Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-04-19 CITY OF MERIDIAN PRE-COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: ----X- Shaun Wardle * ----X- Christine Donnell ~ Charlie Rountree ----X- Keith Bird ----X- Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Ada County EMS Presentation for Proposed Bond Levy: Presented (*30 minutes) * Arrived at 6:13 pm - Charlie Rountree *Approximate allowable time set for agenda item may change depending on discussion. Please use the designated minutes as a guideline only. Meridian City Pre-Council Agenda - April 19, 2005 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. oW;;;;dltrn '<. .~, ~T IDAH,4 ~:.\1~8~ MAYOR Tammy de Weerd CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS William L. M. Nary Keith Bird Charles M. Rountree Shaun Wardle CITY DEPARTMENTS Fire 540 E. Franklin Road 888-1234/ fax 895-0390 Parks & Recreation 11 E. Bower Street 888-3579/ fax 898-5501 Planning & Zoning 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 202 884-5533/ fax 888-6854 Police 1401 E. Watertower Lane 888.6678/ fax 846-7366 Public Works 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 200 898-5500/ fax 898-955] - Building 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 150 887-2211/fax 887.1297 - Sewer (WWTP) 3401 N. Ten Mile Road 888-2191/fax 884-0744 - Water 2235 N. W. 8th Street 888-5242/ fax 884-1159 NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a Pre-Council Meeting at City Council Chambers, Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian City Council will be discussing agenda items which are on the regular scheduled City Council meeting as well as the following issue: - Ada County EMS Presentation for Proposed Bond Levy: The public is welcome to attend the meeting. DATED this 15th day of April, 2005. Jf~P- CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE lvIERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 CITY CLERK- FAX 888-4218 HU~IAN RESOURCES -E\X 884-8723 FINANCE & UTILITY BILLING -FAX 88 7-4813 ~1i\YOR'S OFFICE-E\X 884-8119 CITY OF MERIDIAN PRE-COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: ... X Shaun Wardle..M, K Christine Donnell ~ Charlie Rountree" -X:- Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Adoption of the Agenda: tff~V'-L 3. Ada County EMS Presentation for Proposed Bond Levy: ~'l 'tr--c,J (*30 minutes) *' IflrrNed e 6 ~ /8 f1 ~ - clL.a--l.,;"e fldl m-..-ire.e.. * Approximate allowable time set for agenda item may change depending on discussion. Please use the designated minutes as a guideline only. Meridian City Pre-Council Agenda - April 19, 2005 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. May 20, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING May 24. 2005 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-A REQUEST Approve Minutes of April 19, 2005 Pre-Council Meeting AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: .coJ{0 CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: ~ CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Meridian City Pre-Council Meetina April 19. 2005 The Meridian City Pre-Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Shaun Wardle and Christine Donnell. Members Absent: Charlie Rountree. Staff Present: Ron Anderson, Kenny Bowers, Joe Silva, Ted Baird and Will Berg. Item 1. Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. -L Shaun Wardle ~ Charlie Rountree ---X-Christine Donnell ~Keith Bird ~ Mayor Tammy de Weerd Item 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Bird: Mr. President. Wardle: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we adopt the agenda as published. Donnell: Second. Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All in favor? ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. Item 3. Ada County EMS Presentation for Proposed Bond Levy: Wardle: I am going to begin with this just real briefly on some background on our meeting this evening. As many of you are aware, there is a proposed bond levy for the Ada County EMS. We as a city and elected officials wanted to get more information about this specific bond. We have asked Troy Hagen from the Paramedic EMS District to begin a presentation for us this evening. The goal of this evening is to get more information from the ejected officials for our public service staff as well as our partners in the EMS and so with that Troy I am going to turn this over to you. ( ~ Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 2 of 21 Hagen: Council and Mayor thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to come and speak with you tonight. We will just jump right into the presentation. I think you will find it very informative and hopefully we will provide or answer a lot of your questions and we will have time at the end, I think, to get more questions as they come up. We will just get right into that. First of all a little bit of background on Ada County EMS. We were established in 1975. We just celebrated our 30th anniversary of providing coverage to Ada County and we are very proud and happy of that. The reason that we came to be in the first place is when the private providers that were doing it at the time went bankrupt. The county went into - evaluating the system at the present time with the task force, which I will get into - to figure out how is the best way to provide EMS to Ada County for the long term and the Ada County Commissioners created an ambulance tasking district back then in 1975 under 31-39-08, which is Idaho Code. So, just prior to that there was a task force that was made up primarily to medical community that met and they went in and they traveled up to Seattle and looked at many different systems that existed at the time, which there were not very many 30 years ago and said this is the best way to do it. Seattle has done a good job of setting it up and just kind of the father of modern day EMS is the Seattle based system and so we set up our system very similar and it was a tiered response, meaning that - what that means is that basic life support is they try to get there with the goal of four minutes followed by a smaller core competency of more advanced and more highly skilled paramedics, but follow that up with an eight minute response time standard where you can really optimize the care. So, very similar to if you go and you see a general practitioner, they may have to refer you to a specialist, well not everybody a specialist because the demand isn't necessarily there for that, but there is lots of demand for general practitioners. Kind of the same thing in the EMS. The EMT is a basic level of a way to start. They can do many of the different things and ten follow up with that higher up care. So, that is the system that we have worked today is a tiered response system. That comes to be very important as we continue on with discussions from here on and into the future about why we have a tiered response system. There are currently seven fire departments and 27 fire stations in Ada County that provide basic life support (inaudible) life support. Back at that time they said the fire department is the perfect choice to be able to provide that basic level of care. There are a lot more stations and there are a lot of them and it really fell in line with what their function of rule could be and so to us it was a natural fit into the task force. It was a natural fit to be able to equip them and train them and get them out to provide that basic level of response. There is currently just one EMS agency in Ada County that provides a paramedic level of transport service. So, we do all the 911 calls and provide all of the ambulances and we do that with 12 different stations located throughout the county. Those 12 stations, not to the surprise of many, eight of those are co- located with fire departments as we speak. That's including the Cities of Boise, Meridian, Eagle and Kuna, where we have joint stations. We have three cooperative agreements. Three of our stations are with the local hospitals including St. Alphonsus and St. Luke's downtown in St. Luke's Meridian and the \ Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 3 of 21 district actually only owns one station and that is our main administrative and operations office, which is also a medic station that is there down from Glenwood, down by Hawk Stadium. So, that's the only one that the district actually owns. Just a little bit about the differences in care. I touched on this, but an EMT basic is what every firefighter and paramedic out there is trained at this basic level and that is patient assessment, they can put on oxygen delivery, bandaging, CPR and the use of the automated defibulator and that also becomes a critical element and as we look at why four minutes. Why do want them there in four minutes? It's really is that is the time that has been determined to get - that if somebody needs defibulation if their heart was to go into sudden cardiac arrest. So, that's the key factor for a four minute response time is if they don't get defibulated or shocked within four minutes their survive ability rate starts to go down. Then the EMT advanced, there are a few departments that have gone to the advanced route, where you get some advanced patient assessments, a more airway management and also had the ability to do I.V.'s. Then the paramedic schedule - the advanced patient assessment, even more stuff - this is where you really start getting into cardiology, pharmacology, medication administration and really where it is a significant jump from one level to the next. This is typically from one to two years of education depending on the program that you have gone through. Last year we responded to 17,513 calls throughout the county and that call (inaudible) increases 67 percent annually. So, our system performance is really based on two different things. One is the response times that we have just talked about the four and eight-minute response times and it's based on clinical performance. A lot of times many systems will try to just say okay it's all response time, so we just need to get there and they put an ambulance or paramedic or even an EMT on every street corner and think that they are best serving the public that way and really the best thing that that does is drive up your cost. There has been no statistical data to support that - a flood of EMS providers is the best means of providing the service, it's just a matter of - there is a balance. You either have to have the - you need to get there quickly, but you also have to have enough skill and experience when you get there to be able to know what to do and to do it very well. So, there is a balancing act there. The tiered system in Ada County works with cooperation with local fire departments and the EMS agency and the hospitals and the system that we have been operating, it works very, very well. There is called a standard that is applied across the United States about cardiac arrest survivability. USA Today did a big article in 1993 in July where they took 50 cities and evaluated where they would be at using the standard. They took that exact same standard and applied it to Ada County and you can see where we were number two of second only to Seattle. So, I am very proud of that and that is really a joint cooperative effort between all of the fire departments and the paramedic department to be able to make something like that work. One can't do it without the other. It's very important. So the funding issue. Currently, or I should say historically we have been very reliant on user fees to help pay for our service. We have been at 30 percent tax base, 70 percent fee for service in our budget had been our makeup all the way up until 2002. So, really the majority of our funding came from that Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 4 of21 fee for service. We go out, we transport somebody or we evaluate somebody, they receive a bill for that service and we relied on those fees to keep our tax base very, very low. In fact, Ada County is one of the lowest in the state of Idaho for anyone's taxing districts. There is only one that is lower than ours and that is Blain County and it's by a few tenths of thousandths of a point below us, but they also have much higher values than we do. That's what our current rate is at .0001227, which means that on a $100,000 of taxable value you pay EMS $12.27 per year. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman. Wardle: Madame Mayor. De Weerd: I am sorry, Troy when you talked about dissolving the district to the four and the recommendations from the Blue Ribbon task force, I believe, was 2 - 4, was that what it was? Hagen: 2 - 5 was the recommendation from the chair. De Weerd: What is the difference between - what is the monetary difference between what you were getting and what you would have gotten? Hagen: The monetary difference currently at that $12.27 there, we generate $2.8 million dollars in tax revenue. If it would have went all the way to four - De Weerd: Okay, but what would it have been if you would have changed it to the Blue Ribbon task force recommendation? Hagen: To the .025? It would have been double that. So, roughly $4.6 million, or actually $5.6 million. De Weerd: So that difference was -- I am not doing the math on that. What is the math on that? Donnell: 5.6. Hagen: It would be basically double of what we currently have because that's at $12.27 they are suggesting 2 - 5, so basically double that amount. So, that would have generated an additional $5.6 million per year. Wardle: Just to interrupt for just a moment I would like to welcome Councilman Rountree to the meeting. Rountree: Well, thank you Mr. President. Wardle: Please continue. Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 5 of 21 Hagen: If it would have gone to the maximum and really the maximum was there. The Commission never - you know they never made a decision amongst the three of them about what they would have set that levy at if they would have redistrict. They were still trying to get some from fiscal year 04 data in and so forth so they never voted on it to say yes, we are definitely going to go to .04 or anything like that - I think the reason for that slide is that we are at about one third of what the state maximum is and that had worked well for us for all these years up until the Medicare issue came to be. So, you can see just how far down below we were and how reliant we were on those fee for services. So, in 2002 the Medicare rule change hit and what that did was that prohibited us from balance billing the patient and just a few examples here, we now lose and this is a top ambulance bill that if we go out there and we do about every procedure that you do on somebody like a cardiac arrest, where you are doing a lot of different activities is about $1,200. Out of that $1,200 Medicare will pay about $370 and so we can lose up to $830. On average we are losing about $600 a call. So, that is pretty significant and we will get a little bit more detail there, but really what it does is - what the rule did is that it says okay it may cost you $800 to run your call, that's what you are billing out, but we are only going to give you $370. Prior to the rule change we were able to go and bill secondary insurances and we were able to then go to the patient and recoup the entire cost. With the rule change it says, no you have $370 or you have $270 and it just depends on what level that you are at, but that's it. Now you can go after the patient for a small portion of a co-pay, which on average is anywhere from $50 - $70, but the rest of it you have to write off. That's really where we ran into the significant funding deficit that we are talking about. Because 33 percent of our bill (inaudible) will transports our Medicare patients. So, there is - you know that's a substantial hit on all of our calls. Bird: Mr. President. Wardle: Mr. Bird. Bird: Can I butt in so I don't forget what I was going to ask? Troy, we are going based on heart attack calls, I take it. Out of that 17,500 calls, what percent of them are cardiac arrest calls because I know quite a few of them are accident calls, stuff like that so when you say you lose $600 on a cardiac arrest call, what about the other calls that aren't cardiac arrest? Hagen: The cardiac arrest calls are more of the $830 range. On average on all of our calls that we bill for is $600 per call and there is about - out of the 17,500 calls, about 12,500 of them are billable. Bird: Are they cardiac? Hagen: Every type of call. ( Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 6 of 21 Bird: Thank you, Troy. Hagen: So, that reduction in our revenue is also in a time of rapidly increasing health care costs, as all of we are sure are well aware is that EMS is a health care agency and the cost of our medical supplies go up just as rapidly as they do in the hospital or anywhere else. Certainly we have our increase in demand - 6 percent a year is a pretty significant increase and certainly the depressed economy hasn't helped at all, either which has increased the bankruptcies, medical bankruptcies and stuff where we end losing more money because people can't pay their ambulance bills. So, here is the financial impact that we have had since 2002. Now the 2002 number, the rule went into effect on April 1st. So it was halfway through our fiscal year. So, there is not a full value amount that can be realized in the first year. So, this is under six months of that. We lost $1.2 million in 2002 and you can see in '03 is $1.9; last year and these are actual numbers $2,048,000 that were strictly Medicare write-offs that we had to do. There was no way to collect on that dollar, which we could have previously collected prior to 2002. We are projecting for '06 and '07 to be $2.3 and $2.4 based simply on the growth that we have had. So, our total revenue loss from 2002 to 2005 is $7.4 million is what we have seen so far. Over the course of the next two years in 2006 and 2007, we expect that it be an additional $4.8 million. Just in a graphical format, pretty much the exact thing they just said. So, the issues that hinder our growth are certainly the recent cuts in Medicare. Medicaid quickly followed. They followed the same rule, which took up another three to four percent of our calls, about 3 percent, I think is what our transport rates are, which is a state supported federal program, so now it went from our 33 percent up to 36 to 38 percent of these patients and all federal health insurance companies follow the same rule. So, all the military and any postal service, any type of insurance that is federal insurance, they have to live under the same rules. The ambulance task and district base is limited by the 3 percent budget cap, which I am sure you are all very familiar of that 3 percent plus growth factor, so even if we wanted to increase our levy rate from beyond the $12.27, it's not going to -we can't get there with the 3 percent cap. So, our levy is pretty much stuck right in there fluctuating by a few tens of thousands of a percentage each year. Our EMS fees are already high. We did not want our fees to be a hindrance to somebody calling 911, so that is certainly a last resort to increase our fees any more, which would also just increase bankruptcies and people not paying their bills. So, it really wasn't a good option, certainly aren't going to make up over $2 million a year by an increase in user fees. So, what has been done? Prior to this in 1999, we raised our fees significantly. We knew this was coming, we just didn't know what the true impact was going to be. This is part of the balanced budget after 1997, the Medicare rule change and it wasn't implemented until 2002, so in 1999 we said okay the rules are going to come this year. We increased our rates to try and brace for it, not knowing what the true impact would be, well it didn't happen. So, we received a surplus because we had increased our rates. It didn't happen in 1999 and it didn't happen in 2000, it Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 7 of 21 didn't happen in 2001. Well, it happened in 2002 and our projections were fairly accurate from what had occurred. So, we have lived off of that surplus for 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and now that surplus went up and now it's pretty much back to gone. That's the issue that we are facing here is now where do we go from here? We (inaudible) slower expansion, nobody realizes that than the City of Meridian. Should have had an ambulance out here a long time ago. But, with this funding crisis looming, there was hesitancy to do so. The implemented system restructuring, we certainly have encouraged the co-Iocation, worked with that, we have redeployed our staff, increased our volunteer force and done whatever we can to try to save cost. Commissionef Judy Peavy-Derr has gone back to Washington, D.C. on three different occasions to speak with OUf federal delegates to see if we can get some type of relief from the federal level. In our opinion this is an unfunded federal mandate, but unfortunately we are having to pay the brunt of it. We also have had the state legislative action. We were in the legislator in the last two years and unsuccessfully - tried to get a bill passed that would allow the district to go to the vote of the people with a permanent levy increase with the super majority vote, which was the same thing like the fire districts have and library districts and so forth. We were unsuccessful for the first two years and we finally got it passed this year. So, that is now on the books. They also commissioned the Blue Ribbon task force to citizens to look at all this type of thing and really the unanimous recommendation that came from this is some type of taxpayer support is going to be necessary. Mr. Alloway can certainly speak to that, however, they looked at a couple of different options of doing that, but realized that from a fee for service aspect we are not going to get there, so further tax support is probably necessary and the EMS Advisory Board, which is also a citizens group that advises us and we meet on a monthly basis, went through that thing and came up with the same recommendations. They went through the Blue Ribbon Task Force and certainly concurred with their decision there. So, the Blue Ribbon Task Force there were a couple - there were 16 different recommendations they did, you know, they have implemented the cost saving ones and certainly some of them will take longer as we are working through the EMS planning and coordination committee to implement, but that we are working on all the different aspects of that. One of the options was the over-ride levy, which was a two-year levy adjustment. It wasn't the Blue Ribbon's first choice and the reason for that was that it was a short-term fix for a permanent problem. They don't see this problem going away. So, they said why - we don't want to spend a great deal of effort because you also have the cost of an election. This election is going to cost the commissioners about $100,000 to put on and they said why do we want to do that for a short-term fix? That was kind of the thinking of the Blue Ribbon Task Force and so their second option was the redistricting thing that the Blue Ribbon Task Force unanimously endorsed at the time as to dissolve the current district and re-establish at another one at a new rate and that is what Jerome County had done, so there was precedent in doing so and anyway that was the range. That's not where it would have necessarily been set, but that was the range. The commissioners had their public hearing, they received lots of input from many different entities and Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 8 of21 individuals and decided nobody wanted to do this without a vote of the people. That was never our intent, we want the community support prior to this going into effect, this law that we just got passed, there was no mechanism in Idaho Code to go to the vote of the people for a permanent fix. The Commissioners originally were looking at a permanent fix, without doing so now we are with a temporary fix, but it does bring it to the vote of the people, which certainly no way you can disagree with. So what would the over ride accomplish? They will make up the Medicare loss for the next two years. That's all we are looking for is the money that we are going to lose out of Medicare, if we could have that back then at least we could continue our operations at the current level of service and it certainly will help us assist in developing our comprehensive EMS system as we are working to the EMS planning and coordination committee - that's going to take time and this will help maintain the level of service while we go through that whole process and look at different options of an EMS structure and system and is there a better way to do it. That will certainly be evaluated. For the over ride election and this out of a (inaudible) office, it's a county election, so unfortunately or fortunately depending on your perspective, it's good for the people, all 125 precincts need to be open because it is a county election, however, that is very costly and the time is May 24th and you can see the other (inaudible) by mail or at Barrister, but the cost is going to be approximately $100,000 to open all 125 precincts for the day. That's just Dave Navarro's estimations of costs. So, what they are asking for is $4.8 million to cover Medicare losses only and that is just for the next two years, so if you recall back from the chart that we said we are estimating right around $2.35 million for fiscal year '06, $2.45 million approximately for '07 and that's those two years and you add them together. It's not asking to balance the budget, it's not asking to increase services or program, it's basically make up for Medicare losses and we will continue to work on efficiencies through cooperation, consolidations, partnership efforts to see whatever we can do to make up the remaining of the cost, but let's just try to fund the Medicare loss so we don't have to redo services and to be successful it's 50 percent plus more. So the over ride then, what happens? I just kind of got into that a little bit. We had the planning and coordination committee up and running, which all the area fire chiefs, the hospitals, physicians and EMS are all represented, all getting together at the same table and saying what can we do? Whatever happens out of that committee is going to take time to implement. What this over ride will do is give us two years so we are not in an EMS crisis and by all of sudden having to reduce ambulances or do anything drastic like that as we work through this process over the course of the next two years. Even if there was a consolidation effort, historically a consolidation effort takes five to seven years of anyone that's ever done it. So, anything that we do it's going to take time. This over ride election will buy us some time. So, our goal for Ada County is to provide the most effective, clinically sophisticated, efficient EMS system that we can and to every citizen in Ada County. That's very important to us is that right now we deliver a countywide EMS delivery system. We think that fragmentation would both increase cost and potentially decrease the level of care that's being provided because it would be different and what we don't want is Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 1 9, 2005 Page 9 of 21 many different systems operating within the county when by common sense would say that one system, one consolidated type system would certainly be more efficient just by (inaudible) pure economy of scale. So, in summary, Ada County is committed to being (inaudible) in the county wide EMS system and to maintain that high quality that we also know the fiscal responsibility that has to be to pay for that system. Current tiered system works. It works very, very well. To get the high of cardiac arrest survivability rate, you can't do that with a bad system. As Ada County continues to grow we must grow with it. We can't ignore that fact and I am thinking ahead and this is really a funding issue. The system works, it's just they changed the funding rules on us and now we are trying to figure out how to adapt that system. It's not a necessary of systems or it's not necessarily a political issue, it's really been working and it's been working very well for 30 years, we just need to figure out how to fund it, which is the idea behind the over ride. That is my presentation. So, I would be happy to entertain any questions. Wardle: Council, do you have any questions? Donnell: Yes, Mr. President. Wardle: Ms. Donnell. Donnell: Troy, if you knew the rule was going to change in 1999 and you put in the fee increase, would that not have been and you knew that was coming, obviously, would that not have given the time from then until the rule did change for you to do what you are proposing to do with a two year - an over ride supported that will give you two years to do this coordination, this planning? Would that not have been the time to do that? Hagen: Again, not really knowing what the impact was going to be, it would have been very likely that the impact would of, could have been minimal and that we would have been able to function and to continue to grow and continue to expand. Up until the rule change, the EMS system functioned very well and we were able to keep up with growth. We were able to move in that direction and do those things. I think the question as - we certainly wouldn't have gone for an over ride because we had no idea what the impact was and we were adequately funded at the time and so just not knowing what that true rule was and I think that actually we have - you know as - even our co-location aspect shows no aid, we only owned one station so we do partner, we run very efficiently and very lean and the system worked. We didn't see that this was an issue that would - you know we didn't think it would be as significant as it was or we were hoping it wouldn't be. Donnell: So, follow up, Mr. President. Wardle: Sure, Ms. Donnell. (' Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 10 of 21 Donnell: So, let me phrase that again maybe a little bit differently. I hear you say that you didn't think that it would be as significant and yet from the time you raised the fees until the rule went into effect and you have been living on the surplus from those fees, would this not have been the time for this kind of coordinated planning that you are assuming will occur if the over ride passes and it gives you two years before you'd have to run the over ride again, is that right? Hagen: Mr. President, I am sorry if I didn't answer your question the first time around. I am trying to understand exactly should we have done it back in 1999? Yes, very likely. If we had known that this was going to be this way, absolutely. What we were also looking for was - that's why we went to the legislature for two years, a Blue Ribbon Task Force is this issue has been studied and studied and studied and yeah, if I would have been in charge, if I could have done anything differently we would have been able to take action on this long ago, but we tried all these different options and all these different things that we studied extensively and how we have gone to the legislature again, two years that failed. We were looking at many different types of fixes verses having to just go into and say okay everybody, we are going to completely change the structure because as I said the structure seemed to work well. Donnell: Okay, then follow up again. Wardle: Sure, Ms. Donnell. Donnell: So, let's just take this out a couple of years. Let's say that the over ride is successful and it's a two year over ride and it generates the funds that you need to continue the operation at the level that it is currently and also gives you the time to do the planning to see what we are going to do in the next two years, right? I mean after those two years go. When that over ride culminates, I don't know a better word there, ceases whatever, no longer the funds are there, then the tactic will be of course to go to the people saying that if you don't pass this over ride again, then we are going to have to cut services back, right? Because we will have maintained a level of service for these two years on an over ride because an over ride is short term, so what do you expect that we would accomplish with this? I guess I am having a hard time having known that over rides are in deed short term fixes. Hagen: Mr. President, Councilmember Donnell I am hoping and optimistic that our EMS planning coordination committee will figure out how we can throw out all of our resources into and onto the table and hopefully reduce the entire cost of both the fire and the EMS system since we are talking about you know throwing everything out onto the table is how can we reduce the overall cost? And those are the things that we are going to - you know that every body had to come to the table to be able to do and so it's not just - I don't think this is an EMS issue we are talking EMS planning and coordination it's also the fire issue and okay Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 11 of21 everyone has resources, let's throw everything out on the table and let's see what we can come up with. Donnell: And perhaps a health care issue as well. Hagen: It's absolutely a health care issue. There is no doubt about that. Donnell: Which you can't fix. Hagen: I can't fix that and certainly that's not going to be fixed within the next two years. De Weerd: Mr. President. Wardle: Madame Mayor. De Weerd: I guess also this two years gives us time to work in collaboration with all of the providers, but they did change the legislation so they can go to the voters at that time for a permanent fix. They wouldn't have to come back every two years for a temporary one? Donnell: Is that right? De Weerd: The legislation just passed with the support of the Fire Chiefs Association. Donnell: So, just for clarification when I was listening to you saying that the legislation passed, I was assuming that that legislation was that you could go to the public for an over ride. That's not the case? It's a permanent over ride is what that does? Hagen: Mr. President, Councilmember Donnell currently on state statute even before we just got this rule passed, we could do an over ride. That is what we are going for. We are going for a temporary over ride in May. The new rule did exactly as the Mayor indicated, it gives us the ability to go and fix it permanently with the super majority vote. Now a question may come up why not go for that now? We believe we need to go through this process to get the support of everybody to get a super majority. Wardle: Chief any questions at this time? Anderson: Yes, I guess being the new comer going back to Ada County, I can plead ignorance on a lot of this stuff, Troy, because I don't understand all the history of it and I am trying to get a grasp on it. Can you explain, I guess, why did Medicare make these changes in the rules in the first place? I mean what was the intent there? What were they trying to do? Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting Apri119,2005 Page 12 of 21 Hagen: Chief, Mr. President, Council good question. It actually there was good intentions behind the bill. It was - we had Medicare population on a fixed income and they didn't want to see all of them being medically bankrupt because they had a health care issue and so they came through and said if you are on Medicare and it's also to control their Medicare costs at a federal program, this is all you are going to get. We are going to establish a national fee schedule. This is not just an Ada County issue this is happening all across the country. The ones that are hit the worst are the ones that are so reliant on fee for service. Now those that were very heavily taxed based probably had very little impact from this rule. Those of us that were reliant on the fee for service, impact was significant, but that was the idea behind it was to protect the income of those that are on a set income. So, there is obviously a very powerful lobbying force and the other part of the lobbying force would be the insurance companies. As I mentioned, we can't go back and bill our secondary insurances even. They even took that ability away, so I am sure there was quite an extensive lobbying effort on the part of the insurance companies to make sure that this bill passed as well. Anderson: I guess just a follow up comment I guess on how I view those Medicare changes. I mean it's kind of like, Council member Donnell talked about you know the health care cost in general. It seems to me like those Medicare I Medicaid changes came down because of the spiraling health cost and the federal government said we can't continue to charge this much for ambulance services and for ambulance fees and they were in effect when you said it was a federal mandate, they were setting a limit saying this is the maximum that you can charge and you need to streamline or whatever you need to do, restructure it to become more efficient at providing that service, I guess is kind of how I read that too and we may have a difference, I guess, in opinion about how that comes down. But I guess I am seeing that we need to do something to become more efficient at how we deliver those services, If we look at how the private sector would deal with something like that. Hagen: Chief and Mr. President, I agree. However, when they set the cost the vendors didn't pay attention and neither did the inflation index. They didn't pay attention either. I think you know where we need to - you know what we are trying to do is we are certainly trying to be more efficient as we go because there is no choice, but ambulance services is really funded by two different things. It's fee for service and it's taxed based. If you take away such a large margin of your fee for service, you either are going to have a significant reduction in service, how the private enterprise deal with this is that they would manufacture less (inaudible) or they hang up the sign that's next to the billing office window that says we accept only 10 percent Medicare patients. We can't do that being a governmental 911 agency. We accept everybody. We accept 100 percent patients if that's all that calls us. So, we don't have the ability to put the limits on like the private enterprise does. { Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 13 of 21 Anderson: Also on one of your slides where you were talking about things that have been done. You talked about that you raised fees in 1999 and you say you slowed expansion, again, not having the history could you tell me what expansion has occurred since 1999 so that I could kind of compare that? Hagen: Very little expansion had occurred up until the last year. In the last year I have made more of a determination that there is also a balance there. We could continue to say that we are not going to provide this service because of cost issues - and let the patient care suffer and public safety be at risk or we can get it up to the level that is acceptable, since the county has a statutory obligation to provide an ambulance service - is that we need to be able to provide the service and provide it adequately and say this is a funding issue - let's go and say this is a funding issue and let's get the funding fixed, but we can't just not let the service be provided. Anderson: From what I can gather attending meetings, when you say the expansion has slowed, but Meridian just recently received an ambulance out at Ten Mile Station and Kuna got one about a year ago. When did Eagle get theirs? Hagen: 1999. Anderson: So, we have added some additional ambulances or cars? Is that the correct terminology out into the communities? Hagen: Just in the last year. Anderson: Okay and then I have been hearing something about a Hollandale Station in some of these meetings. Could you explain for me what is the Hollandale Station? Hagen: Certainly, Mr. President, Council. The Hollandale Station is Boise Fire is vacating the Whitney Fire Station that sits on Overland Road and they are building a new station on south Five Mile and Hollandale and our station will go away. We currently own a small manufactured home out in the back lot behind the Whitney Fire Station, so it's not like we are living high on the hog here - that's the station that we have had for many years behind there. They are selling that property. So, the offer by Boise Fire was you can move into our station with us, but we are asking you for $300,000 to do so. It's a matter of making the station go away, which would certainly impact our response times and our capabilities out into southwest Boise or to go in there. If we try to go and build a stand along station it certainly is going to cost more than $300,000. Anderson: So, that Hollandale Station would be your proportionate share of joint facility with Boise Fire? Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 14 of 21 Hagen: That is correct. It's a $1.7 million station. They are asking us for $300,000 and it's a movement of one station to moving it down the road basically. Anderson: You also indicated that when you were talking you said our surplus is pretty much nothing. What is your surplus right now? Hagen: At the end of this year, we anticipate it will be about $450,000 remaining and that would be utilizing $2.3 million out of our surplus this year. That is the balance that would be remaining or should be rolled into next year. That is out of a $9.5 million budget, it's not a lot when we needed $2.3 million to budget of that to utilize this year to balance our budget. So, you can see there is already a $2 million hit right there that we won't have available next year's budget. Anderson: Just a couple more questions here. You indicated that there was 16 recommendations that came from the Blue Ribbon panel and that you had implemented all of the cost saving ones. So, how many of those 16 are implemented then? How many were cost savings? Hagen: I don't have that right in front of me, but again it was co-location was a part of that. The Blue Ribbon Task Force recommendations were more of the system issues that we were addressing in the EMS Planning and Coordination Committee, so co-location being one of those with Meridian and the ones in Boise that we have done since that time. At one time, as you know, we were entertaining property at 8th and Cherry. That was one of the things that (inaudible) it says okay we are going to co-Iocate rather than try to purchase a stand alone station, so that was one of them. There were some of the other (inaudible) I am sorry I don't have them in front of me, so I'd have to go back through, but the ones that (inaudible -) at immediate cost, we are working on and implementing - Wardle: Troy and Chief just to let you know we also invited Don Alloway from the Blue Ribbon Task Force to speak in just a moment to some of those issues. Anderson: You had indicated that a consolidation could take five to seven years to accomplish because that's typically what it's taken in other areas and I guess just kind of an observation that I have had in the meetings that I have attended so far, there doesn't seem to be, I guess, I am not seeing that spirit of cooperation that we are going to do consolidation. I mean, there seems to be a lot of posturing and a lot of rhetoric back and forth about firemen can't make good paramedics, the system works great now, we would saturate the market with paramedics if we added paramedics to any other agencies besides fire. I guess, my question is are we just going through the motions or is there a sincere effort to do some type of consolidation because, I guess, back to the original comment I made about how I view the Medicare and Medicaid cuts, we need to become more streamlined to become more efficient, but I am not seeing, I guess, Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 15 of 21 from the meetings that spirit of cooperation that you are talking about. It seems to be that everybody is just saying why it won't work and why we can't consolidate. Hagen: Chief, Mr. President, Council I think we are so early in this process - we need to get that out of the way for some of it because we had been talking all funding so far. This last meeting was we had just starting determining metrics and if you recall my comments it wasn't that you can't have a good paramedic and fire agency, I know lots of good fire based EMS systems. My point is there is a set number of paramedics in the entire system to include Fire Department, Paramedics, however, there is a set number that there should be and whether that's half of them here or half of them are there, but there is a core of competency or a core group. That has been my point all along. I have nothing opposed to fire-based EMS, there just needs to be a system. We have eight public safety entities that are involved in this process. When I say five to seven years to consolidate, it's usually a city Fire Department and a city EMS Department that are consolidating and that takes that long. We are talking about eight different political entities. This is not going to be an easy road. You certainly have my sincere efforts to be able to do whatever we can do to make this work and yeah, I think you have it from the county, but again there is also seven fire districts to be able to do the same thing. De Weerd: Mr. President. Wardle: Madame Mayor. De Weerd: (inaudible--) saying the presentation I participated in at the Meridian Chamber of Commerce, this came up. I don't if it was during the meeting or after the meeting, but I don't think the consolidation was necessarily merging two into one. It's more looking at better efficiencies and using the one medical doctor and the medical training, which the Commissioners and the different entities have talked about and seem to be in agreement on, it would be something like that. We also talked about Meridian moving into the paramedic I firefighter realm and using that as an opportunity to set a model that can be looked at and developed that could show how it could be done and those kind of things. I guess those are the kind of commitments that we are looking for and not necessarily that everyone would go away and there would be one entity. It's more how we can gain efficiencies and collaborative efforts, those kinds of things. I believe definitely that the group that has been created can find those lines and I guess I would say that Meridian could be an excellent model of opportunity to, like I said, to show how those could be accomplished. Anderson: I agree wholeheartedly, Madame Mayor and I guess one of the things that I have learned in the two weeks that I have been here is that I have been told under no uncertain circumstances by Council members and the Rural Fire District that I am to put paramedic (inaudible) company program together and so Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 16 of 21 I guess while I have you here and we are talking about that EMS system, I guess, I would ask what kind of support we could expect to receive from your agency, Troy, as we move down that road. Hagen: Mr. President, Council aside from the funding issue, obviously, we - our whole issue is the entire system and trying to make sure that the coverage is adequate, is good, competent and so forth. We just don't want to see it decrease in the level of care. I am not opposed to Meridian putting on paramedics. I am not opposed to Boise putting on paramedics. I will bring that right out front. What my concern is is that we don't flood the system with paramedics because more paramedics are not always better. You know there is lots of research that really is just now coming out that it's not always the best thing. My whole point is if we are going to do it, let's make sure we do it right and by doing it right we are doing it together. Throughout the entire Blue Ribbon Task Force, Dennis Johnson representing the fire agencies came in and said fire has a resource, EMS has the expertise. I am offering you our expertise as to be able to go forth and do this. Our training aspects of it are how we build the system and how we work it. We need to all work together to be able to do this because I agree, if you have the resources we do have the expertise, we are going to be able to build a better system, but we need to be able to do that and it's not like everybody is going to agree on how we get there - I am not that naIve, but that is our goal. Wardle: Thank you, Troy. Mindful of our time, I am going to ask you to stay around for just a moment and invite Don Alloway with the Blue Ribbon Task Force to come for a couple of comments. Alloway: Thank you Mr. President, Mayor, Council members I am Don Alloway. I served as the Chairman of the Blue Ribbon Task Force put together by the County Commission to look into Ada County EMS and the thing that caused them to create the Task Force was the Medicare funding problem, but they instructed us that everything was on the table and we should look at the system in general. So we not only addressed funding problem, we addressed a number of other issues and there are a lot of numbers that come around and one of the things that we recommended was that we dissolve the taxing district and create a new one because under the law two years ago, that was the only way to permanently solve the funding. The County Commissioners came out with a recommendation that they would do that and they would set the new levy rate at 4 mills and we are at 1.227 mills now and as a result of that in my testimony in front of the County Commissioners, I said that the absolute, outside maximum that they should set out was 2.5, not 4 and they should only set it at 2.5 provided that Ada County EMS looks seriously at all of the 16 recommendations and the implement of those. I think that one of the problems that we run into is the numbers taken out of context can give us some strange outcomes and I certainly didn't mean to imply, nor did I ever say that it took 2.5 mills to fund a competent EMS system because I never believed that. Your new Fire Chief indicated that after only two weeks he was concerned that there wasn't the spirit of cooperation (' Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 17 of 21 to implement the 16 recommendations of the Task Force. As a matter of Paul Anderson with BSU in 1999 came out with the report that listed a number of things that EMS should do and - (tape turned over) Alloway: - the Task Force was called, EMS said that they had reviewed the report and responded to every one of those criticisms. Our 16 recommendations from the Task Force were very, very similar to the recommendations of Paul Anderson and we didn't read that report before we made those recommendations, so even though that it was alleged that they had all been addressed, they really weren't. Your new Fire Chief in two weeks has figured out that we have still a turf battle - empires that might be (inaudible) if things happened. There are some things that are pretty simple and straightforward. In 2002 when we started the Task Force, we had seven ambulances in Ada County and on a given business day there were seven supervisors on duty at Ada County EMS. Ada County EMS has a higher personnel cost per call than most ambulance districts because they appear top heavy and one of their recommendations that we echoed what Paul Anderson said is that we need an independent group that understands the operation of ambulance districts to come in and review the operations in depth. This is to make sure that the Task Force didn't overlook something about running an ambulance and service that you needed a level of supervision that high. They had six ambulances that were just sitting around and that they weren't using it. They claimed they needed them for mechanical repairs. We didn't think so. We thought they were spares and they could give them to some of the Fire Departments and let the Fire Departments run them in the low call areas to give better service because we are taking 20 and 30 minutes for ambulances to show up in some areas and by the way, some parts of the county that is never going to improve. Overall we felt EMS did a good job, but we felt that there was a lot there that could be changed. In the period of time subsequent to that between now and then they have increased the number of supervisors. They have increased their operating budget by almost a million dollars and at the time that Ada County EMS was being looked at by the Task Force, their budget shortfall is a result in part with the Medicaid and Medicare was about $1.3 or $1.4 million. The numbers that were on the slides would lead you to believe that they are losing $2.4 million in revenue and I guess technically that is correct, but they only collect about 60 percent of what they bill and their ambulance rates are set to be able to break even at that 60 percent collections so they don't need that $2.4 million to make up for Medicare, they need maybe a $1.3 million or $1.4 million of it and so were it just to make up for Medicare and whatever level of operating and efficiencies were (inaudible-) close the year 2002 an over ride levy that would create $1.5 million each year for the two years would be adequate to give them adequate funding. This levy that creates $4.8 million or $2.4 million a year over the next two years is what they need at their current level of efficiency with operating expenses a million dollars more than it was two years ago. There were a number of things that to me are Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 18 of 21 no-brainers. There are calls that the dispatch system ranks the calls according to what's wrong. There is a series of questions that the operator asks the person that calls in - you know, is the patient breathing and a number of things like that to determine exactly how serious it is. There are a lot of calls that fall into category where they are not life threatening. Maybe somebody has a broken leg, it's going to hurt like the devil, but you are not going to die of a broken leg if the bone isn't sticking out and they are not bleeding. If the ambulance gets there in a half hour that is going to be fine. Those are called alpha calls and there are about 4,000 to 5,000 of those calls every year. If they would dispatch the Fire Department only and not the ambulances, remember we have got 27 fire stations and 10 or 12 ambulance stations depending on how you want to count them. If they would just dispatch the Fire Department, most of those, 80 percent of those calls are never transported anyway, that's a substantial savings, more importantly it makes availability better for the ambulances, which would get response times up. That's a simple thing, the technology is there - they know about the calls, but it's a turf waf. The Fire Department wants to be dispatched on all the calls, I am told, because they like the high numbers to justify their existence. Frankly, the ambulance service wants the same thing and so we are dispatching a white truck and a red truck for a lady that is in a wheel chair and has fallen out of the wheel chair and she is perfectly fine on the floor, but she can't get up by herself and we send those two trucks and that's part of the savings. We could quickly look at the structure and get rid of over supervision if in fact, we have it on an interim basis and save substantially in personnel. We could put a hiring freeze on it and save - a lot of things like that they we could do that we haven't looked at. It bothers me that now Ada County EMS has said that they have addressed or are addressing all of the Task Force recommendations and yet I think that if you would have another committee look at Ada County EMS again, you would find that Paul Anderson's problems that he showed and the Task Force problems that they showed are still out there. They need some funding in order to stay in business and we need ambulances and so we need to provide them with that funding. If we provide them at the funding on the levy level, we are going to be providing them with funding where they can operate at their current -under their current steam of operation comfortably. That doesn't guarantee us change and it leaves it at status quo. On the other hand, if we vote the levy down, they are not going to have enough money to operate under any scenario, so it's a tough thing that you are going to face as to whether - as to a political body you want to support this levy election or if you want to say don't waste your money on it, it's a problem that is not going to be cured that way - complacency is going to set in and you need to talk to your Fire Chief and the previous Fire Chief about the conversations that have gone on since January as this committee has been meeting. You need to look at the numerous indications of cooperation and non-cooperation. I am concerned about Ada County EMS willingly allowing Fire Departments to have paramedics, frankly. Kuna right now has an ambulance. They have paramedics. Ada County EMS will not let them transport. They have what they call a chase car, which is a Chevy Suburban with a paramedic in it. When they go on a call, if they need transport they park the Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting Apr1l19,2005 Page 19 of 21 Chevy Suburban at the scene, the paramedic gets in the ambulance and they transport in the Fire Department then if they have enough man - drive it back it, if not they call a volunteer fireman to go out and do it. That chase car costs $450,000 a year. Kuna said if they could be supplemented in funding by $75,000 a year or $80,000 a year they would just run the ambulance - been turned down for doing that and that's not the spirit of cooperation that I expected to see. We could put an ambulance in Starr the same way if you just give them an ambulance that's one of the six surplus ones they had they would furnish the paramedics and they would be happy to do it and that wasn't done. Those are the kinds of things that may be in a perfect world with all of the money in the world, you might not want to do, but we might want to do as citizens of Ada County and we have got to tackle those problems. So, the question, I think that's before you is not whether $2.5 million is needed because it "a" isn't needed in a well run ambulance in my opinion, but "b" it is needed with our system that we have now and the system hasn't changed and so in the short run they need money. The question that is in front of you is if you support the levy is it going to reduce your ability as a political body to encourage the County Commission to revise and revamp Ada County EMS so that they are substantially more efficient and more cooperative with the other public safety agencies and if supporting the levy gets that support, then you ought to publicly support it. If on the other hand, publicly opposing the levy as the City of Boise apparently has chosen to do, we'll give you the leverage to force them to do that by bringing it to a head earlier then I think you would want to do that. It's a decision that I am not sure how I would vote - we are on your side and fortunately you have a week or two to make your minds up. But, it's a tough one because I as a private citizen and having the experience of some sixty hours of public testimony and several hundred hours of reading and research during the Task Force I am convinced that we are wasting money because we are not willing to allow Fire Departments to participate in the EMS system and there are a lot of things out there that can be streamlined and made much more efficient, but I am not convinced that I know enough to get how to get it to happen in Ada County right now with the political sweat that we have and so I am afraid I can give you some information that's my opinion and mine alone, it's not the committees opinion and I can point a problem out to you and I am also afraid I can't help you at all to make the decision because it's a really tough one. We have a system that needs more money, but they also need change and you somehow have got to figure out how to do both and do both more sufficiently and I can only wish you good luck in that. I would stand for any questions that you have. Bird: Mr. President. Wardle: Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Alloway in your opinion, after all the hours that you guys in the Task Force did and I appreciate, what do you feel is what they need in a two-year levy? Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 1 9, 2005 Page 20 of 21 Alloway: If they reversed some of the management decisions made in the last six or eight months they could get by on approximately $3 million over the two years. They would have to do some belt tightening and cutting and there would be some gnashing of teeth and screaming and hollering, but we would not suffer from an ambulance response time, I believe if they took that step. Bird: Mr. President, follow up. Wardle: Mr. Bird. Bird: Coming from a city that tightens their belt all the time, our employees and stuff, I happen to agree with you on that deal. I think that everybody could definitely be more efficient and I think that Task Force 16 points, I don't believe is being adhered to at all. Rountree: Mr. President Wardle: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Mr. Alloway and I am going to ask you for probably a pretty frank observation on your part, but having worked this issue, the hours you worked it, you mentioned that there are issues in terms of cooperation and turf wars and those sorts of things. Is that primarily being driven by the staffs of the emergency services' public staffs and public services or is it being driven from the elected officials down? Alloway: Mr. President, Councilman Rountree it's a guess and please - Rountree: Just asking for an observation. Alloway: As an observation, I think that over time because of the management philosophy in Ada County EMS there has developed an aura or a feeling that only they can do things that nobody else can do it quite as good as them and quite frankly this is not unique to Ada County EMS, Boise City has Firefighter's Union and the firefighters have come out publicly and stated that they can run a better system than Ada County EMS and that's part of the same thing. I think- but at the same time, public officials when they see this happening ought to be jumping on management with both feet and that's never happened. Rountree: Thank you. Wardle: Thank you very much, Council. I would like to thank Mr. Alloway and Mr. Hagen for coming to join us and note that also the rural fire commission is here. We have some decisions to make and we have got some resources and I believe that the Clerk's Office has everyone's numbers if you would like to (' Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting April 19, 2005 Page 21 of 21 engage in further conversation and begin the discussion. With that I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Rountree: So moved. Bird: Second. Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn the meeting. All in favor? ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:05 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: ~ 05 I 24 I OS DATE APPROVED ATTESTED: ** TX CONFIR~"., iON REPORT ** AS OF APR 15 18: 22 PAGE. 81 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TI ME TO/FROM MODE M I N/SEC PGS CMDl:I STATUS 31 1214/15 18: 21 38112116121 EC--S 12113' 26" 1211211 1375 OK 32 134/15 18: 22 PUBLIC WORKS EC--S 1218' 19" 131211 1375 OK ---....-.....---....-------.....-...-----....-........----.....-.......---------.....-----......-.........---.....-------........-----.....-------------....---- riea~ roJf -+hv PubUc JVo-hcz CITY OF MERIDIAN PRE-COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 6;00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: Shaun Wardle _ Christine Donnell - Charlie Rountree Keith Bird - _ Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Ada County EMS Presentation for Proposed Bond Levy: (*30 minutes) *Approximate allowable time set for agenda item may change depending on discussion. Please use the deSignated minutes as a guideline only. Meridian City Pre-Council Agenda - April 19, 2005 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Cily of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior 10 the pUblic meeling. "'* TX CONF, .~TlON REPORT "'''' ( APR 15 '0S ...7:39 PAGE. 01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE M1N/SEC PGS CMDJ:I STATUS 01 04/15 17:29 P-AND-Z EC--S 00'27" 001 072 OK 02 04/15 17: 30 208 895 0390 EC--S 00' 26" 001 072 OK 03 04/15 17: 31 128300040 G3--S 00' 30" 001 072 OK 04 04/15 17:32208 387 6393 EC--S 00'26" 001 072 OK 135 04/15 17: 33 ADA CTY DEVELMT EC--S 00' 27" 001 072 OK 06 04/15 17:34 8885052 EC--S 00'26" 001 072 OK 07 04/15 17:35 CHERRY LANE G3--S 00'42" 1301 072 OK OS 04/15 17:36 IDAHO ATHLETIC C EC--S 00'26" 001 1372 OK 09 04/15 17:37 ID PRESS TRIBUNE EC--S 00'26" 001 072 OK ---_:~---~~~::_:~~::_:~~~~~~:_----------_:===:_--~~~:~~-~~:_----~~:_---~~----------------- t1t'~e VOS~ -\-Of Vll!dtQ... Wottc.e- 1l'\C.l\K.l\..) .;~':'" Df1e;;dicrn ...; ""\ ~'\~J'\'" ID.'\HO, J ~~""'~l. Cl:W.~ ,,~, M!.YOJ( Trol1Il'lY de Weerd CITY COUNcn. MEM"6l:J(~ William L M. Nary Keithl:lird Charles M. ROlJJ'\lre~ ShaUll Wardle Cn'Y DEPAl<TMENl5 Fire 540 c. I'rankhn Road 88il-12341 fax 895-0.390 P. r1<-~ & RecreatiM 11 E. !:lower Street 886-3579/ fax 890.5501 PlaMing '" ZOllln~ 660 E. Watertower Lane Sui te 202 884-55.33/ fax SSil-6854 Pollee 1401 E. Watc,tl.lwl!r Lane 888-66781 fax 846.7366 Public Works 660 1::. Watel10wer LallI! Suile 200 698.SSCllll fa. 8~S.9551 - Building 660 n. Water tower I.anl! Sulte 150 887.2211 / fax 887-1297 . Sewer (WWTP) 3401 N. Ten Mile Road 888-219l/fo" 654.074<), - Wate, 2235 N. W. 8lh Str~~t gl;R.5242 / tax 8t34.115~ NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a Pre-Council Meeting at City Council Chambers, Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, April 19. 2005 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian City Council will be discussing agenda items which are on the regular scheduled City Council meeting as well as the following issue: - Ada County EMS Presentation for Proposed Bond Levy: The public is welcome to attend the meeting, DATED this 15th day of April, 2005. -dI#L:)- C1TY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 err)' CLF.ilk-IY>X S8S'421R C1tlM^N ACSOUilCF.~~~\X 884,8723 ~IN,II"/Cl> & UTttll'1 KIWI"/U-f^X 887.4813 M^VOR'~ Ol'FICI>-!\\X S84.AIICI ..:iT ION REPORT ** F1PR 15 PFlGE. 01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD~ STATUS 23 04/15 17: 20 3810160 EC--S 00' 38" 001 072 OK 24 04/15 17:21 PUBLIC WORKS EC--S 00'27" 001 072 OK 25 04/15 17:22 12084664405 EC--S 00'27" 0101 072 OK 26 04/15 17:238841159 EC--S 00'27" 001 072 OK 27 04/15 17:24 2088840744 EC--S 00'27" 001 072 OK 28 04/15 17:25 POLICE DEPT EC--S 00'26" 001 072 OK 29 04/15 17:266985501 EC--S 00'26" 001 072 OK 30 04/15 17: 26 L I 8RARY EC--S 00' 32" 001 072 OK 31 04/15 17:27 92083776449 EC--S 00'25" 001 072 OK ---_:=---~~~::_:~~:~-~~::~---------------=~:::_--~~~:~~-~~:_----~~:_---~~----------------- J . ~ ,~f~, t: tlcG\(e VOS~-w VuJdlQ... WOt\c.e:- lruY\lC...lI..) olfe;;dian- ::. ~\ ~\~..\.."." ID^I-JO., . ./J ~..v\\.~ ~r 1"01 MAYOJ( Tammy de Weerd CITY COUNCil. MEMBl:.R.> William L. M. Nary Keith Bird Charles M. ROlltllr(j~ ShStUl Wardle Crry DEI'ARTMEN1S Fire 541l C. I'rp nklin Road 888-12,;14/ fax 895-0.>90 P~rk.~ &. ReCl'eath)tl 11 E. Bower Street 868-35791 (~X 898.5501 J>IMtlillg & Zoning 660 E. Wat(:rtower Lane Suite 202 864.5$33 (fax 888-6854 Pollee HOl E. Wate'tower Lane 888.6678/ fax 846-7366 Publk Works 660 1::. Watertower l.ane SUile 200 S9S,S50ll/fa, 898-%5] - Building 660 E, Water tower r.~ne SUite 150 887.221l/f~" 887.1297 . Sewer (WWTP) 3401 N. Ten Mile Road 888.2191 Ifs" 884-0744 . Water 2235 N. W. 6th $tr~et 6$8-52421 fax 864-1159 NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a Pre-Council Meeting at City Council Chambers, Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian City Council will be discussing agenda items which are on the regular scheduled City Council meeting as well as the following issue; - Ada County EMS Presentation for Proposed Bond Levy: The public is welcome to attend the meeting. DATED this 15th day of April, 2005. JI~)- CITY HALL 33 EAST IOAHO AVENUE MERIOIAN. IOAI.ra 83642 (208) 888-4433 CITY CLERk-l>\x 888.421R ~lllM^N n"SOllRCf.$-R\X 884'8723 I'INi\NCE ~ UnLrn KILLI{>I(;-l'^x 887.4813 MAYOR'S QFFiCo-lnX 88-l.8!1'l -..._-----............_-----..._....._-----............_-------~---_..._--------------------.........------.......-----.....------...- DATE T]ME TO/FROM 01 04/15 18:22 8841159 132 04/15 18:23 21388840744 03 04/15 18:24 POLICE DEPT 134 04/15 18:25 8985501 05 04/15 18:26 LIBRARY 06 134/15 18:26 92083776449 07 04/15 18:27 3886924 es 134/15 18= 28 P-AND-Z 09 134/15 18:29 FaxServer 113 84/15 18: 30 208 895 133913 11 134/15 18: 31 128308048 12 84/15 18=32 288 387 6393 13 84/15 18:32 ADA CTY DEIJELMT 14 04/15 18: 33 8885852 15 134/15 18:34 ]DAHO ATHLETIC C 16 8<1/15 18:35 ]D PRESS TR]BUNE 17 84/15 18: 36 2088886781 CITY OF MERtD]AN MODE M] N/SEC PGS EC--S 88' 19" 081 EC--S 81:l'28" 01:11 EC--S 00' 19" 001 EC--S 08' 18" 001 EC--S 813' 213" 801 EC--S 138' 19" 13131 EC--S 08'19" 001 EC--S 80' 19" 001 EC--S 1313'24" 001 EC--S 81:l'19" 001 83--S 138'24" 001 EC--S 138' 19" 1:1131 EC--S 80' 19" 1381 EC--S 138'19" Bel EC--S 138' 18" 881 EC--S 813' 18" 001 EC--S 1:113'18" 81:11 CMDt! STATUS 075 OK 875 OK 075 OK 1375 OK 1375 OK 075 OK 875 OK 075 OK 1375 OK 075 OK 075 OK 1375 OK 075 OK 1375 OK 1375 OK 875 OK 1375 OK f I-eCiS€. roS+ -fbv- PubU c /Vofj ce CITY OF MERIDIAN Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 6:00 p,m. City Council Chambers PRE-COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 1. Roll-call Attendance: Shaun Wardle _ Christine Donnell = Charlie Rountree _ Keith Bird _ Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Ada County EMS Presentation for Proposed Bond Levy: (*30 minutes) *Approximate allowable time set for agenda item may change depending on discussion. Please use the designated minutes as a guideline only. Meridian City Pre-Council Agenda - April 19, 2005 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at pUblic meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related 10 documents and/or hearings. please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the pUblic meeting. 'fl-e4S!" ~00f- -fbv YubU( No-Hcz CITY OF MERIDIAN PRE-COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: Shaun Wardle Christine Donnell Charlie Rountree Keith Bird _ Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Ada County EMS Presentation for Proposed Bond Levy: (*30 minutes) * Approximate allowable time set for agenda item may change depending on discussion. Please use the designated minutes as a guideline only. Meridian City Pre-Council Agenda - April 19, 2005 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. fl~~e PoSt W ?uJd\~ WO~(_e:-\~Cl Y\iLJ'.! ~p /CITYOF '-/VI erzdian'\\, ~...: IDA~H~ l ''''(;'\''1'', -. y;'; ~ /,,~ r I-U:,\'sl'HE y,\.U SUlCI; , 1S0a MAYOR Tammy de Weerd CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS William L. M. Nary Keith Bird Charles M.Rountree Shaun Wardle CITY DEPARTMENTS Fire 540 E. Franklin Road 888-12341 fax 895-0390 Parks & Recreation 11 E. Bower Street 888-35791 fax 898-5501 Planning & Zoning 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 202 884-55331 fax 888-6854 Police 1401 E. Water tower Lane 888-6678 1 fax 846-7366 Public Works 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 200 898-55001 fax 898-9551 _ Building 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 150 887-2211/fax 887-1297 - Sewer (WWTP) 3401 N. Ten Mile Road 888-2191/ fax 884-0744 - Water 2235 N. W. 8th Street 888-52421 fax 884-1159 NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING MERIDIAN CITY COUNCil NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a Pre-Council Meeting at City Council Chambers, Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian City Council will be discussing agenda jtems which are on the regular scheduled City Council meeting as well as the following issue: - Ada County EMS Presentation for Proposed Bond Levy: The public is welcome to attend the meeting. DATED this 15th day of April, 2005. Jf;<<-:;t- CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 CITY CLERK-FAX 888.4218 HU~Ii\N RESOURCES-FAX 884-8723 FINt\t.,CE & UTILITY BILLlNG-Fi\X 887-48]3 ~IAYOR'S OFFICE-FAX 884-8119 Revised 4-19-05 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: -L Shaun Wardle -L Christine Donnell -L Charlie Rountree -L Keith Bird -L Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: By Kathleen Kreller, Idaho Statesman 3. Community Invocation by Will Berg, Meridian City Clerk 4. Adoption of the Agenda: Approve As Amended 5. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of March 29,2005 City Council Regular Meeting: Approve B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 05-005 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed use three story building consisting of retail, office and residential uses in the 0- T zone for Dave Buich by Dave Buich - 641 North Main Street: Approve C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 05-003 Request for a Variance for a reduction in parking requirements for a proposed three-story mixed-use project for Dave Buich by Dave Buich - 641 North Main Street: Approve D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 05- 001 Request for an Annexation and Zoning of 156.49 acres to R-8 & L-O zones for Bainbridae Subdivision by Brighton Properties, LLC - SWC of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road: Approve E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 05- 002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 429 building lots and 35 common lots on 155.44 acres in proposed R-8 and L-O zones Meridian City Council Agenda - April 1 g, 2005 Page 1 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Revised 4-19-05 for Bainbridae Subdivision by Brighton Properties, LLC - SWC of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road: Approve F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 05-002 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development consisting of 428 residential building lots, one church lot and 35 common lots located in a "mixed-use neighborhood center" designation on the Comprehensive Plan for Bainbridae Subdivision by Brighton Properties, LLC - SWC of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road: Approve G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 05-006 Request for a Variance for a time extension to record the Final Plat for Setter Cover for Setter Cove Subdivision by MKH Development, Inc. - north of East Ustick Road and North Locust Grove Road: Approve H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CPA 04-003 Request for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to change approximately 48 acres from Industrial to Mixed-Use Regional for Ten Mile Development. LLC by Hansen-Rice, Inc. - SWC of North Eagle Road and East Pine Avenue: Table to April 26, 2005 Meeting Need Resolution Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 017 Request for a Rezone of 61.63 acres from I-L & L-O to C-G zone for Ten Mile Development. LLC by Hansen-Rice, Inc. - SWC of North Eagle Road and East Pine Avenue: Table to April 26, 2005 Meeting J. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04-051 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Conceptual Planned Development for commercial/retail uses for approximately 615,430 square feet of building areas in a proposed C-G zone for Ten Mile Development. LLC by Hansen-Rice, Inc. - SWC of North Eagle Road and East Pine Avenue: Table to April 26,2005 Meeting K. Development Agreement: AZ 03-025 Request for annexation and zoning of 57.84 acres from RUT to C-G zones for Blue Marlin by W. H. Moore Company - northwest corner of East Ustick Road and North Eagle Road: Approve L. Water Main Easement for Park's Westside Bodv Works by Tim Wallace: Approve Meridian City Council Agenda - April 1 g, 2005 Page 2 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Revised 4-19~05 M. Water Main Easement for Simmons Fine Jewelrv: Approve N. Aoorove Beer. Wine. and liQuor License Renewals: Approve Idaho Pizza Company - Beer & Wine Applebee's - Beer & Liquor MuggsyJs - Beer & Liquor Chicago Connection - Beer & Wine Cherry Lane Recreation - Beer & Liquor Pizza Hut - Beer Limelight - Beer & Wine Kahootz Steak & Alehouse - Beer & Liquor Bill N Lynn's Place - Beer & Liquor Fred Meyer - Beer & Wine Round Table - Beer & Wine Texas Roadhouse - Beer & Liquor O. Aareement for Professional Services with The Land GrouP. Inc. for Communitv Plaza: Approve P. License AQreement with Nampa & Meridian Irriaation District for Trailwav Park Subdivision (Jackson Drain): Approve Q. License Aareement with Nampa & Meridian IrriQation District for Silhouette Subdivision (Onweiler Lateral): Approve R. License Aareement with Nampa & Meridian Irriaation District for Castlebrook Subdivision (Ten Mile Drain): Approve 6. Department Reports: A. Public Works - Rick Clinton 1. Back Flow Inspection Program: Next Week Follow~up B. MayorJs Office 1. Report - Farmers and Merchants State Bank Old Building Use: 7. (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) ''Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, afJ presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter. " Meridian City Council Agenda - April 1 g, 2005 Page 3 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Revised 4-19-05 8. Public Hearing: AZ 05-006 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 76.29 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Zebulon Heiahts Subdivision No.2 by Traditions by Amyx II, LLP - south of East McMillan Road and east of North Locust Grove Road: Approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 9. Public Hearing: PP 05-008 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 175 single-family residential building lots and 20 common lots on 72.85 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Zebulon Heiahts Subdivision NO.2 by Traditions by Amyx II, LLP - south of East McMillan Road and east of North Locust Grove Road: Approve Amended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 10. Public Hearing: CUP 05-006 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development with reductions to lot frontage, increased block length and reduction in density to less than 3 dwelling units per acre in a proposed R-4 zone for Zebulon Heiahts Subdivision No.2 by Traditions by Amyx II, LLP - south of East McMillan Road and east of North Locust Grove Road: Approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 11. Public Hearing: RZ 05-002 Request for a Rezone of 1.28 acres from R-4 to L-O for Meridian Fire Station No.4 by the City of Meridian - Lot 1, Block 4, Thousand Springs Subdivision NO.1: Approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 12. Public Hearing: CUP 05-007 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a wireless telecommunication facility in a C-G zone for Verizon Wireless by AFL Telecommunications - 1776 North Avest Lane: Approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 13. Public Hearing: CUP 05-009 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a multi-tenant office building in an I-L zone as required by the conditions of approval for Lot 5, Block 2, Medimont Subdivision No.1 by Falash & Ross Construction, Inc. - 150 South Adkins Way: Approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 14. Public Hearing: MI 05-001 Request for approval to construct a golf course maintenance equipment storage and repair shop for Cherrv Lane Golf Course by The City of Meridian - east of North Black Cat Road and north of West Cherry Lane: Approve 15. Public Hearing: MI 05-002 Request for a Miscellaneous application for approval to display and sell Jacuzzi models and one (1) above ground pool for the months April to October for Custom Pools and Patio by Custom Pools and Patio - 322 South Main Street: Deny Meridian City Council Agenda - April 1 g, 2005 Page 4 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Revised 4-19-05 16. Discussion of Turn Lanes for The Courtyards at Ten Mile: Discussed 17. Discussion of United Water PUC Application by Brad Watson: Discussed 18. Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: Approve 19, Ordinance No, 05-1141 : Licensed Alcohol Establishments and Prohibitina Two License Establishments within the Same Premise: (Second Reading - Public Comment will be Accepted): 3rd Reading 20, Ordinance No. 05-1143 : AZ 04-033 Request for an Annexation and Zoning of 15.92 acres from C-2 and RUT zones to C-G zone for Stor- !!.by Avest LP - 355 North Ten Mile Road: Approve 21. Ordinance No. 05-1144 : RZ 04-016 Request for a Rezone of .27 acre from R-4 to O-T zone for Serendipity Place Subdivision by Susan Howard -1305 West 1st Street: Approve 22. Ordinance No. 05-1145 : AZ 03-025 Request for annexation and zoning of 57.84 acres from RUT to C-G zones for Blue Marlin by W. H. Moore Company - northwest corner of East Ustick Road and North Eagle Road: Approve Meridian City Council Agenda - April 1 g, 2005 Page 5 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Revised 4-19-05 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: --X- Shaun Wardle ~ Christine Donnell + Charlie Rountree =z= Keith Bird -A- Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: 6:1 /t:/ff-IkleelV' !c..relle.;- ( .:z-~i.t? J7?(-$e.f~ 3. Community Invocation by Pastor Co. dOIl.Slytel, .with Trea3l:1fe \(alley WOlsl.;fJ Center W/Jl ~erJ ( c>~ (J(e-rlr-- 4. Adoption of the Agenda: ~v-< a.~ a ~eflC,- 5. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of March 29, 2005 City Council Regular Meeting: ~provJ.- B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 05-005 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed use three story building consisting of retail, office and residential uses in the O-T zone for Dave Buich by Dave Buich - 641 North Main Street: ~r(;f.-C.- C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 05-003 Request for a Variance for a reduction in parking requirements for a proposed three-story mixed-use project for Dave Buich by Dave Buich - 641 North Main Street: ~vJ-- D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 05- 001 Request for an Annexation and Zoning of 156.49 acres to R-8 & L-O zones for Bainbridae Subdivision by Brighton Properties, LLC - SWC of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road: 4;<f(JYl?v..e...- E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 05- 002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 429 building lots and 35 common lots on 155.44 acres in proposed R-8 and L-Q zones for Bainbridae Subdivision by Brighton Properties, LLC - SWC of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road: ~v<.-- Meridian City Council Agenda - April1g, 2005 Page 1 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Revised 4-19-05 F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 05-002 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development consisting of 428 residential building lots, one church lot and 35 common lots located in a "mixed-use neighborhood center" designation on the Comprehensive Plan for Bainbridae Subdivision by Brighton Properties, LLC - SWC of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road: o/~V'<-.. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 05-006 Request for a Variance for a time extension to record the Final Plat for Setter Cover for Setter Cove Subdivision by MKH Development, Inc. - north of East Ustick Road and North Locust Grove Road: ~Y-<- Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CPA 04-003 Request for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to change approximately 48 acres from Industrial to Mixed-Use Regional for Ten Mile Development. LLC by Hansen-Rice, Inc. - SWC of North Eagle Road <;:lnd East Pine Avenue: 77v~ Iv ~-2b-(}D ~ nit f 0/"-'/7........ Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 017 Request for a Rezone of 61.63 acres from I-L & L-Q to C-G zone for Ten Mile Development. LLC by Hansen-Rice, Inc. - SWC of North Eagle Road and East Pine Avenue: -kv/;-tL-~ "'-2~-P'i' G. ~ H. *" I. '* J. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04-051 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Conceptual Planned Development for commercial/retail uses for approximately 615,430 square feet of building areas in a proposed C-G zone for Ten Mile Development. LLC by Hansen-Rice, Inc. - SWC of North Eagle Road and East Pine Avenue: fr94-- h -I-2,b-(}~ K. Development Agreement: AZ 03-025 Request for annexation and zoning of 57.84 acres from RUT to C-G zones for Blue Marlin by W. H. Moore Company - northwest corner of East Ustick Road and North Eagle Road: ,1t~V"1t... Water Main Easement for Park's Westside Bodv Works by Tim Wallace: ~1I'LC- Water Main Easement for Simmons Fine Jewelrv: ""~l.I-<-- L. M. N. Approve Beer. Wine. and Liauor License Renewals: ~(,;<A- Idaho Pizza Company - Beer & Wine Applebee's - Beer & Liquor Meridian City Council Agenda - April 1 g, 2005 Page 2 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Revised 4-19-05 Muggsy's - Beer & Liquor Chicago Connection - Beer & Wine Cherry Lane Recreation - Beer & Liquor Pizza Hut - Beer Limelight - Beer & Wine Kahootz Steak & Alehouse - Beer & Liquor Bill N Lynn's Place - Beer & Liquor Fred Meyer - Beer & Wine Round Table - Beer & Wine Texas Roadhouse - Beer & Liquor O. Aoreement for Professional Services with The Land Grouo. Inc. for Community Plaza: Ci-ffrotr<- P. License Aareement with Namoa & Meridian Irriaation District for Trailwav Park Subdivision (Jackson Drain): ~v-'t- Q. License Aareement with Namoa & Meridian Irriaation District for Silhouette Subdivision (Onweiler Lateral): ~~ R. License Aareement with Namoa & Meridian Irriaation District for Castlebrook Subdivision (Ten Mile Drain): ~ ~ 6. Department Reports: A. Public Works - Rick Clinton 1. Back Flow Inspection Program AL'fC.f ~u-k wlltl?w-up lb. f1^a~J f. /Up,""r - F4r.-~J I- /n~~frJ'~ lJa.--I,- (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) t?/a: ~dl'~ tt..u-. 7. "Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter. " 8. Public Hearing: AZ 05-006 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 76.29 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Zebulon Heiahts Subdivision No.2 by Traditions by Amyx II, LLP - south of East McMillan Road and east of North Locust Grove Road: d/p~r.e.. .//~ .( c./..( .ffr WppYPV' ~ 9. Public Hearing: PP 05-008 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 175 single-family residential building lots and 20 common lots on 72.85 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Zebulon Heiahts Subdivision No.2 by Traditions by Amyx II, LLP - south of East McMillan Road and east of North Locust Grove Road: ~~ a~~ ./lrC ,. elL #r af7fJrtJv~ Meridian City Council Agenda - April 1 g, 2005 Page 3 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Revised 4-19-05 10. Public Hearing: CUP 05-006 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development with reductions to lot frontage, increased block length and reduction in density to less than 3 dwelling units per acre in a proposed R-4 zone for Zebulon Heiahts Subdivision No.2 by Traditions by Amyx II, LLP - south of East McMillan Road and east of North Locust Grove Road: a/(JYV'V'<. .,t:'(;::.{ &(.,f k-~f7Yi)V~ 11. Public Hearing: RZ 05-002 Request for a Rezone of 1.28 acres from R-4 to L-O for Meridian Fire Station No.4 by the City of Meridian - Lot 1, Block 4, Thousand Springs Subdivision No.1: ~/~ v-.t.... 12. Public Hearing: CUP 05-007 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a wireless telecommunication facility in a C-G zone for Verizon Wireless by AFL Telecommunications - 1776 North Avest Lane: ~~ :I'l~ic-I..(... ffr~~ 13. Public Hearing: CUP 05-009 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a multi-tenant office building in an I-L zone as required by the conditions of approval for Lot 5, Block 2, Medimont Subdivision No.1 by Falash & Ross Construction, Inc. - 150 South Adkins Way: ~~ -//-r:- f c/~ ~ ~jh'<9vA-€. 14. Public Hearing: MI 05-001 Request for approval to construct a golf course maintenance equipment storage and repair shop for Cherrv Lane Golf Course by The City of Meridian - east of North Black Cat Road and north of West Cherry Lane: ~v-..e.... 15. Public Hearing: MI 05-002 Request for a Miscellaneous application for approval to display and sell Jacuzzi models and one (1) above ground pool for the months April to October for Custom Pools and Patio by Custom Pools and Patio - 322 South Main Street: ~ 16. Discussion of Turn Lanes for The Courtyards at Ten Mile: dlT~~ 17. Discussion of United Water PUC Application by Brad Watson: dlJ'cus.r.eti.- 18. Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: ~~ 19. Ordinance No. 05-1141 : Licensed Alcohol Establishments and Prohibitina Two License Establishments within the Same . Premise: (Second Reading - Public Comment will be Accepted) jr:!!- /2.ea.d/h() 20. Ordinance No. t? () -- I (4:5 AZ 04-033 Request for an Annexation and Zoning of 15.92 acres from C-2 and RUT zones to C-G zone for Stor-It by Avest LP - 355 North Ten Mile Road: ar~~ Meridian City Council Agenda - April 19, 2005 Page 4 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Revised 4-19-05 21. Ordinance No. #fl....-;/4- 1- RZ 04-016 Request for a Rezone of .27 acre from R-4 to 0- T zone for Serendioitv Place Subdivision by Susan Howard -1305 West 1st Street: tf/j7FRVl<. 22. Ordinance No. tl? -11.tff? AZ 03-025 Request for annexation and zoning of 57.84 acres from RUT to C-G zones for Blue Marlin by W. H. Moore Company - northwest corner of East Ustick Road and North Eagle Road: ~~ Meridian City Council Agenda - April 1 g, 2005 Page 5 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. May 6, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCil MEETING APPLICANT May 10, 2005 ITEM NO. 5~B REQUEST Approve Minutes of April 19. 2005 City Council Regular Meeting AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: ~./ Contacted: Emaifed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Meridian City Council Meetina ADril 19. 2005. The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:15 P.M., Tuesday, April 19, 2005, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Shaun Wardle, Christine Donnell, and Charlie Rountree. Others Present: Ted Baird, Will Berg, Brad Hawkins-Clark, Brad Watson, John Overton, Rick Clinton, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X Shaun Wardle --1L-Christine Donnell -X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird - --2L- Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: I will go ahead and call this meeting to order. It is Tuesday, April 19th. It is 15 minutes after 7:00 o'clock and I'd like to welcome you all here tonight. We will start with roll call attendance. Mr. Berg. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Item No. 2 is the pledge of allegiance and since I haven't picked on this person before, I will ask our Statesman reporter to, please, come forward and lead us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Will Berg. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Is Pastor Slyter here with us tonight? I don't see him in the audience. I will ask our city derk to, please, lead us in our community invocation. If you will, please, all join us or take this opportunity for a moment of silence. Berg: Thank you. Shall we all pray? Heavenly Father, we want to thank you tonight for the many blessings that you have given us, the many things that you have shown in this community, the outreach that you have given, the volunteers, the neighbors, and the whole community spirit. We are so blessed with your graciousness and we want to thank you for this community, the visions and missions that the people of this community have, let's bring forth and have a future for our children, in your name, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 2 of 77 De Weerd: Mr. Berg, you're a wonderful fill in. Thank you so much. Okay. Item NO.4 is adoption of the agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Okay. We do have some changes to our revised revised agenda. On the Consent Agenda, Items H, I, and J needs to be pulled until 4/26/05, which we will also repeat that when we do the Consent. Under department reports we forgot to put down the most important one, we have got a 6-B and that's the Mayor to report on the Farmers and Merchants old property. De Weerd: Thank you. Bird: And our ordinance numbers, Item No. 20 is 05-1143. Twenty-one is 05-1144. And 22 is 05-1145. And with that I move we approve the revised revised agenda. Rountree: Second. Second. De Weerd: Thank you. If there is no further discussion, all those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of March 29, 2005 City Council Regular Meeting: B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 05-005 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed use three story building consisting of retail, office and residential uses in the 0- T zone for Dave Buich by Dave Buich - 641 North Main Street: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 05-003 Request for a Variance for a reduction in parking requirements for a proposed three-story mixed-use project for Dave Buich by Dave Buich - 641 North Main Street: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 05- 001 Request for an Annexation and Zoning of 156.49 acres to R-8 & L-O zones for Bainbridae Subdivision by Brighton Properties, LLC - SWC of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 05- 002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 429 building lots and Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 3 of 77 35 common lots on 155.44 acres in proposed R-8 and L-O zones for Bainbridae Subdivision by Brighton Properties, LLC - SWC of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 05-002 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development consisting of 428 residential building lots, one church lot and 35 common lots located in a "mixed-use neighborhood center" designation on the Comprehensive Plan for Bainbridae Subdivision by Brighton Properties, LLC - SWC of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road: G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: V AR 05-006 Request for a Variance for a time extension to record the Final Plat for Setter Cover for Setter Cove Subdivision by MKH Development, Inc. - north of East Ustick Road and North Locust G rove Road: K. Development Agreement: AZ 03-025 Request for annexation and zoning of 57.84 acres from RUT to C-G zones for Blue Marlin by W. H. Moore Company - northwest corner of East Ustick Road and North Eagle Road: L. Water Main Easement for Park's Wests ide Bodv Works by Tim Wallace: M. Water Main Easement for Simmons Fine Jewelrv: N. Aoorove Beer. Wine and liquor License Renewals: Idaho Pizza Company - Beer & Wine Applebee's - Beer & Liquor Muggsy~s - Beer & Liquor Chicago Connection - Beer & Wine Cherry Lane Recreation - Beer & Liquor Pizza Hut - Beer Limelight - Beer & Wine Kahootz Steak & Alehouse - Beer & Liquor Bill N Lynn's Place - Beer & Liquor Fred Meyer - Beer & Wine Round Table - Beer & Wine Texas Roadhouse - Beer & Liquor o. Aareement for Professional Services with The Land Group. Inc. for Communitv Plaza: P. License Aareement with Nampa & Meridian Irriaation District for Trailwav Park Subdivision (Jackson Drain): Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 4 of 77 Q. License AQreement with Nampa & Meridian Irriaation District for Silhouette Subdivision (Onweiler Lateral): R. License Aareement with Nampa & Meridian Irriaation District for Castle brook Subdivision (Ten Mile Drain): De Weerd: Consent Agenda, Item 5. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I repeat again that Items H, I, and J on the Consent Agenda need to be pulled until 4/26/05, because we have to wait for a resolution to come fOlWard before we pass on that. And with that I move we approve that Consent Agenda for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all proper papers. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the Consent Agenda with the removal of H, I, and J. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 6: Department Reports: A. Public Works - Rick Clinton 1. Back Flow Inspection Program De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item NO.6. We have our Public Works, our Water Department Superintendent Rick Clinton. Clinton: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I appreciate an opportunity to speak briefly with you tonight. I had issued a memo last week pertaining to an innovative spin to an idea that we presented to Council in the budgeting process on backflow prevention improvements and I guess at this point in time I'd just like to summarize that previously we had proposed that we would contract -- we would actually contract with the testers to do the backflow prevention testing for the customers and this idea I think is kind of an innovative partnership where we would propose to reimburse customers for a portion of the costs of those tests, but we wouldn't actually get involved with contracting to do the testing. We are able to do this within the guidelines of the budget Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 5 of 77 currently in fiscal year FY05 and I guess I'm -- I'll just kind of open it up to questions, if you have any. I don't want to waste more of your time this evening than is necessary. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Rick. Council, do you have any questions? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I need a -- you're going to -- for our tests on our backflows you're going to reimburse us? Clinton: That's the proposal, that if you do a test and you submit an invoice to the water department, we would reimburse for a portion of that test, including parts to repair the device, but with a maximum ceiling on a residential three-quarter inch of 50 dollars. Bird Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor. Rick, just a couple questions? One of them being -- and I have had this question from some neighbors. If I paid -- if they had paid for their test this year, where is the cutoff date for them to get reimbursed? And, then, a follow-up question to that is is there a way that we can streamline the reimbursement project, either through the web or a standard form? Clinton: I'll address the second question first, I guess. I would think that there probably should be a way that we could do that. I have discussed briefly with the finance department how they would like to have those reimbursements. One idea was to apply it as a credit. At this point in time Stacy Kilchenmann would prefer not to do that and had indicated that they would rather just issue checks. And would you ask your first question again for me? Wardle: When would the reimbursement begin? At what point in -- would it be all of fiscal year '05 that -- if any water user in Meridian had paid for the test -- I guess where is the cutoff date for people to receive reimbursement? Clinton: That would be my suggestion is anything after October 1, if there is an invoice for it, that they would submit that. We would only be able to reimburse one time annually, but that's all that the testing is required. The other thing that I guess I should clarify is -- as I kind of alluded to, there are two types of back flow prevention devices. One is a primary device that protects the municipal water system. The second one is a secondary device that may protect an internal building's plumbing from a contamination source inside the building. DEQ only requires us to protect the municipal water system. So, those are the only devices at this time that I would support that we reimburse on, because we do not enforce the testing on those secondary devices at this time. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 6 of 77 Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Wardle: A follow-up question to that. So, we are talking specifically about -- in those instances about commercial buildings? Clinton: Correct. But there could be as many as three devices on a commercial building, one for a fire sprinkler line, one for the domestic service, and one for landscaping that we would reimburse for, because those have the potential to affect the water system. Wardle: Okay. Just for some clarity, I think that from the business community standpoint, especially multi-tenant buildings where tenants inside of a larger building may have a back flow device that they are required to test for, would assume -- from a tenant's perspective assume that they would be able to have that reimbursed, even though the landlord would have ultimate responsibility for the exterior testing? Clinton: I think that is correct. And I guess I would also like to clarify that there are some out there that are testing that aren't necessarily being required to test by the City of Meridian. It's a very good idea that they test them, they are not effective if they don't test them, but some of what you're referring to may be examples that they really aren't required by the City of Meridian. We give them an honorary notice when that test is due, we track that data, but we don't really require them beyond what DEQ requires. De Weerd: Any other questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I think we need to explore the mechanism for reimbursement a little more. It seems to me that if we are establishing a group of providers, if you will, or contractors to provide the service, it would be more cost effective if they were to bill us one time for the services they provided, instead of us cutting a bunch of different checks that we would have to have some kind of an audit trail on. Just -- there has got to be some efficiencies, as opposed to looking at this stuff on an individual residential basis. Clinton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Clinton: Councilman Rountree, I think the risk in that is that, you know, a normal homeowner could -- could acquire a 300-dollar invoice for one device if it were required to have repairs to it. In commercial, we -- I have been told it can be 4,000 dollars to Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 7 of 77 repair a faulty back flow device. So, I think that's why we took this new approach to it, is that we are willing to kind of partner with the customer, but I think -- if I'm understanding what you're saying, we would be paying more than our -- okay. Rountree: No. What I'm saying is that the provider that we establish that can -- that would work in this program would bill us for the portion that the city is going to participate in. So, if it's a residential situation where there was flow tests and a repair and it exceeded the 50 dollar portion that the city was going to participate in, the city would get the bill from the provider of 50 dollars and the residence would get the bill for the balance. That way you would deal monthly with maybe four or five billing entities, as opposed to however many you're anticipating. I would guess in the hundreds. Clinton: Approximately 3,000 a year. Rountree: Yeah. Can we give that some thought? Clinton: Sure. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any further-- Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: -- information needed? You probably wanted direction tonight? Clinton: Well, I was in hopes to get something going on it, but I guess we will regroup and visit about this a little bit further. The other thing that I guess I want to kind of touch on is that where we are looking at less than 4,000 customers, our intent was that once we establish what we are going to do, we would like to notify them in the mail with our test due notices, rather than by mass mailing that may get customers that it doesn't affect, concerned, or have questions where they are not applicable. De Weerd: Rick, could you come back next week with an answer on the proposal to consolidate that billing with each of the inspectors and let us know if that would work and, then, we can -- we can ask Council to go ahead and make a recommendation? Clinton: Sure. De Weerd: Is that fair? Clinton: And I want to make sure that I understand what Councilman Rountree is saying. If -- we could use the example of back flow tester A is -- what you're referring to is that we would actually get an invoice from him, from that company, for those devices that they have tested? Rountree: Right. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 8 of 77 Clinton: Okay. De Weerd: And the associated addresses. Clinton: Sure. The one thing that might challenge us a little is to still be able to demonstrate to that homeowner that we really did contribute to the cost of his test. But we will figure that out. De Weerd: Mr. Wardle, did you have a question? Wardle: No. Madam Mayor, I was just looking for direction on what to bring back. Certainly, I'm okay with the dollar amount and the program itself, but some of the questions that I just raised about even the commercial side are things that, from a business point of view, they will be asking the inspector anyway and so those people will be on the ground doing the inspections, as well as interacting with our water customers and so they would have an incentive to be able to make it clear to those people if they, indeed, were billing the city for our portion of it. Clinton: That's a good point. Yes. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any further information you need from the Council? Clinton: I don't. Thank you. B. Mayor de Weerd - Farmers and Merchants Building. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Item B. I have some additional figures for the Farmers and Merchants building and since Mrs. Donnell was not a participant in last week's conversation, Farmers and Merchants has offered their building for our overflow. Other users of that building will be the Meridian Development Corporation, who would also be paying a portion of the cost, in addition to Avalon Consulting, who is the executive director of MDC. Utility costs will be 8,080 dollars a year, taxes 6,370, and the phone 1,080, for a total of 15,530 dollars, which equals 1,294 dollars a month and that would be shared -- that cost would be shared with the MDC and Avalon Consulting and I did not hear after MDC's meeting what -- if they put an amount on that, but they would be participants in the cost. There are some capital expenditures. For the phone system and installation it's 2,463 dollars. That would be reimbursed dollar for dollar on return, less the installation costs, and I don't have what the cost of installation is. The phone line installation costs 120 and so we could hook them up and assure that they are part of the network. That is a one-time cost of 2,000 dollars. That also would be re- used with the complete amount, re-used either in the new building or in possible fire sub stations. It can be used again. So, that's not a lost cost. The capital expenditures were 4,583 dollars. So, Farmers and Merchants does have plans, if the city would like to utilize that building, to put in some remodel costs of 21,000 dollars, because they feel that -- a commitment to making this work and they want to be a partner with the city. So, are there any questions on this? Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 9 of 77 Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: How many square feet is there in that building? De Weerd: There is 3,965 square feet. And the utility costs were high, because that was a fully -- that was a full building. They had it fully staffed. So, the utility costs could possibly, most likely, be less than that. Bird: We would do this on a sundown basis, year to year? De Weerd: Yes. Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: Since I wasn't here last week and you, obviously, talked about this, what would we do -- what would they do with the building if we didn't lease it? Will they tear it down? De Weerd: Yes. Donnell: But they are willing to contribute 21,000 dollars towards the capital improvements -- I shouldn't say improvements. The capital needs, since they pretty well gutted the building? De Weerd: It wasn't gutted. It, actually, is pretty intact. They would like to lay new carpet down and there were some lighting fixtures and I think just some hardware stuff. It's pretty non-apparent, but they would like to do some things, because it's -- they would like to be a partner. Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: And you have gone through the building, you have toured the building as to how it can meet the needs of the city? De Weerd: Yes. We -- I toured it with their executive director, the Meridian Development Corporation, and there have been some -- some -- or examples of why we could utilize the building. If Council is in support of this, I would sit down with the department directors that reside in this building and bring back a usage report to you of Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 1 0 of 77 how we would best utilize it. And those costs for the phone are for three lines, which will seNice six phones. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Councilman Donnell -- Donnell: Yes. Bird: -- we also last week started the change to the CUP, because they had so much -- only so much time until they had to take it down and we have to get that changed and we also said that we would absorb the costs of that to run to it through and, then, at that point we'd probably see what they want to -- or they want to -- when we get through with it they are going to want to tear it down or leave it up. If they are putting 21,000 in remodel, I think I got an idea what they are going to do. Donnell: I doubt they will. De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, just -- it appears to me that the decision before the Council is, one, whether we expend the extra -- the dollars that are not in the budget and I think something, maybe, that we are overlooking is when we approved the Conditional Use Permit, we approved it as an amenity to downtown, a plaza and a park, and certainly the city has an opportunity, but we have to weigh that against the project that we saw and approved as is currently constructed and only a portion of that remains and that is the plaza portion. So, I just didn't want to overlook that there are additional community costs to what we have already considered. De Weerd: Mr. Wardle, I appreciate that. I believe that they see it as a worthwhile investment, because it gives a physical presence to the Meridian Development Corporation as well, to help with the downtown redevelopment and I believe it's their impression that having that physical presence at this point is very critical to that redevelopment. They have taken off the back awning and the drive-thru area, creating a parking area, which is also going to house the Meridian Farmers Market that should start sometime next month. So, they are moving forward with the commitment to creating a community gathering place for activities like that and they are a primary sponsor of it. So, I guess it is -- it is a trade off and they remain committed to when they do demolish that building, putting in the amenity. So, I would ask for your direction on this. Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 11 of 77 Donnell: Just one more question. De Weerd: Okay. Donnell: Since this would be overflow space for the city, does that mean that we would trade other leased space for this or would this be in addition to other leased space? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell, it would be primarily staff that are housed at City Hall that are kind of living on top of each other and I guess Councilman Bird keeps -- you know, him being our most frugal member, you feels that he has found every efficiency by stacking desks, but we haven't figured out how to stack the chairs, so -- and he's still working on that concept. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: So, I could say something in -- I hate spending taxpayers dollars worse than anybody, but, Christine, I think that we are to a point now that we got a couple of departments that need more people. We don't know where to put them. We are absolutely -- I mean our survey shows that we need about 60,000 square feet and we have got 11 here, so that tells us how crowded we are. And I feel that this is a short- term fix until we get the new one. Donnell: I would be willing to give up my office. Bird: Well, we already -- De Weerd: Someone's already in there, so you don't have one. Bird: We don't have one anymore. De Weerd: I hate to inform you of this, but-- Donnell: Oh, you mean I don't have -- De Weerd: Our closets our used and your office as well. Bird: We just got a place to put our computers and that's it. Donnell: Thank you. Rountree: I'm going to have to abstain. De Weerd: Okay. I would need a motion if you were to support this request. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 12 of 77 Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would make a motion that we enter into a lease agreement for a period of one year with Farmers and Merchants for our appropriate percentage of fees, which is about five dollars a square foot is what we are getting it for, which is quite a bit cheaper than what the going rate is around here, which I appreciate, and that we pay our appropriate share and Avalon Ventures and MDC pay their accordingly share. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the request for a one-year period, with a possible one year renewal? Bird: You bet. De Weerd: And that puts the pressure on you, Mr. Bird. Discussion? Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Just some brief discussion. I am not going to support the motion for a number of reasons. One of those being adding space for simply the sake of space and spending that dollar without a firm plan in place doesn't set well with me. In addition, to the amenity that I feel that the other portions of the project will bring downtown. De Weerd: Okay. Further discussion? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, abstain; Wardle, nay; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSTAIN. Item 7: (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) Item 8: Public Hearing: AZ 05-006 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 76.29 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Zebulon Heiahts Subdivision No.2 by Traditions by Amyx II, LLP - south of East McMillan Road and east of North Locust Grove Road: Item 9: Public Hearing: PP 05-008 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 175 single-family residential building lots and 20 common lots on 72.85 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Zebulon Heiahts Subdivision No.2 by Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 13 of 77 Traditions by Amyx II, LLP - south of East McMillan Road and east of North Locust Grove Road: Item 10: Public Hearing: CUP 05-006 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development with reductions to lot frontage, increased block length and reduction in density to less than 3 dwelling units per acre in a proposed R-4 zone for Zebulon Heiahts Subdivision No.2 by Traditions by Amyx II, LLP - south of East McMillan Road and east of North Locust Grove Road: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. We have entered the public hearing process of our agenda. Items 8, 9 and 10 are all related, so I will open those three items, AZ 05-006, PP 05-008, and CUP 05-006. I will open with staff comments. