Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeventh Day Adventist AZ~eri~i~n ~ Pbnrirr .,,. ~~ „, r. M'llii..v.i.y :lt ~ IA09 Transmittal Date: STAFF SUMMARY OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCXL August 3, 2005 . ~r . ~_ ._ .: ~~ Project Name: Seventh Day Adventist Church Annexation Case No(s): AZ-OS-024 Applicant: Hawkins Companies P&Z Commission Hearing Date(s): July 7, 2005 ... •. ~.~~e,o Recommendation: Approve with conditions A. Summary of Public Hearing: 1. In favor: Jessica Aguilar (Applicant's Representative) 2. In opposition: None 3. Commenting: Bob Kell, Yvette Elliott, Rick Elliott, Eleanor Stafford 4. Staff presenting application: Craig Hood 5. Other staff commenting on application: None B. Key Issues of Discussion by Cornmissiou: 1. Existing and future vehicular access for the properties to the west, the LDS Church and the subject site. 2. Fencing along west property line. C. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: 1. The Commission clarified that the applicant does not have to give the cross access area to the property to the west, but can be compensated for the sale of any property (St'' bullet in Comment #3). 2. The Commission, at the request of the adjacent property owner, included a provision for the construction of a 6-foot tall fence along the west property line ($th bullet in Comment #3). 3. The Commission required all future structures on this site to comply with the L-O zone for setbacks (9th bullet in Comment #3). D. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: As recommended by the Commission at the July 7th hearing, the applicant recently met with City staff to work on language pertaining to the cross-access easement to the west. During the last meeting between Hawkins Companies and City staff, it was agreed that only 25 feet, not 50 feet as Comment #3 currently states, of the subject property should be subject to a cross access easement. The City should require that the applicant reserve an access easement for the properties to the west, but it does not seem necessary to have a1150 feet be on the subject property. Currently there is a 50-foot wide cross access easement for the benefit of the properties to the west from Black Cat Road. Twenty-five feet of the existing easement lies on the subject property and 25 feet lies on the LDS Church. property to the north. When and if the property(ies) to the west want to develop, it will be their responsibility to acquire land for and construct a street within the easement area (if required). The attached language to be included in the development agreement (Exhibit E) basically says that the area subject to the cross access easement may be purchased from the applicant for a street at a fair price when the property to the west is ready to develop. Staff recommends that the St'' bullet in Comment #3, be modified to read: "That the a licant a ees to rovide reasonable and fair means for the arcel to the west Parcel No. 51204449300 to ac uire and im rove as a street the 25-foot wide area containin the existin in ess and a ess easement. The means for the ac uisition of the 25-foot wide area are attached as Exhibit E, which_should be included in the_development agreement." Please see this and other recommended changes in the attached Exhibit C. Proposed changes are in bald and underlined in Exhibit C. E. Conceptual Site Plan 1. Date of Conceptual Site Plan: March 17, 2005 F. Recommended Development Agreement Requirements See attached Exhibit "C" CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSXONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a Request for Annexation and Zoning Approval of 5.0 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to L-O (Limited Office District), by Hawkins Companies Case No(s): AZ-OS-024 For the City Council Hearing Date of: August 9, 2005 A. Findings of Fact Hearing Facts a. A notice of a public hearing was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the City Council public hearing, the first publication appearing and written notice mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred feet (300') of the external boundaries of the property. The notice of public hearing before the City Council was posted upon the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing. All other noticing was done consistent with Idaho Code §67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the August 9, 2005, public hearing(s). The applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian were given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. b. Written and oral testimony was received on this matter, as reflected in the records of the City Clerk (for written testimony) and in the official meeting minutes (for oral testimony). c. The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and issued a written recommendation on the subject matter to the City Council. d. The City Council heard and took oral and written testimony and duly considered the evidence and the retard in this matter. 2. Frocess Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Cade §67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code §§ 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Praaf of Posting filed with the staff report. 3. Application and Property Facts a. In addition to the application and property facts noted in the staff report and the Planning & Zoning Recommendation for the subject application(s), it is hereby CITY QF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S), AZ-OS-024- PAGE 1 of 4 verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings are Joe and Elenor Stafford. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibit D for the findings required for this application. B. Conclusions of Law The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (LC. §57- 6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and Development Ordinances codified at Titles 11 and 12, Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 5, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code 11-17-9. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, tine Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Conceptual Site Plan dated March 17, 2005 as shown in Exhibit B, and the Annexation and Zoning Comments as shown in Exhibit C. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 12-3-5 and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Conceptual Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Conceptual Site Plan dated March 17, 2005 is hereby conceptually approved; and, 2. The Annexation and Zoning Comments are as shown in Exhibit C. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-024- PAGE 2 of 4 D. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67T6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (2$) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. E. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Approved Conceptual Site Plan Exhibit C: Annexation and Zoning Comments Exhibit D: Zoning Amendment Findings Exhibit E: Ingress/Egress Easement Area Agreement Sy action of the City Council at its regular nneeting held on the .2005. COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) Mayor Tammy de Weerd day of CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF I.AW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-024- PAGE 3 of 4 Attest: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk Copy served upon Applicant, The Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. By: City Clerk's Office Dated: CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-024- PAGE 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A Seventh Day Adventist Church Annexation AZ-OS-024 Legal Description It5RHO SURVEY GROUP 145tl Easr Wrtercownr 5r. Suite I50 Meridian, Idaho 816;2. PMnne f21'gtj 846-A57:1 Fart (2tld) 88i.53R9 Pro}ect Na. 05-021 February 7, 2005 _....,_.__.. DESCRIPTIQN FOR STAFFORD PRQPERTY A tract of land in the Southeast quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 4, T.3N., IR.iW., E3_Pil., Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows; BEGINNING at a paint on the section line which bears North 01]°17'10`' East, 653.28 feet from the s®ctian corner common to Sections 3, 4, 8 and 10, T:3N., R.1W., B.M., Ada County, Idaho; thence North DO°17°10" East along the s®ction line, 411.34 feet to a point; thence North 89°39'2Q" West, 529.54 feet to a steel pin; thence South 00°1 T10" West, 411.34 to a steel pin; thence South 89°39'20" East, 529.54 feet to the Pt71NT t7F BEGINNING, containing 5A0 acres, mare ar less. Prepared by: ,~, er ii. ~ ,5ri'Atd~ t+1 c. M'E(+rC~r.AN fP7EP11C wi faf1YC5 Gregory G. Carter, P.L.S. S:11SG PraieelrtHavA[Ina-Blade Cal {OSD43)Cgc~c+~mentnlf~E5G.doc i r y~ 1 d ~~ N OC77'1R' ~ it l.]4" ii.~ ~ '4 ! f] ~ i ~ ~-1 ~ v ~ ~~ lm ~,.m~a z ~ nn w ~ ~ I+ I p -~' 8 gg a o~~ ~~„b r A o °m~~~ i ~ ~ a i r n ` J _ r ^ "1 I# ~'~ j !{ ~ ~ .~ ! ~~ i B 9 u, BtACJCCAr AoFD 5 oo•Irio• yl sn_sY -- 4u i ~ a a ~.~ -- ..... ........... . w ~. R W APP v~~„_. :s. v~ Ia~,r G9 ~ "?t`tis~, .. ~WdAKB £PT,IC _ ~ ~ I 4 C ~ ~ ~ e e { _ ye X I o+sa ( N E ~ I [~ _. ~ tt._~..~ ~Sy ~ ~ ~$~~ R e ~g ~ ~ ~ ~ EXHIBIT S Seventh Day Adventist Church Annexation AZ-OS-024 Conceptual Site Plan EXHIBIT C Seventh Day Adventist Church Annexation AZ-05-024 Annexation and Zoning Comments Recommended deletions are st~~ and additions are in bold and underlined. ANEXATION & ZONING FACTS AND COMMENTS 1. The subject property is within the Urban Services Planning Area. The legal description submitted with the application (stamped 4-26-OS by Gregory G. Carter) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. The Public Works Department has confirmed that the submitted legal description meets the requirements of the City of Meridian. and the Idaho State Tax Commission. 2. Any future subdivision and/or development of this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time. 3. Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, property owner (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The a licant shall contact the Cit Attorne Bill Nar at 888-4433 to initiate this rocess. The DA shall incorporate the following: • That no alterations, expansions, reconstructions or other enlargements to the existing single-family structure will be. permitted except through.a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) and except where 1) the use of the structure changes to a use consistent with this Development Agreement and 2) the structure meets all applicable development standards such as setbacks, frontage, height, etc. • That no building or other structure shall be erected, moved, added to or structurally altered, nor shall any building, structure or land be established or changed in use without a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC). • That all future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. • That the following shall be the only allowed uses on this property: churches and associated activities. ""~'"~ °+"°°~. That the a licant a rees to rovide reasonable and fair means for the arcel to the west Parcel No. 51204449300 to ac uire and im rove as a street the 25-foot wide area containin the existin in ress and a ress easement. The means for the ac uisition of the 25-foot wide area are attached as Exhibit E which shall be included in the development agreement, • That prior to issuance of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) permit, the applicant agrees to provide a vehicular cross-access easement to eider the property to the south ., if_a driveway is constructed near the south property line. • That vehicular access to this site shall be restricted to those approved by ACHD and the City. • That the a licant shall construct a 6-foot tall solid fence aloe the west ro er line. Said fence shall not