HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 01-02
AGE N D A
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 2, 1990
ITEM:
OLD BUSINESS:
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING HELD DECEMBER 19, 1989: (APPROVED)
1 :
AUTHORIZE MAYOR & CITY CLERK TO SIGN BARGAIN & SALE DEED ON
PROPERTY FOR FUTURE FIRE STATION SITE: (APPROVED)
2 :
ORDINANCE VIOLATION: CHERRY LANE MOBILE HOME PARK: (DISCUSSION)
ITEM:
NEW BUSINESS:
SWEAR IN NEWLY ELECTED OFFICIALS:
1: AMENDED ORDINANCE #506: (APPROVED)
2: ORDINANCE #523: ANNEXING & ZONING OF SHULTZ PROPERTY: (APPROVED)
3: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR WILLIAM H. OLSON: (APPROVED)
4: PRE-TERMINATION HEARING WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES: (APPROVED)
5: APPROVE THE BILLS: (APPROVED)
DAY CARE ADDED TO AGENDA (DISCUSSION)
6: DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 2, 1990
The Regular Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order by Grant P.
Kingsford at 7:30 p.m.:
Members Present: Ron Tolsma, Bert Myers, Bob Giesler, Walt Morrow:
Others Present: Gene Gilbert, Ward SinseL K. Beurneler, Mary Louise Navarro, Wayne
Crookston, Gary Smith, Moe AlidjanL Bill Gordon, Dale Ownby, Tamara Perkins, Mona
Debaran Mack, Bill Berg, Neil & Roma Cartwright, Neil & Inez Hudson, Wayne Skiver,
Coleen Le May, Gene Gilbert, Max Yerrington:
The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Myers to approve of the Minutes of the
previous meeting held December 19, 1989 as written.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #1: AUTHORIZE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN BARGAIN & SALE DEED ON PROPERTY
FOR FUTURE FIRE STATION SITE:
The Motion was made by Myers and seconded by Morrow to approve the Mayor and City Clerk
to sign the Bargain & Sale Deed.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #2: ORDINANCE VIOLATION: CHERRY LANE MOBILE HOME PARK:
Morrow: Explained about the meeting held between Mr. Giesler, Mr. Cady and Me. Morrow.
The outcome of the meeting held is that the City will not be charging any building permit
fees, electrical hookup fees and we will do inspections at no cost. Mr. Cady will move
the Mobile Home for no cost to another lot in this subdivision, that move will occur
on January 20,: 1990, this should clear up everything concerning this mobile home.
Kingsford: Thanked Mr. Morrow & Mr. Giesler for their time spent working on this issue.
Ward Sinsel: Is there going to be any type of compensation other than just the moving.
Morrow: There was no fine assessed that I am aware of.
Sinsel: In your local newspaperit was stated that there was three fines.
Kingsford: But there was no fine.
Sinsel: In your Meridian City Ordinance you have an error also it was in the local
newspaper that there were three violations. It also states in your city ordinance
that he was supposed to be there when the trailer was moved in, secondly the easement
or assessment between the places.
Kingsford: The agreement that was made was he is going to move her for free and we are
going to waive our permit fees.
Morrow: She was never assessed any fees, nobody was.
Unknown person: Stated that the trailer was to be moved out of the trailer park not moved
within his trailer park because he doesn I t have a space big enough in there to put that
trailer legally.
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 2, 1990
PAGE #2
Kingsford: Let I s go back to cornrni ttee. Mr. Giesler will you get with Mr. Cady and
see if there is a spot big enough, let I s get this resolved.
Unknown Person: Why isn I t Mr. Cady here? He should be addressing or speaking for
himself.
Kingsford: This wasn 1 t an Agenda Item only to have a report back from the cornrni ttee.
We thought it was a resolved issue, the trailer was going to be moved.
Unknown R:cs:::n: That I s between Cady and the City CounciL it wasn It giving her any option
at all.
Kingsford: Presented Walt Morrow with a placque of appreciation for his 7 years of
service to the City of Meridian.
Tolsma: Presented Mr. Morrow with a flag.
SWEAR IN NEWLY ELECTED OFFICIALS:
Ci ty Clerk Niemann administered the Oath of Office the the newly elected officials.
Kingsford: We need to elect a Council President.
The Motion was made by M.yers and seconded by Giesler to elect Ron Tolsma as Council
President once again.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
Kingsford: Next we need to make appointments for the next two years.
Mr. Yerrington in charge of Sewer Department, Mr. Giesler the Police Department,
Mr. Myers the Fire Department and QRU and Mr. Tolsma the Water Department.
NEW BUSINESS:
ITEM #l: AMENDED ORDINANCE #506:
Kingsford: AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING AND zONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED
AS THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW!;;) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW!;;) EXCEPTING THE NORTH
TWENTY EIGHT (28) ACRES, THEREOF - OF, OF SECTION FIVE (5) TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1
EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, IN ADA COUNTY, STATE OF IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Is there anyone from the audience who wishes Amended Ordinance #506 read in it 1 S
entirety?
The MOtion was made by Giesler and seconded by Myers that the rules and provisions of
50-902 and all rules and provisions requiring that Ordinances be read on three different
days be dispensed with and that Ordinance Number 506 be passed and approved.
Roll Call Vote: Mr. Yerrington - Yea; Me. Giesler - Yea; Mr. Myers - Yea; Mr. Tolsma - Yea:
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #2: ORDINANCE #523: ANNEXING AND ZONING OF SHULTZ PROPERTY:
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 2, 1990
PAGE #3
Kingsford: AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED
AS THE N ~ N ~ SE!;; SW!;; SECTION 18 TOWNSHIP 3 N., RANGE 1 E., BM., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO
LYING SOUTH OF THE RIGHT OF WAY BOUNDARY OF INTERSTATE I -84 NORTH. ALSO ALL OF THAT
PORTION OF INTERSTATE I-84 LYING NORTH OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the audience that would like
Ordinance #523 read in its entirety? There was no response.
The Motion was made by Giesler and seconded by Tolsma that the rules and provisions of
50-902 and all rules and provisions requiring that Ordinances be read on three different
days be dispensed with and that Ordinance Number 523 be passed and approved.
Roll Call Vote: Yerrington - Yea; Giesler - Yea; Tolsma - Yea; Myers - Yea;
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #3: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR WILLIAM H. OLSON:
The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Myers to approve the Condi tional Use
Permit for William H. Olson:
Roll Call Vote: Yerrington - yea; Giesler - Yea; Myers - Yea; Tolsma - Yea:
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #4: PRE-TERMINATION HEARING WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES:
Kinsford: This is to inform you in writing, if you choose to, you have the right
to a pJ:e-determination hearing at 7:30 P.M. 1-2-90 before the Mayor and City Council,
to appear in person to be judged on facts and defend the claim made by the City that
your water, sewer, and trash bill is delinquent. This service will be discontinued
1-10-90 unless paid in full. Is there anyone present who would like to contest
their water, sewer, trash delinquency? No Response.
They are hereby informed that they may appeal or have the decision of the City reviewed
by the Fourth Judicial District Court, pursuant to Idaho Code. Even though they appeal
the water will be shut off.
The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Giesler to approve the turn off list.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
Kingsford: The amount past due is $7,761.40.
ITEM #5: APPROVE THE BILLS:
The Motion \vas made by Tolsma and seconded by Myers to approve the bills.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
Kingsford: There will be an additional Agenda Item, I had a group of people contact me
this afternoon about an issue that is pending before the City for sometime, both sides
of that complaint are present and vie will hear testimony from each one.
Mary Louise Navarro, 238 W. Washington, ouJ: problem is something that all of you are aware
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
J ANGARY 2, 1990
PAGE #4
of and has been going on for many years. We have a residen(:!e directly behind us
at 255 Cherry Avenue, Tamara Perkins Daycare which is operating without a DayCare
License. This Day Care has been operating approximately 7 years in which time we have
done everything as friends as trying to be neighbors as trying to be as cordial and
trying to work it out so that the trespassing of our property, the noise and the kids
coming over to our boundaries and trying to smoke, causing endanger of fire and if
they do come over and they get hurt on our property we are liable. We have pleaded,
we have now exhausted the advisory directors under you, the police, the City Clerk1s
office and your attorney have helped and cooperated with us wonderfully and we thank
you. Now as you their leaders we are asking that something be done. There is a license
that was supposed to be obtained by her, she has had appropriate amount of time
to apply for it and she didn It. We have asked her to please be quiet. As citizens
we are asking you to please make it so that as this law suit is pended you specifically
prohibit the operation of the Day Care. The value of our land of many residences are
going down, people do not want to buy because of the noise, the trespassing and the
potential legal problems. Also our quality of life has been hindered, our emotions
and right next to Tamara Perkins is someone that has a Day Care Center, that for a
year acquired the expenses to obtain one. The people that have complied with your
licensing procedures will come and ask for their money back if you can I t take action
on this. The last reason, our friend that is directly behind the Day Care Center
has just suffered a stroke and her husband has just got out of the hospital, they
need the quiet time. Today, the legal representative of Tammy Perkins her sister Mona
Mack intimidated Inez on the phone causing her to be quit upset, she had to take a
tranquilizer and this put her health in jeopardy.