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. These three applications all address the property that's outlined in bold here on the screen. It's on the south side of West McMillan, approximately a quarter mile west of North Eagle Road. Wainwright comes into the -- into the project on the south end here. Other surrounding properties -- Boise city limits -- the purple line on here represents our area of city impact. Again, the dark black one is the boundaries of their proposed annexation and plat. So, as you can see, quite a bit of the project would abut Boise city -- Boise city limits. Austin Subdivision, I believe, Austin Creek, is on the north side. They are proposing to align with Austin Creek's primary entrance here on the north. Ada County subdivision, Heritage Subdivision, is a one-acre here on the west side, along with the Settlement Bridge, which has been annexed. What's shown here is the half that doesn't have final plats approved on it, but they do have a preliminary plat approved on all this. To the south there are a couple of -- also Ada County parcels that are within the Meridian's area of city impact, but have not been annexed. So, what they are proposing here on Item No. 8 is to annex all of the 76.29 acres to an R-4 zone. It is designated medium density residential on the Camp Plan. They are, actually, asking for a step down, which is unique, we don't see that very often. The density is below three. It comes in about 2.4 units to the acre gross density and would be a step down for the Comp Plan. So, that's the annexation request. A development agreement has been recommended to be entered into between the developer and the city on that. Here is a zoomed in section of the Comprehensive Plan. It's mainly there so you can see the relationship of other areas to our -- to this project. There is a multi-use pathway, public pathway designated throughout the project. The aerial shows Ustick Baptist Church here up on the north side, along with the -- some of the other Boise subdivisions and projects. There are some existing buildings on the site, which would be removed if approved. Here is the preliminary plat that was submitted and is being recommended for approval to you by the Planning and Zoning Commission. I think just two highlights that I will point out. Ada County Highway District does have a storm water pond on the north end adjacent to McMillan there. The entry road would actually split that pond on both sides. There, as I understand it, are some possible exchanges -- property exchanges that may occur between the developer and Ada County Highway District if this is approved. They have provided larger lots along the Heritage Subdivision here on Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 14 of 77 the west there. Their largest common open space is on the south end. They are proposing a pool and clubhouse. Other amenities include the -- about eight percent open space and the pathway. The pathway would actually be extended from Settlement Bridge, which has been approved to construct that on the north side of the slough there. So, it would be continued on. There is a section of it right here that is actually not on the applicant's property. However, we have asked them to prepare a legal description for that pathway, so that in the future our parks department could go and work with that property owner, the church, potentially, to extend the pathway across there. The multi-use pathway, then, does continue through the -- through the project, some in common lot areas, others along the street. The Conditional Use Permit, the reason for it, they are proposing a reduction to the lot frontage for, I believe, about 25 lots of the 170 some odd lots. Twenty-five of them or so would have frontages below 80, at approximately 58. And, then, an increased block length. They are proposing for this block that abuts the residential subdivisions here on the west, which didn't provide any stub streets, obviously, they can't break up the block, since there is no stub street, so that's another reason for the planned development. And, then, the density, less than three dwelling units per acre, that can actually be accomplished through the Comp Plan without a request, but that's there for you. One other item I want to point out. Here is just some blow-up sections of the landscape plan, some typical building elevations that we would propose to construct. This is fairly light on this slide, but we included it so you can see some -- kind of what we were thinking in terms of future circulation in this area. Again, here is the proposed site. Champion Park Subdivision has a couple of phases already constructed, as you know. They were approved with a stub street here to the north. In the future what we would anticipate is to have a connection there -- again, this is to help alleviate Eagle Road traffic, as well as to provide circulation within the section here. We have also asked for them to extend this cul-de-sac -- not have that be a cul- de-sac and extend it as a stub street, so that you could, actually, have -- this would be about a thousand foot block there. So, you would have a local street circulation system in here, potentially, in the future, to help get that circulation. They have agreed to that stub street. The Planning and Zoning Commission has included that in their conditions. This is designated as office here in Boise city. If you come in on Wainwright, it makes the curve up to the north and this is designated for office. Ada County Highway District has asked for, I believe, a 20 foot buffer that would separate these residential uses from this. It's, I think, a little uncertain right now whether this would become a public street or just a driveway, but we just wanted to show this for your consideration, so -- as I mentioned, the Planning and Commission did ask -- or did recommend approval of all three of these. The main testimony came from Ty Ketlinkski, who was representing his father and mother. They own property to the south of the site. Dave Bivens also commented on the application. Craig Hood presented it. Most of the comments and discussion had to do with Eagle Road, of course. There was quite a bit of written comments, if you saw the record on that, from residents in the area concerned about Eagle Road. Staff did either e-mail those people directly or send them postcards to let them know that we did receive their comments, that it has been in the public record. The main item on the traffic there is a -- ITD, in their 2004 Eagle Road corridor study, did have a potential future signal at Wainwright and Eagle Road. I think that's about as much as we know from ITO at this point, but it is in that corridor study plan. The main -- Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 15 of 77 I think the other comments that we received was from the Ketlinskis, who -- we also have a letter from them, who are asking that for -- I believe it's four lots on the south that the height restriction be limited there, so that there is not two story homes. And with that -- we also did receive a letter from the Parkins-Nearse User's Association regarding piping of the ditches. So, if -- and maybe Mrs. McKay, who is representing the applicant, could address some of those to the Council, just so you know where they stand. Thanks. De Weerd: Council, any questions for staff? Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Brad. Is the applicant's representative here? McKay: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, 150 East Aikens, Suite B, Eagle. I'm representing the Amyx family on this development. If I could, I'd like to put some boards up there to kind go through the project for you. As Brad indicated, this property is on your far eastern perimeter. Your city limits do abut us here at Settlement Bridge. Boise city limits are there at McMillan, with Austin Creek and, then, Madison Park here on our eastern boundary. The Amyx family own property clear out to Eagle Road. There is approximately seven and a half acres in Boise's area of impact. We did annex and zone that LOD into Boise city and I believe we have 11 office lots that are proposed. We aligned with Wainwright when we did that subdivision in Boise city. It is recorded and constructed. Rim Lot is the half-mile mark. I did Cameron Park's design. We intentionally put Wainwright there at the half-mile, so at some point in time it would have an opportunity to be a signalized intersection. This intersection is aligned. We continued -- where Meridian's impact area starts we continued that collector on and, then, dropped it into the site. We have a clubhouse, pool, parking area, playground, and the park will be located right there at the end of the collector. This is about 3.36 acres, so it is a large central park area and that will be, obviously, the focal point for this subdivision. We do have McMillan on the north. One problem we had, when ACHD did the rebuild in McMillan Road from Eagle Road to Five Mile and when it went five lanes they pumped out of their storm drainage and purchased these two lots and they are unimproved as far as landscaping, just like a retention area, and, then, they will overflow and I think into the North Slough. One thing they did is they left 60 feet there abutting McMillan Road for this property. [assume that was -- that came off this parcel, but when Austin Creek came through, that 60 feet -- nobody thought about making sure that was in alignment. So, I approached the highway district before we started design and asked if we could do an exchange in order so that I could align with Camas and they indicated that we could work with their drainage in their design department to do -- this is already right of way, so we'd just dedicate additional right of way, we'd go ahead and make modifications to those ponds. I also approached them about improving the esthetics of those ponds. It would require a license agreement. It will require the drainage department to approve whatever our landscape architect recommends, but, obviously, for esthetic purposes, something needs to be done there. The highway district will participate in the sidewalk portion on McMillan for the property that they own. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 16 of 77 They have indicated if our contractor could build it, then, they would pay their proportionate share and it could be done as a private-public type partnership. As we bring this street in, it is what we call a non-continuous collector, where it just comes in for a short distance and, then -- and, then, we turn it into a local street. The lot sizes in this subdivision range from 8,140 square feet, which is my smallest lot here against Madison Park -- and I did Madison Park here in Boise city. Those lots are between seven, eight, and nine thousand square feet. We connect to their stub street. We are bringing it in, crossing over the North Slough and, then, the lots go all the way up to 31,000 square feet. I was very cognizant of the fact that Heritage Subdivision are -- it's acre lots, it's an established development, what we call like estate type lots. So, what I tried to do is come in with a cul-de-sac and fan these lots out as much as possible. So, the lots along here are ranging from 31,000, 17, 18, 19, 20 thousand, keeping them as large as possible. This particular depth I think runs like 140 or 150 feet. So, I'm trying to make it as nice a transition as possible. When we look at the overall lot sizes in here, they are very large, they are very deep. The medium lot size is 12,888 square feet. As Brad indicated, our density is 2.4 dwelling units per acre. We have got five-acre lots on our southern boundary called Jasmine Acres. As far as transition for Jasmine, I came in with the three cul-de-sacs and, then, had to create a straightaway in order to get my interconnectivity through my development and my stub street and so I kept these, I think these are 145, 150, and I kept them wider to try to get a better -- a better transition ing between these estate type lots. These are quite expensive homes, they are large homes, and so what we intend here is -- the price ranges will be 270, like for these smaller lots here next to Madison Park. Within the interior we anticipate it will go up to 400, it could even go beyond that, depending on the size of the homes. Approximate minimum size of these homes will be 2,000 and on up. The product that the Amyx family and their builder has built, like out in Traditions, those homes are usually ranging three, four, five -- I think even 6,000 square feet. So, we intend this to be an upper end, nice residential estate type development. Open space. We gave 8.3 percent open space in this development. This is about .55 acres. There will be playground equipment here and, then, obviously, our central location here. On your -- on your Comprehensive Plan it doesn't mention the multi-use pathway. We built it in Champion Park, I have aligned it right here, so it would be close thereto and at some point in time, if this property ever redevelops, it could be extended to connect to Champion Park and, as you well know, there is an elementary school west of Champion Park. I have got a separate lot with a ten foot -- we will have pedestrian friendly crossings and work with the Public Works and the highway district to make sure that we either do something like stamped concrete or stripped to make it make sure that the traffic slows down. We take those ten-foot pathways; we take them up separate lots all along here and, then, over to the North Slough. It will run along the North Slough and, then, exit here and make them interconnect to Settlement Bridge. So, we will be getting a lot of continuous multi-use path. I have got one gap here for the Baptist -- I believe that's the Ustick -- was the Ustick Baptist Church. They moved over here. We have already written a legal description. An exhibit. I got a copy of an example from your parks department, we prepared an easement to the City of Meridian for the multi-use pathway for this section, indicating that if they would grant the easement, then, we would construct it, so I don't have a gap in my pathway. I also had a little strip here that will go onto Ada County Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 17 of 77 Highway District property and we have agreed to work with them and I think they are open to the idea of letting -- jf we construct, letting us construct that last stretch and making the connection. So, we will have continuous ten foot interconnected multi-use pathway all the way through. We tried to disperse the traffic as much as possible. We will start phase one -- I think we have got three or four different phases. We will start on McMillan and, then, work our way south as far as our phasing is concerned. The collector right here stops right at this location. We have got three ditches that we will be working with. The North Slough, which we will keep open, we want to work with Settlers to make that a water amenity. Settlement Bridge worked with Settlers. We will go through the same scenario they did with a license agreement for any improvement and providing, obviously, access. They will not allow us to have a joint access with the multi-use pathway. They told me that with Settlement Bridge they had already made the determination. So, one side of the slough we will have their vehicular access, the other side will have the ten foot Meridian multi-use pathway. We got the Parkins- Noerse Lateral that runs down the south boundary and, then, it turns and comes up into Heritage. Based on the topography that the -- the topographic map, that facility is running along that boundary. We will be required, under your ordinance, to pipe it. We have a condition that states that that would be necessary. We need to coordinate, obviously, with the users association. A letter was submitted stating that they want to make sure that the easements are provided. Settlers has already submitted a letter as part of our conditions requiring easements for all of these laterals and the slough facilities. As far as fencing, we intend to do vinyl fencing along that exterior here. Along the slough I think they talked about wrought iron fencing, so that it's visible. I did have one concern -- we are in agreement with all the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and your planning staff. We have agreed to add that stub street to the south. The only condition I was concerned with was from the police department, which stated -- they had concerns about the visibility of the pathway, something in the effect of they may require or request a redesign of the pathway to improve the visibility. It's designated wrought iron on the slough, so -- I mean I don't know where in the heck I can put it, other than where it's going and that's its designated area, so I don't know if the Council wants to visit that and, I guess, ask for more specific information. We will coordinate with your parks department, obviously, on the standards. We don't want to exceed that of a public street as designated in the park's Comprehensive Plan. I think you guys typically change that condition to read that we will work with Public Works to come up with an acceptable standard. The only other comment we had was the fire department has asked us to paint the curb red on ten feet, both sides, of hydrants. That's the first time I have seen that condition. I talked with Joe about it. He said they have problems with people parking in front the hydrants, but that sure is -- it's not going to be attractive. And I wish we could -- we put the little reflectors there, people aren't supposed to park in front of the hydrants, I don't know if they want to consider like signage or something, but those red curbs -- now in apartments, if you have ever driven through a multi-family development, they are red and it's not attractive. All of the sidewalks in this subdivision will be detached also. I wanted to make note of that. So, we will have the five-foot landscape area and, then, the four-foot sidewalk throughout the entire development. Other than that, I think we are all in agreement. We have worked really hard on this project. We have asked for a reduction in density based on Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 18 of 77 your Comprehensive Plan, three to eight dwelling units per acre. Your staff agreed with us, because of the larger lots that adjoin us, and I think we have tried to do the best that we can to provide access to the undeveloped properties and make this as nice a development as we possibly can. Do you have any questions? De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Becky, what's the status of the parcel that would be between the Boise office development that Amyx company has gotten conditions for and -- between the purple and the black there right off Eagle Road. Right there. McKay: That particular parcel? That parcel, I believe, was either auctioned or sold and they -- I got a call from an engineer and they asked me to send them our stub street location, which I did. I also -- we are giving them frontage. If you notice that collector that's coming in, there is some to the east. I abut that collector right next to them, so they can connect to my collector and I also gave them a local stub, so they have got two options for redevelopment of the property. It's right -- there is that stub and, then, this collector. We also put that collector onto the east and it abuts D&G's nursery, so at some point in time, if they redevelop, then, ITD could get rid of their access point. We got a lot of letters from the Cameron Park people asking about the light. The only information that I have from our traffic engineer that did the traffic study is that ITD is still working -- looking at that corridor, studying Eagle Road, the discussion is medians and, then, they would put signals at the half miles. That's all we have heard. And I hear it's still in the works, not officially adopted. The way our traffic engineer explained it to us, for every one person -- if we put a light there, for every one person they allow out of our development or Cameron Park, they will inconvenience 20. And ITD will -- they look at what is the public cost of that light. So, at this point in time we are not a priority. They are going to keep that traffic going. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Any other questions? Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor. Captain Overton, would you like to respond to the pathway? have a question on that. Overton: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I will try to do my best. I'm not familiar with this or the request earlier. The question has to do with the comment that Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 19 of 77 the applicant brought up about the police chiefs concerns. In reviewing the notes, it states the applicant should meet with the police chief to discuss features and increased visibility on the multi-use pathway. I guess my first question back would be did the applicant meet with the police chief to get that taken care of? McKay: That's fine. With wrought iron fencing, you will have visibility, so I hope that's sufficient. I guess that's my question. Overton: My second question would be is it wrought iron on both sides of the slough? McKay: Yes, it would be. Yes, sir. Overton: Knowing where the chief sits on design, with confirmation in mind on those ditches, his major concern is and always is are we able to see through the backyards of each -- on both sides of the slough, so we don't provide an area where kids or anyone else can be invisible to the people that live in those yards. I do not believe, knowing how we have dealt with these before, that if it's going to be wrought iron on both sides, it's not going to be an issue at this point. Wardle: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, Becky. Okay. I guess when the applicant comes up for a rebuttal, we will ask the fire chief to make comment on the red curbing. We will ask that at the tail end. Thank you. Okay. There are a couple of people signed to indicate they are either for or against and when I call your name, if you would like to provide testimony, I would invite you to come forward at that time. j believe the first two are the applicants and that was all part of the 15 minutes. Would you like to also make comment? Okay. I had Todd and Joe Amyx signed up for. Chris Rambo is signed up neutral. Would Chris like to provide testimony? Okay. Dave Bivens signed up neutral. And that's the first time I have seen him neutral on something. Donnell: And not willing to talk. De Weerd: Yes. And as Councilmember Donnell mentioned: And not willing to talk. Bird: Yeah. De Weerd: Mark Pearson signed up against. If you will, please, state your name and address. Pearson: I will. Mark Pearson of William R. Schneider & Associates, 520 West Franklin, Boise. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 20 of 77 Pearson: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, J'm here today on behalf of the Ketlinskis, who own property that is adjacent to this development to the south. You can see there is -- just at the very base of it there is an odd shaped parcel and the Ketlinskis have lived in this -- on this acreage for about ten years -- a little more than ten years and they have a rather large parcel, eight plus acres, and the reason that they are here, obviously, development going into the north is they -- they recognize that they can't stop development and they've had nice country living for a long time, but they recognize that things are changing. What they are concerned about is the particular topography of their lot and the way this development is set up is going to create, unfortunately for them, a bit of a stage. Their backyard is going to become a nice viewing area for the lots that are directly adjacent to it, assuming that there are two story properties with windows that look into their backyard. Would it be possible for me to -- I submitted a letter and you all have the photographs that were included with that? As you can see, what we are primarily concerned with are four lots out of, potentially, I believe 170 odd lots, and I have also provided some photos for you of what the backyard looks like. Now, I think we all recognize that in a normal situation where you live in a high-density area, you're going to have a neighbor behind you or maybe one to the side and you just have to live with it and that's certainly acceptable. The problem that we have here is we have got a large estate lot and we are going to four -- essentially four audience members who can watch as my client goes in and out of backyard and uses his hot tub, enjoys his backyard, and the way this property sits, it's up on a bit of a -- it rises up just slightly and, then, it's quite expansive. So, if there is any sort of lighting back there, it will be a really -- well, it will be unpleasant to use that area. We recognize that the restrictions that you put on these types of buildings costs the developer money. There is no question that if we limited this to a one story -- or ask you to restrict these to one story buildings, that that would impact their ability to sell and so we have tried to come up with a couple of possible solutions to protect my clients' privacy and those would include limiting the number one windows on the side of second stories that face my client's property and possibly erecting some type of other sight barrier. I know that when the Council considered these -- considered these things, there are always -- there is always going to be resistance to -- that was short. De Weerd: Three minutes goes by fast for attorneys. Pearson: How can I make any money at that rate. Rountree: It's better for your client, though. Pearson: Yeah. Exactly. De Weerd: If you could, please, summarize. Pearson: J will. I will wrap it up. What we'd ask the Council to do is to approve this subdivision and the CUP with some very limited conditions, either that no second story windows directly face my client's property or that if the builder believes that's not workable, to allow only single story residences on those four lots. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 21 of 77 De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Any questions for-- Bird: I have none, Mayor. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. And, I'm sorry, I can't read the print of this next person. I think it's J with a K -- okay. If will, please, state your name and address. Ketlinski: Jack Ketlinski, 2610 Jasmine Lane. Like Mark said, I've lived there quite a long time and I have enjoyed living there and I would ask the Council to take a hard look at that, to respect my privacy, along with that development. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Stacy Rambo. Neutral. Okay. Thank you. Joe Steinbaugh? Would you like to provide testimony? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Steinbaugh: My name is Joe Steinbaugh. I live at 2065 Paradise Lane in Meridian, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. Steinbaugh: I have a concern on the ditch that -- the Parkinsons-Noerse, which would come from the east headed to the west and, then, making the 90 degree turn headed to the north. There is quite a bit of concern there. That water that runs through that ditch is approximately 254 inches of irrigation water that services Heritage One and Two, the subdivision, and, then, it splits to go to the Crestwood, the Razzberry, the Heritage Commons. The point of concern impacts, of course, Mr. Ketlinski's side of the ditch, as well as the new development area, and they have addressed that as that that would be piped and that's fine. And I don't know how far north that that's going to go, but I did understand them to say that that would be piped from the east to the west and from the south to the north in that particular area. Our point of concern is is that that is a self- dividing Cipoletti weir that that particular headgate divides that water, which has been there for multi years. Underneath that it drains -- there is a drain that drains right in that corner. I wish I had a little -- De Weerd: There is a pointer right in front of you. Steinbaugh: Oh. Rountree: Just be careful with it. Steinbaugh: All right. Okay. Mr. Ketlinski, where is your property at? Are we right here? Right here. I'm backwards. Okay. Well, anyway, right in this area here, this water drains right underneath this Cipoletti weir and so the weir is needing attention, as Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 22 of 77 well as that drainage point that drains back into that waste area. I'm backwards here on my -- with the arrow guide from the Heritage. So, we would like to ask the question, if that is going to be taken care of, as a primary concern. We already have access on Mr. Davis' side for Settlers to service that, but the point of concern on my behalf is the weir. De Weerd: Thank you. Sir, we will ask the applicant's representative to comment when they have their final word. Steinbaugh: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Is there anything further? Steinbaugh: No, ma'am. Thank you very much. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. And the last person I have signed up here is Boyd Hill, who is also neutral. Hill: Madam Chair, I'm Boyd Hill and I live on 1035 East McMillan Road in the Crestwood Subdivision. My concern -- and it's already part of -- they have stated they are going to pipe this ditch, which we use water out of this and it separates there and continues -- separates here down on Locust Grove. My concern is the first 1,000 plus feet from Eagle Road that the Amyxes have developed, the fence is clearly built on the right of way, we have no way of cleaning or clearing that ditch without either burning their fence down or tearing it down, so we can get a backhoe in and I think it should be on the record that it isn't that much value to pipe that in, without it being piped on up to Eagle Road. De Weerd: Thank you for your comments. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Would the representative like to respond? If you will, please, state your name and address. McKay: Becky McKay, 150 East Aikens, Suite B, Eagle. De Weerd: Thank you. McKay: Soon to be business owner in the City of Meridian. De Weerd: You think that earns you points? McKay: No. I just wanted to brag about it. De Weerd: Well, welcome. McKay: Thank you. I guess I'd like to address the single story issue. You know, we go through -- anytime we are developing next to larger lots, it always becomes an issue of debate. There are instances I know where the Council has determined that it was Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 23 of 77 prudent to restrict the heights. I had one project in particular that they did that -- that that happened on Thousand Springs and, then, what we had -- what transpired is we had one of the builders got mixed up and thought his lot was a two story and not the single story and, then, we had go in and cut a deal with the planning department to switch lots on what was one story and talk to the neighbors. So, there is problems with doing that. As far as limiting windows to the south, obviously, the International Building Code mandates certain window sizes for emergency access out of bedrooms. I don't know how we could do that. I have tried -- we did do a neighborhood meeting. I didn't mention that in my presentation. I did talk with Jack Ketlinski. Our lots that are next to him are 90 feet wide by 140 feet deep. They range in size from 12,600 all the way up to 21,000 square feet. So, I have tried to minimize the number of lots. Mr. Ketlinski just has a lot of frontage adjoining our south boundary, because of his eight acres. When we look at the aerial photos, you can see his house. Here it is right here. This particular distance here is about 150 feet right through here. So, when you do a standard setback and when a home goes in here, we would have about a separation of approximately 185 to 200, depending on the depth of the home and where they located it on that particular lot. De Weerd: Becky, do you want to put it up there and -- McKay: Oh. So, yeah, I don't -- I don't know how to, I guess, give him any relief and I guess that's, obviously, up to the Council to make that determination. But my clients do object to the restrictions of single story, because it is -- it is difficult to monitor and, like I have always stated, I think everybody should have a right to either a single story or a two story. As far as the diversion weir -- I will wrap up. My time is up. As far as the diversion weir, we have a considerable amount of depth there on those lots. It would be very easy for us to put an easement back there, so they can get access to that weir. The lots are extremely deep right here. So, what you would probably do is -- we could either do an easement or even a separate common lot right here, so we could make sure that they could get access back there and no one at any point in time could stop them. I would like to coordinate with the users association and I'd like to state for the record one of the users is Jim Moyer, who lives in Heritage and he will be the gentleman designing our pressurized irrigation system and we will work with him on design of our weir boxes and gravity irrigation also. So, one of the gentlemen that lives in that subdivision and signed the letter will be working on this design. But I don't have a problem with the Council, you know, asking me to coordinate. As far as this stretch right here, that was in Boise city. Boise city did not mandate that we pipe ditches. We can fence, pipe, or make it into a water amenity. My clients offset the fence from the top of bank. I believe -- they believe it's 15 feet from the property line. There is a debate going on with the users whether it is adequate access to the ditch based on where they put the fence in Boise city limits in phase one. My recommendation is they, obviously, get with the users and try to work this out, so that they make sure that adequate maintenance of that facility continues. But as far as the Meridian portion, we will have to pipe it. De Weerd: Council? Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 24 of 77 Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: There was some testimony concerned about the drainage out of the southwest corner. Crossing and the drains. Does your drainage plan address that? McKay: In my conversation, sir, with the residents, Mr. Ketlinski indicated that his property drains to the north and some of these other five's are, so we are going to have to determine where their low points are and [ think his is here, I thought that's what he told me, he said it gets real mushy down there, the ditch leaks and so forth, and he said something I just want us to be done, to correct the problem. So, we will have to work with them to create some type of a structure that collects their drainage when they gravity irrigate and, then, put that into the pipe. We have done it before. It is cumbersome, but we do it quite often when we have these large lots. I do have to work with the neighbors to coordinate it, though. De Weerd: So, did you say you were putting together a drainage plan? McKay: Yes. Yes. Part of our construction plans would include the gravity irrigation and how it will gather that drainage. So, it will go to Settlers -- I take copies to the neighbors, we also -- it's part of our construction set that goes to Public Works. And Settlers, even though they use this facility, does comment back to us and make recommendations. De Weerd: Kenny, did you want to make a comment about the red curbing? Bowers: Madam Mayor, City Council Members, by the International Code it does state that curbs do have to be painted red a certain number of feet from the hydrant. But we haven't been enforcing that in subdivisions. I mean we have only been doing that in commercial and industrial, to my knowledge. So, this was new to me tonight also. And I don't -- I just asked Mr. Overton here if he -- if we had had a problem in the subdivisions of people parking in front of hydrants or if they are having a problem that we need these red -- and he didn't know of any at this time. De Weerd: So, would you have a problem if they did not paint their curbs red? Bowers: No, we would not. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Thanks, chief. Any other questions for the representative? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 25 of 77 De Weerd: Okay. I guess I -- I understand the concern of the water users and we have no control over what Boise does or doesn't do, but that would -- that is an important connection with the Meridian side of things and the Meridian users. There is no solution to th is? McKay: My recommendation to my clients is to get with the users -- I think their conversations have only been via the phone and they need to meet out there -- I will be glad to mediate it and go out with them to try to resolve this, but I think -- I think it can be resolved. Obviously, something needs to be done. They need to clean the ditch and they claim they do not -- they do not have enough room with the existing fence where it was placed on the office lots. De Weerd: Mr. Attorney, can we ask that that plan be submitted to our staff, so we know it's been addressed? I know it's an off-site improvement and solution, but -- Baird: Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, my recommendation would be that you do request it, but not necessarily make it a condition of your approval. That way the staff could monitor the progress and, hopefully, help facilitate a solution. De Weerd: Thank you. Thank you. McKay: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Council, if there is no further information needed -- I'm sorry, we have had the concluding remarks. I would ask that you meet with the applicant's representative on any questions on the drainage and let our staff know as well. Okay. Unless, Council, would you like to take further testimony? Rountree: If there is none. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Hearing no further testimony, I move that we close the public hearings on Items 8, 9 and 10. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the public hearings on 8, 9 and 10. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 8. Bird: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 26 of 77 De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I guess nobody wants anymore comments, so I will make a motion that we approve AZ 05-006, annexation and zoning, and to include all staff, applicant, and public testimony. And also approve the findings on this one. I think they should be okay, because we haven't added anything to the annexation or anything, so the findings would be okay on this one. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 8 and I am assuming that the drainage plan and the details of the irrigation line is all a part of that development. Bird: Not in the annexation. That would be in your preliminary plat or your CUP. We will have to ask the attorney-- De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Baird: It won't in this one and we will ask that Mr. Hawkins-Clark give us -- the preliminary plat. Very good. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Berg? Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. No.9. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve PP 05-008, the preliminary, include staff, applicant, and other testimony. Also without the requirement of demanding working out something on the Boise part of the ditch, that we would at least -- they would at least come back to our staff and tell us what has happened, even though we can't require it, and this also -- we would have to have new findings, because there is some changes with the preliminary plat, I believe, that -- is that enough, Brad, for you -- would the findings be okay on this one, too? Hawkins-Clark: I believe so. As long as you address the issue of the two story on the CUP and not include that with this one, then. I think the only other clarification is the police department about the wrought iron fence along the slough, if we could add that. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 27 of 77 Bird: Okay. The wrought iron along the slough on both sides and also no red paint at the hydrants and, then, that would make a change in the findings, so we have to bring the findings back. Oh. And the stub street, instead of the cul-de-sac, which she already had in there, didn't she? Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the nature of those amendments are very specific and capable of being directed to staff, so you could put that on the record and not necessarily have to make them come back. We sort of leave it up to the particulars of what amendments you're making. If it's something that you're going to need to see in writing, then, we suggest we bring them back, but I would suggest that staffs equipped to take your direction on any amendments that you make and just have them on the record and have it completed tonight. Bird: Okay. And, then, I would -- the motion, then, would change to -- to also pass on the revised findings. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve with the stated changes. I guess I would like to ask staff if the requirements of the drainage plan and the users lateral, the piping and the detail associated with that, are clear enough in the site-specific requirements? Hawkins-Clark: Madam Mayor, yes, I think staff understands the direction there. De Weerd: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: We will include it in the preliminary plat findings for your signature. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay, Item 10. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve CUP 05-006, Conditional Use Permit for the planned development and also approve the findings and to include staff, applicant, and public testimony. Wardle: Second. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 28 of 77 De Weerd: Okay. The motion is approve Item 10. Mr. Hawkins-Clark? Hawkins-Clark: I'm sorry. Could we get clarification on the two-story issue on that one? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Two story, I -- no. Yeah. Leave it like it was, that -- in the original findings, as far as I'm concerned. Rountree: Madam Mayor, can we get clarification for the record what that is? Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. I think the way that it came to you from the Planning and Zoning Commission was that there would not be a requirement for -- to limit the houses on those four lots to one story. So, they would be allowed to go to two story. That's the way that the Commission recommendation to you came. So, if you are instructing us to approve it with that, that's the way we will proceed. Bird: That is my -- that's the motion maker's -- if the -- De Weerd: Do I have a second? Wardle: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. The motion is to approve Item 10 as stated. Is there any further discussion? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: We have dwelt with this second story issue several times, most recently last week, and precedent or not, we have dealt with it in a different manner. I would suggest that I would like to see us at least explore that as a Council and for that reason if the motion goes forward, I probably will object. De Weerd: Okay. Is there any further discussion? Any discussion by the motion maker? Bird: I have none. Call for the question. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, nay; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. Meridian City Council April 19. 2005 Page 29 of 77 Item 11: Public Hearing: RZ 05-002 Request for a Rezone of 1.28 acres from R-4 to L-O for Meridian Fire Station No.4 by the City of Meridian - Lot 1, Block 4, Thousand Springs Subdivision NO.1: De Weerd: Okay. Motion passes on Item 10. Public Hearing for Item 11, RZ 05-002. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This request is a joint application essentially between the -- proposed by the Planning and Zoning Department, fire department, and their architect. This is to rezone property for sub station number four, I believe it would be, on South Eagle Road. In Thousand Springs Subdivision this lot was designated as a fire station lot when Thousand Springs came through as a plat in '97, I believe it was. The Ridenbaugh canal runs along the north side. El Dorado Subdivision there. The site plan here is reflecting the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation. Some of the concerns that were expressed at the Planning and Zoning Commission may be related to sound buffering and as you can see here, they have come back to us with an amended plan that shows some pretty dense plantings along there. They would also have three other trees on this side of the aisle between the building and Thousand Springs. That was submitted to us after the Planning and Zoning Commission, so that -- here is the original plan and mainly we are just including this so you can see some of the work that was done with the parks department on this common area on the south side of the sub station, that would connect as a pedestrian connection through to the walkway that comes out of Thousand Springs. So, this would also be a part of the certificate of zoning compliance application that would come to us. This, really, is not a part of the rezone per se, we just wanted to -- to show it for the record. As I mentioned, there was written and oral testimony and most of that was neutral on this item. Again, most people are in favor of having this to be rezoned, so the fire station can move ahead. So, with that I will end staff comments. De Weerd: Thank you, Brad. Council, do you have any questions at this time? Rountree: I have none. Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Watson. Watson: I'm sorry, Madam Mayor, to drag this particular one out. I was just looking through the staff report real quick and just to point out, there is a water line that will need to be connected through the southern portion of that, so some day when you don't see a water -- or a tree through that pathway right there, it's because we told them, no, you can't plant a tree within our easement. So, we will work with them, but just -- ] want to make sure everyone understands. Thank you. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 30 of 77 De Weerd: Thanks. That was going to be one of my questions. I have one person signed up to testify and that is the architect. Would you like to comment? Zabala: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Tom Zabala and I'm with ZGA Architects in Boise, Idaho. My address is 565 West Myrtle Street, Suite 225. I'm here this evening representing the Meridian Rural Fire Protection District, as well as Meridian Fire Department on this application. I think staff pretty succinctly expressed the changes that have been made subsequent to our meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission. The only comment I may have with regard to the landscape plan that you have before you is that prior to the meeting here this evening I met with the neighbor who really had encouraged us to revise the plan to predominately reduce the impact of lights coming into the site from fire trucks returning in the evening. His concern was on the seven trees that you see there are Scotch pine, he was concerned about their mature height and spread at maturity, which, as you can see from -- the plant gets -- at maturity could be as wide as 30 feet and 60 feet tall and he was concerned that we might have gone overboard on his request, which is nice to hear sometimes, and had suggested that perhaps only the lower three be of that variety and that we look at some other varieties perhaps interspersed with the remaining four and I indicated to him at that point that we would be willing to work with him and the parks department in that regard. So, other than that, that is the only change to the staff comments that we would have. I will be happy to answer any questions. De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have any questions? Rountree: I have none. Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Thank you very much. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to provide testimony on this application? Seeing none -- Rountree: Madam Mayor, hearing no further testimony, I would move that we close the Public Hearing on Item No. 11. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: The motion is to close the Public Hearing. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 31 of 77 Rountree: I move that we approve Item No, 11 for the rezone RZ 05-002, Meridian Fire Station No.4, subject to staff comments and testimony here this evening, accommodating the future water line and the parkway and the potential change for the rear landscaping as identified by the architect. Bird: Second. De Weerd: The motion is to approve Item 11 with the changes as stated. Mr. Berg. Berg: Madam Mayor, may I ask a question if that's just amending the findings that are presented? Rountree: Yes. Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Thank you for your reminder. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 12: Public Hearing: CUP 05-007 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a wireless telecommunication facility in a C-G zone for Verizon Wireless by AFL Telecommunications - 1776 North Avest Lane: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 12 is Public Hearing CUP 05-007. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This is a request for a new telecommunications facility at the Avest Mini Storage site on North Locust Grove there just north of Fred Meyer. The zoning ordinance requires these as conditional use permits if they don't treat these as a stealth type tower. Here is the layout of the existing facility and they are proposing to use this area for their wireless tower and associated equipment. Here is a blow up of what that would look like and, then, the tower itself. The Planning and Zoning Commission did receive testimony from Jerry Hansen with AFL Telecommunications. There was no testimony in opposition. No commenting. The main issues of discussion at the Commission related to the height, which is approximately a hundred feet. The distance to the residential area is -- that lie behind the storage unit complex, the Mirage Meadows Subdivision there. There is an existing tower on the site already that is quite a bit shorter, that is approximately in this location. So, this would be a second -- a second facility. The color was discussed some and there was labeled as Idaho Power gray, which would be the color that they would be required to have the facility be. So, I don't believe there was any disagreement with this in terms of the recommended conditions, so I think that's all I have. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 32 of 77 De Weerd: Kind of like naming crayons. Is the applicant here this evening? No. Well, Council, I guess -- is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: Seeing no testimony, I'd like to make a motion that we close the Public Hearing for CUP 05-007. Bird: Second. De Weerd: The motion is to close the Public Hearing on Item 12. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: I'd like to make a motion that we approve the request for CUP 05-007, a request a Conditional Use Permit for Verizon Wireless -- could we, perhaps, make that look like a palm tree? Oh, you didn't hear me, did you? Oh. And I don't believe that there, really, was any need to include any testimony, so that's the motion. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 12. If there is no any further discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor. And I presume the motion includes the findings as presented? Donnell: Oh, yes. And the findings as presented. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Hawkins-Clark: I'm sorry, could I make a clarification there? There was two exhibits that were mixed up between this item and the next item on the agenda. I don't know if you noticed that, but they kind of got interspersed there, so if you would just trust us to make those swaps there, we will do that, but I just wanted to make sure that the clerk was aware of that. Berg: The exhibit? Thank you, Madam Mayor. We will take care of that. Sorry. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 33 of 77 Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 13: Public Hearing: CUP 05~009 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a multi-tenant office building in an I-L zone as required by the conditions of approval for Lot 5, Block 2, Medimont Subdivision No.1 by Falash & Ross Construction, Inc. -150 South Adkins Way: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 13 is Medimont Subdivision No.1, Public Hearing CUP 05-009. I will open the Public Hearing with staff comments. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This application is before you because the previous Conditional Use Permit expired. When this property was annexed and brought into the city there was a development agreement that required these lots along their east boundary to all be approved only through conditional use permits. This is the third lot south of Franklin Road in the subdivision and as you may recall, they did in 2002 come through and get approval for a building. Our code says if you don't construct it within 18 months your permit expires. So, they are, essentially, coming back to you with the same layout that was approved in 2002. I think the only difference is the building. There are some modifications that they are proposing there. Here is the layout. The entry road is here on the left side of the screen, so they do have circulation both north and south of the building. Gates on the east end of the building, with parking. Trash pick up at this point is proposed to be also at the rear, although Sanitary Service Company has expressed some concern about that exact location and may need to modify that somewhat. This site plan up on the screen does not reflect a 20 foot wide landscape buffer that John Barnes, the developer of Medimont, had to construct when he brought this through. The Planning and Zoning Commission had two comments from the public. Ernie Wilberson and Jerry Smith, who are both residents to the east of this site. There was discussion about the designated cross-hatched parking up here for motorcycles, which the applicant testified was, essentially, just for their employees. There was also some discussion about rear access to the fenced area and they testified that a knocks box would be provided, so that the fire department, if necessary, would be able to get through this rear area, since it would be gated. There was also testimony about the trash enclosure, outdoor storage, the fencing and some of the landscaping. Here is the elevation that they are proposing. I believe that before they were going to provide tilt up concrete construction and -- so they have modified that. I'm not flipping through it now. I'll ask the applicant to confirm -- confirm construction on that. But other than that, the Commission did recommend approval and there are findings attached and as I noted in the last application, we have a couple of exhibits that got flip-flopped between these, so with that I'll end staff comments. De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have any questions for staff at this time? Is the applicant here? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 34 of 77 Falash: Madam Mayor, Council, my name is Michael Falash, I'm with Falash & Ross. My office is 149 South Atkins, which is directly across from this piece of our property here. I have since met with the Sanitary Service and we were going to relocate that trash enclosure to the north. You will see the little square box up there, that is an irrigation box and I do have approval through them to move that onto the other side of that irrigation box to get more direct access into the dumpster location. The issue that-- there was some issues on lighting. I refer to that that all the backlighting on that back- side will all be dam lighting, which will be up in the sofit area. We are, basically -- same square footage we had previously. It changed more to a hip roof with split face block and it will be more in an tan -- a two-tone tan color block. Just made that decision on the financial side of it. The gated area, we have lost a couple trailers already across the street and primarily what we want to put back in there will be our trailers, which are typically empty at the time. We don't typically store lumber. We are not a company that collects goods. We try to use what we have and we don't want to collect it, because it tends to just stay around forever anyway. So, basically, the back storage area is just for our security. They do have knocks boxes that you put on the padlocks, so the police and fire department have access to that at anytime and we will be providing that as part of the conditions. Landscaping, like you mentioned, there is a 20-foot landscape buffer on the east side. It's not the best maintained and I will -- I mentioned I would talk to John Barnes, who -- I know we have an association meeting coming up and I will try to bring that up during that association meeting, too, that there needs to be a little maintenance done on that, but we, basically, provided the landscaping as we required by the original development agreement when John Barnes brought it through. At this point I will open it for any questions that you may have. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Thank you. Falash: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Is there any testimony on this application? Thank you. Council? Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: I'd like to make a motion that we close the Public Hearing on CUP 05-009. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 13. Baird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Baird: I believe the motion on the floor would be to close the Public Hearing. Meridian City Council Apr1l19,2005 Page 35 of 77 De Weerd: I'm sorry. Donnell: Did I do that? I did say that, didn't I? Bird: It went over my head, too, Tammy. De Weerd: All those in favor of closing the Public Hearing? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: Making me doubt my motions. Madam Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to approve CUP 05-009, request for Conditional Use Permit for Medimont Subdivision No. 1. Bird: And also the findings. Donnell: And also the findings. Rountree: Second. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Good catch, Mr. Bird. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council, I think most of the people are here for this next item and do you need a break or do you want to just go ahead and go for it? Donnell: Let's go. Item 14: Public Hearing: MI 05-001 Request for approval to construct a golf course maintenance equipment storage and repair shop for Cherry Lane Golf Course by The City of Meridian - east of North Black Cat Road and north of West Cherry Lane: De Weerd: Okay. Item 14 is Public Hearing MI 05-001. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Since the majority of you are probably more familiar with the site than I am, I will just touch on some of the Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 36 of 77 highlights from the Planning and Zoning Department. The application was submitted to us, a miscellaneous application, which we do require public hearings on. The request is for a new golf course maintenance equipment storage and repair shop. The applicant submitted this aerial with their application. Talimar Boulevard is here running north- south. The existing parking lot and clubhouse are located here on the north upper end of this slide. I'm sorry. About here. The location that they showed on their slide for the building was here at the south end next to the drain. The elevations that they submitted are photos that are from the Boise Ranch Golf Course, I believe, and it is a steel metal sided building approximately 5,400 square feet, 45 by 120, and the location, again, is approximately 50 feet. It's difficult to tell on this slide, but approximately 50 feet behind the sidewalk and about 150 south of the clubhouse and about 20 feet north of their south property line. In 2002, as I noted in the report, Mayor Corrie at that time did have some discussions with the lessee and the neighborhood was, essentially, told that there would be an opportunity to comment should a storage maintenance facility come forth. And that's one of the reasons that you're here. In staff's analysis we looked, really, mainly at the zoning ordinance purpose and goals and we included in there four -- I think it was -- yeah, four goals of -- that come from Title 11, Chapter 1, that, essentially, talk about the compatibility of uses with the surrounding community and encouraging excellence and creativity and design of future developments, et cetera. We have recommended that -- that the building as proposed not be approved by Council. We have recommended a couple of different recommendations -- I'm sorry -- standards that would be placed on the building. One of those is that the exterior building materials would be stone, brick, wood, or some other native material. Smooth faced concrete block, tilt up concrete or pre-fab steel would not be permitted. We also have recommended that the color of the building materials must compliment the clubhouse and surrounding area. That the roof design demonstrates at least one of the following: That would be overhanging eaves, sloped roofs, two or more roof planes, varying parapet heights and cornices. So, just so you know, that these are standards that we have included in the pending zoning ordinance that is coming before you in a month or so for some buildings. And we have also recommended that the building side that faces Talimar must incorporate some modulations in it and not be flat faced. there is also a condition that talks about landscaping and providing a landscape buffer on the south and the west, that would be in compliance with our landscape ordinance and that the building setbacks be required per Meridian city code. We have asked that the applicant tonight clarify a couple of items for you. One of those has to do with the building design that you see here, which isn't coming up very well, but an open shed type design that is -- has a roof and one wall on it, whether or not that's accurately part of their intention, or if that was -- you know, if that's part of the 5,400 square feet that they are proposing. The second item we wanted to clarify was the hours of operation and what they anticipate those to be. So, those are the comments that we included for you. If you recommend approval, these are the conditions that are in the miscellaneous application. There are no findings for this. If you do recommend approval tonight, that would be inclusive of just these conditions without findings. Unless you ask us to prepare those. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 37 of 77 Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? Davis: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, yes, we are proposing this-- De Weerd: Mr. Davis -- Davis: Oh, I'm sorry. My name is Dick Davis, 7048 South Shadow Moss in Boise, Idaho, is my address right now. We are in the process of partnering with the city in Cherry Lane Golf Course. We have submitted this application for a maintenance facility. Cherry Lane Golf Course does not have a maintenance facility right now. It's an essential part of the golf course operation. We have to have some place to store our material -- or our equipment, repair our equipment, and this -- this spot that we picked on the -- on the golf course presently is a weed patch and we want to build this building there. It's going to be significantly lower in stature than the clubhouse is. The roof-line. I do have a couple of questions. I don't know -- I don't understand what modulations you want on the -- on the west side. Hawkins-Clark: Do you want me to respond to that? Essentially, what we mean by that is that there is, you know, some variation in the setbacks along the facade, so that as you're looking at the structure from the side you would, actually, have some variations in the -- in the face and we can provide examples, but -- Davis: Okay. Fine and dandy. That's -- that gives me an idea. Okay. There will be no open shed as was in that picture there. That's just the one that we had at Boise Ranch Golf Course. This -- this facility will be totally enclosed with doors that close. The equipment will be stored in there and it will be locked up at night with doors facing to the east. We realize that, you know, we are going to need to put some landscaping around it and that's -- that's no problem as far we are concerned. Hours of operation. I believe the -- there is some regulations on parks and public facilities on hours of operation and we certainly intend to abide by those hours of operation. We are not going to be starting mowers at 1 :00 o'clock in the morning. I don't know what it is, Ted, that the hours of operation for parks are right now, but I think we have gone over that before and that's no problem as far as we are concerned. Baird: Madam Mayor, could I respond to that, just for public information? De Weerd: Yes, please. Baird: The hours of operation for park facilities, they will be open one half hour before sunrise and close one half hour after sunset, unless otherwise provided for. And just to give further information on that, we'd certainly anticipate that the clubhouse would be operating in a different set of hours, but that will be provided for in the amendments to the lease agreement. Not before you tonight. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 38 of 77 Davis: There is one thing in this application as stated. We really would like sewer services to this building if at all possible. I would like -- I would, you know, restroom facilities for our employees in this building, so that they are not having to traipse into the clubhouse with their greasy clothes and that sort of thing. So, we would -- we would like sewer services to this -- to this maintenance facility. The reason we located it where we did locate it is we have already had brief discussion with the parks and rec department here in Meridian and they'd like to see some tennis courts put in and we think that would be, you know, a great amenity for the golf course and the City of Meridian and we moved it as far as we could to the south, so that we would have room for tennis courts to the north of that building, between that -- between the maintenance facility and the clubhouse. So, you know, tennis courts are certainly a possibility for the City of Meridian there and we would be more than happy to work with the City of Meridian in establishing some tennis courts. So, that's -- that's why we moved it as far south as we did. You know, I can see they want us to move it a little bit and that's probably not a problem, because we got plenty of room there to build tennis courts in the future. I guess that's about alii got to say. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions at this point? Bird: I have none at this time. Donnell: No. De Weerd: Thank you. We will invite you back up after public testimony. Davis: Okay. De Weerd: Thank you. I do have a number of people signed up. As I call your name, if you'd like to step forward and provide testimony when I call your name, please, do so. I have Frank LaGrande. For. LaGrande: My name is Frank LaGrande. llive at 3603 Muirfield in Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. LaGrande: And also I live on the golf course and I keep thinking how fast Meridian is growing and what a wonderful asset to have a golf course right here in Meridian and, as you know, the golf course has been in disarray for a good number of years and now we have the chance to have, really, a good golf course and someone that's going to take care of it. Needless to say, they need equipment to take care of it and I'm confident that they are going to get new equipment and they need someplace to keep it and I can't see any other place than the location that they have requested. So, I hope the City Council approves it. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. LaGrande. Any questions, Council? Okay. Okay. Mike Lesh. For. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 39 of 77 Lesh: Madam Mayor, Council, my name is Mike Lesh at 3753 West Moon Lake, that's also on the golf course, and I would basically like to echo Mr. LaGrande's remarks, because the golf course is a tremendous asset to all of us, not only that live on the golf course, but surrounding areas in the community and probably the western hemisphere. At any rate, to have a great golf course you have to have equipment and people and to have equipment you have to have a place to keep it and I think this proposal is just right. I'm in favor of it. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Ken Marler. For. Marler: Madam Mayor, City Council, I'd like to comment just that-- De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address. Marler: Oh. Ken Marler. I live at 2390 Crooked Creek Lane. My view is over the 9th green from the west side. De Weerd: Thank you. Marler: On my location we won't be directly affected by this. It's going to be a needed feature of the golf course. It's something that's going to have to go somewhere. I'm not sure if there is any other better location. With hearing the recommendations from the Planning and Zoning in regards to the construction materials and stuff, I think that something could be -- hopefully, something could be worked out and looking forward to the forward progression and success of the golf course and the new operator. Thank you, De Weerd: Thank you. Dan Berard. I apologize in advance if I don't say your name right. And I already affected Mr. LeGrande, so -- Berard: That's all right. I'm Dan Berard. I live on the golf course also and I totally agree -- De Weerd: State your address, too. Berard: 3439 West Moon Lake Drive. De Weerd: Thank you. Berard: And I agree with the previous gentleman, that we do need a maintenance shed and that seems to be the appropriate place to put it and I agree with the other comments that they made. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. And Lorna? Also for. Thank you. Jacqueline Call. For. Thank you. And Phil -- I'm sorry. Gilman. For. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 40 of 77 Gilman: Madam Mayor and City Council, my name is Phil Gilman. I reside at 3645 Woodmont Drive. Live on the golf course and I'm currently an employee of Cherry Lane Recreation and, hopefully, can continue on with Mr. Davis in his operation. Therefore-- Rountree: No conflict there. De Weerd: There is no pressure from behind you. Gilman: I have worked at the golf course now for seven years in the pro shop and have spent considerable time listening to and trying to comment to playing public and others on the conditions, et cetera, that has existed over the years and I look forward to the next years coming up as an opportunity, as has been expressed, particularly by Mr. LaGrande and by Mr. Davis, of improvement of what can really be a jewel to this city of Meridian and I know one of the main things they have got to have is proper facilities for maintenance equipment storage, repair, supplies and such, and those of you, I'm sure, all of you on the Council and many here are familiar with the layout of the golf course and realize that there is little opportunity for such a facility, other than what is being recommended as the siting of this particular facility. I think for the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission that there will be a facility that compliments that which exists already in the clubhouse, as well as the neighborhood and the golf course itself, particularly as we see it improving over the years. And I do fully support the application and the continuance of the development of this facility and the golf course itself. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Patricia Dustin. Against. Dustin: Mayor. City Council. De Weerd: If you will state your name and address. Dustin: My name is Patricia Dustin. I live at 4214 West Dawson Drive. I'm sure that if any of you on the Councilor the proponents lived right across the street from what was proposed and you saw those buildings, as they show them, that you would definitely be standing where I am here today. I am speaking for the Peltons and Andy and Adula, who are on that list. I'm also speaking for Jack Anderson, who is at a golf tournament and can't be here tonight. Speaking for myself. For Justin Aires. And Jason Hohn will speak for himself here and my husband will also speak for himself. But this proposed equipment and repair building will directly affect seven homeowners in the area. Now, that's directly affect. Now, it will also affect numerous homeowners in the area indirectly. There is five homeowners in Ashford Greens and the street there that they mentioned was Palimoren, but it's actually right across the street from Dawson Drive. It will be those homeowners at 4204 West Dawson Drive, 4208 West Dawson Drive, 4214 West Dawson Drive, 4220 West Dawson Drive, and 4226 West Dawson Drive. Those are the five that it will directly affect in Ashford Greens. Then, it will also affect seven homes in the lakes area and they weren't -- I talked to several of them and they weren't Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 41 of 77 even sent letters on -- on this proposal. So, I talked to several of them and that's what they told me. So, I guess the main thing that we are concerned about is property value. You have a commercial building like this going across the street from you, especially with color and -- your property value is going to go down. Definitely, we know that, if this goes in. Now, these people submitted, along with myself, submitted written statements, too, and -- so I know my time's up, but since I'm speaking for a few others here, the views -- our views are going to be completely destroyed. We bought our property because we had these views in the front and the back. We, particularly, were from property in Tetonia, Idaho, that was ten acres and so we specifically hunted and hunted to find a property that didn't confine us in and so right now if that building goes in, our views are completely destroyed of the fairways, the lake, the greens, and so that's one of the reasons why we are concerned, along with the other reasons that I have stated. Now, there is no reason why they can't consider some other area for this building. Down at the north end of their of parking lot, if they put a building down at the north end of their parking lot, up there by Harbor Drive, across the street is the golf course, there is hardly a home that would be affected by that up there. And, you know, there is better places to put that, rather than down there where seven homes would be affected, in my point of view. So, I know my time is up, then, a few others want to speak, so thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Miles Dustin. Against. M. Dustin: Yes. My name is Miles Dustin. I reside at 4214 West Dawson Drive. De Weerd: Thank you. M. Dustin: Honorable Mayor and Councilmen. We wish to express definite disapproval of this for the mentions that my wife has given. I'm 84 years old and we looked a long time to find a piece of property, since I can't play golf anymore that at least I could watch it. If I could have that pointer. There are five houses right here on West Dawson that are directly across the street from this proposed building. These are all expensive homes, in the 275 to 300 thousand dollar range. Now, I'm sure that if any of you was to have a commercial building stuck in front of your home like that that would block the view that you -- for which purpose you had purchased the property, you would be just a little bit chagrined and we are. The area farther to the north here, where they are talking about a tennis court -- I'm all for progress and I'm glad to see that they are going to put in a facility to maintain their equipment. They need it. But I don't think that's the place for it. The houses -- let's see, this is -- I'm not sure what we have got here. Is this the row of houses? We are the third house. There is -- the seven houses in here are the ones that bar their view. I have a -- I have a bonus room upstairs in my building, my home, that looks directly across here to the 18th fairway, the 18th green. I can sit there and I can watch the golfers who come in all the way -- I can see all the way down that 18th green and I can watch the action on the whole green. I can also see the 10th fairway, which is down the north side of the lake there. I can see the lake, watch the driving range activity from the clubhouse. In fact, all of this was the very reason for which we purchased this home. It, obviously, was going to be the last home we were Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 42 of 77 going to buy and we wanted something that would be entertaining to us where we couldn't get out and do the things that we used to do. So, this is our big objection to it, is the fact that we have a commercial building in a residential zone. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I have a question for Mr. Dustin. De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. M. Dustin: Pardon? Rountree: I have a question for you, sir. You mentioned in your testimony the idea of tennis courts, but you didn't tell me how you felt about that. M. Dustin: I have no objection to tennis courts there. Rountree: Thank you. DeWeerd: Thank you. Okay. Mr. Jason Hohn. Hohn: My name is Jason Hahn and I live at 4226 West Dawson. Madam Mayor, Council Members, I, too, am going to be obstructed. I welcome Mr. Davis and I welcome his money. I think the golf course really needs it and I think he needs a shed, I just think that we can come up with maybe a better alternative as to where to store that - - where to place that. I think in talking with some of the previous owners, at least those of the golf course, they proposed another site just north of the golf course and I just want to find out why -- or north of the clubhouse there and I would actually like to know why that's not a better option, because there is -- as the Dustins have mentioned -- and I think it was just actually east of the -- as I understand it, I think it was like right in this area in here that they were -- that they were considering it initially and there, really, is no obstruction there at all as to -- you know, this is only a parking lot, that's already an eye sore, there is no threat at all. But this walkway right along here is just gorgeous looking out over the 18th green and you can see all the way across from this pathway here and just having a commercial building I think is going to be hard on the subdivision itself. We have pretty strict guidelines and code that we have to adhere to to make sure that our property looks nice and, then, to have something like that go right across the street and I'm sure that if that is the location that it needs to be, I would, then, definitely approve of the staff's recommendation of the upgraded look and facade of the building, so that -- so that we don't have to look at a metal building. That's just going to be really hard on us. I think the only person living in that area that I know of that has -- that would like that is my two year old son who likes the big trucks. So, other than that, I would just like to -- like to suggest to Mr. Davis to maybe find another location that works and that's alii have to say. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Sherry Hohn. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 43 of 77 Hohn: Oh, that was my wife and she couldn't be here. Rountree: Was or still is? De Weerd: Okay. Gordon Margulieux. Margulieux: My name is Gordon Margulieux, 2040 lnterlachen in Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. Margulieux: And I first have to say that they do need a storage shed and I do also have to agree with the staff finding which said that -- that, however, as proposed, we do not believe this structure is compatible or harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood and character. One of the things we lack with this plan is a plan. We see no drawings other than that. What is not included in that plan that you see up there, if we hold true to what they said during the pre-Council meeting, it was going to look like the Boise Ranch, with the exception of the open -- not have the open shed, but they didn't say that there is two fuel tanks that hang out there, too, on the outside of that, that are six feet tall, that whole one -- you know, like the Boise Ranch, that hold a hundred gallons of diesel and 200 gallons of regular fuel within distance of just ten yards -- or ten feet of the irrigation ditch -- open irrigation ditch. It doesn't tell you that the lights come on at night. Those are security lights, they are not there for -- so the people along Dawson may have it easy, they can sleep at night. The people that are south, they are going to be looking at lights, Halogen lights, they have three of them on a hundred foot long building at their Boise Ranch and they were talking about having three or four lights here, so I could see them having four lights that shine east on those houses over there. All those houses over there have short fences, so they can watch their -- see the golf course. The closest fence -- or closest house to that building will be 60 feet away. So, that's going to be -- you know, they are going to have to deal with that. Some of the other things I saw at Boise Ranch Golf Course is there is trash around there. There is not -- there is old tires, there is tarps, there is pipes that are around that shed and I'm not sure if it's going to be the -- there is a lot of weeds up against that shed. I'm not sure what to -- there is nothing -- there is no plan that we have here and I think the reason why is because we also have the wrong application. We are doing a miscellaneous application for what should be a Conditional Use Permit or a variance. This is a residential zone and you're putting in a structure that is over twice the size of my house, a commercial structure right along that area. I think it needs a little bit more planning than what you have right now. A safety concern I have -- again, it's an irrigation ditch along that entire 120-foot length and 45-foot length on the south side is going to be within -- De Weerd: Mr. Margulieux, will you, please, summarize. Margulieux: Okay. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 44 of 77 De Weerd: Thank you. Margulieux: So, what I have got to say is that -- is that the tanks right now have no protection at the Boise Ranch and if someone bumped into it, it could knock it over, end up in the ditch, and 50 feet down the water goes underneath the culvert. Now, the EPA says that there is no regulation for a hundred gallon tank, but they said if it spills they will be there and they will supervise the clean up. One other thing is -- one of the things that I see missing from the plan is the footprint -- the total footprint of this. Because if you look at it, they are talking about just the shed being 45 and 120, but there is going to be some driveway going into it, there is going to be some asphalt around it, get a plan, show us what they want to do, actual drawings, property lines, stuff like that, so we can take a look at it. De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions from Council? Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Is there any further testimony on this application? Okay. Would the applicant like to respond, please. Davis: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Councilmen. Here, again, I'm Dick Davis, 7048 West Shadow Moss in Boise, Idaho. We -- you know -- and I appreciate the comments of everybody. We want to be a good neighbor and we want to be a good partner with the City of Meridian and -- but we have to have a building somewhere and there are -- there are very few spot on the golf course that we can have a building that's big enough to do what we need to do. Mrs. Dustin mentioned on the other side of the Harbor Point Drive there. We looked at that, but there is not enough room there. There is not enough room for a building like this to do what we need to do. We have -- Mr. Hohn mentioned the place north of the clubhouse. That's -- that's very tight for a building this size and we really think that we need a parking lot there in the future, because our parking lot is not going to be big enough. I firmly believe that. The parking lot never gets full right now, but it isn't going to be big enough three years from now. So, we were kind of looking at that area for a parking lot, the area north of the -- north of the clubhouse. True, there will be -- there will be fuel storage there. We will build -- we will build fuel storage that meets EPA standards. We have to have fuel. The equipment all runs on either gasoline or diesel, so we have to have fuel. But we will build an EPA approved fuel storage area, so that if we do have a spill it don't get out of the area where the fuel tanks are. That's -- that, I think, is a recommendation or a necessity. I don't think we can do anything else. So, the chance of fuel getting into the -- into the canal there is remote at best. It is a lot farther than ten feet from the canal. It's probably more like 50 or 60 feet from the canal. I do take exception with Mr. Margulieux's assessment of the facility at Boise Ranch. There aren't weeds around it. There were some tarps in the open shed area. Those were covering up fertilizer to keep rain from blowing in on it. There isn't trash stacked around the maintenance facility at Boise Ranch. Or at least there wasn't three weeks ago when I left. So, I do take exception to that. We will work with the city to provide -- to provide a facility that is compatible with the architecture of Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 45 of 77 the clubhouse to make it as attractive as possible. We do want to asphalt a bunch of that area and get rid of the weeds. It's probably not as high as what you people may even think it is. It ends up being 14 and a half-foot at the very peak of the building. So, you know, you talk about property values going down, perhaps with a really nice golf course, even though there is a maintenance facility maybe in your view to the one side, your property values may be increased because of the quality of the amenity you're living on. So, we want to be a good neighbor, we want to be a good partner with the City of Meridian, and we will certainly build things as they ask us to to make it meet the architectural specifications that look nice there. We will landscape around it and we will do everything we can to be good neighbors. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Davis. Questions from Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor? Mr. Davis, from your comments I think you answered my question, but in your previous testimony you did not address the staff comments. I take it from what you just said that you agree with what you heard from staff in terms of some architectural design aspects of this facility, as opposed to a smooth block or concrete or metal building? Davis: Absolutely. Rountree: Okay. And if you'd hold on for a second, I have a question for Brad. Brad, do you know the location of the sewer or the status of the sewer -- that line that services the clubhouse? Is there sufficient capacity in that line that could accommodate an additional restroom in an outbuilding? Watson: Madam Mayor and Councilmember Rountree, there is sufficient capacity. The sewer extends up Dawson Drive and terminates at the last house on the west side. I do remember that the sewer is extremely shallow when it gets to that point and with the Eight Mile Lateral between the sewer and this proposed shop, I'm not sure it will flow by gravity. There may be some innovative solution that Mr. Davis and his builder can come up with as far as a private sump pump system. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Rountree: What's the service for the clubhouse? Is it off the Dawson or is it -- Watson: No. It comes, actually, off of Harbor Point Drive, I believe. Well, it may come off of Talimar. It's been awhile. But it's a really long service line that crosses underneath the lateral and barely makes it to the clubhouse. Rountree: Would that be able to service a facility at the location proposed or possibly a location to the north of the current clubhouse? Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 46 of 77 Watson: Councilmember Rountree, I think it would be very difficult physically to even get that service down south to that maintenance shop at one percent. It's shallow at the clubhouse. Code also doesn't allow us to put two separate buildings on any service line, so -- Rountree: Madam Mayor, follow up. My question was the service line is not adequate for additional -- Watson: No. Rountree: Okay. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Rountree: You did address the additional location -- the location to the north. The reason being that you have some concern that it's probably not adequate in terms of space, but it does seem to address some of the issues in terms of the view and proximity to neighbors. The other reason you sited was future parking. Could parking also not be provided in the southern location? Davis: It certainly could. Rountree: I have no further questions, but thank you. Davis: Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I got one for Brad. Going back to the sewer issue. If it was -- if that facility was to the north -- and I don't know, Mr. Davis, if -- if there is enough room to put that large a facility to the north of your facility in that weed patch there. It is. But we could come off of that road and bring the sewer in -- and I realize we can't put two buildings on the same sewer line, but there is certainly capacity in there at Harbor Point, isn't there, Brad, to come down? Watson: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Bird, capacity is not an issue for a facility like this, which I would assume would just be a single -- sorry, I'm stumbling on the term here. Bird: A single seater -- De Weerd: One seater. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 47 of 77 Watson: Capacity is not an issue, it's just the ability to get a single service through the parking lot and across the ditch -- or the lateral. I do remember historically when the clubhouse was built it was different to make grade to get that service there. Bird: Was it because of Harbor Point's depth or was it because of just the flow, the lay of the grou nd? Watson: It was because of the lateral and trying to sneak under it with the clearance that Nampa-Meridian requires. It has to be at least very minimum 18 inches and they want three feet below it to get it that far and that was the controlling factor. Bird: Could you come down -- this is a dumb question -- off of Harbor Point, could you come down the east side of the lateral? Because that -- if I remember right, that sewer runs in Harbor Point, don't it? Watson: Yes. Again, it could be possible, it would just need to be surveyed and designed. Bird: To me it seems like it would be easier at that end than it is going to be at the south, because you have still got the lateral to worry about getting through there and it probably is going to take a lift station. Watson: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Bird, my intuition is it's going to take a pump. Bird: I beg your pardon? Watson: My feeling is it will take a pump until the builder or somebody goes out and surveys this. I can't tell you for sure what the best solution is. Bird: At the south end and the north end both, Brad? Watson: Yes. Bird: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Council, anymore questions for the applicant? Is there anything you would like to add? Davis: Thank you for your time. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council? Rountree: Any other testimony? I have no further comments. De Weerd: No. If there is no further testimony, we will ask -- I would say it's never too late, but sometimes it is. Come on forward. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 48 of 77 Bird: An hour from now it would be too late. De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address. L. Berard: Lorna Berard. De Weerd: You can pull that down. L. Berard: Lorna Berard, 4439 West Moon Lake Drive. I just want to make the statement that I think no matter where a buildings goes, any of the three locations, it's going to impact houses. It's bottom line. And I just think that needed to be -- it's going to impact -- you don't always have the view from both the front and the back of your house. It's a great thing. But houses are going to be impacted by whatever happens. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. The applicant is always allowed the last word. Do you have anything further? Davis: I can't top that. De Weerd: You've already -- Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Hearing no further public testimony, I move that we close the Public Hearing on Item No. 14. Bird: Second. De Weerd: The motion is to close the Public Hearing on Item 14. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I'll see if I can get the discussion kicked off with a motion here. I move that we approve Item No. 14, MI 05-001 and to include all staff and applicant comments in response to comments of building materials and the specific construction standards. Bird: Second. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 49 of 77 De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 14. Is there any-- Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Just for discussion, Brad, the question was asked what you meant by -- was it undulating -- Watson: Modulating. Rountree: -- modulating. Whatever. For clarification, I'm just going to throw this out as a suggestion in terms of language, that the -- the exterior of the building facing the street, assuming this motion gets approved, would reflect that of a residence and reflect the architecture that currently exists with the clubhouse in terms of a hipped type roof, a stucco, with architectural treatment or block or siding or something that would reflect an architectural treatment, that they would reflect a residence, as opposed to a commercial building, and that be included in the language, and I will throw that open as discussion and consideration by the maker of the motion and the second. Hawkins-Clark: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Hawkins-Clark: If I could also make a comment, that condition number one does currently state that the -- about sewer service not being provided, so you would need to strike that, if it sounds like what I'm hearing the discussion lead towards is to allow the -- the restroom facility, if it can be approved through Public Works standards, of course. Wardle: Madam Mayor, to clarify the motion, it would be to strike that if it were to be able to be provided by Public Works. Bird: Second agrees. De Weerd: And does the motion maker also agree with the clarification at least on the street side of the facility? Wardle: The maker of the motion agrees with a portion of that statement and I believe that it should resemble -- it should fit in with the residences. I don't believe I would specifically -- if I recall the homes directly to the west of that, the facades of those homes are very nice and I'm not sure that I would require that level of finish work to the exterior of this building. Bird: Second agrees. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 50 of 77 Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Further clarification. There was an indication that landscaping would be provided. I would like to see staff have a landscape plan that's reviewed and consistent with the city's landscape ordinance. Is that a part of the condition? Hawkins-Clark: It is a part of the conditions. Yes. Thank you. I should have clarified that. Rountree: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. The certificate of zoning compliance application requires much more detail than what is reflected here and we would need that. Rountree: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: If you move -- if you did proceed as you are, I guess I might ask for a little clarification on the building height. If you want to put a maximum -- if you want this to be allowed to go to the maximum in this zone, the R-4, then, you know, that does allow over 30 feet and if they do provide it, we have asked for some roof lines that represent more of a residential architecture style in order for them to still get their equipment, et cetera, in there is to put the walls up to whatever level they need to to fit their equipment in there. I guess I'm just pointing out that they may need to -- the ultimate roof line may increase in order to accommodate that equipment and so it would be helpful I think for us when we are reviewing this, when they come back to us with an actual drawing, to maybe have that maximum height there. Rountree: Twenty feet? Hawkins-Clark: And I guess I -- you know, I mean 20 -- you know, 15, 16, 17 feet. I mean there is a lot of variations that fall into it as it's currently written. So just maybe some clarification for us. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the height -- on the height with trusses and stuff in there -- I don't know what size lawnmowers and stuff -- or equipment they are going to be putting in there. I do agree with having a height restriction on it and not the zoning height. I think it needs to be lower than that. But I also think we need to make sure that it is -- it is so that they can get their larger mowers or whatever that -- whatever equipment they need in there. They might need some kind of a pulley effect to pull engines or something like that, to work on and stuff. So, I think we need to look in and also talk to the applicant of what Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 51 of 77 height it would be, but we can put a restriction on height, if it's workable for everybody. On this -- De Weerd: Mr. Bird, would you like me to open the Public Hearing for comment from the applicant, at least, to make comment to height? Bird: I got one other follow-up question, one -- what is the -- all the houses on Dawson and stuff, are they stucco? Because I got a problem with stucco at a maintenance facility. You got equipment going around there all the time and you're going to be dinging it. Mr. Davis is going to be out there with a stucco gun continually to make it look good. I'm not too sure that I wouldn't, if I was living across the street, I would sooner see vinyl siding or something like that, because I think in that Cherry Lane Subdivision and Ashford, there is a lot of vinyl siding. I hate to see us restrict it just to the stucco. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. And as written it doesn't just restrict it to the stucco. It allows them flexibility there for other types of materials that are high quality materials. Bird: But our change was to stucco. Wardle: The motion didn't agree to it and I don't believe the second did either. Bird: And the second didn't either. Rountree: Okay. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: If you would, please, open the Public Hearing back up, I'd like to clear just a maximum height, so that we can move forward and, obviously, try to get under that. De Weerd: Okay. I will open the Public Hearing for Mr. Davis' comments. Davis: The height wouldn't need to be over about 18 feet, probably. You know, we definitely don't want to build a 30-foot structure, because we don't want to heat it, so -- yeah. Wardle: Mr. Davis? Would you -- Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Thank you. Would you be comfortable with a 20-foot height restriction? Davis: That would be perfect. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 52 of 77 Wardle: Okay. Davis: That would be perfect. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: With that clarification, I move that we close the Public Hearing. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: The maker of the motion would like to amend his motion to include the maximum height restriction to 20 feet, if the second agrees. Bird: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Is there any further discussion? I guess I would have just one question. Brad, on the west side of the building is that not an irrigation canal? Can there be landscaping in that area? I guess at least to make mention of landscape requirements, that there would need to be the appropriate distance. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Madam Mayor, for that. I was just verifying it. It does appear that there is that there. Normally, you know, we ask for ten feet behind the sidewalk, all landscaping, no building encroachments. You know, it's possible to accommodate some tree species in less than that, so I think if -- what I would encourage is just to require them to provide the minimum one tree for every 35 lineal feet and shrubs and whatever distance they need to back away from the lateral to get that in there, maybe it could be six feet, they wouldn't have to comply with the ten, but enough that they can provide the required planting material. De Weerd: And that can be worked out at staff level? Wardle: Yes. And thank you, Madam Mayor, I was just going to say that my motion included comments by the applicant to provide landscaping and we have had some discussions with -- in the past on different applications with the irrigation district. They Meridian City Council April 19,2005 Page 53 of 77 have specific requirements and I would suggest that staff level requirements include that review. De Weerd: Okay. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. I'm not repeating the motion. Bird: Why not? De Weerd: I hope everyone was tracking that. It put a maximum roof height. That it also adhere to the staff comments, as well as the applicant's comments, with the landscaping material, appropriate setbacks, and -- was there anything further, Mr. Wardle? Okay. Berg: Madam Mayor, if I could ask a question. I know that we talked about no findings being required, but as part of the record and having to go back to it and looking up conditions, sometimes it's nicer if things are listed in a format that talks about the specifics. I know we have the minutes we can look through, but like this motion, we will be looking through a couple different pages of testimony to determine that motion. I would just recommend we have findings that they don't have to be as long and lengthy as other applicants -- applications, but it would be easier to document and look through. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Berg. I would ask Mr. City Attorney what his thoughts are. Baird: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I know -- in following this transaction, I know we have a Public Hearing next week, but I also know that there is certain time lines that the applicant is required to meet. I would suggest that we come up with a solution that would allow you to give your final approval tonight, rather than setting it over until next week for review of findings. Perhaps we could take a moment and write out the motion and read it into the record, so that could be the final record of your intent in this approval, if it's your desire to make a final approval tonight. That would be my suggestion on how you might want to handle that. De Weerd: Okay. One final note is the sewer issue, so -- that I didn't bring up. So, Mr. Motion Maker, would you like to, please, say it in a concise and short summary. Wardle: Let me ask the city attorney. Are you comfortable with me restating the motion? Baird: Yes. Wardle: That will do for our final decision? Baird: Yes. Wardle: Okay. If I miss anything, let me know. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 54 of 77 De Weerd: You will in two pages. Wardle: Madam Mayor, to restate my motion on Item No. 14, MI 05-001, I'd move that we approve the request to approve -- the request to construct a golf course maintenance, equipment storage, and repair shop for Cherry Lane Golf Course by the City of Meridian, east of North Black Cat Road and north of West Cherry Lane and to include the applicant's agreement with staff comments on specific construction materials, the discussion in regards to landscaping and meeting the minimum requirements, in addition to working with the irrigation district on how to properly landscape that area, the discussion with Public Works about the striking of item number one if sewer is available through the Public Works Department and the specific building height restriction to no more than 20 feet. Bird: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. You have heard the motion. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Item 15 is Public Hearing MI 05-002 -- Council, if we could take a five minute break. (Recess. ) Item 15: Public Hearing: MI 05-002 Request for a Miscellaneous application for approval to display and sell Jacuzzi models and one (1) above ground pool for the months April to October for Custom Pools and Patio by Custom Pools and Patio - 322 South Main Street: De Weerd: Okay. I'm sorry. We will reconvene. Item 15 is Public Hearing for MI 05- 002. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Donnell: Fast staff comments. Hawkins-Clark: Fast. We will make it quick. De Weerd: But we do have public here, so they need to be-- Hawkins-Clark: Quick and accurate. How about that? Okay. This is a miscellaneous application. It's on the property of Meridian Speedway, the creamery -- not the creamery, the barn buildings -- the barns on there near that site. Storey Park. The application specifically is here at the very north end of the site. What they are proposing to do is to construct a temporary use through October of this year. The temporary use is for the sale of custom pools and jacuzzis. So, this is the layout that they submitted. If Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 55 of 77 you can make it out, the green is what they are proposing as the booth. There would be a Cyclone fence and the yellow in the middle of that is proposed to be a tent. And the layout is here. It's fairly obvious. The aboveground pool that they are proposing would be here on the north end and, then, these other items would be the jacuzzis. So, as you can see three or four of those are shown outside of the tent itself. Main Street is shown here. So, the Council has reviewed, I think, just two other miscellaneous applications for temporary uses so far, so these are a fairly recent type of application that you're seeing. Fortunately, you won't have to see these much longer if the zoning ordinance gets approved, because we have standards included for temporary uses in there, but what we have -- when we looked at this, a couple of the concerns that staff had related to the -- obviously, one is the appeal along Main Street, setbacks along Main Street, how the parking is going to be working, signage, a lot of those issues we looked at. One thing that we didn't include in our report had to do with restroom facilities and it came up in our meeting today and [ guess [ would ask the applicant to address that, since they are proposing three -- three days this would operate, Friday, Saturday, Sunday. The hours of operation specifically were listed in there as Friday 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Saturday 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., and Sunday 11 :00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. A couple of the items that we wanted them to address to you tonight for clarification that were not clear to us, one I already mentioned, that's how the restroom facilities will be worked out. The second one is the size. The temporary use -- we normally don't like to see more than 500 square feet for a temporary structure and this one comes in, if you include the whole thing, over a thousand. The tent itself is 600. It's a 20 by 30. But the whole thing is over a thousand, if you include the Cyclone fence. So, I guess that's mainly for the Council to consider. Are you comfortable with that -- with that size. And recognizing that will there be spillover of some of their display material as well. Obviously, we -- this front setback needs to be maintained free and clear of anything 15 feet from the property line in. That's to comply with the C-G zone. So, we have some concerns there. Parking. It's a dirt surface today. It's been used, obviously, for years and years that way. They -- we included in here some standard -- since it's a temporary use, we didn't, obviously, require the parking -- to pave the entire site, but dust mitigation is a concern. Dragging dirt out from the site onto the street is a concern. They need to watch out for that. So, we have included some conditions on that. Noise. We have asked them to address that with you tonight. That's either generators or their other power related things, those were not made clear in the application. There is a number of other site specific conditions that we have asked you to include, if you do recommend approval -- or if you approve this tonight. So, I won't go through those. Those are, I think, pretty clear. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, Brad. Any questions for staff? [s the applicant here? If you will, please, state your name and address. Hill: Jerry Hill, 4048 Chinden, Garden City. De Weerd: Thank you. Do you want to pull that closer? Do you have any comments? Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 56 of 77 Hill: The restroom facilities, we can do a porta-potty, I guess, inside the booth or I just won't drink water for three days when -- I'm manning the booth, so -- we can do a porta- potty inside the booth. Pump noise. The only operational thing will be the above-round pool, which is a small pump that's just a 110 pump that runs four to six hours per day. Signage. Because of the way the gates swing open on 1 st Street there, is we don't have a lot of room for signage that faces the street, so we are going to do a sign on the south end of booth and the north end of the booth on each corner, which is a vinyl banner. The tent is a brand new facility. It's through -- Idaho Tent here in town is making that. It's fire retardant. It's passed all the codes there. I talked to Joe Silva, he said he's fine with that, so -- any other questions? Parking. You know, it's hard to anticipate how many cars will be in there. We looked at maybe five to ten a day, you know, going in. For dust control we will have gravel in the booth or indoor-outdoor carpet is what we were looking at, too, so -- none of the spas will be operational. It's a fully fenced and secured facility, so it will be open just Friday, Saturday, and Sunday during the day and it will be fully fenced. It is an above-ground pool, so it's safe, somebody can't walk into it. It's four feet high and, plus, it's a six foot Cyclone fence as a barrier all the way around, so -- with locking gates, so -- De Weerd: And Cyclone is chain link? Hill: Uh-huh. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions for the applicant? Hill: We do have a signed lease agreement with Meridian Speedway, Ken, at the Speedway. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Madam Mayor, this is a question for our attorney. Do we need indemnification or do we get that if we were to move forward with this permit application for anything that might happen in the above-ground pool? I assume from your comment there will be water in that pool? Hill: Yes. Uh-huh. We do have an insurance policy through Weaver Van Dusen, who is our agent at Custom Pools, so they have a rider on there for a million dollars for liability that names this speedway. Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, and Councilmember Rountree, indeed, you could -- if you were inclined to approve this, you could include as a condition that they provide the city with a copy of certificate of insurance to verify that. Rountree: Thank you. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 57 of 77 De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions for the applicant? No? Thank you. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Council? If you don't need any further information, I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing. Rountree: So moved. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the Public Hearing on Item 15. All of those in favor say aye. Hawkins-Clark: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Those against? Rountree: My lips didn't move. De Weerd: I know. They didn't. Was that an aye? Rountree: That's an aye. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Yes, Brad. Hawkins-Clark: Oh, I'm sorry. The fire department did include three conditions that I didn't address. A fire extinguisher and separation. So, if you could just be sure to include that. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any comment? I guess -- since I get most of the phone calls on our other temporary use and how that kind of went from a little hotdog stand to an outdoor dining experience, I -- until we have an ordinance, I would really like to see these very few and far between. And I just -- this is a gateway into our city. It's already grandfathered gravel -- I mean dirt parking lot. I just see everything that we have been trying to avoid happen right here. A chain link -- and, you know, it's probably better than the taco stand, but I just am really having a problem with some of these temporary uses in areas that don't even meet our current ordinance and so that is my concern and, I'm sorry, I really tried to -- to be quiet on this. Rountree: Do you have an opinion on that? De Weerd: Well -- and it is, because my office will get the phone calls on it. So, I will give you my ten cents worth. Inflation. Any other comments? Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 58 of 77 Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Most of what you said I agree with in terms of the -- the duration of this request, it exceeds my expectations of what temporary might be when you're looking at seven months. There are a multitude of uses that go on in that facility or that will be competing for space that's used for parking for Dairy Days and et cetera, et cetera. Car racing. So, I don't understand the Dairy board entertaining this and I guess I'm not willing to entertain it at this point. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I don't believe the Dairy board entertained this motion. I think he said it was with Kenny Hamilton Productions, who leases from the Dairy board. I, too, agree with Charlie on the shortness of parking. I see -- what concerns me is I see he's running on - - he's going to be open until 7:00 o'clock on Saturday nights. If he's got any customers at all, that takes away from the speedway parking, which is Kenny's business, not mine, but I think after the experience we had with our outdoor hotdog stand, I'm going to have to go along and request that it -- I just -- I think we are just asking for more problems and -- Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: Since this is the discussion portion of this application, I guess I don't see that it's a whole lot different than the fireworks tents that we allow, even though those are for certainly a shorter duration. I think we see these kinds of opportunities for someone to sell their product and I don't think that it's -- it's going to detract from that area at all. I don't think that's a beautiful area when you come into the city as it stands and it's been dirt parking all this time and, frankly, I wish we could take some dirt parking away. So, I would be in support of this application. De Weerd: Mr. Wardle, do you have a motion or-- Rountree: Go ahead and make a motion, Shaun. Wardle: I'll make the motion. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we approve MI 05-002, Item No. 15. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 59 of 77 Donnell: I second that. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 15. Staff asked for additional comments, so do you want to elaborate on that nice quick motion, since you motioned to approve? Wardle: I'll make the motion and maybe the Mayor can make the final vote. That the application include all of the staff comments specific to the fire department's request. What else am I missing here? Hours of operation and restroom facility. Donnell: Second agrees. Wardle: And indemnification of insurance. Or, I'm sorry, the certificate of insurance. Donnell: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Discussion. De Weerd: Discussion, Mr. Bird. Bird: Even though what I said -- why all of a sudden are we asking for insurance identification? We never have before. There is no -- there is absolutely no reason that - - and I mean they could come back on us. Good attorneys can come back on anybody. But he's given a certificate of insurance to the guy he's leasing from. Why all of a sudden are we deciding to do this on one -- one application? We don't even have on some of the contracts insurance on record. So, I can't see that. That's just another reason not to vote for it. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, would you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, nay; Rountree, nay; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. De Weerd: Nay. Motion fails. MOTION DENIED: TWO AYES. TWO NAYS. MAYOR NAY. De Weerd: Do I have a motion that might pass? Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: I'd like to make a motion that we approve the miscellaneous application MI 05- 002 and that would include all staff comments, that we do not include the request for a Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 60 of 77 certificate of insurance, that we do request bathroom facilities and I would like to add that we approve this application for a less amount of time. I guess I'm going to say for at least two months less than what it's been requested, which would make it October. Or September. April through September? April through September, instead of November. [think right now it's April through November. Rountree: October. Donnell: Oh. October. Two months less. April through August. Bird: Or May through September. Donnell: I think it's getting late. De Weerd: April is already half over. Rountree: April through -- De Weerd: Okay. Is there a second? Motion dies. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we deny Item No. 15, the request for temporary permit for MI 05- 002. De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second? Bird: I'll second it. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to deny Item 15. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, nay; Donnell, nay. De Weerd: Aye. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. TWO NAYS. MAYOR AYE. Item 16: Discussion of Turn Lanes for The Courtyards at Ten Mile: De Weerd: Okay. Item 16 is discussion of turn lanes for the Courtyard at Ten Mile. Mr. Hawkins-Clark. