Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-05-21 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, May 21, 2002, at 6:30 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: x X Tammy de Weerd X Cherie McCandless X X Mayor Robert Corrie Bill Nary Keith Bird 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes from April 3, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: Approve B. Approve minutes from April 17, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: Approve C. Approve minutes from April 23, 2002 City Council Regular Meeting: Approve D. Approve minutes from April 30, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: Approve E. Approve minutes from May 1, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: Approve F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 01-045 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a 1743 square foot Sandwich Shop with a drive-thru window in an L-Q zone for Subway by Blaine & Cynthia Jacobson - Northeast corner of Magic View and South Allen Street: Approve G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 02- 005 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 4 building lots and 1 other lot on 20.01 acres in a C-G zone for Willev Subdivision by Roylance and Associates -- 3710 East Franklin Road: Approve Meridian City Council Agenda - May 21, 2002 Page I 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. H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law for Approval: MI 02- 004 Request for modification of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Conditional Approval of Preliminary Plat regarding the sidewalk requirement for Elixir Subdivision by Paul B. Clayton - 521 North Eagle Road: Approve I. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 02-003 Request for a variance from Meridian City Code 12-2-5 regarding the sidewalk requirement for Elixir Subdivision by Paul B. Clayton - 521 North Eagle Road: Approve J. Naming the Los Alamitos I Thousand Springs Park, Kiwanis Park: Approve K. Change Orders for Meridian Settlers Park: Approve L ACHD Impact Fee Offset Agreement for Meridian Settlers Park: Approve M. Streetlight Agreement for Woodbridge Sub. No.2: Approve N. South Slough Sewer License Agreement, Nampa Meridian Irrigation District: Approve O. South Slough Sewer Construction Reimbursement, Packard Estates Developers, LlC: Approve P. Addendum No.3 to Agreement for Professional Services, Ten Mile Interchange Sewer Study - J-U-B Engineers: Approve Q. Agreement for Collection Services on delinquent water J sewer I trash billing accounts with Collection Bureau, Inc.: Approve R. Approve Beer I Wine Licenses for Kahootz Pub & Eatery: Approve 4. Presentation by S.S.I. of S.W.A.C. Ink Cartridge Recycling Program: Presented 5. Department Reports A. Parks Department: 1. Skate Park Construction Agreement - Heartland Construction: Approve - Resolution No. 02-375 Meridian City Council Agenda - May 21, 2002 Page 2 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities rclated to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 8884433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 2. Chamber of Commerce Expansion Proiect - Request for Additional Funds: Approve - $4197.00 6. (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) 7. Tabled from April 2, 2002: FP 01-026 Request for Final Plat approval of 31 building lots and 4 other lots on 13.85 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No. 6 by Bear Creek, LlC - east of Stoddard Road and north of Victory Road: Table to June 4,2002 8. FP 02-004 Request for Final Plat approval of 58 building lots and 5 other lots on 20.76 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No.5 by Bear Creek, LlC - east of Stoddard Road and north of Victory Road: Table to June 4, 2002 9. Continued Public Hearing from May 15, 2002: Proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian: Continue Public Hearing to June 4, 2002 10. Public Hearing: ZA 02-001 Request for amendment to Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by Jim Jewett and B & A Engineers: Approve- Attorney to draft Ordinance 11. Public Hearing: AZ 02w003 Req uest for annexation and zoning of 3.84 acres from R-1 to R-8 zones for proposed Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett - south of West Cherry Lane and south of North Summertree Way: Table to June 4, 2002 12. Public Hearing: PP 02-002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 19 building lots and 2 other lots on 3.84 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett - south of West Cherry Lane and south of North Summertree Way: Table to June 4, 2002 13. Public Hearing: AZ 02-006 Request for annexation and zoning of 76.16 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Heritaae Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law of Approval 14. Public Hearing: PP 02-007 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 273 building lots and 12 other lots on 75.39 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Heritaae Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law of Approval Meridian City Council Agenda - May 21, 2002 Page 3 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. 15. Public Hearing: CUP 02~007 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for single-family residential dwellings, private open space with club house, gazebo, parks and neighborhood scaled commercial site for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of law of Approval 16. Public Hearing: VAC 02-002 Request for a Vacation for unopened future streets within lots 5 and 6, block 1 of Timothy Subdivision for Pack It Up Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - west of South Locust Grove Road and north of East Overland Road: Attorney to Prepare Findings of facts and Conclusions of law of Approval 17. Public Hearing: VAR 02-004 Request for a Variance to allow a second time extension for recording the final plat for Pack It Up Subdivision (formerly Overland Mini Storage Subdivision) by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - west of South Locust Grove Road and north of East Overland Road: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law of Approval 18. Public Hearing: VAR 02-001 Request for a Variance to the landscape requirements for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision by Hubble Engineering, Inc. - 1375 East Fairview Avenue: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law of Approval 19. PFP 02-001 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 4 building lots on 6 acres in a C-G zone for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision by Hubble Engineering, Inc. - 1375 East Fairview Avenue: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of law of Approval 20. Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: Approve- ** Turn off days: 22"d and 29th ** Meridian City Council Agenda - May 21,2002 Page 4 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 tbe City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, May 21, 2002, at 6:30 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: x X Tammy de Weerd X Cherie McCandless -1 X Mayor Robert Corrie Bill Nary Keith Bird 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes from April 3, 2002 City Council Spexial Meeting: .HfJf1mye., Approve minutes from April 17, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: '.4fpIVY~ Approve minutes from April 23, 2002 City Council Regular Meeting: Appt7JVu Approve minutes from April 30, 2002 City Council Spe~i~1 Meeting: rrpfJ/'tJt/~ Approve minutes from May 1, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: ,Hp;::;iVYt0 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 01-045 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a 1743 square foot Sandwich Shop with a drive-thru window in an L-Q zone for Subway by Blaine & Cynthia Jacobson - Northeast corner of Magic View and South Allen Street: AyfJr'VV6 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 02- 005 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 4 building lots and 1 other lot on 20.01 acres in a C-G zone for Wille Subdivision by Roylance and Associates -- 3710 East Franklin Road: fJ/7J 1/6 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law for Approval: M102- 004 Request for modification of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Conditional Approval of Preliminary Plat regarding the sidewalk requirement for Elixir Subdivision by Paul 8. Clayton - 521 North Eagle Road: /1frrV~ Meridian City Council Agenda - May 21, 2002 Page I 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 lcast 48 hours prior to the public meeting. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: V AR 02-003 Request for a variance from Meridian City Code 12-2-5 regarding the sidewalk requirement for Elixir Subdivision by Paul B. Clayton - 521 North Eagle Road: A-ffJt?Y6 J. Naming the los Alamitos I Thousand Springs Park, Kiwanis Park: /J-;9fJrvV'U K. Change Orders for Meridian Settlers Park: .W /?Jv'U l. ACHD Impact Fee Offset Agreement for Meridian Settlers Park: .4-p ;J I'D 11~ M. Streetlight Agreement for Woodbridge Sub. No.2: A-pjJ Tt?V'L-> N. South Slough Sewer license Agreement, Nampa Meridian Irrigation District: A-ffJ r D"V'0 O. South Slough Sewer Construction Reimbursement, Packard Estates Developers, LLC: AyprOLJy!"'; P. Addendum No.3 to Agreement for Professional Services, Ten Mile Interchange Sewer Study - J-U-B Engineers: /t-pfJf1:?V~ Q. 4. Agreement for Collection Services on delinquent water I sewer I trash billing accounts with Collection Bureau, Inc.: ApproV'f?...; Approve Beer I Wine Licenses for Kahootz Pub & Eate~.:: ~ fd-flf<l17./V0 Presentation by S.S.1. of S.W.A.C. Ink Cartridge Recycling Program: pieSVrzlcd R. 5. Department Reports A. Parks Department: 1. Skate Park Construction Agreement - Heartland Construction: AtrrDYe,. - J2eS-r.'Jiu-u.'"JJYj 02- 57S- 2. Chamber of Commerce Expansion Proiect - Request for Additional Funds: . ~ .JJ L J / (),. 60 v'Ij/jJlb/J'fJ- <Q '7 -/7.- S. (Ifems Moved from Consent Agenda) Meridian City Council Agenda - May 21,2002 Page 2 of 4 All materials prescnted at public mcetings shall become property ofthe 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. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Tabled from April 2, 2002: FP 01-026 Request for Final Plat approval of 31 building lots and 4 other lots on 13.85 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No. 6 by Bear Creek, llC - east of Stoddard Road and north of Victory Road: .r~f;yLu -k2 dlA/YzL L// 2CJu Z. FP 02-004 Request for Final Plat approval of 58 building lots and 5 other lots on 20.76 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No.5 by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and north of Victory Road: I tk-b-Lu to dU1'16 '-I I 2002 Continued Public Hearing from May 15, 2002: Proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian: C:rat. PLh fa J /,{.;Jt'?.0 tf / ZOO 2- Public Hearing: ZA 02-001 Request for amendment to Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by Jim Jewett and B & A Engineers: .AftP rove.. - Jt:+fornt1j w d rtLr:'t o-rcLl7tv"rta-e...-. Public Hearing: AZ 02-003 Request for annexation and zoning of 3.84 acres from R-1 to R-8 zones for proposed Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett - south of West Cherry Lane and south of North Summertree Way: TO.JJ.k,. .+0 --Su-ru:... 4 I 2.002- Public Hearing: PP 02-002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 19 building lots and 2 other lots on 3.84 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett - south of West Cherry Lane and south of North Summertree Way: T ~ bLe- .tv J Uh'U__ 4 J 2(.:-02- Public Hearing: AZ 02-006 Request for annexation and zoning of 76.16 acres from RUT to R~8 zones for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: , Jt#o(~ -+0 fJrepC0r6 FFCA./ of A(Pf7?VO--G Public Hearing: PP 02-001 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 273 building lots and 12 other lots on 75.39 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: ft+fDrYltLg to rprLf-pCL1L FFi:-L or A-p-pYDV~ Public Hearing: CUP 02-007 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for single-family residential dwellings, private open space with club house, gazebo, parks and neighborhood scaled commercial site for proposed Heritage Commons by Brig hton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: A~++o(VLUf to fr<epOJ\L. FF~L. 0;: Jf;:;ffO/J~ Meridian City Council Agenda- May 21, 2002 Page 3 of4 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. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Public Hearing: VAC 02-002 Request for a Vacation for unopened future streets within lots 5 and 6, block 1 of Timothy Subdivision for Pack It Up Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - west of South Locust Grove Road and north of East Overland Road: . o-f IJ ..i?~J/t!<:-L /1:.;+for?Ul(f Tv (l/~~ Fret... --rr' - ' Public Hearing: VAR 02-004 Request for a Variance to allow a second time extension for recording the final plat for Pack It Up Subdivision (formerly Overland Mini Storage Subdivision) by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - west of South Locust Grove Road and north of East Overland Road: A-Hvrnu;y -fa w-ep~ A:::-U tJF ~TbtJa.L., Public Hearing: V AR 02-001 Request for a Variance to the landscape requirements for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision by Hubble Engineering, Inc. -1375.. East Fairview Avenue:crC' f' /JA/) v' / ftt+o r1'l.&f +0 Pr~tvLe ,.- n f./ 0 ""T I' ro ~ PFP 02-001 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 4 building lots on 6 acres in a C-G zone for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision by Hubble Engineering, Inc. - 1375 East Fairview Avenue: v4++o r/UA..'I! -1r9 1J (<ef c:uu...., r:: ~CL (J f' A f;970 t ~ Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: /JppwtJ-e-. - TulJ/Y[ off: Z '2-- 1101 4- z q -f~ Meridian City Council Agenda - May 21,2002 Page 4 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property ofthe City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to docu ments and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. June 14, 2002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT REQUEST June 18, 2002 ITEM NO. Approve minutes from May 21, 2002 City Council Regular Meeting 3-A 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: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERiDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS 1iJ/ ~ Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of MeridIan. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCil REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, May 21, 2002, at 6:30 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. RolI~call Attendance: x X Tammy de Weerd X Cherie McCandless X X Mayor Robert Corrie Bill Nary Keith Bird 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes from April 3, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: Approve B. Approve minutes from April 17, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: Approve C. Approve minutes from April 23, 2002 City Council Regular Meeting: Approve D. Approve minutes from April 30, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: Approve E. Approve minutes from May 1, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: Approve F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law for Approval: CUP 01-045 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a 1743 square foot Sandwich Shop with a drive-thru window in an L-Q zone for Subway by Blaine & Cynthia Jacobson - Northeast corner of Magic View and South Allen Street: Approve G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 02- 005 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 4 building lots and 1 other lot on 20.01 acres in a C-G zone for Willey Subdivision by Roylance and Associates -- 3710 East Franklin Road: Approve Meridian City Council Agenda - May 21,2002 Page I of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property ofthe 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. H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MI 02- 004 Request for modification of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Conditional Approval of Preliminary Plat regarding the sidewalk requirement for Elixir Subdivision by Paul B. Clayton - 521 North Eagle Road: Approve I. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law for Approval: V AR 02-003 Request for a variance from Meridian City Code 12-2-5 regarding the sidewalk requirement for Elixir Subdivision by Paul B. Clayton - 521 North Eagle Road: Approve J. Naming the Los Alamitos I Thousand Springs Park, Kiwanis Park: Approve K. Change Orders for Meridian Settlers Park: Approve l. ACHD Impact Fee Offset Agreement for Meridian Settlers Park: Approve M. Streetlight Agreement for Woodbridge Sub. No.2: Approve N. South Slough Sewer License Agreement, Nampa Meridian Irrigation District: Approve O. South Slough Sewer Construction Reimbursement, Packard Estates Developers, LLC: Approve P. Addendum No.3 to Agreement for Professional Services, Ten Mile Interchange Sewer Study - J-U-B Engineers: Approve Q. Agreement for Collection Services on delinquent water I sewer I trash billing accounts with Collection Bureau, Inc.: Approve R. Approve Beer I Wine Licenses for Kahootz Pub & Eatery: Approve 4. Presentation by S.S.I. of S.W.A.C. Ink Cartridge Recycling Program: Presented 5. Department Reports A. Parks Department: 1. Skate Park Construction Agreement - Heartland Construction: Approve - Resolution No. 02-375 Meridi an City Council Agenda - May 21 , 2002 Page 2 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. 2. Chamber of Commerce Expansion Proiect - Request for Additional Funds: Approve - $4197.00 6. (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) 7. Tabled from April 2, 2002: FP 01-026 Request for Final Plat approval of 31 building lots and 4 other lots on 13.85 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No. 6 by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and north of Victory Road: Table to June 4, 2002 8. FP 02-004 Request for Final Plat approval of 58 building lots and 5 other lots on 20.76 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No.5 by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and north of Victory Road: Table to June 4, 2002 9. Continued Public Hearing from May 15, 2002: Proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian: Continue Public Hearing to June 4,2002 10. Public Hearing: ZA 02-001 Request for amendment to Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by Jim Jewett and B & A Engineers: Approve- Attorney to draft Ordinance 11. Public Hearing: AZ 02-003 Request for annexation and zoning of 3.84 acres from R-1 to R-8 zones for proposed Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett - south of West Cherry Lane and south of North Summertree Way: Table to June 4, 2002 12. Public Hearing: PP 02-002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 19 building lots and 2 other lots on 3.84 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett - south of West Cherry Lane and south of North Summertree Way: Table to June 4, 2002 13. Public Hearing: AZ 02-006 Request for annexation and zoning of 76.16 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law of Approval 14. Public Hearing: PP 02-007 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 273 building lots and 12 other lots on 75.39 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law of Approval Meridian City Council Agenda - May 21, 2002 Page 3 of 4 All materials prescntcd at public meetings shall bccome property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hcarings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 15. Public Hearing: CUP 02-007 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for single-family residential dwellings, private open space with club house, gazebo, parks and neighborhood scaled commercial site for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of law of Approval 16. Public Hearing: VAC 02-002 Request for a Vacation for unopened future streets within lots 5 and 6, block 1 of Timothy Subdivision for Pack It Up Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - west of South Locust Grove Road and north of East Overland Road: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law of Approval 17. Public Hearing: V AR 02-004 Request for a Variance to allow a second time extension for recording the final plat for Pack It Up Subdivision (formerly Overland Mini Storage Subdivision) by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - west of South Locust Grove Road and north of East Overland Road: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of law of Approval 18. Public Hearing: VAR 02-001 Request for a Variance to the landscape requirements for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision by Hubble Engineering, Inc. - 1375 East Fairview Avenue: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law of Approval 19. PFP 02-001 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 4 building lots on 6 acres in a C-G zone for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision by Hubble Engineering, Inc. - 1375 East Fairview Avenue: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of law of Approval 20. Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: Approve- ** Turn off days: 22nd and 29th ** Meridian City Council Agenda - May 21, 2002 Page 4 of 4 All materials prcsented at public meetings shall become property ofthe City of Meridian. Anyonc 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. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:30 P.M., Tuesday, May 21, 2002, by Mayor Robert D. Corrie. Members Present: Mayor Robert Corrie, Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Cherie McCandless and William Nary. Others Present: Bill Nichols, Mike Worley, Gary Smith, Brad Watson, Sharon Smith, Brad Hawkins-Clark, Joe Silva, Tom Kuntz, and Dean Willis. Roll Call: X Tammy de Weerd X Bill Nary X Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird X Mayor Robert Corrie Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Corrie: Okay. I want to welcome everybody here this evening. I will open the Meridian City Council regular meeting, Tuesday, May the 21st, 2002, at 6:31. We will start with roll-call attendance, please. Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda: Corrie: Okay. All present. First we have the adoption of the Agenda. Council, are there any additions or corrections on the Agenda? Hearing none, I will entertain a motion to adopt the Agenda. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we adopt the Agenda as published. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRI ED: ALL AYES. Item 3: Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes from April 3, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: B. Approve minutes from April 17, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: Meridian City Council Meeling May 21, 2002 Page 2 of 95 C. Approve minutes from April 23, 2002 City Council Regular Meeting: D. Approve minutes from April 30, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: E. Approve minutes from May 1, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 01-045 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a 1743 square foot Sandwich Shop with a drive-thru window in an L-Q zone for Subway by Blaine & Cynthia Jacobson - Northeast corner of Magic View and South Allen Street: G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 02-005 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 4 building lots and 1 other lot on 20.01 acres in a C-G zone for Willey Subdivision by Roylance and Associates -- 3710 East Franklin Road: H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law for Approval: MI 02-004 Request for modification of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Conditional Approval of Preliminary Plat regarding the sidewalk requirement for Elixir Subdivision by Paul B. Clayton - 521 North Eagle Road: I. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law for Approval: VAR 02-003 Request for a variance from Meridian City Code 12-2-5 regarding the sidewalk requirement for Elixir Subdivision by Paul B. Clayton - 521 North Eagle Road: J. Naming the los Alamitos I Thousand Springs Park, Kiwanis Park: K. Change Orders for Meridian Settlers Park: l. ACHD Impact Fee Offset Agreement for Meridian Settlers Park: M. Streetlight Agreement for Woodbridge Sub. No.2: N. South Slough Sewer License Agreement, Nampa Meridian Irrigation District: O. South Slough Sewer Construction Reimbursement, Packard Estates Developers, llC: P. Addendum No.3 to Agreement for Professional Services, Ten Mile Interchange Sewer Study - J-U-B Engineers: Q. Agreement for Collection Services on delinquent water I sewer I trash billing accounts with Collection Bureau, Inc.: Meridian Cily Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 3 of 95 R. Approve Beer I Wine licenses for Kahootz Pub & Eatery: Corrie: Item Number 3 is the Consent Agenda. You have the Consent Agenda in front of you. Any additions, corrections, or anything you want to pull off? Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Hearing no objections, I'd move that we approve the Consent Agenda and that all contracts, change orders, and everything and authorized the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mrs. Clerk. Roll-Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 4: Presentation by 5.5.1. of S.W.A.C. Ink Cartridge Recycling Program: Corrie: Next on the Agenda is a presentation by S.S.1. and S.W.A.C. Ink Cartridge Recycling Program. Sedlacek: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council, my name is Steve Sedlacek, business manager of Sanitary Services, 722 West Franklin, Meridian. Good evening. Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I have got a quick little handout to give each of you. Sorry. I'm one or two short. We wanted to talk to you tonight. We are seeking your approval or disapproval, however you want to go, on a program, a pilot program, to recycle laser jet and ink jet cartridges as part of your residential and curb- side recycling program. Councilperson McCandless is on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, as is Gary Smith and a few other folks. If I forget to fill in a few blanks here, go ahead and step in and fill in those slots. Basically E-Tech, which is a nonprofit organization, located in Eagle and is run by Lisa Marie Goold and Lisa Marie is here tonight to answer any questions you might be. We believe that there is a market for used ink jet and laser jet cartridges and E-Tech has approached us with an opportunity to collect these at the curb and we will place them in our trucks, take them to Western Recycling and E-Tech will reimburse us 25 cents a cartridge for each one collected. Basically, this is a commodity in the waste stream that can be segregated and removed and placed in recycling bins. We don't have to modify the bins. We don't have to modify our trucks. Space is pretty limited on our trucks. It's not like we can take something that generates, you know, tons and tons of material, but we don't think there will be a lot of these, although that's what the pilot program is to find out. We believe we Meridian City Council Meeting . May 21, 2002 Page 4 of 95 can handle the volumes coming in. So what we'd like to do is attempt a three month pilot program where we go through an educational phase putting out fliers to the homeowners through the billing process, letting them know this is coming on line, telling them how to recycle, and what's recyclable and what's not, just, you know, be another commodity that they can put in a bin and we will see how it goes. Then after three months we come back to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee with the data about how many we have collected, how much money is generated. E-Tech can get back to us about how they are doing financially on this and see if it's something we want to continue. We have talked with the Solid Waste Advisory Committee about it and they were for it. I don't know if we ever had a vote or anything like that, but it was moved that we bring to the Council as the next step to see if you want to do this. So that's about all I've got. I have got a schedule in here on how this would work. At the end of the program, which would occur about six months from now, we would be contracting with E-Tech, just as we do contract now with Western Recycling, so your contract is with sanitary service and then we would be contracting and receiving monies from E-Tech and, of course, any recyclable commodity money, according to our contract, comes to you ultimately, after the household hazards waste costs are removed from that. So there is really no cost to us, other than the educational material to get the program going, Sanitary Services is going to pay for that, and I guess there is a little more postage, maybe one or two envelopes that go out, that the city would pay for. I don't know if it's that much money. In fact, I'm not sure it's any money, because you have a bulk-mailing permit. Any questions or -- you might want to -- did you bring examples of the -- I have got -- I just happened to run through one of these. This is an ink jet cartridge. They are not terribly big or heavy. They can be re-used. What will happen to these is they will be shipped to, I believe, North Carolina; is that correct? For remanufacturing? Goold: Lisa Marie Goold. Mayor Corrie, and Members of the -- 863 West Quarter Drive, Eagle, Idaho. 83616. Members of the Council, kind of familiar here. This is a black ink jet cartridge and these are actually Hewlett-Packard, the most popular -- what most people use are Canon, Epson, and Hewlett-Packard and this is an ink jet that's tri- color and because technology is changing quite rapidly, if I were to tell you a year ago that I would be involved in cartridges as a non-profit organization I would tell you I don't have the time for this, but the Lord sometimes brings you some passions and what's interesting is that when we started with this I have had full support from Mayor Brent Coles working with the in-haul landfill, who has really been working with us and has really been wonderful at helping here, but what we have determined and what -- well, you're familiar with in-haul landfill and the director and whole area, they know that thousands of these going into our landfill. There are really no public receptacles that are out there for the public to deposit these, so we have really found that there are some real serious problems going on here. Currently, I'm working with actually some subdivisions in putting together -- the subdivisions in putting a drop of these at different homes, because they know that so many of these are being thrown out right now, so -- and that's what's happening in Eagle and the Boise area and having a pilot program would actually be one of the very first throughout the United States, because I have a lot of contacts in this industry since I have been involved and really don't know of curb side recycling going on. If I can hand out something. Okay. What I've handed is basically- - it's on the internet called Waste News and this really struck home for me. This is Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 5 of 95 basically an article where it really fueled the passion. Unfortunately, a lot of things stem from the almighty dollar, so when you read this you can kind of read in between the lines. So, anyway, our ultimate goal is to be able to stop these cartridges from going into the landfill and doing a curb side recycling and I'm not saying that it's going to solve everything, but I have a motto and I do have 65 recycling bins at Boise State University and we are doing a very large campaign right now with the students and it will start this fall and working with the athletic department in gearing this up, but we all have a motto and my motto is when you hold a soda can you have a choice to either throw the soda can out or to recycle it. Now who has thrown a soda can in the garbage and felt just a little guilty? We all do. I mean if we do we do. I'm holding this cartridge. I will tell you right now, 98 percent of the community does not know that they can recycle this. Now what's interesting, I have been working closely with the professors at Boise State University and having 65 recycle bins on campus and they are throwing their cartridges or the laser jets, which is quite bigger, and then I will say to them: Now do you use these at home? And they go yeah. Well, can you bring them? And most of them -- well, I just kind of throw them away. I guess I'm used to throwing them away. So that shows you that people even within their office that might recycle them, the majority of them at home are being thrown out. We are not doing it perfectly, it's just that we are not geared for that. So any questions? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I have noticed in Boise some boxes that look like that style. Is that the same? Goold: That's me. Nary: Okay. And I have noticed a bunch of those around Boise and I mean, obviously, you can't use those cardboard boxes for recycling at the curb, but is that the same program? Goold: Yes. It kind of looks like a cartridge. Nary: Yes. Right. Goold: Actually, I will tell what kicked the whole program off was this August we were throwing so many of these away we thought there has to be something else to do with it, so we had at the booth at the fair for non-profit and we had a banner made that said Idaho plants spuds, not printer cartridges. Recycle your printer cartridges. And we didn't know what would come from it, we just thought, you know, let's get the word out, and I'll tell you, there was quite a bunch of people come in with their Albertson's bags. At the end of the fair I think we had 200 and people just knew they felt bad throwing them away, so they kept them, SO-- De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 6 of 95 De Weerd: I guess I'm a little bit more thrifty, because I find the programs that credit you back if you turn in your empty cartridges you get a discount on your new one, so I have been doing that for over a year and a half. But what do you hear back from businesses like those? Do they feel like you're any competition to their for-profit business or have you had any discussions with them? Goold: A lot. Many of them really feel that I'm doing the right thing, because there is so many that are being thrown out. I mean -- okay. Sedlacek: Let me say one thing real quick. There are other outlets for these. I was in the post office here in Meridian the other day and picked up a clear plastic pouch that you can get at the front desk. They are just sitting there on the counter. You just shove your ink jet cartridge in and seal it up and throw it in the out -- it's a prepaid postage mailer and it goes right to a recycling center. Recyclers are trying to get these, because, obviously, when you sell them for 50 dollars a cartridge new -- well, if you could remanufacture that and refill it and sell it for -- you know, if you could get it for a dollar and sell it for 30, I mean, obviously, you have labor to refill it and fix it up, there is a business there. So people are trying to get these. This is a commodity that somebody wants, just like aluminum and newspaper. So we have an opportunity to add that as a commodity to our list of things we collect. But the people are, as you say, you can send one back when you buy one and get credit, you know, and people are welcome to do that. Personally, I just throw mine away. Corrie: Steve, let me ask you how many times can they use those? Sedlacek: These are a one-use deal until they get refurbished. Now I don't know how many times they can refurbish them. Goold: On the refurbishing side there are many different technologies that are going on out there, because when these are being made from OEM's, the original equipment manufacturers, they are being made so that they can only be used once. So, you know, these engineers have been working very hard to be able to have these utilized and in time it's going to drop the cost of some of the new ones as these manufacturers become better and better at it, but I have seen a big difference in a year from manufacturers that were able to take one of these and they have actually a 13 step process, a very good specification as to be able to take these and do them correctly. If they are not done correctly they can damage the computer, so that's why they are best to go back to certain manufacturers. A lot of the manufacturers that make the cartridges for the OEM's, they actually make their own cartridges, too, so a lot of them are seeing the money that the OEM's are making and saying, well, you know, we make them for them, maybe we can offer them less and give them a good product. So you will see a lot of changes in the next two to five years and I think that printout that you have got there clearly will, if you will read in between the lines. Corrie: Any other questions, Council? Okay. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 7 of 95 Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I think that this would be a great program to see how citizens react. I don1t think it's going to take a huge stream as far as bulk out of the waste stream, but I think overall we will really be helping the environment on this and generating something that we can give back to the community as well. So I think we should go for it and see how it works out. Bird: I second that. De Weerd: What, go for it? Corrie: Kind of a makeshift motion, but I will entertain a motion. De Weerd: Makeshift motion. Well, I will let our S.W.A.C. representative lead us in that motion. Corrie: Mrs. McCandless. McCandless: Mr. Mayor, I move that we enter into this three-month trial period with the ink jet -- ink jet -- what's the other one? Nary: Laser jet. McCandless: Laser jet -- De Weerd: Cartridge. McCandless: Yes. I'm lost tonight. And enter into the three-month trial period. Corrie: Okay. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion as aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Department Reports A. Parks Department: 1. Skate Park Construction Agreement - Heartland Construction: Meridian City Council Meeling May 21, 2002 Page 8 of 95 Corrie: Thank you, Steve. Mrs. Goold, thank you very much. Five is Department Reports with the Parks Department. First is the skate park construction agreement, Heartland Construction. Kuntz: Thank you, Mayor and Council. You should have on your screens tonight a resolution -- actually, an agreement first with Heartland Construction to enable us to build the skate park. Included in that agreement is an addendum outlining the contingencies that must be met prior to starting construction and the third item you have is a resolution by the city attorney. We are requesting approval of all three of these items, so that we can move ahead with the project and I will stand for questions De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Tom, in the resolution it was 152,000 and in the agreement it has 153,000. Which amount are you looking at? Kuntz: Councilwoman de Weerd, the correct amount should be 152,000, so on the agreement on 4.1.1, that amount should be stricken and corrected with 152,000. De Weerd: Okay. Kuntz: Thank you. Corrie: Any other discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: On page two -- and, I'm sorry, I don't know if it was the resolution or the agreement, 6.1 talks about an interest rate, a percentage interest rate, but it was left blank. Is that in the update as well? Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Bird: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, in an attempt to get this to the clerk by the Thursday deadline we'll explain some of the things that were missed, but this contract was taken from the contract that was in the bid documents when it was submitted out to bid twice before and that's what the contractors look at in terms of the entire bid package when the price was negotiated at 152,000 and so we missed the interest rate. I don't know what was anticipated. You can indicate what that interest rate would be. The architect also needs to supply the deadline or the time construction would begin and when it would end and also I think there were two addenda, in addition to the addendum that lists the contingencies that have to do as part of the contract, but I didn't Meridian City Council Meeling May 21, 2002 Page 9 of 95 have that with -- I didn't have that information when I was trying to get the documents prepared and in by the Thursday deadline, so -- but just to explain to you where the document came from and what those things are. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Tom, how many addendums is there? The Mayor needs to know before he signs something like this. Kuntz: Councilman Bird, I will rely on our attorney to direct me here, but I assumed there was only one, which talks about the financial obligations from parties A through E, as addendum number one. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council, what we were referring to in the contract are the addenda to the bid specifications that -- or the contract specifications of what was going to be done in the park. That does not refer to the addendum that lists the contingencies for financing. So it's in that packet of specifications in terms of any changes to those specs. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Tom, it would have been when the contractors turned in their bids they had to acknowledge if there was any addendums. Kuntz: Okay. Bird: The original bid. I have no problem with the rest of the Council to passing this, but I would put the condition that the Mayor and the -- that the Mayor doesn't sign it and the Clerk doesn't attest until all this completion on and off, the dates, and the addendums and all this stuff be filled in in this agreement form, under agreement with the contractor and the city. That would be -- and I would have no problem passing it and getting it going, but I think we need to have those filled out before the Mayor signs and the Clerk attests and I'm sure that the department wouldn't want to sign it until all this stuff was filled out. Corrie: I guarantee you I won't. Been there before. Kuntz: I would agree with that. I guess I would like to just get some real clear clarification so that I'm on the same page. It sounds like first one is 6.1 at that percentage. That interest needs to be completed. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 10 of 95 Bird: If he's willing to sign it with zero, we will put zero in there. De Weerd: That would be my preference. Kuntz: The other item is that there were some original addendums to the original bid document. Is that correct? Bird: Yes. Only we don't know, Tom. You'll have to look back on your original bids and see if they acknowledged, any addendums. Look on your original specifications with the Land Group or whoever was the architect that turned out. They could tell if you they had an addendum. You should number them in this contract. Kuntz: It's been so long I can't recall if there were or not. Bird: I understand that. Kuntz: Yes. What else? Bird: We got the correct 152,000. Kuntz: Right. Bird: The addendums. And the completion date. That needs to be filled out. Kuntz: Okay. Bird: And as far as I know -- Kuntz: Now would the completion date be based upon the June 15th start date? Bird: Well, yes, I believe so. That's strictly between what you worked out with him. Kuntz: Well, given the fact that -- Bird: They have got so many days to finish it. Kuntz: Yes. Given the fact that the addendum gives the financial donors June 15th to obligate their money and, you know, if we could go from that date that would probably work. Bird: When are you going to be -- when are you going to have the -- everything ready for him to start? Kuntz: Well, I'm going to have the letters to all these people requesting that their donations be received to the city the first part of June, give a June 15th deadline, and I would like to work with the contractor to get their bonds and everything in place, so that we can start construction June 15th. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 11 of 95 Bird: Are you going to have it ready for him June 15th? Kuntz: Yes. Bird: So he can start? Kuntz: That's what I'd like to do. Bird: Who is getting the building permit, him or you? Kuntz: We are. Bird: Have you got it going? Kuntz: No. Bird: Is the building permit going to be ready June 15th? Tom, all I'm saying is don't put the date down for this guy to start if we can't -- if we can't perform. So set it back to the 30th of June. I don't care. With a completion date. But, you know, just get these filled in is alii care, at a reasonable time. But if we are going to get the permit and everything, if we don't have it ready for him he can't start it. Kuntz: Sure. Councilman Bird, I guess the reason I thought we'd get the permit in a timely fashion, is because the plans have already been reviewed by the Public Works Department, so -- but I will definitely confer with them tomorrow and get a date that's -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Without anymore discussion, I would move that we approve the agreement with Heartland Construction for the skateboard park construction, with addendum number one, and that before you sign and the Clerk attest, that you make sure all the blanks are filled in on the agreement to the right, negotiate an interest on item 6.1 -- if he will go for zero, I'm for that. Corrie: We'll work it out. De Weerd: Is that your motion or-- Bird: That's my motion. De Weerd: If he will go for zero? Bird: If he will go for zero, go zero. Corrie: That's negotiable by us. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 12 of 95 Bird: And that's negotiable. Corrie: And see how much we can -- Bird: Anyway, that's my motion. Nary: I'll second, Mr. Mayor. I did have a question. Corrie: Okay. Discussion? Nary: Yes. Just so our record's clear, since we have been talking about it and they are trying to get this down on the record, the provisions we are talking about, Tom, is 3.1, 6.1,and I think it's 8.3, the ones that are the specific references. The other question I had is on these other folks that have already offered to make these donations, Brighton Corporation, Howell-Murdock Development and the like. Have you been in contact with them to Jet them know that we are ready to go forward regarding -- had approved it going forward on this? Kuntz: Councilman Nary, I have been in touch with each of them. The Statesman did an article about a week ago and contacted -- and I re-contacted all the contributors and then as far as the concrete company, they were contacted by Heartland a little over a week ago. So to answer your question, yes. Nary: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Wee rd. De Weerd: I know it's not really a part of the discussion for this motion, but if your office can write a thank you note from the Mayor and Council, it would certainly be appropriate when we have the ground breaking that they are specifically on hand to make sure we properly thank them at that time. Kuntz Councilman de Weerd, would you mind if I included thank you note in the request for the funds? De Weerd: No. I think it should be separate. Kuntz: Okay. De Weerd: You send your note, we'll send our note. Kuntz: And then clarification on one statement you just made, would it be the Councilor Mayor's choice to have a ground breaking? De Weerd: Ground breaking or ribbon cutting. I just want to see it done. .. i. Meridian City Council MeeUng May 21, 2002 Page 13 of 95 Corrie: You can do one or both or whatever you want, just let us know, so we can get it set up. I think we -- De Weerd: Ribbon cutting. Corrie: Ribbon cutting is probably the best, because everybody is going to anticipate this has started a year ago, so let's get it going and we will have a nice ribbon cutting. That's my preference. Kuntz: Thank you. Corrie: Okay. We can have a really nice one. We'll have half the kids in the city there, anyway. Okay. Any other discussion? De Weerd: No. Corrie: Okay. All in favor of the motion as stated say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion is carried. Tom, let's get together and get this all done and then we'll sign it then. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: If I could have a number I will make a motion to pass the Resolution 02 what? S.Smith: Councilman Bird, that is resolution number 02-375. Corrie: Okay. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we pass Resolution 02-375, the Parks and Recreation Department, City Council, pursuant to Code 50-341, for the construction of Tulley Park Skateboard Park, finding that the construction of said park can be accomplished at a lower price on the open market, now, therefore, be it resolved by the Mayor and the City Council of Meridian, Idaho. I would move that we pass that with suspension of rules. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded on the Resolution No. 02-375. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to have the resolution read in its entirety? Okay. Hearing none, further discussion? Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 14 of 95 Nary: Yes. Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Just a clarification. A resolution doesn't require suspension of rules. Bird: That's right. I withdraw that. Corrie: Okay. Then roll-call vote, Ms. Clerk. Roll-Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion for resolution is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 2. Chamber of Commerce Expansion Project - Request for Additional Funds: Corrie: Okay. Kuntz: Thank you, Mayor and Council. The second item, the Parks Department was contacted by Bennington Construction and the Chamber of Commerce last week regarding the potential need for additional funds to complete the Chamber remodel, which includes our Storey Park restrooms in a timely manner. We met with both groups and it appears that Job Corps, who originally had volunteered to complete approximately 30,000 dollars worth of free labor, was not going to be able to complete the project in a timely fashion to allow the Chamber to get back into their building in July. You should have a form that at the top says Change Order Cost Updates and about midway down the page, starting with number one, additional supervision, it outlines what it will take to finish the project and on the second to the last page outlines the breakdown of the amount the Chamber will be paying to complete the project, which is 6,976 dollars and they are requesting an additional 4,197 dollars from the city and I told them that I would bring this to Council for discussion and/or action tonight. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Tom, I got a couple of questions on this. The additional superviSion, the unexpected length of the project. Our share was the restrooms only right? Kuntz: Correct. Bird: Was it anything that we did to cause the delay in the restroom? Kuntz: No, sir. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 15 of 95 Bird: So what they are asking us to do is to share about 35, 40 percent of the additional supervision cost. Are the restrooms ready? Kuntz: Councilman Bird, they are not. I'm going to say they are at an 80 to 90 percent completion stage. I guess what I understood from our meeting was that because they are using youth that are learning a trade, that it's just taking them a lot longer, number one. I know that item number two, on the drywall taping and texturing, they had to hire someone to come in and redo some of what was done, because it was not done at a very high level. So it sounds like whafs happened is they are getting to the end and the completion rate is not where it should be and so they are suggesting it's going to take another four to -- four weeks of what was planned to complete the entire project, including our portion, which is the restrooms. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess when we entered into this we were willing to accept the savings of using the Job Corps and I guess that means we should also participate in what additional costs there will be because of the savings of the using the Job Corps. So I guess it's just one of those things that you have to do and we pay our share. Do you have drywall in those bathrooms, though? I guess I thought it was all cinder block. Kuntz: Councilman de Weerd, it's only the ceiling. The walls are cinder -- are block and then painted and the ceiling is drywall. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Our agreement was to put in the restrooms at a fixed cost, as I understand it. We had a bid that we had budgeted so much for. This is basically 4,197 dollars over the money we had budgeted for the restrooms, am I not right? Kuntz: That's correct. Bird: What is the total cost, Tom, going to be for those restrooms now with this 4,197? Kuntz: It should be in the area of 66 to 67 thousand total. Bird: Do you have the money in your park budget to pay this? Kuntz: Councilman Bird, I believe there will be some cost savings for projects that will not stand a hundred percent complete by the end of this fiscal year, enough to cover this. My only other concern is there is yet to be landscaping done and it won't be expensive, but the understanding or informal agreement that we have is that the Meridian crty Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 16 of 95 Chamber will get donated material -- we will supply the labor, but they will provide donated materials as far as shrubs and that type of thing. We don't have a signed agreement to that effect and I guess I'm a little concerned that we are now at 4,100 over and then -- I just want to make sure that the Chamber understands that we don't have additional funds to put towards materials for the landscaping. Bird: Tom, you're saying that you're going to use funds from projects that you are not going to have a hundred percent complete at the end of the fiscal year. Are these contracts that are signed, that the money has been -- you know, like is it a contract or is it just a project that you're doing in-house that you're going to not have it done, so you can have some extra funds? Is it a contract? Kuntz: No, sir. Bird: Okay. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Do I understand this correctly, Tom, in the last part of your memo it says the total value of the Job Corps labor of 17,772. So that's how much at least at this point -- I mean it's not going to get any more than that, since we are coughing up this 4,000 dollars -- that's how much savings the Chamber and City have realized on this project so far is 17,000 dollars? Kuntz: Councilman Nary, that's correct. And the projection was for 29,669. Nary: And how much was this originally -- how much was this anticipated cost supposed to be originally before we knew the Job Corps was going to donate 30,000 dollars worth of labor? Kuntz: Our budgeted amount -- excuse me, Councilman Nary. Our budget amount of 162,000. Prior to Job Corps being involved the estimates coming back to us were in the area of 172,000 to 174,000. Again, it's been quite awhile, so I haven't reviewed the numbers recently, but it was a substantial amount that not only Job Corps saved us, but then the Chamber was also able to secure numerous other in-kind contributions or partial donations of the materials. So if you were to take the true value of this project when it's complete, I would probably be in line to say that we are saving 20 to 30 percent in the total construction cost through different contributors. Nary: So when it says here a grand total of 153,000, that's actually 10,000 dollars under what we budgeted for this project originally? Is that -- am I understanding that correctly? Kuntz: I don't know for sure, because I don't know what the Chamber's estimate was on their portion of the building. I know that our portion of the building was 63,000. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 17 of 95 Nary: Okay. So the figure you just said a second ago, 163,000, that was the total cost, not just the city's cost? That was the whole building. Everything. Didn't you say somewhere around 160 was what was budgeted? Kuntz: Oh, I'm sorry. It was budgeted for 63,000 is what we budgeted. Not a hundred. I'm sorry. Nary: Oh. Okay. Kuntz: Yes. I apologize. Nary: So we budgeted for 60 and then we discovered then we were able to, with the Chamber, have these -- this donation of this work, so how much savings were realized and then where did that saving go? Did that get dedicated to a different project? Is that where that went? Kuntz: If I'm following your train of thought here, we -- the City Council approved a budget of the city 63,000 dollars for our portion, which would be the restrooms only. Nary: Uh-huh. Kuntz: When they actually went out and started getting estimates to build the entire facility, the restroom portion of that facility came in at about 72 to 74 thousand dollars. We indicated at that time that we had budgeted 63 and is there a way to come up with some cost savings. The Chamber went out and was able to secure materials, as well as the Job Corps, to bring our amount for the restrooms back into line with what we had budgeted. Nary: So this is 4,000 dollars over what we budgeted originally? Ku ntz: Correct. Nary: All right. I apologize. Kuntz: Sorry. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Tom, didn't we -- a couple months ago didn't we have a change order for the restrooms on some hardware changes and stuff that was an additional cost, if I remember right? Am I thinking of something else? Didn't we change some hardware and stuff? Kuntz: No. I think that part of the reason that the original estimate to build the bathrooms went up to 74 was because we added locking hardware that is part of our maxi-com computerized irrigation system that allows us to automatically lock the doors Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 18 of 95 to the restroom at night, with a panic bar inside, of course. And so that was partially what bumped it up to 72 or 74 and then with all the cost savings that we were able to lower it down back to 63 or 64. That's probably what you're remembering. Bird: Okay. Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we approve the change order request for the Chamber of Commerce -- Meridian Chamber of Commerce for the Storey Park restroom in the sum of 4,197. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made to approve the change order requested from the Parks Department for the amount 4,197 dollars. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Kuntz: Thank you, Mayor and Council. Item 6: (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) Item 7: Tabled from April 2, 2002: FP 01-026 Request for Final Plat approval of 31 building lots and 4 other lots on 13.85 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No. 6 by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and north of Victory Road: Item 8: FP 02-004 Request for Final Plat approval of 58 building lots and 5 other lots on 20.76 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No.5 by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and north of Victory Road: Corrie: Okay. Item NO.7 was tabled from April the 2nd, 2002. This is a request for a final plat approval of 31 building lots and 4 other lots on 13.85 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No. 6 by Bear Creek, LLC, east of Stoddard Road and north Victory Road. Staff, can you give us a report on that one? Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council. The background on this is that we had originally requested tabling of Bear Creek No. 6 due to a submission problem with No. 5 and I -- we can proceed with No. 6 if you like -- I mean one of the -- our preference is to typically approve, you know, phasing according to the subdivision ordinance consecutively, but-- Corrie: Well, we can do that if you want. Hawkins-Clark: Well, I can give you the -- Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 19 of 95 Corrie: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: There was with No.5, as you may recall, an issue with the final plat not complying with the preliminary plat. The applicant has submitted No.5, which is Item No.8 on the agenda, that's the reason that now both of these are on tonight's agenda. There are two items, though, that have come up. One of the agreements that Shari Stiles made with the applicant was that although No.5 has a substantial modification to the preliminary plat, the ordinance allows the planning director to make judgments on those substantial changes and Shari considered the change of the elimination of two open space lots to be significant, but rather than sending the final plat back to Planning and Zoning Commission for a revised preliminary plat, because of the missing common open space lots, she said that they could submit for a final plat Public Hearing. Ordinance 12-3-7.0-2, that -- we can reference that in detail if you like -- does give the guidance for how these final plats are processed. The clerk's office, however, was not notified that NO.5 should be a Public Hearing notice. So it was not noticed as such. So staff's preference tonight -- our feeling is to meet that public notice requirement for final plat for five, given that it's a substantial change. The other issue relates to the significant change. There are some -- as you know, with Kodiak Subdivision, which is abutting this to the south, Jim Jewett is the applicant on that, there was a denial recently on that, that abuts here -- this vacant spot here to the south of Bear Creek 5. This is Bear Creek Phase 5 in this area here. Staff has received an amended or a modified final plat for five last Monday, May 13th, that actually proposes to reduce the number lots in Phase 5 by seven in order potentially allow Phase 5 and what has been known as Kodiak parcel, to allow that subdivision to look at potentially combining and coming in with a modified Phase 5. Now that -- what you have received tonight for five is not that modified plat. Like I said, that was just submitted last week. So because of the lack of notice -- public notice for five and the change of the request of the final plat for five which we had received, we are recommending that both Item NO.7 and NO.8 be continued until June 4th. We also need that time to prepare final comments, which you have not received. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: June the 18th you mean? Hawkins-Clark: I'm sorry. Is it the 18th? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Brad, I'm looking at the city code provision you're referencing in regards to NO.5 that you said the city provision regarding the change to the final plat, the administrative review. Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Nary: Since that has been to the Commission, I thought you said the Public Hearing could be here, but it appears that in the code it says: Administrator may require the final Meridian City Council Meeting May 21 , 2002 Page 20 of 95 plat be submitted to the Commission in the same manner as required in the preliminary plat process, including a public hearing and notice. So does it have to go back to them? Hawkins-Clark: Councilman Nary, that was the discussion between Shari and the applicant that she considered it not to be so significant to delay them to go back to the Planning and Zoning Commission, so in lieu of the word significant, I guess, the agreement that she came to with the application was that instead of going to the Commission they could come to you, this body, for a final plat Public Hearing. Nary: Well -- and I understand her reason for doing that, but we can't rewrite our city code for convenience and this says if there is a substantial difference in the final plat -- and if that's what Mrs. Stiles determined, then the ordinance says it has to be submitted back to the Commission. So -- I mean I understand she's trying to be equitable and that's fine, but we can't just waive the requirements of our code when it's convenient, because, otherwise, we would have to do it all the time. So I don't know how we could do that. I mean there either is a substantial difference, which means the Commission has to review it, or there is not. But I don't think you can split the baby on that. I think you really have to decide one or the other and the Commission as to review it. It has to go to them. Hawkins-Clark: Well, Mrs. Stiles has deemed it a significant change. Nary: I mean -- Mr. Nichols, I mean that's the way I read it. I mean I don't know if you have looked at that, but I mean it doesn't appear to me that we can simply waive that just because it might seem equitable. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Nary, the operative word there is may, that the administrator has the discretion to determine, even if she finds the change significant, has the discretion to decide whether it goes back to the Commission for a hearing or not. So with that in mind -- and I haven't talked to Shari about this specifically, but I believe that what she felt was that because of that discretion she could conclude that it wouldn't go back to the Commission, but that the difference between the preliminary plat and the final plat was enough that Council ought to hear testimony as to why that change occurred and that's why the arrangement was made. I should also state that Mr. Hawkins-Clark has informed me that the applicant paid sufficient fees also to notice this for Public Hearing, so -- and they did pay those fees up front and that should be noted to. But that's -- there is nothing in the code that says you can't have an extra Public Hearing before the Council on this. Ordinarily there is no Public Hearing on a final plat, but ordinarily there is no change between the preliminary and final that constitutes a significant change. Nary: Okay. Corrie: Do we have enough time to notice it in on the 18th? I think we do, do we not? Okay. Any other discussion? Okay. If the Council feels fine, then, with that recommendation, I will entertain a motion to continue this final plat into a Public Hearing needed for Item 5 and Item 6 at that time. ( Meridian City Council Meeling May 21, 2002 Page 21 of95 De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Would we like to hear from the applicant? Corrie: Well, I don't think so in this case. We still -- I think we understand -- is the applicant here tonight? You want to be heard? Arnold: Yes. Corrie: It's not a Public Hearing, but I will see what you have to say. Name and address, please. Arnold: Steve Arnold. I'm here representing -- I'm with Briggs Engineering, 1800 West Overland Road, representing West Park Development. I have got a couple handouts. I don't know if you got those in your packets, but it kind of -- it was what I was required to submit in order to be heard. It was essentially -- I have got the preliminary plat as approved, the final plats as you have approved them, along with the proposed final plats and how they fit into the original approval, so -- I guess what I'd like to start out with is give you some basic site information here. I'll move into what has changed and where -- I guess where I've had difference of opinions with staff as to whether or not those are significant or not. De Weerd: Can I ask -- excuse me. Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: So I guess what I want to be clear on, before we go into this dialogue, you're not in agreement that this is a significant change, so you don't want the Public Hearing? Is that what I'm understanding? You have paid the fee to have the Public Hearing. Arnold: Mr. Mayor, Councilwoman de Weerd, yes, basically we paid the fee. I didn't agree that we should pay that fee. I disagreed with the whole fact that it was a significant change, in that the approval of Phase 1, 2, and 3 -- I mean there were other changes in that that I feel were more significant than what is being changed in Phase 5. So basically we paid the fee, we didn't agree -- I don't agree that this should be heard as a Public Hearing. I have never had a final plat heard before -- before a public forum such as this -- what's being proposed and, frankly, I don't agree that we made a significant change. Other than what was approved by staff in Phase 1 -- I can go through what has changed and let you guys determine whether or not it has been significant or not. I don't think it has. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 22 of 95 De Weerd: I guess is this the appropriate forum to do that in? And if Council wants to do it. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I was going to say, Mr. Hawkins-Clark, can you address the reason -- do you feel comfortable addressing the reason Mrs. Stiles made that decision or do you think that she should be here to address that? Because what I think Mr. Arnold is asking is he wants to appeal this finding that she made. Arnold: I have not seen a finding. Nary: Well, this determination that was made by Mrs. Stiles that there was a substantial difference between the final plat and the preliminary plat. That's what I'm hearing you saying. You want to appeal that decision she made, which then kicks into this Public Hearing issue. I mean do you feel comfortable in addressing that on behalf of the department or do you think Mrs. Stiles should be the person? Hawkins-Clark: I was the staff person that reviewed the application. I'm comfortable in reviewing it if you like. Nary: Okay. Arnold: Mr. Mayor and Councilman Nary, I don't know that I -- we talked about that. That was an option. I could appeal the director's decision. I note there is a change, I just -- I tell you I don't know if it is significant and I guess I was told by your staff that this is the process that I should take and that I should present before this Council those changes and then you were to decide whether or not they were significant. That was the direction that was given to me. So I'm not here to appeal the decision, I guess I'm hear to request approval. I don't know that it needs to go before -- if it needs noticing or a Public Hearing, that being the case, I guess because there is an error I will be back, but, again, I'd like to go through some of the changes that we had made. Corrie: May I ask first, is this the preliminary plat and this is the final plat that's underneath it? Arnold: Correct. Preliminary is on top. Corrie: There is quite a bit of a change in here, as far as I'm concerned. I think it should go back to a Public Hearing on the Planning and Zoning, but that's just my thought, because you have changed this plat considerably from what I can see. Arnold: Mr. Mayor and -- well, I agree there has been changes. I reviewed these changes the very first time in '99 from the Highway District standpoint. I think if you will note, the north end -- the biggest change has been street layout. There was some discontinuing of the cul-de-sac and extending of the streets at the north end. They -- as Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 23 of 95 you go further south there was a -- they eliminated enough of the road -- on the east- west road, Kodiak Drive, and then just south of that they flip-flopped a cul-de-sac. The open space -- we have not decreased the amount of open space, we have shifted that throughout the subdivision to accommodate the different street layout and the storm drainage. The trigger that triggered this discussion about changes was the open space lot there at the northeast corner of the site. It's currently 41,683 square feet and what we have platted and approved is going to be roughly half of that, but we have taken that open space and have shifted it throughout the subdivision further to the south. I guess we have difficulty right now is we have had Phase 1 approved -- well, we have recorded Phase 1, 2, 3, and we have gotten approval for Phase 4, we submitted this to you -- we had to submit it in September of 2001. You know, since then I've had numerous meetings -- well, I found out in December that we were -- that the final plat wasn't going to approved, because it was considered a significant change. I have worked with staff to try to figure out which forum I need to take to present these changes to you. This was the one that was chosen, so I guess we have had this here for about eight months and deferred NO.6 numerous times. Ideally, tonight, when I talked to Brad -- Mr. Hawkins- Clark earlier it was the June 4th agenda that we were going to shoot for if it was deferred tonight. Ideally that being the latest that we are deferred. Other changes we have -- if you will notice, all the phasing has changed from the preliminary. The park -- it's had significant changes as well, but I think those changes are for the better. I'd defer comment to the Parks Department. Open space like I say, we have shifted some of the open space throughout subdivision, but, again, that was accommodating different needs for storm drain. The number of lots, I don't think that was discussed. We have gone from 326 approved down to what you have before you tonight is 325. We have increased the number of common lots from 37 to 50, partly due to phasing and some of the storm drain requirements. I guess what I would ask for tonight, essentially, that we, if at all possible, act on this, both Phase 5 and 6, and I have a proposed modification to the final plat. We are proposing that these southern seven lots that's adjacent to the piece that's south of us be eliminated from this phase, because there is some negotiations with the property owner to the south. I guess I'll stand for questions, but I -- Corrie: You have dropped open space -- total open space has dropped; correct? Bird: About a half acre. Arnold: Mr. Mayor, if you will look at the calculations excluding the irrigation easements, I included those irrigation easements in my calculation, because that was what was presented to the City Council after the approval of the preliminary plat. So if you exclude irrigation easements, which are -- they were not landscaped in any means or required to be landscaped, so I don't -- I don't include those as usable open space. If you will note, the Kennedy lateral easement along the east boundary of the subdivision, that's where the major change in the width of the easement occurred, but that's just fenced and behind it is dirt, so if you exclude those irrigation easements, it actually increases slightly, probably about 5,000 square feet. Corrie: Council, discussion? Questions? Nary: I'd just like to hear from Brad -- Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 24 of 95 Corrie: Okay. Brad. Nary: -- what the reasons were. Hawkins-Clark: I think Mr. Arnold summarized it pretty well. For us, the main -- the main difference is that when you're talking about open space, the goal here is what's usable and the main -- as Mr. Arnold said, a significant change was there in the northeast section where you had close to one acre contiguous block of open space there on the preliminary plat, which is the first page there, and then if you go to the second page it's down to approximately a half acre, and I think that was the main consideration from Mrs. Stiles, because of the actual usability of the space. Much of the open space now is -- is located within either smaller common lots or landscape buffers and while the total open space number, excluding the easements, may have increased, I think our -- then staff's opinion is that the emphasis here is what's usable by the future residents and we feel that that has decreased. There is certainly -- there is an expansion of two lots in the southern portion of the subdivision. It does give the residents in the south, you know, a little bit more -- two more lots that could be used. We are not arguing that. I think that's -- that's recognized on both sides. It's just -- it is a significant -- from us for that large block of contiguous open space in the northeast quadrant. Arnold: Mr. Mayor, I guess what I'd like -- what I had conversations with Mr. Hawkins- Clark earlier is that the recommendation was to approve the final plat, as I understand it. Is that still the case? Hawkins-Clark: The Planning and Zoning staff and Public Works staff have not finalized the recommendation. From us, Planning and Zoning is comfortable with the revised No. 5. What we are not comfortable with is the fact that it wasn't noticed as a Public Hearing. We are recognizing that that's the city's responsibility. Arnold: Mr. Mayor, also if I could -- it was my understanding if it was deferred tonight, that we would be on the June 4th. Has that changed? Hawkins-Clark: That was an error on my part. I did not realize the noticing requirements pushed it out to the 18th. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Brad, why can't we go ahead and pass the one, if you have got a final on six, if five is the hold up? I mean they are not touching each other, they are two separate deals. If you have no problem with six, why can't we -- why do you want to table both of them, let's put it that way? Hawkins-Clark: Councilman Bird, in order to be consistent with the previous action of this Council, which was to table six, because of an incomplete five and the subdivision Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 25 of 95 ordinance does refer to consecutive development. But, you're correct, we do not have issues with six. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Brad, my understanding is that a lot of these reviews of the final plats, we are -- there is always some change to some degree. Lots change a little bit, sometime lots are combined, those kinds of things. Do we have any other history of this particular circumstance where we have made this decision what's a substantial difference? Because our code doesn't give us any guideline as to what does that mean and I guess what I'm concerned with is -- Mr. Arnold didn't exactly say that, but what I'm concerned with is that is this decision based upon some other prior history that we have or did we just decide that here, because -- I mean one lot going down from an acre -- an acre, is that what it was? Hawkins-Clark: Uh-huh. Nary: I mean that does seem significant to me, but have we had a history about that with other subdivisions? Hawkins-Clark: We are not aware of any to this degree. Certainly there have been -- you're right, there are those small minor tweaks that maybe it's a knuckle, instead of, you know, a cul-de-sac or something that gets modified. One of the main standards we try to stick by is the number of lots. You know, certainly the number of Jots cannot increase. Nary: All right. Do we any guideline or practice? I mean -- so what I'm hearing you saying is we haven't invoked this provision before, at least that you're aware of. Hawkins-Clark: Not that I'm aware of. Correct. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess in line of Councilman Nary's questioning, I would have two questions. One is from what I understood from what you said, the changes were primarily due to requirements by ACHD and some the road configurations? Is that why some of these changes happened? Arnold: Mr. Mayor, Councilperson de Weerd, J guess I'm the one that created the problem at the Highway District. We made some changes -- De Weerd: You did this? Arnold: I did. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 26 of 95 De Weerd: Well, at least you're consistent. I think we need to continue -- Arnold: And at that time, you know, the way I saw it, was -- and I guess the staff at that time -- you will notice the road layout to the north is -- to me that was on the verge of significant change and I wasn't sure if I should take that before our Commission, but when I was employed at ACHD I was also directed that they didn't want to see all these dumb little things and I guess we are -- we get phases one through four approved here and then all of a sudden those have -- in my opinion more changes than what we are looking at tonight, road layout and phasing and other open space areas within the sub. So I mean that's -- I guess after you set a precedence you -- yes, essentially the city has had with Phase 1 -- I mean it had all these changes and then we are hitting the brakes on Phase 5 and -- partly my fault about four years ago. So it's coming back to bite me, but -- Corrie: Usually does. De Weerd: I hope you share that with the rest of ACHD staff what you're learning now. Arnold: There is a lot of hope in this Council and J believe we have got favorable comments from staff. I guess the question is does this need to be heard and I guess that's the magic question. We paid for. It I didn't know that it -- I didn't know of any ordinance that required it, but I also didn't know of any that didn't. So we paid our fees and I guess I need clarification for that, so that at least if we are being deferred on that basis, that it's clear to us that it does need to be noticed. De Weerd: I guess I can't answer that quite yet, but the open space is in Phase 5, which was in Phase 2 of the original plat and why did that shrink and is it usable or is it a drainage fill? Arnold: Mr. Mayor, Councilwoman de Weerd, it's going to have trees and grass. There was no pocket park or any kind of playground equipment that was required to be installed there. The other issue that we have with the open space decreasing is we have got -- my client donated an 18 acre park just a little ways away and this -- how much open space does the subdivision need? It was proposed as a multi-drainage use, multi- use drainage and open area. Because of the roads -- the change in the roads, it was not required to be as large, so that's one of the reasons why we decreased it, but then we picked it up in other areas. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: J guess he raises a good question, that these changes have been there since Phase 1. You know, why are we revisiting it or why are we looking at it now in Phase 5? What took us so long to determined that this was a significant change? And that's no criticism to anyone. I guess I would share the same observation as -- it's Meridian City Council Meeting May 21 , 2002 Page 27 of 95 almost a moot point at this point. So I -- maybe, Brad, you could share why now. And I don't mean it to be an unfair question, but it is a good question. Why now? Hawkins-Clark: The main answer that I have is that the reason for the significant change in Phase 1, which it used to show a cul-de-sac and then it was connected, the reason given at that point in time to staff was for utility purposes. I can't go into detail what that was, but that was the reason, to accommodate some kind of utility change or tunnel. So I believe Mrs. Stiles felt that that -- you know, there was a justification because of the actual infrastructure that deemed it to allow the street change. Phases 2 and 3 there really were not what would be considered significant changes, a few widenings of some pedestrian pathways there, beyond that there really wasn't a reason to trigger -- trigger the change. Now you're correct that in that one-acre park, it was just missed by the staff reviewer in terms of the provision, just one of those common space lots, so I guess that's about alii can tell you. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: So, Brad, did I just hear you say that the basis for the substantial difference to want to have a Public Hearing on this phase was also part of Phase 1 and that was missed the first time, so now we are doing it on this phase? Hawkins-Clark: Yes. Nary: I know I'm paraphrasing, but is that essentially what you just said? Hawkins-Clark: Yes. Nary: Okay. Mayor, if I could -- one thing that we are at, if we were to want to go forward on Phase 5 and didn't believe a Public Hearing was necessary, we are still not prepared to go forward tonight, but we wouldn't have to set it all the way to the 18th. Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Nary: Would that be correct? Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Arnold, I'm a little puzzled by -- that the plat that was submitted last week, a new Phase 5 - Arnold: Yes- Meridian City Council Meeling May 21, 2002 Page 28 of 95 Nichols: I guess my question would be which one is it that you want this Council to consider? Because right now the one that's in front of them that you presented is the second page of this document, is different than the one that was submitted last week, and if this Council were to approve this Phase 5, but then you decided that you wanted the other Phase 5, it might compound the problem even worse. Arnold: No, we don't want to do that. Mr. Mayor, Mr. Nichols, first of all, I guess I'd like to pull my previous statement that I was the fault for making the changes here. I didn't -- I wasn't aware that utilities were an issue, so for the record I will state that. Ideally, yes, we'd like you to act on this modified phase and if -- I thought I got that to you in time, but it appears that you guys did not have that before you tonight. I have copies of that, but I don't know if that's going to suffice for notification purposes. I don't know that under normal circumstances what I -- it was my understanding I got it in there in time to be notified. I'm not sure why you guys don't have that before you tonight. I have got copies of that, but is it -- it's my understanding that because it's not a standard plat it's not a public notification, that process, that if you decide tonight that you don't need notices, you could act on this -- the revised Phase 5. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: This seems to get-- Corrie: Worse. De Weerd: -- a little bit more muddied as we go along. I would imagine the reason why you would like Phase 5 to be approved is so Phase 6 could be approved and then he can go back and change Phase 5 later, but I don't think that's the way it's supposed to go. Now the modifications that you're requesting I would imagine are significant and so probably they should have the Public Hearing. So what we have in front of us sounds like it's almost a moot point to begin with, because you're already modifying it. Is that my understanding? Am I following this or it's just not right? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: This is what I'm hearing and maybe I'm wrong, too. What I'm hearing is that what is submitted before us tonight, No.5 and No.6, NO.6 is not a problem. NO.5 is a problem and the reason -- the significant reason that there was determined to be a substantial difference was the change in this common lot on the northwest -- or northeast corner of it. But that common lot had already been altered in Phase 1, which has already been approved. So if that's the whole -- if that's the significant basis and the rest of it is fairly minor changes, then it is moot, because we have already approved it and we should have caught that originally if we felt that was a significant difference or a substantial difference. So to me it doesn't make sense or seem fair to set this over for a Public Hearing when, really, if it should have been done, it should have been in Phase Meridian City Council Meetlng May 21, 2002 Page 29 of 95 1. Right now in Phase 5 it isn't a substantial difference anymore, it was at Phase 1. That's what I think, Mr. Mayor, so we can -- but we are not -- we want to make sure, like Mr. Nichols said, that we are passing what is the -- what is your final plat. I think I did hear Mr. Hawkins-Clark say they weren't -- they didn't have a final recommendation, because of the -- I guess disagreement on what's a substantial difference, but we don't have to set it over to June 18th, we could set it over to next Wednesday and get this figured out and have one plat before us and no more changes and we would be done with it. We can take them both up next Wednesday at our next meeting if you wanted to. Or June 4th. And we could still do it sooner, but we can determine if there is not a substantial difference, we don't need a Public Hearing, we can set it over either to next Wednesday or June 4th, get the staffs final recommendation, make sure the plat you have given us is the final one, without anymore changes. Thafs what I think I'm hearing, so -- Corrie: It has to be June 4th. The 29th is not a land use. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Am I confused as everybody else is? Is this Phase 5 final plat we are looking at here is not the final plat? You have got another one that you turned in Friday? Arnold: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Bird, we turned something in on the 13th, eliminating -- if you look at Phase 5 right now, on the second page, because thafs the final plat, we turned something in, not including the seven lots at the cul-de-sac. We are not proposing that we change that. We are just not including it in that phase. De Weerd: What? Bird: Then that changed the phase completely. Arnold: It does change the phase, but as stated earlier, we are doing that for possibilities of working a negotiation out with the property to the south, which if we include this phase and we plat it and record it and we do reach an agreement, then we've got to vacate right of way and vacate all the easements and go through that process. So you will get to see me a little bit more than you probably want to and I get more chances at confusing you. Bird: But until we see this in the final plat phase, the new final plat, I don't know how we can act upon it. You're saying you're taking seven lots out? Which seven -- I mean which seven are you talking -- are you talking about the -- Arnold: Just the seven -- I have got a copy of that. Bird: One, two, three, four, five, six, seven. Are you leaving those in? I mean until I see it -- if this got the 13th, how come we didn't get it? Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 30 of 95 Arnold: I have got a copy of that if you'd like that now. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, if I may be so bold as to make a suggestion. De Weerd: Please. Nichols: I would suggest the Council continue these two matters, five and six, to the meeting on June 4th, recognizing Mrs. Stiles' conclusion of significant change, but in looking at the delays -- this was submitted a long time ago and it's important to get some resolution on it one way or another and also recognizing that there was another Phase 5 submitted last week, which you do not have before you, which staff has not had an opportunity to give its comments to, that it would seem that June 4th still is going to require staff to reallocate and move some things in order get comments to you in a timely fashion and also to the applicant, but that seems to me where you're headed and rather than use up anymore time this evening, that would be my recommendation to you, that you move it to the 4th, staff can do their reports, and include the modified plat that was submitted last Monday. Nary: Could I second that? Corrie: I prefer a motion. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I guess I'll do that. I would move that we continue Item 7 and 8, FP 01-026 and FP 02-004, the final plats for Bear Creek Subdivision No. 5 and No. 6 and if we could put them on our agenda in that sequential order would probably be easier as well, to continue it to our June 4th meeting for I guess continued review. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to continue NO.7 and 8, which is a request for final plat for Bear Creek No. 5 and No. 6 to June 4th, 2002. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no? Motion carried. We will -- or City Clerk will make that -- just reverse five and six. MOTION CARRI ED: ALL AYES. Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from May 15, 2002: Proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian: Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 31 of 95 Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Item No.9 is a continued Public Hearing from May 15th, 2002. It's a proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian. So at this time I will open the continued Public Hearing and this is not for public testimony, it's only for testimony from our staff. So, Gary, I guess questions of you and -- Hawkins-Clark: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, just to summarize as far as the last meeting, as you may recall, the Urban Service Planning Area paragraph was brought up. It's on page 83 of the text and that was an amendment that the Planning and Zoning Commission forwarded on to you that you had requested further input from the Public Works staff on, particularly regarding the -- some proposed language. So we do -- Planning and Zoning has one other proposed change that I don't believe was included on Brad and Gary's item that I will address after they are done. Watson: Mr. Mayor and Council Members, I believe Gary handed out a -- sort of a summary memo that we wrote earlier today regarding the current language in the Urban Service Planning Area paragraph of the Comp Plan. It's more just a summary of sort of the history of applications outside current city limits that are submitted to Ada County. Most of you were on the Council last year when we went through this and there are a couple members of the audience tonight that were part of those applications, but we were directed to prepare comments and submit testimony recommending denial to both of those projects that were being processed through Ada county and proposing private water and sewer systems. We feel like the current language in the Urban Service Planning Area paragraph in the draft Comp Plan would allow some of those projects to have a better chance of moving forward. When I testified against both those projects at Ada County last year, I testified on the technical -- water and sewer technical aspects, but what I heard the Commissioners saying -- and they agreed with some of those points, but -- and it's just my opinion, I think a lot of their reason for their voting for denial was based on Comprehensive Plan issues. The old -- or the existing Comprehensive Plan has some somewhat specific language saying that urban development within the county, within our impact area, but not contiguous to the city, needs to be serviced by City of Meridian -- well, by municipal services. There was some argument over the definition of municipal at the time. What we have listed in the memo is basically the same points that we listed in our written testimony and oral testimony to Ada County. The biggest thing from a Public Works standpoint is our ability to master plan our facilities when we have a patchwork of either extensions of private systems from other communities or stand-alone community systems. We don't serve discrete packets, we plan for large expenses and everything that we size and route has to go through property to get to other properties upstream or downstream, depending on whether you're talking about water or sewer. We spent hundreds -- and it will probably shock some people -- we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars planning our wastewater collection system, our water supply system, our water distribution system, to service our entire impact area and we feel like community scale private -- privately owned systems will disrupt what we have already done to the point where what we have already done is oversize or we can't get through the areas where these people have developed to other areas that do want to annex to the city. There are a couple of other points here in this memo that we wrote today. They are somewhat secondary in my mind to the master planning issue. The final bullet point that I have on this is not something that I testified about at the county, but I certainly understand the conviction that we are here to listen Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 32 of 95 to proposals, but even the projects that are contiguous to the city or will be contiguous to the city, those proposals -- we are evaluating those proposals daily. You only hear about them months and months after they come in. You never hear about some of them. If we are doing not only these projects that are trying to annex to the city that are contiguous, but any five, ten, 50 acre parcel anywhere in the impact area, if we are evaluating those from the standpoint of trying to connect those to our system some day way out in the future, I'm not sure that we have the resources to do that. We have application fees, review fees, inspection fees that we can impose on anyone that's using our system, but where we are reviewing applications that aren't connected to our system, we won't maintain them, we won't own them, we won't receive any income from those applications. The third or fourth pages that are attached to that memo -- and please stop me if you have any questions. I'm kind of rambling on here. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Brad, since this is a comp plan and a policy statement, why can't we, in ordinance, create fees for this? Watson: Councilman Nary, Mayor and Council, maybe I'm misinterpreting the way this is written now, but if the project goes through Ada County, the City of Meridian is the recommending body, there is no point, if they have private water and sewer services, at which we can collect. We have nothing, other than making a recommendation to Ada County, please, when you take these building permits or, please, when you sign the plat, can you collect a check for the work that we do. Nary: Well, that -- but that's not the language -- that's not what the language says at all. The language just says we will consider growth in the impact area and we will evaluate those systems in the impact area if they could be annexed to the city when they are contiguous, that the city can't take those systems over -- I mean it doesn't just say it's a free reign of development in the impact area. Watson: Councilman Nary -- Nary: And we can't have an ordinance -- is your concern we couldn't have an ordinance that would apply to the impact area. Is that what you mean? Watson: Councilman Nary, Mayor and Council Members, I don't know. Can we have an ordinance that applies to property outside the city limits? Nary: Right. And I don't think we can, but that's all I'm asking you, is that what that -- is that the concern is that we won't be able to collect any fees and right now what do we do. When Power River -- I wasn't here when Power River and Westborough were submitted, so what did we do then? We spent hundreds of hours of our time and we received no fees for that, is that what happened? { Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 33 of 95 Watson: Well, our Public Works fees were not in effect at that time. You recall that they were recently approved. Nary: Correct. Watson: But if that happened this year, yes, we would be working for free, but that's really a secondary issue here. I understand that it doesn't give developers free reign, but we -- I interpret it when applications, such as Powder River goes to Ada County, the City of Meridian is the recommending body. However, they have adopted our Comprehensive Plan. If our Comprehensive Plan simply says we will consider it, that doesn't seem as strong of language as what we have existing. Nary: Okay. When this was discussed at the Planning and Zoning Commission, I believe there was a representative from the Public Works Department there. Those comments weren't brought forward. Watson: You're absolutely right, Councilman Nary. I was there and I think it was either the last or the second to the last meeting -- and I guess I should have spoke up, but the momentum -- I felt like the horse was out the gate and you'll recall that you and I had a private conversation the next day that I felt the Public Works Department had done a very poor job of educating the Planning and Zoning Commission. Nary: And I guess my only other concern, then, Brad, is we have had now -- that's -- this came up last meeting. We have had three months of meetings and we didn't bring it up again and now if we want to change it, the issue is that now do we have to have another Public Hearing, because it's a substantial change to what had already been decided by the Commission, therefore, another Public Hearing has to be held. Not that we can't do that, but that's certainly I think another thing we have to consider if you do want to change that to this proposal that's been brought forward by you and Gary. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess I think that's what this meeting is all about, so -- Nary: Whether we have to have another Public Hearing. Corrie: If you had significant changes, which is not all that bad. Nary: Which isn't a big deal. That was part of the intent to get accomplished and we have had three months of meetings and we haven't had this issue brought up again until now. De Weerd: Not until last week. And it is significant and that's why we did continue it until this week and -- so that we had additional background to provide to Council and why that language should change and -- because I haven't quite learned how to argue with an attorney, so -- Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 34 of 95 Nary: But that's all I'm saying, I'm saying if we want to change it, we can change it. If we change it, we have to have another Public Hearing, because the people who are supportive of that language have a right to come and tell us to leave it, so that's -- so we can't just change it tonight. We can, but we have got to have another hearing if we want to do that. And that's fine with me, I'm just process-wise. That's the result. We wouldn't have to come back if this information was brought forward three months ago. De Weerd: Well -- and it doesn't help to say if we only get that. We have to deal with today and beyond. So I guess it looks like, again, we are not going to vote on it, because I cannot -- well, unless you did want to go with the current language, but I don't. So that's why I had asked that it be continued another week and if that's what we have to do, then that's what we have to do, because it's too big, it's too important, in my opinion, to the whole overall long-term planning for it and that's what exactly this document is, it's a long-term plan. Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain a motion to continue the Public Hearing until the June 4th regular meeting. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Wee rd. De Weerd: Could we all also just limit testimony to this particular item and -- Corrie: Sure. De Weerd: -- since it's the only change that we are -- Corrie: We certainly can. De Weerd: Now I do have one other question. In our Comprehensive Plan do we reference the population numbers that we heard last week? Hawkins-Clark: No, we do not. De Weerd: Okay. So we don't really have to have a conversation on that one? Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Corrie: I don't think so. Bird: I hope not. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council Meeling May 21, 2002 Page 35 of 95 Hawkins-Clark: I'm sorry. I just -- for clarification, because the -- for staff in terms of how to insure that the public receives this -- because our understanding from your previous meeting was that the reason to continue it to today was for this specific reason. De Weerd: Uh-huh. Hawkins-Clark: So, essentially, are we -- are you looking for us to notify certain developers or to have an alternative form of public notice on this item? I'm just trying to understand in terms of insuring that the reason that you're continuing it, that we meet the intent of that and if that is to make sure that this wording is adequately distributed, but we can do that. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess I would have that same question. We did continue it last week because of that specific reason, so, Mr. Attorney, I guess I would like to get your opinion, is it something -- if someone had an interest and they knew we were talking about it at this meeting -- Nary: They are not allowed to speak here tonight, so we're not taking public testimony, so -- Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, the only requirement that I'm aware of is that when you continue a Public Hearing, you continue it to a date certain and announce what the topic is, which is what I think the motion will be. I would also note in looking at the audience there are members from the development community here that are interested in that Urban Service Planning Area that were part of the testimony with regard to where that boundary should be and I would expect that there are people who come that are interested, even if they have been told that they are not going to -- that it's not a Public Hearing in the sense that they have an opportunity to give that public testimony. So my conclusion would be that you continue it to date certain and announce that it be a Public Hearing on the Urban Service Planning Area language that's contained in that particular provision of the Comprehensive Plan, that that's sufficient notice and that you can then proceed to take that testimony, take that evidence, and then render a decision based on that. I'd also like to -- point of clarification, if I may, point out that the issue in Westborough and Powder River was not limited just to sewer and water. There were other issues that pertain to public safety matters and so I think you need to anticipate that those things would also be addressed in testimony or the reports that would come from staff. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 36 of 95 Corrie: Okay. Any other discussion before I go for the motion to continue? I'll entertain a motion that we continue the Public Hearing to June 4th, 2002 on the Urban Service Planning Area testimony only as -- discussion? Nary: Mr. Mayor, I'd so move and if we could reference I guess -- I think we tried to clarify at the last meeting that it's not really the specific Urban Service Planning Area, but it's the discussion in regards to urban services outside the city limits in the urban impact. I think it's more descriptive so that people don't think it's the other thing, because that did have some particular concerns, I would move that we continue this for public testimony to June 4th on the Comprehensive Plan. De Weerd: I would second that. Corrie: Okay. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. Discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Nary, were there specific -- was there specific testimony at Planning and Zoning that staff should specifically notify those individuals? Nary: That was seven or eight months ago. I don't remember. I'm sorry. I can't remember the specific people -- Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary -- or, excuse me, Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I would recommend that you not try to go through and -- because then when you make that sort of effort and you miss somebody, then you open up a different can of worms. I think -- I wouldn't go that far. De Weerd: Okay. Nichols: That may be commendable, but as soon as you do you miss somebody, then you create more problems. Corrie: Any other discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried to continued the Public Hearing until June the 4th. MOTION CARRI ED: ALL AYES. Item 10: Public Hearing: ZA 02-001 Request for amendment to Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by Jim Jewett and B & A Engineers: Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 37 of 95 Item 11: Public Hearing: AZ 02-003 Request for annexation and zoning of 3.84 acres from R-1 to R-8 zones for proposed Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett - south of West Cherry Lane and south of North Summertree Way: Item 12: Public Hearing: PP 02-002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 19 building lots and 2 other lots on 3.84 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett - south of West Cherry Lane and south of North Summertree Way: Corrie: Item No. 10, 11, and 12 have reference to Amberstone Subdivision. First, Item 10 is a Public Hearing request for amendment to the zoning subdivision ordinance by Jim Jewett and B&A Engineers. There was a request for annexation and zoning of 3.84 acres from R-1 to R-8 zone for proposed Amberstone Subdivision and 12 is a Public Hearing request for preliminary plat approval of 19 building lots and 2 other lots on 3.84 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett. With Council's approval I will open the Public Hearing on the AZ 02-001, 003, and the preliminary plat 002. Hearing none, I will open the Public Hearing on Items 10, 11 and 12 and start with staff comments, please. I'd like to request an amendment to the zoning subdivision ordinance first, Brad, it all kind of depends on that. Hawkins-Clark: Sure, Mr. Mayor. Before I go into it, to clarify, the Item No.1 0 is a little unlike previous projects, in that the annexation and zoning and the preliminary plat, the approval of those is dependant on approval of Item No.1 O. Corrie: Right. Hawkins-Clark: Because of the modification to the ordinance. So just for that clarification. Right. Corrie: We'll take it in that order. Thank you, Brad. Hawkins-Clark: Right. In terms of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance amendments, you had received a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval of the request. There was a reference to Exhibit A in Planning and Zoning -- in the recommendation. The copy that staff received did not have that attached. Did the copy that Council received have that attached? If not, then you would not be able to follow along some of these. But, particularly, the ordinance amendments - - the zoning ordinance is proposing two new definitions -- two new definitions and four amended definitions to our zoning ordinance. In addition to that, the -- what's on the screen now is a proposed modification to the schedule of use control and essentially what's happening here is they are proposing a new category of housing type for the city and it's the single family attached dwellings and as you can see, the -- well, maybe you can't if you didn't receive the attachment, Exhibit A, from the clerk's office on that, but essentially it's proposing to add the single family attached, which is a structure consisting of two side-by-side dwelling units where a single family dwelling shares a common wall and a zero lot line, each on a single lot, so it's differentiated from a duplex in that a duplex would typically be a rental type situation and it would typically sit on its Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 38 of 95 own lot with two dwelling units on a single one. So the single family attached has that. It modifies the definition of townhouse in that instead of two attached, a townhouse would now be three minimum or more attached single family dwellings, each of them having private entrances. So there is a proposed shift there that's not -- it's not -- for your information, totally unusual. Many zoning ordinances compliment or have similar definitions for these two types of dwelling units. Just to highlight a couple of the other proposed changes in the zoning amendment. There is a proposed change to the garage requirement in the city and that is that duplexes and attached single family dwellings would have a size difference now, so instead of -- if it's a -- if the size of the garage shall be measured by the exterior dimensions and it is based on each dwelling unit, there would be basically a single car garage of ten by 20, if it's a single for a one bedroom, and if it's a two bedroom or more, then it would be a 20 by 20, which is sort of your standard 400 square foot garage. So that's a change. There is proposed new language for common drive design standards. There is also a proposed change for the planned development standards just to include a change in width there of less than nine feet. As far as the setbacks, the main change that they are looking for is -- is the R-B district change and that's proposing, number one, to reduce the minimum lot area for a dwelling unit from 4,250 to 4,000 square feet and that the minimum street frontage would change from 50 to 40. I think those are some of the main highlights from the zoning amendments. I won't go through in detail all the rest of those, unless you have questions. I can go on. I think that takes care of 10. Item No. 11 is the annexation and zoning request for the 3.B4 acres. Currently county R-1 to an R-8. Parkside Creek Subdivision abuts Cherry Lane here on the north. Black Cat Road is approximately a half-mile to the west there. So we are talking about this enclave piece here. Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of that annexation request. Here are some site photos in the vicinity. Existing pasture. Item No. 12 is the preliminary plat for the 19 building lots and 2 other lots on the -- on the in-fill piece. There is a proposed -- there is a proposed main entrance here aligns with the street to the north of Cherry. The proposed single family attached houses, which would be what would need to be approved in a zoning amendment to approve our -- are here along the north -- in the north section of the project. This is an open space lot that is centralized, sort of a common area for each of the attached units to front on. The public street does extend to the south where there are single family detached houses at the south end of the project to be more compatible with the single family attached houses in Parkside Creek. So these are the larger single family detached here. You should have received a position statement from Anna Powell, who is representing the applicant. It's the same position statement, essentially, for both the zoning amendment or the annexation request and the preliminary plat and essentially reflects a change to the Ada County Highway District staff report, which was just recently made last week, so it simply is to correct Ada County Highway District's condition. I think with that I will stand for any questions. Corrie: Any questions from Council at this point? Bird: I have none. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 39 of 95 Corrie: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. We will hear from the applicant at this point. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Powell: Yes, it is. Corrie: Okay. Name and address, please. Powell: Anna Powell, B&A Engineers, 5505 West Franklin Road, Boise, Idaho. 83705. Corrie: Thank you. Powell: Mr. Mayor, Members of the City Council, I'd like to really just address the zoning ordinance first and not delve into the subdivision until we get through that zoning ordinance amendment, so-- Corrie: Fine. Powell: Having said that, I feel as if I'm here not representing only Mr. Jewett, but also the city, because this was a very cooperative effort. The original intent -- I'm not going to go into a lot of the detail at first, because I think Mr. Hawkins-Clark did a fine job, but I just want to talk about the process a little bit and why we did it and the impetus behind it was to distinguish between the duplex and single family attached. There is a demand for this type of housing unit and the Meridian code had seemed to address it in some spots, but not in others. So we wanted to set out to clarify it. So I went through the whole zoning ordinance, tried to find all the things that might pertain to this, and then I did run it by staff and we went through several reiterations and there are -- some of the amendments were requested by staff to correct other deficiencies in the zoning ordinance. So there was a couple of things I wanted to point out, just so you don't think we are greedy. We didn't actually ask for the reduction in lot size in the R-8, that was actually requested by staff. So I just kind of wanted to make that clear that that's where that came from. The definitions, the intent behind that was just to clearly distinguish between the type -- or between and among the type of housing uses. We did change the definition of flag lot, only to take out a standard that was in the definition section. We moved that to the zoning schedule of use controls where it would be easier for people to find, basically, when they were looking for standards on flag lots. And then we went through and clarified some of the distinctions between duplex and attached single-family dwellings and attached single-family dwellings are zero lot line units, so we have addressed those. And then the common drives. It's very typical when you build these not to have two separate driveways, unless, perhaps, it's on a corner. So we felt the need to add standards for the common drives and work that in the planned development standards as well. Those standards were started in the planned development section, but we had to kind of clarify them and enlarge them a little bit, so they made a whole new section for common drives, so that you didn't -- you could do them outside a planned development. Private streets they do want clarified. Anything serving more than four would still be -- four dwelling units could not be common driveway, so it would have to go through planned development procedures. Other than that, we just cleaned up the table a little bit since we were in there. Staff asked us to take out multi-family dwelling Meridian Clty Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 40 of 95 and three family dwelling, because, really, townhouses and apartment buildings address those issues already. So those two zoning classifications weren't necessary any longer. And that's it. I will spare you from the gritty details unless you have specific questions. Corrie: Questions at this point? Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Ms. Powell, I'm looking at a memo from Dave McKinnon, dated April 15, which is a red lined, tracks changes to the existing ordinance. Is this -- it's a little different than the one that you submitted. Is this one acceptable to your client as Mr. McKinnon proposed it? Powell: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Nichols, Dave -- Mr. McKinnon issued an updated e-mail on April 18th and that is the one that the P&Z has recommended approval of to this body. The changes were not substantial. If we had to go back to that other version, we could live with it. It was -- in all honesty, it was just clarification -- pagination errors and a few words that were -- they were largely typographical, they were not substantive changes. So I would prefer to go with the one from the 18th. Corrie: Does that answer your question, Mr. Nichols? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: The one you're talking about that was in front of P&Z, is that dated 4/15 or four -- Powell: Mr. Mayor, Councilwoman de Weerd. De Weerd: Or 17th. Powell: I have April 18th. Hawkins-Clark: Mr. Mayor, if I could clarify. Yes, it was dated the 17th, but it was received -- received by the Clerk on the 17th, but it was for the 18th P&Z meeting. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Powell: I'm sorry. Corrie: Okay. Anything else? Powell: No. I was looking at the date I received the e-mail. I'm sorry. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 41 of 95 De Weerd: I just wanted to make sure. Corrie: Okay. Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Is there anyone in the audience that would like to issue testimony on the Amberstone Subdivision? Okay. Council, discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess some of the cleanup in this, Brad, there were certain issues that came up in an application that the Wardles had and I can't remember the name of it, but we liked the original design and it, unfortunately, didn't meet our ordinance. Does this clean up some of the issues that were raised in that particular application? Hawkins-Clark: Mrs. de Weerd, it does. It does address the common drive issue, which was one of those. It does address the setback. This does allow for -- if you have two separate detached structures, it does allow for ten feet separation between the external walls. That one was Berkeley Square. I could not tell you if there were some items in that -- I believe each of the setback issues, the common drive issues, are -- and the new definition are all accommodated now in this proposed amendment. De Weerd: Good. Okay. That's all. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, just to point out that the language you have before you is not in ordinance form. If you approve it we will have to put it in ordinance form and then that ordinance will have to be adopted and published and be effective before you can act on the annexation and zoning and the preliminary plat application that's before you, just so that there isn't any misunderstanding as how that process would occur. Corrie: Any other questions? Okay. If you want we can close the Public Hearing on this and go to the request for amendment and go to the ordinance form and then back to the annexation and preliminary plat. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I'd move we close the Public Hearing. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 42 of 95 Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item 10, 11, and 12. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Any further discussion? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Just for clarification, Mr. Nichols, we can pass all of them tonight, it's just a timing issue of where we adopt them at a later meeting; is that what you meant? Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Nary, Members of the Council, the annexation and zoning and the preliminary plat presuppose that this ordinance has been adopted. So what I would -- at least maybe I'm looking at it too limited, but what I envision is you would table this to June 4th, that at the June 4th meeting we would have an ordinance in place to adopt these changes, if that's what you want us to do, and then at the June 4th meeting you could then act on the annexation and zoning and the preliminary plat, because those will require findings which have to entered and by the time those findings are actually signed by the Mayor and entered, the annexation -- or the amended ordinance would be in effect. So that's how I envision this process. Nary: So we could recommend approval the Item 10 tonight or the ordinance to be returned on June 4th and then table other two? Nichols: Yes. Nary: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Mayor -- and maybe there is some discussion, but I don't have any. It seems pretty straight forward and it seems to make sense to me, so I guess I would move -- I move that we approve ZA 02-001 for an ordinance to be returned to us on June 4th for our approval pursuant to the findings of the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff of request for amendment to the zoning and subdivision ordinance by Jim Jewett and B&A Engineers. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mrs. Clerk. Roll-Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion carried. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 43 of 95 MOTION CARRI ED: ALL AYES. Corrie: I will entertain a motion on the tabling of Item 11 and 12 until the June 4th meeting. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would move that we table Items 11 and 12, AZ 02-003, and PP 02-002, request for annexation and zoning of 3.4 acres from R-1 to R-8 for proposed Amberstone Subdivision, along with the preliminary plat approval of 19 building lots and 2 other lots on that same acreage until our June 4th meeting. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. You've heard the motion. Any further discussion? Just a minute. Any other discussion? Okay. Roll-call vote, please. I'll explain it, then. Roll-Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Okay. I'll let you have a few words here. Powell: Mr. Mayor, I understood the motion. I understand what you did, but I wasn't -- what I wanted to ask was if it was possible to conduct the Public Hearing tonight. I didn't see that the Public Hearing was dependent upon the -- Corrie: Can't have a public -- well, we have a Public Hearing, but nobody testified other than you. Powell: No. The Public Hearing -- my understanding was that the last Public Hearing was just on the zoning ordinance amendment. Was it also on the preliminary plat and the annexation? Corrie: Right. And we opened them all three at one time. All at once. Powell: Never mind. Item 13: Public Hearing: AZ 02-006 Request for annexation and zoning of 76.16 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 44 of 95 Item 14: Public Hearing: PP 02-007 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 273 building lots and 12 other lots on 75.39 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: Item 15: Public Hearing: CUP 02~007 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for single-family residential dwellings, private open space with club house, gazebo, parks and neighborhood scaled commercial site for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: Corrie: All right. Okay. Then Item No. 13, 14, and 15 is also from Heritage Commons. Item No. 13 is a request for annexation and zoning of 76.16 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation, the west side of north Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road and then we also have a request for a preliminary plat of -- this is entirely different. Maybe we ought to take these one at a time, so we don't get confused. So I will open the Public Hearing on request for annexation and zoning of 76.16 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for the proposed Heritage Commons, AZ 02-006. Staff comments first. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. So do I understand correctly you'd just like a staff report strictly on -- Corrie: Just on that one. Right. Hawkins-Clark: Okay. To orient you, the subject application is proposing to annex Ada County -- current Ada County property zoned RUT to a city R-8 zone. The Charter High School is immediately across Locust Grove on the east side. Existing county residences abut the property. On the north two five acre parcels there, there is a little over an acre piece here and then another -- I believe it's four or five acre piece that abuts to the east here. There are existing county subdivisions abutting here to the south. The Sundance Subdivision, which you had recommended approval of a few months ago, is here at the northeast corner of Meridian and Ustick Roads. So the request is to annex. The Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend approval and the recommendation for the annexation and zoning I believe is clean. There was a couple of position statements on the other two items associated with Heritage Commons Subdivision, for PP02-002 -- I'm sorry -- 02-006, their recommendation I believe stands with -- stands as correct. Corrie: Okay. Any questions for staff at this point? Bird: I have none. Corrie: All right. This is a Public Hearing. This will be on the request of annexation and zoning. Do we have sign-up sheets for this one? Okay. We have Bev Donahue, Mike Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 45 of 95 Donahue, and Herb Lee. First Bev -- oh, I'm sorry. We have the applicant. I'm sorry, David. Trying get it moving along here a little too fast. Turnbull: I appreciate you letting me come up. Corrie: Raise your right hand, please. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Turnbull: Yes. Corrie: Name and address, please, David. Turnbull: My name is David Turnbull, I'm president of Brighton Corporation, the applicant here. My office address is 12426 West Explorer Drive. We came prepared tonight to make a presentation based on the whole application, which is the preliminary plat, Conditional Use Permit, and the annexation. I would say right now, since you have opened this hearing, we have no issues on the annexation and the staff report or Findings of Fact that came out of the Planning and Zoning Commission. There are a couple of issues that we would need to discuss on the preliminary plat and the Conditional Use Permit, but other than that I will hold my presentation on those issues, because all of our presentation refers to those issues. And I will stand for any questions you might have on the annexation, but I can't imagine what they would be. Corrie: Any questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: I hope that -- I wish it turns out to be true here. Let me take them one at a time. Turnbull: Okay. But I would ask, probably, when we get to the conditional use and preliminary plat, those are very much tied together and we'll make one presentation on that. Corrie: Thank you. Now the sign-up sheet for the one that we are doing now, the request for annexation and zoning. Bev Donahue. Is she here today -- tonight? Somewhat the same ones are going to be for all three of those. We probably ought to open it up. Didn't know quite sure where you're going, but that's okay. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Donahue: I do. Corrie: Name and address, please, ma'am. Donahue: Beverly Donahue, 3775 North Locust Grove, Meridian, Idaho. The small acre -- little over an acre where we are going to be discussing tonight. I don't know if you received this in your packet from ACHD, this letter. You were supposed to receive it this evening. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 46 of 95 Corrie: I don't know that we received any from ACHD or not. Donahue: Did you get it? Did they get it? Corrie: I don't have it in my packet. Donahue: From Craig Hood. You did not get it? S.Smith: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Yes. S.Smith: I would be happy to go make copies. Hawkins-Clark: If I could just clarify, Mr. Mayor, I believe that that -- that memo from Mr. Hood speaks specifically to the access onto Locust Grove and so that would be a plat issue, not necessarily -- Donahue: Okay. So for clarification, I didn't know when you had -- earlier today the city they said you'd probably do 13, 14, 15 all at once, so I didn't know if my disagreement was for all of them or a la carte. Corrie: Okay. If you want to come back and do all three, it's going to be the same thing, so we can go ahead and -- what I should do is back up and reopen the Public Hearing for all three at one time. I thought there was going to be some controversy on the annexation, but there doesn't seem to be, so let me go back. Donahue: Because that's what they explained to me. Corrie: Right. And I will open the Public Hearing for all three and then we will have -- step back then and let the staff and them do the other part, so -- all right. Nary: Would it be necessary, Mr. Mayor, to make sense simply, just -- like you said, open the Public Hearing and simply table this discussion on the annexation until after we have heard all the other -- Corrie: So -- all right. Let me open the Public Hearing and then we can table that first part of it there. I will open the Public Hearing, then, on Items 14 and 15 as well, preliminary plat and request for Conditional Use Permit. At this time you want to table the -- Item No. 13? Nary: I'd so move. McCandless: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 47 of 95 ., Corrie: Motion made and seconded to table Item 13 until after the preliminary plat and Conditional Use Permit discussion. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Okay. Staff, go forward and then we will get the developer and then we will get to the -- sorry about that. I thought we would save some time, but I guessed wrong. Hawkins-Clark: Sure. Sure. The -- to continue, there is some site photos here of the surrounding area that -- I guess we do show these related to the annexation and zoning. Existing private easement road there along the north property line. That is a shot looking to the west and then the right one looking north into the site from Ustick Road. In terms of the preliminary plat, the applicant is proposing 273 building lots. There are -- there are actually -- we need to make a correction to the number of other lots. It was 17 other lots. Just a correction on that. As a point of beginning, this is shown on the draft Comprehensive Plan as a proposed neighborhood center area, so, if you recall, those are the half moon shaped type designs on the future land use map that is part of the draft plan, so the applicant was well aware of that. This is coming in and sort of the city's first attempt at sort of reviewing what might one of those look like and many of the proposed standards that staff had for those neighborhood centers are reflected here and a couple of those are right here. I'll point out the small neighborhood commercial area on Locust Grove here, they have proposed six lots. Again, here is the primary entrance road from Locust Grove. There is another entrance road here along the north. They have proposed a large common lot here. There is also a large common area here. So you -- as you will see in the Conditional Use Permit on the next item, they are proposing a gazebo feature on this open lot and a community center on this. So they have got approximately a little over six acres of open space, I believe, that is useful proposed. A couple of other features of the plat to point out. They are proposing narrow lots that are facing the entry road here and here. They are alley-loaded lots. There is an alley behind them here, there is an alley here, there is also some alley-loaded lots here along the north. The street configuration is also somewhat conforming to our proposed neighborhood center and that is you can see the block lengths for the most part are between five and six hundred feet, so fairly narrow lots -- or, I'm sorry, blocks here and here. They have proposed stub streets to the south at two locations and to the north they do have the street that abuts the northern boundary here. There is also a proposed stub here and here. To the west they have two proposed stub streets here and here. The Planning and Zoning Commission did receive quite a bit of testimony on it and one of the main points of difference between the Meridian Fire Department and the applicant are the proposed narrow streets. They do have several 29-foot wide street sections, which, as you're aware, the standard that most of what Meridian has constructed and sees today is a 36-foot wide street section. So I think at this point I will let -- since this is a staff presentation, I'll let Joe Silva touch on their concerns with the narrow street sections. If you -- if you want, I can show you where those are at, but generally they are here where you see some of the shorter 500-foot type long blocks. The main entry road is your standard width. They do have a proposed 29-foot wide collector along the north, but that is proposed to have no parking. The point of difference between the applicant Meridian City Council Meeling May 21, 2002 Page 48 of 95 and the fire department are the streets that are residential that have 29-foot street sections that allow parking on both sides. So I will let Joe touch on that issue. Silva: Joe Silva, Fire Marshal. In an effort to provide some background information for both the Council and the developer in this case, we did a -- kind of a show and tell demonstration of how the 20-foot minimum fire -- the fire lanes are typically a minimum 20 feet wide and what we did is invited Mr. Wardle, the representative for the developer, and members of the Planning and Zoning staff to join us in a kind of somewhat of a demonstration to demonstrate how the 20-foot is utilized in the field. With that thought in mind we took some photographs of that -- of that session to kind of share with the Council to kind of provide them some background on how that goes about being utilized. And essentially -- this will take a second to load. What we did is we set up a mock street, utilizing a 20-foot wide fire lane and there is three things -- three key issues we intent to try to address this evening, how do we use the 20-foot wide fire lane, how many calls for service does a subdivision the size of Heritage Commons expect to generate and how many of those will be fires. So what we did was we set up in a parking lot. The curb there on the right-hand side of the screen represents one side of the 20-foot and the actual vertical surface of the vehicles parked there on the left represents the other side of that 20-foot width. There is some challenges offered in advancing hose lines in narrow alleyways or -- as you can see where that one person is standing right -- right there, that represents about five feet of distance right there and now the challenge will be bring the hose lines off -- they are loaded in a transverse compartment that goes across the apparatus, now they are going to have to be deployed and I might point out also that it's our Planning and Zoning staff that has the fire equipment on in these photos. So we are going to pull them down. Some of the challenges we have with other vehicles that may be parked along the street and that's one point that Mr. Wardle has indicated in the design that because of the two-car garages, the ability for vehicles to be parked off street on the driveway, that utilization of the street for purposes of parking will be somewhat minimal. However, when we get only five feet to deal with on one side of the apparatus, sometimes the supply lines, which are that yellow there, are five inches in diameter, if it becomes charged at 80 pounds pressure, which is our typical hydrant pressure, it can become lodged underneath a wheel and constrict or restrict the flow of water into the fire apparatus. The other challenge is when we have -- to save compartment space, the apparatus has been designed to have a ladder rack on the top of the vehicle to save compartment space, therefore, we can pick up the whole right side for carrying rescue equipment. When that ladder rack comes down it sticks out about five feet three inches and then you still have to have room in order get people down in there to unload the rack, as our Planning and Zoning staff is attempting to demonstrate here. We are going to pull -- have to remove that ladder off that ladder rack. Typically that ladder rack is strictly horizontal once in the fully down position, so this would be a very awkward position for any person attempting to unload that ladder -- reception ladder off the apparatus. Other equipment also must be deployed. Those doors are approximately 16 inches in width, so that you have got to maintain a certain amount of room to be able to manipulate other equipment around the apparatus. What we also wanted to demonstrate is even in older neighborhoods, which this subdivision will not always be new, but it will transition to an older neighborhood, of which people will partake in different, you know, sort of RV vehicles, whether or not they are trailers or snowmobiles, boats, trailers, those problems Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 49 of 95 exist throughout our community and this is just an example mid day on Cathy Lane of how that stacking takes place. This would be somewhat of a typical construction zone on Campfire Street. You can tell that vehicles and trailers are parked eschew on the street and makes for narrow passages. Sometime after the neighborhood is fully built out and during just the course of routine maintenance, whether that be lawn maintenance or whatever, obstructions do appear and in this case it's a lawn maintenance trailer, combined with an island that's a landscape island on an entry to a sub. This midday shot of West Cherry. So these obstructions as subdivisions become older, vehicles and families have teenage children that drive and not all vehicles get stacked into the garage and onto the front driveway. So those are some of our challenges in providing emergency services in these neighborhoods. Of course, some of these challenges can be overcome by staffing levels and what we hope to intend to do is build in some passive assistance in a variety of emergency services in these neighborhoods. These are our local comparisons to staffing levels with Nampa and Caldwell with the number of people in our department per thousand, as opposed to Nampa and Caldwell, and then the number of on-duty staff reflected of our Station two in our operation. To kind of give just a quick summary on our number of requests that we can typically expect in Heritage Commons Subdivision with 273 lots built out, one of 22 residents, based on historical data that we have experienced we will call for services -- call Meridian Fire Department for service and that converts to 34 requests for service in just this subdivision, with expectation of about two percent of the structures having some sort of structure fire on any given year. Basically that's -- those are the things I have got. I'll stand for questions on any of those issues or any other related fire department issues. Corrie: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you. A couple of the other items on the preliminary plat, for the Council's awareness, that have not been fully resolved, at least that we are aware of, there was quite a bit of this discussion regarding how the north property would be accommodated. Staff's understanding is that the applicant has met with the -- I believe the three property owners on the north and there is an offer to construct a rail fence with some landscaping to help to beautify that entrance road coming off of Locust Grove and you can see it currently would run right up to the property line, so there is an offer, I believe, to beautify this north, rather than putting a six foot solid cedar fence, which nobody agreed would really be appropriate. So that was one of the requests of the Planning and Zoning Commission was to meet with those property owners and, as I say, I believe that was done, but the applicant can address that further. Another issue was -- there is a user irrigation ditch that courses here along the east boundary of the property, existing county property here and existing county property here. There was an offer, I believe, to construct a new -- it is going to be piped. The ditch is on the Heritage Commons property, so the question was how will they maintain access to the water. I believe that there is an offer to provide some valves -- it will still be piped, but to provide valves for those folks to have access to that water that way. The position statement that Meridian City Council Meeting May 21 , 2002 Page 50 of 95 I submitted does address a couple of other small changes that were not included that Mr. John Wardle submitted that reflect a few changes there, but I think the only other issue of disagreement that has come up, there is a common -- what staff is viewing as a common driveway at this location here along the north. The request is to serve five buildable lots off of that common drive. The Planning and Zoning Commission said that that could happen if the -- if it was widened to 24 feet wide. Currently it's 20 feet wide. That would meet the common driveway width, the 24 would, but the applicant is proposing to stay with 20 foot wide and still service five lots off of that. A couple of highlights on the Conditional Use Permit, since that hearing was also opened. This was submitted by the applicant as a proposed street scene and that would be, just to go back, as you come in at the entrance here on the north and here on the south, so a couple of the features of the Conditional Use Permit and planned developments, the two amenities, one of those amenities is a community center. This is a proposed elevation of that, and another amenity is a gazebo, which was proposed towards the front end of the project. I believe there are a couple of modifications, so I won't spend much time on the commercial, because I think the applicant has come prepared to have some discussion on that front commercial area, but this was the original submission. I think the only other issued on the planned development that I did address in the position statement, dated May 20th, was the front commercial area here, these proposed six lots. The Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation to you is that right now they would have to come back with a Conditional Use Permit to receive approval on this commercial area. That is primarily because of the proposed elevations for the commercial buildings don't match the lotting pattern that is here, so there was -- the request is to come back and basically get that through a Conditional Use Permit fixed up and then they would be allowed, without a Conditional Use Permit, a number of uses, some of your standard neighborhood type uses that are health care facilities, doctor's offices, etc. Unless there is any other questions, that's the highlights that I have. Corrie: Discussion? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Developer now. Dave. You have been sworn in, so just give your name and address, please. Turnbull: I'm still sworn? Corrie: Yes. You're still sworn. Turnbull: I only like to do that once a night, but -- and get away with it. Jonathan are you ready to go? We took a little bit too much time in Planning and Zoning Commission hearing and we'd like to conserve your time, as well as ours, and so we have produced a Power Point presentation that will help us through. I want to -- Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, that -- I haven't been as excited about a project for a couple years as I am about this one. We began the planning process on Heritage Commons with the idea that the new development in Meridian needs to come up with a fresh identity. If you go back to the early to mid '90s in Meridian city, virtually every new development was Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 51 of 95 required to comply with the R-4 zone, lower density zone, so what we have ended up with over the past many years is a repetitive 80 foot by 100 foot lots as far as the eye can see. The amenities were sacrificed in order to maintain affordability. The planned development process was very seldom used, because of the vague standards and the difficulty and time-consuming nature of the process. So when we were considering what to do and how -- when we were contemplating a land plan for Heritage Commons, we were encouraged by kind of a new way of thinking from the Meridian City Planning and Zoning staff, headed by Shari Stiles, and, in fact, been bolstered by Brad Hawkins-Clark and Steve Siddoway's determination to provide new direction for Meridian's development patterns. So Heritage Commons' application before you this evening is a result of consultation with your planning department and it's tailored to the concept that has been approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission in the Comprehensive Plan, which I thought maybe you would sign off on tonight, but apparently have not been able to get that far. Heritage Commons breaks a pattern of repetitive, unimaginative subdivisions. We offer a variety of housing types, sizes and pricing. Our design provides a safe, well-connected street system built on a neighborhood scale and our amenity package will be unparalleled, as you will see a little later. And as kind of the pioneers we are, we are submitting the first neighborhood -- or what we term a village center. In your Comprehensive Plan you call it a neighbor center, we call it a village center. Heritage Commons offers both carriage lane and conventional homes. Many of these plans we have developed for both our Harris Ranch project and for Heritage Commons specifically. In fact, Jake Centers is here, who has been very innovative in coming up with several of these designs. These are the carriage lane homes. These are homes where the garages come off of an alley. They fit on home sites as small as 3,520 square feet. We also have conventional homes that offer access off garages. The home sites range anywhere from 5,000 to 8,000 square feet. Now if you want to take a look at -- you will see this home right here, for example, this was a parade home out in Harris Ranch. It's got a two-car garage front, but, actually, that's a three-car garage. It's a tandem garage. It also appears as a single story, but that's a two-story home, actually, but you won't know that from the front or the back. And it's 2,700 square feet. The same can be said about many of these plans here. So we feel like the architecture is what makes all of the difference here. You could take the land planning as good as we think Heritage Commons is and still put in substandard architecture and have a substandard development. So we are very concerned about the esthetics and the long-term appeal. We like to be proud of what we do and what we end up with when we are finished. Just as important as the functionality and ambience of the community is a safe, well- connected street system that is built on a neighborhood scale and this will address some of the issues that Mr. Silva brought up. We believe that traffic -- traffic calming needs to -- traffic calming or slowing features need to be built into the system, rather than added later. The result is a pedestrian friendly, neighborhood friendly environment. As you can see in this diagram here, we have for the past eight years -- I don't know that we have done a subdivision for a long time that hasn't had detached sidewalks, but these things come at a price. They provide pedestrian safety, but they come at a cost to the development, so we like to do them, so we do. You'll also notice that if you measure here you will see a well-connected street system. There is no home within this development that is more than 350 feet from a secondary access and that's the advantage that a gridded street system gives you and why the street widths that we are proposing are appropriate. I'm going to let Mike Wardle discuss that in further detail in Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 52 of 95 just a minute. We have spent a great deal of time working on the amenity package and I think that you will recognize that what we have proposed here is far more than what would be required under your PO ordinance. You will notice that as we flip through these slides we have incorporated a common architectural theme to the amenities as we plan -- as we planned and also in the commercial elements. The slides that Brad showed you previously were our initial concepts. We have since over the past month or two refined those significantly. You will probably notice that there were at least three different architectural themes incorporated in those and I was uncomfortable with that, I wanted all the common area amenities to have a common architectural theme. So here is the entrance for Heritage Commons. You will see a separated boulevard entrance. This structure here on the left -- this guard house on the left is not a guard house, that's the pressure irrigation system. Probably the best one you will see. The one over here is just for show. We will probably use it for storage or something. I don't know. But, anyway, this gives you really kind of a nice sense of a broad lane into the community. As you continue up the street, when you come into the community, you're coming up this way, you will come to the commons park. This is a 2.4 acre park, it's larger than a soccer or a football field and one of the unifying elements in the middle will be this gazebo, which is really not just your standard backyard gazebo, this is large enough to accommodate -- you could accommodate a wedding, you could accommodate a stage play, you could accommodate a wedding, for that matter. The same architectural elements on there together. And then as you continue up the street even further you have our community center and you will see what was previously an old farm house look is now tied into the same architectural theme. It comes complete with a gathering room, conference room, exercise room, kitchen, and restrooms and changing rooms. And then a significant swimming pool behind, an outdoor swimming pool. And then finally to the west side of the project we have two smaller pocket parks surrounded by 44 home sites and here is the community center right there. So you can see we have really given a lot of thought to our amenity package. As I mentioned, Heritage Commons is proposing the first neighborhood center. We call it a village center, because in planner jargon a neighborhood center refers to a seven to ten acre site that has a grocery store and fuel stations and related retail. That's not what we are planning here. We are planning something that's more on a neighborhood or village scale. It's appropriately located at the mid section line, right in the location where you have one of your circles drawn on the Comprehensive Plan. It's innovative in balancing new urbanism concepts with market realities. The easterly buildings here are pulled up against the Locust Grove frontage, so that you bring your architecture forward to the street. The westerly buildings provide a buffer from the main drive-thrus and parking from these residential lots behind. So the parking and drive lanes are concentrated between the buildings for both esthetic and for practical reasons. The architectural theme that you have seen throughout is incorporated in our architectural theme here. I might point out Brad indicated that when we first submitted this plan there was some -- maybe what was perceived as an inconsistency in the size of the elevation versus the size of the buildings. We actually submitted two elevations at the Planning and Zoning hearing, one was approximately this size, one was approximately this size and this represents foresighted architecture. The larger buildings would -- this would be the front elevation, the small buildings this would be the elevation here. So we are trying to build in enough flexibility in this plan so that this first of your neighborhood centers has maximum opportunity for market acceptance and success, because we feel like what Meridian City Council Meeting May 21 , 2002 Page 53 of 95 we do here and whether we succeed or not will determine whether you have anymore in the future. We have designed -- excuse we. We have designed three alternative site plans. One is a six building layout. We also have a five building layout with two buildings on the west side that are the larger buildings, the three on the front are the smaller footprints. Then we have a third alternative that is four larger buildings. So, in summary -- I'm going to let Mike Wardle step up here in a minute, but, in summary, Heritage Commons we feel is a fresh approach, it's innovative, and it's pioneering and we have been pioneers in the past and we will continue to stick our necks out, but we need your assistance in this effort and at the end of Mr. Wardle's presentation I will ask you for some specific approvals. Stand for any questions. I'll invite Mr. Wardle up. Corrie: Okay. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Wardle: Yes. Mike Wardle, 50 Broadway Avenue in Boise. 