Minutes - 2000 - City Council - 01/07/2000 - JointORIGINAL
OPEN
JANUARY 7, 2000
EAGLE AREA OF IMPACT MEETING MINUTES
JANUARY 7, 2000, 9:00 AM
The Board of Ada County Commissioners (Board) met this date in an Open Meeting in the
Public Hearing Room of the Ada County Administration Building to act on the following
items. Staff members present: Jeff Patlovich, Patricia Nilsson, and Anna Powell, Ada
County Development Services, Ax Yewer, Ada County Prosecuting Attorney's Office; Rick
Yzaguirre, Lynne Sedlacek, Nancy Merrill, Steve Guerber, Mark Butler, Susan Buxton, Dan
Friend, and Mike Hormaechea, City of Eagle; Gussie O'Connor, Jim Benedict, Dennis
Stegenga, Jim Heneghan, and Adell Heneghan, City of Star; John Tensen, Doug Strickling,
and Scott Spjute, Boise City. Minutes Recorder: Gloria Uscola.
IN THE MATTER OF CALL TO ORDER:
Commissioner Simmons called the meeting of the Ada County Commissioners to
order at 9:00 a.m.
II.
IN THE MATTER OF ROLL CALL:
In attendance were Commissioners Roger D. Simmons, Frank Walker, and Grant P.
Kingsford.
IlL IN THE MATTER OF CHANGES TO THE AGENDA:
There were none.
IV. IN THE MATTER OF NEW BUSINESS:
Attendees introduced themselves and stated who they were representing.
M. Butler, Zoning Administrator for the City of Eagle, presented the Eagle
Comprehensive (Comp) Plan. He gave a brief background of the Comprehensive
Plan since 1993 and then described their new plan. In 1993, the City of Eagle
adopted their Comp Plan and presented the plan to Ada County which also
adopted the plan. The land use plan looked fairly similar to the current 2000 Plan.
In 1995, they received a request from a property owner to change the land use
map. The City of Eagle went through a lengthy process to review the Comp Plan
but no significant changes were made. In I997, the City of Eagle decided to
review the Comp Plan again because they wanted to bring the land use map in
accordance with the text of the Comp Plan. When this was completed, they sent
the updated Comp Plan to Ada County and the response they received was that
the County could not adopt the plan until they added a schools component and a
property rights component which are required by state statute. In 1997, despite
the County's denial, they adopted the Comp Plan but later that year, the City
Council budgeted money to add the required components. From this point, the
plan moved into a two-year process including focus groups, resident input, and
cooperation with several agencies such as ACHD and APA. This resulted in what
they are presenting as the 2000 Plan. This plan was then sent to Ada County.
M. Butler continued by giving a brief overview of land use issues that have
changed. He highlighted those areas of land that are in the impact area outside of
the city limits that have changed from the 1993 Comp Plan. The City of Eagle
wanted to look at areas that were not developed and lower the total density in
those areas. He said there is some land between Old and New Highway 55 that
was designated as four units per acre but the density was not lowered because of
the major roadway. Also, they created a Business Park near this location. In the
west, the City of Eagle took some land south of Floating Feather near the high
school and changed it from a two unit per acre maximum to a one unit per acre.
He noted Eagle's Comp Plan buildout, according to APA, would have resulted in
a population of 33,500 people. The citizens who were part of the focus group,
made a recommendation to the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City
Council said they did not want to be like other cities that have a high density.
They wanted to keep a rural feel, reduced population, and less traffic. In their
plan, they designated a population of approximately 23,000 people. The Planning
c:\winflows\temp\01-07-00eagle.doc 1
OPEN JANUARY 7, 2000
& Zoning Commission and the City of Eagle proposed 40,000 people. When the
City Council reviewed the 2000 Plan, they proposed a population of 28,000
people. From the 1993 Comp Plan to the 2000 Plan, they will have a reduction in
population from 33,000 people to 28,000 people. The outcome is a reduction in
land use and total density.