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this item is -- is, essentially, here for your clarification and I'm going to let Mr. Ralphs, who is Meridian City Council April 19,Z005 Page 61 of 77 representing the developer tonight, kind of just expand on his letter, which was submitted to you, but, essentially, the reason they are here is to clarify a condition that was in their annexation and zoning development agreement, as well as their preliminary plat, which dealt with Pine Avenue and Ten Mile and the requirement for a center turn lane to be constructed in both of those roads. The application was approved September 2nd, 2003. Right now the thing that's pressing this is they have three four- plex buildings that they want certificates of occupancy one within a week and staff is saying we will not release certificates of occupancy on those buildings, because you have not constructed the turn lanes. I reviewed the minutes pretty carefully from that meeting in 2003. It was not specified that this is -- the turn lane shall be put in before the residential or before any COs or that dealt with the commercial. There was some conversation in your meeting that talked quite a bit about the commercial that they are proposing at the corner and whether or not that turn lane, really, only had to be put in when the commercial came in. The residential is going to generate approximately 350 to 400 trips a day, if you allow all the residential units to go in. So, the vast majority of the trips, when this is built out, are going to be commercial. There was comment from Mrs. Atkinson, Irma Atkinson, who lives north of this, who expressed quit a bit of concern and also read an editorial about -- about this issue, so, you know, staff is just not comfortable releasing any certificates of occupancy without this issue being clarified. So, I think it's mainly a question of timing on this, not whether they will or won't. It's just -- it's a timing question. So, I think that's all I have. Ada County Highway District hasn't changed their position in terms of -- in 2007 Ten Mile Road will be improved, which would include this intersection and widening Pine out to -- you know, to provide the turn lanes that they would provide. So, Ada County Highway District, my understanding is -- obviously, you have the final say on this and they will work with the applicant and the city to get this done. But their position is that it doesn't need to happen until 2007 when they had planned to make the improvements, so -- De Weerd: Thank you, Brad. Is the applicant here? Ralphs: Yes, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address. Ralphs: My name is Rod Ralphs. My address is 2730 North Greenbelt Place in Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. Ralphs: I'm here on behalf of DKA Development, the developers of the site. Do we have any other kind of a graphic to that site, Brad? Oh, perfect. What I want to do, just by way of background, because we do have a few members that are new to the City Council from the time this was originally approved, so I just want to give you a little bit of background on it and, then, bring you up to date on where the project is and, then, we have several proposals that we'd like you to entertain and consider as we move forward. Back when we had the preliminary plat approval, we originally came in with this whole Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 62 of 77 thing as one project and there was a lot of objections, a lot of concerns about all of the traffic that this would generate and so at the request of the City Council, we went back down to ACHD, we had another meeting with them and we came up with two proposals for them. One was to phase the project, going with residential as phase one and, then, these two buildings right here would be phase two, and the way those are -- the types of buildings those are, those would be a two story office building is the way those are configured. So, that would be phase two. And, then, phase three out here, we have agreed with the city and with ACHD, that we would probably end up holding off on this until after ACHD came in and did the big improvements on Ten Mile and Pine. So, what we have done out there -- and that's kind of the background of the project. Now, the conditions that were put on there -- and I'm going to cite the Findings of Facts and Conclusion of Law that are dated September -- just one moment. September 16th. Of September 2003. Specifically page 12, item two, and it talks about the requirements that the developer has and jf I may I will share those with you. The developer shall be required to construct the following -- and, then, there are three bullet points. The first one is construct an additional lane on Pine Street at the intersection of Ten Mile. This additional lane will allow one turn lane for turning movements and another for straight- line movements. The improvements should decrease the cut-through traffic through the Thunder Creek Subdivision, because the intersection will operate more efficiently with fewer cars stacking east on Pine. Okay. Now, construct an additional lane on the north leg of Pine Road -- or, excuse me, on the north leg of Ten Mile Road at the intersection of Pine. So, what we have got is we have -- oh. Thank you. So, if you look back at the graphic on it, we have got the north leg of Ten Mile and Pine, which is, really, the leg that butts up against Moshers Farm on the west and, then, Mr. Fuller's property on the east. So, that's the north leg of that intersection. The east leg over here off of Pine is the other one that we have been asked to look at expanding an item for a turn lane. We had a little bit of a different world back, then, too. People were adapting from the reduced student load at Meridian High School and a lot of that traffic is down. This is an intersection that needs some mitigation and we went to ACHD and we said, you know, we would go ahead and put these improvements in. The ambiguity and the concern and the question that we have now is was that tied to the residential and commercial of phase two or was it anything, meaning going in with just the residential. Now, if you go back to our meeting minutes, we talked about phase one and two going in fairly close in time. Now, what we have done out there is we have just done phase one and we are holding off on phase two, which would be the commercial, which would bring trips in, and if we could go back to that graphic, Brad, if we could. Thank you. So, this is what we have done, we have gone ahead and started the construction with phase one and that's the residential and that's the one, and that's the one that's kind of created the time crunch, because we do have some occupancy permits coming up. The clarification and the reason that we are here tonight is to find out do we need those turn lanes in there for residential only, if we hold off doing all of the commercial, and, if so, then, in the event that we were to ever move forward on phase two commercial, then, yes, let's go ahead and put turn lanes in. It just wasn't clear in the meeting minute notes -- or minutes what the meaning of the City Council was. Now, one of the other things that we did -- and I know we had a couple of -- Member Bird and Mayor de Weerd, you were there when we had this, and we went out of our way to be really good neighbors with Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 63 of 77 off-site improvements, with sidewalks up at Mashers Farm, et cetera. We still want to continue that, but what I'd like to do is just give you three proposals to just kind of mull over with the current situation that we have got. The first is to tie the lane additions to the commercial only and, then, when the commercial goes in, of course, the turn lanes go in. The second one would be to compromise by putting in a date certain. If, for whatever reason, ACHD were to, because of budget constraints or whatever, were not to put in the expanded use of Ten Mile or Pine, that we go ahead, we put up a letter of credit for these improvements, and if there is a date certain that the City Council wants to pick and if ACHD is not acting, then, we go ahead and the money is there to go ahead and put in that extra turn lane. Right now the -- the configuration that you're looking at for the north leg of Ten Mile intersection there and Pine, is just really adding a turn lane only. As you know, ACHD is looking at doing a five lane north-south and a through lane east-west. So, then, that would be option number two. The final option would be to -- we go ahead and put it in, but we also want to do something extra and this is something you probably don't hear from a whole lot of developers, but if you are adamant about it going in, even if we just had the residential, what we would propose doing is going ahead and building out the south leg as well. Now, that's over and above anything that the City Council has asked from us. But what we want to do is -- with that south leg is we are going to have a more gradual and it will be a more consistent time with the north leg and the south leg. You would have the right turn lane coming in from -- if you were in North Ten Mile, you would have the right turn lane to go onto Pine and, then, that would tie in also with the three lanes that you would have on the southbound of Ten Mile as well. That would be an additional option that we would like to contribute in there. The trade-off, or course, would be -- and since we are going to add this extra leg, that if we could have 60 days to go ahead and do that and that, again, would be a date certain, to where we could go in, we could build out that whole intersection to accommodate these, but we could go ahead with, I believe, six occupancy permits that are in process and, then, finish those out within 60 days. So, that's the clarification we are asking for and some options to mull over. And I'd answer any questions if you had them. De Weerd: Council, questions? I guess I should make my own statement first, since I was on the Council at the time. I remember it as Irma did. In fact, when I saw the building start, I thought it was tied to even a building permit. So, when I got her letter, I - - that was my recall as well, because it -- that area is very busy, even with the opening of Mountain View. It's busy at different times for different reasons and Ten Mile four way stop backs up passed Pine at certain points in the day and that is not when the high school is out. That's generally during the commuter traffic. So, it's a -- it's a complicated intersection at the different times of day for different types of situations. So, in my recollection, it was tied to the project. I think the retail -- and I have been browsing through the minutes -- I haven't gone very far -- it's why I'm reading what I say. But I just thought that the commercial was tied more to the Ten Mile improvements when the road was built and, yes, you did do some amazing off-site improvements that give us reassurance to approve it, with the thought that kids would be there and they would be walking to school and so that was, definitely, appreciated, but it -- I really believe that the turn lanes are needed and they are needed now and I guess I don't Meridian City Council April 19, Z005 Page 64 of 77 have a problem with option three, but I don't have a vote unless they want to tie it again. Council, any other comments? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I, too, agree with what you said. I felt -- I thought that that was -- but I'd have to go back and read through the motion and all the findings and stuff on -- on what was exactly passed upon. But I thought that the turn lanes was definitely tied with any part of that. The first part of that project. I mean that is a very -- and even though you don't have the school kids, you still got -- you have got more of the north end people out there that come down Franklin. I mean Ten Mile and Franklin has got to be one of the worst intersections to get through and it all -- 90 percent of it's coming north to Pine and Ten Mile. I don't know. I suppose I'm like Mayor, I could go with number three. De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, just a clarification from the city attorney's office. Which of these options would be -- I guess defendable? And I'm asking is there ambiguity in the legal interpretation of the finding itself? Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council member Wardle, I would be hesitant to give you a specific legal opinion on defendability here off the cuff. However, I'm looking at a provision and this may not be an answer to your question, but it might steer the conversation. I'm looking at a provision that the development agreement -- now, am I correct that these conditions would also have been included in the development agreement? Hawkins-Clark: That's correct. Baird: Okay. Item number 15 in the development agreement talks about certificates of occupancy and this might make clear what your intent was. I'm reading from -- I'll give you the page on that. Page 16 of 25 for AZ 03-009. Make sure I've got the right application. Certificate of occupancy. The owners and developer agree that no certificates of occupancy will be issued until all improvements are completed, unless the city and owners and developer have entered into an addendum agreement stating that when the improvements will be completed in a phase development. In any event, no COs -- pardon my abbreviation -- shall be issued in any phase in which the improvements have not been installed, completed and accepted by city. Does that answer your question about what you're able to do tonight? I think that the correct motion to come before you would be a motion to amend the development agreement, but that's not what -- that's not what's here tonight. De Weerd: Well, that sounds pretty clear to me and I'm not even an attorney. Meridian City Council April 19, Z005 Page 65 of 77 Baird: I see Mr. Hawkins-Clark approaching his mike, so he might have something to add. Hawkins-Clark: Well, the reason that we didn't ask them to amend the development agreement, I guess, is because the only reason that we suggested even that they come to you tonight is just a clarification. It's just the timing. I mean we -- this, really, isn't even a formal motion that staff is asking for. We just -- you know, we will continue to proceed as we have and not issue any certificates of occupancy until all the improvements are made, if that's what you instruct us to do. It's just that when I read this, you know, the timing -- it just wasn't there for me. I mean I could see it go either way. If you read through the minutes, if you read through the findings, I does -- you know, this is the improvement -- it's very clear this is what they have to do, it's just, you know, there was so much discussion during that meeting about the phasing and a lot of praise given to them for doing an off-site improvement, which could lead you to imply that you expected it to happen right away, but -- so I guess that's just the reason that we recommended it. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: And with that, my clarification was -- from the attorney's that that, obviously, options one and option number two are not for my -- or, really, before us for consideration. So, then, it would be option number three and is that -- is there some fairness in what is proposed in the sense that, really, we have an additional 60 days, but we are going to be getting an addition improvement? I think that's what's really -- to narrow some options down, what's before the Council right now. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I just need to get square what's being said, not having been there, so [ don't know what your intent was, but, Rod, you offered up some solutions and I'm just going to make sure that I understood what you said, that you're offering those up as solutions that you're amenable to, either one or all, or a combination thereof? Ralphs: Well, obviously, the concern for those who are going into that project, to be very candid with you, is to get the occupancy permit, and so when we come here and we visit with you about some things -- we looked at this and we went over it with Brad and we said, oh, we are only on the hook for the north and east legs. That's not even a full intersection. And so what we thought would be a great compromise here would be to come in and say, you know what, after looking at the different concerns, looking at, you know, what's perceived as a timing issue on going in, how about if we come in here and we propose that we go in and we do the whole intersection. The other thing that I would want to add to that and I forgot was we would like to have some help from the Meridian City Council April 19, Z005 Page 66 of 77 other applications that are coming into that area, So kind of a latecomer agreement for those improvements. But to go in there and to go ahead and build out that intersection so you have got your turn lanes, so that you do have that flow and so that's kind of a trade-off that we are proposing tonight. Or we can go back and we can go to the north and east leg, but we felt when we first looked at this thing that we were looking at all three legs. We were not. We are only on the hook for north and the east and I think if you really wanted to do it right and if you wanted to create the impression that -- and the actual effect of moving traffic through a very awkward intersection, would be to go ahead and let's do this third leg and what we are asking for is some -- as a compromise on the time. We will go ahead and do the thing and within 60 days we will have ACHD's engineer -- we have already started discussions with them on that and, then, go ahead and move forward with those -- with that third leg. De Weerd: Can the engineering happen that quickly? Ralphs: My understanding is that it can, Madam Mayor. There is a gentleman here that can answer that better than I, so I would defer to him, but -- Bird: Well, if we can, we'd like you to take all our projects for us. De Weerd: It's late, Gary. Ralphs: I think the statement is correct. We are really looking at an amendment of the development agreement where we could accommodate this third leg for some additional time is I really think what we are looking at here. De Weerd: But, in the meantime, you want occupancy and -- Ralphs: I think for seven units out of the 58. Or 14 total. There is seven of them out of the 14 four-plexes. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Yeah. Unless -- unless they were to bond, other than that, we'd have to change at least number 15 in the development agreement I would think. Unless they were to bond for the improvements, if the Council so desired. De Weerd: I guess I would like Gary to respond on how -- what the turnaround time is on -- I guess engineering another leg, because if that's something that Council agrees to, you have people watching this project, so -- Gary. Inselman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Gary Inselman, ACHD, 3775 North Adam, Garden City. On the -- because this would purely be a temporary improvement, we are not looking at building the ultimate intersection with this development. The Meridian City Council April 19, Z005 Page 67 of 77 engineering would be as fast as their consultant could turn it around. We would agree to review it as quickly as possible. I'm a little confused about the talk of additional leg of the intersection, though, because you can't add a turn lane on the north leg without widening on the south, because you have to shadow taper -- you have to have a taper on the south anyway to shadow that turn lane. So, there would be widening on the south under any circumstances to get a turn lane on Ten Mile. If they want to add an additional lane to provide a right turn lane onto Pine, that would be fine, but, then, you would be four lane wide -- four lanes wide on that south leg of the intersection, then, at Pine and there would be additional pavement, then, for us to remove in a year and a half. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Is there sufficient right of way to do all of that? It seems like it's pretty tight through there. Inselman: Councilman Rountree, we should have acquired the right of way sufficient for five lanes abutting their development, so, theoretically, there would be enough right of way to squeeze that in temporarily. I'm not sure about adding that additional right turn lane, because without the curb and gutter, then, we need to be able to have room for the shoulder and ditch between the pavement and the sidewalk. De Weerd: Any other questions? Thank you. Council? Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Really, the only question I have is -- is whether -- one, whether this is a reasonable request, whether the additional benefit and clarification for the city would allow 60 days. My question is what type of provision would be available as a remedy if these improvements were not made in 60 days? And I guess I'll direct my specific question to the legal staff. What sort of things do we have within our ordinance that we could require? Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Wardle, we are in a real gray area here and I'm going to ask for some help from planning staff, because they have got the tools and I don't want to punt the whole question over there, but if I could hear from Mr. Hawkins-Clark to see if you have got any insight on how this could be structured to insure that any direction tonight could be monitored by your staff and secured. Hawkins-Clark: Councilman Wardle, Madam Mayor, we really -- this can be handled just like any project, frankly. You know, I mean this was not noticed as a Public Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 68 of 77 Hearing, so, in my OpiniOn, you can't amend the development agreement tonight, because we didn't let anybody know that that's what you're thinking about. The only thing this is about is timing. We have bonding that we -- you know, we have surety in place today for a number of various improvements, landscaping and otherwise, you know, on staff right now -- I mean with the city. The other likely issue is the certificate of occupancy being withheld. I mean I think the bonding and the certificate of occupancy, you know, are standard tools for enforcement. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Two specific questions. One, are the bonds in place now and, secondly, what's the process for the proper amendment of the development agreement and how quickly could that be done. Hawkins-Clark: A miscellaneous application would need to be submitted -- take about 15 days minimum, probably 20, to get the notice out and on the bonding question, we do have -- I guess I can't answer the question on the turn lanes. Did we -- yeah. The city engineer doesn't recall asking for that at the time of signature of the final plat. The applicant's shaking their head no. So, it sounds like we don't right now have the bonding for the construction of the turn lanes in place, so -- De Weerd: Why didn't you come a couple months ago? Ralphs: Well, that's, actually, when we started discussions with Brad. That's, actually, when we did go in there and we did review the meeting minutes and we said we are seeing this condition in here, but there is no when. And, then, that's when Mr. Campbell, one of the developers, went over and started visiting with ACHD and a lot of the response he was getting, you know, that is so close in time to our improvements, what exactly are you going to be doing, and while we don't really get a definitive answer either way, we go back to Brad and Brad says, you know, you really got to come into the City Council and get clarification and that's, really, how it happened. But, yeah, it did, it happened a couple of months ago and Brad can evidence that, that this became -- we became aware of it and we approached them, we had a separate meeting to go over it, and there was, really, no clear when. Was it tied to the residential? Was it tied to residential phase -- and phase two of the commercial? There just -- it wasn't there. And so we are here, you know, asking for that clarification. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Could Gary come back up from ACHD. I have got a question to ask. Gary, when is the redo scheduled for the complete intersection there; do you have any idea? Ten Mile and Pine. MerIdian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 69 of 77 Inselman: Councilman Bird, what do you mean by the review? Bird: Redo. lnselman: Oh, the redo. Construction? Bird: Yeah. The construction. Inselman: It would be 2007 with the Ten Mile project. It's being designed currently. We are scheduled to buy right of way beginning in our fiscal year 2006. Bird: Let me ask you your opinion on something, because -- and not putting you on the spot, but I -- after hearing testimony and stuff, I'm kind of thinking that this is a waste of time to go out there and do this temporary fix, even though that is a bad intersection, if 2007 we are going to completely redo the intersection, myself. And I don't know if this residential is going to cause that many more trips a day or -- you know, if it's going to affect the intersection that much, as bad as it is already, but -- and I hate to see us throwing money down for just two years for a temporary fix that is just a temporary fix. What's your opinion? Inselman: Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird. De Weerd: No comment is preferable. Inselman: Yeah. We -- ACHD will support the city in whatever decision you make. I-- at this point, since it is now two years after the application requirement was met and we are so close to doing improvements, my opinion would be that until the commercial goes in, the additional traffic from those few residential units, would not greatly impact that intersection and additional turn lanes without the light, does not effectively improve the efficiency of the intersection. Sometimes it makes it worse, because it confuses people. Whose turn is it to go? Bird: Thank you very much, Gary. I appreciate it. I agree with him. De Weerd: So, it appears that the choice is to leave the development agreement as is and hold that CO until the improvements are done or you ask for a miscellaneous application for them to come through with a modification to the development agreement; is that correct, Mr. Baird? Baird: That's -- those are your choices as I understand them, because, again, as Mr. Hawkins-Clark has already stated, the initial request was for you to clarify what you meant and so I guess what I would ask you to do before you take -- take a motion on any of those actions, is put on the record to clarify, at least for those of you who are here, what your intent was at the time. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 70 of 77 De Weerd: Well, I know intent at the time was that those improvements were done when -- when there was traffic generated out of the development. And, again, that was two years ago, so -- Baird: And, Madam Mayor, you definitely have an ambiguity here and it's that ambiguity that caused the staff and the applicant to have those discussions that took some time and it would be my recommendation that the best way to clear up that ambiguity -- unless somebody is willing to step up and say, no, we meant it to be exactly the way they want it, is that you have them come back with that miscellaneous application. De Weerd: Because I believe our memory on this is the same as one of the resident who has voiced her opinion, both in writing, as well as in the paper, so -- Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd? Mr. Bird. Bird: I would, too, seeing I'm the other sitting duck, I would, too, agree with you, that I felt that that was when we passed it was what we were seeking. But that was two years ago and now we are to the point of being within two years of getting the intersection completely done and I hate to see anybody have to throw money basically down the drain to do something that's just very temporary and a person a lot smarter in traffic control than I am stated that it probably wasn't a fix anyway. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I have no idea what your intent was when you made this, but I'll weigh in as we need to figure out some way to unwind this. I agree with Gary, I drive through the intersection every day; it's a bad intersection. The improvement that they are proposing will correct it. What the Council did and what's being talked about now, more than likely will make it somewhat better for the egress out of the development for the folks that are going to have to live in there, but it won't help the through traffic any appreciable amount. I don't know -- I haven't heard a good solution, because -- other than coming back for modification, but that still leaves the applicant without occupancy permits on residences that are ready to be occupied. Is there a crafty way to get both of these things done without further delay? Ralphs: If I could just throw in on a couple of things. We do have bonding with the city on some things such as landscaping and what we would propose to do would be to roll that over into these lane improvements, if that's the direction you want to go tonight. And so while you don't have them expressly in place for the lanes, we are more than happy to take whatever bonding we do have in place and roll it over, so you do have it in place for these lanes at a future date. The other thing that I would add -- and I would again -- going back to what the residential is and based on what Mr. Inselman pointed Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 71 of 77 out, the vehicle trips that we have done here at this intersection, the residential side, they are either going to be going south -- I mean you will have some that will go up to Albertson's, but those who are going into town, they won't even touch the intersection. And those who are heading south on the freeway won't go to the intersection either. And there is not a lot of vehicle trips there, but -- Rountree: Are you sure? They might, because they might have to go right -- they'd go west. Bird: I was going to say, if they are smart, they will go -- Ralphs: They would go down Pine if they were -- if they were smart. But I just -- we are here. We came into you with this project as one, we ended up phasing it, because we wanted to be a good neighbor, we wanted to work with the people who were there. We are quite a ways down the road and we are a lot closer to ACHD and so we are here tonight to work out something that can work for everybody and we do, we just need a little bit more time to squeeze these things in, if you go that way. On the other hand, if you say no on the extra lanes and based on what ACHD would say with the trips out of the residential, we do, we hold off on phase two and three, until ACHD goes ahead and does the major improvements. But we had always talked about going phase one residential and phase two close in time. So, we knew there was always going to be a commercial component and it was going to be close in time. And if you go back through the meeting minutes of that time, that was repeatedly stated, and we have totally held off on the commercial, because we knew that would bring more vehicles in. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: If I understood what our attorney and Brad to say, if we -- if we are going to change, basically, Article 15 in the development agreement, we have got to come back through a miscellaneous, so that we can have a Public Hearing. It's not fair for the people that testified and left under the belief that that intersection was going to be done before traffic was coming out on it. So, Brad, how -- what did you say, nine days? De Weerd: That's not what he said. Bird: I know it. Hawkins-Clark: As soon as we get it in our office, we will get it over to the clerk's and send out the notices. Twenty days, probably. We will -- you know, we are depending on them getting an application into our office and I assume they will get something in very soon, so -- but we do need a minimum of 15 days to notify the residents. Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'd also recommend -- and just point out that Mr. Inselman's comments on the record tonight would need to be repeated into the Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 72 of 77 record for the Public Hearing hearing, either in writing or have him here in testimony, if the intent is to seek some relief on some of these conditions based on changes in time and the changes in conditions that -- come prepared to make your case at that time. De Weerd: Thank you. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: It appears to me that we are going to amend this development agreement one way or another, a whole lot or just a little bit. My preference may be just a little bit. But either way it needs to come forward. So, what type of -- do I need to bring a motion for that or does it just need to come forward through the Planning and Zoning staff? Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Wardle, this was noticed up as just a discussion. It appears to me that you have completed your discussion and given both the staff and the applicant sufficient direction, so you're waiting on them to make the next move. Wardle: Thank you. Item 17: Discussion of United Water PUC Application by Brad Watson: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Item 17 is discussion of United Water PUC Application by Mr. Watson. Watson: Sorry. Thank you, Madam Mayor. That snuck up on me. I hate to keep you any longer than you have already been here on something like this and I appreciate getting it on the agenda at a late hour. United Water filed an application with the Public Utilities Commission in March requesting that their -- they call it their certificated area be expanded westward from Boise. This was at the request of Dan Wood and the Black Rock Development has been in front of you at pre-Council several times over I think probably the last year requesting service from the City of Meridian. I handed out a hard copy of a short memo I wrote, as well as the PUC staff report. I mention in my memo that I gave you a notice of the application and decision memorandum. Actually, I didn't, because by the time I got around to copying this at 5:00 o'clock today it just seemed like too much paper, but the city attorney's office does have that. This area is much larger than just the Black Rock Subdivision that was proposed. It -- actually, it overlaps into the city's area of impact. Much of it goes into this nebulous referral area that we have as well. The long and short of it, I will write a letter to the PUC in opposition of this application. I have four or five -- I guess six bullet points that I will include in our letter and I'm only bringing this to you for some feedback, if there is anything that I haven't thought of, any comments that you'd like to have me include in that, I will. The six bullet points -- I won't go through them in detail, but I would point out number three is that we Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 73 of 77 do have pending planning efforts for this area. I will be bringing an agreement to you in the next week or two from JUB Engineers to master plan sewer -- we have already master planned sewer in this area, that we will be doing the whole south area, down to roughly Columbia Road. It's my understanding that the Planning and Zoning Department will be providing -- or proposing an enhancement in next year's budget to do some land use planning in this area as well. All that being said, I will take questions or direction. De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have questions or direction? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Good catch. Keep moving on it. Let them know that we don't support it. Bird: Second that. Watson: Thank you. Item 18: Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 18 is the water, sewer, and trash delinquencies. Pursuant to Meridian City Code 9-1-21, delinquent water users shall have the right to request a pre-termination hearing prior to water service being disconnected. No water users having requested such pre-termination hearing for April 19, 2005, water service for the attached turn-off list will be terminated on April 20th, 2005. The total amount of the turn-off list is $26,127.15. Do I have a motion to approve? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve the delinquency notice for turn off on April 20th, 2005, in the amount of $26,127.15. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 18. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 74 of 77 Item 19: Ordinance No. 05-1141 Licensed Alcohol Establishments and Prohibitina Two License Establishments within the Same Premise: (Second Reading - Public Comment will be Accepted) De Weerd: Thank you. Items 19, 20, 21 and 22 are ordinances. Oops. Sorry. I will ask you to read Item 19 by title only. Please note for the record this is the second reading. Public comment will be accepted. If you will, please, read this ordinance by title only. Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 05-1141, an ordinance amending Title 3, Chapter 2, Section 2, of the Meridian City Code regarding amending the requirements for licensed alcohol establishments and prohibiting two licensed establishments within the same premise, providing a savings clause and providing for a summary and providing an effective date. De Weerd: Thank you. The second reading of Ordinance 05-1141. Is there anyone who would like to provide public comment at this time? Hearing none, I would accept a motion -- oh, I don't need a motion -- Rountree: It goes to third reading. Item 20: Bird: It just goes to third reading. Correct. Item 21: Item 22: Ordinance No. 05-1143 : AZ 04-033 Request for an Annexation and Zoning of 15.92 acres from C-2 and RUT zones to C-G zone for Stor- !! by Avest LP - 355 North Ten Mile Road: Ordinance No. 05-1144 : RZ 04-016 Request for a Rezone of .27 acre from R-4 to 0- T zone for Serendipitv Place Subdivision by Susan Howard - 1305 West 1st Street: Ordinance No. 05-1145 : AZ 03-025 Request for annexation and zoning of 57.84 acres from RUT to C-G zones for Blue Marlin by W. H. Moore Company - northwest corner of East Ustick Road and North Eagle Road: De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, read Items 20, 21, and 22, the ordinances, by title only. Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 05-1143, an ordinance for property located in the southeast quarter of Section 10, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, at Meridian -- excuse me -- Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A and annexing certain land and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate city limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City of Meridian, establishing and determining the land use and classification of said lands from RUT, Ada County, to C-G, general commercial Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 75 of 77 in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, the Idaho State Tax Commission as required by law and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading rules and providing for an effective. Berg: Ordinance 05-1144, an ordinance for land located in the northeast quarter of Section 12 South, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A of this ordinance and rezoning certain land and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho, within the corporate city limits of the City of Meridian, as rezoning the land use zoning classification of said lands by Meridian City Code, providing that copies -- oh. Excuse me. From R-4, low -- high density to OT, Old Town, Meridian -- in Meridian City Code, providing that copies of the ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, the Idaho State Tax Commission as required by law and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading and providing for an effective. Berg: Ordinance 05-1145, an ordinance finding that Winston W. -- excuse me. Winston H. Moore and Joann Crawford and Jack Jolson, the owners of certain land -- real property generally located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Ustick Road and Eagle Road, State Highway 55, immediately north of the propose Kessler, Cobbs, Ruwe annexation and east of the Champion Park Subdivision, Meridian, Idaho, to be known as Blue Marlin and which lies contiguous or adjacent to the city limits of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, and made a request for annexation in writing to the City Council and that said land be annexed to the City of Meridian and zoning designated General Retail and Service Commercial District, (C-G), and declaring that said land by proper legal description as described below, be a part of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, repealing all ordinance, resolutions, orders, or parts thereof, in conflict herewith and directing the city engineer to add said property to the official maps of the City of Meridian and directing the clerk of the City of Meridian to file a certified copy of the ordinance and map of the areas to be annexed with the Ada County recorder, auditor, treasurer, and assessor and the State Tax Commission in the State of Idaho, pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-223 and Section 63-2215. This is an older ordinance. We just got the development agreement signed and that's why the ordinance is on this agenda. De Weerd: Thank you. You have heard these ordinances read by title only. Is there anyone who would like to hear them read in their entirety? You're more than welcome to come up here and read them. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we approve Items No. 20, 21, and 22, Ordinance 05-1142, 05- 1144, and 05-1145, with suspension of rules. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 76 of 77 Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor, I move we adjourn. De Weerd: I'm not going to entertain that motion. Just real quick a couple of items. Arbor Day is April 29th at 2:30 at Peregrine Elementary. Strategic Planning is on May 3rd at 5:00 o'clock, so please note that. Donnell: Strategic Planning? De Weerd: Yes. That's one that Councilman Wardle and Councilman Rountree weren't at, so we need to -- Donnell: So, those of us that did attend before do not need to attend again? De Weerd: You sure do. Donnell: Oh. De Weerd: This is to -- it sounds like Mr. Rountree's even read the -- or listened to the tape. So, it is to pick up where we left off and to work with the directors on the focus areas, some initiatives, objectives, and action items. Donnell: May the what? De Weerd: May 3rd at 5:00 p.m. at the police station. And finally -- well, that's -- we have City Council at 7:00. So, we will -- Donnell: Okay. De Weerd: And now I -- you guys, it's late. Only if Council doesn't want to move to adjourn. Donnell: I think we can answer their questions. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council April 19, 2005 Page 77 of 77 Ralphs: While we were going through this amendment -- or this modification, is there any way that we can get four occupancy permits for the residential? And if we do not go through and none of the approvals happen, then, you know, the rest of the residential gets shut down. De Weerd: I guess that's not the way the development agreement reads. Ralphs: I had to ask. Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, for the record, the way that I read that development agreement, it requires modification for any occupancy permit to be issued, unless all of the improvements are completed. Unfortunately, you're stuck with that language, regardless of the ambiguities that may -- you may think exist in the record, that document is a binding agreement between you and the city. Ralphs: I understand. All right. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we adjourn. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11 :00 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) ~~ ~ Y DC 'vy'EERD tl'7J tPl.(.ftC41 (JlYzJ'/d~ SMIUt.-. ". L/ /0 / tJ7 DATE APPROVED April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 19, 2005 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 3 REQUEST EMS Presentation and Discussion AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. RECEIVED APR t 9 2005 g~~~eg1A: Dear Commissioners We recently received a presentation from Don Alloway in regards to the proposal to dissolve the current Ambulance District and reform a new one. The City has some concerns we would like to provide comment on. As elected officials we believe that it is always better to seek the input of the constituents whenever possible We support an advisory vote or a voluntary vote to allow the citizens of this County to weigh in on any proposal that may affect their property taxes. We further recognize the financial hardships that have been placed upon the expanding needs without the expanding dollars to supply those needs. However, we agree with the Ada County Emergency Services Blue Ribbon Task Force in their final report, 'Some ofthe issues of interest included here, if implemented without others, could have an undesired effect on the EMS delivery system in Ada County.' The report pointed out a number of areas that needed closer scrutiny that could result in cost savings and better efficiencies. As one of the task force members stated, 'We need not throw more tax revenue at a system that is flawed' - iftaxes are raised what is the short and long- range plan for services and where is the accountability to the taxpayers on what exactly they will get with this proposed increase? The '911' medical response is vital to the health and safety of our citizens; we appreciate the immediacy of this issue. Meridian would like to be a partner in working towards viable solutions. To that end, we have been working with your EMS division on 'co-locations,' albeit there are a couple of issues to work out. Additionally, we will be adding firefighter paramedics to all of our stations when Station 4 opens at the end of 2005. We are eager to work with you in finding how we can best serve our constituents at the lowest possible cost. If the Ada County Commission finds that an increase is imminent; and prior to working with the surrounding cities and fire districts, we would like to go on record of adamantly opposing anything more than a maximum ofa 2.5 mills amount. We don't support a larger increase because we trust the citizen's committee's analysis that the 2.5 will meet the needs and even expected growth of the service for the next few years. We have directed our City Attorney to attend your public meeting of December 7, 2004 to carry our message to you our County elected officials. Sincerely, RECEIVED APR t 9 2005 cjty ofMerldian. City Cle1k Office Dear Ada County Commissioners: We have had the opportunity to review the proposed Letter of Commitment in Support of the Levy Override Election for the Operation of Ada County Emergency Medical Services in both the original version and the revised proposal prepared by the Ada County Fire Chiefs Association. At this time the City of Meridian cannot be a signatory of either document. We would like to offer our input and support to most ofthe issues proposed by the Letter of Commitment, but we wish you to be fully aware of our perspective. As we stated in our earlier letter on this issue we support the belief that the voters of Ada County, our collective constituents the citizens of Meridian included, should have the ballot opportunity to exercise their right, when there is a request to increase their taxes, no matter what the amount. Furthermore, we continue to believe that the Blue Ribbon Task force has made numerous recommendations that need to be explored. We supported the concept of seeking voter approval for the increase ofthe levy to the .25 mills, but we also wish to participate and actively be involved in seeking all solutions to the current medical fiscal crisis that this County faces. The City of Meridian has always been willing to sit down with all stakeholders and work towards real solutions that will be long lasting and viable. We are willing to put our efforts and resources towards a global solution, but we don't believe this agreement is necessary to achieve that end. The City was not consulted in the drafting of either the original or the revised Letter of Commitment so we have not felt ownership in the language. Rather than waste our time or yours with <<wordsmithing" the document so that we can remove or edit language that we believe does not work in the best interest of our citizens we simply re-commit our City to being a participant at the table to seek a solution for all of Ada County on this vital concern. Please accept our offer to be a participant and leader with you on this critical issue and we will work with you and all the stakeholders to find a solution that benefits all of the citizens that we serve. Yours truly, Mayor and City Council Ada County EMS . Established September 1975 . Ada County EMS began when the private EMS provider suddenly went bankrupt. · A Blue Ribbon Task Force was established to research and develop an EMS System. . The Ada County Commissioners created an ambulance district under Idaho Code Section 31-3908. Ada County EMS System · A 1974 Task Force promoted an EMS system in Ada County utilizing a two tiered system. This is the type of service still present today. · Basic Life Support (BLS) response goal within 4 minutes - EMT-level, non-transport · Advanced Life Support (ALS) response goal within 8 minutes - Paramedic level, transport RECEIVED APR 1 9 2005 City of Meridian City Clerk Office Ada County EMS System Ada County EMS System . 111ere are currently 7 fire departments and 27 fire stations in Ada COlmty that provide the BLS or Intermediate Life Support (ILS) service (EMT-level, non-transport). . There is currently 1 EMS agency and 12 EMS stations in the system that provlde ALS service (paramedic level, transport). EMS Stations . 12 stations throughout the county . 8 co-located with fire departments .3 cooperative agreements with hospitals . 1 station owned by the EMS district .Doubles as the administrative and operations office Ada County EMS System - Differences between levels of care: - EMT-Basic - Basic patient assessment, perform o:A)'gen delivery, bandaging, CPR, use of automatic de fibrillatoc - EMT-Advanced - Moce advanced patient assessment -Advanced ailVlay management -lV's Ada County EMS System . EMT-Paramedic skills: . Advanced patient assessment skills . More advanced airway skills . Cardiac monitoring and rhythm identification . Medication administration . One to two years of education Ada County EMS System -ACEMS responded to 17,513 medical emergencies last year . Call volume increases 6%+ annually System Performance . Based on: Response Times AND Clinical Performance The Tiered System Works! Cardiac Arrest Survival Rates Ada County EMS Funding - How is ACEMS funded? . ACEMS is a taxing district Historically, -30% of funding is tax based -70% of funding is fee for service -A majority of EMS funding comes from users of the system minimizing the costs to all of the taxpayers in Ada County 4 Ada County EMS . Property tax levy: . Currently set at 0.0001227 . State maximum for an ambulance taxing district is 0.0004. Idaho Code ~ 31-3908 Medicare rule change . Prohibited balance billing to the patient . EMS now loses up to $830/Medicare call . Average loss per call is $600 . 33% of billable transports are Medicare patients . Reduction is compounded annually by continued loss of revenue, skyrocketing healthcare costs, increase in demand, and the depressed economy Medicare Rule Financial Impact . Actual and Projected revenue losses . 2002 - 51,273,339 (6 months under new rule) . 2003 - $1,915739 . 2004 - $2,048,497 . 2005 - $2,186,976 . 2006. $2,334,815 . 2007 - $2,492,649 . Total revenue loss from 2002 to 2005 - $7,424,532 . Additional projected loss for 2006 & 2007 - $4,827,463 Adjustments and Non-payment History Ada County EMS . Issues that hinder the growth of ACEMS . Recent cuts in Medicare / Medicaid reimbursement have created budget shortfalls . The ambulance taxing district tax base is limited by the 3% budget cap . Increased demand for service . EMS fees already high What has been done? . ~~:ed fees significantly in 1999 to cover anticipated . Slowed expansion . Implemented system re-structuring (co-location, deployment of staff, volunteers) . F edeml deleg.ition visits · ~;~~~:~;1:~:~1~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~r~F~3~~~t~h~n . Commissioned Blue Ribbon Task Force of citizens . EMS Advisory Board evaluation Options . Blue Ribbon Task Force Recommendations . EMS Advisory Board Recommendations . Override Levy (2 year levy adjustment) . Short term fIx for permanent problem . Cost $100,000 plus public education (money and resources the district does not have and cannot spend on a campaign) Secondary Option . Dissolution of current taxing district and recreating another at higher levy rate . Unanimous vote from the Blue Ribbon Task Force Current $12.27/year on $100,000 t~'{able value Levy max $40.00/year on $100,000 taxable value What would the override accomplish? . Make up for the Medicare loss for the next two years . Maintain the current service level . Assist in developing a comprehensive EMS System operations plan involving area departments and resources Override Election . Requirements . All 125 precincts need to be staffed with 3 people . Timelines . May 24th election day . Poll open at Barrister - May 10th for early voting . V oring by mail - One month prior . Cost - approximately $100,000 Override Election . Cost Estimates . Chief judges . Precinct Workers . Early Voting Workers . Polling Place Rent . Absentee Postage . Ballot Printing . Publication . Supplies . Delivery to polls . Misc. . Estimated Total Cost $18,750 $62,500 $ 2,880 $ 1,700 $ 60 $ 1,000 $ 2,800 $ 1 ,500 $ 6,300 $ 1,500 $98,990 Override Election . Asking for $4.8 million to cover t<1edicare losses only . To be successful, requires a 50%+1 voter approval Override, then what happens? . EMS Planning and Coonlination Committee will continue its work . Total EMS System review including EMS & Fire . Will e\'aluate system dcsign to detcrmine if any cfficiencies can be identified without a reduction in the level of service . Will evaluate pnrtnering and consolidation of services Ada County EMS Goal . To Provide the most effective, clinically sophisticated, efficient Emergency Medical Services (EMS) System for the citizens and visitors of Ada County, . Enhance the County-wide EMS delivery System Fragmentation will cause system demise resulting in a decreased level of care and higher costs to taxpayers and patients Summaty . Ada County is committed to maintaining a countywide EMS delivery system of the highest quality, yet maintain the fiscal responsibility our community demands . The current tiered system works . As Ada County continues to grow, EMS must grow with it . This is a funding and public safety issue in the best interests of our citizens, not a systems or political issue Questions? "Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." Henry Ford 10 April 1 5, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Dave Buich CUP 05-005 Aprill~, 2005 ITEM NO. 5-8 REQUEST Findings for Approval - Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed use three story building consisting of retail, office and residential uses in the 0-1 zone for Dave Buich - 641 North Main Street AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Conroc~d: ~~ Emailed: 5Go--:f+tP Lt<Vo.rc.M~+-ed~ Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS See attached findings ~v-U Phone: CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a new mixed use three-story building consisting of retail, office, and residential uses in the 0- T Zone, by Dave Buich. Case No(s). CUP-05-005 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 5, 2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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 967- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the AprilS, 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 for approval to the City Council. d. The City Council heard and took oral and written testimony and duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code 967-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code SS 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof 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 OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S).CUP-D5-DD5 - PAGE I of4 verified that the property owner(s) ofrecord at the time of issuance of these findings is Shepard Enterprises Limited Partnership. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibit D for the findings required for the application. B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Pla1ming Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. S67- 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 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code Sll-17-9. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the govenunental 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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Site Plan dated 2/15/05 as shown in Exhibit B and the Conditions of Approval 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 S 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 CUP Site Plan is hereby conditionally approved; and 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in Exhibit C. CITY OF MERIDIAN FrNDlNGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S).CUP-05-005 - PAGE 2 of 4 D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use pennit shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the council. During this time, the permit holder must commence the use as permitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. In this context "structures" shall include sewer and water lines, streets or building construction. The applicant has specified in the application and to the commission and council a construction schedule and completion date for the project. If the completion date specified for the project is exceeded, the conditional use application shall become null and void. However, the applicant may submit an application for a time extension on the project for city council review. The application for time extension shall be submitted at least thirty (30) days prior to the deadline for completion of the project. For projects requiring platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. Par projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one year from the original date of approval by the council. If the successi ve phases are not submitted within one year intervals, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and void. (MCC 11-17-4.B.) E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis I. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body ofthe City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code 9 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Approved Site Plan Exhibit C: Pinal Conditions of Approval Exhibit D: Conditional Use Pennit Findings CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S).CUP-05-005 - PAGE 3 of 4 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~? ,2005. I ..;-'.. (1 - dayof COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED~ MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED_ d!,dL.P Attest: William G. Berg, Jr., and City Attorney. By<J~lt~ 1 ~ \1 V\ CIty Clerk's Office Dated: 4- 'Z l-ot; CITY OF MERJDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLusrONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S).CUP-05-005 - PAGE 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A Buich CUP CUP-05-00S Legal Description EXHIBIT B Buich CUP CUP-05-005 Approved Site Plan i ~ ~ ;; D~ II) <OJ I a. !j" r- ::J co EXHIBIT C Buich CUP CUP-OS-OOS Conditions of Approval SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I. The building and site improvements shall be constructed per the approved plans with all modifications required by this application. 2. Wall signs are approved as submitted on the building elevations and shall be regulated by the L-Q standards for signage in the zoning ordinance. No freestanding signs are approved for this project. Any additional signs will require a modification of the Conditional Use Permit. 3. The applicant shall be required, prior to CZC approval, to coordinate with the Meridian Development Corporation to obtain the design documents for the streetscape that was developed for Farmers and Merchants Bank, and implement the design on the subject site. 4. The applicant shall provide signage at the intersection of the alley and the south exit to the parking lot which prohibits left turns into the alley and is clearly visible to traffic exiting the site. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Meridian City Code requires that this site be served with an automatic underground irrigation system. Use of non-potable irrigation water is required when determined to be available by the City Public Works Department as regulated by City Ordinance 9-1-28. 2. Sanitary sewer and water service shall be from the city of Meridian's existing systems adjacent to the site. 3. This conditional use permit shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in MCC 11-17-4.B. 4. All standard parking stalls shall be at least 9 feet wide and 19 feet long and all compact stalls shall be at least 7 Y2 feet wide and 15 feet long per Ordinance 11- 13-4.F. All drive aisles shall be at least 25 feet wide. 5. All parking areas and drive aisles shall be paved for all uses, in compliance with the submitted plans. Handicap parking spaces shall be signed and striped in compliance with Federal accessibility guidelines. 6. All exterior lighting, whether attached to the building or located within the parking lot, shall be down-shielded or otherwise altered so that the light does not spill over onto adjacent properties or right-of-way. All parking lot lighting shall be in accordance with Ordinance 11-13 -4C. 7. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in this report and Section 11-14 of the City Zoning and Development Ordinance. All signage shall require separate sign pennit(s). 8. All construction and site improvements shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the adopted building and fire codes. 9. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. Storm water treatment and disposal must be designed in accordance with Department of Environmental Quality 1997 publication Catalog of Storm Water Best Management Practices for Idaho Cities and Counties and City of Meridian standards and policies. Off-site disposal into surface water is prohibited unless the jurisdiction which has authority over the receiving stream provides written authorization prior to development plan approval. The applicant is responsible for filing all necessary applications with the Idaho Department of Water Resources regarding Shallow Injection Wells. 10. Certificate of Occupancy: All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed development. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). A bid must accompany any request for temporary occupancy. OTHER AGENCY COMMENTS Fire Deoartment Comment: 1. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shan be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 12" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing pennits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. 2. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3. For all Fire Lanes, paint the curb red and provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane" . 4. Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix D. 5. The first digit of the Apartment/Office Suite shall correspond to the floor level. 6. Provide a Knoxbox entry system for the complex prior to occupancy. 7. All processes & storage practices shall be required to comply with the International Fire Code. 8. Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. 9. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 10. Buildings over 30' in height are required to have access roads in accordance with Appendix D Section DI05. 11. Please contact the Fire Marshal at 888-1234 to work specific issues associated with this project as soon as possible. Sanitarv Services Comment: I. Please contact Bill Gregory at SSC (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal and submit stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application. Police Deoartment Comment: I. The Police Department has no concerns related to the site design submitted with the application. Parks Deoartment Comment: I. Tree Grate and Tree Box standard for Downtown street trees: The proposed tree grate shall be a 6 foot by 6 foot, cast iron, French pattern tree grate. This grate is available from Canterbury International. This grate shall be placed in a 6 foot by 6 foot inside diameter tree box with a steel grate frame set in concrete. Prior to CZC approval, contact Meridian Parks and Recreation Department for specifications and tree box construction drawings. EXHIBIT D Buich CUP CUP-05-005 Required Findings STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USES The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following, and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; City Council finds that the subject property, as depicted, is large enough to accommodate the required open spaces and landscaping required by the ordinance, but not parking. The applicant has submitted a Variance application for a reduction in the number of required parking spaces (VAR-05-003). The City of Meridian has prepared draft Downtown Design Guidelines which have not been adopted by the City as of the date of this report and will apply to projects in the city's downtown core. These proposed guidelines do not require new buildings in the downtown core, which are built to certain specifications, to provide any off- street parking. In light of these proposed changes, City Council will support a Variance to the parking requirements for the proposed structure. If a Variance is approved for the project, staff finds that the project will meet this requirement. The proposed mixed use building consists of 8,300 square feet of ground floor retail, 8,460 square feet of second floor office, and third floor residential with four (4) units. Ordinance requires one (1) off-street parking space per 200 s.t. of gross floor area for retail, one (1) off-street parking space per 400 s.t. of gross floor area for office, and two (2) parking spaces for each residential unit, for a total of 71 required spaces. The proposed site plan shows 22 off-street parking stalls, 11 of which are compact spaces. The adjacent city-owned parking lot contains 32 parking spaces. A. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the property as "Old Town" and it is currently zoned O-T. Old Town "includes the historic downtown and the true community center. Uses would include offices, retail and lodging, theaters, restaurants and service retail for surrounding residents and visitors.... In order to provide and accommodate preservation of the historical character, specific design requirements may be imposed" (see Comprehensive Plan, p. 99). Ordinance 11- 8-1, Schedule of Use Control, allows for professional offices, retail, and apartment buildings through the conditional use process in the 0- T zone. City Council finds that the requested use will be in compliance with the approved Future Land Use Map if design requirements are imposed that preserve the character of Old Town. City Council further finds that if the project is approved as a CUP it will be in compliance with the MCC. B. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; The surrounding properties vary greatly and include, a bank, a lumberyard, the Creamery, and a feed mill. Old Town is intended as a mixed use zone. Therefore, staff finds that the proposed development will not adversely change the existing or intended character of the general vicinity. City Council finds the design concept to be compatible with the intended character ofthe area. C. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; City Council does not anticipate that the proposed development will have an adverse impact on the surrounding property. In the case of the Creamery and other surrounding properties, the proposed project should actually add further incentive for redevelopment. However, the Commission and Council should consider any testimony given at the public hearings before making this finding. D. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; The project proposes vehicular access from Broadway Avenue and from the alley to the south of the property. The Commission and Council will need to reference any written or verbal testimony submitted by the Meridian Police and Fire Departments regarding their ability to adequately service this project. ACHD approved the proposed project with the conditions noted in their report. Water and sanitary sewer service to the project is readily available to the site via mains installed adjacent to the property. E. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; If approved, the applicant will finance the extension of sewer, water, utilities and pressurized irrigation to serve the project. The primary public costs to serve the future project will be fire and police services. City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. F. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; ACHD estimates that the traffic volume would be 319 additional average daily trips (169 existing) for the originally proposed bank building. Traffic congestion is an ongoing issue for downtown, the resolution of which is beyond the scope of this project. ACHD staff finds that the additional traffic created by a revised building should not be excessive. City Council also finds that no smoke, fumes, glare or odors will result from the proposed use. G. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; As discussed above, vehicular approaches are proposed from Broadway Avenue and from the existing alley. City Council finds that the proposed use will not create significant interference with traffic on the surrounding public streets. Please refer to ACHD comments for additional detail on this issue. According to ACHD staff, the project does not require action by the ACHD Commission and was approved at stafflevel February 15, 2005. H. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. City Council finds that this proposal will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic, or historic feature considered to be of major importance. April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Dave Buich V AR 05-003 April1~, 2005 ITEM NO. s.c REQUEST Findings for Approval- Request for a Variance for a reduction in parking requirements for a proposed three-story mixed use project for Dave Buich - 641 North Main Street AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: +/1 g I ()c;- Phone: Emailed:5coI+g.LK.V a. { chi +-e.c..-f 5 .. LOM Staff Initials: J:2 Materials presented at public meellngs shall become property of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS See attached findings ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER Request for a Variance from Meridian City Code (MCC) 11-13-5 (Schedule of Parking Space Requirements), for a reduction in Parking Requirements for a proposed 3-story mixed-use project, in the Q-T zone for 641 North Main Street, by Dave Buich. Case No: V AR-05-003 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 5, 2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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') ofthe external boundaries ofthe 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 g67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the April 5, 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 ofthe City Clerk (for written testimony) and in the official meeting minutes (for oral testimony). c. The City Council heard and took oral and written testimony and duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code g67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code g~ 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof 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 verified that the property owner of record at the time of issuance of these findings is SCS Investments, LLC. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDTNGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). V AR-05-003 - PAGE I of 4 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibit B for the findings required for this application. B. Conclusions of Law 1. 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 (I.C. ~67- 6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and Development Ordinances codified at Titles II 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 6, 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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A. 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 is hereby granted a variance to MCC 11-13-5 Schedule of Parking Space Requirements, in the O-T Zone to allow for a reduction in parking requirements for a proposed 3-story mixed-use building. D. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). V AR-05-003 - PAGE 2 of 4 2. Please take notice that this is a final action ofthe governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code ~ 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) 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: Required Findings for Variance By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 1tf1A: '".{j ,2005. I (q-l!- dayof COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED ---- Attest: d~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDfNGS OF FACT, CONCLuSrONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S).VAR-05-003 - PAGE 3 of4 Copy served upon Applicant, The Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. By: ,j ~J\lJrv City Clerk's Office Dated: 4~ 2 \ -OS CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LA W AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S).VAR-05-003 - PAGE 4 of4 EXHIBIT A Buich Variance V AR-OS-003 Legal Description EXHIBIT B Buich Variance V AR-OS-003 Required Findings REQUIRED FINDINGS According to Ordinance 11-18-1, Variances, the Council may authorize in specific cases a variance from the terms of either the Zoning or Subdivision Ordinance. Specifically, the Ordinance lists the following Findings (MCCl1-18-3), all of which must be determined before granting a variance: "A. That there are such special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that the strict application of the provisions of this Title would clearly be impracticable or unreasonable; City Council finds that the subject property, as depicted, is large enough to accommodate the required open spaces and landscaping required by the ordinance, but not parking. The City of Meridian has prepared draft Downtown Design Guidelines that apply to projects in the city's downtown core. The guidelines have not been adopted by the City as of the date of this report; however, these proposed guidelines do not require new buildings such as this one in the downtown core to provide any off-street parking. Variances for a reduction in parking requirements have recently (in the past two years) been approved for many properties in the downtown area, including Fanners and Merchants State Bank, Aromatic Sensations and Holy Trinity Charismatic Episcopal Church. In addition, the Meridian Development Corporation (MDC) has submitted comments in support of the request which state: "And MDC specifically supports the request for reduced parking since it should be MDC's role to provide additional parking at some time in the future when it is needed." The proposed mixed use building consists of 8,300 square feet of ground floor retail, 8,460 square feet of second floor office, and third floor residential with four (4) units. Ordinance requires one (l) off-street parking space per 200 s.f. of gross floor area for retail, one (1) off-street parking space per 400 s.f. of gross floor area for office, and two (2) parking spaces for each residential unit, for a total of 71 required spaces. The proposed site plan shows 22 off-street parking stalls, 11 of which are compact spaces. The adjacent city-owned parking lot contains thirty- two (32) parking spaces. B. That strict compliance with the requirements of this Title would result in extraordinary hardship to the owner, subdivider or developer because of unusual topography, the nature or condition of adjacent development, other physical conditions or other conditions that make strict compliance with this Title unreasonable under the circumstances, or that the conditions and requirements of this Title will result in inhibiting the achievements or the objectives of this Title; The City has adopted goals, objectives, and policies that support mixed uses within the Old Town district. If off-street parking be strictly required for all properties in Old Town, staff believes that a majority of the properties would be restricted to a residential-only use and would not redevelop. City Council generally supports the redevelopment of the smaller, older lots in the original Meridian Township, as these conversions allow for a more vibrant downtown area. City Council finds that strict compliance with the City's parking requirements on this site would result in an extraordinary hardship to the developer due to the circumstances surrounding this property mentioned in the previous finding. Further, City Council fmds that enforcing the conditions and requirements of the off-street parking ordinance will inhibit the objectives of allowing Old Town to be a mixed use area. C. That the granting of the specified variance will not be detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to other property in the area in which the property is situated; City Council anticipates that the variance will not be detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to other properties in the area. Further, the Council has granted parking variances to properties with similar situations within Old Town, and is unaware of any harmful impacts from these parking variances. D. That such variance will not have the effect of altering the interest and purpose of this Title and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan." City Council finds that the issuance of a variance for reducing parking standards to allow the redevelopment of a small piece of property in Old Town will not have the effect of altering the purpose and/or interest of the Zoning Ordinance or the Comprehensive Plan. April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AZ 05-001 April 1~, 2005 APPLICANT Brighton Properties, LLC ITEM NO. 5~D REQUEST Findings for Approval- Request for Annexation and Zoning of 156.49 acres to R-8 and L-O zones for Bainbridge Subdivision - southwest comer of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted:~ --k~ Date: '-t/J~/~ Phone: Emailed:rL-furyL!0...L/lehr; 5h.-1on('()\p COn" Staff Initials: I ~ Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. See attached Findings ~vU CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a Request for Annexation and Zoning of 152.68 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium Density Residential)(146.83 Acres) and L-O (Limited Office)(5.85 Acres) AND Preliminary Plat Approval of Three-Hundred-Eighty-Nine (389) Single- Family Building Lots, Twenty-Two (22) Other/Common Lots, One (1) Church Lot, and One (1) Lot to be Developed/Re-Subdivided in the Future AND Conditional Use Permit Approval for a Planned Development Consisting of Single-Family Homes, a Future Neighborhood Park, and a Church, with Reduced Minimum Lot Frontages, Reduced Minimum Lot Sizes, and Increased Maximum Block Length, by Brighton Properties, LLC. Case No(s): AZ-05-00l, PP-05-002, CUP-05-002 For the City Council Hearing Date of: AprilS, 2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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 April 5, 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 record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code ~67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code ~S 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDlNGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-001 / PP-05-002 / CUP-05-002- PAGE I of5 evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof 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 verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings are Brad and LouAnn Janicek, Brighton Corporation, Boise Research Center, Inc., Brighton Properties, LLC, and Brighton Investments, LLC. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibits G, H, and I for the findings required for these applications. B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shaH exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (LC. ~67- 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 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shaH 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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Preliminary Plat dated February 16, 2005 as shown in Exhibit B, the Site Plan dated February 16, 2005 as shown in Exhibit C, the Annexation and Zoning Comments as shown in Exhibit D, the Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions as shown in Exhibit E, and the CUP/PD Site Specific and Standard Conditions as shown in Exhibit F. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-OOI / PP-OS-002 I CUP-OS-002- PAGE 2 ofS C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code S 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 Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat dated February 16, 2005 is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The applicant's Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated February 16, 2005 is hereby conditionally approved; and, 3. The Site Specific and Standard Conditions are as shown in Exhibits E and F. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Pennit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the council. During this time, the permit holder must commence the use as permitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, acquire building permits and commence construction of penn anent footings or structures on or in the ground. In this context "structures" shall include sewer and water lines, streets or building construction. The applicant has specified in the application and to the commission and council a construction schedule and completion date for the project. Ifthe completion date specified for the project is exceeded, the conditional use application shall become null and void. However, the applicant may submit an application for a time extension on the project for city council review. The application for time extension sha1l be submitted at least thirty (30) days prior to the deadline for completion of the project. For projects requiring platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one year from the original date of approval by the council. If the successive phases are not submitted within one year intervals, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and void. (MCC 11-17-4.8.) 2. Notice of Twelve (12) Month Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that after the date of approval of the preliminary plat, the owner or developer shall have one year within which to file the request for approval of the final plat. After approval of final plat, the owner or developer shall have one year to begin construction of the public utilities and one year thereafter to complete construction of those public facilities. (MCC 12-2-4.B & C.) E. Notice of Final Actionand Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S), AZ-05-001 / PP-05-002 / CUP-05-002- PAGE 3 of 5 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek ajudicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Approved Preliminary Plat (with conditions) Exhibit C: Approved Site Plan (with conditions) Exhibit D: Annexation and Zoning Comments Exhibit E: Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions Exhibit F: CUP/PD Site Specific and Standard Conditions Exhibit G: Zoning Amendment Findings Exhibit H: Preliminary Plat Findings Exhibit I: CUP/PD Findings By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~/l ,2005. f 1-11: day of COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY deWEERD VOTED_ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-00 I / PP-05-002 / CUP-05-002- PAGE 4 of 5 (TIE BREAKER) k~ Attest: William G. Berg, Jr., and City Attorney. By:,k~ ~bll- City Clerk's Office Dated: 4-2J-cY3 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-OO I / PP-OS-002 I CUP-OS-002- PAGE 5 of 5 EXHIBIT A Bainbridge Subdivision AZ-05-001 Legal Description (3 pages) Engineering North West, LLC 423 N, Al1ce,<mr Place. Suite 180 lloise.Id.ho 83104 (20g) 376.5000 . Pax (208) 316.5556 Project No. 02.043.0 I Date: April 5, 2005 BAINBRIDGE SUBDIVISION TOTAL ANNEXA lION DESCRIPTION (INCLUDING LANDSCAPE AREA) A parcel of land located in the E 112 oflhe NW 1/4, and the NE If4 of Section 27, T. 4 N., R. I W., B.M" Ada CounlY. Idaho and being morc paniculurly described as follows: Commencing ulthe section corner common 10 Sections 22, 23, 26 <IUd 27 of said T. 4 N., R.lW.; Thencc South 00020'42" West, 1399.56 feet on the see lion line common to said Sections 26 and 27 to the REAL POINT OJ~ BEGINNING; Thence continuing South O{)'20'42" West, 728.01 feet on the section line common to said Seclions 26 and 27: Thence leaving said sccHon line, North 86021'29" West, 465.&3 feel; Thence Soulh Or13'40" West, 104.07 fect; Thence South 61003'36" ElISt, 338.99 feel; Thence South 51"58'47" East, 195.68 feel; Thence South 89039' 18" East, 25,(){) feet to II poinl on Ihe section line common to said Scclions 26 and 27; Thence South 00020'42" West, 147.72 feel on the seclion line common 10 said Sections 26 and 27 10 lile 1/4 Section comer common to SQid Scctions 26 and 27; Thence leaving said s~lion line, NOl'lh 89021 '06" West. 2651.02 feet on the easl.west mid-section line of said Section 27 10 !he Center 1/4 Section corner of said Section 27; Thence North 89Q20' 14" West, 1324.91 feet on the east-west mid.section line of said Section 27 to the center.west 1/16 th seerion comer of said Section 27; Thence leaving said mid.section line, NOlth 00027' 19" East, 1318,77 fect on lhe westerly boundary line of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 27 to the Northwest comer said SE 1/4 of the l\'W 1/4; Thence South 89018'50" East, 330.98 feel on the northerly boundary line of said SE 114 of lhe NW 1/4; ll:l.inblid.r;c TeL:.l An:Jc-.u~li)Q l.toCJ.b: Thence leaving said northerly boundary tine, North 00"26'53" Easl, 1318.56 feet to a point on the section line common 10 said Sections 22 and 27; Thence South 89" 17' 17" East, 992.76 feet on the sm:tjon line common to said Sections 22 andl7 to the 1/4 section corner common 10 said Sections 22 and 27; Thence Sou!h 890[7'35" East, ]55.71 fcet on the section line common to Sllid Sections 22 and 27: Thence leaving said section line, South 00"42'25" West. 95.00 (eet; Thence South 63048'25" West, 94,48 fretlO a point of curve; Thcnce 47.52 fcet on the arc ofa curve to the right, said curve having a rndius of 122.00 feel, a t;cntrallmglc of 22019'09" and a dlord distance of 47.22 fect which bears South 11"52'06" Wcst; Thence South 23001 '40" West, 7.13 feet to a point of curvc; Thence 2 '-'79 feet on !he arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 58.00 feet, a central angle of 2103l'35" and a chord distance of 21.66 feet which bears SOUlll 12015'53" West to a point of rcversecurve; Thence 326.14 feet on !he arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 1948.73 feet, a central angle of 09.35'21" and a chord distance of325,76 feet which bears South 06017'46" West 10 a point ofrcverse curve; Thence 571.32 fed on the an: of a t;urve to thc left, said curvc having a radius of 626.53 feel, a cenrml angle of 52Q 14'50" and a chord distance of 551.73 feet which bears Soulh 1500 t' 58" East 10 a point of compound curve; Thence 170.52 feel on the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a mdius of 256.00 feet, a cenlral angle of 38.09'49" and a chord dislllnce of 167.38 feet which bears Sou!h 60014' ! 7" Ea.~l; Thence South 79019'12" East, 60.84 feet [0 a point of curve; Thcnce 162.40 feet on the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a rudius of 360.00 feet, a ccnlrul angle of 25"50' 48" and a chord distance of 161.03 feel which bears North 87.45'24" EilSt; Thence NOlth 74050'00" Easl, J 12.27 feet to a point of curve; Thence 203.18 feet on the arc of a curve 10 the right, said Cur.'C having a f"ddius of l120.oo feet, II central angle of 10.23 '39" nnd a chord dislnncc of 202.90 feet which bears North 80QOI '49" Eas[; Thence North OOn38'54" East, 54.10 feet; Thence South 89021 '06" East, 90,00 feel; Thence South 00038'54" West, 47.92 feet to n point of curve; Thence 864.31 feet on the arc of a Curve to the right. said Curve having a radius of 1431.37 feet, a ccmraJ angle of 340.35'49" and a chord distance of 851.24 feet whleh bears South 74038'42" Eust to a point of reverSe curve; , Thence 724.66 feet on the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 1330.00 feet, a centnlllmgle of 3F13'04" and a chord distance of715.72 feet which bears South 72"57'20" East 10 a point of compound curve; Thence 12.77 feel on the arc of 1l CUrVe to the left, said curve having a radius of 48,00 feet, a central angle of 15"14'31" and a chord distance of 12.73 feet which bellJ'S North 83048'52" EllSt; Thence North 76011'37" Easl. 28.27 feeuo a point of curve; Thence 27.66 feet on the arc of a curve to the right, said curve having lllildius of 1 ]2.00 feet, a cCllltal angle of 14009'05'" and a chord distance of 27.59 feet which bears North 830[6'09'" EllS!: Thence Nor/h 41059'22" East, 107.19 fecI; Thence South 89"39' 18" East. 70.00 fce! to lhe real poinl of beginning, Said parcel contains 154.85 acres more or less. PREl>ARED BY: Engineering Nor(hWe.~t, LLC James K. Washburn,Pl.S EXHIBIT B Bainbridge Subdivision PP-05-002 Approved Preliminary Plat (2 pages) EXHIBIT C Bainbridge Subdivision CDP-05-002 Approved Site Plan I l 1 ~ II } I I I " III ! Ll i,lll " .blr I :l I ~ t~ ;IHild:! dl III ~~ ..1.::111 II III 1~ g ~n~ 6~ ~~ ~ ~~ : ~i I ;~ ~~ ::t~ JE >-' Z,.:?:; :ig ~:~ ~~~ ~ ~:J ~r . . M; ~ ! ~ I EXHIBIT D Bainbridge Subdivision AZ-05-001 Annexation and Zoning Comments ANEXATION & ZONING COMMENTS I. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped by James R. Washburn, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 2. Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time. 3. A Development Agreement (DA) will be required as part of an annexation of this property. Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The auulicant shall contact the Citv Attornev Bill Narv at 888-4433 to initiate this orocess. The DA shall incorporate the following: · That the applicant agrees to provide the City with a legal description for the Johnson 2.S-acre outparcel (Parcel No. 80427142323) prior to annexation. · That the developer acknowledges by signing this Agreement that the property encompassed in this agreement is not currently sewerable by the City of Meridian. The City does not make any specific guarantees or promises to the developer as to when this property may be able to be included in the City sewer system. The developer assumes the risk in regards to this property and waives any claim against the City, that may exist due to the lack of available sewer service. · That the City is not requiring any park property be dedicated. However, if the applicant chooses to dedicate a park to the city, details such as boundary requirements and clear title will need to be worked out with the City Parks Department and Legal Department. · That the applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. · That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. 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 oftraffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. · That all future uses on Lots 2 and 3, Block 15, shall be required to obtain conditional use permit approval from the City. EXHIBIT E Bainbridge Subdivision PP-05-002 Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS-PRELIMINARY PLAT 1. The preliminary plat prepared by Engineering NorthWest, LLC, dated Nov 04, revised on 2-16-05, is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All comments/conditions of the accompanying Annexation/Zoning (AZ-OS-001) and Conditional Use Permit (CUP-OS-002) application shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-05-002). 2. Unless City staff and ACHD staff determine that a stub street is not necessary, provide a stub street to the 45-acre (potential school site) parcel to the west. Provide a vehicular stub street to the north through Block 15, unless that property becomes a school site. Provide public stub streets to the west (Fairborn Drive), south (Levanham Avenue, Dartmouth Avenue, Portsmouth Avenue, and Shropshire Place), and to the 2.S-acre outparcel (Shropshire Avenue), as proposed. 3. Place a note on the face of the final plat stating that all future front garage setbacks shall be 20-feet as measured from the property line or the back of sidewalk, whichever is more restrictive. 4. Prior to the City Engineer's signature of a final plat containing Lot 17, Block 2, and/or Lots 2-4, Block 25, the applicant shall provide evidence that the access easement across said lots has been relinquished OR the lots should be designated temporary non-build lots in a final plat note. 5. The submitted 2-page landscape plan prepared by The Land Group, Inc., dated 3- 25-05 is approved as submitted. The following should be included in the landscape plan: · Provide a 35-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to Chinden Boulevard and Ten Mile Road. In accordance with MCC 12-13-10, the 35-foot wide landscape buffers shall be located entirely outside of the ultimate right-of- way for the adjacent street and shall not include the width of the sidewalk. If the required sidewalk is placed outside of the right-of-way and within the landscape buffer, the buffer width shall be increased to 40-feet. · Depict and construct a 10-foot wide gravel shoulder on Ten Mile Road abutting the site, with the remaining portion of the right-of-way being landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. · The landscaping proposed on the north and east sides of Broadbent Way do not lie within the boundaries of the preliminary plat. The landscaping for the north side of Broadbent Way shall be included in the application. o All micropaths within the proposed subdivision shall be designed in accordance with MCC 12-13-15 "Micropath Landscaping" and MCC 12- 4-3 "Pedestrian Walkways." Micropath fencing shall be constructed per MCC 12-13-15-9. o All areas being counted toward the open space requirement shall be free of "wet ponds" or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the required open space are subject to Ordinance 12-13- 14 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees, as depicted on the submitted landscape plan. o Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that are removed. Other than the changes listed above, the approved landscape plan is not to be altered without prior written approval of the Planning & Zoning Department. 6. Construct a micro-path centrally located through Block 11, connecting Vanderbilt Drive to Lancaster Drive. 7. Place a note on the face of the final plat requiring any future use(s) on Lot 3, Block 15, to obtain separate conditional use permit approval. 8. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per MCC 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 9. The applicant has not indicated who will own and operate the pressurized irrigation system within this development. Underground vear-round pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to remain a private homeowners' association system, complete plans and specifications shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development plan review process. A draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual shall be submitted prior to plan approval. The applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shaU be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 10. Provide permanent fencing around the perimeter of the development. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. If pennanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of building pennits. All fences shall taper down to 3-feet maximum within 20 feet of all right- of-way. All fencing shan be installed in accordance with MCC 12-4-10. II. Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Bainbridge Homeowners' Association. 12. Permanent sanitary sewer service to this development is to be provided by the undeveloped "North" Black Cat Lift Station. At this point in time, the Meridian City Council has approved funding for the design; however no funding has been approved for the construction. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department to be in accordance with the approved master sewer plan. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. Ifthis development is approved, it shall be subject to the North Black Cat sewer system being available. 13. Municipal water to this site shall be via extensions from existing mains in Ten Mile Road. Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer and water mains to and through this proposed development, thereby making them available to adjacent properties. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. 14. Other than the public street accesses approved by ACHD and ITD, direct lot access to Ten Mile Road and Chinden Boulevard is prohibited. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access to Ten Mile Road and Chinden Boulevard. GENERAL REOUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT I. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2. Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to MCC 12-13-10-8. 3. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all fencing, landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 4. A detailed landscape plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance and as noted in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application. 5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 6. Two-hundred-fifty and one-hundred-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivideyls expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior commencing installations. 7. Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 8. Submit any up-dated groundwater/soils monitoring data, as collected and analyzed by a soils scientist, to the Public Works Department for review. Any drainage areas (detention/retention basins) must be designed to ensure that water will percolate or discharge with a period of time not to exceed 24-hours for all storms up to and including a 100-year storm events. Side slopes within drainage areas shan not exceed 3: 1. Any portion of a drainage area not improved with sod/grass seed (or other approved landscaping) shall not count towards the required open space area. The project engineer should pay close attention to the results of field studies determining the groundwater, soil type & and characteristics during the design and construction phases. The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least I-foot above groundwater. 9. The applicant shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 10. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 11. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 12. Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying that all street finish centerline elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. 13. The applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution 02-374. 14. Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation/conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 15. Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in MCC 12-2-4. OTHER AGENCY/DEPARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 Yz" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. f Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 5. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 7. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. 8. The proposed 389-lot subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 1,128 residents at build out. 9. The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost ofthis installation is to be borne by the developer 10. All portions ofthe buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 11. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Minimum acreage standard for City Park: The City is willing to develop and maintain Community Parks, Urban Parks, and Neighborhood Parks. Neighborhood Parks will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The City may choose to maintain neighborhood parks at an acreage of seven acres or larger. It will be the responsibility of private homeowner groups or associations to develop and maintain the smaller mini parks and some Neighborhood Parks in their subdivision that the City does not maintain. Please contact Doug Strong to discuss layout of the 7.5-acre park and vehicular parking for this lot. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. The Meridian Police Department has concerns regarding the lack of parking proposed for the park lots. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a storm water management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT 1. All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facility involved are the Simpson Lateral (30' easement), the Harrell Lateral (30' easement), and the McMullen Lateral (30' easement). 2. A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 3. A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.LD. facilities. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 5. All storm drainage must be retained on-site. 6. The development must supply irrigation access to all lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall do one of the following: a. Dedicate by donation a total of 48-feet of right-of-way along Ten Mile Road, and construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way. b. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way, in an easement provided to the District. C. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located at the back edge of the existing right-of-way. Accomplish all necessary adjustments to properly accommodate existing drainage and utilities. 2. Construct a collector roadway (Broadbent Drive) to intersect Ten Mile Road to directly align with the main entrance to Silverleaf Subdivision. 3. Construct Broadbent Drive (the collector roadway) as a 40-foot street section with vertical curb, gutter and a 5-foot concrete sidewalk (attached or detached) within the 60-feet of proposed right-of-way. Construct Broadbent Drive so that the right~of-way line is at the property line and is not separated by a landscape buffer or a common lot. 4. Construct the internal streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and a 4-foot detached concrete sidewalk that is separated by a 5-foot planter strip within 55-feet of right-of-way and/or 33-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and a 4-foot detached concrete sidewalk that is separated by a 5-foot planter strip within 52~feet ofright-of-way, as proposed. Any street section less than 36-feet (measured from back of curb to back of curb) requires written approval from the appropriate fire department. 5. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 630-feet east of the west property line to serve the 71.6-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 6. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 1,450-feet east of the west property line to serve the SO-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTUREIJ. 7. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 1,750-feet west ofTen Mi1eRoad to serve the SO-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the telminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 8. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 480 -feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 9. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 210-feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the tenninus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, 'THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 10. Construct a stub street to the west property line approximately 800-feet south of Sate Highway 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) to serve the 28.171-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. District staffis supportive of the applicant's proposal. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTUREtI. 11. Construct a stub street to the south property line of the 2.46-acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus ofthe roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, tlTHIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 12. Construct a stub street to the north property line of the 2.46-acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURElt. 13. Construct a "quasi" stub street that runs along the west property line ofthe 2.46- acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. 14. Construct a non-standard cul-de-sac turnaround at the terminus of North Shropshire Place that meets the criteria established by District policy. Submit a design ofthe turnaround for review and approval by District Development Division staff. 15. Provide a minimum street section of21-feet on either side of the island. Any proposed landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this shall be required on the final plat. The design shall be reviewed and approved by ACHD's Development staff. 16. Locate the island within Broadbent Drive at the intersection of State Highway 20- 26 and Broadbent D11ve a minimum of200-feet south of State Highway 20-26 or otherwise approved by the District's Traffic Services Staff. 17. This segment of Bainbridge Subdivision's preliminary plat (Lots 1,2,3,4, and 5 of Block 5 and Lots 3, 4 and 5 of Block 4) should be approved contingent upon the right-of-way within the 80-acre parcel to the south being reviewed, approved, dedicated to the public and constructed (or a financial surety in place for the construction of the roadways) prior to the signature of the final plat for Bainbridge Subdivision. 18. Comply with requirements of rTO for State Highway 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) frontage. Submit to the District a letter from rTD regarding said requirements prior to District approval of the final plat or issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Contact District III Traffic Engineer Dan Coonce at 334-8340. 19. Other than the access point that has specifically been approved with this application, direct lot access to Ten Mile Road is prohibited. A note of this access restriction shall be noted on the final plat. 20. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility ofthe applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to can DIGLINE (1- 800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387- 6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shan be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. II. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT 1. The New Approach to US 20/26 should be designed to county and state standards and be spaced out at one (half) mile spacing :from Ten Mile Road if possible. The Developer will need to obtain an approved access permit from ITD District III prior to construction. Contact Matt Ward at 334-8342 for more information on acquisition of an access permit. 2. The main entrance to the subdivision on US 20/26 will need a turn bay added for safety of the turning traffic. 3. The applicant should preserve or dedicate additional right of way to accommodate future widening of US 20/26. 4. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan calls for sidewalks. The subdivision plan does not show sidewalks on US 20/26. The City should require the developer to construct and maintain any pathways called for in the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The Meridian Comprehensive plan shows a collector system at the halfmile. The subdivision does not reflect this in the design. Since no full frontage or backage road system has been included, the collector system is important to future mobility in this square mile section. The City should consider if collector roads are needed. 6. Design should consider access to and connectivity with the adjacent subdivisions. The adjacent parcels are currently zoned rural (county). Does the City anticipate future development as commercial or residential? The Meridian Camp plan, in this area, calls for commercial area centered at the Y2 mile, with residential at the mile roads. This design does reflect that plan. Will the adjacent Rambo subdivision redevelop? If so, how will this plan affect that area. In particular is concern for the parcel at the intersection ofTen Mile and Chinden, as related to access. 7. The site should also consider the potential for a school adjacent (west) to the site. Connectivity has been provided for pedestrians. Access for autos should be provided so residents would not need to exit to the arterial routes to access the school. 8. The applicant should construct a noise abatement feature along any residential lots adjacent to the highway. The noise abatement shall be located on the applicant's property. The noise abatement feature should be 10' higher then the elevation at the US 20/26 centerline. This feature may be a berm, or a combination berm/ concrete block wall. Should the developer desire to substitute other noise abatement measure, such as improvements to the buildings, they should submit these to ITD for consideration. Noise abatement (berms, fences, etc.) will be the responsibility of the developer and will be constructed off of the State Right of Way. 9. The Applicant should provide for all improvements required at the new intersection, including signals, acceleration and deceleration lanes on US 20/26. 10. ITD would like to the opportunity to review the revised plat prior to final approval. EXHIBIT F Bainbridge Subdivision CUP-OS-002 CUP/PD Site Specific and Standard Conditions SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS-CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1. The site plan prepared by Engineering NorthWest, LLC, dated February 2005, is approved, with the conditions listed herein. Applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the Annexation/Zoning (AZ-05-001) and Preliminary Plat (PP- 05-002) as a condition of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP-05-002). 2. The project shall conform to the R-8 dimensional standards, except as follows: Minimum frontage: 48-feet (non cul-de-sac lots). 3. In addition to providing 10% of the site as open space, work with Planning & Zoning staff on fmalizing at least one other amenity (tot lot, tennis court, etc.). 4. All use(s) on Lots 2 and 3, Block 15, shal1 be required to obtain separate CUP approval. 5. Temporary sales/information trailers shall be subject to the fol1owing conditions: a. The proposed subdivision shall have no more than two temporary sales trailers on-site. b. The trailer shall be skirted with materials that are similar in color and material to the rest of the trailer. c. The applicant shall be responsible for providing adequate off street parking. d. One wall sign is allowed for the temporary sales trailer. The sign shall be limited in size to 18% of the wall area. No other signs shall be permitted. e. A building permit for the temporary building must be obtained through Meridian's Building Department prior to placing the trailer on a lot. A site plan must accompany the building permit and be approved by Planning Department. f. Sanitary sewer service and domestic water service may be requested for the proposed use. Should a hook-up be requested, an assessment for sewer and water service wi11 be determined during the building permit application process. g. Applicant must provide the Public Works and Fire Departments with information on the method of fire protection to be used for the trailer. h. The trailer must conform with all setbacks as set forth in the Bainbridge Subdivision conditional use penuit and preliminary plat. The maximum timeframe for the sales and information trailer shall be 48 months from the date of the last final plat that completes the subject preliminary plat. If the applicant requires an extension of this pennitted period, the applicant shall submit a status of their plans to the P&Z Department. j. The applicant's request to site the same trailer under the above-stated conditions at other locations within future Bainbridge phases is approved without a CUP modification. A new Certificate of Zoning Compliance and building permit for all future trailer locations must be submitted to the City for each future location, but a CUP should not be required for each future trailer location. 6. Construction within Bainbridge Subdivision shall substantially comply with the five (5) elevations submitted by the applicant. Construction materials used on the structures shall be approved by the City of Meridian Building Department and in accordance with the most recent Uniform Building Code. 7. The Four (4) buildable lots adjacent to Ten Mile Road, north of the existing residence (Johnson) may contain structures with attic trusses and liveable space above the first floor, but shall not be a full two stories tall. OTHER AGENCY/DEPARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side ofthe hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 5. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or pennanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 7. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. 8. The proposed 389-10t subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 1,128 residents at build out. 9. The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer 10. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' ofa paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 11. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Minimum acreage standard for City Park: The City is willing to develop and maintain Community Parks, Urban Parks, and Neighborhood Parks. Neighborhood Parks will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The City may choose to maintain neighborhood parks at an acreage of seven acres or larger. It will be the responsibility of private homeowner groups or associations to develop and maintain the smaller mini parks and some Neighborhood Parks in their subdivision that the City does not maintain. Please contact Doug Strong to discuss layout ofthe 7.5-acre park and vehicular parking for this lot. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. The Meridian Police Department has concerns regarding the lack of parking proposed for the park lots. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-offis not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. StOlIDwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT 1. All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facility involved are the Simpson Lateral (30' easement), the Harrell Lateral (30' easement), and the McMullen Lateral (30' easement) . 2. A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 3. A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.LD. facilities. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 5. All storm drainage must be retained on-site. 6. The development must supply irrigation access to all lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall do one of the following: a. Dedicate by donation a total of 48-feet of right-of-way along Ten Mile Road, and construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way. b. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way, in an easement provided to the District. c. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located at the back edge of the existing right-of-way. Accomplish all necessary adjustments to properly accommodate existing drainage and utilities. 2. Construct a collector roadway (Broadbent Drive) to intersect Ten Mile Road to directly align with the main entrance to Silverleaf Subdivision. 3. Construct Broadbent Drive (the collector roadway) as a 40-foot street section with vertical curb, gutter and a 5-foot concrete sidewalk (attached or detached) within the 60-feet of proposed right-of-way. Construct Broadbent Drive so that the right-of-way line is at the property line and is not separated by a landscape buffer or a common lot. 4. Construct the internal streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and a 4-foot detached concrete sidewalk that is separated by a 5-foot planter strip within 55-feet of right-of-way and/or 33-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and a 4-foot detached concrete sidewalk that is separated by a 5-foot planter strip within 52-feet of right-of-way, as proposed. Any street section less than 36-feet (measured from back of curb to back of curb) requires written approval from the appropriate fire department. 5. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 630-feet east of the west property line to serve the 71.6-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, nTHIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 6. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 1,450-feet east of the west property line to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 7. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 1,750-feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTUREII. 8. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 480 -feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTUREII. 9. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 210-feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the SO-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, IITHIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 10. Construct a stub street to the west property line approximately SOO-feet south of Sate Highway 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) to serve the 2S.171-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. District staff is supportive of the applicant's proposal. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, llTHIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTUREII. 