01/14/02 Memo/Hafferman/Glacier Mall ProposalEPA= _
Subject: Glacier Center Mall Proposal
Date: January 14, 2002
At this time, I lean towards favor annexing the Glacier Center Mall properties for the following
reasons and comments:
1. To my knowledge the proponents have followed all the adopted rules and regulations
ui to this ioint, however, thii will u6m -, !!: Y, Ae annlicati* las �i
FAI rM%QTATQ1NWA 4 1 NMN�36M&&
2. It is my opinion that the growth of the City, that can be economically justified, will occur
to the north, to the west and, to a lesser degree, to the south. I am attaching an analysis -1
made which indicates what I mean by "economically".
3. While this annexation will create an "island" for the City to administer, this mall can
become the catalyst for "orderly" growth by this mall being the impetus for this council and
the administration to rapidly develop definitive rules and regulations and a growth policy that
proponents can follow before they ever begin to prepare a proposal.
If Wolford prefers that the annexation occur up front, I see no problem since annexation was made
possible by the recent law enacted by the State Legislature and providing of city services appears
possible. I would like to see us have our "ducks in order" first.
1111 Is I III,
HOWEVER, I am concerned about the Wolford agreement to extend a city sewer that "Would most
likely be done by extending a sewer main north on Whitefish Stage" because:
1. 1 cringe at the thought of the City owning and maintaining a 11/2 mi. force main that goes
under a railroad, over a river, up a hill then by a gravity line to the city sewer. Then the
sewage has to continue on a long trip through gravity mains and force mains before it reaches
the wastewater treatment plant. It appears to me that would involve non -beneficial high -lift
pumps together with a lot of force main that we need to set aside money to replace someday,
let alone the maintenance responsibilities and the cost to the rate payers for maintenance.
2. It seems logical to me to have the developers either put in their own treatment facilities or
let the mall connect to the Evergreen sewer with Wolford paying Evergreen for the
transmission of the sewage and the City collecting the hook-up fee and charging for the
treatment. That way, if we have a break in the transmission line we don't have to worry and
maintenance costs are relegated to treatment only.
3. The reason the existing treatment plant is located near Ashley Creek is because that
location was (a) downhill from the user and (2) adjacent to Ashley Creek for ease in discharge
of the effluent from the plant. The latter was a common practice in the bygone era. Obviously,
that downhill reason and our environmental disregards are no longer applicable.
4. Based or the Facility Plan 2000, it appears we are going to have to begin planning an
enlargement of our sewage treatment facilities. Imagine that we start getting along with the
Evergreen people and we start working together to solve our mutual sewerage problems.
With the Glacier Mail in the victure, COULD we consider building a second plant north of
Reserve Drive for treating all the wastewater for development north of Res-01"ve �o the
Whitefish River then everything north and south of Reserve all the way west to however far
the City may someday grow? Development in Evergreen could then be accomplished without
using individual septic tanks and community sewer facility. Then we would have the City,
Evergreen and Wolford all contributing to the financing and working together to solve a
mutual problem at a more affordable price for all. Wolford's contribution would be limited
to the lesser of building their own plant including all engineering and permitting costs or
connecting to the city sewer main on Whitefish Stage Road including payment of hook-up
fees. Since the construction of this second treatment facility would lag the mall development,
Wolford would still have to connect to Evergreen sewer noted in paragraph 2 foregoing and
Wolford's contribution would have to be adjusted downward to reflect this need.
5. If the suggestion foregoing was implemented, the life of our existing plant would be greatly
extended, probably sufficient to handle any future expansion of the City to the south.
ANNEXATION OF ROADS: I strongly recommend we NOT annex all right-of-ways along arterials
and highways because they have either city water or sewer mains therein. We simply need utility
easements, just like for power, tv or natural gas. It may be logical to buy an easement from the
adjoining land owner just so when repairs and maintenance are needed that we do not have to do that
work in the right-of-way. But please, let's not get into the maintenance and repair of Highway 2,
Reserve Drive, Whitefish Stage, Willow Glen and the like. That's a lot more taxes that city residents
would bear if only they had to pay the tab. We need the wide range of people who use those roads
to share in the cost of maintenance, repair and reconstruction.
I am wondering what the meaning of the second to last paragraph of Ken Kalvig's letter may be, and
could someone from the developer explain. It reads:
"Finally, neither the discussions that have taken place between Wolford Development's
representatives and you, your staff, or other city official or representatives, nor the contents
of this letter, shall be interpreted to mean that Wolford Development is in any way waiving
or abandoning any rights it has, or its ability to proceed, because of action taken by the
Flathead County Commissioner on the master plan and zoning application Wolford filed with
the Flathead County Planning and Zoning Officer last year. Therefore, if we proceed forward
by petitioning the city for annexation and initial zoning, it will be with the understanding that
such applications and their processing do not in any way affect rights obtained by Wolford
as a result of the county's action to this point in the process."