be constructed of cedar. • That future buildin setbacks from the access easement shall be in com fiance with the setback of the L-O zone for streets. EXHIBIT D Seventh Day Adventist Church Annexation AZ-OS-024 Zoning Amendment Findings ANNEXATION & ZONING ANALYSIS According to Ordinance 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both the P&Z Commission and Council are required "to review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed zoning amendment in terms of the following standards and shall find adequate evidence answering the following questions about the proposed zoning amendment." The following is the list of standards found in 11-15-11 and analysis: A. Will the new zoning be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and, if not, has there been an application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment; The 2p02 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the subject property as "Low Density Residential". However, the applicant has applied for office zoning on behalf of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. While the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map does not explicitly support an office zoning of this property, City Council Finds that there are Comprehensive Plan policies that support evaluating this site for a zone not specifically envisioned by the Map (see below). "The Meridian Comprehensive Plan is an official policy guide for decisions concerning the physical development of the community. It indicates, in a general way, how the community may develop in the next five to ten years." (Chapter I, Section S ofthe Comprehensive Plan) Furthermore, in Chapter VII, Section C, "Future Conditions" states the following: "Figure VII-2 [The Comprehensive Land Use Map] depicts desired future land use categories and their location within the Impact Area. The areas depicted on the map aze conceptual and, therefore, will require further analysis prior to the creation of a zoning map." The property directly north of the subject site is designated "Public/Quasi-Public" on the Future Land Use Map. Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Flan defines Public, Quasi-Public and Open Space as areas designated to preserve and protect existing private, municipal, state, and federal land for area residents and visitors. Theses areas include neighborhood, community, and urban parks. Government facilities, public and private schools, health care facilities, churches, utilities, park and recreational areas, and cemeteries are also considered public/quasi-public type uses. NOTE: The City does not have a zoning designation that closely corresponds to the public/quasi_public designation shown on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Therefore, several properties that are designated for public/quasi-public uses are zoned L-O, including the LDS Church to the north. City Council recognizes that the land use designations on the p'uture Land Use Map are conceptual. Because the Comprehensive Plan is a "guide" when determining land uses and can be applied generally to areas, City Council believes that this is an instance to expand the public/quasi-public designation slightly south of where it is depicted on the Future Land Use Map. City Council finds the following Goals, Objectives, and Action items contained in the 2002 Comprehensive Plan to be applicable to this application (analysis is in italics below policy): "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 2) On the submitted conceptual plan, the applicant is proposing two access points to Black Cat Road, an arterial roadway. ACHD has approved two access points for this property, but not as shown on the conceptual plan. See the ACHD staff report and Finding "J"for further analysis. • "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridors (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.)." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 4) Black Cat Raad is designated as an arterial street. By City Ordinance, a 25- footwide landscape buffer is required adjacent to Black Cat Road (MCC 12- 13-10-4). Landscaping will be required by the City with CZC/Subdivision approval. • "Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services" (Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action items 1 and 4) On June 17, 2005, a joint agency/department comments meeting was held with representatives of key service providers to this property. In that meeting no deficiencies of public services to serve this property were raised. The applicant has also listed some Comprehensive Plan policies that support the annexation and proposed use of the property (see applicant's letter dated May S, 2005). If the applicant enters into a development agreement to develop the property with a church and not professional offices, clinics or other commercial uses, City Council finds that L-O zoning of this property will be harmonious and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the future; Concurrent with the annexation and zoning application, the applicant has submitted a conceptual site plan. This site plans depicts a church and associated parking on this property. City Council does not anticipate that the applicant plans to rezone the subject property in the future if the subject annexatioi~/zoning is approved, as the anticipated church use is principally permitted in the requested L-O zone. C. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the fashion that would be allowed under the new zoning -for example, a residential area turning into a commercial area by means of conditional use permits; City Council finds that churches, as well as professional offices, laboratories, libraries and medical clinics are currently permitted uses within the requested L-O zone. Further, there are several uses in the requested L-O zone that can occur with conditional use permit approval. There is no detailed development plan proposed far this property at this time. City Council is concerned that this area may turn into a commercial retail site, and is limiting the uses that can operate an the site to church type uses. D. Has there been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that the area should be rezoned. For example, have the streets been widened, new railroad access been developed or planned or adjacent area being developed in a fashion similar to the proposed rezone area; City Council finds that the recent annexation and zoning of Milliron Subdivision, and the construction of the LDS Church directly north of this site, dictates that the subject property be similarly zoned and developed. The streets adjacent to this site have not been widened recently, and Black Cat Road and Cherry Lane are not in the current ACHD Five-Year Work Program or CIP for roadway improvements. E. Will the proposed uses be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area; The applicant will be required to construct, operate and maintain the fitture church building(s) in accordance with City Code. Although residential uses were envisioned for this area when the 2002 Comprehensive Plan was adopted, City Council finds that an L-O zone also complies with the Comprehensive Plan (see Finding "A" above). City Council finds that the design of the submitted conceptual layout for a church building could be harmonious with the adjacent properties ifcross-access is provided to the parcels to the west (single-family home) and north (LDS Church) and/or south (single-family hoxne), and appropriate landscape buffers are installed along the perimeter of the property. City Council further finds that the proposed office zone and church use will change the existing character of the area, but that the proposed zone and fixture use should be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the character of the overall area. City Council finds that any fixture uses, if designed, constructed and operated in accordance with adopted city ordinances, should be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the intended character of the vicinity. F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; The 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the property to the north as public/quasi-public; the property to the east is medium density residential; and, the properties to the south and west axe designated for low residential densities. City Council finds that the zoning of this property to L-O for a future church should not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or fiiture neighboring uses if the applicant enters into a development agreement with the City, and all development and landscaping ordinances are exercised. G. Will the area be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such services; Sanitary sewer is currently being constructed in Black Cat Road as part of the improvements for Milliron Subdivision to the west. Water mains are readily available in Black Cat Raad. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay any applicable park and highway impact fees as well as construct on-site storm water drainage facilities. On June 17, 2005, a joint agency/department comments meeting was held with representatives of key service providers to this property. Based on the joint agency/department meeting and other comments received from agencies/departments, City Council finds that the public services listed above can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. H. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cast for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Tf approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, local street (driveway) infrastructure, utilities and irrigation services to serve the project. Other required site improvements will be funded and constructed by the developer through the CZC/Subdivision approval process. The primary public costs to serve the future uses will be fire and police facilities and services. City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed zoning and subsequent development will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. I. Will the proposed uses not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; If the subject annexation and zoning application is approved, the applicant intends to construct a church building on this site. ACHD staff estimates that a church will generate approximately 400 additional vehicle trips per day. City Council finds that any future uses on this site will generate additional traffic on adjacent roadways above and beyond the existing residence. The level of impact developing this site will have an the public will depend upon the type of use(s) approved and the square footage of the building(s). City Council recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of this annexation application/development; however, due to churches historically having a low impact on the surrounding area, City Council does not believe that the amount traffic and noise generation will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. Further, City Council does not anticipate the proposed annexation and subsequent church use will create excessive smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. City Council finds that the proposed L-O zoning and church use should not be detrimental to people, property or the general welfare of the area. MCC 11-1 ~-4 provides the P&Z Commission and City Council the authority to require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Meridian that may require some written commitment for all future uses to more fully comply with this finding. Due to the close proximity of existing and future residential uses, City Council believes that a Development Agreement is necessary to ensure that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent with the