11. Construct a stub street to the south property line of the 2.46-acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus ofthe roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, llTHIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTUREII. 12. Construct a stub street to the north property line of the 2.46-acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, IITHIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 13. Construct a "quasi" stub street that runs along the west property line of the 2.46- acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. 14. Construct a non-standard cul-de-sac turnaround at the terminus of North Shropshire Place that meets the criteria established by District policy. Submit a design of the turnaround for review and approval by District Development Division staff. 15. Provide a minimum street section of21-feet on either side ofthe island. Any proposed landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this shall be required on the final plat. The design shall be reviewed and approved by ACHD's Development staff. 16. Locate the island within Broadbent Drive at the intersection of State Highway 20- 26 and Broadbent Drive a minimum of200-feet south of State Highway 20-26 or otherwise approved by the District's Traffic Services Staff. 17. This segment of Bainbridge Subdivision's preliminary plat (Lots 1,2, 3,4, and 5 of Block 5 and Lots 3, 4 and 5 of Block 4) should be approved contingent upon the right-of-way within the 80-acre parcel to the south being reviewed, approved, dedicated to the public and constructed (or a financial surety in place for the construction of the roadways) prior to the signature of the final plat for Bainbridge Subdivision. 18. Comply with requirements of ITD for State Highway 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) frontage. Submit to the District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements prior to District approval of the final plat or issuance of a building pennit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Contact District III Traffic Engineer Dan Coonce at 334-8340. 19. Other than the access point that has specifically been approved with this application, direct lot access to Ten Mile Road is prohibited. A note ofthis access restriction shall be noted on the final plat. 20. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State ofIdaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in confonnance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility ofthe applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1- 800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387- 6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT 1. The New Approach to US 20/26 should be designed to county and state standards and be spaced out at one (half) mile spacing from Ten Mile Road if possible. The Developer will need to obtain an approved access permit from ITD District III prior to construction. Contact Matt Ward at 334-8342 for more information on acquisition of an access permit. 2. The main entrance to the subdivision on US 20/26 will need a turn bay added for safety of the turning traffic. 3. The applicant should preserve or dedicate additional right of way to accommodate future widening of US 20/26. 4. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan calls for sidewalks. The subdivision plan does not show sidewalks on US 20/26. The City should require the developer to construct and maintain any pathways called for in the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The Meridian Comprehensive plan shows a collector system at the halfmile. The subdivision does not reflect this in the design. Since no full frontage or backage road system has been included, the collector system is important to future mobility in this square mile section. The City should consider if collector roads are needed. 6. Design should consider access to and connectivity with the adjacent subdivisions. The adjacent parcels are currently zoned rural (county). Does the City anticipate future development as commercial or residential? The Meridian Camp plan, in this area, ca11s for commercial area centered at the ~ mile, with residential at the mile roads. This design does reflect that plan. Will the adjacent Rambo subdivision redevelop? If so, how will this plan affect that area. In particular is concern for the parcel at the intersection of Ten Mile and Chinden, as related to access. 7. The site should also consider the potential for a school adjacent (west) to the site. Connectivity has been provided for pedestrians. Access for autos should be provided so residents would not need to exit to the arterial routes to access the school. 8. The applicant should construct a noise abatement feature along any residential lots adjacent to the highway. The noise abatement shall be located on the applicant's property. The noise abatement feature should be 10' higher then the elevation at the US 20/26 centerline. This feature may be a berm, or a combination berm! concrete block wall. Should the developer desire to substitute other noise abatement measure, such as improvements to the buildings, they should submit these to ITD for consideration. Noise abatement (berms, fences, etc.) will be the responsibility of the developer and will be constructed off of the State Right of Way. 9. The Applicant should provide for all improvements required at the new intersection, including signals, acceleration and deceleration lanes on US 20/26. 10. ITD would like to the opportunity to review the revised plat prior to final approval. EXHIBIT G Bainbridge Subdivision AZ-OS-OOl Zoning Amendment Findings According to Meridian City Code (MCC) 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both the Planning & Zoning 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: 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 subject property is located in the heart of a Mixed UselNeighborhood Center designation on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates approximately 1/3 of this property as 'Mixed Use - Regional' with a Neighborhood Center. The purpose of this designation is "to provide a blend of high-density residential, small-scale commercial, entertainment, office and open space uses that are geared to serve all residents within a one to two square mile area. The developments are encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual neighborhood center plan depicted in Figure VII-3. The purpose of these centers is to create a centralized, pedestrian- oriented, identifiable and day-to-day service oriented focal point for neighborhood districts. The centers should offer an internal circulation system that connects with adjacent neighborhoods or regional pathway(s). They will also serve as public transit locations for future park-and-ride lots, bus stops, shuttle bus stops or other alternative modes of transportation." (See Chapter VII, pg. 95.) . After evaluating the original preliminary plat submittal and the Comprehensive Plan policies regarding mixed use areas, City staff met with the applicant to discuss omitting the portion of the site within the mixed use designation. This request was based on the fact that the original plat did not conform to the purpose statement of the mixed use designation and staff could not make the findings to recommend approval of the original applications. The applicant has submitted a revised preliminary plat that includes one 9-acre lot to be developed in the future (Lot 3, Block 15). City Council believes that by leaving the 9-acre lot undeveloped at this time, the small-scale commercial/office/entertainment aspect of the mixed-use/neighborhood center option is preserved for the future. Similarly, if the City decides to amend the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant could develop this area with single-family homes. The remainder portion of the subject site is designated 'Medium Density Residential' on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, medium density is defined as areas including single- family homes at densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. Although the proposed density (2.56 d.u./acre) is below the minimum target density of3 d.u./acre, City Council finds that the revised preliminary plat generally conforms to this stated purpose and intent. In the applicant's submittal letter, dated December 22,2004 several Comprehensive Plan policies are listed (please see applicant's letter). City Council also finds the following 2002 Comprehensive Plan text policies to be applicable to this application (analysis in italics below policy): · "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 2) The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) has previously submitted letters to the City stating that their policy for access to a Type IV Principal Arterial will be at intersections only, and spaced at one-half mile intervals in urban areas. ITD allows approaches (other than intersections) in special cases and on a temporary basis. City Council finds that the proposed access point to Chinden Boulevard (SH 20-26) meets the location requirements of lTD. Further, City Council finds that Broadbent Way will serve as the access point to Chinden Boulevardfor all the properties in this section. The revised location of the proposed Broadbent Way/Ten Mile Road intersection now meets ACHD 's requirements, as it aligns with the approved street in Silverstone Subdivision to the east. · "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridors (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.)." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 4) As depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, the applicant is proposing to construct a 35-foot wide landscape berm with dense vegetation along Chinden Boulevard. The applicant is also proposing to construct a 35-foot wide landscape buffer along Ten Mile Road. City Council is supportive of these widths, as long as the entire buffer lies outside the ultimate right-of-way, and the sidewalk is located outside of the 35-foot wide btiffer (or increase buffer to 40-ftet). See Site Specific Condition #5 in the Preliminary Plat section. · "Consider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach" from the National Center for Bicycling and Walking in all land use decisions." (Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, #3) This publication encourages jurisdictions to establish bikeway and walkway facilities in new construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient. · "On-street bikeways should be incorporated on all future Collector streets." (Chapter VI, Figure VI-5) Figure VI-5 on page 57 of the Comprehensive Plan designates a bikeway mid- mile between Ten Mile Road and Black Cat Road, and between Chinden Boulevard and McMillan Road. The applicant is proposing a 36-foot street sectionfor Broadbent Way (collector). · "Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area." (Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B) Lot 3, Block 15, on the revised preliminary plat is designated for commercial, retail and multi-family uses on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The subject application proposes none of these uses, and designates this 'future development" lot as residential. Although City Council is recommending that this lot be zoned R-8 with the majority of the development, development of this lot will require separate conditional use permit approval. Gitv Council finds that the vrovosed zoninf! and subseauent uses fsinf!le- familv homes and a church) will be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comvrehensive Plan. B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the future; City Council is hopeful that at least a portion of the 9-acre "future development" lot will be rezoned for multi-family uses and commercialloffice/entertaimnent uses in the future. Once there is a residential housing base established in this area that can support non-residential uses, this area may be rezoned to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 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 the proposed single-family development could be allowed within the requested R-8 zone, if the accompanying Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development is also approved. According to current City Code, churches are required to obtain CUP approval. The future church, to be zoned L-O, will require separate detailed CUP approval in the future. 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 a substantial portion of the land to the east has been developed (or approved for development) in a manner similar to the proposed subdivision, with single-family dwelling units. Lochsa Falls Subdivision to the east was approved with a gross density of 2.92 dwelling units per acre and a city park. Silverleaf Subdivision, also to the east, has a gross density of 3.8 dwelling units per acre (minus the future school site). There have been no recent street improvements in the area. Further, Ten Mile Road is not currently scheduled within ACHD's Five Year Work Program or Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for roadway widening. Chinden Boulevard is not in ITD's current STIP for roadway improvements (is in corridor preservation). This development is currently not serviceable by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer system. Sewer service for this development will be via the future North Black Cat lift station. At this point in time, the Meridian City Council has approved funding for the design; however no funding has been approved for the construction. If this development is approved, it shall be subject to the North Black Cat sewer system being available. Other urban services, such as water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend such services to the site. City Council finds that the subject site is proposed for development in a fashion similar to other properties in the area. 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 has submitted four front elevations for the proposed single-family homes. If the homes are constructed in substantial compliance with the submitted elevations, they will be similar in design to other residences in the area. The existing character of the area will, and is, currently changing. However, this is the first development to apply for development in the subject square mile. This development will set the tone for how the rest of this square mile, particularly the Neighborhood Center develops or does not develop. City Council finds that if Lot 3, Block 15, is not developed with single-family detached units, the proposed R-8 zoning and subsequent residential use proposed with the concurrent preliminary plat will be harmonious and appropriate to the intended character of the vicinity. If this development is approved as proposed, City Council finds that it will significantly change not only the existing character of the area, but will also change the intended character of the vicinity, as noted on the Future Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan. F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; Due to other existing and proposed uses near the site, City Council does not anticipate that the proposed zoning/uses will be physically hazardous to future or existing uses or neighbors in the area. The City Council has relied on staff analysis, comments from other agencies, and public testimony to detennine whether the proposed use will be disturbing or hazardous to the existing neighboring uses and future expected uses in this vicinity. 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; There is a 2.5-acre outparcel on Ten Mile Road that will be an enclave if the subject annexation application is approved. This parcel was created in 1988 and does not meet Ada County's standards for minimum lot size and frontage in the RUT zone. Further, when sidewalk and landscaping are provided by the subject developer there will be a gap in the facilities. To allow the City to initiate annexation of this outparcel City Council recommends that the applicant provide the City with the legal description for the Johnson 2.5-acre outparcel (Parcel No. S0427142323). This development is currently not serviceable by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer system. Sewer service for this development will be via the future North Black Cat lift station. At this point in time, the Meridian City Council has approved funding for the design; however no funding has been approved for the construction. If this development is approved, it sha1l be subject to the North Black Cat sewer system being available. Other urban services, such as water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend such services to the site. Water to serve this development is existing or currently under development with Lochsa Falls Subdivision. The applicant shall be responsible for the extension of utilities to and through this proposed development. Sizing and routing shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. On January 28,2005, a joint agency/department comments meeting was held with representatives of key service providers to this property. The Meridian Police Department and Parks Department have concerns with no parking (plan) being provided for the two proposed parks. The nearest on-street parking for the 7.5- acre park would be along a collector roadway. On-street parking would take up some of the open space that could be used for "green" useable park area. The detailed comments and conditions from the Fire Department, Police Department, and other agencies/departments are at the end of this report. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fees as well as construct on-site storm water drainage facilities. The ACHD Commission acted on this project on March 2,2005. The ACHD recommends approval ofthe subject development with site specific and standard conditions of approval. Based on the comments received from other 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 cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; If approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, public street infrastructure, utilities and irrigation services to serve the project. The primary public costs to serve the future residents will be fire, police, school facilities and services. City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and this development will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 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; City Council recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of a development on this site; however, City Council does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. City Council does not anticipate that annexation and development in accordance with current city code and the Comprehensive Plan will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. City Council finds that if Lot 3, Block 15, were to develop similar to the rest of the proposed subdivision then the proposed residential zoning/uses may be detrimental to people, property and/or the general welfare of the area because it would not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. However, because Lot 3, Block 15, is being reserved for future development, the subject applications should not adversely affect any person or property. 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; The applicant is proposing to construct one public street entrance into the site from Ten Mile Road and one public street entrance into the site from Chinden Boulevard (SH 20/26). The proposed public street entrance to Ten Mile Road (Broadbent Way) aligns with a previously approved public street entrance into Silverleaf Subdivision (Satinwood Drive). If all vehicular approaches (streets) are approved and constructed in accordance with ITD and ACHD policies, City Council does not believe that the subdivision will create interference with traffic on the surrounding public streets. Please review any comments from ACHD or ITD for this project for additional information regarding this finding. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance; and City Council is not aware of any natural or scenic features that may be lost, damaged or destroyed with the approval of the subject applications. Any existing trees larger than 4" caliper that are removed should be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance. L. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of Meridian. (Ord. 592, 11-17-1992)? In accordance with the findin2:s listed above Citv Council finds that the annexationlzoniu2: ofthis orooertv as nrooosed bv the aoolicant would be in the best interest of the Citv. EXHIBIT H Bainbridge Subdivision PP-05-002 Preliminary Plat Findings Sections 12-3-31.2 and 12-3-5 D read as follows: "In determining the acceptance ofa proposed subdivision, the Commission/Council shall consider the objectives of this title and at least the following: A. The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan; Please see Annexation and Zoning Finding "An. B. The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development; Please see Annexation and Zoning Finding "G". C. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement program; Because the developer will be required to install sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, City Council finds that a development on this property will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. The public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The development will not require major expenditures for providing supporting services. The Commission and Council have relied upon comments submitted from the public service providers (i.e. police, fire, ACHD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See Finding "Gn under Annexation and Zoning, and the Agency Comments and Conditions for more detail.) E. The other health, safety or environmental problems that may be brought to the Commission's attention. City Council finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with this subdivision that should be brought to the Council or Commission's attention; no hazardous natural features have been identified on the site. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. EXHIBIT I Bainbridge Subdivision CUP-05-002 CUP/PD Findings The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11- 17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and aU yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; As part of the Planned Development (PD) the applicant is requesting relief from the standard street frontage requirement, lot size requirement, and maximum block length, as required by Meridian City Code. See Special Consideration #1 below for detailed analysis. City Council finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the requested use and an other required features. Although the site is large enough to accommodate all of the features required by ordinance, the applicant has asked, through the Planned Development, to modifY specific development standards. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; City Council finds that the proposed single-family residential subdivision, with a gross density of 2.56 dwelling units per acre, is generally harmonious with and in accordance with the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map, which designates a majority of the land to be "Medium Density Residential" (provided the Commission and Council grant the requested planned development). Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "A". C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "E". D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; Please see Annexation & Zoning Findings. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; Please see Annexation & Zoning Findings "0" and "R", the Other Agency/Department Comments and Conditions, and any comments that may be submitted to the City Clerk regarding this project. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "R". G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Please see Annexation and Zoning Finding "1". H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "J". I. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "K". clfe;idian .\ ~ STAFF SUMMARY OF COUNCIL HEARING Transmittal Date: April 14, 2005 Project Name: Bainbridge Subdivision Case No(s): AZ-05-001lPP-05-002/CUP-05-002 Applicant: Brighton Properties, LLC City Council Hearing Date: AprilS, 2005 Council Action: Approve with conditions (all ayes) A. Summary of Public Hearing: 1. In favor: David Turnbull (Applicant) 2. In opposition: None 3. Commenting: Lisa Johnson 4. Staff presenting application: Anna Canning 5. Other staff commenting on application: Brad Watson B. Key Issues of Discussion by Council: I. Single-story home restriction adjacent to the existing residence (Jolmson) 2. Sewer serviceability 3. Possible dedication of park property to the City C. Key Changes (see attached Exhibits): - The Council voted to amend Exhibit D, Comment #3, by adding a bullet stating that sewer service is currently not available to this property and the applicant understands the risks. - The Council voted to amend Exhibit D, Comment #3, by adding a bullet regarding steps for dedicating a park to the City (providing clear title, etc.). - The Council voted to amend Exhibit E, Site Specific Condition #2, by al10wing the applicant to work with staff when determining if a stub street to the property to the west is appropriate or not. - The Council voted to amend Exhibit E, Site Specific Condition #10, by requiring perimeter fencing to be installed. - The Council voted to amend Exhibit F, Site Specific Condition #3, by allowing the applicant to work with staff on providing an additional amenity for this project. - The Council voted to amend Exhibit F, by adding Site Specific Condition #10, restricting the lots adjacent to Ten Mile Road to not be a full two-stories. D. Recommended Conditions of Approval (by COlmnission, if applicable) See attached Exhibits D, E and F EXHIBIT H Bainbridge Subdivision PP-05-002 Preliminary Plat Findings Sections 12-3-3 J.2 and 12-3-5 D read as follows: "In detennining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission/Council shall consider the objectives of this title and at least the following: A. The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan; Please see Annexation and Zoning Finding "A". B. The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development; Please see Annexation and Zoning Finding "G". c. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement program; Because the developer will be required to install sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, City Council finds that a development on this property will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. The public [mancial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The development will not require major expenditures for providing supporting services. The Commission and Council have relied upon comments submitted from the public service providers (i.e. police, fire, ACHD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See Finding "G" under Annexation and Zoning, and the Agency Comments and Conditions for more detail.) E. The other health, safety or environmental problems that may be brought to the Commission's attention. City Council finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with this subdivision that should be brought to the Councilor Commission's attention; no hazardous natural features have been identified on the site. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. EXHIBIT I Bainbridge Subdivision CUP-05-002 CUP/PD Findings The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11- 17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; As part of the Planned Development (PD) the applicant is requesting relief from the standard street frontage requirement, lot size requirement, and maximum block length, as required by Meridian City Code. See Special Consideration #1 below for detailed analysis. City Council finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the requested use and all other required features. Although the site is large enough to accommodate all of the features required by ordinance, the applicant has asked, through the Planned Development, to modifY specific development standards. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; City Council finds that the proposed single-family residential subdivision, with a gross density of2.56 dwelling units per acre, is generally harmonious with and in accordance with the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map, which designates a majority of the land to be "Medium Density Residential" (provided the Commission and Council grant the requested planned development). Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "A". C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "E". D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; Please see Annexation & Zoning Findings. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; Please see Annexation & Zoning Findings "G" and "H", the Other Agency/Departrnent Comments and Conditions, and any comments that may be submitted to the City Clerk regarding this project. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "H". G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Please see Annexation and Zoning Finding "I". H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "J". I. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "K". cU;;;dlan \ ~nNIO y i./? 't.f ., _ !' I"~ .. .. ~ r," "". \, "" , 'lID STAFF SUMMARY OF COUNCIL HEARING Transmittal Date: April 14, 2005 Project Name: Bainbridge Subdivision Case No(s): AZ-05-001jpP-05-002/CUP-05-002 Applicant: Brighton Properties, LLC City Council Hearing Date: April 5, 2005 Council Action: Approve with conditions (all ayes) A. Summary of Public Hearing: 1. In favor: David Turnbull (Applicant) 2. In opposition: None 3. Commenting: Lisa Johnson 4. Staff presenting application: Anna Canning 5. Other staff commenting on application: Brad Watson B. Key Issues of Discussion by Council: 1. Single-story home restriction adjacent to the existing residence (Johnson) 2. Sewer serviceability 3. Possible dedication of park property to the City C. Key Changes (see attached Exhibits): - The Council voted to amend Exhibit D, Comment #3, by adding a bullet stating that sewer service is currently not available to this property and the applicant understands the risks. - The Council voted to amend Exhibit D, Comment #3, by adding a bullet regarding steps for dedicating a park to the City (providing clear title, etc.). - The Council voted to amend Exhibit E, Site Specific Condition #2, by allowing the applicant to work with staff when determining if a stub street to the property to the west is appropriate or not. - The Council voted to amend Exhibit E, Site Specific Condition #10, by requiring perimeter fencing to be installed. - The Council voted to amend Exhibit F, Site Specific Condition #3, by allowing the applicant to work with staff on providing an additional amenity for this project. - The Council voted to amend Exhibit F, by adding Site Specific Condition #10, restricting the lots adjacent to Ten Mile Road to not be a full two-stories. D. Recommended Conditions of Approval (by Commission, if applicable) See attached Exhibits D, E and F April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING V AR 05-006 April 1 $, 2005 APPLICANT MKHDevelopment, Inc. ITEM NO. 5RG REQUEST Findings for Approval- Request for a Variance for a time extension to record the Final Plat for Setter Cove Subdivision - north of East Ustick Road and North Locust Grove Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATrORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Conlacted:Yo;t ! ~ Dale: 4/1<2(oe; Phone: Emailed: ...r~(,\..\ IA ('.... ~ ~+- Staff Initials: J:-/2.. Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. See attached Findings (IJ~ Mf CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the matter of the request for a variance for a time extension until October 7, 2005 to record the fmal plat for Setter Cove Subdivision, by MKH Development. Case No(s). V AR-OS-006 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 5, 2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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 ten days before said hearing. All other noticing was done consistent with Idaho Code S67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the April 5, 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. Oral testimony was received on this matter, as reflected in the official meeting minutes. c. The City Council heard and took oral and written testimony and duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code S67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code ss 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as evidenced by the Affidavit ofMaiJing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof 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 for the subject application(s), it is hereby verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings is MKH Development. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibit B for the findings required for this application. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). VAR-05-006 - PAGE I of6 B. Conclusions of Law 1. 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 (I.C. 967- 6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and Development Ordinances codified as 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 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. 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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 4. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A and the Findings in Exhibit B. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code 9 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 request for a variance for a time extension to record the final plat for Setter Cove Subdivision is hereby approved. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Time Extension until October 1,2005 to Record the Final Plat Please take notice that the applicant must file the final development plan with the Ada County Recorder within the above approved time period. The final plat must be recorded within one-year of the end of the original one-year time period. If the final development plan is not filed with the Ada County Recorder within the allowed time period, the plat will be considered null and void. E. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Variance Findings By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the / q ./.1-- day of ~/L ,2005. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). V AR-05-006 - PAGE 2 of6 COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED-F- COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED_ Copy served upon Applicant, The PIa and j; Attorney. By: (\ t-. (l A.u- City Clerk's Office Dated: -+- 'L\ .- 0 S CITY OF MERrDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). V AR-05-006 - PAGE 3 of6 EXIDBIT A Let!al Descriotion TEALEY'S LAND 2501 Bogus Basin Rd, . BOise, Idaho 83702 SURVEYING (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385.0696 Project No,; 2324 Date: May 9, 2003 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED SETTER COVE SUBDIVISION FOR JIM HOLUSTER A parcel of land situated in the SW 1/4 of Section 32, TAN., R lE., RM, Meridian. Ada County, Idaho as shown on Record of Survey No. 5920, on file under Instrument No, 102103319 in the Office of the Recorder for Ada County, Idaho and more particulany described as foHows: COMMENCING at an aluminum cap marking the West 1/4 corner of said Section 32: thence along the West line of said Section 32 South 00.00'11" East 997,12 feet to an iron pin; thence leaving said West line North 8S"SO'05' East 1327,25 feet to a brass cap marking the Northeast corner of Summerfield Subdivision NO.5 as on file in the Office of the Recorder for Ada County, Idaho, said point also being the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence North DO.OO'S7" West 301.09 feet to an iron pin; thence North 37"07'22" East 126.25 feet to an iron pin on a curve; thence along the arc of a curve 10 the left haVing a radius of 325.00 feet, a central angle of 37"16'37", a length of 211.64 and a long chord that bears South 71"31 '58" East 207.92 feet 10 an iron pin marking a point of tangent; thence North 89048'44" Ea~t 390,17 feet to an iron pin on the East line of the W 1/2 of the NE 1f4 of the SW lf4 of said Section 32; thence along said East line South 00.01'20" East 666,85 feet to an iron pin marking the Southeast corner of said W 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4; thence along the South line of said W 1/2 of the NE 114 of the SW 114 South 89"48'44" West 663.66 feet to an iron pin marking the Southwest 1/16 corner of said Section 32; thence North 00'00'57" West 331.85 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, Said Parcel Contains 10.28 Acres, more or less. lI.\.~, ,- ~8\ ~ ~ 434 .g ~ -?t}~~~~Z~ ~\O~ ~~~:.'p, 1;f' 232,\-Pi",.Deac,d"". do", CITY OF MERlDIAN FINDfNGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). V AR-05-006 - PAGE 4 of 6 EXHIBIT B V ariance Findim~:s REOUIRED FINDINGS According to Ordinance 12-11-2, Variance Findings, the Council may authorize in specific cases a variance from the terms of either the Zoning or Subdivision Ordinance. Specifically, the Ordinance lists the following Findings, all of which must be determined before granting a variance: A. That there are such special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that the strict application of the provisions of this Title would clearly be impracticable or unreasonable. In such cases, the subdivider shall first state his reasons in writing as to the specific provision or requirement involved; The Applicant states that the reason for the delay in recording the final plat within the time limits as required by MCC 12-3-8.A. is that the applicant lost track of the one-year time requirement while they were negotiating with Meridian School District and getting a contractor to begin construction of the infrastructure. This is the only special circumstance that was cited in the application. City Council finds that the reason cited above is substantial grounds to approve a variance. B. That strict compliance with the requirements of this Title would result in extraordinary hardship to the owner, subdivider or developer because of unusual topography, the nature or condition of adjacent development, other physical conditions or other conditions that make strict compliance with this Title unreasonable under the circumstances, or that the conditions and requirements of this Title will result in inhibiting the achievements or the objectives of this Title; City Council fmds that strict compliance with the requirements of this Title is not due to unusual topography, adjacent development, or other physical conditions of the site. The developer had a pre-construction meeting in October, 2004, and has already constructed the sewer. Also, the applicant testified at the hearing that construction of the water mains and roads are in process. Council has CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). V AR-05-006 - PAGE 5 of 6 determined that the City has more assurance of this plat being recorded and the development proceeding by approving this variance. C. That the granting of the specified variance will not be detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to other property in the area in which the property is situated; City Council finds that the requested variance will not be detrimental or injurious to the public's welfare or to the other properties in the area as long as current ordinances are met at the time of building permits for all lots within the subdivision. D. That such variance will not violate the provisions of the Idaho Code. City Council is unaware of provisions of Idaho Code that would be violated by the issuance of the requested variance. E. That such variance will not have the effect of altering the interest and purpose of this Title and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. City Council finds that the issuance of a variance for this project will not directly alter the interest and purpose of the Meridian City Subdivision Ordinance, which is intended to ensure orderly development occurs within the established timeframe. The Applicant has stated they intend to record the final plat within six months following approval of this request. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). V AR-05-006 - PAGE 6 of 6 April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AZ 03-025 April 19, 2005 APPLICANT W.H. Moore Company ITEM NO. 5-K REQUEST Development Agreement - Request for Annexation and Zoning of 57.84 acres from RUT to C-G zones for Blue Marlin - northwest comer of East Ustick Road and North Eagle Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS See attached Development Agreement ~~ Date: q/rl/Os Staff Initials: Phone: /?d-.i./ / /'/ ~ /.-Ie II W.H. MOORE ~COMPANY Real Estate Development EI Dorado Business Campus 194G S. Bonito Way, Suite 160 Meridian, Idaho 83642 P,D. Box 8204 Boise, Idaho 83707-2204 TELEPHONE (208) 323-1919/FAX323-7523 Date: April 12, 2005 To: City Clerk ~ City of Meridian JOnathanR.87 Development Agreement From: Subject: As a condition to the annexation and rezone of property at the northwest comer of Us tick and Eagle, attached is a development agreement executed by Winston Moore. We understand the City Council will approval and sign this agreement at their April 19 meeting. Thank you for your assistance. ClTY OF MERIDIAN Crry CLERK OFFi~r: ADA COUNTY RECORDER L .AVID NAVARRO BOISE IDAHO 04/21/05 01 :45 PM DEPUTY Vicki Allen RECORDED-REQUEST OF Meridian City AMOUNT .00 35 11/1111111111111111111111111I11/11111 105048793 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PARTIES: 1. 2. City of Meridian Winston H. Moore, Owner/Developer 1ft THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this "Agreement"), is made and entered into this /2 - day of I1J:;y-,L ,2005, by and between CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal corporation of the State ofIdaho, hereafter called "CITY', and Winston H. Moore, hereinafter called "OWNERlDEVELOPER" . 1. RECITALS: 1.1 WHEREAS, "OWNERlDEVELOPER" is the sole owner, in law and/or equity, of certain tract ofIand in the County of Ada, State ofIdaho, described in Exhibit A for each owner, which is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full, herein after referred to as the "Property"; and 1.2 WHEREAS, lC. ~ 67-6511A, Idaho Code, provides that cities may, by ordinance, require or peffilit as a condition of re-zoning that the "Owner" make a written commitment concerning the use or development of the subj ect "Property"; and 1.3 WHEREAS, "City" has exercised its statutory authority by the enactment of Ordinance 11-15-12 and 11-16-4 A, which authorizes development agreements upon the annexation and/or re-zoning of land; and 1.4 WHEREAS, "Owner" has submitted an application for annexation and zoning of the "Property's" described in Exhibit A, and has requested a designation of (C-G) General Retail and Service Commercial District, (Municipal Code of the City of Meridian); and 1.5 WHEREAS, "OwnerlDeveloper" made representations at the public hearings both before the Meridian Planning & Zoning COmmission and before the Meridian City Council, as to how the subject "Property" will be developed and what improvements will be made; and 1.6 WHEREAS, record of the proceedings for the requested annexation and zoning designation of the subject "Property" held before the Planning & Zoning Commission, and subsequently before the City Council, include DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-025 - BLUE MARLIN) PAGE 1 OF 13 responses of govennnent subdivisions providing services within the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction, and received further testimony and comment; and 1.7 WHEREAS, City Council, the 23rd day of March, 2004, has approved certain Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order, set forth in Exhibit B, which are attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full, hereinafter referred to as (the "Findings"); and 1.8 WHEREAS, the Findings require the "Owner" to enter into a development agreement before the City Council takes final action on annexation and zoning designation; and 1.9 "OWNER" deems it to be in its best interest to be able to enter into this Agreement and acknowledges that this Agreement was entered into voluntarily and at its urging and requests; and 1.10 WHEREAS, "City" requires the "Owner/Developer" to enter into a development agreement for the purpose of ensuring that the "Property" is developed and the subsequent use of the "Property" is in accordance with the terms and conditions ofthis development agreement, herein being established as a result of evidence received by the "City" in the proceedings for zoning designation from government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction and from affected property owners and to ensure re- zoning designation is in accordance with the amended Comprehensive Plan ofthe City of Meridian adopted August 6,2002, Resolution No. 02-382, and the Zoning and Development Ordinances codified in Meridian City Code Title 11 and Title 12. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 2. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS: That the above recitals are contractual and binding and are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 3, DEFINITIONS: For all purposes oftms Agreement the following words, terms, and phrases herein contained in this section shall be defined and interpreted as herein provided for, unless the clear context of the presentation ofthe same requires otherwise: 3.1 "CITY": means and refers to the City of Meridian, a party to this Agreement, which is a municipal Corporation and government subdivision ofthe state of Idaho, organized and existing by virtue of law of the State of Idaho, whose address is 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-025 - BLUE MARLIN) PAGE 2 OF 13 3.2 "OWNER/DEVELOPER": means and refers to Winston H. Moore whose address is PO Box 8204, Boise, Idaho 83707, the party developing said "Property" and shall include any subsequent owner(s)/developer(s) of the "Property" . 3.3 "PROPERTY": means and refers to that certain parcel(s) of "Property" located in the County of Ada, City of Meridian as described in Exhibit A describing the parcels to be annexed and zoned C-G (General Retail and Service Commercial District) attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth at length. 4. USES PERMITTED BY THIS AGREEMENT: 4.1 The uses allowed pursuant to this Agreement are only those uses allowed under "City's" Zoning Ordinance codified at Meridian City Code Section 11.: 7-2 (C) which are herein specified as follows: "Owner/Developer" shall/lOt develop all or any part of the "Property" unless and until it has applied for and received either (a) a site-specific conditional use permit for the parcel to be developed, or (b) approval for a planned development of the entire "Property. " The following are found to be pertinent provisions of the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan and are applicable to this AZ~03-025 application: Chapter VII, pgs. 97-98, Chapter IV, GoalI, Obj. A, #6, Chapter IV, Goal II, Obj. A, Chapter V, Goal III, Obj. B, #8, Chapter VI, Subsection 2, pg. 71, Chapter VII, GoalI, Obj. B, # 5, Chapter VII, Goal IV, Obj. D, #7. 4.2 No change in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be allowed without modification of this Agreement. 5. CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 5.1. "Owner/Deve10per" shall develop the "Property" in accordance with the following special conditions: A. Adopt the Special Recommendation ofthe Planning & Zoning Commission as follow: 1. Delete Annexation and Zoning Site Specific Condition #3, page 8, of the 11/03/03 staff report in its entirety. 2. Replace Site Specific condition #3 with the following: "3.a. Prior to annexation ordinance approval, the City of Meridian and Winston H. Moore will enter into a Development Agreement (DA). This DA will require either a DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-025 - BLUE MARLIN) PAGE 3 OF 13 conditional use or a planned development application be submitted to the City of Meridian prior to future development. (per action of the City Council taken at their March 23, 2004 meeting, eliminate the word subdivision, so that the Development Agreement would require either a conditional use permit or a planned development. 3.b. A conceptual master plan will be submitted with the planned development application or if the project is phased, a site specific plan will be submitted. (per action of the City Council taken at their March 23, 2003 meeting, eliminated the word "for" and replaced it with the work "or".) 3.c. Any future plan, whether a planned development or a phased project, shall show a continuous public or private road system that goes from Ustick Road north and may connect to the north boundary and may also connect to Eagle Road, State Highway 55, if allowed by lTD. The Developer shall provide further detail with the application for either a conditional use permit or a planned development for a roadway system within the project, as well as to how the traffic is going to be moved throughout the development, and such roadway system shall be consistent with the ITD and ACHD. (Per action of the City Council taken at their March 23, 2004 meeting by providing an additional last sentence pertaining to the roadway system within the development.) " B. Adopt the Comments and Recomrnendations ofthe Meridian Planning & Zoning Department as follows: 1. Remove any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5/7/517, when services are available from the City of Meridian, Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. C. Adopt the Recommendations of ACHD as follows (provided that "Owner/Developer" does not waive its right to further negotiate project-specific conditions with ACHD): If the rezone is approved and the District receives a development proposal, the District intends to provide the following requirements, in addition to any additional requirements that may apply upon District review of future development, to the City of Meridian. 1. The applicant shall do one of the following: a. Dedicate by donation (or through a development offset agreement whereby the applicant is reimbursed from impact fees to be collected solely from the applicant's specific development project) 48-feet of right-of-way from centerline along Ustick Road, and construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ustick Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-025 - BLUE MARLIN) PAGE 4 OF 13 b, Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ustick Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way, in an easement provided to the District. c. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ustick Road, located at the back edge of the existing right- of-way. Accomplish all necessary adjustments to properly accommodate existing drainage and utilities. 2. Construct any local roadways that are proposed to intersect Ustick Road to align or offset a minimum of 30G-feet from any existing roadway (measured centerline to centerline). 3, Construct any driveways that are proposed to intersect U stick Road to align or offset a minimum of 230-feet from any existing or proposed driveway or street. 4. Once the access points have been approved by the District, they are to be identified as such on the construction drawings. The remaining frontage along arterial and collector streets shall be identified as having no access. 5. Comply with requirements oflTD for Eagle Road frontage. Submit a letter from ITD regarding the said requirements prior to District approval ofthe final plat or issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever comes first. Contact the Idaho Transportation Department's District ill Traffic Engineer Dan Coonce at 334-8300. 6. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. ACHD Standard Conditions of Approval I. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way, 2. An utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter, and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction ofthe proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387- 6258 (with file number) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Constructions Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-025 - BLUE MARLIN) PAGE 5 OF 13 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #197, also mown as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility ofthe applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right- of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contract ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are comprised during any phase of construction. 10. No charge in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirement or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. D. Adopt the Recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department as follows: The following will be the requirements and/or concerns to provide minimum levels of fire protection for the proposed project: 1. That a fire-flow as required by the International Fire Code is provided to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 350' apart. 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Water Department. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-025 - BLUE MARLIN) PAGE 6 OF 13 3. Pinal approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. 4. All internal and external roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside. 5. Operational fire hydrants are required before combustible construction begins. 6. The fire lanes shall have a clear driving surface which is 20' wide available at all times. E. Adopt the Recommendations of the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District as follows: 1, All laterals and waste ways must be protected. 2. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans and requires a Land Use Change Application be filed for review prior to final platting. 3. The Developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. 4. NMID recommends that irrigation water be made available to all developments within the Narnpa Meridian Irrigation District. F. Adopt the State of Idaho Transportation Department's Recommendations as follows (provided that "Owner/Developer" does not waive its right to further negotiate access conditions with ITD): 1. SH 55 has been designated a Principal Arterial. ITD would like Ada County and the City of Meridian to help us preserve the corridor by recognizing the following conditions. Future right of way widths will be, A: 120 feet each side of centerline (240 feet total) for building setbacks and to include a frontage road, or B: 70 feet each side of centerline (140 feet total) if the developer provides an internal frontage road type system to feeder roads. 2. Access to a Principal Arterial Type N will be intersections only, and spaced at one mile intervals in rural areas and one-half mile intervals in urban areas. Approaches (other than intersections) may be permitted in special cases on a temporary basis as follows: 1) Allowed until state highway system is improved by a construction project at which time an access will be provided to the property, which may not directly access the state highway system, but may be via a frontage or backage road. 2) Shall be recorded at the County Recorders Office 3) Temporary access restrictions will be noted on the permit. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-025 - BLUE MARLIN) PAGE 7 OF 13 3. Noise abatement (berms, fences, etc.) will be the responsibility of the developer and will be constructed off of the State Right of Way. (Further information about the noise abatement may be obtained from the Noise Abatement Measures, which is on file in the City Clerk's office. 6. COMPLIANCE PERIOD/CONSENT TO REZONE: This Agreement and the commitments contained herein shall be terminated, and the zoning designation reversed, upon a default of the "Owner" or "Owners" heirs, successors, assigns, to comply with Section 5 entitled "Conditions Governing Development of Subject Property" of this agreement within two years of the date this Agreement is effective, and after the "City" has complied with the notice and hearing procedures as outlined in LC. 967-6509, or any subsequent amendments or recodifications thereof. 7. CONSENT TO DE-ANNEXATION AND REVERSAL OF ZONING DESIGNATION: "Owner/Developer" consents upon default to the reversal of the zoning designation of the "Property" subject to and conditioned upon the following conditions precedent to-wit: 7.1 That the "City" provide written notice of any failure to comply with tIns Agreement to "Owner" and ifthe "Owner" fails to cure such failure within six (6) months of such notice. 8. INSPECTION: "Owner/Developer" shall, immediately upon completion of any portion or the entirety of said development of the "Property" as required by this agreement or by City ordinance or policy, notifY the City Engineer and request the City Engineer's inspections and written approval of such completed improvements or portion thereof in accordance with the tenus and conditions of this Development Agreement and all other ordinances of the "City" that apply to said Development. 9. DEFAULT: 9.1 In the event "Owner/Developer", "Owner/Developer's" heirs, successors, assigns, or subsequent owners ofthe "Property" or any other person acquiring an interest in the "Property", fail to faithfully comply with all of the terms and conditions included in this Agreement in cOlmection with the "Property", this Agreement may be modified or terminated by the "City" upon compliance with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, 9.2 A waiver by "City" of any default by "Owner" of anyone or more of the covenants or conditions hereof shall apply solely to the breach and breaches waived and shall not bar any other rights or remedies of "City" or apply to any subsequent breach of any such or other covenants and conditions. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-025 - BLUE MARLIN) PAGE 8 OF 13 10. REQUIREMENT FOR RECORDATION: "City" shaIl record either a memorandum ofthis Agreement or this Agreement, including all of the Exhibits, at "Owner's" cost, and submit proof of such recording to "Owner", prior to the third reading ofthe Meridian Zoning Ordinance in connection with the re-zoning of the "Property" by the City Council. If for any reason after such recordation, the City Council fails to adopt the ordinance in connection with the annexation and zoning of the "Property" contemplated hereby, the "City" shall execute and record an appropriate instrument of release of this Agreement. 11. ZONING: "City" shall, following recordation of the duly approved Agreement, enact a valid and binding ordinance zoning the "Property" as specified herein. 12. REMEDIES: This Agreement shall be enforceable in any court of competent jurisdiction by either "City" or "Owner", or by any successor or successors in title or by the assigns of the parties hereto. Enforcement may be sought by an appropriate action at law or in equity to secure the specific performance of the covenants, agreements, conditions, and obligations contained herein. 12.1 In the event of a material breach of this Agreement, the parties agree that "City" and "Owner" shan have thirty (30) days after delivery of notice of said breach to correct the same prior to the non-breaching party's seeking of any remedy provided for herein; provided, however, that in the case of any such default which cannot with diligence be cured within such thirty (30) day period, if the defaulting party shall commence to cure the same within such thirty (30) day period and thereafter shall prosecute the curing of same with diligence and continuity, then the time allowed to cure such failure may be extended for such period as may be necessary to complete the curing of the same with diligence and continuity. 12.2 In the event the performance of any covenant to be performed hereunder by either "Owner" or "City" is delayed for causes which are beyond the reasonable control of the party responsible for such performance, which shall include, without limitation, acts of civil disobedience, strikes or similar causes, the time for such performance shall be extended by the amount of time of such delay. 13. SURETY OF PERFORMANCE: The "City" may also require surety bonds, irrevocable letters of credit, cash deposits, certified check or negotiable bonds, as allowed under Meridian City Code 912-5-3, to insure that installation of the improvements, which the "Owner" agrees to provide, if required by the "City". 14. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: The "Owner" agrees that no Certificates of Occupancy will be issued until all improvements are completed, unless the "City" and "Owner" have entered into an addendum agreement stating when the improvements will be completed in a phased developed; and in any event, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued in any phase in which the improvements have not been installed, completed, and accepted by the "City". DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-025 - BLUE MARLIN) PAGE 9 OF 13 15. ABIDE BY ALL CITY ORDINANCES: That "Owner" agrees to abide by all ordinances ofthe City of Meridian and the "Property" shall be subject to de-annexation ifthe owner or his assigns, heirs, or successors shall not meet the conditions contained in the Findings ofF act and Conclusions of Law, this Development Agreement, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian. 16. NOTICES: Any notice desired by the parties and/or required by this Agreement shall be deemed delivered if and when personally delivered or three (3) days after deposit in the United States Mail, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed as follows: CITY: OWNERlDEVELOPER: c/o City Engineer City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Ave. Meridian, ill 83642 Winston H. Moore PO Box 8204 Boise, Idaho 83707 with copy to; City Clerk City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Ave. Meridian, ill 83642 16.1 A party shall have the right to change its address by delivering to the other party a written notification thereof in accordance with the requirements of this section. 17. ATTORNEY FEES: Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief as may be granted, to court costs and reasonable attorney's fees as determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture ofthis Agreement. 18. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE: The parties hereto aclmowledge and agree that time is strictly ofthe essence with respect to each and every term, condition and provision hereof, and that the failure to timely perform any of the obligations hereunder shall constitute a breach of and a default under this Agreement by the other party so failing to perform. 19. BINDING UPON SUCCESSORS: This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties' respective heirs, successors, assigns and personal representatives, including "City's" corporate authorities and their successors in office. This Agreement shall be binding on the "Owner" of the "Property", each subsequent owner and any other person acquiring an interest in the "Property". Nothing herein shall in any way prevent sale or alienation of the DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-025 - BLUE MARLIN) PAGE 10 OF 13 "Property", or portions thereof, except that any sale or alienation shall be subject to the provisions hereof and any successor owner or owners shall be both benefited and bound by the conditions and restrictions herein expressed. "City" agrees, upon written request of "Owner", to execute appropriate and recordable evidence of termination of this Agreement if "City", in its sole and reasonable discretion, had determined that "Owner" has fully performed its obligations under this Agreement. 20. INVALID PROVISION: If any provision ofthis Agreement is held not valid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed to be excised from this Agreement and the invalidity thereof shall not affect any of the other provisions contained herein. 21. FINAL AGREEMENT: This Agreement sets forth all promises, inducements, agreements, condition and understandings between "Owner" and "City" relative to the subject matter hereof, and there are no promises, agreements, conditions or understanding, either oral or written, express or implied, between "Owner" and "City", other than as are stated herein. Except as herein otherwise provided, no subsequent alteration, amendment, change or addition to this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties hereto unless reduced to writing and signed by them or theif successors in interest or their assigns, and pursuant, with respect to "City", to a duly adopted ordinance or resolution of "City". 21.1 No condition governing the uses and/or conditions governing fe-zoning ofthe subject "Property" herein provided for can be modified or amended without the approval of the City Council after the "City" has conducted public hearing(s) in accordance with the notice provisions provided for a zoning designation and/or amendment in force at the time of the proposed amendment. 22, EFFECTIVE DATE OF AGREEMENT: This Agreement shall be effective on the date the Meridian City Council shall adopt the amendment to the Meridian Zoning Ordinance in connection with the annexation and zoning of the "Property" and execution of the Mayor and City Clerk. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-025 - BLUE MARLIN) PAGE 11 OF 13 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this agreement and made it effective as hereinabove provided. OWNER /DEVELOPER: ~QJ,~ STON H. 00 CITY OF MERIDIAN Attest: ~ BY- MAYVK 1.. . e WEERD /;1 c/~ t10U?1~ 4-/9-0~ STATE OF IDAHO : ss COUNTY OF ADA ) On tills 1.1--t!: day of flti",; J , 2005, before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared WINSTON H. GORE known or identified to me to be the person who executed the instrument and acknowledged to me that he have executed the same. ~,,\,,~\~~IM:~//fll.l;' (SE~~~~........~~tfI~ ~(:::::)J %Q~ .~1fo:~~\'~# 1111111111I Ill""" ~~0.~ Notary Public f9J Iqaho -J Residingat: 15~ ~ Commission expires: 'r - 2/'" - 89 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-025 - BLUE MARLIN) PAGE 12 OF 13 STATE OF IDAHO : ss County of Ada ) On this~ day of Am,;/ ,2005, before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared Tammy de Weerd and WilIiadi O. Berg, Jr., know or identified to me to be the Mayor and Clerk, respectively, ofthe City of Meridian, who executed the instrument or the person that executed the instrument of behalf of said City, and aclmowledged to me that such City executed the same. ~",'II ........",." .........., ~'\.~~..~. $.,,;~~"-4'c (SEAL) I ~~... ....~~ '- f"*! ~OT"'~J--"'.p. \ i \ -.- : * ~ \tP.\.~l1BL\C JIll i "\,,:'; .(,.~.".........""o !I>....~ .....~t~?~I~~.~~~...... DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-03-25) PAGE 13 OF 13 BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) . ) ) ) The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for public hearing IN THE MATTER OF THE :APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 57.84 ACRES FOR PROPOSED BLUE MARLIN FROM RUT TO C-G, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF USTICK ROAD AND EAGLE ROAD/SH 55, IMl\1EDIA TEL Y NORTH OF THE PROPOSED KlSSLERlCOBBSIEAGYIRUWE ANNEXATION AND EAST OF CHAMPION PARK SUBDIVISION, MERlDIAN, IDAHO W.H. MOORE COMPANY, APPLICANT C/C 03/23/04 Case No. AZ-03-025 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CON~LUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNE~TION AND ZONING on March 13,2004, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., and Anna Powell Planning Director for the Planning and Zoning Department, Jonathan Seel, Winston Moore, Tom Davis and Cornell Larsen, appeared and testified, and the City Council having dilly considered the evidence and the record . Decision and Order: in this matter therefore makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTIN"G APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03~025) PAGE] OF 22 FINDINGS OF FACT 1. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code S~ 67-6509 and 67-6511) and Meridian City Code ~~ 11-15-5 and 11-16-1. 2. The City Council takes judicial notice of its zoning, subdivision and development ordinances codified at Titles I 1 and 12, Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof, .and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted August 6,2002, Resolution No. 02-382, and maps and the ordinance Establishing the Impact Area Boundary. 3. The property which is the subject ofthe application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, is approximately 57.84 acres in size and is located on the northwest comer of the intersection of Us tick Road and Eagle Road/SH 55, immediately north of the proposed Kissler/CobbslEagylRuwe annexation and east of Champion Park Subdivision, Meridian, Idaho, aU within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian and the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 4. Per Ada County Assessor records*, there are three (3) separate tax parcels within the proposed annexation boundaries. The parcel ownerships are as fonows: WinstonH. Moore (2 parcels) Joann Crawford (I parcel; middle) 29.70 acres 28.05 acres Total 57.75 acres (approx.) *~ While the Ada County Assessor records still show Crawford as 'owner of the 28-acre parcel, a Warranty Deed was submitted with the application showing Mr. Moore purchased the property. However, the deed submitted with the application is not recorded and the Assessor~s Office still shows Joann Crawford and Jack Joslin as the titled owners. Per staffs request, the Applicant submitted a Memorandum of Purchase Contract which outlines the legal rights of Winston H. Moore as the "Buyer" of the Crawford property." Said contract confiffils that FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZw03-025) PAGE 2 OF 22 W.H. Moore is the equitable owner of the 28-acre Crawford parcel and, as such, has the right to approve consent for the annexation application 10 be submitted to the City, Wiuston H. Moore has provided notarize4 consent for the subject application. The Applicant is W.H. Moore Co. of Boise, Idaho. 5. The property is presently zoned RUT (Ada County). 6. The Applicant requests the property be zoned as C-G (General Retail and Service Commercial). 7. The suhject property is bordered to the north by RUT and Agricultural and zoned "Low Density" within the Boise City Area ofhnpact, to the south by RUT, to the east by R.8, and to the west by RUT. 8. The Applicant proposes to develop the subj ect property in the following manner: no development plans were submitted with the application. 9. The Applicant requests zoning ofllie subject real prop~rty as C-G, which is consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map which designates the subject property as Mixed Use-Regional. 10. There are no significant or scenic features of major importance that affect the considerati(:m of this application. II. The City Council recognizes the concerns of Jack Ketlinski, Wally Hedrick and Tom Davis addressed in their letters dated and February 11,2004, February 19,2004 and March 4, 2004. 12. Giving due consideration to the comments received from the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03-025) PAGE 3 OF 22 governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridi8.11 planning jurisdiction, public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the following conditions of development are imposed: A. Adopt the Special Recommendation ofthe Planning & Zoning Commission as follows: 1. Delete Annexation and Zoning Site Specific Condition #3, pg. 8, of the 11/3/03 staff report in its entirety. 2. Replace Site Specific condition #3 with the following: <<3.a. Prior to armexation ordinance approval, the City of Meridian and Winston H. Moore will enter into a Development Agreement (DA). This DA will require either a conditional use or a planned development application be submitted to the City of Meridian prior to future development. (Per action of the City Council taken at their March 23, 2004 meeting, eliminate the word subdivision, so that the Development Agreement would require either a conditional use permit or a planned development.) 3.b. A conceptual master plan will be submitted willi the planned development application or a site specific plan with any conditional use. (Per action of the City Council taken at their March 23, 2004 meeting, eliminated the word "foru and replaced it with the word "or".) 3.c. Any future plan shall show a continuous public or private road system that goes from Ustick Road north and may COlll1ect to the north boundary and may also connect to Eagle Road, State Highway 55, if allowed by lTD. The Developer shall provide further detail with the application for either a conditional use permit or a planned development for a roadway system within the project, as well as to how the traffic is going to be moved throughout the development, and such roadway system shall be consistent with the ITD and ACHD. (Per action of the City Council taken at their March 23,2004 meeting by providing an additional last sentence pertaining to the roadway system within the development. )" B. Adopt the Comments and Recommendations of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Department as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND.CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (.Az..03~025) PAGE 4 OF 22 1. Essential City services will be made available to the subject property. 2. Replace Site Specific condition #3 with the following: "3.a. Prior to annexation ordinance approval, the City of Meridian and Winston H. Moore will enter into a Development Agreement (DA). This DA will require either a conditional use or a planned development application be submitted to the City of Meridian prior to future development. (Per action of the City Council taken at their March 23, 2004 meeting, eliminate the word subdivision, ,so that the Development Agreement would require either a conditional use pe1mit or a planned development.) 3.b, A conceptual master plan will be submitted with the planned development application or a site specific plan with any conditional use. (Per action of the City Council taken at their March 23, 2004 meeting, eliminated the word "for'" and replaced it with the word "or".) 3.e. Any future plan shall show a continuous public or private road system that goes from Ustick Road north and may connect to the north boundary and may also connect to' Eagle Road, State Highway 55, if allowed by lTD. The Developer shall provide further detail with the application fOT either a conditional use permit or a planned development for a roadway system within the project, as well as to how the traffic is going to be moved throughout the development, and such roadway system shall be consistent with the ITD and ACHD. (Per action of the City Council taken at their March 23, 2004 meeting by providing an additional last sentence pertaining to the roadway system within the development.)" 3, Remove any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. C. Adopt the Recommendations of ACHD as follows: If the rezone is approved and the District receives a development proposal, the District intends to provide the following requirements, in addition to any additional requirements FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXA nON AND ZONJNG BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03-02S) PAGE 5 OF 22 that may apply upon District review of future development, to the City of Meridian: 1. The applicant shall do one of the foUowing: a. Dedicate by donation (or through a development offset agreement whereby the applicant is' reimbursed from impact fees to be collected solely from the applicant's specific development project) 48-feet of right-of-way from centerline along Ustick Road, and construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ustick Road, IOGated a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline ofthe right-of-way. b. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ustick Road., located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way, in an easement provided to the Distlict. c. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ustick Road, located at the back edge of the existing right-of-way. Accomplish all necessary adjustments to properly accommodate existing drainage and utilities. 2. Construct any local roadways that are proposed to intersect Ustick Road to align or offset a minimwn of 300- feet from any existing roadway (measured centerline to centerline). 3. Construct any driveways that are proposed to intersect Us tick Road to align or offset a minimum of230-feet from any existing or proposed driveway or street. 4. Once the access points have been approved by the District, they are to be identified as such on the construction drawings, The remaining frontage along arterial and collector streets shall be identified as having no access. 5. Comply with requirements of ITD for Eagle Road frontage. Submit a letter from ITD regarding the said requirements prior to District approval of the final plat or issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs ftrst. Contact The Idaho Transportation Department's District III Traffic Engineer Dan Coonce at 334. 8300. 6. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. ACHD Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facili ties shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03-025) PAGE 6 OF 22 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. ~eplace any existing damaged CUl'b, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed urness approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387~6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State ofIdaho shall prepare and 'certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements oJ the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #197, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. ' 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right- of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right~of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicanfs authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confinnation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03-025) PAGE 7 OF 22 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use ofthe property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time ,the change in use is sought. D. Adopt the Recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department as follows: The following will be the requirements and/or concerns to provide minimum levels of fire protection for the proposed project: 1. That a fIfe-flow as required by the International Fire Code is provided to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of350' apart. 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Water Department. 3. Pinal approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. 4. All internal & external roads shall have a turning radius of 28l inside and 48' outside. 5. Operational fire hydrants are required before combustible construction begins. 6. The fire lanes shall have a clear driving surface which is 20' wide available at all times. E. Adopt the Recommendations of the Narnpa Meridian Irrigation District as follows: 1. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. 2. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans and requires a Land Use Change Application by filed for review prior to final platting, 3. The Developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. 4. NMID recommends that irrigation water be made available to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GR.A.N'l'm"G APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03-025) PAGE 8 OF 22 F. Adopt the State ofIdaho Transportation Depa.rtri1ent's Recommendations as follows: 1. SH 55 has been designated a Principal Arterial. ITO would like Ada County and the City of Meridian to help us preserve this corridor by recognizing the following conditions. Future right of way widths will be, A: 120 feet each side of centerline (240 feet total) for building setbacks and to include a frontage road, or B: 70 feet each side of centerline (140 feet total) ifthe developer provides an internal frontage road type system to feeder roads. 2. Access to a Principal Arterial Type IV will be intersections only, and spaced at one mile intervals in rural areas and one-half mile intervals in urban areas. Approaches (other than intersections) may be penni tted in special cases and on a temporary basis as follows: (l) Allowed until state highway system is improved by a construction project at which time an access will be provided to the property, which may not directly access the state highway system, but may be via a frontage or backage road. (2) Shall be recorded at the County Recorders Office. (3) Temporary access restrictions will be noted on the permit. 3. Noise abatement (benns, fences, etc.) will be the responsibility of the developer and will be constructed off of the State Right of Way. (Further information about the noise abatement may be obtained from the Noise Abatement Measures, which is on file in the City Clerk's office.) 13. [t is found that the 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map desi~ates all of the subject properties as "Mixed Use-Regional". The purpose of this designation is "to provide for a combination of compatible land uses that are typically developed under a master or conceptual plan. . ". and to identify key areas [of the City] which are either infill in nature or situated in highly visible or transitioning areas of the City where innovative and flexible design opportunities are encouraged. - The intent of this designation is to offer the developer a greater degree of design and use flexibility". " Additionally, the following Comprehensive Plan text policies are applicable to this application: -Chapter VII, pgs. 97-98, Chapter IV, Goal 1, Obj. A, #6, Chapter IV, Goal n, Obj. A, Chapter V, "FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ~03-02S) PAGE9 OF 22 Goal III, Obj. B, #8, Chapter VI, Subsection 2, pg. 7 I, Chapter VIr, Goal 1, Obj. B, #5, Chapter VIT, ,Goal W, Obj. D, #7. 14. The general vicinity of this project is experiencing a rapid change from agricultural and low density residential uses to commercial/urban type development. Champion Park Subdivision (aka "Parkstone") is a 100+ acre, mixed use development immediately west of the subject property, the first phase of which has received final plat approval. Carol Professional Center ,is a six acre offic~ park (zoned L-O) located approximately one half (%) mile south of the subject property on the west side of Eagle Road, Municipal water was extended east of Eagle Road a few years ago to serve Summer's Funeral Home. Providence Place Subdivision is a large, urban density residential subdivision located in Boise City less than a ~ mile east of the property. It is found that a rezone of the proposed property would be compatible with other land use and facility changes in the area. IS. No uses are proposed with this application. Certain permitted uses in the C-G zone such as bus stations, outdoor entertainment uses, wholesale facilities and service stations, could have ,a negative impact on the existing residential uses to the north and future homes in Champion Park. The other existing single family use near the subject property (the Nesmith out parcel) is designated as future mixed use in the comprehensive plan. It is found that any future uses, if designed, constructed and operated in accordance with adopted city ordinances and future CUP applications, should be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing character of the vicinity. 16. It is found that the majority of future uses on the subject property will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses if all development and landscaping FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03~025) PAGE 10 OF 22 ordinances are exercised. Some uses may be disturbing to existing residential uses to the west. 17. It is found that roadway improvements will be required on UstickRoad to handle the additional traffic generated by future development. Sanitary sewer and water are either currently available or under construction to provide service to the area. Comments were submitted by the Meridian Fire Department, and are addressed in paragraph 12.D. above. All other public services and facilities noted above appear to be adequate to service this property. 18. It is found that this development will not cause excessive additional requirements at public cost. The South Slough Trunk extension was funded by the City of Meridian but will not create new demands on the public coffer for this development. Other required site improvements will be funded and constructed by the developer. It is also found that the annexation and zoning alone will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. 19. It is found that several of the allowed uses in the C-G zone may invol ve activities, processes, materialsl equipment or conditions that could produce excessive traffic and noise and have .other public impacts. MCC 11-12-2 and 11-12-3 are intended to mitigate impacts of some uses such as fire hazards, bulk storage, and contractor's yards. In addition, a Development Agreement could establish use parameters that would prevent detrimental effects. To comply with this finding a DA shall be entered into which requires a conceptual plan for future uses, paying particuLar attention to uses along the north and northwest boundaries. 20. It is found that any future uses will impact the level and flow of traffic on the surrounding streets. Specific traffic counts will be determined at the time of development application. In accordance with Comp Plan policy #12 (pg. 79) and policy #2 (pg. 107), it is found FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN . (AZ-03-02S) PAGE 11 OF 22 that the number of vehicular access points to Ustick and Eagle Roads should be restricted .and comply with ACHD policies in order to preserve the capacity and movement on these roadways at build -out. 21. It is found that the annexation alone will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of other natural features. 22. It is found that the annexation of this property would be in the best interest of the City for the following reasons: · increased commercial Land base availabLe to future developers; · increased property tax revenue; · municipal services are available to the area; and · application substantially complies with the Comprehensive Plan. It is also found that, based upon the information submitted in the application, it is difficult for the Commission and Council to fully determine "best interesf' factors, since no future users are known at this time. The CUP/PD process does grant the City a fairly high degree of design and use review authority, but the additional demand on staff to process such applications should also be considered. 23. It is found that if the developer pays for the requested improvements and complies with the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact No. 12, and all sub-parts, the economic welfare of the City and its residents and tax and rate payers will be protected, a condition of annexation and zoning designation. 24. It is also found that the development considerations as referenced in Finding No. 12 are reasonable to require and must be taken into account, in order to assure the proposed FINDlNGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLlN (AZ-03-025) PAGE 12 OF 22 development is designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner which is hanDonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing, or intended character of the general vicinity, in order to assure that the proposed use will not change the essential character of the affected vicinity and will insure that the proposed uses will not be hazardous or disturbing to the existing, or future neighboring uses, particularly considering dIe impact ofproposed development on potential to produce excessive traffic,. noise, smoke, fumes, glare and odors. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The City of Meridian has authority to annex real property upon written request for :annexation and the real property being contiguous or adjacent to city boundaries and that said property lies within the area of city impact as provided by Idaho Code Section 50-222. The Meridian City Code ~ 11-16 provides the City may annex real property that is within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2, The Council may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 3. The City of Meridian has exerci sed its authority and responsibility as provided by "Local Land Use Planning Act ofI975", codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code by the adoption of the Amended Comprehensive Plan City of Meridian adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382. 4. The following are found to be pertinent provisions of the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan and are applicable to this Application: Chapter VII, pgs. 97-98, Chapter IV, Goal I, Obj. A, #6, Chapter IV, Goal II, Dbj. A, Chapter V, Goal ill, Obj. B, #8, Chapter VI, Subsection 2, p g. 71, Chapter VIl, Goal L Ob j. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03-025) PAGE 13 OF 22 B, #5, Chapter VII, Goal IV, Obj. D, #7. 5. The zoning of(C-G) General Retail and Service Commercial is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at ~ 11-7-2 K as follows: (C~G) General Retail and Service Commercial District: The purpose of the C-G District is to provide for commercial uses which are customarily operated entirely or almost entirely within a building; to provide fOT a review of the impact of proposed commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel-related services as well as retail sales for the trai.1sient and pennanent motoring publi~. All such districts shall be connected to the Municipal water and sewer systems of the City, and shall not constitute strip commercial development and encourage clustering of commercial development. 6. Since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation ofland. See Burt vs. The City ofIdaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P2d 1075 (1983). 7. The development of the annexed land, if annexed, shall meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian including, but not limited to: Section 12-2-4 which pertains to development time schedules and requirements; Section 12-4-13, which pertains to the piping of ditches; and Section 12-5-2 N, which pertains to pressurized irrigation systems, and Zoning and Subdivision and Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian. 8. Pursuant to Section 11-16-4 A ofthe Zoning and Development Ordinance the owner and/or developer shall enter into a Development Agreement. DECISION AND ORDER NO\V, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the City Council does hereby Order and this does FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03-02S) PAGE 14 OF 22 Order: 1. The applicanfs request for annexation and zoning of approximately 57.84 acres to General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) is granted subject to the tenus and conditions ofthjs Order hereinafter stated. 2. The application is for annexation and zoning of57.84 acres. The legal description shall be prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor, Licensed. by the State ofIdaho, and shall conform to all the provisions of the City of Meridian Resolution No. 158. The legal description for annexation must place this parcel contiguous to the Corporate City Limits per Ordinance No. 686. 3. Developer shall be required to meet the conditions set forth and in the event the condi tions herein are not met by the Developer that the property shall be subject to de-annexation, with the City of Meridian, which provides for the following conditions of development, to-wit: A. Adopt the Special Recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Commission as follows: 1. Delete Annexation and Zoning Site Specific Condition #J, pg. 8, of the 1113/03 staff report in its entirety. 2. Replace Site Specific condition #3 with the following: "3.a. Prior to annexation ordinance approval} the City of Meridian and Winston H. Moore will enter into a Development Agreement (DA). This DA will require either a conditional use or a planned development application be submitted to the City of Meridian prior to future development. (per action of the City Council taken at their March 23, 2004 meeting, eliminate the word subdivision, so that the Development Agreement would require either a conditional use permit or a planned development.) 3.b. A conceptual master plan will be submitted with the planned development application or a site specific plan with any conditional use. (Per action of the FINDINQS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE :MARLIN (AZ-03-Q25) PAGE 15 OF 22 City Council taken at their March 23, 2004 meeting, eliminated the word "for" and replaced it with the word "or".) 3.c. Any future plan shall show a continuous public or private road system that goes from Ustick Road north and may connect to the north boundary and may also connect to Eagle Road, State Highway 55, if allowed by lTD. The Developer shall provide further detail with the application for either a conditional use pennit or a planned development for a roadway system within the project, as well as to how the traffic is going to be moved throughout the development, and such roadway system shall be consistent with the ITD and ACHD. (Per action of the City Council taken at their March 23,2004 meeting by providing an additional last sentence pertaining to the roadway system within the development.)" B. Adopt the Comments and Recommendations of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Department as follows: 1. Essential City services will be made available to the subject property. 2. Replace Site Specific condition #3 with the following: "3.a, Prior to annexation ordinance approval, the City of Meridian and Winston H. Moore will enter into a Development Agreement (DA). This DA will require either a conditional use or a planned development application be submitted to the City of Meridian prior to future development. (per action of the City Council taken at their March 23~ 2004 meeting, eliminate the word subdivision, so that the Development Agreement would require either a conditional use permit or a planned development) 3.b. A conceptual master plan wiU be submitted with the planned development application or a site specific plan with any conditional use. (per action of the City Council taken at their March 23, 2004 meeting, eliminated the word "for" and replaced it with the word "or".) 3.e. Any future pl&n shall show a continuous public or private road system that goes from Ustick Road north and may connect to the north boundary and may also connect to Eagle Road~ State Highway 55, if allowed by LTD. FlNDIN'GS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICA nON FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03-025) PAGE]6 OF 22 The Developer shall provide further detail wi~h the application for either a conditional use pennit or a planned development for a roadway system within the project, as well as to how the traffic is going to be moved throughout the development, and such roadway system shall be consistent with the ITD and ACHD. (Per action of the City Council taken at their March 23, 2004 meeting by providing an additional last sentence pertaining to the roadway system within the development.)" 3. Remove any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems wi thin this project from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells maybe used for non-domestic pUlposes such as landscape irrigation. C. Adopt the Recommendations of ACHD as follows: If the rezone is approved and the District receives a development proposal, the District intends to provide the following requirements, in addition to any additional requirements that may apply upon District review of future development, to the City of Meridian: 1. The applicant shall do one of the following: a. Dedicate by donation (or through a development offset agreement whereby the applicant is reimbursed from impact fees to be collected soleLy from the applicant's specific development project) 48-feet of right-of-way fi:om centerline along Ustick Road, and construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ustick Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way. b. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ustick Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline ofthe right-of-way, in an easement provided to the District. c. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ustick Road, located at the back edge of the existing right-of-way. Accomplish all necessary adjustments to properly acconunod~te existing drainage and utilities. 2. Construct any local roadways that are proposed to intersect Ustick Road to align or offset a minimum of 30G-feet from any existing roadway (measured centerline to centerline). FlNDJNGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND WNfNG BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03~025) PAGE 17 OF 22 3. Construct any driveways that are proposed to intersect Ustick Road to align or offset a minimum of 230-feet from any existing or proposed driveway or street. 4. Once the access points have been approved by the District, they are to be identified as such on the construction drawings. The remaining frontage along arterial and collector streets shall be identified as having no access. 5. Comply with requirements ofITD for Eagle Road frontage. Submit a letter from ITD regarding the said requirements prior to District approval of the final plat or issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Contact The Idaho Transportation Department's District III Traffic Engineer Dan Coonce at 334- 8300. 6. Comply with aU Standard Conditions of Approval. ACHD Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2, All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3, Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5, All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required petnlits), which incorporates any required design changes. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONThTG BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03-025) PAGE 18 OF 22 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #197, also known as Ada County Highway District Road [mpact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right- of~way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIG LINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right~of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway pistrict. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confnmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. II. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with aU rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. D. Adopt the Recommendations' of the Meridian Fire Deparbnent as follows: The following will be the requirements and/or concerns to provide minimum levels of fire protection for the proposed project: 1. That a fire-flow as required by the International Fire Code is provided to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of350' apart. 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Water Department. 3. Final approval of the fire hydrant locations shall . be by the Meridian Fire Department. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03-025) PAGE 19 OF 22 4. All internal & external roads shall have a turning radius of28> inside and 48' outside. 5. Operational fire hydrants are required before combustible construction begins. 6. The fire lanes shall have a clear driving surface which is 20' wide available at all times. E. Adopt the Recommendations of the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District as follows; 1. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. 2. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans and requires a Land Use Change Application by filed for review priM to final platting. 3. The Developer must comply with Idaho Code 31"3805. 4. NMID recommends that irrigation water be made available to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. F. Adopt the State ofIdaho Transportation Department's Recommendations as follows: 1. SH 55 has been designated a Principal Arterial. ITD would like Ada County and the City of Meridian to help us preserve this conidor by recognizing the following conditions. Future right of way widths will be, A: 120 feet each side of centerline (240 feet total) for building setbacks 3Jld to include a frontage road, or B: 70 feet each side of centerline (140 feet total) if the developer provides an internal frontage road type system to feeder roads. 2. Access to a Principal Arterial Type IV will be intersections only, and spaced at one mile intervals in rural areas and one-half mile intervals in urban areas. Approaches (other than intersections) may be permitted in special cases and on a temporary basis as follows: (1) Allowed until state highway system is improved by a construction project at which time an access will be provided to the property, which may not directly access the state highway system, but may be Via a frontage or backage road. (2) Shall be recorded at the County Recorders Office. (3) Temporary access restrictions will be noted on the permit. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DEClS10N AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03-025) PAGE 20 OF 22 3. Noise abatement (berms, fences, etc.) will be the responsibility ofthe developer and will be constructed off of the State Right of Way. (Further infonnation about the noise abatement maybe obtained from the Noise Abatement Measures, which is on file in the City Clerk's office.) 4. The City Attorney shall prepare for consideration by the City Council the appropriate ordinance for the annexation and zoning designation of the real property which is the subject of the application to (C-G) General Retail and Service Commercial District, and Meridian City Code 9 11- 7-2. 5. Subsequent to the passage ofthe Ordinance provided for in section 4 of this Order the engineering staff of the Public Works Department shall prepare the appropriate mapping changes of the official boundaries and zoning maps as provided in Meridian City Code S 11-21-1 in accordance with the provisions of the annexation and zoning ordinance. NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION AND RIGHT TO REGULATORY T AKINGS ANALYSIS The Appli~t is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing" and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue.' A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code ~ 67~652L An affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by this decision may, within twenty~eight (28) days after FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ-03-02S) PAGE 21 OF 22 Code. the date ofthis decision and order, seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho JJpr; Z . . 2004. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 20 I!:- day of COUNCILMAN BILL NARY COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD MA VOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) DATED; 1--2-t?- tJ4 MOTION: APPROVED:+ DISAPPROVED:_ ~~) Mfl .*~ erd ,,\\\\\ III ""6'~~DR.1 ~1- ~~ j' <Y l'~o '\ ~ SEAL ~ % 7~ ~<f'~ f %".0 ~r lS1' ' ;f'./ "'-'r;/~ C'OU?-,Ii'f . ~~\.,~' '!'" . ,;,.,\\\,\ ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN SHAUN WARDLE Attest: .f-- 2--/-1/ -I- . FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BLUE MARLIN (AZ~(J3-025) PAGE22 OF22 VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED-P- VOTED~ VOTED - April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT April 18, 2005 ITEM NO. 5-0 REQUEST Agreement for Professional Services with The Land Group, Inc. for Community Plaza AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUilDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached Agreement Mr~ Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meelings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made this _ day of , 2005, by and between the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Idaho, hereinafter referred to as "CITYtI, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Melidian, Idaho 83642, and of The Land Group, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "LAND GROUP", 462 E. Shore Drive, Suite 100, Eagle, Idaho 83616, a corporation organized under the laws of the State ofIdaho. 1, Scope of Services: LAND GROUP shall perfonn all services, and comply in all respects, as specified in the document titled "Scope of Services" a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit tlA't and incorporated herein by this reference, together with any amendments that may be agreed to in wliting by the parties, 2. Time of Performance: This agreement shall become effective upon execution by both parties, and shall expire on September 30,2005 unless earlier temlinated or extended. 3. Indemnification and Insurance: LAND GROUP shall indemnifY and save and hold harmless CITY from and for any and all losses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, or injury to persons or propeliy and losses and expenses caused or incurred by LAND GROUP, its servants, agents, employees, guests, and business invitees, and not caused by or arising out ofthe tortious conduct of CITY or its employees. LAND GROUP shall maintain, and specifically agrees that it will maintain, throughout the tenn of this Agreement, liability insurance, in which the CITY shall be named an additional insured in the minimum amount as specified in the Idaho Tort Claims Act set forth in Title 6, Chapter 9 of the Idaho Code. Additionally, LAND GROUP shall maintain professional liability insurance. The limits of insurance shall not be deemed a limitation of the covenants to indemnifY and save and hold harmless CITY; and if CITY becomes liable for an amount in excess of the insurance limits, herein provided, LAND GROUP covenants and agrees to indemnify and save and hold hannless CITY from and for all such losses, claims, actions, or judgments for damages or liability to persons or property. Additionally, LAND GROUP shall maintain Workers Compensation Insurance, in the statutory limits as required by law. LAND GROUP shall provide CITY with a Certificates ofInsurance, or other proofs of insurance evidencing LAND GROUP'S compliance with the requirements of this paragraph and file such proof of insurance with the CITY. In the event the insurance minimums are changed, LAND GROUP shall immediately submit proof of compliance with the changed limits. Evidence of all insurance shall be submitted to the City Clerk with a copy to Meridian City Accounting, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642. Agreement - COlmnunity Plaza - The Land Group - page I of 5 4. Independent Contractor: In all matters pertaining to this agreement, LAND GROUP shall be acting as an independent contractor, and neither LAND GROUP nor any officer, employee or agent of LAND GROUP will be deemed an employee of CITY. The selection and designation of the persOlmel of the CITY in the perfonnance of this agreement shall be made by the CITY. 5. Compensation: LAND GROUP shall be compensated for real estate services pursuant to and specified in attached Exhibit "A", not to exceed Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) 6. Method of Payment: LAND GROUP will invoice the City of Meridian Parks Department at 11 W. Bower Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642 directly for all current amounts earned under this Agreement at the end of each month. The CITY will pay all invoices within thirty (30) days after receipt. 7. Notices: Any and all notices required to be given by either of the parties hereto, unless otherwise stated in this agreement, shall be in writing and be deemed communicated when mailed in the United States mail, certified, return receipt requested, addressed as follows: City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 The Land Group, Inc. 462 E. Shore Drive, Suite 100 Eagle, Idaho 83616 Either pmiy may change their address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving written notice of such change to the other in the manner herein provided. 8. Attorney Fees: Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief as may be granted, to court costs and reasonable attorneys1 fees as determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture ofthis Agreement. 9. Time is of the Essence: The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition and provision hereof, and that the failure to timely perform any ofthe obligations hereunder shall constitute a breach of, and a default under, this Agreement by the party so failing to perform. Agreement - Community Plaza - The Land Group - page 2 of 5 10, Assignment: It is expressly agreed and understood by the parties hereto, that LAND GROUP shall not have the right to assign, transfer, hypothecate or sell any of its rights under this Agreement except upon the prior express written consent of CITY. 11. Discrimination Prohibited: In perfonning the Services required herein, LAND GROUP shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age or disability. 12, Reports and Information: At such times and in such forms as the CITY may require, there shall be furnished to the CITY such statements, records, repOlis, data and information as the CITY may request pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. 13. Audits and Inspections: At any time during normal business hours and as often as the CITY may deem necessary, there shall be made available to the CITY for examination all of LAND GROUP'S records with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. LAND GROUP shall permit the CITY to audit, examine, and make excerpts or transcripts from such records, and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls, records of per sonne 1, conditions of employment and other data relating to all matters covered by this Agreement. 14, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material: No material produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to copyright in the United States or in any other country. The CITY shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose and otherwise use, in whole or in part, any reports, data or other materials prepared under this Agreement. 15. Compliance with Laws: In performing the scope of services required hereunder, LAND GROUP shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and codes of Federal, State, and local govermnents, 16. Changes: The CITY may, from time to time, request changes in the Scope of Services to be performed hereunder. Such changes, including any increase or decrease in the amount of LAND GROUP'S compensation, which are mutually agreed upon by and between the CITY and LAND GROUP, shall be incorporated in written amendments to this Agreement. 17. Termination: If, through any cause, LAND GROUP, its officers, employees, or agents fails to fulfill in a timely and proper manner its obligations under this Agreement, violates any of the covenants, agreements, or stipulations of this Agreement, falsifies any record or document required to be prepared under this agreement, engages in fraud, dishonesty, or any other act of misconduct in the perfonnance of this contract, or if the City Council determines that tennination of this Agreement is in the best interest of CITY, the CITY shall thereupon have the Agreement - Community Plaza - The Land Group - page 3 of 5 right to tenninate this Agreement by giving written notice to LAND GROUP of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least fifteen (15) days before the effective date of such tenninatioll. LAND GROUP may terminate this agreement at any time by giving at least sixty (60) days notice to CITY. In the event of any tennination of this Agreement, all finished or unfinished documents, data, and reports prepared by LAND GROUP under this Agreement shall, at the option of the CITY, become its property, and LAND GROUP shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily complete hereunder, Notwithstanding the above, LAND GROUP shall not be relieved ofJiability to the CITY for damages sustained by the CITY by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by LAND GROUP, and the CITY may withhold any payments to LAND GROUP for the purposes of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the CITY from LAND GROUP is determined. This provision shall survive the termination of this agreement and shall not relieve LAND GROUP of its liability to the CITY for damages. 18. Construction and Severability: If any part of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such holding will not affect the validity or enforceability of any other part of this Agreement so long as the remainder of the Agreement is reasonably capable of completion. 19. Entire Agreement: This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other agreements or understandings, oral of written, whether previous to the execution hereof or contemporaneous herewith. 20. Applicable Law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State ofIdaho, and the ordinances of the City of Meridian. 21, Approval Required: This Agreement shall not become effecti ve or binding until approved by the City of Meridian. Agreement - Community Plaza - The Land Group - page 4 of 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN Agreement - Community Plaza ~ The Land Group - page 5 of 5 Scope of Services Exhibit "A" The following reviews the type and scope of services provided and the fees required for completion. A. COMMUNITY PLAZA MASTER PLAN 1. The Land Group will work with the City of Meridian Parks Department to prepare an overall Master Plan for the final build-out portion of the 58 acre Settlers Park. The proposed master plan park area will include the approximately 6 acres southeast potion of the park. The master plan also includes the open area west of the existing water tank. The Land Group's scope of service includes the following: . The Land Group will assist with the City of Meridian Parks Department for a public input process and involvement. We anticipate the public input includes meeting with an advisory group. After approval with the preliminary master plan, the city may require an open house type public meeting. . Using the existing site survey and input from the public input process, the Land Group will provide schematic concepts for Community Plaza. The concepts will include pedestrian circulation from the existing parking to the Community Plaza area, open market layout, possible large barn for different events and community users, conceptual utilities, vehicle access to market area and possible open amphitheater venue. The schematic master plan also includes recreational use of the open area west ofthe water tank, such as tennis courts and pathways. The Land Group will locate the best location for all structures, circulation, recreation and access, · The concepts are to be presented to the public advisory committee. All comments will be discussed and the concepts will be blended into one overall master plan. · The overall Master Plan is to be approved by the advisory committee and City Council. · A construction cost estimate will be provided after final master plan approvaL . The Land Group's service does not include architectural services for buildings, including electrical, mechanical and structural services. The City of Meridian Parks Department will be responsible for the following: . Assisting with the public input process and advisory committee. . Responsible to request and assemble the advisory committee members. · Assist in setting up the advisory committee members. · [frequired, assist and set up the public open house meeting. B. CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTATION Upon approval of the master plan, the Land Group will provide a proposal for the working drawings and technical sections of specifications to construct the Scope of Services - Community Plaza - Page 1 of 4 Community Plaza village. The Land Group shall coordinate services with those of other consultants necessary to provide construction documents which help to maintain a construction budget in accordance with the preliminary design estimate of probable construction cost. C. FEES AND TERMS Community Plaza and Open Space Master Plan. . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . $5,000.00 nte Fees for Professional Services shall be billed monthly for progress payment based upon percentage of work completed. D. SERVICES NOT INCLUDED 1. Site Surveying (it is assumed the existing topographic survey provided by City of Meridian Parks department is accurate, current and complete. Extra survey needed for the project is extra services.) 2. Geoteclmical investigation report and geoteclmical field observations. 3. Construction Management. 4. Construction Quality Control Testing. 5. Rezoning Process. 6. Conditional Use Pelmit. 7 _ Soil Testing. 8. Design revisions after approval to proceed with construction documents. It design revisions are requested, the Land Group will perform the revisions after receiving written authorization. 9. Full-time construction observations services, testing and construction staking. 10. Tree Survey/ Arborist Report. 11. Water Features. 12. Traffic Study/Report. 13. Play Structures. 