83702. I appreciate Mr. Silva's comments, because the discussion that we have had is the same discussion that's been ongoing throughout the country -- go back one, Jonathan -- for some time. In fact, it stems back more than a dozen years when the first concepts of new urbanism or the traditional neighborhood elements came back into vogue. It's a national discussion. I was interested to see the number of calls that the fire department would expect at Heritage Commons that were true fire calls, because nationally fire trucks roll to -- anywhere from 67 to 80 percent of their calls are medical, a very small percentage of the calls actually require the services of the fire truck per se. I, too, am excited about this project, because it does embody, not in a pure sense, but in a Meridian, Idaho, sense, the elements of new urbanism that take us back to a time where the street system really is not the dominant feature. Streets are critical to the character and the quality of community. In a report entitled Toward New Neighborhood Street Standards, August Awanti, guru of the so-called new urbanism, stated: The street, which is the public realm of America, is now a barrier to community life. And, in reality, that's been self-inflicted, because we have gone away from traditional neighborhood elements, we gone to an automobile-oriented type of development design where livability is not the first priority and yet it should be. We typically see long and poorly connected streets, wider, because bigger is better, and so the individuals, the people that live there, are the ones that have suffered. The street systems typically are not as safe, because they invite speed, they are not as friendly, because they don't separate the pedestrians from the travel lanes sufficiently. And they usually require an action to go back and to calm streets and we see a lot of that for the Highway District to put in some type of a barrier to make people slow down in those street systems. There was a study done in the late 1990's in Longmont, Colorado, that concluded that narrow streets are the safest. There is some interesting information that's pointed out that if we take the typical 36 foot street, in comparison to -- in the case of Longmont, Colorado, quite a wide variety of streets that I will talk about in moment, even here in Meridian, they found that the streets -- the 24 foot street was actually the safest and that included parking on those streets. Just going from the 24-foot wide street to a 36 foot street resulted in a 400 percent increase in accidents and they come back to an interesting problem, even on a low volume street there are more accidents when it's wide, because of speed. There has been a discussion in this region, in Oregon in particular, in the city of Portland, about skinny streets and they concluded in this particular study that the skinny streets or Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 54 of 95 the smaller streets are safer from an automobile accident perspective, but they also, interestingly enough, found that there was no correlation in reduced effectiveness of fire protection with the narrow street system. That study concluded with a recommendation to policy makers, because, in reality, the decision is made by policy makers, not by recommendations from fire codes, but it suggested that policy makers need to look at a larger public safety issue and ask is it better to reduce vehicular accidents, injuries, and deaths or provide wide streets for no apparent benefit to fire response and, in reality, that a truism. Four years ago a man by the name of Dan Burton came to Meridian, I think he was sponsored here by Smart Growth and I'm not certain who else, but he spoke at a facility here in town and talked about standards that he had come up with for helping neighborhood street design and his most effective street was the 24 or 26 foot wide paved street. Now I have to qualify that. That would range from a 28 to a 30 foot back-to-back street and when I speak about the streets that we have tonight in Heritage Commons, the Highway District's 29-foot street is basically right in the middle of those two. His was 28 to 30 with the curbs and gutters. The Highway District standard is 29 feet. So we are right in the middle of that. But the key to a healthy neighborhood street was the fact he had detached sidewalks. You have -- it's providing access, really, only to residential uses. Parking is provided on both sides and they are typically short streets terminating in two to six blocks with on-street parking encouraged and he had a concluding comment, too. If on-street parking is light or non-existent or limited to only one side, streets will fail to properly slow traffic. He talked about emergency response and pointed out that it's improved by having totally connected short blocks in a grid pattern, not by wider, longer, and single access cul-de-sacs of the typical streets of the recent decades throughout suburbia. He felt that a better solution was to have the multi- gridded access system and points out the effectiveness of driveways as providing this space that is the concern of the fire department. There are two schematics shown here. The top one is taken directly from Mr. Burton's healthy neighborhood street and it's also the same standard of the Portland queuing street, that I will talk about in a moment, relates to. The bottom -- and I don't have my glasses on, hopefully you can read it, it's essentially the same street, 26 to 30 feet wide, and it's also the queuing -- and the queuing concept is simply the same thing that we find in all of our old town areas. If you have parking -- a great deal of parking you may find a situation where you have to hesitate. You have got essentially two lanes of parking, one through lane, but if you have cars parked like in myoid north end Boise neighborhood, you have cars parked right across the street, the opposing traffic would wait for just a moment or two while the first one to that hole got through it. There were no driveways on the street, so -- and very few alley parking spaces, so the reality was that the streets were choked up. That's not typical in the new subdivisions where we have off-street parking and usually two to three car garages. I would point out that, again, Heritage Commons' minimum street standard is 29. Portland got into the skinny street program about 12, 13 years ago and in looking back they found that the best neighborhoods that they had were those that had the older style gridded street patterns. They also found that those street systems were actually the safest. There were environmental benefits from those skinny streets, there was certainly a better use of the land, there was less impervious area for storm runoff, hence less collection problems. There were financial benefits, lower maintenance costs for the taxpayer, lower development cost, but increased affordability. Quality of life issues, they were safer for pedestrians, because the streets were separated from the sidewalks, as Heritage Commons proposes to do. Even bicycling Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 55 of 95 was safer, because you found typically lower speeds. And so, essentially your community, really, was improved by that skinny street system. But the final issue was that it requires that there be a grid-like street pattern, which actually improved emergency service access. Prior to 1991 Portland's local neighborhood streets were designed for higher speeds and two directional traffic and basically it was to satisfy the 20 unobstructed access for the fire department. The fire department went through a very serious analysis and I -- not because I expect that nothing will change in terms of the standards that we propose, but we have here this evening and we will even loan to Mr. Silva, the videotape that came out of that region to show how the actual real working situations occur on those narrow streets. The fact is that after they did their analysis, they came to the conclusion that as long as the streets were through and connected, they were for basically low density single family neighborhoods and there was ample off-street parking and little requirement for off-street parking, not that it wasn't allowed, but simply typically you have your garage and your driveways for the off-street parking and you have frequent driveway openings that provide passing pockets, they approved and adopted and changed their standards to accommodate that so-called queuing street with a 26 foot to 28 foot wide improved section. What they also found is that these narrower streets -- and they are actually going through a process of retrofitting -- they calm themselves. Now the ACHD system that we are proposing conforms with changes that were made three years ago and that came during the time that we were trying to implement a system at Harris Ranch, but the realities of Harris Ranch does not embody the standards that ACHD adopted. Heritage Commons does. They had two options, to go to a narrow or 29 foot wide local street, residential street, and that refers to one that's under a grid system, you have to have detached sidewalks, a planter strip, block lengths less than 500 feet and at least two street connections with volumes of less than 500 trips per day. Every one of the streets that we propose accommodates that or conforms to that. The other option was if you didn't have a grid system, as long as you had passing pockets where you had predetermined and pared driveways, a vertical curve or a development agreement that guaranteed that those driveways would go in that location and that, again, traffic volumes of less than 500 trips per day. Heritage Commons actually, all of the streets that- De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, I'm sorry, I hate to be rude, but if I don't do something I'm going to fall asleep. You know, this is a lot of information to digest and I think we need our fire department to take a look at it, but in light of the time it's getting and we have a lot of agenda here, we do usually have time restrictions on testimony and -- Wardle: Mr. Mayor and Madam de Weerd, I'm just about finished. De Weerd: I don't want to be rude, but -- Wardle: I appreciate that, though. Corrie: If you will finish up -- Wardle: I will very quickly. Go to the next one, Jonathan. This particular slide shows in the blue the larger streets, the 33 to 36 foot wide streets that perform -- we have provided a real network for access without any restriction at all. The yellow streets are Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 56 of 95 the 29-foot streets and in all cases the traffic volumes are less than 300 feet. Excuse me. Less than 300 vehicle trips per day, except in two locations and those are just over 300. The last slide I have is -- if you have got good color vision there, you will see red lines at various locations. The red areas are essentially non-parking zones. All the way around the community -- or the little common park is a parking restriction and all of the driveway locations essentially providing spaces that provided -- about 25 to 30 percent of all areas along any street frontage are maintained as non-parking for the driveways. And you put those side by side, then it actually creates no parking areas, but gives the fire department the space that they need for any staging. Mr. Mayor, Council Members, that's really all that I am bringing to you this evening, but the plan does totally grid and totally connect, the streets conform to ACHD standards and have been approved by them. Thank you. Mr. Turnbull will finish up. Corrie: Can you do it in about two minutes? Turnbull: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, just a couple of outstanding issues. One is the commercial CUP and that's found in your Planning and Zoning CUP recommendation number two, page two. We request the conditional use approval of the three site plans presented this evening be granted and request that you delete P&Z recommendation number two for a separate or further CUP approval for the commercial development, except for uses not listed in our annotated staff report. That's request number one. Request number two, there was some confusion in the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing regarding the access to the Donahue parcel and part of that came with the Public Works recommendation that perhaps sewer access -- the sewer line needed to be provided to their parcel to provide sewer service. We've had our -- we had our engineer verify the parcel can be serviced by the existing sewer line in Locust Grove Road. There is no need for a sewer service from Heritage Commons. This was originally a concern of the Public Works Department, but we have provided them with the documentation, I believe, for that and they have accepted that. We do not believe that there is a basis for requiring us to provide an access to the parcel to the south. We are building an entry road, entry features, and entry landscaping and providing neighboring property with a sizable buffer from our development. To require us to provide access free of charge to this parcel I think is unjust when we are expending all the money to make those improvements. During the Planning and Zoning hearing there was some confusion about a vehicular access easement versus a sewer access easement and at least two of the Commissioners spoke out against requiring a vehicular access easement, but when the issue of sewer service came up, they did recommend that we provide a sewer service and easement and the way I heard it was they were requiring a sewer service along a sewer line and an easement accompanying that. The third item is common drive. The common drive is P&Z preliminary plat recommendation number six, page two. We propose modification and we are willing to make a compromise here. We had originally proposed a 20-foot wide driveway. The staff is construing that to be a private street, not a common drive, requiring a 24-foot wide street and sidewalks on both sides. We are proposing that we provide a 24-foot wide common drive, but that no sidewalks be required. And as you probably are aware, as a planned development, we are not subject to all the ordinances -- the subdivision ordinances, we can create different standards. And, furthermore, this Council just Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 57 of 95 approved another common drive, 20 feet wide, serving six lots in another project and we'd ask for the same consideration. Is that two minutes? Corrie: Yeah. You'll probably have to answer some other questions, so you'll have a second crack at it here. Thank you. Any questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Mrs. Donahue. Bev. Thank you. We already swore you in, so -- B.Donahue: I'm all sworn in? Corrie: Just give us your name and address, please. B.Donahue: I haven't moved yet. I'm at 3775 North Locust Grove. Do you want to go back to the original thing where I'm located? Corrie: Fine. Put it back on there. B.Donahue: Okay. These are some of the concerns we have that I just handed out to you. The first one is on the irrigation. We have been down to City Council numerous times trying to get information regarding this subdivision and we have had a couple problems, because like in some of the notes it was supposed to be handed in ten days prior, well, one person says ten days, including the weekends, well, the office is closed, so I don't know if it's ten working days or ten days total, trying to get some information. We finally just received information yesterday on the irrigation on how it's supposed to go. Well, the problem we are having with the irrigation is we irrigate from the north where the entrance way will be, because we can't irrigate from the back of our property. We always have done it from the north, which they know, because we have all our pipes set there. So no one has contacted with us and that water issue hasn't been resolved yet. The next problem we have is the curb cut, which we went down to ACHD and spent most of the morning with them. My main concern is safety. We have five teenagers and with the increased volume of the roadway, we cannot back out onto North Locust Grove. We are already having problems doing it now and when the subdivision comes in and the other subdivision, we are going to have 1,300 more cars daily coming down Locust Grove, we have got the school across, which now the kids will be seniors and they will be driving at the school, so that both of them are coming south toward -- south on North Locust Grove, we can't even back out, we are going to get hit. So I'm going to have car accidents, my kids won't even be able to get to school, to work, whatever. So what we are proposing is on our property on the side of our garage make a road that will go back on our property, we'll do it on our own property, we will put our own driveway in, and we want an entrance that is matched up with the commercial property, so we can get onto the subdivision and go around the corner, so we are driving forward and not with our butts going onto the road. And ACHD, after talking to them, they also agreed that it would be up to you now to make a motion or look into that for our safety. And that's what that letter is that I asked if you had received earlier. The third thing that we are interested in is the sewer stub. We received notification today from the Brighton Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 58 of 95 Corporation that somebody come out and looked at the way the sewer was set up. Well, I'm a little confused, because when the charter school came in and they put the sewer into the charter school, that was going to fill up the sewer problem there and then the charter school was planning on adding and putting more school buildings around, which is going to have to attach to that sewer, so we want to know where we are going to be able to hook up to the sewer, because if that's full to capacity, which is the charter school and they have all their ground yet to still build and add onto, are we even going to be able to, if we ever go into the city, attach that way or from Heritage Commons? That's a great concern of ours. Then the fourth thing is the fencing. They have discussed it with the neighbors on the other side, but my concern is now all of a sudden I was in the middle of a field, I'm corner lot property, and we are not talking, you know, people visiting fields or anything like that, we are talking 1,300 cars daily going by our bedrooms. So I want some kind of a buffer, I would prefer something like a block wall and a lot of vegetation in front of the block wall to help with the noise, because if they are going slow because it's going to be pedestrian friendly, little motorcycles and everything are slowly going to go up to the stop sign, so that's -- I'm going to be listen to all kinds of traffic 24 hours a day. So I have been trying to get a hold of Shari Stiles and talk to her about that, but, unfortunately, she's been out sick, so I have not gotten anywhere on that aspect. Also we have other property around us for our horses, livestock, and whatever, I don't think a wood fence is going to cut it for the people that are still out in the county and that have domestic animals. Also the fifth thing is our concern is the commercial property. We had met one time prior to the P&Z meeting and we were assured that was going to be professional office buildings, doctor offices, and things like that and then looking at some of the minutes, the new paperwork that we just received, it can be a family restaurant or fast food, whatever. Now we were led to believe one thing, now we just wanted to know exactly what the clarification is going to be on commercial property. We ask for no drive-thru things or drive-thru type facilities, because, you know, we don't want kids or people hanging out in that area across on the side of our house. I think I'm done. Corrie: Okay. B.Donahue: Are you awake? Corrie: Yes. We were listening to you. Mr. Bird, do you have-- Bird: I have none. Corrie: Any questions? All right. Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Wee rd. De Weerd: Maybe our staff could answer a few of the questions that she brought up in terms of irrigation and the responsibility of the property owners to maintain what currently exists and the sewer stubs and -- and Brad could maybe define what neighborhood business uses are allowed. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 59 of 95 Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council Members, the irrigation situation, the developer is responsible to provide irrigation water to the properties that they are impacting with their development. They can't -- as I understand it, they can't change the point of delivery and they can't change the amount of water that has been used by the property. It's my understanding that the sewer stub into Locust Grove will work. Elevation-wise, once the White Drain is constructed and the effluent from the Vienna Woods Subdivision and Edinburg is diverted into the White Drain, the capacity in the eight-inch line in Locust Grove is not an issue. And I don't believe it would be an issue for a single family dwelling at this time even. Was there another item, Council Member de Weerd? De Weerd: No. But if Brad could help with this definition of what type of business uses are allowed, that would be helpful. Hawkins-Clark: Yes. As far as businesses uses, the way it's drafted now is there would be no fast food at all. Any drive-thrus of any kind would require a Conditional Use Permit, so that would go to -- everybody within 300 feet would be notified by mail. The uses that would be allowed, the list that has been submitted -- it includes health care facilities, your dental, doctor's office, pharmacy, optical shop, that kind of thing. Office and retail and the list there includes a bank, it does include dining and other food, beverage-related uses, personal services, retail store, restaurant and it does allow for the planning director to make a determination if another use is considered neighborhood friendly. De Weerd: Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Mike Donahue. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? M.Donahue: I do. Corrie: Name and address, please. M.Donahue: My name is Mike Donahue, I live at 3775 North Locust Grove. Basically going to run through what the wife just went through. The irrigation issue, like I say, we really -- our main concern is we don't see no final plan how our water is going to be handled, so we are real tentative as to that issue and talking with the developer earlier tonight, he pretty much promised us we'd get together with one of his engineers sometime this week and start working out some type of a -- I guess a formal plan as to how we would go about that. I explained some of my problems and I think when we were at the Planning Commission earlier today it appeared to us that they were going to irrigate off the west side or supply the water off the west side, which ours has to be off the north, because our water flows from the north to the south. So we are just real tentative and unclear about how the process -- this irrigation issue is handled and we don't want to be left out in the cold, you know -- you know, standing there trying to figure it out. And I guess just -- that's a real big issue with us on that access of the water. Now on the curb cut, the problem we really have is the outlet. On our driveway it's less than 150 feet from the outlet of the subdivision. We are standing right at 120. And that's why Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 60 of 95 we got the letter from the highway department and, you know, that's why they are very supportive of our, you know, view that, you know, a curb cut and access out onto Heritage would be -- you know, would be a better flow plan for the traffic, because our driveway is only 33 feet to the street, so you're going to pull into our driveway and you're going to back out and the guy -- Craig Hood down at the highway department, he did see the issue there, that it is less than 150 minimum that they require for that speed zone in that area and they have 150 foot for -- it's a 35 mile an hour speed zone? Yeah. So, you know, I mean as far as access to our property, it's a big issue, because now we are going to have -- my wife said 1,300, I seen a thing where it said 1,600 and I think 1,100 or so on the farther service road to the north. So there is going to be a lot more traffic on that road. Right now their study shows like I think 4,800 trips a day with they estimate a two percent increase on that right now. That's without the subdivision or anything else that went in, all the subdivisions to the north, you know, all this other traffic, including the school and all this other stuff. So we are looking probably 6,000 trips a day and he seemed to agree with that. Craig did. He didn't seem to have too big of an issue with that. So our feeling is we'd like to see the Council, you know, require that and I don't think it's a big cost issue. On the total cost of this development, I think it's a very small, small issue. You know, I can appreciate, you know, the developer, you know, he don't want to put out anymore money than what he has to, but, you know, from our standpoint, you know, our lives have been impacted by the main entrance coming directly along our property line, so now we have all that issue with noise and traffic and you name it, you know. So we think it's a good compromise, you know, and a benefit for all, not only including us, but everybody else that travels North Locust Grove, because with us backing out that's an issue with the traffic that has to go by. You know, if somebody makes a mistake, you've got serious problems. And you got the high school directly across the street and when they come out, I have been there, and it's -- you know, they are going for the fastest Coke in the world, you know. So that's our issue with that. Now as far as the sewer stub, my biggest concern with that is if we stick with the Locust Grove use -- now I'm trying to find their letter. Okay. From, I guess, Northwest Engineering. Now down on the bottom portion of their letter -- apparently they turned this into the planning department. It says based on our field survey it is reasonable to assume that the property could be serviced from the existing main to the north on Locust Grove and the thing that makes us a little nervous is, you know, that little lawyer-type wording there, it's reasonable to assume. So let's say it doesn't work, then we are kind of held hostage, you know, since -- where are we going to go? We are going to go back out through the way where they -- Planning and Zoning recommended that sewer stub. Now if they want to say without a doubt, put it in writing, if it doesn't work we will take care of it, I have got no problem with that. But until you get rid of that little, you know, fudge factor there, you know, reasonable to assume, well, then, we got a -- I think we have an issue there. So we'd like you to stay with the P&Z recommendation to put the sewer stub onto the property. And, once again, as far as I'm concerned that curb cut is a big issue, not only with our safety, but the public safety traveling on North Locust Grove. You have a driveway that's 33 feet in depth, you're coming out onto a main street like Locust Grove, there is guaranteed to be problems at some point in time, especially when we fall within -- you know, we don't even meet their recommendations of 150 feet. We are 120 right now. And the guy down at the highway department, you know, he didn't -- didn't hesitate to write that letter. He said I have no problem with that. He says I'll meet with my supervisor and I will have you something by Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 61 of95 3:00 and I think as you can see that letter is probably dated 3/19, so apparently they thought this was a big enough issue that, you know, they'd get right on it on what they said they would do and I think that pretty much covers it. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Donahue, I just had a couple questions. Just so I'm oriented, could you show us where the location of your house is and where the driveway is, just so I'm clear in my mind? M.Donahue: This is basically where our house is. Okay. Our house is located -- I think this is a well marker right here. I'm not sure. That's basically our driveway right there. That's the edge of our driveway and our driveway -- the edge of our driveway to the edge of the property line is 85 feet and then you have his buffer, which I think is another 30 -- I'm not sure. I'm going by what we talked about out on the -- out on the sidewalk. So this -- Nary: So this location is approximately where your driveway is? M.Donahue: Yes, sir. Nary: And where is your house currently? M.Donahue: Our house is 33 feet back and that's our house. Nary: And how is it oriented? Does it face -- M.Donahue: It faces the street. The entrance would be on the north side and that -- the edge of our house to the edge of our property is 32, 33 feet -- I guess I would say 33 feet to the property line. So that would be the relationship to everything how our house sits. Nary: Okay. Thank you. No other questions. Corrie: Thank you. Okay. Herb Lee. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Lee: Yes, it is. Corrie: Thank you. Name and address. Lee: My name is Herb Lee. I live at 3665 North Locust Grove, which is to the south of the Donahue residence. It's a four-point acre parcel there. The issues that I have will be -- the traffic issue that they have, I know their concerns, I took a picture, I thought they Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 62 of 95 had it, but they don't have it. The irrigation is a problem, because my property flows three different ways. Okay. The water -- the ditch comes down the west side of the property and down the back of my property line and about halfway up the property line I have a ditch that I can block off and send it up toward Locust Grove. Okay. To the front of my property. From that point it goes north and south. Okay. The water will flow -- I take that from you. The water that comes down the back comes up here and then I have -- it diverts this way and diverts this way. The water in this area all drains this way and down here, because the waste ditch comes down here, it comes underneath that ditch there. Okay. This water that comes back here I drain -- I irrigate from this side this direction for this area right back in here, the water comes across the front, comes down, and drains this way like a little ditch right here that comes out, catches the water and goes on down that line there, which is where this waterline goes and that becomes my waste ditch also for the property that's on this side here. So all this water right in here and here flows down this way and comes out the back. All this water over here, it goes out and comes down and goes down this way. They were saying that they wanted to get rid of the wastewater from this area, but they have no -- right now no place for this wastewater here to go if they stop the ditch at that point. So my issues are the water as far as where the waste goes and how do I get my water from here up to there and how do I get it back up into here and that's something that we need to work out with those guys there. If we come over, like they say, and meet with the engineer and find out what will work, I'll work on that. One other issue that I have is the fencing again. I have horses, okay, and if they put a wooden fence on down my fence line, no matter what you do they will be gnawing on that wood fence. I have some pictures that I have taken of some of the other subdivisions that are in the area, they have -- the ones that I have seen that the horses don't seem to bother are a block wall and vinyl fences. So there is some -- they could do those two things, other than a wooden fence. A wooden fence requires a lot of maintenance. Vinyl fencing, every time it rains it's new again, it's washed off and it looks good again. And that will enhance the vision of all that. If they put a block wall down there or a vinyl fence, I don't have a problem. If they want to put a bock wall or a vinyl fence down there, I don't have a problem with the either. The sewer, I go along with what they are saying right now, that if it will work they can go ahead and we can tie in out here and work, that's okay with me. The sewer that they are talking about stubbing up over on Donahue's is over here, that would mean that I would have go through here. So this -- it's kind of -- I don't know what to do there. I don't know if they can come in through here and down our property line with the sewer stub, if this doesn't work over here or if they guarantee that this will work, I don't have a problem with that. There will be a lot of traffic. They have 1,646 cars per day coming out of here, they have 1,400 and some odd over here per day, after the final phase they have -- this is going to be their main entrance going in, okay, I was under the impression, maybe I'm wrong, I thought they needed two entrances, one that was going to be a service entrance, if that's a service entrance over there, it's not going to be done until Phase 5. Okay. So if that's going to be an entrance, maybe that's where they need to have the trucks come in. I don't think those guys will like that too well. But at least it will alleviate some of this problem here until everything is developed and this is a five phase -- is that a five year project? Is that the way you got it pegged? Did you guys see that? A year per phase? Corrie: We'll let them answer that. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 63 of 95 Lee: I don't know. I think that takes care of what I had in mind. Corrie: Okay. Is there anyone else from the public? Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Spirk: Yes, it is, sir. Corrie: Thank you. Spirk: Thank you, Mayor and City Council, for your attention. Corrie: Name and address, please. Spirk: I'd like to go on record as opposing -- Corrie: Name and address, please. Spirk: Oh. I'm sorry. Paul Spirk, 3534 Curt Drive. Corrie: Thank you. Spirk: First of all, I'd like to go on record, as I said before, to oppose Heritage Commons, because of the safety issues. I have researched commons and found out that the original name means a large expensive area of land on common ground and in all the concerns these communities were self-contained, with the outer perimeters being large areas of farmland, grasslands, parks, and common areas. This should never be developed for these intended uses. That's what commons are. In these self-contained communities are shops, retail, barber shops, there is transportation such as buses, light rails, trains, commuter vans, and common places for these neighborhoods. What is being proposed is a copy from something old. Alleyways. Narrow streets. Front porches. Back garages. People move to the suburbs, as I did, to get away from the city life. That's crowded living areas, congested streets, crime, noise, pollution, and government telling you what you can or cannot do with your property. The city planner has been asked on several occasions -- I have been at the hearings, the public hearings that I have attended, he was asked what is a subdivision. His next question was -- another question that was asked was what is a neighborhood center. What are the standards being used to the determine these entities? His response has been vague and not very clear. His pet answer is mixed use. Even that is unclear to me, because the colors on the map change all the time. I feel that if the city is planning to improve lots that are narrower than three sheets of plywood from end to end or smaller than those in old town Meridian, they will have to continue to approve other developer and planners for smaller houses. It is unconscionable to me to think that the three impacted schools can absorb the additional student population when River Valley Elementary, Lowell Scott Middle, and Centennial High School are overcrowded at this time. I'm a school teacher. Other neighborhoods that have been developed throughout the country over the past 50 years with small lots, limited parking, no public transportation, no access to services have Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 64 of 95 failed or at best have been turned into rental properties and neighborhoods in ghettos. My question is this proposed neighborhood is a neighborhood to nowhere. Thank you. Corrie: Is there anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony? Yes, sir. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Johnson: Yes, sir. Corrie: Name and address, please. Johnson: C.L. Johnson, 1570 East Ustick Road, Meridian. Just two questions and I think the Planning and Zoning have answered that. One is where are the sewer stubs -- I adjoin the property on the south. I have some pasture ground on the south of this property. Wondered where the sewer stubs were and to insure that the wastewater from my property has -- arrangements have been made to expel that off my property. Corrie: Okay. Johnson: That's the questions I have. Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Anyone else like to issue testimony? Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Centers: Yes, sir. Corrie: Name and address, please, for the record. Centers: Jake Centers, 2011 Locust Grove, Meridian. And I just want to come up and talk a little bit about Brighton Corporation. I own Tahoe Construction. We do quite a bit of building in quite a few different developments and one of them being Harris Ranch out over in Boise city, which is a Brighton Corporation development. When I began building in Harris Ranch about three years ago I thought that my biggest obstacle in getting my plans approved would be Boise city and I was sorely mistaken. Brighton Corporation's ACC approval is a major pain in the neck. And then once you do get your plans approved through their architectural control committee, they make you post a thousand dollar bond to insure that your approved plans conform to what you actually build. So if you build a home and are missing a couple of floor holds or missing an architectural element that was on the approved plan, they won't refund your money until that element is done. So as far as there being any concerns about the quality of construction of these homes, regardless of their size, trust me, there is -- that's not going to be an issue. The other thing about Brighton Corporation is they also have a building division, so they build within their development. So Brighton Corporation is very concerned about the quality of the development all the way through build out, unlike other developers who just develop and don't really care, as long as they sell their lots to get the project sold out and move on. Not the case with Brighton Corporation. And just as a final note, you know, I have sat in a lot of these meetings where the P&Z, the staff, and you, Council, have commented on how tired you are of 8,000 square foot cookie Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 65 of 95 cutter lots in standard subdivisions. So, you know, Brighton Corporation particular has listened to that and they are presenting Heritage Commons to you tonight. So, you know, I would just say that Heritage Commons is providing what you have been asking for, but, you know, they cannot provide the innovation that you have been looking for and still meet your old standards and requirements. So keep that in mind when considering the facts of the reduced street widths and some of the other -- I think very innovative ideas that they have brought forward here tonight. And in response to the gentleman's comment about his concern of houses being built on 24 foot wide lots, if any of you have had the opportunity to go down to Harris Ranch and look at the Mill District, I think you would be very pleasantly surprised at what we can do on 24 feet. So any questions? Corrie: Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. A few questions need to be answered, and, Dave, just -- if you can kind of a wrap up here. I'll give you -- Turnbull: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. I'd like to -- the first thing I'd like to, I guess, relate to you is that I did something that I have never done on a project before when we entered into a contract on this property. I went out and knocked on the homes -- the door of every home that surrounded that -- well, on Locust Grove and along on East Heron's Crossing, just introduced myself to let them know who we were, that we were planning on putting forth a development plan and that we would look forward to answering any questions they had. As you can imagine, there weren't too many -- a lot of times people aren't home, so I went prepared with a letter and a business card and if they were home I gave them a businesses card and told them what we were up to, if they were not home I left a letter in their front door, along with a business card asking them to call me at any time. Since that time Jon Wardle has visited the property out on Locust Grove three times, left business cards each time, called twice, and so I don't think there is any lack of effort to try to communicate with the neighbors and address their concerns. Now I will address some of the testimony that's been given. The Donahues, who abut our property -- can you put that plat back up? They spoke about their irrigation concerns. This is nothing new to anybody who has sat on a planning and zoning commission or city council. We convey irrigation water just as it was before our development. Sometimes it has to be piped and sometimes it has to be rerouted, but the point that Gary Smith made is true, and I believe it is a condition of our final plat that we will take care of the irrigation water. That's a commitment that we have always had, we have dealt with it on every project. There is not a property in Ada County that doesn't have a ditch or several ditches running through it. This is probably something new to the neighbors and so it concerns them, but it's not anything new to this process and we will deal with that. The access issue. I can understand the Donahue's concern for safety and there is one thing that we would agree to, if their concern is a driveway to their home through this location, we will provide a narrow access for a driveway for their home. What I do object to is having to improve this whole buffer here, go to the expense and maintain that and then having them come in in the future and piggyback off our effort and so, okay, we are going to stick some commercial buildings in there and then we will get the opportunity to go ahead and provide maintenance for their landscape buffer and pay for their landscape buffer, pay for their utilities, pay for their roadway system into it. So if their concern is an access driveway for their home, we would be happy to provide that. The sewer has been addressed by Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 66 of 95 our engineers and been reviewed by the Public Works Department, which Mr. Smith I think referenced. The buffer on this side right here is actually more significant than any of the other buffers. It brings us from 28 to 35 feet from back of curb to their property line. So we did that, because, number one, we line up with the access to the charter school across the street, but we felt like it was important to provide that extra buffer if we could. So there will be a significant buffer there. As far as the commercial uses that were brought up, I think Mr. Hawkins-Clark has addressed that. There will be no fast food. If there were a bank that needed a drive-thru, they would need a Conditional Use Permit. Quite frankly, I think a bank with a drive-thru in this location would not be obtrusive or offensive, it probable would be appropriate, but it still would require a separate Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Lee addressed some of the same issues, traffic, which has all been reviewed and approved by the highway district. Irrigation, which I addressed under the Donahue comments, and he had an issue on fence, on a wood fence. Well, you know, if I have I don't know how many property owners that abut that property, but if one wants chain link and one wants vinyl and one wants wood, one wants concrete block, pretty soon I have a hodgepodge in my neighborhood that is, quite frankly, unacceptable to our development. So we want a unified fencing program as much as possible and we are proposing a wood fence on the boundary and I believe that's what has been required and approved in all other developments around the city. Mr. Lee asked about this second access here. Actually, this is, you know, from an emergency standpoint that would function. The question how long this whole project will take to develop out? I hope two years, but I can't tell you today whether it will be two or five years. If it's longer than five years I'm probably in trouble. Not be in trouble, but -- I think it was Mr. Paul Spirk who talked about safety and got into a definition what a common is. I guess you can go to different parts of the world and find a different definition for commons. There is probably no common definition for common. But I'm not sure what that has to do with this development. He also indicated that he moved to the suburbs so people couldn't tell him what to do with his property. I think we feel the same way. We don't feel like somebody else should be able to tell us what to do with our property. The reference to lots that are no wider than three sheets of plywood, well, actually, they are four sheets of plywood. And, actually, if you go down to Harris Ranch you will find they work very well. I am -- honest to goodness, I am more proud of what we have done in the Mill District at Harris Ranch. I walk through that project, there is not a single -- there is one sign for a resell and it's because they want to build another knew home in the Mill District with Mr. Centers over here. That's a testament to the effectiveness of how people feel about that community and I'm more proud of that project than everything I have done so far and will be prouder of this one when it's done. He addressed school overcrowding and the ghettos. I think that's the one that Mr. Centers gave about our Ace being a pain in the neck. I'm not sure if that was a compliment, but I think that's probably the reality with our developments, we are very careful about the builders that we'll let in, we are careful about the architecture that we allow to be built and we hold people to a higher standard and I guess I don't make any apologies for that. Doc Johnson, as I know him, asked about sewer stubs. His property stub is right here and there is a sewer stub to his property at that location. I don't remember if there was another questions. Johnson: Just the wastewater. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 67 of 95 Turnbull: The wastewater, of course, is the same comment that we handle on a routine basis and that would be dealt with, with the conditions of the final plat. Finally, I guess I would like to address a little bit the fire department's objections. I would not expect the fire department to give on narrow street standards anymore than I would expect a school teacher to give up tenure. That's, I guess, you know, kind of their job, their territory to stake out. But we do ask the Commission to balance the interest and recognize that narrower streets in a well connected network provide the necessary, but infrequent fire department access, while providing a neighborhood that functions in a safe and more livable manner 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. It was very interesting after -- the day after the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing where we got into all this thing about narrow streets, we actually had a fire call at the Harris Ranch on narrow streets and, guess what, there were five fire trucks on the spot and put out the fire before there was any damage at all and they had to drive through two existing phases of the development to get there. So I think that's a testament that narrow streets can work, they can accommodate the fire department. Mr. Silva showed some pictures of some existing developments and I think one was in Ashford Greens, which was one of my developments and he showed a landscaping trailer with the gate open. You know, sure, there is going to be parking some places. There was also a very broad, expansive driveway right next to it where the fire department could pull their truck right up and serve -- you know, respond to any kind of an emergency in that location. So the fire department, I think, and the city need to recognize that they will not get both connectivity, which we provide here, and wider streets. You're going to get one or both and if you can't do this on this kind of a development, and you require us to go back to wide streets, I can point an example right here, I could eliminate that street connection right there and still fall within your subdivision ordinances, I could eliminate that street connection right there and still comply with your subdivision ordinances and, guess what, I'd lose probably 750 feet of street expense and sewer expense and water expense and I would pick up six plat-able lots. I'm about half a million dollars behind by providing this connectivity and if we don't have some cooperation for the city and foresight to recognize that these streets actually work and they actually will function as a better, more livable neighborhood, then I'm afraid this is the last you're going to see of it. I mean that will be the message that you send to us and the rest of the development community. So I hope I have wrapped it up quickly enough. I feel very strongly about this project. We have done the best planning that we have done and I'm exited to get going. The other comment I would like to make and I appreciate the effort the planning department has made, we have talked about centers through the whole Comprehensive Plan here, how do we get this kind of development to be submitted and, you know, how do you get developers to submit something like that. I ask for one thing. I didn't ask -- I didn't ask for anything but this, expedited hearing process. We've had an expedited hearing process, we got put on the Planning and Zoning Commission, we got through there in the first night, we are asking for your approval here tonight so we can move on with the process. Time means as much to us as far as almost anything else and if we can get fast -- you know, I'm not talking about circumventing the process, but I'm talking about expediting the process and if we can get that, as well as fast turn around times for our final plats and our construction plans, that's the best incentive you can give us. Thank you. Corrie: Any questions? Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 68 of 95 De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd, De Weerd: I guess I did have one. Mr. Lee asked about a sewer stub as well. You answered on the Donahue and the Johnson property, but you didn't answer on his. Turnbull: Mr. Lee and Donahue's are adjoining parcels and we had our engineer go out and shoot elevations on their property, shoot elevations on the sewer lines out here, we submitted a letter to your Public Works Department that says that his findings are that it will adequately -- the trunk line at Locust Grove Road will adequately service these properties, If they want more proof, I guess we are always going to have to -- your city has the data and they reviewed it and they were okay with it, so I don't know what more to say about that. De Weerd: Okay. Turnbull: We made a specific effort to go out there and verify it and we have done that. De Weerd: Thank you. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I had a question for Brad. I was noticing in the position statement -- and I don't know if it was a slight discrepancy, but in the retail is has a bank with a drive-up and then at the bottom it talks about a drive-thru requires a CUP and I did hear Mr. Turnbull say that a drive-up window for a bank would require a CUP. So what was -- was that just an oversight in that inclusion of a bank with drive-up as an allowed use? So we would have to strike that? Hawkins-Clark: Council and Mayor, my understanding is that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation is no drive-thrus period. Nary: So we would simply eliminate with a drive-up on the retail provision regarding a bank? Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Nary: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Okay. Any discussion before -- want to close the public hearing or keep it open? McCandless: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 69 of 95 Corrie: Mrs. McCandless. McCandless: I move we close the Public Hearing. Bird: All three? McCandless: Yes. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Items 13, 14, and 15 for Heritage Commons. Further discussion? Then all those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. Public Hearing is now closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Comments, discussion from Council? McCandless: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. McCandless. McCandless: I think this is probably one of the finest planned developments that I have seen since I have been sitting here. I feel like they have answered all of the concerns that were given to us up here and I want to compliment them on the work that they have done toward it. I think it's lovely and I think it could work. And I think it's time we put our money where our mouth is when we -- we have been talking about -- not subdivisions, but planned communities such as this. Corrie: Okay. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would agree with Mrs. McCandless that the -- you know, it -- I try very hard to stick to what our ordinances say and what our requirements are and I don't see anything in here -- there is, obviously, some tweaks that need to be resolved regarding some fencing, but that's included in the recommendation and some issues with irrigation and sewer. As Mr. Turnbull stated, it's exactly right, the law requires it. I mean he knows that. I don't know if you knew that before this whole process started, but the law requires them to meeting those delivery needs, waste needs, all of those things, that has to happen. So that's not a concern to me. I would also agree with Mrs. McCandless that if we were -- if we weren't dealing with Brighton Corporation and the track record that they have in these types of developments, you know, maybe it is a concern, it is different, but we wanted different and we have asked for different and we have made a point of bringing that out and I'm not concerned that Brighton Corporation is not going to follow Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 70 of 95 through with this. I have complete confidence in them being able to do that. Again, there is a few minor tweaks. I think most of those were addressed in this position statement by Mr. Hawkins-Clark. Those are the things that were discussed at the Planning and Zoning level. The narrower streets, I understand Mr. Silva's concerns. In my experience the city of Boise was concerned about the exact same thing in regard to Harris Ranch and they have not had a problem with that. That was worked out fine and they raised the exact same issues about access and it hasn't been a problem. So our experience has been that they really can work as Mr. Turnbull stated. I understand Mr. Silva's position, it isn't something we are used to here, it's something that is different, but I think it can work, I'm not concerned that it won't be able to be done properly and there will be access for the fire trucks. That won't be a big problem I don't believe. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I will follow the other two Council people. I agree. I think this is a very, very nice planned development that Meridian can certainly use. I like the commercial part of it, the neighborhood center, we have been wanting to get one off the ground. Brighton Corp has come forward. I suggest anybody that thinks that you can't get around on the streets to go down into Harris Ranch, take a big truck with a trailer behind it, which probably turns as far as a fire truck and you can get through. I think it's the first of its kind in Meridian. I hope it isn't the last of its kind. I hope we get a couple more like this, because then we can quit being cookie cutter subdivisions. Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd? De Weerd: I didn't say anything. Corrie: Certainly don't have to. I mean if you have said all you want to say. Discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Okay. I didn't want to disappoint anyone, but it's getting late, so won't say much. I just also would echo everything that has been said. I know that there is a lot of discomfort, because there are still questions out for several of the property owners, but those will be addressed and I think the developer has noted that he would give you a curb cut and put that in the recommendations that's to your property and that would have to then be discussed if your property were ever to redevelop, because I do understand their concerns. So I think with everything that's -- a lot of the testimony with the sewer and the irrigation, fencing has yet to be resolved, but in staff recommendations that is an issue, so with that I think Mr. Nary can make a motion. Corrie: Mr. Nary. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 71 of95 Nary: Mr. Mayor. I guess we will start with item number 13. I move the approval of AZ 02-006, request for annexation and zoning of 76.16 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation, west side of North Locust Grove between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road, and for Council to prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law, Decision and Order, pursuant to the staff recommendations, including -- I don't believe there is any other additions or corrections to the annexation, and include the staff report. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded for a recommendation of approval of the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order by the attorney. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mrs. Clerk. Roll-Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I move the approval of PP 02-007, request for preliminary plat approval of 273 building lots and 17 other lots on 75.39 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Heritage Commons -- this was modified, so that was -- to include the staff report, as well as the position statement by Mr. Hawkins-Clark dated today, dated 5/20/02, in relation to the preliminary plat and it appears that Mr. Turnbull had raised that outstanding issue regarding the Locust Grove parcel and that's the one regarding the driveway, so the driveway we would want a specific finding that they would provide a driveway access only through the property on the -- I guess the south of the entrance way to the adjoining lots and counsel to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order pursuant to those changes. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Discussion? Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I'd just ask Mr. Nary -- it sounded as though the Donahues needed the access for the residence, that was their primary concern, but Mr. Turnbull's concern was that that access not be converted into some sort of commercial access if the property's use somehow changed and I believe Councilwoman de Weerd may have been alluding to that in her comments. So I would ask that you -- if you want the use of the driveway restricted to that residence and the existing pasture area, I suppose, maybe they might have some reason to do something back there, if that's your-- Nary: What I would prefer to say is that there would be a private residential driveway access only, so that it's clear that the Donahues will have access, but any other development in the future -- this common drive issue I don't recall if there was any other concern about modifying recommendation number six, the 24 foot wide private street. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 72 of 95 McCandless: Second agrees. Nary: Was that something we need to clear up, Brad? This is what was brought up by the developer. Preliminary plat recommendation number six on page two. Hawkins-Clark: Right. They -- I believe the proposal meets the planned development ordinance, with the exception of the sidewalks. I mean I think in this situation staff would support their proposal. Nary: So include this recommendation, but modify number six with a 20 foot wide private street and I will give this to Mr. Nichols to include in the Findings of Fact, so he can include this other recommendation as well. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Just to make sure, does that eliminate sidewalks on both sides of the street or would it allow sidewalk on one side? Hawkins-Clark: Both. Nichols: Okay. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I think this is probably discussion that should have been under the annexation and zoning and here we have the leaders of the north Meridian area plan, but in other developments we have included some language as far as participation in the recommendations that come forth in particular to the transportation issues and, Mr. Attorney, maybe you can help me on this. Were we supposed to do that under the annexation and zoning and -- or is this an appropriate spot for it? Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, it's not really a plat issue as such, it would either be under the Conditional Use Permit or under the annexation and zoning. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. I would hope that we would remember that in the next motion, since we failed to in the first one. Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Any further discussion? Okay. Hearing none, roll-call vote, Madam Clerk. Roll-Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is approved. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 73 of 95 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Number 15, request for Conditional Use Permit. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Mayor, I move the approval of CUP 02-007, request for Conditional Use Permit for the planned development for single family residential dwellings, private open space with a club house, gazebo, parks and neighborhood scaled commercial site for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation, to include all staff comments, including the position statement of May 20th of '02 by Mr. Hawkins-Clark of the Planning and Zoning Department, as well as the -- as well as what's recommended by the developer -- I'm not sure -- Brad, correct me -- basically what's brought up by the Brighton Corporation about deleting recommendation number two, the requirement for a separate CUP with a site plan, is that taken care of at all with this language that is included from the prior memo from Brighton Corp in regards to number two? What seems to be recommended here, seems to be cured by this statement, other than we would amend retail banks to exclude the word with a drive-up, and then there isn't a CUP for every single use on this property. Some them are allowed. Hawkins-Clark: Correct. In terms of use, that's correct. The position statement, if you recommend approval of that, then the position statement is worded as such that they have to come back with a Conditional Use Permit for the configuration of the commercial area and that was because prior to tonight we had not seen the new elevations that they had shown. Still haven't spent a lot of time with that. Essentially what it comes down to is -- is that the elevations, knowing which they submitted -- what they have submitted tonight, if that's your recommendation for approval, which is different than their original application, then I think we are comfortable with that and that portion of the position statement could be stricken that requires a separate Conditional Use Permit for the commercial area. Nary: And I guess I'm comfortable with that. If it does change certainly, then, you can bring that back, but I guess my motion would be that we strike that language and that we go forward on what was presented. If the staff feels that it isn't consistent with what was presented tonight, then a separate hearing needs to be held, then we can do that, but I'd rather we go forward, that's the whole -- Bird: I'd rather we go forward, too. and I think that something -- the arrangement on that, the lots in the commercial could -- I don't know why that has to come back for a conditional use. I think that's something that the developer and the staff could work out, as long as -- we basically agreed upon the design and whether they put four large ones on or two large and four small, I think that's something that we don't have to go back for a Conditional Use Permit, definitely, for. You know, I think that's something that -- between staff and the developer decide on that. De Weerd: We have definitions that deal with that. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 74 of 95 Bird: Right. Nary: So I guess the conclusion of my motion would be for counsel to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order, consisting of all of those multiple findings. Bird: I will second it. Corrie: Okay. De Weerd: Excuse me. Nary: And also I would like to amend my motion to include that they also comply with the recommendations from the North Meridian Area Planning in regards to traffic and -- that was the traffic issues we were talking about, whatever you're talking about -- I totally forgot that. De Weerd: I think our attorney has the language down by now. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, what we would include would be the same language that was included for Cedar Springs, for Bridgetower, it has to do with any of the issues pertaining to ACHD infrastructure and other type issues and things that have been discussed in the North Meridian Planning Area. So it's become a standard condition on those -- those north area and so I can't recite it verbatim, but -- Nary: So what Mr. Nichols said I would like that included in the motion. Bird: Second agrees. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, I do have one other thing and that is the site plan layouts that were shown on the Power Point presentation do not appear anywhere in the written record and so we need Mr. Wardle to print out those site plan layouts and provide them to staff and we will attach them to the findings as the layout that does not require a CUP for a site plan that -- Nary: Okay. Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Madam Clerk. Roll-Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is approved. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 75 of 95 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Before we go on to the next one, let me say something here. I think our Comprehensive Plan is falling into place here early. We do have the developers on this ten square mile area that we have worked with and I'm really happy that the first one that's really come across to do something of this nature for us is Brighton Corporation. They are a great builder, you look at all their properties, they are superior, so, David, this is from the chair taking a privilege that I appreciate what you have done here, I know you're going to work with the neighbors and you always have and I'm just thrilled that we are starting with you and you were one of the leaders in that north ten square mile area and I hope that they all start following suit and go from you now. All right. Thank you. Council, you want a break for a second? Okay. Let's have a break for about five minutes. (Recess. ) RECONVENED AT 11:03 P.M. Item 16: Public Hearing: VAC 02~002 Request for a Vacation for unopened future streets within lots 5 and 6, block 1 of Timothy Subdivision for Pack It Up Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - west of South Locust Grove Road and north of East Overland Road: Item 17: Public Hearing: VAR 02-004 Request for a Variance to allow a second time extension for recording the final plat for Pack It Up Subdivision (formerly Overland Mini Storage Subdivision) by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - west of South Locust Grove Road and north of East Overland Road: Corrie: All right. Okay. We'd like to reconvene the Council and Item Numbers 16 and 17 is a Public Hearing request for vacation for unopened future streets within Lots 5 and 6, Block 1 of Timothy Subdivision for Pack It Up Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineering. And then also a Public Hearing, request for variance to allow a second time extension for recording the final plat for Pack It Up Subdivision (formerly Overland Mini storage Subdivision) by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc., So at this time I will open the Public Hearing on both 16 and 17 and invite the staff's comments first and then we will go to the representative. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. The vacation is an interesting one that I don't think we have ever actually seen before. Briefly, the reason for it -- and here on the screen is what you probably recognize as Overland Mini Storage lot here, it's actually part of the Timothy Subdivision. I guess I don't have that on there. But the Timothy Subdivision as it was originally approved included some designated future right-of-way streets that were, of course, never actually built, because this an existing vacant lot. The applicant has addressed all of that in their application, which I assume you have read. We do have a staff report to you, dated today, from Dave McKinnon and he does address briefly some of these issues. The Ada county engineer and surveyor John Priester has -- is the only person that has said that these future unopened streets require vacation. Ada County Highway District and our staff Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 76 of 95 said that we could process it without it, but they are here to basically request a vacation of those -- of those future. So we are supportive of that. The time extension is tied to this Item Number 16, in that since Ada county is requiring a vacation, they got delayed for the recording of their plat, so that is the reason why they are unable to meet the time extension which you had already approved a year ago, so they are asking due to this unforeseen issue with the Ada county surveyor they are asking for that second time extension for six months, not one year. Corrie: Any questions from staff? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Is the representative -- is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Boyle: Yes. Corrie: Name and address for the record. Boyle: Clint Boyle with Pinnacle Engineers, 12552 West Executive Drive, and I just got to apologize up front, because my presentation will be much less exciting than the previous one you just saw, so -- much shorter as well, though, so I guess there is benefit there. I do have copies of the original Timothy plat. I believe they may be in your applications. If you want to look at those I will pass them around. I will try to be as brief as possible. This particular subdivision for Pack It Up Subdivision was essentially a re- plat of two lots in Timothy Subdivision, being Lots 5 and 6, which are the southeast corner of the subdivision. Timothy Subdivision, when it was originally approved, had these neat little future streets shown on it, with a note that at the time that a subdivision was recorded in the future that they'd like to see this future street network. We have processed the Pack It Up Subdivision. These future streets, as you will note, there is nothing that ties them to anything in the world, they don't have any bearings or dimensions on them for that matter, and it also shows kind of an urban lotting pattern. Again, those were -- at some future date it was expected that this would develop in accordance with Timothy Subdivision when urban services became available in the area. Obviously, through other developments on Lot 2 of Timothy Subdivision, other lots, it hasn't occurred as they were projecting in the future. There have already been buildings constructed over the future street area and other portions being Lot 2 of what was originally Timothy Subdivision. So, essentially, we went through the platting process, ACHD signed off on the plat, as well as the city, with no problems with regards to the future streets, which aren't improved, aren't dedicated as public right of ways per se, as typically dedicated. The Ada County surveyor and his review of the plat has required that we vacate the streets, which has kind of thrown us into a little bit of a predicament there, because ACHD did recognize them as being publicly dedicated. We are going through a process with ACHD to vacate the streets. We have had many discussions with their legal department on it and I don't think that they are even stated as a true vacation of a public street, but more to the effect that they were quitclaiming any interest that they may have in a future street within those locations. So, in a nutshell, because of this single issue with the county surveyor and him being adamant Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 77 of 95 about that, we have sent letters and had correspondence back and forth with him regarding the issue and he has pretty much stuck to his guns on it. Because of that it has delayed the recording of the plat. That is the only outstanding item that we have to record this plat. It is the county surveyor signing off and, therefore, the treasurer and recorder, which our pretty much routine signatures there. So with that said, this plat would have been recorded if this issue had not come up within the given time constraints, but based on that we are requesting the time extension, which we are projecting will probably take roughly two to three months from this particular point in time, but should be easily accomplished in six months, and get us through ACHD's process for quitclaiming or vacating the streets. With that I'll stand for any questions. Hopefully that was quick enough get us home in a half an hour. Corrie: You did a good job. Do Council have comments, question? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: We are basically vacating a street that doesn't really exist anyway? Boyle: Right. Nary: You wonder why people think government doesn't work. Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else to issue testimony? Seeing none, Council, any other testimony for the Public Hearing? Okay. Then I'll entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing on Items 16 and 17. McCandless: So moved. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Items 16 and 17. All in favor say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Discussion? Okay. I'll entertain a motion on the request for a vacation of unopened future streets in Lots 5 and 6, Block 1, of Timothy Subdivision for Pack It Up Subdivision. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 78 of 95 Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we approve the request for vacation for Pack it Up Subdivision within Lots 5 and 6, Block 1, of Timothy Subdivision and ask the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Madam Clerk. Roll-Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Item Number 17. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we approve the request for a variance to allow a second time extension for the recording of the final plat for Pack It Up Subdivision, as requested by the applicant, and to include staff comments and ask the attorney to draw up Findings Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, please. Roll-Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 18: Public Hearing: VAR 02-001 Request for a Variance to the landscape requirements for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision by Hubble Engineering, Inc. - 1375 East Fairview Avenue: Item 19: PFP 02-001 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 4 building lots on 6 acres in a C-G zone for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision by Hubble Engineering, Inc. - 1375 East Fairview Avenue: Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 79 of 95 Corrie: Item Number 18 is a Public Hearing. This is a request for a variance from the landscape requirements for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision by Hubble Engineering, 1375 East Fairview Avenue. At this time I will open the Public Hearing and invite staff comments first. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. The subject property is here. I'm sure you're well aware the -- two items are before you, the lots here are tied together and that approval of the preliminary final plat would be reliant on approval of this hearing. Essentially, they are requesting approval to allow the existing six foot wide landscape buffer that is on Fairview Avenue in front of Intermountain and Intermountain is on this right parcel only. The left is what is proposed to be platted in the next item into a few lots. So Jane Suggs is here and she does have a proposal tonight that we -- we actually haven't had time to review much at staff level. Our recommendation, basically, for the request on the variances is specifically to not grant the existing six-foot street buffer. We did propose an alternative in our recommendation on page three, so that is what Jane has come prepared tonight to address in terms of our compromise that we had proposed there. We are recommending to remove the row of parking that is immediately adjacent to the existing street buffer, which is along Fairview. Intermountain was approved on the basis of a department store, which had a parking ratio of one stall for 400 square feet. They would still meet ordinance should they lose that row of parking there adjacent to Fairview. The relocation of the emissions van and the coffee kiosk will need to be handled in a manner that doesn't further reduce the number of available parking stalls. The coffee kiosk was approved with the Conditional Use Permit, I believe, about four years ago. Mayor, did you open 19 as well? Okay. Corrie: Yes. There was only one. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Could I ask you a question, Brad, before you go on for the other-- Hawkins-Clark: Sure. Nary: What I was noticing in the compromise paragraph, it says that the required parking for the store was 137 spaces. By eliminating the row of parking it goes down the 160 spaces, but it says that the coffee kiosk and the emission van would need to be handled without reducing any further parking stalls, but don't they have a 23 stall leeway here to be in compliance? Hawkins-Clark: That is correct. Yeah. The last sentence there on the second paragraph, parking lot was approved with 193 spaces. 137. So, yeah, if you factor in the requirements for the stall, there is a surplus of parking. Nary: Okay. If they were able to relocate -- if we just follow what your suggestion was, if they were to relocate that emissions van and coffee kiosk in their lot and only reduce 23 spaces, they'd still be in compliance with this. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 80 of 95 Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Nary: I know there is some other stuff regarding landscaping islands and all those things. Okay. I just wanted to be sure I -- Hawkins-Clark: Right. Right. The last paragraph there on page three of our report does discuss the installation of interior landscape islands. That would -- essentially what is proposed to help bring the number of trees up to what was originally required for Intermountain Outdoor Sports. So I think on Item Number 18, you know, essentially, we are recommending a compromise of sorts, but not the six-foot to be allowed. So in terms of 19, the plat -- here are some existing photos. I'm sure you're all well familiar with the area. There is an existing Quonset hut out there that we are recommending be removed prior to building permits and here is a copy of the proposed plat. They are looking at four lots, essentially dividing this left vacant area here into three lots and Intermountain would sit on its own lot and I think I'll just leave it up to Jane to address a couple of the outstanding issues that we had on that plat. Corrie: Okay. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Brad, I don't see any mention about sidewalks. Are there any sidewalks in there? Hawkins-Clark: There are no existing sidewalks. De Weerd: Do you know -- that's -- we don't have sidewalks on either side of that street. Bird: They put sidewalks in down-- Hawkins-Clark: Stonehenge. Bird: Yeah. They put sidewalks down there and -- yes, across over there at Walgreen. Walgreen and down there they have sidewalks. I don't think -- I know the athletic club does, but -- De Weerd: That's what I mean. We don't have sidewalks on either side of a very busy street. Hawkins-Clark: The Highway District on the plat, they did -- the Highway District did require installation of it. If you saw their comments. De Weerd: Okay. But it's not in our comments and it's -- usually it's standard comment, but I just -- it was a glaring omission. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 81 of 95 Hawkins-Clark: Well, we can glaringly put it back in and in bold. De Weerd: I'm sorry. It is getting late, you know. Corrie: What makes you think it's late? It's early in the morning. All right. Anything else? De Weerd: No. Corrie: Okay. The applicant's representative. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Suggs: Yes, sir. Corrie: Name and address, please, for the record. Suggs: My name is Jane Suggs and I represent Hubble Engineering on behalf of Jerry Sweet and Intermountain Outdoor Sports. First, let me just clarify one thing. On page three of the recommendations on the plat, at the top of page number 13, construct five foot sidewalk on Fairview Avenue. The sidewalk to be installed prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Lots 2,3 and 4. So -- is that not on yours? For the plat. Nary: That's page four, actually. Suggs: I'm sorry. It's there and -- not curb and gutter, but sidewalk. Okay. Clint stole my thunder, because I did -- also won't be as fancy as Brighton Corporation. So thank you for that. And we will do this really fast, because the last time I had talked about this project at P&Z it was 1 :00 a.m. This process is a little bit unique. You have seen this before. It's a preliminary and final plat, because we have four or fewer lots. Also as staff mentioned, this all sort of hinges on landscape variance. Landscape variance is not heard by P&Z, but only heard by you. And I have a copy of a landscape plan that Brad will put up in just a minute. But first let me tell you -- let's talk a little bit about that landscape variance. Our original landscape variance request was that we just use existing landscape. This project was built out something like seven to eight years ago and the landscaping was installed according to the approved plan, but there might have been some things that didn't quite get put in just like the plan had asked. But my first request is that the existing landscaping stand for the landscape for the subdivision, because this is just a simple subdivision of the undeveloped portion on the corner. That included the six-foot -- six to seven feet of landscaping that's located along Fairview Road. Now I am actually asking for a new variance request and I have some conditions -- or a position statement on the staff report and also I have a new variance letter. You probably didn't get that in time, because I didn't fax over in time, so I have copies of that. Nobody's seen that yet. What that new variance request does in response to the position statement to the staWs findings on the variance was that I hope to -- we plan to put on a 35 foot buffer along the undeveloped portion of the site along Fairview Road. If Brad could put that landscape plan up, so that we can take a look at that. There we go. You will see there on the west side of the site along Fairview Road we are installing a 35-foot landscape buffer on the undeveloped portion. That will be 20 feet -- a 20-foot buffer along Stonehenge -- a sidewalk along Stonehenge, as the councilman Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 82 of 95 mentioned. In addition, as the staff requested, all the dead and dying landscape along Fairview Road in front of the existing store will be removed and replaced with appropriate landscaping. As the staff recommended, all the landscaping will be in easements, not in common lots, which it is typical. New landscaping will be provided along the east property line. You can see that closer to where the arrow is. And very specifically there will be a new landscape buffer along the Fairview Street frontage. Now the first request was that we actually not improve that landscaping. Staff had requested that that entire row of parking be removed along Fairview and that that all be landscape buffer. We agree with that, but we do believe that those two permitted uses, one of the ways that we can accomplish having them not impact the parking anymore is to have some cutouts for that. So that's what's shown there, but more than 60 percent of that buffer will be the width that was recommended by the staff. All the variances -- all the landscaping on the undeveloped portion of the site will be pretty much in keeping with the landscape ordinance. We are asking for a continued variance on that landscape buffer along Fairview Road and the interior landscaping and the reason for that, of course, is not only the removal of parking, but also the disruption to the existing parking facility -- this is an existing store, why we are asking a variance for is because of the condition regarding the fact that this is not a new project, this is an existing commercial enterprise. I wanted to go over the staff report on the variance. It seems that staff was able to make three of the four findings for the variance, but on the fourth finding, number o -- or letter D, they could not make the finding and one of the reasons they could not make the finding was because they chose this particular item of the landscape buffer along Fairview Road and said that they could not make the finding that this particular approval would -- they think it would impact the landscape ordinance by creating I guess some sort of precedent in allowing a six foot buffer and we -- I think we have solved that, because the reason you could make that finding was a specific -- it seemed to be specific finding and so we believe we have addressed that by adding a landscaping buffer and making it wider along Fairview. Also in that finding the staff had commented that the landscaping -- the reductions that we had asked for were beyond the alternative compliance section of the landscape ordinance and we were not asking specifically for alternative compliance, we were asking for a portion of that. In alternate compliance there is a section for variance. We feel the areas that are just kind of beyond the alternative compliance part of the landscape code. I believe that they can with these changes make the appropriate finding and so that would make the full findings for the variance. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Ms. Suggs, they don't find the second one either. It says there is no topography problem. Am I misreading that? Suggs: Well, they say: However, staff finds the existing asphalt parking lot is a condition that makes strict application of this ordinance unreasonable. B. Is that what you're reading? Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 83 of 95 Nary: Right. Yeah. Okay. I guess that's -- I don't agree with that. I think just because there is asphalt there and an existing parking lot or something -- that's not what they are talking about, but -- okay. That's fine. Suggs: I'm reading that as they have found -- in fact, on one, in each of those, A, B, and C, it seems if they made a finding D, they were unable to -- a specific example of that landscape buffer along the street and not allowing the six to seven foot buffer that exists, but I believe that the findings can be appropriately made. I can move on to the next item, which would be the preliminary and final plat, unless there is some questions specifically about the landscape variance. Corrie: On the cut outs in the front there on that Franklin side, what are you planning on putting there? Suggs: There are two existing uses there that are permitted and it's a coffee kiosk and an emissions van. So those have been permitted to be there. I know the staff report kind of mentions the coffee kiosk, but that's just something we had worked out in the Planning and Zoning meeting. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Currently that coffee kiosk has -- essentially is like a drive-thru for those parking stalls. With those trees and buffer there, where is the traffic flow going to go? Suggs: We have allowed enough room. Just like they do now. That's pretty much uses -- it sits long the edge of the parking and you can go behind the coffee kiosk one way and it would be kind of in the travel lane in the other. I mean it pretty much is located about where it is right now and it just impacts one row of parking there. So where you see the cut out will go from the 26 foot width to -- back up to about the six or seven foot width of buffer. Nary: And why isn't it possible to move the van and that kiosk to a different location on the lot? Suggs: Well, we are trying to do what staff requested and try to allow those uses to remain without impacting additional spaces. Nary: I don't think they said it had to remain in the same space, so I'm saying why can't they move to a different space on that lot? You still have a 23-space buffer between what's required by code and what's left by eliminating all of those spaces on the front. Suggs: There are two items. One is -- well, first, the store was analyzed under the idea of being a department store and not a retail space, which is -- retail store, which is typically one space for 200 square feet, instead of 400 square feet. So there is a little bit Meridian City Council Meeting May 21 , 2002 Page 84 of 95 of a concern there. The owners are concerned not with just meeting the minimum requirements, but allow -- providing parking for their customers, which I don't know if you have been over there, but I have been a few times and it stays pretty packed. Also there are some plans, according to the owners, of the possibility of expanding. The facility was built so that it could be expanded into more retail space and we didn't want to create a situation where there would be a problem with actually doing that expansion and not having enough a parking. So even though there is some leeway, we want to leave as much leeway as possible and have those kind of in those locations where it could be convenient for them to remain, but also not impact the parking spaces. Nary: So if the store was evaluated at one space per 200 square feet, how much parking is required? Suggs: 242 spaces. For retail, office, and warehousing. Nary: So you want them evaluated in regards to that? Suggs: No. I want to continue to evaluate it the way that they had and the way that I had discussed with staff earlier. However -- I mean I don't want to eliminate any type of leeway we have in that parking to try and reduce the parking down to the space. I mean, again, I'm trying to -- we are trying to make sure that we are serving the commercial spaces as well as possible. Nary: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess before we move onto the application itself, you know, we have worked really hard to try and be consistent among the decisions we make and with the applications that we get for a variance and it seems to me like we received the request for variance for Seven Gates a year or two ago and we gave them no credit for having asphalt down, that that was some kind of a reason for a variance. It was Seven Gates; is that right? John Forsythe's property? Hawkins-Clark: Correct. De Weerd: And so I guess I'm struggling a little bit trying to justify the variance. I certainly understand it and I do like the alternative. However, I do think that like staff is recommending with the landscape islands and stuff like that, that there is compliance issues that they never met before, which, again, was something that we had with Seven Gates, and they can go ahead and put landscaping in that parking lot, which I believe we have done with other applications. So I'm not quite certain why this is all of a sudden different because there is existing asphalt. So I would appreciate maybe a little bit of help catching up here. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 85 of 95 Hawkins-Clark: I can pull the landscape ordinance to quote directly, but the landscape ordinance that was approved about two years ago has a clause that addresses if there is an existing site that -- it's tied to the percentage of the lot that is going to be redeveloped -- it gets somewhat into an issue of are we considering this to be a redevelopment of Intermountain, even though it's just a plat. The way the landscape ordinance reads, it's talking about actual redevelopment of an existing commercial site. Should they come -- should they come in with a proposed to, for example, put a mezzanine level in the store or expand it some way, that would probably be a little bit more clear cut issue of whether the landscape ordinance would kick in. Does that make sense? I mean it's addressing a development site there. They are at this point in time not proposing any developments. It's strictly a subdivision. So that, for us, was some of the difference. I can pull the wording. It's just going to take me a second. That's the gist of it. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Brad, maybe you could -- while you're looking for that, what it sounds to me, I guess, and maybe that's what this disagreement is, but it sounds to me -- and I guess I agree with Councilwoman de Weerd, I mean I don't think asphalt is a real good reason to grant a variance, but my reading of that was that the intent was instead of having to tear out 29 feet of asphalt down here somewhere, the staffs compromise suggestion is to rip out about half of that and basically still have a pretty fairly straight landscape buffer across the top of that and not have these little cut outs where there is really -- it sort of defeats the purpose of the whole landscape idea is to have these cut outs with a van parked there and a kiosk parked there and really eliminating that buffer. That's the way I read what the concern about the asphalt is. It's not -- if you can tear out this much asphalt, you can tear that piece out, too. That's not going to matter. It's -- the issue here is how much is too much and that's what that particular compromise is. This I just don't think is much of a compromise. That's not really what the purpose of the ordinance is, is to create a landscaped look to the street and that's why it's there, but I think the staff, you know, has come up with something that is a compromise, I just don't think your compromise is really much of a compromise at all. Suggs: And -- Brad, did you want to speak -- Hawkins-Clark: I was just going to say it is Ordinance 12-13-11-4, existing parking lot applicability, and it is tied to -- 25 percent is the number for re-striping the parking lot, overlay the parking lot, replacement less than 25 percent, no additional landscaping is required. For parking lot replacement that is 25 to 50 percent of the parking area, then we require the perimeter and right-of-way landscaping. So do you happen to have that number, Jane, what the percentage of the parking area is that is -- or would be required to be torn up? It looks -- it just appears that it's less than 25 percent. Suggs: Well, we would prefer to tear up as little as possible. In fact, our proposal to do what I believe is a compromise -- a healthy compromise here along the landscape buffer along the street, especially since we are taking out all the old landscaping and the Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 86 of 95 lava rock there and putting in lawn and trees that seem to fit the site. And this is on the existing portion where we are not planning on doing any development and we are meeting the code on the undeveloped portion. In fact, I believe your Comprehensive Plan will soon not require the 35 feet of landscaping on this portion of Fairview, you would be going back to a 20 or 25 foot buffer along that section, so, actually, everything that is being proposed now is going to be above and beyond what would be required. In fact, some of the landscaping -- because they put the sidewalk within two -- close to the edge of the pavement so we could avoid some of the poles that -- it shows the poles there. We will actually be getting publicly some landscape within the right of way, so that, actually, it will be a little bit more than some of that that you see where the line is, so we are going a few feet beyond what was recommended by the Council -- by the staff. I'm not sure, maybe Brad can tell me, but I think Fred Meyer just put in a gasoline island. Did they do additional landscaping when they-- Hawkins-Clark: They did. They installed about ten new internal planters where it was previously just stripped. Suggs: Did they put anything additional up front? Hawkins-Clark: On Fairview? Suggs: Yes. Hawkins-Clark: They had existing 35 feet. Suggs: Okay. I would like to move on, maybe, to the preliminary and final plat, unless there is more conditions -- concerns about -- again, just to make the point that this is an existing site, that Intermountain Sports is not going to be -- we are not making any changes to that and the three sites will be developed by others, likely, and sold. So then they would be developed by others. And that would be, again, maybe an appropriate time to -- well, as Brad said, whenever there is a building permit would be a perfect time to ask for additional landscaping. Corrie: Jane? Suggs: Yes. Corrie: Maybe you'd know. What's the width -- you have those two cut outs there. What's the width of the berm between the -- your edge of the road there? Is it less than what's there now? See, when you had your -- Suggs: The cut outs? Corrie: Before you had cut outs. Suggs: The cut outs would pretty much be just what the parking is now, which is about an 18 to -- 18 to 20 foot parking space with the cut out and the width of that is going to be probably eight to nine parking spaces long. Maybe. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 87 of 95 Corrie: What is the width north and south of there? It's 35 feet on the sides there, but what's -- where that cut out is, what's the width from the north of the cut to the -- Suggs: Of the landscaping? Right now it's about six feet and we are putting about three or four feet within the right of way, so it looks like it could be as much as ten and -- I have a scale, Brad, if you need to measure it off of that. Actually, that might not be to scale. No, that's not going to work, since it got reduced. Hawkins-Clark: Oh, is it reduced? Nary: Ms. Suggs, maybe it's the lateness of the hour, but I have heard you say this twice now. You're saying because it's an existing store that it would be more appropriate when the store was requesting a change for us to request the landscaping requirements. So it would be your position, then, you're not required to do any landscaping and you need this variance at all? Suggs: Well, my first variance was not to put any additional landscaping in, but we feel like we want to, though, beyond that and do some additional on the existing store. That would not -- our first request was not to put any landscaping, it was to use the existing landscaping and then put the landscaping that was required on the undeveloped portion. That's why we come in with this variance -- this change variance with us, which would ask that we do consider some of the staff requests for compromise and that we put some landscaping along the Fairview Road frontage. Nary: Because it appears to me that your compromise is really a compromise of the staff's recommendation to compromise the 35-foot requirement. Suggs: Yes, it is. Nary: Okay. So it is not really an alternate to the 35-foot, it's actually an alternate to the 19-foot requirement that the staff made. Suggs: I think it's more than 19 feet. It's about 20 -- 20 something. Nary: I just saw the 19 feet in the paragraph here. Approximately 19 feet. Provide a significant amount of new landscaping, approximately 19 feet. The resulting buffer would be 25 to 26 feet. Suggs: Twenty-six feet. Right. Nary: Okay. So it's an additional landscape -- Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, the distance of the buffer in those cut out areas is about 17 feet from the back of sidewalk and about seven or eight feet from property line. Suggs: Yeah. I would be happy to answer any more questions. It is 17 feet of landscaping when your new ordinance tonight asks for 25. The Comprehensive Plan Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 88 of 95 asks for 25 along this street. Moving on to the preliminary and final plat. We agree with the staffs recommendation that this is something that should be approved, again, with the variance according to this landscape plan. Just to clarify a couple of the other issues. On item number two, I have spoken with public -- one of the public works engineers and the applicant will provide some information about the capacity of the irrigation system and an OM manual and the -- it was -- I understand from the Public Works Department they would like to have that when the plan review process goes through for the development of those other lots. And we talked about the coffee kiosk, which is number three, that that is an allowed use, even though it says it shall be removed. The Quonset hut, the one that's used now for community activities, that will be removed, Number four addresses the landscape variance. Number 18, I just wanted to clarify that it asks that irrigation ditches and laterals that are adjacent to the site be tiled or -- and I take that as enclosed. The Jackson drain is a pretty major drain. And we talked to the irrigation system and they don't really want that large of drain enclosed. But we will -- we do show that in the final plat. An easement to protect that is on the property and we will make sure that the irrigation system does not impact that. At the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting there was a neighbor, Mr. McNitt, that came from the Danbury Subdivision, and requested that we work out an irrigation system with him. It turns out that Danbury is irrigating a portion of the land along Stonehenge and we -- already the owners have been talking to Mr. McNitt about taking -- changing that. There is already a stub for irrigation there. It comes off of well water on the site. And, in summary, I would hope that you would approve the preliminary and final plat for the Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision and do that according to the landscape variance request that's shown -- the variance request and the landscaping shown on the plan as presented tonight. And I can answer some more questions about that or some of the items on the preliminary and final plat. Corrie: Okay. Council, questions? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Nary: No. Corrie: Okay. Thank you, Jane. Appreciate it. Since this is a Public Hearing I have to ask the question. Is there anybody from the public that would like to issue testimony? Chief Worley? All right. Good. With that, Council, do you have any more discussion on the Public Hearing portion of it? If not, I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing on the variance request 02-001. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close the Public Hearing on VAR 02-001 for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision by Hubble Engineering. Nary: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21,2002 Page 89 of 95 Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Okay. Discussion? Comments? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: In regard to the variance, I'm reading the staff report and I guess I'm not really sure, it says in the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning, as well as the suggestions by the applicant here, that we design this landscape -- I think what she was -- Ms. Suggs was saying was that we adopt the landscaping suggestion they made. I just can't find the grounds for a variance here. I don't even agree with the staffs finding in the second one that asphalt is a good reason to make compliance unreasonable. I just don't. It's just asphalt. If they have to tear it up, they can tear part of it up. But we have a reason for a landscape ordinance. We are attempting to enforce that consistently. I think consistently here the only variance that we should be considering is whether or not it has to be 35 or 25 and if in our new Comprehensive Plan along there is 25 feet, then that's what we should allow is 25 feet. And I think the staffs recommendation makes it approximately 25 feet, 25 to 26. I don't want to design the front of the landscaping, but I think 25 feet is fine. They can move those uses. I agree that the coffee kiosk is an approved use that they can have on that site, but they just can't have it there. They can put it somewhere else. There is space on that lot to move it to another location and they can do that, but I don't think there is any other findings that I can see to grant a variance to the degree that the applicant is asking for. I think we should be fair and reasonable and make it 25 feet. Other than that, I don't think there is enough evidence to grant a variance otherwise. McCandless: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. McCandless. McCandless: I agree with what Mr. Nary said and I also caution that if we grant this variance we would sure set a precedence for other variance requests that we wouldn't want. Corrie: Okay. Any other comments? Okay. Hearing none, I will then entertain a motion on the request for a variance. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 90 of 95 Nary: I'm going to move that we deny V AR 02-001, request for a variance in the landscape requirements for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision as requested by the applicant. I don't know that we need to say that we grant a variance up to 25 feet, but their application is a request from six foot to something else and staff's recommendation was 35. I guess 25 is reasonable. I don't know if Mr. Nichols could -- if he has any thought as to how to frame that as you really are only asking for one thing and we are really talking about something else, though everybody is agreed that they can do something else. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, in addressing a variance you can -- I believe the staff recommendation as set out in the report from David McKinnon, which was received in the clerk's office on the 17th -- in other words, you don't -- you don't have to say it's either approved or denied, because they have requested just to go to the six feet or now just a modified version. I think you can say we are going to grant the variance only to the extent contained in the staff report for the reason -- for these reasons: One is there is a pending Comprehensive Plan change which would reduce the street buffering along there to less than 35 feet. Second, there is no change in the existing building itself or the existing use that is currently on the property itself and the elimination of one row of parking will not drop the parking below the minimum amount and that it's consistent with what's already there. We can craft it if that's what you want to do to allow them that flexibility and it would only be, as I understand it, on the developed portion of the lot and the developed portions would have to comply with the existing landscape ordinance it pertains to. Nary: I appreciate that. Thank you very much. That sounds -- and, again, I'm looking at the position statement by the applicant and they are essentially agreeing that what they have fashioned here is what they are going to live with, so I would move that we grant the variance, then, instead of 02-001, the request for a variance to the landscape requirements for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision pursuant to the staff report of April 22nd, with the staff compromise that your landscaping be less than 35 feet and approximately 25 feet to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan change that is imminent, as well as the fact that there is no change in use to the space, so the reduction of parking spaces will not impact the required number of spaces for that use of that retail store and that facility, that being the uses that are in that row parking spaces needed to be eliminated and be relocated to another portion on the site and that the other landscaping requirements and recommendation by the staff be adopted as well. That's all. McCandless: I will second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Would you repeat the motion? Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 91 of 95 Corrie: That was a rhetorical question. Okay. Roll-call vote, Mrs. Smith. Sharon. Roll-Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Request for preliminary and final plat approval of 4 building lots on 6 acres in a C-G zone for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision and I think we have discussed that. Is there anybody -- any further discussion? Okay. I'll entertain a motion, then, on the request for preliminary and final plat. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I'd move the approval of PFP 02-001, request for preliminary and final plat approval of 4 building lots on 6 acres in a C-G zone for Intermountain Outdoor Subdivision by Hubble Engineering with all staff comments, as well as the -- on the position statement, changes as requested by the applicant and that counsel prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, please. Roll-Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 20: Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: Corrie: Okay. Delinquency and trash turn off schedule. This is to inform you in writing, if you so choose, that you have a right to a predetermined hearing at 7:30, on Tuesday, May the 21st, before the Mayor and City Council to appear in person and be judged on the facts and to defend a claim made by the city that your water, sewer, and trash bill is delinquent. You may retain counsel. And your service may be discontinued on May the 22nd, unless payment is received in full. Is there anyone here that wishes to contest their water, sewer, or trash delinquency? Smith: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Yes. Gary. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 92 of 95 Smith: The water department has requested that they also be allowed to turn off on the 29th. Corrie: The 22nd and the 29th? Smith: Yes, sir. Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Service will be discontinued on May the 22nd or May the 29th, unless payment is received in full. You are hereby informed that you may appeal to have the decision of the city reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court pursuant to Idaho state code. Even though you appeal your water will be shut off. The amount of the turn off list is $14,862.83. I will entertain a motion on the delinquency turn off. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I move that we accept the water, sewer and trash delinquency list and the turn off schedule for May 22nd and May 29th. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded. Any other discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: I will entertain a motion to adjourn, unless anybody has anything seriously to discuss. Bird: So moved. Worley: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: I didn't hear a second on that, so you may talk, Chief. Worley: I'd just like to mention to Council if you want to tentatively put on your schedules the afternoon of June 17th. We are tentatively planning a ribbon cutting for that day. Corrie: June 17th. De Weerd: Put it on the 19th. Bird: And you and the Mayor are barbecuing? Worley: Something like that, Mr. Bird. Corrie: Don't tell all, chief. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 93 of 95 Worley: And also, Mayor Corrie and President de Weerd, we would like to schedule a final walk-through on the 11 th prior to the -- you're not going to be here then either. Striking out all over tonight. De Weerd: Gone from the 9th to the 18th. Worley: It's all planned this way, too. De Weerd: I know. Worley: The 17th of June is on a Monday and I was talking about a Mayor and Council final walk-through on the 11 tho McCandless: Is that going to be at night or -- Bird: During the day. We will have the Chamber come do their normal ribbon cutting. McCandless: I haven't made my reservations yet. I might come back early. Worley: It's still tentative, but I was told today that the clean up and waxing and that sort of thing starts probably the end of this week. Corrie: Okay. McCandless: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. McCandless. McCandless: There is one thing I wanted to say and that is it seems like we are getting an awful lot of pieces of paper that we are supposed to read while they are talking to us all of a sudden. Bird: We are having that trouble again, aren't we, Cherie. McCandless: Yes, we are. Bird: Shut them down again if they aren't in here by Friday, they don't-- McCandless: Well, I don't know about you guys, but I can't read and listen at the same time. One or the other. Corrie: Well, then we can certainly do that, if that's what-- McCandless: Well, we thought we had that-- Corrie: Well, I know, but it seems like that keeps popping up. So what we need to do is have the city clerk's office make sure that when they come that they know that Thursday Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 94 of 95 is the cut off and I will make the announcement at the beginning of the meeting that any new materials will not be accepted -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I think another thing that we have to make sure is our staff comments and stuff get out to the applicants in plenty of time. You can't expect the applicants to have it here by Thursday or Friday if we don't get our reports to them until Thursday or Friday and then there isn't time if they haven't got the faxes that Monday, then we get upset over them being there Tuesday, I think that as the previous Council did a couple times, we just shut her down, just don't take it. And that happens once or twice -- and as for staff, that's -- Mr. Mayor, you're going to have to take care of that end of it and if they are not getting it out we have got to find out why they are not getting it back out to them in time and if the applicant isn't getting it back, they can be put it off for two weeks, as far as I'm concerned. I'm like Cherie, I'm sick and tired of coming in here and getting six inches of paper that shows up on important items that we sit here and try to read through and find out and, you know, it doesn't make us look too smart and it doesn't take much -- I don't need much help to look dumb. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: The other side of the coin, though, that we do need to remember as we go through the budget process next month we need to look at that, but part of the reason, to be fair to the staff, is we don't have a lot of staff. We have a lot of stuff, but we don't have a lot of people to do it. And so we need to evaluate that, too, if that is part of the problem. I don't know what the particular problem is, but I agree it is very troubling and difficult to try to evaluate something as you're reading it when they are trying to talk to you. But part of that problem may be the fact that we just don't have enough people to do the things that we need done. So we either need to figure out a way to do that, or we have to look at some other way to do that, so that way we don't delay developers unnecessarily and give our staff adequate time to respond to things and give us adequate time to review things. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I just want to remind you that on the 29th that we have -- we meet at 5:30, because we have a -- the joint meeting with ACHD on Waltman, Main Street intersection and then on the 18th we meet at 4:30 with Doneen Blakeslee in June and I just wanted to say something to Gary. That letter from Brad to the -- on the South Slough, sewer and water, that was a great letter. If you could pass that on to Brad, that was very nice. Meridian City Council Meeting May 21, 2002 Page 95 of 95 Smith: I will. Thank you. De Weerd: I move we adjourn. Nary: Second. Corrie: All in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Adjourned at 12:05. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:05 A.M. FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) 6 I (/3 102- DATE May 17,2002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT May 21,2002 ITEM NO. :3 - A REQUEST Approve minutes from April 3, 2002 City Council Special 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: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Afp(OYU J-/-O Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property ot the City of Meridian. May 17,2002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING May 21,2002 APPLICANT ITEM NO. ~ / B REQUEST Approve minutes from April 17, 2002 City Council Special 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: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: ftfpfD I{ f!J ).1- 0 Date: Phone: Materials presented at pUblic meetings shall become property otthe City at Meridian. May 17,2002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT May 21, 2002 ITEM NO. 3-C REQUEST Approve minutes from April 23, 2002 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: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMP A MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: AtProYU J-f-D Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. May 17,2002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING May 21 , 2002 APPLICANT ITEM NO. ~ - D REQUEST Approve minutes from April 30, 2002 City Council Special Meeting 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: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS MfYTJ\{& /--f-o Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetIngs shall become property of the City of Meridian. BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN C/C 04/16/02 IN THE MATTER OF THE ) REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL ) USE PERMIT FOR 1,743 SQ. ) FT. SANDWICH SHOP ) (SUBWAY) IN AN L-O ZONE ) LOCATED AT THE ) NORTHEAST CORNER OF ) MAGIC VIEW AND S. ALLEN ) STREET, MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) ) BUUNEANDCYNTH~ ) JACOBSON, ) ) APPLICANT ) ) Case No. CUP-OI-045 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The above entitled conditional use permit application having come before the City Council on April 2, 2002 and continued until April 16, 2002, at the hour of 6:30 p.m., at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and David McKinnion Planner II for the Planning and Zoning Department, and Cornell Larsen, appeared and testified, and the City Council having duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter and the Recommendations to City Council issued by the Planning and Zoning Commission who conducted a public hearing and the Council having heard and taken oral and written testimony, and having duly FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 1 considered the matter, the City Council hereby makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order to-wit: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. A notice of a public hearing on the conditional use permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for April 16, 2002, before the City Council, the first publication appearing and written notice having been mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred feet (300') of the external boundaries of the property under consideration more than fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing and with the notice of public hearing having been posted upon the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing and the copies of all notices were made available to newspaper, radio and television stations as public service announcements; and the matter having been duly considered by the City Council at the April 16, 2002, public hearings; and the applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian, having been given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. 2. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code &67-6509,6512, 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 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 2 of Posting filed with the staff report. 3. This proposed development request is in an L-O zone and by reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code S 11-17-4, a public hearing was required before the City Council on this application. 4. The property is located at the northeast corner of Magic View and S. Allen Street, Meridian, Idaho. 5. The owner of record of the subject property is W.H. Moore Company of Boise, Idaho. 6. Applicants are Blaine and Cynthia Jacobson, dba Subway Sandwich and Salads of Boise, Idaho. 7. The subject property is currently zoned L-O. The zoning district of L-O is defined within the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, Section 11-7-2. 8. The proposed application requests a conditional use permit for drive- thru Subway restaurant. The L-O zoning designation within the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance requires a conditional use permit be obtained for most uses including those requested by the Applicant. (Meridian City Zoning and Development Ordinance, Section 11-8-1). 9. The Meridian City Council recognizes that the proposed application is FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 3 in compliance with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 10. The use proposed within the subject application will in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City Ordinance. 11. 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 and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, and Maps and the Ordinance establishing the Impact Area Boundary. 12. Giving due consideration to the comment received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian 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 and the following is also found to be required to mitigate the effects of the proposed use and development upon services delivered by political subdivisions providing services to the subject real property within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian, subject to the following: Adopt the Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff as follows: 1. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. The revised landscape plan shall include landscaping for the entire perimeter of the property per the approved plan in accordance with the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 4 Meridian Landscape Ordinance. As well as the addition of at least one additional tree on the east side of the property, among the arborvitae, in order to meet the one tree per 35 lineal feet requirement for landscape buffers adjacent to parking. Please note that there is an existing sanitary sewer service line along the east boundary that serves the property to the north. This is a private service line within an easement. The existence of this service line should be considered when placing and selecting trees for this area. A detailed irrigation plan with performance specifications will be required as part of the revised landscape plan. A pathway through landscaping for foot traffic from the surrounding building shall be provided. 2. All parking and areas of circulation shall be improved with a hard surface in accordance with Meridian City Code Il-13-4.D. A new site plan shall be submitted that provides a 25-foot wide driveway aisle width for the northern parking stalls and that provides at least a 9' wide drive-through lane. 3. 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. 4. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-14 of the City Zoning and Development Ordinance. All sigtlage is subject to design review and shall require separate permits. Temporary or portable signs are prohibited, and will be removed upon 3 days notice to the applicant. 5. Prior to the construction of a second building on the subject property, the developer shall apply for and obtain a conditional use permit for a planned development prior to construction. 6. The hours of operation shall be from 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Sunday through Wednesday, and from 10:00 a.m. to II :00 p.m. Thursday through Saturday. 7. All construction and site improvements shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 8. As the development agreement specifically limited uses on the property to office and an ancillary restaurant (included within an office building) as represented at public hearings, a modification would be required prior to City Council approval of the project. The original Development Agreement for the Magic View annexation will FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 5 need to be modified to include the following use as a conditional use for the southeastern parcel: Drive-through Restaurant. Modification of the development agreement requires a separate application and public hearing process and must include all owners of the property included in the original Development Agreement. If drive-throughs are to be considered on this property, staff recommends that they be limited and that the amendment to the development agreement be very specific that it is not a blanket amendment to all of the property. 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 a 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. IO.Trash: The trash enclosure shall be enclosed on at least three (3) sides by a solid wall or sight-obscuring fence at least four (4) feet in height in accordance with Ordinance 11-12-1 C. Coordinate location and construction requirements with Sanitary Services, Inc. II. 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 fonn 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. 12.As part of a conditional use permit, the City of Meridian may impose additional restrictions/condi tions. 13.Water and sewer service locations to serve this proposed building were not shown on the submitted site plan. The designer shall furnish the Public Works Department a new site plan showing proposed and existing utility locations. 14.A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and a building permit shall be obtained prior to FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 6 the start of construction. IS. This conditional use permit shall be voided if the start of construction for the approved use does not begin within 18 months of approval by City Council per MCC1I-I7-4B. Adopt the Recommendations of the ACHD as follows: 1. The applicant shall provide the District with a copy of a recorded access easement among the parcels for use of the driveway for access to the public street prior to approval. 2. Dedicate 29-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Magic View Drive abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of-way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will not be compensated for this additional right-of-way because Magic View Drive is a loca1l10cal commercial street and is to be brought to adopted standards by the developers of abutting properties. 3. Applicant is proposing two driveways on Magic View Drive; · Proposed driveway # I is located approximately IIO-feet from the intersection of Allen Street and Magic View Drive. This location meets District policy and is approved with this application. Pave the driveway to its full-required width of 25 to 30-feet and to a point 30-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Magic View Drive. · Proposed driveway # 2 is located approximately 250-feet from the intersection of Allen Street and Magic View Drive. This location meets District policy and is approved with this application. Pave the driveway to its full-required width and to a point 30-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Magic View Drive. Pave the driveway to its full-required width of 25 to 30-feet and to a point 30-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Allen Street. 4. Construct curb, gutter, 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk, and match paving on Magic View Drive abutting the parcel. Improvements shall be constructed to one-half of a 40-foot street section. 5. Replace any damaged curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk on Allen Street to match existing FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 7 improvements. Segments to be replaced shall be determined by ACHD Construction Services staff. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 6. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact ACHD's Utility Coordinator at 387- 2516 or 378-6258 (with file, number) for details. 7. Meet District drainage requirements per section 8000 of the ACHD Development Policy Manual. Contact District staff at 387-6170 for details. 8. If utility relocation is necessary to construct improvements required with this development, then all utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 9. Any existing irrigation facilities should be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 10. Comply with the ACHD's Standard Requirements listed in their report dated January 18, 2002. Adopt the Recommendations of Central District Health as follows: 1. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 2. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 3. 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. 4. Applicant shall submit plans for a food establishment reVIew. Adopt the Recommendations of Sanitary Service as follows: 1. Waste Enclosure location site pertaining to the dimensions they look good. However, Applicant shall allow a minimum of 11' inside the gate posts. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 8 / I Adopt the Recommendations of Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District as follows: I. If all drainage is retained on site this project will not impact the District, however, if any drainage leaves the site a Land Use Change / Site application shall be required. 2. If the development is planning a pressure urban irrigation systeln that will be owned, operated and maintained by the Irrigation District, contact the District on the installation of the pressure system. Fill out questionnaire and return it to initiate the process of contractual agreements between the owner or developer and the District for the ownership, operation and maintenance of the pressure urban irrigation system. 3. All laterals and waste ways shall be protected and 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. The developer must comply with Idaho Code 931-3805. Adopt the Recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department as follows: 1. A fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute shall be available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 400' 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. 4. All radii shall be 28' inside and 48' outside radius for the internal road system. Adopt the Recommendations of the Water Department as follows: 1. Water service for this lot can be obtained from the 10" water main in Magic View Drive. Additionally, adopt the action of the City Council from their Tuesday, April 16, 2002 meeting as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 9 I. At this time, perimeter landscaping shall not be required where the future office building will be constructed. This does not waive or eliminate the perimeter landscaping which will be required when the future office building is constructed. 13. 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; it is found that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the requested drive-thru restaurant use and the required features. A modification to the driveway aisle width on the north side of the property shall be required to accommodate the drive-thru driveway aisle and the adjacent parking. The submitted site plan shows the drive-thru lane as part of driveway asile width. A barrier (e.g., striping) to separate the drive-thru from the parking area driveway. When the applicant or another developer applies for the construction of a second building on this site, it shall be required to apply for a conditional use permit as a planned development or further subdivide the property. If the developer applies for a conditional use permit for a planned development, they shall be required to meet all of the planned development standards as listed in Title 12, Chapter 6 of the Meridian City Code. 14. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; it is found that the current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 10 the property as "Mixed!Planned Use Development". It is also found that the development plan to be in harmony wit the Meridian Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. 15. 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 0 the same area; it is found that the proposed development will not change the essential character of the general vicinity and will be harmonious with the intended character of the same area, however, it is not in compliance with the intended character of the general vicinity. The intended character, as indicated by the Development Agreement and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the Magic View Office Complex, Annexation and Conditional Use Permit, has always been office, with an "ancillary" restaurant. A freestanding (non-ancillary) drive-thru restaurant is not an office use. 16. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; it is found that the proposed use may adversely affect other properties in the general vicinity by means of the speaker/menu board sound, additional traffic and traffic headlights. The applicant has placed the speaker and driveMthru window in a manner that will reduce the intrusion of headlights into the residential neighborhood to the north. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 11 Nevertheless, the speaker is directed at the residential neighborhood. 17. That the proposed use will be selVed 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; it is found that the proposed development will be adequately selVed by the essential public facilities and services listed above, however, when and if the second building is approved on the site, additional sewer and water selVice lines will need to be installed for said building. 18. 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; it is found that the proposed use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community, nor would it create the need for any new facilities or selVices to be paid for by the public. 19. 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; it is found that no excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors will result from the proposed use, however, noise from the speaker/menu- board may be detrimental to adjacent properties. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERl\1IT - 12 20. 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; it is found that the proposed use will not create significant interference with any traffic on the surrounding public streets as long as ACHD requirements are met and all approaches and traffic control measures are installed. 21. 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. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975" hereinafter referred to for convenience as the "Act" codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.c. &67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council may exercise all the powers required and authorized under the "Act" except the power to adopt ordinances by the establishment of a Planning and Zoning Commission by ordinance pursuant to Idaho Code Section 67-6504 which the City Council of the City of Meridian has established by the passage of the "City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance" at Titles XI and XII, Chapter I, Meridian City Code. 3. As part of a zoning ordinance the City Council can, subject to hearing and notice provision required, provide for the process of special and/or conditional use permits which a proposed use is otherwise prohibited by the terms of the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 13 ordinance but allowed with conditions under the specific provisions of the ordinance which the City of Meridian has done in the adoption of its zoning ordinances. 4. The City Council has the duty and responsibility to review the facts and circumstances of each application for special use permit to determine prior to granting the same that the evidential showing supports the finding that the following standards are met and that the proposed development: (Meridian City Code s 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; 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; 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; d. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; e. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer; or that the person responsible for the establishment of the proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; f. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; g. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 14 property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; h. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; and 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. 5. Prior to granting a conditional use permit in the Limited Office District (L-O), a public hearing shall be conducted with notice to be published and provided to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred feet (300') of the external boundaries of the land under consideration for the conditional use permit all in accordance with the provisions of Meridian City Code S 11-17-5 City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, which provides as follows: "Prior to approving a Conditional Use Permit, the applicant and the Commission and Council shall follow notice and hearing procedures provided in Chapter 15 of this Title. Provided, however, that conditional use applications for land in Old Town and in industrial and commercial districts shall only be required to have one public hearing which shall be held before the Planning and Zoning Commission; and after the recommendation of the Commission is made, the application shall go before the City Council without a public hearing and the Council may approve, deny, or modify the recommendation of the Commission." 6. Following the public hearing and within 45 days after the conclusion of the public hearing the Commission shall, transmit its recommendations to the Meridian City Council with supportive reasons. The Commission shall recommend that the application be approved, approved with conditions or denied. The Commission shall ensure that any approval or approval with conditions of an FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 15 application shall be in accordance with Meridian Comprehensive Plan, City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, and Idaho State law. (Meridian City Code ~ 11-17-6) 7. When the City Council approves a conditional use permit it may impose conditions of that approval that reasonably: A. Minimize adverse impact on other development; B. Control the sequence and timing of development; C. Control the duration of development; D. Assure that the development is maintained properly; E. Designate the exact location and nature of the development; F. Require the provision for on-site public facilities or services; and G. Require more restrictive standards than those generally required, in this Ordinance. 8. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted December 21, 1993, Ord. 629, January 4, 1994 and Maps. DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the City Council does FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 16 hereby ORDER and this does Order that: 1. That the above named applicant is granted a conditional use permit for a drive-thru Subway restaurant, in a L-O zone located at the northeast corner of Magic View and S. Allen Street, Meridian, Idaho, subject to the following conditions of use and development, subject to the following: Adopt the Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff as follows: 1. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. The revised landscape plan shall include landscaping for the entire perimeter of the property per the approved plan in accordance with the Meridian Landscape Ordinance. As well as the addition of at least one additional tree on the east side of the property, among the arborvitae, in order to meet the one tree per 35 lineal feet requirement for landscape buffers adjacent to parking. Please note that there is an existing sanitary sewer service line along the east boundary that serves the property to the north. This is a private service line within an easement. The existence of this service line should be considered when placing and selecting trees for this area. A detailed irrigation plan with performance specifications will be required as part of the revised landscape plan. A pathway through landscaping for foot traffic from the surrounding building shall be provided. 2. All parking and areas of circulation shall be improved with a hard surface in accordance with Meridian City Code 11-13-4.0. A new site plan shall be submitted that provides a 25-foot wide driveway aisle width for the northern parldng stalls and that provides at least a 9' wide drive-through lane. 3. All exterior lighting, whether attached to the building or located within the parldng lot, shall be down-shielded or otherwise altered so that the light does not spill over onto adjacent properties or right-of-way. All parldng lot lighting shall be in accordance with Ordinance 11-13-4C. 4. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-14 of the City Zoning and Development Ordinance. All signage is subject to design review and shall require separate permits. Temporary or portable signs are FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 17 prohibited, and will be removed upon 3 days notice to the applicant. 5. Prior to the construction of a second building on the subject property, the developer shall apply for and obtain a conditional use permit for a planned development prior to construction. 6. The hours of operation shall be from 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Sunday through Wednesday, and from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Thursday through Saturday. 7. All construction and site improvements shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 8. As the development agreement specifically limited uses on the property to office and an ancillary restaurant (included within an office building) as represented at public hearings, a modification would be required prior to City Council approval of the project. The original Development Agreement for the Magic View annexation will need to be modified to include the following use as a conditional use for the southeastern parcel: Drive~through Restaurant. Modification of the development agreement requires a separate application and public hearing process and must include all owners of the property included in the original Development Agreement. If drive-throughs are to be considered on this property, staff recommends that they be limited and that the amendment to the development agreement be very specific that it is not a blanket amendment to all of the property. 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 a 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. Trash: The trash enclosure shall be enclosed on at least three (3) sides by a solid wall or sight-obscuring fence at least four (4) feet in height in accordance with Ordinance 11-12-1 C. Coordinate location and construction requirements with Sanitary Services, Inc. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 18 II. 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. Any temporary occupancy will not exceed 60 days to complete the required improvements. 12. As part of a conditional use permit, the City of Meridian may impose additional restrictions/condi tions. 13. Water and sewer service locations to serve this proposed building were not shovvn on the submitted site plan. The designer shall furnish the Public Works Department a new site plan showing proposed and existing utility locations. 14. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and a building permit shall be obtained prior to the start of construction. 15. This conditional use permit shall be voided if the start of construction for the approved use does not begin within 18 months of approval by City Council per MCCII-I7-4B. Adopt the Recommendations of the ACHD as follows: I. The applicant shall provide the District with a copy of a recorded access easement among the parcels for use of the driveway for access to the public street prior to approval. 2. Dedicate 29-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Magic View Drive abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building pennit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of-way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will not be compensated for this additional right-of-way because Magic View Drive is a local/local commercial street and is to be brought to adopted standards by the developers of abutting properties. 3. Applicant is proposing two driveways on Magic View Drive; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 19 · Proposed driveway # I is located approximately II O~feet from the intersection of Allen Street and Magic View Drive. This location meets District policy and is approved with this application. Pave the driveway to its full-required width of 25 to 30-feet and to a point 3D-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Magic View Drive. · Proposed driveway # 2 is located approximately 250~feet from the intersection of Allen Street and Magic View Drive. This location meets District policy and is approved with this application. Pave the driveway to its full-required width and to a point 30-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Magic View Drive. Pave the driveway to its full-required width of 25 to 30-feet and to a point 30-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Allen Street. 4. Construct curb, gutter, 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk, and match paving on Magic View Drive abutting the parcel. Improvements shall be constructed to one-half of a 40-foot street section. 5. Replace any damaged curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk on Allen Street to match existing improvements. Segments to be replaced shall be determined by ACHD Construction Services staff. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 6. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact ACHD's Utility Coordinator at 387-2516 or 378-6258 (with file number) for details. 7. Meet District drainage requirements per section 8000 of the ACHD Development Policy Manual. Contact District staff at 387~6170 for details. 8. If utility relocation is necessary to construct improvements required with this development, then all utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 9. Any existing irrigation facilities should be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 10. Comply with the ACHD's Standard Requirements listed in their report dated January 18, 2002. Adopt the Recommendations of Central District Health as follows: 1. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 20 2. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 3. 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. 4. Applicant shall submit plans for a food establishment review. Adopt the Recommendations of Sanitary Service as follows: 1. Waste Enclosure location site pertaining to the dimensions they look good. However, Applicant shall allow a minimum of II' inside the gate posts. Adopt the Recommendations of Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District as follows: 1. If all drainage is retained on site this project will not impact the District, however, if any drainage leaves the site a Land Use Change / Site application shall be required. 2. If the development is planning a pressure urban irrigation system that will be owned, operated and maintained by the Irrigation District, contact the District on the installation of the pressure system. Fill out questionnaire and return it to initiate the process of contractual agreements between the owner or developer and the District for the ownership, operation and maintenance of the pressure urban irrigation system. 3. All laterals and waste ways shall be protected and 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. The developer must comply with Idaho Code s3I-3805. Adopt the Recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department as follows: 1. A fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute shall be available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 21 400' 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. 4. All radii shall be 28' inside and 48' outside radius for the internal road system. Adopt the Recommendations of the Water Department as follows: 1. Water service for this lot can be obtained from the 10" water main in Magic View Drive. Additionally, adopt the action of the City Council from their Tuesday, April 16, 2002 meeting as follows: 1. At this time, perimeter landscaping shall not be required where the future office building will be constructed. This does not waive or eliminate the perimeter landscaping which will be required when the future office building is constructed. 2. The conditions shall be reviewable by the Council pursuant to Meridian City Code S 11-17-9. 3. The above conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application for a conditional use permit. 4. That the City Attorney draft an Order Granting Conditional Use Permit 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 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 22 Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION 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. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~I day of yYl~ ,2002. ROLL CALL: COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD VOTED ~ COUNCILWOIv1AN TAMMY deWEERD VOTED~ COUNCILWOMAN CHElUE Mc CANDLESS VOTEDJft2=- COUNCILMAN WILLIAlVl L.M. NARY VOTED ~ MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED ...--- DATED: MOTION: APPROVED:~ DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 23 Copy served upon Applicant, Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By: City Clerk S h CUt 0'L>2mc cWu Dated: 6 -!):J -Or;}-1 Z:\Work\M\Meridian\Meridian I 5360M\Subay\FfClsCUPO I .045.doc FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 24 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN C/C 04/16/02 IN THE MATTER OF THE ) REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL ) USE PERMIT FOR 1,743 SQ. ) FT. SANDWICH SHOP ) (SUBWAY) IN AN L-O ZONE ) LOCATED AT THE ) NORTHEAST CORNER OF ) MAGIC VIEW AND S. ALLEN ) STREET, MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) ) BLAINE & CYNTHIA ) JACOBSON, ) ) APPLICANT ) ) Case No. CUP-OI-045 ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1. This matter coming before the City Council on the April 2, 2002 and continued until April 16, 2002, under the provisions of Meridian City Code S 11-17- 4 for final action on conditional use permit application and the Council having received and approving the Recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission the Council takes the following action: 2. That the above named applicant is granted a conditional use permit for a drive-thru Subway restaurant in an L-O zone located at the northeast corner of ORDER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP-OI-045) - I Magic View and S. Allen Street, Meridian, Idaho, subject to the following conditions of use and development: Adopt the Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff as follows: 1. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. The revised landscape plan shall include landscaping for the entire perimeter of the property per the approved plan in accordance with the Meridian Landscape Ordinance. As well as the addition of at least one additional tree on the east side of the property, among the arborvitae, in order to meet the one tree per 35 lineal feet requirement for landscape buffers adjacent to parking. Please note that there is an existing sanitary sewer service line along the east boundary that serves the property to the north. This is a private service line within an easement. The existence of this service line should be considered when placing and selecting trees for this area. A detailed irrigation plan with performance specifications will be required as part of the revised landscape plan. A pathway through landscaping for foot traffic from the surrounding building shall be provided. 2. All parking and areas of circulation shall be improved with a hard surface in accordance with Meridian City Code 11-13-4.D. A new site plan shall be submitted that provides a 25-foot wide driveway aisle width for the northern parking stalls and that provides at least a 9' wide drive-through lane, 3. 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-oE-way. All parldng lot lighting shall be in accordance with Ordinance 11-13-4C. 4. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-14 of the City Zoning and Development Ordinance. All signage is subject to design review and shall require separate permits. Temporary or portable signs are prohibited, and will be removed upon 3 days notice to the applicant. 5. Prior to the construction of a second building on the subject property, the developer shall apply for and obtain a conditional use permit for a planned development prior to construction. ORDER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP-OI-045) -2 6. The hours of operation shall be from 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Sunday through Wednesday, and from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Thursday through Saturday. 7. AIl construction and site improvements shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 8. & the development agreement specifically limited uses on the property to office and an ancillary restaurant (included within an office building) as represented at public hearings, a modification would be required prior to City Council approval of the project. The original Development Agreement for the Magic View annexation will need to be modified to include the following use as a conditional use for the southeastern parcel: Drivewthrough Restaurant. Modification of the development agreement requires a separate application and public hearing process and must include all owners of the property included in the original Development Agreement. If drive-throughs are to be considered on this property, staff recommends that they be limited and that the amendment to the development agreement be very specific that it is not a blanket amendment to all of the property. 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 a 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.Trash: The trash enclosure shall be enclosed on at least three (3) sides by a solid wall or sight-obscuring fence at least four (4) feet in height in accordance with Ordinance 11-12-1C. Coordinate location and construction requirements with Sanitary Services, Ine. 11. Certificate of Occupancy: AIl 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 ORDER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP-O 1-045) -3 accompany any request for temporary occupancy. Any temporary occupancy will not exceed 60 days to complete the required improvements. 12.As part of a conditional use permit, the City of Meridian may impose additional restrictions/condi ti ons. I3.Water and sewer service locations to serve this proposed building were not shovvn on the submitted site plan. The designer shall furnish the Public Works Department a new site plan showing proposed and existing utility locations. I4.A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and a building permit shall be obtained prior to the start of construction. IS. This conditional use permit shall be voided if the start of construction for the approved use does not begin within 18 months of approval by City Council per MCCII-17-4B. Adopt the Recommendations of the ACHD as follows: 1. The applicant shall provide the District with a copy of a recorded access easement among the parcels for use of the driveway for access to the public street prior to approval. 2. Dedicate 29-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Magic View Drive abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of-way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will not be compensated for this additional right-of-way because Magic View Drive is a 10caI/local commercial street and is to be brought to adopted standards by the developers of abutting properties. 3. Applicant is proposing two driveways on Magic View Drive; · Proposed driveway # I is located approximately II O-feet from the intersection of Allen Street and Magic View Drive. This location meets District policy and is approved with this application. Pave the driveway to its full-required width of 25 to 30-feet and to a point 30-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Magic View Drive. ORDER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP-01-045) -4 · Proposed driveway # 2 is located approximately 250-feet from the intersection of Allen Street and Magic View Drive. This location meets District policy and is approved with this application. Pave the driveway to its full-required width and to a point 30-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Magic View Drive. Pave the driveway to its full-required width of 25 to 30-feet and to a point 30-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Allen Street. 4. Construct curb, gutter, 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk, and match paving on Magic View Drive abutting the parcel. Improvements shall be constructed to one-half of a 40-foot street section. 5. Replace any damaged curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk on Allen Street to match existing improvements. Segments to be replaced shall be determined by ACHD Construction Services staff. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 6. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact ACHD's Utility Coordinator at 387- 2516 or 378-6258 (with file number) for details. 7. Meet District drainage requirements per section 8000 of the ACHD Development Policy Manual. Contact District staff at 387-6170 for details. 8. If utility relocation is necessary to construct improvements required with this development, then all utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 9. Any existing irrigation facilities should be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 10. Comply with the ACHD's Standard Requirements listed in their report dated January 18, 2002. Adopt the Recommendations of Central District Health as follows: I. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 2. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swaIe prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. ORDER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUpwOlw045) -5 3. 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. 4. Applicant shall submit plans for a food establishment reVIew. Adopt the Recommendations of Sanitary Service as follows: 1. Waste Enclosure location site pertaining to the dimensions they look good. However, Applicant shall allow a minimum of 11' inside the gate posts. Adopt the Recommendations of NaInpa & Meridian Irrigation District as follows: 1. If all drainage is retained on site this project will not impact the District, however, if any drainage leaves the site a Land Use Change I Site application shall be required. 2. If the development is planning a pressure urban irrigation system that will be owned, operated and maintained by the Irrigation District, contact the District on the installation of the pressure system. Fill out questionnaire and return it to initiate the process of contractual agreements between the owner or developer and the District for the ownership, operation and maintenance of the pressure urban irrigation systeIn. 3. All laterals and waste ways shall be protected and 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. The developer must comply with Idaho Code &31-3805. Adopt the Recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department as follows: 1. A fire~flow of 1,000 gallons per minute shall be available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 400' apart. ORDER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP-OI-045) - 6 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. 4. All radii shall be 28' inside and 48' outside radius for the internal road system. Adopt the Recommendations of the Water Department as follows: 1. Water service for this lot can be obtained from the 10" water main in Magic View Drive. Additionally, adopt the action of the City Council from their Tuesday, April 16, 2002 meeting as follows: I. At this time, perimeter landscaping shall not be required where the future office building will be constructed. This does not waive or eliminate the perimeter landscaping which will be required when the future office building is constructed. 3. The above conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application for a conditional use permit. 4. Notice to Permit Holder, this conditional use permit is not transferable without complying with the provisions of Meridian City Code S 11-17-8, a copy of which is attached to this permit. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the J... / day of ~cuy ,2002. ORDER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP~OlN045) N 7 ob rt D. Corrie, Mayor City of Meridian Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. By: City Clerk ~h etA on ~:Jh \ \,11\11111/// \\\\ /111 \\\\-{ Of Mff::tfl) II;; ,,\\ :'\ ~ ///.... } c:} cpt\POR,ij r. '1- ~ ::: ~ (:'0 ~ t6 Dated: ~- 22-02- SEAL - --: -y 0'::: .~~ \ <:0. ,,0) 2 -:;::. "'0 ...... uSr 1S\ ' -<9 .2 ,/:.<'1 to- "- -'; '1 A -0" ", //// I...()'''. "'-\f ' \,\ "I - .