Mona Mack, 1117 So. Owyhee, I am an attorney by profession and also Tamara1s sister.
With respect to some of the things that have been mentioned, there are some factual
differences that we have. To clarify for the record, in calling today, and I did
call Mrs. Hudson to tell her that no matter what the outcome of the operation of this
day care facility, whether Tamara no longer operates it or not that Tamara desires to
be a good neighbor and with respect to her own children to the extent that there is a
problem because Mr. & Mrs. Hudson1s back yard does adjoin Tamara1s she will be taking
measures be it the installation of a fence, right now there is only a chain link,
or a head shrub, some additional buffering to try to help the situation and with respect
to her own children beyond the consideration of the operation of this day care facility,
will be restricting the hours that they are out in the back yard. She will insist that
her own children be quiet as she has traditionally. I would like to assure the Council
that such was not my purpose what so ever. It is in an effort to disfuse a situation.
Tamara did call Mary Navarro once and was hung up on, but otherwise in terms of complaints
being made to the police directly, no attempt was made to contact Tamara. The children
that Tamara cares for, and she is a State Licenses Day Care Operator, are from ages SMo.
to 9 years of age. One of the complaints that was filed with the Police did relate to
smoking, the police did respond, and the children in the back yard were playing Sunday
School and that can be verified via the City's Police Report. The home is located near
a grade school, and I don' t know if that is causing some of the confusion. Some of the
children in the neighborhood are being confused with Tarnrnyl s day Care kids. To the
legal issue, Tammy is not required to obtain a City License as you all know, but she is
required under the current Ordinance to have a conditional use permit before operating
a day care facility in this area. In viewing the Ordinance I have counciled that I
believe that it is unconstitutional for a number of reasons. I did send a letter to
Wayne, the letter detailed the legal challenges to the ordinance and in that letter at
that time we suggested resolving this matter by testing the ordinance through a
declaratory ruling action, things have progressed to the point where the City is in a
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 2, 1990
PAGE #5
position that it needs to proceed with an injunction and that opportunity to peaceably
resolve the constitutionality of this ordinance. In seeking an injunction I would
urge the City to do so. Our one request is that the City not seek a temporary restraining
order, if you feel preliminary injunction is necessary seek it, I would like to consolidate
that with a final injunction, our one request is because I have to be out of town through
Friday is that the City wait until Monday before appearing before court. Tammy has
agreed that the children in her care for those few days will not be allowed outside of
the home and will not be allowed in the back yard at alL If the City does prevail
with respect to this ordinance, Tammy of course will immediately shut down the operation.
If you have any questions concerning the day care Tsmmy would certainly be glad to answer
them or legal questions I can answer.
Giesler: If she does not allow the kids outside is this in any violation of the State
Licensing.
Mack: No. She is only allowed to have twelve children on the premises when there is
one operator . Generally there aren I t that many children on the premises at one time.
Kingsford: I might comment that this issue has gone on for way to long a period of time,
partly as a result of that negotiation between attorneys because it has been the
desire of the Council that it get remedied a good deal faster.
Navarro: I would like to clarify a few items that were just mentioned by Mona as far as
identifing myself as professionally I am an accountant I have a MBA which is a Master I s
of Business of Administration and my husband is also an accountant and Vice President
of Albertson IS. I would like to say as Mayo!:" Kingsford has just said that this is a
history of almost 7 years, promises have been made before. Also on the issue brought
up of adjoining the Hudson I s are directly behind this Day Care Center and so is my
property and so is the Cartwright' s. Bill Berg is directly in front of us and to give
you an idea, we have a school yard behind BilL and as was brought up, we have a school
yard right there and they make alot less noise than this Day Care. There is noone
supervising those kids when they are in the back yard. We just the other day counted
fifteen and have counted more than twelve numerous times. I have no recollection
of hanging up on Ms. Perkins. I quess its unfortunate to have regular neighbors.
We go right back to our specific request that they not be allowed to operate during
this litigation. I thank you for your time.
Mack: She does only allow 3 to 5 out in the back yard at a time, she does have children
in the house as well, the kids are in constant view from the window.
ITEM #6: DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
Kingsford: Mr. Myers could you meet with the Ada County Commissioners with regard to
area of impact negotiations.
Myers: Thursday at 3:30 will be fine.
Kingsford: We have a Planning & Zoning seat that has expired, we need to make an appoint-
ment for that seat.
The Motion was made by Myers and seconded by Yerrington to reappoint Moe Alidjani
to the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 2, 1990
PAGE #6
The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Myers to go into Executive Session
with the Attorney to discuss pending litigation at 8:08 P.M.:
Motion Carried: All Yea:
Kingsford: The Council reconvened at 8:32 P.M., for the record the Council met to
discuss pending litigation, Counsel will keep us advised on that and we will proceed.
The Motion was made by Myers and seconded by Tolsma to adjourn at 8:35 P.M.:
Motion Carried: All Yea:
Meeting Adj ourned:
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
~I~~
ATTEST:
pc:
MaYd~ & Council
p & Z Members,
Ward, Stuart,
Bldg., Police,
Engineer, Gass,
Atty., ACHn,
Valley News, Statesman,
NMID, Settlers, CDH,
Hallett
Mail (3)
File (3)
OFFICIAL OATH OF OFFICE
i do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the
Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution and
Laws of the State of Idaho, that I will faithfully discharge
all the duties of the office of CgUNCILNAN of
r7ERZDIAN Idaho, according to the best of my
ability.
/~~ i/~(
Subscribed and sworn before me this 2 day of JANUARY ,
19 9~
Filed { / „~ 19gJ
ity Cle kk~
i
~.
OFFICIAL OATH OF OFFICE
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the
Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution and
Laws of the State of Idaho, that I will faithfully discharge
all the duties of the office of COUNCILMAN of
P9FRIDIAN , Idaho, according to the best of my
ability.
/ %
Subscribed and sworn before me this z day of JANUARY ,
19 9Q
OFFICIAL OATH OF OFFICE
i do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the
Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution and
Laws of the State of Idaho, that I will faithfully discharge
all the duties of the office of COUNCILMAN of
MERIDIAN , Idaho, according to the best of my
ability.
/, ~~
Subscribed and sworn before me this ? day of JANUARY ,
19 9~
Filed ~-- ~ 19`~~
,
I M PA CT F E E METHODOLOGY
The following formula sets forth the methodology for calculating
the net cost of expanding the capacity of ACHD's roadway system to
accommodate the additional traffic attributable to a new unit of
development (dwelling unit or 1,000 square feet of nonresidential
use):
Unit Cost = Peak Hour Trip Rate (One-Way) x New Trips Factor x
Average Trip Length x Percent ACHD Network x Average
Cost per Peak Hour Trip Mile
Credit = Average Daily Trip Rate (One-Way) x New Trips Factor
x Average Trip Length x Highway User Fee Credit +
Property/Sales Tax Credit
Net Unit Cost = Unit Cost - Credit
Peat Hour Trip Bate (One-Way)
One-half the trips generated during Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic (Weekday PM)
specified for the type of residential (per dwelling wit) or nonresidential (per 1,000 square
feet of gross floor area) land use in the most recent edition of the Institute of Traffic
Engineers Trip Generation manual.
Average Daily Trip Bata (Ono-Nay)
One-half the Average Daily TriDa (Weekday) specified for the type of residential (per
dwelling unit) or nonresidential (Der 1,000 square feet of gross floor area) land use in the
most recent edition of the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation manual.
Naw TriDa !actor
Percent of triDS that are "primary" tripe, as opposed to "passby" or "diverted link" trips.
Average Trip Length
Average distance traveled Der one-way trip for each of three geographic areas: Boise--5.99
miles; Buna, Meridian and Eagle--8.06 miles; remainder of Ada County--12.64 miles. the
average LriD length is reduced by one-fourth for convenience stores and by one-half for other
neighborhood retail uses such as small shopping centers and supermarkets.
Percent ACHD Network
Percentage of future daily travel-miles projected to occur on ACHD's roadway network: 67.9
percent.
Average Coat per Peak Hour Trip Mile
Calculated by dividing the average cost of one lane-mile of roadway (construction and right-
of-way acquisition) by the average number of vehicle trips that can be accommodated per lane
during the PH peak hour at the desired Level o£ Service (LOS C. The cost has been calculated
at f744.20.
Highway Uaer tee Credit
Credit is 57.00 per daily travel mile (see Appendix).
Property/Sales iax Credit
Credit is 5294.57 per single-famLly unit, 3213.35 per multi-Family unit, t86.49 per mobile
home, and 3325.98 per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential development (see Appendix).
James Duncan and Associates 28 Ada County Highway District
An impact fee methodology is designed to determine proportionate,
fair-share costs for future roadway improvements attributable to
new development. There are Pour major components of such a
methodology: trip generation rates (how many times you will
travel), trip lengths (how far you will travel), lane-mile capital
costs (how much it will cost to provide the roads that you will
travel on) and user fee and tax credits (how much you will
otherwise pay for the same facilities).
T r i p Rata s
"Trip generation" is the measure of the number of daily vehicular
trips likely to be generated from a specified land use activity.