M. Butler continued by saying that in relation to large lot developments as well as
areas with higher density, they want to create an ordinance to encourage Planned
Urban Developments (PUD's) to have varying housing types and lot sizes. They
would like to see large areas of open space and some clustered homes. The City
of Eagle is very concerned with commercial development being placed outside of
the central business district. Camille Beckman, a retailer, asked for a Comp Plan
amendment so they could develop a manufacturing facility. The City Council felt
the project would bring some amenities that would benefit the City of Eagle so
they decided to allow for a conditional Comp Plan amendment. They made an
agreement with the company that if their site does not develop as indicated, the
Comp Plan will go back to one unit per acre.
The last area with changes M. Butler discussed was along Chinden Boulevard.
The Banbury subdivision is builtout currently at one unit per acre and Spyglass is
also one unit per acre. The City of Eagle felt it was good to change the land use
designation from two units per acre maximum to one unit per acre to stay
consistency with the present development. The bench area up to Linder Road was
changed from one unit per two acres to one unit per acre on the upper side. The
one unit per two acres designation remained where development of that nature
already existed.
F. Walker asked if the two-acre lots to the north exist at this time. M. Butler
replied that the area off Valentine was split from five acre lots in 1998. There
have been several splits since that time so some lots are less than two acres. S.
Guerber added that they did not change what already existed as far as density
goes.
M. Butler said the City of Eagle tried to encourage higher densities near the
central business district which is within the City of Eagle but is related to what is
occurring in the impact area. There have been many comments about urban
sprawl and large lots that waste land putting an extra burden on the infrastructure
but the City of Eagle, from comments by the citizens, felt they wanted to keep
some rural areas. They also want to be able to provide housing for the elderly as
well as starter homes. They wanted to cluster the higher densities down in
towards the core.
F. Walker asked if they had a submission from the Eagle Sewer District in relation
to the Comp Plan. M. Butler replied they have submittals from all the agencies
including the Eagle Sewer District, School District, Fire District, United Water,
Eagle Water, and ACHD. F. Walker requested copies of the submittals. He asked
if the Eagle Sewer District thought this was a justifiable Comp Plan or if they
would like to see higher density. M. Butler replied that the Eagle Sewer District
Manager wants as high of density as possible because it makes the sewer system
more efficient. L. Sedlacek added that the Eagle Sewer District Manager was on
Eagle's Planning & Zoning Commission during the development of the Comp
Plan. The Eagle Sewer District already had the facility plan completed so they
were comparing it to the Comp Plan. They planned for some clustering and
looked for areas where gravity flow was more conductive than others. The Eagle
Sewer District is in agreement with the densities.
F. Walker asked if the City of Eagle anticipated that the densities will be sewered
as development occurs. M. Butler replied that the City of Eagle serves the one
acre area in Redwood Creek and they are expanding that service to Colony 1 and
II and are working with Camille Beckman to get sewer extended to that property.
He did not know if the Eagle Sewer District was planning on extending sewer to
the north. L. Sedlacek added that as part of the Sewer Facility Plan they have a
¢:\windows\temp\01-07-00eagle.doc 2
OPEN JANUARY 7, 2000
designated central service area which goes as far north as Floating Feather Road.
She said the Sewer District was using higher buildout figures so the capacity is
available. The gravity flow service to some of the lowland areas on the larger lots
could be a problem. However, on Eagle Island and other such areas, the densities
and floodways allow for sewer. Currently there is a major trunk line through
Eagle Island.
F. Walker said the County is always concerned about septic systems and how they
impact the groundwater and aquifers. L. Sedlacek replied that the Eagle Sewer
District is working closely with Central District Health to meet their requirements
such as nutrient pathogen studies. They have found that even some of the two
acre lots in the Eagle area are not big enough for septic so they will be looking
into adding sewer to those areas.