~:~ ~. \\\' ,,111 , Z:\ W ork\M\Meridian\Meri dian 1 5360M\Su bay\OrderCUP .doc ORDER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP-OI-045) - 8 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN THE MATTER OF THE REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR WILLEY SUBDIVISION, LOCATED AT 3710 E. FRANKLIN ROAD, MERIDIAN, IDAHO BY: ROYLANCE & ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT CIC 05/07/02 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. PP-02-005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT The above entitled matter coming on regularly for public hearing before the City Council on May 7, 2002, and Shari Stiles, PlalU1ing and Zoning Administrator, Gary Smith, Public Works Director, and Jolm RelU1ison, appeared and testified, and the City Council having received a report from Brad Hawkins-Clark, PlalU1er for the PlalU1ing and Zoning Department, and Bruce Freckleton, Engineering Teclmician III, and the City Council having received as part of the record of this matter the recommendation to City Council of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the applicant having submitted the "PRELIMINARY PLAT WILLEY SUBDIVISION, SITUATED IN THE SW1I4 OF THE SW 'l4 OF SECTION 9, T. 3N., R. lB., BM, CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2002, WILLEY SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT, DESIGN BY: JER, DRAWN BY: CRS, DATED 2/14/02, JOB NUMBER: 0201-2248, 1 OF 1, X:\projects\rcwilley\2248\drawings\plat\prelim\ 2248pre.dwg\ 04\05\02, R.C. WILLEY HOME FURNISHINGS - OWNER-DEVELOPER, ROYLANCE AND ASSOCIATES, P.A. - PROJECT ENGINEERJPLANNER", submitted for FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT WILLEY SUBDIVISION 1 (PP-02-005) 1 preliminary plat approval and which preliminary plat for approval application is herein received and adjudged by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code S 12-3-3. Therefore the City Council makes the following findings: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That the proposed development is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan by reason of the fact that it lies within the existing Urban Area as defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map. Infrastructure Planning Analysis Comprehensive Plan and Map. adopted December 21. 1993. and the property is presently zoned General Retail and Service Commercial District (C-G). and requires connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer System. [Meridian City Code S 11-7-2 K] 2. The preliminary plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan City of Meridian adopted December 21. 1993. Ordinance No. 629. 3. It is determined that Urban Services can be made available to accommodate the proposed development if the plat complies with the requirements and conditions hereinafter set forth as conditions of preliminary plat approval. and provided changes are made as may be required by the Public Works and Building Departments. 4. The proposed development is a continuity of the proposed development within the City's Capital Improvement Program and if the conditions which are requested by the Planning and Zoning Administrator and the Engineering Teclmician III and as proposed by the developer as stated on the preliminary plat there will be public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development ifbuilt in accordance with the conditions and as proposed, will FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT WILLEY SUBDIVISION / (PP-02-005) 2 not create health, safety or environmental problems and there have been no specifics of any such concerns brought to the Council's attention. 6. It is found that the Recommendation To City Council of the Planning and Zoning Commission is reasonable and appropriate for the conditions of approval of the preliminary plat as hereinafter set forth. 7. The applicant has submitted for consideration ofthis approval drawing ofthe preliminary plat herein designated as: "PRELIMINARY PLAT WILLEY SUBDIVISION) SITUATED IN THE SWl/4 OF THE SW 14 OF SECTION 9) T. 3N., R. IE.) BM) CITY OF MERIDIAN) ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2002) WILLEY SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT) DESIGN BY: JER, DRAWN BY: CRS, DATED 2/14/02) JOB NUMBER: 0201-2248) 1 OF I, X:\projects\rcwilley\2248\drawings\plat\prelim\2248pre.dwg\ 04\05\02, R.C. WILLEY HOME FURNISHINGS - OWNER-DEVELOPER) ROYLANCE AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.- PROJECT ENGINEERlPLANNER". 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 AND THIS DOES ORDER 1. The Preliminary Plat ofthe applicant as evidenced by "PRELIMINARY PLAT WILLEY SUBDIVISION, SITUATED IN THE SWl/4 OF THE SW 14 OF SECTION 9) T. 3N., R. IE., BM, CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2002, WILLEY SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT, DESIGN BY: JER, DRAWN BY: CRS) DATED 2/14/02, JOB NUMBER: 0201-2248, 1 OF I, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT WILLEY SUBDIVISION I (PP-02-005) 3 X:\projects\rcwilley\2248\drawings\plat\prelim\2248pre.dwg\ 04\05\02, R.C. WILLEY HOME FURNISHINGS - OWNER-DEVELOPER, ROYLANCE AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.- PROJECT ENGINEER/PLANNER", is hereby conditionally approved; and 2. The conditions of approval are as follows to-wit Adopt the Recommendations ofthe Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff as follows: 1. Sanitary sewer and water service to this site shall be via existing mains and lines adjacent to the lots, with the exception of Lot 1, Block 1, which will be served by a new sewer line to be installed in Gaudians Avenue by Touchmark, Inc. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. 2. Applicant shall revise the plat to add two-foot contour lines to the east portion of Lot 3, Block 2 and to Lot 2, Block 1. 3. Applicant has indicated that a pressurized irrigation system will be provided to the three (3) new buildable lots (already existing to Lot 2, Block 1) through the existing irrigation pump located on Lot 3, Block 2. However, no details were provided on ownership of the system. Applicant shall confirm that the system will remain private. The applicant shall be required to provide a backup source to the pressurized irrigation system. As part of the development plan-review process, the Public Works Department shall review plans and specifications for the irrigation system. A draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual must be submitted prior to plan approval. 4. Per Ordinance 12-5-2.K, the subdivider will be responsible to construct new, five (5) foot wide sidewalks adjacent to Eagle Road/SH 55. The sidewalk design and location should be coordinated with ITD for Eagle Road/SH 55 and City of Meridian. 5. Per Ordinance 12-13-10-4, a minimum 35-foot wide landscape buffer is required along Eagle Road/SH 55 and Franklin Road. Lot 2, Block 1 (existing R.C. Willey building) has an existing buffer that meets this ordinance. However, the subdivider will be required to continue the 35-foot buffer along Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2. Per Ordinance 12-13-10-2, if detached sidewalks are provided, the buffer width may be measured from the back of curb when it can be demonstrated that there is no opportunity for expansion of the street section within the right-of-way; the buffer width must exclude the width of the sidewalk. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT WILLEY SUBDIVISION / (PP-02-005) 4 6. All landscaped street buffers may be placed within a landscape easement, maintained by a business-owners association. All landscaping is to be done prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. The conceptual Landscape Plan (Sheet L-l, dated 2-14-02) is approved as submitted with the exception that the eight (8) trees in the Eagle Road landscape buffer on Lot 1, Block 2 must be relocated outside ofthe public right-of-way. Said modification must be reflected on the detailed landscape plan submitted with the Final Plat application. 8. The Applicant/Subdivider is responsible to ensure that the new street trees on Eagle and Franklin Roads will not conflict with power poles or utility lines when trees reach mature size. 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 a 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. PRELIMINARY PLAT GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1. Applicant shall submit a copy of the Ada County Street Name Committee's final approval letter for the subdivision name, and the lot and block numbering. 2. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 3. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% of any incomplete improvements will be required for all landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to City signature on the final plat. 4. 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. 5. The Evans Drain shall be tiled upon receipt of approval of all applicable controlling authorities. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT WILLEY SUBDIVISION / (PP~02-005) 5 intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. The ditches to be piped should be shown on the site plans. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 6. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Sections 9-1 ~4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 7. Per Ordinance 12-13-8-2, three (3) copies of detailed irrigation performance specifications shall be submitted with the Final Plat application. Adopt the Recommendations of ACHD as follows: 1. Comply with requirements ofITD for State Highway 55 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. 2. Utilize the existing driveway to Lanark Street, located approximately 140-feet east ofthe west property boundary. This driveway location meets District policy and is approved with this application. The applicant is also proposing to utilize an existing driveway to Lanark Street, located approximately 350-feet east of the west property boundary. This driveway location meets District policy and is approved with this application. Pave the driveways to their full-required width of 24 to 3D-feet and to a point 3D-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Lan ark Street. 3. Utilize a driveway to Gaudians Avenue, located approximately 500-feet north ofthe south property boundary. This driveway location meets District policy and is approved with this application. The applicant is proposing to utilize an existing driveway on Gaudians Avenue, located approximately 720-feet north ofthe south property boundary. This location meets District policy and is approved with this application. Pave the driveways to their full-required width of24 to 3D-feet and to a point 3D-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Gaudians Avenue. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. 5. Meet District drainage requirements per section 8000 of the ACHD Development Policy Manual. 6. If utility relocation is necessary to constmct improvements required with this development, then all utility relocation costs associated with improving street FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT WILLEY SUBDIVISION I (PP-02-005) 6 frontages abutting the site should be borne by the developer. 7. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 8. There are no direct lot or parcel access points approved with this application to Franklin Road and Eagle Road. Direct lot or parcel access to Franklin Road and Eagle Road is prohibited. Lot access restrictions, as required with this application, shall be stated on the final plat. 9. Additionally, comply with ACHD's Standard Requirements listed within their report dated March 15, 2002 Adopt the Meridian Fire Department Recommendations as follows; 1. A fire-flow consistent with Appendix III-A of the Uniform Fire Code shall be provided to service the entire project. Please show all proximity fire hydrants within 500' of the project on the resubmitted plat. 2. All internal and external roads shall have a minimum of281 inside and 481 outside radius. 3. The proposed buildings and uses shall comply with the 1997 Uniform Fire Code. 4. Acceptance of water supply for fire protection is contingent upon acceptance of the water system by the City of Meridian. 5. Final approval for fire hydrant location shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. 6. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway standards and are a minimum of 3 7' wide. Adopt the Recommendation of the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. 1. The flow for this drain will not exceed the maximum of 48 inches of the City of Meridian's ordinance. This is a subterranean drain and will have to be tiled accordingly. 2. A Land Use Change/Site application shall be filed. 3. All laterals and waste ways must be protected and 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. The developer must comply with Idaho Code S31-3805. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT WILLEY SUBDIVISION / (PP-02-005) 7 day of 4. Should the development be planning a pressure urban irrigation system that will be owned, operated and maintained by the Irrigation District contact the District concerning the installation of the pressure system. Fill out a questionnaire and return to the District in order to initiate the process of contractual agreements between the owner or developer and the Irrigation District for the ownership, operation and maintenance of the pressure urban irrigation system. Adopt the Recommendations of the Central District Health Department as follows: 1. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Envirorunental Quality. 2. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 3. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 4. 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. Adopt the Recommendations of Sanitary Service as follows: 1. Provide waste enclosure plans for review. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the /11 O( >>,) , 2002. i) ROLL CALL c?l COUNCILMAN BIRD VOTED our COUNCILWOMAN deWEERD VOTED aCJL COUNCILWOMAN McCANDLESS VOTED cuy COUNCILMAN NARY VOTED ~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT WILLEY SUBDIVISION / (PP-02-005) 8 MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE VOTED- (TIE BREAKER) . f ~ 11 AfrroD,e_d. " it( ~ - I CLij'OY Copy served upon Applicant. The Planning and Zolrt\ng)?,epartment, Public Works . \ \ \ \ III { Department and City Attorney. ,.,,'.I\~ Of M~fl/I'III' " -0 /0,1. ,II' /' (j c,ORPO'0)'; ~z..I'% o r ~ (J, j () ^ -" I ...'~ ~ A -; By: drLOJVoYl CYYYu.-"to! IJf~-kJ' Dated: tJ :- :;L -lXJ- City Clerk ,SEAL Z:\Work\M\Meridian\Mcridian I 5360M\Willey Sub PP-02-005\FfClsOrdPP.doc \~ ,.t) ~ '1'-, ,,-,- ~ ~;~'>" \.~/j" ,q; 0 $ ~; ~...:-:; , .. 'J r 1 SI , X-" --::;.. I """, , <\~ ......$' "," ., '~r~" \'v I'"~ . 1, ,I" IIII'. \ \ \' FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT WILLEY SUBDIVISION / (PP~02~005) 9 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN C/C 05/07/02 IN THE MATTER OF THE ) REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION ) TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAT ) PERTAINING TO THE SIDEWALK ) REQUIREMENT FOR 3 BUILDING ) LOTS, A 5.69 AREA PARCEL, A 6.8 ) ACRE PARCEL AND A 1 ACRE ) PARCEL, FOR ELIXIR ) SUBDIVISION, LOCATED AT 521 ) N. EAGLE ROAD, MERIDIAN, ) IDAHO ) ) BY: ELIXIR INDUSTRIES, ) ) ) APPLICANT ) ) CASE NO. MI-02-004 MODIFICATION TO THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT The above entitled matter coming on regularly for public hearing before the City Council on May 7, 2002, at 6:30 o'clock p.m. at the Meridian City Hall located at 33 East Idaho, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, and Paul Clayton, appeared and testified, and no one appeared in opposition, and the City Council having received a report from David McKinnon, Planner II for the Planning and Zoning Department, and the City Council having received as part of the record of this matter the recommendation to City Council of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the applicant having submitted the "PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR ELIXIR PROPERTIES SUBDIVISION, A PORTION OF THE SE1I4 OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, MODIFICATION TO THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT ELIXIR SUBDIVISION FOR MI-02-004 AND PP-OI-014 - 1 IDAHO, BERGEY LAND SURVEYING PAYETTE AND HORSESHOE BEND, IDAHO, 2412-03.DWG, SHEET 1 OF 1, DATE STAMPED: RECEIVED JUL 24 2001 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE, ELIXIR INDUSTRIES, DEVELOPER", submitted for preliminary plat approval and which preliminary plat for approval application is herein received and adjudged by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code 9 12-3-3, and pursuant to the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the Preliminary Plat, Case No. PP-01-014, which were approved on September 19, 2001, and said Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the Preliminary Plat are hereby modified as follows: On page 7, Item number 17 is hereby deleted, and the applicant shall not be required to construct a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk on Eagle Road 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 AND THIS DOES ORDER 1. That the Findings of Fact and Conclusions for the Preliminary Plat, Case No. PP- 01-014, which were approved on September 19, 2001, shall be modified to delete Item 17 on Page 7, as the applicant shall not be required to construct a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk on Eagle Road By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the :;11 day of vnr CLu.! ' 2002. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN BIRD VOTED {tift v COUNCILWOMAN deWEERD VOTED (Jut COUNCILWOMAN McCANDLESS VOTED aLf MODIFICIATION TO THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT ELIXIR SUBDIVISION FOR MI-02-004 AND PP-OI-014 - 2 COUNCILMAN NARY VOTED CUJU MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE ~ VOTED- (TIE BREAKER) L1.r, /). =:: F I ndYl)IJ e.,o{ _ _~~ I WL Gl-C-~ Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoninll Department, Public Works Department . \ \ \ \ \ \ 111 r II 'if" and City Attorney. \\\\\ OF PJU::d'JI11 "" :\-{ '170... /"/" " c} 1'4J. ,...", :..~,. cpf,POflq h "'f; ~ :: .:f ~ 'S ~ ~ gh 0Ul <<l f}.~09-- By: City Clerk ~ - ... Z:\Work\M\Mcridian\Mcridian I 5360M\Elixir Sub MI-02-004\FfCls0rdMI-02-004.doc MODIFICIA TION TO THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT ELIXIR SUBDIVISION FOR MI-02-004 AND PP-OI-014 - 3 BEFORE THE MElUDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF PAUL B. CLAYTON, FOR A V AlUANCE FOR ELIXIR SUBDIVISION FROM 12-5- 2K MElUDIAN CITY CODE, FOR REQUIREMENT FOR A SIDEWALK ON EAGLE ROAD, LOCATED AT 521 N. EAGLE ROAD, MElUDIAN, IDAHO C/C 05-07-02 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) V AR-02-003 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE The above entitled matter coming on regularly for public hearing before the City Council on May 7,2002, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, and Paul Clayton, appeared and testified, and the City Council having received the transmittal to agencies and having received the variance application, having heard the testimony presented, being fully advised in the premises does hereby make the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision, as follows to-wit: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivisions and Development Ordinances codified at Title 11 Municipal Code of the City of Meridian and all current zoning maps thereof and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993 Ordinance #629 B January 4,1994 and Maps. 2. The requirements ofIdaho Code S 67-6509, 6516 and Meridian City Code SS 11-15-5 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND -- ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE I V AR-02-003 I ELIXIR SUBDIVISION Page 1 of 7 and 12-11-3 as evidenced in the record of this matter. 3. The Applicant Paul B. Clayton, whose address is 501 N. Eagle Road, Meridian, Idaho. 4. The owner of the property is Elixir Industries, 17925 South Broadway, Gardena, California 90248. 5. The property located at 521 N. Eagle Road, Meridian, Idaho is an I-L/L-Q zones. 6. The legal description of the property appertains to the real property that is included within the Vicinity Map, and is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and consisting of two pages, and as the legal description appears in the record of proceeds of this matter, and which is on file with the Meridian City Clerk's office. 7. The present land use of subject property is presently zoned as I-L/L-O, and which subject property is presently industrial. 8. The proposed land use of subject property is to develop the subject property in the following mmmer: Industrial. 9. That a vicinity map, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and consisting of two pages, of the proposed scale approved by the City Council showing property lines, existing streets, proposed district and such other items as required have been furnished. 10. The Applicant seeks a variance for the requirement for a sidewalk on Eagle Road of the following provision of the Meridian City Code, S 12-5-2K - Sidewalks And Pedestrian Walkways, which provides as follows: 12-S-2K: Sidewalks And Pedestrian Walkways: Five foot (5') sidewalks shall be required on both sides of the street, except where the average width of lots, as measured at the street frontage line or at the building setback line, is over one hundred feet (100'), sidewalks on only one side of the street may be FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND -- Page 2 of 7 ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE / V AR-02-003 / ELIXIR SUBDIVISION allowed, Pedestrian walkways, when required, shall have easements at least ten feet (10') in width and include a paved walk at least five feet (5') in width. Sidewalks and crosswalks shall be constructed in accordance with the standards and specifications as adopted by the CounciL 11. All property owners within three hundred feet (3001) ofthe external boundaries have been notified by mail, and their mailing addresses may be obtained from the list on file with the Planning and Zoning Department. 12. That there are such special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that the strict application of the provisions ofthis Title would clearly be impracticable or unreasonable; it is found that the steep embankment of the property adjacent to Eagle Road is a special circumstance/condition that would make requiring a sidewalk on Eagle Road impracticable and unreasonable. 13. 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 ofthis Title will result in inhibiting the achievements or the objectives of this Title; it is found that strict compliance with the requirements of the Meridian City Code 12-5-2K (sidewalks) would result in extraordinary hardship to the Applicant due to the unusual topography of the site. Additionally, the sidewalk will not connect with any other sidewalk. 14. 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; it is found that the requested variance will not be particularly detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to other FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND -- ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A V ARlANCE I V AR-02-003 I ELIXIR SUBDIVISION Page 3 of 7 properties in the area. 15. That such variance will not have the effect of altering the interest and purpose of this Title and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan; it is found that the issuance of a variance will not have the effect of altering the purpose and interest of the "sidewalk" requirement of the City Code. 16. The applicant paid the fee established by the City Council for application for a variance. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The City of Meridian has authority pursuant to the enactment ofthe Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975 codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, and in particular, by the provisions ofIdaho Code ~ 67-6516 to provide as part of its zoning ordinance for the process of applications for variance permits. 2. The City of Meridian has exercised its authority of Idaho Code S 67-6516 by the enactment as a part of its Zoning and Development Ordinance variances, as set forth in Meridian City Code S 11-18. 3. That the requirements for the processing of a variance request are set forth in Idaho Code S 67-6509,6516 and Meridian City Code ~s 11-15-5 and 11-17-5. 4. Application and standards for variances are set forth in Meridian City Code S 11-18- 2, and the findings which are required are set forth in Meridian City Code S 11-18-3, include required findings that there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that strict application ofthe provisions of Zoning and Development Ordinance would clearly be impracticable and unreasonable, and a finding that strict compliance with the requirements of the Zoning and Development Ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the owner, subdivider or FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND -- ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A V ARlANCE J V AR-02-003 J ELIXIR SUBDIVISION Page 4 of 7 developer because unusual topography, the nature or condition of adjacent development, or other physical conditions or other conditions that make strict compliance with the ordinance unreasonable under the circumstances, or that the conditions and requirements of said ordinance will result in inhibiting the achievements or the objectives of the ordinance, and that the granting of a 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, and that such variance will not have the effect of altering the interest and purposes of the Zoning and Development Ordinance and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 5. Meridian City Code, 9 12-5-2K - Sidewalks And Pedestrian Walkways, in the I-L/L- o zone if granted the variance for the requirement for a sidewalk on Eagle Road, provides as follows: 12-S-2K: Sidewalks And Pedestrian Walkways: Five foot (5') sidewalks shall be required on both sides of the street, except where the average width oflots, as measured at the street frontage line or at the building setback line, is over one hundred feet (100'), sidewalks on only one side of the street may be allowed. Pedestrian walkways, when required, shall have easements at least ten feet (10') in width and include a paved walk at least five feet (5') in width. Sidewalks and crosswalks shall be constructed in accordance with the standards and specifications as adopted by the Council. DECISION AND ORDER NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LA W, the City Council does hereby Order and this does Order: 1. That the Applicant is hereby granted a variance for the requirement for a sidewalk on Eagle Road from the Meridian City Code, S 12-5-2K Sidewalks And Pedestrian Walkways, in the I-L1L-O zone for Elixir Subdivision based on topography of the site. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND -- ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE / V AR-02-003 / ELIXIR SUBDIVISION Page 5 of 7 NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION 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 a variance authorizing a variance of the Sidewalks And Pedestrian Walkways, requirements in the I-L/L-O Zones as provided in the Section 12-5-2K, and 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. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~I day of vrYl~ , 2002. ROLL CALL: COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD VOTED CLCf VOTED CUfb COUNCILWOMAN TAMMY deWEERD COUNCILWOMAN CHERIE McCANDLESS VOTED ~ COUNCILMAN WM. L.M. NARY VOTED 0/ MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED DATED: MOTION: APPROVED: tilJ ~~~~VED: 1'YL~Y FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND -- ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE / V AR-02-003 / ELIXIR SUBDIVISION Page 6 of 7 Copy served upon Applicant, the Platllling and Zoning Department, Public Works Department, and the City Attorney office. \ \ \ I \ \ 11111/1 III \\\\ f Me:- II/I ,,\\ ~l 0 cRt/' /111 ,';' /,'" v4. /'l ::;-' 0' ,o?>POR-1 r. '1,; "'-:;.. .~. I if.l ('0 -:;:. By: _ ~(})),n-&u~jt, 1~iJ.~~11llited: 4- S2~ -D:P CIty Clerk . ~,. f'J .:'1"... Q':: .- ~~ -.-:;\. ~I-- ,CJ 0 .2 ,16 <:~r 1S-' . ~ $ ~~(") -- ~,..... <->.1 4- /-"or ,-............ '" ,-:;-. c~', ~~:a ~Aro'iV ,\' !;'III/,-~-"-t ~ iI ' \\\\\ . I J ;' I ~ : : 1 I , \ , \ , \\204.229.127.194\SERVERZ\Work\M\Meridian\Meridian I 5360M\Elixir Sub V AR-02-003\FlClsGrantV AR02-003.doc FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE I V AR-02-003 / ELIXIR SUBDIVISION Page 7 of 7 ~ o (.r,) o o (J) o Q CD o o ~ (J'I 0 Q C '"U ::0 ::0 ~ en 0 0 "'Tl CD CD .... oo~ tT:l m - -. < ~. -.'""'& n -. (J) 2.s:: ~[ s: <. m -. en "C _. o :J i~1~:~. {."j~+;'~j. ,r.;.,:;~J);r"I-':-... ':":';'";':".' .c ,.,.::.:,~.:.: "::.,:,i r...':.::;i'. "::~<\: '~ -. , "-''';c''7~.c'_~':: {~';'. ':;~~'; '. ..' :;':--':" '~/::!:~~:i.~ ~.L.'~.,' . . >., ..~;,.. " :.,;... . -~.. \ ( EAGLEr 1 r ~Jt},:b ;0-/"'/+" I t>P:L c /l o "" c o 0') o o m CO r- 0 0 C "'0 ;u ::0 ..J. N 0 0 ..J. 01 o o ..J. CD o o "11 C\) C\) - ~ en tn EAGLE RD \ / '] Q s: ~ m :rJ ...., :; !e .- ,lA.I1;f "A" ~~ m r - >< - ;::0 "0 <;tl -0 C)"'O -m ~ ;0. ~~ 3:cn :t-c "'0 OJ o - < - en - o z ,; , , ,- I May 17,2002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING May 21, 2002 APPLICANT Parks Department ITEM NO. REQUEST Naming the Los Alamitos / Thousand Springs Park -- Kiwanis Park 3<T 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: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERI DIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMP ANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS See Attached Memo from Parks Director ~f(Dy'G 4-iJ Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. MERIDIAN PARKS & RECREATION ." Memoran um RECEIVED MAY 1 6 2002 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE To: Mayor Corrie and City COlUlcil From: Tom Kuntz ,~j:? Date: May 16, 2002 Re: Consent Agenda Items for May 21, 2002 Council City Meeting The Parks Staff respectfully requests the following three items be placed on the Consent Agenda for May 21, 2002 Council Meeting. ~ 1. Kiwanis Park - The Parks Commission passed a motion at their May 08, 2002 meeting to recommend naming the future Los Alamitosnhousand Springs park site as "Kiwanis Park". Our estimates to develop the rune-acre Neighborhood Park will be more than $500,000.00 in either donated services, materials, and/or cash. The Parks staff and Commission recognizes the commitment from the Meridian Day Breaker Kiwanis Club in completing this project. We would appreciate the Council's formal action authorizing the naming of Kiwanis Park. 2. Settler's Park Construction Change Orders - This is a follow-up to the information you received at your May 14, 2002 workshop. We are requesting approval for change order #1 ($8,810.00), change order #2 ($26,855.00) and extra services for The Land Group to design the sewer lines ($3,750.00), and the additional parking lot ($4,750.00). 3. Ada County Highway District Agreement - Attached is a memo from Gary Inselman, outlining an agreement in which the impact fees charged by ACHD would be offset by the costs of right a way purchased from the City. The Parks Staff has reviewed the right a way and impact fee calculations and agree that tlns is an equitable agreement. We request the Council's approval of this agreement so construction at Settler's Park can continue. May 1 7, 2002 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING May 21,2002 APPLICANT Parks Department ITEM No.5 - Ii REQUEST Skate Park Construction Agreement -- Heartland Construction 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: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERI DIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS See Attached Memo from Parks Director See Attached Resolution & Agreement Ll..--O ApfJ r7J)}fJ 12tsoucbtJY7 02- 375 Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. RESOLUTION NO. 02- f> 'I f) PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: TULLY SKATEBOARD PARK A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN PURSUANT TO IDAHO CODE ~50-341 PERTAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TULLY SKATEBOARD PARK, FINDING THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PARK CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED AT A LOWER PRICE ON THE OPEN MARKET. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN: SECTION 1: Heartland, L.L.c. doing business as Heartland Construction, L.L.c. holds a license authorizing it to work on Public Works projects up to One Million and No/lOO ($1,000,000.00) Dollars in value. SECTION 2: Heartland, L.L.c. is willing to construct the Tully Skat,eboard Park project for the sum of One Hundred Fifty Two Thousand and Noll 00 ($152,000.00) Dollars. SECTION 3: In two previous solicitations for bid, the lowest bid was $188,750.00, SECTION 4: Awarding a contract to Heartland, L.L.c. for the construction of Tully Skateboard Park will allow the City to construct the Park at a lower price than would have been achieved by competitive bidding. SECTION 5: Pursuant to Idaho Code 950-341 K the Mayor is authorized to sign, and the City Clerk to attest, a Construction Agreement with Addendum for the construction of Tully Skateboard Park at a contract price of One Hundred Fifty Two Thousand and Noll 00 ($152,000.00) Dollars. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this '2.\ '2st- day of YVL Ctj , 2002. Resolution for Tully Skateboard Park - Page I of 2 APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this ?J ~t day of uyVl ~ ' 2002. BY: ATTEST: JI.i&v:.. P ~~ l ~ City Clerk' f ' Resolution for Tully Skateboard Park - Page 2 of 2 CERTIFICATE OF CLERK OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN I, the undersigned, do hereby certify: 1. That I am the duly appointed and elected Clerk of the City of Meridian, a duly incorporated City operating under the laws of the State ofIdaho, with its principal office at 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho. 2. That as the City Clerk of this City, I am the custodian of its records and minutes and do hereby certify that on the 2/ ff"p day of /fL.a(f ,2002, the following action has been taken and authorized: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN PURSUANT TO IDAHO CODE ~50-341 PERTAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TULLY SKATEBOARD PARK, FINDING THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PARK CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED AT A LOWER PRICE ON THE OPEN MARKET. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN: SECTION 1: Heartland, L.L.c. doing business as Heartland Construction, L.L.C. holds a license authorizing it to work on Public Works projects up to One Million and No/lOO ($1,000,000.00) Dollars in value. SECTION 2: Heartland, L.L.C. is willing to construct the Tully Skateboard Park project for the sum ofOlle Hundred Fifty Two Thousand and No/lOO ($152,000.00) Dollars. SECTION 3: In two previous solicitations for bid, the lowest bid was $188,750.00. SECTION 4: Awarding a contract to Heartland, L.L.c. for the construction of Tully Skateboard Park will allow the City to construct the Park at a lower price than would have been achieved by competitive bidding. SECTION 5: Pursuant to Idaho Code 950-341 K the Mayor is authorized to sign, and the City Clerk to attest, a Construction Agreement with Addendum for the construction of Tully Skateboard Park at a cont~~MI17rjpe of One Hundred Fifty Two Thousand and Noll 00 \ \ \ \ 1I1I ($152,000.00) Doll'.l,.~&~1 Of MEFlIr>'1111 ,-,-' :'\ "\ <..14 /1........ ~" c) ov..POi14l; '1-- ~ $ ~ . ~o% kp~ Q ~ SEAL ~ ~~~ G. BERG, JR. ? C r - 7. & ~ -; ~ ,C!> ::: Certificate ofCle-po ~r 15\' P $' Page 1 of2 -:.;. ':1 R>~ ,-,~ ........./. COUo.r-rJ. ~ "" 11111 N 1 l \\\\\ ((111/11111\\\" STATE OF IDAHO, ) : ss. County of Ada, ) On ,thi~ \ day C?f ~ ' in the year 2002, before me, ~ f: DV\/1 ;"~I , 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 of the City of Meridian. (SEAL) oe.ua"III",_ .~+:5bQ.~'L8]j+ .. .~~OT~::1(X'1> ~O:>' "'V- A ,......1> . i ~~~ · f \ .. .. I .. ~ \ l' : ~ \ '" ~ \ '" t) 0'}'1PBL1f...~ It 0.. :-1iir--....~...... .... OFIP........ .tI,tni'D ~YLMbV\ ~~ ~ Notary Public for Idaho Commission Expires: bL\ -l~-o6 Z:\Work\M\MeridiulI\Meridian l5360M\Rcsolutions City Hall\2002\CertifClk for RcsolTullySkatcboardPark.dcc Certificate of Clerk Page 2 of2 AGREEMENT FORM THIS AGREEMENT is between HEARTLAND, L.L.C. dba HEARTLAND CONSTRUCTION, L.L.C. (herein called CONTRACTOR) and City of Meridian, Idaho (herein called OWNER). OWNER and CONTRACTOR, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, agree as follows: 1 WORK 1.1 CONTRACTOR shall complete Work as specified or indicated in the Contract Documents. The work is generally described as follows: "Tully Skateboard Park" 2. LAl'IDSCAPE ARCIDTECT 2.1 The Land Group is hereinafter called Landscape architect and is to act as OWNER's representative, assume duties and responsibilities, and have the rights and authority assigned to in the Contract Documents in connection with completion ofthe Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. 3. CONTRACT TIME 3.1 Contract Times: 3.1.1 CONTRACTOR will achieve Substantial Completion on or before SEPfl:ml?J:.f /lGJ~t:1):J ,and Work will be c~~pleted and ready r final payment and acceptance In accordance WIth the General CondItIOns on or before t::.J::;:;J . 3.2 Liquidated Damages 3.2.1 OWNER and CONTRACTOR recognize that time is of the essence of this Agreement and that OWNER will suffer financiatloss ifthe Work is not completed within the times specified in paragraph Contract Times above, plus any extensions thereof allowed in accordance with the General Conditions. OWNER and CONTRACTOR also recognize the delays, expense and difficulties involved in proving in a legal or other dispute resolution proceeding the actual loss suffered by OVlNER if the Work is not completed on time. Accordingly, instead of requiring any such proof, OWNER and CONTRACTOR agree that as liquidated damages for delay (but not as a penalty) CONTRACTOR shall pay OWNER two hundred and fifty dollars and zero cents ($250.00) for each day that expires after the time specified in paragraph Contract Times above, for Substantial Completion until the Wark is substantially complete. 3.2.2 After Substantial Completion, if CONTRACTOR neglects, refuses, or fails to complete the remaining Work within the Contract Times or any property OWNER granted extensions thereof, CONTRACTOR shall pay OWNER one hundred dollars and zero cents ($100.00) for each day that expires after the time specified in paragraph Contract Times above for completion and readiness for final payment. 3.2.3 OWNER shall recover such liquidated damages by deducting the amount owned from the final payment or any retainage held by OVINER. Tully Skateboard Park Agreementll 8101 4. CONTRACT PRICE 4.1 Contract Price: 4.1.1 OWNER shall pay CONTRACTOR the following total based on the conformed Bid, which is included as an Exhibit to this Agreement. One Hundred Fifty Two Thousand Dollars and no/IOO cents ($152,000.00). Subject to additions and deletions as provided in the Contract Document. 5. RETAINAGE 5.1 Prior to final Completion, OVVNER shall retain from progress payments five (5) percent of the value of Work completed, OWNER shall retain (5) percent of the value of stored materials and equipment. 5.2 OWNER will release to CONTRACTOR all retainage for those separate portions of the Work determined finally complete by LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT and accepted by OWNER for use as intended. 6. INTEREST 6.1 Monies not paid when due as provided in article 14 of the General Conditions shall bear interest at the rate of..e-percent per month. 7. CONTRACTOR S REPRESENTATIONS 7.1.1 CONTRACTOR has familiarized itse1fwith the nature and extent of the Contract Documents, Work, site, locality, general nature of work to be performed by OWNER or others at the site that relates to Work required by the Contract Documents and local conditions and federal, state, and local Laws and Regulations that in any manner may affect cost, progress, performance, or furnishing of Work. 7.1.2 CONTRACTOR has studied carefully reports of explorations and tests of subsurface conditions and drawings of physical conditions which are identified in the Supplementary Conditions of the General Conditions, and accepts the determination set forth in the Supplementary Conditions of the extent of the technical data contained in such reports and drawings upon which CONTRACTOR is entitled to rely. CONTRACTOR acknowledges that such reports and drawings are not Contract Documents. 7.1.3 CONTRACTOR has obtained and carefully studied (or assumes responsibility for obtaining and carefully studying) examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and reports (in addition to or to supplement those referred to above) which pertain to the conditions (subsurface or physical) at or contiguous to the site or otherwise and which may affect the cost, progress, performance, or furnishing of the work as CONTRACTOR deems necessary for the performance and furnishing of the Work at the Contract Price, within the Contract Times, and in accordance with the other terms and conditions of the Contract Documents, including specifically the provisions of the General Conditions; and not additional or Tully Skateboard Park Agreement/2 8/01 supplementary examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, reports, or similar information or data re or will be required by CONTRACTOR for such purposes. 7.1.4 CONTRACTOR has reviewed and checked information and data sho\VIl or indicated in the Contract Documents with respect to existing Underground Facilities at or contiguous to the site and has included costs as defined in the General Conditions. 7.1.5 CONTRACTOR has correlated information knO\VIl to CONTRACTOR and results of such observations, familiarizations, examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and reports with Contract Documents. 7.1.6 CONTRACTOR has given LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT written notice of all conflicts, errors, ambiguities or discrepancies that it has discovered in the Contract Documents and the written resolution thereof by LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT is acceptable to CONTRACTOR, and the Contract Documents are generally sufficient to indicate and convey understanding of terms and conditions for performing and furnishing Work. 8. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 8.1 The Contract Documents which comprised the entire Agreement between O\VNER and CONTRACTOR concerning Work are defined in the General Conditions. 8.2 Drawings bearing the following general title: Tully Skateboard Park 8.3 Addenda numbers L to --3-, inclusive. 8.4 Exhibits to this Agreement include: 8.4.1 Advertisement for Bid 8.4.2 Instruction to Bidders 8.4.3 Bid Form signed by CONTRACTOR 8.4.4 Executed Performance Payment Bond 8.4.5 Public Works Contract Report 8.4.6 Documents submitted by CONTRACTOR prior to execution of Agreement. 8.4.7 Notice to Proceed 9. MISCELLANEOUS 9.1 No assignment by a party hereto of any rights under or interests in the Contract Documents will be binding on another party hereto without the written consent of the party sought to be bound; and specifically, but without limitation, monies that may become due and monies that are due may not be assigned without such consent (except to the extent that the effect of this restriction may be limited by law), and unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under the Contract Documents. 9.2 OVVNER and CONTRACTOR each binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party hereto, its partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives in respect to all covenants, agreements and obligations contained in the Contract Documents. Tully Skateboard Park Agreement/3 8/01 9.3 GOVERNING LAW, The validity. Meaning and effect of this Contract shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the State ofIdaho applicable to contracts made and performed in are subject to the venue of the Fourth Judicial District of the State ofIdaho IN WITNESS WHEREOF, OWNER and CONTRACTOR have signed this Agreement in triplicate. One counterpart each has been delivered to OWNER, CONTRACTOR and LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. All portions of the Contract Documents have been signed or identified by OWNER and CONTRACTOR. OWNER: CONTRACTOR: BV~ ~2-- ,4IkSkclt ~4Ar,1/' 9-.. \\\11 ft1frrlll;"f {CORPORATE ~\^\.T ~f MERID/~/III/ ...... ~ ~lA. 'l f' () O?PO/t.1 '1'; . y %. Address for giving nqf1ces' ~ ~o ~ - - - - ~ ~ - - B "/ S --z...,S -~ Date Date (CORPORATE SEAL) Address for giving notices 33 E. Idaho 550 W. State Street Meridian Idaho 8364; Ea Ie Idaho 83616 'l ~ ~ 'l ~ ..<" " ...... "1 C \V ..... 1I111 OUN1"<' 1\\"'" II/I 11\ Phone. (208) 888-4433 /111111\ IlIII 208-939-2808 (If OWNER is a public body, attach License No. 14419-A-3-4(7J8.39A3) evidence of authority to sign and Agent for service of process: resolution of other documents authorizing execution of Agreement.) (If CONTRACTOR is a corporation, attach evidence of authority to sign.) Tully Skateboard Park Agreement/4 8/G! ~ ADDENDUM TO CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT #:3 This Addendum made this ;).. 3 day of , 2002, by and between the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereinafter referred to a 'City", and Heartland, L.L.C. dba Heartland Construction, L.L.c., hereinafter referred to as "Contractor." Witnesseth: Whereas, the City of Meridian has twice solicited formal bids for the Tully Skateboard Park; and Whereas, the lowest bids at each bid opening greatly exceeded the architect's estimate for the project; and Whereas, the Meridian City Council rejected all bids after each bid opening; and Whereas, in compliance with Idaho Code 50-341, the Meridian City Council has determined that the construction of the Tully Skateboard Park can be performed more economically on the open market; and Whereas the contract price submitted by Contractor is lower than the lowest bid submitted in response to either of the two formal invitations to bid for the construction of the Tully Skateboard Park; and Whereas, the City's ability to proceed is conditioned upon the receipt of funds and donations from third parties. Now, therefore, in consideration of the foregoing, and for valuable and mutual consideration, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. This addendum is made a part of the contract between the parties of the same date hereof. 2. The foregoing contract to which this addendum is a part, and the work to be performed pursuant to that agreement, and the parties' obligation to be bound to the contract, are contingent upon the following: a. Payment to City from Brighton Corporation and/or David Turnbull of the sum of$11,000 on or before June 15,2002; and b. Payment to City from Howell-Murdoch Development and/or Kevin Howell of the sum of$5,000 on or before June 15,2002; and c. Payment to City from Friends of Meridian Parks of the sum of $5,000 on or before June 15,2002; and d. Payment to City from interested skateboard enthusiast/youth groups of the sum of$6,000 on or before June 15, 2002; and Addendum to Construction Agreement -1 e. Donation to the City from Low's RediMix of concrete worth not less than $10,000 for use in the Tully Skateboard Park project. 3. In the event that the foregoing payments or donations are all received as set forth above, then Contractor will receive a Notice to Proceed from City and the work shall begin as set out in the contract documents. In the event that any of the foregoing payments or donations are not received as set . forth above, then, and in said event, the Contract for Construction of which this addendum is a part, shall be null and void. Attest:J~ ~ f!:7 9, William G. BergbIJ:rHI~j,ty Clerk \",\ 11// \\\\_1 Of MEAII' /111/ ,\ =,'" IJI...;. "I' /' a o\'\POR.1)'; '1r-/~ .:: .......0 ~o -:.. .... ~ - g ~ - - Heartland, L.L.C. dba Heartland Construction, L.L.C. - - Addendum to Construction Agreement-2 May 17,2002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING May 21, 2002 APPLICANT Parks Department REQUEST Change Orders for Meridian Settler's Park ITEM NO. \3 -Ie 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: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS See Attached Memo from Parks Director !+p-provf./ Jf-o Date: Phone: MaterIals presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Mem ran um RECEIVED To: Mayor Corrie and City Council From: Tom Kuntz .---r-Ji- Date: May 16,2002 Re: Consent Agenda Items for May 21, 2002 Council City Meeting MA't f 6 2002 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE The Parks Staff respectfully requests the following three items be placed on the Consent Agenda for May 21, 2002 Council Meeting. 1. Kiwanis Park - The Parks Commission passed a motion at their May 08, 2002 meeting to recommend naming the future Los Alamitosnhousand Springs park site as "Kiwanis Park". Our estimates to develop the nine-acre Neighborhood Park will be more than $500,000.00 in either donated services, materials, and/or cash. The Parks staff and Commission recognizes the commitment from the Meridian Day Breaker Kiwanis Club in completing this project. We would appreciate the Council's formal action authorizing the naming of Kiwanis Park. 2. Settler's Park Construction Change Orders - This is a follow-up to the information you received at your May 14, 2002 workshop. We are requesting approval for change order # 1 ~ ($8,810.00), change order #2 ($26,855.00) and extra services for The Land Group to design the sewer lines ($3,750.00), and the additional parking lot ($4,750.00). 3. Ada County Highway District Agreement - Attached is a memo from Gary InseIman, outlining an agreement in which the impact fees charged by ACHD would be offset by the costs of right a way purchased from the City. The Parks Staff has reviewed the right a way and impact fee calculations and agree that this is an equitable agreement. We request the Council's approval of this agreement so construction at Settler's Park can continue. 2000 Edition - Electronic Format AlA Document G701- 2000 Change Order PROJECT: (Name IlIJd address)Meridian 58 Acre Park Phase One CHANGE ORDER NUMBER:01 DATE: May 6, 2002 ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NUMBER: 01028 CONTRACT DA IE: March 28, 2002 CONTRACT FOR: Site Development & Landscape TO CONTRACTOR: (NIlIJJelllJdaddress)Arnerican Pavin~ PO Box 395 Meridian, Idaho 83680 THE CONTRACT IS CHANGED AS FOLLOWS: (Include, where applicable, any undisputed IlIJJOWJ/ attributable to previously executed Construction Change Directives.) &. Pond Liner Change - see attached letter<-$B 15> B. Observation wells (3) at stormwater SeepaQ8 bed per DEQ ($1,500) C. Site changes per ACHD R.O.W 1$5,625) D. Install 125 I.f. of 18" PVC inlet from Irrigation box to Pond - Sommer's Construction Proiect ($2.500) The original (Contract Sum) (Cuaranteed Maximum Price) was $833.165.00 The net change by previously authorized Change Orders $0.00 The (Contract Sum) (CuaranLecd Mm:imum Price) priono Lhis Change Order was $833.165.00 The (Contract Sum) (Cuaranteed Ma.umum Price) win be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by this Change Order in the amount of $8.810.00 The new (Contract Sum) {-Guaranteed Maximum -Pci€ej including this Change Order will be $841,975.00 The Contract Time will be (increa~ed) (decreased) (unchanged) by (Q) days. The date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore isSept. 27. 2002 NOTE: This Change Order does not include changes in the Contract Sum, ConLract Time or Guaranteed Maximum Price which have been authorized by Construction Change Directive for which the cost or time are in dispuLe as described in Subparagraph 7.3.8 of AIA Document Mm. Not valid until signed by the Architect, Contractor and Owner. The Land Group. Inc. American Pavin~ Co. City of Meridian OWNER (1)ped l18me) (Signature) 1/~ l \? )4:i6t f:- BY f'M.,<7' l1)$t-.l i ?/~/(1L DATE Ll4\-z-...-- BY -rC~~"-( BY \! .t>. S-~ b - 0 2---- DATE DATE @ 2000 The Amencan Institute ot Architects. Reproduction 01 the material herem or substantial quotation of its provisions without written permission of the AlA violates the copyright Jaws of the United States and will subject the violator to legal prosecution. WARNING: Unlicensed photocopying Violates u.s. copyright laws and will subject the violator to legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with permission of the AlA and can be reproduced in accordance with your license without violation until the date of expiration as noted below. User Document; changeorder1.aia -- 5/6/2002. AlA License Number 1116865, which expires on 12/31/2002. OWNER 0 ARCHITECT 0 CONTRACTOR 0 FIELD 0 OTHER D AUTHENTICA TION OF THIS ELECTRONICALLY DRAFTED AlA DOCUMENT MAYBE MADE BY USiNG AlA DOCUMENT D401. @ 2000 AIA@ AlA DOCUMENT G701-:20oo CHANGE ORDER The American Institute of Arch i tects 1735 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006.5292 <, 9. '< " . -" < ' < " " .... . . ~ , c c c ,,',' ,"", ,,",",' c *" ,"","""* c, ,c ,c C:::C"," ,'C" ", ,:.~E!_IC:__D Railing Ga. C ,,', :"C"c,c ,~"' "", Telephone: 888-7988 Fax: 888-5020 P.O. Box 395, Meridian, Idaho 83680 Idaho P.W #12145-MA-2-4(43) Oregon GGB # 137240 April 23. 