Recycling Center Permit Revoked, Phase 1A of Meadows Subdivision Approved
The P & I.N. Depot in New Meadows held about 25 attendees for the City Council Meeting and two Public Hearings on Monday, September 23. Council members Troy Black, Josh Carr, Jeff Parnett, and Shiloh Ryker were all present along with Mayor Julie Good, City Attorney Richard Stubbs, City Engineer Grae Harper, City Clerk Kyla Gardner, and Deputy Clerk Diane Hunter. After roll call and the Pledge of Allegiance, the Mayor began her report.
The Mayor described the recent Ground Breaking Ceremony for the new Youth Center stating excavation would start that week. She noted another community meeting regarding the Mehen Memorial Skate Park design with Grindline is scheduled for October 3 at 6:00 p.m. at The Depot. The Fall Festival will be on October 5 from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. in the City Park.
The Mayor stated she met with Mendy and Wendy from Adams County Health Center regarding the mobile clinic and setting up services in New Meadows. Due to grant cycle funding dates, the earliest they will bring the mobile clinic to New Meadows is Spring of 2025. They discussed possibly using the ACHC vans for appointment transportation.
After her report, the Mayor described the Public Hearing process and gave a last call for anyone wanting to sign up to give testimony. The Public Hearing for the Consideration of the Revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for Brown’s Mountain Recycling on 3640 South End Road was then opened. Gardner read the Governing Body Disclosure and questions addressed to each Council member regarding knowledge of the applicant and their proposal.
Donna Brown then gave the Applicant Presentation stating that item number 4 on the progress report has been in compliance 100% since January of 2024 and that they had heard no objection from anyone stating differently. She explained their understanding of the area that was to be cleared of all contaminating fluids. In the end, Brown stated they had all agreed they are done. They plan to get the fence posts put in since the holes are ready and then call it quits for the year. She said next year when they begin clean up again, it will not be for a recycling yard and expressed disappointment with the process and the city administration.
Since the decision to remove themselves from the permit process was stated during the hearing and not previously, the Mayor and city attorney noted that legally the hearing needed to proceed. As testimony in favor of the CUP revocation began, the applicants left the meeting. Testimony in favor included emphasis on the importance of keeping water clean, respect for neighboring properties, concern for animals and watershed cleanliness, and notes on missed time deadlines. Concern was expressed about items being moved to other properties rather than being disposed of.
Neutral testimony included statements that the recycling center itself has been a benefit and great service to the community. Many people declined to give further comment except to affirm their noted position since the Applicants had left the meeting. There was no rebuttal from the Applicant or final questions from the Governing Body and the hearing was then closed.
The Council then proceeded to the action item of voting to revoke the Brown’s Mountain Recycling CUP. The Mayor stated this decision should include conditions. After discussion and requests for information from Stubbs and Harper, a motion was made to revoke the CUP for Brown’s Mountain Recycling with the condition that the property must be compliant with all current city ordinances by October 31, 2024. The vote was unanimous to revoke. A letter will be sent to the Applicant. Harper noted there are some grants available for people needing to clean up properties like this.
Next, the Public Hearing for Design Review of the Meadows Subdivision Phase 1A was opened. Gardner asked the Governing Body the disclosure questions and Rob Pair with Crestline Engineers gave the Applicant Presentation starting with an explanation of the original Preliminary Plat approval for the full project. He noted that the approval conditions only included that a development agreement be put together. As the process started, Pair stated the owners had decided to start with just the first eight lots.
Pair discussed general details of the construction project including a landscaping berm, area for snow storage, connection areas for water and sewer mains and general layout. The Governing Body then asked questions regarding timing of construction, approval of layout by the fire department, lighting, and paving. Pair said no street lights are proposed but they do plan to eventually pave the roads within the development. The developers plan to put together a local improvement project specifically for things like paving roads. Pair also gave a slideshow of the construction plans.
Testimony in favor was then opened with former owner Ole White and separately Philip Good both stating their thoughts that this development would be beneficial for the community to help with the community growth, increase in population, and that with growth will come change.
Neutral testimony was given by six community members with concerns ranging from dust and trash abatement, safety of school children on roads near construction, impact on neighborhoods, water truck use being enforced, and questions on the builder or owners understanding of the rural character of our community. Considerations of the business and infrastructure impacts including on emergency services departments were also mentioned. There was also discussion about the potential impact on water use.
Positive statements around the new development given in neutral testimony included that these will be nicer homes being built rather than another RV or trailer park and that this will bring needed homes to our area.