public/quasi-public designation of the Future Land Use Map and does not negatively impact nearby properties. J. Will the area have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; On the submitted conceptual plan, the applicant has depicted two access points to Black Cat Road. The proposed driveways are located near the north and south property lines. The ACRD consider access points in their analysis of development applications. The ACHD has not approved the driveway locations as shown on the conceptual site plan. The ACHD has given the applicant two options for access: 1) construct one driveway at the south property line and provide cross- access to the properties to the south and west, and construct a second driveway in alignment with Milliron Drive, or 2) construct one driveway at the north property line and provide cross-access to the properties to the north (LDS Church) and west, and construct a second driveway in alignment with Milliron Drive. Because the property to the west does not have frontage on a public street, City Council believes that across-access easement between the subject property and the property to the west should be provided. Ifcross-access is provided to the west, then the property to the west can redevelop and access Black Cat Road. City Council believes that the proposed uses (and potential access) should not be hazardous to neighboring uses or traffic flows if they are constructed as required by ACHD. Further, City Council finds that the least amount of interference to traffic on the surrounding public streets will occur ifcross-access between the subject property and the adjacent properties are provided. See the ACRD staff report for more analysis. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance; and City Council is unaware of any natural of scenic features of major importance on this site and finds that no natural ar scenic features of major importance will be lost or damaged by approving the annexation and zoning application. All existing trees larger than 4" caliper that are removed from the site, that the City Arborist deems necessary for mitigation, shall be mitigated for. L. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of Meridian. (Ord. 592, 11-17-1992)" The legal description submitted with the application, prepared by Idaho Survey Group, shaves that the property is contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. The legal description meets the requirements of the City of Meridian and State Tax Commission and will place the parcel contiguous to existing city limits. The subject property is within the Urban Services Planning Area. The land directly north, and east of the subject property have previously been annexed into the City and this is a logical expansion of the City boundary. The applicant is proposing to develop the land in substantial compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. In accordance with the findings listed above, C~ Council finds that the annexation/zonin of this ro ert would be in the best interest of the City_NOTE: City Council has included Development Agreement stipulations far annexation and zoning of this property. EXHIBIT E Seventh Day Adventist Church Annexation AZ-OS-024 Ingress/Egress Easement Area Agreement GRH Ten Mile LLC, an Idaho limited liability company, and Halker Properties LLC, an Idaho limited liability company, (collectively, "Grantors") hereby agree that Grantors, and its successors and assigns shall sell fee title, for "fair market value" (as determined below), to the Northerly 25 feet of the Property [either defined term earlier in Development Agreement or insert description] (the "Easement Area") to the owners ("Benefited Owners") of the benefited property of the Easement Area, (such property depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A1" and made a part hereof, and more particularly described on Schedule I attached hereto and made a part hereof), if so requested by the Benefited Owners or their successors or assigns, for the installation and construction of a public road and only upon the approval by the City of Meridian of an annexation and re-subdivision of the benefited property, or a portion thereof, consistent with the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan in effect at the time of request or otherwise with specific notice to Grantor. The Easement Area is subject to an existing easement for ingress and egress, as evidenced by that certain Warranty Deed, recorded October 9, 1975, as Instrument No. 7530794, in the Official Records of Ada County, Idaho. In the event Grantors and the Benefited Owners fail to agree upon the fair market value for the fee title to the Easement Area, said valuation shall be determined in the following manner: Grantor and the Benefited Owners shall each appoint an appraiser to determine the fair market value of the fee title to the Easement Area and improvements. If those two appraisers' determination of fair market value are within five percent (5%) of each other, then the "fair market value" shall be the average thereof. If the two determinations far fair market value are greater than five percent (5%) apart, then the parties shall jointly select and hire a third appraiser and thereafter the "fair market value" shall be the average of the two closest valuations whether such valuation be the determination of Grantor's appraiser or the Benefited Owners' appraiser or the third appraiser. Each party shall pay for the cost of their own appraisal and shall pay for one- half of the cost of the third appraiser. If the Benefited Owner's cannot agree to or otherwise do not accept the final determined fair market value, Grantor shall be released from its obligation to sell the Easement Area as set forth in this paragraph. The City of Meridian is not a party of interest to this transaction and will not be involved in any part of the determination of fair market value.