2002 The Land Group Attn: Dave Koga 128 SEagle R.d Eagle. Idaho 83616 Re: Meridian 58-Acre Park Phase I American Paving Co. JoM 1248 - Revised ReO The following is a revised request for change order as per your letter dated April 9,2002. Items addressed below: Item #1-pond liner. instaIl30-mil PVC liner without geotextile fabric in lieu oithe PPL~ 24 pound line membrane without geotextile fabric. deduct...........................<$81S.00> Item #2..observation wells, installed as per detail required by DEQ, including concrete cMAt-k.tE- M 'j CI{{.Oe..~ A col.lars. 3 ~c.b., add. ..........,.,....."........".................'11"..............................................................,.................." $1,.500,00 CAA~f. OMiLL"\. "f.:>" b. provide 100 If 0 ................. $4,545.00 ~ NOTE: Includes asphaltpatch. " '6'u'T""!>171rtipld~ p c. provide two 8" stu gs as noted on dmwmg - .... $8,350.00 ~, UN ~ tee.' C W d' gs, thrust blocks & blowoftS as required-add ....... $2 , to'.. L ....."I"11..............<w........ ..."1........ ......."1..............'" ,. If you should tequire any further~forma1ion, please don't hesitate to call oW' office. Sincerely, ~co. T~ Vice President TI.Jtk Authorized Signature Required Date 1248-RCQ.watel-liae & weJ1s nMsed , ,"," , ' "," ,," ''" '~'""*" ,,'" ""*" , , "' '" ' ",' , " "', ' ",', ,', :;,',' ",""'Pl~~I*.~'";",Ra"l,n"g ca. '"'"" '" ,:' ',-,' >; Telephone: 888-7988 Fax: 888-5020 P.O. Box 395, Meridian, Idaho 83680 Idaho P.w. #12145-AAA-2-4(43) Oregon CCB # 137240 April 23, 2002 The Land Group Attn: Dave Koga 128 SEagle Rd Eagle, Idaho 83616 Re: Meridian 58-Acre Park Phase I American Paving Co. Job#1248 The following is a request for change order as per your letter dated April 9, 2002, regarding change onler increases and decreases. Item#4: Meridian Road R.O.W.-per ACHD R.O.W. revisions deleting the 48" R.O.W." deleted asphalt paving approximately 380 sf and additional cost for landscape. irrigation amendments and the addition of the mow strip..add $5,,625.00. Total request for change onler-Item#4 Meridian Rd. R.O.W. ..................... $5,625.00 C \..I-A N4 ~ t:riLo~~ ~ c.. If you should zeqWre any furtherinformati~ please don't hesitate to call our office. Sincerely. AmericanPa'Ving Co. ~ T~/ Vice President TLItk: Authorized Signature Required Date 124S-RCOMW mrisions ,,' '~,' , . p' . " $ ',', . '":oj(. " " ',' ' " '* ' "., .. , ' , ' . ':'.' " , . . ,,",",, ' : ,~lne~llea'n l~avlng" eD. ':., .<' , , . '.' ., : , ~ ~ ~ ? , ' ~".",? /'-./ ~"? ."~' ~ ~ '; ~, '" . ? ~ -~ . .? Telephone: 888-7988 Fax: 888-5020 P.O. Box 395, Meridian, Idaho 83680 Idaho P,W #12145-AAA-2-4(43) Oregon CCB # 137240 April 26, 2002 Meridian Parks Department Atin: Tom Kuntz 11 WBower ~eri~,D) 83680 Re: Meridian S8 Acre Padr, Phase One American Paving Co. Job #1248 As requested, American Paving CO. is providing prices for the work, as noted on Sheet 2.21 by the Land Group, numbered notes: 11 Existing Irrigation Piping Save & Protect. .000oal: Relecate ootl<<. krigatioA 8.S required t1Be to paad bei&g releeateti. Remt)ve Be. iastall :new 30" CMP appraximately 6 If. Set & pG1H." ooaemte base tm<! e0Mleet to -e" ............................................... Option 2: Install inlet 18" PVC approximately 125lf and connect to existing IS" PVC. For an additional cost of............................................................................ $2,500.00 C ha..-..-.. :> .a. ,. d y d -€'V' .:i:t D If you should have any questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to call our office. Sincerely. ~gco. Terry Lutz Vice President cc: Dave Koge.. The Land Group TLljm 1248-MeIidim Palb-Itrigatioo ~ d.91 d.1,!) ~ ~ ~ ~..^::" ; = @ ~ "@ @ 1)zZ -"0 ~ rijonl g 1) ~.. ml>U' Z"'m ~6m eJiV ~ZD ~~~ m ~G\e l>r (f2) . ~~ 9 z'" = ~~ @ zlJ m\)l ~ ill- ~i oU' J:U' g OJ: ;om m z~ P"; ={] rO z;o ~ ml> ;lJo = ED (F pl::! IJ~ ~~ 0 ~~ . / l)~m r"-):. !tf!!~ {j>OJ: rilrn '~ ffl-n mz PU; ?!ffi 00 ~Q ~ ~ ~ ~ a ;0 3l ~ ~ ;0 n o OJ 01 r m ;....... r z m (j>;u mp. mz 00 ~~ l>;u r;ij "'m ;::;z -\ \ Z ':...r 0' ll'J: ~ ~ q ~lj) ~~ ,\>> '& 1}f rn g~ -0\ E)$" 'Lt. tr (i\ t "il (f> r ~ 0 ~1) ll'm ..... QO "":.JI: D m m 1) 18" r~ mE r~ (l>rn <:l>;o ... Gr 0 m '( (l> m (l> / ~ '" .J,..~O"' r1l..1AJ / . 17 )> --I --I I ........L I ~ /I 'l( " t? R,,'Oft..t' A 1'-6" fi~~i~iF~ ". .., j<.\:,~)~.;~, :.(~..-;i J,,!U:-:':! >dU;' ';r .~ i,..~~;~- .;:'~JC~:-;';~- ~/,~l)~~ ": .., (\Y}';\:,COt-.JC!'ETE. COLLAR)'~~}('(J>,;i) : .;'~'\-~;-,f~~~)~: 0: ~,~M.~~!1)(:~ :Y1:J~.('~~~~"~' tf:~~)~;-;"-;~;~' d;~,~~."()~~ ~ . ~. "i'l(. " \)1 r;2,'~"\A [~?('\. {f~:)"\~,,,~ "'\)I l,J;;,"})r 1-- '.' ~ : ~~~?a$~?&?t'r~;~i\~f-\~i~)~'f;~ii~~f~?i?'~1:~ AST IRON LOCKABLE FRAME AND COVER SHALL 4" DIA. PERFORATED PVC PIPE o 0 OBSERVATION WELL W/LOCKING LID SHALL BE INSTALLED 5 FT. FROM EDGE OF SEEPAGE BED. SEE PLAN FOR LOCATION . o 0 o Q " o Q o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 REBAR TO ANCHOR OBSERVATION WELL FOOT PLATE ... o 0 '" Q 0 .. : ~: iI..~. .... ~ .. I. I."'......... -.'" I... -II I.. .... .. L .",.. ;... " " . ',' . . ".ASTM C-33 SAND..: I ~ ."::. " :"':. '.~'. '..-'; : ',~ :" :': -.....:.. . \.. '" .' . '. .... .. ill ..~. +. .. + ." :.. ..,.. .." ...: .. '. . OBSERVATION WELL DETAIL PER IDAHO STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES #43 N.T.S. -t I'll""" L....~ II d ...... 0 ""~ t1 0:..-. \ \ \ ,. \ ,l f . t ! / .I / t ! f LO III :I: <( LO ~ N t( ~ 8 8 ~ i @ in m ~ ~ :I: -' -' j!; r:: ~ ~ f.! ~ ~ ~ ~ B ~ 0 \:l B~ ~ * ~ ~ ~ 5~ ~ ;, ~;: ~ ~i i 5 ~ 5 i'5 ~ ~... ~ ~ fu ~ ~ ~ ; ~<( ~ IX (/) IX z ;z: is :<tQ ;:J' 1 I <t <( m ili <t C~ lli So ~ ~ ~ IE ffi t~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ll. ~~ ~::l ll. ~ g 8 g li. ~~ (1)1;: LU < 0( m 00 i5 I ~ 0:: U ~ \0 Cl mm 0..... eeeee8eee@ ,.: ~ 0.. ~ o ~ o 0.. ~ 0( 9 >- m ~ n. ~ n. ~ UI 1= o (g )::a DB ~ ~ o d ll:: --- -.... ..- -- -- ~ ~ ~ ~ VI ..j ..J ~ ():;j :2 VJ <: N Q ( C r: I Sl: .$ ........ > I - ::r... ~ '9::S I..lJ l- V) ~ v 0 ~ ~ II'} '" N Iii in \ \ \ 1:; \ t \ a~ t;1; ~~ i 0.0 1-...- -' ~ '" o I:J <Il ~ ~ z o ~ > ll:: tj m o Ii l' ()~tlA\i- G1\-Qi-\'"<. \'1l 2000 Edition - Electronic Format AlA Document G701- 2000 Change Order PROJECT: (Name and address)Meridian 58 Acre Park Phase One CHANGE ORDER NU MBER:02 DATE: May 9, 2002 ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NUMBER: 01028 CONTRACT DATE: March 28, 2002 CONTRACT FOR: Site Development & Landscape TO CONTRACTOR: (Name;md address)American Pavin~ PO Box 395 Meridian, Idaho 83680 THE CONTRACT IS CHANGED AS FOLLOWS: (Include, where applicable, any undisputed amouJJt attributable to previously executed Construction Change Directives.) Domestic water mainline changes per Meridian Public Works Request. See Drawing revisions. The original (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Priee) was $833.165.00 The net change by previously authorized Change Orders $8.810.00 The (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Price) prior to this Change Order was $841.975.00 The (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum-J.2E€e1 will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged1 by this Change Order inlhe amount of $26.855.00 The new (Contracl Sum) (Cuaranteed Maximum -Pri€et including this Change Order will be $868.830.00 The Contract Time will be (increased) (dccrea5ed~ (unchanged) by (Q) days. The date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore isSept. 27. 2002 NOTE: This Change Order does not include changes in the Contract Sum, Contract Time or Guaranteed Maximum Price which have been authorized by Construction Change Directive for which the cost or time are in dispute as described in Subparagraph 7.3.8 of AlA Document MOL Not valid until signed bv the Architect. Contractor and Owner. The Land Group. Inc. American Pavin~ Co. City of Meridian OWN ER (Typed name) (Signature) -rer<.f..y LulL- BY v:: F BY c;-=- q -cl L--- DATE DATE bA>.J\o BY 1k L..;;t ~ 5, q.o'z'" DATE @ 2000 The American Institute ot Architects. Reproduction ot the materIal herem or substantial quotation of its provisions without written permission of the AlA violates the copyright laws of the United States and will subject the violator to legal prosecution. WARNING: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and will subject the violator to legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with permission of the AlA and can be reproduced in accordance with your license without violation untit the date of expiration as noted below. User Document: changeorder2.aia -- 5/9/2002. AlA License Number 1116865, whkh expires on 1213112002. OWNER 0 ARCHITECT 0 CONTRACTOR 0 FIELD 0 OTH ER 0 AUTHENTICA T/ON OF THIS ELECTRON/CALL Y DRAFTED AlA DOCUMENT MAYBE MADE BY USING A/A DOCUMENT 0401. ~ @ 2000 AIA@ AlA DOCUMENT G701-2oo0 CHANGE ORDER The American Institute of Architects 1735 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006.5292 ~ ~< ~ ". , ' .. '*' " , '. '*. , . <... '" . <:,:.~,,:,". ,':, . ' " ._.'e..can R8"llIg ea.. '. ~ .,,' .,. ~? ,~~,? , ? , ,. ~ ~~y ?, ?? ' _ ';, ~ > <"' -c<<' --.: '" ? ~ "~ Telephone: 888.7988 Fax: 888-5020 P.O, Box 395, Meridian, Idaho 83680 Idaho P.w. #12145-AAA-2.4(43) Oregon CGB # 137240 May 8. 2002 The Land Group Atln: Dave Koga 128 SEagle Rd Eagle, Idaho 83616 Re: Meridian 58-Acre Park Phase I American Paving Co. Job# 1248 - Revised ReO AB requested., the following is a breakdown of domestic water line, changes made as per meeting held 5/08/02 with Brad and Lynn with The Public Works Dept and Kris with Cascade Pipeline. American Paving Co. has added a 5% profit margin 10 the individual unit prices and Cascade Pipeline has added 10%. rr concrete collars are required for water valves. etc, they are to be at the unit price of$200.00 each. Please note changes in waterline from 16" to 12" water main and fittings. Item #3-domestic water mlllnHne: a change 187 If of 16" water main to a 12" watermain-deduct.........<$570.00> b. provide 100 If of 12" wafer main to stub out west-add ......."........... $4,150.00 NOTE: Includes asphalt patch. c. provide two 8" stub out &, fittings as noted on drawings-add .... ...... $9.275,00 d. provide all fittings. thrust blocks & blowoffs as required-add....... $14,000.00 Total revised cost for Item#3-domestic water line........................................ $26.855.00 If you should require any further information, please don't hesitate to call our office. TLItk Authorized Signature Required Date 1248.RCQ-wate!" line &. wells rev.is:ed 5'()& \~... \\ ~ \ ~ ';~ \\ -U')~ \2 /.... ,/ \ W i5 <- \' >- ~ / .~' 0-2 4. ffi D- = /"."'/.' Y J:;i; W ~ ! .' :1z /. 0:(- u: < \ J:O:: -1 "\.( \ ~ ~ % '40 ~~ ), \ ;i; ;i; \-\ ;;.......\..\ \ ~\ \)\ :". "'", r\; \ \.,~J \ \ A X, ~~ 1...\.~~7" \ \ t.\ /.1. 0... ~ ~\\ \ w () \ t \ I' ~~ / ~>0' ~~ \ .1< 0- =g:~ CL ~ 1~ 'M~ W tf!) 7 / ~;;,U"i ..... y I .......q- 'T'/ /. ";i;~N ~'\/" ~ Q; I- ..':'. ~3~ " , 8 'ii m .1" \ cO ~~ Ii z ::> (f) ~~ ~o::= ~ 4. ~~ to 0> o::oiS r--W ~~~~~o ~~\:!ciG:C)g~Si.~ lOO" u: :>< C)..J- 0 o l'1 to :>< -7) ..J CO -CO ':i 0"<l"~:><0':Eu..l- -\ e~f!)li" ~(/l~:t~ r--C'l}(~~':E~..J'ing Z W -~ rt ~ "lO P ~ ~ ifi '0 ..... cO . ti f?- 0:: :z :::> (I) ~~ :4:0::" ~4. ':EPtO 2> a:;~~ -\~ (OW ~~~4.0 "<1"4. ow."-o :z ..t~ ;;:;ml-(?rtClO3'~W 'O'lt..J >(",-\~ " " ~NtO\.!;(~~coco'-"':i N \O"<I".:><,,':Eu.. -\ ..... r-- 10 -_, ..J :>< 1-(1) ':J '"' ....."<1" ~~\.>.." ~ \,l..4. "'" r--N:X{j~':E~-1v;g " .' C'l -\ \ . ~ o:z .;.l zw.-u..l;'llOf-.....-CO \ \ --\ "\6' THE LAND GROUP, INC. April 29, 2002 City of Meridian Parks Department Tom Kuntz 11 West Bower Meridian, Idaho 83642 Re: Extra Services Fee Proposal Meridian Settlers Park - Phase One Dear Tom: This letter is in response to you request for The Land Group, Inc. to provide Extra Services on the subject project. The scope of these services will be: 1. Additional parking lot area south of the phase one parking lot, including lawn area for overflow parking. The additional parking area includes approximately 125 parking spaces, (2) light poles, grading plan, drainage plan, enclosed dumpster, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, gates, landscape and irrigation. Cost for construction documents (working drawings) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $4,750.00 Note: No cost for the following items: design development, bidding phase and construction administration. 2. Nfil th W(8t hHvn III (11, mel:uffing, mCfl:l1:deriftg sioo-;;ed-k, earth berms, trees, Ia'Nfllffid trClOS. ? IF... C8st for emutmctiell:1 daCtlfflcnt3 and adm1n13tratioh .............................. $9,166.66 " 3. Additional sewer system design for entire site Cost for construction documents and administration .............................. $3,750.00 These services will be billed to you under the terms and conditions of our contract. The fee for these services will not exceed without further authorization:: We request your written approval of this authorization for Extra Services prior to proceeding work. Please sign and returned one copy of this letter for our files. If this is not your understanding, or if you have questions regarding the above, please contact me immediately. Sincerely, ~~, {Printed name, tit e CITY OF MERIDIAN OWNER (signature) (Printed name, title and date) ff L<I/ldJC<lpt Archile-Clllry . Silt Plel/lilills, . Cil'i! ElIghutl'illg . Golf COllrsr Irrigation c:.~ EngiJ/rtriltg . Graphic COllIlJllllliratioll 12$ Sou th Eagle Road' Eagle, ldaho 83616 . P 208.939.4041 F 208.939.4445 . w\V\\'.theJandgroup.cc "',L II -- -- .....-...-.1- ....,,'" ~drlU group lnc 2089394445 p.2 ~" ",f~-"- ~ ':.1 ~- -::::L..~.." -Tt ( ,.-.---i M - .=. '__ _ _ '- ~ "l ~? i ....1 i.} r --- 'I q ~l ;, ,~>~ :.~ :~i!l i L~ r..:_-, .' !~ .iI ,Ell i 11 f ! ,i! I f i' 0 t=., e::, -~~ f j( -. ~ _ ~.~ -----~.-J ,if- , c :1' gj' : I I -" ij ~r- -=~ 1.1 ,II ,I r .-:-.J I J.:'~L~ ! ! i ; l-:-;'-~ j , , , , , I I 1 c--- "__I 1; 'I " :j 'I I, ~ I fl Ii " " ~ ! Ii " II If jj , ~i I ; l ", j' r"' "~r--. if! I: "'" i ; ; .........~ " \ \ . } .... . -.. ~ \,\~ i ) l I , I -_.'-~ ' , . r -.:-~~ . -'\ " ! Ii, i }I If I II , II .il Ii J _H ! ... ~~J, I:> '," II .ji I J 1./; ? "---_"Ht... / .; - -- .-- ~i>;!; - ~~_ ""=.;-:_':...~"".. "Q 'f ft. " ji ;~ '" > !:! m -< c :;D, ~: ?11.>r..~ _.._ .._.~_ bl l,JUr" .J.rlW" <:::089384445 p.2 D(f'1-l ~ .~. J ., t/-r..f)..jL <-:pc.. k 1 "'-J !!l Q Z C z o n ~ . ~ ~ ; ~ n 0 _ ~ C _ _ _-=::_ _&-<_ _ _ _ _ _ --. is ~ - -::::---==- ~~ -)\ I ::::: - -=:) -- - -- --.-:---=- -::; - . C) g.::: - /.- :--. -........ ~,.. z ---ruture "Re-od-Right-Qf-Yia - ~ Y. - ::I:-- :-' -~ ...~ i ..d THE LAND GROUP, INC. April 29, 2002 City of Meridian Parks Department Tom Kuntz 11 West Bower Meridian, Idaho 83642 Re: Extra Services Fee Proposal Meridian Settlers Park - Phase One Dear Tom: This letter is in response to you request for The Land Group, Inc. to provide Extra Services on the subject project. The scope of these services will be: 1. Additional parking lot area south of the phase one parking lot, including lawn area for overflow parking. The additional parking area includes approximately 125 parking spaces, (2) light poles, grading plan, drainage plan, enclosed dumpster, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, gates, landscape and irrigation. Cost for construction documents (working drawings)............................. $4,750.00 , Note: No cost for the following items: design development, bidding phase and construction administration. 2. North ,rt;Jt laYi'D III e8, ifldtldifig, meafldcriftg 3iaewalk, earth bel'ffis, trees, lawfl ami trees. ? f}/... Cost far e61'1stfl:lctiem 80etHTl.::nt:3 and 461HhJ:i3uation .............................. $7 ~66.66 o' 3. Additional sewer system design for entire site Cost for construction documents and administration .............................. $3,750.00 These services will be billed to you under the terms and conditions of our contract. The fee for these services will not exceed without further authorization:: We request your written approval oftrus authorization for Extra Services prior to proceeding work. Please sign and returned one copy of this letter for our files. If this is not your understanding, or if you have questions regarding the above, please contact me immediately. Sincerely, CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~~ OWNER (signature) ~. OOtULiE (Printed name, title and date) , LUIII/J(ap( ~"lJ'(bil((I/Jre . Silf P/lIIJllill,e. .. Cll'iI r:'JJp,lllfi:rill.~ . Golf CfJll/'se lJ'l'I~~(lliol/ C'" l:J1L~jJlI:t'rill,~ . G'rllplJif C'jII/IIJllllj(tllilJIl 128 South En~Jc Rond' En~lc. Idahn 8361(,' "208.939.40<11 F 208.939.4-1-15' www.thcl:.ndgrnu".cc A '>I .\ 2000 Edition - Electronic Format AlA Document G701- 2000 Change Order PROJECT: (Name and address)Meridian 58 Acre Park Phase One CHANGE ORDER NUMBER:Q1 DA TE: May 6, 2002 ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NUMBER: 01028 CONTRACT DATE: March 28, 2002 CONTRACT FOR: Site Development & Landscape TO CONTRACTOR: {N.Wle and address)American Paving PO Box 395 Meridian, Idaho 83680 THE CONTRACT IS CHANGED AS FOllOWS: (Include, wbere applicable, any undisputed anlOunl ,1Itribulilble to previously executed Construction Change Directives.) A. Pond Liner Change - see attached letter<-$815> B. Observation wells (3) at stormwater seepage bed per DEQ ($1.500) C. Site chanqes per ACHD R.O.W ($5.625) D. Install 1251J. of 18" PVC inlet from Irrigation box to Pond - Sommer's Construction Proiect ($2.500) The original (Contract Sum) (Cuaranteed Ma:ximuffi Price) was $833.165.00 The net change by previously authorized Change Orders sO.OO The (Contract Sum) (C\;IaraFlteed MaximNffi Price) prior to this Change Order was s833.165.00 The (Contract Sum) {Guaranteed MaJdmum-PH€ej will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by this Change Order in the amount of 58.810.00 The new (Contract Sum) (Cuaranteed Maximum -PH€ej including this Change Order will be s841.975.00 The Contract Time will be (il'1crcasea) (decreased) (unchanged) by (Q) days. The date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore isSept. 27. 2002 NOTE: This Change Order does not include changes in the Contract Sum, Contract Time or Guaranteed Maximum Price which have been authorized by Construction Change Directive for which the cost or time are in dispute as described in Subparagraph 7.3.8 of AlA Document &01. Not valid until signed by the Architect, Contractor and Owner. The Land Group, Inc. American Paving Co. City of Meridian /" 1/AV lO )'OqP- BY ~<;JI~l...t T 1?/v,/Ot- DATE ~ (Sig/Jature) L~?.----- t<~ . n f2-12; (3' BY DA~-;'~2)~ 2- -rC~~L( BY '.J .? 5"""- ~ ~ OL-- DATE @ 2000 The Amencan Institute ot Architects. Reproduction ot the matenal herem or substantIal quotation of its provisions without written permission of the AlA violates the copyright laws of the United States and will subiect the violator to legal prosecution. WARNING: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and will subject the violator to legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with permission of the AlA and can be reproduced in accordance with your license without violation until the date of expiration as noted below. User Document: changeorderl.aia -- 5/6/2002. AlA License Number 1116865, which expires on 12131/2002. OWNER 0 ARCHITECT D CONTRACTOR D FIELD 0 OTHER D AUTHENTlCA TlON OF THIS ELECTRONICALL Y DRAFTED AlA DOCUMENT MAYBE MADE BY USING AlA DOCUMENT D401. ~~. ~,.~ ......r ' ... ..... ........ .... ..... @ 2000 AIA@ AlA DOCUMENT G70l-2000 CHANGE ORDER The American Institute of Architects 1735 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006-5292 May 17,2002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Parks Department May 21/2002 ITEM NO. =3...../ ( L-. REQUEST ACHD Impact Fee Offset Agreement for Meridian Settlers Park AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: See Attached Memo from Parks Director CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: See Attached Memo and Agreement AprO'{-L> 4 -[) Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Mem r ndum RECEIVED To: Mayor Corrie and City Council From: Tom Kuntz ''1~' Date: May 16, 2002 Re: Consent Agenda Items for May 21,2002 Council City Meeting ~!AY ! 6 2002 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE The Parks Staff respectfully requests the following three items be placed on the Consent Agenda for May 21, 2002 Council Meeting. 1. Kiwanis Park - The Parks Commission passed a motion at their May 08, 2002 meeting to recommend naming the future Los Alamitosnhousand Springs park site as "Kiwanis Park". Our estimates to develop the nine-acre Neighborhood Park will be more than $500,000.00 in either donated services, materials, and/or cash. The Parks staff and Commission recognizes the commitment from the Meridian Day Breaker Kiwanis Club in completing this project. We would appreciate the Council's formal action authorizing the naming of Kiwanis Park. 2. Settler's Park Construction Change Orders - This is a follow-up to the information you received at your May 14, 2002 workshop. We are requesting approval for change order #l ($8,810.00), change order #2 ($26,855.00) and extra services for The Land Group to design the sewer lines ($3,750.00), and the additional parking lot ($4,750.00). 3. Ada County Highway District Agreement - Attached is a memo from Gary Inselman, outlining an agreement in which the impact fees charged by ACHD would be offset by the costs of right a ~ way purchased from the City. The Parks Staff has reviewed the right a way and impact fee calculations and agree that this is an equitable agreement. We request the Council's approval of this agreement so construction at Settler's Park can continue. .....~-a.. ~.4-~~5~~ ...- J\S~'~ Ada County Highway District David E. Wynkoop, President Sherry R. Huber, 1st Vice President Judy Peavey.Oerr, 2nd Vice President S4san S, Eastlaks, Commissioner Dave Bivens, Commissioner 31 B East 37th Street Garden City ID 83714-6499 Phone (208) 387-6100 FAX (2Q8} 387-6391 E.mai/; teJlus@ACHD.ada.ld.us May 16,2002 City of Meridian 11 W Bower Street Meridian,lD RE: Park R.ightwof-Way dedication on Meridian Road IF A-23-02 D~ar Mayor Corrie, Pleas~ review the enclosed Impact Fee Offset Agreement {or 3231 square feet of right-at-way dedicated on Meridjan Road. Compensation for right-at-way is based on the purchase price of bare ground with no improv.ements. The value of $ .5655 per square foot is comparable with other parcels the District has acquired in the immediate vicinity. If you find the Agreement acceptable, sign and notarize the Agreement and Warranty Deed in the presence of a Notary Public. After this document has been reviewed, signed and notarized, return the original to 'me. Upon ACHD's receipt and approval of the signed Agreement and Warranty Deed, the amount due to YOu will be processed. The Impact Fee tor the park has been assessed at $1 ,827.00 and the Right-of-Way deqication'is equal to the same amount When the agreement and warranty deed are returned to ACHD an Impact Certificate will be issued. ~~ Gary Inselman Impact Fee Administrator l0 38'i1d 8NINN'i1ld aHJ'i1 E5E9-L8E-80l ~p:0T l0(ll/9T/~0 ~~ it); '~'A:CHD )~ I ~ Ada County Highway District David E. Wynkoop, President Dave Bivens, 1st Vice President Judy Peavey-Derr, 2nd Vice President Susan S. Eastlake, Commissioner Sherry R. Huber, Commissioner 318 East 37th Street Garden City ID 83714-6499 Phone (208) 387-6100 FAX (208) 387-6391 E-mail: tellus@ACHD.ada.id.us Date Recorded: Instrument #: Book(s): Page(s) ROAD IMPACT FEE OFFSET AGREEMENT NO. IFA-23-02 SERVICE ZONE: PROJECT NAME: DEVELOPER West Ada Park City of Meridian 11 W Bower St Meridian, 1083642 (ADDRESS IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT) PROJECT LOCATION: Meridian Road This Agreement is entered into this _ day of , 2002, by and between the ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT, a Body Politic and Corporate of the State of Idaho, acting by and through its authorized representative and: City of Meridian (Name of Applicant(s) (Social Security # or Tax ID #) whose current mailing address is (SEE ABOVE), for the purpose herein below stated: I. ACHD ORDINANCE NO. 193: ON NOVEMBER 16,1999, THE ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT APPROVED ORDINANCE NO. 193 ESTABLISHING A PROGRAM OF ROAD IMPACT FEES. SECTION 15 OF THAT ORDINANCE PROVIDES FOR OFFSETS AGAINST ROAD IMPACT FEES FOR QUALIFYING SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS PROVIDED BY A DEVELOPER, AND INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS: A. In the calculation of road impact fees for a particular project, offsets shall be given for the value of any construction of system improvements or contribution or dedication of land or money required by ACHD from a developer for system improvements. B. Offsets will only be allowed jf the proposed improvements are contained in the capital improvements plan, and if the person seeking the offset applies to ACHD in writing prior to breaking ground or otherwise commencing construction of the breaking ground or otherwise commencing construction of the improvements, and if ACHD approves the improvement in writing. C. A developer who is required to construct, fund or contribute system improvements in excess of the road impact fees which would otherwise have been paid for the development project, shall be reimbursed for such excess construction, funding or contribution from road impact fees paid by development located in the benefit zone which is benefited by such improvements. Any such reimbursements shall be made within three months of the dedication or acceptance of construction unless otherwise agreed. D. If offsets or reimbursements are due to the developer pursuant to this section, the parties shall enter into a written agreement, negotiated in good faith, prior to the construction, funding or contribution. E. The amount of an offset resulting from a right-of-way dedication shall not exceed the greater of the fair market value of, or the acquisition costs attributable to, the real property so dedicated. F. The amount of an offset resulting from a qualified capital improvement shall not exceed the developers out-of-pocket construction cost for the improvement. II. THE PURPOSES OF THIS AGREEMENT ARE TO: 1) ESTABLISH THE VALUE OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATIONS AND/OR QUALIFYING IMPROVEMENTS ELIGIBLE FOR THE IMPACT FEE OFFSETS, 2) ESTABLISH THE METHOD BY WHICH THE OFFSET WILL BE PROVIDED, AND 3) LIST OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS. A. VALUE OF QUALIFYING IMPROVEMENTS The value of the qualifying improvements that are eligible for impact fee offsets is calculated below: 1. Ri ITEM DESCRIPTION Meridian Road COST PER FOOT $00.5655 TOTAL $1827.00 RIGHT-OF-WAY TOTAL: $1827.00 TOTAL VALUE: $1827.00 B. METHOD BY WHICH OFFSET WILL BE PROVIDED The applicant shall be fully compensated for the value of the qualifying improvements determined in Section II.A by the following method: 1. The Right-of-Way dedication amount is the same or equal to the Impact Fee assessed to the park. There will not be any monies exchanged. C. OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. Documentation Appropriate and acceptable written documentation establishing the value of all dedicated right-of-way and/or construction improvements must be furnished to the District. 2. Compensation 2 In consideration of the premises and the mutual agreement of the parties, the cash payments amount to the full compensation for the land and/or improvements furnished by the applicant. 3. Assignment The parties agree that payments, as provided in this Agreement, may not be assigned, transferred or conveyed to any other person or property. 4. Compliance with Codes, Standards and Specifications All work by the developer of agent(s) shall comply with all currently adopted specifications of Ada County Highway District for highway construction in effect at the time the contract is awarded, except where otherwise noted. All ordinances and regulations in effect in Ada County and its respective cities, and State of Idaho statutes relating to such work shall be complied with. 5. Enforceability If, for any reason a court determines that ACHD Ordinance #193, or any amendments thereto or any replacement Ordinance, is null and void, then any further obligation pursuant to this Agreement shall be immediately terminated. 6. Applicable Law The existence, validity, construction, operation and effect of this Agreement and its terms and conditions, and the rights and obligations of each of the parties hereto shall be determined in accordance with and construed pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho. 7. Severability Any provision of this Agreement which may be prohibited by law or otherwise held invalid shall be ineffective only to the extent of such prohibition or invalidity. Such determination shall not otherwise invalidate or otherwise invalidate or otherwise render ineffective all or any of the remaining provisions of this Agreement. 8. No Agency Relationship Created This Agreement shall not be construed as creating either a partnership or agency an employment relationship between the parties hereto. 9. Entire Agreement This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties and superseded any and all prior correspondence, communications, negotiations, discussions and other representations of either of the parties hereto. This Agreement may not be modified in any respect except by an instrument in writing and signed by both parties hereto. 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto have set their hand, on this day and year, BY: CIty of Mendlan Mayor Date STATE OF COUNTY OF ~ss. ) On this day of , 20_, before me, a notary publIc in and for said State, personally appeared, known to me to be the applicant(s) named in hereinabove Agreement and known to me to be the persons whose name are subscrIbed to the wIthin instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same. above wrItten. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, ] have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first (SEAL) NOTARY PUBLIC FOR THE STATE OF IDAHO RESIDING AT BOISE, IDAHO MY COMMISSION EXPIRES BY: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Impact Fee Administrator <$15,000 Date Manager of the Right-of-Way & Development Dept. <$25,000 Date Director of ACHD <$50,000 Date President of the ACHD Commission >50,000 Date 4 Ustick Road T 4N, R I W, Section 36 (Reserved for Ada County Recorder) WARRANTY DEED THIS INDENTURE, made this day of , 2002, CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION the IIGRAl"\JTOR". and ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT, a body politic and corporate of the State of Idaho, the "GRANTEE"; WITNESSETH: FOR V ALOE RECEIVED, the GRANTOR has granted, conveyed, bargained and sold, and does hereby grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm to the GRANTEE and its successors and assigns forever, that certain real property situated in the COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO, more particularly described on Exhibit "All attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereo f, TOGETHER with all and singular the buildings, structures, improvements and fixtures thereto, the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, and rents, issues and profits thereof (the "Premises"). SUBJECT TO general taxes and assessments for the current year which are not yet due and payable, easements of record or obvious on a physical inspection of the Premises, any recorded reservation of oil and/or mineral rights and covenants of record. Subject to those exceptions to title to which this conveyance is expressly made subject and those made, suffered or done by the GRANTEE: (a) the GRANTOR covenants to the GRAt"\fTEE, its successors and assigns, that the GRANTEE shall enjoy the quiet and peaceful possession of the Premises; and (b) GRANTOR warrants to the GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, that GRANTOR is the owner of said Premises in fee simple and has the right and authority to convey the same to GRANTEE, and GRANTOR will defend the GRANTEE's title from allla'WfUI claims whatsoever. Warranty Deed, page 1 (10/27/01) S:IACHOR\V\Deeds-Easements\Warranty Deed - Ustick Road.doc The current address of the GRANTEE is: Ada County Highway District 318 East 37th Street Garden City, Idaho 83714-6499 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this WARRANTY DEED has been duly executed by and on behalf of the GRANTOR., the day, month and year herein first above written. City of l\ileridian, Idaho, A MuuIcip'll Corporation Robert Corrie, Mayor Attest Clerk Warranty Deed, page 2 (10/27/01) S:\ACHDR \lI\Deed5-Eascmctls\Warranty Deed . Ustick Road.doc STATE OF IDAHO ) ) 55. County of Ada ) On this day of , 2002, before me, . a Notary Public in and for the State of Idaho, personally appeared Robert Come, Mayor, known or identified to me to be the Mayor the person who executed this instrument on behalf of said Corporation, and acknowledged to me that such Corporation executed the same. IN \V1TNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and aflixed my official seal the day month and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public for Idaho Residing at: My commission expires: Warranty Deed, page 3 (10/27/01) S:\A.CHDR W'\Deeds-Ea.sements\Wamnty Deed" Ustick Road.doc rvlt;e.ro''''"...... f2'-DP-O 12-.D. l,)...), t:o~-"'le:.....,-r 3130 South Owyhee Street Boise, Idaho 83705-4768 208.342.5400 Fax 208.3 42.5353 A M~mbt'r ofiht IT Group Parcel Description A parcel of land located in the SElf4 of Section 36, Township 4 North, Range I West, B.M., as shown on Record of Survey No. 4958, Instrument No. 100030102, Records of Ada County, Idaho, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a 3 114" aluminum cap marking the southeast corner of said Section 36, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, B.M.; thence North 89019'43" West coincident with the south line of said Section 36, being also the centerline of Ustick Road, a distance of 82.00 feet; thence North 00051 '23" East parallel with the east line of said Section 36 a distance of 25.00 feet to the north line of the existing right-of-way of said Ustick Road and the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continui.ng North 00051 '23" East paranel whh the east line of said Section 36 a distance of 23.00 feet to a point 48.00 feet north of the south line of said Secti.on 36; thence South 89019'43" East parallel with the south line of said Section 36 a distance of 20.00 feet; thence North 45045'50" East a distance of35.41 feet to a point 37.00 feet west of the east line of said Section 36 and the centerline of Meridi.an Road; thence North 00051 '23" East parallel with and 37.00 feet west of the east line of said Section 36 a distance of75.00 feet; thence North 06034'00" East a distance of 120.60 feet to the existing west right-of-way line of said Meridian Road; thence South 00051 '23" West coincident with the west right-of-way line of said Meridian Road a distance of 217.96 feet; thence South 45041 '36" West a distance of 35.37 feet to a point on the existing north right-of-way line of said Ustick Road; thence North 89019'43 West coincident with the existing north right-of-way line of said Us tick Road a distance of 32.06 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described parcel contains 3231 sq. ft. or 0.0740 acres, more or less and references Record of Survey No. 4958, Instrument No. 100030102, Records of Ada County, Idaho. Prepared by: W & H Pacific, Inc. End of description. David S. Short Jr. P.L.S whpacific.com planners surveyors engineers landscape architects -- ---------- - --------- -- ----.--.------------ ----. ----1 ... . "- I , , I , , 1 , , I , , I , , I , I , , I , , ,I .. c en --I 0 ^ JJ ~ 0 ~ 0 m ~ r ^ ~ m b )> (Jl en )0- m Q ~ ~ m z m --I JJ 8 i5 ;;: :".. Z m n JJ s: 0 )> m 0 C ::0 r is en (J) ~ i5 -l m 0 ::0 ~ 0 r ^ )> ^ 0 m JJ Z )> m en :?: m 0' ~ )> Jj m ~, z 0; :?: --I C ~ c "" ./>. .h Q) )> n D ~ ~..-...-.r~O:; '____-. ,.1"""-"" ~.IWIo~_ ..._". o -l -< o ." s: m JJ o )> Z 'lJ )> JJ ^ . , . , :1 , i , , \1 ;11 ,:; I' ,'J (( i ,\ I "", <r~~~ ., '~ I " )' !; . , , a , If I I' , I ,tiJ;: : . ~-.I- ~._ ~,... ,... L"._..~" 5 MERIDIAN ROAD May 17, 2002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING May 21, 2002 APPLICANT Public Works Department REQUEST Woodbrige NO.2 Street Light Agreement ITEM NO. S --Jli\ 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: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS See Attached Agreement M P{oY~ 1-0 Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~i~<< N.oIlOJeI1l!l1! IStle Dmlopmenl I Feosibiliry Ano!YJis Letter of Transmittal Bruce A. Freckleton Meridian, City of 660 E. Watertower Meridian, ID 83642 We are sending you: JJN'o;}'JQf';~p' 1~~':J!{Jjl1 2 These are transmitted as checked below: [RI For Review & Comment D Sign & Return Original D Sign & Return Copy RECEIVED MAY 1 6 2002 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE RECEIVED MAY 0 6 2002 MERlDlAN CITY ENGINffR o For Your Approval 0 Make Changes Noted D Copy for Your Records 0 Original for Your Records o ~ Remarks: Copy To: Signed: Conger Management Group 405 South 8lh Street, Suite 131, Boise, ID 83702 . Phone (208) 336.5355 . Fax (208) 336.2282 STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT This Street Light Agreement is made and entered into between the CITY OF MERIDIAN and Woodbridge Community LLC, pertaining to the street lights in Snorting Bull Subdivision Phase II, a residential development in Meridian, Idaho. For good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: L Woodbridge Community LLC has provided .ill street light poles, concrete pole bases, fixtures, bulbs, and components to the residential development known as Snorting Bull Subdivision Phase II in Meridian, Idaho. The parties acknowledge that the l8. street light poles and appurtenances were specially ordered items, not customarily used in residential developments in Meridian, Idaho. 2. Woodbridge Community LLC, or it's assigns, agree to replace, repair and provide any required maintenance of any of the above mentioned street lights, and/or appurtenances thereof, that may hereafter be broken, damaged, or deteriorated, or require maintenance, at its own expense; and it is further agreed that Woodbridge Community LLC, or its heirs, successors and assigns, shall keep the lights operational at all times, it being understood by the City that bulbs, and/or ballast, do burn out and that the City will allow reasonable time to replace them. 3. It is agreed that the City of Meridian authorize and pay for the electrical service to be supplied to the ~ street lights located in Snorting Bull Subdivision Phase II in the usual and customary manner. 4. It is agreed that the City of Meridian, because Idaho Power Company will not maintain the bulbs and ballast or provide any maintenance, will enter into a Schedule 40 Agreement with Idaho Power Company, and not a Schedule 41 Agreement, which in proper cases provide that Idaho Power Company would provide maintenance, bulbs, and ballast It is also agreed that lighting served under the Schedule 40 Agreement must be controlled by a photo electric device of the "fail off' type. 5. It is understood and agreed that Woodbridge Community LLC will assign its rights and obligations hereunder to Woodbridge Homeowner's Association when said Homeowners Association is formed and operationaL SNORTING BULL SUBDIVISION PHASE II STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page I This AGREEMENT shall be binding on Woodbridge Community LLC, its heirs, successors and assigns, and the CITY OF MERIDIAN. Dated this day of ,20 CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipality and Political subdivision of the State of Idaho By Robert D. Corrie, Mayor ATTEST: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk By: Woodbridge Community LLC, an Idaho limited liability company I By: ?'Neillf)erpJ~S L.l.. C, an Idaho limited liability company, Its man ger J: By: u. !lA' Derick O'Neill, Manager ATTEST~~~ ~ Sec~ ST ATE OF IDAHO, ) ss. County of Ada, ) On this _ day of ,20_, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared ROBERT D. CORRIE and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the CITY OF MERIDIAN, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. SNORTING BULL SUBDIVISION PHASE II STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 2 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 STATE OF ,) : ss. County of ,) On this gy Of~, 20~, before me, the under~igned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared DaeicJe.. O'Nil11 and L.~~ ~frL. known to me to be the ~and Secretary of O'Al '-1. ' Ul.l ., and who executed the within lUst e t on behalf of said corporation, and acknowledged to me that said corporatIon 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 ~ C. /J\jt!lWv NOT Y PUBL~fOR IDAHO RESIDING AT 1%(/ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES LJ/J'f/!J>OOS SNORTING BULL SUBDIVISION PHASE II STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 3 STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT This Street Light Agreement is made and entered into between the CITY OF MERIDIAN and Woodbridge Community LLC, pertaining to the street lights in Snorting Bull Subdivision Phase II, a residential development in Meridian, Idaho. For good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Woodbridge Community LLC has provided ll. street light poles, concrete pole bases, fixtures, bulbs, and components to the residential development known as Snorting Bull Subdivision Phase II in Meridian, Idaho. The parties acknowledge that the.lli street light poles and appurtenances were specially ordered items, not customarily used in residential developments in Meridian, Idaho. 2. Woodbridge Community LLC, or it's assigns, agree to replace, repair and provide any required maintenance of any of the above mentioned street lights, and/or appurtenances thereof, that may hereafter be broken, damaged, or deteriorated, or require maintenance, at its own expense; and it is further agreed that Woodbridge Community LLC, or its heirs, successors and assigns, shall keep the lights operational at all times, it being understood by the City that bulbs, and/or ballast, do burn out and that the City will allow reasonable time to replace them. 3. It is agreed that the City of Meridian authorize and pay for the electrical service to be supplied to the .ill street lights located in Snorting Bull Subdivision Phase II in the usual and customary manner. 4. It is agreed that the City of Meridian, because Idaho Power Company will not maintain the bulbs and ballast or provide any maintenance, will enter into a Schedule 40 Agreement with Idaho Power Company, and not a Schedule 41 Agreement, which in proper cases provide that Idaho Power Company would provide maintenance, bulbs, and ballast. It is also agreed that lighting served under the Schedule 40 Agreement must be controlled by a photo electric device of the "fail off' type. 5. It is understood and agreed that Woodbridge Community LLC will assign its rights and obligations hereunder to Woodbridge Homeowner's Association when said Homeowners Association is formed and operationaL SNORTrNG BULL SUBDIVISION PHASE rr STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT P age I This AGREEMENT shall be binding on Woodbridge Community LLC, its heirs, successors and assigns, and the CITY OF MERIDIAN. Dated this day of ,20 CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipality and Political subdivision of the State ofIdaho By Robert D. Come, Mayor ATTEST: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk By: Woodbridge Community LLC, an Idaho limited liability company By: ?'Neill ~n rpris s LC, an Idaho limited liability company, its mana er . By: U \ Derick O'Neill, Manager ATTEST: ) ss. County of Ada, ) On this _ day of , 20_, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared ROBERT D. CORRIE and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the CITY OF MERIDIAN, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. SNORTING BULL SUBDIVISION PHASE II STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 2 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 STATE OF ,) : ss. County of ,) On this 26my of Jlpui , 201l.b, before me, ~he undersi&ned, a Notary Public in a d for said ,State, personally appeared -():JeJek- D'Altll.l and W known to me to be the President and Secretary of ., and who executed the within instrument on behalf of said corporation, and ackn wledged to me that said corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. ~ (} VJtlliu;~ NOT YPUBL~IDAHO RESIDING AT MY COMMISSION EXPIRES tt;/It// ;I.(J~S- SNORTING BULL SUBDIVISION PHASE II STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 3 STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT This Street Light Agreement is made and entered into between the CITY OF MERIDIAN and Woodbridge Community LLC, pertaining to the street lights in Snorting Bull Subdivision Phase II, a residential development in Meridian, Idaho. For good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. t<1 <J-yc\ OY! '~" Y1# , ~-\V\ V\J0-i\ . &~, 5" - 1...\ - D?-- M-~ Woodbridp;e Community LLC, or it's assIgns, agree to replace, repair and provide any required maintenance of any of the above mentioned street lights, and/or appurtenances thereof, that may hereafter be broken, damaged, or deteriorated, or require maintenance, at its own expense; and it is further agreed that Woodbridge Community LLC, or its heirs, successors and assigns, shall keep the lights operational at all times, it being understood by the City that bulbs, and/or ballast, do burn out and that the City will allow reasonable time to replace them. Woodbridge Community LLC has pJ fixtures, bulbs, and components to th Subdivision Phase II in Meridian, Idal poles and appurtenances were speciall developments in Meridian, Idaho. concrete pole bases, own as Snorting Bull that the 18 street light ily used in residential 2. 3. It is agreed that the City of Meridian authorize and pay for the electrical service to be supplied to the II street lights located in Snorting Bull Subdivision Phase II in the usual and customary manner. 4. It is agreed that the City of Meridian, because Idaho Power Company will not maintain the bulbs and ballast or provide any maintenance, will enter into a Schedule 40 Agreement with Idaho Power Company, and not a Schedule 41 Agreement, which in proper cases provide that Idaho Power Company would provide maintenance, bulbs, and ballast. It is also agreed that lighting served under the Schedule 40 Agreement must be controlled by a photo electric device ofthe "fail off' type. 5. It is understood and agreed that Woodbridge Community LLC will assign its rights and obligations hereunder to Woodbridge Homeowner's Association when said Homeowners Association is formed and operational. SNORTING BULL SUBDNISION PHASE II STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 1 This AGREEMENT shall be binding on Woodbridge Community LLC, its heirs, successors and assigns, and the CITY OF MERIDIAN. Dated this ;21 day of ~~ , 20 02-.; . CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipality and Political subdivision of the State ofIdaho ATTEST: ~VLMoYl 2r-y~ o\-h William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk o ,ce>-~ Robert D. Corrie, Mayor ~ -, , By: Woodbridge Community LLC, an Idaho limited liability company By: ?'Neill ~n rpr1's ..s LC, an Idaho limited liability company, Its mana er By: \ Derick O'Neill, Manager ATTEST: ss. County of Ada, ) On this ijg day of ~ ' 20 ,,~, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared ROBERT D. CORRIE and WILLIAM C. hM"orl 5rt1.'~ERC, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and Ci~e.~ of the CITY OF MERIDIAN, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. SNORTING BULL SUBDIVISION PHASE II STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. SEAL "..,nerllllll'. ..........' i'l'll T A lJ ~'qqd! ".~II; (Goeeeeoee i · MOl> ~ .. *f f'I I CF.l o4!l '. +,,1. .... \""l 0.' ~ !Il!~ ./Jl.1C \. ($> G... ... . ;,t... OJ;'> .....m".... ""q"" In A 110 ..,..,..... ....'''.',IIU.I'..' tl,k& ~ NOTARYPUBL~IDM10 RESIDING AT r; &. If.-d.~ MY COMMISSION PIRES '//_O.;L_ o'/- STATE OF ,) : ss. County of ,) On this ~my of -Ap2AI , 20Jlb:., before me, ~he undersi~ed, a Notary Public and for said ,State) personally appeared j)e;e.jrJe D'A/Pl1J and {)J known to me to be the President and Secretary of ., and who executed the within instrument on behalf of said corporation, and ackn wledged to me that said corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. ~ (} tu~~ NOT Y PUBL~./IDAHO RESIDING AT MY COMMISSION EXPIRES hi 14 / ~O~ S- SNORTING BULL SUBDIVISION PHASE II STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 3 STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT This Street Light Agreement is made and entered into between the CITY OF MERIDIAN and Woodbridge Community LLC, pertaining to the street lights in Snorting Bull Subdivision Phase II, a residential development in Meridian, Idaho. For good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Woodbridge Community LLC has provided 18 street light poles, concrete pole bases, fixtures, bulbs, and components to the residential development known as Snorting Bull Subdivision Phase II in Meridian, Idaho. The parties acknowledge that the 18 street light poles and appurtenances were specially ordered items, not customarily used in residential developments in Meridian, Idaho. 2. Woodbridge Community LLC, or it's assigns, agree to replace, repair and provide any required maintenance of any of the above mentioned street lights, and/or appurtenances thereof, that may hereafter be broken, damaged, or deteriorated, or require maintenance, at its own expense; and it is further agreed that Woodbridge Community LLC, or its heirs, successors and assigns, shall keep the lights operational at all times, it being understood by the City that bulbs, and/or ballast, do bum out and that the City will allow reasonable time to replace them. 3. It is agreed that the City of Meridian authorize and pay for the electrical service to be supplied to the ~ street lights located in Snorting Bull Subdivision Phase II in the usual and customary manner. 4. It is agreed that the City of Meridian, because Idaho Power Company will not maintain the bulbs and ballast or provide any maintenance, will enter into a Schedule 40 Agreement with Idaho Power Company, and not a Schedule 41 Agreement, which in proper cases provide that Idaho Power Company would provide maintenance, bulbs, and ballast. It is also agreed that lighting served under the Schedule 40 Agreement must be controlled by a photo electric device 'of the "fail off' type. 5. It is understood and agreed that Woodbridge Community LLC will assign its rights and obligations hereunder to Woodbridge Homeowner's Association when said Homeowners Association is formed and operationaL SNORTING BULL SUBDIVISION PHASE II STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 1 This AGREEMENT shall be binding on Woodbridge Community LLC, its heirs, successors and assigns, and the CITY OF MERIDIAN. Dated this )1 day of urY1 CLL~ , 20 C/l- . CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipality and Political subdivision of the State of Idaho ATTEST: 0~~~~4f. 1~ William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk ,MAY 2.1 I ;24XI~ By: Woodbridge Community LLC, an Idaho limited liability company By: ?'NeillDjterpr~. S L1C' an Idaho limited liability company, Its man ger ~ I By: 'v _~N Derick O'Neill, Manager ATTEST:/~.t<--d ~ Sec~ STATE OF IDAHO, ) : 5S. County of Ada, ) On thi~ day of m O;i ., 20.Qb, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, p sonally appeared R:9~ERT D. CORRIE and VlILLIi.11 fr ShClt'Ui$MliMRG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and dt),P(;idk of the CITY OF MERIDIAN, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. SNORTING BULL SUBDIVISION PHASE II STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. SEAL l.UnUtt'f .....,..." AN 11' "ff" " ~ "" .... ~ ....... .t> "" ...: ... .,. ~ .. · A. \ 0 .... ~ c., I ~yo . .t.-:' 10..;: oQ \;. \trt: :>. ... 0 t:- .__ . ....:!. <..' \, -r . "" - :-r<:'~"<>, >< :1:""': ~-"~ ..~: ~ o. " .O! ..., . . Of"'''' ~ .: -{( ,...... ........ ~,I ,,&'- STATE OF ,) : ss. ~A~. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDINGATt.llt,,wz ~ Ilti~A- MY COMMISSION XPJRES / J- ',.J.4~ County of ,) On this ~y of ~, 20~, before m~, the under,signed, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Dt.leiUe.. D'Alw.J and 0.~Wf;1;. '!!dJf/IL. known to me to be tbe ~ and Secretary of O'Al '-1. . LflJ " and who executed the within lUst e t on behalf of said corporation, and acknowledged to me that Said corporatIOn 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 ~l C. WP.lLh/ NOT Y POOLI fOR IDAHO RESIDING AT MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SNORTING BULL SUBDIVISION PHASE II STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 3