R. Simmons asked if the Eagle Sewer District can afford to extend sewer to two-
acre lots. L. Sedlacek replied that the availability of sewer will be determined
when developments come in. She said Hubble Creek was done that way and the
Colony and Colony II will be done that way as well. She was confident that it
could be done. M. Butler added that one of the reasons they put text in the Comp
Plan to encourage PUD's and clustered developments is to keep density low but
they do not require extensive lengths of sewer lines to service large lots.
P. Nilsson asked what the lot size will be for the clustered lots. M. Butler replied
that the code is very restrictive right now in regard to cluster developments so he
did not know. They will be working on their ordinance to create incentives to
make it easier for people to do PUD's with smaller lots. They would like to see a
variety of lot sizes. He said Brookwood, located near Floating Feather and Eagle
Road, has 380 units on approximately 200 acres and is a good example of a PUD
that they would like to see.
A. Powell clarified that the Comp Plan does not suggest or mandate any size for
lots in cluster developments. M. Butler replied no, it does not.
R. Simmons asked if they had done a red line version of the Comp Plan. M.
Butler replied that their red line version compares the focus groups
recommendations to the 1997 plan. They do not have anything comparing the
1993 Comp Plan to the 2000 Plan.
The next topic of discussion was the proposed boundary amendments. The
proposed additions to the impact area have been divided into three areas and P.
Nilsson showed where they were located.
S. Buxton, legal counsel, noted that she represents both the City of Eagle and the
City of Star so when they discuss the areas on the west side of the proposed Eagle
Area of Impact, there is a conflict of interest and she would have to leave the
discussion.
In relation to the first area for discussion, the southeastern area in the vicinity of
the Boise regional sewage treatment plant, R. Yzaguirre said he has spoken with
Mayor Coles earlier in the week when the City of Boise became aware of what the
City of Eagle was proposing. Other than these conversations, they did discuss the
Comp Plan 2000. He said he would like to leave this meeting with a process on
how to move forward with the project because he was not sure of the procedure.
He thought they followed the proper procedure by addressing the project as a
council and forwarding it on to the County, but he has been asked why he did not
go to Boise City first. He said they never had any intentions of offending anyone
and he wanted to do what was fair.
R. Simmons thought the City of Eagle had already negotiated with Boise City and
had come up with some kind of mutual agreement.
OPEN JANUARY 7, 2000
S. Guerber replied that there is an inaccurate line from what their intention was
and it has caused some problems. He was referring to the area south of the south
channel of the Boise River which incorporates Boise's sewer plant. It seemed that
they would bring a portion of it into what it appeared to be within the proposed
Eagle Area of Impact. He said they changed the line that tuns along the south
cannel so it has eliminated the problem that was causing Boise City the greatest
concern. He said they always had discussions saying Eagle was not bringing
Boise's sewer plant into their Area of Impact. He believed the issue was resolved.
As far as the areas further north from the sewer plant, they are not within the Area
of Impact for Boise but they just learned that the City of Boise is proposing to
annex the property all the way up to Old Highway 55 along State Street. The City
of Eagle had not been aware of that before as the City of Boise had not
communicated their intent for the area. He believed Hill Road was a logical point
of division in the areas to the north. Another reason the City of Eagle looked at
the areas around the joint park and the nearby subdivisions is because when the
subdivision developers began their planning, they came to the City of Eagle to
consider being annexed into the city. The areas are developed and they are being
serviced by Eagle Sewer District, Eagle Water, Eagle Fire Department, and the
Sheriff's deputies assigned to Eagle. Since the City of Eagle provides services, he
thought it was logical for the areas to be brought into the City of Eagle.
R. Simmons said from a historical perspective, he was on the County Commission
when Brenson was approved and it seemed that the only reason it was approved
because Eagle indicated they would eventually extend sewer services there and
annex the area.