Trip generation factors are not absolutes, but are statistical
projections from available data. While local data is preferable
to data from national sources, no such local data is currently
available for Ada County. Therefore, rates contained in the most
recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE}
technical manual, Trip Generation, were used in this study.
Trip generation rates contained in the ITE manual include both
production (going) and attraction (coming) trips, a fact that could
lead to double counting. For example, consider the case of a
single-family resident leaving home, going to a store and then
returning home. According to the methodology used by the ITE
manual, this two-way shopping trip is counted as four trip ends:
a production and attraction trip for the single-family home and a
production and attraction trip for the retail store. For this
reason, each rate is divided by two in order to avoid double
counting.
There are two basic trip rate approaches for measuring the impact
of a development on roadway capacity: average daily trips (ADT)
and peak hour trips (PHT). Average daily trip rates are usually
James Duncan and Associates 29 Ada County Highway District
used in planning and analyzing rural roads and major inter-city
highways. Such roads are designed for and actually carry fairly
continuous loads of traffic spread over the entire day. Although
some hours will, be busier than others, there is not a real peak
hour on most such roads. The flow of traffic is affected
primarily by the number or volume of vehicles on the road, although
roadway design and weather and visibility conditions are also
factors. Intersections and interchanges creating significant
traffic interruptions are generally few and far apart.
Peak hour trip-rates are often used on urban roadways which are
used heavily for commuting. For example, a road that requires
six lanes to accommodate traffic at 8 AM may need only four at 10
AM and two at 3 AM. Average daily traffic is insignificant for
planning purposes, but traffic during the rush hour or peak hour
can be overwhelming. Further, the capacity limitations are
largely determined by the intersections. Traffic may move along
relatively smoothly for hundreds of feet between intersections and
then back up at major intersections and interchanges.
As a general rule for both trip generation rates and roadway
capacity, afternoon peak hour trips account for about ten percent
of all daily trips and morning PHTs average about eight percent.
However, the distribution of trip rates will vary greatly for
individual land uses.
For example, retail commercial uses generate many ADTs and
relatively Pew PHTs, while the reverse is true for office and
industrial uses which are more employee-oriented, with everyone
arriving and leaving at the same time. For this reason, while the
choice of ADT or PHT rates should not affect the total amount of
revenue produced by an impact fee system, it will effect the
distribution of rates for individual land uses.
James Duncan and Associates 30 Ada County Highway District
ACHD's roadway network, with its mix of rural roads and urban
arterials, has traffic characteristics of each kind of road. Thus,
either system of capacity-demand analysis is workable for Ada
County. However, it is the Consultant's opinion that peak hour
trips are a better overall measure of roadway capacity in Ada
County, since it is the heavily traveled urban commuting corridors
that are most impacted by new development.
New T rip s
Most impact fee systems reduce trip generation rates for certain
uses by a factor that reflects the incidence of passby trips, (i.e.
trips that would be on the road anyway and for which the stop is
not the primary destination).
While this phenomenon is real, its magnitude is not well
researched. The hest available data is summarized in the ITE
manual on pages 10 to 16. For shopping centers, the passby rate
decreases as the size of the center increases, since larger
shopping centers are more likely than smaller ones to be a primary
destination. The Formula given in the ITE manual is:
Percentage of Passby Trips = 45.1 - .0225(A)
where A is 1,000 sq. ft. of gross leasable area.
This formula is based on a limited number of studies (38), and
explains only 21 percent of the variation in observed passby rates
by size of facility (rz = .21). Nevertheless, it reflects the best
available data at this time.
The formula for the percentage of new (or primary) trips is simply
100 percent minus the passby rate. The formula would indicate new
trip rates for shopping centers ranging from 55.2 percent for a
center of less than 30,000 square feet to 88.7 percent for large
shopping centers with 1.5 million square feet or more.
James Duncan and Associates 31 Ada County Highway District
Research for passby rates for other retail commercial uses is much
more sketchy. Studies cited in the ITE manual for five common
retail commercial uses are summarized below:
Land Use % Primary Trips
Convenience Market 55
Service Station 42
Fast Food Restaurant 39
Supermarket 20
Bank 15
These data should be interpreted cautiously. The figures are each
based on only one study, and the studies may not have used
consistent methodologies. It seems unlikely, for example, that
a convenience store would be more than twice as likely to be a
primary destination than a supermarket; one would expect the
reverse to be true. Nevertheless, the data does support a
reduction in standard ITE trip rates for these types of uses by
about 50 percent.
Trip Lang t2'1
The impact of new development on roadway capacity is dependent not
only on the number of trips that it will generate, but also on the
travel distance or length of the trips. The Ada Planning
Association has calculated average trip lengths for all trips with
origins or destinations in the following geographic areas: Boise
Central City (consisting of the Downtown, North End, Warm Springs
and Central Bench Planning Areas); the remainder of the Boise
Metropolitan Area; the western cities of Meridian, Kuna and Eagle;
and rural areas (the remainder of northern Ada County). These
calculations were based on traffic from existing development
distributed on the Year 1995 network contained in the 1982
Transportation Plan for Northern Ada County.
James Duncan and Associates 32 Ada County Highway District
The model runs indicate that the average trip length in northern
Ada County is 6.66 miles. However, countywide average trip lengths
are not as accurate for impact fee usage, since trips from outlying
rural development will be longer than trips from inner city
development and therefore should be charged accordingly. The
overall average trip lengths for the central city and the remainder
of the metropolitan area were identical, so 5.99 miles has been
used as the average trip length for the Boise Metropolitan Area.
Overall average trip lengths for the three western cities were also
very similar, ranging from 8.06 miles for Meridian to 8.87 miles
for Eagle. The lowest figure, 8.06 miles has been used as the
average trip length for the three western cities. Remaining rural
areas of the county are assumed to have an average trip length of
12.64 miles.
While the average trip length should be reasonably accurate for
most land uses, a lower figure is appropriate for certain
convenience retail and service uses. The Urban Land Institute, for
example, estimates that neighborhood shopping centers generally
have a service area radius of approximately two miles in urban
areas. Convenience stores are likely to have even shorter average
trip lengths.
This phenomenon has been recognized in some impact fee ordinances.
In Dade County, Florida's ordinance, for example, the county-wide
average trip length of 8.06 miles is used for most land uses, but
is reduced to 4.0 miles for small shopping centers and fast food
restaurants, and is further reduced to 1.25 miles for convenience
stores.
In the recommended methodology for Ada County, the average trip
length has been reduced by one-half for small shopping centers
(less than 30,000 square feet), supermarkets, banks and fast food
restaurants, and by one-fourth for convenience stores.
James Duncan and Associa~es 33 Ada County Highway District
While average trip lengths have been used for calculating credits
for highway user fees, they cannot be used for determining the
traffic impact on the ACRD roadway network since many trips will
use both ACHD roads and State/Federal roads. As noted earlier,
about two-thirds of all future travel-miles will be on the ACHD
roadway network. Consequently, the average trip length used to
calculate the cost of expanding ACHD's roadway capacity has been
reduced by about one-third (multiplied by 67.8 percent).
Trip-M i 1 a Cos t
A major component of the impact fee formula is the capital cost of
new roadway capacity. The unit of roadway capacity used is a mile
of vehicle travel during the afternoon peak hour. Capital costs
include engineering, construction and rights-of-way.
Two approaches were used to calculate average daily travel-mile
capacity costs. The first is based on typical construction costs
for different types of roadway improvements and average right-of-
way costs. The second is based on estimated total project costs
to implement a future planned roadway network.
Cost estimates used in the formula are based on a comparison of the
estimates generated by both approaches. It should be noted that
the capacity of a roadway is based on a number of factors,
including the desired level of service (LOS) and the type of
roadway (classification, number of lanes, etc.).
The level of service used for planning purposes by the Ada Planning
Association is LOS "C". At this level of service, the maximum
capacity per lane can range from 812 peak hour trips for a four-
lane principal arterial with between .5 to 2.5 signals per mile to
270 peak hour trips for a two-lane, one-way collector with five or
James Duncan and Associates 34 Ada County Highway District
more signals per mile.l
The system-wide average capacity per lane-mile obviously depends
heavily on the mix of roadway types. To determine the system-wide
average for the ACHD network, the Consultant analyzed data provided
by the Ada Planning Association. The data included all existing
roadway links in the computer model of ACHD's roadway network,
The modeled network contains all of the arterials and most of the
major collectors, but excluded local residential streets. The
data provided for each link included length (in miles), number of
lanes and estimated maximum capacity at LOS C. The modeled
network consists of 968.67 existing lane-miles with a capacity of
5,950,061 daily travel miles, or 595,006 peak hour travel miles.
Based on these figures, the average capacity per lane-mile was
calculated to be 614.3 peak hour trips.
The first costing approach was to take actual local construction
cost estimates for several types of roadway improvements, determine
the mix of required project types and then divide by average
vehicle lane-mile capacity. This approach took the average for
both new construction and widening projects and then averaged the
two major types, assuming that future projects will contain a
similar mix of the two types. Based on this approach, the average
construction cost of a lane-mile of roadway was estimated to be
$228,568 (Table 11).
1 Florida Department of Transportation, "Generalized Daily
Level of Service Maximum Volumes for Florida's Urbanized Areas,"
October 27, 1987.