14. Easements and ROW descriptions and purchase. E. ADDITIONAL SERVICES When specifically requested, work not described above shall be performed as additional services. This work may include, but is not limited to: 1. Making revisions in drawings, specifications or other documents, or preparing change order documents, when such revisions are clue to causes beyond the control of our finn. 2. Design revisions after securing Owner approvals to proceed. If design revisions are requested, the Land Group will perform the additional services after receiving written authorization. 3. Providing additional site observations. 4. Preparation of record drawings or transferring as-built blueprint information to the original drawings. 5. Providing any other services not specifically included in this proposal. Scope of Services - Community Plaza - Page 2 of 4 F. REIMBURSABLE EXPENES Reimbursable Expenses shall be as per AlA document B141-1987 Article 10, section ] 0.2 through 10.2.1.6 1. Cost of models, special renderings, promotional photography, special process printing, special equipment, special printed reports or publications, maps and documents. 2. Photographic services, film and processing. 3. Cost of copies of drawings, reports and visual images; xerography and photographic reproduction of drawings and other documents furnished or prepared in connection with the work of this contract. 4. Cost of commercial carrier and public transportation, lodging, car rental and parking, subsistence and out-of-pocket expenses. Private automobile travel at $0.375 per mile. 5. Cost of postage and shipping expenses other than first class mail. 6. Long distance telephone charges. 7. Electronic data processing. 8. Fees for additional special consultants retained with the approval of client. 9. Full color printing a. Full size glossy prints. . . . , . . . _ . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . .. $120.00 each b. 12 scale prints .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $75.00 each c. 11 x 17 prints. . . , . . . . . . . . .$35.00 first print, $2.50 each additional print d. 8 12 x 11 prints, . . . . . . . _ .. $20.00 first print, $1.50 each additional print 10. Mounting and laminating a, FuJI size boards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . $75.00 each b. Add frame. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . $45.00 each 11. Courier delivery cost. 12. Bidding packages for blueprint sets and project manuals. G. ASSUMPTIONS The assumptions listed below were fundamental in determining the appropriate fee for the scope of work proposed in this section. Significant deviations from these assumptions could materially impact the actual fee incurred under the above scope. The assumptions include: 1. Completion of individual tasks will take place in an orderly fashion. Submittals required by the Owners will respect a time table jointly established by the Land Group prior to the beginning of work. 1. STANDARD OF CARE/CONSTRUCTION CHANGES The Land Group, Inc. will follow the professional standards of care expected of a landscape architect and civil engineer licensed and practicing in the State of Idaho. The owner acknowledges that in the performance of services, as defined in this agreement, the landscape architect, civil engineer and his consultants are expected to meet the standard of care as defined by the State of Idaho. The owner acknowledges that this standard of care does not imply or represent that the contract documents produced by the landscape architect and his consultants will be 100% free from inconsistencies, conflicts, or discrepancies and does not guarantee that 100% of the elements of the project are included. The owner understands that since the landscape Scope of Services - Community Plaza - Page 3 of 4 architect and his consultants cannot produce 100% accurate documents, that construction changes will occur and the changes may cost an additional 4-6% above the original contract price between the owner and the contractor. These changes are in addition to any changes required due to unseen or hidden conditions, changes in the codes or regulations and any owner directed changes. The owner will establish a construction contingency to fund construction changes. All costs or credits associated with construction changes will be handled by a modification to the original contract between the owner and the contractor. J. COMPENSATION FOR SCOPE OF SERVICES Compensation for additional services shall be on a time and expense basis in accordance with the following: PRINCIP AL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT CIVIL ENGINEER, PE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PROJECT MANAGER CIVIL ENGINEER, E.LT. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE IN TRAINING PRODUCTION CADD CLERICAL $95.00 per hour $95.00 per hour $85.00 per hour $75.00 per hour $75.00 per hour $55.00 per hour $40.00 per hour Fees for Professional Services shall be billed monthly for progress payment based upon percentage of work completed. Reimbursable Costs shall be billed with fee invoices. Scope of Services ~ Community Plaza - Page 4 of 4 April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT April l{f, 2005 ITEM NO. 5-L REQUEST Water Main Easement for Park's Westside Body Works by Tim Wallace AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT; CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached ~.j-/ Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at pUblic meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. City of Meridian Public Works Dept. Memo To: Mayor de Weerd & City Council From: Karie Glenn City Of Meriilian City Clerk Office cc: File Date: 4/11/2005 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for April 19, 2005 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests that the following items be placed on the April 19, 2005 City Council agenda, on the Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: 1) Water Main Easement for Park's Westside Bodv Works bv Tim Wallace. Typical Water Main Easement. Recommended Council Action: Approve the Water Main Easement for Park's Wests ide Body Works by Tim Wallace and authorize the Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest. Thank you for your consideration. . Page 1 WATER:MAIN EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made this _ day of _, 20_between , the parties of the first part, and hereinafter called the Grantors, and the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the party of the second part, and hereinafter called the Grantee; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors desire to provide a water main right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the water main is to be provided for through an underground pipeline to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain, service and subsequently connect to said pipeline from time to time by the Grantee; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantors, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantors do hereby give, grant and convey unto the Grantee the right- of-way for an easement for the construction, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement of a water main over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A and B) The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of a water line and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, additional connection thereto, repair and replacement at the convenience of the Grantee, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement and right-of-way unto the said Grantee, it's successors and assigns forever. IT IS EXPRESSL Y UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that after construction, making repairs, performing other maintenance or making subsequent connection to the water line, Grantee shall restore the area of the easement and adjacent property to that existent prior to undertaking such construction, repairs and maintenance. However, Grantee shall not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring anything placed within the area described in this easement that was placed there in violation of this easement. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the Grantee that should any part of the right-of- way and easement hereby granted shall become part of, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such right-of-way and easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished. Water Main Easement EASMT WTR.doc THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the Grantee that they are lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract ofland, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that they will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first herein above written. GRANTOR: --r::- u/~r? O'Mler STATE OF IDAHO) ) ss County of Ada ) On this ~ day of A pr i \ _ ,20 ctfbefore me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared I, rn W Ii I fa t! ~ known or identified to me to be the O'Mler of the c01]Joratlon that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year fist above written. ...~,\<~~'l<~I'~~i!;ti!##~~ (SE~~~o~....e"ee~~ ;0'4>\ t l' v.OTA.l?y"\ ~ ~ * ~ ~~-- j * E ;. "DO P tr B l;\' (. "... $ ~ .....ifl/>-1 ~oeo.." .,o".."..~>> 0 i': ..~~~'~#e~i ~ .~;~~;\~~.. GRANTEE: CITY OF MERIDIAN Water Main Easement EASMT WTR.doc Tammy de Weerd, Mayor Attest by William G. Berg, City Clerk Approved By City Council On: STATE OF IDAHO, County of Ada On this _day of ,2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY de WEERD and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., mown to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. (SEAL) NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO Residing at: Commission Expires: Water Main Easement EASMT WTR.doc IDAHO SURVEY GROUP 1450 East Watertower St. Suite J 50 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone (208) 846-8570 Fax (208) 884-5399 Project No. 04-355-01 April 7, 2005 Park's Westside Body Works Meridian City Water Easement A 15.00 foot wide strip ofland located in the SW 1/4 of Section 6, T.3N., R.1E., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest comer of said Section 6, from which the South 1/4 comer of said section bears North 88001' 10" East, 2404.62 feet; Thence North 88001 ' 10" East, 921.62 feet; Thence North 00013'50" West, 65.55 feet to a point on the North right-of-way of Fairview Avenue; Thence along said right-of-way North 88034'57" East, 157.78 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING ofa 15.00 foot wide strip ofland being 10.00 feet left and 5.00 feet right of the following described lines: North 00000' East, 20.00 feet; South 88001' West, 25.00 feet to the terminus of said lines. Sidelines shortened or extended as required to form a continuous 15.00 foot wide strip ofland. Professional Land Surveyors I I I I I I i ! I I i I -t- i -0 ~ ~~ 7J~ ~~ C 5 f"r\ i! ~ ~ April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 1~, 2005 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-M REQUEST Wafer Main Easement for Simmons Fine Jewelry AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See attached CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: ~r' MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SElTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. City of Meridian Public Works Dept. Memo To: Mayor de Weerd & City Council From: Karie Glenn cc: File Date: 4/1112005 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for April 19, 2005 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests that the following items be placed on the April 19, 2005 City Council agenda, on the Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: 1) Water Main Easement for Simmons Fine Jewelrv. Typical Water Main Easement. Recommended Council Action: Approve the Water Main Easement for Simmons Fine Jewelry and authorize the Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest. Thank you for your consideration. . Page 1 WATER MAIN EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made this ~ day of .A~ it- , 2005 between SIMMONS FINE JEWELRY, INC., the parties of the first part, and hereinafter called the Grantors, and the CITY OF MERIDIAN, Ada County, Idaho, the party of the second part, and hereinafter called the Grantee; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors desire to provide a water main right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the water main is to be provided for through an underground pipeline to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain, service and subsequently connect to said pipeline from time to time by the Grantee; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantors, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantors do hereby give, grant and convey unto the Grantee the right-of-way for an easement for the construction, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement of a water main over and across the following described property: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A and B The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of a water line and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, additional connection thereto, repair and replacement at the convenience of the Grantee, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement and right-of-way unto the said Grantee, it's successors and assigns forever. . IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that after construction, making repairs, performing other maintenance or making subsequent connection to the water line, Grantee shall restore the area of the easement andadjacent property to that existent prior to undertaking such construction, repairs and maintenance, However, Grantee shall not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring anything placed within the area described in this easement that was placed there in violation of this easement. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. Water Main Easement Page 1 of 1 Simmons Fine Jewelry and City of Meridian C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\Local Settings\ Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\2ZK71 YZ2\2581 Water Main _ Esmt_ Conveyance. doc THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the Grantee that should any part of the right-of-way and easement hereby granted shall become part of, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such right-of-way and easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished, THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the Grantee that they are lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that they will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN \VITNESS \VHEREOF, the said parties of the fIrst part have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year fIrst herein above written. GRANTOR: SIMMONS FINE JEWELRY, INC. 4 County of Ada On this 'f.S day of ,2005, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, ersonaIly appeared Jay V. Simmons, known or identifIed to me to be the President of the corporation that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. (SEAL) Water Main Easement Page 2 of2 Simmons Fine Jewelry and City of Meridian C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\2ZK71 YZ2\2581 Water Main _ Esmt_ Conveyance. doc GRANTEE: CITY OF MERIDIAN TAMMY DE WEERD - Mayor Attest by William G. Berg, City Clerk Approved By City Council On: STATE OF IDAHO ) ) ss County of Ada ) On this _day of ,2005, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY de WEERD and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. (SEAL) NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO Residing at My Commission Expires: Water Main Easement Page 3 of 3 Simmons Fine Jewelry and City of Meridian C:lJ)ocuments and Settings\Owner\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\2ZK71YZ2\2581 Water Main _ Esmt_ Conveyance. doc Roylance & AssociateS.A. 391 W. State Street, Suite E, Eagle, Idaho 83616 March 30, 2005 Project No. 2581 Exhibit "A" Legal Description Simmons Fine Jewelry Water Main Easement 2,336 Square Feet Engir'~s,. Surveyors · Landplanners Telephone (208) 939-2824 Fax (208) 939-2855 An easement for the purpose of accessing and maintaining a water main and fire hydrant located in a portion of Lot 3, Block 1 of Gemtone Center No.4 Subdivision (a recorded subdivision on file in Book 86 of Plats, at pages 9684 and 9685, records of Ada County, Idaho), situated in the Northeast One Quarter of Section 8, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, described as follows: Commencing at a brass cap monurnenting the Northeast Corner of said Section 8, thence following the easterly line of said Section 8 South 01008'45" West a distance of 1,341.58 feet to a point; Thence leaving said easterly line South 90000'00" West a distance of 370.07 feet to a 5/8-inch steel pin on the easterly right-of-way of N. Olive Avenue; Thence following said easterly right-of-way North 01008'4511 East a distance of 95.02 feet to the POINT OF BEGlNNING. Thence following said easterly right of way North 01008'45" East a distance of 20.00 feet to a point; Thence leaving said easterly right-of-way North 90000'0011 East a distance of 116.59 feet to a point; Thence South 00000'00" East a distance of 20.00 feet to a point; Thence South 90000'00" West a distance of 116.99 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above-described tract of land contains 2,336 square feet, more or less, subject to all existing easements and rights-of-way. Prepared By: ROYLANCE & ASSOCIATES P.A. 391 W. STATE STREET, SUITE E EAGLE, IDAHO 83616 208-939-2824 208-939-2855 (FAX) X:\Projects\Architecture NW\2581 \Admin\Legals\2581 Water Main Easement.doc ~pr-04-05 17: 28 ~ ---4:~ 2 [ ~ ~o 1 ~ I ! z u:: I.:.J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ B <( cb G gs>bt F r om-Roy I :;mf~'~ AHOC i ~ te~ rct O).t ~ ~ ~_ . .e~'~tf'~ .~ ~ ---- 10 I ro 1 "'.>>.90.IOS r-t:LQ:: 2<(1....1 wc..;::2: ~~8 z< ~gs5 ::E F o u U I..L..l ell ~ 20H3S-285S 7-741 P,OG/OS H5~ !Z ~ (5 0.. -!'i:- i \ 1 1 I I I I I -;1- -- - - IT! i - -- ~ : o I : B-~ jl i QfE i ~U ~ I ~ :..~ d i r\ r-.Z ..2 ).,2; g 2 ~ ~ I ~i ~ ffi ~ u ~ glr--. U t-. ~ 07 ~IOCZ LJ ,...J ~ 8:~ .-J~ ~U Ig11"'J P-':lU ~-; yl ~[ ~~ ~~: ~ 3..00,00.005 r-, I I 1 l[ : ~~ I Ili~ i~ !~ /' :~ iI- ~ ,Ig 19 . ~ I i'g 1'8 5 ~ Iii i~ U . I ---l-V ~O!B~__ .ocraz: 3St.90. ~ON 3..sv.aO.~ON 'Z1. V ::lAliO }J Gr'OH '319V7I }J o ('oj w Z z ::J ::i l...J >- ~- i= t- i::i >- D::. & ::E 5! tIS C:::. g: ;S vs r 1 <r~~iIIi ~ttJ cD .tl ~ ~~ .q:v'I<r:/ 8- tom iji m'g~~ i <.3~~ IIlwl- ~~.~~ :;; <j~~ ; ~ ~~: f"- Z\::<l.r~ 2 ~~:S3. !l l+I III ., g 0 :~ ; It r") April 15/ 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April ~, 2005 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-N REQUEST Approve Beer, Wine, and Liquor License Renewals AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: See attached CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUilDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: ~~ CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SffiLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April1!&,2005 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 16 REQUEST Discussion of Turn Lanes for the Courtyards at Ten Mile AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: See attached CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DE?T: ~ CITY PARKS DEPT: iJ oJ' S MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: dJ ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: EmaiJed: Staff Initials: Materialll prellented at public meetlngllllhall become property of the City of Meridian. n V I, ! 't, L U U? () : v L AIVI No,0815 p, J/l DTE DEVELOPMENT, LLC REAL ESTATE .M:ANAGE1v.IENT & DEVELOPMENT 850 E. FMNKLlN RD., STR 406 ME.R1DIAN, IDAHO 83642 TEL: 208,884.1712 208,371.3358 F.\X: 775.522.8631 L.(I,ND, R:Esm.E.N1'1AL, .AND COMMER.CIAL REAr.. ESTA TS DEVELOPMENT April 12, 2005 VIA F ACSIMILB: 8&8.6854 RECEIVED APR 1.42005 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICF :Mr. Brad Hawkins-Clark Planning & Zoning City ofMendian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Re: THE COURTYAImS AT T:EN M1:tE, TuRN LANEs DISCUSSION AT em COUNCIL MEETING ON APRU.19, 2005. Dear Brad: On behalf of DTE Development, Uc, we respectfully request to be placed on the City Council Agenda for April 19) 2005, to be placed on the latter part ofllie agenda due to scheduling needs. To be discussed would be those issues, which are related to the addition ofTum Lanes on Ten Mile Road and Pine Street. Sincerely, Doug Campbell DTE Development, LLC APR 14 '05 09: 21 April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT April 141, 2005 ITEM NO. 17 REQU EST Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: ~ Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meeHngs shall become property of the City of Meridian. DELINQUENCY FOR TURN OFF Schedule for April 20, 2005 Cycle 1 MAYOR: Pursuant to Meridian City Code 9-1-21, delinquent water users shall have the right to request a pre termination hearing prior to water service being disconnected. No water users having requested such pre- termination hearing for April 19, 2005, water service for the attached turn-off list will be terminated on April 20, 2005. The total amount of the turn-off list is $26,127.15. APR 1 9 2005 City of Meridian City Clerk Office (~" CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 1 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03:50pm Current Period: 04/2012005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Report Criteria: Terminated customers not included Customer.Cust No 0 '" {<} 880000001 Customer. Bill Cycle" 1 Last Pmt Last Pmt Name Non-Delinq 0212012005 01/20/2005 12/20/2004 Date Amount ---.--..-~-- 24.04.0552.1 ABBEY BEN 71.42 39.89 31.53 03/22/2005 42.81 - 24.04.1904.1 ABBOTT, SCOTT 54.18 54.08 .10 04/13/2005 56.54 - 23.02.4990.4 ABDERHALDEN, RICHARD 114.83 55.41 46.57 12.85 02/15/2005 75.00 - 23.02.1930.2 ACUNA, JULIO & 77.90 38.22 25.22 14.46 02/14/2005 80.00 - 36.69.0632.1 ADAMS, RAYMOND & VICKIE 98.10 51.53 46.57 03/1412005 61.61 - 30.74.3026.3 ALEKSEYER, SERGEY & L YUBO 47.13 36.01 11.12 03117/2005 24.17 - 30.30.6342.2 ALEX, JULIUS K 37.92 29.58 8.34 03/25/2005 20.64 - 24.03.0400.1 ALLEN, JAMES 41.62 36.01 5.61 0310712005 60.00 - 30.74.2542.2 ALLEN, JIM 115.39 70.93 44.46 03/1512005 75.00 - 30.74.3040.4 ANDERSON, DEBORAH A. 27.38 21.82 5.56 03129/2005 19.66 - 30.74.1026.1 ANDERSON, DOUGLAS 159.46 90.33 69.13 02/15/2005 50.00 - 25.05.0160.1 ANDERSON, GORDON & JUDYT 101.30 36.01 65.29 02/16/2005 122.71 - 30.74.2978.1 ANDERSON, JAMES J. 37.92 29.58 8.34 03/1512005 20.64 - 30.30.6290.2 ANDERSON, RANDY & LORI 40.47 32.13 8.34 03/1512005 23.19 - 30.30.6036.2 ANIBAL, CHRIS 27.38 21.82 5.56 03/30/2005 19.66 - 23.02.6300.1 ANSON, PATRICIA ' 95.78 52.86 42.92 03/2312005 50.00 - 22.50.1990.2 ANSON, REBECCA 106.58 43.77 62.81 02/16/2005 156.24 - 46.60.0010.3 ARMSTRONG, JAMES & NANCY 64.74 29.58 21.46 22.50.1616.2 ARNZEN, RANDY 77.65 44.55 33.10 01124/2005 122.39 - 29.07.0972.3 ASUMENDI, RUBEN 82.82 43.77 39.05 03/07/2005 95.45 - 36.69.0530.1 ATCHISON, JEFFERY 163.15 43.77 72.81 02/16/2005 84.64 - 30.74.3660.2 ATHERTON, NOBLE 146.70 91.55 55.15 03/1612005 51.88 . 30.74.3100.2 BABCOCK, JULIE 43.22 33.46 9.76 03/22/2005 22.00 - 24.04.1290.3 BACON, THOMAS & JANIS 133.20 84.08 49.12 0311612005 103.90 - 22.51.0694.1 BAfLEY, PEGGY 80.64 48.98 31.66 04/19/2005 25.00 - 23.02.3550.2 BAILEY, PEGGY 44.59 43.77 .82 0410412005 72.00 - 23.02.2130.1 BALDWIN, PIXIE 56.65 35.19 21.46 03/14/2005 25.22 - 30.74.3604.3 BARBEY, THOMAS 149.02 80.68 24.56 04105/2005 4.00 - 32.32.4054.2 BARBOUR, KELLY & JENNIFER 35.29 32.13 3.16 04/1512005 32.13 - 25.25.0104.2 BARNES, GREG & JASMINE 74.30 59.29 15.01 03/15/2005 61.61 - 23.01.2110.2 BARROETABENA, PHYLLIS 83.56 62.32 21.24 03/17/2005 75.00 - 24.03.0868.4 BATES, CANDACE 77.48 33.46 44.02 02/22/2005 59.06 - 22.51.0932.1 BAYVIEW - KELLOGG 88.98 36.28 18.83 33.87 01/26/2005 22.59 - 22.50.1022.1 BEACH, ROXANNE 167.01 44.05 86.70 36.26 02/17/2005 60.00 - 31.52.0700.2 BECK, BILL 75.94 32.70 32.70 10.54 31.52.0750.2 BECK, BILL 15.10 7.55 7.55 25.25.4040.2 BEDOYA, PEDRO 62.44 33.46 28.98 02/25/2005 36.50 - 22.51.3080.3 BEEBE, MELINDA 46.32 21.82 24.50 03/23/2005 25.22 - 24.04.1208,2 BEHRENDS, DALE 111.68 73.77 37.91 03117/2005 83.00 - 24.04.2010.7 BELAIR, DENNIS 67.20 29.58 17.70 12121/2004 113.87 - 36.68.0312.2 BENSON, JR. DARRYL 94.10 43.77 50.33 02/14/2005 80.46 - 22.51.2622.1 BENTLEY, DONALD 246.88 125.32 121.56 03/31/2005 250.64 - 22.51.0474.2 BENTLEY, RENEE 71.42 39.89 31.53 02/2512005 31.53 - 35.65.0352.1 BERG, JOSEPH 71.30 36.01 35.29 03/02/2005 39.05 - 36.68.0272.1 BERTEL, STEVEN 78.82 36.01 42.81 02/15/2005 81.86 - 25.25.9932.2 BILLINGS, RAYMOND & DELANP 186.68 28.25 35.29 01/21/2005 91.18 - 37.72.0256.2 BIRDGE, RICHARD & TONI 82.82 43.77 39.05 03/22/2005 46.57 - 30.30.6006.2 BJORUM, MICHAEL & KATY 43.25 32.13 11.12 03/24/2005 24.17 - 24.04.1140.2 BLASER, GLENN 106.47 32.13 35.29 01121/2005 89.46 - 24.04.0536.8 BOBKO, RAYMOND 40.74 20.49 20.25 02/14/2005 155.74 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent r CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 2 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19,2005 03:50pm Current Period: 04120/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Last Pmt Name Balance Non-Delinq 02/20/2005 Date Amount - - -- - --------...------ 22.50.1726.2 BOESIGER, MAX 126.42 67.34 28.98 03117/2005 50.00 - 24.04.0862.5 BOESPFLUG, DAN & KATHY 119.44 54.08 65.36 03114/2005 104.90 - 22.50.3696.2 BOHN, HEATHER 56.44 25.70 32.74 03/1012005 57.96 - 30.74.3046.2 BOHN, JOHN D. 36.59 28.25 8.34 03/22/2005 23.19 - 37.72.0164.1 BONFRISCO, LOUIE & JENNELL 62.35 32.13 30.22 02108/2005 50.00 - 30.30.6050.2 BONNEY, AARON 29.93 24.37 5.56 03/17/2005 76.22 - 24.04.2266.2 BOOKER, KEITH 158.54 63.17 95.37 02/16/2005 148.71 - 32.32.4960.1 BORCHERS, LARRY 59.90 32.13 27.77 03/0112005 35.29 - 30.74.0680.2 BOSSART.HILL, CANDACE 123.69 10/18/2004 65.70 - 25.05.0802.1 BOYLE, JOHN 78.51 36.01 42.50 03/14/2005 82.00 - 22.50.4272.1 BREEDLOVE, ANGELA 51.31 28.25 23.06 0312412005 40.00 - 23.01.0600.1 BREWER, SID & SHELLY 118.51 43.96 74.02 03/14/2005 51.00 - 37.37.3226.2 BRIDGES, GREG & STACEY 82.82 43.77 39.05 02122/2005 39.05 - 23.02.3370.4 BRIGGS, TERI 171.94 128.60 43.34 03/1612005 60.00 - 23.01.3510.4 BRINEGAR, E. E. 151.74 41.22 66.50 02/16/2005 77.64 - 23.02.1290.5 BRINEGAR, E.E. 82.48 45.98 36.50 03/22/2005 66.50 - 23.02.1320.2 BRINEGAR, E.E. 63.66 32.13 31.53 03/09/2005 30.84 - 23.02.3712.2 BRINEGAR, E.E. 127.96 47.65 80.33 03/15/2005 57.85 - 36.69.0574.1 BROWN, JAMES & SHERRY 61.34 39.89 21.45 03/15/2005 70.00 - 30.74.3004.2 BROWN, SHERRI 52.69 36.01 16.66 03/2412005 26.13 - 30.30.6330.2 BROWNE, CHRISTOPHER 33.81 28.25 5.56 04/0412005 22.21 - 36.69.0566.1 BROWNELL, D.R. 62.70 39.89 42.81 03115/2005 42.81 - 30.30.6136.2 BRUEGEMAN, TRAVIS & PARKS 40.47 32.13 8.34 03/1512005 23.19 . 30.30.6078.2 BRUNSON, KATHY & MICHAEL 49.91 36.01 13.90 03129/2005 25.15 - 24.03.0312.1 BURKETT, JEFFREY & ROXANN 135.62 51.53 84.09 02/16/2005 119.46 - 23.02.5120.1 BURNETT, CAREY 66.20 33.46 32.74 02/1712005 40.26 - 30.30.6264.2 BURNETT, MICHAEL & DIANNE 46.03 32.13 13.90 04/15/2005 25.15 - 23.01.0950.3 BURNETTE, DIANNE 67.20 38.22 28.98 02/28/2005 32.74 - 30.74.3618.4 BURNS, EMMETT 37.93 17.94 17.70 22.51.0298.2 BYE, DEANNA 58.68 33.46 25.22 03/2512005 32.74. 36.68.0232.2 BYINGTON, ALEX & HEIDI 81.62 51.53 30.09 04/05/2005 54.00 " 32.32.4946.5 BYINTON, ELMER 28.68 17.94 10.74 22.50.0724.1 C.F.1. INVESTMENTS 93.23 27.43 21.46 01/24/2005 50.00 - 30.74.0402.1 CALLAWAY, LAUREL 81.60 45.10 36.50 03/09/2005 84.28 - 30.30.6280.2 CAMPBELL, ROBERT 83.79 69.89 13.90 03/1612005 75.29 - 30.30.6116.2 CAPPEL, GEORGE & SALLY 43.25 32.13 11.12 03/15/2005 24.17 - 30.74.3098.2 CARR, ERICA 49.91 36.01 13.90 03/22/2005 22.60 - 36.69.1122.2 CARTER, J.R. 52.68 51.53 1.15 03/29/2005 50.00 - 24.04.0798.2 CASE, RICHARD & DONNA 67.30 28.25 39.05 02/17/2005 209.02 - 22.50.2108.1 CASELLA, GARY 58.56 29.58 28.98 02/16/2005 90.70. 30.74.0680.2 CASH, MICHAEL 72.38 25.70 21.46 02109/2005 8.56 - 22.50.0312.2 CASS, BRUCE & RAMONA 89.27 49.01 40.26 02/2812005 44.02 - 31.31.0215.1 CENTRAL PARK PLAZA BLDG A 400.58 204.05 196.53 02/25/2005 106.61 - 30.74.2886.2 CHAPPELL, MARK & MARY 84.89 51.53 33.36 03121/2005 32.01 - 30.74.2850.1 CHEESBROUGH, JAMES G. 54.89 43.77 11.12 03/3112005 70.74 - 23.02.4700.2 CHENEY, STEVEN 53.36 33.46 19.90 04/19/2005 60.00 - 23.02.6100.1 CHENEY, STEVEN 69.96 33.46 36.50 03/22/2005 36.50 - 30.74.2926.1 CHESS, ALAN C. 60.45 43.77 16.68 03/17/2005 26.13 - 30.30.6228.2 CHILDRESS, JACK 36.24 33.46 2.78 03/3112005 18.68 - 30.30.6286.2 CHILDRESS, JACK 58.25 36.01 22.24 04/0112005 28.09 - 35.35.0216.1 CHRISTENSEN, S. G. 26.52 25.52 1.00 04/06/2005 25.04 - 22.51.1174.2 CHRISTIANSON, ARTHUR & COI 94.01 18.83 48.83 26.35 0211612005 131.78 - 22.51.1170.2 CHRISTIANSON, ARTHUR & COI 60.17 11.31 37.55 11.31 02/16/2005 64.10 - 25.25.0160.2 CLARK, CORTNEY 33.66 25.70 7.96 03130/2005 50.00. 37.37.3808.2 CLARK, VICTOR & JODY 74.94 32.13 42.81 0211512005 85.62 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ( CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Standard Payment Customers Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Page: 3 Apr 19, 2005 03:51pm Last Pmt Last Pmt Balance Non-Delinq 02/20/2005 01/20/2005 12/20/2004 Dale Amount ----... - - ~ -- ------.-.-- 24.04.1248.3 CLAY, STEVEN & SUSAN 47.69 47.65 .04 04/07/2005 54.05 - 25.05.0344.1 CLIFF, DWIGHT 154.10 129.13 24.97 04/11/2005 50.00 - 29.07.0892.3 CLUPHF, CHRIS 79.20 33.46 28.98 03/02/2005 60.00 - 37.37.3966.2 COLE, DANIEL & RENEE 106.96 54.08 52.88 03/08/2005 52.88 - 30.74.3074.1 COLLINS, JAMES & DENISE 67.11 47.65 19.46 03/28/2005 27.11 - 22.51.4170.4 COLSON, HOWARD 47.04 21.82 25.22 02/11/2005 75.66 - 37.37.3008.1 CONCORE 84.28 44.02 40.26 02/2512005 40.26 - 30.74.3072.2 CONN, STEPHEN 63.46 41.22 22.24 03/30/2005 25.54 - 22.50.2422.4 CONOVER, CHUCK & NATALIE 75.18 39.89 35.29 02/25/2005 85.62 - 23.02.1920.1 CONRADI, LINDA 93.80 93.68 .12 03/22/2005 48.00 - 30.30.6018.2 CONWAY, JOHN & ELAINE 33.40 25.70 7.70 04/0512005 50.00- 25.05.0518.1 COOK, ROBERT 82.82 43.77 39.05 03/14/2005 89.38 - 23.02.3100.2 COPE, WILLIAM & REBECCA 77.98 45.98 32.00 04101/2005 41.00 - 30.74.3212.1 COREY BARTON BUILDERS 125.62 70.12 26.52 02/22/2005 44.02 - 24.03.0270.1 CORTINA, LUIS 67.54 36.01 31.53 02/25/2005 35.29 - 24.04.1746.1 COSGROVE, AMY 151.87 43.77 65.29 02/16/2005 72.81 - 30.30.6090.1 COSTELLO, SHARON 36.11 27.77 8.34 03/22/2005 23.19 - 30.74.2922.1 COWAN, ROBERT 44.35 36.01 8.34 04104/2005 23.19 - 30.30.6218.2 CRAYCROFT, DINORAH , 36.24 33.46 2.78 04104/2005 18.68 . 22.50.3928.1 CROASDALE, DENA 75.06 36.01 39.05 02/22/2005 85.62 - 37.72.0228.3 CRONISTER, DAVID & TERESA 135.09 79.29 54.09 1.71 20.47.1178.2 CROW, JEFFREY 128.94 48.16 40.26 40.52 01/26/2005 40.00 - 22.51.0742.2 CRUM, SCOTT & BECKY 91.30 29.58 28.98 32.74 01/3112005 32.74 - 23.02.6350.1 CRYSTAL, LAREE 66.32 37.34 28.98 02115/2005 40.26 - 22.50.1368.1 CULVER, WARN V. 39.49 33.28 6.21 12/14/2004 200.00 - 23.02.5690.5 CURIEL, FABIOLA 130.96 60.62 70.34 03101/2005 89.14 - 24.04.0686.2 DA ROSA, JULIE 142.04 86.74 55.30 03/1612005 66.58 - 30.30.6066.3 DABNEY, SCOTT & MARIE 50.14 33.46 16.68 03/15/2005 11.79. 23.02.0910.1 DAILEY, DON 38.42 37.34 1.08 03/22/2005 45.10- 22.50.0284.3 DALE, MARK 66.88 17.94 17.70 17.70 12/21/2004 20.00 - 20.46.0316.3 DANAHA, STEPHEN 79.97 35.88 31.53 12.56 22.50.4574.3 DAROSA, JOE 178.88 108.54 70.34 03/01/2005 47.78 - 24.03.0078.2 DAVIS, LORAN & SHANNON 97.51 42.44 39.05 16.02 02/1512005 100.00 - 23.02.0908.2 DAVIS, MARGARET 70.08 37.34 32.74 03108/2005 40.26 - 22.50.0288.6 DAWSON, CAROL 43.28 21.82 21.46 0410112005 77.04 - 36.36.0996.2 DAWSON, CAROL D. 105.18 39.89 65.29 02/16/2005 145.73 - 34.34.5058.1 DCU INVESTMENTS 33.90 15.07 18.83 03107/2005 3.76 - 23.02.0904.1 DECHAMBEAU, JOHN 58.56 29.58 28.98 0310112005 32.74 - 30.74.3158.2 DEES, RICHARD & JANICE 41.57 36.01 5.56 03/23/2005 22.21 - 23.02.0140.2 DELLlMAGINE, RANDY 45.32 45.10 .22 03/30/2005 39.00 - 30.30.6094.1 DERITA, FRANK & ANNA 28.48 25.70 2.78 03/15/2005 18.68 - 23.02.1610.1 DESILET, DENICE 51.16 42.10 9.06 04/19/2005 50.00 - 24.03.0720.1 DOBARAN, JOHN & ARVELLA 18.86 7.55 11.31 03/22/2005 11.31 - 24.04.1166.3 DONALDSON, NEAL 110.22 33.46 32.74 01/28/2005 99.24 - 24.04.2282.1 DRURY, PATRICK 90.34 43.77 46.57 03/17/2005 61.90 - 35.35.0036.3 DUARTE, RACHEL 34.36 33.46 .90 03/1812005 119.00 - 30.74.3042.1 DUNKLE, GARY 52.69 36.01 16.68 03129/2005 26.13 - 25.25.1060.3 DUNSWORTH, BRAD & JODI 82.65 47.65 35.00 03/11/2005 90.00 - 23.02.5010.1 EARLEY, GEORGE 54.76 29.58 25.18 04/11/2005 29.00 - 30.74.3784.1 EBBERS, MARIE 48.26 26.05 22.21 03108/2005 55.74 - 21.48.1633.1 EDDY'S BAKERY .52 .52 01/1812005 3.48 - 30.74.3678.2 EDWARDS, DEARL W 82.70 56.57 26.13 03/30/2005 2.44 - 20.47.1228.2 EICHLER, BRIAN & LISA 72.30 40.77 31.53 03/01/2005 35.29 - 30.74.2368.1 ELDRED, FLOYD 67.54 36.01 31.53 02114/2005 116.88 - 37.72.0101.1 ELK RUN HOMEOWNERS ASSO 200.00 03/11/2005 116.30 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 4 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03:51pm Current Period: 0412012005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDellnquent Balance Last Pm! Last Pmt Cust No Balance Non-Oelinq 02/20/2005 Dale Amount ----------- 30.74.2998.2 EMERY, KEVIN 35.49 24.37 11.12 03/23/2005 24.17 - 23.02.6510.2 EMMONS, CYNTHIA 81.48 41.22 40.26 03/1412005 273.36 - 30.74.2842.2 ENGLE, ROBERT 47.36 33.46 13.90 03/14/2005 22.60 - 23.02.1940.1 EPLEY, RITA 86.90 67.40 19.50 03/22/2005 50.00 - 22.50.1238.2 ERHART, MILT 105.34 10/1912004 127.82 - 22.50.1236.3 ERHART. MILT 75.61 35.35 40.26 03/1112005 100.52 - 30.74.3796.2 ESPEY, MATTHEW & ANDREA 67.42 43.25 24.17 03/1412005 42.81 - 23.02.2430.2 ETIENNE, LUCRETIA 70.41 39.05 28.80 03/22/2005 30.00 - 22.50.3822.1 EVANS, M. SHAE 77.60 37.34 40.26 02/2512005 81.20 - 30.74.2688.1 EVANS, STEVEN & KRISITE 129.26 41.22 40.26 01/1912005 120.82 - 20.46.0132.3 EVANS, SUSAN 84.83 49.54 35.29 03/14/2005 74.34 - 30.74.3614.1 FACKRELL, THOMAS 67.42 43.25 24.17 03/15/2005 70.58 - 24.04.1564.2 FAIRCHILD, KERI 59.90 32.13 27.77 03/14/2005 55.54 - 22.51.0406.1 FARMERS & MERCHANTS BAN~ 239.20 126.94 112.26 04/19/2005 101.94 - 23.02.5890.1 FElL, KAY OR SKIP FElL 93.24 56.74 36.50 02/25/2005 84.28 - 35.65.0262.2 FENWICK, J. & LOGAN, SHERYL 57.34 17.94 17.70 22.50.0260.7 FIELDSTAD, CHRISTY 42.02 41.82 .20 04/18/2005 54.00 - 22.50.0290.5 FIELDSTAD, CHRISTY 72.38 25.70 28.98 17.70 0111312005 95.78 - 30.74.2568.2 FINLEY, JEFFREY 214.92 52.86 32.74 81.54 01/19/2005 76.06 - 30.74.1056.1 FISHER, BEA J. 58.80 33.46 25.34 03/14/2005 90.00 - 32.32.4964.2 FITZGERALD, RYAN & CATHERI 31.04 21.82 9.22 02/0112005 100.00 - 30.74.3354.1 FLOREZ, BARRY 63.54 39.37 24.17 02/15/2005 101.13 - 35.65.0790.2 FOREST, JOHN & REGINA 105.56 83.90 21.66 04106/2005 105.00 - 30.30.6164.2 FORMAN, BRUCE & GINA 51.24 37.34 13.90 03123/2005 22.60 - 30.30.6212.2 FORSTER, PAMELA 79.91 66.01 13.90 03/16/2005 136.53 - 30.30.6072.2 FOURNIER, TIM 39.37 28.25 11.12 0411112005 24.17 - 30.30.6026.2 FRANK, ERIC 37.92 29.58 8.34 03/21/2005 20.64 - 23.02.4010.3 FRED SCHIMPH 82.82 43.77 39.05 03/14/2005 54.09 - 23.02.4930.4 FREEMAN, SARAH 63.66 32.13 31.53 02/25/2005 124.62 - 24.04.1708.2 FREINWALD, CLAY JR 82.26 37.34 36.50 02/15/2005 90.00 - 23.01.0830.2 FRIENDS OF CHILDREN & FAMII 1.00 1.00 03/23/2004 50.91 - 24.04.1454.1 FUENTES. CHRYSTLE 78.94 39.89 39.05 03/14/2005 96.57 - 22.51.3660.3 FUHRMAN. JIM 41.91 17.94 17.70 37.37.5022.1 FULLER, JASON & TRACY 85.72 56.74 28.98 35.35.0084.3 GALE, DANIEL 58.55 52.86 5.69 25.25.4530.2 GALlTZ, KURT & JEANINE 52.91 51.53 1.38 03/1712005 43.00 - 30.74.2910.3 GALLEGOS, ANN 36.59 28.25 8.34 03/22/2005 23.19 - 37.72.0166.3 GANONG, KEITH & LUANN 45.40 45.10 .30 03122/2005 47.48 - 29.07.1084.2 GARCIA, JOAQUIN 82.94 47.65 35.29 0311112005 46.57 - 25.25.9904.2 GARVIN, MATTHEW 89.17 45.10 44.07 04/0512005 .55 - 30.74.3078.2 GENTSCH, NOREEN 295.66 108.69 178.09 03/17/2005 120.00 - 30.74.2938.5 GENTSCH, NOREEN 33.81 28.25 5.56 03/15/2005 22.21 . 30.30.6362.2 GILSON, CAROL 33.81 28.25 5.56 03/22/2005 22.21 - 30.74.2884.2 GILSON, NANCY 49.91 36.01 13.90 03/15/2005 25.15 - 30.74.3052.2 GOINS, LEVI 44.06 36.01 8.05 03/15/2005 23.00 - 30.30.6010.2 GOULD, TRAVIS & AMANDA 82.70 39.89 42.81 03109/2005 100.91 - 30.30.6156.2 GRAHAM, JAMES & CORA 37.69 32.13 5.56 03115/2005 22.21 - 46.46.6220.1 GRAVES. KEEGAN & KATHY 41.10 37.34 3.76 04/05/2005 32.74 - 30.74.3022.1 GRAY, RICHARD & GAYLE 47.13 36.01 11.12 03/21/2005 24.17 - 36.69.0376.1 GRAYSON, GARY 67.43 43.77 23.66 0311612005 69.00 - 24.04.1146.2 GREEN LANCE & GLORIA 103.84 37.34 66.50 02/16/2005 119.28 - 32.32.4766.1 GREG HATCHER CONSTRUCT!( 41.13 17.70 16.69 30.74.3180.2 GROESBECK, KEN & ROBERTA 67.42 43.25 24.17 03115/2005 81.86 - 30.30.6120.2 GRONEWOLLER, STUART & AM 47.13 36.01 11.12 03/25/2005 24.17 - 24.03.0034.1 GROUND. JENNIFER 104.40 66.01 38.39 03/1712005 100.00 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ( (^ CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 5 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19,2005 03:51pm Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pml Last Pm! Cust No Balance Non-Delinq 02/20/2005 01120/2005 12/20/2004 Date Amount ------- 32.32.4688.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY 31.34 17.70 8.48 1.68 46.17.0534.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY 31.03 21.46 9.57 03/15/2005 3.48 - 32.32.4302.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOME~ 87.43 77.86 9.57 0311512005 5.16 - 32.32.4134.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOME~ 35.40 17.70 17.70 03/15/2005 82.42 - 32.32.4342.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOME~ 36.19 21.46 9.57 3.48 1.68 37.37.3300.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOME~ 29.34 17.70 7.04 3.48 1.12 37.37.3330.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOMES 14.76 11.28 3.48 37.37.5030.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOME~ 35.40 17.70 17.70 59.09 - 46.17.0707.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOME~ 15.21 11.73 3.48 30.30.6352.2 GUGELMAN, JOSH & GINGER 40.70 29.58 11.12 03/22/2005 21.62 - 24.04.1620.7 GUYMON, GREG & ALISON 69.32 37.34 28.98 03/02/2005 100.00 - 30.74.3084.2 HADLEY JR, DOUGLAS 56.57 39.89 16.68 03/23/2005 26.13 - 25.25.0118.2 HAGEN, PHILIP 28.76 25.70 3.06 03/15/2005 43.62 - 24.04.1220.2 HALE, JAMES & DOW, OIANE 62.07 43.77 18.30 36.68.0268.2 HALE, LAWRENCE 39.16 38.56 .60 03/1712005 75.06 - 23.01.0020.1 HAMMOND 00, THOMAS R 34.16 33.46 .70 03/22/2005 58.28 - 20.46.0434.2 HAMMONS, CURTIS & CARLA 67.41 35.88 31.53 03/15/2005 66.82 - 24.04.1320.4 HANCE, JOHN & SARA 90.88 46.32 44.56 03/01/2005 60.00 - 22.51.1134.1 HANDY MAT, LLC. 18.86 11.31 7.55 03/01/2005 7.55 - 20.47.0002.3 HANNUM, ELLEN & PAUL 83.06 50.55 32.51 0310112005 88.40 - 20.46.0138.3 HARADA, JAMES, 93.48 54.43 39.05 03/10/2005 76.57- 32.32.4026.2 HARPER, JENNIFER 46.50 25.70 20.80 02/15/2005 65.00 - 24.04.0512.3 HARRIS, KATHY 148.79 63.17 42.81 0211512005 113.66 - 30.74.2988.2 HARRIS, MELISSA 73.64 43.77 29.87 02/01/2005 50.00 - 30.30.6058.2 HARSCH, CODY 24.60 21.82 2.78 03122/2005 18.68 - 36.69.1240.1 HART, DOUG 67.42 32.13 35.29 02/2212005 78.10 - 30.74.2908.1 HARTSOCK, JAMES G. 87.32 56.74 30.58 03/22/2005 28.48 - 22.50.2112.2 HAY, CHARLES & ROBERTA 85.96 43.77 42.19 0410512005 90.00 - 20.46.0260.1 HAYES, MARCIA 54.88 32.85 22.03 02125/2005 50.00 - 24.04.1212.1 HAYLETT, MIKE 32.16 32.13 .03 04/19/2005 31.50 - 36.69.0694.2 HEATON, CHAD & HEATHER 122.44 77.65 44.79 03/16/2005 100.00 - 23.02.5070.3 HEFNER, C & BEAN, D. 69.96 33.46 36.50 03/22/2005 40.26 - 30.74.2872.1 HENDERSON, GLEN 52.69 36.01 16.68 03122/2005 26.13 - 30.30.6282.2 HENDERSON, JAREO & AMY 44.58 33.46 11.12 04/0512005 21.62 - 30.74.3356.2 HENDRIKSE, EDITH 50.92 31.26 19.66 02/14/2005 69.24 - 23.02.2250.5 HENEY, TIMOTHY & JOANN 84.50 48.00 36.50 04113/2005 44.02 - 22.51.0658.1 HICKEY, JEAN 75.29 31.53 39.05 02/1412005 80.91 - 34.34.6066.1 HIGH DESERT CONSTRUCTION 6.84 3.48 3.36 34.34.6264.1 HIGHLANDER HOMES 245.45 32.74 138.02 57.49 22.50.4810.2 HIX, MICHAEL 73.74 29.58 32.74 11.42 02/25/2005 40.00 - 20.46.0356.1 HOLDRIDGE, JOANNE 148.93 104.91 44.02 03/17/2005 51.54 - 25.05.0722.2 HOLLEY, ANNA 80.92 45.10 35.82 03/15/2005 50.00 - 30.74.1014.3 HOLLOWAY, JERALD K 73.96 41.22 32.74 03115/2005 73.00 - 32.32.4630.3 HOLZER, ERIC & LISA 63.90 39.89 24.01 03/2212005 42.81 - 22.51.0446.2 HOOTS, TRACI & RAMIREZ, MAf 769.67 249.02 282.03 30.30.6096.2 HOPPE MIYAKE, BRENDA 32.66 32.13 .53 04/1812005 61 .00 - 24.04.1550.1 HOSFORD, DWIGHT 65.00 34.68 30.32 0311412005 37.84 - 30.30.6128.2 HOUDE, RICHARD & CATHRYN 41.44 33.46 7.98 04/18/2005 21.00 - 36.69.1276.2 HOWARD, DONALD & CAROLYN 95.68 04/21/2004 35.32 - 23.01.0420.1 HOWARD, TREVIS 117.45 86.81 30.64 03/16/2005 65.00 - 22.20.0084.1 HOWELL, PATRICIA 32.67 25.70 6.97 03/29/2005 25.22 - 35.64.0016.2 HUCKENBERRY, HEATH & LORI 50.92 25.70 25.22 02/25/2005 32.74 - 35.65.0708.1 HUDDLESTON, CODY 89.92 89.29 .63 0411912005 113.00- 30.74.3436.2 HUMPHREYS, JASON & CHRIST 181.42 95.20 42.20 44.02 02115/2005 64.34 - 36.69.0926.2 HUNTTING, DENNIS & RANAE 1,337.82 37.34 44.02 66.50 1,189.96 03/21/2005 44.02 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ( CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 6 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03:51 pm Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Last Pmt Cust No Balance Non-Delinq 02/2012005 01/20/2005 12/20/2004 Date Amount ---~~-- 22.50.3894.2 HURLEY, DALE &. GAIL 63.54 28.25 35.29 03/11/2005 70.58 - 30.74.2944.3 HUSFLOEN, TRISHA 36.96 17.94 17.70 1.32 03101/2005 15.00 - 24.04.1914.4 HYDE, JOHN 200.14 70.93 129.21 03/14/2005 72.89 - 25.25.4024.2 HYMAS, AARON 87.42 25.70 28.98 01/28/2005 78.56 - 21.49.1148.1 IDAHO HEATING AND AIR 279.60 139.80 139.80 03/22/2005 279.60 - 30.74.2856.2 IMMEGART, KURT 55.90 24.37 31.53 03/21/2005 27.77 - 23.02.5820.1 JACKSON, ROBERT 50.80 21.82 28.98 03114/2005 32.74 - 36.69.0492.1 JACKSON. ROCKY 54.80 29.58 25.22 02/15/2005 32.74 - 36.65.3112.1 JACOBS. MARIE 84.80 29.58 55.22 02/16/2005 91.72 - 35.65.0666.2 JAMESON, BRETT 83.67 24.37 27.77 02/01/2005 61.10 - 30.74.2912.2 JAQUES, RENAE 107.65 63.17 44.48 04/05/2005 35.93 - 22.50.2096.1 JEFFS, GEORGE & PATTY 77.72 41.22 36.50 0312912005 47.78 - 30.74.3076.1 JENKINS, NANCY 40.70 29.58 11.12 03/23/2005 21.62 - 30.30.6046.2 JENNINGS, MARIA 34.94 29.38 5.56 03/1412005 19.66 - 30.74.2930.2 JEPPESEN, RYAN 49.91 36.01 13.90 04/01/2005 25.15- 22.51.0302.7 JEPSON, MIKE & JAMI E 77.72 41.22 36.50 03/1412005 44.02 - 20.46.0252.4 JOHANSEN, DALE 8. JANICE 76.86 44.12 32.74 03107/2005 36.50 - 30.30.6314.2 JOHNSON, ALICIA D 53.79 39.89 13.90 03/25/2005 25.15. 30.30.6262.2 JOHNSON, ANGELA 46.03 32.13 13.90 03/15/2005 25.15 - 37.37.4100.2 JOHNSON, BENJAMIN & HOLLY 73.72 33.46 40.26 03/01/2005 51.54 -, 25.25.1074.2 JOHNSON, BRETT & MICHELLE 71.75 39.89 31.86 03122/2005 50.00 - 30.30.6324.3 JOHNSON, CHRIS 34.04 25.70 8.34 03/31/2005 20.64 - 35.35.3082.2 JOHNSON, ERIC & KRASTEVA, ; 58.56 29.58 28.98 03101/2005 28.98 - 30.74.3642.2 JOHNSON. KEVIN 115.98 72.67 29.07 02/1412005 100.00 - 23.01.2710.2 JOHNSON, MARC 70.08 37.34 32.74 03/25/2005 70.26 - 36.69.0912.2 JOHNSTON, GLEN & TIMI 86.58 43.77 42.81 02/15/2005 32.71 - 22.51.4290.1 JONES. BRET 330.13 105.70 113.22 03/15/2005 105.70 - 20.47.1036.2 JONES, FAROL 80.89 45.66 35.23 03/16/2005 61.53 - 36.69.0580.1 JONES, FRANKLIN 77.36 41.04 36.32 02/01/2005 68.88 - 24.04.1138.2 JONES, NATHAN &. SARAH 56.02 28.25 27.77 03/14/2005 31.53 - 22.50.2354.1 JONES, OWEN 92.52 25.70 31.53 03/0112005 26.26 - 30.74.2976.1 JONES, RANDALL 66.01 43.77 22.24 03121/2005 28.09 - 22.50.2418.2 JONES, WES & CINDY 107.60 67.34 40.26 03/1612005 50.52 - 22.50.2098.3 JONES, WES &. CINDY 68.95 32.13 31.53 03/21/2005 30.00 - 22.50.2122.2 JONES, WES &. CINDY 80.27 43.77 36.50 03122/2005 88.04 - 30.74.2932.1 JORDAN, MITCHELL 51.01 39.89 11.12 03/22/2005 24.17 - 23.01.2720.2 JOY, JENNIFER 56.46 33.46 23.00 04104/2005 50.00 - 20.46.0840.4 JUDY, VICTOR 62.64 34.87 27.77 03/1412005 59.30 - 35.35.1460.2 KAMCHATHPHAY, C & BOUALA' 78.94 39.89 39.05 02/22/2005 93.14 - 23.02.2310.1 KAREL, RUSTY 81.63 45.13 36.50 03/14/2005 47.78 - 23.03.4020.1 KB WELDING 100.93 78.45 9.51 02/28/2005 3.48 - 30.74.3378.1 KERSBERG, FRANK 40.73 20.49 20.24 03/0112005 20.00 - 34.34.5062.2 KEZAR, JEFFERY & MONIQUE 8.33 7.79 .54 30.30.6014.2 KIMBALL, LINDA 8. KIRA 28.48 25.70 2.78 03122/2005 18.68 - 22.50.0594.2 KINDALL, AARON & MISTIE 132.41 50.55 39.05 42.81 02/1712005 39.05 - 22.51.3570.4 KNOX. JERRY & NORMA 634.92 37.34 67.78 77.78 07/19/2004 50.00 - 30.30.6242.2 KOLLING, MATT 101.43 59.89 41.54 02/25/2005 55.47 - 30.30.6162.2 KRIDER, ROBERT & TINA 40.70 29.58 11.12 03/1 712005 21.62 - 30.74.2966.1 KUNARD, LARRY 59.06 25.70 33.36 03/24/2005 21.42 - 35.35.0144.3 LAMASTERS, TERRENCE 71.30 38.56 32.74 02/25/2005 76.76. 22.50.4268.2 LANHAM, PATRICE 127.86 73.77 54.09 03/1612005 91.61. 23.01.0890.1 LANTZ, STAN 31.98 31.31 .67 03130/2005 50.00 - 22.50.0520.2 LAURICELLA, CARL & LAURIE 76.86 44.12 32.74 03/10/2005 40.26 - 30.74.3140.2 LAW, DARRELL & ARNEADA 61.78 45.10 16.68 03/21/2005 23.58 - 22.50.0600.2 LAYTON, JONATHON & FELlCIT 88.14 44.12 32.74 03/30/2005 32.74. ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ( CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 7 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03:51pm Current Period: 04120/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pm! Last Pmt Cust No Balance Non-Delinq 01/20/2005 Date Amount ~ -----.-....- --- -- --- 30.74.1260.3 LEGGETT, CHAD & CHERYL 147.16 112.57 34.59 03/17/2005 60.00 - 30.30.6052.2 LEWIS, JEFF 62.32 29.58 32.74 03/1012005 32.74 - 22.50.2130.1 LIKES, JENNiFER 45.16 29.58 15.58 03/14/2005 50.00 - 30.74.3218.3 LINDSEY, STEPHANIE 75.06 49.91 25.15 04/0512005 42.81 - 22.51.0382.1 LISBY, DOLORES 15.10 7.55 7.55 02/15/2005 11.31 - 23.02.4070.4 LJ PROPERTIES LLC 80.76 15.55 31.31 18.83 12121/2004 44.86 - 36.36.1012.1 LOGUE, MERTON & REBECCA 66.20 33.46 32.74 03/0912005 36.50 - 30.74.2858.1 LOPEZ, DONALD 70.64 51.53 19.11 03115/2005 60.00 - 30.74.3624.3 LUTHY, BRITTENY 86.37 40.4 7 23.19 03/0912005 50.00 - 29.07.0782.1 LYON, DOUG & TRICIA 75.06 36.01 39.05 02/1412005 81.86 - 34.34.6258.1 M & W HOMES 19.15 15.67 3.48 24.04.2232.3 MACARTHUR, KENNETH & TRIS 81.48 41.22 40.26 03/14/2005 54.62 - 23.02.4480.1 MADRID, JOSEPH F 102.71 32.13 31.53 01/24/2005 73.36 - 23.02.1410.1 MADSEN, JOHN 92.14 51.88 40.26 03/1 812005 77.86 - 23.01 .3350.1 MADSEN, LOU 29.90 25.70 4.20 04/11/2005 50.00 - 22.50.2336.1 MAGNUSON, ERIC 67.42 32.13 35.29 03102/2005 72.81 - 22.51.0862.2 MAHATHY, ANTHONY 84.50 48.00 36.50 03/14/2005 40.26 - 22.50.1676.4 MAHATHY, ANTHONY 75.06 36.01 39.05 02/22/2005 80.33 - 22.51.0858.1 MAHATHY, ANTHONY 47.88 26.42 21.46 03/08/2005 42.38 - 22.50.1686.5 MAHATHY, ANTHONY 63.66 32.13 31.53 03/02/2005 83.06. 30.74.3144.2 MAHONEY, J. ANNETTE 29.93 24.37 5.56 03/21/2005 22.21 - 22.50.2234.3 MALLOY, STEPHEN 73.84 37.34 36.50 0310 1/2005 47.78 - 25.25.9930.1 MANLEY, JUSTIN & HEIDI 66.20 33.46 32.74 03108/2005 36.50 - 30.74.2642.1 MANWARING, MARK 82.72 43.77 38.95 03/1612005 62.00 - 22.51.0486.1 MARCH, RICHARD 161.44 76.14 85.30 02/1 6/2005 155.64 - 35.35.3078.4 MARCUM, BRETT & RUDD, KRIS 138.18 45.10 32.74 44.02 24.03.0806.4 MARCUM, CARL & JULIE 81.74 39.89 35.29 6.56 04105/2005 35.00 - 29.07.0236.2 MARSH, ROBERT 71.18 32.13 31.53 7.52 03/2312005 31.53 - 30.74.2840.2 MARTELL, WiLLIAM & DELLA 37.92 29.58 8.34 04/13/2005 20.64 - 24.03.0274.3 MARTIN, BILL & DEANA 80.67 43.77 36.90 03/16/2005 60.00 - 23.02.2520.3 MARTIN, CRAIG 206.67 113.77 92.90 03/1612005 77 .91 - 37.37.2892.1 MARTIN, RONNA 74.34 39.05 35.29 03/1712005 35.29 - 30.30.6348.2 MARTINEZ, BRIAN & PARK, SAR 47.13 36.01 11.12 03/2912005 24.17 - 35.64.0020.2 MARTINEZ, RON 91.30 29.58 28.98 01113/2005 156.06 - 22.50.2424.1 MARTS, DEBt 50.92 25.70 25.22 04104/2005 32.74 - 37.37.3032.1 MARX, BRAD & JANA 141.82 55.41 42.81 23.02.2280.1 MASLEN, JENNY 78.02 32.32 45.70 02/1712005 100.00 - 35.35.0243.2 MAUS, DOUGLAS & LAURIE 73.84 37.34 36.50 03101/2005 40.26 - 22.50.3888.1 MAXEY, STEFFANIE 52.14 24.37 27.77 03/2112005 49.23 - 30.74.2826.2 MCCASHLAND, DAVID 44.52 43.77 .75 03/11/2005 81.00 - 30.30.6110.2 MCCAULEY, BRIAN 61.90 29.58 32.32 02/22/2005 65.00 - 20.46.0512.2 MCCLAIN, TROY 40.60 36.73 3.87 01/10/2005 75.00 - 30.30.6276.2 MCCOID, JAY & MONICA 34.04 25.70 8.34 03/1 712005 20.64 - 22.50.3728.2 MCCOLLUM, SHAYNA 89.12 45.10 44.02 03/1012005 85.30 - 30.74.3146.3 MCCUDLE, NATHAN & ARIANE 127.80 91.66 36.14 03/23/2005 30.44 - 24.04.1880.1 MCCUE, DENNIS & RHONDA 125.51 39.89 42.81 02/22/2005 39.05 - 30.30.6140.2 MCDONALD, JOSHUA 89.87 59.29 30.58 04/01/2005 31.03 - 23.02.5350.1 MCEVOY, SAMUEL C. 180.25 180.24 .01 04/04/2005 67.75 - 30.30.6054.2 MCEWAN, ROY & LEGGETTE 46.22 39.89 6.33 03/01/2005 68.00 - 37.37.5010.1 MCFATE, DAVID E. 50.43 50.33 .10 03/2412005 54.09 - 30.74.3106.2 MCGUIRE. JOSEFH AND SARAI- 62.27 29.58 32.69 03109/2005 .85 - 23.02.6270.5 MCKINLEY, JUNE 67.54 36.01 31.53 03122/2005 43.92 - 23.02.4870.4 MCKINLEY, JUNE 76.00 75.10 .90 04/18/2005 50.00 - 20.46.0270,2 MCLAUGHLIN, MATTHEW 77.19 45.66 31.53 0212512005 31.53 - 23.02.2050.2 MCMURDIE, PAUL & SHANELL 99.46 51.88 47.58 03/1412005 92.00 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ( CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 8 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03:52pm Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Last Pmt Cust No Name Balance Non-Delinq 01/2012005 12/20/2004 Date Amount ------------- 22.50.3808.2 MCNAIR, DAWN 39.49 17.67 36.36.1014.2 MCQUEEN, ALLEN 113.70 20.25 24.01 69.44 11/29/2004 44.61 - 24.04.2052.2 MENDENHALL, ALAN 98.31 47.65 50.33 .33 03114/2005 50.00 - 23.02.1126.1 MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT 112.86 60.19 52.67 03/01/2005 45.15 - 25.95.0707.2 MERRILL, GREG 25.88 21.82 4.06 30.74.3790.1 MERRITHEW, ROBERT 78.87 56.57 22.30 03/1412005 50.00 - 20.46.0198.3 MESERTH, ANDY 88.19 52.57 35.62 04115/2005 50.00 - 46.46.7105.1 MESSINA VILLAGE - WATER FE, 10.86 7.40 3.48 03117/2005 8.38 - 37.37.3022.1 MEYER, JOHN & ISABEL 39.16 17.70 21.46 02/25/2005 23.34 - 37.37.9998.1 MEYETT, WILLIAM H 25,04 14.70 10.34 03/01/2005 14.26 - 23.01.0076.4 MICHAEL, SHIRLEY 66.50 53.90 12.60 02125/2005 47.00 - 22.50.4032.3 MICHAILOFF. ERNEST 96.20 33.46 62.74 03115/2005 40.26 - 25.25.1096.2 MICHELOTTI, DARCI 25.72 25.70 .02 0410412005 14.46 - 30.30.6264.2 MILLAR, SANDRA & TIM 94.56 52.66 41.70 03/1412005 32.40 - 30.74.0052.1 MILLER, E. ROGER 30.80 25.70 5.10 03/2412005 25.22 - 30.74.3696.1 MILLER, GREGORY & ERICA 67.42 43.25 24.17 02/16/2005 123.62 - 20.46.0340.2 MILLER. MARK 87.65 54.91 32.74 03115/2005 44.02 - 22.50.2352.2 MILLER, SARAH 110.10 29.58 40.26 02/16/2005 88.42 - 20.46.0406.1 MILLS, TIMOTHY 39.23 38.22 1.01 04/13/2005 30.00 - 20.46.0886.1 MJNEGAR, JOHN 58.88 34.87 24.01 03/11/2005 61 .43 - 24.04.1862.2 MITCHELL, PATRICK 75.18 39.89 35.29 03/07/2005 46.57. 24.04.0538.1 MONSON. THOMAS 107.68 57.96 49.12 02116/2005 150.00 - 30.74.1076.1 MOORE, EVELYN 47.16 25.70 21.46 03102/2005 25.22 - 22.51.4214.2 MOORE, LAWRENCE & KRISTIN 240.69 65.10 44.02 47.78 83.79 24.04.1634.1 MOORE, RUSSELL C 297.36 21.82 17.70 21.46 236.40 37.37.2894.1 MORGAN CREEK HOMES 31.26 17.70 10.08 3.48 24.03.0889.1 MORNING GLORY #2 HOA 31.32 22.51.3112.6 MORRIS. AMBER 81.12 23.60 26.88 02125/2005 30.64 - 22.50.0746.5 MORRISON, MIKE 69.06 40.06 28.98 03115/2005 40.26 - 23.01.4504.1 MORTENSEN CONSTRUCTION 6.59 3.46 3.11 36.69.1646.1 MORTENSEN, ERIC 186.02 28.98 148.71 4.85 20.46.0450.3 MOSKOWITZ, ALAN & HELENE 103.45 45.13 28.98 29.34 01/2612005 54.60 - 23.02.6050.3 MOWLER, JAKE 34.20 33.46 .74 04/01/2005 36.50 - 34.34.6052.2 MULKEY, JACOB & JENNIFER 39.77 36.01 3.76 03111/2005 69.38 - 30.74.3064.3 MULLINS, GENE & KATHERINE 43.48 29.58 13.90 03/2312005 22.60 - 23.02.6660.1 MYERS, MICHAEL 85.36 45.10 40.26 02/28/2005 103.08 - 30.74.3362.2 NAKAMYRA STEPHEN TRUST 99.96 47.36 52.60 02/1712005 130.59 - 24.04.1876.2 NEEDS. KATHY 86.58 43.77 42.81 0311412005 85.62 - 22.50.2252.1 NELSON, VAN 46.28 21.62 24.46 02/15/2005 46.00 - 24.04.1446.2 NEWBERRY, PAULA 78.94 39.69 39.05 02/15/2005 46.57 - 23.01.3200.1 NEWKIRK, MARYANN 39.40 17.94 21.46 03/01/2005 21.46 - 22.50.0034.2 NEWMAN, TIM 44.21 28.44 15.77 30.74.0664.1 NIELSON, STEVE 68.98 48.98 20.00 03/11/2005 74.28 - 22.50.2238.2 NOSALSKIY. RUSLAN 126.88 82.86 44.02 03/16/2005 110.60 - 30.30.6260.2 NOSAREV, L1L1YA 47.36 33.46 13.90 03/22/2005 22.60 - 22.50.0020.2 OAK. JERRY 50.92 25.70 25.22 03/0712005 25.22 - 23.02.0452.1 OAKES, DARA LYNN 97.64 62.35 35.29 02/16/2005 85.62 - 24.04.1260.2 OBENCHAIN, TERRY & ELLOND. 54.44 17.94 36.50 02115/2005 110.60 - 37.72.0258.1 OLDS, ANGELA 61.56 33.46 28.10 12/2812004 36.60 - 25.25.0086.1 OLIVER CLEAVER 115.62 72.81 42.81 03/16/2005 83.68 - 22.50.3720.1 OLSON, CHERIE 58.68 33.46 25.22 03/14/2005 28.98 - 30.30.6246.1 OMANOVIC, ASIM 37.92 29.58 8.34 03122/2005 20.64. 30.30.6248.2 OMANOVIC, IBRAHIM & SENAD 51.24 37.34 13.90 04/05/2005 22.60. 22.50.2258.3 OSTERHOUT, MAR LEA 50.74 48.98 1.76 03/08/2005 75.00 - 22.51.3430.2 OVERTON, DAVID 54.36 07102/2004 56.31 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent (" CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 9 Standard Payment Customers Apr 1 9, 2005 03:52pm Current Period: 04/2012005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last pmt Last Pmt Cust No Balance Non-Delinq 02/20/2005 12/20/2004 Date Amount -------------- 37.72.0268.1 OWEN, KENNETH 67.42 32.13 35.29 02/25/2005 78.10 - 30.74.3286.1 OWENS, GLENN & VICKIE 86.46 59.35 27.11 02/25/2005 96.90 . 24.03.0044.2 PADGETT, DAVE & CHARLENE 84.88 47.65 37.23 04/05/2005 50.00 - 30.74.0358.5 PALLlSTER, J.L. & CHRISTY 71.99 43.77 28.22 03/07/2005 70.00 - 25.25.0062.2 PALMER, JUSTIN 52.26 28.25 24.01 0310712005 27.77 - 25.05.0428.1 PALOMO, ALEX 32.42 32.13 .29 03/2312005 35.00 . 30.74.3152.3 PANTALEO, RAYMOND & BETT) 52.69 36.01 16.68 03/30/2005 26.13. 30.74.2682.4 PASSANNANTE, DAN 351.91 142.88 52.88 0311612005 31.00 - 30.30.6070.2 PASSANNANTE, DAN & ATHENJl 54.02 37.34 16.68 03/2912005 63.84 - 30.30.6204.2 PASSANNANTE, DAN & LYNCH, 57.84 28.25 29.59 03/24/2005 65.00 - 30.30.6160.2 PERME, BONNIE 70.99 51.53 19.46 03/2912005 27.11 - 35.35.1446.2 PETERSON, JAKE & ANN 73.96 41.22 32.74 03/10/2005 47.78 - 37.37.4182.1 PETTENGILL, RAY & DEBBIE 79.44 37.84 41.60 02/22/2005 83.20 - 20.46.0874.1 PETTINGILL, C. BLAINE 90.62 61.18 29.44 03/22/2005 50.00 - 30.74.3000.1 PHILLIPS, RICHARD 49.91 36.01 13.90 03/1412005 75.48 - 20.47.1110.3 PIERCE, WILLIAM & LAURA 99.05 58.79 40.26 03107/2005 70.26 - 30.74.5034.2 PIMENOV, AVEL 28.68 17.94 10.74 22.51.4000.3 PIONEER FINANCE, LLC 329.89 30.21 29.85 09/21/2004 50.53 . 37.72.0112.4 PLUM, GINGER & LARRY 76.22 39.89 36.33 02/22/2005 20.00 - 24.04.1412.1 PLUMLEY, RODNEY & M. NAOM 78.94 39.89 39.05 03/2412005 42.81 - 30.74.3012.1 POFELSKI, MARK & ABBY 53.79 39.89 13.90 03/2912005 25.15 - 24.03.0332.1 PORTER, DAVID 47.04 21.82 25.22 03/21/2005 44.02- 20.46.0824.2 POTTER, GWENDOLYN 59.07 45.13 13.94 02116/2005 36.50 - 30.74.2874.2 PRICE, WILLIAM 54.89 43.77 11.12 0312512005 24.17 - 23.02.2610.1 PRIEN, TODD 103.35 57.99 45.36 03/01/2005 49.12 - 35.65.0610.2 PRIMEAUX, MARK & KATRINA 86.70 47.65 39.05 04/01/2005 54.09 - 23.02.5340.2 PRIVATSKY, K. & JOHNSTON, TI 426.78 83.90 107.86 92.90 12/1512004 100.00 - 30.30.6102.2 PRUDHOMME, JENNIFER 46.87 32.97 13.90 04/05/2005 22.60 - 23.01.0100.2 PYLlCAN, WOODROW A. 131.29 02/18/2003 45.26 - 30.30.6082.2 QUICK, BRENDA 34.04 25.70 8.34 0312812005 20.64 - 31.52.0302.1 R T NAHAS FURNiTURE STORE 181.59 33.31 48.35 03/24/2005 118.73 - 30.74.0902.2 RACKHAM, LARRY 42.31 21.82 20.49 03/09/2005 47.84 - 24.04.1838.3 RADICAN, DONALD & CYNTHIA 52.96 33.46 19.50 03/30/2005 50.00 - 24.04.2074.1 RAMZA, RONALD 88.74 41.22 40.26 03/14/2005 32.74 - 30.30.6114.2 RANEY, TAYLOR & MAGHAN 36.59 28.25 8.34 03/1412005 23.19 - 36.68.0124.2 RAPP, RONALD & CHERYL 69.96 33.46 36.50 02/15/2005 40.26 - 35.65.0440.3 RAPP, RONALD & CHERYL 22.00 17.94 4.06 30.30.6222.2 RASMUSSEN, TONYA 37.02 25.70 11.32 02/08/2005 28.98 - 37.37.3118.2 RICE, JAMES & LlZETTE 154.32 04/11/2005 155.00 - 37.72.0146.1 RICE, RALPH & SUSAN 47.85 47.65 .20 04/01/2005 46.37 - 30.30.6272.1 RICE, THOMAS & SAMANTHA 47.36 33.46 13.90 03124/2005 22.60 - 30.74.3302.2 RIEBE, DEANA 50.92 31.26 19.66 0310712005 48.98 - 25.05.0454.2 RILEY, R SHANE 81.48 41.22 40.26 03/2112005 40.26- 30.74.3094.2 ROBERTS, EDWARD 31.03 28.25 2.78 03/22/2005 21.23 - 24.04.2096.8 ROBINSON, RICHARD & PRICILl 74.80 41.22 33.58 01/25/2005 65.84 - 24.04.2006.2 ROBINSON, RICHARD & PRISCII 78.94 39.89 39.05 02/1412005 50.33 - 30.74.2862.1 RODGERS, FREDRICK 44.40 36.01 8.39 04/13/2005 25.00. 22.51.3214.2 ROEHR, CLINT 49.01 25.70 21.46 02/14/2005 75.00 - 30.74.3090.1 ROGERS, WAYNE & SUSAN 59.78 28.25 31.53 03/03/2005 35.29 - 35.35.1222.2 ROHNBACH, DAVID 61.92 32.13 29.79 0310112005 60.00 - 22.51.0866.1 ROHRBACH, CHERYL 46.07 43.11 2.96 04/07/2005 60.00 - 23.02.4710.1 ROSE, DEANNA 85.70 45.10 40.60 03/16/2005 70.00 - 30.30.6298.2 ROSE, SHONA 48.46 37.34 11.12 03/14/2005 50.86 - 35.35.3028.1 ROTTA, JOE & DARCiE 122.88 45.10 77. 78 02116/2005 133.08 - 36.69.1534.1 ROWLEY, RONALD R. 82.70 39.89 42.81 02/2812005 42.81 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent (- CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Standard Payment Customers Current Period: 04/2012005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquenl Balance Page: 10 Apr 19, 2005 03:52pm Cust No Name Non-Delinq Last Pmt Last pmt 01/20/2005 12/2012004 Date Amount - --- -------------- 20.47.0074.2 RUMSEY, PHILIP & JENNIFER 135.96 53.90 40.26 03/0712005 50.00 - 36.69.1076.1 RUPERT, DAVID & LAURIE 154.66 59.29 95.37 02/1612005 174.80 - 23.02.3180.1 RYAN, WALTER 54.17 48.00 6.17 04/13/2005 100.00 - 22.50.0090.1 SABA, VIRGINA 117.47 44.81 72.66 03/15/2005 88.00 - 30.74.3432.2 SAGER, LEE & NADEAN 86.58 60.45 26.13 03101/2005 96.90 - 22.51.3206.5 SALINAS, MARIO & OLGA 48.99 29.58 17.70 30.30.6256.2 SANDERSON, BRIAN & BENNET 37.92 29.58 8.34 03121/2005 20.64 - 20.46.0870.1 SANSOUCIE, KENNETH & BARE 68.52 40.77 27.75 01/2712005 63.06 - 35.65.0872.4 SCHILD, LES 19.04 10.66 8.38 02/15/2005 8.38 - 23.01.1200.2 SCHIMPH, FRED 143.76 85.10 58.66 03/24/2005 67.00 - 35.35.0018.4 SCHMIDT, BRODIE 52.26 28.25 24.01 03/1112005 27.77 - 30.30.6318.2 SCHORNAK, SANDRA L 49.91 36.01 13.90 03/23/2005 25.15 - 22.51.3720.2 SCHOW, BART & ALISSA 61.53 21.82 32.74 01/26/2005 252.00 - 22.51.3730.2 SCHOW, BART & ALISSA 61.82 29.58 32.24 03/0812005 33.00 - 46.17.0208.1 SCHROEDER ENT 23.84 20.36 3.48 29.07.0984.1 SCOTT, JASON 76.42 28.25 27.77 01/18/2005 100.00 - 24.04.2294.3 SCOTT, STEVEN & LORI 132.10 59.29 72.81 03/15/2005 57.85 - 23.01.2040.1 SEAMONS, DOUGLAS 77.87 45.13 32.74 02/28/2005 76.76 - 30.74.2718.2 SELLS, DAVID 82.70 39.89 42.81 03/2212005 61.53 - 30.74.3050.2 SEVERINE, JAMES & KATHLEEf\ 31.26 25.70 5.56 03/3012005 19.66 - 35.64.2028.2 SEXTON, MARY 141.40 20.49 31.53 01/18/2005 80.33 - 25.95.0621.2 SHARIAT, SIAMACK 52.11 49.58 2.53 03/10/2005 32.87 - 30.30.6240.2 SHAW, KELLY 78.63 66.01 12.62 03116/2005 115.00 - 29.07.1072.3 SHEETS, RONALD & RHONDA 77.60 37.34 40.26 03/08/2005 44.02 - 22.50.3780.2 SHELLEY,DIXIE & R. KENT 63.54 28.25 35.29 03/22/2005 35.29 - 22.50.3694.3 SHEL TRON, ROGER 86.02 28.25 57.77 02/16/2005 97.37 - 24.04.1618.3 SHIMEL, RYAN & SARAH 63.63 63.17 .46 04/05/2005 54.00 - 24.04.1878.3 SHIRLEY, GARRY 36.09 36.01 .08 04/13/2005 35.21 - 22.50.0292.1 SHOEMAKER, TAMI 73.04 25.70 32.66 09/14/2004 100.00 - 24.03.0292.1 SHURTZ, ROD 128.30 70.93 57.37 03/17/2005 77.00 - 23.01.2760.1 SIEGEL, ROSALlE 44.62 24.37 20.25 03/1112005 27.77 - 36.69.1292.3 SIMMONS, BRETT 76.20 76.14 .06 03/15/2005 149.30 - 36.69.1140.1 SIMMONS, JAY 52.08 51.53 .55 03121/2005 61.61 - 37.37.3400.2 SISNEROS, LARRY 86.58 43.77 42.81 03/14/2005 89.38 - 22.51.4034.1 SKINNER, KEN 56.99 17.83 17.70 21.46 01/31/2005 69.16 - 23.02.3962.4 SLENDER, LEONARD & BOSWEI 80.14 33.46 21.46 25.22 01/26/2005 29.92 - 30.30.6020.2 SLEVIN, BETTY 27.38 21.82 5.56 03/23/2005 19.66 - 30.74.1118.2 SLYTER, GORDON 136.44 52.86 47.78 03118/2005 50.00 - 30.74.1114.2 SLYTER, GORDON 42.43 36.01 6.42 02/28/2005 32.74 - 30.74.1086.3 SLYTER, GORDON 78.38 52.86 25.52 02/04/2005 85.00 - 30.74.2928.1 SMITH, ARLlN D. 63.23 43.77 19.46 03/17/2005 27.11 - 30.74.1050.1 SMITH. CARSON 43.40 25.70 17.70 03/2212005 17.70 - 30.74.2936.1 SMITH. FRANK 56.57 39.89 16.68 03/1412005 26.13 - 36.69.0862.2 SMITH, JOHN & MARY 136.18 67.05 69.13 02/1112005 153.30 - 22.51.0498.2 SMITH, KARL 211.96 64.50 147.46 03/2412005 150.00 - 30.30.6022.2 SMITH, MICHAEL 39.37 28.25 11.12 04/1112005 24.17 - 22.50.0012.1 SMITH, PAUL H. 66.20 33.46 32.74 03122/2005 44.02 - 32.32.4822.3 SOMAZZI, ROGER & JENNIFER 69.60 39.89 29.71 03/2912005 50.00 - 24.03.0836.3 SOSA, JOSEPH 51.22 41.22 10.00 03/21/2005 36.50 - 24.03.0038.2 SPANGENBERG, TODD 43.28 21.82 21.46 03/11/2005 70.92 - 25.05.0778.3 SPARLING, STEVEN & BRENDA 117.26 63.17 54.09 02/28/2005 65.37 - 24.03.0426.4 STAGGERS, PERRY 434.86 434.86 23.02.2170.2 STALFORD, SHANNON 63.32 34.34 28.98 03110/2005 65.06 - 25.05.0512.3 STALLINGS, JOSEPH & ANGELP 92.88 45.10 47.78 03101/2005 40.20 - 30.30.6334.2 STEELE, STEVEN & DEBBIE 101.64 47.65 50.33 03/3012005 90.00 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ( CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account Ust- council Page: 11 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19,2005 03;52pm Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Name Balance Non-Delinq 0212012005 Date ~----- 23.02.5370.3 STEPHENS, MICHAEL & JEWEL' 45.18 39.89 5.29 03121/2005 30.00 - 30.30.6294.2 STEPHENSON, MICHAEL 37.92 29.58 8.34 03/24/2005 20.64 - 30.30.6268.1 STETSON HOMES 40.50 20.25 20.25 03124/2005 20.25 - 30.74.2994.2 STOKESBERRY, COREY 136.14 73.97 53.01 03/25/2005 81.82 - 30.74.3008.2 STONE, CLARA 59.35 39.89 19.46 04/05/2005 27.11 - 22.51.0938.5 STRATE, EUGENE 76.13 49.17 26.96 04/06/2005 21.92 - 23.01.1170.2 STRATE, EUGENE & CARYN 99.93 73.90 21.46 24.04.1962.1 STRICHARSKIY, PETER & VERA 92.88 45.10 47.78 02/22/2005 47.78 - 23.23.0002.1 STUBBLEFIELD DEVELOPMENT 502.65 452.65 50.00 04/15/2005 336.09 - 45.20.0804.2 SULLIVAN, MICHAEL & OTILLO 42.26 17.94 21.46 23.01.2910.3 SUNBRIDGE 2.387.27 2,344.77 42.50 03/29/2005 2,341.03 - 30.74.3162.4 SWANSON, DAVE & CARMEN 37.69 32.13 5.56 04/0112005 22.21 - 30.30.6230.3 SWIFT, JEFFREY 68.44 48.98 19.46 03/14/2005 24.56 - 23.02.1730.2 T & T INC 217.44 126.22 91.22 03129/2005 117.46- 36.69.0484.6 TAOEVIC. WENDY 277.12 32.13 61.61 01/21/2005 66.35 " 37.37.3982.2 TALLMAN, JULIE & TROY 86.58 43.77 42.81 02/14/2005 75.27 - 35.35.1458.1 TAYLOR, DAVE 94.08 65.10 28.98 02/28/2005 33.72 - 35.65.0308.3 TAYLOR, THOMAS & CATHERIN 36.45 36.01 .44 03/22/2005 42.37 - 23.02.2604.2 TELL, JOHN & LAURA 43.41 43.11 .30 03/2212005 36.20 - 20.47.0052.4 TENNANT. ROBERT & CONNIE 102.81 58.79 44.02 04/11/2005 62.82 - 29.57.0104.1 THE PERFECT CUP 52:76 15.07 11.31 15.07 02/09/2005 30.14 - 22.50.1860.1 THE PODIATRY BLDG 78.24 26.08 26.08 26.08 01/26/2005 26.08 - 23.02.5880.1 THIEL, PATRICK D. 97.46 45.10 52.36 01126/2005 55.30 - 23.02.2550.7 THOMAS, DREW 110.04 21.46 12/15/2004 35.15 - 22.50.0350.1 THOMASSON, DAVID C 93.03 49.01 44.02 03/22/2005 26.08 - 29.07.0246.1 THOMPSON, DOUGLAS 95.56 50.20 45.36 02/2512005 52.88 - 30.30.6016.2 THOMPSON, MICHAEL & HUNTE 37.92 29.58 8.34 03/31/2005 20.64 - 22.50.2110.2 THOMPSON, RHONDA 90.46 47.65 42.81 03/1012005 101.87 - 46.46.6246.2 THRONEBERRY, BRIAN & KATH 86.58 43.77 42.81 03/16/2005 50.33 - 30.74.3154.2 THURGOOD, KAREN 43.25 32.13 11.12 03/25/2005 24.17-. 23.02.2200.3 TODD, RICK 96.31 71.09 25.22 03116/2005 61.72 - 30.74.2520.1 TOLAND, DAVID 149.44 82.57 66.87 02/17/2005 100.00 - 22.50.4022.3 TORGESON, MATIHEW 92.32 29.58 62.74 02/22/2005 36.50 - 36.69.0314.2 TOTMAN, JERRY 50.92 25.70 25.22 03116/2005 28.98 - 33.33.9110.1 TOUCHMARK 64.51 20.25 24.01 03101/2005 20.25 - 33.33.9066.1 TOUCHMARK 78.10 35.29 42.81 03/0112005 42.81 - 33.33.9114.1 TOUCHMARK 72.03 24.01 24.01 03/0112005 20.25 - 33.33.9062.1 TOUCHMARK 66.82 27.77 39.05 03/01/2005 31.53 - 33.33.9060.1 TOUCHMARK 59.30 27.77 31.53 03101/2005 31.53 - 33.33.9112.1 TOUCHMARK 64.51 20.25 24.01 03/01/2005 20.25 - 33.33.9000.1 TOUCHMARK 20.20 10.10 10.10 03/15/2005 10.10 - 33.33.9036.1 TOUCHMARK 22.73 19.25 3.48 33.33.9024.1 TOUCHMARK 59.30 27.77 31.53 03/01/2005 31.53 - 22.50.2248.1 TRICKETT, KEVIN 52.26 28.25 24.01 02/25/2005 31.53 - 20.46.0180.2 TROYER, SCOTT & LOIS 108.43 60.81 47.62 04/04/2005 107.00 - 30.30.6134.2 TUCKER, JEREMY & DEBBIE 49.91 36.01 13.90 03/28/2005 25.15 - 22.50.3824.1 TURNBOUGH, JAKE & WENDY 107.30 41.82 28.98 02/0812005 28.98 - 30.74.3036.1 URATA, FRANK & DAWN 47.13 36.01 11.12 03/2212005 24.17 - 23.02.4840.4 VALESKO, DONALD 71.30 36.01 35.29 02/1112005 100.62 - 23.01.0860.3 VAN BRAGT, WILLY 75.69 50.87 24.82 03/28/2005 25.00 - 30.74.2848.2 VAN HOFWEGEN, SHAWN 31.03 28.25 2.78 03123/2005 21.23 - 30.30.6144.2 VANPAEPEGHEM, A QUINN 52.69 36.01 16.68 03/23/2005 26.13 - 22.50.0136.3 VICTORY, CHRIS 144.07 68.53 55.29 20.25 01/1412005 82.88 - 22.50.4586.2 VICTORY, MICHAEL & YUNSUK 67.81 23.55 21.46 22.80 01/24/2005 80.00 - 23.02.4550.1 VINCENT, TOMMY 89.00 41.22 47.78 03/30/2005 44.02 - .n in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ( (- CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Standard Payment Customers Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Page: 12 Apr 19, 2005 03:52pm Name Last Pm! Non-Delinq 02/2012005 01120/2005 12/20/2004 Date 30.74.2920.1 VOGELE, JOHN & ALICE 40.52 29.40 11.12 0311512005 21.44 - 24.03.0284.3 WADDELL, WILLIAM & ELEANOF 61.82 29.58 32.24 02/15/2005 37.00 - 23.02.1430.4 WADDOUPS, DOROTHY 87.00 26.42 21.46 01/19/2005 60.00 - 30.74.2866.1 WALKER, GARY 71.74 47.65 24.09 03/22/2005 30.00. 30.74.1040.1 WALKER, VICKI 58.32 33.28 25.04 0211512005 35.04 - 20.46.0860.2 WALMER, TAMMY JO 78.92 44.65 31.53 03/0712005 40.00 . 23.01.3340.1 WALSH, RON 136.52 36.69.1056.2 WARNER, JAMES 95.96 02/16/2005 106.84 - 21.48.2651.1 WATER WORKS CAR WASH INC 3.48 3.48 12/14/2004 63.26 - 22.51.0734.2 WATSON, CLAYTON & THELMA 91.40 21.82 17.70 26.66 04/19/2005 4.12 - 24.03.0302.2 WATTS, MELVIN & SONDEE 84.38 43.77 40.61 0311512005 40.00 . 23.02.6080.1 WEBB, GERALD 59.90 32.13 27.77 02/16/2005 93.06 - 22.51.3310.2 WEBB, MICHAEL 126.48 48.80 32.56 02/15/2005 50.00. 23.01.3300.2 WELCH, LEE 107.19 106.59 .60 04/13/2005 112.07. 30.30.6336.3 WERLlNGER, MARK & SUSAN 49.91 36.01 13.90 03/15/2005 25.15. 22.51.3770.2 WERNER, DALE & SUSAN 105.21 52.86 47.78 22.50.4530.2 WEST, ROBERT & JON I 91.29 51.03 40.26 0211712005 73.52 - 30.74.3122.1 WESTERBERG, STEVEN 75.63 43.77 31.86 02/10/2005 50.00 - 36.36.1082.1 WESTMINSTER HOMES 57.32 22.59 26.35 01125/2005 6.42 - 36.36.1134.1 WESTMINSTER HOMES 42.92 21 .46 21.46 02/25/2005 18.88 - 36.69.0698.2 WHEELER, DAWN 55.90 24.37 31.53 02/25/2005 31.53 - 35.35.0087.2 WHEELER, JOSHUA & HEIDI 68.15 63.77 4.38 04/19/2005 85.00 - 22.50.2384.4 WHITE, SHAINE 35.18 33.46 1.72 04105/2005 60.00 - 20.46.0130.2 WICKHAM, MARY LOU 75.17 43.64 31.53 03101/2005 39.05 - 30.74.2970.1 WIESE, GARY 53.79 39.89 13.90 03121/2005 25.15 - 30.74.3060.2 WIGGINS, TOMMY & SHARON 37.92 29.58 8.34 04/04/2005 14.70 - 30.30.6124.2 WILLIAMS, SCOTT 37.92 29.58 8.34 04/0412005 20.64 - 30.30.6226.2 WILLIS, DEAN & EILEEN 34.04 25.70 8.34 03/1512005 20.64 - 30.74.0356.1 WILSON, DEANA 150.39 100.93 49.46 03/16/2005 70.00 - 25.25.1008.2 WILSON, MICHAEL 62.44 33.46 28.98 02/28/2005 53.48 - 22.50.0210.3 WILSON, MITCHELL 72.09 43.11 28.98 03108/2005 55.30 - 24.03.0316.2 WILSON, RUSSELL 82.70 39.89 42.81 0310112005 80.33. 29.07.0880.2 WINKLER, GREG 62.04 33.46 28.58 04/19/2005 40.00 - 32.32.4932.2 WITTE, JOHN & MELODY 35.64 17.94 17.70 03/07/2005 32.74 - 20.47.1204.2 WIXSON, RYAN 75.83 47.68 28.15 0410512005 55.00 - 22.51.0690.2 WRIGHT, SANDRA 61.56 29.58 31.96 03/14/2005 100.00 - 30.74.0372.3 YELTON, LAURA 105.62 75.10 30.52 03/16/2005 80.00 - 25.25.1090.2 YOUNG, ANGELA 75.18 39.89 35.29 02/25/2005 39.05 - 23.02.0670.1 YOUNG, AUSTIN L 70.74 30.03 29.43 04/04/2005 29.43 - 23.02.0680.1 YOUNG, AUSTIN L 60.86 33.91 26.95 04/15/2005 10.00 - 30.74.2900.2 ZIMMERMAN, RANDY & KELLY 60.45 43.77 16.68 03122/2005 26.13 - ----- 54,979.61 28,852.46 18,912.10 3,171.32 4,043.73 ---------- --~"--- Report Criteria: Terminated customers not included Customer.Cust No 0" {<} 880000001 Customer.BilI Cycle = 1 ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is 10 be sent April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT April 1 {J, 2005 ITEM NO. 18 REQUEST Ordinance No. 05-1141 licensed Alcohol Establishments and Prohibiting Two licensed Establishments within the same premise - Second Reading AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See attached fll(( 0j \ e ~ ~~~ (f !VI'} r Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meeHngs shall become property of the City of Meridian. April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT A vest LP \ C\ April ~ 2005 AZ 04-033 ITEM NO. -1:f- Zo REQUEST Ordinance - Request for Annexation and Zoning of 15.92 acres from C-2 and RUT zones to C-G zone for Stor-It - 355 N. Ten Mile Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: ~t: fL~ ~ Dale: 4ft>?!",,; Phone: Emailed: (!:..( eLL ~u..C\..cLr aLl. + _ <!-C.,J Staff Initials: LY<- Matenals presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS SQe attached ~k1 Ot)./! NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO I.e. ~ 50-901(A) CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 05-~ PROVIDING FOR RE-ZONING ORDINANCE An Ordinance ofthe City of Meridian granting annexation and zoning for land known as Stor-it commonly located in the SE 1/4 of Section 10, Township 3 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described in Attachment "A". This parcel contains 15.92 acres more or less. Also, this parcel is SUBJECT TO all easements and rights-of-way of record or implied. As surveyed by Quadrant Consulting, Inc. as attached as exhibit "B" and is not based on an actual field survey. A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho. This ordinance shall become effective on the If-IJ.. day of /~J~7. ,2005. JI~A~,~ City of Meridian Mayor and City Council By: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk First Reading: 1--19 -tl S- Adopted after first reading by suspension of the Rule as allowed pursuant to Idaho Code 50-902: YES )<. NO Second Reading: - Third Reading: STATEMENT OF MERIDIAN CITY ATTORNEY AS TO ADEQUACY OF SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 05- //4:3 The undersigned, William L.M. Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that he is the legal advisor of the City and has reviewed a copy ofthe attached Ordinance No. 05-~ of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and has found the same to be true and complete and provides adequate notice to the public pursuant to Idaho Code S 50-901A (3). DATED this ~ day of April; 2~05r)( ~L~ William. L.M. Nary City Attorney ORDINANCE SUMMARY - AZ-04-033 - STOR-IT - Page 1 :~~~~~:Jci ~4~~~/~~~~I.f~~D NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 ~~bg~~E~i~kMJI~~ST OF 1111111111111111111111111111111111111 Meridian Cil'{ 105048796 CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. ty S -- ! I ~ ~ BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, DONNELL, ROUNTREE, WARDLE AN ORDINANCE (AZ-04-033 STOR-IT) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST ~ OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST OF THE BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO AS DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A" AND ANNEXING CERTAIN LANDS AND TERRITORY, SITUATED IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AS REQUESTED BY THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING THE LAND USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF SAID LANDS FROM RUT (ADA COUNTY) TO C-G (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW; AND PROVIDING FOR A SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the following described land as evidenced by attached Legal Description herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit "N' is within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for annexation and re-zoning by the owner of said property, to-wit: Aves!, LP SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby annexed and re-zoned from RUT (Ada County) to C-G (General Commercial) in the Meridian City Code. SECTION 3. That the City has authority pursuant to the laws of the State ofIdaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and zone said property. SECTION 4. That the City has complied with all the noticing requirements pursuant to the laws of the State ofIdaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and re-zone said property. SECTION 5. That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts ofthe City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. ANNEXATION OF AZ-04~033 STOR-IT - Page 1 of3 SECTION 6. All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8. The Clerk of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner, including the lands herein rezoned, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State ofIdaho, to-wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State ofIdaho. SECTION 9. That pursuant to the affirmative vote of one-half (112) plus one (1) of the Members of the full Council, the rule requiring two (2) separate readings by title and one (1) reading in full be, and the same is hereby, dispensed with, and accordingly, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this / q-l(:: day of +1 i , 2005. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN~ IDAHO, this 11-1} day of +/7 ATTEST: i ~~~!9-J CITY CLERK ... ANNEXATION OF AZ-04-033 STOR-IT - Page 2 of3 STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) ss. County of Ada ) On this {C(+Ltday of /tfr; I ,2005, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY de WEERD and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the CITY of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WIlNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. (SEAL) ~....~~~;I::";##~ ~.. ,.~ .......00.4,1'./" I ~ ".0 0.0 -? "- : ! ~OTAI?.r.\ 'i i * i -.- : * : \ tP. \. ~{!BL\C j J \~~...~o , ~~.,:~ OF \\l~~ #"............. uM -dYL ANNEXATION OF Az..04-033 STOR-IT - Page 3 of3 ~ Stor-it AZ-04-033 Legal Description November 9, 2004 Page 1 of2 EXHIBIT "A" ANNEXATION PROPERTY BOUNDARY A tracI ofland beiugall ofParc"el A as shown on Record of Survey No. 5576 Instrument No. lOllOll:209, s:lid parcel being described in Warranly Deed Instrument No. 10 1115511, Ada County Records, together with a pornon of the Union Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way, all ~ing situated in the SE Y. of Section 10, Township 3 North, Range I West. Boise Moridian, Ada County, Idaho, uid tract being more particularly described as follows: Commencing lit the Southellllt comer of said Seclion 10; thence along !he East line of said SecLion, being the centerline ofTen Mile Road, North 00027'06" BasI ]096.83 feet to a 5/8" rebar and cap marking !he SQutheast come:r of said Parcel "An said poinl being the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said East line a[ong the South line of said Paroel"A" North 88~51'50" Wc:st 1545.36 feet; thence leaving said Soutb line :-Iorth 01008' [0" East 450.00 !bet toa point on the South Ilm: of the Union Pacific Ruilroad RighI- of.Way; thence . North OloOS'IO" East 200.00 feet, to the: North line of said Righl-of-Way, thence along: said North line South 8805 ('SO" EasI1537.60 reo! to the said Enslline of said Section 10, thence' along said East line South 00027'06" West 200.01 to a point on Ihe said South line of the Union Pacific Railroad Right- of-Way, thence continuing along sPid East line South OO~27'06" WelIl 450.03 [eet 10 the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said lrlll;t contains 23.00 acres, more or less, being 15.94 acresofsPid Pllfcel A and 7.0611CrcS of said Union Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way. MERJOIP.N PlIBUC WOR~S DEfl. RliwJt, 'bPROV.~' 1.-- ' ~.ll NOV 2 3 2001l ~ UJ. CQ~ ~< ~~ ~~ ~~ ~z ~ ~ ~ t3 z~~ tI) ~ E--i ~ c:: w z c:: 8 '<t :::- ;z- ."'660' :JNRIVlIll dO SI ~'f;O,Of'~"" ~';i!";,~.;90 3.90.a~b~ OVO~ 3lltl I~: .~-- ~ I ~~. " ~ '" ~~ J ~: / 11 i ~ i //' 1il~ ~ ~I / ~~ ~ v: ~~ ~ ~IJ: 1 ~I ~ jl .~ ~~ t~O ~i~ ~~ (/)1 / ~ ~ ~ ::3 ~~ ~~ " in Ei i~ ~ 00 ~t; z " ~ YI ~~ ~ I i ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~".; . fj ~ ~~ ..~ , ~ '~"f~l~~%~t~.~.~ . "''''30''''0"~J e l.. o I- Z O' 0- "<t- o o N April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCil MEETING APPLICANT Susan Howard \C\. April ~, 2005 RZ 04-016 ITEM NO. ~ ~I REQUEST Ordinance - Request for a Rezone of .27 acres from R-4 to O-T zones for Serendiptiy Place Subdjyjsion - 1305 West 1st Street AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEfT: CITY WATER OEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted:, ~/'-'I-!CJ'v..Jrl/>iOt Date: c./ 1(<6'/()~ Phone: Emailed:-:Sa-heu..:.o.rd..-#..;>-@tv1.5tI.cOMStafflnitials:J...Je-.... Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. See attached ~ IV 0//1 4' o NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO I.C. ~ SO-901(A) CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. OS--M.1: PROVIDING FOR RE-ZONING ORDINANCE An Ordinance of the City of Meridian granting re-zoning for land known as Serendipity Place Subdivision commonly located in the Northeast Y4 of Section] 2, Township 3 North, Range] West, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described in Attachment "A", This parcel contains .27 acres more or less. Also, this parcel is SUBJECT TO all easements and rights-of-way of record or implied. As surveyed as attached as exhibit "B" and is not based on an actual field survey. A full text ofthis ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, C;qf Meridian, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho. This ordinance shall become effective on the ~ day of 1f-jh"/7 , 2005. pursuant to Idaho Code 50-902: First Reading: -1-( 9- tJ .? Adopted after first reading by suspension YES~ NO_ Second Reading: - Third Reading: STATEMENT OF MERIDIAN CITY ATTORNEY AS TO ADEQUACY OF SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 05- (/1-4- The undersigned, William L.M. Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that he is the legal advisor of the City and has reviewed a copy of the attached Ordinance No. 05-~ of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and has found the same to be true and complete and provides adequate notice to the public pursuant to Idaho Code S 50-901 A (3). DA TED this ~ day of April, :001 /1 ;) J UJLf j<1.J~ William. L.M. Nary City Attorney ORDINANCE SUMMARY - REZONE OF RZ-04-016 SERENDIPITY PLACE SUBDIVISION - Page I ~~~~~~~JJ ~4~~~/~~E~(~O~~D NAVARRO ~~~~~~E~i~MJI~~ST OF 1111111111I11111111111111I11111111111 Meridian City 1050487'37 AMOUNT .00 CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. tJ;;- - I ! 44 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD~ DONNELL~ ROUNTREE~ WARDLE AN ORDINANCE (RZ-04-016 - SERENDIPITY PLACE SUBDIVISION) LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST % OF SECTION 12~ TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST BOISE MERIDIAN, CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AS DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A" OF THIS ORDINANCE AND RE-ZONING CERTAIN LANDS AND TERRITORY, SITUATED IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; AND RE-ZONING THE LAND USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF SAID LANDS FROM R-4 (LIGHT DENSITY) TO O-T (OLD TOWN MERIDIAN) IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LA W; AND PROVIDING FOR A SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the following described land as evidenced by attached Legal Description herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit "A" is within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for re- zoning by the owner of said property, to-wit.- Susan Howard SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby re-zoned from R-4 to O-T (Old Town Meridian) in the Meridian City Code. SECTION 3. That the City has authority pursuant to the laws of the State ofIdaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to re-zone said property. SECTION 4. That the City has complied with all the noticing requirements pursuant to the laws of the State ofldaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian re-zone said property. SECTION 5. That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. RE-ZONE OF RZ-04-016 SERENDIPITY PLACE SUBDIVISION- Page 1 of 3 SECTION 6. All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8. The Clerk of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner, including the lands herein rezoned, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State ofIdaho, to-wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho. SECTION 9. That pursuant to the affirmative vote of one-half (I/2) plus one (1) of the Members of the full Council, the rule requiring two (2) separate readings by title and one (1) reading in full be, and the same is hereby, dispensed with, and accordingly, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN~ IDAHO, this 19~day of /Ipr-/I ,2005. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this / q-/6 day of IJpr / 7 , 2005. RE-ZONE OF RZ-04-016 SERENDIPITY PLACE SUBDIVISION- Page 2 of 3 STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) ss. County of Ada ) On this ~ day of ~,: I , 2005, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, person lly appeared TAMMY de WEERD and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the CITY of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. ' IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. (SEAL) #""~;'~~'~""'~"#. ~..,.. ~~ .........dt/)'> "..., f ,,'t'.... ....1>- '\ ! ! ~oTAJ(r '\ i ~ * i -.- i * s \ \" .PUB\.. \C l : \:~G~...........~~~....I 9......,j.''e 0 F \)) ..."...... .............. .~h 1'fJT A PUBLIC FOR IDAHO lfESDf GAT: Mf'y/Jl'af\. ~COMMISSION EXPIRES: O(I/;}.~/()7 RE-ZONE OF RZ-04-016 SERENDIPITY PLACE SUBDIVISION- Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT A Serendipity Place Subdivision RZ-04-016 Legal Description RE-ZO~r. DESCRIPTION FOR SERENDlPI l'l' Pl,.-\CE SUBDIVISION . lk.:cmlll'r 15, 2{){j.1 A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED LN tHE -";ORTHf:A5T 1/4 OF SECTION 11, TOWNSH1P 3 NOKTH, RANGE I WEST, ElOISE MERIDIAN, ;\tERJDl.-\l:_, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, HRING MORE PAR1KUJ.ARLY DESCRlBED l\.S"flJU ()WS: COMMENCTNG AT THE NOR.TUEA~r CO~~?.R OF ShCTlON n, T.3 N., R.I W., Il.\1., THENCE . S OO"2(}'3()" E 1041.96 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE M SAm SECTION 1 J 10 A POINT ,\l'THE I~TERSEI :nON DF N. MfiRfDlAN Sl'RHE'I AND W. Iv! A PI. f. A VENUE, TH8{('[\ S 8904?'J()" W 3J6.oo FEbT ALONG THE CENTERI.JNr.: OF W. MAPLIOAVENlJE 1\, A !'OINT !\T THf-: rNrHR~F.CttON Of SA 10 W. MAPLS A VE'N( Jf-: AND W I'1RST S rREET, THENCE s 00"20'3('" 1: 2C16.60 FEET ALONG Tlil: C[";NTERI.lNE OF W. FTRST STRHHI'TO A POINT. THE REAl. POl~' OF BEGrNNING OF !'Hili Df.'s('I-tII'TfON; THENCE COr--.'Tll"lffNG $l;0"20'30" Ii 99.(1(; PHF!' ^W:-\CJ SAIDCENTERI.INETO:\ POINT i\'J"[ HE INTERSEC']'fON OF W flll{!;'f STREET AND w. r:Hllill{Y A \lHNlJE; THENCE S S\l"4Q'JS"W 188.00 }'h!;;T ALONnl'1fr. ('1'1': rElli.INEOf W CHERRY A VENT:E TO,\ PotNT; THENCH ~ (H)"20'JO~ W AI.ONO EASfERt,Y HorJNflARV OF F'RAN MERlOiAN SL.13OlVl!;lON 97.00 Ff-E!"I'O,\ POINl; COKTINUINU ALONG SAID ima!)IV1SrON HOC Ir-;'OARY TlW FOLLOWfNU: 'I HE!\Cf! N g9"4')',15' h IOJXl FEET TO A i'OlN 1": 'J'Il~N('E N fJr)'~\l'.'O" W 2.00 FEET TO A POINT; LEAV[NO SAID ~lJBDJVlSI()N BOUNDARY nJE: POLLoWIN<l: TII~NCP, N 8'Y'49'.lS" f, 178.00 FEET 1'0 TilE REAL POINT OF BIWINNlNG OF TI'Il~ DESCRIPTION, CONTAININCl 0.43 ACRES, MOI<l-: OR LHss. ~~~s~~ W ^ YNEK '^""E<. (t(r1T4 4 ~~r.s. .", \~~~"~A/ B~~ 1'~ I<. -. a;'?>J~/' -- ja~ .M O~ 20ns y~~~~ b~~t-tc I N 00'20'30" W I 2'00'4L REAL POINT OF BEGINNING _ _ __~'19)~1J~~___ N 89'49'35" E 1000' I . i~ ,3= ''g ~ b 10 12: , ~ - ---.-L - - - - - - Y:!._ CHERR!:. ,6v-L- - - - - - I- L.() S 89'49'35" W 188.00' _ ~C.!:lERRY AY....E~_ I -r- \-- 1-- RE-ZONE MAP SERENDIPITY PLACE SUBDIVISION OWG DATE: 12/15/04 KDH 1 "= 50' W. FAIRVIEW A~.O~6 _ 12~07 ~gi 9~9 ~ f-k' _8~'.1~JJJC ~ 116JlQ'1 f_ In W. MAPLE AVE. z I- ~~ ~ I 6 ' 1'0 i~ lb 1!0 I~ ,v} BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. ~ ( BRIGGS )) ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS 1800 W. OVERlAND ROAO t BOISE. iDAHO 83705 · (20B)344-9700 April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT W.H. Moore Company AZ 03-025 April 1 tl', 2005 ITEM NO. .ifb2---- REQUEST Ordinance - Request for Annexation and Zoning of 57.84 acres from RUT to C-G zones for Blue Marlin - northwest comer of East Ustick Road and North Eagle Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SmLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached ~v' @ q / fl4'~ Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meeHnss shall become property of the CIIy of Meridian. CERTIFICA TION OF THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To: The Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor of Ada County, and The State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho I, WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk, of the City of Meridian, Ada County, State of Idaho, do hereby certify that the attached copy of Ordinance No. -04"'-' ~ S -1/4-5', passed by the City Council ofthe City of Meridian, on the ~day of IIp-;'l , 200~ is a true and correct copy of the original of said document which is in the care, custody and control of th . Clerk of the City of Meridian. : ss. STATE OF IDAHO, County of Ada, On this ~ day of Afn' / , in the year ;2,{)()5 , before me, <<.11'\.;( of> l :51AM-k , a Notary Public, appeared WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known or identified to me to be the City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho that executed the said instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf ofthe City OfMeridian~~"""Jt. ~\C L.~~, I '\~........~ ~t. i )(- (~OT-1~ '\ >;P. \ : : _._ J..: : : 'i-P .*: (SEAL) \~.... OlJLIC/ i \-; .1>;.......... ~ 0 I "##f""Jt.~;..!!?t:"",,~ z:\ Work\M\Meridian\Melidian I 5360MlBJue Marlin AZ-03-025\CertificatiOllOfClerkOrd.doc CERTIFICATION OF THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AZ-03-025 WHITE PETERSON A TIORNEYS A T LAW KEVIN DINIUS JULIE KLEIN FiSCHER CHRISTOPHERD. GABBERT WM. F. GIGRAY, IlJ T. GUY HALLAM .. JILL S. HOLlNKA JOHN R. KORMANIK . WILLIAM A. MORROW WILLIAM F. NICHOLS .. CANYON PARK AT THE IDAHO CENTER 5700 E. FRANKLIN RD., SUITE 200 NAMPA, IDAHO 83687-7901 TEL (208) 466-9272 FAX (208) 4664405 CHRISTOPHER S. NVE PHILIP A. PETERSON TODD A. ROSSMAN TERRENCE R. WHITE'" · Also admiued in CA .. Also admitted in OR ... Also admilted in W A April 13, 2004 William G. Berg, Jr. City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 Re: Ordinance No. 9tP- 05-( /4S; (W.B. Moore and Joann Crawford and Jack Joslin) Summary of Publication Dear Will: Pursuant to the direction of the Meridian City Council, this office has prepared a summarization of the ordinance providing for an annexation and zoning ordinance for W. H. Moore, JOaJ.ID Crawford, and Jack Joslin, pursuant to the City's action. I do hereby advise the City, and make this statement, that said summary is true and complete and provides adequate notice to the public of the provisions of said ordinance. You are hereby directed to file this statement with the ordinance, pursuant to the provisions ofIdaho Code 9 50-901(A). 4~ Wm. F. Nichols Enclosure Z:\Work\M\Meridian\Meridian 15360MIBlue Marlin AZ-03-025\Berg Sum Ord Ltr 0413 04.da: NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO I.e. ~ SO-90I(A) CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. ~ pe; -I (~ PROVIDING FOR AN ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE An Ordinance of the City of Meridian granting annexation and zoning for land owned by W.H. Moore, Joann Crawford and Jack Joslin, to be known as Blue Marlin, consisting of 57.84 acres and commonly located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Us tick Road and Eagle Road/SH 55, immediately n011h of the proposed Kissler/Cobbs/Ruwe annexation and zoning and east of Champion Park Subdivision, Meridian, Idaho, with a zoning designation ofC-G General Retail and Service.Commercial; and providing for effect of invalidity; providing that all ordinances and resolutions in conflict are repealed and rescinded; and providing an effective date. Legal Descrintion C-G ZONING A PORTION OF THE SE y,j, SECTION 32, TAN., R.IE., PREPARED FOR W.H. MOORE A parcel ofland being a portion of the SE l4 of Section 32, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a brass cap marking the southeast corner of said section 32; thence along the south boundary of said section 32, said south boundary also being the centerline of East Ustick Road, North 89044'36" West 1195.23 feet, thence leaving said south boundary along a line parallel with the west boundary of the SE l4 of the SE y,j of section 32; North 00030'05" East 25.00 to an iron pin on the North Right-of-Way line of East Ustick Road, thence leaving said North Right-of-Way line; North 00030'05" East 466.28 feet, thence North 89044'36" West 133.00 feet, thence North 00030'05" East 994.14 feet, thence North 28002'00" West 267.86 feet, thence North 44052'35" West 94.43 feet, thence North 31039'35" West 201.40 feet, thence North 47036'35" West 44.58 feet to a point on the south boundary of Jasmine Acres Subdivision, Book 59 of Plats at pages 5829-30, records of Ada County, thence along said south boundary, South 89046'35" East 1348.57 feet, thence South 00030'21" West 225.00 feet, thence South 89046'35" East 121.80 feet, thence leaving said south boundary of Jasmine Acres; South 89046'35" East 193.61 feet to a point on the east boundary of said section 32, thence along said east boundary, South 00030'22" West 1764.70 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 59.32 acres, more or less, and is subject to all covenants, rights, rights-of-ways and easements of record. This description is based on recorded information only. No field survey was completed in connection with this description. A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho. This ordinance shall become effective on the /q-/! day of /.J1H'1 L ,2001:" Ity of Meridian Mayor and City Council By: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk First Reading: 1--1 q - 6? ~ Adopted after first reading by suspension of 50-902: YES-L NO_ Second Reading: Third Reading: Z:\Work\M\Meridian\Meridian 15360M\Blue Marlin AZ-03-025\SUMANNEXZONGORD.doc . ~ f 1-'; City of Meridian c ~ublic ~~,~~'D~Pt. RECEIVED APR 9 2005 City of Meridian City Clerk Office Memo To: Mayor De Weerd & City ~ncjJ From: Brad Watson, P,E. 4~0 CC: File, City Clerk, City Attorney Date: 4/19/05 Re: April 19, 2005 City Council Meeting Agenda Item On March 15, 2005, United Water Idaho filed an application with the Public Utilities Commission to "amend and revise its Certificated of Public Convenience and Necessity in order to expand its service territory." Ihisfilingwas r"E:l'quested.by Black. Rock, LLC. You will recall that Dan WoodJ'T1~t seyeralpJ'T1esWi~hMayor ~nd Council over the last year on the proposed Black Rock Developmen~ requesting City of Meridian water and sewer service. Since the City is not ready to provide sewer service to this area, it appears Black Rock LLC is pursuing approval of a cluster-type development through Ada County. A map showing the service area requested by United Water is attached as well as copies of the Notice of Application, Decision Memorandum and the Commission Staff Report. I intend to submit written comments to the PUC in opposition to the majority of the proposed service area expansion based on the following points. Please provide any feedback on these points and I will revise or expand my comments accordingly. 1. Area Within Existina Area of Impact. The area within Meridian's Area of Impact should be deleted from UWI's request. This area has, since 1997, been included in all City of Meridian planning efforts including utilities and land use. 2. Area Within Referral Area. The remainder of the proposed service area west of the line %-mile west of Cloverdale Road has been included in the officially adopted sewer master planning area since 1993. VVhile the City of Meridian cannot at this point in time provide sewer service to the proposed Black Rock Development, sewer extensions are proceeding toward this area in a step-wise manner. 3. Pendina Plannina Efforts_ The City of Meridian intends to proceed this year with additional sewer and water master planning of the area south of the existing Area of Impact to Columbia Road, from McDennott Road on the west to ~-mile west of Cloverdale Road. The City of Meridian has every intention of including the subject area in its Area of Impact in the future. The City of Meridian will also undertake land use planning later this year in this same area. 4. Reaional Plannina Coordination. City of Meridian public works staff has met with both Boise City and City of Nampa public works staff to discuss which municipality will most logically serve the unincorporated area south of Meridian. We have also met with the City of Kuna's engineering consultant who is preparing their sewer master plan. No municipality, other than Meridian, has expressed a desire to provide municipal services to the subject area. 5. Future Restrictions to Services Extension. The presence of United Water in the subject area may restrict the City of Meridian from extending water and sewer service to its ultimate planning area by blocking the natural and logical extension of its lines. 6. No Obiection to Area Outside AOI and Referral Area. The City of Meridian does not object to UWI's request to serve the area east of the line Y:I.-mile west of Cloverdale Road. Ada County Ordinance No_ 345. I ~ MoridiaIn t..\-bm, SeMal F'larrmg NM IV muolCly ~ RRJ~~=~Cltf~ EJ l.4erkJian Nett of ay IqlIct ReRrnd Me. [2J lncorpo:rated ~ Meridian M~a of City Impact . d :;~ ;:l4 ~ 5 o (,) c: ~ c: ctl (,) ~ N D.5 - D.S 1 I,(Ja -------' ~Of ~ CG-:tad: Ada Cw'rty ~S<<Vice:s 65IJ Mai1 Strnetl Bo<so. IdaOO {2IJ8) J8.4.2277 9125/97 (mm} DONOVAN E. WALKER DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION PO BOX 83720 BOISE, IDAHO 83720-0074 (208) 334-0357 IDAHO BARNO. 5921 RECEIVED I]] fiLED 0 [nllS APR 15 PN 12: 42 IU!~r;G ;. liLLIe 1 UTlL rr'IES Cor'it'ilS S ION Street Address for Express Mail: 472 W. W ASlllNGTON BOISE, ill 83702-5983 Attorney for the Commission Staff BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ) UNITED WATER IDAHO INC. TO AMEND AND) CASE NO. UWI-W-OS-l REVISE ITS CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC ) CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY NO. 143. ) ) COMMENTS OF THE ) COMMISSION STAFF ) The Staff of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission, by and through its Attorney of record, Donovan E. Walker, Deputy Attorney General, in response to Order No. 29745, the Notice of Application and Notice of Modified Procedure in Case No. UWI-W-05-l issued on Aprill, 2005, respectfully submits the following comments. BACKGROUND United Water Idaho me. filed an Application seeking to amend and revise its Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity in order to expand its service territory. The Application was triggered by Black Rock LLC, an Idaho corporation, who requested that United Water provide domestic water and fire protection service to a proposed residential subdivision located in Ada County within an area bounded by Eagle Road, Amity Road, Lake Hazel Road, and Locust Grove Road. Black Rock consists of 4410t8 on approximately 42 buildable acres, with approximately 181 STAFF COMMENTS APRIL 15, 2005 acres of open areas. A map depicting the location of the Black Rock Development, United Water's current certificated boundary, and United Water's proposed certificated boundary was attached to the Company's Application asAttachment A United Water proposes to provide service pursuant to its Tariff No.1, General Metered Service, and in all respects will provide service pursuant to its Rules and Regulations as approved by the Commission. United Water submits that the extension into this area is consistent with the public convenience and necessity. STAFF ANALYSIS ill its Application, United Water is seeking to expand its certificated area boundary to encompass the Black Rock Development and much ofthe surrounding area. In fact, the Black Rock Development, by itself, represents only about 10 percent of the enti~e area for which United Water seeks to expand. The Black Rock Development lies outside of the city limits of the City of Meridian, but is immediately adjacent to Meridian's Area of Impact boundary. Attachment A is a map prepared by Staff shovv:ing the location of Meridian's Area of Impact in relation to the proposed Black Rock Development and to the expansion area sought by United Water. Although the Black Rock Development lies outside of the City's Area of Impact, the strip of land immediately north of the Black Rock Development lies within the Area of Impact. The authority of the Commission with regard to expansion of a water utility's certificated areas is spelled out in the Idaho Code, in pertinent part, as follows; 61-526. Certificate of convenience and necessity. - No. ..water corporation shall henceforth begin the construction of a.. .line, plant, or system or of any extension of such.. . line, plant, or system, without having first obtained from the ~ commission a certificate that the present or future public convenience and necessity require .such construction: provided, that this section shall not be construed to require such corporation to secure such certificate for an extension within any city or county, within which it shall have theretofore lawfully commenced operation, or for an extension into territory whether within or without a city or county, contiguous to its.. . line, plant, or system, and not therefore served by a public utility of like character,...and provided further, that if any public utility in constructing or extending its lines, plant, or system, shall interfere or be about to interfere with the operation of the line, plant, or system of any other public utility already constructed, or if public convenience and necessity does not require or will require such construction or extension, the commission on complaint of the public utility claiming to be injuriously affected, or on the commission's own motion, may, after hearing, STAFF CO:MMENTS APRIL 15,2005 make such an order and prescribe such terms and conditions for the locating or type of the line, plant or system affected as to it may seem just and reasonable.. . United Water, in its Application, correctly states that the area they are proposing to serve is not within the authorized territory of any other public utility water corporation under the jurisdiction of the Commission. The Application states that there are no known public utilities, persons, or corporations with whom the expansion is likely to compete, and the requested expansion would not interfere with the operation of any other water utility corporation under the jurisdiction of the Commission. This too, appears correct because the requested expansion area is not currently being served by any water utility, and because the only water utility likely to compete is the City of Meridian, which is not a public utility, person, or corporation under the jurisdiction of the Commission. The City of Meridian's intention to provide, and, in fact, require that it be the water service provider within its city limits and Area of Impact is apparent in an April 8, 2003 amendment to the City's July 2002 Comprehensive Plan. The following is an excerpt from that amendment: Urban Services Policies: The City of Meridian desires all development within its Area ofhnpact to be served with city services. Such services include sanitary sewer, water, fire, police, parks and libraries.... However, it is recognized that some development may precede the ability of the City, on its own, to extend services for such development. Upon formal requests to the City for development that is on property not immediately serviceable with urban services, the City may consider said applications. ... Expansion of the sanitary sewer and/or water systems may be at the option of either the City of Meridian or the developer. Developments within the Area of Impact but outside the City limits will only be considered if the following standards and conditions are agreed to by the developer( s): 1. The development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extensions to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development; 5. All developer-initiated system expansions (approved by the City) must be for properties which are adjacent to existing or previously approved projects where City sewer and water services are or will be provided. STAFF CONThlliNTS APRIL 15, 2005 (Reference Urban Services Amendment to the July 2002 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, approved April 8,.2003). The City of Meridian has been notified of the Application and comment deadline. It is Staffs understanding that Meridian intends to submit comments concurrently with Staff, and that its comments will oppose United Water's Application. It is also Staffs understanding, however, that the City of Meridian will be unable to provide service to the Black Rock Development or adjacent areas for several years in the near future_ If the Commission were to deny United Water's Application, it would effectively deny water service to Black Rock for an indefinite period of time. Especially given that Black Rock is located outside of Meridian's Area of Impact, Staff believes that the Commission should give approval to at least serve Black Rock. In addition, however, Staff also believes that it is reasonable and in the public interest for the Commission to approve expansion of the Company's certificated area to include the requested areas adjacent to Black Rock that are not within Meridian's Area of Impact. For those areas within Meridian's Area of Impact, Staff believes the Commission should carefully weigh additional arguments expected to be put forth by the City of Meridian and United Water regarding the ability and legal authority of each to provide service. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that United Water be granted approval to expand its certificated area to include all of those areas identified in its Application that are not located within the City of Meridian's Area of Impact. For those areas within the City's Area of Impact, Staff recommends that the Commission consider the arguments of the City of Meridian and United Water. Respectfully submitted this \5 th day of April 2005. ,~~G.k~ ? ~-- ~ Donovan E. Walker Deputy Attorney General Technical Staff: Rick Sterling i:umisclcomments/uwiw05.1 dWTps STAFF COMMENTS APRIL 15,2005 Attachment A Case No. UWI-W-05-1 Staff Comments 4/15105 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE THIS 15TH DAY OF APRIL 2005, SERVED THE FOREGOING COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSION STAFF, IN CASE NO. UWI-W-05-01, BY MAILING A COPY THEREOF, POSTAGE PREPAID, TO THE FOLLOWING: GREGORYP. WYATT UNITED WATER IDAHO INC PO BOX 190420 BOISE ill 83719-0420 DEAN JMILLERESQ McDEVITT & MILLER LLP PO BOX 2564 BOISE ill 83701 ~b~ SECRETAR CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ADA COUNTY RECORDE( JAVID NAVARRO BOJSE IDAHO 04/21105 01:45 PM DEPUTY Vicki Allen RECORDED - REQUEST OF Meridian City AMOUNT .00 1111111111I11111111111111111111111111 10504879::: CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. '(}4=- t!J 5" -II 4- ~ AN ORDINANCE FINDING THAT, WINSTON H. MOORE AND JOANN CRAWFORD AND JACK JOSLIN, THE OWNERS OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF USTICK ROAD AND EAGLE ROAD/SH 55, IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF THE PROPOSED KISSLER/COBBS/RUWE ANNEXATION AND EAST OF CHAMPION PARK SUBDIVISION, MERIDIAN, IDAHO, TO BE KNOWN AS BLUE MARLIN AND WHICH LIES CONTIGUOUS OR ADJACENT TO THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO; HAVE MADE A REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION IN WRITING TO THE COUNCIL; AND THAT SAID LAND BE ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND ZONING DESIGNATED GENERAL RETAIL AND SERVICE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (C-G); AND DECLARING THAT SAID LAND, BY PROPER LEGAL DESCRIPTION AS DESCRIBED BELOW, BE APART OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, ORDERS OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; AND DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ADD SAID PROPERTY TO THE OFFICIAL MAPS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO; AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN TO FILE A CERTIFIED COpy OF THE ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE AREAS TO BE ANNEXED WITH ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AUDITOR, TREASURER AND ASSESSOR, AND THE STATE TAX COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, PURSUANT TO IDAHO CODE SECTION 50-223 AND SECTION 63-2215. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1.~: That the following described land is contiguous and adjacent to the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for annexation to the City of Meridian, Idaho, by the owners of said Property, to-wit: LEGAL DESCRIPTION C-G ZONING A PORTION OF THE SE ~, SECTION 32, TAN., R.IE., ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE (AZ-03-025) - 1 PREPARED FOR W.H. MOORE A parcel ofland being a portion of the SE ~ of Section 32, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Melidian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a brass cap marking the southeast comer of said section 32; thence along the south boundary of said section 32, said south boundary also being the centerline of East Ustick Road, North 89044'36" West 1195.23 feet, thence leaving said south boundmy along a line parallel with the west boundary of the SE ~ of the SE ~ of section 32; North 00030'05" East 25.00 to an iron pin on the North Right-of-Way line of East Ustick Road, thence leaving said North Right-of-Way line; North 00030'05" East 466.28 feet, thence North 89044'36" West 133.00 feet, thence North 00030'05" East 994.14 feet, thence North 28002'00" West 267.86 feet, thence North 44052'35" West 94.43 feet, thence North 31039'35" West 201.40 feet, thence North 47036'35" West 44.58 feet to a point on the south boundary of Jasmine Acres Subdivision, Book 59 of Plats at pages 5829-30, records of Ada County, thence along said south boundary, South 89046'35" East 1348.57 feet, thence South 00030'21" West 225.00 feet, thence South 89046'35" East 121.80 feet, thence leaving said south boundary of Jasmine Acres; ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE (AZ-03-025) - 2 South 89046'35" East 193.61 feet to a point on the east boundary of said section 32, thence along said east boundary, South 00030'22" West 1764.70 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 59.32 acres, more or less, and is subject to. all covenants, rights, rights- of-ways and easements of record. This description is based on recorded information only. No field survey was completed in cOlmection with this description. SECTION 2: That the above-described real property be, and the same is hereby annexed and made a part of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. SECTION 3: That the real property herein by this ordinance annexed to the City of Meridian hereinabove described shall be zoned General Retail and Service Commercial District (C-G). SECTION 4: That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, comprehensive plan and all official maps depicting the boundaries of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 5: The zoning designation set forth in Section 3 of this ordinance is subject to the tenns and conditions of that certain Development Agreement by and between the City of Meridian and the owner ofthe land described in Section 1 dated the J '2 fh day of A-pnl , 20~ and that the uses are to be developed under the planned unit development process and conditional use permit process. SECTION 6: All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE (AZ-03-025) - 3 SECTION 7: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8: The Clerk of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner plainly and clearly designating the boundaries ofthe City of Meridian, including the lands herein annexed, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State ofIdaho, to- wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho, all in compliance with Idaho Code 963-2215 and 950-223. / a7:.A. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this ~ day of ~;L , 2004:~ AP~ED BY HIE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this ! q~ day of 7 ,2004.';1 allowed pursuant to Idaho Code 50- ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE (AZ-03-025) - 4 STATE OF IDAHO,) : ss. County of Ada ) On this I ~~ay of A-f;i r: I , 2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appear d TAMMY de WEERD and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the CITY of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. (SEAL) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. !I>~"'~~';;EI'~'''';#",### ~.. ...:t- ..........4t-./' ~ " .: ....~/ .. ...~ ~ ,:" ! ~OTA~.r""~ \ a " i -0- 1 )( ~ '\ $_\ PlJBL\Cj j \~i.~:.~::~;.~~;-~~<' Z:\ Work\M\Meridian\Meridian 15360M\Blue Marlin AZ-03-025\AZOrd.doc ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE (AZ-03-025) - 5 1 .....fi'" .--. ~;g Vi Z 0;" z Q> 0 ~ : -'J n C ~ ;:r, ~~~: ~~ ,~ s ~ ~ (~;~;rs/ /7 ,;,'s7~:u ":;~ /' ;' ,r; ~(;~;,!~;;:!;~O ./t/ //./ ./ //,/ // ,,/ /' // /::f7/ / .,t'; t,/ / // // / // ///' // /,/ ~ s'// z o ~~// / /' / / / " / //"'cv ~~ ;:;i/ "? // / ./ / / ,/ / /" ~ ,0 t5 g//~~%>/// /~~//;/)~ , "//,, ///... /,.// ~/ / // / ,// // //. /'// // //// // ~/ // /'//./ /' / // / / / //. //~ 1Il / / / ,/ / ,/ /' /' / / ,/ ,// //'. ./ J/ // ~ /,// / // / / -0/ ,/' // / / /Sg.//. ~' // // ,/ // // /~// ,./ .,/ / ,/" //' ,~~/ i / ./ ./ /' // iJ ./ ./ /./ /1 / b1' ./ ~ Y // ,./. / ,,' /&?/./ /'// ,///' ~/ . C / ,/ /// "./ /l'l//// ./ ,/ , , / ,/ ,,/ / / / / / 0 ///// /////~Z / // / //. / //0/ .../'/ /'/./ / ~i~ /. /~,// ,../' // ./ ! /. ,//// /. /'/ /' /." /. /~ ~ / / ./ / ./' "./ G") / / ' ./ /,// ./ .' r'1 .~/// //// // //8/ .,/./../ / ,/ "~/'./ ~,// // /" ,/,./ //z,// '//./////'// N. / ////// fTl/ '////'// / ~{/;~<//>;/;~:>;~~~// .~ // /. // ///,,/ / // / / // '/, ,/ /// ,/ L / / /// / // ././ // / /./ /./ / ~o ~:,;-,(J:.' / / / / ./ /,/ ./ /./ / ' o. ::: ,~ / ./ / / / / ./ ./ / ./ / / .' .f2', ~6 ti. d /// /.// /,/./.// /./'//./'/ /./ / / /'/./3/~'o,; ;;:: J9'[5L "on?: 1/ / // / ./' ./ ./.// ,/ ./ ./ / / c...i :~U::I:',o+. g~ ~' ./ /" / .// // ,/ .// .// /' / / / ... -J, ~~ I ~ ~,,/ ././// ./ // // /' /,/ ./ ./' ./' '/ / '//~bl~, ~~ q ~ / -' / , / " / ./ /,/ / ,1,/ /' ~~ ~$.. J ~/ ..../ ,./ / / // ,./".!.:;'~tL/ ,/ / 1/ /' //~:'-,f. NOISlI\lGans S3~J'<f JNIf'lS'iJ' Jsr,97.68S I ' '."Il)'!. S"!-J?:---;v::s. !.6\'.5R,.; ~~tC\.l .~(i) (-- ,." '1) -cAl I.I'l fX s..) !d ~ (] M Pi 0 ,~!8 ~i~ /"T17 c) .:::::. 0; ~ 0 0 n n :z; :0 :<l ? d . N E'd 2800 2irE b02 d1S:irO EO 11 d~S Tara Green From: Brad Watson [watsonb@merldiancity.org] Sent; Thursday, April 21, 2005 9:14 AM To: Mayor De Weerd; Will Berg; Tara Green; Shaun Wardle Cc: Rick Clinton Subject: Cross Connection Control Program Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Green Although I think it was Council's thought that Rick and I would be back to answer questions on the cross connection control program at next week's Council meeting, we would like to postpone it until May 3. This will allow us time to gather information to better answer some of the questions that came up. Unless I hear different from any of you, we will be prepared to discuss this again at the May 3 Council meeting. Thank you, Brad 4/29/2005 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a Request for Annexation and Zoning of 76.29 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Low Density Residential) AND Preliminary Plat Approval of One- Hundred-Seventy-Five (175) Single-Family Residential Building Lots and Twenty (20) Other/Common Lots AND Conditional Use Permit Approval for a Planned Development with Reductions to Lot Frontage, Increased Block Length and Reduction in Density to Less Than Three (3) Dwelling Units per Acre for Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2, by Traditions by Amyx II, LLP. Case No(s): AZ-05-006, PP-05-00S, CUP-05-019 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 19,2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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 g67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the April 19, 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 record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code g67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code gg 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). AZ-05-006 / PP-05-00S / CUP-05-019- PAGE I of5 evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof 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 Plalming & Zoning Recommendation for the subject application(s), it is hereby verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings is Traditions by Amyx II, LLP. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibits G, H, and I for the findings required for these applications. B. Conclusions of Law 1. 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. ~67- 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 6, 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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Preliminary Plat dated November 23,2004 as shown in Exhibit B, the Site Plan dated November 23, 2004 as shown in Exhibit C, the Annexation and Zoning Comments as shown in Exhibit D, the Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions as shown in Exhibit E, and the CUPIPD Site Specific and Standard Conditions as shown in Exhibit F. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. CITY OF MERJDlAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-006 / PP-OS-008 I CUP-OS-O 19- PAGE 2 of S 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 Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat dated November 23,2004 is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The applicant's Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated November 23,2004 is hereby conditionally approved; and, 3, The Site Specific and Standard Conditions are as shown in Exhibits E and F. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Pennit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the council. During this time, the pennit holder must commence the use as permitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. In this context "structures" shall include sewer and water lines, streets or building construction. The applicant has specified in the application and to the commission and council a construction schedule and completion date for the project. If the completion date specified for the project is exceeded, the conditional use application shall become null and void. However, the applicant may submit an application for a time extension on the project for city council review. The application for time extension shall be submitted at least thirty (30) days prior to the deadline for completion of the project. For projects requiring platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one year from the original date of approval by the council. If the successive phases are not submitted within one year intervals, the conditional approval ofthe future phases shall be null and void. (MCC 11-17-4.B.) 2. Notice of Twelve (12) Month Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that after the date of approval of the preliminary plat, the owner or developer shall have one year within which to file the request for approval of the final plat. After approval of final plat, the owner or developer shall have one year to begin construction of the public utilities and one year thereafter to complete construction of those public facilities. (MCC 12-2-4.B & C.) E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-006/ PP.OS-008 / CUP-OS-O] 9- PAGE 3 of 5 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action ofthe governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use pennit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Approved Preliminary Plat (with conditions) Exhibit C: Approved Site Plan (with conditions) Exhibit D: Annexation and Zoning Conunents Exhibit E: Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions Exhibit F: CUP/PD Site Specific and Standard Conditions Exhibit G: Zoning Amendment Findings Exhibit H: Preliminary Plat Findings Exhibit I: CUP/PD Findings By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the i C\ 1\--.. day of Apr I \ , 2005. COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED+ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED --4JA- MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED~ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-006/ PP-05-008 / CUP-05-0 19- PAGE 4 of 5 (TIE BREAKER) and City Attorney. BY:,\ha 9lhOIAf'.. City Clerk's Office Dated: 4-- 2 q -05" CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-006/ PP-05-008 / CUP-05-0 19- PAGE 5 of 5 EXHIBIT A Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 AZ-05-006 Legal Description (3 pages) Pr?~~(! >10 ()4-161:-(J:; Th""ce $V\llb 89"5 j ',,5" EaR', 563.4(1 fe,,1 D. Terryi"ellgh. LLs I' I'. ~" .. J1 ~" " , () EXHIBIT B Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 PP-05-008 1\PP.roved Preliminary Plat III i~I~"!i ~~,i:~11;H j~1 ;IH J~ ~j fniU !