N. Merrill said the property around the river that is north of the sewer plant was
considered for annexation by Eagle because they received a request from the
property owner. The City of Boise intended to annex the area and the property
owner preferred to be annexed by Eagle. S. Guerber added that this is the
remainder of the Eagle Island area and the property owner already has half his
property in Eagle and would prefer to deal with one entity for all his property.
M. Butler showed the line that S. Guerber referred to as being inaccurate and
pointed out the new proposed line. He also showed where the Eagle Island
property requesting to be annexed by the property owner was located. He said the
first proposal was to extend the impact area line down to Chinden, but now the
proposal is to extend the impact area line down to the north boundary of the south
channel at~d follow the Boise River to the existing line.
R. Simmons asked if since plan was modified, would the boundary now go to the
north of the river. M. Butler replied yes, it would be north of the south channel.
F. Walker asked how Boise's boundary went north of the south channel because a
natural line would have been the south channel. M. Butler replied that in 1978
when Eagle adopted their first plan, they had a boundary that was not formally
adopted. He said he did not know when Boise's boundary moved into the area.
S. Guerber said he thought Boise moved their boundary in order to identify the
areas around the sewer plant. J. Tensen said he did not know of any other reason
for Boise to extend their boundary other than to provide a buffer around the sewer
treatment plant.
L. Sedlacek said she wanted Boise City to know that it was not Eagle's intent to
bring the sewer treatment plant into their area.
J. Tensen said Boise City appreciates the modification of the boundary but their
concern lies with Eagle's intentions related to the negotiations of the Baker Land
Trade and that Eagle's Area of Impact line still includes property that Boise City
owns for the waste water treatment facility. He said Boise City does not
recognize the Baker Land Trade. He asked if it was the intent of Eagle to honor
Resolution No. 97-9. R. Yzaguirre and S. Guerber replied that they did. M.
c:\windows\temp\01-07-00eagle.doc 4
OPEN JANUARY 7, 2000
Butler reviewed the details of Resolution No. 97-9. It would result in all of Boise
City's land to be outside of Eagle's impact Area. J. Tensen added that it was
Boise's understanding that the City of Boise would get 50 acres for the 50 acres it
was trading to Eagle. L. Sedlacek and N. Merrill said they agreed and M. Butler
said they should adjust the boundary to show it. L. Sedlacek suggested meeting
with the sewer district to make sure they all were in agreement about the
boundary.
G. O'Connor asked if as they go through the process of amending the area of
impact, should the swap be included. A. Yewer replied when you have an overlap
between two cities who want an area, the State Code calls for the two cities to
negotiate it and then bring it to the County. He suggested Eagle go the City of
Boise and get the boundaries established and once they have agreed on how to
draw the lines, then they can come to the County with the plan.
F. Walker said if the cities cannot come to an agreement, they can turn to the
County for mediation. R. Simmons agreed and said they have already done this
between Boise and Meridian but would like to see Boise and Eagle work this out
first. F. Walker agreed.
R. Yzaguirre asked what the City of Boise's reaction was to the Eagle Island
property. S. Spjute said Boise City is concerned about the Eagle Island property
for a couple of reasons. First, the City of Boise has the land in their Area of
Impact now and it is designated as open space. They would like to see some land
and natural preservation and non-residential uses in the area because of the
proximity to the waste water treatment plant. Second, Boise City sewer lines
would be serving the area. J. Tensen added it would make sense that the impact
line not go straight up Five Mile Road but would take in the tip of Eagle Island
because right now they will have a part of the Boise City Area of Impact as an
island on Eagle Island surrounded by Garden City and Eagle which is not
connected to Boise City. It would not be logical.
M. Butler asked if the area was in the Boise Area of Impact, would it stay open
space. S. Spjute replied it would be designated for open space because of the
location of the sewer treatment plant and because it is in a floodway.