James Duncan and Associates 35 Ada County Highway District
t
Table 11
AVERAGE LANE-MILE CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Number of Lanes
From To
Construction
Cost Per New
Lane-Mile
0 3
0 4
0 5
Avg. New Construction
$214,906
189,375
178,175
$194,152
2 3 398,460
2 4 255,700
2 5 214,906
3 4 261,549
3 5 189,752
4 5 247,536
Avg. Widening $262,984
Avg. New/Widening $228,568
Source: Ada County Highway District; James Duncan and Associates.
The next step was to estimate average right-of-way costs. In
October 1989, ACHD analyzed all of their projects over the past
two years that involved right-of-way purchases. They sampled from
10 to 50 percent of the purchases for each project. Purchases
accounted for 234,809 square feet at a total cost of $520,177, for
an average cost of $2.22 per square foot. Using ACHD's average
of 19.5 feet of right-of-way width per lane, the average cost of
right-of-way per lane-mile was then estimated to be $228,571.
When added to the average construction cost calculated above, the
total average capital cost per lane-mile was estimated at $457,139.
Dividing that amount by the vehicular lane-mile capacity at Level
of Service "C" (614.3 peak hour trips) yielded an estimated average
capital cost of $744.20 per daily trip-mile (Table 12).
James Duncan and Associates 36 Ada County Ki~hc.~ay District
Table 12
LANE-MILE/TRIP-MILE COST ESTIMATE
Avg. Construction Cost per Lane-Mile
Plus Avg. ROW Cost per Lane-Mile
Avg. Capital Cost per Lane-Mile
Divided by Peak Hour Traffic Capacity
Avg. Cost per Travel-Mile Capacity
$228,568
$228,571
$457,139
614.3
$744.20
The second costing approach estimated the total project costs
required to implement the County's planned future roadway network
and then divided that cost by the amount of new capacity added.
ACHD provided cost estimates Por most of the projects required to
implement the Year 1995 network contained in the 1982
Transportation Plan.
Cost estimates were provided for improvements to 364 roadway links.
The total estimated cost of these projects was $97,280,232. The
estimated new capacity that would be created by these projects
totalled 118,015.6 peak hour travel miles at LOS C, indicating an
average daily travel-mile cost of $824.30.
The two previously described approaches resulted in a relatively
narrow range of estimated trip-mile costs ($744.20 and $824.30).
Based on the average lane-mile capacity of 614.3 vehicles per day
during the afternoon peak hour, these represent capital cost
equivalents of $457,162 and $506,367 for a new lane-mile of
roadway. The lower figure was used in the impact fee formula.
James Duncan and Associates 37 Ada County Highway District
U 5 ER FE E AND TAX C RED 2 T 5
In order to be both equitable and legally defensible, road impact
fees must avoid "double taxation." In other words, impact fees
should be structured to credit feepayers for other taxes or fees
they have paid or will pay for the same services.
The ACHD is responsible for all roadway construction and
maintenance in Ada County, with the exception of Federal and state
highways. Since the proposed road impact fee methodology assigns
no costs for trips on Federal and state highways, only taxes or
fees that go to ACHD need to be considered in determining
appropriate credits.
Impact fee credits have been calculated for major revenue sources
that are derived from local fees and taxes and used for roadway
capital expenditures: state and Federal highway user fees
distributed to ACHD, property taxes paid to ACHD and state sales
tax revenues allocated to ACRD.
Credits are generally of two types. Credits for highway user
fees, which are paid in proportion to roadway usage, are based on
the amount of vehicle travel generated by new development.
Property and sales tax credits, on the other hand, are calculated
as fixed amounts for different land use types on a per dwelling
unit or per 1,000 square foot basis. In all cases, credit is given
only for that portion of ACRD revenues that are spent on capital
improvements.
Highway user fee credits are expressed in terms of an effective tax
rate per gallon of motor fuel, which is then converted into a per-
mile credit based on average fuel consumption. Property tax
credits are based on the average taxable value per dwelling unit
or per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential floor space.
James Duncan and .9ssociates 38 Ada County Highway District
Credits for future annual highway user fee, property and sales tax
payments must be expressed in terms of an equivalent, current lump
sum payment, in order to be deducted from the one-time gross impact
fee. The present value of a stream of future annual payments can
be calculated by assuming an appropriate time period and discount
rate.
The credit for highway user fees has been calculated to be $7.00
per average daily travel mile. Combined property and sales tax
credits for general land use types are summarized in Table 14. The
detailed calculations on which these credits are based may be found
in the Appendix.
Table 14
PROPERTY AND SALES TAX CREDITS
(Per Unit/1,000 square feet)
Property Sales Combined
Land Use Type Tax Credit Tax Credit Credit
Single Family $265.87
Multi-Family 194.65
Mobile Home 67.79
Nonresidential 325.98
$18.70 $284.57
18.70 213.35
18.70 86.49
- 325.98
James Duncan and Associates 39 Ada County Ki~hway District
N E T UN I T COS T S C H EDU L E S
Application of the fair share formula described in the previous
section results in a determination of net unit costs to provide
required roadway improvements for various types of land use. Net
unit cost calculations will vary geographically, due to varying
average trip lengths in different areas.
Net unit costs for selected land uses are shown on the following
three pages for the Boise Metropolitan Area (Table 14), the western
cities of Meridian, Kuna and Eagle (Table 15), and the remainder
of Ada County (Table 16).
The cost schedule for the Boise Metropolitan Area applies to all
projects within the contiguous boundaries of the Boise and Garden
City Areas of City Impact, as they are officially defined on the
effective date of the impact fee ordinance. Similarly, the cost
schedule for the western cities applies to all projects within the
Areas of City Impact of Meridian, Kuna and Eagle. Figure II on
the following page depicts the three assessment districts.
Net unit cost amounts Pound in the following schedules represent
the maximum impact fee that can be legally charged, consistent with
the impact fee methodology employed in this study. If desired,
however, ACRD could charge a lesser amount than the net unit cost
as long as the fees still meet proportionate, fair share standards.
James Duncan and Associates 40 Ada County Highway District
Figure II
PROPOSE D
A S S E S S ME N T
DISTRICTS
James Duncan and .4ssociates 41 .4da County Highway District
NORTH HALF ADA COUN"I'Y
Table 14
N E T UN 2 T COS T S C H E DU L E-- 8 0 2 5 4 ME TRO P O L 2 TAN AREA
ACHD TRIP- TOTAL NET
TRIP RATE9 NE77 TRIP LENGTH TRIP- MILE UNIT TAX CREDIT UNIT
PHT ADT TRIPS AVC. ACHD MILES COST COST GAS OTHER COST
Per Dwelling Unit
Single Family (>1500 sf) 0.503 5.031 1.00 5.99 4.06 2.0 3744.20 51,519 3211 4295 81,023
Single Family (<1500sf) 0.419 4.135 1.00 5.99 9.06 1.7 3744.20 51,250 5173 3285 3792
Retirement Community 0.200 1.650 1.00 5.99 4.06 0.8 37}4.20 4604 SG9 3295 5250
Duplex/MUlti-Family 0.337 3.052 1.00 5.99 4.06 1.4 3744.20 41,017 5128 4213 S6i6
Hobile Home 0.280 2.407 1.00 5.99 4.06 1.1 5744.20 3845 5101 486 3651
Nursinfl Home (bed) 0.104 1.299 1.00 5.99 4.06 0.4 2744.20 5314 454 496 3162
Hotel Room 0.332 4.352 1.00 5.99 4.06 1.3 4744.20 41,003 5192 498 5723
Motel Room 0.313 5.095 1.00 5.99 4.06 1.3 2744.20 3944 4214 599 5633
Per 1,000 Sq. Pt.