~~~f'i! j1 ~ i I~: H~Ui .; "~H EXHIBIT C Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 CUP-05-019 Approved Site Plan EXHIBIT D Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 AZ-OS-006 Annexation and Zoning Comments ANEXA TION & ZONING COMMENTS 1. The legal description submitted with the application (dated 12-9-04, amended 1-25- 05, stamped by D. Terry Peugh) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian and is approved. 2. Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time. 3. A Development Agreement (DA) will be required as part of an annexation of this property. Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The aDDlicant shall contact the Citv Attornev Bill Narv at 888-4433 to initiate this nrocess. The DA shall incorporate the following: · That the applicant agrees to construct a continuous multi-use pathway from the west property line throughout the site to the south property line. Further, the applicant agrees to provide the City with all easemeats and legal descriptions for the any portions of the multi-use pathway that are €'Hffefltly off-site (under ACHD ownership and church ownership), prior to final plat signature. · That the applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. · That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. 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. EXHIBIT E Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 PP-05-008 Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS (PRELIMINARY PLAT) 1. The preliminary plat prepared by Engineering Solutions, LLP, dated 11-23-04, is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All conditions of the accompanying Annexation/Zoning (AZ-05-006) and Conditional Use Permit (CUP-05-006) application shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-05- 008). 2. In addition to the street system proposed, construct a public stub street to the 5- acre Wagnild parcel (Parcel No. S0532427810) to the south. 3. The submitted 2-page landscape plan prepared by Harvest Design, Inc., dated 1- 19-05 is approved as submitted, with the following modifications: · If allowed by ACHD, install one tree for every 35-feet of frontage on the McMillan Road right-of-way. Coordinate the license/maintenance agreement with ACHD for any landscaping within the right-of-way. · In addition to sidewalk, construct a minimum 10-foot wide gravel shoulder along McMillan Road and landscape the remaining portion of the right-of-way with lawn or other ACHD approved groundcover. Coordinate the license/maintenance agreement with ACHD for any landscaping within the right-of-way. · The applicant shall work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection/mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. · All areas being counted toward the open space requirement shall be free of "wet ponds" or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the required open space are subject to Ordinance 12-13-14 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees, as depicted on the submitted landscape plan. 4. Except for the North Slough (aka Settlers Canal), all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12- 4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non- approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association approval can't be obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the Meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 5. The applicant has not indicated who will own and operate the pressurized irrigation system within this development. Underground year-round pressurized irrigation must be provided to aU lots within this development. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to remain a private homeowners' association system, complete plans and specifications shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development plan review process. A draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual shall be submitted prior to plan approvaL The applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 6. Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, all structures on this site shall be removed. 7. Place a note on the face of the final plat stating that all future front garage setbacks shall be 20-feet as measured from the property line or the back of sidewalk, whichever is more restrictive. 8. All portions of buildings located on all lots within the development should be within ISO-feet of a paved surface (as measured around the perimeter of the building). A minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion ofthe project, which serves more than 50 homes. The two entrances shall be separated by no less than Y2 the diagonal measurement of the proj ect. Prior to issuance of the 51 5t building permit, a secondary emergency access approved by the Meridian Fire Department shall be provided. 9. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of building permits. All fences shall taper down to 3-feet maximum within 20 feet of all right- of-way. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with MCC 12-4-10. Fencing adjacent to any section of the multi-use pathway shall be installed in accordance with MCC 12-13-15-9. The applicant shall construct wrought iron fencing on both sides of the North Slough (for multi-use pathway visibility). 10. Maintenance of aU common areas shall be the responsibility of the Zebulon Heights No.2 Homeowners' Association. 11. Permanent sanitary sewer service to this development is to be provided by the undeveloped North Slough Trunk. Temporarily sewer service will be provided by the Lift Station serving VielU1a Woods Subdivision. At this time sewer does not exist at the location the applicant has shown on the preliminary plat. The applicant will be responsible for the extension of utilities to and through this proposed development. Sizing and routing shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. If this application is approved, it shall be subject to availability of the sanitary sewer. The applicant shall also be responsible for any upgrades to the lift station that may be necessary to increase the capacity to handle this development. 12. Water service shall be from extensions of the existing main in E. McMillan Road, and the future phase of Settlement Bridge. Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer and water mains to and through this proposed development, thereby making them available to adjacent properties. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard fonns of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. 13. Direct lot access to McMillan Road is prohibited. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access to McMillan Road. 14. The City recommends that the applicant coordinate with the Parkins-Nourse User's Association on coming up with a solution to the existing access problem to the irrigation pipe adjacent to Wainwright Drive in Boise City. GENERAL CONDITIONS (PRELIMINARY PLAT) 1. All grading ofthe site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2. Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to MCC 12-13-10-8. 3. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 1] 0% will be required for all fencing, landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 4. A detailed landscape and fencing plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance and as noted in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application. 5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 6. Two-hundred-fiftyand one-hundred-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior commencing installations. 7. Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 8. Submit any up-dated groundwater/soils monitoring data, as collected and analyzed by a soils scientist, to the Public Works Department for review. Any drainage areas (detention/retention basins) must be designed to ensure that water will percolate or discharge with a period of time not to exceed 24-hours for all storms up to and including a 1 DO-year storm events. Side slopes within drainage areas shall not exceed 3: 1. Any portion of a drainage area not improved with sod/grass seed (or other approved landscaping) shall not count towards the required open space area. The project engineer should pay close attention to the results of field studies detennining the groundwater, soil type & and characteristics during the design and construction phases. The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of3-feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least I-foot above groundwater. 9. The applicant shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 10. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 11. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 12, Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying that all street finish centerline elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. 13. The applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution 02-374. 14. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 15. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 16. Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation/conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 17. Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in MCC 12-2-4. OTHER AGENCYIDEPARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits. f Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 5. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 7. To increase emergency access to the site a minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than 50 homes. The two entrances should be separated by no less than Y2 the diagonal measurement of the project. 8. The proposed 175-10t subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 508 residents at build out. 9. The proposed project lies outside the five-minute response zone goal. Achievement of this goal is subject to budgetary constraints and is intended to enhance the probability of a favorable outcome on a request for Basic Life Support. The budget constraints are typically defined as capital outlay for facilities that are located within 1.5 miles from a given location and sufficient operational funds to staff the facilities. 10. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 11. tIe parkiRg sigRS aRe paifltee e'l.:lfBs Hill Be reEJ.l:1iree fer all Fife LaRes. MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Pathway and Trail standards: The proposed pathway and/or trail shall meet the standards as set forth in the August 2003 Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System Plan, pgs. 3-2 and 3-3, sections B & C. 2. Standard for City to assume Maintenance of a section of Pathway: The pathway must connect from one major arterial to another, and either an easement or ownership deed must be granted before the city will assume the maintenance of any section of pathway. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF ApPROVAL 1. Enter into a cooperative development agreement for the allocation of costs for the sidewalk on McMillan Road abutting the ACHD storm drainage ponds (approximately 665-feet.) 2. Construct the main entrance, Camas Creeks Avenue, to intersect McMillan Road in alignment with the main entrance into Austin Creek Located on the north side of McMillan Road. 3. Construct East Wainwright Drive (from the east property line to Lot 20 Block 10) as a residential collector with no access or front-on housing. Construct this segment of Wainwright Drive as a 30-foot street section with vertical curb, gutter and 5-foot concrete sidewalks within 50feet of right-of-way, as proposed. 4. Construct the remainder of the local streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and sidewalk within 50-feet or right-of-way, as proposed. 5. Extend Wainwright Drive into the site from the east property line adjacent to the north property line, as proposed. 6. Construct a stub street to the south property line approximately 460-feet east of the west property line, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating, "This roadway will be extended in the future." 7. Extend a previously approved stub street from the west property line approximately 875-feet south of McMillan Road, as proposed. 8. Extend Rochester Drive from the east property line approximately 138-feet south of the north property line, as proposed. 9. Construct a stub street to the east property line approximately 370-feet north of Wainwright Drive, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating, "This roadway will be extended in the future." 10. Provide access to the located to the east of this site just north of Wainwright Drive, by constructing Wainwright Drive as a "quasi-stub street" that runs along the north property line of this site, as proposed. Construct Wainwright Drive as a full 36-foot street section and place the right-of-way line abutting 7.260, 1.19, 5.0-acre sties to provide them with future access to the public transportation system, as proposed. 11. Construct six (6) cul-de-sac turnarounds without center islands within the subdivision, as proposed. Construct the turnarounds to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 12. Construct an eastbound right turn lane on McMillan Road at the McMillan Road and Camas Creek Way intersection, as recommend by the submitted traffic impact study. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 13. Construct a westbound left turn lane on McMillan Road at the McMillan Road and Camas Creek Way intersection, as recommended by the submitted traffic impact study. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 14. If the applicant chooses to landscape the storm drainage ponds, the applicant shall obtain a license agreement and have the landscape and sprinkler plan reviewed and approved by the ACHD Drainage Division. 15. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF ApPROVAL 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIG LINE (1- 800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHDright-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387- 6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. Portions of the proposed development do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the public areas. The applicant should meet with the Police Chief to discuss features that increase visibility of the multi-use pathway where natural surveillance is not ideal. The site plan and/or landscaping plan shall be revised in accord with those discussions. 2. Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if solid fencing is used adjacent to a pathway. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT 1. All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facility involved is the North Slough (Settlers) Canal (60' easement), Little Lateral (20' easement), and the Parkins Nourse lateral (30' easement). 2. A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 3. A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.LD. facilities. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 5. All stOlTI1 drainage must be retained on-site. 6. The development must supply irrigation access to all lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. Tfthe developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. EXHIBIT F Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 CUP-05-019 CUP/PO Site Specific and Standard Conditions SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/PD) 1. The PD site plan prepared by Engineering Solutions, LLP, dated 11-23-04, is approved, with the conditions listed herein. The applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the Annexation/Zoning (AZ-OS-006) and Preliminary Plat (PP_ 05-08) as a condition of the Conditional Use Penn it (CUP-OS-006). 2. The project shall confonn to the R-4 dimensional standards, except as follows: · Minimum frontage: 50-feet (non cul-de-sac lots). · Block 7 is allowed to exceed the 1,OOO-foot block length. No other variances, exceptions or reductions to the City adopted dimensional standards or uses are approved with this CUP application. 3. The following amenities are required as part of the Planned Development, per the application: playground equipment on Lot 1, Block 6; a swimming pool with restroom/locker/changing areas and playground equipment on Lot 5, Block 8; a multi-use pathway throughout the development; and, & Five (5) percent of the site set aside for open space (exclusive of the channel for the North Slough). Said multi-use pathway shall be construct a minimum of lO-feet wide. Prior to signature of the final plat, a permanent pedestrian easement, in favor of the City of Meridian, shall be recorded for the multi-use pathway. The easement(s) shall be sufficient width to cover the lO-wide pathway. Additionally, a note shall be added to the face of the final plates) indicating the City of Meridian is responsible for the maintenance of the pathway surface located within the easement. The applicant shall be required to obtain a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) from the City prior to construction of any pennanent structures on the proposed park lots. 4. The applicant shall work with Meridian Planning & Zoning staff and ACHD staff on striping, signage, or other means to create an efficient multi-use pathway crossing of the public streets. The applicant shall install signs or other means to infonn the traveling public (striping crosswalks, etc.) of pathway/street intersections (where deemed appropriate by ACHD staff and City staff). 5. Construction within Zebulon Heights Subdivision No. 2 shall substantially comply with the seventeen (17) elevations submitted by the applicant. Construction materials used on the structures shall be approved by the City of Meridian Building Department and in accordance with the most recent Building Code. OTHER AGENCY/DEPARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of l,OOO gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 Yz" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red la' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing penuits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 5. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 7. To increase emergency access to the site a minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than 50 homes. The two entrances should be separated by no less than Yz the diagonal measurement of the project. 8. The proposed 175-10t subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 508 residents at build out. 9. The proposed project lies outside the five-minute response zone goal. Achievement of this goal is subject to budgetary constraints and is intended to enhance the probability of a favorable outcome on a request for Basic Life Support. The budget constraints are typically defined as capital outlay for facilities that are located within 1.5 miles from a given location and sufficient operational funds to staff the facilities. 10. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 11. No parking signs and painted curbs will be required for all Fire Lanes. MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Pathway and Trail standards: The proposed pathway and/or trail shall meet the standards as set forth in the August 2003 Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System Plan, pgs. 3-2 and 3-3, sections B & C. 2. Standard for City to assume Maintenance of a section of Pathway: The pathway must connect from one major arterial to another, and either an easement or ownership deed must be granted before the city will assume the maintenance of any section of pathway. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF ApPROVAL 1. Enter into a cooperative development agreement for the allocation of costs for the sidewalk on McMillan Road abutting the ACHD stonn drainage ponds (approximately 665-feet.) 2. Construct the main entrance, Camas Creeks A venue, to intersect McMillan Road in aligmnent with the main entrance into Austin Creek Located on the north side of McMillan Road. 3. Construct East Wainwright Drive (from the east property line to Lot 20 Block 10) as a residential collector with no access or front-on housing. Construct this segment of Wainwright Drive as a 3D-foot street section with vertical curb, gutter and 5-foot concrete sidewalks within 50feet of right-of-way, as proposed. 4. Construct the remainder of the local streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and sidewalk within 50-feet or right-of-way, as proposed. 5. Extend Wainwright Drive into the site from the east property line adjacent to the north property line, as proposed. 6. Construct a stub street to the south property line approximately 460-feet east of the west property line, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating, <<This roadway will be extended in the future." 7. Extend a previously approved stub street from the west property line approximately 875-feet south of McMillan Road, as proposed. 8. Extend Rochester Drive from the east property line approximately 13S-feet south of the north property line, as proposed. 9. Construct a stub street to the east property line approximately 370-feet north of Wainwright Drive, as proposed. Install a sign at the tenninus of the roadway stating, "This roadway will be extended in the future." 10. Provide access to the located to the east of this site just north of Wainwright Drive, by constructing Wainwright Drive as a "quasi-stub street" that runs along the north property line ofthis site, as proposed. Construct Wainwright Drive as a full 36-foot street section and place the right-of-way line abutting 7.260, 1.19, S.O-acre sties to provide them with future access to the public transportation system, as proposed. 11. Construct six (6) cul-de-sac turnarounds without center islands within the subdivision, as proposed. Construct the turnarounds to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 12. Construct an eastbound right turn lane on McMillan Road at the McMillan Road and Camas Creek Way intersection, as recommend by the submitted traffic impact study. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff 13. Construct a westbound left turn lane on McMillan Road at the McMillan Road and Camas Creek Way intersection, as recommended by the submitted traffic impact study. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 14. If the applicant chooses to landscape the storm drainage ponds, the applicant shall obtain a license agreement and have the landscape and sprinkler plan reviewed and approved by the ACHD Drainage Division. 15. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF ApPROVAL 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required penuits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in confonuance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1- 800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387- 6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confinuation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. Portions of the proposed development do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the public areas. The applicant should meet with the Police Chief to discuss features that increase visibility of the multi-use pathway where natural surveillance is not ideal. The site plan and/or landscaping plan shall be revised in accord with those discussions. 2. Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if solid fencing is used adjacent to a pathway. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design ofthe subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stonnwater disposal and design a storm water management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT 1. All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facility involved is the North Slough (Settlers) Canal (60' easement), Little Lateral (20' easement), and the Parkins Nourse lateral (30' easement). 2. A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 3. A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.LD. facilities. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 5. AU storm drainage must be retained on-site. 6. The development must supply inigation access to all lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers lnigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. EXHIBIT G Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 AZ-05-006 Zoning Amendment Findings According to Meridian City Code (MCC) 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both the Pla1ming & Zoning Commission and Council are required "to review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed zoning amendment in tenns 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 by City Council: 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; In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, 'medium density' is defined as areas including single-family homes at densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. The applicant is requesting that all the subject site be zoned R-4 (Low Density Residential). The R-4 district allows for a maximum of four (4) dwelling units per acre (MCCIl-7-2.C). Although the requested zoning designation, R-4, allows densities consistent with the medium density Comprehensive Plan designation, the proposed residential density is only 2.4 gross dwelling units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan does allow a one step increase or decrease in residential areas without amending the Comprehensive Plan. Due to the existing one-acre lots in Heritage Subdivision to the west, City Council believes that a step down in density is justified here. If the City approves an R-4 zone (and associated PP and CUP applications), the proposed zoning/density will allow a smooth transition from the estate lot sizes in Heritage Subdivision to the urban lots in Madison Park to the east. Further, 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): "Develop and maintain greenbelts along waterways." (Chapter V, Goal 1, Objective A, Action item 4) The applicant is proposing to leave the North Slough open abutting this site. In accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant is proposing to construct a Multi-Use Pathway along the slough and throughout the development, thereby enhancing the natural features and the development. "Require new residential development to meet development standards regarding landscaping, signage, fences and walls, etc." (Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective C, Action item 4) If the applicant complies with the conditions in this report, the development will meet the standards for landscaping, signage, fences and walls outlined in City Code. "Require useable open space to be incorporated into new residential subdivision plats." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action item 3) The applicant is proposing to set aside approximately 8 percent of the site as open space. In addition, in the applicant's letter (from Shari Stiles) other Comprehensive Plan policies are listed supporting the annexation and proposed residential use of the property. Citv Council finds that if the applicant comolies with the conditions included in this reoort. the overall desifm of the subdivision would be in general conformance with the Citv of Meridian Comorehensive 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 preliminary plat proposing single-family lots on the subject site (Zebulon Heights No. 2 Subdivision, PP-05-008). City Council does not anticipate that the applicant plans to rezone the subject property in the future if the accompanying CUP and PP applications are approved. 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 the proposed single-family development could be allowed within the requested R-4 zone, ifthe accompanying Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development is also approved. 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 other properties in the area have been developed in a manner similar to the proposed subdivision, with single-family dwelling units. Austin Creek Subdivision to the north and Madison Park Subdivision to the east have gross densities of approximately 4 dwelling units per acre. Heritage Subdivision to the south has a residential density of approximately 1 dwelling unit per acre while Settlement Bridge Subdivision has a density of 3.7 dwelling units per acre. There have been no recent street improvements in the area. This section of McMillan Road abutting the site is in ACHD's Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for road widening in 2015. Locust Grove Road in this area is not currently scheduled within ACHD's Five Year Work Program or Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for roadway widening. Other urban services, such as sewer and water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend such services to the site. City Council finds that the subject site is proposed for development in a fashion similar to other properties in the area. 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; City Council finds that the requested zoning and proposed density is within the anticipated range for a lower density urban project. Further, based on the Comprehensive Plan, City Council believes that some of the existing large county parcels in the area (south and east) will redevelop with similar densities in the near future. City Council also finds that the proposed zoning/uses can be designed and constructed in a manner that will be hannonious with, and appropriate in appearance with, the existing and intended character of the surrounding area. The existing character of the area will, and is, currently changing, especially upon build-out of the proposed project and other similar subdivisions in the general vicinity. F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; The applicant has submitted seventeen (17) front elevations for the proposed dwelling units. City Council believes that the design of the dwelling units will be compatible with the adjoining uses, if the buildings are constructed as shown on the submitted elevations. City Council does not anticipate that the proposed residential uses will be disturbing or hazardous to existing or future uses as long as the conditions outlined in this report are complied with and house construction is conducted in a manner consistent with City Code. 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; Permanent sanitary sewer service to this development is to be provided by the undeveloped North Slough Trunk. Temporarily sewer service will be provided by the Lift Station serving Vienna Woods Subdivision. At this time sewer does not exist at the location the applicant has shown on the preliminary plat. The applicant will be responsible for the extension of utilities to and through this proposed development. Sizing and routing shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. If this application is approved, it shall be subject to availability of the sanitary sewer. The applicant shall also be responsible for any upgrades to the lift station that may be necessary to increase the capacity to handle this development. Water service shall be from extensions of the existing main in E. McMillan Road, and the future phase of Settlement Bridge. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fees. On March 9, 2005, ACHD approved this development with site-specific and standard conditions. The applicant should comply with all requirements of the ACHD. Please review the ACHD report for additional information regarding this finding. On February 25, 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 cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; If approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, local street infrastructure, utilities and irrigation services to serve the project. The primary public costs to serve the future residents will be fire, police, school facilities and services. City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed amlexation and zoning 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; According to the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) prepared by Washington Group International the proposed project is anticipated to generate 2,368 (including the office portion approved in Boise City). City Council recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of this subdivision; however, City Council does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. City Council does not anticipate the proposed annexation and subsequent uses will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. City Council finds that the proposed residential zoning/uses will not be detrimental to people, property or the general welfare of the area. 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; The applicant is proposing to construct one public street entrance into the site from McMillan Road and extend two other stubs streets from the east. The extension of Rochester Drive from Madison Park Subdivision and Wainwright Drive from Zebulon Heights Subdivision No. 1 will cause traffic volumes on the existing portions of the streets to increase. However, the increase in volume is within ACHD acceptable range for local/commercial/collector streets. Please review the ACHD report for this project for additional information regarding this finding. If the proposed vehicular approaches (streets) are approved and accepted by ACHD, City Council does not believe that the subdivision will create interference with traffic on the surrounding public streets. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance; and City Council finds that there are some existing trees and other mature landscaping on this site. Any existing trees larger than 4" caliper that are removed shall be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance (MCC 12-13-13). The applicant should work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing and implementing a protection plan. If any trees are deemed to be a hazard, diseased or dying by the City Arborist, prior to removal, mitigation will not be required for those trees. The applicant is proposing to leave the North Slough open abutting the site. City Council believes that the North Slough is a scenic feature that should be protected. City Council finds that the proposed annexation and zoning should not result in the loss or damage of any natural or scenic features, as long as the existing trees are protected/mitigated and the North Slough is relocated and protected in manner that does not negatively impact its beauty. City Council is not aware of any natural or scenic feature(s) that would be lost, damaged or destroyed by allowing this site to be annexed, zoned and developed with residential uses. 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, Inc., shows that the property is contiguous to the existing corporate boundary ofthe City of Meridian. The land directly west of the subject property was previously annexed into the City and this is a logical expansion of the City boundary. City Council finds that all essential services are available or will be provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public funds. The applicant is proposing to develop the land in substantial compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. In accordance with the findings listed above, Citv Council finds that the annexation/zoning of this orooertv would be in the best interest of the Citv. EXHIBIT H Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 PP-05-008 Preliminary Plat Findings Meridian City Code (MCC) 12-3-3 J.2 and 12-3-5 D read as follows: "In determining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission/Council shall consider the objectives of this title and at least the following: A. The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan; Please see Annexation a11d Zoning item "A". B. The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development; City Council finds that public services can be made available to accormnodate the proposed development. See Annexation and Zoning items "G" and "H" for more details. C. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, City Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. The public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; See Annexation and Zoning item "H" and the Agency Comments and Conditions for more detail. E. The other health, safety or environmental problems that may be brought to the Commission's attention. City Council is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. EXHIBIT I Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 CUP-05-019 CUP/PDFindings The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11- 17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and aU yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; As part of the Planned Development (PD) the applicant is requesting relief from the standard street frontage requirement of the R-4 zone, as required by Meridian City Code. . City Council finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the requested use and all other required ordinance features. Although the site is large enough to accommodate all of the features required by ordinance, the applicant has asked, through the Planned Development, to modify specific development standards. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; City Council finds that the proposed single-family residential subdivision is l!:enerally harmonious with and in accordance with the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map, which designates the land to be "Medium Density Residential" (provided the Commission and Council grant the requested planned development). Please see Annexation & Zoning item "A". C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; Please see Annexation & Zoning item "E". D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; City Council finds that the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of approval, will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; Please see Annexation & Zoning items "G" and "H", the Other Agency/Department Comments and Conditions, and any comments that may be submitted to the City Clerk regarding this project. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Please see Annexation & Zoning item "H". G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Please see Annexation and Zoning item "I". H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; Please see Annexation & Zoning item "J". The Commission and Council should review any comments received from the ACHD and/or!TD regarding this project when detennining this finding. I. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Please see Annexation & Zoning item "K". CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a Request for Annexation and Zoning of 76.29 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Low Density Residential) AND Preliminary Plat Approval of One- Hundred-Seventy-Five (175) Single-Family Residential Building Lots and Twenty (20) Other/Common Lots AND Conditional Use Permit Approval for a Planned Development with Reductions to Lot Frontage, Increased Block Length and Reduction in Density to Less Than Three (3) Dwelling Units per Acre for Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2, by Traditions by Amyx II, LLP. Case No(s): AZ-05-006, PP-05-008, CUP-05-019 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 19, 2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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 967- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the Apri119, 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 record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code 967-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code S9 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as CITY OF MERIDIAN FrNDrNGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-006 f PP-05-008 f CUP-05-0] 9- PAGE I of 5 evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof 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 Plmming & Zoning Recommendation for the subject application(s), it is hereby verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings is Traditions by Amyx II, LLP. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibits G, H, and I for the findings required for these applications. B. Conclusions of Law 1. 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. g67- 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 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code g 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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Preliminary Plat dated November 23,2004 as shown in Exhibit B, the Site Plan dated November 23, 2004 as shown in Exhibit C, the Annexation and Zoning Comments as shown in Exhibit D, the Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions as shown in Exhibit E, and the CUPIPD Site Specific and Standard Conditions as shown in Exhibit F. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. CITY OF MERIDIAN FrNDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-006 I PP-05-008 I CUP-05-0 19- PAGE 2 of 5 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 Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat dated November 23, 2004 is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The applicant's Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated November 23, 2004 is hereby conditionally approved; and, 3. The Site Specific and Standard Conditions are as shown in Exhibits E and F. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the council. During this time, the pennit holder must commence the use as permitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. In this context "structures" shall include sewer and water lines, streets or building construction. The applicant has specified in the application and to the commission and council a construction schedule and completion date for the project. If the completion date specified for the project is exceeded, the conditional use application shall become null and void. However, the applicant may submit an application for a time extension on the project for city council review. The application for time extension shall be submitted at least thirty (30) days prior to the deadline for completion of the project. For projects requiring platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one year from the original date of approval by the council. If the successive phases are not submitted within one year intervals, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and void. (MCC 11-17-4.B.) 2. Notice of Twelve (12) Month Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that after the date of approval of the preliminary plat, the owner or developer shall have one year within which to file the request for approval ofthe final plat. After approval of final plat, the owner or developer shall have one year to begin construction of the public utilities and one year thereafter to complete construction of those public facilities. (MCC 12-2-4.B & C.) E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-006/ PP-05-008 / CUP-05-0 19- PAGE 3 of 5 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please fake notice that this is a final action of the governing body ofthe City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use pennit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Approved Preliminary Plat (with conditions) Exhibit C: Approved Site Plan (with conditions) Exhibit D: Annexation and Zoning Comments Exhibit E: Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions Exhibit F: CUP/PD Site Specific and Standard Conditions Exhibit G: Zoning Amendment Findings Exhibit H: Preliminary Plat Findings Exhibit 1: CUP/PD Findings By actio!,! of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the \q-th day of Apyu\ ,2005. COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED-4fA-- MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED_ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). AZ-05-006! PP-05-00S / CUP-05-0 19- PAGE 4 of 5 (TIE BREAKER) and City Attorney. By: J/l.h 1'1 ~~ IllYu City Clerk's Office Dated: 4.. 7.F\ - OS CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CAS E NO(S). AZ-05-006/ Ppw05-008 / CUP-05-0] 9- PAGE 5 of 5 EXHIBIT A Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 AZ-05-006 Legal Description (3 pages) Pr?'e(! :>1;;. 04-161-0\. D r eny :P~lI?h, P.L5 I. 1\ 2 ...,1.1' ;. '[ . CI EXHIBIT B Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 PP-05-008 Approved Preliminary Plat I' Ii 1 ij~i~H!i ti:!iI. "11;1! '~~r. '~'I 1~1$.! !i:f:1 i~ ~~ I~U ii; j Ii: ! ~ l'f! f j Hfiul EXHIBIT C Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 CDP-05-019 Approved Site Plan EXHIBIT D Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 AZ-05-006 Annexation and Zoning Comments ANEXATION & ZONING COMMENTS 1. The legal description submitted with the application (dated 12-9-04, amended 1-25- 05; stamped by D. Terry Peugh) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian and is approved. 2. Any future subdivision; uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time. 3. A Development Agreement (DA) will be required as part of an annexation of this property. Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the Citv Attornev Bill Narv at 888-4433 to initiate this process. The DA shall incorporate the following: · That the applicant agrees to construct a continuous multi-use pathway from the west property line throughout the site to the south property line. Further, the applicant agrees to provide the City with all casemems and legal descriptions for the any portions of the multi-use pathway that are ~ off-site (under ACHD ownership and church ownership), prior to final plat signature. · That the applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. · That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. 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. EXHIBIT E Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 PP-05-008 Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS (PRELIMINARY PLAT) 1. The preliminary plat prepared by Engineering Solutions, LLP, dated 11-23-04, is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All conditions of the accompanying Annexation/Zoning (AZ-05-006) and Conditional Use Permit (CUP-05-006) application shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-05- 008). 2. In addition to the street system proposed, construct a public stub street to the 5- acre Wagnild parcel (Parcel No. S053242781 0) to the south. 3. The submitted 2-page landscape plan prepared by Harvest Design, Inc., dated 1- 19-05 is approved as submitted, with the following modifications: · If allowed by ACHD, install one tree for every 35-feet of frontage on the McMillan Road right-of-way. Coordinate the license/maintenance agreement with ACHD for any landscaping within the right-of-way. · In addition to sidewalk, construct a minimum lO-foot wide gravel shoulder along McMillan Road and landscape the remaining portion of the right-of-way with lawn or other ACHD approved groundcover. Coordinate the license/maintenance agreement with ACHD for any landscaping within the right-of-way. · The applicant shall work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection/mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. · All areas being counted toward the open space requirement shall be free of "wet ponds" or other such nuisances. All storm water detention facilities incorporated into the required open space are subject to Ordinance 12-13-14 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees, as depicted on the submitted landscape plan. 4. Except for the North Slough (aka Settlers Canal), all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12- 4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non- approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association approval can't be obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the Meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 5. The applicant has not indicated who will own and operate the pressurized irrigation system within this development. Underground year-round pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to remain a private homeowners' association system, complete plans and specifications shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development plan review process. A draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual shall be submitted prior to plan approval. The applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 6. Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, all structures on this site shall be removed. 7. Place a note on the face of the final plat stating that all future front garage setbacks shall be 20-feet as measured from the property line or the back of sidewalk, whichever is more restrictive. 8. All portions of buildings located on all lots within the development should be within 150-feet of a paved surface (as measured around the perimeter of the building). A minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than 50 homes. The two entrances shall be separated by no less than Y2 the diagonal measurement of the project. Prior to issuance of the 51 sl building permit, a secondary emergency access approved by the Meridian Fire Department shall be provided. 9. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. If pennanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of building permits. All fences shall taper down to 3-feet maximum within 20 feet of all right- of-way. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with MCC 12-4-10. Fencing adjacent to any section of the multi-use pathway shall be installed in accordance with MCC 12-13-15-9. The applicant shall construct wrought iron fencing on both sides of the North Slough (for multi-use pathway visibility). 10. Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Zebulon Heights No.2 Homeowners' Association. 11. Permanent sanitary sewer service to this development is to be provided by the undeveloped North Slough Trunk. Temporarily sewer service will be provided by the Lift Station serving Vienna Woods Subdivision. At this time sewer does not exist at the location the applicant has shown on the preliminary plat. The applicant will be responsible for the extension of utilities to and through this proposed development. Sizing and routing shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. If this application is approved, it shall be subject to availability of the sanitary sewer. The applicant shall also be responsible for any upgrades to the lift station that may be necessary to increase the capacity to handle this development. 12. Water service shall be from extensions of the existing main in E. McMillan Road, and the future phase of Settlement Bridge. Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer and water mains to and through this proposed development, thereby making them available to adjacent properties. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. 13. Direct lot access to McMillan Road is prohibited. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access to McMillan Road. 14. The City recommends that the applicant coordinate with the Parkins-Nourse User's Association on coming up with a solution to the existing access problem to the irrigation pipe adjacent to Wainwright Drive in Boise City. GENERAL CONDITIONS (PRELIMINARY PLAT) 1. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2. Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to MCC 12-13-10-8. 3. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all fencing, landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 4. A detailed landscape and fencing plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance and as noted in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application. 5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 6. Two-hundred-fiftyand one-hundred-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior commencing installations. 7. Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 8. Submit any up-dated groundwater/soils monitoring data, as collected a11d analyzed by a soils scientist, to the Public Works Department for review. Any drainage areas (detention/retention basins) must be designed to ensure that water will percolate or discharge with a period of time not to exceed 24-hours for all storms up to and including a 100-year storm events. Side slopes within drainage areas shall not exceed 3: I. Any portion of a drainage area not improved with sod/grass seed (or other approved landscaping) shall not count towards the required open space area. The project engineer should pay close attention to the results of field studies detennining the groundwater, soil type & and characteristics during the design and construction phases. The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least I-foot above groundwater. 9. The applicant shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 10. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 11. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 12. Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying that all street finish centerline elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established nonnal groundwater elevation. 13. The applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution 02-374. 14. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 15. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 16. Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or tenus of the approved annexation/conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 17. Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in MCC 12-2-4. OTHER AGENCY/DEPARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 5. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or pemlanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 7. To increase emergency access to the site a minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than 50 homes. The two entrances should be separated by no less than Yz the diagonal measurement of the project. 8. The proposed 175-lot subdivision with all estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 508 residents at build out. 9. The proposed project lies outside the five-minute response zone goal. Achievement of this goal is subject to budgetary constraints and is intended to enhance the probability of a favorable outcome on a request for Basic Life Support. The budget constraints are typically defined as capital outlay for facilities that are located within 1.5 miles from a given location and sufficient operational funds to staff the facilities. 10. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 11. }Ie f]arlciRg signs aHa j3ai:atea 61::1fBS . ill he reE:}l:lifea for aU fire LaRes. MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Pathway and Trail standards: The proposed pathway and/or trail shall meet the standards as set forth in the August 2003 Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System Plan, pgs. 3-2 and 3-3, sections B & C. 2. Standard for City to assume Maintenance of a section of Pathway: The pathway must connect from one major arterial to another, and either an easement or ownership deed must be granted before the city will assume the maintenance of any section of pathway. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF ApPROVAL 1. Enter into a cooperative development agreement for the allocation of costs for the sidewalk on McMillan Road abutting the ACHD storm drainage ponds (approximately 665-feet.) 2. Construct the main entrance, Camas Creeks Avenue, to intersect McMillan Road in alignment with the main entrance into Austin Creek Located on the north side of McMillan Road. 3. Construct East Wainwright Drive (from the east property line to Lot 20 Block 10) as a residential collector with no access or front-on housing. Construct this segment of Wainwright Drive as a 3D-foot street section with vertical curb, gutter and 5-foot concrete sidewalks within 50feet of right-of-way, as proposed. 4. Construct the remainder of the local streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and sidewalk within 50-feet or right-of-way, as proposed. 5. Extend WainwIight DIive into the site from the east property line adjacent to the north property line, as proposed. 6. Construct a stub street to the south property line approximately 460-feet east of the west property line, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating, "This roadway will be extended in the future." 7. Extend a previously approved stub street from the west property line approximately 87S-feet south of McMillan Road, as proposed. 8. Extend Rochester Drive from the east property line approximately 13S-feet south of the north property line, as proposed. 9. Construct a stub street to the east property line approximately 370-feet north of Wainwright Drive, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating, "This roadway will be extended in the future." 10. Provide access to the located to the east of this site just north of Wainwright Drive, by constructing Wainwright Drive as a "quasi-stub street" that runs along the north property line of this site, as proposed. Construct Wainwright Drive as a full 36-foot street section and place the right-of-way line abutting 7.260,1.19, S.O-acre sties to provide them with future access to the public transportation system, as proposed. 11. Construct six (6) cul-de-sac turnarounds without center islands within the subdivision, as proposed. Construct the turnarounds to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 12. Constf9ct an eastbound right turn lane on McMillan Road at the McMillan Road and Camas Creek Way intersection, as recommend by the submitted traffic impact study. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 13. Construct a westbound left turn lane on McMillan Road at the McMillan Road and Camas Creek Way intersection, as recommended by the submitted traffic impact study. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 14. Ifthe applicant chooses to landscape the storm drainage ponds, the applicant shall obtain a license agreement and have the landscape and sprinkler plan reviewed and approved by the ACHD Drainage Division. IS. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF ApPROVAL 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction ofthe proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State ofIdaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1- 800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387- 6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject ofthis application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use ofthe subject property unless a waiver/valiance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. Portions of the proposed development do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the public areas. The applicant should meet with the Police Chief to discuss features that increase visibility of the multi-use pathway where natural surveillance is not ideal. The site plan and/or landscaping plan shall be revised in accord with those discussions. 2. Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if solid fencing is used adjacent to a pathway. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a storm water management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT I. All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facility involved is the North Slough (Settlers) Canal (60' easement), Little Lateral (20' easement), and the Parkins Nourse lateral (30' easement). 2. A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 3. A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.I.D. facilities. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 5. All storm drainage must be retained on-site. 6. The development must supply irrigation access to all lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. EXHIBIT F Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 CUP-05-019 CUP/PD Site Specific and Standard Conditions SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/PD) 1. The PD site plan prepared by Engineering Solutions, LLP, dated 11-23-04, is approved, with the conditions listed herein. The applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the Annexation/Zoning (AZ-05-006) and Preliminary Plat (PP_ 05-08) as a condition of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP-05-006). 2. The project shall conform to the R-4 dimensional standards, except as follows: · Minimum frontage: 50-feet (non cul-de-sac lots). · Block 7 is allowed to exceed the 1,000-foot block length. No other variances, exceptions or reductions to the City adopted dimensional standards or uses are approved with this CUP application. 3. The following amenities are required as part of the Planned Development, per the application: playground equipment on Lot 1, Block 6; a swimming pool with restroom/locker/changing areas and playground equipment on Lot 5, Block 8; a multi-use pathway throughout the development; and, 8- Five (5) percent of the site set aside for open space (exclusive of the channel for the North Slough). Said multi-use pathway shall be construct a minimum of lO-feet wide. Prior to signature of the final plat, a permanent pedestrian easement, in favor of the City of Meridian, shall be recorded for the multi-use pathway. The easement(s) shall be sufficient width to cover the lO-wide pathway. Additionally, a note shall be added to the face of the final plates) indicating the City of Meridian is responsible for the maintenance of the pathway surface located within the easement. The applicant shall be required to obtain a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) from the City prior to construction of any permanent structures on the proposed park lots. 4. The applicant shan work with Meridian Planning & Zoning staff and ACHD staff on striping, signage, or other means to create an efficient multi-use pathway crossing of the public streets. The applicant shall install signs or other means to inform the traveling public (striping crosswalks, etc.) of pathway/street intersections (where deemed appropriate by ACHD staff and City staff). 5. Construction within Zebulon Heights Subdivision No. 2 shall substantially comply with the seventeen (17) elevations submitted by the applicant. Construction materials used on the structures shall be approved by the City of Meridian Building Department and in accordance with the most recent Building Code. OTHER AGENCY/DEPARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' apart. Intemational Fire Code Appendix C 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved tum around. 5. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 7. To increase emergency access to the site a minimUlU of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than 50 homes. The two entrances should be separated by no less than 72 the diagonal .measurement of the project. 8. The proposed 175-lot subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 508 residents at build out. 9. The proposed project lies outside the five-minute response zone goal. Achievement of this goal is subject to budgetary constraints and is intended to enhance the probability of a favorable outcome on a request for Basic Life Support. The budget constraints are typically defined as capital outlay for facilities that are located within 1.5 miles from a given location and sufficient operational funds to staff the facilities. 10. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within ISO' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. II. No parking signs and painted curbs will be required for all Fire Lanes. MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Pathway and Trail standards: The proposed pathway and/or trail shall meet the standards as set forth in the August 2003 Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System Plan, pgs. 3-2 and 3-3, sections B & C. 2. Standard for City to assume Maintenance of a section of Pathway: The pathway must connect from one major arterial to another, and either an easement or ownership deed must be granted before the city will assume the maintenance of any section of pathway. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF ApPRO V AL 1. Enter into a cooperative development agreement for the allocation of costs for the sidewalk on McMillan Road abutting the ACHD stonn drainage ponds (approximately 665-feet.) 2. Construct the main entrance, Camas Creeks Avenue, to intersect McMillan Road in alignment with the main entrance into Austin Creek Located on the north side of McMillan Road. 3. Construct East Wainwright Drive (from the east property line to Lot 20 Block to) as a residential collector with no access or front-on housing. Construct this segment of Wainwright Drive as a 30-foot street section with vertical curb, gutter and 5-foot concrete sidewalks within 50feet of right-of-way, as proposed. 4. Construct the remainder of the local streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and sidewalk within 50-feet or right-of-way, as proposed. 5. Extend Wainwright Drive into the site from the east property line adjacent to the north property line, as proposed. 6. Construct a stub street to the south property line approximately 460-feet east of the west property line, as proposed. Install a sign at the tenninus of the roadway stating, "This roadway will be extended in the future." 7. Extend a previously approved stub street from the west property line approximately 87S-feet south of McMillan Road, as proposed. 8. Extend Rochester Drive from the east property line approximately 138-feet south of the north property line, as proposed. 9. Construct a stub street to the east property line approximately 370-feet north of Wainwright Drive, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating, "This roadway will be extended in the future." 10. Provide access to the located to the east of this site just north of Wainwright Drive, by constructing Wainwright Drive as a "quasi-stub street" that runs along the north property line of this site, as proposed. Construct Wainwright Drive as a full 36-foot street section and place the right-of-way line abutting 7.260, 1.19, S.O-acre sties to provide them with future access to the public transportation system, as proposed. 11. Construct six (6) cul-de-sac turnarounds without center islands within the subdivision, as proposed. Construct the turnarounds to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 12. Construct an eastbound right turn lane on McMillan Road at the McMillan Road and Camas Creek Way intersection, as recommend by the submitted traffic impact study. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 13. Construct a westbound left turn lane on McMillan Road at the McMillan Road and Cmnas Creek Way intersection, as recommended by the submitted traffic impact study. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 14. Ifthe applicant chooses to landscape the storm drainage ponds, the applicant shall obtain a license agreement and have the landscape and sprinkler plan reviewed and approved by the ACHD Drainage Division. 15. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF ApPROVAL 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and an applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1- 800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387- 6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the tenns and conditions ofthis approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. Portions of the proposed development do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the public areas. The applicant should meet with the Police Chief to discuss features that increase visibility of the multi-use pathway where natural surveillance is not ideal. The site plan and/or lal1dscaping plan shall be revised in accord with those discussions. 2. Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if solid fencing is used adjacent to a pathway. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design ofthe subject project shall obtain current best management practices for storm water disposal and design a stonnwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT 1. AU irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facility involved is the North Slough (Settlers) Canal (60' easement), Little Lateral (20' easement), and the Parkins Nourse lateral (30' easement). 2. A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 3. A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.LD. facilities. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 5. All stonn drainage must be retained on-site. 6. The development must supply irrigation access to all lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. EXHIBIT G Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 AZ-05-006 Zoning Amendment Findings According to Meridian City Code (MCC) 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both the Planning & Zoning 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 by City Council: 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; In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, 'medium density' is defined as areas including single-family homes at densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. The applicant is requesting that all the subject site be zoned R-4 (Low Density Residential). The R-4 district allows for a maximum of four (4) dwelling units per acre (MCCII-7-2.C). Although the requested zoning designation, R-4, allows densities consistent with the medium density Comprehensive Plan designation, the proposed residential density is only 2.4 gross dwelling units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan does allow a one step increase or decrease in residential areas without amending the Comprehensive Plan. Due to the existing one-acre lots in Heritage Subdivision to the west, City Council believes that a step down in density is justified here. If the City approves an R-4 zone (and associated PP and CUP applications), the proposed zoning/density will allow a smooth transition from the estate lot sizes in Heritage Subdivision to the urban lots in Madison Park to the east. Further, 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): "Develop and maintain greenbelts along waterways." (Chapter V, Goal 1, Objective A, Action item 4) The applicant is proposing to leave the North Slough open abutting this site. In accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant is proposing to construct a Multi-Use Pathway along the slough and throughout the development, thereby enhancing the natural features and the development. "Require new residential development to meet development standards regarding landscaping, signage, fences and walls, etc." (Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective C, Action item 4) if the applicant complies with the conditions in this report, the development will meet the standards for landscaping, signage, fences and walls outlined in City Code. "Require useable open space to be incorporated into new residential subdivision plats." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action item 3) The applicant is proposing to set aside approximately 8 percent of the site as open space. In addition, in the applicant's letter (from Shari Stiles) other Comprehensive Plan policies are listed supporting the annexation and proposed residential use of the property. Citv Council finds that if the a/Jplicant comolies with the conditions included in this reoort. the overall deshm of the subdivision would be in !!eneral conformance with the Citv of Meridian Comorehensive 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 preliminary plat proposing single-family lots on the subject site (Zebulon Heights No. 2 Subdivision, PP-05-008). City Council does not anticipate that the applicant plans to rezone the subject property in the future if the accompanying CUP and PP applications are approved. 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 the proposed single-family development could be allowed within the requested R-4 zone, if the accompanying Conditional Use Permit for a Plmmed Development is also approved. 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 other properties in the area have been developed in a manner similar to the proposed subdivision, with single-family dwelling units. Austin Creek Subdivision to the north and Madison Park Subdivision to the east have gross densities of approximately 4 dwelling units per acre. Heritage Subdivision to the south has a residential density of approximately 1 dwelling unit per acre while Settlement Bridge Subdivision has a density of 3.7 dwelling units per acre. There have been no recent street improvements in the area. This section of McMillan Road abutting the site is in ACHD's Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for road widening in 2015. Locust Grove Road in this area is not currently scheduled within ACHD's Five Year Work Program or Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for roadway widening. Other urban services, such as sewer and water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend such services to the site. City Council finds that the subject site is proposed for development in a fashion similar to other properties in the area. 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; City Council finds that the requested zoning and proposed density is within the anticipated range for a lower density urban project. Further, based on the Comprehensi ve Plan, City Council believes that some of the existing large county parcels in the area (south and east) will redevelop with similar densities in the near future. City Council also finds that the proposed zoning/uses can be designed and constructed in a manner that will be hannonious with, and appropriate in appearance with, the existing and intended character of the surrounding area. The existing character of the area will, and is, currently changing, especially upon build-out of the proposed project and other similar subdivisions in the general vicinity. F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; The applicant has submitted seventeen (17) front elevations for the proposed dwelling units. City Council believes that the design of the dwelling units will be compatible with the adjoining uses, if the buildings are constructed as shown on the submitted elevations. City Council does not anticipate that the proposed residential uses will be disturbing or hazardous to existing or future uses as long as the conditions outlined in this report are complied with and house construction is conducted in a manner consistent with City Code. 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; Permanent sanitary sewer service to this development is to be provided by the undeveloped North Slough Trunk. Temporarily sewer service will be provided by the Lift Station serving Vienna Woods Subdivision. At this time sewer does not exist at the location the applicant has shown on the preliminary plat. The applicant will be responsible for the extension of utilities to and through this proposed development. Sizing and routing shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. If this application is approved, it shall be subject to availability of the sanitary sewer. The applicant shall also be responsible for any upgrades to the lift station that may be necessary to increase the capacity to handle this development. Water service shall be from extensions of the existing main in E. McMillan Road, and the future phase of Settlement Bridge. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fees. On March 9, 2005, ACHD approved this development with site-specific and standard conditions. The applicant should comply with all requirements of the ACHD. Please review the ACHD report for additional information regarding this finding. On February 25, 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 cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; If approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, local street infrastructure, utilities and irrigation services to serve the project. The primary public costs to serve the future residents will be fire, police, school facilities and services. City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed annexation and zoning 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; According to the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) prepared by Washington Group International the proposed project is anticipated to generate 2,368 (including the office portion approved in Boise City). City Council recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of this subdivision; however, City Council does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. City Council does not anticipate the proposed annexation and subsequent uses will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. City Council finds that the proposed residential zoning/uses will not be detrimental to people, property or the general welfare of the area. 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; The applicant is proposing to construct one public street entrance into the site from McMillan Road and extend two other stubs streets from the east. The extension of Rochester Drive from Madison Park Subdivision and Wainwright Drive from Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.1 will cause traffic volumes on the existing portions of the streets to increase. However, the increase in volume is within ACHD acceptable range for local/commercial/collector streets. Please review the ACHD report for this project for additional information regarding this finding. If the proposed vehicular approaches (streets) are approved and accepted by ACHD, City Council does not believe that the subdivision will create interference with traffic on the surrounding public streets. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance; and City Council finds that there are some existing trees and other mature landscaping on this site. Any existing trees larger than 4" caliper that are removed shall be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance (MCC 12-13-13). The applicant should work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing and implementing a protection plan. If any trees are deemed to be a hazard, diseased or dying by the City Arborist, prior to removal, mitigation will not be required for those trees. The applicant is proposing to leave the North Slough open abutting the site. City Council believes that the North Slough is a scenic feature that should be protected. City Council finds that the proposed annexation and zoning should not result in the loss or dalTIage of any natural or scenic features, as long as the existing trees are protected/mitigated and the North Slough is relocated and protected in manner that does not negatively impact its beauty. City Council is not aware of any natural or scenic feature(s) that would be lost, damaged or destroyed by allowing this site to be annexed, zoned and developed with residential uses. 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, Inc., shows that the property is contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. The land directly west ofthe subject property was previously annexed into the City and this is a logical expansion of the City boundary. City Council finds that all essential services are available or will be provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public funds. The applicant is proposing to develop the land in substantial compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. In accordance with the findings listed above, Citv Council finds that the annexationlzoninl! of this orooertv would be in the best interest of the City. EXHIBIT H Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 PP-05-008 Preliminary Plat Findings Meridian City Code (MCC) 12-3-3 J.2 and 12-3-5 D read as follows: "In determining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission/Council shall consider the objectives of this title and at least the following: A. The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan; Please see Annexation and Zoning item "An. B. The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development; City Council finds that public services can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. See Annexation and Zoning items "G" and "H" for more details. c. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, City Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. The public fmancial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; See Annexation and Zoning item "R" and the Agency Comments and Conditions for more detail. E. The other health, safety or environmental problems that may be brought to the Commission's attention. City Council is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. EXHIBIT I Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 CUP-05-019 CUP/PD Findings The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in tenus of the following and may approve a conditional use penuit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11- 17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; As part of the Planned Development (PD) the applicant is requesting relief from the standard street frontage requirement of the R-4 zone, as required by Meridian City Code. . City Council finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the requested use and all other required ordinance features. Although the site is large enough to accommodate all of the features required by ordinance, the applicant has asked, through the Plalmed Development, to modify specific development standards. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; City Council finds that the proposed single-family residential subdivision is generally harmonious with and in accordance with the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map, which designates the land to be "Medium Density Residential" (provided the Commission and Council grant the requested planned development). Please see Annexation & Zoning item "A". C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; Please see Annexation & Zoning item "E". D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; City Council finds that the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of approval, will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; Please see Annexation & Zoning items "G" and "R", the Other Agency/Department Comments and Conditions, and any comments that may be submitted to the City Clerk regarding this project. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Please see Annexation & Zoning item "H". G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Please see Annexation and Zoning item "I". H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; Please see Annexation & Zoning item "J". The Commission and Council should review any comments received from the ACRD and/or ITD regarding this project when determining this finding. I. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Please see Annexation & Zoning item "K". CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a Request for Annexation and Zoning of 76.29 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Low Density Residential) AND Preliminary Plat Approval of One- Hundred-Seventy-Five (175) Single-Family Residential Building Lots and Twenty (20) Other/Common Lots AND Conditional Use Permit Approval for a Planned Development with Reductions to Lot Frontage, Increased Block Length and Reduction in Density to Less Than Three (3) Dwelling Units per Acre for Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2, by Traditions by Amyx II, LLP. Case No(s): AZ-05-006, PP-05-008, CUP-05-0l9 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 19,2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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 April 19, 2005, public hearing(s). The applicant, affected property owners, and govenunent 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 record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code g67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code gg 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDfNGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO{S). AZ-05-006! PP-05-008 ! CUP-05-019- PAGE I of 5 evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof 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 verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings is Traditions by Amyx II, LLP. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibits G, H, and I for the findings required for these applications. B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Plmming Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (LC. g67- 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 6,2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code g 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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Preliminary Plat dated November 23, 2004 as shown in Exhibit B, the Site Plan dated November 23, 2004 as shown in Exhibit C, the Annexation and Zoning Comments as shown in Exhibit D, the Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions as shown in Exhibit E, and the CUPIPD Site Specific and Standard Conditions as shown in Exhibit F. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-006 J PP-05-008 J CUP-05-0 I 9- PAGE 2 of 5 C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code S 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 Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat dated November 23,2004 is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The applicant's Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated November 23,2004 is hereby conditionally approved; and, 3. The Site Specific and Standard Conditions are as shown in Exhibits E and F. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the council. During this time, the permit holder must commence the use as permitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. In this context "structures" shall include sewer and water lines, streets or building construction. The applicant has specified in the application and to the commission and council a construction schedule and completion date for the project. If the completion date specified for the project is exceeded, the conditional use application shall become null and void. However, the applicant may submit an application for a time extension on the project for city council review. The application for time extension shall be submitted at least thirty (30) days prior to the deadline for completion of the project. For projects requiring platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one year from the original date of approval by the council. If the successive phases are not submitted within one year intervals, the conditional approval ofthe future phases shall be null and void. (MCC 11-17-4.B.) 2. Notice ofTwe1ve (12) Month Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that after the date of approval of the preliminary plat, the owner or developer shall have one year within which to file the request for approval of the final plat. After approval offinal plat, the owner or developer shall have one year to begin construction of the public utilities and one year thereafter to complete construction of those public facilities. (MCC 12-2-4.B & C.) E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-006 / PP-05-008 ( CUP-05-0 [9- PAGE 3 of 5 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Melidian, pursuant to Idaho Code ~ 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use pennit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Approved Preliminary Plat (with conditions) Exhibit C: Approved Site Plan (with conditions) Exhibit D: Annexation and Zoning Comments Exhibit E: Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions Exhibit F: CUP/PD Site Specific and Standard Conditions Exhibit G: Zoning Amendment Findings Exhibit H: Preliminary Plat Findings Exhibit 1: CUPIPD Findings By actio~ of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the j q th day of A?VI \ , 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~ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-006 / PP-05-008 / CUP-05-019- PAGE 4 of 5 (TIE BREAKER) Attest: Public Works Department and City Attorney. By,3w\ II ~f\lt \. City Clerk's Office Dated: -4 -Zq -65 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSrONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-006/ PP-OS-Q08 / CUP-05-019- PAGE S of5 EXHIBIT A Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 AZ-05-006 Legal Description (3 pages) Pr9JCC! >Jo 04-16:l:-0{> D. Terry hll1!.h. P.L.S j. ,\ ~.....,J.; ~ I . (I EXHIBIT B Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 PP-05-008 ApfJ~()ved Preliminary Plat !' ii ii~i~~ii ti~m~~~U iit~ !~j! J~ ~ j~UI f~n! ih nL~H !Hi!; I EXHIBIT C Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 CUP-05-019 Approved Site Plan EXHIBIT D Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 AZ-05-006 Annexation and Zoning Comments ANEXA TION & ZONING COMMENTS 1. The legal description submitted with the application (dated 12-9-04, amended 1-25- 05, stalTIped by D. Terry Peugh) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian and is approved. 2. Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time. 3. A Development Agreement (DA) will be required as part of an annexation of this property. Prior to the mmexation ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the Citv Attorney Bill Narv at 888-4433 to initiate this process. The DA shall incorporate the following: · That the applicant agrees to construct a continuous multi-use pathway from the west property line throughout the site to the south property line. Further, the applicant agrees to provide the City with all easemeats flflcllegal descriptions for the any portions of the multi-use pathway that are €tlffefltI.y off-site (under ACHD ownership and church ownership), prior to final plat signature. · That the applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. · That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. 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. EXHIBIT E Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 PP-05-008 Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS (PRELIMINARY PLAT) 1. The preliminary plat prepared by Engineering Solutions, LLP, dated 11-23-04, is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All conditions of the accompanying Annexation/Zoning (AZ-05-006) and Conditional Use Permit (CUP-05-006) application shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-05- 008). 2. In addition to the street system proposed, construct a public stub street to the 5- acre Wagnild parcel (Parcel No. S0532427810) to the south. 3. The submitted 2-page landscape plan prepared by Harvest Design, Inc., dated 1- 19-05 is approved as submitted, with the following modifications: · If allowed by ACHD, install one tree for every 35-feet of frontage on the McMillan Road right-of-way. Coordinate the license/maintenance agreement with ACHD for any landscaping within the light-of-way. · In addition to sidewalk, construct a minimum 10-foot wide gravel shoulder along McMillan Road and landscape the remaining portion of the right-of-way with lawn or other ACHD approved ground cover. Coordinate the license/maintenance agreement with ACHD for any landscaping within the right-of-way. · The applicant shall work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection/mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. · All areas being counted toward the open space requirement shall be free of "wet ponds" or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the required open space are subject to Ordinance 12-13-14 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees, as depicted on the submitted landscape plan. 4. Except for the North Slough (aka Settlers Canal), all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12- 4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non- approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association approval can't be obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the Meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 5. The applicant has not indicated who will own and operate the pressurized irrigation system within this development. Underground year-round pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to remain a private homeowners' association system, complete plans and specifications shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development plan review process. A draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual shall be submitted prior to plan approval. The applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 6. Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, all structures on this site sha1l be removed. 7. Place a note on the face of the final plat stating that all future front garage setbacks shall be 20-feet as measured from the property line or the back of sidewalk, whichever is more restrictive. 8. All portions of buildings located on all lots within the development should be within ISO-feet of a paved surface (as measured around the perimeter of the building). A minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than 50 homes. The two entrances shall be separated by no less than ~ the diagonal measurement of the project. Prior to issuance of the 5151 building permit, a secondary emergency access approved by the Meridian Fire Department shall be provided. 9. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of building permits. All fences shall taper down to 3-feet maximum within 20 feet of all right- of-way. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with MCC 12-4-10. Fencing adjacent to any section of the multi-use pathway shall be installed in accordance with MCC 12-13-15-9. The applicant shall construct wrought iron fencing on both sides of the North Slough (for multi-use pathway visibility). 10. Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Zebulon Heights No.2 Homeowners' Association. I 1. Pennanent sanitary sewer service to this development is to be provided by the undeveloped North Slough Trunk. Temporarily sewer service will be provided by the Lift Station serving Vienna Woods Subdivision. At this time sewer does not exist at the location the applicant has shown on the preliminary plat. The applicant will be responsible for the extension of utilities to and through this proposed development. Sizing and routing shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. If this application is approved, it shall be subject to availability of the sanitary sewer. The appbcant shall also be responsible for any upgrades to the lift station that may be necessary to increase the capacity to handle this development. 12. Water service shall be from extensions of the existing main in E. McMillan Road, and the future phase of Settlement Bridge. Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer and water mains to and through this proposed development, thereby making them available to adjacent properties. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. 13. Direct lot access to McMillan Road is prohibited. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access to McMillan Road. 14. The City recommends that the applicant coordinate with the Parkins-Nourse User's Association on coming up with a solution to the existing access problem to the irrigation pipe adjacent to Wainwright Drive in Boise City. GENERAL CONDITIONS (PRELIMINARY PLAT) 1. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2. Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to MCC 12-13-10-8. 3. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all fencing, landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 4. A detailed landscape and fencing plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance and as noted in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application. 5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 6. Two-hundred-fiftyand one-hundred-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Pinal design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior commencing installations. 7. Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 8. Submit any up-dated groundwater/soils monitoring data, as collected and analyzed by a soils scientist, to the Public Works Department for review. Any drainage areas (detention/retention basins) must be designed to ensure that water will percolate or discharge with a period of time not to exceed 24-hours for all storms up to and including a 1 DO-year storm events. Side slopes within drainage areas shall not exceed 3: 1. Any portion of a drainage area not improved with sod/grass seed (or other approved landscaping) shall not count towards the required open space area. The project engineer should pay close attention to the results of field studies determining the groundwater, soil type & and characteristics during the design and construction phases. The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established nonnal groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least I-foot above groundwater. 9. The applicant shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 10. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 11. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 12. Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying that all street finish centerline elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. 13. The applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution 02-374. 14. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Anny Corps of Engineers. 15. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 16. Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved mmexationlconditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 17. Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in MCC 12-2-4. OTHER AGENCY/DEPARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 5. AU entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 7. To increase emergency access to the site a minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than 50 homes. The two entrances should be separated by no less than 11 the diagonal measurement of the project. 8. The proposed 175-lot subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 508 residents at build out. 9. The proposed project lies outside the five-minute response zone goal. Achievement of this goal is subject to budgetary constraints and is intended to enhance the probability of a favorable outcome on a request for Basic Life Support. The budget constraints are typically defined as capital outlay for facilities that are located within 1.5 miles from a given location and sufficient operational funds to staff the facilities. 10. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 11. N e parlciag sigHs aHEl13aiateEl e'l::lres ille e Fe!:}l:lired fer all Fire LaBes. MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Pathway and Trail standards: The proposed pathway and/or trail shall meet the standards as set forth in the August 2003 Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System Plan, pgs. 3-2 and 3-3, sections B & c. 2. Standard for City to assume Maintenance of a section of Pathway: The pathway must connect from one major arterial to another, and either an easement or ownership deed must be granted before the city will assume the maintenance of any section of pathway. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF ApPROVAL 1. Enter into a cooperative development agreement for the allocation of costs for the sidewalk on McMillan Road abutting the ACHD storm drainage ponds (approximately 665-feet.) 2. Construct the main entrance, Camas Creeks Avenue, to intersect McMillan Road in alignment with the main entrance into Austin Creek Located on the north side of McMillan Road. 3. Construct East Wainwright Drive (from the east property line to Lot 20 Block 10) as a residential collector with no access or front-on housing. Construct this segment of Wainwright Drive as a 30-foot street section with vertical curb, gutter and 5-foot concrete sidewalks within 50feet of right-of-way, as proposed. 4. Construct the remainder of the local streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and sidewalk within 50-feet or right~of-way, as proposed. 5. Extend Wainwright Drive into the site from the east property line adjacent to the north property line, as proposed. 6. Construct a stub street to the south property line approximately 460-feet east of the west property line, as proposed. Install a sign at the tenninus of the roadway stating, "This roadway will be extended in the future." 7. Extend a previously approved stub street from the west property line approximately 875-feet south of McMillan Road, as proposed. 8. Extend Rochester Drive from the east property line approximately 138-feet south of the north property line, as proposed. 9. Construct a stub street to the east property line approximately 370-feet north of Wainwright Drive, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus ofthe roadway stating, "This roadway will be extended in the future." 10. Provide access to the located to the east ofthis site just north of Wainwright Drive, by constructing Wainwright Drive as a "quasi-stub street" that runs along the north property line of this site, as proposed. Construct Wainwright Drive as a full 36-foot street section and place the right-of-way line abutting 7.260, 1.19, S.O-acre sties to provide them with future access to the public transportation system, as proposed. 11. Construct six (6) cul-de-sac turnarounds without center islands within the subdivision, as proposed. Construct the turnarounds to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 12. Construct an eastbound right turn lane on McMillan Road at the McMillan Road and Camas Creek Way intersection, as recommend by the submitted traffic impact study. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 13. Construct a westbound left turn lane on McMillan Road at the McMillan Road and Camas Creek Way intersection, as recommended by the submitted traffic impact study. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 14. If the applicant chooses to landscape the storm drainage ponds, the applicant shall obtain a license agreement and have the landscape and sprinkler plan reviewed and approved by the ACHD Drainage Division. 15. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF ApPROVAL 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGUNE (1- 800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387- 6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the tenns and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT I. Portions of the proposed development do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the public areas. The applicant should meet with the Police Chief to discuss features that increase visibility of the multi-use pathway where natural surveillance is not ideal. The site plan and/or landscaping plan shall be revised in accord with those discussions. 2. Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if solid fencing is used adjacent to a pathway. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-offis not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stonnwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT 1. All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facility involved is the North Slough (Settlers) Canal (60' easement), Little Lateral (20' easement), and the Parkins Nourse lateral (30' easement). 2. A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 3. A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.I.D. facilities. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 5. All stonn drainage must be retained on-site. 6. The development must supply irrigation access to all lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. EXHIBIT F Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 CUP-05-019 CUP/PD Site Specific and Standard Conditions SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/PD) 1. The PD site plan prepared by Engineering Solutions, LLP, dated 1 I -23-04, is approved, with the conditions listed herein. The applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the Annexation/Zoning (AZ-05-006) and Preliminary Plat (PP_ 05-08) as a condition of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP-05-006). 2. The project shall confonn to the R-4 dimensional standards, except as follows: · Minimum frontage: 50-feet (non cul-de-sac lots). · Block 7 is allowed to exceed the 1,000-foot block length. No other variances, exceptions or reductions to the City adopted dimensional standards or uses are approved with this CUP application. 3. The following amenities are required as part of the Planned Development, per the application: playground equipment on Lot 1, Block 6; a swimming pool with restroom/locker/changing areas and playground equipment on Lot 5, Block 8; a multi-use pathway throughout the development; and, & Five (5) percent of the site set aside for open space (exclusive of the channel for the North Slough). Said multi-use pathway shall be construct a minimum of lO-feet wide. Prior to signature of the final plat, a permanent pedestrian easement, in favor of the City of Meridian, shall be recorded for the multi-use pathway. The easement(s) shall be sufficient width to cover the lO-wide pathway. Additionally, a note shall be added to the face of the final plates) indicating the City of Meridian is responsible for the maintenance of the pathway surface located within the easement. The applicant shall be required to obtain a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) from the City prior to construction of any permanent structures on the proposed park lots. 4. The applicant shall work with Meridian Planning & Zoning staff and ACHD staff on striping, signage, or other means to create an efficient multi-use pathway crossing of the public streets. The applicant shall install signs or other means to inform the traveling public (striping crosswalks, etc.) of pathway/street intersections (where deemed appropriate by ACHD staff and City staff). 5. Construction within Zebulon Heights Subdivision No. 2 shall substantially comply with the seventeen (17) elevations submitted by the applicant. Construction materials used on the structures shall be approved by the City of Meridian Building Department and in accordance with the most recent Building Code. OTHER AGENCY/DEPARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing pennits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 5. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 7. To increase emergency access to the site a minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than 50 homes. The two entrances should be separated by no less than Y2 the diagonal measurement of the project. 8. The proposed 175-10t subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 508 residents at build out. 9. The proposed project lies outside the five-minute response zone goal. Achievement of this goal is subject to budgetary constraints and is intended to enhance the probability of a favorable outcome on a request for Basic Life Support. The budget constraints are typically defined as capital outlay for facilities that are located within 1.5 miles from a given location and sufficient operational funds to staff the facilities. 10. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 11. No parking signs and painted curbs will be required for all Fire Lanes. MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Pathway and Trail standards: The proposed pathway and/or trail shall meet the standards as set forth in the August 2003 Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System Plan, pgs. 3-2 and 3-3, sections B & C. 2. Standard for City to assume Maintenance of a section of Pathway: The pathway must connect from one major arterial to another, and either an easement or ownership deed must be granted before the city will assume the maintenance of any section of pathway. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF ApPROVAL 1. Enter into a cooperative development agreement for the allocation of costs for the sidewalk on McMillan Road abutting the ACHD storm drainage ponds (approximately 665-feet.) 2. Construct the main entrance, Camas Creeks Avenue, to intersect McMillan Road in aligmnent with the main entrance into Austin Creek Located on the north side of McMillan Road. 3. Construct East Wainwright Drive (from the east property line to Lot 20 Block 10) as a residential collector with no access or front-on housing. Construct this segment of Wainwright Drive as a 30-foot street section with vertical curb, gutter and 5-foot concrete sidewalks within 50feet of right-of-way, as proposed. 4. Construct the remainder ofthe local streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and sidewalk within 50-feet or right-of-way, as proposed. 5. Extend Wainwright Drive into the site from the east property line adjacent to the north property line, as proposed. 6. Construct a stub street to the south property line approximately 460-feet east of the west property line, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating, "This roadway will be extended in the future." 7. Extend a previously approved stub street from the west property line approximately 875-feet south of McMillan Road, as proposed. 8. Extend Rochester Drive from the east property line approximately I 38-feet south of the north property line, as proposed. 9. Construct a stub street to the east property line approximately 370-feet north of Wainwright Drive, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating, "This roadway will be extended in the future." to. Provide access to the located to the east of this site just north of Wainwright Drive, by constructing Wainwright Drive as a "quasi-stub street" that runs along the north property line of this site, as proposed. Construct Wainwright Drive as a full 36-foot street section and place the right-of-way line abutting 7.260, 1.19, 5.0-acre sties to provide them with future access to the public transportation system, as proposed. 11. Construct six (6) cul-de-sac turnarounds without center islands within the subdivision, as proposed. Construct the turnarounds to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 12. Construct an eastbound right turn lane on McMillan Road at the McMillan Road and Camas Creek Way intersection, as recommend by the submitted traffic impact study. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 13. Construct a westbound left turn lane on McMillan Road at the McMillan Road and Camas Creek Way intersection, as recommended by the submitted traffic impact study. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 14. If the applicant chooses to landscape the stonn drainage ponds, the applicant shall obtain a license agreement and have the landscape and sprinkler plan reviewed and approved by the ACHD Drainage Division. 15. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF ApPRO V AL 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1- 800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387- 6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. Portions of the proposed development do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the public areas. The applicant should meet with the Police Chief to discuss features that increase visibility of the multi-use pathway where natural surveillance is not ideal. The site plan and/or landscaping plan shall be revised in accord with those discussions. 2. Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if solid fencing is used adjacent to a pathway. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stonnwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stonnwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT 1. All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facility involved is the North Slough (Settlers) Canal (60' easement), Little Lateral (20' easement), and the Parkins Nourse lateral (30' easement). 2. A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 3. A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.LD. facilities. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 5. All storm drainage must be retained on-site. 6. The development must supply irrigation access to aU lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. EXHIBIT G Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 AZ-05-006 Zoning Amendment Findings According to Meridian City Code (MCC) 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both the Planning & Zoning 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 by City Council: 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; In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, 'medium density' is defined as areas including single-family homes at densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. The applicant is requesting that all the subject site be zoned R-4 (Low Density Residential). The R-4 district allows for a maximum of four (4) dwelling units per acre (MCCII-7-2.C). Although the requested zoning designation, R-4, allows densities consistent with the medium density Comprehensive Plan designation, the proposed residential density is only 2.4 gross dwelling units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan does allow a one step increase or decrease in residential areas without amending the Comprehensive Plan. Due to the existing one-acre lots in Heritage Subdivision to the west, City Council believes that a step down in density is justified here. If the City approves an R-4 zone (and associated PP and CUP applications), the proposed zoning/density will allow a smooth transition from the estate lot sizes in Heritage Subdivision to the urban lots in Madison Park to the east. Further, 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): "Develop and maintain greenbelts along waterways." (Chapter V, Goal 1, Objective A, Action item 4) The applicant is proposing to leave the North Slough open abutting this site. In accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant is proposing to construct a Multi-Use Pathway along the slough and throughout the development, thereby enhancing the natural features and the development. "Require new residential development to meet development standards regarding landscaping, signage, fences and walls, etc." (Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective C, Action item 4) if the applicant complies with the conditions in this report, the development will meet the standards for landscaping, signage, ftnces and walls outlined in City Code. "Require useable open space to be incorporated into new residential subdivision plats." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action item 3) The applicant is proposing to set aside approximately 8 percent of the site as open space. In addition, in the applicant's letter (from Shari Stiles) other Comprehensive Plan policies are listed supporting the annexation and proposed residential use of the property. Citv Council finds that if the applicant comolies with the conditions included in this reoort. the overall desirm of the subdivision would be in f!eneral conformance with the Citv of Meridian Comorehensive 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 preliminary plat proposing single-family lots on the subject site (Zebulon Heights No. 2 Subdivision, PP-05-008). City Council does not anticipate that the applicant plans to rezone the subject property in the future if the accompanying CUP and PP applications are approved. 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 the proposed single-family development could be allowed within the requested R-4 zone, ifthe accompanying Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development is also approved. 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 other properties in the area have been developed in a manner similar to the proposed subdivision, with single-family dwelling units. Austin Creek Subdivision to the north and Madison Park Subdivision to the east have gross densities of approximately 4 dwelling units per acre. Heritage Subdivision to the south has a residential density of approximately 1 dwelling unit per acre while Settlement Bridge Subdivision has a density of 3.7 dwelling units per acre. There have been no recent street improvements in the area. This section of McMillan Road abutting the site is in ACHD's Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for road widening in 2015. Locust Grove Road in this area is not currently scheduled within ACHD's Five Year Work Program or Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for roadway widening. Other urban services, such as sewer and water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend such services to the site. City Council finds that the subject site is proposed for development in a fashion similar to other properties in the area. 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; City Council finds that the requested zoning and proposed density is within the anticipated range for a lower density urban project. Further, based on the Comprehensive Plan, City Council believes that some of the existing large county parcels in the area (south and east) will redevelop with similar densities in the near future. City Council also finds that the proposed zoning/uses can be designed and constructed in a manner that will be harmonious with, and appropriate in appearance with, the existing and intended character of the surrounding area. The existing character of the area will, and is, currently changing, especially upon build-out of the proposed project and other similar subdivisions in the general vicinity. F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; The applicant has submitted seventeen (17) front elevations for the proposed dwelling units. City Council believes that the design of the dwelling units will be compatible with the adjoining uses, if the buildings are constructed as shown on the submitted elevations. City Council does not anticipate that the proposed residential uses will be disturbing or hazardous to existing or future uses as long as the conditions outlined in this report are complied with and house construction is conducted in a manner consistent with City Code. G. WilJ 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; Penn anent sanitary sewer service to this development is to be provided by the undeveloped North Slough Trunk. Temporarily sewer service will be provided by the Lift Station serving Vienna Woods Subdivision. At this time sewer does not exist at the location the applicant has shown on the preliminary plat. The applicant will be responsible for the extension of utilities to and through this proposed development. Sizing and routing shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. If this application is approved, it shall be subject to availability of the sanitary sewer. The applicant shall also be responsible for any upgrades to the lift station that may be necessary to increase the capacity to handle this development. Water service shall be from extensions of the existing main in E. McMillan Road, and the future phase of Settlement Bridge. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fees. On March 9, 2005, ACHD approved this development with site-specific and standard conditions. The applicant should comply with all requirements of the ACHD. Please review the ACHD report for additional information regarding this finding. On February 25, 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 cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; If approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, local street infrastructure, utilities and irrigation services to serve the project. The primary public costs to serve the future residents will be fire, police, school facilities and services. City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed annexation and zoning 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; According to the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) prepared by Washington Group International the proposed project is anticipated to generate 2,368 (including the office portion approved in Boise City). City Council recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of this subdivision; however, City Council does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. City Council does not anticipate the proposed annexation and subsequent uses will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. City Council finds that the proposed residential zoning/uses will not be detrimental to people, property or the general welfare ofthe area. 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; The applicant is proposing to construct one public street entrance into the site from McMillan Road and extend two other stubs streets from the east. The extension of Rochester Drive from Madison Park Subdivision and Wainwright Drive from Zebulon Heights Subdivision No. 1 will cause traffic volumes on the existing portions of the streets to increase. However, the increase in volume is within ACHD acceptable range for local/commercial/collector streets. Please review the ACHD report for this project for additional information regarding this finding. If the proposed vehicular approaches (streets) are approved and accepted by ACHD, City Council does not believe that the subdivision will create interference with traffic on the surrounding public streets. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance; and City Council finds that there are some existing trees and other mature landscaping on this site. Any existing trees larger than 4" caliper that are removed shall be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance (MCC 12-13-13). The applicant should work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing and implementing a protection plan. If any trees are deemed to be a hazard, diseased or dying by the City Arborist, prior to removal, mitigation will not be required for those trees. The applicant is proposing to leave the North Slough open abutting the site. City Council believes that the North Slough is a scenic feature that should be protected. City Council finds that the proposed annexation and zoning should not result in the loss or damage of any natural or scenic features, as long as the existing trees are protected/mitigated and the North Slough is relocated and protected in manner that does not negatively impact its beauty. City Council is not aware of any natural or scenic feature(s) that would be lost, damaged or destroyed by allowing this site to be annexed, zoned and developed with residential uses. 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, Inc., shows that the property is contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. The land directly west of the subject property was previously annexed into the City and this is a logical expansion of the City boundary. City Council finds that all essential services are available or will be provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public funds. The applicant is proposing to develop the land in substantial compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. In accordance with the findings listed above, Citv Council finds that the annexation/zoninlI of this orooertv would be in the best interest of the City. EXHIBIT H Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 PP-05-008 Preliminary Plat Findings Meridian City Code (MCC) 12-3-3 ].2 and 12-3-5 D read as follows: "In determining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission/Council shall consider the objectives of this title and at least the following: A. The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan; Please see Annexation and Zoning item "A". B. The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development; City Council finds that public services can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. See Annexation and Zoning items "G" and "H" for more details. C. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, City Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. The public fUlancial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; See Annexation and Zoning item "H" and the Agency Comments and Conditions for more detail. E. The other health, safety or environmental problems that may be brought to the Commission's attention. City Council is not aware of any health, safety or envirorunental problems associated with the development of this subdivision. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. EXHIBIT I Zebulon Heights Subdivision No.2 CUP-05-019 CUP/PDFindings The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (Il- 17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; As part of the Planned Development (PD) the applicant is requesting relief from the standard street frontage requirement ofthe R-4 zone, as required by Meridian City Code. . City Council finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the requested use and all other required ordinance features. Although the site is large enough to accommodate all of the features required by ordinance, the applicant has asked, through the Planned Development, to modify specific development standards. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; City Council finds that the proposed single-family residential subdivision is generally harmonious with and in accordance with the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map, which designates the land to be "Medium Density Residential" (provided the Commission and Council grant the requested planned development). Please see Annexation & Zoning item "A". C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; Please see Annexation & Zoning item "E". D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; City Council finds that the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of approval, will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shan be able to provide adequately any such services; Please see Annexation & Zoning items "G" and "H", the Other Agency/Department Comments and Conditions, and any comments that may be submitted to the City Clerk regarding this project. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Please see Annexation & Zoning item "H". G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Please see Annexation and Zoning item "I". H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; Please see Annexation & Zoning item "J". The Commission and Council should review any comments received from the ACHD and/or ITD regarding this project when determining this finding. I. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Please see Annexation & Zoning item "K". CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a request to Rezone 1.28 acres from R-4 to L-O (Limited Office) for Meridian Fire Station No.4, by City of Meridian. Case No(s): RZ- 05-002 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 19, 2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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 ofrecord within three hundred feet (300') ofthe 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 S67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the April 19, 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 record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code S67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code SS 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof of Posting filed with the staff report. 3. Application and Property Facts CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-05-002 - PAGE I of4 a. In addition to the application and property facts noted in the staff report and the Planning & Zoning Recommendation for the subject appIication(s), it is hereby verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings is City of Meridian. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibit C for the findings required for this application. B. Conclusions of Law 1. 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. S67- 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 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code S 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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Site Plan dated September 2004 as shown in Exhibit B and the Site Specific and Standard Comments 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 S 12-3-5 and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The Site Specific and Standard Comments are as shown in Exhibit B. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). RZ-05-002 - PAGE 2 of 4 E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action ofthe governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Site Specific and Standard Comments Exhibit C: Zoning Amendment Findings By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the fl7Jr: ( ,2004. (/?J f'!J. ~ I day of COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~f- COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) ---- VOTED_ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). RZ-05-002 -PAGE3 of4 and City Attorney. By: )hC\ ~~6J/\--. Sify Clerk's Office Dated: 4- 1. '2~05 CITY OF MERIDIAN FLNDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISLON & ORDER CASE NOeS). RZ-05-002 - PAGE 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A Meridian Fire Station No.4 RZ-05-002 Legal Description REZONE HOUNDARY DESCRIPTION FOR THE CITY or; MERIDIAN, ADA COllNTY, IDAHO ,\ parce] located In Ihe Nr: of the SE y, of Section 20, Township 3 North. Range 1 Ensr, Buise 1vleridian. and bdnu 1,01 ] of Block -I ()f lJIOU:':;,IND ,"'[,TUNGS SUBDfl7S/0N NO / ~~u~~(~~~~i~~II~~~~kd:~~~Jt~~~\l:~~ ~~I::~,~~ 8248 in Ilw nflkc of the Recorder. Ada Coullly, Idaho. Commencing at a drill sleel monUJ11el1l marking the northeasterly comer of said NE '/, of the SF '/.., from which a drill sleel monument marklllg the southeasterly comer of said NE 'I, uf lhe SE 'f, bears S 0"00' 14" E a distance of I 350.04 feet: ~~'~r~~,t f~c:)t:~];)I~~i::;~~o:~~ :~l~(~:~~/~/;~ulldary pf Said NF of tbe SE 'I, a distance of [benee continuing S O"O(J' IrE a disLUnce of 24'1.51 kd to a point on the eXlension of the sputherly bpundary of said lot I; b,'undary S SlP59'54" W along said southerly boundary lmc feet lo the soulhwcSlt:rly corner of said Lot I; t::~e~l(~;tl~,~;~~;~~~r~;~IU~;:~:li~l~~,~CrerlY boundary of said Lot I a distance of 34509 feet to Ihenee S (,7025' 31\" E along thc nurtherly boundary of said Lot J a distance of 248.98 ICel III the POINT OF BEmNNIN(~ Ihis parcel conwins 1.57 (lereS and IS subject to any easements cxisting or in use. Prepared by: Olenll K. Bcnnell. PLS Civil Sllf\'CY Consult,mlS, lncorporatcil Fcbruary 4. 2005 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY REZONE DESCRIPTION FOR LOT 1 OF BLOCK 4 OF THOUSAND SPRINGS SUBDIVISON NO. 1 LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EASI; BOISE MERIDIAN. ADA COUNTY; IDAHO. ~ ~ ") ~ f.Q ,!::) 2 i:::l :0:: S' ~-?s.)-6'. '.9.9' .c- BLOCK 4 THOUSAND SPRINGS SUBDMSION NO. f 181.91 . S 89"59'54" W 229.91' NORTHEASTERL Y ~~R'f5: gj ;Z~ 1/4 SE 1/4 t ~ <:'~.96" SCALE: 1 -=50' S.t:.9a>' t::::J ~ ~ lu ~ ~, 2;:;;; ~oi b{~ lu ~ 2 i:::l lJ} 48.00' EXHIBIT B Meridian Fire Station No.4 RZ-05-002 Site Specific and Standard Comments SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS (Rezone) 1, The legal description submitted with the application is accurate and meets the requirements of the City of Meridian and State Tax Commission. 2. All development on said property shall comply with Meridian City Code. 3. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application shall be submitted for approval prior to occupancy of the building. 4. The applicant shall work with City Staff to provide additional landscaping for the screening and buffering from the residences on the west side of the property. Fire Deoartment Comments 1, Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 2. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shan have the 4 Yi" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. 3. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 4, Provide a 20' wide Fire Lane for all internal & external roadways. 5. Operational fire hydrants and temporary or permanent street signs are required before combustible construction begins. 6. The office lot will have an unknown transient population and will have an unknown impact on Meridian Fire Department can volumes. The Meridian Fire Department has experienced 2397 responses in the year 2003. According to a repOlt completed by Fire & Emergency Services Consulting Group our requests for service are projected to reach 2800 in the year 2005 and 3800 by the year 2010. Fire lanes and streets shall have a vertical clearance of 13'6". This includes mature landscaping. 7. The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer. 8. The proposed location of the Meridian Fire Station meets the general requirements of the Master Site Plan for fire station locations. The site appears to have met the minimum lot dimensions required for a satellite fire station location, 9. There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all fire department connections. 10. The State Fire Marshall will conduct the plan review for this proposed Meridian Fire Department substaion. Sanitary Services Comment: 1. SSC has no comments related to this application. EXHIBIT C Meridian Fire Station No.4 RZ-OS-002 Required Findings for Zoning Amendment STANDARDS FOR ZONING AMENDMENT The Commission and Council shall review the particularfacts 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 (11-15-11): 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 subject property is designated as "Public/Quasi Public" and is identified as an "Existing or Potential Fire Station" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, public/quasi public is defined as areas which are designated to preserve and protect existing private, municipal, state and federal lands for area residents and visitors, City Council finds that the requested Limited Office (L-O) zoning designation for use as a Meridian Fire Department substation is harmonious and in accordance with the Comprehensive plan. B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be re-zoned in the future; City Council does not anticipate that the applicant intends to rezone the subject property in the future. C. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the fashion that would be allowed under the new zoning; City Council finds that the proposed use as a fire station is allowed in the proposed L-O zone. The applicant has not submitted a proposed site plan and is not specifically proposing to install any site improvements with the subject rezone application. The applicant will be required to submit for a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) which, when processed, will require the applicant to make site improvements, including parking and landscaping, in accordance with Meridian City Code. D. Has there been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that the area should be rezoned; City Council finds that the City's Comprehensive Plan has provided the applicant with the ability to request the L-O zone for the subject property. The area adjacent to this property contains a mixture of uses including retail, office, and residential and has been developing and changing rapidly over the past decade. The rezoning of the property will allow for the construction of a fire department substation which will improve public safety services in the fast growing area of southeast Meridian. 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; City Council anticipates that the proposed use will be operated and maintained to be harmonious with the existing neighborhood. The applicant has submitted specific information concerning the design or appearance of the proposed fire station and City Council finds that it is hannonious with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. F. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; City Council finds that the requested rezone should not be disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. Through the Comprehensive Plan process, the City determined that public/quasi public uses are appropriate for the area. Any future change of use on the property that may have a significant impact on the surrounding properties will require conditional use approval under current ordinances, and adjoining property owners will have an opportunity to comment. City Council anticipates that the proposed fire station will not be hazardous or disturbing to the neighboring uses. The Commission and Council should consider all public testimony, oral and written, before making this finding, G. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shaU be able to provide adequately any such service; On February 25, 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 cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; City Council finds that the requested uses will not create excessive additional requirements at public costs for public facilities and services, Additionally, City Council finds that the proposed rezone would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. I. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment, and conditions that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; City Council finds that the proposed L-O zoning designation of the property does not inherently allow uses that will generate activities, processes, materials, equipment, and conditions that are detrimental to the general welfare of the community. J. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; City Council finds that the proposed L-O zoning will not interfere with general traffic patterns on any public streets. Please refer to the ACHD staff report for a full report on traffic issues. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. City Council finds that no natural or scenic feature will be lost, damaged or destroyed by issuance of this conditional use. Staff has not identified any natural or scenic features on the site. L. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City; City Council finds that the proposed rezone would be in the best interest of the City by allowing the construction of a Meridian Fire Department substation which will improve public safety services in the fast growing area of southeast Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of Falash Construction Case No(s). CUP-OS-009 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 19, 2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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 S67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the April 19, 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. Oral testimony was received on this matter, as reflected in the records ofthe 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 record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a, There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code S67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code SS 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof of Posting filed with the staff report, 3. Application and Property Facts CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). CUP-05-00? _ - PAGE 1 of 4 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 verified that the property owner( s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings are Falash and Ross Construction, me, Michael Falash. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibit D for the findings required for Conditional Use Permits. B. Conclusions of Law 1, 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. S67- 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 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps, 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code S 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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Site Plan submitted with the application as shown in Exhibit B and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit C, The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval ofthe application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code 9 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 CUP Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated submitted with the application is hereby conditionally approved; and CITY OF MERlDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). CUP-05-007_ - PAGE 2 of4 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in Exhibit C. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1, Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use pennit shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the council. During this time, the permit holder must commence the use as pennitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. In this context "structures" shall include sewer and water lines, streets or building construction. The applicant has specified in the application and to the commission and council a construction schedule and completion date for the project. If the completion date specified for the project is exceeded, the conditional use application shall become null and void. However, the applicant may submit an application for a time extension on the project for city council review. The application for time extension shall be submitted at least thirty (30) days prior to the deadline for completion of the project. For projects requiring platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one year from the original date of approval by the council. If the successive phases are not submitted within one year intervals, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and void. (MCC 11-17-4.B.) E. Notice of Pinal Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body ofthe City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. P. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS), CUP-05-007 _ - PAGE 3 of 4 Exhibit B: Approved Site Plan Exhibit C: Final Conditions of Approval Exhibit D: Conditional Use Permit Findings B~ of the City Council at its regular meetiog held on the )---1- ,2005. lal'&. I day of COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD MA YOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED_ and City Attorney. By: jll'Mll'f\ ~ "'2 D ""' City Clerk's Office Dated: 4 - 2 , -Os CITY OF MERIDIAN ENDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). CUP-05-00? _ - PAGE 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A Falash Construction CUP-05-009 Legal Description . Falash Properties, L.L.C., an Idaho limited liability "".Falash & Ross Construction, Inc., an Idaho . f'" P. plV~j- EXHIBIT B Falash Construction CUP-05-009 Approved Site Plan EXHIBIT C Falash Construction CUP-05-009 Final Conditions of Approval SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS 1. Si!!l1s & Addressin!!: No signs are being approved with the subject CUP application. Signs require a separate permit in compliance with the sign ordinance. See Site Specific Condition #2 below. 2. LandscaDin!!: The applicant is proposing to place the trash enclosure on the north east side of the parcel. This trash enclosure location and design must be approved by City staff. Please contact Bill Gregory at SSC (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal and submit stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application. SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (CUP) 1. All conditions of the previously approved Medimont Subdivision shall also be considered conditions of the Conditional Use Penuit (CUP-05-009) application. 2. No signs are approved with this application. All wall and free-standing signs require a separate permit. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-14 of the City Zoning and Development Ordinance. 3. Provide the building address numbers on the monument facing Adkins Way. Please contact Joe Silva (888-1234) for further infonnation regarding this condition and the size of the numbering/lettering. 4. The landscape plan prepared by Michael Falash - Architect., is approved with the following changes/notes: The landscape plan may change based on site plan modifications. If the site plan is not approved by Meridian Fire Department or SSC as presented, then an amended landscape plan must be submitted for review. 5. The site plan prepared by Michael Falash Architects, is approved as submitted with the changes listed in this staff report. The number and size of the off-street parking stalls is approved as shown on the submitted site plan. 6. Comply with the conditions and comments of all City Departments, and other agencies, 7. No additional buildings or other structures shall be erected, moved, added to or structurally altered, nor shall any building structure or land be established or change in use on this site without first obtaining a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) from the Meridian Planning and Zoning Department (MCC 11-19-1). 8. All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed development. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). A bid must accompany any request for temporary occupancy. Any temporary occupancy will not exceed 60 days to complete the required improvements. 9. If construction has not begun within 18 months of City Council approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to the start of development. 10. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed in such a manner as to eliminate glare and illumination of the adjoining roadways and properties, in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-13-4.C. 11. AU construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 12. Applicant's (or successor's) failure to comply with any of the tenns of approval of the conditional use pennit shall be cause for revocation of the conditional use permit. OTHER AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY 1. Waste enclosure access: The applicant shall provide drive-on capability for 6 and 8 cubic yard containers. Allow a minimum of 60 ft. frontal clearance for such containers. 2. Please contact Bill Gregory at SSC (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal and submit stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. Please contact the Police Chief for detailed review of any development proposal and submit stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application. MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 2. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3. Provide a 20' wide Fire Lane for all internal roadways all roadways shall be marked in accordance with Appendix D Section D103.6 Signs. 4. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 5. Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix D. 6. Provide a Knoxbox entry system for the complex prior to occupancy. 7. Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. 8. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 9. There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all fire department connections. 10. This project will be required to provide a 20' wide swing or rolling emergency access gate. The gate shall be equipped with a Knoxbox Padlock which has to be ordered thru the Meridian Fire Department. EXHIBIT D Falash Construction CUP-OS-009 Conditional Use Permit Findings STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USES The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following, and may approve a conditional use permit ifthey shall f'md evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; The proposed site plan shows a centrally located office building with parking on the north and east of the proposed building. There is a 4-foot wide apron adjacent to a 24' wide drive lane south of the proposed building. Staff is supportive of the layout for the proposed drive lanes and proposed traffic flow pattern for this lot, as vehicles should not interfere with internal traffic flows or traffic flows on the adjacent shared driveways or Adkins Rd. See Site Specific Condition #2 below, Parking stalls are required at the ratio of one space per 400 square-feet of gross floor area for office/warehouse (MCC 1I-I3-S.B). Per this requirement, 29 stalls are required. There are 34 parking stalls provided on this site, 33 standard stalls, and 1 handicap accessible stall. This provision exceeds the City's minimum parking stall ratio. Staff finds that the project should have ample parking. All proposed building setbacks and landscaping meet the minimum standards outlined in Titles 11 and 12, Meridian City Code. Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the required yards (setbacks), open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features required by the ordinance. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the property as "Industrial" and is currently zoned I-L. Staff finds that the requested use is consistent with the Future Land Use Map and that if approved as a CUP the project will be in compliance with City ordinances. C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; Staff is generally supportive of the site plan design. This area is part of a larger office/commercial/industrial area, which staff believes the applicant has designed to accommodate. Staff believes that an office/warehouse will be compatible with other useslbuildings in the area. There is a significant amount of landscaping being provided (approximately 14% of the gross land area), and the proposed use is consistent with the previously approved uses within Medimont Subdivision, Stafffinds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the general design, construction, operation, and maintenance should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area, D. That the proposed use, if it complies with aU conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed office/warehouse use will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission and Council should rely upon any public testimony provided to detennine if the development will adversely affect the other property in the vicinity. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shaU be able to provide adequately any such services; Sanitary sewer and water are currently provided to the subject site. The Ada County Highway District Board of Commissioners previously acted on the Medimont Subdivision applications. The conditions, requirements and restrictions for Medimont Subdivision also apply to CUP-05-009. The Commission and Council should reference any written and/or verbal testimony submitted by any public service provider, regarding their ability to adequately service this project. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and wiD not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; If approved, the applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. Staff 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. G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Staff recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of an OfficelW arehouse in this location; however, staff does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. Staff does not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. Staff finds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to people, property or the general welfare of the area. H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; The applicant is proposing to utilize two driveways off of Adkins Way. The applicant proposes a fence to close off the south access lane and the west side of the building. Police and fire have expressed concern with not being able to access the site from all direction. See agency comments below. Staff does not believe that the proposed vehicular approaches will interfere with the traffic on the spine driveway or the public streets. I. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Staff is unaware of any natural of scenic features of major importance on this site and finds that no natural or scenic features of major importance will be lost or damaged by approving the annexation and zoning application. Any existing trees larger than 4" caliper that are removed shall be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of AFL Telecommunications (Verison Wireless) Case No(s). CUP-05-007 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 19, 2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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 S67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the April 19, 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. 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 record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code S67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code sS 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof of Posting filed with the staff report. 3. Application and Property Facts CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). CUP-05-007_ - PAGE I of4 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 verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings are Avest Limited Partnership, Kathleen Weber General Partner. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibit D for the findings required for Conditional Use Pennits. B. Conclusions of Law 1. 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. S67- 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 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code S 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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Site Plan dated December 16, 2004 as shown in Exhibit B and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit C. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval ofthe application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code S 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 CUP Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated December 16, 2004 is hereby conditionally approved; and CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). CUP-05-007_ - PAGE 2 of4 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in Exhibit C, D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use pennit shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the council. During this time, the permit holder must commence the use as pennitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. In this context "structures" shall include sewer and water lines, streets or building construction. The applicant has specified in the application and to the commission and council a construction schedule and completion date for the project. If the completion date specified for the project is exceeded, the conditional use application shall become null and void. However, the applicant may submit an application for a time extension on the project for city council review. The application for time extension shall be submitted at least thirty (30) days prior to the deadline for completion of the project. For proj ects requiring platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one year from the original date of approval by the council. If the successive phases are not submitted within one year intervals, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and void. (MCC 11-17-4.B.) E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body ofthe City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). CUP-05-007_ - PAGE 3 of4 Exhibit B: Approved Site Plan Exhibit C: Final Conditions of Approval Exhibit D: Conditional Use Permit Findings By ~f the City Council at it, regular meeting held on tlle / --Z , 2005. ; COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) 10/./'.6. day of VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ --- VOTED_ and City Attorney. By: J()JJL.1",o\ City Clerk's Office Dated: 4-2.1-05 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). CUP-05-00? _ - PAGE 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A AFL Telecommunications (Verison Wireless) CUP-05-007 Legal Description veriZQ[l wireless EXHIBIT "A" Pago 2 ofl DESCIUPTlON OF PREMISES VERIZON LEASE SITE DESCRIPTION: LOCATED iN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 5. TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE I EAST, BOISE MERrDIAN, ADA COUNTY. STATE OF IDAHO, AND BEJNG MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS' BEGINNING AT A POINT SOUTH 00'26'34" WEST 1685.57 FEET ALONG MONUMENT LINE AND EAST 425.14 FEET FROM THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 17. TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 3 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN AND RUNNING THENCE NORTH 25.00 FEET; THENCE EAST 50.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 25.00 FEET; THENCE WEST 50.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING CONTAINS: 1250 SQUARE FEET, OR 0.029 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. (AS SURVEYED). VERlZON ACCESS AND UTILITIES DESCRIPTION: TOGETHER WITH ALL RIGHTS OF iNGRESS AND EGRESS OVER, ACROSS AND THROUGH EXISTING DRIVEWAYS, ROADS AND UNIMPROVED SURFACES OF THE GRANTOR'S LAND FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING AND MAINTAINING THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS SITE. INCLUDING THE INST ALLA TION AND MAINTENANCE OF POWER AND TELEPHONE UTILlTms. 278778v I <llEl~ !lOI CHWF )OSFI'1I 12/8/2004 12 EXHIBIT B AFL Telecommunications (Verison Wireless) CUP-05-007 Approved Site Plan verizgn wireless - EXHIBIT C AFL Telecommunications (Verison Wireless) CUP-05-007 Final Conditions of Approval SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS 1. Signs & Addressin!!: No signs are being approved with the subject CUP application. Signs require a separate permit in compliance with the sign ordinance. See Site Specific Condition #2 below. 2. Co-Location Reauirements - As required by MCC 11-22-E.3, The applicant shall design the tower as to accommodate the applicant's antennas one other user's comparable antennas. The Meridian Police and Fire departments have made comment. See Other Agencies Comments and Concerns. SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (CUP) 1. All conditions of the previously approved A vest Plaza Subdivision shall also be considered conditions of the Conditional Use Pennit (CUP-05-007) application. 2. No signs are approved with this application. All wall and free-standing signs require a separate permit. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-14 of the City Zoning and Development Ordinance. 3, No tower shall have constructed thereon, or attached thereto, in any way, any platform, catwalk, crow's nest, or like structure, except during periods of construction or repair. No signs or banners shall be attached to any portion of a wireless communications tower. 4. All abandoned or unused towers and associated facilities shall be required to be removed within sixty (60) days of cessation of use as a wireless communication facility, unless a time extension is granted by the city council. 5. All lighting on the tower, other than that required by the FAA, shall be prohibited. 6, Comply with the conditions and comments of all City Departments, and other agencies. 7. No additional buildings or other structures shall be erected, moved, added to or structurally altered, nor shall any building structure or land be established or change in use on this site without first obtaining a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) from the Meridian Planning and Zoning Department (MCC 11-19-1). 8. All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed development. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). A bid must accompany any request for temporary occupancy. Any temporary occupancy will not exceed 60 days to complete the required improvements. 9. If construction has not begun within 18 months of City Council approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to the start of development. 10. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed in such a manner as to eliminate glare and illumination of the adjoining roadways and properties, in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-13-4.C. 11. Applicant's (or successor's) failure to comply with any of the terms of approval of the conditional use permit shall be cause for revocation of the conditional use permi t. 12. All climbing pegs within the bottom twenty feet shall be removed and shall only be used when the tower is being serviced. OTHER AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. The City of Meridian must have the first right of refusal for co-location of communications devices as per MCC 11-22-E.3 MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT I. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Deparhnent and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 2. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 Yz" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing pennits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10', g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509,5. 3, The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 4. Provide a 20' wide Fire Lane for all internal roadways all roadways shall be marked in accordance with Appendix D Section D103.6 Signs. 5. Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 7, All aspects of the building systems (including exiting systems), processes & storage practices shall be required to comply with the International Fire Code. 8. All portions ofthe buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 9. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shan be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m), b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3 .1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 10. This project will be required to provide a 20' wide swing or rolling emergency access gate. The gate shall be equipped with a Knoxbox Padlock which has to be ordered thru the Meridian Fire Department. EXHIBIT D AFL Telecommunications (Verison Wireless) CUP-05-007 Conditional Use Permit Findings STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USES The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following, and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall f'md evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, parldng, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; The proposed site plan indicates the pole shall be located entirely on Commercial property and not within a residential area. Mirage Meadows Subdivision is approximately 280 feet to the north of the site which is greater than the required setbacks as listed in 11-22-D, of 125% of the height of the tower. Furthermore, the tower lies approximately 380 feet from Locust Grove Road, which is greater than three times the height ofthe tower. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the property as "Commercial" and is currently zoned C-G. Staff finds that the requested use is consistent with the Future Land Use Map and that if approved as a CUP the project will be in compliance with City ordinances. C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance wiD be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; Staff is generally supportive ofthe site plan design. This area is part of a larger commercial/industrial area, which staff believes the applicant has designed to accommodate. Staff believes that monopole communications tower will be compatible with other useslbuildings in the area. There is an existing 85' Cricket tower located near this site and the proposed use is consistent with the previously approved uses within A vest Plaza Subdivision. The applicant has applied the design standards as listed under MCC 11-22-5C to the site as it will be of monopole design: it will be painted as to blend into the surroundings unless required by the FAA; it will be sufficiently setback from the property line; the accessory building will be surrounded by a sight obscuring fence; the landscape buffer has been established by the Stor-it facility; and the pegs will be removed after construction as conditioned. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the general design, construction, operation, and maintenance should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area and in compliance with the standards as set forth in MCC 11-22. D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed Communications tower will not adversely affect other property in the area, The Commission and Council should rely upon any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect the other property in the vicinity. E. That the proposed use will he served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; Sanitary sewer and water will not be required on the subject site. Roads are already provided and the site is an existing commercial operation. The Meridian Fire Department requires the generator to comply with a11 design standards for underground fuel storage. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; If approved, the applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. Staff 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. G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will he detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Staff recognizes that traffic and noise will not increase with the approval of a monopole tower in this location. Staff does not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. Staff finds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to people, property or the general welfare of the area. H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing commercial site located on Lot 9 Block 1 of A vest Plaza Subdivision. There is proposed a fencing structure to close off the site and there is a secondary fencing along A vest property line and a perimeter building. Police and fire have expressed concern with not being able to access the site from all directions, See agency comments below. I. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Staff is unaware of any natural of scenic features of major importance on this site and finds that no natural or scenic features of major importance will be lost or damaged by approving the annexation and zoning application. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of Request for a Miscellaneous Application for Approval to Construct a Golf Course Maintenance Equipment Storage and Repair Shop for Cherry Lane Golf Course in an R-4 Zone, by Lakeview Meridian Investors, LLC. Case No(s). MI-05-001 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 19, 2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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 S67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the April 19, 2005, public hearing. The applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian were given fuII 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 City Council heard and took oral and written testimony and duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code S67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code SS 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof 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 verified that the property owner of record at the time of issuance of these findings is CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO. MI-05-001 - PAGE I of4 the City of Meridian, (Applicant is Lakeview Meridian Investors, LLC, potential operator of the golf course.) B. Conclusions of Law 1. 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 (I.e. s67- 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 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code S 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. 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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 6. That this approval is subject to the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit A. 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 S 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 Miscellaneous Application request, as evidenced by having submitted the application dated March 25, 2005 (File No. MI-05-00 1), is hereby conditionally approved as follows: a. Comply with the conditions of approval in Exhibit A (as modified by City Council at their April 19, 2005 public hearing). b. Additionally, the Applicant shall coordinate with staff and the irrigation district on a method to properly landscape the west side ofthe building, c. The maximum building height shall be twenty (20) feet (measured to the peak). CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO. MI-05-001 - PAGE 2 of4 D. Exhibits Exhibit A: Site Specific Conditions of Approval By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the i q-ttr.. day of ArY\ \ , 2005, COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED~ MAYOR TAMMY deWEERD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED-===-- CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO. MI-05-001 - PAGE 3 of 4 \~ ':!'\'~1' Copy served upon Applicant, The Plannini1iifd1!~t'f1 and City Attorney. ) ~ By: ~ Xt.l~(l ~Oo^0 City Clerk's Office Dated: 5-1u.05 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO. MI-05-001 - PAGE 4 of4 EXHIBIT A Cherry Lane Golf Course Maintenance & Repair Shop MI-OS-OOl (Modifications per the City Council motion at their April 19, 2005 meeting. Deletions are in sfrikeettf and additions are in underline.) SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. If approved, this building shall only be used as an accessory stmcture to the main clubhouse building, Se er fieF' iess ill Rst bSJ3r8 idea t6 Fills I:H:Iilaiag. 2. The applicant shall prepare a revised, detailed site plan that relocates the structure further north and provide a landscape buffer on the south in compliance with MCC 12-13-12-3 and a street buffer on the west in compliance with MCC 12-13-10. The City Council grants staff the ability to work with the Aoolicant and the irrigation district to allow the street buffer to be less than ten (1 Q) feet if necessary to accommodate the Eight Mile Lateral. However the minimum olantin!! reauirements are still reauired. 3. The applicant incorporate the following standards into the building design: · The exterior building materials shall demonstrate the appearance of high quality materials of stone, brick, wood or other native materials. Smooth faced concrete block, tilt-up concrete panels or prefabricated steel panels are prohibited except as accent materials. · The color of the building materials shall compliment the clubhouse materials, · The roof design shall demonstrate at least one of the following: a) overhanging eaves; b) sloped roofs, c) two or more roof planes, d) varying parapet heights, and/or e) cornices. The roof style shall comoliment the surrounding residences such as a hinned roof. · The building side facing W. Talamore Blvd, shall incorporate modulations along at least 30% of the building length. The facade facin!! the oublic street should resemble that of a residence and blend with neighborin!! residences. · The maximum building maximum building height shall be twenty (20) feet (measured to the ~ 4, Applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) prior to construction of the new building. 5. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits for construction of a building from the City of Meridian Building Department. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Meridian noise ordinance (MCC 6-3-6). 7. Applicant must meet the building setbacks as required by MCC 11-9-1. 8. All fuel storage facilities shall comolv with EP A and Meridian Fire Denartment standards, Cherry Lane Golf Course Maintenance and Repair Shop - MI-05-00I - Exhibit A Page I of I BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL C/C April 19, 2005 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR CUSTOM POOLS ANDP A TIO FOR TEMPORARY DISPLAY AND SALE OF JACUZZI MODELS AND ONE (I) ABOVE GROUND POOL FOR THE MONTHS APRIL TO OCTOBER LOCATED AT 322 SOUTH MAIN CASE NO. MI-05-002 ORDER OF DENIAL OF MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION This matter coming before the City Council for Miscellaneous Application denial pursuant to Meridian City Code 9 12-3- 1. B for a temporary use to display and sell Jacuzzi models and one (1) above ground pool for the months April to October by Custom Pools and Patio, and the Council finding that the Administrative Review is complete from Sonya Allen, Assistant City Planner, for the Planning and Zoning Department, dated: Hearing Date: April 19,2005 to the Mayor and Council, the council takes the following action: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: In the exercise if its police and governing powers, the City Council ofthe City of Meridian denies the subject application by Custom Pools and Patio for the following reasons: ORDER OF DENIAL OF MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY DISPLAY AND SALE OF JACUZZI MODELS AND ONE (I) ABOVE GROUND POOL FOR THE MONTHS APRIL TO OCTOBER BY CUSTOM POOLS AND PATIO (MI-DS-DD2) Page I of3 1. The size of the use, the large tent, and the required parking all conflict with the multitude of uses that take place on and adjacent to the su bject site. The proposal would add unacceptable additional congestion to the area, negatively impacting existing uses and traffic safety . 2. The proposed duration of the use exceeds the expectations of what a temporary use should be and more closely resembles a permanent use that is not appropriate for review under a miscellaneous application, NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION AND RIGHT TO REGULATORY TAKINGS ANALYSIS The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code 9 67-6521, An affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by this decision may, within twenty-eight (28) days after the date ofthis decision and order, seek ajudicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. ORDER OF DENIAL OF MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY DISPLAY AND SALE OF JACUZZI MODELS AND ONE (I) ABOVE GROUND POOL FOR THE MONTHS APRIL TO OCTOBER BY CUSTOM POOLS AND PATIO (Ml-OS-002) Page 2 of3 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the \C\th day of Prr~ \ ,2005. William G. Berg, Jr., Ci ~'" ,~ Copy served upon Applicant, the Plann City Attorney. ny,~ Dated: LP -)~.-o5 ORDER OF DENIAL OF MISCELLANEOUS APPLICA nON FOR TEMPORARY DISPLAY AND SALE OF JACUZZI MODELS AND ONE (1) ABOVE GROUND POOL FOR THE MONTHS APRIL TO OCTOBER BY CUSTOM POOLS AND PA no (MI-05-002) Page 3 of3 DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIWSEC PGS CMOIl STATUS 11 64/15 17'413 381131613 EC--S 132'20" 13134 13'73 OK 12 134/1517:43 PUBLIC WORKS EC--S 01'213" <l64 1373 OK 13 64/1517:458841159 EC--S <l1'20" 004 0'73 OK 14 04/1517'4620088413744 EC--S 01'22" 064 1373 OK 15 64/1517'48 POLlCE OEPT EC--S 131'20" 004 1373 OK 16 134/15 17: 50 89855131 EC--S 01' 18" 064 073 OK 17 64/1517:52 LIBRARY EC-S 01'47" 004 073 OK 18 04/1517'5492083776449 EC--S 01'19" 604 0'73 OK 19 64/15 17'56 3886924 EC--S 131'20" 064 1373 OK 20 134/15 17:58 P-FIND-Z EC--S 01'20" 004 073 OK 21 34/15 18:00 FaxServer EC--S 131'36" 13134 073 OK 22 134/15 18: 02 208 855 133913 EC--S 131' 19" 13134 13'73 Ok 23 04/15 18: 04 128300040 G3--S 131' 44" 064 1373 OK 24 64/15 18: 06 208 387 6393 EC--S 01' 19" 1304 073 OK 25 04/15 18:08 ADR CTY DEVELMT EC--S 01'20" 064 073 OK 26 64/15 18: 139 8005052 EC--S 01'19" 004 073 OK 27 04/15 18: 11 CHERRY LFlNE G3--S e2'37" la64 073 OK 28 64/1518:15 IDAHO ATHLETIC C EC--S 01'20" la04 1373 OK ~ 0'1/15 18: 16 ID PRESS TRIBUNE EC--S 01 '213" 1304 073 OK ---~~---~~~:_~~~:=_:~~~~~~~~------------=:==:_--~~~~:_~~~-----~~~----~~----------------- , P feet Se . Po.:s+ -FOr ~ b LA' c J\J(}/{ C!-.t CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: Shaun Wardle _ Christine Donnell == Charlie Rountree _ Keith 8ird _ Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter, with Treasure Valley Worship Center Adoption of the Agenda: 5, Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of March 29, 2005 City COuncil RegUlar Meeting: 6. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 05.005 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed use three story building consisting of retail, office and residential uses in the O. T Zone for DaVE! Buich by Dave Buich - 641 North Main Street; C, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval; VAR 05.003 Request for a Variance for a reduction in parking requiremenls for a proposed three-story mixed-use project for Dave ~by Dave BUich - 641 North Main Street: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval; AZ 05- 001 Request for an Annexation and Zoning of 156.49 acres to R-B & L-a zones for Bainbrido& Subdivision by Brighton Properties, LLC - SWC of Chinden 80ulevard and North Ten Mile Road: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 05- 002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 429 building lots and 35 common lots on 155.44 acres in proposed R-8 and l-O zones for Bainbridae Subdivision by Brighton Properties, lLC _ SWC of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road: Merldl~n City Council Agenda -April 19, 2005 Psge 1 of 4 AU materials presented at pubUc meetings Shall becom9 property of ll1e City of Meridian. Anyone deSiring accommoda~on for disabilities relaled 10 documents andlor hearings please contact lhe City Clerk's Offlce at 865-4433 alleasl48 hours prior to the public meeting. DELINQUENCY FOR TURN OFF Schedule for April 20, 2005 Cycle 1 MAYOR: Pursuant to Meridian City Code 9-1-21, , delinquent water users shall have the right to request a pre termination hearing prior to water service being disconnected. No water users having requested such pre- termination hearing for April 19, 2005, water service for the attached turn-off list will be terminated on April 20, 2005. The total amount of the tum-offlist is $26,127.15. City of Meridian City Clerk Office ( ( CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinq uent Account List- council Page: 1 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03:50pm Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Report Criteria: Tennlnated customers not included Customer.Cust No () = {<} 880000001 Customer.BiII Cycle = 1 Last Pmt Last Pmt Name Balance Non-Delinq 01/20/2005 Date Amount ------..._~-- 24.04.0552.1 ABBEY BEN 71.42 39.89 31.53 03/2212005 42.81 - 24.04.1904.1 ABBOTT, SCOTT 54.18 54.08 .10 04/13/2005 56.54 - 23.02.4990.4 ABDERHALDEN, RICHARD 114.83 55.41 46.57 12.85 02115/2005 75.00 - 23.02.1930.2 ACUNA, JULIO & 77.90 38.22 25.22 14.46 02114/2005 80.00 - 36.69.0632.1 ADAMS, RAYMOND & VICKIE 98.10 51.53 46.57 03/14/2005 61.61 - 30.74.3026.3 ALEKSEYER, SERGEY & LYUBO 47.13 36.01 11.12 03/17/2005 24.17 - 30.30.6342.2 ALEX, JULIUS K 37.92 29.58 8.34 03/25/2005 20.64 - 24.03.0400.1 ALLEN, JAMES 41.62 36.01 5.61 03/07/2005 60.00 - 30.74.2542.2 ALLEN, JIM 115.39 70.93 44.46 03/15/2005 75.00 - 30.74.3040.4 ANDERSON, DEBORAH A. 27.38 21.82 5.56 03/29/2005 19.66 - 30.74.1026.1 ANDERSON, DOUGLAS 159.46 90.33 69.13 02/15/2005 50.00 - 25.05.0160.1 ANDERSON, GORDON & JUDYT 101.30 36.01 65.29 02116/2005 122.71 - 30.74.2978.1 ANDERSON, JAMES J. 37.92 29.58 8.34 03/15/2005 20.64 - 30.30.6290.2 ANDERSON, RANDY & LORI 40.47 32.13 8.34 03/15/2005 23.19 - 30.30.6036.2 ANIBAL, CHRIS 27.38 21.82 5.56 03r30/2005 19.66 - 23.02.6300.1 ANSON, PATRICIA 95.78 52.86 42.92 03/23/2005 50.00 - 22.50.1990.2 ANSON, REBECCA 106.58 43.77 62.81 02/16r2005 156.24 - 46.60.0010.3 ARMSTRONG, JAMES & NANCY 64.74 29.58 21.46 22.50.1616.2 ARNZEN, RANDY 77.65 44.55 33.10 01/24/2005 122.39 - 29.07.0972.3 ASUMENDI, RUBEN 82.82 43.77 39.05 03/0712005 95.45 - 36.69.0530.1 ATCHISON, JEFFERY 163.15 43.77 72.81 02/16/2005 84.64 - 30.74.3660.2 ATHERTON, NOBLE 146.70 91.55 55.15 03116/2005 51.88 - 30.74.3100.2 BABCOCK, JULIE 43.22 33.46 9.76 03/2212005 22.00 - 24.04.1290.3 BACON,THOMAS & JANIS 133.20 84.08 49.12 03/16/2005 103.90 - 22.51.0694.1 BAILEY, PEGGY 80.64 48.98 31.66 04119/2005 25.00 - 23.02.3550.2 BAILEY, PEGGY 44.59 43.77 .82 04/04/2005 72.00 - 23.02.2130.1 BALDWIN, PIXIE 56.65 35.19 21.46 03/1412005 25.22 - 30.74.3604.3 BARBEY, THOMAS 149.02 80.68 24.56 43.78 04105/2005 4.00 - 32.32.4054.2 BARBOUR, KELLY & JENNIFER 35.29 32.13 3.16 04/15/2005 32.13- 25.25.0104.2 BARNES, GREG & JASMINE 74.30 59.29 15.01 03/15/2005 61.61 - 23.01.2110.2 BARROETABENA, PHYLLIS 83.56 62.32 21.24 03/1712005 75.00 - 24.03.0868.4 BATES, CANDACE 77.48 33.46 44.02 0212212005 59.06 - 22.51.0932.1 BAYVIEW - KELLOGG 88.98 36.28 18.83 33.87 01/26/2005 22.59 - 22.50.1022.1 BEACH, ROXANNE 167.01 44.05 86.70 36.26 0211712005 60.00 - 31.52.0700.2 BECK, BILL 75.94 32.70 32.70 10.54 31.52.0750.2 BECK, BILL 15.10 7.55 7.55 25.25.4040.2 BEDOYA, PEDRO 62.44 33.46 28.98 02125/2005 36.50 - 22.51.3080.3 BEEBE, MELINDA 46.32 21.82 24.50 03/23/2005 25.22 - 24.04.1208.2 BEHRENDS, DALE 111.68 73.77 37.91 03/17/2005 83.00 - 24.04.2010.7 BELAIR, DENNIS 67.20 29.58 17.70 12121/2004 113.87 - 36.68.0312.2 BENSON, JR. DARRYL 94.10 43.77 50.33 02114/2005 80.46 - 22.51.2622.1 BENTLEY, DONALD 246.88 125.32 121.56 03/31/2005 250.64 - 22.51.0474.2 BENTLEY, RENEE 71.42 39.89 31.53 02125/2005 31.53 - 35.65.0352.1 BERG, JOSEPH 71.30 36.01 35.29 03/0212005 39.05 - 36.68.0272.1 BERTEL, STEVEN 78.82 36.01 42.81 02115/2005 81.86 - 25.25.9932.2 BILLINGS, RAYMOND & DELANP 186.68 28.25 35.29 46.57 01/21/2005 91.18 - 37.72.0256.2 BIRDGE, RICHARD & TONI 82.82 43.77 39.05 03/2212005 46.57 - 30.30.6006,2 BJORUM, MICHAEL & KATY 43.25 32.13 11.12 03/24/2005 24.17 - 24.04.1140.2 BLASER, GLENN 106.47 32.13 35.29 01/21/2005 89.46 - 24.04.0536.8 BOBKO, RAYMOND 40.74 20.49 20.25 0211412005 155.74 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account list- council Page: 2 Slandard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03:50pm Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance last Pmt last Pml Cust No Name Non-Delinq Date Amount --~---- 22.50.1726.2 BOESIGER, MAX 126.42 67.34 28.98 03/17/2005 50.00 - 24.04.0862.5 BOESPFLUG, DAN & KATHY 119.44 54.08 65.36 03/14/2005 104.90 - 22.50.3696.2 BOHN, HEATHER 58.44 25.70 32.74 03/10/2005 57.96 - 30.74.3046.2 BOHN, JOHN D. 36.59 28.25 8.34 03/22/2005 23.19 - 37.72.0164.1 BONFRISCO, LOUIE & JENNELl 62.35 32.13 30.22 02108/2005 50.00 - 30.30.6050.2 BONNEY, AARON 29.93 24.37 5.56 03/1712005 76.22 - 24.04.2286.2 BOOKER, KEITH 158.54 63.17 95.37 02116/2005 148.71 - 32.32.4960.1 BORCHERS, LARRY 59.90 32.13 27.77 03/01/2005 35.29 - 30.74.0660.2 BOSSART-Hill, CANDACE 123.69 10/18/2004 85.70 - 25.05.0802.1 BOYLE, JOHN 78.51 36.01 42.50 03/14/2005 82.00 - 22.50.4272.1 BREEDLOVE, ANGELA 51.31 28.25 23.06 03/24/2005 40.00 - 23.01.0800.1 BREWER, SID & SHELLY 118.51 43.96 74.02 03/14/2005 51.00 - 37.37.3226.2 BRIDGES, GREG & STACEY 82.82 43.77 39.05 02/22/2005 39.05 - 23.02.3370.4 BRIGGS, TERI 171.94 128.60 43.34 03/16/2005 80.00 - 23.01.3510.4 BRINEGAR, E. E. 151.74 41.22 66.50 02/16/2005 77. 64 - 23.02.1290.5 BRINEGAR, E.E. 82.48 45.98 36.50 03/22/2005 66.50 - 23.02.1320.2 BRINEGAR, E.E. 63.66 32.13 31.53 03/09/2005 30.84 - 23.02.3712.2 BRINEGAR, E.E. 127.98 47.65 80.33 03/15/2005 57.85 - 36.69.0574.1 BROWN, JAMES & SHERRY 61.34 39.89 21.45 03/15/2005 70.00 - 30.74.3004.2 BROWN, SHERRI 52.69 36.01 16.68 03/24/2005 26.13 - 30.30.6330.2 BROWNE, CHRISTOPHER 33.81 28.25 5.56 04104/2005 ' 22.21 - 36.69.0566.1 BROWNEll, DR 82.70 39.89 42.81 03/15/2005 42.81 - 30.30.6136.2 BRUEGEMAN, TRAVIS & PARKS 40.47 32.13 8.34 03/15/2005 23.19 - 30.30.6078.2 BRUNSON, KATHY & MICHAEL 49.91 36.01 13.90 03/29/2005 25.15 - 24.03.0312.1 BURKETT, JEFFREY & ROXANN 135.62 51.53 84.09 02/16/2005 119.46 - 23.02.5120.1 BURNETT, CAREY 66.20 33.46 32.74 02/17/2005 40.26 - 30.30.6284.2 BURNETT, MICHAEL & DIANNE 46.03 32.13 13.90 04/15/2005 25.15 - 23.01.0950.3 BURNETTE. DIANNE 67.20 38.22 28.98 02/28/2005 32.74 - 30.74.3618.4 BURNS, EMMETT 37.93 17.94 17.70 22.51.0298.2 BYE, DEANNA 58.68 33.46 25.22 03/25/2005 32.74 - 36.68.0232.2 BYINGTON, ALEX & HEIDI 81.62 51.53 30.09 04/05/2005 54.00 - 32.32.4946.5 BYINTON, ELMER 28.68 17.94 10.74 22.50.0724.1 C.F.1. INVESTMENTS 93.23 27.43 21.46 01124/2005 50.00 - 30.74.0402.1 CALLAWAY, LAUREL 81.60 45.10 36.50 03/09/2005 84.28 - 30.30.6280.2 CAMPBELL, ROBERT 83.79 69.89 13.90 03/16/2005 75.29 - 30.30.6116.2 CAPPEL, GEORGE & SAllY 43.25 32.13 11.12 03/15/2005 24.17 - 30.74.3098.2 CARR, ERICA 49.91 36.01 13.90 03/22/2005 22.60 - 36.69.1122.2 CARTER. J.R. 52.68 51.53 1.15 03/29/2005 50.00 - 24.04.0798.2 CASE, RICHARD & DONNA 67.30 28.25 39.05 02/17/2005 209.02 - 22.50.2108.1 CASELLA, GARY 58.56 29.58 28.98 02/16/2005 90.70 - 30.74.0680.2 CASH, MICHAEL 72.38 25.70 21 .46 02/09/2005 8.56 - 22.50.0312.2 CASS, BRUCE & RAMONA 89.27 49.01 40.26 02/28/2005 44.02 - 31.31.0215.1 CENTRAL PARK PLAZA BLDG A 400.58 204.05 196.53 02/25/2005 106.61 - 30.74.2686.2 CHAPPELL, MARK & MARY 84.89 51.53 33.36 03/21/2005 32.01 - 30.74.2850.1 CHEESBROUGH, JAMES G. 54.89 43.77 11.12 03/31/2005 70.74 - 23.02.4700.2 CHENEY, STEVEN 53.36 33.46 19.90 04/19/2005 60.00 - 23.02.6100.1 CHENEY, STEVEN 69.96 33.46 36.50 03/22/2005 36.50 - 30.74.2926.1 CHESS, ALAN C. 60.45 43.77 16.68 03/17/2005 26.13 - 30.30.6228.2 CHilDRESS, JACK 36.24 33.46 2.78 03/31/2005 18.68 - 30.30.6286.2 CHilDRESS, JACK 58.25 36.01 22.24 04/01/2005 28.09 - 35.35.0216.1 CHRISTENSEN. S. G. 26.52 25.52 1.00 04/06/2005 25.04 - 22.51.1174.2 CHRISTIANSON, ARTHUR & COI 94.01 18.83 48.83 26.35 02/16/2005 131.78 - 22.51.1170.2 CHRISTIANSON, ARTHUR & COI 60.17 11.31 37.55 11.31 02/16/2005 64.10 - 25.25.0160.2 CLARK, CORTNEY 33.66 25.70 7.96 03/30/2005 50.00 - 37.37.3808.2 CLARK, VICTOR & JODY 74.94 32.13 42.81 02/1 5/2005 85.62 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ( Delinquent Account List- council Standard Payment Customers Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmounlDelinquent Balance Page: 3 Apr 19, 2005 03:51pm Last Pml Last Pmt Date Amount Cust No Name Balance Non-Delinq 24.04.1248.3 CLAY, STEVEN & SUSAN 47.69 47.65 .04 25.05.0344.1 CLIFF, DWIGHT 154.10 129.13 24.97 29.07.0892.3 CLUPHF, CHRIS 79.20 33.46 28.98 37.37.3966.2 COLE, DANIEL & RENEE 106.96 54.08 52.88 30.74.3074.1 COLLINS, JAMES & DENISE 67.11 47.65 19.46 22.51.4170.4 COLSON, HOWARD 47.04 21.82 25.22 37.37.3008.1 CONCORE 84.28 44.02 40.26 30.74.3072.2 CONN, STEPHEN 63.46 41.22 22.24 22.50.2422.4 CONOVER, CHUCK & NATALIE 75.18 39.89 35.29 23.02.1920.1 CONRADI, LINDA 93.80 93.68 .12 30.30.6018.2 CONWAY, JOHN & ELAINE 33.40 25.70 7.70 25.05.0518.1 COOK, ROBERT 82.82 43.77 39.05 23.02.3100.2 COPE, WILLIAM & REBECCA 77. 98 45.98 32.00 30.74.3212.1 COREY BARTON BUILDERS 125.62 70.12 26.52 24.03.0270.1 CORTINA. LUIS 67.54 36.01 31.53 24.04.1746.1 COSGROVE, AMY 151.87 43.77 65.29 30.30.6090.1 COSTELLO, SHARON 36.11 27.77 8.34 30.74.2922.1 COWAN, ROBERT 44.35 36.01 8.34 30.30.6218.2 CRAYCROFT, DINORAH 36.24 33.46 2.78 22.50.3928.1 CROASDALE, DENA 75.06 36.01 39.05 37.72.0228.3 CRONISTER, DAVID & TERESA 135.09 79.29 54.09 20.47.1178.2 CROW, JEFFREY 128.94 48.16 40.26 22.51.0742.2 CRUM, SCOTT & BECKY 91.30 29.58 28.98 23.02.6350.1 CRYSTAL, LAREE 66.32 37.34 28.98 22.50.1368.1 CULVER, WARN V. 39.49 33.28 6.21 23.02.5690.5 CURIEL, FABIOLA 130.96 60.62 70.34 24.04.0666.2 DA ROSA, JULIE 142.04 86.74 55.30 30.30.6066.3 DABNEY, SCOTT & MARIE 50.14 33.46 16.68 23.02.0910.1 DAILEY, DON 38.42 37.34 1.08 22.50.0284.3 DALE, MARK 66.68 17.94 17.70 20.46.0316.3 DANAHA, STEPHEN 79.97 35.88 31.53 22.50.4574.3 DAROSA, JOE 178.88 108.54 70.34 24.03.0078.2 DAVIS, LORAN & SHANNON 97.51 42.44 39.05 23.02.0908.2 DAVIS. MARGARET 70.06 37.34 32.74 22.50.0288.6 DAWSON, CAROL 43.28 21.82 21.46 36.36.0996.2 DAWSON, CAROL D. 105.18 39.89 65.29 34.34.5058.1 DCU INVESTMENTS 33.90 15.07 18.83 23.02.0904.1 DECHAMBEAU, JOHN 58.56 29.58 28.98 30.74.3158.2 DEES, RICHARD & JANICE 41.57 36.01 5.56 23.02.0140.2 DELLlMAGINE, RANDY 45.32 45.10 .22 30.30.6094.1 DERIT A. FRANK & ANNA 28.48 25.70 2.78 23.02.1610.1 DESILET, DENICE 51.16 42.10 9.06 24.03.0720.1 DOBARAN, JOHN & ARVELLA 18.86 7.55 11.31 24.04.1166.3 DONALDSON, NEAL 110.22 33.46 32.74 24.04.2282.1 DRURY, PATRICK 90.34 43.77 46.57 35.35.0036.3 DUARTE, RACHEL 34.36 33.46 .90 30.74.3042.1 DUNKLE, GARY 52.69 36.01 16.66 25.25.1060.3 DUNSWORTH, BRAD & JODI 82.65 47.65 35.00 23.02.5010.1 EARLEY, GEORGE 54.76 29.58 25.18 30.74.3784.1 EBBERS. MARIE 48.26 26.05 22.21 21.48.1633.1 EDDY'S BAKERY .52 30.74.3678.2 EDWARDS, DEARL W 82.70 56.57 26.13 20.47.1228.2 EICHLER, BRIAN & LISA 72.30 40.77 31.53 30.74.2368.1 ELDRED, FLOYD 67.54 36.01 31.53 37.72.0101.1 ELK RUN HOMEOWNERS ASSO 200.00 ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent 1.71 40.52 32.74 04/07/2005 54.05 - 04/11/2005 50.00 . 03f02/2005 60.00 - 03/08/2005 52.88 - 03/28/2005 27.11 - 02/11/2005 75.66 - 02/25f2005 40.26 . 03/30f2005 25.54 - 02/25/2005 85.62 - 03f22/2005 48.00 - 04105/2005 50.00 - 03/14f2005 89.38 - 04/01/2005 41.00 - 02/22/2005 44.02 - 02/25f2005 35.29 - 02f16f2005 72.81 - 03/22/2005 23.19 - 04/04/2005 23.19 - 04f04/2005 16.68 - 02/22/2005 85.62 - 01/26/2005 40.00 - 01/31/2005 32.74 - 02/15/2005 40.26 - 12/14f2004 200.00 - 03/01f2005 89.14 - 03/16/2005 66.58 - 03/15/2005 11.79- 03/22/2005 45.10- 12/21/2004 20.00 - 03/01/2005 47.78 - 02/15/2005 100.00 - 03/08/2005 40.26 - 04/01/2005 77.04 - 02/16/2005 145.73 - 03107f2005 3.76 - 03101f2005 32.74 - 03/23f2005 22.21 - 03/30/2005 39.00 - 03/15/2005 18.68 - 04f19/2005 50.00 - 03f22/2005 11.31 - 01 f28/2005 99.24 - 03f17/2005 61.90 - 03/18/2005 119.00 - 03/29/2005 26.13 - 03/11/2005 90.00 - 04/11/2005 29.00 - 03/08f2005 55.74 - 01/18f2005 3.48 - 03f30/2005 2.44 - 03/01/2005 35.29 - 02/14/2005 116.88 - 03f11/2005 116.30 - 17.70 12.56 CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 4 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19. 2005 03:51pm Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Last Pmt Cust No Name Non-Delinq 12/20/2004 Date Amount ----........... ~ - - -------- 30.74.2998.2 EMERY, KEVIN 35.49 24.37 11.12 03/23/2005 24.17 - 23.02.6510.2 EMMONS, CYNTHIA 81.48 41.22 40.26 03/14/2005 273.36 - 30.74.2842.2 ENGLE, ROBERT 47.36 33.46 13.90 03/14/2005 22.60 - 23.02.1940.1 EPLEY, RITA 86.90 67.40 19.50 03/22/2005 50.00 - 22.50.1238.2 ERHART, MILT 105.34 10/19/2004 127.82 - 22.50.1236.3 ERHART, MILT 75.61 35.35 40.26 03/11/2005 100.52 - 30.74.3796.2 ESPEY, MATTHEW & ANDREA 67.42 43.25 24.17 03/14/2005 42.81 - 23.02.2430.2 ETIENNE, LUCRETIA 70.41 39.05 28.80 03/22/2005 30.00 - 22.50.3822.1 EVANS, M. SHAE 77.60 37.34 40.26 02/25/2005 81.20 - 30.74.2688.1 EVANS, STEVEN & KRISITE 129.26 41.22 40.26 01/19/2005 120.82 - 20.46.0132.3 EVANS, SUSAN 84.83 49.54 35.29 03/14/2005 74.34 - 30.74.3614.1 FACKRELL, THOMAS 67.42 43.25 24.17 03/15/2005 70.58 - 24.04.1564.2 FAIRCHILD, KERI 59.90 32.13 27.77 03/14/2005 55.54 - 22.51.0406.1 FARMERS & MERCHANTS BAN~ 239.20 126.94 112.26 04/19/2005 101.94 - 23.02.5890.1 FElL, KAY OR SKIP FElL 93.24 56.74 36.50 02/25/2005 84.28 - 35.65.0262.2 FENWICK, J. & LOGAN, SHERYL 57.34 17.94 17.70 22.50.0260.7 FIELDSTAD, CHRISTY 42.02 41.82 .20 04/18/2005 54.00 - 22.50.0290.5 FIELDSTAD, CHRISTY 72.38 25.70 28.98 17.70 01/13/2005 95.78 - 30.74.2568.2 FINLEY, JEFFREY 214.92 52.86 32.74 81.54 01/19/2005 76.06 - 30.74.1056.1 FISHER, BEA J. 58.80 33.46 25.34 03/14/2005 90.00 - 32.32.4964.2 FITZGERALD, RYAN & CATHERI 31.04 21.82 9.22 02/01/2005 100.00 - 30.74.3354.1 FLOREZ, BARRY 63.54 39.37 24.17 02/15/2005 101.13- 35.65.0790.2 FOREST, JOHN & REGINA 105.56 83.90 21.66 04/06/2005 105.00 - 30.30.6164.2 FORMAN, BRUCE & GINA 51.24 37.34 13.90 03/23/2005 22.60 - 30.30.6212.2 FORSTER, PAMELA 79.91 66.01 13.90 03/16/2005 136.53 - 30.30.6072.2 FOURNIER, TIM 39.37 28.25 11.12 04/11/2005 24.17 - 30.30.6026.2 FRANK, ERIC 37.92 29.58 8.34 03/21/2005 20.64 - 23.02.4010.3 FRED SCHIMPH 82.82 43.77 39.05 03/14/2005 54.09 - 23.02.4930.4 FREEMAN, SARAH 63.66 32.13 31.53 02/25/2005 124.62 - 24.04.1708.2 FREINWALD, CLAY JR 82.26 37.34 36.50 02/1 5/2005 90.00 - 23.01.0830.2 FRIENDS OF CHILDREN & FAMII 1.00 1.00 03/23/2004 50.91 - 24.04.1454.1 FUENTES, CHRYSTLE 78.94 39.89 39.05 03/14/2005 96.57 - 22.51.3660.3 FUHRMAN, JIM 41.91 17.94 17.70 37.37.5022.1 FULLER, JASON & TRACY 85.72 56.74 28.98 35.35.0084.3 GALE, DANIEL 58.55 52.86 5.69 25.25.4530.2 GALITZ, KURT & JEANINE 52.91 51.53 1.38 03/17/2005 43.00 - 30.74.2910.3 GALLEGOS, ANN 36.59 28.25 8.34 03/22/2005 23.19 - 37.72.0166.3 GANONG, KEITH & LUANN 45.40 45.10 .30 03/22/2005 47.48 - 29.07.1084.2 GARCIA, JOAQUIN 82.94 47.65 35.29 03/11/2005 46.57 - 25.25.9904.2 GARVIN, MATTHEW 89.17 45.10 44.07 04/05/2005 .55 - 30.74.3078.2 GENTSCH, NOREEN 295.66 108.69 178.09 03/17/2005 120.00 - 30.74.2938.5 GENTSCH, NOREEN 33.81 28.25 5.56 03/15/2005 22.21 - 30.30.6362.2 GILSON, CAROL 33.81 28.25 5.56 03/22/2005 22.21 - 30.74.2884.2 GILSON, NANCY 49.91 36.01 13.90 03/15/2005 25.15 - 30.74.3052.2 GOINS, LEVI 44.06 36.01 8.05 03/15/2005 23.00 - 30.30.6010.2 GOULD, TRAVIS & AMANDA 82.70 39.89 42.81 03/09/2005 100.91 - 30.30.6156.2 GRAHAM, JAMES & CORA 37.69 32.13 5.56 03115/2005 22.21 - 46.46.6220.1 GRAVES, KEEGAN & KATHY 41.10 37.34 3.76 04/05/2005 32.74 - 30.74.3022.1 GRAY, RICHARD & GAYLE 47.13 36.01 11.12 03/21/2005 24.17 - 36.69.0376.1 GRAYSON, GARY 67.43 43.77 23.66 03/16/2005 69.00 - 24.04.1146.2 GREEN LANCE & GLORIA 103.84 37.34 66.50 02/16/2005 119.28 - 32.32.4766.1 GREG HATCHER CONSTRUCTIC 41.13 17.70 16.69 30.74.3180.2 GROESBECK, KEN & ROBERTA 67.42 43.25 24.17 03/15/2005 81.86 - 30.30.6120.2 GRONEWOLLER, STUART & AM 47.13 36.01 11.12 03/25/2005 24.17 - 24.03.0034.1 GROUND, JENNIFER 104.40 66.01 38.39 03/17/2005 100.00 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 5 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03:51pm Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDefinquenl Balance Last Pmt Last Pml Cust No Name Non-Delinq 12/20/2004 Date Amount --............... - - ~ -- 32.32.4688.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY 31.34 17.70 8.48 46.17.0534.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY 31.03 21.46 9.57 03/15/2005 3.48 - 32.32.4302.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOME~ 87.43 77.86 9.57 03/15/2005 5.16 - 32.32.4134.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOME~ 35.40 17.70 17.70 03/1512005 82.42 - 32.32.4342.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOMEE 36.19 21.46 9.57 3.48 1.68 37.37.3300.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOMEE 29.34 17.70 7.04 3.48 1.12 37.37.3330.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOMEE 14.76 11.28 3.48 37.37.5030.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOMEE 35.40 17.70 17.70 46.17 .0707.1 GUARANTEED QUALITY HOMEE 15.21 11.73 3.48 30.30.6352.2 GUGELMAN, JOSH & GINGER 40.70 29.58 11.12 03/22/2005 21.62 - 24.04.1620.7 GUYMON, GREG & ALISON 69.32 37.34 28.98 03/02/2005 100.00 - 30.74.3084.2 HADLEY JR, DOUGLAS 56.57 39.89 16.68 03/23/2005 26.13 - 25.25.0118.2 HAGEN, PHILIP 28.76 25.70 3.06 03/15/2005 43.62 - 24.04.1220.2 HALE, JAMES & DOW, DIANE 62.07 43.77 18.30 36.68.0268.2 HALE, LAWRENCE 39.16 38.56 .60 03/1712005 75.06 - 23.01.0020.1 HAMMOND 00, THOMAS R 34.16 33.46 .70 03/22/2005 58.28 - 20.46.0434.2 HAMMONS, CURTIS & CARLA 67.41 35.88 31.53 03/1512005 66.82 - 24.04.1320.4 HANCE, JOHN & SARA 90.88 46.32 44.56 03/01/2005 60.00 - 22.51.1134.1 HANDY MAT, LLC. 18.86 11.31 7.55 03/01/2005 7.55 - 20.47.0002.3 HANNUM, ELLEN & PAUL 83.06 50.55 32.51 03/01/2005 88.40 - 20.46.0138.3 HARADA. JAMES 93.48 54.43 39.05 03110/2005 76.57 - 32.32.4026.2 HARPER, JENNIFER 46.50 25.70 20.80 02115/2005 65.00 - 24.04.0512.3 HARRIS, KATHY 148.79 63.17 42.81 02115/2005 113.66 - 30.74.2988.2 HARRIS, MELISSA 73.64 43.77 29.87 02/01/2005 50.00 - 30.30.6058.2 HARSCH, CODY 24.60 21.82 2.78 03/22/2005 18.68 - 36.69.1240.1 HART, DOUG 67.42 32.13 35.29 02/22/2005 78.10 - 30.74.2908.1 HARTSOCK, JAMES G. 87.32 56.74 30.58 03/22/2005 28.48 - 22.50.2112.2 HAY, CHARLES & ROBERTA 85.96 43.77 42.19 04/05/2005 90.00 - 20.46.0260.1 HAYES, MARCIA 54.88 32.85 22.03 02/25/2005 50.00 - 24.04.1212.1 HAYLETT, MIKE 32.16 32.13 .03 04/19/2005 31.50 - 36.69.0694.2 HEATON, CHAD & HEATHER 122.44 77.65 44.79 03/16/2005 100.00 - 23.02.5070.3 HEFNER, C & BEAN, D. 69.96 33.48 36.50 03/22/2005 40.26 - 30.74.2872.1 HENDERSON, GLEN 52.69 36.01 16.68 03/22/2005 26.13 - 30.30.6282.2 HENDERSON, JARED & AMY 44.58 33.46 11.12 04/0512005 21.62 - 30.74.3356.2 HENDRIKSE, EDITH 50.92 31.26 19.66 02/1412005 69.24 - 23.02.2250.5 HENEY, TIMOTHY & JOANN 84.50 48.00 36.50 04/1312005 44.02 - 22.51.0658.1 HICKEY, JEAN 75.29 31.53 39.05 02/14/2005 80.91 - 34.34.6066.1 HIGH DESERT CONSTRUCTION 6.84 3.48 3.36 34.34.6264.1 HIGHLANDER HOMES 245.45 32.74 138.02 57.49 22.50.4810.2 HIX, MICHAEL 73.74 29.58 32.74 11.42 02/25/2005 40.00 - 20.46.0356.1 HOLDRIDGE, JOANNE 148.93 104.91 44.02 03/17/2005 51.54 - 25.05.0722.2 HOLLEY, ANNA 80.92 45.10 35.82 03/15/2005 50.00 - 30.74.1014.3 HOLLOWAY, JERALD K 73.96 41.22 32.74 03/15/2005 73.00 - 32.32.4630.3 HOLZER, ERIC & LISA 63.90 39.89 24.01 03/22/2005 42.81 - 22.51.0446.2 HOOTS, TRACI & RAMIREZ, MAF 769.67 249.02 282.03 30.30.6096.2 HOPPE MIYAKE, BRENDA 32.66 32.13 .53 04118/2005 61.00 - 24.04.1550.1 HOSFORD, DWIGHT 65.00 34.68 30.32 03/14/2005 37.84 - 30.30.6128.2 HOUDE, RICHARD & CATHRYN 41.44 33.46 7.98 04118/2005 21.00 - 36.69.1276.2 HOWARD, DONALD & CAROLYN 95.68 04121/2004 35.32 - 23.01.0420.1 HOWARD, TREVIS 117.45 86.81 30.64 03116/2005 65.00 . 22.20.0084.1 HOWELL, PATRICIA 32.67 25.70 6.97 03129/2005 25.22 - 35.64.0016.2 HUCKENBERRY, HEATH & LORI 50.92 25.70 25.22 02/25/2005 32.74 - 35.65.0708.1 HUDDLESTON, CODY 89.92 89.29 .63 04/19/2005 113.00 - 30.74.3436.2 HUMPHREYS, JASON & CHRIST 181.42 95.20 42.20 44.02 02/15/2005 64.34 - 36.69.0926.2 HUNTTING, DENNIS & RANAE 1,337.82 37.34 44.02 66.50 1,189.96 03/21/2005 44.02 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page; 6 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19. 2005 03;51pm Current Period; 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pm! Last Pmt Cust No Non-Delinq 01/20/2005 Date Amount -------- 22.50.3894.2 HURLEY, DALE & GAIL 63.54 28.25 35.29 03/11/2005 70.58 - 30.74.2944.3 HUSFLOEN, TRISHA 36.96 17.94 17.70 03/01/2005 15.00 - 24.04.1914.4 HYDE, JOHN 200.14 70.93 129.21 03/14/2005 72.69 - 25.25.4024.2 HYMAS, AARON 67.42 25.70 28.98 01/26/2005 78.56. 21.49.1148.1 IDAHO HEATING AND AIR 279.60 139.80 139.80 03/22/2005 279.60 - 30.74.2856.2 IMMEGART, KURT 55.90 24.37 31.53 03/21/2005 27.77 - 23.02.5620.1 JACKSON, ROBERT 50.80 21.82 26.98 03/14/2005 32.74 - 36.69.0492.1 JACKSON. ROCKY 54.80 29.58 25.22 02/15/2005 32.74 - 36.65.3112.1 JACOBS, MARIE 84.80 29.58 55.22 02/16/2005 91.72 - 35.65.0666.2 JAMESON, BRETT 83.67 24.37 27.77 02101/2005 61.10 - 30.74.2912.2 JAQUES, RENAE 107.65 63.17 44.48 04/05/2005 35.93 - 22.50.2096.1 JEFFS, GEORGE & PATTY 77.72 41.22 36.50 03/29/2005 47.78 - 30.74.3076.1 JENKINS, NANCY 40.70 29.58 11.12 03/23/2005 21.62 - 30.30.6046.2 JENNINGS. MARIA 34.94 29.38 5.56 03/14/2005 19.66 - 30.74.2930.2 JEPPESEN, RYAN 49.91 36.01 13.90 04/01/2005 25.15 - 22.51.0302.7 JEPSON, MIKE & JAMIE 77.72 41.22 36.50 03/14/2005 44.02 - 20.46.0252.4 JOHANSEN, DALE & JANICE 76.86 44.12 32.74 03/07/2005 36.50 - 30.30.6314.2 JOHNSON. ALICIA D 53.79 39.89 13.90 03/25/2005 25.15 - 30.30.6262.2 JOHNSON. ANGELA 46.03 32.13 13.90 03/15/2005 25.15 - 37.37.4100.2 JOHNSON. BENJAMIN & HOLLY 73.72 33.46 40.26 03/01/2005 51.54 - 25.25.1074.2 JOHNSON. BRETT & MICHELLE 71.75 39.89 31.86 03/22/2005 50.00 - 30.30.6324.3 JOHNSON, CHRIS 34.04 25.70 8.34 03/31/2005 20.64 - 35.35.3082.2 JOHNSON, ERIC & KRASTEVA.; 58.56 29.58 28.98 03/01/2005 28.98 - 30.74.3642.2 JOHNSON, KEVIN 115.98 72.67 29.07 02/14/2005 100.00 - 23.01.2710.2 JOHNSON. MARC 70.08 37.34 32.74 03/25/2005 70.26 - 36.69.0912.2 JOHNSTON, GLEN & TIMI 86.58 43.77 42.81 02/1 5/2005 32.71 - 22.51.4290.1 JONES, BRET 330.13 105.70 113.22 03/15/2005 105.70 - 20.47.1036.2 JONES. FAROL 80.89 45.66 35.23 03/16/2005 61.53 - 36.69.0580.1 JONES. FRANKLIN 77.36 41.04 36.32 02101/2005 68.88 - 24.04.1138.2 JONES, NATHAN & SARAH 56.02 28.25 27.77 03/14/2005 31.53 - 22.50.2354.1 JONES, OWEN 92.52 25.70 31.53 03/0 1/2005 26.26 - 30.74.2976.1 JONES, RANDALL 66.01 43.77 22.24 03/21/2005 28.09 - 22.50.2418.2 JONES, WES & CINDY 107.60 67.34 40.26 03/16/2005 50.52 - 22.50.2098.3 JONES, WES & CINDY 68.95 32.13 31.53 03/21/2005 30.00 - 22.50.2122.2 JONES, WES & CINDY 80.27 43.77 36.50 03/22/2005 86.04 - 30.74.2932.1 JORDAN, MITCHEll 51.01 39.89 11.12 03/22/2005 24.17 - 23.01.2720.2 JOY, JENNIFER 56.46 33.46 23.00 04/04/2005 50.00 - 20.46.0840.4 JUDY, VICTOR 62.64 34.87 27.77 03/14/2005 59.30 - 35.35.1460.2 KAMCHATHPHAY, C & BOUALA) 78.94 39.89 39.05 02/22/2005 93.14 - 23.02.2310.1 KAREL. RUSTY 81.63 45.13 36.50 03/14/2005 47.78 - 23.03.4020.1 KB WELDING 100.93 78.45 9.51 02128/2005 3.48 - 30.74.3378.1 KERSBERG, FRANK 40.73 20.49 20.24 03101/2005 20.00 - 34.34.5062.2 KEZAR, JEFFERY & MONIQUE 6.33 7.79 .54 30.30.6014.2 KIMBALL. LINDA & KIRA 28.48 25.70 2.78 03/22/2005 18.68 - 22.50.0594.2 KINDALL, AARON & MISTIE 132.41 50.55 39.05 42.81 02117/2005 39.05 - 22.51.3570.4 KNOX, JERRY & NORMA 634.92 37.34 67.78 77.78 452.02 07/19/2004 50.00 - 30.30.6242.2 KOLLING, MATT 101.43 59.89 41.54 02/25/2005 55.47 - 30.30.6162.2 KRIDER, ROBERT & TINA 40.70 29.58 11.12 03/17/2005 21.62 - 30.74.2966.1 KUNARD, LARRY 59.06 25.70 33.36 03/24/2005 21.42 - 35.35.0144.3 LAMASTERS. TERRENCE 71.30 36.56 32.74 02/25/2005 76.76 - 22.50.4268.2 LANHAM, PATRICE 127.86 73.77 54.09 03/16/2005 91.61 - 23.01.0890.1 LANTZ. STAN 31.98 31.31 .67 03/30/2005 50.00 - 22.50.0520.2 LAURICELLA, CARL & LAURIE 76.86 44.12 32.74 03/10/2005 40.26 - 30.74.3140.2 LAW, DARRELL & ARNEADA 61.78 45.10 16.68 03/21/2005 23.58 - 22.50.0600.2 LAYTON, JONATHON & FELlCIT 88.14 44.12 32.74 03/30/2005 32.74 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account L1st- council Page: 7 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03:51pm Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last pmt Last Pmt Name Balance Non-Delinq 02/20/2005 12/20/2004 Date Amount - - ----------- -----..... - ---.. 30.74.1260.3 LEGGETT. CHAD & CHERYL 147.16 112.57 34.59 03/17/2005 60.00 - 30.30.6052.2 LEWIS, JEFF 62.32 29.58 32.74 03/10/2005 32.74 - 22.50.2130.1 LIKES, JENNIFER 45.16 29.58 15.58 03/14/2005 50.00 - 30.74.3218.3 LINDSEY, STEPHANIE 75.06 49.91 25.15 04/05/2005 42.81 - 22.51.0382.1 LISBY, DOLORES 15.10 7.55 7.55 02/15/2005 11.31 - 23.02.4070.4 LJ PROPERTIES LLC 80.76 15.55 31.31 12/21/2004 44.86 - 36.36.1012.1 LOGUE, MERTON & REBECCA 66.20 33.46 32.74 03/09/2005 36.50 - 30.74.2858.1 LOPEZ, DONALD 70.64 51.53 19.11 03/15/2005 60.00 - 30.74.3624.3 LUTHY, BRITTENY 86.37 40.47 23.19 22.71 03/09/2005 50.00 - 29.07.0782.1 LYON, DOUG & TRICIA 75.06 36.01 39.05 02/14/2005 81.86 - 34.34.6258.1 M & W HOMES 19.15 15.67 3.48 24.04.2232.3 MACARTHUR, KENNETH & TRIS 81.48 41.22 40.26 03/14/2005 54.62 - 23.02.4480.1 MADRID, JOSEPH F 102.71 32.13 31.53 01/24/2005 73.36 - 23.02.1410.1 MADSEN, JOHN 92.14 51.88 40.26 03/18/2005 77.86 - 23.01.3350.1 MADSEN, LOU 29.90 25.70 4.20 04/11/2005 50.00 - 22.50.2336.1 MAGNUSON, ERIC 67.42 32.13 35.29 03/02/2005 72.81 - 22.51.0862.2 MAHATHY, ANTHONY 84.50 48.00 36.50 03/14/2005 40.26 - 22.50.1676.4 MAHA THY, ANTHONY 75.06 36.01 39.05 02/22/2005 80.33 - 22.51.0858.1 MAHATHY. ANTHONY 47.88 26.42 21 .46 03/08/2005 42.36 - 22.50.1686.5 MAHATHY. ANTHONY 63.66 32.13 31.53 , 03/0212005 83.06 - 30.74.3144.2 MAHONEY, J. ANNETTE 29.93 24.37 5.56 03/21/2005 22.21 - 22.50.2234.3 MALLOY, STEPHEN 73.84 37.34 36.50 03/01/2005 47.78 - 25.25.9930.1 MANLEY, JUSTIN & HEIDI 66.20 33.46 32.74 03108/2005 36.50 - 30.74.2642.1 MANWARING, MARK 82.72 43.77 38.95 03/16/2005 62.00 - 22.51.0486.1 MARCH, RICHARD 161.44 76.14 85.30 02/16/2005 155.64 - 35.35.3078.4 MARCUM. BRETT & RUDD, KRIS 138.18 45.10 32.74 44.02 24.03.0806.4 MARCUM. CARL & JULIE 81.74 39.89 35.29 6.56 04105/2005 35.00 - 29.07.0236.2 MARSH, ROBERT 71.18 32.13 31.53 7.52 03/23/2005 31.53 - 30.74.2840.2 MARTELL, WILLIAM & DELLA 37.92 29.58 8.34 04/13/2005 20.64 - 24.03.0274.3 MARTIN, BILL & DEANA 80.67 43.77 36.90 03/16/2005 80.00 - 23.02.2520.3 MARTIN, CRAIG 206.67 113.77 92.90 03/16/2005 77.91 - 37.37.2892.1 MARTIN. RONNA 74.34 39.05 35.29 03/17/2005 35.29 - 30.30.6348.2 MARTINEZ, BRIAN & PARK, SAR 47.13 36.01 11.12 03/29/2005 24.17 - 35.64.0020.2 MARTINEZ. RON 91.30 29.58 28.98 01/13/2005 156.06. 22.50.2424.1 MARTS, DEBI 50.92 25.70 25.22 04/04/2005 32.74 - 37.37.3032.1 MARX, BRAD & JANA 141.82 55.41 42.81 23.02.2280.1 MASLEN. JENNY 78.02 32.32 45.70 0211712005 100.00 - 35.35.0243.2 MAUS, DOUGLAS & LAURIE 73.84 37.34 36.50 03/01/2005 40.26 - 22.50.3888.1 MAXEY, STEFFANIE 52.14 24.37 27.77 03/21/2005 49.23 - 30.74.2826.2 MCCASHLAND, DAVID 44.52 43.77 .75 03/11/2005 81.00 - 30.30.6110.2 MCCAULEY, BRIAN 61.90 29.58 32.32 02122/2005 65.00 - 20.46.0512.2 MCCLAIN. TROY 40.60 36.73 3.87 01/10/2005 75.00 - 30.30.6276.2 MCCOID, JAY & MONICA 34.04 25.70 8.34 03/17/2005 20.64 - 22.50.3728.2 MCCOLLUM, SHAYNA 89.12 45.10 44.02 03/10/2005 85.30 - 30.74.3146.3 MCCUDLE, NATHAN & ARIANE 127.80 91.66 36.14 03/23/2005 30.44 - 24.04.1880.1 MCCUE, DENNIS & RHONDA 125.51 39.89 42.81 02122/2005 39.05 - 30.30.6140.2 MCDONALD, JOSHUA 89.87 59.29 30.58 04/01/2005 31.03 - 23.02.5350.1 MCEVOY, SAMUEL C. 180.25 180.24 .01 04/04/2005 67.75 - 30.30.6054.2 MCEWAN. ROY & LEGGETTE 46.22 39.89 6.33 03/01/2005 68.00 - 37.37.5010.1 MCFATE, DAVID E. 50.43 50.33 .10 03/24/2005 54.09 . 30.74.3106.2 MCGUIRE, JOSEFH AND SARAI- 62.27 29.58 32.69 03/09/2005 .85 - 23.02.6270.5 MCKINLEY, JUNE 67.54 36.01 31.53 03/2212005 43.92 - 23.02.4870.4 MCKINLEY, JUNE 76.00 75.10 .90 04/1812005 50.00 - 20.46.0270.2 MCLAUGHLIN, MATTHEW 77.19 45.66 31.53 02/25/2005 31.53 - 23.02.2050.2 MCMURDIE, PAUL & SHANELL 99.46 51.88 47.58 03/14/2005 92.00 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ( (' CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account list- council Page: 8 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03:52pm Current Period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance last pmt last Pmt Cust No Non-Delinq 02/20/2005 01/20/2005 Date Amount ------ 22.50.3808.2 MCNAIR, DAWN 39.49 21.82 17.67 36.36.1014.2 MCQUEEN, AllEN 113.70 20.25 24.01 11/29/2004 44.61 - 24.04.2052.2 MENDENHAll, ALAN 98.31 47.65 50.33 .33 03/14/2005 50.00 - 23.02.1126.1 MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT 112.86 60.19 52.67 03/01/2005 45.15 - 25.95.0707.2 MERRill, GREG 25.88 21.82 4.06 30.74.3790.1 MERRITHEW, ROBERT 78.87 56.57 22.30 03/14/2005 50.00 - 20.46.019B .3 MESERTH, ANDY 88.19 52.57 35.62 04/15/2005 50.00 - 46.46.7105.1 MESSINA VilLAGE - WATER FE, 10.B8 7.40 3.48 03f17/2005 8.38 - 37.37.3022.1 MEYER, JOHN & ISABEL 39.16 17.70 21.46 02f25/2005 23.34 - 37.37.9998.1 MEYETT, WilliAM H 25.04 14.70 10.34 03/01/2005 14.26 - 23.01.0076.4 MICHAEL, SHIRLEY 66.50 53.90 12.60 02f25/2005 47.00 - 22.50.4032.3 MICHAllOFF. ERNEST 96.20 33.46 62.74 03/15/2005 40.26 - 25.25.1096.2 MICHELOTTI, DARCI 25.72 25.70 .02 04/04/2005 14.48 - 30.30.6264.2 MilLAR, SANDRA & TIM 94.56 52.86 41.70 03/14/2005 32.40 - 30.74.0052.1 MilLER, E. ROGER 30.80 25.70 5.10 03/24/2005 25.22 - 30.74.3696.1 MillER, GREGORY & ERICA 67.42 43.25 24.17 02116/2005 123.62 - 20.46.0340.2 MillER, MARK 87.65 54.91 32.74 03/15/2005 44.02 - 22.50.2352.2 MILLER, SARAH 110.10 29.58 40.26 02f16/2005 88.42 - 20.46.0406.1 MILLS, TIMOTHY 39.23 38.22 1.01 04/13/2005 30.00 - 20.46.0886.1 MINEGAR, JOHN 58.88 34.87 24.01 03/11/2005 61.43 - 24.04.1862.2 MITCHELL, PATRICK 75.18 39.89 35.29 03/07/2005 46.57 . 24.04.0538.1 MONSON, THOMAS 107.88 57.96 49.12 02f16/2005 150.00 - 30.74.1076.1 MOORE, EVELYN 47.16 25.70 21 .46 03/0212005 25.22 - 22.51.4214.2 MOORE, LAWRENCE & KRISTIN 240.69 65.10 44.02 47.78 83.79 24.04.1634.1 MOORE, RUSSEll C 297.38 21.82 17.70 21.46 236.40 37.37.2894.1. MORGAN CREEK HOMES 31.26 17.70 10.08 3.48 24.03.0889.1 MORNING GLORY #2 HOA 31.32 31.32 22.51.3112.6 MORRIS, AMBER 81.12 23.60 26.88 02f25/2005 30.64 - 22.50.0746.5 MORRISON, MIKE 69.06 40.08 28.98 03/15/2005 40.26 - 23.01.4504.1 MORTENSEN CONSTRUCTION 6.59 3.48 3.11 36.69.1646.1 MORTENSEN, ERIC 186.02 28.98 148.71 4.85 20.46.0450.3 MOSKOWITZ, ALAN & HELENE 103.45 45.13 28.98 29.34 o 1/26f2005 54.60 - 23.02.6050.3 MOWLER, JAKE 34.20 33.46 .74 04/01/2005 36.50 - 34.34.6052.2 MULKEY, JACOB & JENNIFER 39.77 36.01 3.76 03/11/2005 89.38 - 30.74.3064.3 MULLINS, GENE & KATHERINE 43.48 29.58 13.90 03/23/2005 22.60 - 23.02.6860.1 MYERS, MICHAEL 85.36 45.10 40.26 02128/2005 103.08 - 30.74.3362.2 NAKAMYRA STEPHEN TRUST 99.96 47.36 52.60 02117/2005 130.59 - 24.04.1876.2 NEEDS, KATHY 86.58 43.77 42.81 03f14/2005 85.62 - 22.50.2252.1 NELSON, VAN 46.28 21.62 24.46 02f15/2005 46.00 - 24.04.1446.2 NEWBERRY, PAULA 78.94 39.89 39.05 02f15f2005 46.57 - 23.01.3200.1 NEWKIRK, MARYANN 39.40 17.94 21.46 03/01/2005 21.46 - 22.50.0034.2 NEWMAN, TIM 44.21 28.44 15.77 30.74.0664.1 NIELSON, STEVE 68.98 48.98 20.00 03/11/2005 74.28 - 22.50.2238.2 NOSAlSKIY, RUSLAN 126.88 82.86 44.02 03/16f2005 110.60 - 30.30.6260.2 NOSAREV, L1L1YA 47.36 33.46 13.90 03f2212005 22.60 - 22.50.0020.2 OAK, JERRY 50.92 25.70 25.22 03f07 f2005 25.22 . 23.02.0452.1 OAKES, DARA LYNN 97.64 62.35 35.29 02f16/2005 85.62 - 24.04.1260.2 OBENCHAIN, TERRY & ELlOND. 54.44 17.94 36.50 02f15/2005 110.60 - 37.72.0258.1 OLDS, ANGELA 61.56 33.46 28.10 12f2B/2004 36.60 - 25.25.0086.1 OLIVER CLEAVER 115.62 72.81 42.81 03/16/2005 83.68 - 22.50.3720.1 OLSON, CHERIE 58.68 33.46 25.22 03/14/2005 28.98 - 30.30.6246.1 OMANOVIC, ASIM 37.92 29.58 8.34 03/22f2005 20.64 - 30.30.6248.2 OMANOVIC, IBRAHIM & SENAD 51.24 37.34 13.90 04105/2005 22.60 - 22.50.2258.3 OSTERHOUT, MARLEA 50.74 48.98 1.76 03/08f2005 75.00 - 22.51.3430.2 OVERTON, DAVID 54.36 07/0212004 56.31 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent CITY OF MERIDIAN ( Delinquent Account List- council Page: 9 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03:52pm Current Period: 04/2012005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance last Pmt Last Pmt Non-Delinq 02120/2005 12120/2004 Date Amount - - ------.---.- ------ ---- ----- 67.42 32.13 35.29 02125/2005 78.10 - 86.46 59.35 27.11 02125/2005 96.90. 84.88 47.65 37.23 04/05/2005 50.00 - 71.99 43.77 28.22 03/07/2005 70.00 - 52.26 28.25 24.01 0310712005 27.77 - 32.42 32.13 , .29 03/23/2005 35.00. 52.69 36.01 16.68 03/30/2005 26.13. 351.91 142.88 52.88 03/16/2005 31.00 - 54.02 37.34 16.68 03/29/2005 63.84 - 57.84 28.25 29.59 03/24/2005 65.00 - 70.99 51.53 19.46 03/29/2005 27.11 - 73.96 41.22 32.74 03/1012005 47.78 - 79.44 37.84 41.60 0212212005 83.20 - 90.62 61.18 29.44 03/2212005 50.00 - 49.91 36.01 13.90 03/14/2005 75.48 - 99.05 58.79 40.26 03107/2005 70.26 - 28.68 17.94 10.74 329.89 30.21 29.85 09/21/2004 50.53 - 76.22 39.89 36.33 0212212005 20.00 - 78.94 39.89 39.05 03/24/2005 42.81 - 53.79 39.89 13.90 03/29/2005 25.15 - 47.04 21.82 25.22 03/21/2005 44.02 - 59.07 45.13 13.94 02/16/2005 36.50 - 54.89 43.77 11.12 03/25/2005 24.17 - 103.35 57.99 45.36 03/01/2005 49.12 - 86.70 47.65 39.05 04/01/2005 54.09 - 426.78 83.90 107.86 12115/2004 100.00 - 46.87 32.97 13.90 04/05/2005 22.60 - 131.29 02118/2003 45.26 - 34.04 25.70 8.34 03/28/2005 20.64 - 161.59 33.31 46.35 03/24/2005 118.73 - 42.31 21.82 20.49 03/09/2005 47.84. 52.96 33.46 19.50 03/30/2005 50.00. 88.74 41.22 40.26 03/14/2005 32.74. 36.59 28.25 8.34 03/14/2005 23.19 - 69.96 33.46 36.50 02115/2005 40.26 - 22.00 17.94 4.06 37.02 25.70 11.32 02108/2005 28.98 . 154.32 04/11/2005 155.00 - 47.85 47.65 .20 04/01/2005 46.37 - 47.36 33.46 13.90 03/24/2005 22.60 - 50.92 31.26 19.66 03/07/2005 48.98 - 81.48 41.22 40.26 03/21/2005 40.26 - 31.03 28.25 2.78 03/2212005 21.23 - 74.80 41.22 33.58 01/25/2005 65.64 - 78.94 39.89 39.05 02/14/2005 50.33 - 44.40 36.01 8.39 04/13/2005 25.00 - 49.01 25.70 21.46 02/14/2005 75.00 - 59.78 28.25 31.53 03/03/2005 35.29 - 61.92 32.13 29.79 03/01/2005 60.00 - 46.07 43.11 2.96 04/07/2005 60.00 - 85.70 45.10 40.60 03/16/2005 70.00 - 48.46 37.34 11.12 03/14/2005 50.86 - 122.88 45.10 77. 78 02116/2005 133.08 - 82.70 39.89 42.81 02/28/2005 42.81 - Name OWEN, KENNETH 30.74.3286.1 OWENS, GLENN & VICKIE 24.03.0044.2 PADGETT, DAVE & CHARLENE 30.74.0358.5 PALLlSTER, J.L. & CHRISTY 25.25.0062.2 PALMER, JUSTIN 25.05.0428.1 PALOMO, ALEX 30.74.3152.3 PANTALEO, RAYMOND & BETT'r 30.74.2682.4 PASSANNANTE, DAN 30.30.8070.2 PASSANNANTE, DAN & ATHEN/l 30.30.8204.2 PASSANNANTE, DAN & lYNCH, 30.30.6160.2 PERME, BONNIE 35.35.1446.2 PETERSON, JAKE & ANN 37.37.4182.1 PETTENGill, RAY & DEBBIE 20.46.0674.1 PETTINGill, C. BLAINE 30.74.3000.1 PHilLIPS, RICHARD 20.47.1110.3 PIERCE, WilLIAM & LAURA 30.74.5034.2 PIMENOV, AVEl 22.51.4000.3 PIONEER FINANCE, lLC 37.72.0112.4 PLUM, GINGER & lARRY 24.04.1412.1 PLUMLEY, RODNEY & M. NAOM 30.74.3012.1 POFELSKI, MARK & ABBY 24.03.0332.1 PORTER, DAVID 20.46.0824.2 POTTER, GWENDOLYN 30.74.2874.2 PRICE, WilLIAM 23.02.2610.1 PRIEN, TODD 35.65.0610.2 PRIMEAUX, MARK & KATRINA 23.02.5340.2 PRIVATSKY, K. & JOHNSTON, TI 30.30.6102.2 PRUDHOMME, JENNIFER 23.01.0100.2 PYLlCAN, WOODROW A 30.30.6082.2 QUICK, BRENDA 31.52.0302.1 R T NAHAS FURNITURE STORE 30.74.0902.2 RACKHAM, LARRY 24.04.1838.3 RADICAN, DONALD & CYNTHIA 24.04.2074.1 RAMZA, RONALD 30.30.6114.2 RANEY. TAYLOR & MAGHAN 36.68.0124.2 RAPP, RONALD & CHERYL 35.65.0440.3 RAPP, RONALD & CHERYL 30.30.6222.2 RASMUSSEN. TONYA 37.37.3118.2 RICE, JAMES & llZETTE 37.72.0146.1 RICE, RALPH & SUSAN 30.30.6272.1 RICE, THOMAS & SAMANTHA 30.74.3302.2 RIEBE, DEANA 25.05.0454.2 RilEY, R SHANE 30.74.3094.2 ROBERTS, EDWARD 24.04.2096.8 ROBINSON, RICHARD & PRICILl 24.04.2006.2 ROBINSON, RICHARD & PRISCII 30.74.2862.1 RODGERS, FREDRICK 22.51.3214.2 ROEHR, CLINT 30.74.3090.1 ROGERS, WAYNE & SUSAN 35.35.1222.2 ROHNBACH, DAVID 22.51.0866.1 ROHRBACH, CHERYL 23.02.4710.1 ROSE, DEANNA 30.30.6298.2 ROSE, SHONA 35.35.3028.1 ROTTA, JOE & DARCIE 36.69.1534.1 ROWLEY, RONALD R ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent CITY OF MERIDIAN DeHnquent Account List- cou ncil Page: 10 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03:52pm Current Period: 04f20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum Amoun!Delinquenl Balance Last Pm! Last Pmt Non-Delinq 01/20/2005 Date Amount - - - ............... - ------.-..-.... - 20.47.0074.2 RUMSEY, PHILIP & JENNIFER 135.96 53.90 40.26 03/07/2005 50.00 - 36.69.1076.1 RUPERT. DAVID & LAURIE 154.66 59.29 95.37 02116/2005 174.80. 23.02.3180.1 RYAN, WALTER 54.17 48.00 8.17 04/13/2005 100.00 - 22.50.0090.1 SABA. V1RGINA 117.47 44.81 72.68 03/15/2005 88.00 - 30.74.3432.2 SAGER. LEE & NADEAN 86.58 60.45 28.13 03/01/2005 96.90 - 22.51.3206.5 SALINAS, MARIO & OLGA 48.99 29.58 17.70 30.30.6256.2 SANDERSON, BRIAN & BENNET 37.92 29.58 8.34 03/21/2005 20.64. 20.46.0870.1 SANSOUCIE, KENNETH & BARE 68.52 40.77 27.75 01127/2005 63.06 - 35.65.0872.4 SCHILD, LES 19.04 10.66 8.38 02/15/2005 8.38 - 23.01.1200.2 SCHIMPH. FRED 143.76 85.10 58.66 03/24/2005 67.00 - 35.35.0018.4 SCHMIDT, BRODIE 52.26 28.25 24.01 03/11/2005 27.77 - 30.30.6318.2 SCHORNAK, SANDRA L 49.91 36.01 13.90 03/23f2005 25.15 - 22.51.3720.2 SCHOW, BART & ALISSA 61.53 21.82 32.74 01/26/2005 252.00 - 22.51.3730.2 SCHOW, BART & ALISSA 61.82 29.58 32.24 03f08/2005 33.00 - 46.17.0208.1 SCHROEDER ENT 23.84 20.36 3.48 29.07.0984.1 SCOTT, JASON 76.42 28.25 27.77 01/18/2005 100.00 - 24.04.2294.3 SCOTT, STEVEN & LORI 132.10 59.29 72.81 03/15/2005 57.85 - 23.01.2040.1 SEAMONS. DOUGLAS 77.87 45.13 32.74 02/28/2005 76.76 - 30.74.2718.2 SELLS, DAVID 82.70 39.89 42.81 03/2212005 61.53 - 30.74.3050.2 SEVERINE. JAMES & KATHLEE~ 31.26 25.70 5.56 03/30/2005 19.66 - 35.64.2028.2 SEXTON, MARY 141.40 20.49 31.53 01/18/2005 80.33 - 25.95.0621.2 SHARIAT, SIAMACK 52.11 49.58 2.53 03/10/2005 32.87 - 30.30.6240.2 SHAW, KELLY 78.63 66.01 12.62 03/16/2005 115.00 - 29.07.1072.3 SHEETS, RONALD & RHONDA 77.60 37.34 40.26 03f08/2005 44.02 - 22.50.3780.2 SHELLEY,DIXIE & R. KENT 63.54 28.25 35.29 03f2212005 35.29 - 22.50.3694.3 SHELTRON, ROGER 86.02 28.25 57.77 02/16/2005 97.37 - 24.04.1618.3 SHIMEL, RYAN & SARAH 63.63 63.17 .46 04/05/2005 54.00 - 24.04.1878.3 SHIRLEY, GARRY 36.09 36.01 .08 04/13/2005 35.21 - 22.50.0292.1 SHOEMAKER, TAMI 73.04 25.70 32.66 09/14/2004 100.00 - 24.03.0292.1 SHURTZ, ROD 128.30 70.93 57.37 03/17/2005 77 .00 - 23.01.2760.1 SIEGEL, ROSALIE 44.62 24.37 20.25 03/11/2005 27.77 - 36.69.1292.3 SIMMONS, BRETT 76.20 76.14 .06 03/15/2005 149.30 - 36.69.1140.1 SIMMONS, JAY 52.08 51.53 .55 03/21/2005 61.61 - 37.37.3400.2 SISNEROS, LARRY 86.58 43.77 42.81 03/14/2005 89.38 . 22.51.4034.1 SKINNER. KEN 56.99 17.83 17.70 21.46 01131/2005 69.16 . 23.02.3962.4 SLENDER, LEONARD & BOSWEI 80.14 33.46 21.46 25.22 01/26/2005 29.92 - 30.30.6020.2 SLEVIN, BETTY 27.38 21.82 5.56 03/23/2005 19.66 - 30.74.1118.2 SLYTER, GORDON 136.44 52.86 47.78 03/18/2005 50.00. 30.74.1114.2 SLYTER, GORDON 42.43 36.01 6.42 02128/2005 32.74 - 30.74.1086.3 SLYTER, GORDON 78.38 52.86 25.52 02/04/2005 85.00 - 30.74.2928.1 SMITH, ARLlN D. 63.23 43.77 19.46 03/1712005 27.11 - 30.74.1050.1 SMITH, CARSON 43.40 25.70 17.70 03/22/2005 17.70 - 30.74.2936.1 SMITH, FRANK 56.57 39.89 16.68 03/14/2005 26.13 - 36.69.0862.2 SMITH, JOHN & MARY 136.18 67.05 69.13 02/11/2005 153.30 - 22.51.0498.2 SMITH, KARL 211.96 64.50 147.46 03/24/2005 150.00 - 30.30.6022.2 SMITH, MICHAEL 39.37 28.25 11.12 04/11/2005 24.17 - 22.50.0012.1 SMITH, PAUL H. 66.20 33.46 32.74 03/2212005 44.02- 32.32.4822.3 SOMAZZI, ROGER & JENNIFER 69.60 39.89 29.71 03/29/2005 50.00- 24.03.0836.3 SOSA, JOSEPH 51.22 41.22 10. 00 03/21/2005 36.50 . 24.03.0038.2 SPANGENBERG, TODD 43.28 21.82 21.46 03/11/2005 70.92 - 25.05.0778.3 SPARLING, STEVEN & BRENDA 117.26 63.17 54.09 02128/2005 65.37 - 24.03.0426.4 STAGGERS. PERRY 434.86 434.86 23.02.2170.2 STALFORD, SHANNON 63.32 34.34 28.98 03/10/2005 65.06 - 25.05.0512.3 STALLINGS, JOSEPH & ANGELP 92.88 45.10 47.78 03/01/2005 40.20 - 30.30.6334.2 STEELE. STEVEN & DEBBIE 101.64 47.65 50.33 03/30/2005 90.00 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ( CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 11 Standard Payment Customers Apr 19, 2005 03;52pm Current Period: 04/20f2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquen! Balance Las! Pm! Last Pmt Cust No Balance Non-Delinq 12f20/2004 Date ---------- 23.02.5370.3 STEPHENS, MICHAEL & JEWEL' 45.18 39.89 5.29 03f21/2005 30.00 - 30.30.6294.2 STEPHENSON, MICHAEL 37.92 29.58 8.34 03f24/2005 20.64 - 30.30.6268.1 STETSON HOMES 40.50 20.25 20.25 03f24/2005 20.25 - 30.74.2994.2 STOKESBERRY, COREY 136.14 73.97 53.01 03/25/2005 81.82 - 30.74.3008.2 STONE, CLARA 59.35 39.89 19.46 04/05/2005 27.11 . 22.51.0938.5 STRATE, EUGENE 76.13 49.17 26.96 04/06/2005 21.92 - 23.01.1170.2 STRATE, EUGENE & CARYN 99.93 73.90 21.46 24.04.1962.1 STRICHARSKIY, PETER & VERA 92.88 45.10 47.78 02f22f2005 47.78. 23.23.0002.1 STUBBLEFIELD DEVELOPMENT 502.65 452.65 50.00 04/15f2005 336.09 - 45.20.0804.2 SULLIVAN, MICHAEL & OTILLO 42.26 17.94 21.46 23.01.2910.3 SUNBRIDGE 2,387.27 2,344.77 42.50 03f29/2005 2,341.03 . 30.74.3162.4 SWANSON, DAVE & CARMEN 37.69 32.13 5.56 04f01/2005 22.21. 30.30.6230.3 SWIFT, JEFFREY 68.44 48.98 19.46 03/14/2005 24.56 - 23.02.1730.2 T & T INC 217.44 126.22 91.22 03/29/2005 117.46- 36.69.0484.6 TADEVIC, WENDY 277.12 32.13 61.61 01/21/2005 66.35 - 37.37.3982.2 TALLMAN, JULIE & TROY 86.58 43.77 42.81 02/14/2005 75.27 - 35.35.1458.1 TAYLOR, DAVE 94.08 65.10 28.98 02/28/2005 33.72 - 35.85.0308.3 TAYLOR, THOMAS & CATHERIN 38.45 36.01 .44 03/22f2005 42.37 - 23.02.2604.2 TELL, JOHN & LAURA 43.41 43.11 .30 03/22f2005 36.20 - 20.47.0052.4 TENNANT, ROBERT & CONNIE 102.81 58.79 44.02 04/11/2005 62.82 - 29.57.0104.1 THE PERFECT CUP 52.76 15.07 11.31 15.07 02109/2005 30.14 - 22.50.1860.1 THE PODIATRY BLDG 78.24 26.08 26.08 26.08 01/26/2005 28.08 - 23.02.5880.1 THIEL, PATRICK D. 97.46 45.10 52.36 01/26/2005 55.30 - 23.02.2550.7 THOMAS, DREW 110.04 21.46 12/15/2004 35.15 - 22.50.0350.1 THOMASSON, DAVID C 93.03 49.01 44.02 03/22f2005 26.08 - 29.07.0246.1 THOMPSON, DOUGLAS 95.56 50.20 45.36 02/25/2005 52.88- 30.30.6016.2 THOMPSON, MICHAEL & HUNTE 37.92 29.58 8.34 03/31/2005 20.64 - 22.50.2110.2 THOMPSON, RHONDA 90.46 47.65 42.81 03/10/2005 101.87 - 46.46.6246.2 THRONEBERRY, BRIAN & KATH 86.58 43.77 42.81 03/16/2005 50.33 - 30.74.3154.2 THURGOOD, KAREN 43.25 32.13 11.12 03/25/2005 24.17 - 23.02.2200.3 TODD, RICK 96.31 71.09 25.22 03/16/2005 61.72 - 30.74.2520.1 TOLAND, DAVID 149.44 82.57 66.87 02/17f2005 100.00 - 22.50.4022.3 TORGESON, MATTHEW 92.32 29.58 62.74 02/22f2005 36.50 - 36.69.0314.2 TOTMAN, JERRY 50.92 25.70 25.22 03/16f2005 28.98 - 33.33.9110.1 TOUCHMARK 64.51 20.25 24.01 03/01/2005 20.25 - 33.33.9066.1 TOUCHMARK 78.10 35.29 42.81 03/01/2005 42.81 - 33.33.9114.1 TOUCHMARK 72.03 24.01 24.01 03fOl/2005 20.25. 33.33.9062.1 TOUCHMARK 66.82 27.77 39.05 03f01/2005 31.53. 33.33.9060.1 TOUCHMARK 59.30 27.77 31.53 03f01/2005 31.53. 33.33.9112.1 TOUCHMARK 64.51 20.25 24.01 03f01/2005 20.25 - 33.33.9000.1 TOUCHMARK 20.20 10.10 10.10 03f15/2005 10.10 - 33.33.9036.1 TOUCHMARK 22.73 19.25 3.48 33.33.9024.1 TOUCHMARK 59.30 27.77 31.53 03/01/2005 31.53 - 22.50.2248.1 TRICKETT, KEVIN 52.26 28.25 24.01 02/25/2005 31.53 - 20.46.0180.2 TROYER, SCOTT & LOIS 108.43 60.81 47.62 04/04/2005 107.00 - 30.30.6134.2 TUCKER, JEREMY & DEBBIE 49.91 36.01 13.90 03/28f2005 25.15 - 22.50.3824.1 TURNBOUGH, JAKE & WENDY 107.30 41.82 28.98 02/08f2005 28.98 - 30.74.3036.1 URATA, FRANK & DAWN 47.13 36.01 11.12 03/22/2005 24.17 - 23.02.4840.4 VALESKO, DONALD 71.30 36.01 35.29 02/11/2005 100.62 - 23.01.0860.3 VAN BRAGT, WILLY 75.69 50.87 24.82 03/28/2005 25.00 - 30.74.2848.2 VAN HOFWEGEN, SHAWN 31.03 28.25 2.78 03/23/2005 21.23 - 30.30.6144.2 VANPAEPEGHEM, A QUINN 52.69 36.01 16.66 03/23/2005 26.13 - 22.50.0136.3 VICTORY, CHRIS 144.07 68.53 55.29 20.25 01/14f2005 82.88 - 22.50.4586.2 VICTORY, MICHAEL & YUNSUK 67.81 23.55 21.46 22.80 01/24f2005 80.00 - 23.02.4550.1 VINCENT. TOMMY 89.00 41.22 47.78 03/30f2005 44.02 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ( Delinquent Account List- council Standard Payment Customers Current period: 04/20/2005 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Page: 12 Apr 19. 2005 03;52pm Cust No Name 30.74.2920.1 VOGELE, JOHN & ALICE 24.03.0284.3 WADDELL, WILLIAM & ELEANOf 23.02.1430.4 WADDOUPS, DOROTHY 30.74.2866.1 WALKER, GARY 30.74.1040.1 WALKER, VICKI 20.46.0860.2 WALMER, TAMMY JO 23.01.3340.1 WALSH, RON 36.69.1056.2 WARNER, JAMES 21.48.2651.1 WATER WORKS CAR WASH INC 22.51.0734.2 WATSON, CLAYTON & THELMA 24.03.0302.2 WATTS, MELVIN & SONDEE 23.02.6080.1 WEBB, GERALD 22.51.3310.2 WEBB, MICHAEL 23.01.3300.2 WELCH, LEE 30.30.6336.3 WERLlNGER, MARK & SUSAN 22.51.3770.2 WERNER, DALE & SUSAN 22.50.4530.2 WEST, ROBERT & JONI 30.74.3122.1 WESTERBERG, STEVEN 36.36.1082.1 WESTMINSTER HOMES 36.36.1134.1 WESTMINSTER HOMES 36.69.0698.2 WHEELER, DAWN 35.35.0087.2 WHEELER, JOSHUA & HEIDI 22.50.2384.4 WHITE, SHAINE 20.46.0130.2 WICKHAM, MARY LOU 30.74.2970.1 WIESE, GARY 30.74.3060.2 WIGGINS, TOMMY & SHARON 30.30.6124.2 WILLIAMS, SCOTT 30.30.6226.2 WILLIS, DEAN & EILEEN 30.74.0356.1 WILSON, DEANA 25.25.1008.2 WILSON, MICHAEL 22.50.0210.3 WILSON. MITCHELL 24.03.0316.2 WILSON. RUSSELL 29.07.0880.2 WINKLER, GREG 32.32.4932.2 WITTE, JOHN & MELODY 20.47.1204.2 WIXSON, RYAN 22.51.0690.2 WRIGHT, SANDRA 30.74.0372.3 YELTON, LAURA 25.25.1090.2 YOUNG, ANGELA 23.02.0670.1 YOUNG, AUSTIN L 23.02.0680.1 YOUNG, AUSTIN L 30.74.2900.2 ZIMMERMAN, RANDY & KELLY Grand Totals: Last Pmt Non-Delinq 01/20/2005 12120/2004 Date ------- 40.52 29.40 11.12 03/15/2005 21.44 - 61.82 29.58 32.24 02/15/2005 37.00 - 87.00 26.42 21.46 01/19/2005 60.00 - 71.74 47.65 24.09 03122/2005 30.00 . 58.32 33.28 25.04 02/1512005 35.04 . 78.92 44.65 31.53 03/07/2005 40.00 - 136.52 95.96 02/16/2005 106.84 - 3.48 3.48 12/14/2004 63.26 - 91.40 21.82 17.70 26.66 04/19/2005 4.12 - 84.38 43.77 40.61 03/1512005 40.00 - 59.90 32.13 27.77 02/1612005 93.06 - 126.48 48.80 32.56 02/1512005 50.00. 107.19 106.59 .60 04/1312005 112.07- 49.91 36.01 13.90 03115/2005 25.15 - 105.21 52.86 47.78 91.29 51.03 40.26 02117/2005 73.52 . 75.63 43.77 31.86 02110/2005 50.00 - 57.32 22.59 26.35 01/25/2005 6.42 - 42.92 21.46 21.46 02125/2005 18.88 - 55.90 24.37 31.53 02125/2005 31.53 - 68.15 63.77 4.38 04/19/2005 85.00 - 35.18 33.46 1.72 04/05/2005 60.00 - 75.17 43.64 31.53 03/01/2005 39.05 - 53.79 39.89 13.90 03/21/2005 25.15 - 37.92 29.58 8.34 04/04/2005 14.70 - 37.92 29.58 8.34 04104/2005 20.64 - 34.04 25.70 8.34 03/15/2005 20.64 - 150.39 100.93 49.46 03/1612005 70.00 - 62.44 33.46 28.98 02/2812005 53.48 - 72.09 43.11 28.98 03/0812005 55.30 " 82.70 39.89 42.81 03/01/2005 80.33 - 62.04 33.46 28.58 04/19/2005 40.00 - 35.64 17.94 17.70 03/07/2005 32.74 - 75.83 47.68 28.15 04/05/2005 55.00 - 61.56 29.58 31.98 03/14/2005 100.00 - 105.62 75.10 30.52 03/16/2005 80.00 - 75.18 39.89 35.29 02/25/2005 39.05 - 70.74 30.03 29.43 04104/2005 29.43 - 60.86 33.91 26.95 04115/2005 10.00 - 60.45 43.77 16.68 03122/2005 26.13 - --------...- 54,979.61 28,852.46 18,912.10 3,171 .32 4,043.73 --- --- Report Criteria: Terminated customers not included Customer.Cust No 0 = {<} 880000001 Customer. Bill Cycle = 1 ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent r ~~ -Pos-f- ~r Itb,) ,;c f\Jo+ru CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: Shaun Wardle Christine Donnell Charlie Rountree Keith Bird _ Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: 3. Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter, with Treasure Valley Worship Center 4. Adoption of the Agenda: 5. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of March 29, 2005 City Council Regular Meeting: B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 05-005 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed use three story building consisting of retail, office and residential uses in the O-T zone for Dave Buich by Dave Buich - 641 North Main Street: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 05-003 Request for a Variance for a reduction in parking requirements for a proposed three-story mixed-use project for Dave Buich by Dave Buich - 641 North Main Street: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 05- 001 Request for an Annexation and Zoning of 156.49 acres to R-8 & L-O zones for Bainbridae Subdivision by Brighton Properties, LLC - SWC of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 05- 002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 429 building lots and 35 common lots on 155.44 acres in proposed R-8 and L-O zones for Bainbridae Subdivision by Brighton Properties, LLC - SWC of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road: Meridian City Council Agenda - April 19, 2005 Page 1 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING PP 05-002 APrill~ 2005 APPLICANT Brighton Properties, LLC ITEM NO. 5ME REQUEST Findings for Approval - Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 429 building lots and 35 common lots on 155.44 acres in a proposed R-8 and L-Q zones for Bainbridge Subdivision _ southwest comer of Chinden Boulevard and North Ten Mile Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted:~~ --( ~.J)~ Date: 4ll-==6 (o? Phone: Emaifed: cL+v("(\~w..\ Q.. ~(\r-\o!) WC? .Ca~Staff Initials: ~ Materials presenfed at pub! c meelings shall become property of the City of Meridian. See aHached Findings ~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a Request for Annexation and Zoning of 152.68 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium Density Residential)(146.83 Acres) and L-O (Limited Office)(5.85 Acres) AND Preliminary Plat Approval of Three-Hundred-Eighty-Nine (389) Single- Family Building Lots, Twenty-Two (22) Other/Common Lots, One (1) Church Lot, and One (1) Lot to be DevelopedlRe-Subdivided in the Future AND Conditional Use Permit Approval for a Planned Development Consisting of Single-Family Homes, a Future Neighborhood Park, and a Church, with Reduced Minimum Lot Frontages, Reduced Minimum Lot Sizes, and Increased Maximum Block Length, by Brighton Properties, LLC. Case No(s): AZ-OS-OOl, PP-OS-002, CUP-05-002 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April S, 2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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 S67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the April 5, 200S, 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 ofthe 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 record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code S67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code SS 11-15-5 and 11-17-S as CITY OF MERlDlAN FINDrNGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). AZ.05-001 / PP-05-002 / CUP-05-002- PAGE lof5 evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof 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 verified that the propeliy owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings are Brad and LouAnn Janicek, Brighton Corporation, Boise Research Center, Inc., Brighton Properties, LLC, and Brighton Investments, LLC. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibits G, H, and I for the findings required for these applications. B. Conclusions of Law L 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. g67- 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 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code gll-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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Preliminary Plat dated February 16, 2005 as shown in Exhibit B, the Site Plan dated February 16, 2005 as shown in Exhibit C, the Annexation and Zoning Comments as shown in Exhibit D, the Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions as shown in Exhibit E, and the CUPIPD Site Specific and Standard Conditions as shown in Exhibit F. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-001 / PP-05-002 I CUP-05-0OZ- PAGE 2 of5 C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code S 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 Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat dated February 16, 200S is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The applicant's Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated February 16, 200S is hereby conditionally approved; and, 3. The Site Specific and Standard Conditions are as shown in Exhibits E and F. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Pennit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the council. During this time, the permit holder must commence the use as pennitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. In this context "structures" shall include sewer and water lines, streets or building construction. The applicant has specified in the application and to the commission and council a construction schedule and completion date for the project. If the completion date specified for the project is exceeded, the conditional use application shall become null and void. However, the applicant may submit an application for a time extension on the project for city council review. The application for time extension shall be submitted at least thirty (30) days prior to the deadline for completion of the project. For projects requiring platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one year from the original date of approval by the council. If the successive phases are not submitted within one year intervals, the conditional approval ofthe future phases shall be null and void. (MCC 11-17-4.B.) 2. Notice of Twelve (12) Month Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that after the date of approval of the preliminary plat, the owner or developer shall have one year within which to file the request for approval of the final plat. After approval offinal plat, the owner or developer shall have one year to begin construction ofthe public utilities and one year thereafter to complete construction of those public facilities. (MCC 12-2-4.B & C.) E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-D5-DDI I PP-D5-DD2 / CUP-OS-D02- PAGE 3 of5 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code 967-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek ajudicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Approved Preliminary Plat (with conditions) Exhibit C: Approved Site Plan (with conditions) Exhibit 0: Annexation and Zoning Comments Exhibit E: Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions Exhibit F: CUP/PD Site Specific and Standard Conditions Exhibit G: Zoning Amendment Findings Exhibit H: Preliminary Plat Findings Exhibit I: CUP/PD Findings By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~/7 ,2005. /q4 dayof ~ COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD MAYORTAMMYdeWEERD VOTED --- CITY OF MERlDlAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-00 I / PP-05-002 / CUP-05-002- PAGE 4 of 5 (TIE BREAKER) and City Attorney. By:,l(\hld1~ City Clerk's Office Dated: 4- 2 \ -OS CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-00 1 I PP-05-002 I CUP-05-002- PAGE 5 of 5 EXHIBIT A Bainbridge Subdivision AZ-05-001 Legal Description (3 pages) Ellgineerillf( North West, LLC 423 N. "nee'for Plnee. Suite 180 lloi,c.ld"ho 83704 (208) 376.5000. Pox (208) 376-5556 Project No. 02-043-01 Dale: AprilS,2005 BAINBRIDGE SUBDIVISION TOTAL ANNEXATION DESCRIPTION (INCLUDING LANDSCAPE AREA) A parcel of land localed in the E 1/2 of Ihe NW 1/4, and the NE 1/4 of Section 27, T.4 N., R. I W.. B.M.. Ada County, Tdllho and being more particulurly described as follows: Commencing lltlhe section comer Common to Sections 22, 23,26 :md 27 of said T. 4 N., R.I W.; Thence South 00020' 42" West, 1399.56 feet on the section line common to said Sections 26 and 27 to the REAL POINT 01<' BEGINNING; Thence continuing SOUlh 00'20'42" West, 728.01 feet on the section line common to said Sections 26 and 27; Thence leaving said seClion line. North 86021.29" West, 465.83 feet; Thence South 07013'40" West, 104.07 feet; Thence South 61003'36" East, 338.99 feet; Thence South 51058'47" E:Jst, 195.68 feet; Thence South 89039' i8" East, 25.00 feet to a point on the section line common to said Scclions 26 and 27; Thence South 00020'42" West, 147.72 feet on the section line common to said Sections 26 and 27 10 the 1/4 Section corner common to said Sections 26 and 27; Thence leaving said section line, Nonh 89021 '06" West, 2651.02 feel on the easl-wesl mid-section line of said Section 27 to the Center l/4 Seclion corner of said Section 27; Thence North 89020'14" West, 1324.91 feet on the east-west mid-section line of said Section 27 to the cenler-west 11 16 th section comer of said Section 27; Thence leaving said mid-section line, NOlth 00027' 19" East, .1318.77 feet on the westerly houndllry line of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of suid Section 27 to the NOl1hwest corner said SE 114 of the NW 1/4; Thence South 89018'50" East, 330:98 feet on the northerly boundary line ofsaid SE 114 of the NW 114; B.1inbridg.e T(lu,1 ^11I~{:'xn.lioo. Ot.:ic.dDc Thence leaving said northerly boundary tine, North 00u26'S3" Easl, 1318.56 feeL [0 a point on the section line common to said Sections 22 and 27; Thence South 89"I7' IT' East, 992.76 feet on the section line common Lo said Sections 22 and 27 to the J/4 section comer common 10 said Sections 22 and 27; Thence South 890[7'35" East, 155.71 feet on the section Iinccommon 10 said Sections 22 and 27; Thence leaving said section line, South 00042'25" West. 95.00 (eet; Thence South 63048'25" West, 94.48 fectto a polnt of curve; Thence 47.52 feet on the arc of a curve to the right, said curve huving a radius of 122.00 feel, a central angle of 22019'09" and 11 chord c.listance of 47.22 fcel which bears South 11052'06" West; 'TIlt:nce South 23001'40" West, 7.13 feello a point of curve; Thence 21.79 feet on the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 58.00 feet. a ccntral angle of 21.31 '35" lInd a chord distance of 21.66 feet which bears South 12"15'53" West to a point of reversecul"Ve; Thence 326, 14 feet 011 the arc of a curye to the right, said curye having a radius of 1948.73 feet, a central angle of 09"35'21" and II chord distance of 325.76 feet which bears SOLJth 06" 17' 46" West 10 a point of reverse curve; Thence 571.32 feet on the arc of a CUl"Ve to the left, ~aid curve having a radius of 626.53 fect, a central angle of 52014' 50" and a chord distance of 551.73 feet which bears South 15001 '58" East to a point of compound curve; Thence 170.52 fec[ on the are of a curve to the left. said curve having a radius of 256.00 feet, a central angle of 38.09'49" and a chorddisl.1nce of 167.38 feet which beMS Soulh 60014'17" East; Thence South 7')019' 12" Ea..