yes, motion passed
3. Approval of Northgate I.C. — Construction Cooperative Agreement
Planning and Development Director Devin Hillam presented the ITD construction
agreement that had been signed by all the other involved entities for the Northgate
interchange. Mr. Hillam stated that the City's responsibilities were outlined in section
3.3. He also stated that City Staff was in support of this agreement.
Councilmember Ellis wanted to make sure this was a separate agreement and that it
would not be committing the City to any sort of sewer agreement. Councilmember
Baumeister was concerned about section 1.3.3 about ITD coming and asking for
additional funds from the other entities to complete this project.
Councilmember Ellis motioned to allow the Mayor to sign and enter into the construction
cooperative agreement as presented for the Northgate interchange.
Councilmember Evans seconded motion for approval of the agreement
Roll Call: Baumeister -yes, Lewis -yes, Ellis -yes, Evans -yes, motion passed
4. Adoption of Ordinance 769 and Resolution 2017-02, Appropriations for FY2018
Council wanted to keep the levy flat so they took the available 3% and $112,000 of
foregone. The foregone amount will be used on City streets.
Councilmember Ellis motioned to approve Resolution 2017-02
Councilmember Evans seconded motion for approval
Roll Call: Evans -yes, Baumeister -yes, Ellis -yes, Lewis -yes, motion passed
Councilmember Ellis motioned to approve Ordinance 769
Councilmember Lewis seconded motion for approval
Roll Call: Baumeister -yes, Ellis -yes, Lewis -yes, Evans -yes, motion passed
CLAIMS:
City of Chubbuck claims for August 16th, 2017 as presented to Mayor England and
Council.
Councilmember Ellis motioned for approval of City of Chubbuck claims
Councilmember Evans seconded motion for approval
Roll Call: Baumeister -yes, Lewis -yes, Ellis -yes, Evans -yes, motion passed
2. Chubbuck Development Authority claims for August 16th, 2017 as presented to
Mayor England and Council
Councilmember Ellis just wants to make sure for the future that the City and Chubbuck
Development doesn't offer more, than what is going to be received when bringing businesses
into the City.
Councilmember Ellis motioned for approval of Chubbuck Development Authority claims
Councilmember Baumeister seconded motion for approval
Roll Call: Lewis -yes, Ellis -yes, Evans -yes, Baumeister -yes, motion passed
ADJOURN: MAYOR KEVIN ENGLAND
X RA
Rich Morqan
City Clerk
X:
Kevin England
Mayor