Nalk-in Bank 10.098
Bank w/drive-in 13.690
Specialty Retail 2.034
Discount Store 3.055
Auto Sales 2.290
Supermarket 4.411
Convenience Store 35.563
Fast Pood Restaurant 16.629
@uality Restaurant 3.625
Howie Theater 3.072
Church 0.321
Hospital 0.792
Light Industrial 0.519
RAD Center 0.497
Business Park 0.675
Truck Terminal 0.412
Harehousing 0.370
Mini Warehouse 0.129
Medical Office 1.913
General Office
(under 30,000 sf) 1.455
(30,000-74,999 sf) 1.105
(75,000-124,999 sf) 0.985
(125,000-174,999 sf) 0.920
(175,000-249,999 sf) 0.875
(250,000-349,999 sf) 0.915
(350,000-449,999 sf) 0.775
(450,000-549,999 sf) 0.750
(550,000-649,999 sf) 0.725
(650,000-749,999 sf) 0.705
(750,000 sf and over) 0.690
Shopping Center
(under 30,000 sf) 9.410
(30,000-79,999 sf) 9.345
(75,000-149,999 sf) 3.115
(150,000-2}8,888 sf) 2.295
(250,000-349,999 sf) 1.925
(350,000-499,999 sf) 1.765
(450,000-549,999 sf) 1.670
(550,000-699,999 sf) 1.610
(100,000-899,999 sf) 1.530
(900,000-1,099,999) 1.490
(1,100,000-1,299,999) 1.450
(1,300,000-1,}99,999) 1.425
(1,500,000 sf t) 1.410
James Duncan and
94.976
145.554
20.338
35.580
23.762
62.750
443.529
316.063
47.810
38.890
3.850
8.394
3.484
3.045
6.209
9.929
2.441
1.303
17.085
12.195
8.155
6.860
6.200
5.770
5.210
4.950
9.585
9.385
4.215
4.080
83.175
97.355
31.155
29.965
24.155
21.500
19.905
18.995
17.515
16.720
16.190
15.510
15.525
Assoc
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
D.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.55
0.56
0.57
0.59
0.62
0.64
0.66
0.69
0.73
O.ii
0.91
0.96
0.99
fates
3.00 2.03 10.3
3.00 2.03 13.9
5.99 4.06 4.1
5.99 9.06 6.2
5.99 4.06 4.6
3.00 2.03 4.5
1.50 1.02 18.1
3.00 2.03 16.9
5.99 4.06 7.9
5.99 9.06 12.5
5.99 9.06 1.3
5.99 9.06 3.2
5.99 9.06 2.1
5.99 4.06 2.0
5.99 4.06 2.7
5.99 4.06 1.7
5.99 9.06 1.5
5.99 4.06 0.5
5.99 4.06 7.9
5.99 4.06 5.9
5.99 4.06 4.5
5.99 4.06 4.0
5.99 4.06 3.7
5.99 4.06 3.6
5.99 4.06 3.3
5.99 4.06 3.1
5.99 4.06 3.0
5.99 4.06 2.9
5.99 4.06 2.9
5.99 4.06 2.9
3.00 2.03 10.6
5.99 9.06 9.9
5.99 4.06 7.3
5.99 9.06 5.4
5.99 9.06 4.8
5.99 4.06 4.6
5.99 4.06 4.5
5.99 4.06 4.5
5.99 4.06 4.5
5.99 4.06 4.7
5.99 4.06 4.9
5.99 4.06 5.0
5.99 4.06 5.1
42 Ac
3749.20 37,692
5799.20 510,323
3794.20 53,073
5744.20 49,616
3799.20 53,960
5794.20 53,338
3799.20 513,958
5749.20 212,595
5799.20 S5,4i8
5794.20 59,293
5799.20 5969
3744.20 52,392
2799.20 51,567
f794.20 41,502
3799.20 f2,040
5749.20 41,295
3794.20 51,118
3799.20 4390
3749.20 55,980
5749.20 49,398
5799.20 53,340
5749.20 32,977
5744.20 52,781
5744.20 52,695
4744.20 42,963
3744.20 52,342
2799.20 52,267
3794.20 52,191
E7}4.20 42,131
57}9.20 42,095
57:}4,20 57,963
4749.20 57,367
5799.20 E5,#04
4794.20 59,030
5744.20 53,590
5744,20 53,409
g7}9,20 43,341
5794.20 43,358
5749.20 43,371
4744.20 53,462
3149.20 53,563
4749.20 53,121
4744.20 53,780
a County Hig
5997
51,528
5426
5746
5498
4659
32,329
23,319
51,002
51,631
SI61
4350
5146
5129
3260
4207
5102
455
4716
5511
4342
4298
4260
4292
4219
4203
4192
4194
4171
4111
$964
41,119
4894
4739
3625
5576
5553
E 5-15
1535
4593
4552
5573
$577
hway
5326 S6,J19
4326 E8, 4fi9
3326 52,323
4326 43,549
5326 52,63fi
3326 52,353
8326 810,803
4326 48,9}I
5326 34,150
4326 57,327
4326 4491
5326 51,718
5326 31,095
5326 41,048
3326 $1,454
5326 5713
5326 5640
4326 E9
5326 54,437
5326 83,560
4326 52,672
3326 42,363
4326 42,195
3326 42,077
5326 51,919
5326 51,913
4326 51,749
Y326 41,681
5326 41,623
4326 $1,598
5326 $6,413
5326 45,927
4326 43,194
4326 42,971
$326 42,G39
E32fi 82,507
4326 $2,463
4326 52,436
4326 52,510
5326 52,599
5326 42,685
4326 52,922
$326 $2,977
District
Table 15
NET UN I T C O S T S CHEDUL E--MERIDIAN , KUNA AND EA G L E
ACRD TRIP- TOTAL HET
TRIP RATES NRN TRIP LENGTH TRIP- MILE UNIT TAX CRRDIT UNIT
PHS ADS TRIPS AVC. ACHD MILES COST COST GAS OTHRR COST
Per Dwelling Unit
Single Family (>1500sf) 0.503 5.031 1.00 8.06 5.96 2.7 5744.20 52,094 5254 5255 S1,}ii
Single Family (<1500sf) 0.41} 9.135 1.00 8.06 5.#6 2.3 5719.20 51,662 3233 5255 31,164
Retiremen[ Community 0.200 1.650 1.00 9.06 5.46 1.1 5794,20 5513 493 5295 4-135
Duplex/HUlti-Family 0.337 3.052 1.00 9.06 5.46 1.9 579}.20 51,368 5172 5213 5983
Mobile Name 0.290 2.407 1.00 6.06 5.46 1.5 5749.20 81,137 4136 896 591}
Nursing Home (bed) 0.104 1.299 1.00 B. Ofi 5.46 0.6 5744.20 5923 373 599 3252
Hotel Room 0.332 4.352 1.00 8.06 5.46 1.9 8749.20 51,350 5296 598 51,007
;lo tel Room 0.313 5.095 1.00 8.06 5.96 1.7 5794.20 51,271 5287 598 5966
Per 1,000 Sq. Pt.
Nalk-in Bank 10.098
Bank w/drive-in 13.640
Specialty Retail 2.039
Discount Store 3.055
Auto Sales 2.290
Supermarket 4.411
Convenience Store 35.563
Past Food Restaurant 16.629
quality Restaurant 3.625
Movie Theater 3.072
Church 0.321
Hospital 0.792
Light Industrial 0.519
RAD Center 0.497
Business Park 0.675
Truck Terminal 0.412
warehousing 0.370
Mini warehouse 0.129
Medical Office 1.913
General Office
(under 30,000 sf) 1.455
(30,000-79,999 sf) 1.105
(75,000-129,999 sf) 0.985
(125,000-17},999 sf) 0.920
(175,000-249,999 sf) 0.875
(250,000-349,999 sf) 0.815
(350,000-}49,999 sf) 0.775
(450,000-549,999 sf) 0.750
(550,000-649,999 sf) 0.725
(fi50,000-749,999 sf) 0.705
(750,000 sf and over) 0.690
Shopping Center
(under 30,000 sf) 9.410
(30,000-74,999 sf) 9.395
(75,000-199,999 sf) 3.115