~t, 60.84 feet to a point of curve; Thence 162.40 feet on the arc of n curve to the left, said curve having a radius of360.oo feel, a ccntml anglcof2S.50'48" and a chord dislanec of 161.03 fect which benrs North 87045'24" East; Thence North 74050'00" llitst, 112.27 feet [0 a poim of curve; Thcnce 203.18 feet on the arc of a curve to the right, said curve haYing a mdius of 1120.00 feet, a central angle of 10023'39" and n chord distance of 202.90 feet which bears North 80001'49" Enst: lhinblhlgi: Tn::ll AOllG.'l:.ulon D.:ioC,:.do;: Thence North 00038'54" East, 54.10 feet; Thence South 89021'06" East, 90.00 fcet; Thencc Soulh 00038' 54" West, 47.92 fcet 10 a pain! of curve; Thence 864.31 feel on the lIrc of a Curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 143 [.37 feci, a central angle of 34035'49" and a chord distance of 851.24 feet which bears South 74038'42" Eust to a point of reverse curve; , Thence 724.66 feel on the arC of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 1330.00 feet, a ccnlml angle of 31013'04" and a chord distance of715.72 feet which bears Soulh 72057'20" East to a point of COIupound curve; Thence 12.77 feet on the arc of a curve (a the left, said curve having a radius of 48.00 feel, a central angle of 15014'31 ,. and a chord distance of J2.73 feet which bean; Nonh 83048'52" East; Thence North 76011' 37" East, 28.27 feetto a poi nt of C UNe; Thence 27.66 feet on the arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a mdius of 112.00 fect, II centra! angle of 14009'05" and II chord distance of 27.59 feet which bears North 83016'09" Eust; Thenco North 41059'22" East, 107.19 feet; Thence South 89039' 18" East. 70.00 feet to the rOlll point of beginning. Said parcel contains 154.85 acrcs more or Icss. PREPARED ny: Engineering NorthWe.~t, LLC Jume.~ It Washburn, PL., EXHIBIT B Bainbridge Subdivision PP-OS-002 Approved Preliminary Plat (2 pages) E::l:.""'tUF~~... EXHIBIT C Bainbridge Subdivision CUP-05-002 Approved Site Plan --il I I 1 II 1 I ! J 11!! Ill! ! ~ I l! I !IllJlhln lnll!l ~ 1111: I II I ..;.:, i ;!' I ] II : : I ~H- ~~ 5~ ~ ~~ g ~i S5~ ~~ ~~ ~,..: :Z,.,:~ :i~ ~l;{~ <:;::s , ~:t~ ~ ~3i ~r < ~ ;!i~ ;;d ::l ! ~ i J EXHIBIT D Bainbridge Subdivision AZ-05-00 1 Annexation and Zoning Comments ANEXA TION & ZONING COMMENTS 1. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped by James R. Washburn, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 2. Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time. 3. A Development Agreement (DA) will be required as part of an annexation of this property. Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The aODlicant shall contact the City Attomev Bill Nary at 888-4433 to initiate this nrocess. The DA shall incorporate the following: · That the applicant agrees to provide the City with a legal description for the Johnson 2.5-acre outparcel (Parcel No. S0427142323) prior to annexation. · That the developer acknowledges by signing this Agreement that the property encompassed in this agreement is not currently sewerable by the City of Meridian. The City does not make any specific guarantees or promises to the developer as to when this property may be able to be included in the City sewer system. The developer assumes the risk in regards to this property and waives any claim against the City, that may exist due to the lack of available sewer service. · That the City is not requiring any park property be dedicated. However, if the applicant chooses to dedicate a park to the city, details such as boundary requirements and clear title will need to be worked out with the City Parks Department and Legal Department. · That the applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. · That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. 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 all future uses on Lots 2 and 3, Block 15, shall be required to obtain conditional use pennit approval from the City. EXHIBIT E Bainbridge Subdivision PP-05-002 Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS-PRELIMINARY PLAT 1. The preliminary plat prepared by Engineering NorthWest, LLC, dated Nov 04, revised on 2-16-05, is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All comments/conditions of the accompanying Annexation/Zoning (AZ-OS-OOl) and Conditional Use Pennit (CUP-OS-002) application shall also be considered conditions ofthe Preliminary Plat (PP-05-002). 2. Unless City staff and ACHD staff determine that a stub street is not necessary, provide a stub street to the 45-acre (potential school site) parcel to the west. Provide a vehicular stub street to the north through Block 15, unless that property becomes a school site. Provide public stub streets to the west (Fairborn Drive), south (Levanham Avenue, Dartmouth Avenue, Portsmouth Avenue, and Shropshire Place), and to the 2.5-acre outparcel (Shropshire Avenue), as proposed. 3. Place a note on the face of the final plat stating that all future front garage setbacks shall be 20-feet as measured from the property line or the back of sidewalk, whichever is more restrictive. 4. Prior to the City Engineer's signature of a final plat containing Lot 17, Block 2, and/or Lots 2-4, Block 2S, the applicant shall provide evidence that the access easement across said lots has been relinquished OR the lots should be designated temporary non-build lots in a final plat note. 5. The submitted 2-page landscape plan prepared by The Land Group, Inc., dated 3- 25-05 is approved as submitted. The following should be included in the landscape plan: · Provide a 35-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to Chinden Boulevard and Ten Mile Road. In accordance with MCC 12-13-10, the 35-foot wide landscape buffers shall be located entirely outside of the ultimate right-of- way for the adjacent street and shall not include the width of the sidewalk If the required sidewalk is placed outside of the right-of-way and within the landscape buffer, the buffer width shall be increased to 40-feet. · Depict and construct a 10-foot wide gravel shoulder on Ten Mile Road abutting the site, with the remaining portion of the right-of-way being landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. · The landscaping proposed on the north and east sides of Broadbent Way do not lie within the boundaries of the preliminary plat. The landscaping for the north side of Broadbent Way shall be included in the application. · All micropaths within the proposed subdivision shall be designed in accordance with MCC 12-13-15 "Micropath Landscaping" and MCC 12- 4-3 "Pedestrian Walkways." Micropath fencing shall be constructed per MCC 12-13-15-9. · All areas being counted toward the open space requirement shall be free of "wet ponds" or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the required open space are subject to Ordinance 12-13- 14 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees, as depicted on the submitted landscape plan. · Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that are removed. Other than the changes listed above, the approved landscape plan is not to be altered without prior written approval of the Planning & Zoning Department. 6. Construct a micro-path centrally located through Block 11, connecting Vanderbilt Drive to Lancaster Drive. 7. Place a note on the face of the final plat requiring any future use(s) on Lot 3, Block 15, to obtain separate conditional use permit approvaL 8. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per MCC 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 9. The applicant has not indicated who will own and operate the pressurized irrigation system within this development. Underground year-round pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to remain a private homeowners' association system, complete plans and specifications shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development plan review process. A draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual shall be submitted prior to plan approvaL The applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 10. Provide permanent fencing around the perimeter of the development. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of building permits. All fences shall taper down to 3-feet maximum within 20 feet of all right- of-way. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with MCC 12-4-10. 11. Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Bainbridge Homeowners' Association. 12. Permanent sanitary sewer service to this development is to be provided by the undeveloped "North" Black Cat Lift Station. At this point in time, the Meridian City Council has approved funding for the design; however no funding has been approved for the construction. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department to be in accordance with the approved master sewer plan. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. Ifthis development is approved, it shall be subject to the North Black Cat sewer system being available. 13. Municipal water to this site shall be via extensions from existing mains in Ten Mile Road. Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer and water mains to and through this proposed development, thereby making them available to adjacent properties. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. 14. Other than the public street accesses approved by ACHD and ITD, direct lot access to Ten Mile Road and Chinden Boulevard is prohibited. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access to Ten Mile Road and Chinden Boulevard. GENERAL REOUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT 1. All grading ofthe site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2. Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to MCC 12-13-10-8. 3. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all fencing, landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 4. A detailed landscape plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance and as noted in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application. 5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 6. Two-hundred-fifty and one-hundred-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior commencing installations. 7. Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 8. Submit any up-dated groundwater/soils monitoring data, as collected and analyzed by a soils scientist, to the Public Works Department for review. Any drainage areas (detention/retention basins) must be designed to ensure that water will percolate or discharge with a period of time not to exceed 24-hours for all storms up to and including a 100-year stonn events. Side slopes within drainage areas shall not exceed 3: 1. Any portion of a drainage area not improved with sod/grass seed (or other approved landscaping) shall not count towards the required open space area. The project engineer should pay close attention to the results of field studies determining the groundwater, soil type & and characteristics during the design and construction phases. The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least I-foot above ground water. 9. The applicant shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 10. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 11. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 12. Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying that all street finish centerline elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. 13. The applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as detennined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution 02-374. 14. Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or tenns of the approved annexation/conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 15. Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in MCC 12-2-4. OTHER AGENCY/DEP ARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 1;2" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 5. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 7. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. 8. The proposed 389-1ot subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 1,128 residents at build out. 9. The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer 10. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 11. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Minimum acreage standard for City Park: The City is willing to develop and maintain Community Parks, Urban Parks, and Neighborhood Parks. Neighborhood Parks will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The City may choose to maintain neighborhood parks at an acreage of seven acres or larger. It will be the responsibility of private homeowner groups or associations to develop and maintain the smaller mini parks and some Neighborhood Parks in their subdivision that the City does not maintain. Please contact Doug Strong to discuss layout ofthe 7.5-acre park and vehicular parking for this lot. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. The Meridian Police Department has concerns regarding the lack of parking proposed for the park lots. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Depmiment of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stonnwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT 1. All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facility involved are the Simpson Lateral (30' easement), the Harrell Lateral (30' easement), and the McMullen Lateral (30' easement). 2. A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 3. A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.LD. facilities. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 5. All storm drainage must be retained on-site. 6. The development must supply irrigation access to all lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall do one of the following: a. Dedicate by donation a total of 48-feet of right-of-way along Ten Mile Road, and construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way. b. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way, in an easement provided to the District. c. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located at the back edge of the existing right-of-way. Accomplish all necessary adjustments to properly acconunodate existing drainage and utilities. 2. Construct a collector roadway (Broadbent Drive) to intersect Ten Mile Road to directly align with the main entrance to Silverleaf Subdivision. 3. Construct Broadbent Drive (the collector roadway) as a 40-foot street section with vertical curb, gutter and a 5-foot concrete sidewalk (attached or detached) within the 60-feet of proposed right-of-way. Construct Broadbent Drive so that the right-of-way line is at the property line and is not separated by a landscape buffer or a common lot. 4. Construct the internal streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and a 4-foot detached concrete sidewalk that is separated by a 5-foot planter strip within 55-feet ofright-of-way and/or 33-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and a 4-foot detached concrete sidewalk that is separated by a 5-foot planter strip within 52-feet of right-of-way, as proposed. Any street section less than 36-feet (measured from back of curb to back of curb) requires written approval from the appropriate fire department. 5. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 630-feet east of the west property line to serve the 71.6-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 6. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 1,450-feet east of the west property line to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 7. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 1,750-feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, l1THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTUREl1. 8. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 480 -feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, 'THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTUREtI. 9. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 21O-feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, IITHIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 10. Construct a stub street to the west property line approximately 800-feet south of Sate Highway 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) to serve the 28.171-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. District staff is supportive of the applicant's proposal. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, t1THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE'1. 1 J. Construct a stub street to the south property line of the 2.46-acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus ofthe roadway and install a sign at the terminus ofthe stub street stating that, 'THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 12. Construct a stub street to the north property line of the 2.46-acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, l1THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 13. Construct a "quasi" stub street that runs along the west property line of the 2.46- acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. 14. Construct a non-standard cul-de-sac turnaround at the terminus of North Shropshire Place that meets the criteria established by District policy. Submit a design of the turnaround for review and approval by District Development Division staff. 15. Provide a minimum street section of21-feet on either side of the island. Any proposed landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this shall be required on the final plat. The design shall be reviewed and approved by ACHD's Development staff. 16. Locate the island within Broadbent Drive at the intersection of State Highway 20- 26 and Broadbent Drive a minimum of 200-feet south of State Highway 20-26 or otherwise approved by the District's Traffic Services Staff. 17. This segment of Bainbridge Subdivision's preliminary plat (Lots 1,2,3,4, and 5 of Block 5 and Lots 3, 4 and 5 of Block 4) should be approved contingent upon the right-of-way within the 80-acre parcel to the south being reviewed, approved, dedicated to the public and constructed (or a financial surety in place for the construction of the roadways) prior to the signature of the final plat for Bainbridge Subdivision. 18. Comply with requirements ofITD for State Highway 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) frontage. Submit to the District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements prior to District approval of the final plat or issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Contact District III Traffic Engineer Dan Coonce at 334-8340. 19. Other than the access point that has specifically been approved with this application, direct lot access to Ten Mile Road is prohibited. A note of this access restriction shall be noted on the final plat. 20. Comply with all Standard Conditions of ApprovaL Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside ofthe right~of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility ofthe applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DfGLINE (1- 800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387- 6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written continuation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject ofthis application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT 1. The New Approach to US 20/26 should be designed to county and state standards and be spaced out at one (half) mile spacing from Ten Mile Road if possible. The Developer will need to obtain an approved access permit from ITD District III prior to construction. Contact Matt Ward at 334-8342 for more information on acquisition of an access permit 2. The main entrance to the subdivision on US 20/26 will need a turn bay added for safety of the turning traffic. 3. The applicant should preserve or dedicate additional right of way to accommodate future widening of US 20/26. 4. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan calls for sidewalks. The subdivision plan does not show sidewalks on US 20/26. The City should require the developer to construct and maintain any pathways called for in the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The Meridian Comprehensive plan shows a collector system at the half mile. The subdivision does not reflect this in the design. Since no full frontage or backage road system has been included, the collector system is important to future mobility in this square mile section. The City should consider if collector roads are needed. 6. Design should consider access to and connectivity with the adjacent subdivisions. The adjacent parcels are currently zoned rural (county). Does the City anticipate future development as commercial or residential? The Meridian Comp plan, in this area, calls for commercial area centered at the Y2 mile, with residential at the mile roads. This design does reflect that plan. Will the adjacent Rambo subdivision redevelop? If so, how will this plan affect that area. In particular is concern for the parcel at the intersection ofTen Mile and Chinden, as related to access. 7. The site should also consider the potential for a school adjacent (west) to the site. Connectivity has been provided for pedestrians. Access for autos should be provided so residents would not need to exit to the arterial routes to access the school. 8. The applicant should construct a noise abatement feature along any residential lots adjacent to the highway. The noise abatement shall be located on the applicant's property. The noise abatement feature should be 10' higher then the elevation at the US 20/26 centerline. This feature may be a benn, or a combination berm/ concrete block wall. Should the developer desire to substitute other noise abatement measure, such as improvements to the buildings, they should submit these to ITD for consideration. Noise abatement (berms, fences, etc.) will be the responsibility of the developer and will be constructed off ofthe State Right of Way. 9. The Applicant should provide for all improvements required at the new intersection, including signals, acceleration and deceleration lanes on US 20/26. 10. ITD would like to the opportunity to review the revised plat prior to final approval. EXHIBIT F Bainbridge Subdivision CUP-OS-002 CUP/PD Site Specific and Standard Conditions SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS-CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1. The site plan prepared by Engineering NorthWest, LLC, dated February 2005, is approved, with the conditions listed herein. Applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the Annexation/Zoning (AZ-05-001) and Preliminary Plat (PP_ 05-002) as a condition ofthe Conditional Use Permit (CUP-05-002). 2. The project shall confonn to the R-8 dimensional standards, except as follows: Minimum frontage: 48-feet (non cul-de-sac lots). 3. In addition to providing 10% of the site as open space, work with Planning & Zoning staff on fmalizing at least one other amenity (tot lot, tennis court, etc.). 4. All use{s) on Lots 2 and 3, Block 15, shall be required to obtain separate CUP approval. 5. Temporary saleslinformation trailers shall be subject to the following conditions: a. The proposed subdivision shall have no more than two temporary sales trailers on-site. b. The trailer shall be skirted with materials that are similar in color and material to the rest of the trailer. c. The applicant shall be responsible for providing adequate off street parking. d. One wall sign is allowed for the temporary sales trailer. The sign shall be limited in size to 18% ofthe wall area. No other signs shall be permitted. e. A building permit for the temporary building must be obtained through Meridian's Building Department prior to placing the trailer on a lot. A site plan must accompany the building permit and be approved by Planning Department. f. Sanitary sewer service and domestic water service may be requested for the proposed use. Should a hook-up be requested, an assessment for sewer and water service will be detennined during the building permit application process. g. Applicant must provide the Public Works and Fire Departments with information on the method of fire protection to be used for the trailer. h. The trailer must conform with all setbacks as set forth in the Bainbridge Subdivision conditional use permit and preliminary plat. The maximum timeframe for the sales and information trailer shall be 48 months from the date of the last final plat that completes the subject preliminary plat. If the applicant requires an extension of this permitted period, the applicant shall submit a status of their plans to the P&Z Department. j. The applicant's request to site the same trailer under the above-stated conditions at other locations within future Bainbridge phases is approved without a CUP modification. A new Certificate of Zoning Compliance and building permit for all future trailer locations must be submitted to the City for each future location, but a CUP should not be required for each future trailer location. 6. Construction within Bainbridge Subdivision shall substantially comply with the five (5) elevations submitted by the applicant. Construction materials used on the structures shall be approved by the City of Meridian Building Department and in accordance with the most recent Uniform Building Code. 7. The Four (4) buildable lots adjacent to Ten Mile Road, north of the existing residence (Johnson) may contain structures with attic trusses and liveable space above the first floor, but shall not be a full two stories tall. OTHER AGENCY /DEPARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 12" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 5. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or pennanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 7. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. 8. The proposed 389-10t subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 1, 128 residents at build out. 9. The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer 10. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 11. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Minimum acreage standard for City Park: The City is willing to develop and maintain Community Parks, Urban Parks, and Neighborhood Parks. Neighborhood Parks will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The City may choose to maintain neighborhood parks at an acreage of seven acres or larger. It will be the responsibility of private homeowner groups or associations to develop and maintain the smaller mini parks and some Neighborhood Parks in their subdivision that the City does not maintain. Please contact Doug Strong to discuss layout of the 7.5-acre park and vehicular parking for this lot. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. The Meridian Police Department has concerns regarding the lack of parking proposed for the park lots. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stonnwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT 1. All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facility involved are the Simpson Lateral (30' easement), the Harrell Lateral (30' easement), and the McMullen Lateral (30' easement). 2. A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 3. A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.LD. facilities. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District 5. All storm drainage must be retained on-site. 6. The development must supply irrigation access to all lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall do one of the following: a. Dedicate by donation a total of 48-feet of right-of-way along Ten Mile Road, and construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way. b. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way, in an easement provided to the District. c. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located at the back edge of the existing right-of-way. Accomplish all necessary adjustments to properly accommodate existing drainage and utilities. 2. Construct a collector roadway (Broadbent Drive) to intersect Ten Mile Road to directly align with the main entrance to SiIverIeaf Subdivision. 3. Construct Broadbent Drive (the collector roadway) as a 40-foot street section with vertical curb, gutter and a 5-foot concrete sidewalk (attached or detached) within the 60-feet of proposed right-of-way. Construct Broadbent Drive so that the right-of-way line is at the property line and is not separated by a landscape buffer or a common lot. 4. Construct the internal streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and a 4-foot detached concrete sidewalk that is separated by a 5-foot planter strip within 55-feet of right-of-way and/or 33-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and a 4-foot detached concrete sidewalk that is separated by a 5-foot planter strip within 52-feet of right-of-way, as proposed. Any street section less than 36-feet (measured from back of curb to back of curb) requires written approval from the appropriate fire department. 5. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 630-feet east of the west property line to serve the 71.6-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTUREII. 6. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 1,450-feet east of the west property line to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, lITHIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 7. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 1,750-feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 8. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 480 -feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 9. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 21 O-feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, 'THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 10. Construct a stub street to the west property line approximately 800-feet south of Sate Highway 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) to serve the 28.171-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. District staff is supportive of the applicant's proposaL Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURElI. 11. Construct a stub street to the south property line of the 2.46-acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURElI. 12. Construct a stub street to the north property line of the 2.46-acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTUREll. 13. Construct a "quasi" stub street that runs along the west property line ofthe 2.46- acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. 14. Construct a non-standard cul-de-sac turnaround at the terminus of North Shropshire Place that meets the criteria established by District policy. Submit a design of the turnaround for review and approval by District Development Division staff. 15. Provide a minimum street section of21-feet on either side of the island. Any proposed landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this shall be required on the final plat. The design shall be reviewed and approved by ACHD1s Development staff. 16. Locate the island within Broadbent Drive at the intersection of State Highway 20- 26 and Broadbent Drive a minimum of200-feet south of State Highway 20-26 or otherwise approved by the District's Traffic Services Staff. 17. This segment of Bainbridge Subdivision's preliminary plat (Lots 1,2,3,4, and 5 of Block 5 and Lots 3, 4 and 5 of Block 4) should be approved contingent upon the right-of-way within the 80-acre parcel to the south being reviewed, approved, dedicated to the public and constructed (or a financial surety in place for the construction of the roadways) prior to the signature of the final plat for Bainbridge Subdivision. 18. Comply with requirements ofITD for State Highway 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) frontage. Submit to the District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements prior to District approval of the final plat or issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Contact District III Traffic Engineer Dan Coonce at 334-8340. 19. Other than the access point that has specifically been approved with this application, direct lot access to Ten Mile Road is prohibited. A note of this access restriction shall be noted on the final plat. 20. Comply with all Standard Conditions of ApprovaL Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction ofthe proposed development Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State ofIdaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building pennit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1- 800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within . ACHDright-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387- 6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject ofthis application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT 1. The New Approach to US 20/26 should be designed to county and state standards and be spaced out at one (half) mile spacing from Ten Mile Road if possible. The Developer will need to obtain an approved access permit from ITD District III prior to construction. Contact Matt Ward at 334-8342 for more information on acquisition of an access permit. 2. The main entrance to the subdivision on US 20/26 will need a turn bay added for safety of the turning traffic. 3. The applicant should preserve or dedicate additional right of way to accommodate future widening of US 20/26. 4. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan calls for sidewalks. The subdivision plan does not show sidewalks on US 20/26. The City should require the developer to construct and maintain any pathways called for in the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The Meridian Comprehensive plan shows a collector system at the half mile. The subdivision does not reflect this in the design. Since no full frontage or backage road system has been included, the collector system is important to future mobility in this square mile section. The City should consider if collector roads are needed. 6. Design should consider access to and cOlUlectivity with the adjacent subdivisions. The adjacent parcels are currently zoned rural (county). Does the City anticipate future development as commercial or residential? The Meridian Comp plan, in this area, calls for commercial area centered at the Y2 mile, with residential at the mile roads. This design does reflect that plan. Will the adjacent Rambo subdivision redevelop? If so, how will this plan affect that area. In particular is concern for the parcel at the intersection ofTen Mile and Chinden, as related to access. 7. The site should also consider the potential for a school adjacent (west) to the site. Connectivity has been provided for pedestrians. Access for autos should be provided so residents would not need to exit to the arterial routes to access the school. 8. The applicant should construct a noise abatement feature along any residential lots adjacent to the highway. The noise abatement shall be located on the applicant's property. The noise abatement feature should be 10' higher then the elevation at the US 20/26 centerline. This feature may be a berm, or a combination berm! concrete block wall. Should the developer desire to substitute other noise abatement measure, such as improvements to the buildings, they should submit these to ITD for consideration. Noise abatement (berms, fences, etc.) will be the responsibility of the developer and will be constructed off of the State Right of Way. 9. The Applicant should provide for all improvements required at the new intersection, including signals, acceleration and deceleration lanes on US 20/26. 10. ITD would like to the opportunity to review the revised plat prior to final approval. EXHIBIT G Bainbridge Subdivision AZ-05-001 Zoning Amendment Findings According to Meridian City Code (MCC) 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both the Planning & Zoning Commission and Council are required "to review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed zoning amendment in tenus 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: 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 subject property is located in the heart of a Mixed Use/Neighborhood Center designation on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates approximately 1/3 of this property as 'Mixed Use - Regional' with a Neighborhood Center. The purpose of this designation is "to provide a blend of high-density residential, small-scale commercial, entertairunent, office and open space uses that are geared to serve all residents within a one to two square mile area. The developments are encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual neighborhood center plan depicted in Figure VII-3. The purpose of these centers is to create a centralized, pedestrian- oriented, identifiable and day-to-day service oriented focal point for neighborhood districts. The centers should offer an internal circulation system that connects with adjacent neighborhoods or regional pathway(s). They will also serve as public transit locations for future park-and-ride lots, bus stops, shuttle bus stops or other alternative modes of transportation." (See Chapter VII, pg. 95.) After evaluating the original preliminary plat submittal and the Comprehensive Plan policies regarding mixed use areas, City staff met with the applicant to discuss omitting the portion of the site within the mixed use designation. This request was based on the fact that the original plat did not conform to the purpose statement of the mixed use designation and staff could not make the findings to recommend approval of the original applications. The applicant has submitted a revised preliminary plat that includes one 9-acre lot to be developed in the future (Lot 3, Block 15). City Council believes that by leaving the 9-acre lot undeveloped at this time, the small-scale commerciaVoffice/entertairunent aspect of the mixed-use/neighborhood center option is preserved for the future. Similarly, if the City decides to amend the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant could develop this area with single-family homes. The remainder portion of the subject site is designated 'Medium Density Residential' on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, medium density is defined as areas including single- family homes at densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. Although the proposed density (2.56 d.u./acre) is below the minimum target density of3 d.u./acre, City Council finds that the revised preliminary plat generally conforms to this stated purpose and intent. In the applicant's submittal letter, dated December 22,2004 several Comprehensive Plan policies are listed (please see applicant's letter). City Council also finds the following 2002 Comprehensive Plan text policies to be applicable to this application (analysis in italics below policy): · "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 2) The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) has previously submitted letters to the City stating that their policy for access to a Type IV Principal Arterial will be at intersections only, and spaced at one-half mile intervals in urban areas. ITD allows approaches (other than intersections) in special cases and on a temporary basis. City Council finds that the proposed access point to Chinden Boulevard (SH 20-26) meets the location requirements of lTD. Further, City Council finds that Broadbent Way will serve as the access point to Chinden Boulevardfor all the properties in this section. The revised location of the proposed Broadbent Way/Ten Mile Road intersection now meets A CHD 's requirements. as it aligns with the approved street in Silverstone Subdivision to the east. · "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridors (setback, vegetation, low walls, benns, etc.)." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 4) As depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, the applicant is proposing to construct a 35-foot wide landscape berm with dense vegetation along Chinden Boulevard. The applicant is also proposing to construct a 35-foot wide landscape buffer along Ten Mile Road. City Council is supportive of these widths, as long as the entire buffer lies outside the ultimate right-ofway, and the sidewalk is located outside of the 35-foot wide btifftr (or increase btiffer to 40-feet). See Site Specific Condition #5 in the Preliminary Plat section. · "Consider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach" from the National Center for Bicycling and Walking in all land use decisions." (Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, #3) This publication encourages jurisdictions to establish bikeway and walkway facilities in new construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient. · "On-street bikeways should be incorporated on all future Collector streets." (Chapter VI, Figure VI-5) Figure VI-5 on page 57 of the Comprehensive Plan designates a bikeway mid- mile between Ten Mile Road and Black Cat Road., and between Chinden Boulevard and McMillan Road. The applicant is proposing a 36-foot street section for Broadbent Way (collector). · "Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area." (Chapter VII, Goal 1, Objective B) Lot 3, Block 15, on the revised preliminary plat is designated for commercial, retail and multi-family uses on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The subject application proposes none of these uses, and designates this "fiaure development" lot as residential. Although City Council is recommending that this lot be zoned R-8 with the majority of the development, development of this lot will require separate conditional use permit approval. Citv Council finds that the DroDosed zoninf! and subseauent uses fsinf!le- (amilv homes and a church) will be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comvrehensive Plan. B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the future; City Council is hopeful that at least a portion of the 9-acre "future development" lot will be rezoned for multi-family uses and commercial/office/entertainment uses in the future. Once there is a residential housing base established in this area that can support non-residential uses, this area may be rezoned to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 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 the proposed single-family development could be allowed within the requested R-8 zone, if the accompanying Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development is also approved. According to current City Code, churches are required to obtain CUP approval. The future church, to be zoned L-O, will require separate detailed CUP approval in the future. 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 a substantial portion of the land to the east has been developed (or approved for development) in a manner similar to the proposed subdivision, with single-family dwelling units. Lochsa Falls Subdivision to the east was approved with a gross density of 2.92 dwelling units per acre and a city park. Silverleaf Subdivision, also to the east, has a gross density of 3.8 dwelling units per acre (minus the future school site). There have been no recent street improvements in the area. Further, Ten Mile Road is not currently scheduled within ACHD's Five Year Work Program or Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for roadway widening. Chinden Boulevard is not in ITD's current STIP for roadway improvements (is in corridor preservation). This development is currently not serviceable by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer system. Sewer service for this development will be via the future North Black Cat lift station. At this point in time, the Meridian City Council has approved funding for the design; however no funding has been approved for the construction. If this development is approved, it shall be subject to the North Black Cat sewer system being available. Other urban services, such as water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend such services to the site. City Council finds that the subject site is proposed for development in a fashion similar to other properties in the area. 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 has submitted four front elevations for the proposed single-family homes. If the homes are constructed in substantial compliance with the submitted elevations, they will be similar in design to other residences in the area. The existing character of the area will, and is, currently changing. However, this is the first development to apply for development in the subject square mile. This development will set the tone for how the rest of this square mile, particularly the Neighborhood Center develops or does not develop. City Council finds that if Lot 3, Block 15, is not developed with single-family detached units, the proposed R-8 zoning and subsequent residential use proposed with the concurrent preliminary plat will be harmonious and appropriate to the intended character of the vicinity. If this development is approved as proposed, City Council finds that it will significantly change not only the existing character of the area, but will also change the intended character of the vicinity, as noted on the Future Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan. F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; Due to other existing and proposed uses near the site, City Council does not anticipate that the proposed zoning/uses will be physically hazardous to future or existing uses or neighbors in the area. The City Council has relied on staff analysis, conunents from other agencies, and public testimony to detennine whether the proposed use will be disturbing or hazardous to the existing neighboring uses and future expected uses in this vicinity. G. Will the area be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and f1re 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; There is a 2.5-acre outparcel on Ten Mile Road that will be an enclave if the subject annexation application is approved. This parcel was created in 1988 and does not meet Ada County's standards for minimum lot size and frontage in the RUT zone. Further, when sidewalk and landscaping are provided by the subject developer there will be a gap in the facilities. To allow the City to initiate annexation of this outparcel City Council recommends that the applicant provide the City with the legal description for the Johnson 2.5-acre outparcel (Parcel No. S0427142323). This development is currently not serviceable by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer system. Sewer service for this development will be via the future North Black Cat lift station. At this point in time, the Meridian City Council has approved funding for the design; however no funding has been approved for the construction. Ifthis development is approved, it shall be subject to the North Black Cat sewer system being available. Other urban services, such as water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend such services to the site. Water to serve this development is existing or currently under development with Lochsa Falls Subdivision. The applicant shall be responsible for the extension of utilities to and through this proposed development. Sizing and routing shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. On January 28,2005, a joint agency/department conunents meeting was held with representatives of key service providers to this property. The Meridian Police Department and Parks Department have concerns with no parking (plan) being provided for the two proposed parks. The nearest on-street parking for the 7.5- acre park would be. along a collector roadway. On-street parking would take up some of the open space that could be used for "green" useable park area. The detailed comments and conditions from the Fire Department, Police Department, and other agencies/departments are at the end of this report. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fees as well as construct on-site storm water drainage facilities. The ACHD Conunission acted on this project on March 2, 2005. The ACHD recommends approval of the subject development with site specific and standard conditions of approval. Based on the comments received from other 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 cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; If approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, public street infrastructure, utilities and irrigation services to serve the project. The primary public costs to serve the future residents will be fire, police, school facilities and services. City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and this development will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 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; City Council recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of a development on this site; however, City Council does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. City Council does not anticipate that annexation and development in accordance with current city code and the Comprehensive Plan will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. City Council finds that if Lot 3, Block 15, were to develop similar to the rest of the proposed subdivision then the proposed residential zoning/uses may be detrimental to people, property and/or the general welfare of the area because it would not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. However, because Lot 3, Block 15, is being reserved for future development, the subject applications should not adversely affect any person or property. 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; The applicant is proposing to construct one public street entrance into the site from Ten Mile Road and one public street entrance into the site from Chinden Boulevard (SH 20/26). The proposed public street entrance to Ten Mile Road (Broadbent Way) aligns with a previously approved public street entrance into Silverleaf Subdivision (Satinwood Drive). If all vehicular approaches (streets) are approved and constructed in accordance with ITD and ACHD policies, City Council does not believe that the subdivision will create interference with traffic on the surrounding public streets. Please review any comments from ACHD or ITD for this project for additional information regarding this finding. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance; and City Council is not aware of any natural or scenic features that may be lost, damaged or destroyed with the approval ofthe subject applications. Any existing trees larger than 4" caliper that are removed should be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance. L. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of Meridian. (Ord. 592, 11-17-1992)? In accordance with the findings listed above Citv Council finds that the annexation/zoning of this orooertv as orooosed bv the aoolicant would be in the best interest of the Citv. EXHIBIT H Bainbridge Subdivision PP-05-002 Preliminary Plat Findings Sections 12-3-3 J.2 and 12-3-5 D read as follows: "In determining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission/Council shall consider the objectives of this title and at least the following: A. The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan; Please see Annexation and Zoning Finding "A". B. The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development; Please see Annexation and Zoning Finding "G". C. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement program; Because the developer will be required to install sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, City Council finds that a development on this property will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. The public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The development will not require major expenditures for providing supporting services. The Commission and Council have relied upon comments submitted from the public service providers (i.e. police, fire, ACHD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See Finding "G" under Annexation and Zoning, and the Agency Comments and Conditions for more detail.) E. The other health, safety or environmental problems that may be brought to the Commission's attention. City Council finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with this subdivision that should be brought to the Councilor Commission's attention; no hazardous natural features have been identified on the site. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. EXHIBIT I Bainbridge Subdivision CUP-05-002 CUP/PD Findings The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in tenns of the following and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11- 17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; As part of the Planned Development (PD) the applicant is requesting relief from the standard street frontage requirement, lot size requirement, and maximum block length, as required by Meridian City Code. See Special Consideration #1 below for detailed analysis. City Council finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the requested use and all other required features. Although the site is large enough to accommodate all of the features required by ordinance, the applicant has asked, through the Planned Development, to modify specific development standards. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; City Council finds that the proposed single-family residential subdivision, with a gross density of2.56 dwelling units per acre, is generally harmonious with and in accordance with the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map, which designates a majority of the land to be "Medium Density Residential" (provided the Commission and Council grant the requested planned development). Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "A". C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "E". D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; Please see Annexation & Zoning Findings. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; Please see Annexation & Zoning Findings "G" and "H", the Other Agency/Department Comments and Conditions, and any comments that may be submitted to the City Clerk regarding this project. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "H". G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Please see Annexation and Zoning Finding "I". H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "J". I. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Please see Annexation & Zoning Finding "K". cU'c;;;iJfIflV\ ~rJc\lIo y '~., fl iI, ! l ~ ~ ... '" '"",''' ,. ... . , "'" STAFF SUMMARY OF COUNCIL HEARING Transmittal Date: April 14, 2005 Project Name: Bainbridge Subdivision Case No(s): AZ-05-001lPP-05-002/CUP-05-002 Applicant: Brighton Properties, LLC City Council Hearing Date: April 5, 2005 Council Action: Approve with conditions (all ayes) A. Summary of Public Hearing: 1. In favor: David Turnbull (Applicant) 2. In opposition: None 3. Commenting: Lisa Johnson 4. Staff presenting application: Anna Canning 5. Other staff commenting on application: Brad Watson B. Key Issues of Discussion by Council: 1. Single-story home restriction adjacent to the existing residence (Johnson) 2. Sewer serviceability 3. Possible dedication of park property to the City C. Key Changes (see attached Exhibits): - The Council voted to amend Exhibit D, Comment #3, by adding a bullet stating that sewer service is currently not available to this property and the applicant understands the risks. - The Council voted to amend Exhibit D, Comment #3, by adding a bullet regarding steps for dedicating a park to the City (providing clear title, etc.). - The Council voted to amend Exhibit E, Site Specific Condition #2, by allowing the applicant to work with staff when determining if a stub street to the property to the west is appropriate or not. - The Council voted to amend Exhibit E, Site Specific Condition #10, by requiring perimeter fencing to be installed. - The Council voted to amend Exhibit F, Site Specific Condition #3, by allowing the applicant to work with staff on providing an additional amenity for this project. - The Council voted to amend Exhibit F, by adding Site Specific Condition #10, restricting the lots adjacent to Ten Mile Road to not be a full two-stories. D. Recommended Conditions of Approval (by Commission, if applicable) See attached Exhibits D, E and F April 15, 2005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING CU P 05-002 April 1 $ 2005 APPLICANT Brighton Properties, LLC ITEM NO. 5MF REQUEST Findings for Approval- Request for a CUP for PO consistng of 428 residential building lots, one church lot and 35 common lots located in a mixed use neighborhood center designation on the Compo Plan for Bainbridge Subdivision - SWC of Chinden Blvd. & N. Ten Mile AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLlCE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: ~~ -:-z; j '1~ P7',.QQ , Date: 411-tjo~ Phone: Emalled: . furf\b{)..-/1 l2..hrfj,/J-LMmrD COrv1 Stafflnltials: A,J? Materials presented at p lie: meelin9s'shall bee:ome property of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS See aHached Findings ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a Request for Annexation and Zoning of 152.68 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium Density Residential)(146.83 Acres) and L-O (Limited Office)(5.85 Acres) AND Preliminary Plat Approval of Three-Hundred-Eighty-Nine (389) Single- Family Building Lots, Twenty-Two (22) Other/Common Lots, One (1) Church Lot, and One (1) Lot to be DevelopedlRe-Subdivided in the Future AND Conditional Use Permit Approval for a Planned Development Consisting of Single-Family Homes, a Future Neighborhood Park, and a Church, with Reduced Minimum Lot Frontages, Reduced Minimum Lot Sizes, and Increased Maximum Block Length, by Brighton Properties, LLC. Case No(s): AZ-05-001, PP-05-002, CUP-05-002 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 5, 2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. 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 April 5, 2005, public hearing(s). The applicant, affected property owners, and govenunent 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 Pla1ming 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 record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code ~67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code ~~ 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as ClTY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). AZ-OS-OOI I PP-OS-OOl I CUP-OS-DOl- PAGE lof5 evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof 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 verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings are Brad and LouAnn Janicek, Brighton Corporation, Boise Research Center, Inc., Brighton Properties, LLC, and Brighton Investments, LLC. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibits G, H, and I for the findings required for these applications. B. Conclusions of Law L 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 (I.C. ~67- 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 6,2002, 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, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Preliminary Plat dated February 16, 2005 as shown in Exhibit B, the Site Plan dated February 16, 2005 as shown in Exhibit C, the Annexation and Zoning Comments as shown in Exhibit D, the Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions as shown in Exhibit E, and the CUPIPD Site Specific and Standard Conditions as shown in Exhibit F. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-OOI ! PP-OS-002 ! CUP-OS-002- PAGE 2 ofS C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code S 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 Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat dated February 16, 2005 is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The applicant's Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated February 16, 2005 is hereby conditionally approved; and, 3. The Site Specific and Standard Conditions are as shown in Exhibits E and F. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Penuit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the council. During this time, the permit holder must commence the use as permitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, acquire building permits and commence construction of pennanent footings or structures on or in the ground. In this context "structures" shall include sewer and water lines, streets or building construction. The applicant has specified in the application and to the commission and council a construction schedule and completion date for the project. If the completion date specified for the project is exceeded, the conditional use application shall become null and void. However, the applicant may submit an application for a time extension on the project for city council review. The application for time extension shall be submitted at least thirty (30) days prior to the deadline for completion of the project. For projects requiring platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one year from the original date of approval by the council. If the successive phases are not submitted within one year intervals, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and void. (MCC 11-17-4.B.) 2. Notice of Twelve (12) Month Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that after the date of approval of the preliminary plat, the owner or developer shall have one year within which to file the request for approval of the final plat. After approval of final plat, the owner or developer shall have one year to begin construction of the public utilities and one year thereafter to complete construction of those public facilities. (MCC 12-2-4.B & C.) E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-00 I / PP-05-002 I CUP-D5-DD2- PAGE 3 of 5 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Approved Preliminary Plat (with conditions) Exhibit C: Approved Site Plan (with conditions) Exhibit D: Annexation and Zoning Comments Exhibit E: Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions Exhibit F: CUP/PD Site Specific and Standard Conditions Exhibit G: Zoning Amendment Findings Exhibit H: Preliminary Plat Findings Exhibit I: CUP/PD Findings By ~o~ of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~ '2 ,2005. f'qdL day of COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY deWEERD VOTED_ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). AZ-05-00! I PP-05-002 I CUP-05-002- PAGE 4 of 5 (TIE BREAKER) and City Attorney. By: jOJtO-. J\~ City Clerk's Office Dated: 4- 2. \ -aC; CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-001 / PP-05-002 / CUP-OS-OOl- PAGE 5 of5 EXHIBIT A Bainbridge Subdivision AZ-05-001 Legal Description (3 pages) Engineering North West, LLC 423 N. Ancestor Plnce, Suite 180 nOi,e. (dah" 83704 (200) 376-.1000 . Pax (20$) 376.SSS6 Project No. 02-043.01 Date: April S, 2005 BAINBRIDGE SUBDIVISION TOTAL ANNEXATION DESCRIPTION (INCLUDING LANDSCAPE AREA) A parcel of land located in the E 112 of the NW 1/4, and the NE 114 of Section 27, T.4 N.. R. 1 W., B.M.. Ada County, Idaho and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the section corner common to Sectiom 22, 23, 26 lInd 27 of said T. 4 N., R.I W.; Thence South 00020' 42" West, 1399.56 feet on the section line common 10 said Sections 26 and 27 to the REAL POINT 01<' BEGINNING; Thence continuing South 00'20'42" West, 728.01 feet on the section line common to said Sections 26 and 27; Thence leaving said section line, North 86021 '29" West, 465.83 feet; Thence South 07Q 13'40" West, 104.07 feet; Thence South 61003'36" East, 338.99 feet; Thence South 51058'47" East, 195.68 reet; Thence South 89039' 18" East, 25,00 feet to a point on the section line common to said Sections 26 and 27; Thence South 00020'42" West, 147.72 feet on the section line common to said Sections 26 and 27 (0 the 1/4 Section comer common to said Sections 26 and 27: Thence leaving said slXtion Hnc, North 89021'06" West. 2651.02 feet on the east-west mid-section line of said Section 27 to the Center 1/4 Section comer of said Section 27; Thence Nonh 89020' 14" West, 1324.91 feet on the east-west mid-section line of said Section 27 to the center-west 1/ 16 tll section comer of said Section 27; Thence leaving said mid-section line, NOIth 00027' 19" East, 1318,77 feel on the westerly boundary Hne of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 27 to the Northwest comer said SE 1/4 of the NW 114; Thence South 89018'50" East, 330,98 feet on the northerly boundary line ofsllid SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4; B.:tinbrids.-t Tmnl ^tm~DiIi:on .l>c:3Ccdoc Theile<: leaving said northerly boundary fine, North 00026'53" Easl, 1318.56 feel 10 a point on the section line commOn to said Sections 22 antl27; Thence SOUlh 89" 17' 17" East, 992.76 feet on the section line common to said Sections 22 and 27 to the 1/4 section comer common 10 said Secrions 22 and 27; Thence South 890 17'35" East, I 55.71 feet on the section line common 10 said Sections 22 aml 27; Thence lcaving said section line, South 00"42'25" West, 95.00 feel.; Thence South 63048'25" Wesl, 94.48 feet to a point of curve; Thence 47.52 feet on the arc of a curve to rhe right, said curve having a rodius of 122.00 feel, a central angle of 22019'09" and aehord distance of 47.22 feet which bears Soulh 11"52'06" West; Thence South 23"01'40" West, 7.13 feel to a point of curve; Thence 2 t .79 feet on the lire of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 58.00 feer, a central angle of 21031 '35" and a (:hord disllrnce of 21.66 feet which bears Soulh 12015'53" West to a point of reversceurve; Thence 326.14 feet 011 the arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 1948.73 feet, a central angle of 09"35'21" and l\ chord distllnce of 325.76 feer which bears South 06" 17' 46" West 10 a poinl of reverse curve; Thence 571.32 fcet on the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 626.53 feel, a central angle of 52" 14'50" and a chord distance of 551.73 feet which bears South 1500 l' 58" East to a [Joint of compound curve; Thence 170.52 feet on the arc of a curve to the left, said curve havi ng a rodi us of 256.00 feel, a cenlral angle of 38"09' 49" and II chord dist;mce of 167.38 feet which bears Soulh 60"14' 17" Ea~t; Thence South 79019'12" East, 60.84 feel to a point of curve; Thence 162.40 feet on the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a mdius of 360.00 feet, a central angle of 25"50'48" and a chord distance of 161.03 feCI which bears North 87"45'24" East; Thence N0l1h 74"50'00" Enst, 1 J 2.27 feet to a point of curve; Thence 203.18 feet on lhe arc of a curve to the right, stud cUn'e having a mdius of 1120.00 feet, a central angle of \0"23'39'. and n chord diMance of 202.90 feet which bears North 80~01 '49" East; H.:.IillbriLlgo 'f(l~111 Anjle~llcn lX;lr;:..ctoc Thence North 00038'54" Eust, 54..10 feet; Thence South 89021'06" East, 90,00 fect; Thence South 00038'54" West, 47.92 feet 10 11 point of curve: Thence 864.31 feet all the arc: of a curve to the right. said curve having 11 radius of 1431.37 feet, II ccntrlll angle of 34035'49" and a chord distance of 851.24 feet which bears South 74038'42" Bust to a pointof reverse curve; , Thence 724,66 feet on [he arc of a curve to lhe left, said curve having a radius of 1330,00 feel, a central angle of 31"13'04" and a chord distance of 715.72 feel which bears Soulh 72057'20" East to a poillt of compound curve; Thence 12.77 feel on the arc of a curve [0 the left, said curve having a radius of 48.00 feet, 11 central angle of 15014'31" and a chord distance of 12.73 feet which bears North 83"48'52" East; Thence North 76"11 '37" East, 28.27 leel (0 a poim of curve; Thence 27.66 feel on the arc of a curVe 10 the right, said curve having a radius of 112.00 feel, a cenlrll[ al1gle of 14009'05" and a chord dislance of 27.59 feel which bciITS North &30t6'09" East; Thence North 41059'22" East, 107.l9 feet; Thence South 89039' 1.8" Easl, 70,00 fcct lO the real point of beginning. Said parcel contains 154.85 aeres more or less, PREPARED BY: Engineering Nor(hWe.~I, LLC James l{, Washburn, P.LS EXHIBIT B Bainbridge Subdivision PP-05-002 Approved Preliminary Plat (2 pages) E:l..~~~... EXHIBIT C Bainbridge Subdivision CUP-05-002 Approved Site Plan --}i I I ~ II ,_ I ! I liPlll !n1l1 I, II II 1 1111 > I !'Illll!! HIl ~l III gJ 11111 I'I! I ..,-:' !llr. .IJ II ::: I u~ 3~d ~ ! ~ i I i. ill iii lit I!; ii! ~:I EXHIBIT D Bainbridge Subdivision AZ-05-001 Annexation and Zoning Comments ANEXATION & ZONING COMMENTS 1. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped by James R. Washburn, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 2. Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time. 3. A Development Agreement (DA) will be required as part of an annexation of this property. Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner( s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The aooIicant shall contact the Citv Attomev Bill Narv at 888-4433 to initiate this orocess. The DA shall incorporate the following: · That the applicant agrees to provide the City with a legal description for the Johnson 2.S-acre outparcel (Parcel No. S0427142323) prior to annexation. · That the developer acknowledges by signing this Agreement that the property encompassed in this agreement is not currently sewerable by the City of Meridian. The City does not make any specific guarantees or promises to the developer as to when this property may be able to be included in the City sewer system. The developer assumes the risk in regards to this property and waives any claim against the City, that may exist due to the lack of available sewer service. · That the City is not requiring any park property be dedicated. However, if the applicant chooses to dedicate a park to the city, details such as boundary requirements and clear title will need to be worked out with the City Parks Department and Legal Department. · That the applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. · That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. 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 all future uses on Lots 2 and 3, Block 15, shall be required to obtain conditional use pennit approval from the City. EXHIBIT E Bainbridge Subdivision PP-05-002 Preliminary Plat Site Specific and Standard Conditions SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS-PRELIMINARY PLAT 1. The preliminary plat prepared by Engineering NorthWest, LLC, dated Nov 04, revised on 2-16-05, is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All comments/conditions of the accompanying Annexation/Zoning (AZ-05-001) and Conditional Use Permit (CUP-05-002) application shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-05-002). 2. Unless City staff and ACHD staff determine that a stub street is not necessary, provide a stub street to the 45-acre (potential school site) parcel to the west. Provide a vehicular stub street to the north through Block 15, unless that property becomes a school site. Provide public stub streets to the west (Fairborn Drive), south (Levanham Avenue, Dartmouth Avenue, Portsmouth Avenue, and Shropshire Place), and to the 2.5-acre outparcel (Shropshire Avenue), as proposed. 3. Place a note on the face of the final plat stating that all future front garage setbacks shall be 20-feet as measured from the property line or the back of sidewalk, whichever is more restrictive. 4. Prior to the City Engineer's signature of a final plat containing Lot 17, Block 2, and/or Lots 2-4, Block 25, the applicant shall provide evidence that the access easement across said lots has been relinquished OR the lots should be designated temporary non-build lots in a final plat note. 5. The submitted 2-page landscape plan prepared by The Land Group, Inc., dated 3- 25-05 is approved as submitted. The following should be included in the landscape plan: · Provide a 35-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to Chinden Boulevard and Ten Mile Road. In accordance with MCC 12-13-10, the 35-foot wide landscape buffers shall be located entirely outside of the ultimate right-of- way for the adjacent street and shall not include the width of the sidewalk. If the required sidewalk is placed outside of the right-of-way and within the landscape buffer, the buffer width shall be increased to 40-feet · Depict and construct a 10-foot wide gravel shoulder on Ten Mile Road abutting the site, with the remaining portion of the right-of-way being landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. · The landscaping proposed on the north and east sides of Broadbent Way do not lie within the boundaries of the preliminary plat The landscaping for the north side of Broadbent Way shall be included in the application. · All micropaths within the proposed subdivision shall be designed in accordance with MCC 12-13-15 "Micropath Landscaping" and MCC 12- 4-3 IIPedestrian Walkways. II Micropath fencing shall be constructed per MCC 12-13-15-9. · All areas being counted toward the open space requirement shall be free of "wet ponds" or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the required open space are subject to Ordinance 12-13- 14 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees, as depicted on the submitted landscape plan. · Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that are removed. Other than the changes listed above, the approved landscape plan is not to be altered without prior written approval of the Planning & Zoning Department. 6. Construct a micro-path centrally located through Block 11, connecting Vanderbilt Drive to Lancaster Drive. 7. Place a note on the face of the final plat requiring any future use(s) on Lot 3, Block 15, to obtain separate conditional use pennit approvaL 8. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per MCC 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 9. The applicant has not indicated who will own and operate the pressurized irrigation system within this development. Underground vear-round pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to remain a private homeowners' association system, complete plans and specifications shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development plan review process. A draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual shall be submitted prior to plan approval. The applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 10. Provide permanent fencing around the perimeter of the development. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of building permits. All fences shall taper down to 3-feet maximum within 20 feet of all right- of-way. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with MCC 12-4-10. 11. Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Bainbridge Homeowners' Association. 12. Pennanent sanitary sewer service to this development is to be provided by the undeveloped "North" Black Cat Lift Station. At this point in time, the Meridian City Council has approved funding for the design; however no funding has been approved for the construction. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department to be in accordance with the approved master sewer plan. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard fonns of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. If this development is approved, it shall be subject to the North Black Cat sewer system being available. 13. Municipal water to this site shall be via extensions from existing mains in Ten Mile Road. Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer and water mains to and through this proposed development, thereby making them available to adjacent properties. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. 14. Other than the public street accesses approved by ACHD and ITD, direct lot access to Ten Mile Road and Chinden Boulevard is prohibited. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access to Ten Mile Road and Chinden Boulevard. GENERAL REOUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT 1. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2. Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to MCC 12-13-10-8. 3. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all fencing, landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 4. A detailed landscape plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance and as noted in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application. 5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 6. Two-hundred-fifty and one-hundred-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are detennined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior commencing installations. 7. Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 8. Submit any up-dated groundwater/soils monitoring data, as collected and analyzed by a soils scientist, to the Public Works Department for review. Any drainage areas (detention/retention basins) must be designed to ensure that water will percolate or discharge with a period of time not to exceed 24-hours for all storms up to and including a 100-year stonn events. Side slopes within drainage areas shall not exceed 3: 1. Any portion of a drainage area not improved with sod/grass seed (or other approved landscaping) shall not count towards the required open space area. The project engineer should pay close attention to the results of field studies determining the groundwater, soil type & and characteristics during the design and construction phases. The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least I-foot above groundwater. 9. The applicant shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 10. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 11. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 12. Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying that all street finish centerline elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. 13. The applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution 02-374. 14. Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation/conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 15. Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in MCC 12-2-4. OTHER AGENCY/DEPARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of ] ,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of500' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 12" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 5. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or pennanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible constmction is brought on site. 7. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. 8. The proposed 389-lot subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 1,128 residents at build out 9. The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer 10. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 11. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903 .3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Minimum acreage standard for City Park: The City is willing to develop and maintain Community Parks, Urban Parks, and Neighborhood Parks. Neighborhood Parks will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The City may choose to maintain neighborhood parks at an acreage of seven acres or larger. It will be the responsibility of private homeowner groups or associations to develop and maintain the smaller mini parks and some Neighborhood Parks in their subdivision that the City does not maintain. Please contact Doug Strong to discuss layout of the 7.5-acre park and vehicular parking for this lot. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. The Meridian Police Department has concerns regarding the lack of parking proposed for the park lots. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stonnwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT 1. All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facility involved are the Simpson Lateral (30' easement), the Harrell Lateral (30' easement), and the McMullen Lateral (30' easement). 2. A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 3. A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.LD. facilities. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 5. All storm drainage must be retained on-site. 6. The development must supply irrigation access to all lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall do one of the following: a. Dedicate by donation a total of 48-feet of right-of-way along Ten Mile Road, and construct a minimum 5~foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way. b. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way, in an easement provided to the District. c. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located at the back edge of the existing right-of-way. Accomplish all necessary adjustments to properly accommodate existing drainage and utilities. 2. Construct a collector roadway (Broadbent Drive) to intersect Ten Mile Road to directly align with the main entrance to Silverleaf Subdivision. 3. Construct Broadbent Drive (the collector roadway) as a 40-foot street section with vertical curb, gutter and a 5-foot concrete sidewalk (attached or detached) within the 60-feet of proposed right-of-way. Construct Broadbent Drive so that the right-of-way line is at the property line and is not separated by a landscape buffer or a common lot. 4. Construct the internal streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and a 4-foot detached concrete sidewalk that is separated by a 5-foot planter strip within 55-feet of right-of-way and/or 33~foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and a 4-foot detached concrete sidewalk that is separated by a 5-foot planter strip within 52-feet of right-of-way, as proposed. Any street section less than 36-feet (measured from back of curb to back of curb) requires written approval from the appropriate fire department. 5. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 630-feet east of the west property line to serve the 71.6-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE IT . 6. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 1,450-feet east of the west property line to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, 'THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 7. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 1,750-feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the tenninus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE", 8. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 480 -feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, 'THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 9. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 21O-feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the tenninus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 10. Construct a stub street to the west property line approximately 800-feet south of Sate Highway 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) to serve the 28.1 7 I-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. District staff is supportive of the applicant's proposal. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 11. Construct a stub street to the south property line of the 2.46-acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 12. Construct a stub street to the north property line of the 2.46-acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 13. Construct a "quasi" stub street that runs along the west property line ofthe 2.46- acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. 14. Construct a non-standard cul-de-sac turnaround at the terminus of North Shropshire Place that meets the criteria established by District policy. Submit a design of the turnaround for review and approval by District Development Division staff. 15. Provide a minimum street section of21-feet on either side of the island. Any proposed landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this shall be required on the final plat. The design shall be reviewed and approved by ACHD's Development staff. 16. Locate the island within Broadbent Drive at the intersection of State Highway 20- 26 and Broadbent Drive a minimum of200-feet south of State Highway 20-26 or otherwise approved by the District's Traffic Services Staff. 17. This segment of Bainbridge Subdivision's preliminary plat (Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of Block 5 and Lots 3, 4 and 5 of Block 4) should be approved contingent upon the right-of-way within the 80-acre parcel to the south being reviewed, approved, dedicated to the public and constructed (or a financial surety in place for the construction of the roadways) prior to the signature of the final plat for Bainbridge Subdivision. 18. Comply with requirements of ITD for State Highway 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) frontage. Submit to the District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements prior to District approval ofthe final plat or issuance ofa building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Contact District III Traffic Engineer Dan Coonce at 334-8340. 19. Other than the access point that has specifically been approved with this application, direct lot access to Ten Mile Road is prohibited. A note of this access restriction shall be noted on the final plat. 20. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shan be relocated outside ofthe right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State ofIdaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road hnpact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1- 800-342- I 585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387- 6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT 1. The New Approach to US 20/26 should be designed to county and state standards and be spaced out at one (half) mile spacing from Ten Mile Road if possible. The Developer will need to obtain an approved access permit from ITD District III prior to construction. Contact Matt Ward at 334-8342 for more information on acquisition of an access permit. 2. The main entrance to the subdivision on US 20/26 will need a turn bay added for safety of the turning traffic. 3. The applicant should preserve or dedicate additional right of way to accommodate future widening of US 20/26. 4. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan calls for sidewalks. The subdivision plan does not show sidewalks on US 20/26. The City should require the developer to construct and maintain any pathways called for in the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The Meridian Comprehensive plan shows a collector system at the half mile. The subdivision does not reflect this in the design. Since no full frontage or backage road system has been included, the collector system is important to future mobility in this square mile section. The City should consider if collector roads are needed. 6. Design should consider access to and connectivity with the adjacent subdivisions. The adjacent parcels are currently zoned rural (county). Does the City anticipate future development as commercial or residential? The Meridian Comp plan, in this area, ca11s for commercial area centered at the Y2 mile, with residential at the mile roads. This design does reflect that plan. Will the adjacent Rambo subdivision redevelop? If so, how will this plan affect that area. In particular is concern for the parcel at the intersection ofTen Mile and Chinden, as related to access. 7. The site should also consider the potential for a school adjacent (west) to the site. Connectivity has been provided for pedestrians. Access for autos should be provided so residents would not need to exit to the arterial routes to access the school. 8. The applicant should construct a noise abatement feature along any residential lots adjacent to the highway. The noise abatement shall be located on the applicant's property. The noise abatement feature should be 10' higher then the elevation at the US 20/26 centerline. This feature may be a berm, or a combination berm! concrete block wall. Should the developer desire to substitute other noise abatement measure, such as improvements to the buildings, they should submit these to ITD for consideration. Noise abatement (benns, fences, etc.) will be the responsibility of the developer and will be constructed off ofthe State Right of Way. 9. The Applicant should provide for all improvements required at the new intersection, including signals, acceleration and deceleration lanes on US 20/26. 10. ITD would like to the opportunity to review the revised plat prior to final approval. EXHIBIT F Bainbridge Subdivision CUP-05-002 CUP/PD Site Specific and Standard Conditions SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS-CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT L The site plan prepared by Engineering NorthWest, LLC, dated February 2005, is approved, with the conditions listed herein. Applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the Annexation/Zoning (AZ-05-001) and Preliminary Plat (PP_ 05-002) as a condition of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP-05-002). 2. The project shall conform to the R-8 dimensional standards, except as follows: Minimum frontage: 48-feet (non cul-de-sac lots). 3. In addition to providing 10% of the site as open space, work with Planning & Zoning staff on fmaIizing at least one other amenity (tot lot, tennis court, etc.). 4. All use(s) on Lots 2 and 3, Block 15, shall be required to obtain separate CUP approval. 5. Temporary sales/information trailers shall be subject to the following conditions: a. The proposed subdivision shall have no more than two temporary sales trailers on-site. b. The trailer shall be skirted with materials that are similar in color and material to the rest of the trailer. c. The applicant shall be responsible for providing adequate off street parking. d. One wall sign is allowed for the temporary sales trailer. The sign shall be limited in size to 18% ofthe wall area. No other signs shall be permitted. e. A building permit for the temporary building must be obtained through Meridian's Building Department prior to placing the trailer on a lot A site plan must accompany the building permit and be approved by Planning Department f. Sanitary sewer service and domestic water service may be requested for the proposed use. Should a hook-up be requested, an assessment for sewer and water service will be determined during the building permit application process. g. Applicant must provide the Public Works and Fire Departments with information on the method of fire protection to be used for the trailer. h. The trailer must conform with all setbacks as set forth in the Bainbridge Subdivision conditional use permit and preliminary plat The maximum timeframe for the sales and infonnation trailer shall be 48 months from the date of the last final plat that completes the subject preliminary plat. If the applicant requires an extension of this permitted period, the applicant shall submit a status of their plans to the P&Z Department. j. The applicant's request to site the same trailer under the above-stated conditions at other locations within future Bainbridge phases is approved without a CUP modification. A new Certificate of Zoning Compliance and building permit for all future trailer locations must be submitted to the City for each future location, but a CUP should not be required for each future trailer location. 6. Construction within Bainbridge Subdivision shall substantially comply with the five (5) elevations submitted by the applicant. Construction materials used on the structures shall be approved by the City of Meridian Building Department and in accordance with the most recent Uniform Building Code. 7. The Four (4) buildable lots adjacent to Ten Mile Road, north of the existing residence (Johnson) may contain structures with attic trusses and liveable space above the first floor, but shall not be a full two stories tall. OTHER AGENCY/DEPARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 5. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 6. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 7. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. 8. The proposed 389-lot subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 1,128 residents at build out. 9. The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer 10. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 11. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Minimum acreage standard for City Park: The City is willing to develop and maintain Community Parks, Urban Parks, and Neighborhood Parks. Neighborhood Parks will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The City may choose to maintain neighborhood parks at an acreage of seven acres or larger. It will be the responsibility of private homeowner groups or associations to develop and maintain the smaller mini parks and some Neighborhood Parks in their subdivision that the City does not maintain. Please contact Doug Strong to discuss layout of the 7.5-acre park and vehicular parking for this lot. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. The Meridian Police Department has concerns regarding the lack of parking proposed for the park lots. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department ofHeaIth & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stonnwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stonnwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT 1. All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facility involved are the Simpson Lateral (30' easement), the Harrell Lateral (30' easement), and the McMullen Lateral (30' easement). 2. A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 3. A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.LD. facilities. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 5. All stonn drainage must be retained on-site. 6. The development must supply irrigation access to all lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall do one of the following: a. Dedicate by donation a total of 48-feet of right-of-way along Ten Mile Road, and construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way. b. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline ofthe right-of-way, in an easement provided to the District. c. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, located at the back edge of the existing right-of-way. Accomplish all necessary adjustments to properly accommodate existing drainage and utilities. 2. Construct a collector roadway (Broadbent Drive) to intersect Ten Mile Road to directly align with the main entrance to Silverleaf Subdivision. 3. Construct Broadbent Drive (the collector roadway) as a 40-foot street section with vertical curb, gutter and a 5-foot concrete sidewalk (attached or detached) within the 60-feet of proposed right-of-way. Construct Broadbent Drive so that the right-of-way line is at the property line and is not separated by a landscape buffer or a common lot. 4. Construct the internal streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and a 4-foot detached concrete sidewalk that is separated by a 5-foot planter strip within 55-feet of right-of-way and/or 33-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter and a 4-foot detached concrete sidewalk that is separated by a 5-foot planter strip within 52-feet of right-of-way, as proposed. Any street section less than 36-feet (measured from back of curb to back of curb) requires written approval from the appropriate fire department. 5. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 630-feet east of the west property line to serve the 71.6-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 6. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 1,450-feet east of the west property line to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the tenninus of the stub street stating that, t1THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTUREtI. 7. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 1,750-feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Install a sign at the tenninus of the stub street stating that, t1THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 8. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 480 -feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 9. Construct a stub street to the south property line located approximately 210-feet west ofTen Mile Road to serve the 80-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus ofthe stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE1t. 10. Construct a stub street to the west property line approximately 800-feet south of Sate Highway 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) to serve the 28.171-acre parcel located directly to the south, as proposed. District staff is supportive of the applicant's proposal. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 11. Construct a stub street to the south property line of the 2.46-acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. Construct a temporary turnaround at the tenninus of the roadway and install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 12. Construct a stub street to the north property line of the 2.46-acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus ofthe stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". 13. Construct a "quasi" stub street that runs along the west property line of the 2.46- acre out parcel that is located on Ten Mile Road, as proposed. 14. Construct a non-standard cul-de-sac turnaround at the terminus of North Shropshire Place that meets the criteria established by District policy. Submit a design of the turnaround for review and approval by District Development Division staff. 15. Provide a minimum street section of 21-feet on either side ofthe island. Any proposed landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this shall be required on the final plat. The design shall be reviewed and approved by ACHD's Development staff. 16. Locate the island within Broadbent Drive at the intersection of State Highway 20- 26 and Broadbent Drive a minimum of 200-feet south of State Highway 20-26 or otherwise approved by the District's Traffic Services Staff. 17. This segment of Bainbridge Subdivision's preliminary plat (Lots 1,2,3,4, and 5 of Block 5 and Lots 3, 4 and 5 of Block 4) should be approved contingent upon the right-of-way within the 80-acre parcel to the south being reviewed, approved, dedicated to the public and constructed (or a financial surety in place for the construction of the roadways) prior to the signature ofthe final plat for Bainbridge Subdivision. 18. Comply with requirements of ITD for State Highway 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) frontage. Submit to the District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements prior to District approval of the final plat or issuance of a building pennit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Contact District III Traffic Engineer Dan Coonce at 334-8340. 19. Other than the access point that has specifically been approved with this application, direct lot access to Ten Mile Road is prohibited. A note ofthis access restriction shall be noted on the final plat. 20. Comply with all Standard Conditions of ApprovaL Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with :file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with :file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required pennits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1- 800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387- 6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions ofthis approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use ofthe subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT 1. The New Approach to US 20/26 should be designed to county and state standards and be spaced out at one (half) mile spacing from Ten Mile Road if possible. The Developer will need to obtain an approved access permit from ITD District III prior to construction. Contact Matt Ward at 334-8342 for more information on acquisition of an access permit. 2. The main entrance to the subdivision on US 20/26 will need a turn bay added for safety of the turning traffic. 3. The applicant should preserve or dedicate additional right of way to accommodate future widening of US 20/26. 4. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan calls for sidewalks. The subdivision plan does not show sidewalks on US 20/26. The City should require the developer to construct and maintain any pathways called for in the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The Meridian Comprehensive plan shows a collector system at the half mile. The subdivision does not reflect this in the design. Since no full frontage or backage road system has been included, the collector system is important to future mobility in this square mile section. The City should consider if collector roads are needed. 6. Design should consider access to and connectivity with the adjacent subdivisions. The adjacent parcels are currently zoned rural (county). Does the City anticipate future development as commercial or residential? The Meridian Comp plan, in this area, calls for commercial area centered at the Yz mile, with residential at the mile roads. This design does reflect that plan. Will the adjacent Rambo subdivision redevelop? If so, how will this plan affect that area. In particular is concern for the parcel at the intersection of Ten Mile and Chinden, as related to access. 7. The site should also consider the potential for a school adjacent (west) to the site. Connectivity has been provided for pedestrians. Access for autos should be provided so residents would not need to exit to the arterial routes to access the school. 8. The applicant should construct a noise abatement feature along any residential lots adjacent to the highway. The noise abatement shall be located on the applicant's property. The noise abatement feature should be 10' higher then the elevation at the US 20/26 centerline. This feature may be a berm, or a combination berm! concrete block wall. Should the developer desire to substitute other noise abatement measure, such as improvements to the buildings, they should submit these to ITD for consideration. Noise abatement (berms, fences, etc.) will be the responsibility of the developer and will be constructed off of the State Right of Way. 9. The Applicant should provide for all improvements required at the new intersection, including signals, acceleration and deceleration lanes on US 20/26. 10. ITD would like to the opportunity to review the revised plat prior to final approva1. EXHIBIT G Bainbridge Subdivision AZ-05-001 Zoning Amendment Findings According to Meridian City Code (MCC) 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both the Planning & Zoning Commission and Council are required "to review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed zoning amendment in terms ofthe 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: 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 subject property is located in the heart of a Mixed UseINeighborhood Center designation on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates approximately 1/3 of this property as 'Mixed Use - Regional' with a Neighborhood Center. The purpose of this designation is "to provide a blend of high-density residential, small-scale commercial, entertainment, office and open space uses that are geared to serve all residents within a one to two square mile area. The developments are encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual neighborhood center plan depicted in Figure VlI-3. The purpose of these centers is to create a centralized, pedestrian- oriented, identifiable and day-to-day service oriented focal point for neighborhood districts. The centers should offer an internal circulation system that connects with adjacent neighborhoods or regional pathway(s). They will also serve as public transit locations for future park-and-ride lots, bus stops, shuttle bus stops or other alternative modes of transportation." (See Chapter VII, pg. 95.) After evaluating the original preliminary plat submittal and the Comprehensive Plan policies regarding mixed use areas, City staff met with the applicant to discuss omitting the portion of the site within the mixed use designation. This request was based on the fact that the original plat did not conform to the purpose statement of the mixed use designation and staff could not make the findings to recommend approval of the original applications. The applicant has submitted a revised preliminary plat that includes one 9-acre lot to be developed in the future (Lot 3, Block 15). City Council believes that by leaving the 9-acre lot undeveloped at this time, the small-scale commercial/office/entertainment aspect of the mixed-use/neighborhood center option is preserved for the future. Similarly, if the City decides to amend the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant could develop this area with single-family homes. The remainder portion of the subject site is designated 'Medium Density Residential' on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, medium density is defined as areas including single- family homes at densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. Although the proposed density (2.56 d.u.lacre) is below the minimum target density of3 d.u./acre, City Council finds that the revised preliminary plat generally conforms to this stated purpose and intent. In the applicant's submittal letter, dated December 22, 2004 several Comprehensive Plan policies are listed (please see applicant's letter). City Council also finds the following 2002 Comprehensive Plan text policies to be applicable to this application (analysis in italics below policy): · "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 2) The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) has previously submitted letters to the City stating that their policy for access to a Type IV Principal Arterial will be at intersections only, and spaced at one-half mile intervals in urban areas. ITD allows approaches (other than intersections) in special cases and on a temporary basis. City Council finds that the proposed access point to Chinden Boulevard (SH 20-26) meets the location requirements of lTD. Further, City Council finds that Broadbent Way will serve as the access point to Chinden Boulevardfor all the properties in this section. The revised location of the proposed Broadbent Way/Ten Mile Road intersection now meets ACHD 's requirements, as it aligns with the approved street in Silverstone Subdivision to the east. · "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridors (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.)." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective 0, Action item 4) As depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, the applicant is proposing to construct a 35-foot wide landscape berm with dense vegetation along Chinden Boulevard The applicant is also proposing to construct a 35-foot wide landscape buffer along Ten Mile Road. City Council is supportive of these widths, as long as the entire buffer lies outside the ultimate right-aI-way, and the sidewalk is located outside of the 35-foot wide btiffer (or increase buffer to 40-feet). See Site Specific Condition #5 in the Preliminary Plat section. · "Consider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach" from the National Center for Bicycling and Walking in all land use decisions." (Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, #3) This publication encourages jurisdictions to establish bikeway and walkway facilities in new construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient. · "On-street bikeways should be incorporated on all future Collector streets." (Chapter VI, Figure VI-5) Figure VI-5 on page 57 of the Comprehensive Plan designates a bikeway mid- mile between Ten Mile Road and Black Cat Road, and between Chinden Boulevard and McMillan Road. The applicant is proposing a 36-foot street sectionfor Broadbent Way (collector). · "Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area." (Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B) Lot 3, Block 15, on the revised preliminary plat is designatedfor commercial, retail and multi-family uses on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The subject application proposes none of these uses, and designates this "future development" lot as residential. Although City Council is recommending that this lot be zoned R-8 with the mcljority of the development, development of this lot will require separate conditional use permit approval. Citv Council finds that the orooosed zoninz and subseauent uses (sinf!le- familv homes and a church) will be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comorehensive Plan. B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the future; City Council is hopeful that at least a portion of the 9-acre "future development" lot will be rezoned for multi-family uses and commercial/office/entertaimnent uses in the future. Once there is a residential housing base established in this area that can support non-residential uses, this area may be rezoned to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 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 the proposed single-family development could be allowed within the requested R-8 zone, if the accompanying Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development is also approved. According to current City Code, churches are required to obtain CUP approval. The future church, to be zoned L-O, will require separate detailed CUP approval in the future. 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 a substantial pOltioll of the land to the east has been developed (or approved for development) in a manner similar to the proposed subdivision, with single-family dwelling units. Lochsa Falls Subdivision to the east was approved with a gross density of 2.92 dwelling units per acre and a city park. Silverleaf Subdivision, also to the east, has a gross density of 3.8 dwelling units per acre (minus the future school site). There have been no recent street improvements in the area. Further, Ten Mile Road is not currently scheduled within ACHD's Five Year Work Program or Capital hnprovements Plan (Crp) for roadway widening. Chinden Boulevard is not in ITD's current STIP for roadway improvements (is in corridor preservation). This development is currently not serviceable by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer system. Sewer service for this development will be via the future North Black Cat lift station. At this point in time, the Meridian City Council has approved funding for the design; however no funding has been approved for the construction. rfthis development is approved, it shall be subject to the North Black Cat sewer system being available. Other urban services, such as water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend such services to the site. City Council finds that the subject site is proposed for development in a fashion similar to other properties in the area. 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 has submitted four front elevations for the proposed single-family homes. If the homes are constructed in substantial compliance with the submitted elevations, they will be similar in design to other residences in the area. The existing character of the area will, and is, currently changing. However, this is the first development to apply for development in the subject square mile. This development will set the tone for how the rest of this square mile, particularly the Neighborhood Center develops or does not develop. City Council finds that if Lot 3, Block 15, is not developed with single-family detached units, the proposed R-8 zoning and subsequent residential use proposed with the concurrent preliminary plat will be harmonious and appropriate to the intended character of the vicinity. If this development is approved as proposed, City Council finds that it will significantly change not only the existing character of the area, but will also change the intended character of the vicinity, as noted on the Future Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan. F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; Due to other existing and proposed uses near the site, City Council does not anticipate that the proposed zoning/uses will be physically hazardous to future or existing uses or neighbors in the area. The City Council has relied on staff analysis, comments from other agencies, and public testimony to determine whether the proposed use will be disturbing or hazardous to the existing neighboring uses and future expected uses in this vicinity. 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; There is a 2.5-acre outparcel on Ten Mile Road that will be an enclave if the subject annexation application is approved. This parcel was created in 1988 and does not meet Ada County's standards for minimum lot size and frontage in the RUT zone. Further, when sidewalk and landscaping are provided by the subject developer there will be a gap in the facilities. To allow the City to initiate annexation ofthis outparcel City Council recommends that the applicant provide the City with the legal description for the Johnson 2.5-acre outparcel (Parcel No. S0427142323). This development is currently not serviceable by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer system. Sewer service for this development will be via the future North Black Cat lift station. At this point in time, the Meridian City Council has approved funding for the design; however no funding has been approved for the construction. If this development is approved, it shall be subject to the North Black Cat sewer system being available. Other urban services, such as water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend such services to the site. Water to serve this development is existing or currently under development with Lochsa Falls Subdivision. The applicant shall be responsible for the extension of utilities to and through this proposed development. Sizing and routing shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. On January 28,2005, ajoint agency/department comments meeting was held with representatives of key service providers to this property. The Meridian Police Department and Parks Department have concerns with no parking (plan) being provided for the two proposed parks. The nearest on-street parking for the 7.5- acre park would be along a collector roadway. On-street parking would take up some of the open space that could be used for "green" useable park area. The detailed comments and conditions from the Fire Department, Police Department, and other agencies/departments are at the end of this report. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fees as well as construct on-site storm water drainage facilities. The ACHD Commission acted on this project on March 2,2005. The ACHD recommends approval of the subject development with site specific and standard conditions of approval. Based on the comments received from other 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 cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; If approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, public street infrastructure, utilities and irrigation services to serve the project. The primary public costs to serve the future residents will be fire, police, school facilities and services. City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and this development will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 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; City Council recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of a development on this site; however, City Council does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. City Council does not anticipate that annexation and development in accordance with current city code and the Comprehensive Plan will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. City Council finds that if Lot 3, Block 15, were to develop similar to the rest of the proposed subdivision then the proposed residential zoning/uses may be detrimental to people, property and/or the general welfare of the area because it would not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. However, because Lot 3, Block 15, is being reserved for future development, the subject applications should not adversely affect any person or property. 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; The applicant is proposing to construct one public street entrance into the site from Ten Mile Road and one public street entrance into the site from Chinden Boulevard (SH 20/26). The proposed public street entrance to Ten Mile Road (Broadbent Way) aligns with a previously approved public street entrance into Silverleaf Subdivision (Satinwood Drive). If all vehicular approaches (streets) are approved and constructed in accordance with ITD and ACHD policies, City Council does not believe that the subdivision will create interference with traffic on the surrounding public streets. Please review any comments from ACHD or lTD for this project for additional infonnation regarding this finding. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance; and City Council is not aware of any natural or scenic features that may be lost, damaged or destroyed with the approval ofthe subject applications. Any existing trees larger than 4" caliper that are removed should be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance. L. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of Meridian. (Ord. 592, 11-17-1992)? In accordance with the findings listed above Citv Council finds that the annexation/zoning of this propertv as proposed bv the applicant would be in the best interest of the Citv.