J. Tensen stated that in regard to the City of Boise's annexation notices, they sent
a letter to property owners in the area indicating Boise's plans but there was no
City of Eagle property or property in their area of impact, so they did not receive
a notice. In regard to the area just east of Highway 55, they do not have plans to
annex it at this time and Boise does not have sewer to that point yet. S. Guerber
said it was his understanding that notification went to the Eagle Fire Department
that Boise City was going to annex all the area and it would be de-annexed from
the Eagle Fire Department. D. Friend said that was correct. He received a map
from Boise City showing that the annexation was going to occur this year and
asked that they sign an automatic aid agreement to provide fire protection;
however, they would still lose the tax base.
R. Simmons said that it sounds like Boise City and the City of Eagle have some
negotiating to do but it needs to occur outside this forum. He moved on to the
eastern boundary where the Eagle/Ada Park site lies and said it was the County's
understanding that this area would become part of Eagle's Area of Impact but not
be annexed into the Eagle. However, the County had some concerns about
portions of the landfill they were including in their area of impact. R. Yzaguirre
responded that the area was included just to square off their boundary and to have
a straight line. He realized they made some mistakes by making straight lines but
the intent was merely to keep the boundaries straight.
F. Walker said that the only real issue then is the portion towards the south, north
of Hill Road were development is already present. He asked what densities they
anticipated for area because the land use designations need to remain consistent.
L. Sedlacek replied that much of area is a cemetery. The City of Eagle was
c:\windows\temp\01-07-00eagle doc 5
OPEN JANUARY 7, 2000
looking to include the Bonita Hills and the Benson Subdivisions in their area of
impact.
F. Walker asked if Benson was builtout. J. Patlovich replied they were not. They
still need to do the final plat for Phase No. 5 but the application was approved.
F. Walker said the area to the north has been a concern. N. Merrill said the owner
of the tavern in that area is considering selling his property so they will have to
discuss that at a later date.
T. Nilsson noted when the Bonita Hills application came in, Development
Services received a letter from Boise City stating that they did not consider it
within their area of impact. The larger portion of the original parcel was outside
Boise's area of impact, but the smaller portion was inside. She said Boise City
and Eagle would have to work out the issue.
There was a ten minute break.
R. Simmons said they would like to discuss Area 3 andquestioned why it was
necessary to include these rural lands in the area of city impact. M. Butler replied
the reason the boundary goes so far north is to keep the boundary square. He said
the Spurwing residents wanted to be in the City of Eagle at some point and
dictated the boundary. They also looked at including the Moon Valley
development. He said one of the main concerns was sewer but they are looking at
a lift station to serve the area.
R. Simmons noted that Moon Valley already has central septic. M. Butler replied
that there may be other development in the area that will require sewer service.
He realized that according to the Comp Plan they will need to show that sewer
services will be there within ten years.
R. Simmons asked if they expected to move sewer out to the existing boundaries
within ten years. M. Butler said he does. Eagle sees movement out to the west
because the land to the north is already developed with five acre lots. L. Sedlacek
added that they have a middle school site on Linder and there is a lot of interest
for sewer service on the State Street corridor.
R. Simmons asked where the sewer is now. L. Sedlacek said the sewer will be in
the Colony Subdivisions and the master plan calls for a regional lift station
located near the north channel and Linder Road. She said they hope to serve
Eagle Island State Park and the mobile home courts on the south side of the north
channel.
M. Butler said in regard to the expansion to the north, the idea was to have both
sides ofHomer Roadin the area of impact rather than splittingit. S. Guerber said
that in order to move the boundaries you have to look at what will happen with
services. The City of Eagle is in a situation where it does not provide a lot of the
services but entities from the City of Eagle will; such as the fire department, the
library district, and law enforcement services. Services are out there even though
they are not currently in the area of impact so they were proposed to be included.
N. Merrill said as Boise is considering their Foothills Plan there had been a lot of
concern about Eagle's Foothill area. The residents there want to be involved in
the planning and the City of Eagle provides planning to residents outside their
area of impact.