(150,000-299,999 sf) 2.245
(250,000-349,999 sf) 1.925
(350,000-949,999 sF) 1.765
(950,000-549,999 sf) 1.610
(550,000-699,999 sf) 1.610
(700,000-899,999 sf) 1.530
(900,000-1,099,999) 1.130
(1,100,000-1,299,999) 1.150
(1,300,000-1,999,999) 1.425
(1,500,000 sf t) 1.}10
94.976
145.554
20.338
35.580
23.762
62.750
943.525
316.063
47.810
38.890
3.950
8.394
3.484
3.0}5
6.209
9.928
2.491
1.303
17.085
12.195
8.155
6.860
6.200
5.770
5.210
4.850
4.585
4.385
9.219
4.030
83.175
97.355
37.155
29.465
24.155
z1.s0a
19.905
13.945
17.515
16.720
16.190
15.910
15.525
D.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
l.oD
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.55
0.56
0.57
0.59
0.62
o.sa
0.66
0.69
0.73
0.77
0.81
0.86
0.99
4.03 2.73 13.8
9.03 2.73 18.6
8.06 5.46 5.6
8.06 5.46 8.3
8.06 5.46 6.3
4.03 2.73 6.0
2.02 1.37 29.3
4.03 2.73 22.7
8.06 5.46 9.9
9.06 5.}6 16.9
8.06 5.46 1.8
9.06 5.96 4.3
8.06 5.96 2.8
6.06 5.46 2.7
8.06 5.46 3.7
8.06 5.46 2.3
3.06 5.46 2.0
8.06 5.46 0.7
8.06 5.46 9.9
8.06 5.46 8.0
8.06 5.96 6.0
8.06 5.46 9.4
s.ofi s.4s s.o
3.06 5.96 4.8
8.06. 5.46 4.5
9.06 5.46 9.2
8.06 5.46 9.1
8.06 5.96 9.0
6.06 5.46 3.9
8.06 5.46 3.8
4.03 2.73 14.2
8.06 5.46 13.3
8.06 5.96 9.8
8.06 5.46 7.3
8.06 5.46 6.5
8.06 5.46 6.2
8.06 5.46 6.0
8.06 5.46 6.1
8.06 5.46 6.1
9.06 5.46 6.3
8.06 5.46 6.4
B.O6 5.-16 6.7
8.06 5.46 6.8
3744.20
5744.20
4744.20
5794.20
5744.20
5794.20
$744.20
t744.20
3794.20
S7}4.20
2744.20
5794.20
5744.20
f7}}.20
S7}},20
5744.20
3744.20
57}4.20
3744.20
S7}.1.20
5744.20
S7}4.20
E7}},20
5744.20
5744.20
5744.20
5799.20
3744.20
5744.20
$144.20
5744.20
5744.20
3i}-1.20
57}9.20
S7}}.20
5794.20
E 744.20
3744.20
5744.20
$799.20
5744.20
5744.20
4744.20
310,266
513,967
44,136
26,211
54,655
54,484
418,078
216,906
47,371
412,991
51,303
53,219
52,109
52,021
$2,715
S1,6i6
51,505
$525
47,313
55,917
$4,#94
$4,006
53,791
53,553
53,319
53,152
53,050
42,949
$2,867
$2,506
410,562
59,913
$7,212
45,423
54,330
S#,557
54,496
54,518
$4,536
E},659
44,794
35,007
55,086
31,340 5326 56,607
52,053 5326 511 ,494
4574 4326 53,23fi
51,004 3326 59,881
8670 4326 43,659
-5995 4326 43,27:
53,128 5326 514,624
34,}59 5326 512,122
51,349 5326 55,696
$2,194 $J26 59,973
4211 $326 SiG0
S}il $326 E2,}22
$197 $326 $1,566
5172 5326 51,523
5350 5326 42,069
4278 4326 51,072
4133 3326 51,041
874 5326 5123
$964 $326 SG,083
4688 5326 44,903
$460 5326 53,705
4337 $326 53,293
5390 $326 53,066
4326 4326 $2,901
$299 5326 52,695
5271 4326 32,152
5259 8326 52,965
$297 4320 42,375
4235 5326 E2,JU3
4230 4326 52,250
51,299 4326 55,941
31,499 5326 56,039
41,203 4326 45,742
5967 5320 59,110
5841 5326 43,663
5775 5326 53,496
8143 $326 43,}27
5734 5326 43,-158
$120 5326 83,}90
8730 5326 53,602
3743 3326 53,726
5771 5326 33,910
5777 3326 43,963
James Duncan and Associates 43 Ada County Highway District
Table 16
NE T UN I T C O S T S CH E D UL E-- R EMA S ND E R O F ADA COUNTY
ACRD TRIP- TOTAL NET
TRIP BATES NEN TRIP LENGTH TRIP- MILE UNIT TAX CREDIT UNIT
PNT ADT TRIPS AVG. ACHD MILES COST COST CAS OTHER COST
Per Dwelling Unit
Single Family (>1500sf) 0.503 5.031 1.00 12.64 8.57 4.3 EN4.20 43,205 5445 2295 42,4 i5
Single Family (<1500sf) 0.414 9.135 1.00 12.64 8.57 3.5 5744.20 52,637 $366 5255 51,997
Retirement Community 0.200 1.650 1.00 12.64 8.57 1.1 3744.20 S1,2i6 5146 5295 3945
Duplex/MUlti-Family 0.337 3.052 1.00 12.64 8.57 2.9 5744.20 52,146 $270 5213 51,663
Mobile Nome 0.280 2.407 1.00 12.64 8.57 2.4 3744.20 51,783 4213 296 $1,483
Nursing Home (bed) 0.104 1.299 1.00 12.64 8.57 0.9 5744.20 5663 5115 599 5451
Hotel Room 0.332 4.352 1.00 12.64 8.57 2.9 Y744.20 52,117 E3S5 498 41,635
Hotel Room 0.313 5.095 1.00 12.69 8.57 2.7 2744.20 51,993 5451 598 $1,444
Per 1,000 Sq. Pt.
Nalk-in Hank 10.098
Bank w/drive-in 13.640
Specialty Retail 2.034
Discount Store 3.055
Auto Sales 2.290
Supermarket 9.411
Convenience Store 35.563
Past Pood Restaurant 16.629
Quality Restaurant 3.625
Hovie Theater 3.072
Church 0.321
Hospital 0.792
Light Industrial 0.519
R&D Center 0.497
Business Park 0.675
Truck Terminal 0.412
Harehousing 0.310
Mini warehouse 0.129
Medical Office 1.813
General Office
(under 30,000 sf) 1.455
(30,000-74,999 sf) 1.105
(75,000-124,999 sf) 0.985
(125,000-174,999 sf) 0.920
(175,000-249,999 sf) 0.875
(250,000-349,999 sf) 0.815
(350,000-449,999 s£) 0.775
<450,000-549,999 sf) 0.750
(550,000-649,999 sf) 0.725
(650,000-749,999 sf) 0.705
(750,000 sf and over) 0.690
Shopping Center
(under 30,000 sf) 9.410
(30,000-79,999 sf) 4.345
(75,000-149,999 sf) 3.115
(150,000-249,999 sf) 2.245
(250,000-349,999 sf) 1.925
(350,000-449,999 sf) 1.765
(450,000-549,999 sf) 1.670
(550,000-699,499 sf) 1.610
(700,000-899,999 sf) 1.530
(900,000-1,099,999) 1.490
(1,100,000-1,299,999) 1.450
(1,300,000-1,999,999) 1.425
(1,200,000 sf +) 1.410
94.976
145.554
20.338
35.580
23.762
62.750
443.528
316.063
47.810
38.890
3.850
8.344
3.494
3.045
6.209
4.928
2.941
1.303
17.085
12.195
8.155
6.960
6.200
5.770
5.210
4.850
9.565
9.385
4.215
4.080
83.175
97.355
37.155
29.465
24.155
21.500
19.905
18.945
17.515
16.720
16.190
15.910
15.SZ5
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
l.oD
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1,00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1,00