One person spoke in opposition of the project, Fire Commissioner Keith Westengard, Chairman of Meadows Valley Rural Fire District Board of Commissioners. Westengard noted the growth that has already occurred in the Fire District and the significant growth anticipated over the next five years including expanding the fire station for 24 hour coverage. He said he would like to discuss a donation of Lot 8 in the proposed development site for the fire department expansion.
Pair then gave the rebuttal from the Applicant. He stated that dust abatement was standard and monitored in these types of construction zones and they could potentially put something in the CC&Rs about trash, but that they will follow city ordinances. Pair said safety of pedestrians is important to them and they are hoping this subdivision will set a good example for pedestrian traffic since there will be pedestrian warning devices, stop bars and cross walks at each intersection and there will be paved walkways.
Pair continued stating he thinks a key to providing attainable housing will be in smaller density developments like this one. The project group hopes these homes will be attainable for locals including teachers, emergency services members, and families. He said the goal of the developers is to keep square footage, cost and price down. The owners are prohibiting short term rentals in the development.
Pair noted that they had many discussions regarding paving streets since it is a bigger expense, but that ultimately by creating the local improvement project the cost will be spread out over years rather than being an up front cost.
Regarding Lot 8, it was agreed that this will be a separate discussion with the owners. Since Fire Commissioner Westengard expressed concern about whether the Fire District could offer Fire and EMS services if they did not receive the donation of Lot 8, the City Council and Mayor expressed their concerns about approving the design review if Fire and EMS would not be able to service the new homes. The Governing Body affirmed that they have a duty to provide safety, medical, and fire services to citizens and said they must ensure these services would be available before approving the project. Ultimately, after much discussion, it was determined with Westengard and Fire Chief Doug Buys that the projected turn-arounds and lane widths would be satisfactory for serving the projected development.
Further questions from the Governing Body asked about anticipated square footage of homes. The owner stated they hope to have them built under 1200 square feet, but this has not been determined with the builder yet. Regarding water and sewer, Harper joined in after questions stating that the water and sewer facility upgrades were made to already anticipate the future increases in use. He said that the new system offers high capacity pumping and capability, so it is “designed for the New Meadows of the next 20 years.” As for the sewer system, the City and Engineer are currently working on a new wastewater plan and Harper said the first eight homes will not have a large impact on it. He also stated that in reviewing the plans, everything looks top notch from an engineering perspective and he would recommend approval of the subdivision.
The public hearing was then closed and the council moved to action on the Developers Agreement. A motion to approve the Developers Agreement for Meadows Subdivision with conditions that a local improvement project will be set up, stormwater notes taken care of, and that construction access would only be via Highway 95 or Peterson Memorial was made and approved unanimously. A motion was made to approve the Design Review for Meadows Subdivision Phase 1A and was approved unanimously.
A short break occurred and was followed by a motion to approve the Primary Operator Contract between City of New Meadows and Kirk Kundrick. This was approved unanimously. The City is applying for a wastewater and facility planning grant, so a resolution was put forward and approved unanimously.
Kundrick then discussed the USDA Supplemental Federal Conditions to add new controls to well #4. This will replace existing control with a new drive and is being included in the funds already approved for the water project. The USDA requires anything over $10,000 to have three bids, so the new paperwork shows the three received. A motion for this was approved unanimously.
Four Resolutions regarding address additions for Renewal Salon, a C&M building and two others on Nora and Peterson Memorial were put forward. The Council moved to add 113 Peterson Memorial, 117 Peterson Memorial, 302 Nora Street, and 301 Nora Street as addresses to these buildings and each were individually approved unanimously.
The Mayor requested the Council approve the formation of a temporary Streets and Roads Committee. Since Council member Carr has brought up this idea a few times, he agreed to sit on the committee. Doug Buys was also invited to join and Hunter Brown will also be invited. A vote was taken to approve the creation of the temporary committee and advertise for any community members with experience regarding gravel roads to join. This was approved unanimously.
The Building Services Agreement Fiscal Year 2024-2025 was approved unanimously.
An Industrial Park Lease Agreement with Seed Woodworking was approved unanimously with Council member Black abstaining from voting.
The Mayor stated that the GMCO Dust Abatement test results were better than expected. She noted that there have only been two complaints so far this year about dust and they usually receive significantly more. The Council agreed to have the Mayor ask GMCO for a 5% discount due to the extra work and time used because of the date mix up.
For Discussion Items, the Mayor gave an update on the Clearwater Financial agreement. The City Council had asked Clearwater to apply the Retainer to the remaining amount owed and they agreed. Clearwater should have everything ready to submit to the City by October 15.
The Consent Agenda items were all approved unanimously. Future meeting topics will be the report back from GMCO and names for the new youth center.
The meeting was then adjourned. The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, October 15 at City Hall. The day of the week is changed due to Columbus Day.