L. Sedlacek noted that United Water has not developed a well but they do have a
major well site on the northwest comer of Linder and State Streets.
R. Simmons said the area north of Beacon Light is designated as one unit per five
acre but asked what they were planning past Homer Road. M. Butler replied that
they considered showing the land use for this area in the Comp Plan but thought it
c:/windows\temp\01-07 00eagle doc 6
OPEN JANUARY 7, 2000
was too early at this stage. They thought they would leave the Comp Plan up to
the boundary they have and then negotiate the additional area with the County and
the City. He said the intent would probably be to continue with similar land use.
R. Simmons asked what the existing zoning was. T. Nilsson replied that there is
some RP (Rural Preservation) but most of it is RR (Rural Residential) which is a
ten-acre zone. She noted there have been non-farm developments approved in the
area which contain ! 5-year deed restricted open spaces.
F. Walker said it was mentioned that Spurwing and the developments to the north
of it anticipated coming into Eagle and asked if there were any transmittals from
the Homeowners' Associations indicating this desire. R. Yzaguirre replied that
they do not have anything in writing.
G. Kingsford asked if they have submitted their plan to Meridian. R. Yzaguirre
replied that they had not.
P. Nilsson said one of the criteria for area of impact boundaries is a reasonable
expectation of annexation. She asked if there is any future annexation plans. M.
Butler replied that they are expanding to the west so he figured the services would
go in that direction. He said they are working on annexation up to Beacon Light
Road but a few years ago, they attempted to annex any parcel that was available
which included land north of Beacon Light Road. He said the areas that are five-
acre lots should stay in the area of impact for now.
L. Sedlacek said that she did not think that there was a total consensus on the
Eagle City Council about the areas they will be annexing. She would like to meet
with Star before deciding because the lots are already developed with on-site
septic systems that are working.
R. Simmons said a city has to have a reasonable expectation of annexation for
properties outside the city limits but also within the County because otherwise
those property owners start to feel disenfranchised. He has always been reluctant
to expand an area of impact past a point that the city does not expect to annex. At
the same time, he does not want to thwart any ability to plan on the part of the
City of Eagle. If the City of Eagle is planning to go in a direction and they can
show they will annex, he would be willing to work with them on it. If they do not
plan to annex at this time, they should leave it as it is for now. If the intent is to
preserve some of the rural character around their existing area of impact, they
have a better chance by leaving it in the County and outside of the area of impact.
R. Yzaguirre responded that Eagle was concerned with what Star was proposing.
They heard Star's intention was to go to Linder Road and Eagle felt that they
needed to state their position. R. Simmons replied that he could appreciate his
comments and that the County has heard from Star that they are concerned with
what Eagle is proposing. He said it puts the County in the position to have to
work out the issues and logic should dictate which way the cities grow. He did
not want to establish artificial boundaries just so cities could protect themselves
from encroachment.
N. Merrill asked if it is the County's intent to keep a buffer area as cities grow
closer to each other. G. Kingsford replied that Meridian tried to do that in 1978
with Boise. The area of Five Mile to Eagle Road was suppose to be a "greenbelt
area" and he suggest not doing that because it is not realistic because it does not
work. He thought the two cities should abut. N. Merrill said she agreed and that
is what Eagle and Star are looking at. It may not be within the next ten years but
maybe within 20 or 30 years they will have to decide where the boundaries will
meet.
F. Walker said they need to let growth take its natural course and agreed with
Conunissioner Simmons that if they establish artificial boundaries as far as areas
of impact, then in-fill and creeping sprawl occurs. There will not be a well-
c:\windows\temp\0 1-07-00eagle.doc 7
OPEN
JANUARY 7, 2000
defined urban area and instead there could be miles of poor development. He
said he would like to explore the area where Spurwing is because it appears Eagle
is growing that way and it could makes sense to bring that into the area of impact.