0.55
0.56
0.57
0.59
0.62
0.64
0.66
0.69
0.73
0.77
0.91
O.S6
0.59
6.32 4.28 21.6
6.32 4.29 29.2
12.64 8.57 8.7
12.64 8.57 13.1
12.64 8.57 9.8
6.32 9.28 9.4
3.16 2.14 38.1
6.32 9.28 35.6
12.64 8.57 15.5
12.64 8.57 26.3
12.64 8.57 2.7
12.64 6.5T 6.8
12.64 8.57 4.4
12.64 8.57 9.3
12.64 8.57 5.8
12.64 8.57 3.5
12.64 8.57 3.2
12.69 8.57 1.1
12.64 8.57 15.5
12.64 8.57 12.5
12.64 8.57 9.5
12.69 8.57 8.4
12.64 8.57 7.9
12.64 8.57 7.5
12.69 8.57 7.0
12.64 8.57 6.6
12.64 8.57 6.4
12.64 8.57 6.2
12.64 8.57 6.0
12.64 8.57 5.9
6.32 9.29 22.3
12.69 8.57 20.9
12.G4 8.57 15.3
12.69 6.57 11.9
12.64 8.57 10.2
12.69 8.57 9.7
12.64 8.57 9.5
12.64 8.57 9.5
12.64 8.57 9.6
12.64 8.57 9.8
12.64 6.57 10.1
12.64 9.57 10.6
12.64 6.51 10.7
82,101 5326 513,673
53,220 5326 515,202
5900 5326 55,260
51,574 EJ26 57,990
51,051 $326 55,924
51,398 5326 55,316
54,905 3326 423,120
56,991 5326 519,196
42,115 5326 $9,119
53,441 5326 515,922
5341 3326 51,377
3738 4326 53,984
5308 5326 52,673
5269 5326 52,574
5549 3326 53,430
5436 5326 51,866
5216 5326 51,818
5115 5326 5391
51,512 4326 49,725
51,079 5326 57,875
5722 5326 56,000
3601 4326 55,349
5549 5326 54,993
$511 4326 Yi,i44
5461 $32G 54,111
$429 5326 54,189
5406 5326 54,052
8389 5326 43,910
5373 4326 53,797
$361 $326 53,714
32,031 5326 414,207
52,351 5326 512,869
51,887 5326 59,190
51,549 5326 46,630
41,319 3326 $5,930
51,216 5326 45,651
51,166 4326 $5,559
51,151 5326. 45,609
$1,130 E32G 55,658
$1,145 5326 55,935
31,165 5326 86,029
51,209 3326 56,319
41,215 $326 46,432
5744.20
5744.20
5794.20
5744.20
5744.20
5744.20
2144.20
5744.20
5744.20
5744.20
5744.20
5749.20
5744.20
5744.20
5744.20
5749.20
5744.20
5744.20
5744.20
3744.20
5744.20
5744.20
4744.20
5744.20
5744.20
5749.20
5744.20
4744.20
5744.20
3744.20
5144.20
5744.20
37-44.20
5744.20
5744.20
5744.zD
5744.20
2144.20
47}4,20
5744.20
5744.20
5744.20
5744.20
516,100
521,747
56,496
59,740
81,301
57,032
323,351
526,513
511,560
519,599
32,044
55,049
53,307
53,170
34,305
52,628
32,360
5923
311,563
59,290
57,047
56,282
$5,969
55,581
55,198
59,943
54.793
54,624
54,496
54,401
416,564
515,546
511,403
48,505
57,5 i5
57,193
87,051
57,095
$1,11}
57,306
$7,518
57,552
Si,976
James Duncan and Associates 44 Ada County Highway District
DELINQUENT LIST
~N OFF January 10,1990 •
Account
------------------ Name & Address
------------------------------------------------ Past Due Amount
---------------------------
6 John R.Beaudoin 46.10
713 Meridian St.
344 Ray Gilbert Properties 97.35
607 W. Broadway
382 Stan Lantz 60.20
608 W. 3rd
496 Matthew Mitchell 51.45
805 W. 4th
500 Century 21 Realty 153.40
420-422-424-426 W. Idaho
881 Fleet Funding 209.50
511-515-521 W. Idaho
910 Richard Hines 87.80
123 W. Idaho
916 Keith Mooney 66.55
736 W. 1st st
920 Phyllis Barroetabena 33.82
37 W. Idaho
3252 Billy M. Strother 42.20
847 W. Pine
3286 Lonnie J. Keating 58.80
711 W. Pine
3424 Don Mittleider 45.10
1645 W. 1st St
3548 Donald Dickson 52.40
233 W. Maple
3550 Kerry L. Larson 90.60
225 W. Maple
3562 Virginia Meyer 36.85
230 Camellia
3564 Don Todd 57.85
236 Camellia
3570 Arthur L. McFadden 65.00
316 W. Camellia
3584 Wilma Blair 71.25
1239 W. 2nd
3586 Louie J. Neagle 74.10
216 Cherry Ave
n
~J
Raul Perez, Jr
1224 Northgate
Richard F. Mader
1422 W. 14th St
Robert Tidwell
1433 Elm Place
Charles Harris
1434 Elm P1.
Mona Nimmo
1327 W. Carlton
Victor Norbury
1443. W. Washington
Charles A. Nuskins
1114 W. 12th. Ave
Fredrick J. Shaddick
1002 W. Washington Dr
Phyllis Treasure
3950 Sugar Creek Dr
Rick Ryerse
3661 Woodmont Dr
Mickey Ware
3721 Sea Island Ct
David Whitten
2151 Todd Way
Douglas Henderson
2085 Kristen Way
Ronald Shoemaker
2181 Maxie P1
Rick Quanstrom
2267 Leann Way
Kenneth Grapatin
1890 Marianne P1
Rick K. Coffman
1960 Marianne P1
Daniel Wilmot
1879 Todd Way
Clinton Barhart
2580 Misty DR
•
page 2
67.40
70.10
58.85
101.40
55.45
54.00
40.45
68.50
74.60
28.75
117.00
66.80
25.50
4].40
88.95
59.65
96.00
110.45
'.47.70
page 3
,J
Darrell Calhoun
2586 Misty Dr
Val Westergard
2551 Misty Dr
Steven M. Cantrell
1750 W. Chateau Dr
Jeff R. Burroughs
1861 Tracy Ct
Ronald W. Bentzinger
2135 Monaco Way
Cherly L. Anderson
1891 Hendricks Ct
Alpha Denny
1841 W. Chateau Dr
Donald Fisher
1750 Beardon Ct
Merton Logue
1341 Darrah Dr
Lorrie M. Edholm
1305 Darrah Dr
Brenda L. Thomas
2664 13th St
Michael R. Young
2724 N.W. 13th St
Shayne Ups haw
1310 Darrah Dr
Leeon Martineau
1332 Darrah Dr
Rodney Porter
1322 Claire St
Russell S. Heaughins
1528 W. Cherry Lane
R & M Hames
k383 Storey St
Judy Silker
1552 Storey St
Wallace Theis
1521 Kingswood Ave
C~
146.35
50.50
67.75
96.95
73.50
55.55
65.50
46.35
44.45
42.35
52.20
56.10
88.20
68.85
47.10
61.65
74.55
77.58
69.80
page 3
• •
Gerald Coatney 49.85
2006 N.W. 12th St
Philip Marr 55.60
1509 Tana Dr
Robert Saunders 83.55
1227 Fairwood Dr
George Webster 75.35
2219 N.W. 12th St
Martin Henning 75.00
1306 W. Chateau Ave
Vickee K. Larson-Poole 65.20
1328. W. Chateau Ave
Joyce Scrivner 44.30
1414 W. Chateau Ave
Dennis Nick 59.90
1512 W. Chateau Ave
Robin Yelton 94.10
1089 W. Chateau Ave
Alfred Joodro, Jr 46.35
1065 W. Chateau Dr
David McGowan 81.45
2211 N.W. 11th 5t
Twayne Walker Const 40.10
1177 Delmar Dr
Charles A Bates 68.05
2182 N.4J. 11th Ave
Terry Sellman 81.60
810 Delmar DR
Douglas Goliohtly 69.95
1141 Fairwood Ct
Mary Ulin 64.20
1.111 Fairwood Ct
Donald Fickes 133.05
1016 Storey Ave
Leonard McFadden 71.55
104 W. Cherry Ln
Ralph Culbertson 54.95
1930 Crestmont Dr
•
William Uick
521 Longford Dr
LeRoy Smith
694 Longford Dr
Roger Becker
671 Tiffany Dr
Bill L. Lindauer
551 Tiffany Dr
Steven Haven
1843 Lawndale
Tel-Car Inc.
220 E. Fairview
American Textiles
200 E. Fairview
Stephen Buffatt
2092 N.E. 10th Ave
Michael D. Masters
435 E. Washington
Apollo Cleaners
1535 E. 1st St
Steve Hunt
16 E. Washington Ave
H.L.Roberts
1431 Meridian St
David. A. Raymond
318. E. Broadway
Mittleider Harness Shop
126 E. Broadway
Cynthia Clyne
325 E. Idaho
W.D.Thomson
930 E. 4th St
W.D.Thomson
924 E. 4th St
Blue Banner Corp.
331 E. 1st St
Kimberly Wolfe
424 E. 3rd St
•
page 4
64.35
86.20
93.80
47.95
85.40
141.25
68.70
80.05
47.30
134.40
72.80
38.70
45.55
37.10
55.75
38.70
49.85
613.00
58.95
• • page 5
60360 Robert Van Houten 37.10
416 E. 1st
60424 Mark Aguirre 37.90
121 E. King Ave
60452 Cindi Atwood 35.25
223 E. 3rd
60544 Lee Stucker 54.25
52 E. Franklin
61784 Terry Glassinger 37.10
126 E. Williams Ave
92120 Ira Gunn 51.95
211 S.W. 7th
92130 Allen H. Giacomini 32.40
313 S.W. 7th Ave
92800 Ted Isaacson 46.35
734 Pennwood
92838 George Savell 52.90
733 Fulmer Ct
92846 Steve McGowan 34.65
653 Fulmer Ct
92877 Todd Hammons 37.10
671 Barrett
93750 Alpine Wood Products 90.40
217 W. Franklin
95067 Ellen Vanslyke 48.75
934 Crestwood Dr
95108 Roland Erickson 38.85
1476 W. Crestwood Dr
109 Accounts Total Past Due: $7,761.40
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
& CROOKSTON
Attorneys and
C<lunsalors
P.O. Box 427
Morl~~dahO
rolephontJ 888.>\481
900:185:1
BARGAIN AND SALE DEED
THIS INDENTURE, Made the .:JiJ:l_ day ~L/.2":'~'i~__--'
1990, between the CITY OF MrRTDIAN, IDAHO, a Municipal
corporation, the parties of the first part, and the CITY OF
MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT, a subdivision of the City of Meridian,
the parties of the second part,
WIT N ESE T H:-
That the said parties of the first part, for and in
consideration of the sum of TEN ($10.00) DOLLARS, and other good
and valuable consideration, lawful money of the United States of
America, to them in hand paid by the said parties of the second
part, the receipt for which is hereby acknowledged, have
granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents do
grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the said parties of the
second part, and to their heirs and assigns forever, all that
certain piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being in the
County of Ada, and State of Idaho, particularly described as
follows, to-wit:
(SEE EXHIBIT uAn ATTACHED HERETO)
together with all and singular the tenements, hereditaments and
appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining,
and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders,
rents, issues and profits thereof; and also all the estate,
right, title, interest, property, possession, claim and demand
whatsoever, as well in law as in equity, of the said parties of
the first part, of, in or to the said premises, and every part
and par eel the reo f, w i t.h the a p pur ten an c e s .
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, all and singular the said premises,
together with the appurtenances, unto the said parties of the
second party, and to their heirs and assigns forever.
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
& CROOKSTON
At1orne~s and
Counselors
P.O. Box 427
Meridian, Idaho
83642
Telephone a&l4461
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have
hereunto set their hands and seals, the day and year first above
written.
CITY OF MERIDIAN, Idaho
a Municipal corporation
STATE OF IDAHO
s s .
County of Ada
On th i s J ___ day of d~fI!0:!~__, 1 g.~ before me, the
undersigned, a Notary Publ ic in andUor said State, personally
appeared GRANT P. KINGSFORD and JACK NIEMANN, known or
identified to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively,
of the City of Meridian, whose names are subscribed to the
foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that they executed
the same in their respective capacities of Mayor and City Clerk
for and on behalf of the City of Meridian.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed
my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first
above written.
(S EAU
_jp~'!c_!lf~__- - --
N'o tar y Pub 1 i c for I d a h 0
Residence Meridian, Idaho
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
& CROOKSTON
AUorneys end
Counselors
P.O. Box 427
Meridian, Idaho
83$42
Telephone 6884461
EXHIBIT IIAII
A parcel of property situtated in the NE 1/4 of SE 1/4 of
Section 34, T. 4 N., R. 1 W., 8.M., Ada County, Idaho and more
particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Section corner common to Section 35 and
the said Section 34;
thence North 0053'1411 East 1,200. 60 feet to a point on
Ten Mile Road marked by a P-K nail and washer;
thence along the following courses and distances to iron
pins;
North 6400813611 West 264.07 feet;
Nor t h 8 go 08' 36 tI We s t 362. 60 fee t;
thence North 67056106" West 387.43 feet to an iron pin,
said pin being the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING;
thence along the following courses and distances to iron
pins;
North 66036'06" tvest 90.00 feet
South 23023154" West 80.00 feet
South 66036106u East 90.00 feet
North 23023'5411 East 80.00 feet to the pOint of beginning,
comprising 0.165 acre, more or less.
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
& CROOKSTON
A~~~~:~~O~~d
P.O. Box 427
MerIdIan, Idaho
83642
Telephono 8!l84461
9001850
ORDINANCE NO. ~
SCHULTZ & OLSON ANNEXATION
A NOR DIN A N C E ANN E X I N G AND Z 0 N I N G C E R T A I N REA L PRO PER T Y ~J H I CHI S
DESCRIBED AS THE N 1/2 N 1/2 SE 1/4 SE 1/4 SECTION 18 TO~JNSHIP 3
N., RANGE 1 E., BM., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO LYING SOUTH OF THE RIGHT-
-OF-vJAY BOUNDARY OF INTERSTATE 1-84 NORTH. ALSO ALL OF THAT
PORTION OF INTERSTATE 1-84 LYING NORTH OF HiE ABOVE DESCRIBED
PROPERTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Mayor of the City of
Meridian have concluded that it is in the best interest of said
City to annex to the said City real property which is
hereinbelow described:
SCHULTZ & OLSON ANNEXATION:
THE N 1/2 N 1/2 SE 1/4 SE 1/4 SECTION 18
TO~~NSHIP 3 N., RANGE 1 E., BM., ADA COUNTY,
IDAHO LYING SOUTH OF THE RIGHT--OF-WAY
BOUNDARY OF INTERSTATE 1-84 NORTH. ALSO ALL
OF THAT PORTION OF INTERSTATE 1-84 LYING
NORTH OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY.
NOvJ, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO:
Section 1: That the above described and referenced real
property is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and shall be
zoned as follo1t/s: General Retail and Service Commercial (C.G.).
Section 2: That the property shall be subject to de-
annexation if the owner or his assigns, heirs, or successors
shall not meet the requirements contained in the Findings of
Fact and Conclusions of Law adopted by the City Council of the
City of Meridian, which are incorporated herein as if set forth
ORDINANCE
P ag e - 1
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
& CROOKSTON
A~~~~:~~;~d
P.O. Box 427
Merl=~dehO
Telephone 688-4461
in full. The property shall also be subject to the restrictions
of the Idaho Department of Transportation
Section 3: That the City Clerk shall cause one (1) copy of
the legal description and map which shall plainly and clearly
designate the boundaries of said property, to be filed with the
Ada County Recorder, Ada County Assessor, and the State Tax
Commission within ten (10) days following the effective date of
this Ordinance.
Section 4: This Ordinance shall be in full force and
effect from and after its passage, approval and publication as
required by law.
PASSED by the City Counc; 1 and Approved by the Mayor of the
C i t Y 0 f Mer i d i an, A d a Co u n t y, I d a h 0, t h ; s~A day .~ UC0-1 '
1990.
APPROVED:
r-~ {?lf7t~
~;=}&.?~~~
;
\
ORDINANCE
Page - 2
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
& CROOKSTON
A~~~~:~~;~d
P.O. Box 427
Merl~:;4~daho
Telephone 6884461
STATE OF IDAHO~)
s s.
County of Ada, )
I, JACK NIEMANN~ City Clerk of the City of Meridian~ Ada
County, Idaho, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is
a true~ full and correct copy of an Ordinance entitled IIAN
ORDINANCE ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS
DESCRIBED AS THE N 1/2 N 1/2 SE 1/4 SE 1/4 SECTION 18 TOvJNSHIP 3
N., RANGE 1 E., BM., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO~ LYING SOUTH OF THE
RIGHT--OF-vJAY BOUNDARY OF INTERSTATE 1-84 NORTH. ALSO All OF
THAT PORTION OF INTERSTATE 1-84 lYING NORTH OF THE ABOVE
DESCRIBED PROPERTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATEu; passed as
Ordinance No. :;(25 by the Ci~GiJuncil and Mayor of the City
of Mer i d i an, 0 nth e ~ day 0 K.\ O.v II Gr' Y , 1990.
DATED this.3...t:.L day o~Jt1<1fr.: _ , 1990.
C~"~J\f?-'HrcmoF MERIDIAN
/'W COUNTYlf~r~1.
L/ /
STATE OF IDAHO,)
s s .
County of Ada, )
On this ~ day O~r.,{{lTLj , 1990, before me, the
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the said State,
personally appeared JACK NIEMANN, known to me to be the person
who subscribed his name to the rJithin and foregoing instrument,
and acknowledged to me the executed the same.
IN vlITNESS vJHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed
my official seal the day and year in this certificate first
a q~lv e wr i
ORDINANCE
Page - 3
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
& CROOKSTON
Attorneys and
Counselors
P.O. Box 427
Merl~~dahO
Telephone 888-4461
900:1849
AMENDED ORDINANCE NO. 506
HOSAC ANNEXATION #2
AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY l<JHICH IS
DESCRIBED AS THE NORTHvJEST QUARTER (NH 1/4) OF THE SOUTH\JJEST
QUARTER (S~4 1/4) EXCEPTING THE NORTH THENTY EIGHT (28) ACRES,
THEREOF-OF, OF SECTION FIVE (5) TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST,
BOISE MERIDIAN, IN ADA COUNTY, STATE OF IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Mayor of the City of
Meridian have concluded that it is in the best interest of said
City to annex to the said City real property which is
hereinbelow described:
HOSAC ANNEXATION #2
The Northwest Quarter (NWl/4) of the
Southwest Quarter (SHl/4) excepting the
North Twenty Eight (28) acres, thereof-of,
of Section Five (5) Township 3 North, Range
1 East, Boise Meridian, in Ada County, State
of Idaho, except a strip Ten feet wide off
the entire East side there-of for a road.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO:
Section 1: That the above described and referenced real
property is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and shall be
zoned as follows: R-8 Residential.
Section 2: That the property shall be subject to de-
annexation if the owner or his assigns, heirs, or successors
shall not plat the property, construct water and sewer line
extensions to serve the property, and construct streets to and
AMENDED ORDINANCE 506
P ag e - 1
within the property~ \'/hich condition subsequent shall run with
land and also be personal to the o~."ners~ Mr. and Mrs. Chester
Hosac.
Section 3: That the City Clerk shall cause one (1) copy of
the legal description and map which shall plainly and clearly
designate the boundaries of said property~ to be filed with the
Ada County Recorder, Ada County Assessor, and the State Tax
Commission within ten (10) days following the effective date of
this Ordinance.
Section 4: This Ordinance shall be in full force and
effect from and after its passage, approval and publ ication as
required by law.
PASSED by the City Counci 1 and Approved by the Mayor of the
...---r---
City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this.q4 day Of~~,
1990.
APPROVED: ~ ;J
~~j.p V
M OR
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
& CROOKSTON
A~~~~~~~:,:d
AMENDED ORDINANCE 506
Page - 2
P.O. Box 427
Meridian, Idello
63642
ralephone 88804461
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
& CROOKSTON
Ag~~~~~~O~~{j
P.O. Box 427
Merl=~dahO
Telephone 888..\461
STATE OF IDAHO,)
s s .
County of Ada, )
I, JACK NIEMANN, City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Ada
County, Idaho, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is
a true, full and correct copy of an Ordinance entitled IIAN
ORDINANCE ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS
DES C RIB EDT HEN 0 R T H W EST QUA R T E R (N vI 1 / 4 ) 0 F THE SOU T H W EST
QUARTER (Sri 1/4) EXCEPTING THE NORTH TWENTY EIGHT (28) ACRES,
THERE-OF, OF SECTION FIVE (5) TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST,
BOISE MERIDIAN, IN ADA COUNTY, STATE OF IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN
E F F E C T I V E 0 ATE "; pas sed a s 0 r din a n c e N 0 .j) f}')en1-Li S;;; G by the C i t Y
Duncil and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the ~ day of
~ '/PM ,A",..-",__, 19~~. .
~. ...----.--
DATED this 3f"~_ day ~f ~~'J-i _, 199@l.
(1i~~~ ~---
C I ~'''t:I. E K T H - C I TV 0 F MER I 0 I AN
ADA COUNTY, IDAHO.
STATE OF IDAHO,) "___'~
s s.
County of Ada, )
On th i s ~ day ~lr~Af-T"1 __, 19~ID>, before me, the
undersigned, a Notary PU~d for the said State,
personally appeared JACK NIEMANN, known to me to be the person
who subscribed his name to the within and foregoing instrument,
and acknowledged to me the executed the same.
hereunto set my hand and affixed
in this certificate first
AMENDED ORDINANCE 506
Page - 3