He agreed with Commissioner Simmons regarding residents becoming
disenfranchised when they are within area of impacts and referred to the
southwest area in Boise which suffers the negative consequences of being within
an impact area. He did not want to set up future Commissions for a fight over the
corridor between Star and Eagle and leaving residents without a voice over what
is occurring.
R. Simmons said one of the problems the County has with the City of Boise is
that they have a huge area which is not in the annexation path right now and there
is nothing the County can do for them. It is almost impossible to bring land back
after the area of impact is established. He thought the best thing to do was be very
conservative. He said he would be willing to look at areas that would be logical
and reasonable to include in the area of impact.
G. Kingsford said it might make sense for the Legislature to consider another
planning area in order to reduce the fear of land grabs between cities. He agreed
with the other Commissioners in regard to bringing too much property into an
area of impact that will remain there for a long period of time.
R. Simmons said that the Mayor Yzaguirre has asked that item four on the agenda
not be discussed at this time so their attorney and the County's counsel can
discuss the issues.
N. Merrill said they received a transmittal that the County is proposing a zoning
ordinance regarding Title 8 and asked what they were planning on doing with it
and how it affects Eagle's Area of Impact. P. Nilsson said the Board will be
hearing the item on February 2, 2000. The zoning district is remaining basically
the same, but there are renaming one of them. One provision that the P & Z
Commission has recommended in the RT (Rural Transition) zone is similar to the
non-farm in the rural ordinances. It will allow for cluster provisions so the parcel
does not have to be plotted as five-acre lots. On the non-clustered portions, they
have provided for smaller lots on central systems, and the remaining area would
only be restricted until the city was ready to annex it. She said the uses will
basically stay the same.
A. Powell said that currently, the R1 zoning district would allow a septic system if
community water is available. The proposed change would be any development
within the R1 zone would have to be on sewer and water.
R. Simmons said they need to discuss the issue of septic on two and a half acres
versus two acres. He said he felt uncomfortable even with septic on two and half
acres. He wanted to discuss this issue with Eagle some time in the future to work
out an agreement. A. Powell said this is the reason she asked Eagle if their Comp
Plan designated a minimum size for the clustering provisions. She thought the
new zoning ordinance would accommodate Eagle's desire for more PUD's and
facilitate their development.
M. Butler asked if the issue of septic was in relation to the area Eagle had planned
for one unit per two acres. R. Simmons replied that there is a concern for
increased nitrates in the water supply as the population grows because of smaller
acre lots having septic systems. He said developers have said once you establish
septic on smaller lots, you reduce the possibility of ever getting sewer to the area
because it becomes economically impossible to extend sewer.
L. Sedlacek said they need to look at other options beside central sewer and septic
as they exist today. As part of Eagle's facility plan for sewer they discussed on-
sight septic management districts. She said they could educate people on how to
manage septic systems.
c:\windows\temp\01-07-00eagle,doc 8
OPEN
JANUARY 7, 2000
VI.
F. Walker said there are other options they will need to explore in the future as far
as the technology of the septic tanks and making requirements--there are advanced
systems. He said a concern raised by the Treasure Valley Hydrologic Modeling
Project is the existence of uncased wells going into the aquifer and draining
nitrates into the water. These issues need to be addressed.
L. Sedlacek said DEQ completed a water study of Eagle/northwest Ada County's
water quality and it showed that problems do exist and they need to be addressed.
She said the Treasure Valley cannot continue to pull water out of the aquifer, use
it once, run it through very expensive treatment, and then dump it into the Boise
River. There are other places all across the county who address similar water
quality issues and they need to explore some options.
R. Yzaguirre said they will be meeting with Star and Boise soon and would
schedule a follow-up meeting with Ada County after those two meetings.
IN THE MATTER OF RECESS:
There being no further business to come before the Board at this time, the meeting
was recessed at 11:05 a.m.
c:\windows\temp\O 1-07-OOeagle.doc 9